Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2022-03-24 Council Agenda Packet
Corcoran City Council Agenda March 24, 2022 - 7:00 pm a.WH Electric Administrative Permit, Site Plan, and Preliminary Plat* 1.Call to Order / Roll Call 2.Pledge of Allegiance 3.Agenda Approval 4.Commission Representatives* 5.Open Forum – Public Comment Opportunity 6.Presentations/Recognitions 7.Consent Agenda a.Financial Claims* b.Order the EAW – Pioneer Trail* c.Donations – Stanchion* d.Award Bids – Cropland* e.Call Work Sessions for April 14, May 12, May 26, and June 23* f.Memorial Garden Policy* 8.Planning Business – Public Comment Opportunity b.Cook Lake Highlands Final Plat and PUD* c.Zoning Ordinance Amendment Ground Mounted Solar* 9.Unfinished Business – Public Comment Opportunity 10.New Business – Public Comment Opportunity a.Combine, Close Out and Create Funds* 11.Staff Reports a.Active Corcoran Planning Applications* 12.2022 City Council Schedule* 13.Adjournment *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the Council Chambers Agenda Packet book located by the entrance. The complete Council Agenda Packet is available electronically on the City website at www.corcoranmn.gov. HYBRID MEETING OPTION AVAILABLE The public is invited to attend the regular Council meetings at City Hall. Meeting Via Telephone/Other Electronic Means Call-in Instructions: +1 312 626 6799 US Enter Meeting ID: 828 9735 8460 Press *9 to speak during the Public Comment Sections in the meeting. Video Link and Instructions: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82897358460 visit http://www.zoom.us and enter Meeting ID: 828 9735 8460 Participants can utilize the Raise Hand function to be recognized to speak during the Public Comment sections in the meeting. Participant video feeds will be muted. In-person comments will be received first, with the hybrid electronic means option following. For more information on options to provide public comment visit: www.corcoranmn.gov STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 4. Council Meeting: March 24, 2022 Prepared By: Michelle Friedrich Topic: Commission Representatives Action Required: None – Informational Summary: The advisory commission rep resentatives for the February 24th Council meeting are as follows: • Planning Commission : Dean Jacobs • Parks and Trails Commission: Judy Strehler Financial/Budget: N/A Council Action: N/A Attachments: N/A Agenda Item 7a. Council Meeting Date:3/24/2022 Prepared By:Maggie Ung Amount Project name $0.00 -$ $419,902.31 $ 419,902.31 122,761.35$ $ 542,663.66 Date Paid to Amount Description 3/3/2022 MN Dept of Revenue 183.26$ Fuel Tax 3/4/2022 RevTrak 727.04$ Credit Card Fee 3/4/2022 RevTrak 39.90$ Chargeback 3/4/2022 Farmer's Bank 15.00$ ACH Filing Fee 3/7/2022 Postalia 400.00$ Postage 3/9/2022 MN Dept of Revenue 130.25$ Fuel Tax 3/10/2022 ADP 91,103.02$ Net Payroll and Taxes 3/14/2022 MN PERA 19,610.87$ Pension Plan 3/14/2022 Optum Bank 3,878.34$ Employee HSA 3/14/2022 State of MN - Empower 4,701.92$ Employee Deferred Comp/Healthcare Savings 3/15/2022 Sun Life 1,490.72$ Employee STD and LTD 3/9/2022 Zoom 14.99$ Zoom For Council Worksession 3/9/2022 Zoom 64.99$ Zoom For Council Meetings 3/11/2022 Fleetio 30.00$ PD Software 3/14/2022 Deluxe 371.05$ Envelopes Total 122,761.35$ TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR APPROVAL Auto Deductions / Electronic Fund Transfer / Other Disbursements ALL OTHER FINANCIAL CLAIMS Check Register (See attached Check Detail Registers) Total Checks Total of Auto Deductions Total Total Fund #500 = (See attached Payments Detail) FINANCIAL CLAIMS CHECK RANGE FUND #500 ESCROW CLAIMS Paid to SEE THE REGISTER FOR #500 CLAIMS CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 1/8Page: 03/18/2022 12:52 PM User: mung DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/11/2022 - 03/24/2022 JOURNALIZED PAID Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 1 1357.10 03/24/22IN000443074PW CATERPILLAR REPAIRZIEGLER INC03/01/22100-43100-50220 1(357.10)03/24/22CM000054406PW - PARTS RETURNZIEGLER INC03/03/22100-43100-50220 0.00 Total For Check 1 Check 31889 31889306.78 03/24/22601459613PAYROLL PERIOD #05ADP, LLC03/11/22100-41900-50300 306.78 Total For Check 31889 Check 31890 3189080.00 03/24/222562PD TRAINING - LAWSONALLIED MEDICAL TRAINING03/10/22100-42100-50207 80.00 Total For Check 31890 Check 31891 31891805.66 03/24/222009101CITY HALL PROPANEBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/08/22100-41900-50210 31891421.74 03/24/222009100CITY HALL PROPANEBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/03/22100-41900-50210 318912,994.18 03/24/222024324UNLEADED 87BEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/10/22100-42100-50212 318911,002.88 03/24/222002735CLEAR 91 PREMIUM GASBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY02/22/22100-43100-50212 318912,448.03 03/24/222024323ULS2 DYED KODIAK WINTER B5BEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/10/22100-43100-50212 31891185.47 03/24/222020879CLEAR 91 PREMIUM GASOLINEBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/04/22100-43100-50212 7,857.96 Total For Check 31891 Check 31892 3189253.70 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20010025-24BELLWETHER COMMUNITY ASSOC03/08/22601-00000-22200 53.70 Total For Check 31892 Check 31893 318933,848.00 03/24/2210092022 ANNUAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SUBSBENCHMARK SOLUTIONS, LLC02/23/22100-42100-50300 3,848.00 Total For Check 31893 Check 31894 318941,925.00 03/24/221154202ENGAGEMENT SERVICESBERGAN KDV03/08/22100-41400-50300 1,925.00 Total For Check 31894 Check 31895 3189577.52 03/24/22003P18429PD SQUAD REPAIR/MAINTENANCEBOYER TRUCKS03/07/22100-42100-50403 3189572.76 03/24/22003P18421PD SUPPLIES - ANTIFREEZEBOYER TRUCKS03/04/22100-42100-50403 31895185.96 03/24/22003P18430PW - TRUCK PARTSBOYER TRUCKS03/04/22100-43100-50220 336.24 Total For Check 31895 Check 31896 3189610,506.25 03/24/22B284222WATER SUPPLY CONVEYANCE AND TREATMBRAUN INTERTEC CORP02/15/22422-49400-50530 10,506.25 Total For Check 31896 Check 31897 31897688.73 03/24/22916293556PARKS SUPPLIES BASEBALL GEARBSN SPORTS, LLC03/07/22100-45100-50210 688.73 Total For Check 31897 Check 31898 31898545.79 03/24/221243LEGAL SERVICESCARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER03/02/22100-00000-22205 31898285.02 03/24/221243LEGAL SERVICESCARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER03/02/22100-00000-22205-056 31898249.38 03/24/221243LEGAL SERVICESCARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER03/02/22100-00000-22205-071 3189835.63 03/24/221243LEGAL SERVICESCARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER03/02/22100-00000-22205-087 3189835.63 03/24/221243LEGAL SERVICESCARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER03/02/22100-00000-22205-117 31898866.42 03/24/221243LEGAL SERVICESCARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER03/02/22100-00000-22205-128 318984,407.58 03/24/221243LEGAL SERVICESCARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER03/02/22100-41600-50304 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 2/8Page: 03/18/2022 12:52 PM User: mung DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/11/2022 - 03/24/2022 JOURNALIZED PAID Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 31898 318983,521.23 03/24/221243LEGAL SERVICESCARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER03/02/22100-42100-50304 9,946.68 Total For Check 31898 Check 31899 3189916.80 03/24/2203-2022GAS BILLCENTERPOINT ENERGY 03/08/22100-41900-50380 31899341.37 03/24/2203-2022GAS BILLCENTERPOINT ENERGY 03/08/22100-45200-50380 358.17 Total For Check 31899 Check 31900 319001,779.44 03/24/2203_2022PW - GAS BILLCENTERPOINT ENERGY HOUSTON03/02/22100-43100-50381 1,779.44 Total For Check 31900 Check 31901 31901145.68 03/24/2203_2022PUBLIC WORKS LAND LINECENTURY LINK02/28/22100-43100-50321 145.68 Total For Check 31901 Check 31902 31902109.21 03/24/224112903120CITY HALL RUGSCINTAS - 47003/09/22100-41900-50400 3190213.19 03/24/224112253175PD TOWELSCINTAS - 47003/02/22100-42100-50400 3190274.73 03/24/224112903099PW TOWELSCINTAS - 47003/09/22100-43100-50400 3190215.10 03/24/224112253164PW TOWELSCINTAS - 47003/02/22100-43100-50400 31902111.88 03/24/224112253207PW TOWELSCINTAS - 47003/02/22100-43100-50400 31902187.15 03/24/224112903217PW UNIFORMSCINTAS - 47003/09/22100-43100-50417 31902153.93 03/24/224098567895APW UNIFORMSCINTAS - 47010/13/21100-43100-50417 31902187.15 03/24/224112253345PW UNIFORMSCINTAS - 47003/02/22100-43100-50417 852.34 Total For Check 31902 Check 31903 3190325.46 03/24/2203_2022CITY HALL WATER BILLCITY OF CORCORAN03/15/22100-41900-50382 25.46 Total For Check 31903 Check 31904 3190496.14 03/24/2203_2022LAND LINE 3/15/22-4/14/22COMCAST- 90294333603/05/22100-41900-50321 3190496.11 03/24/2203_2022LAND LINE 3/15/22-4/14/22COMCAST- 90294333603/05/22100-42100-50321 3190496.10 03/24/2203_2022LAND LINE 3/15/22-4/14/22COMCAST- 90294333603/05/22100-43100-50321 288.35 Total For Check 31904 Check 31905 319051,532.00 03/24/220159549-INCITY HALL BUILDING DOOR REPAIRCOMMERCIAL DOOR SYSTEMS03/07/22100-41900-50401 1,532.00 Total For Check 31905 Check 31906 319064,400.25 03/24/22324713AGREEMENT MANAGED SERVICESCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/15/22100-41920-50300 31906885.00 03/24/22324422AGREEMENT MANAGED BACKUPCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/15/22100-41920-50300 319061,262.00 03/24/22324112AGREEMENT OFFICE 365COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/15/22100-41920-50300 319063,040.00 03/24/22323559CITY HALL SUPPORT SERVICESCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/28/22100-41920-50300 9,587.25 Total For Check 31906 Check 31907 31907170.57 03/24/2259594EMPLOYEE JACKETSCORPORATE CONNECTION03/08/22100-41900-50210 170.57 Total For Check 31907 Check 31908 31908164.00 03/24/2203112022PLANNING - 2022 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP CORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS03/11/22100-41910-50433 31908170.85 03/24/2202252022QR CODE GENERATORCORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS02/25/22100-42100-50350 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 3/8Page: 03/18/2022 12:52 PM User: mung DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/11/2022 - 03/24/2022 JOURNALIZED PAID Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 31908 319087.00 03/24/225238PW TRAINING - PARKINGCORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS03/01/22100-43100-50207 319083.00 03/24/225315PW TRAINING - PARKINGCORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS03/03/22100-43100-50207 31908142.69 03/24/22220302-06-10PW TRAINING - MEALSCORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS03/02/22100-43100-50207 31908103.17 03/24/22220301-06-8PW TRAINING - MEALSCORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS03/01/22100-43100-50207 319083.00 03/24/225301PW TRAINING - PARKINGCORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS03/03/22100-43100-50207 31908121.93 03/24/224780PW TRAINING - MEALSCORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS03/03/22100-43100-50207 319085.00 03/24/225191PW TRAINING - PARKINGCORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS03/02/22100-43100-50207 319087.00 03/24/225198PW TRAINING - PARKINGCORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS03/01/22100-43100-50207 319085.00 03/24/225295PW TRAINING - PARKINGCORPORATE PAYMENT SYSTEMS03/02/22100-43100-50207 732.64 Total For Check 31908 Check 31909 319091,376.44 03/24/2203_2022PDLICENSE TAX FOR TRAILER - FORFEIT DVS03/02/22100-42100-50430 31909270.00 03/24/2203_2022PD PEACE OFFICER LICENSEMN POST BOARD03/03/22100-42100-50433 3190972.10 03/24/2202.25.2022PLEAA MEMBERSHIPS FADDEN/STEELMANPLEAA02/25/22100-42100-50433 1,718.54 Total For Check 31909 Check 31910 3191018.75 03/24/22202357PW SUPPLIESCROW RIVER FARM EQUIPMENT12/14/21100-43100-50210 18.75 Total For Check 31910 Check 31911 319114.38 03/24/22114X84387204CITY HALL WATERCULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER01/31/22100-41900-50210 3191132.76 03/24/22114X84785704CITY HALL OFFICE WATERCULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER02/28/22100-41900-50210 37.14 Total For Check 31911 Check 31913 3191375.20 03/24/22881205RENTAL OF CROPLAND PARCELS BID NOTECM PUBLISHERS INC03/10/22100-41900-50350 3191359.37 03/24/22881206ASPHALT/ROAD MAINTENANCE BIDSECM PUBLISHERS INC03/10/22100-43100-50350 3191359.37 03/24/22881207SEAL COAT/FOG SEAL PROJECTECM PUBLISHERS INC03/10/22100-43100-50350 3191363.32 03/24/22881208DUST CONTROL BIDSECM PUBLISHERS INC03/10/22100-43100-50350 257.26 Total For Check 31913 Check 31914 31914109.95 03/24/22253913APD K-9 SYNTHETIC BITE SLEEVEELITE K-903/04/22202-42100-50438 109.95 Total For Check 31914 Check 31915 31915365.70 03/24/22243252PW SUPPLIESFELLING TRAILERS INC03/07/22100-43100-50220 365.70 Total For Check 31915 Check 31916 31916355.50 03/24/2216157CITY HALL HVAC SYSTEM REPAIRFOSTER MECHANICAL07/28/21100-41900-50401 355.50 Total For Check 31916 Check 31917 31917128.85 03/24/22TI105245591QTRLY MAIL METERFP MAILING SOLUTIONS03/04/22100-41900-50322 128.85 Total For Check 31917 Check 31918 3191864.80 03/24/222020310SUPPORT SERVICESGOPHER STATE ONE CALL02/28/22601-49400-50380 3191864.80 03/24/222020310SUPPORT SERVICESGOPHER STATE ONE CALL02/28/22602-49450-50380 129.60 Total For Check 31918 Check 31919 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 4/8Page: 03/18/2022 12:52 PM User: mung DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/11/2022 - 03/24/2022 JOURNALIZED PAID Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 31919 3191912.50 03/24/221000183104VIEW RECORDED DOCUMENTSHENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTS REC03/02/22100-43125-50300 12.50 Total For Check 31919 Check 31920 319201,464.26 03/24/221000183197PD RADIO LEASEHENNEPIN COUNTY INFO TECH03/02/22100-42100-50323 1,464.26 Total For Check 31920 Check 31921 319213,718.89 03/24/2277191.1OUTDOOR WARNING SIRENINTEGRATED PROTECTION SYSTEM03/15/22209-42100-50520 3,718.89 Total For Check 31921 Check 31922 319224,423.50 03/24/2232663PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/08/22100-00000-22205 3192267.50 03/24/2232657PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-009 31922126.50 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-013 31922182.50 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-015 319222,826.50 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-017 3192273.00 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-024 3192236.50 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-030 31922635.00 03/24/2232663PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/08/22100-00000-22205-044 31922323.00 03/24/2232659PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-056 319221,022.50 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-056 3192273.00 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-071 31922182.50 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-075 319221,588.00 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-080 319222,077.50 03/24/2232663PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/08/22100-00000-22205-087 31922132.00 03/24/2232659PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-087 31922112.50 03/24/2232658PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-087 319221,318.00 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-087 31922793.00 03/24/2232663PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/08/22100-00000-22205-098 3192259.00 03/24/2232659PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-098 31922424.50 03/24/2232663PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/08/22100-00000-22205-111 31922671.50 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-117 31922809.50 03/24/2232663PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/08/22100-00000-22205-127 319222,718.50 03/24/2232663PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/08/22100-00000-22205-128 3192254.00 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-00000-22205-129 319227,347.50 03/24/2232663PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/08/22100-41910-50300 319222,651.50 03/24/2232660PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/07/22100-41910-50300 319221,580.00 03/24/2232663PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/08/22100-42401-50300 31922362.50 03/24/2232663PLANNING SERVICES 02/2022LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVIC03/08/22601-49400-50300 32,671.50 Total For Check 31922 Check 31923 31923103.00 03/24/222022WORKER'S COMPENSATION COVERAGE PRELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TR03/04/22100-41110-50365 31923430.21 03/24/2218722CLAIM #00469096LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TR03/01/22100-41400-50365 319239,098.00 03/24/222022WORKER'S COMPENSATION COVERAGE PRELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TR03/04/22100-41900-50360 31923134,518.00 03/24/222022WORKER'S COMPENSATION COVERAGE PRELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TR03/04/22100-42100-50365 3192333,716.00 03/24/222022WORKER'S COMPENSATION COVERAGE PRELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TR03/04/22100-43100-50365 3192313,949.00 03/24/222022WORKER'S COMPENSATION COVERAGE PRELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TR03/04/22100-45200-50365 31923631.00 03/24/222022WORKER'S COMPENSATION COVERAGE PRELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TR03/04/22601-49400-50360 31923479.00 03/24/222022WORKER'S COMPENSATION COVERAGE PRELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TR03/04/22602-49450-50360 192,924.21 Total For Check 31923 Check 31924 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 5/8Page: 03/18/2022 12:52 PM User: mung DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/11/2022 - 03/24/2022 JOURNALIZED PAID Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 31924 3192462.92 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20006729-14LENNAR03/08/22601-00000-22200 62.92 Total For Check 31924 Check 31925 3192564.05 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20006472-66LENNAR HOMES03/08/22601-00000-22200 31925136.39 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20006526-16LENNAR HOMES03/08/22601-00000-22200 3192562.96 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20006662-15LENNAR HOMES03/08/22601-00000-22200 3192561.92 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20006726-14LENNAR HOMES03/08/22601-00000-22200 325.32 Total For Check 31925 Check 31926 3192630.74 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20006702-14LENNAR HOMES03/08/22601-00000-22200 30.74 Total For Check 31926 Check 31927 31927441.04 03/24/22364104PW SUPPLIESLITTLE FALLS MACHINE03/09/22100-43100-50220 441.04 Total For Check 31927 Check 31928 319281.52 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20007212-23M/I HOMES MPLS/ST PAUL LLC03/08/22601-00000-22200 1.52 Total For Check 31928 Check 31929 319291,150.00 03/24/22031522DEPENDENT CARE FSA 1/22-2/22MATT GOTTSCHALK03/15/22100-00000-21708 1,150.00 Total For Check 31929 Check 31931 3193149,570.82 03/24/223198PERMIT INSPECTIONS FEBRUARY 2022METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVIC03/04/22100-42400-50300 49,570.82 Total For Check 31931 Check 31932 3193259,640.00 03/24/22022822FEBRUARY 2022 SAC CHARGESMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL03/01/22602-00000-20800 31932(596.40)03/24/22022822FEBRUARY 2022 SAC CHARGESMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL03/01/22602-00000-36200 59,043.60 Total For Check 31932 Check 31933 3193311,642.72 03/24/220001136554WASTE WATER SERVICESMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRO03/02/22602-49450-50312 11,642.72 Total For Check 31933 Check 31934 31934700.00 03/24/2213134LEADERSHIP ACADEMY - C. ANDRESSMN CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOC03/11/22100-42100-50207 700.00 Total For Check 31934 Check 31935 3193580.00 03/24/2202282022PD TRAINING - EMS NORTH MEMORIAL02/28/22100-42100-50207 80.00 Total For Check 31935 Check 31936 31936348.31 03/24/224033144PW VEHICLE REPAIRNUSS TRUCK & EQUIPMENT03/05/22100-43100-50220 348.31 Total For Check 31936 Check 31937 319371,500.00 03/24/22233153SIMULATOR RENTALOSSEO GUN CLUB02/07/22100-42100-50207 1,500.00 Total For Check 31937 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 6/8Page: 03/18/2022 12:52 PM User: mung DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/11/2022 - 03/24/2022 JOURNALIZED PAID Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 31938 31938211.01 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20010201-36PULTE HOMES03/08/22601-00000-22200 3193829.06 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20019357-10PULTE HOMES03/08/22601-00000-22200 240.07 Total For Check 31938 Check 31939 3193931.38 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20019351-10PULTE HOMES OF MINNESOTA LLC03/08/22601-00000-22200 31.38 Total For Check 31939 Check 31940 3194012.18 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20010250-24PULTE HOMES OF MN, LLC03/08/22601-00000-22200 3194018.46 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20019307-10PULTE HOMES OF MN, LLC03/08/22601-00000-22200 30.64 Total For Check 31940 Check 31941 3194112.44 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20019418-77RAVINIA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIA03/08/22601-00000-22200 12.44 Total For Check 31941 Check 31942 31942218.20 03/24/2222-30471LASER AP CHECKSRITEWAY BUSINESS FORMS02/23/22100-41900-50210 218.20 Total For Check 31942 Check 31943 319431,541.40 03/24/2203012022MARCH 2022 LIFE INSURANCESTANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY03/01/22100-00000-21709 1,541.40 Total For Check 31943 Check 31944 3194477.94 03/24/22I1554779PD SUPPLIES - IRRITANTSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT03/02/22100-42100-50210 31944135.98 03/24/22I1553917PD UNIFORMSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT02/24/22100-42100-50417 213.92 Total For Check 31944 Check 31945 319451.85 03/24/2203/08/2022UB refund for account: 20020010-75SUNRAM CONSTRUCTION, INC.03/08/22601-00000-22200 1.85 Total For Check 31945 Check 31946 31946400.68 03/24/2203_2022PD UNION DUES/TLDFTEAMSTER LOCAL 32002/28/22100-00000-21707 400.68 Total For Check 31946 Check 31947 3194730.22 03/24/2202-2022USPS SHIPPINGTHE UPS STORE #153302/07/22422-49400-50530 30.22 Total For Check 31947 Check 31948 31948247.46 03/24/229900457092PD/CH CELL PHONEVERIZON WIRELESS02/26/22100-41900-50321 319481,249.49 03/24/229900457092PD/CH CELL PHONEVERIZON WIRELESS02/26/22100-42100-50321 1,496.95 Total For Check 31948 Check 31949 31949175.00 03/24/22901181PW SUPPLIES-TOOLSWESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE03/04/22100-43100-50210 175.00 Total For Check 31949 Check 31950 31950260.35 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22100-00000-22205-007 31950138.22 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22100-00000-22205-056 319501,063.45 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22100-00000-22205-065 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 7/8Page: 03/18/2022 12:52 PM User: mung DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/11/2022 - 03/24/2022 JOURNALIZED PAID Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 31950 31950212.89 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22100-00000-22205-087 31950216.43 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22100-00000-22205-098 319502,605.83 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22100-41900-50381 3195060.82 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22100-42100-50381 31950218.98 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22100-43100-50381 31950259.65 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22100-45200-50381 3195094.60 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22601-49400-50380 31950281.52 03/24/2203-2022STREET LIGHTSWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/22602-49450-50380 5,412.74 Total For Check 31950 Check 31951 31951156.41 03/24/22770014829STREET LIGHTSXCEL ENERGY03/03/22100-43100-50381 156.41 Total For Check 31951 Check 31952 3195227.92 03/24/22770102444STREET LIGHTSXCEL ENERGY03/03/22100-43100-50381 27.92 Total For Check 31952 Check 31953 3195331.58 03/24/22770673379STREET LIGHTSXCEL ENERGY03/08/22100-43100-50381 31.58 Total For Check 31953 Check 31954 3195435.43 03/24/2203012022SQUEEGEE & GLASS CLEANERMENARDS MAPLE GROVE03/01/22100-42100-50223 3195414.60 03/24/2203022022-1PD LICENSE TABS CHIEFDVS03/02/22100-42100-50403 50.03 Total For Check 31954 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 8/8Page: 03/18/2022 12:52 PM User: mung DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/11/2022 - 03/24/2022 JOURNALIZED PAID Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number 332,081.88 Fund 100 GENERAL FUND 109.95 Fund 202 POLICE DONATION FUND 3,718.89 Fund 209 OUTDOOR WARNING POINT 10,536.47 Fund 422 DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT 1,943.48 Fund 601 WATER 71,511.64 Fund 602 SEWER Fund Totals: 419,902.31 Total For All Funds: 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. Agenda Item: 7b. TO: Corcoran City Council FROM: Nicholas Ouellette through Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: March 17, 2022 for the March 24, 2022 City Council Meeting RE: Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for Cushman & Wakefield for 56.54 acres at 6210 Pioneer Trail (PID 32-119 -23-34-0013, 32-119 -23 -34 -0007, 32-119-23-43-0005 and 32- 119-23-43-0006) (city file no. 21-047) REVIEW DEADLINE: N/A 1.Description of Request Cushman & Wakefield has submitted a request to initiate a mandatory EAW for “Pioneer Trail Industrial Park” to develop a five-lot industrial/business park with 10 buildings and a new public road located on 56.54 acres. The Minnesota Environmental Review Program rules require a mandatory EAW for new warehousing or light industrial facilities greater than 300,000 gross square feet in Corcoran. 2.Background Under Minnesota Environmental Review Program rules, the City is the governmental unit responsible for preparing the EAW and determining whether the project has the potential for significant environmental effects. The purpose of the environmental review process is to provide useable information to the project proposer, government decision-makers and the public concerning the primary environmental effects of a proposed project. The EAW should identify measures to protect the environment that can later be imposed as conditions of approval in future development applications. If the EAW identifies significant environmental effects that cannot be mitigated or minimized, the City Council would order the preparation of an EIS. An EIS does not necessarily disclose more information about potential impacts; but rather, its main purpose is to examine project alternatives and additional mitigative measures to lessen significant impacts identified in the EAW. Furthermore, an EIS is not a means to approve or deny a project, but is an additional source of information to guide decisions. Very few projects move to the EIS stage because, in most cases, the EAW does an adequate job of describing the potential impacts and identifying mitigative measures. The statutory standard for requiring and EIS is whether the project has the potential for significant environmental effects – it is not whether the EAW has adequately disclosed information about potential impacts. Accordingly, if Council determines that the EAW does not disclose sufficient information about potential impacts, the Council would request additional information before making a decision on the need for an EIS. Pioneer Trail EAW (21-047) 2 March 24, 2022 3. Analysis The item for Council to consider is approving the draft Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for distribution for the Pioneer Trail Industrial Park Plan. This draft EAW document is required under the Minnesota Environmental Review rules for industrial, commercial and institutional developments. Because most of this work was prepared during the PUD Sketch Plan Review, there is a limited cost to the EAW, which will be paid out of the developer’s escrow. When the Council approves the EAW for distribution, the 30-day period for comments begins. Staff will finalize the draft EAW document and distribute for review and comment. Key dates under the tentative schedule developed by staff are: Pioneer Trail EAW Schedule Corcoran Key Dates RGU approves for distribution 3/24/2022 Draft document distributed for comments 3/29/2022 Deadline for submission to EQB 3/29/2022 EQB Publication date 4/5/2022 Comment Deadline 5/5/2022 RGU prepares Final Document 5/19/2022 Notice of Decision - Council 5/26/2022 No project approvals can be granted until the EAW process is completed. 4. Action Move to approve Pioneer Trail EAW for distribution and comment. Attachments 1. Draft Pioneer Trail EAW dated March 17, 2022 Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 1 July 2013 version ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET This Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) form and EAW Guidelines are available at the Environmental Quality Board’s website at: http://www.eqb.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: Pioneer Trail Industrial Park 2. Proposer: Cushman & Wakefield Contact person: Jon Rausch Title: Address: 3500 American Blvd W, Suite 200 City, State, ZIP: Bloomington, MN 55431 Phone: 612-685-8288 Fax: Email: Jon.Rausch@cushwake.com 3. Responsible Governmental Unit: City of Corcoran Contact person: Kendra Lindahl, AICP Title: City Planner Address: 8200 County Road 116 City, State, ZIP: Corcoran, MN 55340 Phone: 612-638-0225 Fax: Email: klindahl@landform.net 4. Reason for EAW Preparation Required: Discretionary: EIS Scoping Citizen petition ☒ Mandatory EAW RGU discretion Proposer initiated If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number(s) and name(s): EAW, Minnesota Rules 4410.4300, Subpart 14 Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Facilities Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 2 5. Project Location: 6210 Pioneer Trail County: Hennepin City/Township: Corcoran PLS Location (¼, ¼, Section, Township, Range): SE ¼, SW ¼, Township 23, Range 19 Watershed (81 major watershed scale): Mississippi River (20) GPS Coordinates: 45.06668366654562, -93.61842390950972 Tax Parcel Numbers: 32-119-23-34-0013, 32-119-23-34-0007 32-119-23-43-0005, 32-119-23-43-0006 At a minimum attach each of the following to the EAW: • County map showing the general location of the project; • U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy acceptable); and • Site plans showing all significant project and natural features. Pre-construction site plan and post- construction site plan. Attachments: Appendix A: Figures • Figure 1: Concept Plan • Figure 2: Soil Classifications • Figure 3: Water Resources Map • Figure 4: County Well Index • Figure 5: Potential Wetland Impacts • Figure 6: Hennepin County Location Map • Figure 7: Cover Type Map • Figure 8: USGS Topographic Map • Figure 9: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Appendix B: Wetland Delineation and WCA Notice of Decision Appendix C: FEMA FIRMette Appendix D: Phase I ESA Executive Summary Appendix E: DNR NHIS Request for Concurrence Letter Appendix F: Traffic Impact Study Appendix G: Feasibility Study Appendix H: SHPO Response Letter Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 3 6. Project Description a. Provide the brief project summary to be published in the EQB Monitor, (approximately 50 words). The Pioneer Trail Business Park is a proposed five lot industrial/business park with 10 buildings and a new public road located on 56.54 acres at the northwest corner of Highway 55 and Pioneer Trail. 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. Cushman & Wakefield propose a new industrial park named “Pioneer Trail Business Park”. The project will be located in the City of Corcoran on 56.65 acres, according to the proposer’s submitted documents. The project will create five lots and 10 buildings for gas/convenience, offices, retail, warehousing, light manufacturing, warehouse and mini storage/self storage uses. Six buildings are proposed for the mini storage/self storage use on one 27.3 acre lot, totaling 199,000 gross square feet of building area. Four buildings are proposed for light industrial, office and commercial uses totaling 187,600 gross square feet of building area. These four buildings are proposed on four lots ranging in size from 2.8 to 8.3 acres. Existing Site Conditions A parcel tabulation is provided below and parcels will be referred to as Parcel A, Parcel B, Parcel C and Parcel D. The project is located on four separate parcels in the city of Corcoran. Parcel B is vacant and the remaining parcels are used for agricultural purposes. Wetlands are present on the site and shown the Concept Plan does not show plans for wetland preservation. Table 1: Pioneer Trail Business Park Parcel Areas Parcel PID Address Total Parcel Acres Parcel A 32-119-23-34-0013 6210 Pioneer Trail 9.81 Parcel B 32-119-23-34-0007 22733 Wagon Wheel Lane 0.99 Parcel C 32-119-23-43-0005 52 Address Unassigned 26.03 Parcel D 32-119-23-43-0006 52 Address Unassigned 19.71 TOTAL 56.54 Concept Plan Figure 1, Appendix A shows the Concept Plan for this project. The Concept Plan shows a preliminary concept for five lots, a new public street, stormwater ponds, buildings, drive aisles, loading docks, parking and septic pad locations. The proposer has applied to the City of Corcoran for a PUD Concept Plan Review and the City Council generally indicated support for the concept. The attached Concept Plan is consistent with the plan submitted to the City by the proposer. The project will include multiple commercial and industrial businesses in addition to the mini storage/self storage facility. The mini storage/self storage facility will make up the majority of the development with six buildings totaling approximately 199,000 gross square feet of building area on a 27.3 acre parcel. Specific users have not been identified for the remaining four proposed buildings. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 4 Table 2: Lot Tabulation Description Proposed Lot Lot Width Description Number of Buildings Gross Building Area 1 545 ft. Gas/Convenience 1 10,300 sq. ft. 2 335 ft. Office/Retail 1 11,300 sq. ft. 3 785 ft. Office Warehouse/Light Manufacturing/Distribution 1 66,000 sq. ft. 4 1,045 ft. Office Warehouse/Light Manufacturing/Distribution 1 100,000 sq. ft. 5 1,890 ft. Mini Storage/Self Storage 6 199,000 sq. ft. Infrastructure and Site Improvements A new public road is proposed with the development, providing access to the site from Pioneer Trail to the west. The public road is proposed in accordance with the City of Corcoran’s plans for the Southwest District. The Feasibility Study in Appendix A indicates a traffic signal control is required at the intersection of Pioneer Trail and Highway 55, in addition to dedicated turn lanes on southbound Pioneer Trail. Dedicated turn lane improvements are also required at the intersection of Pioneer Trail and the new public road. The site is located within a future study area for a proposed trunk sanitary sewer system. Public water and sewer are not available to the site and are not likely to be available within two years. While development is typically restricted without access to these services, the Corcoran City Council indicated support for development in advance of these services being available to the site. The proposer plans to provide septic and well for the development until it can connect to municipal services when they are available in the future. The Feasibility Study notes the site is in a future well exploration area as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. While the City has no plans to install a well in the near term, the Feasibility Study recommends that a lot within the site be platted and deeded to the City for future water well exploration. The Concept Plan shows two large stormwater ponds for the development. Construction and Timing of Site Development Activities The site will be graded for the construction of streets, parking, buildings and stormwater ponds. Phases are anticipated to develop based on market conditions. c. Project magnitude Table 3: Project Magnitude Description Number Total project acreage 56.54 Linear project length Not applicable Number and type of residential units Not applicable Residential building area (in square feet) Not applicable Commercial building area (in square feet) 21,600 Industrial building area (in square feet) 76,000 Institutional building area (in square feet) Not applicable Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 5 Description Number Other uses – Self-Storage (in square feet) 199,000 Structure height(s) Limited to 45 ft. 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 project will allow development of additional commercial and industrial businesses in Corcoran and bring a high quality business park to Corcoran. e. Are future stages of this development including development on any other property planned or likely to happen? Yes ☒ No If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for environmental review. f. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? Yes ☒ No If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review. 7. Cover Types The before cover types in Table 4 correspond with the cover types shown in Figure 7 in Appendix A. Table 4: Cover Types Cover Types Before (acres) After (acres) Wetlands (medium tall grass and short grasses) 12.94 2.55 Deep Water/Streams N/A 0 Wooded/Forest 6.73 0 Brush/Grassland (grassland)(green short grasses) 5.25 0.5 Cropland (fallow)(hayfield) 31.52 0 Lawn/Landscaping N/A 20.89 Impervious Surface (bldgs. Pavement) 0.03 29.3 Stormwater Pond N/A 3.4 Other (describe) N/A N/A TOTAL 56.64 acres 8. Permits and Approvals List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals, certifications and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public 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. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 6 Table 5: Permits and Approvals Unit of Government Type of Application Status Federal U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Section 404 Clean Waters Act – Wetland Permit To be applied for, if required State Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Section 401 Water Quality Certification To be applied for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Construction Permit To be applied for Demolition Notification Checklist To be applied for Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Abandonment of Water Wells To be applied for Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) Water Appropriation Permit To be applied for, if needed Local Hennepin County Right-of-way Excavation Permit To be applied for, if needed City of Corcoran EAW / EIS Need Decision Draft prepared Planned Unit Development (PUD) Sketch Plan Reviewed Wetland Conservation Act (Boundary Approval/Replacement Plan) Wetland delineation approved, mitigation plan to be applied for Rezoning To be applied for Preliminary PUD Development Plan To be applied for Preliminary Plat To be applied for Final PUD Development Plan To be applied for Final Plat To be applied for Erosion Control, Grading, and Stormwater Permit To be applied for, if needed Building Permits To be applied for Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Stormwater Permit, Erosion Control, and Site Plan Approval To be applied for 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 Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 7 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. The existing land use of the project site is agricultural. A small portion of the site consists of wetlands. Adjacent parcels north of the site have agricultural and farm homestead land uses. There are single family residential land uses to the northeast and northwest of the site, and to the west across Pioneer Trail. Properties adjacent to the east of the site have light-industrial land uses. Properties to the south are located across Highway 55 in the City of Medina and have vacant or residential land uses. Table 6 below provides an inventory of existing land uses adjacent to the project site. Table 6: Adjacent Area Land Uses Adjacent Use Location Agricultural North of the Parcels C and D Residential Homes North of Parcel A and B Northeast of Parcel D Light Industrial East of Parcel D Highway 55 South of the development 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 Corcoran’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (Figure 9, Appendix A) designates the project parcels as Light Industrial. The Light Industrial category is intended to provide areas for manufacturing, warehousing, automotive, trucking, office and other related industrial uses. The project consists of commercial and light-industrial uses. Parcel A is proposed for a gas/convenience use which may require a Comprehensive Plan amendment to guide the parcel as Commercial. The City’s Comprehensive Plan includes maps that identify wetlands and ecologically significant areas and a set of goals and policies that focus on preservation and protection of important and high-quality areas as development occurs. The Wetland Locations and Classifications map from the Introduction and Community Background chapter in the Comprehensive Plan the indicates that Parcels B and C contain wetlands but the site does not contain any ecologically significant natural areas. The Comprehensive Plan also shows the site within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and is part of the Future Study Area for the sanitary sewer staging plan. The City’s Comprehensive Plan also identifies a potential future well exploration area in the vicinity of the site. The Feasibility Study in Appendix G indicates that the City does not have near term plans to install a well in this area but may eventually install a municipal well in southwest Corcoran. The Feasibility Study requests an individual lot be platted and dedicated to the City for future water well exploration. Stormwater ponds will be required to comply with State, watershed and local stormwater standards. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 8 iii. Zoning, including special districts or overlays such as shoreland, floodplain, wild and scenic rivers, critical area, agricultural preserves, etc. Parcels A, C and D are zoned Light Industrial (I-1) district and Parcel B is zoned Urban Reserve (UR) district. The site is located within the City of Corcoran’s Southwest District that establishes a “gateway” to the City around the intersection of Highway 55 and County Road 19 west of this site. The Southwest District plan provides direction for site development, streets and public amenities in the area surrounding the intersection of Highway 55 and County Road 19 to the west of this site. The Southwest District plan guides that access for both business and industrial uses shall be from a new public road, which the proposer has provided in their Concept Plan. There are four wetlands on the site which are regulated by the Wetland Overlay District. The Wetland Overlay District provides standards for wetland protection and buffering. Table 7: Project Parcel Zoning Parcel Zoning Parcel A Light Industrial (I-1) Parcel B Urban Reserve (UR) Parcel C Light Industrial (I-1) Parcel D Light Industrial (I-1) 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 project is consistent with the goals and policies stated in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan which guides the site for light industrial uses. The proposed project is consistent with the guiding for Parcels B, C and D. Proposed Lots 1 and 2 on Parcel A are planned for gas/convenience and office/retail uses which may not be compatible with the light industrial designation. As shown on the Concept Plan, the project appears to preserve two wetlands but will impact the other two wetlands. Where wetlands are altered or destroyed, the mitigation must be provided to recreate the functions and values of the wetland. The development is within Stage 3 (2030-2035) of the sanitary sewer staging plan and in the Future Study Area for sanitary sewer. Development in the MUSA is deemed premature until sanitary sewer and water are available. The City Council will need to grant either a variance or waiver through the PUD process to allow development in advance of these services. The Zoning Ordinance regulates that off-street loading areas be screened from adjacent residentially zoned or guided property and will impact the loading areas on proposed Lots 3 and 4. The Southwest District Design Guidelines indicate that future driveways and other direct access from new developments to Highway 55 shall not be permitted. Access to the business park is provided through the new public road that connects with Pioneer Trail. The Southwest District Guidelines show the public road extending through the site to a connection with Rolling Hills Road to the east. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 9 c. Identify measures incorporated into the proposed project to mitigate any potential incompatibility as discussed in Item 9b above. The project will not extend sanitary sewer and water which are not yet available to the site and development is considered premature without access to these services. Well and septic systems will be provided to proposed Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 until the development is able to connect with municipal services. Preserved wetlands on this site will be consistent with City ordinances pertaining to wetland protection and buffering. The gas/convenience and office/retail uses may require a comprehensive plan amendment from Light Industrial to Commercial. The comprehensive plan amendment is required when a user is determined and the need for change is confirmed. 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. The surficial and bedrock geology for Hennepin County has been mapped in the Minnesota Geological Survey’s Geologic Atlas of Hennepin County1. Surficial deposits in the Project Area are comprised of loam to clay loam diamict with scattered pebbles, cobbles, and rare boulders. On average, the composition of this very coarse-grained sand fraction is 41 percent shale. The surrounding area is also comprised of patchy sections of organic detritus and organic clayey silt to sand. The bedrock geology of the western portion of the Project Area consists of St. Lawrence Formation, which is dolomitic, feldspathic siltstone with interbedded, very fine-grained sandstone and shale. The eastern portion of the Project Area consists of Jordan Sandstone, a medium- to coarse-grained, friable quartzose sandstone, and Mazomanie Formation, a fine- to medium-grained, cross-stratified, generally friable, quartzose sandstone. The estimated depth from the land surface to the bedrock surface is approximately 326 to 400 in the west portion of the Project Area and approximately 300 to 325 in the eastern portion of the Project Area. According to the surrounding water well logs on the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Minnesota Well Index (MWI)2, no wellhead protection areas or drinking water supply management areas are within the Project Area. The Loretto Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) and Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) are located approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the Project Area and would not be affected by the Project. The drinking water supply management area vulnerability ranking is classified as low. No known karst or sinkhole features are present within the Project Area. b. Soils and topography - Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications and descriptions, including limitations of soils. 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 1 Steenberg, Julia R.; Bauer, Emily J; Chandler, V.W.; Retzler, Andrew J; Berthold, Angela J; Lively, Richard S. (2018). C- 45, Geologic Atlas of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Minnesota Geological Survey. Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/200919. 2 MDH. Minnesota Well Index. July 15, 2019. https://mnwellindex.web.health.state.mn.us/mwi/ Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 10 stabilization, soil corrections or other measures. Erosion/sedimentation control related to stormwater runoff should be addressed in response to Item 11.b.ii. According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, the Project Area is comprised of six soil types. Soil within the Project Area is associated mainly with moraines, hillslopes, and lake plains. The soil types include Lerdal loam (moraines, somewhat poorly drained), Hamel/overwash-Hamel complex (ground moraines, somewhat poorly drained to poorly drained), Angus- Kilkenny complex (Hills on moraines, moderately well drained to well drained), and Lester-Kilkenny complex (Hillslopes, moraines, ground moraines, and lake plains; moderately well drained to well drained). Figure 2, Appendix A identifies soil classifications within and in the vicinity of the Project Area. Table 8 lists hydrologic soil groups. The four hydrologic soil groups are: • Group B: Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained, or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. • Group C: Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. • Group D: Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high-water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. Table 8: NRCS Soils within the Project Area Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Percent Slopes Hydrologic Soil Group Erosion Rating Acres Approx. Percent of Project Area L40B Angus-Kilkenny complex 2-6 B/C/D Not Rated 21.6 38.3 L41C2 Lester-Kilkenny complex 6-10 C/D Moderate 15.5 27.4 L36A Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex 0-3 C/D Not Rated 8.5 15.1 L41D2 Lester-Kilkenny complex 10-16 C Moderate 6.7 11.8 L35A Lerdal loam 1-3 C/D Not Rated 4.2 7.4 L41E Lester-Kilkenny complex 16-22 C Not Rated 0.0 0.1 Source: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Hennepin County Soil Survey Topography within the Project Area is generally flat with no slopes greater than 22 percent identified. The soil composition overall has a slower infiltration rate, resulting in a higher runoff potential. In areas with steep slopes, special consideration will be given to prevent erosion during construction, such as erosion control blankets, along with vegetation establishment to permanently stabilize side slopes and any areas impacted as a result of construction. 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. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 11 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 1 mile of the project. Include DNR Public Waters Inventory number(s), if any. Surface Waters A review of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) geospatial data determined that no lakes, trout streams or trout lakes3, wildlife lakes4, migratory waterfowl feeding/resting lakes5, or outstanding resource value waters 6 are present within the Project Area. Based on a review of Hennepin County geospatial data, no county ditches are located within the project area. Peter Lake (North Bay) is located approximately 0.25 miles southeast of the Project Area, south of Highway 55, and Jubert Lake is located approximately 0.25 miles north of the Project Area. Figure 3, Appendix A identifies surface waters in the vicinity of the Project Area. DNR Public Waters No DNR Public Waters and Watercourses are located within the Project Area (Figure 3, Appendix A). Table 9 lists DNR Public Waters and Public Watercourses within one mile of the Project Area7. The proposed project would not encroach into these DNR Public Waters and Watercourses. Table 9: DNR Public Waters within One Mile of the Project Area Name Public Water ID Type Jubert 27016500 Public Water Basin Morin 27042300 Public Water Basin Peter (Main Basin) 27014701 Public Water Basin Peter (North Bay) 27014702 Public Water Basin Scott 27110200 Public Water Wetland Unnamed Basin 27042200 Public Water Wetland Unnamed Basin 27049400 Public Water Wetland Unnamed Basin 27049500 Public Water Wetland Unnamed Basin 27049700 Public Water Wetland 3 DNR. State Designated Trout Streams, Minnesota. Date of content: May 14, 2020. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-trout- stream-designations 4 DNR. Designated Wildlife Lakes. Date of content: December 8, 2016. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-designated- wildlife-lakes 5 DNR Migratory Waterfowl Feeding and Resting Areas. Date of content: December 30, 2016. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-migratory-waterfowl-areas 6 DNR. Lakes of Biological Significance. Date of content: July 7, 2020. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-lakes-of- biological-signific 7 DNR. Public Waters Basin and Watercourse Delineations. Date of content: June 10, 2020. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-mn-public-waters Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 12 Name Public Water ID Type Unnamed Basin 27049800 Public Water Wetland Unnamed Basin 27049900 Public Water Wetland Rush Creek, South Fork M-062-004-002 Public Watercourse Unnamed Watercourse M-062-004-002-004- 001 Public Watercourse Unnamed Watercourse M-064-0046-002 Public Watercourse Wetland Resources Based on a review of the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) data, time-lapsed aerial imagery, and a wetland delineation performed by Kjolhaug Environmental Services on November 14, 2019, four wetlands are present within the Project Area (Figure 3, Appendix A). Wetland 1 is located along the western boundary of the Project Area and consists of a shallow marsh and partially farmed seasonally flooded basin wetland. Wetland 1 is classified as a temporarily flooded, emergent palustrine wetland (PEM1A) in the NWI database. Wetland 2 is located along the northern border of the Project Area and consists of a farmed seasonally flooded basin wetland. Wetland 2 is identified in the NWI database as a temporarily/seasonally flooded, emergent, farmed palustrine wetland PEM1Af/PEM1C wetland. Wetland 3 is located near the center of the Project Area and consists of a shallow marsh and partially farmed seasonally flooded basin wetland. Wetland 3 is classified in the NWI database as a PEM1A wetland. Wetland 4 is located along the southern border of the Project Area near Highway 55 and consists of a shallow marsh and partially farmed seasonally flooded basin wetland. Wetland 4 was not identified within the NWI. Table 10 summarizes wetlands delineated in the project area. Figure 3, Appendix A identifies wetlands and other aquatic resources within or in the vicinity of the Project Area. Appendix B includes the wetland delineation report and WCA Notice of Decision. Table 10: Wetlands within the Project Area Wetland ID Circular 39* Cowardin Eggers & Reed Dominant Vegetation Size (Acres Onsite) 1 1/3 PEM1Af/ PEM1C Seasonally Flooded Basin, Shallow Marsh Reed canary grass, cattail, smartweed, scattered sedges 1.75 2 1 PEM1Af Seasonally Flooded Basin Sparse vegetation, field nutsedge 0.60 3 1/3 PEM1Af/ PEM1C Seasonally Flooded Basin, Shallow Marsh Cattail, reed canary grass, smartweed 0.33 4 1/3 PEM1Af/ PEM1C Seasonally Flooded Basin, Shallow Marsh Cattail, reed canary grass, sedges 0.47 *Type 1 wetland types include seasonally flooded basins or flats; Type 3 wetlands indicate inland shallow fresh marshes. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 13 MPCA 303d Impaired Waters List No 303d impaired waters designated by the MPCA8 were identified within the Project Area based on the draft 2022 impaired waters list. One impaired water, Peter Lake (North Bay), Assessment Unit Identification (AUID) 27-0147-02, is located within one mile of the site, approximately 0.25 miles southeast of the Project Area (Figure 3, Appendix A). Peter Lake (North Bay) is impaired for nutrients. Floodway/Floodplain A FIRMette was generated through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) mapping tool, which indicates that the project area is located with Zone X, an area of minimal flood hazard. Appendix C includes the FEMA FIRMette for the Project Area. 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. 1) Depth to groundwater Based on a review of domestic water wells located near the Project Area, the depth to static water level ranges from 78 feet and 140 feet. 2) MDH Wellhead Protection Area The Project Area is not within a MDH Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) or Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA)9. The Loretto DWSMA and WHPA are located approximately 0.75 miles southwest of the Project Area, south of Highway 55. The vulnerability ranking of this DWSMA is low. Figure 4 in Appendix A illustrates the location of the Loretto DWSMA and WHPA in relation to the Project Area. 3) Onsite and/or nearby wells A search of the MDH MWI database indicates that there are no wells present within the Project Area 10. Braun Intertec Corporation completed site reconnaissance as a part of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and no indications of wells were observed at the site at the time of the site visit. If any wells are wells are found during construction, they will be sealed and abandoned in compliance with MDH regulations by a licensed contractor. Eight wells within a 500-foot radius of the Project area. Table 11 tabulates documented wells within 500 feet of the Project Area based on the MDH CWI database. Figure 4 in Appendix A identifies the locations of wells in the vicinity of the project. 8 MPCA. Impaired Waters Viewer (IWAV). Data is based on Draft 2022 Impaired Waters List. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/impaired-waters-viewer-iwav 9 MDH. Source Water Protection Web Map Viewer. https://mdh.maps.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=8b0db73d3c95452fb45231900e977be4 10 MDH. Minnesota Well Index. July 15, 2019. https://mnwellindex.web.health.state.mn.us/mwi/ Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 14 Table 11: CWI Wells within 500 feet of the Project Area Well ID Use Type Status Elevation (msl ft.) Well Depth (ft.) Static Water Level (ft.) 248501 Public supply/ non- community, non-transient Active 1049 Unknown Unknown 544660 Domestic Active 1016 202 78 583329 Domestic Active 1061 205 140 649309 Domestic Active 1060 264 130 643977 Domestic Active 1050 180 123 764194 Domestic Active 1051 170 130 155069 Domestic Active 1030 291 120 149424 Domestic Active 1028 203 110 b. Describe surface water and groundwater features on or near the site in a.i. and a.ii. 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. 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. A feasibility study11 was completed to evaluate the wastewater treatment options for the Project. Based on the findings of this study, it was determined that connecting the Project to the existing sanitary sewer and wastewater system would not be viable. The following paragraphs summarize the findings of the feasibility study. The closest existing City of Corcoran sanitary sewer is located approximately three miles east of the Project Area. The distance alone would render connection to this system impractical and not cost effective. Furthermore, the sewer system at that location was not designed to include wastewater from this proposed development. In the City’s previous 2030 Comprehensive Plan, wastewater from this Project and the surrounding area of Southwest Corcoran was anticipated to be served via a connection into Medina, which borders Highway 55 to the south of the Project Area. However, during the time that the City prepared the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, it was determined that Medina had slowed their staging of sewer system development in areas towards southwest Corcoran, and that both Medina and the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) no longer envisioned wastewater from southwest Corcoran being directed through Medina (and generally eastward along Highway 55). For this reason, the City of Corcoran’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan states that the method and timing of regional wastewater service to Southwest Corcoran would be determined through future study. The potential options for regional service would be longer-term (over ten years) and very high-cost options, resulting in the need for future study. Another option that was considered was to connect to the City of Loretto’s wastewater system. The City of Loretto recently transitioned from operating their own permitted wastewater treatment facility to a regionalized connection, i.e., they connected into the Independence 11 Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. DRAFT Highway 55 Infrastructure Feasibility Study. March 2022. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 15 wastewater forcemain, which is part of a local regional system that ultimately discharges into the regional sewer system of the Twin Cities area (managed by MCES). Operation of the Independence forcemain and the local regional system is governed by a Quad-City Agreement amongst Loretto, Greenfield, Independence, and Medina. Connection of the proposed development into Loretto and the wider regional system was determined to not be viable for two reasons. First, the system was not designed to include significant future growth. Second, the infrastructure would need to reach the north edge of Loretto which would likely not be cost effective as it would require a lift station, approximately 1½ miles of forcemain, a directionally drilled/cased crossing of State Highway 55, as well as long-term operation and maintenance costs for the connecting infrastructure. Additionally, if the existing Loretto sewer system does not have enough available capacity to transfer this development-added flow to the south side of Loretto, additional force main length and a cased crossing of the railroad would also be required. 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. Given the limitations with connecting to the sewer system, it was determined that the most viable option for wastewater discharge generated by the Project would be to install an individual subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS) for each parcel as currently proposed. Given the typically clayey soils in the area, these systems would utilize septic tank(s), with treated effluent being pumped to mound systems for further treatment/infiltration. The proposed gas station will have somewhat higher-strength wastewater discharge, which will likely require additional treatment unit(s) compared to the other lots. Hennepin County is the governing authority for permitting and tracking the installation, operation, maintenance, and enforcement of all SSTSs in the City of Corcoran. At some point in the future, when the City of Corcoran’s sewer and water systems are extended to the Project Area, the City will require all of the lots to connect to City water and sewer systems. Therefore, an 80-foot street right-of-way is required to accommodate a future watermain and gravity sewer to be installed along the proposed road. 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. The project would not result in wastewater discharges to surface waters. 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. Pre-Construction Stormwater Runoff Under existing conditions, the Project Area consists of agricultural land. Surface water runoff drains towards existing wetlands areas and roadway ditches. No existing stormwater features are present within the existing Project Area. Pollutants typically associated with agricultural areas Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 16 include pesticides, sediment, nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium) from fertilizers, and metals. Post-Construction Stormwater Runoff The proposed project will increase impervious surfaces consisting of proposed buildings, parking areas, and roadways. The increased impervious surface areas will result in higher runoff rates, volumes, and pollutants compared to the existing conditions. Stormwater best management practices (BMPs) will be constructed to mitigate stormwater runoff rate, volumes, and pollutant loading. It is anticipated that the project will include wet sedimentation ponds with filtration benches to provide stormwater treatment. Preliminary locations for the proposed stormwater BMPs in the conceptual plan (Figure 1, Appendix A). The proposed drainage design will be confirmed as the project design is developed and will comply with all applicable local and state regulatory requirements. The MPCA will require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction Stormwater permit to be obtained for the project and all design since more than one acre of land will be disturbed by the proposed project. Project construction will adhere to NPDES permitting requirements. The project will also adhere to the City of Corcoran and Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission (ECWMC) stormwater requirements. A Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required in accordance with MPCA and City of Corcoran stormwater requirements. A SWPPP be prepared during final project design and submitted for approval prior to construction of the project. Erosion control will utilize temporary sediment basins with ditches and check dams (sized per permit guidance), temporary ground cover where construction has paused, and perimeter control to avoid erosion and sedimentation throughout the site. Stockpiles will be stabilized when not in use and have the stockpile perimeter controlled. All permanent slopes 4:1 or steeper will have erosion control blankets installed. 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. Dewatering It is not anticipated that project construction would require dewatering and groundwater appropriation. If temporary dewatering is required during construction, a DNR Water Appropriation Permit would be required if dewatering activities exceed 10,000 gallons per day or one million gallons per year. The extent and duration of any potential dewatering requirements will be confirmed as the project design develops and all required permits will be obtained prior to project construction. Water Supply The closest existing City of Corcoran potable watermain is located approximately three miles east of the Project Area. The distance renders connection to this system impractical and would not be cost effective. Neighboring homes and businesses utilize private wells, and likewise, private wells Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 17 are the most viable option for the proposed development. Review of well logs for these neighboring homes and businesses suggest that wells located in this development would be completed in the quaternary buried aquifer (usually artesian). These wells are typically four-inch diameter wells, completed in sand layers. The well depths of adjacent private wells indicate that wells located in the proposed development would be approximately 150 to 200 feet deep. Test pumping is commonly indicated at 20 to 30 gallons per minute (gpm). Wells completed in the underlying bedrock would also be an option, though at a higher cost. The developer will need to install fire protection systems in accordance with public safety requirements, as determined by the fire marshal. This may require installation of water storage tank that would serve as a reservoir to supply a building’s fire suppression system. Corcoran’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan identified a potential future well exploration area in the vicinity of this site. Although there are no plans to install a municipal well in the near term, the City may eventually install municipal well(s) in southwest Corcoran. As such, the City may consider siting a potential municipal well in the upland area slightly west of Building F of Lot 5, at the northern edge of the property. Given various well setback requirements and the need for the City to own the property within 50 feet of the well, the City would need an outlot designated for this purpose at the northern property edge (approximately 110 by 110-foot area), which would allow for the possibility of siting a future municipal well near the center of the outlot, along with a small wellhouse. An easement for a narrow access road would also be required between the street and the well site. At some point in the future, the City would install a test well to verify the suitability of this location for a municipal well (or conversely, to rule it out). If suitable, installation of the municipal well, wellhouse, and access road would occur at that time. As noted in the wastewater section, the developer must provide an 80-foot street right-of-way, which will provide an adequate width such that future City watermain can be installed along the south side of the road. iv. Surface Waters b) 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. Four wetlands are located within the Project Area covering a combined 3.15 acres. Complete avoidance of these wetland will not be feasible with the proposed project. Based on the preliminary project design, it is anticipated that the project will avoid impacts to Wetland 1 and Wetland 2. The project is anticipated to encroach into portions of Wetland 3 and Wetland 4. Minimization of impacts to wetlands will be evaluated as the project design advances. Figure 5 in Appendix A illustrates the potential impacts to wetlands resulting from the proposed project. Table 12 identifies the potential wetland impacts resulting from the proposed project. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 18 Table 12: Wetlands within the Project Area Wetland ID Circular Cowardin Size (Acres Onsite) Potential Impact (acres) 1 1/3 PEM1Af/ PEM1C 1.75 0 2 1 PEM1Af 0.60 0 3 1/3 PEM1Af/ PEM1C 0.33 0.33 4 1/3 PEM1Af/ PEM1C 0.47 0.47 Total Potential Impact 0.8 Impacts to wetlands are regulated by the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The City of Corcoran is the WCA local governmental unit (LGU). It is anticipated that impacts to regulated wetlands will be mitigated through wetland banking credits within the same Wetland Bank Service Area. The Project Area is located in Wetland Bank Service Area 7. Current regulations require wetland impacts within this area of the state are replace at a minimum ratio of 2:1. Mitigation for unavoidable permanent wetland impacts will be provided in accordance with all regulations and requirements in place at the time of final design and permitting. Wetlands that are avoided will be required to comply with the City of Corcoran’s wetland buffer requirements. c) 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. No surface waters are present within the Project Area. Surface waters present in the vicinity of the Project area are separated by roads and existing development. The Project would not impact surface waters in the vicinity of the Project area. 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 Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) was completed in September 2018 by Braun Intertec Corporation to assess the presence of potential contamination. It should be noted that the Phase I ESA only covers the eastern portion of the Project Area, and thus only discusses contamination potential within and around this portion. The Phase I ESA included a records review, interviews, aerial Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 19 photographs, site reconnaissance, and a summary of land use activities. Appendix D includes the executive summary from the Phase I ESA. Based on the results of the Phase I ESA, the eastern portion of the Project Area was historically utilized as cultivated agricultural land from at least 1947 to present day. The surrounding area has historically been agricultural land and rural residences except for one property to the southeast. This property was a farmstead from 1937 to 1947, and then, through various removals and rebuilds noted from aerial photographs taken in 1956, 1960, 1967-1974, and 1978-1984converted to a commercial use. Today, this property is owned by an electric and lighting service company. The Phase I ESA did not identify any recognized environmental conditions, controlled recognized environmental conditions, or historical recognized environmental conditions. No additional site investigations were recommended based on the findings of the Phase I ESA. A review of the MPCA’s What’s in My Neighborhood (WIMN) database 12 was conducted to identify documented potentially contaminated sites within or in the vicinity of the entire Project Area. No WIMN records are located within the Project Area and no records are located within approximately 1,000 feet of the Project Area. Two tank sites are located northwest of the Project Area along Pioneer Trail including one underground storage tank site approximately 1,500 feet away, and a second aboveground storage tank site approximately 1,800 feet away. Additionally, two sites are located approximately 2,000 feet west of the Project Area along Highway 55 including a very small quantity hazardous waste generator and an aboveground tank site. None of the aforementioned sites have a history of leaks or spills. The Phase I ESA and the review of the MPCA’s What’s in My Neighborhood (WIMN) did not identify any known potentially contaminated or hazardous materials within or in the vicinity of the Project Area that would be exposed or exacerbated by the construction of the proposed project. In the event that potentially contaminated soils or other potentially hazardous materials are encountered during construction, plans will be developed to properly handle and treat contaminated soil and/or groundwater. Any contaminated soils or other potentially hazardous materials encountered during construction will be handled and disposed of in accordance with MPCA and any other applicable requirements. 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 Waste Construction wastes will be typical of office/light industrial developments. Construction wastes will be primarily non-hazardous and would be managed as municipal solid waste (MSW) or construction/ demolition debris. Hazardous wastes in the form of used oils/lubricants, waste paints, or other materials may be generated during construction. The contractor will be required to manage and dispose of all construction-generated waste in accordance with MPCA requirements and all other applicable regulatory requirements. Construction wastes will either be recycled or stored in approved containers and disposed of in the proper facilities. Any excess soil material that is not suitable for use onsite would become the property of the contractor and would be disposed of properly. All solid waste will be managed according to MPCA and other regulatory requirements. 12 MPCA. What’s in My Neighborhood. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/whats-my-neighborhood Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 20 The Project Area does not contain existing buildings or structures are present. No demolition of existing buildings or structures would be required during construction. Operational Waste The project would generate solid waste during operation of the development, which is anticipated to include storage condominiums, office/showroom/retail, gas station/convenience store, and office warehouse/light manufacturing/distribution uses. Solid waste generated during operation of the development will be typical of waste generated by these office/light industrial uses and would be primarily managed as mixed municipal solid waste (MSW). CalRecycle provides a list of estimated solid waste generate rates for office, industrial, service, and other establishments for general planning purposes.13 Based on estimated solid waste generate rates of 1.42 lbs. per 100 square feet per day for office/warehouse uses and 0.9 lbs. per 100 square feet per day for auto service station uses, it was estimated that the project may produces approximately 1,040 tons of MSW per year. The collection of MSW would be managed waste hauler licensed by the City of Corcoran. The project will adhere to all MPCA requirements and other regulations pertaining to the use, handling and disposal of solid waste. Recycling areas will be provided in compliance with the Minnesota State Building code. 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 anticipated fuel storage tanks will be installed as part of the proposed gas station/convenience store facility. The number and size of the tanks will be identified as the project design develops. Based on fuel storage tank requirements for gas stations of a similar size in the area, it is anticipated that approximately seven to eight fuel storage tanks will be installed at the facility ranging from 8,000 to 20,000 gallons in storage capacity. The tank owner will be required to register with the MPCA and adhere to the design and operating regulations pursuant to Minnesota Rules Chapter 7150. The owner will be required to register the fuel storage tanks with the MPCA and comply with periodic inspection requirements and spill control and countermeasures. 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. Construction equipment may require the limited use of potentially hazardous materials, such as gasoline or diesel fuels, motor oils, hydraulic fluids, and other lubricants. Vehicles responsible for the transportation of hazardous materials will be equipped with spill kits for rapid response to any spills and refueling procedures will be implemented to eliminate leakage. Additionally, all fuels, oils, and lubricants will be stored in containment apparatuses while not in use or when being stored. Construction staff will be trained to spot and appropriately respond to potential spills. In the event that a leak or spill incident occurs, the contractor will be required to respond in accordance with MPCA containment and remedial 13 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 21 action procedures. A Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures plan will be prepared by a Minnesota Professional Engineer pursuant to federal regulations. Section 12.c describes the potential storage and use of hazardous materials during operation of the project. 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 in near the site. The vegetative land cover within the Project Area primarily consists of active agricultural land with limited trees lining the northern and eastern borders. Due to the dominance of agricultural land throughout the Project Area, there is limited habitat available for use by wildlife. Although limited, the tree lines along the field edge could provide avian migration stopover habitat as well as suitable nesting habitat. Therefore, there is a slight potential for migratory birds to be present within the Project Area during the spring, summer, and fall as well as potential for avian species that winter in Central Minnesota. The limited vegetative land cover present within the Project Area and along the borders may provide habitat for urban wildlife species, such as mice, rabbits, raccoons, and squirrels, among others. Four farmed wetlands (3.15 acres) were identified within the Project Area, but it is anticipated that the wetlands support a limited diversity of aquatic species due to their disturbed nature and their isolation from larger, less disturbed wetland communities. 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-____) and/or correspondence number (ERDB _____________) 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. State-Listed Threatened and Endangered Species Under Stantec’s Limited License to Use Copyrighted Material (LA 1005) related to Rare Features Data, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) was searched in January 2022 to identify species within a one-mile radius of the Project Area. The NHIS search did not indicate any records within the proposed Project Area. Records of rare species were identified within in the one-mile review area including the trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator, State special concern species). A concurrence request was submitted to the DNR for review and is included in Appendix E. Trumpeter Swan (Cygnus buccinator) During the breeding season, trumpeter swans use small ponds and lakes or bays on larger water bodies that have approximately 100 meters of open water for take-off and have extensive beds of emergent vegetation such as cattails, bulrushes, and sedges. They will commonly use muskrat houses, beaver lodges, exposed hummocks, small islands, and floating platforms to construct their nests. Adult trumpeter swans are primarily herbivorous but will occasionally feed on small crustaceans, fish, and fish eggs. Due to over hunting, Trumpeter swans in Minnesota were declared extirpated in the state in the mid-1900s. Reintroduction efforts began in the 1960s and a survey conducted in 2015 estimated the breeding population to be more than 17,000 individuals. Currently, the leading threat to their population is lead poisoning from lead shot and fishing sinkers but degradation of wetland habitat, power line collisions, and Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 22 illegal hunting. Although repopulation efforts have continued to be successful, the trumpeter swam was included on Minnesota’s List of Endangered and Threatened Species List with the status of special concern due to continued threats to their population.14 The Project Area consists of active agricultural land and does not contain suitable breeding or feeding habitat for the trumpeter swan. Based on a review of the NHIS data, occurrences of trumpeter swans were associated with Morin Lake which is approximately 0.85 miles northeast of the Project Area. Due to the lack of suitable habitat, the project is not anticipated to have an impact on the trumpeter swan. Federally-Listed Threatened and Endangered Species Per a review of the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service’s Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) website, one federally listed species is within the Project Area, the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis, federal threatened species) County: Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) During winter, the northern long-eared bat (NLEB) uses large caves and mines that have large passages and entrances, constant temperatures, and high humidity with no air currents. In summer, the NLEB roosts underneath bark, in cavities, and in crevices of live and dead trees that either retain their bark or provide suitable cavities or crevices.15 In Minnesota, the DNR maintains records of maternity roost trees or a hibernaculum within its NHIS database. Upon review of the DNR NHIS database under Stantec’s license agreement LA-1005, there are no records of NLEB maternity roost trees or a hibernaculum within the Project Area or its vicinity. Additionally, no tree clearing is anticipated to be required as part of this project and there are only a few trees along the perimeter of the Project Area; therefore, the Project will have no effect on NLEB. Migratory Birds According to the USFWS IPaC, there are no migratory birds of concern with the potential to occur within the Project Area. Construction activities and development within the Project Area have the potential to impact birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The MBTA makes it illegal for anyone to take (i.e., to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct) any migratory bird, or the parts, nests, or eggs of such a bird except under the terms of a valid permit issued pursuant to Federal regulations. Under the MBTA, construction activities in grassland, roadsides, wetland, riparian (stream), shrubland, or woodland habitats that would otherwise result in the taking of migratory birds, eggs, young and/or active nests should be avoided. Although the provisions of the MBTA are applicable throughout the entire year, most migratory bird nesting activity in Minnesota occurs approximately from mid-March to August 15, per the DNR. Native Plant Communities and Biodiversity Sites 14 Stucker, S.P., DNR. Rare Species Guide. 2018. https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/rsg/profile.html?action=elementDetail&selectedElement=ABNJB02030 15 USFWS. Northern Long-Eared Bat Fact Sheet. April 2015. https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/508_NLEB%20fact%20sheet.pdf Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 23 Native plant communities, biodiversity sites, and Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Areas (RESA) were reviewed for the area within one mile of the proposed Project Area using the NHIS review trough Stantec’s license LA-1005. No native plant communities or biodiversity sites were noted within the Project Area however a few were noted within one mile of the Project Area. A native plant community (forested rich peatland system) is located approximately 0.55 miles east of the Project Area. Three sites of biodiversity significance ranked as moderate and one ranked as below were identified within one mile of the Project Area. The three moderate ranked biodiversity sites are all located over 0.55 miles east and northeast of the Project Area and the one below ranked site is approximately 0.25 miles north of the Project Area. Four RESA sites extend into the one-mile review area. Of these, two are ranked as high and two ranked as moderate ecological areas. The closest moderate ranked RESA site is located on the south side of Highway 55 opposite of the Project Area but all work being performed is proposed on the north side. The other moderate ranked RESA site is located approximately 0.65 miles northeast of the Project Area. The two high ranked RESA sites are approximately 0.5 miles south and 0.32 miles southeast of the Project Area. All of these RESA sites are located outside of the Project Area and will not be encroached upon by the proposed project. 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. The project is not anticipated to have impacts or adverse effects on federally or state-listed threatened and endangered species in the Project Area due to the lack of suitable habitat for the trumpeter swan, northern-long eared bat, migratory birds, native plant communities, and biodiversity sites. Although the Project Area is unlikely to provide suitable summer habitat for the NLEB, under the Final 4(d) Rule of the ESA, tree clearing, although not expected, is not prohibited as there are no records of NLEB maternity roost trees or a hibernaculum within the Project Area or a 0.25-mile buffer. Urban wildlife may be impacted with the removal of agricultural land, impacts to the land surrounding the agricultural land, and impacts to public road right-of-way within the Project Area; however, these habitat generalist species are typically adaptive to development activities and would likely relocate to similar undeveloped areas in the vicinity or continue to live in the remaining undeveloped areas within the Project Area. d. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources. It is not anticipated that tree removal will be required during construction of the project. If required, removal of vegetation will avoid the NLEB bat pupping season from June 1 through August 15, when possible. The project will avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands to the extent possible. Based on the preliminary design, it is anticipated that the project may avoid impacts to two wetlands and may permanently impact two other wetlands. During construction, erosion control and runoff prevention measures will be implemented. Construction activities that involve soil disturbance can result in the introduction and spread of invasive species. Minnesota statutes (Chapter 18) and local ordinances regulate management of noxious weeds and Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 24 invasive species. Best management practices during construction activities and operation within the Project Area should be implemented to minimize the introduction or spread of noxious weeds and invasive species at the site. 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. Appendix H includes a letter from the Minnesota State Historical Preservation Office with their determination that no known historical structures, archeological sites, or cultural properties are on or near the project site. 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. The Project Area currently consists primarily of agricultural land with wooded field edges. No designated scenic views or vistas are present in the vicinity of the Project. The landscape immediately surrounding the site consists of undeveloped agricultural land to the north, Highway 55 to the south, existing commercial and industrial facilities to the east, and residential uses to the northwest. The primarily visual impact will be the transition of views from agricultural land to buildings, parking lots, and stormwater basins. The development is not expected to include industries that would emit vapor plumes. The Project Area is zoned by the City of Corcoran as light industrial. The project will be required to adhere to the City of Corcoran’s ordinance requirements including building height and form, landscape screening, and lighting. The existing wooded tree line and vegetation along the northern boundary of the Project Area will continue to function as a visual buffer between Project and the residential lots to the northwest. 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. The project does not include heavy industrial uses that would have significant emissions. The project includes light industrial office warehouse, manufacturing, and distribution uses. These facilities may utilize natural gas and electric-powered equipment, which would emit low levels of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) and criteria pollutants, such as Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), and particulate matter (PM). An inventory of potential electric and natural gas equipment to be installed at these facilities is not known at this time as prospective tenants have not been finalized. Generally, air emissions associated by these types of office and light industrial uses are relatively low and the facilities would not require an air permit. However, Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 25 future tenants would be responsible for determining air permit applicability or exemption determinations based on the equipment to be installed with the facility prior to starting construction. The project includes a gas station/convenience store with fuel pumps and would require the installation of underground fuel storage tanks. Gasoline and diesel fuel storage tanks generate low quantities of working and evaporative losses of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and HAPS, typical of all retail fuel stations. Emissions primarily occur during vehicle fueling. Gasoline dispensing facilities are required to install vapor recovery systems to minimize emissions during tanker unloading. A detailed quantitative analysis of stationary source emissions is not possible at this time. However, general estimates of potential emissions arising from the gas station operations and natural gas heating for the planned square footage of the development can be estimated. Table 13 presents estimated maximum potential emissions from the Project. Table 13: Maximum Potential Emissions from Gas Station Fueling and Heating the Proposed Development (tons per year) Pollutant Gas Station (tons per year) Facility Heating (tons per year) Total (tons per year) PM 0.00 0.67 0.67 PM10 0.00 0.67 0.67 PM2.5 0.00 0.67 0.67 SO2 0.00 0.05 0.05 NOx 0.00 8.76 8.76 VOC 17.67 0.48 18.15 CO 0.00 7.36 7.36 Lead 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mercury 0.00 0.00 0.00 HAPS unknown 0.17 0.17 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. The Project Area is located in a CO maintenance area. The Project is expected to generate increased vehicular traffic, which will result in a relatively small increase in CO emissions and other vehicle related emissions. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) developed a CO hot spot screening method designed to identify intersections that may result in CO emissions that exceed air quality standards. MnDOT’s screening method assumes that intersections with a total daily traffic volume exceeding 82,300 vehicles per day may result in potential CO impacts that exceed air quality standards. A traffic impact study was completed for the Project, which is discussed in Section 18. Based on this study, intersections within the study area would not generate traffic exceeding 82,300 vehicles per day. Therefore, it is not anticipated that vehicle emissions generated by the project would have the potential to significantly impact CO air pollution. 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 Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 26 and quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of dust and odors. The Project may generate temporary dust and odors during construction. Potential odors would likely be associated with exhaust from diesel engines and fuel storage. Dust generated during construction will be minimized through standard dust control measures such as applying water to exposed soils and limiting the duration of exposed soils to the extent possible. Dust levels after construction is complete would be minimal as all surfaces will be paved or revegetated. 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. 1) Existing noise levels/sources in the area Existing noise sources include traffic along Highway 55 and connecting roadways and existing commercial and industrial uses adjacent to Highway 55. 2) Nearby sensitive receptors The noise receptors nearest to the Project Area are the residential homes to the northwest of the Project Area. The homes are located approximately 115 to 300 feet northwest of the Project Area. 3) Conformance to state noise standards The project is expected to minimize noise disturbances caused by construction and operation of the project development and will adhere to the noise regulations outlined in Minnesota State Statute 7030.0030 and Corcoran City Ordinances 1060.090 and 82.03 subpart 5. The regulations state that construction activities are prohibited between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and 9:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. on weekends. Furthermore, if the project includes a car wash operation it will comply with Corcoran City Ordinance 1040.100 subpart 4, which states car wash operations shall be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. daily. 4) Quality of life Operation and construction of the Project will generate noise consistent with industrial uses and is not anticipated to affect the quality of life for nearby properties. The Project will be required to adhere to State and city noise regulations. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 27 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 5) availability of transit and/or other alternative transportation modes. 1) Existing and proposed parking spaces The existing project site consists of an undeveloped, agricultural area. No existing parking is available at the site. The Project would provide approximately 505 parking spaces to accommodate the proposed development. 2) Estimated total average daily traffic generated It is anticipated that the proposed development will generate approximately 8,986 trips per day. Table 14 summarizes daily and peak hour traffic. Table 14: Weekday Trip Generation for Proposed Project Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips Weekday Daily Total Trips Light Industrial (Lot 4) 100,000 SF 74 65 487 Light Industrial (Lot 3) 66,000 SF 49 43 321 Retail (Lot 2) 11,300 SF 27 74 615 Storage Facility (Lot 5) 379,000 SF 64 68 648 Gas Station/ Convenience Store (Lot 1) 20 VFP 632 538 6,915 Total 846 788 8,986 Notes: SF denotes square feet, VFP indicates vehicle fueling positions. 3) Maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of occurrence The proposed development is expected to generate 846 trips during the a.m. peak hour (7:30-8:30 a.m.) and 788 during the p.m. peak hour. (5:00 – 6:00 p.m.) Table 9, above, summarizes peak hour traffic generation estimates resulting from the Project. 4) Source of trip generation rates Trip Generation, Eleventh Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. 5) Availability of transit and/or other alternative transportation modes No transit routes or pedestrian facilities are present in the Project Area. 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 Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 28 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. A traffic impact study was completed to evaluate opening year (year 2027) and future (year 2040) traffic volumes and determine the effects of the proposed project on traffic congestion in the area. For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the full development would be completed by 2026. The traffic impact study was completed using Synchro software for the following intersections: • Trunk Highway (TH) 55 and Pioneer Trail • TH 55 and Rolling Hills Road • County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 19 and Pioneer Trail • Pioneer Trail and the proposed development access road Traffic capacity results are present in terms of level of service (LOS) which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. Intersections are ranked from LOS A through LOS F. LOS results are based on the average delay per vehicle. LOS A indicates the best traffic operation and LOS F denotes an intersection where demand exceeds capacity. Typically, intersection LOS A through D is considered to be acceptable traffic flow conditions. Table 15 and Table 16 summarize the results of the intersection operations analysis for the year 2027 and 2040 conditions, respectively. Appendix F includes the traffic impact study which provides additional details. Table 15: Year 2027 No Build and Build Intersection Operations Analysis Intersection Traffic Control 2027 No Build LOS 2027 Build LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour TH 55/ Pioneer Trail NB/SB stop A/E A/E F/F F/F TH 55/ Rolling Hills Road SB stop A/D A/D A/E A/E CSAH 19/ Pioneer Trail EB/WB stop A/B A/B A/C A/C Pioneer Trail/ proposed development access WB stop N/A N/A A/B A/B Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. Results of the traffic operations analysis indicate that under year 2027 No Build conditions, all intersections and movements operate at LOS E or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, indicating acceptable traffic operations. During the 2027 Build conditions, the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection operates at an overall LOS F during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, indicating poor traffic conditions. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 29 Table 16: Year 2040 No Build and Build Intersection Operations Analysis Intersection Traffic Control 2040 No Build LOS 2040 Build LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour TH 55/ Pioneer Trail NB/SB stop A/F A/E F/F F/F TH 55/ Rolling Hills Road SB stop A/D A/D A/F A/F CSAH 19/ Pioneer Trail EB/WB stop A/B A/C A/C A/C Pioneer Trail/ proposed development access WB stop N/A N/A A/B A/B Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. During the 2040 No Build conditions, southbound movements at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection operate at LOS F during the a.m. peak hour. The overall intersections operate at LOS A at all other intersections and all other movements operate at LOS E or better. Under 2040 Build conditions, the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection operate at an overall LOS F during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The southbound movements at TH 55/Rolling Hills Road operate at LOS F during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The TH 55/Rolling Hills Road intersections operates at an overall LOS A. All other movements and intersections operate at LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. c. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate project related transportation effects. TH 55/ Pioneer Trail Intersection Improvements The southbound movements at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection operates at a LOS F during the 2027 and 2040 Build conditions. In order to accommodate traffic generated by the proposed development, traffic signal control was considered at this intersection. A signal warrants analysis was completed for the 2027 Build condition based on criteria outlined in the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The results of the signal warrant analysis indicate that warrants are met at the TH 55/ Pioneer Trail intersection for the 2027 Build condition. Any changes to signal control must be reviewed and approved by MnDOT. An intersection operations analysis was completed a potential traffic signal at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection. Table 17 summarizes the results of this analysis. Table 17: TH 55/Pioneer Trail Intersection Operations Analysis with Traffic Signal Control 2027 Build LOS 2040 Build LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour B/C B/C B/D B/D Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. The TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection operations analysis indicates that under traffic signal control, all movements would operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours under both year 2027 and 2020 Build conditions. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 30 Recommended Mitigation Table 14 summarizes recommended measures to mitigate potential traffic impacts resulting from the proposed development. Table 18: Recommended Traffic Mitigation Measures Intersection Short-Term Measures Long-Term Measures TH 55/ Pioneer Trail • Widen southbound approach to accommodate dedicated left turn lane and a thru/right turn lane. • Install traffic signal. • No additional improvements. TH 55/ Rolling Hills Road • No additional improvements. • No additional improvements. CSAH 19/ Pioneer Trail • No additional improvements. • No additional improvements. Pioneer Trail/ proposed development access • Construct westbound approach with dedicated left and right turn lanes. • Construct a northbound right turn lane. • No additional improvements. 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. It is anticipated that individual lots will be constructed over the next few years and that the full build out will occur by 2026. Currently, it is anticipated that Lot 5 will be constructed first, which proposes a storage unit facility. The timeline of project construction will depend on market conditions and may vary from the current foreseeable construction timeline. The project site is located in the City of Corcoran’s southwest Metropolitan Urban Services Area that has been planned for land uses and development as stated within the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Extension of services to the areas is planned to occur in 2030-2035 and, therefore, the City included estimated calculations within each section of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan that accounted for the increased demand for water, sanitary sewer and transportation improvements. The development is proposed in advance of these services being available to the site, however, septic and well will be provided to the development until a time they are able to connect with municipal services. This EAW considered potential cumulative impacts for future light industrial and commercial development as described in applicable items. Beyond the analysis conducted and provided, there are no known of project cumulative impacts as a result of the proposed project that were not reviewed and considered as part of this process. 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. As stated in previous items, the proposed project site was planned for development to connect to municipal water and wastewater services. Installation of the main trunk sanitary sewer line is not planned Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 31 with this development and is anticipated to be extended to this area in 2030-2035. The project will not require municipal services but is proposed at a density appropriate enough to be connected to municipal services when available. The construction of the public road is consistent with the Southwest District Plan. A light industrial self-storage facility is planned on a parcel immediately to the west of the site and is not expected to interact with the environmental effects of the proposed project. Several residential and senior living development are currently under review by the City. These proposed developments are concentrated towards the eastern portion of the City of Corcoran along County Road 116. One other project is proposed in close proximity to the Project, the proposed Garages Too development located at 2240 Highway 55. An application for this project was submitted to the City of Corcoran in November 2021 requesting approval of a rezoning, site plan, conditional use permit, variance, and preliminary plat to allow for the development of four new buildings for a proposed mini storage/self storage facility adjacent to Highway 55. This proposed project is adjacent to the eastern boundary of the proposed Pioneer Trail Industrial Park. Proposed light industrial development within and immediately adjacent to the Project Area along Highway 55 is consistent with the City of Corcoran’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 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. Potential impacts that were considered as part of the cumulative potential effects evaluation include waters resources, wetlands, public infrastructure, and loss of agricultural land, and transportation. Water Resources The project will convert undeveloped agricultural land into a proposed industrial park, which will increase impervious surfaces compared to existing conditions. As discussed in Section 11 of this EAW, the proposed additional impervious surface area is expected to result in higher runoff rates, volumes, and pollutants compared to the existing conditions. Other proposed developments in the area resulting in the conversion of agricultural and rural residential land to industrial and residential developments will similarly increase the area of impervious surfaces. These future developments will be required to implement stormwater BMPs to mitigate stormwater runoff impacts in accordance with all City, ECWMC, and MPCA approval and permitting requirements. Therefore, adverse cumulative impacts to water quality and quantity are not anticipated. Public Infrastructure As discussed in Section 11, currently the most viable option for water supply and wastewater, is to utilize private wells and a subsurface sewage treatment system. As future development occurs, sewer and water systems may be extended to the Project Area and the proposed development would be required to connect the City water and sewer systems. The Project will be required to accommodate an 80-foot right-of-way to accommodate future expansion to the watermain. The City of Corcoran regulates future development thought its land use policies and zoning requirements. The City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan identified the potential for future municipal well exploration areas and future studies to evaluate sewer and water extension to Southwest Corcoran. The Project would not preclude future extension of the sewer and water systems and will connect to these systems when available. Therefore, adverse cumulative impacts related to public infrastructure are not anticipated. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 32 Wetlands It is anticipated that the Project will impact approximately 0.8 acres of wetlands. Potential wetland impacts will be confirmed during final design and permitting of the Project. Planned development in the vicinity of the Project may also impact wetlands in the surrounding area. Wetlands are protected by state and federal laws, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and WCA, which require avoidance of wetland impacts when possible, and when avoidance is not possible, impacts must be minimized and mitigated. Adverse cumulative impacts to wetlands are not anticipated given the federal and state regulations that mandate avoidance, minimization, and mitigation requirements for wetland impacts. Agricultural Land The Project will convert existing agricultural land to an industrial development. Planned development along the Highway 55 and the surrounding areas may also convert agricultural land to other land uses. The City of Corcoran guides development through the City’s land use plan and zoning codes. The Project is consistent with the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, which identifies the Project Area and adjacent properties along Highway 55 for future light industrial development. The City of Corcoran through their land use policies and zoning requirements, regulates future development and can protect agricultural land from future development as appropriate. Therefore, adverse cumulative impacts to agricultural land are not anticipated. Transportation A Traffic Impact Study for the Project was completed that incorporated future traffic growth and recommended mitigation measures to address traffic impacts. Appendix F includes the Traffic Impact Study. Future developments in the surrounding area that are anticipated to increase traffic congestion, would be required to complete a traffic impact study and identify mitigation measures to address these impacts. Therefore, adverse cumulative impacts related to traffic congestion are not anticipated. 20. Other Potential Environmental Effects If the project may cause any additional environmental effects not addressed by items 1 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 the proposed project. Potential environmental effects have been addressed in Items 1 through 19. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW 33 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 ________________________________ Date _______________________________ Title ________________________________ Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW Appendix A Figures f:\community\radach, joe\temp projects\northmarq\corcoran - pioneer trail\concepts\_corcoran - concept n_211004.dwgSave Date:10/05/211of1 CONCEPT PLAN N LANDSPEC USA 5229 Minnetoga Terrace Minnetonka, MN 55343REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:JTRJTR10/05/21PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK Corcoran, MinnesotaNOTESFigure 1. Concept Plan Carver County Hennepin County Wright County ^_ ¾¾Ç5555 Wagon Wheel L a Pio n e e r T r L35AL35A L35A L35A L36A L36A L36A L36A L44A L44A L44A L44A L16A L9A L22C2 L37B L36A L22C2 L22C2 L22C2 L37BL37B L37B L22C2 L22C2 L22C2 L22C2 L22D2 L22D2 L22D2 L40B L40B L40B L22EL22E L22E L41C2 L41C2 L41C2 L41C2 L23AL23A L23A L23A L24A L41D2 L41D2 L41D2 L41E L24A 32 5 T119 R23W T118 R23W Corcoran Medina Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯V:\2277\active\227704712\03_data\gis_cad\gis\pro\eaw\eaw.aprx Revised: 2022-01-24 By: kjmuellerLegend Project Area NRCS Soils Classification L16A,Muskego, Blue Earth, and Houghton soils, ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes L22C2,Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded L22D2,Lester loam, 10 to 16 percent slopes, moderately eroded L22E,Lester loam, 10 to 22 percent slopes L23A,Cordova loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes L24A,Glencoe clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes L35A,Lerdal loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes L36A,Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes L37B,Angus loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes L40B,Angus-Kilkenny complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes L41C2,Lester-Kilkenny complex, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded L41D2,Lester-Kilkenny complex, 10 to 16 percent slopes, moderately eroded L41E,Lester-Kilkenny complex, 16 to 22 percent slopes L44A,Nessel loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes L9A,Minnetonka silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Hennepin Feet 2. Data Sources: City of Corcoran, NRCS, MNDOT 3. Background: MnGeo 2020 7-county (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:6,000 0 250 500 Feet Prepared by KJM on 2022-01-24 TR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX IR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S32 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 227704712City of Corcoran, MN EAW Soil Classifications 2 Carver County Hennepin County Wright County ^_ $+11 $+19 ¾¾Ç5555 Horseshoe Tr Railway St Homestead Tr Malla rdLaRolling Hills RdHillview LaLoretto St A pache DrWil lo wDr Shi re D r Pioneer TrHorsesho e B e nd Dr73rdAveNTomahawk TrChippewa Rd 30 29 28 31 32 33 6 5 4 7 8 9 T119 R23W T118 R23W Corcoran Medina Loretto Morin (27042300) Unnamed (27042200) Unnamed (27042100) Unnamed (27042000) Unnamed (27049400) Unnamed (27037100) Unnamed (27049600)Unnamed (27049700) Unnamed (27049800) Unnamed (27035400) Thomas (27050100) Unnamed (27049900) Jubert (27016500) Peter (Main Basin) (27014701) Peter (North Bay) (27014702) Unnamed (27049500) Scott (27110200) Unnamed Creek (M-062-004-002-004)Rush Creek, SouthFork (M-062-004-002)U nn a m e d S tream(M-064-004.6-002)UnnamedCreek (M-062-004-002-004-001)PETER (NORTH BAY) (Nutrients) PETER (NORTH BAY) (Nutrients) Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯V:\2277\active\227704712\03_data\gis_cad\gis\pro\eaw\eaw.aprx Revised: 2022-03-03 By: kjmuellerLegend 1 Mile Radius Project Area Field Delineated Wetland 2022 MPCA Impaired Lakes (Draft) Minnesota Public Waters Delineations Public Water Watercourse Public Ditch/Altered Natural Watercourse Public Waters Basins NHD - Flowline NHD - Waterbody NWI Circular 39 Class 1 - Seasonally Flooded Basin or Flat 2 - Wet Meadow 3 - Shallow Marsh 4 - Deep Marsh 5 - Shallow Open Water 6 - Shrub Swamp 7 - Wooded Swamp 8 - Bog Municipal and Industrial Activities Riverine Systems Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Hennepin Feet 2. Data Sources: City of Corcoran, MNDNR, MNDOT 3. Background: MnGeo 2020 7-county (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:24,000 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Prepared by KJM on 2022-03-03 TR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX IR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S32 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 227704712City of Corcoran, MN EAW Water Resources Map 3 Carver County Hennepin County Wright County ^_ !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A!A !A !A!A !A!A !A !A!A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A !A!A !A !A !A !A!A !A !A!A !A !A 126395 105388 149424 126361 145416 426346 126834 105139 248501 425077 765027 400838 105194 155069 127232 105362 107089 178191 725399 164529 453839 764194 660562 616618 675321 612343 668019 655029 690117 649240 544660 655079662275 169219 739129506522 450347 735717 441055 737569624943 478391 111017 160690 766267 662292 504387 611859 649309 583329 756058 719406169245 498345 643977 435852 736633 434449 530298 174575158438 105061 274488 ¾¾Ç5555 Rolling Hills RdHorseshoe Tr Pio n e e r T r Ho r sesho e B e n d Dr Chippewa Rd 31 32 33 6 5 4 T119 R23W T118 R23W Corcoran Medina Loretto Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯V:\2277\active\227704712\03_data\gis_cad\gis\pro\eaw\eaw.aprx Revised: 2022-01-24 By: kjmuellerLegend County Well Index !A Unknown !A Domestic !A Irrigation !A Public Supply 500 ft Radius 1/2 mi Radius Project Area Wellhead Protection Areas Drinking Water Supply Management Area Vulnerability Low Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Hennepin Feet 2. Data Sources: City of Corcoran, NRCS, MNDOT, MNDOH 3. Background: MnGeo 2020 7-county (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:14,400 0 600 1,200 Feet Prepared by KJM on 2022-01-24 TR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX IR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S32 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 227704712City of Corcoran, MN EAW County Well Index 4 Carver County Hennepin County Wright County ^_ Potential Impact 0.47 ac. Potential Impact 0.33 ac. ¾¾Ç5555 Wago n W h e e l L a Pione e r T r Wetland 1 Wetland 4 Wetland 3 Wetland 2 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯V:\2277\active\227704712\03_data\gis_cad\gis\pro\eaw\eaw.aprx Revised: 2022-03-03 By: kjmuellerLegend Project Area Potential Wetland Impact Field Delineated Wetland Industrial Park Concept Plan Site Septic Stormwater Pond Building Footprint Road/Parking Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Hennepin Feet 2. Data Sources: City of Corcoran, Carlson McCain 3. Background: MnGeo 2020 7-county (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:4,800 0 200 400 Feet Prepared by KJM on 2022-03-03 TR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX IR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S32 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 227704712City of Corcoran, MN EAW Potential Wetland Impacts 5 Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunityFigure 6: Hennepin County Location Map Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 03.14.22 Pioneer Trail EAW • Corcoran, MN 0 2.5 5 7.5 Miles Legend County Boundary Hennepin CountyHennepin County Project Location Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Figure 7: Cover Type Map Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 03.14.22 Pioneer Trail EAW • Corcoran, MN 0 250 500 750 Feet Legend Site Boundary Land Cover Type Impervious Surface Wooded/Forest Wetlands Cropland Brush/Grassland 10261 0 2 4 102210281 0 3 0 10 3 2 103410361038104010421 0 4 4 104610 0 6 972 97410129821004 9 9 6 10 5 6 10149989949921008101010589701032 1006 Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Figure 8: USGS Topographic Map Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 03.14.22 Pioneer Trail EAW • Corcoran, MN Legend Site Boundary 2-foot Contours 0 250 500 750 Feet ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Pio n e e r T r l Rolling Hills RdJubertLnScott Lake Jubert Lake The method and timing of regional wastewater service to be determined through future study. 5/27/2029 Figure 9: 2040 Future Land Use Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 03.15.22 Pioneer Trail EAW • Corcoran, MN Legend ! ! ! ! ! !Future Study 2040 MUSA Future MUSA Expansion Agricultural Reserve (Date of Expiration) Municipal Boundary Streams Lake/Open Water Parcel Boundaries Wetlands Future Land Use Rural/Ag Residential Existing Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Mixed Residential High Density Residential Rural Service/Commercial Commercial Mixed Use Business Park Light Industrial Public/Semi-Public Parks/Open Space Agricultural Preserve (Date of Expiration) Open Water 0 500 1,000 Feet Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW Appendix B Wetland Delineation and WCA Notice of Decision 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Report Prepared for Landspec Fund 2 LLC by Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company, Inc. (KES Project No. 2019-179) January 6, 2020 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page 1. WETLAND DELINEATION SUMMARY .......................................................................... 1 2. OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. METHODS .............................................................................................................................. 2 3.1 Wetland Delineation........................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Aerial Review for Offsite Hydrology Determinations ....................................................... 3 4. RESULTS ................................................................................................................................ 4 4.1 Review of NWI, Soils, Public Waters and NHD Information ........................................... 4 4.2 Wetland Determinations and Delineations......................................................................... 4 4.3 Other Areas ........................................................................................................................ 6 4.4 Aerial Review for Offsite Hydrology Determinations ....................................................... 7 4.5 Request for Wetland Boundary and Jurisdictional Determination .................................... 8 5. CERTIFICATION OF DELINEATION .............................................................................. 9 FIGURES 1. Site Location 2. Existing Conditions 3. National Wetlands Inventory 4. Soil Survey 5. DNR Public Waters Inventory 6. National Hydrography Dataset 7. Offsite Hydrology Assessment Areas APPENDICES A. Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota B. Wetland Delineation Data Forms C. Precipitation Information D. Aerial Review for Offsite Hydrology Assessment 1 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Report 1. WETLAND DELINEATION SUMMARY • The 56.4-acre 6210 Pioneer Trail Site was inspected on November 14, 2019 for the presence and extent of wetland. • The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map showed four wetlands mapped within the site boundaries. • The soil survey showed Hamel (Partially Hydric) as the Hydric Soil Type mapped on the site. • The DNR Public Waters Inventory did not show any DNR Public Waters, DNR Public Waterways or DNR Public Wetlands within 1000 feet of the site. • The National Hydrography Dataset showed one Lake/Pond approximately 200 feet west of the site. • Four wetlands delineated within the site boundaries are summarized in Table 1 below. Table 1. Wetlands delineated on the 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland ID Wetland Type Dominant Vegetation Size (Acres Onsite) Circular 39 Cowardin Eggers and Reed 1 1/3 PEM1Af/PEM1C Seasonally Flooded Basin, Shallow Marsh Reed canary grass, cattail, smartweed, scattered sedges 1.75 2 1 PEM1Af Seasonally Flooded Basin Sparse vegetation, field nutsedge 0.60 3 1/3 PEM1Af/PEM1C Seasonally Flooded Basin, Shallow Marsh Cattail, reed canary grass, smartweed 0.33 4 1/3 PEM1Af/PEM1C Seasonally Flooded Basin, Shallow Marsh Cattail, reed canary grass, sedges 0.47 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report 2 2. OVERVIEW The 56.4-acre 6210 Pioneer Trail Site was inspected on November 14, 2019 for the presence and extent of wetland. The property was located in Section 32, Township 119 North, Range 23 West, Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The site was situated north of Minnesota Highway 55, east of Pioneer Trail (Figure 1). The site boundaries corresponded to Hennepin County PID#’s: 3211923430006, 3211923430005, 3211923340007 and 3211923340013. The 6210 Pioneer Trail Site consisted of a farm field that had been planted with corn on the western portion and soybeans on the eastern portion, with crops remaining to be harvested on the eastern portion of the site. The topography of the site sloped from an elevation of 1060 ft MSL on the eastern portion of the site down to a low of 1008 ft MSL on the northern portion. Surrounding land use consisted of single-family residential, farm land and rural residential. Four wetlands were delineated within the site boundaries. The delineated wetland boundaries and existing conditions are shown on Figure 2. Appendix A of this report includes a Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota, which is submitted in request for: (1) a wetland boundary and type determination under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), and (2) delineation concurrence under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 3. METHODS 3.1 Wetland Delineation Wetlands were identified using the Routine Determination method described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Waterways Experiment Station, 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region (Version 2.0) as required under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. Wetland boundaries were identified as the upper-most extent of wetland that met criteria for hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology. Wetland-upland boundaries were marked with pin flags that were located by land surveyors from Otto Associates. Soils, vegetation, and hydrology were documented at a representative location along the wetland- upland boundary. Plant species dominance was estimated based on the percent aerial or basal coverage visually estimated within a 30-foot radius for trees and vines, a 15-foot radius for the shrub layer, and a 5-foot radius for the herbaceous layer within the community type sampled. Soils were characterized to a minimum depth of 24 inches (unless otherwise noted) using a Munsell Soil Color Book and standard soil texturing methodology. Hydric soil indicators used are from Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (USDA Natural Resources 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report 3 Conservation Service (NRCS) in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, Version 7, 2010). Mapped soils are separated into five classes based on the composition of hydric components and the Hydric Rating by Map Unit color classes utilized on Web Soil Survey. The five classes include Hydric (100 percent hydric components), Predominantly Hydric (66 to 99 percent hydric components), Partially Hydric (33 to 65 percent hydric components), Predominantly Non-Hydric (1 to 32 percent hydric components), and Non-Hydric (less than one percent hydric components). Plants were identified using standard regional plant keys. Taxonomy and indicator status of plant species was taken from the 2017 National Wetland Plant List (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2017. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.3, Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH). 3.2 Aerial Review for Offsite Hydrology Determinations Areas in agricultural cropland that exhibited potential wetland signatures on aerial photography and with low or depressional topography were reviewed generally following methods described in Using Aerial Imagery to Assess Wetland Hydrology (Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) 2010) and Guidance for Submittal of Delineation Reports to the St. Paul District Corps of Engineers and Wetland Conservation Act Local Governmental Units in Minnesota, Version 2.0 (USACE 2015). These methods use aerial photography and antecedent precipitation conditions to identify areas that have wetland hydrology signatures during periods of typical precipitation. Available years of Farm Service Agency (FSA) aerial photography were reviewed for the site to determine long-term hydrology. In cases where additional aerial photography was relevant, available, and necessary to make hydrology determinations, we reviewed aerial photography from other sources such as the Minnesota Geospatial Information Office (MnGEO) and Google Earth. Signatures at locations of potential wetlands on aerial photographs were interpreted and classified using seven codes (Table 2). Wetland hydrology was assumed to be present within areas exhibiting wetland signatures in more than 50% of years with normal climatic conditions based on antecedent precipitation. Table 2. Aerial photograph interpretation codes Code Classification CS Crop stress DO Drowned out NC Not cropped SW Standing water WS Wetland signature AP Altered pattern NV Normal vegetation 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report 4 This analysis used only aerial photographs taken following periods of precipitation within the normal range as determined using the Wetland Delineation Precipitation Data Retrieval tool (Minnesota Climatology Office 2015). This tool classifies antecedent precipitation as Normal (N), Wet (W) or Dry (D) by comparing precipitation during the three months preceding the estimated date of aerial photography to the 30-year average from 1981-2010. July 1 was used as the estimated date of FSA aerial photography. 4. RESULTS 4.1 Review of NWI, Soils, Public Waters and NHD Information The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) (Minnesota Geospatial Commons 2009-2014 and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) showed four wetlands mapped within the site boundaries (Figure 3). The Soil Survey (USDA NRCS 2015) showed Hamel (Partially Hydric) as the Hydric Soil type mapped on the site. Soil types mapped on the property are listed below in Table 3 and a map showing soil types is included in Figure 4. The Minnesota DNR Public Waters Inventory (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 2015) did not show any DNR Public Waters, DNR Public Waterways or DNR Public Wetlands within 1000 feet of the site (Figure 5). The National Hydrography Dataset (U.S. Geological Survey 2015) showed one Lake/Pond approximately 200 feet west of the site (Figure 6). 4.2 Wetland Determinations and Delineations Potential wetlands were evaluated during field observations on November 14, 2019. Four wetlands were identified and delineated on the property based on field observations and aerial photography (Figure 2). Corresponding data forms are included in Appendix B. The following descriptions of the wetlands and adjacent uplands reflects conditions observed at the time of the Table 3. Soil types mapped on the 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Symbol Soil Name Acres % of Area % Hydric Hydric Category L40B Angus-Kilkenny complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes 21.60 0.389 5 Predominantly Non-Hydric L41C2 Lester-Kilkenny complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded 14.96 0.270 5 Predominantly Non-Hydric L36A Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes 8.04 0.145 45 Partially Hydric L41D2 Lester-Kilkenny complex, 12 to 18 percent slopes, eroded 6.68 0.120 5 Predominantly Non-Hydric L35A Lerdal loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes 4.20 0.076 15 Predominantly Non-Hydric L41E Lester-Kilkenny complex, 18 to 25 percent slopes 0.03 0.001 5 Predominantly Non-Hydric 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report 5 field visit. Herbaceous vegetation was senesced at the time of the field visit. Precipitation conditions were wetter than typical based on the Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database method, but were within the normal range based on the 30-day rolling total precipitation (Appendix C). The site experienced wetter than normal conditions for much of the 2019 growing season. Notably, between the preceding months of July, August, September and October the site received 25.16 inches of rainfall. Wetland 1 was a Type 1/3 (PEM1Af/PEM1C) shallow marsh and partially farmed seasonally flooded basin wetland. The wetland was dominated by cattail in the center, with a fringe dominated by reed canary grass, smartweed and scattered sedges. No saturation or inundation was observed within the wetland at the time of the November 14, 2019 field visit, however saturation and shallow inundation of 1-3” was observed during the November 25, 2019 TEP Meeting (0.67” precipitation between November 14 and November 25). The wetland covered 1.75 acres within the site boundaries. Adjacent upland consisted of a farm field dominated by soybeans, which had been harvested by the time of the field visit. Primary and secondary hydrology indicators were not observed on the upland. The delineated boundary followed a change in vegetation from a wetland plant community to farmed upland dominated by soybeans, as well as a distinct change in topography. Wetland 1 was shown as a PEM1A wetland on the NWI map, and was located within an area mapped as Hamel (Partially Hydric) on the soil survey. Wetland 1 extended offsite, sloping downhill to the north. Wetland 2 was a Type 1 (PEM1Af) farmed seasonally flooded basin wetland that was dominated by sparse cover of field nutsedge. No saturation or inundation was observed within the wetland at the time of the November 14, 2019 field visit, however saturation and shallow inundation of 1- 3” was observed during the November 25, 2019 TEP Meeting (0.67” precipitation between November 14 and November 25). The wetland covered 0.60 acres within the site boundaries. Adjacent upland consisted of a farm field dominated by soybeans, which had been harvested by the time of the field visit. Primary and secondary hydrology indicators were not observed on the upland. The delineated boundary followed a change in vegetation from a wetland plant community to farmed upland dominated by soybeans, as well as a distinct change in topography. Wetland 2 was shown as a PEM1Af/PEM1C wetland on the NWI map, and was located within an area mapped as Hamel (Partially Hydric) on the soil survey. Wetland 2 extended offsite to the north. Wetland 3 was a Type 1/3 (PEM1Af/PEM1C) shallow marsh and partially farmed seasonally flooded basin wetland dominated by cattail, reed canary grass and smartweed. No saturation or inundation was observed within the wetland at the time of the November 14, 2019 field visit, however saturation and shallow inundation of 1-3” was observed during the November 25, 2019 TEP Meeting (0.67” precipitation between November 14 and November 25). The wetland covered 0.33 acres within the site boundaries. 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report 6 Adjacent upland consisted of a farm field dominated by soybeans, which had been harvested by the time of the field visit. Primary and secondary hydrology indicators were not observed on the upland. The delineated boundary followed a change in vegetation from a wetland plant community to farmed upland dominated by soybeans, as well as a distinct change in topography. Wetland 3 was shown as a PEM1A wetland on the NWI map, and was located within an area mapped as Lester-Kilkenny (Predominantly Non-Hydric) on the soil survey. Wetland 3 drained overland to the west towards Wetland 1. Wetland 4 was a Type 1/3 (PEM1Af/PEM1C) shallow marsh and partially farmed seasonally flooded basin wetland dominated by cattail, sedges and reed canary grass with a fringe of sparsely vegetated farmed wetland that contained field nutsedge. No saturation or inundation was observed within the wetland at the time of the November 14, 2019 field visit, however saturation and shallow inundation of 1-3” was observed during the November 25, 2019 TEP Meeting (0.67” precipitation between November 14 and November 25). The wetland covered 0.47 acres within the site boundaries. Adjacent upland consisted of a farm field dominated by soybeans, which had been harvested by the time of the field visit. Primary and secondary hydrology indicators were not observed on the upland. The delineated boundary followed a change in vegetation from a wetland plant community to farmed upland dominated by soybeans, as well as a distinct change in topography. Wetland 4 was not shown as a wetland on the NWI map, but was located within an area mapped as Hamel (Partially Hydric) on the soil survey. Wetland 4 drained to the south through a culvert beneath Minnesota State Highway 55. 4.3 Other Areas Other areas were investigated because they were: (1) observed to support a hydrophytic plant community, (2) had visible wetland hydrology indicators, (3) were shown as wetland on the NWI map, or (4) were depressional and mapped as hydric soil. Field investigation led to the conclusion that these areas were not wetland. A potential connection between Wetland 1 and Wetland 3 (Area D, See Figure 2) was evaluated based upon the presence of partially hydric soils (Hamel). This area was sloped, and showed washed out crops during some wetter than typical photo years, but did not show sufficient wetland hydrology signatures to be determined wetland. Wetland 1 and Wetland 3 were evaluated during the offsite hydrology review, and were determined not to extend far enough to form a connection. This area was also reviewed in the field and determined to be upland. Area A, B and C are discussed in Section 4.4 on the following page. 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report 7 No other areas with hydrophytic vegetation or wetland hydrology were observed on the site. No other areas were shown as hydric soil on the soil survey or as wetland on the NWI map. 4.4 Aerial Review for Offsite Hydrology Determinations Aerial photography was reviewed for 12 years between 1997 and 2017 that were assessed for wet/normal/dry climatic conditions using the Wetland Delineation Precipitation Data Retrieval tool and an estimated photo date of July 1 for the FSA aerials. Five years (1997, 2006, 2010, 2012 and 2015) were determined have precipitation in the normal range during the three months preceding the estimated photo dates. Areas showing at least one wetland signature during a year with wetter than normal precipitation conditions were included in the aerial review. The results are summarized in Table 5 below and review areas are shown on Figure 7. Aerial photographs showing review areas and interpretations are included in Appendix D. Seven Areas (Wetlands 1 through 4 and Areas A, B and C) exhibited potential wetland signatures, were located in cropland, and were reviewed according to the BWSR (2010) protocol. Areas exhibiting wetland signatures in more than 50% of the years with precipitation in the normal range are generally assumed to meet wetland hydrology criteria. Areas exhibiting wetland signatures in 30% to 50% of the years with precipitation in the normal range were reviewed in the field (Table 5, Figures 2 and 7). Field delineated wetlands were examined during the offsite hydrology assessment to confirm or adjust wetland boundaries to match the extent of consistent signatures on aerial imagery. Table 5. Offsite hydrology determinations summary Area No. of Photo Years w/ Normal Precipitation No. of Normal Precipitation Years w/ Wetland Signatures % of Normal Precipitation Years w/ Wetland Signatures Wetland Determination WL 1 5 5 100 Yes WL 2 5 4 80 Yes WL 3 5 5 100 Yes WL 4 5 5 100 Yes Area A 5 1 20 No Area B 5 2 40 No Area C 5 2 40 No, Washout Wetland 1, 2, 3 and 4 showed sufficient wetland signatures on aerial imagery taken under normal precipitation conditions to meet offsite hydrology criteria. Boundaries for these wetlands were determined during fieldwork, and were confirmed based on the offsite hydrology review. Wetland descriptions have been provided in Section 4.2 of the report. Area A (Sample Point A) showed wetland signatures in 20% of years with normal precipitation conditions. This area was not shown as a wetland on the NWI map, and was located within an area shown as Lester-Kilkenny complex (Predominantly Non-Hydric) on the soil survey. This area was below the threshold for field verification, however a sample point was taken that 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report 8 revealed a sloped area that did not meet wetland hydrology criteria. Therefore, this area was determined to be upland. Area B (Sample Point B) showed wetland signatures in 40% of years with normal precipitation conditions. This area was not shown as a wetland on the NWI map, and was located within an area shown as Hamel Loam (Partially Hydric) on the soil survey. This area was reviewed in the field, and was dominated by healthy soybeans, that had partially been washed out along the hillslope. The adjacent hillslope contained erosional rills that drained through the subject area toward the road ditch offsite to the south. Notably, the road ditch to the south (offsite) contained shallow marsh wetland (See Figure 2), however the area between the road ditch wetland and SP- B contained a strip of upland plants including smooth brome and Canada thistle. The area surrounding SP-B contained deposited sediment from the adjacent hillslope, which is believed to be the reason that this area does not contain healthy crops during some photo years. This area was therefore determined to be upland. Areas C (Sample Point C) showed wetland signatures in 40% of years with normal precipitation conditions. This area was not shown as a wetland on the NWI map, and was located within an area shown as Angus-Kilkenny (Predominantly Non-Hydric) on the soil survey. The area surrounding SP-C was reviewed in the field, and consisted of healthy crops. Given that the precipitation conditions were atypically wet during the 2019 growing season, this area was determined not to meet wetland hydrology criteria. 4.5 Request for Wetland Boundary and Jurisdictional Determination Appendix A of this report includes a Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota, which is submitted in request for: (1) a wetland boundary and type determination under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), and (2) delineation concurrence under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report 9 5. CERTIFICATION OF DELINEATION The procedures utilized in the described delineation are based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual as required under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. This wetland delineation and report were prepared in compliance with the regulatory standards in place at the time the work was performed. Site boundaries indicated on figures within this report are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. Delineation Completed by: Adam Cameron, Wetland Ecologist Minnesota Certified Wetland Delineator No. 1321 Kyle Uhler, GIS Specialist Minnesota Certified Wetland Delineator No. 1353 Report Prepared by: Adam Cameron, Wetland Ecologist Minnesota Certified Wetland Delineator No. 1321 Report reviewed by: __________________________________ Date: January 6, 2020 Mark Kjolhaug, Professional Wetland Scientist No. 000845 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report FIGURES 1. Site Location 2. Existing Conditions 3. National Wetlands Inventory 4. Soil Survey 5. DNR Protected Waters Inventory 6. National Hydrography Dataset 7. Offsite Hydrology Assessment Areas © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA Figure 1 - Site Location 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,500 Feet Site Boundary Source: ESRI Streets Basemap !( !( !( !(10301028 102610241022 10201018 1016 10141012101010321034 1036 1048 10381046104010501044 1042 1052 1054 10561008100610581004100210009981 0 6 0 10561020 10 5 8 10261058 10381016 1 0 5 6 10 5 6 1060104810581060 10581 0 5 6 10 5 0 1058 1028101010601 0 4 0 1 0 4 4 1004 1010 1032 105810 3 6 103 4 10 5 2 1026 1050 10161058 1012 1022 1 0 2 21052 1 0 4 2 10581010 1 0 5 4 1034104 6 1008 1016Figure 2 - Existing Conditions (2016 MNGEO Photo) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary Winter Delineation Offsite Wetland Transect Wetland Boundary Erosional Rill !(Sample Point Culvert Hennepin County Lidar Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 1.75 Acres Wetland 3 0.33 Acres Wetland 4 0.47 Acres Wetland 2 0.60 Acres SP2-1Wet SP-C SP-A SP-B T4-1 T1-1 T3-1 Rill 1 Rill 5 Rill 4 Rill 3 Rill 2 Area D PEM1A PEM1C PEM1C PFO1/EM1A PEM1A PEM1A PEM1A PEM1A PEM1C PEM1Af PEM1C PEM1A PEM1A PEM1A PEM1A PABF PUBGxPEM1APUBGx PFO1/EM1C Figure 3 - National Wetlands Inventory 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 400 Feet Site Boundary Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USFWS L40B L40B L41C2 L36A L36A L35A L40B L36A L37B L41D2 L36A L41C2 L35AL37B L41D2 L35A L41D2 L35A L41E L22D2 L23A L22C2L22C2 L22C2 L44A L22C2 L41C2 L44A L23A L23A L22D2 L36A L41D2 L24A L22C2 L36A L22E L37BL24A L22E L16A L44A Figure 4 - Soil Survey 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 400 Feet Site Boundary Hydric/Predominantly Hydric Partially Hydric Predominantly Non-Hydric/Non-HydricSource: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USDA, NRCS See narrative for soil series information. Jubert (27-165 P) Unnamed (27-494 W) Unnamed (27-495 W) Peter (North Bay) (27-147-02 P) Peter (Main Basin) (27-147-01 P)Unnamed (27-498 W) Unnamed (27-494 W) Unnamed (27-422 W)Unnamed Stream (M-064-004.6-002)Figure 5 - DNR Public Waters Inventory 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,000 Feet Site Boundary Public Ditch/Altered Natural Watercourse Public Watercourse Public WatersSource: MNGEO Spatial Commons, MN DNR Figure 6 - National Hydrography Dataset 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,000 Feet Site Boundary Hydro Junction Artificial Path Connector Stream/River Lake/Pond Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USGS Figure 7 - Offsite Hydrology Assessment Areas (2017 FSA Photo: Wet Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report APPENDIX A Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report APPENDIX B Wetland Delineation Data Forms Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub stratum )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = =Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 =Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Sample area consisted of a farm field that was planted with corn for the 2019 growing season. The crops had been harvested, and the soils at this location were tilled. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County:Corcoran/Hennepin Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/14/2019 Sampling Point:SP1-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S:32 T:119N R:23W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size:30 ft Radius 0 (Plot size:15 ft Radius Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 0 0 Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 0 0 0 0 0.00% N/A 0 (Plot size:5 ft Radius 0 0 0 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft Radius If yes, optional wetland site ID: Precipitation from Gridded Database Method wetter than typical. 30-day precipitation rolling average within normal range. Sample point was taken with a farmed area, therefore vegetation was disturbed and normal circumstances were not present. N Dominant Species Indicator Staus X N/A Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? No N Hamel (Partially Hydric)NWI Classification: 0 - 2 Lat:Long:-Datum:- Investigator(s):A.Cameron, K.Uhler Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:See Joint Application Form State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 25-40 2.5Y 4/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Yes FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Water table present?Yes X No Depth (inches):34 32 Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) No X Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histisol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Remarks: Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Remarks: Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 13-25 10YR 2/1 98 10YR 4/6 2 C M Clay Loam 0-13 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam Sampling Point:SP1-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist)%Color (moist)%Type*Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub stratum )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = =Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 =Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Sample point was located in an area that had been planted with corn for the 2019 growing season. The crops at this location had been drowned out, but sparse cover of field nutsedge was present. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County:Corcoran/Hennepin Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/14/2019 Sampling Point:SP1-1WetMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S:32 T:119N R:23W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size:30 ft Radius 5 (Plot size:15 ft Radius Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 5 10 Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Y 0 Cyperus esculentus 5 Y FACW (Plot size:5 ft Radius 0 2.00 5 10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft Radius Wetland 1If yes, optional wetland site ID: Precipitation from Gridded Database Method wetter than typical. 30-day precipitation rolling average within normal range. Sample Point was located within a farmed area, therefore vegetation was disturbed and normal circumstances were not present. Y Dominant Species Indicator Staus X Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? No N Hamel (Partially Hydric)NWI Classification: 0 - 2 Lat:Long:-Datum:- Investigator(s):A.Cameron, K.Uhler Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:See Joint Application Form State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) X X X 22-31 2.5Y 4/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam This area showed wetland signatures in 100% of normal photo years in the offsite hydrology review. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Yes FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Water table present?Yes X No Depth (inches):30 28 Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) No X Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histisol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Remarks: Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Remarks: Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 14-22 10YR 2/1 98 10YR 4/6 2 C M Clay Loam 0-14 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam Sampling Point:SP1-1Wet Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist)%Color (moist)%Type*Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub stratum )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = =Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 =Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):A.Cameron, K.Uhler Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:See Joint Application Form State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: N Hamel (Partially Hydric)NWI Classification: 0 - 2 Lat:Long:-Datum:- X Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? No Absolute % Cover30 ft Radius Wetland 2If yes, optional wetland site ID: Precipitation from Gridded Database Method wetter than typical. 30-day precipitation rolling average within normal range. Sample Point was located within a farmed area, therefore vegetation was disturbed and normal circumstances were not present. Y Dominant Species Indicator Staus 0 0 0 0 0 2.00 5 10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 Cyperus esculentus 5 Y FACW (Plot size:5 ft Radius Y 0 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size:30 ft Radius 5 (Plot size:15 ft Radius Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 5 10 Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Sample point was located in an area that had been planted with corn for the 2019 growing season. The crops at this location had been drowned out, but sparse cover of field nutsedge was present. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County:Corcoran/Hennepin Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/14/2019 Sampling Point:SP2-1 WetMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S:32 T:119N R:23W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PEM1Af , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) X X X Sampling Point:SP2-1 Wet Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist)%Color (moist)%Type*Loc** 0-29 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam 29-34 2.5Y 4/2 98 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam Remarks: Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Remarks: Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histisol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) No X Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Water table present?Yes X No Depth (inches):35 33 This area showed wetland signatures in 80% of normal photo years in the offsite hydrology review. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Yes US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub stratum )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = =Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 =Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):A.Cameron, K.Uhler Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:See Joint Application Form State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: N Lester-Kilkenny Complex (Predominantly Non-Hydric)NWI Classification: 4 - 6 Lat:Long:-Datum:- X N/A Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? No Absolute % Cover30 ft Radius If yes, optional wetland site ID: Precipitation from Gridded Database Method wetter than typical. 30-day precipitation rolling average within normal range. Sample point was taken with a farmed area, therefore vegetation was disturbed and normal circumstances were not present. N Dominant Species Indicator Staus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 (Plot size:5 ft Radius N/A 0 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size:30 ft Radius 0 (Plot size:15 ft Radius Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 0 0 Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 0 0 0 0 0.00% Sample area consisted of a farm field that was planted with corn for the 2019 growing season. The crops had been harvested, and the soils at this location were tilled. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County:Corcoran/Hennepin Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/14/2019 Sampling Point:SP3-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S:32 T:119N R:23W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP3-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist)%Color (moist)%Type*Loc** 0-13 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam 13-25 10YR 2/1 98 10YR 4/6 2 C M Clay Loam Remarks: Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Remarks: Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histisol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) No X Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Water table present?Yes X No Depth (inches):34 32 *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Yes 25-40 2.5Y 4/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub stratum )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = =Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 =Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):A.Cameron, K.Uhler Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:See Joint Application Form State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: N Lester-Kilkenny Complex (Predominantly Non-Hydric)NWI Classification: 0 - 2 Lat:Long:-Datum:- Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft Radius Wetland 3If yes, optional wetland site ID: Precipitation from Gridded Database Method wetter than typical. 30-day precipitation rolling average within normal range. Sample Point was located within a farmed area, therefore vegetation was disturbed and normal circumstances were not present. Y Dominant Species Indicator Staus 40 40 0 0 0 1.50 80 120 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 Typha angustifolia 40 Y OBL (Plot size:5 ft Radius Phalaris arundinacea 40 Y FACW Y 0 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size:30 ft Radius 80 (Plot size:15 ft Radius Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 40 80 Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 2 2 0 0 100.00% Sample point was located within an avoided wetland in a farm field. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County:Corcoran/Hennepin Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/14/2019 Sampling Point:SP3-1WetMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S:32 T:119N R:23W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PEM1A , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) X X X Sampling Point:SP3-1Wet Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist)%Color (moist)%Type*Loc** 0-14 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam 14-22 10YR 2/1 98 10YR 4/6 2 C M Clay Loam Remarks: Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Remarks: Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histisol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) No X Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Water table present?Yes X No Depth (inches):30 28 This area showed wetland signatures in 100% of normal photo years in the offsite hydrology review. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Yes 22-31 2.5Y 4/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub stratum )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = =Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 =Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Sample area consisted of a farm field that was planted with corn for the 2019 growing season. The crops had been harvested, and the soils at this location were tilled. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County:Corcoran/Hennepin Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/14/2019 Sampling Point:SP4-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S:32 T:119N R:23W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size:30 ft Radius 0 (Plot size:15 ft Radius Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 0 0 Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 0 0 0 0 0.00% N/A 0 (Plot size:5 ft Radius 0 0 0 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft Radius If yes, optional wetland site ID: Precipitation from Gridded Database Method wetter than typical. 30-day precipitation rolling average within normal range. Sample point was taken with a farmed area, therefore vegetation was disturbed and normal circumstances were not present. N Dominant Species Indicator Staus X N/A Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? No N Lerdal loam (Predominantly Hydric)NWI Classification: 4 - 6 Lat:Long:-Datum:- Investigator(s):A.Cameron, K.Uhler Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:See Joint Application Form State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 25-40 2.5Y 4/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Yes FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Water table present?Yes X No Depth (inches):34 32 Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) No X Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histisol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Remarks: Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Remarks: Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 13-25 10YR 2/1 98 10YR 4/6 2 C M Clay Loam 0-13 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam Sampling Point:SP4-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist)%Color (moist)%Type*Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub stratum )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = =Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 =Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Sample point was located in an area that had been planted with corn for the 2019 growing season. The crops at this location had been drowned out, but sparse cover of field nutsedge was present. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County:Corcoran/Hennepin Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/14/2019 Sampling Point:SP4-1WetMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S:32 T:119N R:23W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size:30 ft Radius 5 (Plot size:15 ft Radius Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 5 10 Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Y 0 Cyperus esculentus 5 Y FACW (Plot size:5 ft Radius 0 2.00 5 10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft Radius Wetland 4If yes, optional wetland site ID: Precipitation from Gridded Database Method wetter than typical. 30-day precipitation rolling average within normal range. Sample Point was located within a farmed area, therefore vegetation was disturbed and normal circumstances were not present. Y Dominant Species Indicator Staus X Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? No N Lerdal loam (Predominantly Non-Hydric)NWI Classification: 0 - 2 Lat:Long:-Datum:- Investigator(s):A.Cameron, K.Uhler Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:See Joint Application Form State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) X X X 22-31 2.5Y 4/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam This area showed wetland signatures in 100% of normal photo years in the offsite hydrology review. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Yes FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Water table present?Yes X No Depth (inches):36 34 Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) No X Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histisol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Remarks: Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Remarks: Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 14-22 10YR 2/1 98 10YR 4/6 2 C M Clay Loam 0-14 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam Sampling Point:SP4-1Wet Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist)%Color (moist)%Type*Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub stratum )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = =Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 =Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Sample area consisted of a farm field dominated by corn stubble from the 2019 growing season. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County:Corcoran/Hennepin Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/14/2019 Sampling Point:SP-AMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S:32 T:119N R:23W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size:30 ft Radius 25 (Plot size:15 ft Radius Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 5 10 Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 2 1 20 80 50.00% N 0 Trifolium pratense 20 Y FACU (Plot size:5 ft Radius Cyperus esculentus 5 Y FACW 0 3.60 25 90 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft Radius If yes, optional wetland site ID: Precipitation from Gridded Database Method wetter than typical. 30-day precipitation rolling average within normal range. Sample point was taken with a farmed area, therefore vegetation was disturbed and normal circumstances were not present. N Dominant Species Indicator Staus X N Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? No N Lester-Kilkeny Complex (Predominantly Non-Hydric)NWI Classification: 3 - 5 Lat:Long:-Datum:- Investigator(s):A.Cameron, K.Uhler Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:See Joint Application Form State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 24-35 2.5Y 4/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam This area showed wetland signatures in 20% of normal photo years in the offsite hydrology review. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) XYes FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Water table present?Yes No Depth (inches):X X Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) No Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histisol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Remarks: Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Remarks: Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 8-24 10YR 2/1 90 10YR 4/4 10 C M Clay Loam 0-8 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam Sampling Point:SP-A Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist)%Color (moist)%Type*Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub stratum )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = =Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 =Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):A.Cameron, K.Uhler Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:See Joint Application Form State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: N Hamel (Partially Hydric)NWI Classification: 0 - 2 Lat:Long:-Datum:- X X N/A Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? No Absolute % Cover30 ft Radius If yes, optional wetland site ID: Precipitation from Gridded Database Method wetter than typical. 30-day precipitation rolling average within normal range. Sample point was taken with a farmed area. Vegetation and soils were disturbed and normal circumstances were not present. N Dominant Species Indicator Staus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 (Plot size:5 ft Radius N/A 0 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size:30 ft Radius 0 (Plot size:15 ft Radius Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 0 0 Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 0 0 0 0 0.00% Sample area consisted of a farm field dominated by soybeans. The crops were healthy, although some had been washed out along the hillslope. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County:Corcoran/Hennepin Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/14/2019 Sampling Point:SP-BMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S:32 T:119N R:23W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP-B Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist)%Color (moist)%Type*Loc** 0-4 10YR 3/2 100 Loam Agricultural sediment 4-24 10YR 2/1 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Sandy Clay Loam Remarks: Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Remarks: Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Assumed A12. Soils disturbed due to erosion from farming. Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histisol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) No Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Water table present?Yes No Depth (inches):X X This area showed wetland signatures in 40% of normal photo years in the offsite hydrology review. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) XYes US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub stratum )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = =Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 =Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):A.Cameron, K.Uhler Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:See Joint Application Form State: Flat Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: N Angus-Kilkenny Complex (Predominantly Non-Hydric)NWI Classification: 0 - 2 Lat:Long:-Datum:- X N/A Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? No Absolute % Cover30 ft Radius If yes, optional wetland site ID: Precipitation from Gridded Database Method wetter than typical. 30-day precipitation rolling average within normal range. Sample point was taken with a farmed area, therefore vegetation was disturbed and normal circumstances were not present. N Dominant Species Indicator Staus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 (Plot size:5 ft Radius N/A 0 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size:30 ft Radius 0 (Plot size:15 ft Radius Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 0 0 Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 0 0 0 0 0.00% Sample area consisted of a farm field dominated by a healthy crop of soybeans. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across all Strata: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County:Corcoran/Hennepin Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/14/2019 Sampling Point:SP-CMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):None S:32 T:119N R:23W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) X Sampling Point:SP-C Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist)%Color (moist)%Type*Loc** 0-6 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam 6-13 10YR 2/1 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam Remarks: Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Remarks: Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histisol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) No X Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Water table present?Yes No X Depth (inches): X This area showed wetland sigantures in 40% of normal years in the offsite hydrology review. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Yes 13-25 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report APPENDIX C Precipitation Information Corcoran, MN: Precipitation Summary Source: Minnesota Climatology Working Group Monthly Totals: 2019 Target: T119 R23 S32 (latitude: 45.07299 longitude: 93.61477) mon year cc tttN rrW ss nnnn oooooooo pre (inches) Jan 2019 86 119N 24W 29 NWS ROCKFORD .43 Feb 2019 86 119N 24W 29 NWS ROCKFORD 2.47 Mar 2019 86 119N 24W 29 NWS ROCKFORD 1.89 Apr 2019 27 119N 22W 31 BYRG 3.16 May 2019 27 119N 22W 31 BYRG 7.83 Jun 2019 27 119N 22W 31 BYRG 2.64 Jul 2019 27 119N 22W 31 BYRG 9.24 Aug 2019 27 119N 22W 31 BYRG 5.60 Sep 2019 27 119N 22W 31 BYRG 4.76 Oct 2019 86 119N 24W 29 NWS ROCKFORD 5.56 Nov 2019 86 119N 24W 29 NWS ROCKFORD 1.59 September/October/November Daily Records Date Precip. Sep 1, 2019 0 Sep 2, 2019 .07 Sep 3, 2019 .85 Sep 4, 2019 0 Sep 5, 2019 0 Sep 6, 2019 0 Sep 7, 2019 0 Sep 8, 2019 .05 Sep 9, 2019 .13 Sep 10, 2019 .35 Sep 11, 2019 .55 Sep 12, 2019 .80 Sep 13, 2019 .33 Sep 14, 2019 .02 Sep 15, 2019 0 Sep 16, 2019 0 Sep 17, 2019 0 Sep 18, 2019 .20 Sep 19, 2019 0 Sep 20, 2019 0 Sep 21, 2019 .33 Sep 22, 2019 .04 Sep 23, 2019 .04 Sep 24, 2019 0 Sep 25, 2019 T Sep 26, 2019 0 Sep 27, 2019 0 Sep 28, 2019 0 Sep 29, 2019 0 Sep 30, 2019 1.00 1981-2010 Summary Statistics Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec WARM ANN WAT 30% 0.42 0.43 1.11 1.80 2.33 3.16 2.47 2.72 1.84 1.25 1.01 0.55 15.61 25.88 25.64 70% 0.78 0.89 1.85 3.01 4.06 4.96 4.32 4.86 4.52 3.15 1.89 1.43 20.64 32.11 32.55 mean 0.69 0.67 1.59 2.59 3.22 4.33 3.73 3.97 3.36 2.38 1.55 1.07 18.61 29.15 28.99 Date Precip. Oct 1, 2019 .81 Oct 2, 2019 .65 Oct 3, 2019 .44 Oct 4, 2019 T Oct 5, 2019 1.19 Oct 6, 2019 .13 Oct 7, 2019 0 Oct 8, 2019 0 Oct 9, 2019 0 Oct 10, 2019 .09 Oct 11, 2019 .56 Oct 12, 2019 .02 Oct 13, 2019 .03 Oct 14, 2019 T Oct 15, 2019 .16 Oct 16, 2019 T Oct 17, 2019 0 Oct 18, 2019 0 Oct 19, 2019 T Oct 20, 2019 0 Oct 21, 2019 .16 Oct 22, 2019 1.28 Oct 23, 2019 .04 Oct 24, 2019 0 Oct 25, 2019 0 Oct 26, 2019 0 Oct 27, 2019 0 Oct 28, 2019 T Oct 29, 2019 0 Oct 30, 2019 0 Oct 31, 2019 0 Date Precip. Nov 1, 2019 0 Nov 2, 2019 .12 Nov 3, 2019 T Nov 4, 2019 0 Nov 5, 2019 T Nov 6, 2019 0 Nov 7, 2019 0 Nov 8, 2019 0 Nov 9, 2019 0 Nov 10, 2019 .07 Nov 11, 2019 .01 Nov 12, 2019 0 Nov 13, 2019 0 Nov 14, 2019 .02 Site Visit Nov 15, 2019 0 Nov 16, 2019 0 Nov 17, 2019 .07 Nov 18, 2019 0 Nov 19, 2019 .13 Nov 20, 2019 0 Nov 21, 2019 .46 Nov 22, 2019 .01 Nov 23, 2019 0 Nov 24, 2019 0 Nov 25, 2019 0 Nov 26, 2019 0 Nov 27, 2019 .56 Nov 28, 2019 T Nov 29, 2019 0 Nov 30, 2019 .14 12/9/2019 Precipitation Documentation Worksheet Using Gridded Database climateapps.dnr.state.mn.us/gridded_data/precip/wetland/worksheet.asp?passXutm83=451608&passYutm83=4991243&passcounty=Hennepin&pass…1/1 Minnesota State Climatology Office State Climatology Office - DNR Division of Ecological and Water Resources home | current conditions | journal | past data | summaries | agriculture | other sites | about us Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database Precipitation data for target wetland location: county: Hennepin township number: 119N township name: Corcoran range number: 23W nearest community: Leighton section number: 32 Aerial photograph or site visit date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 Score using 1981-2010 normal period values are in inches A 'R' following a monthly total indicates a provisional value derived from radar-based estimates. first prior month:October 2019 second prior month:September 2019 third prior month:August 2019 estimated precipitation total for this location:5.32R 5.56R 4.99 there is a 30% chance this location will have less than:1.25 1.84 2.72 there is a 30% chance this location will have more than:3.15 4.52 4.86 type of month: dry normal wet wet wet wet monthly score 3 * 3 = 9 2 * 3 = 6 1 * 3 = 3 multi-month score: 6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)18 (Wet) Other Resources: retrieve daily precipitation data view radar-based precipitation estimates view weekly precipitation maps Evaluating Antecedent Precipitation Conditions (BWSR) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8/28/19 9/12/19 9/27/19 10/12/19 10/27/19 11/11/19 11/26/19Daily and monthly total precipitation (inches) monthly precip daily precip 30d rolling total 30 -day rolling total normal precip range Site Visit Climate Conditions 6210 Pioneer Trail Site, Corcoran Site Visit November 14, 2019 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Wetland Delineation Report APPENDIX D Aerial Review for Offsite Hydrology Assessment Exhibit 1 Field data sheet reference (if applicable): Wetland Hydrology from Aerial Imagery – Recording Form Project Name: 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Date: 11/12/2019 County: Hennepin Investigator: A.Cameron Legal Description (S, T, R): S:32 T:119N R:23W Date Image Taken (M-D-Y) Image Source Climate Condition Image Interpretation(s) (wet, dry, normal)i Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area: A Area: B Area: C April 14, 1997 MN GEO Normal (1) NC/SS (1) SS (1) NC/SS (1) NC (1) NSS NSS SS (1) July 1, 2003 FSA Wet DO DO NC/DO N/A N/A DO/Washout DO April 17, 2006 MN GEO Normal (2) NC (2) NSS NC (2) WS (2) WS (1) NSS NSS July 1, 2008 FSA Normal, N/A N/A, Fallow N/A, Fallow N/A, Fallow N/A, Fallow N/A, Fallow N/A, Fallow N/A, Fallow July 1, 2009 FSA Dry NC NV NC NC NV SS NV July 1, 2010 FSA Wet NC NV NC NC/NV NV NV NV April 15, 2010 MN GEO Normal (3) NC (3) SS (2) NC (3) NC/SS (3) NSS SS (1) NSS April 1, 2012 MN GEO Normal (4) NC (4) SS (3) NC (4) NC (4) NSS SS (2) NSS July 1, 2013 FSA Wet NC DO NC NC/CS NV DO DO July 1, 2015 FSA Normal (5) NC (5) CS (4) NC (5) NC/CS (5) NV NV CS (2) April 15, 2016 MN GEO Dry NC/SS NS NC NC/NSS NSS NS NSS July 1, 2017 FSA Wet NC/CS DO/S NC/DO NC/DO CS CS CS Normal Climate Condition Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area: A Area: B Area: C Number of normal years 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Number with wet signa tures 5 4 5 5 1 2 2 Percent with wet signatures 100% 80% 100% 100% 20% 40% 40% KEY WS - wetland signature SS - soil wetness signature CS - crop stress NC - not cropped AP - altered pattern NV - normal vegetative cover DO - drowned out SW - standing water NSS – no soil wetness signature Other labels or comments: • Use above key to label image interpretations. It is imperative that the reviewer read and understand the guidance associated with the use of these labels. If alternate labels are used, indicate in box above. • If less than five (5) images taken during normal climate conditions are available, use an equal number of images taken during wet and dry climate conditions and use as many images as you have available. Describe the results using this methodology in your report. i Use MN State Climatology website to determine climate condition when image was take Exhibit 1 Field data sheet reference (if applicable):____________ Wetland Determination from Aerial Imagery – Recording Form Project Name: 6210 Pioneer Trail Site Date: 11/12/2019 County: Hennepin Investigator: A.Cameron Legal Description (S, T, R): S:32 T:119N R:23W Use the Decision Matrix below to complete Table 1. Hydric Soils present1 Identified on NWI or other wetland map2 Percent with wet signatures from Exhibit 1 Field verification required3 Wetland? Yes Yes >50% No Yes Yes Yes 30-50% No Yes Yes Yes <30% Yes Yes, if other hydrology indicators present Yes No >50% No Yes Yes No 30-50% Yes Yes, if other hydrology indicators present Yes No <30% No No No Yes >50% No Yes No Yes 30-50% No Yes No Yes <30% No No No No >50% Yes Yes, if other hydrology indicators present No No 30-50% Yes Yes, if other hydrology indicators present No No <30% No No 1 The presence of hydric soils can be determined from the “Hydric Rating by Map Unit Feature” under “Land Classifications” from the Web Soil Survey. “Not Hydric” is the only category considered to not have hydric soils. Field sampling for the presence/absence of hydric soil indicators can be used in lieu of the hydric rating if appropriately documented by providing completed field data sheets. 2 At minimum, the most updated NWI data available for the area must be reviewed for this step. Any and all other local or regional wetland maps that are publically available should be reviewed. 3 Area should be reviewed in the field for the presence/absence of wetland hydrology indicators per the applicable 87 Manual Regional Supplement, including the D2 indicator (geomorphic position). Table 1. Area Hydric Soils Present Identified on NWI or other wetland map Percent with wet signatures from Exhibit 1 Other hydrology indicators present1 Wetland? Wetland 1 Yes Yes 100 Yes Yes Wetland 2 Yes Yes 80 Yes Yes Wetland 3 Yes Yes 100 Yes Yes Wetland 4 Yes No 100 Yes Yes Area A Yes No 20 No No Area B Yes No 40 No No Area C Yes No 40 No No, Washout 1 Answer “N/A” if field verification is not required and was not conducted. Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (1997 MNGEO Photo: Normal Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary 1997 Wetland Signature Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2003 FSA Photo: Wet Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2006 MNGEO Photo: Normal Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary 2006 Wetland Signature Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2008 FSA Photo: Normal Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2009 FSA Photo: Dry Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2010 MNGEO Photo: Normal Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary 2010 Wetland Signature Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2010 FSA Photo: Wet Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2012 MNGEO Photo: Normal Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary 2012 Wetland Signature Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2013 FSA Photo: Wet Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2015 FSA Photo: Normal Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary 2015 Wetland Signature Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2016 MNGEO Photo: Dry Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B Offsite Hydrology Assessment Year (2017 FSA Photo: Wet Year) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Area A Area C Area B BWSR NOD Form – November 12, 2019 1 Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision Local Government Unit: City of Corcoran County: Hennepin Applicant Name: Landspec Fund 2 LLC Applicant Representative: Adam Cameron, Kjolhaug Project Name: 6210 Pioneer Trail LGU Project No. (if any): Date Complete Application Received by LGU: 01/06/2020 Date of LGU Decision: 1/17/2020 Date this Notice was Sent: 1/17/2020 WCA Decision Type - check all that apply ☒ Wetland Boundary/Type ☐ Sequencing ☐ Replacement Plan ☐ Bank Plan (not credit purchase) ☐ No-Loss (8420.0415) ☐ Exemption (8420.0420) Part: ☐ A ☐ B ☐ C ☐ D ☐ E ☐ F ☐ G ☐ H Subpart: ☐ 2 ☐ 3 ☐ 4 ☐ 5 ☐ 6 ☐ 7 ☐ 8 ☐ 9 Replacement Plan Impacts (replacement plan decisions only) Total WCA Wetland Impact Area: Click here to enter text. Wetland Replacement Type: ☐ Project Specific Credits: ☐ Bank Credits: Bank Account Number(s): Technical Evaluation Panel Findings and Recommendations (attach if any) ☒ Approve ☐ Approve w/Conditions ☐ Deny ☐ No TEP Recommendation LGU Decision ☐ Approved with Conditions (specify below)1 ☒ Approved1 ☒ Denied List Conditions: Decision-Maker for this Application: ☒ Staff ☐ Governing Board/Council ☐ Other: Decision is valid for: ☒ 5 years (default) ☐ Other (specify): 1 Wetland Replacement Plan approval is not valid until BWSR confirms the withdrawal of any required wetland bank credits. For project - specific replacement a financial assurance per MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9 and evidence that all required forms have been reco rded on the title of the property on which the replacement wetland is located must be provided to the LGU for the approval to be valid. LGU Findings – Attach document(s) and/or insert narrative providing the basis for the LGU decision1. ☒ Attachment(s) (specify): Please see the Delineation Review Summary attached. ☐ Summary: 1 Findings must consider any TEP recommendations. Attached Project Documents ☒ Site Location Map ☐ Project Plan(s)/Descriptions/Reports (specify): Figure 2-Existing Conditions BWSR NOD Form – November 12, 2019 2 Appeals of LGU Decisions If you wish to appeal this decision, you must provide a written request within 30 calendar days of the date you received the notice. All appeals must be submitted to the Board of Water and Soil Resources Executive Director along with a check payable to BWSR for $500 unless the LGU has adopted a local appeal process as identified below. The check must be sent by mail and the written request to appeal can be submitted by mail or e -mail. The appeal should include a copy of this notice, name and contact information of appellant(s) and their representatives (if applicable), a statement clarifying the intent to appeal and supporting information as to why the decision is in error. Send to: Appeals & Regulatory Compliance Coordinator Minnesota Board of Water & Soils Resources 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 travis.germundson@state.mn.us Does the LGU have a local appeal process applicable to this decision? ☐ Yes1 ☒ No 1If yes, all appeals must first be considered via the local appeals process. Local Appeals Submittal Requirements (LGU must describe how to appeal, submittal requirements, fees, etc. as applicable) Notice Distribution (include name) Required on all notices: ☒ SWCD TEP Member: Stacey Lijewski , Hennepin SWCD ☒ BWSR TEP Member: Ben Carlson ☒ LGU TEP Member (if different than LGU contact): Kevin Mattson ☒ DNR Representative: Jason Spiegel ☒ Watershed District or Watershed Mgmt. Org.: Elm Creek Watershed District ☒ Applicant: Landspec Fund 2 LLC ☒ Agent/Consultant: Adam Cameron, Kjolhaug Optional or As Applicable: ☒ Corps of Engineers: USACE_requests_mn@usace.army.mil ☐ BWSR Wetland Mitigation Coordinator (required for bank plan applications only): ☐ Members of the Public (notice only): ☐ Other: Signature: Date: 1/17/2020 This notice and accompanying application materials may be sent electronically or by mail. The LGU may opt to send a summary of the application to members of the public upon request per 8420.0255, Subp. 3. Site Meeting Record Wenck Associates, Inc. | 1800 Pioneer Creek Center | P.O. Box 249 | Maple Plain, MN 55359-0249 Toll Free 800-472-2232 Main 763-479-4200 Email wenckmp@wenck.com Web wenck.com - Boundary and Type Review Other __________________________________________ Site Name: 6210 Pioneer Trail Location: Corcoran, MN LGU: City of Corcoran Review Date/Time: 11/25/2019 11:00 and 01/14/2020 2:00pm Notes Attendees: Wes Boll (Wenck), Adam Cameron (Kjolhaug), Ben Carlson (BWSR) WCA TEP (Wes Boll, Corcoran & Ben Carlson, BWSR) met with the consultant (Adam Cameron, Kjolhaug) to review wetland boundaries submitted to the City of Corcoran on November 20, 2019. Four wetlands were identified on the site through off-site review and on-site investigation. An incomplete report consisting of the off-site aerial review summary and figures was submitted to allow for field review of the site prior to winter conditions. The TEP agreed to the field review and the Application will be noticed when a complete Delineation Report and Application Form is submitted. The off-site review was conducted on seven potential wetland areas on the site. The analysis determined that four of the seven areas met wetland criteria. The three areas (A, B, and C) were determined to be non-wetland since hydrology indicator signatures were observed in less than 50% of the normal years. The TEP reviewed the off-site analysis and had questions on Area B, Area C, and the boundaries of Wetland 2, 4, and 1. The TEP also identified potential signatures in an area just north of Area B. The investigated site was harvested or fallow agricultural ground at the time of the site visit. Conditions at the time of the delineation and site investigation were wetter than normal, with soil saturation and standing water present in many areas of the site. The TEP reviewed the field delineation by walking the site and confirming the location of delineated boundaries. In general, the TEP agreed with the delineation of wetland boundaries, as the boundaries corresponded approximately to the extent of wetland signatures on off-site analysis and indicators of wetland hydrology and cropping patterns. On January 6, 2020, Adam Cameron of Kjolhaug submitted a revised wetland delineation report with an additional parcel added to the Project Limits. The parcel added was located on the western edge of Wetland 1 as shown on Figure 2 – Existing Conditions. The additional area of Wetland 1 was delineated during the winter to help with the planning purposes of the client. The western edge of Wetland 1 is the approximate and conservative boundary as shown in Figure 2. If impacts to Wetland 1 are to occur during the construction phases of the project, the winter delineation 2 T:\2294-Corcoran\WCA\2019\6210 Pioneer Trail\Delineation Review Summary_11252019.docx portion of Wetland 1 will need to be delineated and approved during the growing season. Recommended Revisions: The TEP recommended additional review and potentially revision of some of the wetland boundaries on site. The TEP agreed with the placement of the boundaries of Wetland 4 and the non-wetland determination in Areas A, B, and C on the site, based on the lack of off-site hydrology signatures during normal years, landscape position, and cropping patterns during 2019 under extremely wet conditions. Wetland 2-The TEP recommended the south boundary of the wetland move to the south to encompass a depressional area that appeared to meet wetland hydrology criteria during the off-site analysis and site investigation. Wetland 1 and Wetland 4 – It appeared during the field investigation that the delineated boundaries were accurate, but the TEP requested a summary of the off- site hydrology signatures in comparison to the field delineated boundary in order to confirm the boundary. Recommended Approval Status: Conduct additional review, approve boundary and type as revised if necessary. Additional Potential Wetland Areas: There were no other potential wetland areas on the site that met wetland criteria based on the field visit. Other potential wetland areas (depressional areas and drainages with standing water) were determined to not meet wetland criteria during normal conditions. Action Items # Party Action Required Date Completed 1 Kjolhaug Review off-site and confirm boundaries (if necessary). Submit Delineation Report and Application Form 12-17-19 Revised Report sent 01-06-2020 2 City of Corcoran/Wenck Review submitted information and facilitate approval 01-17-2020 © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA Figure 1 - Site Location 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,500 Feet Site Boundary Source: ESRI Streets Basemap !( !( !( !(10301028 102610241022 10201018 1016 10141012101010321034 1036 1048 10381046104010501044 1042 1052 1054 10561008100610581004100210009981 0 6 0 10561020 10 5 8 10261058 10381016 1 0 5 6 10 5 6 1060104810581060 10581 0 5 6 10 5 0 1058 1028101010601 0 4 0 1 0 4 4 1004 1010 1032 105810 3 6 103 4 10 5 2 1026 1050 10161058 1012 1022 1 0 2 21052 1 0 4 2 10581010 1 0 5 4 1034104 6 1008 1016Figure 2 - Existing Conditions (2016 MNGEO Photo) 6210 Pioneer Trail Site (KES 2019-179) Corcoran, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 300 Feet Site Boundary Winter Delineation Offsite Wetland Transect Wetland Boundary Erosional Rill !(Sample Point Culvert Hennepin County Lidar Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons Wetland 1 1.75 Acres Wetland 3 0.33 Acres Wetland 4 0.47 Acres Wetland 2 0.60 Acres SP2-1Wet SP-C SP-A SP-B T4-1 T1-1 T3-1 Rill 1 Rill 5 Rill 4 Rill 3 Rill 2 Area D Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW Appendix C FEMA FIRMette National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250 Feet Ü SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Zone A, V, A99 With BFE or DepthZone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Regulatory Floodway 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depth less than one foot or with drainage areas of less than one square mileZone X Future Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood HazardZone X Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to Levee. See Notes.Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to LeveeZone D NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X Area of Undetermined Flood HazardZone D Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer Levee, Dike, or Floodwall Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 17.5 Water Surface Elevation Coastal Transect Coastal Transect Baseline Profile Baseline Hydrographic Feature Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Effective LOMRs Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary Digital Data Available No Digital Data Available Unmapped This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap accuracy standards The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 1/21/2022 at 5:13 PM and does not reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effective information may change or become superseded by new data over time. This map image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels, legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers, FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for regulatory purposes. Legend OTHER AREAS OF FLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERAL STRUCTURES OTHER FEATURES MAP PANELS 8 B 20.2 The pin displayed on the map is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative property location. 1:6,000 93°37'13"W 45°4'16"N 93°36'36"W 45°3'50"N Basemap: USGS National Map: Orthoimagery: Data refreshed October, 2020 Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW Appendix D Phase I ESA Executive Summary Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW Appendix E DNR NHIS Request for Concurrence Letter Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 7500 Olson Memorial Highway Suite 300, Golden Valley MN 55427-4886 January 31, 2022 File: 227704712 Attention: NHIS Review Division of Ecological and Water Resources Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 500 Lafayette Road, Box 25 Saint Paul, MN 55155 Good afternoon, Reference: Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW – NHIS Concurrence Request Landspec Fund 2, LLC is proposing to construct the Pioneer Trail Industrial Park (Project Site) located in Section 32, Township 119 North, Range 23 West in the City of Corcoran in Hennepin County, Minnesota. The proposed project involves the construction of five lots, two stormwater ponds, and a new road connecting all the lots to the existing Pioneer Trail, north of the intersection at Highway 55. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is required per Minnesota Rules 4410.4300, subpart 14. The Project Site currently consists of agricultural field and public road right-of-way (ROW) that is bordered by Highway 55 to the south, Pioneer Trail and residential housing to the west, agricultural fields to the north, and an agricultural field and commercial business to the east. The attached figures illustrate the location of the proposed project site. Table 1 below describes the proposed land uses for the five lots: Table 1. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park Proposed Land Uses Proposed Lots Land Use Lot Size (Acres) Number of Buildings Building Size (Square Feet) Lot 1 Gas/Convenience 4.1 1 10,300 Lot 2 Office/Showroom/Retail 2.8 1 11,300 Lot 3 Office Warehouse/Light Manufacturing/Distribution 7.5 1 66,000 Lot 4 Office Warehouse/Light Manufacturing/Distribution 8.3 1 100,000 Lot 5 Storage Condominiums 27.3 6 379,000 Under Stantec’s Limited License to Use Copyrighted Material (LA 917, 140076) related to Rare Features Data, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) was searched in January 2022 to identify species within a one-mile radius of the project site. The NHIS search did not indicate any records within the proposed project site. Records of rare species were identified within in the one-mile review area. The following species information was gathered from the MN DNR Rare Species Guide (https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/rsg/index.html). January 31, 2022 NHIS Review Page 2 of 3 Reference: Pioneer Trail Industrial Park Trumpeter Swan (Cygnus buccinator) During the breeding season, trumpeter swans use small ponds and lakes or bays on larger water bodies that have approximately 100 meters of open water for take-off and have extensive beds of emergent vegetation such as cattails, bulrushes, and sedges. They will commonly use muskrat houses, beaver lodges, exposed hummocks, small islands, and floating platforms to construct their nests. Adult trumpeter swans are primarily herbivorous but will occasionally feed on small crustaceans, fish, and fish eg gs. Due to over hunting, Trumpeter swans in Minnesota were declared extirpated in the state in the mid -1900s. Reintroduction efforts began in the 1960s and a survey conducted in 2015 estimated the breeding population to be more than 17,000 individuals. Currently, the leading threat to their population is lead poisoning from lead shot and fishing sinkers but degradation of wetland habitat, power line collisions, and illegal hunting are also notable factors. Although repopulation efforts have continued to be successful, the trumpeter swam was included on Minnesota’s List of Endangered and Threatened Species List with the status of special concern due to continued threats to their population. The Project Site consists of active agricultural land and does not contain suitable breeding or feeding habitat for the trumpeter swan. Based on a review of the NHIS data, occurrences of trumpeter swans were associated with Morin Lake which is approximately 0.85 miles northeast of the Project Site. Due to the lack of suitable habitat, the project is not anticipated to have an impact on the trumpeter swan. Native Plant Communities and Biodiversity Sites Native plant communities, biodiversity sites, and Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Areas (RESA) were reviewed for the area within one mile of the proposed Project Site. A native plant community (forested rich peatland system) is located approximately 0.55 miles east of the Project Site. Three sites of biodiversity significance ranked as moderate, and one ranked as below were identified within one mile of the Project Site. The three moderate ranked biodiversity sites are all located over 0.55 miles east and northeast of the Project Site and the one below ranked site is approximately 0.25 miles north of the Project Site. Four RESA sites extend into the one-mile review area. Of these, two are ranked as high and two ranked as moderate ecological areas. The closest moderate ranked RESA site is located on the south side of Highway 55 opposite of the Project Site. All work associated with this Project is proposed on the north side of Highway 55 and would not disturb this RESA site. The other moderate ranked RESA site is located approximately 0.65 miles northeast of the Project Site. The two high ranked RESA sites are approximately 0.5 miles south and 0.32 miles southeast of the Project Site. All of these RESA sites are located outside of the proposed Project Site and will not be encroached upon by the proposed project. Conclusion The proposed project site contains limited potential suitable habitat for rare plants, animals, native plant communities, and other rare features. The project would not result in remov al of suitable habitat for rare species or native plant communities as the project will be constructed within an area previously disturbed by active agriculture and public road ROW. Therefore, it is not anticipated that significant impacts to state-listed species or habitat would result from the proposed Pioneer Trail Industrial Park project. Per our license agreement and the requirements of the state environmental review, we are requesting the DNR’s concurrence with our review and assessment of the potential impacts from the project on known species documented in the NHIS database. The specific NHIS data evaluated as part of this review will not be distributed, mapped, or used within the EAW document or publicly distributed. The EAW will provide general explanatory text similar to that contained in this letter to document the species occurrence and potential impacts. January 31, 2022 NHIS Review Page 3 of 3 Reference: Pioneer Trail Industrial Park Please do not hesitate to contact me at 763.252.6802 or Erin.Sejkora@stantec.com should you have any questions. Thank you for your time. Regards, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Erin Sejkora Project Manager, Senior Planner Phone: 763.252.6802 Erin.Sejkora@stantec.com Attachment: Project Location Figures Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW Appendix F Traffic Impact Study File #227704712 February 25, 2022 DRAFT Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: 7963-479-4200 Fax: 763-479-4242 Prepared for: City of Corcoran, MN 8200 CR 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Traffic Impact Study for Pioneer Trail Industrial Park in Corcoran, MN February 2022 i DRAFT Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... 1-1 2.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ........................................................... 2-1 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................... 3-1 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS ........................................................................ 4-1 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 5-1 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 6-1 7.0 APPENDIX ........................................................................................ 7-1 FIGURES FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................. 2-2 FIGURE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN ................................................................. 2-3 FIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................. 3-2 FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ............................. 4-3 FIGURE 5 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES .............................. 4-4 FIGURE 6 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR LOS RESULTS ..................................... 5-5 FIGURE 7 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR LOS RESULTS ..................................... 5-6 I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. __________________________________ DATE: February 25, 2022 Edward F. Terhaar License No. 24441 February 2022 1-1 DRAFT 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the impacts of a proposed industrial park development located in Corcoran, MN. This study is part of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed project. The project site is generally located on the north side of TH 55 east of Pioneer Trail. Based on discussions with City, this study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • TH 55/Pioneer Trail • TH 55/Rolling Hills Road • CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail • Pioneer Trail/development access The most intense development alternative consists of the following uses: • 100,000 square feet of light industrial • 66,000 square feet of light industrial • 11,300 square feet of retail • 379,000 square foot storage facility • Gas station with convenience store and 20 vehicle fueling positions All access will be provided at a new public street located approximately 500 feet north of TH 55 on Pioneer Trail. For purpose of this study, the development is expected to be completed in 2026. The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed redevelopment is expected to generate 846 trips during the a.m. peak hour, 788 trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 8,986 trips daily. • Traffic generated by the proposed development results in poor levels of service at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. • The results of a signal warrant analysis for the 2027 Build condition indicate th at warrants are met at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection. Based on this review, a full signal warrant analysis and Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) per Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) standards should be completed to confirm future traffic control. Any changes to the intersection control must be reviewed and approved by MnDOT. • The following mitigation measures are recommended at each intersection: o TH 55/Pioneer Trail ▪ Short term – Widen southbound approach to accommodate a dedicated left turn lane and a through/right turn lane. Install traffic signal control. ▪ Long term – No additional improvements needed. February 2022 1-2 DRAFT o TH 55/Rolling Hills Road ▪ Short term – No improvements needed. ▪ Long term – No improvements needed. o CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail ▪ Short term – No improvements needed. ▪ Long term – No improvements needed. o Pioneer Trail/development access ▪ Short term – Construct westbound approach with dedicated left and right turn lanes. Construct a northbound right turn lane. ▪ Long term – No additional improvements needed. February 2022 2-1 DRAFT 2.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the impacts of a proposed industrial park development located in Corcoran, MN. This study is part of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed project. The project site is generally located on the north side of TH 55 east of Pioneer Trail. The project location is shown in Figure 1. Based on discussions with City, this study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • TH 55/Pioneer Trail • TH 55/Rolling Hills Road • CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail • Pioneer Trail/development access Proposed Development Characteristics The most intense development alternative consists of the following uses: • 100,000 square feet of light industrial • 66,000 square feet of light industrial • 11,300 square feet of retail • 379,000 square foot storage facility • Gas station with convenience store and 20 vehicle fueling positions All access will be provided at a new public street located approximately 500 feet north of TH 55 on Pioneer Trail. For purpose of this study, the development is expected to be completed in 2026. The proposed development plan is shown in Figure 2. February 2022 2-2 DRAFT February 2022 2-3 DRAFT February 2022 3-1 DRAFT 3.0 Existing Conditions The proposed project site is currently used for agricultural purposes. The site is bounded by TH 55 on the south, Pioneer Trail on the west, existing residential and commercial uses on the east, and agricultural uses on the north. Near the site location, TH 55 is a two lane undivided roadway with turn lanes and traffic signal control at major intersections. Pioneer Trail is a local two-lane roadway. Existing conditions near the proposed project location are shown in Figure 3 and described below. TH 55/Pioneer Trail This four-way intersection is controlled with stop signs on the northbound and southbound approaches. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one shared lane for left turn, through, and right turn movements. TH 55/Rolling Hills Road This three-way intersection is controlled with a stop sign on the southbound approach. The eastbound approach provides one left turn lane and one through lane. The westbound approach provides one through lane and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one shared lane for left turn and right turn movements. CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail This four-way intersection is controlled with stop signs on the eastbound and westbound approaches. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide one left turn/through lane and one right turn lane. Traffic Volume Data Weekday traffic volume data was recorded at the existing intersections in January, 2022. Existing traffic volume data is presented later in this report. February 2022 3-2 DRAFT February 2022 4-1 DRAFT 4.0 Traffic Forecasts Traffic Forecast Scenarios To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were completed for the years 2027 and 2040. Specifically, weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were completed for the following scenarios: • 2022 Existing. Existing volumes were determined through traffic counts at the subject intersections. The existing volume information includes trips generated by the uses near the project site. • 2027 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2027 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on historic traffic volume growth in the project area. • 2027 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2027 No-Build volumes to determine 2027 Build volumes. • 2040 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2040 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on historic traffic volume growth in the project area. • 2040 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2040 No-Build volumes to determine 2040 Build volumes. Trip Generation for Proposed Project The expected new development trips were calculated based on data presented in Trip Generation, Eleventh Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. These calculations represent total trips that will be generated by the proposed development. The resultant trip generation estimates are shown in Table 4-1. Table 4-1 Weekday Trip Generation for Proposed Project Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Light Industrial 100,000 SF 65 9 74 9 56 65 487 Light Industrial 66,000 SF 43 6 49 6 37 43 321 Retail 11,300 SF 16 11 27 37 37 74 615 Storage facility 379,000 SF 49 15 64 19 49 68 648 Gas station with convenience store 20 VFP 316 316 632 269 269 538 6915 Totals 489 357 846 340 448 788 8986 Notes: SF=square feet and VFP=vehicle fueling positions. February 2022 4-2 DRAFT The gas station trips can be categorized in the following trip types: • New Trips. Trips solely to and from the proposed development. • Pass-By Trips. Trips that are attracted from the traffic volume on roadways immediately adjacent to the site. Based on information published in the Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, the percentage of each trip type is as follows: • Gas Station - 60% new, 40% pass by Trip Distribution Percentages Trip distribution percentages for the subject development trips were established based on the nearby roadway network, existing and expected future traffic patterns, and location of the subject development in relation to major attractions and population concentrations. The distribution percentages for trips generated by the proposed development are described below: • 65 percent to/from the east on TH 55 • 20 percent to/from the west on TH 55 • 12 percent to/from the north on CSAH 19 • 3 percent to/from the west on Pioneer Trail Traffic Volumes Development trips from Table 4-1 were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the preceding trip distribution percentages. Traffic volumes were established for all the forecasting scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The resultant peak hour volumes are shown in Figures 4 and 5. February 2022 4-3 DRAFT February 2022 4-4 DRAFT February 2022 5-1 DRAFT 5.0 Traffic Analysis Intersection Level of Service Analysis Traffic analyses were completed for the subject intersections for all scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro software. Initial analysis was completed using existing geometrics and intersection control. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. The following is a detailed description of the conditions described by each LOS designation: • Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10 seconds or less. • Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, b ut with some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this level. • Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay r anges from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service D corresponds to high-density flow in which speed and freedom are significantly restricted. Though traffi c flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection. • Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55 to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often experienced include long queues, stop-and-go waves, poor travel times, low comfort and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection correspond to this level of service. February 2022 5-2 DRAFT The LOS results are shown in Figures 6 and 7 and described below. All LOS worksheets are included in the Appendix for further detail. 2022 Existing Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS TH 55/Pioneer Trail NB/SB stop A/E A/D TH 55/Rolling Hills Road SB stop A/C A/C CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail EB/WB stop A/B A/B Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. All intersections and movements operate at LOS E or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. 2027 No-Build Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS TH 55/Pioneer Trail NB/SB stop A/E A/E TH 55/Rolling Hills Road SB stop A/D A/D CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail EB/WB stop A/B A/B Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. All intersections and movements operate at LOS E or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. 2027 Build Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS TH 55/Pioneer Trail NB/SB stop F/F F/F TH 55/Rolling Hills Road SB stop A/E A/E CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail EB/WB stop A/C A/C Pioneer Trail/development access WB stop A/B A/B Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. The southbound movements at TH 55/Pioneer Trail operate at LOS F during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The northbound movements operate at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour. The overall intersection operates at LOS F during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. All other movements and intersections operate at LOS E or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. February 2022 5-3 DRAFT 2040 No-Build Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS TH 55/Pioneer Trail NB/SB stop A/F A/E TH 55/Rolling Hills Road SB stop A/D A/D CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail EB/WB stop A/B A/C Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. The southbound movements at TH 55/Pioneer Trail operate at LOS F during the a.m. peak hour. The overall intersection operates at LOS A during all scenarios. All other movements operate at LOS E or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. 2040 Build Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS TH 55/Pioneer Trail NB/SB stop F/F F/F TH 55/Rolling Hills Road SB stop A/F A/F CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail EB/WB stop A/C A/C Pioneer Trail/development access WB stop A/B A/B Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. The southbound movements at TH 55/Pioneer Trail operate at LOS F during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The northbound movements operate at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour. The overall intersection operates at LOS F during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The southbound movements at TH 55/Rolling Hills Road operate at LOS F during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The overall intersection operates at LOS A. All other movements and intersections operate at LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Traffic Signal Warrants at TH 55/Pioneer Trail As shown above, the southbound movements and the overall intersection operate at LOS F during the 2027 Build and 2040 Build scenarios at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection. In order to accommodate traffic generated by the proposed development, traffic signal control was considered at this location. The traffic forecasts for the 2027 Build scenario were used to analyze the peak hour and four-hour traffic signal warrants. These volumes include trips from the proposed project as well as other background traffic. The traffic volume forecasts were used to determine if specific warrants are satisfied based on published criteria outlined in the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Con trol Devices (MMUTCD). Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume) and Warrant 3 (Peak Hour Volume) were assessed. Since the posted speed limits on TH 55 is 55 mph, the analyses presented consider reductions for speeds greater than 40 mph. The results of the signal warrant analysis for the 2027 Build condition indicate the warrants are met at the intersection. Based on this review, a full signal warrant analysis and Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) per Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) February 2022 5-4 DRAFT standards should be completed to confirm future traffic control. Any changes to the intersection control must be reviewed and approved by MnDOT. Intersection Operations at TH 55/Pioneer Trail with Traffic Signal Control A potential mitigation measure for the operational issues shown at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection is traffic signal control. The updated intersection operation results assuming traffic signal control are shown below. Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results at TH 55/Pioneer Trail with Traffic Signal Control Scenario AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS 2027 Build B/C B/C 2040 Build B/D B/D Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. All movements and the overall intersection operate at LOS D or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours under both scenarios. Recommended Mitigation The following mitigation measures are recommended at each intersection: • TH 55/Pioneer Trail o Short term – Widen southbound approach to accommodate a dedicated left turn lane and a through/right turn lane. Install traffic signal control. o Long term – No additional improvements needed. • TH 55/Rolling Hills Road o Short term – No improvements needed. o Long term – No improvements needed. • CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail o Short term – No improvements needed. o Long term – No improvements needed. • Pioneer Trail/development access o Short term – Construct westbound approach with dedicated left and right turn lanes. Construct a northbound right turn lane. o Long term – No additional improvements needed. February 2022 5-5 DRAFT February 2022 5-6 DRAFT February 2022 6-1 DRAFT 6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed redevelopment is expected to generate 846 trips during the a.m. peak hour, 788 trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 8,986 trips daily. • Traffic generated by the proposed development results in poor levels of service at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. • The results of a signal warrant analysis for the 2027 Build condition indicate th at warrants are met at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection. Based on this review, a full signal warrant analysis and Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) per Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) standards should be completed to confirm future traffic control. Any changes to the intersection control must be reviewed and approved by MnDOT. • The following mitigation measures are recommended at each intersection: o TH 55/Pioneer Trail ▪ Short term – Widen southbound approach to accommodate a dedicated left turn lane and a through/right turn lane. Install traffic signal control. ▪ Long term – No additional improvements needed. o TH 55/Rolling Hills Road ▪ Short term – No improvements needed. ▪ Long term – No improvements needed. o CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail ▪ Short term – No improvements needed. ▪ Long term – No improvements needed. o Pioneer Trail/development access ▪ Short term – Construct westbound approach with dedicated left and right turn lanes. Construct a northbound right turn lane. ▪ Long term – No additional improvements needed. February 2022 7-1 DRAFT 7.0 Appendix • Level of Service Worksheets Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW Appendix G Feasibility Study PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY Draft March 2022 Prepared for: City of Corcoran, MN 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center Maple Plain, MN 55359 Project Number: 227704712 PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Table of Contents March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1.1 TRANSPORTATION................................................................................................................ 2.1 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 2.1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................... 2.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................... 2.1 TRAFFIC FORECASTS ........................................................................................................... 2.2 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................... 2.4 FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................ 2.7 SEWER AND WATER ............................................................................................................. 3.1 WASTEWATER ....................................................................................................................... 3.1 WATER .................................................................................................................................... 3.2 FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................ 3.3 WATER RESOURCES ............................................................................................................ 4.3 REGULATORY OVERVIEW .................................................................................................... 4.3 WATERSHED SETTING AND LAND USE ............................................................................... 4.4 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................. 4.4 FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................ 4.5 FINANCING ............................................................................................................................. 5.1 SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 5.1 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................ 6.0 TRANSPORTATION ................................................................................................................ 6.1 SEWER AND WATER ............................................................................................................. 6.2 WATER RESOURCES ............................................................................................................ 6.3 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Weekday Peak Hour Trip Generation for Proposed Project Table 2. Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Table 3. Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Table 4. Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results Table 5. Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results Table 7. Model Results for Water Main Increase and New Tower PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Table of Contents March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 FIGURES Figure 1 Site Plan APPENDICES Appendix A Comprehensive Plan (Sewer and Water) Appendix B Stormwater Modeling Guidelines PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Introduction March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 1.0 Introduction Landspec USA is a development group proposing to construct an industrial / warehouse development of over 500,000 square feet located on Pioneer trail and Pioneer Trail Industrial Park in Southwest Corcoran. The area was previously planned for a similar development in 2004/2005 so the change in landuse is under review for infrastructure impacts and needs related to mostly traffic drainage and stormwater with a review of sewer and water supply for future service. This Draft Feasibility Study is the basis for cost estimating on public infrastructure needs for the site and outcomes are incorporated into the Environmental Assessment Worksheet and that public process. Figure 1 shows the site layout. PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 2.0 Transportation 2.1 Background This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: · TH 55/Pioneer Trail · TH 55/Rolling Hills Road · CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail · Pioneer Trail/development access 2.2 Proposed Development Characteristics For purpose of the traffic impact analysis, the proposed development is assumed to consist of the following uses: · 100,000 square feet of light industrial · 66,000 square feet of light industrial · 11,300 square feet of retail · 379,000 square foot storage facility · Gas station with convenience store and 20 vehicle fueling positions 2.3 Existing Conditions The proposed project site is currently used for agricultural purposes. The site is bounded by TH 55 on the south, Pioneer Trail on the west, existing residential and commercial uses on the east, and agricultural uses on the north. Near the site location, TH 55 is a two lane undivided roadway with turn lanes and traffic signal control at major intersections. Pioneer Trail is a local two-lane roadway. TH 55/Pioneer Trail - This four-way intersection is controlled with stop signs on the northbound and southbound approaches. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one shared lane for left turn, through, and right turn movements. TH 55/Rolling Hills Road - This three-way intersection is controlled with a stop sign on the southbound approach. The eastbound approach provides one left turn lane and one through lane. The westbound approach provides one through lane and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one shared lane for left turn and right turn movements. CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail - This four-way intersection is controlled with stop signs on the eastbound and westbound approaches. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide one left turn/through lane and one right turn lane. PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 Turn movement data was recorded at the existing intersections during the a.m. (6:00 – 9:00 a.m.) and p.m. (3:00 – 6:00 p.m.) peak periods in January, 2022. These volumes were used in the development of traffic forecasts for the project. 2.4 Traffic Forecasts To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were completed for the years 2027 and 2040. Specifically, weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were completed for the following scenarios: · 2022 Existing. Existing volumes were determined through traffic counts at the subject intersections. The existing volume information includes trips generated by the uses near the project site. · 2027 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2027 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on historic traffic volume growth in the project area. · 2027 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2027 No-Build volumes to determine 2027 Build volumes. · 2040 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2040 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on historic traffic volume growth in the project area. · 2040 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2040 No-Build volumes to determine 2040 Build volumes. The expected new development trips were calculated based on data presented in Trip Generation, Eleventh Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. These calculations represent total trips that will be generated by the proposed development. The resultant trip generation estimates are shown in Table 1. Table 1 Weekday Trip Generation for Proposed Project Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Light Industrial 100,000 SF 65 9 74 9 56 65 487 Light Industrial 66,000 SF 43 6 49 6 37 43 321 Retail 11,300 SF 16 11 27 37 37 74 615 Storage facility 379,000 SF 49 15 64 19 49 68 648 Gas station with convenience store 20 VFP 316 316 632 269 269 538 6915 Totals 489 357 846 340 448 788 8986 Notes: SF=square feet and VFP=vehicle fueling positions. The gas station trips can be categorized in the following trip types: · New Trips. Trips solely to and from the proposed development. · Pass-By Trips. Trips that are attracted from the traffic volume on roadways immediately adjacent to the site. PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 Based on information published in the Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, the percentage of each trip type is as follows: · Gas Station - 60% new, 40% pass by Trip distribution percentages for the subject development trips were established based on the nearby roadway network, existing and expected future traffic patterns, and location of the subject development in relation to major attractions and population concentrations. The distribution percentages for trips generated by the proposed development are described below: · 65 percent to/from the east on TH 55 · 20 percent to/from the west on TH 55 · 12 percent to/from the north on CSAH 19 · 3 percent to/from the west on Pioneer Trail Development trips from Table 4-1 were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the preceding trip distribution percentages. Traffic volumes were established for all the forecasting scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The resultant peak hour volumes are shown in Tables 2 and 3. Table 2 Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes TH 55/Pioneer Trail EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing 3 886 4 1 266 7 0 1 8 32 4 7 2027 No-Build 3 931 4 1 280 7 0 1 8 34 4 7 2027 Build 171 836 4 1 249 274 0 1 8 280 4 84 2040 No-Build 4 1060 5 1 318 8 0 1 10 38 5 8 2040 Build 172 965 5 1 287 275 0 1 10 284 5 85 TH 55/Rolling Hills Rd EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing 7 919 - - 278 4 - - - 16 - 7 2027 No-Build 7 966 - - 292 4 - - - 17 - 7 2027 Build 7 1117 - - 528 4 - - - 17 - 7 2040 No-Build 8 1099 - - 333 5 - - - 19 - 8 2040 Build 8 1250 - - 569 5 - - - 19 - 8 CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing 4 0 10 8 5 15 7 107 1 21 295 1 2027 No-Build 4 0 11 8 5 16 7 112 1 22 310 1 2027 Build 4 10 11 8 11 44 7 112 1 66 310 1 2040 No-Build 5 0 12 10 6 18 8 128 1 25 353 1 2040 Build 5 10 12 10 12 46 8 128 1 69 353 1 Pioneer Trail/access EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing - - - - - - - 10 - - 43 - 2027 No-Build - - - - - - - 11 - - 45 - 2027 Build - - - 323 - 34 - 11 435 54 45 - 2040 No-Build - - - - - - - 12 - - 51 - 2040 Build - - - 323 - 34 - 12 435 54 51 - PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 Table 3 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes TH 55/Pioneer Trail EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing 2 346 7 11 881 44 5 2 9 6 1 1 2027 No-Build 2 364 7 12 926 46 5 2 9 6 1 1 2027 Build 80 332 7 12 850 273 5 2 9 259 1 145 2040 No-Build 2 414 8 13 1054 53 6 2 11 7 1 1 2040 Build 80 382 8 13 978 280 6 2 11 260 1 145 TH 55/Rolling Hills Rd EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing 4 357 - - 929 24 - - - 9 - 7 2027 No-Build 4 375 - - 976 25 - - - 9 - 7 2027 Build 4 596 - - 1127 25 - - - 9 - 7 2040 No-Build 5 427 - - 1111 29 - - - 11 - 8 2040 Build 5 648 - - 1262 29 - - - 11 - 8 CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing 4 0 13 5 10 31 24 273 3 7 164 8 2027 No-Build 4 0 14 5 11 33 25 287 3 7 172 8 2027 Build 4 7 14 5 22 73 25 287 3 35 172 8 2040 No-Build 5 0 16 6 12 37 29 327 4 8 196 10 2040 Build 5 7 16 6 23 77 29 327 4 36 196 10 Pioneer Trail/access EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing - - - - - - - 46 - - 8 - 2027 No-Build - - - - - - - 48 - - 8 - 2027 Build - - - 397 - 51 - 48 305 35 8 - 2040 No-Build - - - - - - - 55 - - 10 - 2040 Build - - - 397 - 51 - 55 305 35 10 - 2.5 Traffic Analysis Traffic analyses were completed for the subject intersections for all scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro software. Initial analysis was completed using existing geometrics and intersection control. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. The following is a detailed description of the conditions described by each LOS designation: · Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10 seconds or less. · Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, but with some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this level. PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 · Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay ranges from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. · Level of service D corresponds to high-density flow in which speed and freedom are significantly restricted. Though traffic flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection. · Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55 to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. · Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often experienced include long queues, stop-and-go waves, poor travel times, low comfort and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection correspond to this level of service. The LOS results for the study intersections are presented in Tables 4 and 5. Table 4 Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results TH 55/ Pioneer Tr EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Intersection 2022 Existing A A A A A A C C C E E E A 2027 No-Build A A A A A A C C C E E E A 2027 Build A A A A A A D D D F F F F 2040 No-Build A A A B A A D D D F F F A 2040 Build A A A B A A D D D F F F F TH 55/Rolling Hills Rd EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing A A - - A A - - - C - C A 2027 No-Build A A - - A A - - - D - D A 2027 Build A A - - A A - - - E - E A 2040 No-Build A A - - A A - - - D - D A 2040 Build A A - - A A - - - F - F A CSAH 19/ Pioneer Tr EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing B B B B B A A A A A A A A 2027 No-Build B B B B B A A A A A A A A 2027 Build C C B C C A A A A A A A A 2040 No-Build B B B B B A A A A A A A A 2040 Build C C B C C A A A A A A A A Pioneer Tr/access EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing - - - - - - - A - - A - A 2027 No-Build - - - - - - - A - - A - A 2027 Build - - - B - A - A A A A - A PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 2040 No-Build - - - - - - - A - - A - A 2040 Build - - - B - A - A A A A - A Table 5 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results TH 55/ Pioneer Tr EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Intersection 2022 Existing B A A A A A C C C D D D A 2027 No-Build B A A A A A C C C E E E A 2027 Build B A A A A A F F F F F F F 2040 No-Build B A A A A A D D D E E E A 2040 Build B A A A A A F F F F F F F TH 55/Rolling Hills Rd EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing B A - - A A - - - C - C A 2027 No-Build B A - - A A - - - D - D A 2027 Build B A - - A A - - - E - E A 2040 No-Build B A - - A A - - - D - D A 2040 Build B A - - A A - - - F - F A CSAH 19/ Pioneer Tr EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing B B A B B B A A A A A A A 2027 No-Build B B A B B B A A A A A A A 2027 Build C C A C C B A A A A A A A 2040 No-Build C C A C C B A A A A A A A 2040 Build C C A C C B A A A A A A A Pioneer Tr/access EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2022 Existing - - - - - - - A - - A - A 2027 No-Build - - - - - - - A - - A - A 2027 Build - - - B - A - A A A A - A 2040 No-Build - - - - - - - A - - A - A 2040 Build - - - B - A - A A A A - A Traffic Signal Warrants at TH 55/Pioneer Trail As shown above, the southbound movements and the overall intersection operate at LOS F during the 2027 Build and 2040 Build scenarios at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection. In order to accommodate traffic generated by the proposed development, traffic signal control was considered at this location. The traffic forecasts for the 2027 Build scenario were used to analyze the peak hour and four-hour traffic signal warrants. These volumes include trips from the proposed project as well as other background traffic. The traffic volume forecasts were used to determine if specific warrants are satisfied based on published criteria outlined in the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD). Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume) and Warrant 3 (Peak Hour Volume) were assessed. Since the posted speed limits on TH 55 is 55 mph, the analyses presented consider reductions for speeds greater than 40 mph. PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Transportation March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 The results of the signal warrant analysis for the 2027 Build condition indicate the warrants are met at the intersection. Based on this review, a full signal warrant analysis and Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) per Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) standards should be completed to confirm future traffic control. Any changes to the intersection control must be reviewed and approved by MnDOT. Intersection Operations at TH 55/Pioneer Trail with Traffic Signal Control A potential mitigation measure for the operational issues shown at the TH 55/Pioneer Trail intersection is traffic signal control. The updated intersection operation results assuming traffic signal control are shown below. Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour LOS Results at TH 55/Pioneer Trail with Traffic Signal Control Scenario AM Peak Hour LOS PM Peak Hour LOS 2027 Build B/C B/C 2040 Build B/D B/D Note: Level of service results presented with overall intersection LOS followed by worst movement LOS. All movements and the overall intersection operate at LOS D or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours under both scenarios. 2.6 Findings The following mitigation measures are recommended at each intersection: · TH 55/Pioneer Trail o Short term – Widen southbound approach to accommodate a dedicated left turn lane and a through/right turn lane. Install traffic signal control. o Long term – No additional improvements needed. · TH 55/Rolling Hills Road o Short term – No improvements needed. o Long term – No improvements needed. · CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail o Short term – No improvements needed. o Long term – No improvements needed. · Pioneer Trail/development access o Short term – Construct westbound approach with dedicated left and right turn lanes. Construct a northbound right turn lane. Construct south bound left into development. o Long term – No additional improvements needed. PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Sewer and Water March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 3.0 Sewer and Water 3.1 Wastewater As mentioned previously, the prior development (AUAR, 2004) was exploring sewer shared with Medina. Sewer from MCES is not currently available, therefore the development is proceeding under rural development (well/septic) infrastructure. This is discussed further below. · The closest existing City of Corcoran sanitary sewer is located approximately 3 miles east of this proposed development and eventually discharges to L80 near the Maple Grove border. The distance alone would render connection to this system impractical and not cost effective. Furthermore, the sewer system at that location was not designed to include wastewater from this proposed development. In the City’s previous 2030 Comprehensive Plan, wastewater from this development and the surrounding area of Southwest Corcoran was anticipated to be served via a connection into Medina, which borders Pioneer Trail Industrial Park to the south of this development. However, when the City was working with the Metropolitan Council in preparing the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, it was realized that Medina had slowed their staging of sewer system development in areas towards SW Corcoran, and that both Medina and the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) no longer envisioned wastewater from SW Corcoran being directed through Medina (and generally eastward along Pioneer Trail Industrial Park). For this reason, Corcoran’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan states that the method and timing of regional wastewater service to Southwest Corcoran would be determined through future study. The potential options for regional service would be longer-term (over 10 years) and very high-cost options, resulting in the need for future study. · Another option that was suggested to Corcoran was to connect to the Loretto wastewater system. Loretto recently transitioned from operating their own permitted wastewater treatment facility (pond system) to a regionalized connection, i.e., they connected into the Tri-City wastewater forcemain, which is part of a local regional system that ultimately discharges wastewater from Independence, Greenfield and Medina into the regional sewer system located in Maple Plain. Operation of the Tri-City forcemain and the local regional system was modified to a Quad-City Agreement amongst Loretto, Greenfield, Independence, and Medina. Connection of the proposed Corcoran development into Loretto and the wider regional system is not viable for two reasons. First, the Quad City system was not designed to include significant future growth. Second, the infrastructure needed to reach the north edge of Loretto would likely not be cost effective, as it would require a lift station, approximately 1½ miles of forcemain, a directionally drilled/cased crossing of State Pioneer Trail Industrial Park, as well as long term operation and maintenance costs for the connecting infrastructure (plus a share of the local regional system costs). If the existing Loretto sewer system did not have enough available capacity to transfer this development-added flow to the south side of Loretto, additional force main length and a cased crossing of the railroad would also be required. · Given the above background, the most viable option is what is currently envisioned by the developer: installation of an individual subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS) for each parcel. Given the typically clayey soils in the area, these systems would utilize septic tank(s), with treated effluent being pumped to mound systems for further treatment/infiltration. We understand that the developer has stated that they may install only a wastewater holding tank for Lot 5 (storage units), given minimal employee occupancy. Hennepin County is the governing authority for permitting and tracking the installation, operation, maintenance, and enforcement of all SSTSs in Corcoran. The County may or may not allow the holding tank, and may require an SSTS to be PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Sewer and Water March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 installed, which would be minimal in size. Lastly, it is noted that the gas station will have a somewhat higher-strength wastewater, which will likely require additional treatment unit(s) compared to the other lots. Again, this will be governed by the County. · The other potential option would be to install a community wastewater system, which would utilize one larger area for the infiltration area (mounds), rather than the smaller individual mound systems located at each lot, as currently shown. The developer would need to ensure that a suitable area that is large enough in size as determined by soil testing is included in the development design. This would also require working out a cost sharing agreement amongst the various lots for system installation and for long-term operation and maintenance, which could be somewhat more complicated by the fact that the gas station has an increased level of treatment needed. The community system approach is only noted as a potential option and is not necessarily recommended. The County would govern this approach and if system is large enough the MPCA would be involved. · At some point in the future, when Corcoran sewer and water systems are extended into this area, the City will require all of the lots to connect to City water and sewer systems. With this in mind, the developer must provide an 80-foot street ROW such that watermain can be installed along the south side of the road and gravity sewer can be installed along the north side of the road. This will prevent having to tear up the entire length of road for the future utility installation. Since wastewater would likely be routed by gravity to the very northern edge for routing into/through the parcels to the north, a permanent easement to install this future north-south gravity sewer should be installed from the north side of the road to the northern property edge (western corner thereof). 3.2 Water · The closest existing City of Corcoran potable watermain is located approximately 3 miles east of this proposed development. The distance renders connection to this system impractical, and would not be cost effective. Neighboring homes and businesses utilize private wells, and likewise, private wells are the most viable option for the proposed lots. Review of well logs for these neighboring homes and businesses suggest that wells located in this development would be completed in the quaternary buried aquifer (usually artesian). These wells are typically 4-inch diameter wells, completed in sand layers that are located at depths that suggest the well depths in the proposed development would be on the order of 150 to 200 feet. Test pumping is commonly indicated at 20 to 30 gallons per minute (gpm). Wells completed in the underlying bedrock would also be an option, though at a higher cost. · The developer will need to install fire protection systems in accordance with public safety requirements, as determined by the City’s designated fire marshal. This may require installation of water storage tank that would serve as a reservoir to supply a building’s fire suppression system. · Corcoran’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan identified a potential future well exploration area in the vicinity of this site. Although there are no plans to install a municipal well in the near term, the City may eventually install municipal well(s) in SW Corcoran. As such, the City requests dedication for siting a municipal well in the upland area just west of Building F of Lot 5, at the northern edge of the property. Given various well setback requirements and the need for the City to own the property within 50 feet of the well, the City would need an outlot designated for this purpose at the northern property edge (approximately 110 by 110-foot area), which would allow for the possibility of siting a future municipal well near the center of the outlot (along with a small wellhouse). An easement for a narrow access road would also be required between the street and the well site. At some point in the future, the City would install a test well to verify the suitability of this location PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Water Resources March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 for a municipal well (or conversely, to rule it out). If suitable, installation of the municipal well, wellhouse, and access road could occur at that time. · Lastly, as noted in the wastewater section, the developer must provide an 80-foot street ROW, which will provide an adequate width such that future City watermain can be installed along the south side of the road. 3.3 Findings The sewer and water review shows the following significant findings. · Future connections to sewer and water requires corridors and necessary easements that shall be coordinated with construction plans and platting. · 80 foot ROW along Street A would allow for future utility corridor. · An individual lot shall be platted and dedicated to the City for future water well exploration. 4.0 Water Resources 4.1 Regulatory Overview Stormwater management regulations in the proposed project area would be guided or directed by Corcoran’s Local Surface Water Management Plan (Local Plan) the City’s Guidelines, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and MS4 requirements. Each of these documents has a larger regulatory context: · The Local Plan reflects the goals, policies and rules of the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission’s Third Generation Watershed Management Plan (Commission’s WMP). · The SWPPP is a requirement of the City’s stormwater permit, also known as the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. The MS4 permit is issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) which was reissued in October of 2021. · Among other goals, both documents include plans to meet pollutant load reductions calculated in the Elm Creek Watershed Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study. TMDL studies are required for surface waters that are designated as impaired – in other words, those that do not meet one or more state water quality standards. · City guidelines lay out the required modeling parameters, preferred BMPs and some construction materials. City approval is required prior to application for the WMO approval process. Further City review occurs with construction plan approval process. PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Water Resources March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 4.2 Watershed Setting and Land Use The majority of the proposed development is situated in the South Fork of Rush Creek watershed, and drains northward to Jubert Lake. Other parts of the development drain to the south under HWY 55 and northeast towards Horseshoe Bend Trail. Existing land use in the proposed development is agricultural and topography varies significantly. The MUSA districts have ongoing changes from agricultural to non-agricultural land use that presents both challenges and also opportunities to better manage stormwater runoff. This is true of the proposed development site, where land use will change from row crops to commercial/industrial. Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) installed during construction will maintain or improve water quality towards Jubert Lake and manage runoff rates to equal or less than existing conditions. 4.3 Stormwater Management The development on the parcel previously proposed by United Properties (2004) converts the agricultural to large scale industrial/commercial. Agricultural use of the land would cease, replaced by both pervious open space and impervious surfaces that will impact stormwater runoff. Although elimination of agriculture can benefit water quality by reducing export of nutrients and sediments through onsite ponding and filtration (Best Management Practices or BMPs), construction of additional impervious surfaces, such as the roads, driveways, rooftops, and sidewalks increase the volume to nearby surface waters. Turn lane improvements to HWY 55 and Pioneer Trail would also increase impervious surface area and, like neighborhood roads and driveways, would require practices to mitigate the impacts. Mitigation is accomplished by aligning development plans with City requirements and WMO/MS4 stormwater regulations. Corcoran’s Local Plan, in agreement with the Commission’s WMP, requires that development plans over 1 acre disturbed area be submitted to the City and the Commission for review. The purpose of the review is to ensure that the developer’s plans for stormwater management during and after construction meet the Commission’s rules regarding the rate, volume and pollutant load of stormwater runoff, along with other rules regarding wetland alteration, erosion and sediment control and other aspects of surface water protection. The City focuses on rates of discharge, downstream impacts and long term construction sustainability. This adherence to Commission rules on water quality (BMPs) is one of the strategies Corcoran has chosen to also meet its TMDL obligations to reduce nutrients. The implementation plan calls on Corcoran to apply these standards when land use changes, a strategy that is predicted to have the net result of improving, or not further degrading, the water quality of stormwater runoff. Stormwater modeling guidelines are in Appendix B and may be updated prior to development’s final construction plan approval. Complementing the Local Plan, Corcoran’s SWPPP requires plan review, construction site erosion and sediment control, and post-construction stormwater management. Construction site inspections by the City’s consultant will begin with land-disturbing activity and end with final stabilization of PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Water Resources March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 exposed soils and City acceptance of the development. After construction, the City would enter an agreement with tany developer’s common area association or similar group to ensure that stormwater Best Management Practices continue to function and are maintained as intended. 4.4 Findings Onsite · Stormwater improvements are necessary within the development to meet City guidelines and in accordance with regulations of the WMO. · To move towards meeting load reduction goals, the City’s Local Surface Water Plan identifies that improvements to water resources will occur with development. Offsite Offsite conveyance impacts for the development will be further explored as follows: • Conveyance path to the north towards Jubert Lake for sustained flows from a majority of impervious land use, • Potential diversion away from Horseshoe Bend Trail (an older roadside system), and • Drainage paths under HWY 55, MnDOT approval and into Medina. Costs may be incurred offsite by the development for drainage/water resource needs and the City is exploring a stormwater fee that may be incorporated in 2022. PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Financing March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 5.0 Financing 5.1 Summary Financing options of the development necessary for infrastructure and to mitigate impacts typically follow the approach of: · On-site infrastructure is managed by the developer · Although not currently available, all trunk sewer, water fees (TLAC), will be due at time services are made available to the site. · Stormwater fee may be implemented by City prior to final platting. · Off-site projects are typically managed by the by City (engineering, bidding and construction management) through an escrow provided by developer. The financial package will be further detailed and negotiated as the project moves forward and culminates in the overall Developer Agreement with the overall preliminary plat approval which is updated for each phase of the development. PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK DRAFT INFRASTRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY OF CORCORAN, MN Conclusions and Recommendations March 2022 Project Number: 227704712 6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The following infrastructure improvements are feasible and necessary to manage the development. These improvements are consistent with similar requirements for other developments in Corcoran, and have shown to be necessary for managing the additional population: Transportation · TH 55/Pioneer Trail o Short term – Widen southbound approach to accommodate a dedicated left turn lane and a through/right turn lane. Install traffic signal control. o Long term – No additional improvements needed. · TH 55/Rolling Hills Road o Short term – No improvements needed. o Long term – No improvements needed. · CSAH 19/Pioneer Trail o Short term – No improvements needed. o Long term – No improvements needed. · Pioneer Trail/development access o Short term – Construct westbound approach with dedicated left and right turn lanes. Construct a northbound right turn lane. Construct south bound left into development. o Long term – No additional improvements needed. · Additional improvements may be necessary based on MnDOT review. Sewer and Water · Future connections to sewer and water requires corridors and necessary easements that shall be coordinated with construction plans and platting. · 80 foot ROW along Street A would allow for future utility corridor. · An individual lot shall be platted and dedicated to the City for future water well exploration. Water Resources · Offsite property and / or improvements may be necessary to manage the additional drainage and allow the City to implement compliance as identified in the City’s TMDL. · Stormwater fees may be in place prior to final platting and would be applied to the development. · Discharge to the Highway 55 ROW wil be required to receive MnDOT approval. FIGURE Site Plan f:\jobs\9821 - 9840\9824 - landspec - corcoran\cad\engineering\concepts\_corcoran - concept n_220211.dwgSave Date:02/11/221of1 CONCEPT PLAN N LANDSPEC USA 5229 Minnetoga Terrace Minnetonka, MN 55343REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:JTRJTR10/05/21PIONEER TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK Corcoran, MinnesotaNOTES1. 02/11/22 80' RIGHT OF WAY APPENDIX A Sewer and Water Comprehensive Plan Systems ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H City of Medina Wastewater connection point will be evaluated during the Crow River WWTP Study.City ofGreenfieldCity of Medina Scott Lake Jubert Lake Horseshoe TrlCounty Road 19Pio n e e r T r l H o rs e s h o e BendDrChe s t nut Dr RollingHillsRdKimberly LnWa g o n W he el L n County Road 50 65th Pl N Homestead TrlWinchester TrlJubertLnSW-A SE-AG SW-K SW-J SW-I SW-L SW-F SW-G SW-D SW-E SW-C SW-B SW-H SW-1 SW-2 SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 (LS) SW-6 SW-7 (LS) SW-8 The method and timing of regional wastewater service to be determined through future study.24''8"18"12" 12"15" 8'' 456719 456750 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1,100 0 1,100550 Feet ± Path: L:\2294\100\2040CompPlan\SW Proposed Trunk Sanitary Sewer.mxd Date: 8/7/2019 Time: 8:15:33 AM User: ShuJC0243!Proposed Gravity !Proposed Gravity (Lateral)Proposed Forcemain !H Sewer Nodes (LS) = Lift StationSewer SubdistrictsMunicipal Boundary2040 MUSAFuture MUSA Expansion Area ! ! ! !Future Study AreaParcel BoundariesStreamsLake/Open Water Map 7-4Proposed Trunk SanitarySewer System - SW District 119 !O !O !O #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #*City of GreenfieldCityofMapleGroveCity of Medina City of Rogers Bechtold RdPio n e e r T r l TrailHavenRdCounty Road 116County Road 30 Schutte Rd Oakdale Dr County Ro a d 1 0 Horseshoe Trl Co u n t y R o a d 5 0 Larsen Rd Willow DrHunterRdCounty Road 19Homestead Trl Cain RdRolling Hills RdCountry Rd Mohawk DrLarkin RdFoxline DrStrehler Rd Dassel Ln OldSettlersR d Stie g R d Kalk RdMeister Rd Maple Hill Rd93rd Ave N Tessmer Rd Blue Bonnet DrJubertLn456710 456750 456719 456730 4567116 4567101 4567117 Brockton Ln N109th Ave N 4567101 ")55 Hackamore Rd Morin Lake Scott Lake Jubert Lake Goose Lake Cook Lake 456710 R u s h C reekRushCreek South F o r k Ru sh Creek SouthForkR u sh C r eek2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet ± Path: L:\2294\100\2040CompPlan\Trunk Water System.mxd Date: 1/15/2019 Time: 1:36:40 PM User: ShuJC0243 Existing WatermainProposed Watermain !O Potential Water Tower Locations #*Existing Supply Connection withNeighboring Communities #*Proposed Supply Connection withNeighboring Communities #* Emergency Connection withNeighboring Communities(Normally Closed) #*Potential Water Storage #*Potential Booster StationPotential Future Well Exploration AreasMunicipal Boundary2040 MUSAFuture MUSA Expansion AreaParcel BoundariesStreamsLake/Open Water Map 9-2Trunk Water System 137 APPENDIX B Stormwater Modeling Guidelines Stormwater Guidelines for Development March 2019 Issue Cities changing from rural to urban development are challenged by the additional stormwater generated due to construction of impervious surfaces, along with the offsite infrastructure, or lack thereof, to manage effectively. To standardize the modeling and review process, the guidelines below were created for efficiency. Note: A watershed approval is required per Elm Creek WMO rules, which also reviews flow rates, water quality and volume management. Modeling Watershed Information · Provide an aerial photo of the development that includes the overall watershed and subwatershed boundaries · Provide a summary of the acreage to each discharge point leaving the site. Any increase (or decrease) shall be identified. · Show any floodplain adjacent to project or within the project · Show downstream water bodies and flow paths o Downstream flow paths and water bodies typically need to have elevations, inverts, and condition identified. Subwatersheds A HydroCAD model (typically used) has inputs that can vary by user. To minimize resubmittals, review time and effort, the following data shall be utilized. · Electronic model shall be submitted · Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) shall be lowered one category due to the mass grading and compaction of the soils. For example, an existing B soil, shall be modeled as a proposed C soil (unless it remains undisturbed) · Wetlands, filtration basins, and ponds shall be modeled at CN of 98 · Identify peak rates for storm events and proposed shall be equal or less than existing rates. o Note: There are certain conditions where at City’s discretion the off-site conditions require a reduction in flow rate from existing rates. · SWMM (i.e. EPA-, XP-, or PC-) models can be submitted for review, however these increase review time. Model Setup for Outlet Control Structures, NWLs and Infiltration · The model’s flow control structures (OCS, culverts, etc.) shall match the construction plan information. During the plan and model review both may be modified and revised · Individual detail plates are required for each OCS, and individual plates shall have inverts identified · A pond or wetland NWL (and model starting elevation) shall be set at the constructed outlet control elevation. o No live storage shall be utilized below the controlling OCS elevation. o No live storage shall be used for filtration shelves on ponds below controlling OCS elevation · If a pond or wetland has an NWL (wet surface), infiltration shall not be used in flood routing. · If a pond has filtration BMP causing drawdown below the NWL, this drawdown elevation shall not be used as the NWL for flood routing. (Filtration has a slower release time and during wet periods is not available as live storage). Construction Plans Catch Basins · Street drainage shall be sufficient to manage the 10-year event · Typical a CB inlet capacity is 2 to 2.5 CFS, and CBs shall be spaced accordingly · Three inches (0.25 feet) of head on a CB will inundate a street centerline (2% slope). · Spacing is 200 to 250 feet using longitudinal street dimensions of 40 feet from road centerline to half the house footprint (assumes rear half of house drains to rear yard). Dimensions equal 10,000 SF. · CBs may be required on both sides of ped ramps to capture flows Natural Drainage Features · Waterbodies receiving urban drainage (wetlands, ditches, gullies) may need to have OCS installed, erosion protection, or reduced flow rates to allow the feature to function over the long term due to more consistent flows from increased impervious via development · Offsite work may be necessary and City will assist with coordination, easements, etc. HWLs and EOFs · The freeboard requirements are: o Low Opening is a minimum of two feet above the HWL o Low Opening is a minimum of two feet above the EOF · EOFs shall be accurately shown and as builts are required. The highest point shall be the EOF (for example top of curb) since this is the controlling elevation o In certain instances, channel calculations of the swale may be required to show the EOF has capacity to manage estimated flow · Overland EOFs are preferred, however if a second pipe serves as an EOF then modeling will include a 100-year event using the second pipe (EOF) as the only outlet (primary outlet plugged). Rear Yards · Rear yards or swales less than 2% shall have draintile. Typically, every two to three lots will require rear yard CBs. Sump Connections · Houses adjoining a wetland or pond do not need individual sump connection · Others will have access to rear yard stormsewer. Offsite Impacts Adjacent Parcels · City will review adjacent parcels (downstream and upstream) for impacts from volume, point discharge, etc. and may require off site improvements. City will assist in coordination of any off site work. · Off site water quality improvement projects may be determined by the City for assistance with compliance with City’s TMDL approach of implementing improvements upon development. · FEMA modifications may be necessary due to development and implemented by City. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park EAW Appendix H SHPO Response Letter MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE 50 Sherburne Avenue ▪ Administration Building 203 ▪ Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 ▪ 651-201-3287 mn.gov/admin/shpo ▪ mnshpo@state.mn.us AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND SERVICE PROVIDER February 22, 2022 Kendra Lindahl City Planner City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55357 RE: Pioneer Trail Industrial Park 6210 Pioneer Trail, Corcoran, Hennepin County SHPO Number: 2022-0773 Dear Kendra Lindahl: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced project. Information received on January 26, 2022, has been reviewed pursuant to the responsibilities given the State Historic Preservation Office by the Minnesota Historic Sites Act (M.S. 138.666). Based on information that is available to us at this time, we have determined that there are no properties listed in the National or State Registers of Historic Places and no known or suspected archaeological properties located in the area that will be affected by this project. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36 CFR § 800. If this project is considered for federal financial assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, then review and consultation with our office will need to be initiated by the lead federal agency. Be advised that comments and recommendations provided by our office for this state-level review may differ from findings and determinations made by the federal agency as part of review and consultation under Section 106. If you have any questions regarding our review of this project, please contact Kelly Gragg-Johnson, Environmental Review Program Specialist, at kelly.graggjohnson@state.mn.us. Sincerely, Sarah J. Beimers Environmental Review Program Manager City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-27 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota, is authorized to accept donations of real or personal property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 456.03 for the benefit of citizens, and is specifically authorized to accept gifts; and WHEREAS, the City received a monetary donation in the amount of $150.00 from The Stanchion, is allocated to the police department; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is appropriate to accept the donation as offered for the benefit of the City of Corcoran, and residents; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Corcoran acknowledges the generosity The Stanchion and graciously accepts the donation. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 24th day of March, 2022. ________________________________ Tom McKee – Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director City Seal Agenda Item: 7c. STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 7d. Council Meeting: March 24, 2022 Prepared By: Jessica Beise Topic: Approving Cropland Bids Action Required: Approval Summary: The City owns property near City Hall. In the past the City has requested bids for the rental of the land for farming purposes. Staff sent bidding information to ten previous bidders and advertised for bids in the Crow River News and with the League of Minnesota Cities. Staff will open all received bids on March 24, 2022, at 1:00 pm for the rental of 49 tillable acres. Bid results and information will be provided to Council at the March 24 Council meeting. Council should review the bids and award the contracts to the highest bidder. Financial/Budget: For 2020 and 2021 the land was rented for $141.00 per acres for the 27 acre parcel and for the 22 acre parcel. The land rented for $180.00 and $160.00 per acre in 2018 and 2019. The 2022 performance reports and 2023 budget will be updated to reflect the increase or decrease in revenue dependent upon final bid results on March 24, 2022. Council Action: Approve Resolution 2022-28 Awarding Cropland Rental Contracts with highest bid results. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2022-28 Awarding Cropland Rental Contracts with highest bid results. 2. Bids List – Crop Land (Will be submitted to Council after bid opening) City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-28 Page 1 of 1 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION AWARDING CROPLAND RENTAL CONTRACTS WHEREAS, pursuant to advertisements for bids for the rental of crop land owned by the City of Corcoran, bids received, opened, and tabulated according to law, and the attached bids were received complying with the advertisement; and WHEREAS, TBD provided the highest bid for the 27 acre parcel located ½ mile north of City hall on County Road 116 (PID 13-119-23-32-0001) in the amount of $TBD/acre; and WHEREAS, TBD provided the highest bid for the 22 acre parcel located at City Park (PID 23-119-23- 34-0001) in the amount of $TBD/acre; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF CORCORAN, MN: •The Interim City Administrator is hereby authorized to enter into a two-year (2022 – 2023) contract with TBD in the name of the City of Corcoran for the rental of the 27 tillable acre parcel of crop land located ½ mile north of City Hall on County Road 116 (SE corner of Schutte Road and County Road 116) in the amount of $TBD/acre; and •The Interim City Administrator is hereby authorized to enter into a one-year (2022) contract with TBD in the name of the City of Corcoran for the rental of the 22 tillable acre parcel of cropland at City Park in the amount of $TBD/acre. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 24th day of March, 2022. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor City Seal ATTEST: ____________________________________ Jessica Beise– Interim City Administrator Agenda Item 7d. 3/24/2022City of Corcoran 2022 Cropland Bids Last Name First Parcel 1 Parcel 2 27 22 $TBD $ TBD $TBD Per Acre $TBD.00 Total Bid $ $ $ Per Acre $1,122.00 Total Bid $ $3,375.00 $ Per Acre $2,750.00 Total Bid Apparent High Bidder Highlighted in Green - Results are unofficial until approved by the City Council. The City Council meeting date for review and approval is March 24, 2022. STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 7e. Council Meeting: March 24, 2022 Prepared By: Jessica Beise Topic: City Council Work Sessions Action Required: Schedule Work Sessions Summary: The City Council has directed staff to schedule work sessions due to the increase in complex development reviews and policy considerations. Council and staff discussions resulted in scheduling work session meetings as follows: • April 14th 5:30 pm – 6:30 pm • May 12th 5:30 pm – 6:30 pm • May 26th 5:30 pm – 6:30 pm • June 23rd 5:30 pm – 6:30 pm The meetings are open to the public. Once scheduled, staff will draft agendas to include topic items of discussion including code enforcement review, water tower and treatment facility planning and updates, and policy and ordinance review. Financial/Budget: Minor costs associated with snacks and beverages will be incorporated into the existing budget. Alignment with Values: This item relates to the following adopted values: Efficient and Effective Service Delivery We believe providing services to residents and businesses in an efficient and effective manner makes government easier to work with and creates a business friendly environment. Responsible Decision Making We believe it is the responsibility of the City to address difficult issues now in order to avoid larger more difficult issues in the future. Transparency We believe that open an honest communication is essential for an informed and involved citizenry. Processes and decision making should include opportunities to educate citizens and receive feedback. Council Action: Schedule City Council one-hour work sessions at 5:30 pm on April 14, May 12, May 26, and June 23, 2022. Attachments: None. STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 7f. Council Meeting: March 24, 2022 Prepared By: Maggie Ung Topic: Memorial Garden Policy Action Required: Approval Summary: In 2008, the City Council received a proposal from the Parks and Trails Commission for the development of a small garden, walkway, and gazebo to be located to the rear of City Hall. In 2010, the Memorial Garden was created. The purpose of the garden, titled Memorial Garden, was to honor long time dedicated employees and volunteers to the city; and to provide a park amenity to the residents and citizens of Corcoran. In reviewing current procedures, staff is recommending the attached policy to guide the use of the remaining and incoming funds for the Memorial Garden. For purchases under $5,000, Parks and Trails Commission approval is needed prior to purchase. Purchases will then be brought to the City Council for approval as part of the claims register. For purchase equal to or exceeding $5,000, both the Parks and Trails Commission and the City Council must approve prior to the purchase. Financial/Budget: There is no impact to the budget or financials. The City will need approval for the expenditures related to the funds prior to the money being spent. Options: 1. Adopted Resolution 2022-29 Adopting the Memorial Garden Policy. 2. Direct staff to amend the policy. 3. Decline the policy. Council Action: Approve the Memorial Garden Policy and adopted Resolution 2022-29 Adopting the Memorial Garden Policy. Attachments: 1. Memorial Garden Policy 2. Resolution 2022-29 Adopting the Memorial Garden Policy MEMORIAL GARDEN POLICY Purpose The purpose of this policy is to establish specific guidelines the City of Corcoran will follow with the funds related to the Memorial Garden. Background The Park Capital fund is a Capital Project fund and is restricted per MN State Statute 85.53. The Memorial Garden was segregated in the Park Capital fund back in 2010, when the park was developed. Responsibility The City Administrator is the responsible authority overseeing all city expenditures and the chief purchasing agent for the City. It is the responsibility of staff to review this policy periodically and bring forth amendments to City Council when needed. Staff will follow this guideline when making purchasing decisions regarding the Memorial Garden. Financial Requirements The Memorial Garden is tracked as a part of the Park Capital fund, which is a special revenue fund. The Memorial Garden’s cash is kept separately from the remainder of the City in its own savings account at the City’s main bank. The funds are committed to expenditures for the purpose of the Memorial Garden. If the park for any reason no longer exists, the funds will be lumped into the remaining Park Capital fund. Funding Funding may come from grants or donations. All funds received are presented to Parks and Trails Commission and the City Council. Making Purchases: For purchases under $5,000: All purchases under $5,000 will be brought forth to the Parks and Trails Commission for approval. If approved by the commission, purchases will subsequently be brought to the City Council for approval as part of the claims register. For purchases equal to or exceeding $5,000: If purchases are equal to or exceed $5,000, approval must be received from both the Parks and Trails Commission and City Council prior to purchase. Examples of past purchases includes the following: • Plants to beautify and maintain the Memorial Garden. • Memorial items such as engraved bricks/boulders and benches. City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-29 Page 1 of 1 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MEMORIAL GARDEN POLICY WHEREAS, polices guide in the preparation and management of the City’s overall budget and major objectives to be accomplished and; WHEREAS, Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) best practices recommends government formally adopt financial policies and; WHEREAS, the Memorial Garden was developed in 2010 to provide a park amenity to the residents and citizens of Corcoran and to honor long time dedicated employees and volunteers to the City; WHEREAS, the policy will serve as a guideline for use of funds related to the Memorial Garden; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota authorizes the adoption of the Memorial Garden Policy. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 24th day of March, 2022. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. Agenda Item: 8a. TO: Corcoran City Council FROM: Nicholas Ouellette through Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: March 16, 2022 for the March 24, 2022 City Council Meeting RE: Preliminary Plat, Site Plan and Administrative Permit for “Corcoran II Substation” at Larkin Road and County Road 116 (PID 25 -119 -23 -23 -0001 ) (City file no. 22 -004 ) 120 -DAY REVIEW DEADLINE: May 31 , 20 22 1.Description of Request The applicant is requesting approval preliminary plat to create one lot and two outlots from a 36.92-acre parcel for a new electric substation in addition to a site plan approval for this essential service. Typically, this application would be administratively approved but since there is a plat, the site plan and administrative permit will be processed concurrently. 2.Parks and Trails Commission Review The Parks and Trails Commission reviewed the item on February 17, 2022 and recommended acceptance of Outlot A (1.5 gross acres) for park land dedication. Credit will be given for the net land area accepted for park dedication. The applicant will be responsible for providing gross and net acreage for this park dedication. 3.Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 3, 2022. In addition to the applicant, there were four people present to speak at the public hearing and six emails that were provided with the packet and entered into the record. Commissioner Lanterman gave his opinion that the applicant did not have the right to submit an application and that the City should not have accepted the application. Staff stated that the City Attorney opined that due to the eminent domain process that Wright Hennepin Electric is using to acquire the property, the City could process the application but any approvals would be contingent upon acquisition of title from the Hennepin County Court. The applicant elected to proceed with the application, understanding this requirement. Commissioner Lanterman thereafter expressed concerns about the status of the eminent domain proceedings and noted disagreement among those offering testimony before the Planning Commission as to the existence and status of a stipulated order approving the eminent domain petition. The Planning Commission did not make a recommendation on the application. The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend denial because they did not believe that the applicant had the legal right to submit an application. Corcoran II Substation (22-004) 2 March 24, 2022 Following the meeting, the Interim City Administrator and consulting planner met with the City Attorney. Staff believes that it is permissible for Wright Hennepin Electric to apply during the eminent domain process. The City Code does not specifically describe the process for submitting a development application when the property is being acquired through eminent domain, but the City Attorney has stated that the intent is to ensure that approval is collected from all required persons or entities and the process followed here ensures that no application is approved unless and until this occurs. The applicant has provided a copy of the signed Order Approving Petition and Transferring Title and Possession. The order gives Wright Hennepin Electric the title to and possession of the property on April 26, 2022, upon the posting of required funds. Upon such posting, Wright Hennepin Electric will own the property on April 26, 2022 and the draft resolution includes a condition stating that the approval shall not take effect until this occurs and is verified by the City. Further, the resolution also states that the City Council will not approve the final plat until after this occurs. The applicant has submitted revised plans which have addressed issues regarding off-site grading, landscaping conflicts, fence slats, future site access, and seeding and maintenance plans. 4. Background In 2021, the applicant requested approval for a new electric substation on the south side of 19835 Larkin Road adjacent to the transmission lines. The application was withdrawn so the applicant could determine a more suitable location for the new substation. 5. Context Zoning and Land Use The site is zoned Mixed Residential (RMF-2) district and the Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Mixed Residential. The site is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and Southeast District. Surrounding Properties The surrounding properties are all located within the MUSA and Southeast District. The property to the north is zoned Downtown Mixed Use (DMU) district and guided Mixed Use in the Comprehensive Plan. Properties to the east are zoned RMF-2 district and guided Mixed Residential. Properties to the south are zoned Urban Reserve (UR) district and guided Mixed Residential. Properties to the east are zoned Light Industrial (I-1) district and C-1 Community Commercial and are guided Light Industrial and Commercial respectively. Corcoran II Substation (22-004) 3 March 24, 2022 Natural Characteristics of the Site The Natural Resources Inventory (NRI) map identifies emergent, shrub and wet prairie wetlands on the site. The wetland delineation provided by the applicant identifies five wetlands throughout the site. One wetland is identified within the project area being acquired by the applicant. 6. Analysis Staff has reviewed the application for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and City Code requirements, as well as City policies. The City Engineer’s comments are incorporated into this staff report, the detailed comments are included in the attached engineering memo and the approval conditions require compliance with the memo. A. Level of City Discretion in Decision-Making The City’s discretion in approving a site plan is limited to whether or not the plan meets the standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the site plan. 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 City’s subdivision and zoning ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the preliminary plat. The City’s discretion in approving an administrative permit is limited to whether the proposed plan meets the standards outlined in the City’s zoning ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the permit. B. Consistency with Ordinance Standards Preliminary Plat The applicant is proposing to subdivide the existing 38.91-acre site into one lot and two outlots. The existing landowner will retain 32.29 acres in Outlot B while the applicant is acquiring 5.30 acres. They will create a 2.87 acre Lot 1, Block 1, a 1.5-acre Outlot A and dedicate 0.93 acres of right-of-way for County Road 116 and Larkin Road. 1.32 acres of right-of-way will also be dedicated for Larkin Road from Outlot B. In 2020, the City and the present owners of the subject property agreed to a deferred assessment of the subject property in the base amount of $21,800, and subject to 2% annual interest, which is to be come due in full upon the platting of the subject property. Payment of this fee is a condition of final plat approval. Corcoran II Substation (22-004) 4 March 24, 2022 Easements The applicant has provided drainage and utility easements over the wetland buffer and stormwater pond. Drainage and utility easements must remain free of all encroachments unless specifically permitted by the City with an encroachment agreement. The City requires drainage and utility easements over all outlots. However, a drainage and utility easement is not required over Outlot A because it will be the City park. A drainage and utility easement shall be provided over Outlot B. The City has an existing watermain easement on the property which will remain in place after the final plat. Wetlands A wetland is located on the site and is subject to the standards in Section 1050.010 “Wetland Overlay District.” The wetland located on Lot 1 extends east into Outlot B. Plans show the wetland area on the east side of Lot 1 will be filled but a portion of the wetland will remain on Outlot B. A buffer from the remaining wetland area is required on this site. The wetland buffer shown on plans is 25 ft. in width as required for medium quality wetlands. MnDOT seed mix 34-261 is proposed for the wetland buffer and the applicant has provided a wetland buffer maintenance plan. The City Engineer has requested the provide slope intercept or grading exhibits to ensure grading will not occur in the wetlands or adjust the wetland application to account for this impact. Park Dedication Park dedication is due for the acreage being acquired by the applicant for the electrical substation. Park dedication will be due for Outlot B when it develops in the future. The Parks and Trails Plan in the Comprehensive Plan and the Southeast District Plan and Design Guidelines show a future neighborhood park situated in what is proposed as Outlot B. The Southeast District Plan and Design Guidelines shows a linear park running north to south along the east side of County Road 116. The linear park will continue north and south through the Southeast District on the east side of County Road 116. The linear park will provide trail connections to new civic and community spaces in addition to providing safe and convenient pedestrian crossings throughout the Southeast District. Under the current ordinance, park dedication of land is required at 28% of the net pre-development area for Mixed Residential land or equivalent market value in cash. The ordinance would require approximately 1.5 acres of park dedication for the if the gross acreage acquired by the applicant is 5.3 acres; however, staff has included a condition that the applicant provide the pre-development gross acreage exhibit. The applicant is proposing to dedicate Outlot A for the linear park as envisioned by the Southe ast District Plan. Outlot A is approximately 1.5 net acres. The proposed park dedication appears Corcoran II Substation (22-004) 5 March 24, 2022 to meet dedication requirements. Outlot A is 135 feet in width and matches the width of the linear park adjacent to the Saint Therese development. The linear park will form a contiguous connection along County Road 116 from Larkin Road to City Hall and will include an off-road trail with landscaping. Trails and Sidewalks The Parks and Trails Plan map from the Comprehensive Plan identifies an existing on road trail on County Road 116 and a proposed off-road trail through proposed Outlot A (the linear park) and Outlot B. The proposed off-road trail is not located within the project site. The trail on Outlot B will be deeded and constructed when Outlot B develops. The City will develop the trail in the linear park when all acreage is available for a connected trail. Site Plan Site plan approval is required for all developments except for agricultural uses in the Agricultural (A) and Rural Residential (RR) districts, single family detached dwellings and two family attached dwellings. Lot Standards and Setbacks The minimum lot standards and setback requirements in the RMF-1 are based on dwelling type. Section 1030.090 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that essential services in residential zoning districts shall be located on land at least one acre in size. This project will be subject to the setback standards for an apartment/condominium in the RMF-2 district as they are the most restrictive standards. Th e proposed lots comply with the minimum lot standards for the RMF-2 district and for Essential Services. Lot standards and setbacks applicable to this project are: RSF-1 District Lot 1 (Substation Site) Outlot A Minimum Lot Size* 1 acre 2.26 acres 1.5 acres Minimum Lot Width 100 ft. 271 ft. 136 ft. Minimum Principal Structure Setbacks Front, from major roadways 100 ft. NA NA Front, from all other streets 25 ft. 301 ft. NA Side 30 ft. 111 ft. NA Rear 25 ft. 141 ft. NA Maximum Principal Building Height 35 ft. or three stories 11 ft. NA *As regulated by Section 1030.060, the minimum lot size for essential services in residential district is one acre. The minimum lot size required for an apartment/condominium in the RMF-2 district is one acre. Corcoran II Substation (22-004) 6 March 24, 2022 Access and Streets The electrical substation will have access from Larkin Road. The access from Larkin Road shall have a concrete apron. Future access to the site will come from the future street in Outlot B as and the access from Larkin Road will be eliminated. The City has performed a feasibility study on the Larkin Road and County Road 116 intersection to determine if the developer is responsible for necessary off-site roadway improvements. The feasibility study determined additional Larkin Road right-of-way was not required from the proposed site at this time. The feasibility study notes the existing Larkin Road is a gravel roadway with a 4-ton limit. During construction, the applicant shall either obtain a secondary permit from Hennepin County to access property directly from County Road 116 or the applicant should be responsible for improving Larkin Road to the proposed access to accommodate construction vehicles. The level of improvement is dependent on the needs of Wright Hennepin for vehicle access to the site. If Larkin Road improvements are necessary, access shall only come from County Road 116 along the improved stretch of Larkin Road. Access to the site would only be permitted from County Road 116 through the improved stretch of Larkin Road. Parking While there are no employees and only occasional service calls, the plans dimension two parking stalls for service trucks. The parking area complies with the minimum dimensional requirements for parking stalls and drive aisles. A curb has been provided around the perimeter of the parking area and entrance drive as required by Section 1060.060 of the Zoning Ordinance. The area within the fence is crushed aggregate. Section 1050.010 of the Zoning Ordinance regulates that a five foot setback from the wetland buffer edge is required for roads and parking lots. Plans must show compliance with this standard where the drive aisle is adjacent to the wetland buffer. Landscaping The site complies with the minimum landscape standards in Section 1060.070 the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance requires one overstory tree per 50 linear feet of site perimeter and one understory shrub per 30 linear feet of site perimeter. Plans show plantings at sizes and percentages that comp ly with ordinance requirements. 56 overstory trees and 62 shrubs have been provided on plans where 30 overstory trees and 49 understory shrubs are required . However, plans show trees located in the drainage and utility easement. Staff has included a condition the applicant must work with City staff to finalize the location of drainage and utility easements and locate landscaping outside of the easements. Corcoran II Substation (22-004) 7 March 24, 2022 A native wet and dry-tolerant seed mix will be planted around the stormwater pond. The City requires a stormwater maintenance agreement for the stormwater pond. The City park areas will be seeded with low maintenance commercial turf mix MnDOT 25-131. The applicant has also provided slats in the chain link fence to provide additional screening of the substation. The applicant has provided a swale along the west side of the substation to direct stormwater from the south and west of the site to the stormwater pond in the north of the site. The applicant has also provided drain-tile in the swale. Public Safety The Public Safety Committee reviewed the plans and noted no concerns. Buildings The substation facility is primarily electrical equipment but it does have a small utility building located to the rear of the site. The plans show steel roofing (4:12 pitch) and textured block building finish. The applicant has provided material and color samples for review and approval by staff. The proposed finishes and colors are typical for other City built utility buildings in residential areas. Administrative Permit The electric substation is considered an “essential service” by the Zoning Ordinance. Essential Services are defined as “the erection, construction, alteration or maintenance by private or public utilities, or municipal departments of underground or overhead telephone, gas, electrical, steam, hot water, waste, or water transmission, distribution, collection, supply or disposal systems, including poles, wires, mains, drains, sewers, pipes, conduits, cables, fire alarm boxes, police call boxes, traffic signals, hydrants and other similar equipment and accessories in connection therewith for the furnishing of adequate service by such private or public utilities or municipal departments. Essential services shall not include waste facilities” and are allowed by administrative permit in the RMF-2 zoning district. Essential services are allowed in all districts by administrative approval subject to the standards in Section 1030.090 of the Zoning Ordinance. They are allowed by right or administrative permit in all districts because they are essential utilities that the City needs to function and the Council developed an ordinance with performance standards to ensure transition to adjacent uses. These types of services are likely to be located near development because development drives need. Typically, these uses would be approved administratively by staff, however, because the plat is being sent to the Planning Commission and Council, staff chose to share the site plan and administrative permit for action. Section 1030.090 of the Zoning Ordinance, Subd. 4 established performance standards for essential services. Corcoran II Substation (22-004) 8 March 24, 2022 Subd. 4. Performance Standards. A. Except for electrical lines, phone lines, cable television lines, gas lines and similar lineal facilities, all essential public services in the Agricultural and Residential zoning districts shall be located on land at least one acre in size. In all other zoning districts, parcels of land for essential services shall be large enough so that all structures and facilities comply with the required setbacks for zoning district. The site complies with the one acre minimum lot size for essential services. This is consistent with the minimum lot size for the RMF-2 district. The site includes a small utility building which complies with the setback standards for principal structures in the RMF-2 district. B. Utility substations and communications antennas permitted by the Corcoran City Code and this Ordinance shall be encouraged to be located on the same parcel; however, the parcel shall be large enough so that all structures and facilities comply with the required setbacks for the zoning district. Complies. C. The site shall be landscaped and maintained in accordance with Section 1060.070 (Landscaping) of this Ordinance. All above grade lift stations, pump stations, substations and similar structures not located in a building shall be screened. The site complies with the minimum landscape standards in Section 1060.070. This essential service is different from a typical residential or commercial/industrial standard and does not neatly fall into either category. However, staff reviewed the application against the higher non-residential standard, which requires a minimum of: • One overstory tree per 1,000 square feet of gross building floor area or one tree per 50 lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is greater, and • One understory shrub for each 300 square feet of building or one tree per 30 linear feet of site perimeter whichever is greater. The site perimeter is 1,466 linear feet for Lot 1 Block 1 which requires 30 overstory trees and 49 understory shrubs. The applicant has provided the minimum number of trees and shrubs required. A stormwater pond is located between the substation and rear property line. A native wet and dry-tolerant seed mix will be planted in this area. The City requires a stormwater maintenance agreement for the stormwater pond. Corcoran II Substation (22-004) 9 March 24, 2022 Plans show required trees and shrubs in the drainage and utility easement along the rear property line. Trees and shrubs are also in the wetland buffer where they are not permitted. The location of some trees and shrubs may also be within the side utility and drainage easements. Staff has included a condition the applicant must revise the landscape plan to show the drainage and utility easements and relocate trees and shrubs outside of the wetland buffer and drainage and utility easement. The electrical substation equipment is enclosed with a seven foot high chain link fence with barb wire at the top for security and complies with all structure setbacks. The chain link fence includes slats to provide additional screening of the substation. Fence details have been provided for review and approval by staff. D. Buildings and structures shall be constructed to be compatible with the size, color, appearance and character of other structures in the zoning district. The substation facility is primarily electrical equipment but it does have a small utility building The plans show steel roofing (4:12 pitch) and textured block building finish. The applicant has provided material and color samples for review and approval by staff. The proposed finishes and colors are typical for other City built utility buildings in residential areas. E. Facilities and equipment shall be removed within 6 months of becoming unnecessary or obsolete. Staff has included this as a condition of approval in the draft resolution. Subd. 5. Special Districts. Essential public services located in a special overlay district shall comply with the requirements and development guidelines in that district. As noted above, wetlands are present on the site. The applicant must comply with the standards regulating wetland and wetland buffer areas in Section 1050.010 “Wetland Overlay District.” Subd. 4. All electrical, cable television, phone lines and similar facilities serving new development within the urban service area shall be located underground. Not applicable. This cannot apply to a substation that requires a connection with an adjacent above-ground transmission line. Corcoran II Substation (22-004) 10 March 24, 2022 Summary Essential services are permitted in all zoning districts as an administrative approval, due to the essential nature of the utility services. Many of these services are provided by the City but other services are provided by private utility companies. It is common to locate these services in residential districts they serve. Staff find s that the ordinance standards have been met and recommends approval of the request. 7. Recommendation Move to adopt Resolution 2022-24 approving the preliminary plat, site plan and administrative permit for the electric substation. Attachments 1. Resolution 2022-24 Conditionally Approving Preliminary Plat, Site Plan and Administrative Permit 2. Site Location Map 3. City Engineer’s Memo dated February 24, 2022 4. Feasibility Study dated February 24, 2022 5. Order Approving Petition and Transferring Title and Possession 6. Applicant’s Narrative dated January 18, 2022 7. Preliminary Plans dated March 14, 2022 8. Building Elevation dated January 18, 2022 9. Letter from WH President and CEO dated February 23, 2022 10. Letter from WH President and CEO dated March 14, 2022 11. Letter from Pemberton Law dated March 14, 2022 12. Facts about Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association dated February 23, 2022 13. Corcoran Substation Information dated February 23, 2022 14. Wright Hennepin Electric Presentation dated March 14 , 2022 15. Public Comments City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 20 22-24 Page 1 of 4 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION CONDITIONALLY APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT, SITE PLAN AND ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT FOR “CORCORAN SUBSTATION II” AT LARKIN ROAD AND COUNTY ROAD 116 (PID 25-119-23-23-0001) (CITY FILE NO. 22-004) WHEREAS, the Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association has requested approval of a preliminary plat, site plan and administrative permit for the property legal described as: See Attachment A WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the submitted preliminary plat, site plan and administrative permit at a duly called Public Hearing; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Corcoran City Council approves the request for a preliminary plat, site plan and administrative permit subject to the following findings and conditions: 1.The approvals in this resolution shall not take effect until the applicant has provided the City with proof it has secured title to the property. 2.Upon satisfaction of the above condition, a preliminary plat is approved, in accordance with the plans received by the City on January 18, 2022 and March 11, 2022, except as amended by this resolution. 3.The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the City Engineer’s memo dated February 24, 2022. 4.Upon satisfaction of condition 1 above, a Site Plan and Administrative Permit is approved for the electrical substation, subject to the conditions in this Resolution. 5.Prior to approval of final plat: a.The applicant must take title to the property and provide proof of the same to the City. b. The plans must show a curb around the perimeter of the parking area and entrance drive in accordance with City standards. c.The applicant shall provide the net and gross acreage of the land they area acquiring as the pre-development acreage, as well as the net and gross acreage calculations for the lot and outlot areas. City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 20 22-24 Page 2 of 4 d. The plans must be revised to wetland buffer setbacks in compliance with Section 1050.010 of the Zoning Ordinance. e. The color and style of the fence slats must be approved by City staff. f. Outlot A shall be deeded to the City by warranty deed. The applicant must provide a copy for City approval. g. The applicant shall finalize the location of drainage and utility easements with City staff. h. The applicant shall work with City staff to locate landscaping outside of the drainage and utility easements. 6. The developer must enter into a stormwater maintenance agreement with the City. The agreement shall be recorded with the final plat. 7. The applicant shall enter into a Site Improvement Performance Agreement to provide a financial guarantee to protect the work prior to release of the final plat for recording. 8. The 2020 watermain deferred assessment shall be due prior to release of final plat and the applicant will pay the deferred assessment. a. Upon determination of damages owed as a result of the applicant’s condemnation of the property subject to this application, either by court- appointed commissioners or by direct negotiation, the applicant shall pay to the City the full amount of this assessment, inclusive of any interest accrued at that time, within 30 days of such determination. b. Nothing in this condition shall be construed to prevent the applicant from seeking a corresponding reduction in any damage payment made to present owners. 9. Approval of the preliminary plat shall expire within one year of the date of this resolution unless the applicant has filed a complete application for approval of final plat. 10. Facilities and equipment shall be removed within six months of becoming unnecessary or obsolete. City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 20 22-24 Page 3 of 4 VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 24th day of March 2022. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 20 22-24 Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENT A The Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter except that part lying southerly of the southerly right-of-way line of the Town Road now opened and laid out and generally running East and West, approximately located between the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, all in Section 25, Township 119, Range 23, except that parcel which lies westerly of a line parallel and distant 40 feet East of the West line of Section 25, Township 119, Range 23. Hennepin County Property Map Date: 2/9/2022 Comments: 1 inch = 400 feet PARCEL ID: 2511923230001 OWNER NAME: George H Deziel Rev Trust PARCEL ADDRESS: 7400 Co Rd No 116, Corcoran MN 55340 PARCEL AREA: 36.92 acres, 1,608,377 sq ft A-T-B: Abstract SALE PRICE: SALE DATA: SALE CODE: ASSESSED 2020, PAYABLE 2021 PROPERTY TYPE: Farm HOMESTEAD: Non-Homestead MARKET VALUE: $1,008,700 TAX TOTAL: $10,922.34 ASSESSED 2021, PAYABLE 2022 PROPERTY TYPE: Farm HOMESTEAD: Non-Homestead MARKET VALUE: $973,500 This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2022 Memo To: Kevin Mattson, City of Corcoran From: Kent Torve, City Engineer Steve Hegland, PE Project: Corcoran II Substation (Wright- Hennepin) Date: February 24th, 2022 Exhibits: This Memorandum is based on a review of the following documents: 1. Preliminary Plans for the Corcoran II Substation, Prepared by Civil Methods, Inc. Dated January 28th, 2022. 2. Corcoran II Substation Stormwater Management Plan, Prepared by Civil Methods, Inc. Dated January 17th, 2022 Comments: General: 1. Consistent with the review process, a comment response letter shall be provided in response to the following comments provided in this Memorandum in which the applicant provides a written response to each item. 2. In addition to engineering related comments per these plans, the proposed plans are subject to addition planning, zoning, land-use, and other applicable codes of the City of Corcoran. 3. Final approval by the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission (ECWMC) must be attained before any site grading or activity may commence. Approval from City is required before submitting to ECWMC. 4. For any site activity (demo, grading, utilities, etc.) no closures or restrictions of any kind shall be imposed upon the public use of Larkin Road without the City’s permission. Should any lane restrictions be necessary, the Contractor shall notify the City at least 48 hours in advance and provide a Traffic Control Plan. 5. Larkin Road is a 4-ton roadway so contractor shall be responsible for ensuring they have adequate access for construction without exceeding roadway limits. 6. An encroachment agreement shall be required for all site improvements or items placed within the City ROW, easements, or adjacent private property. 7. Ownership and maintenance agreement on storm sewer and any BMPs to be verified with City and are typically requirement of the WMO. 8. City is performing a feasibility study on Larkin Road and County Road 116 intersection. Developer may be responsible for roadway improvements to Larkin Road as outlined in feasibility study. Plat: 1. The applicant shall have all drainage and utility easements provided and shown and all platting requirements met per the City Code. Drainage and utility easements (5’ – 10’) shall be provided along property lines, as standard per City requirements. February 23, 2022 Corcoran II Substation (Wright-Hennepin) Kevin Mattson Page 2 of 3 2. Provide Drainage and utility easement over Outlot B. 3. Grading as proposed will extend past the proposed property line/wetland mitigation boundary. Please provide slope intercept or grading extents to ensure that grading will not occur in wetlands or adjust wetland application to account for this impact. Erosion Control/SWPPP 1. Preparation of and compliance with a SWPPP per MPCA requirements shall be required for construction. a. Revise the SWPPP to reference City of Corcoran permanent stormwater management requirements, not the City of North Branch. 2. City of Corcoran is an MS4 city and site visits to be conducted weekly during construction. 3. Silt fence to be added to pond perimeter prior to construction. 4. Turf Reinforcement Mat (TRM) for EOFs of any ponds/bmp/wetlands, per the Corcoran Standard Plates, shall be Slopetame3 or MnDOT Spec. 2020 - Rolled Erosion Prevention Product - Category 76, or MnDOT Spec. 2018 Turf Reinforcement Mat – Category 4. (Slopetame2 is no longer an available product.) 5. Currently, specifying Category 20 erosion control blanket (Rolled Erosion Prevention Product – MnDOT 2020 specs.) for most areas. Ditch bottoms shall require Category 25 when grades are corrected to 2%. 6. Provide Rolled Erosion Prevention Product (REPP) for all ditch bottoms on south end of project and any slopes 4:1 or greater. 7. Provide erosion control from EOF of Pond to north wetland. 8. Provide redundant silt fence for wetland located on eastern property edge. 9. Concentrated flow cannot be directed at silt fence. The use of silt fences as a sediment barrier is not permitted in areas of concentrated flow, such as ditches or outfalls. In these cases, soil berms, silt dikes, straw wattles, excelsior logs, rock check dams, or other BMPs suitable for concentrated flow should be used. Please provide for silt fence relief for pond outlet and detail on plans. Transportation 1. Road to be privately owned and maintained 2. Site entrance at Larkin Road to have concrete apron. 3. All parking areas shall have concrete curbing and a paved surface. a. Provide concrete curb on entrance road and parking area 4. Public safety to review site and determine if emergency vehicle turnaround is required. 5. Future access to site will come off Future Street in Outlot B and access off Larkin Road will be eliminated. Provide proposed location of future access. Site Plans 1. Provide additional wetland buffer monuments at buffer angle points. 2. Revise tree locations on landscaping plan to be out of drainage swales. Grading /Stormwater 1. Reference the City of Corcoran Stormwater Guidelines for Development Review for standards for stormwater systems and modeling. February 23, 2022 Corcoran II Substation (Wright-Hennepin) Kevin Mattson Page 3 of 3 2. Provide MIDS inputs or model to verify water quality modeling was completed correctly. Only results are currently provided. 3. The western berm is centered on the property line with grading occurring within the city park. The grading and berm shall all be located within the applicants lot. 4. All drainage swales shall maintain a minimum of 2% slope and all slopes should be 4:1 or flatter unless approved by the city engineer. o Per city standards drainage slopes less than 2% require draintile o Provide 2% minimum grade in swale east of bituminous driveway. o Provide 2% minimum grade in south and west swales. o Minimum 2% drainage required on all bituminous/gravel surfaces. o Revise swale/berm grading to be no greater than 4:1 slopes. 5. Provide flared end section inverts. 6. Modify Subcatchment 1 in the proposed HydroCAD so that Tc values represent proposed site conditions, or justify the use of cultivated surface. 7. Justify the use of 0.03 cfs filtration rate for the filtration bench and what the assumed filtration rate (in/hr) is. Filtration rate will be required to be verified post-construction to confirm actual rate is at least the design rate. 8. Identify the draintile elevations both on the plan as well as the invert into the structure to ensure that the tile drains properly and has adequate cover. 9. The city park area should be seeded with a low maintenance commercial turf mix MnDOT 25-131. 10. Detail shows top of filter bench at 902.0. We assume this was meant to be 992.0. Please clarify if this is not the case. End of Comments Feasibility Report Project: Wright Hennepin Electrical Cooperative Corcoran II Substation By: Steve Hegland, PE Kent Torve, City Engineer The Wright Hennepin Electric Co-op is proposing to add an electrical substation at the NE corner of Larkin Road and County Road 116. As part of the development application, the city performed a feasibility study to look at the ROW needs and any potential roadway upgrades associated with this substation. Right of Way Stantec looked at the existing intersection of Larkin Road and County Road 116 to identify the proposed layout of the intersection should it be upgraded in the future. This was done to and identify if the ROW being dedicated with the development is sufficient. The existing intersection has an offset eastern leg which is shifted north from the western leg and is skewed to the northeast. In the SE District Guidelines, Larkin Road is identified as a Connector Street and is realigned with the rest of Larkin Road, west of County Road 116. We assumed County Road 116 would be reconstructed to a 4 lane highway and Larkin Road was realigned to the Connector Street standards with turn lanes onto the County Road. Attached to this feasibility study is the proposed layout of this intersection. The proposed realignment results in the ROW being significantly shifted to the south which would require ROW dedication from future development but does not necessitate additional ROW from the Wright Hennepin proposed site at this time. Additionally, there is an existing natural gas easement that runs along the southern boundary of the Wright Hennepin site and overlaps the 10’ D&U easement. This easement would prohibit small utilities from being installed within the easement, however significant utility needs along this corridor are not anticipated until the area is redeveloped, and the ROW is expected to be realigned with that future development. Roadway Design Larkin Road from County Road 116 to County Road 10 is posted at a 4-ton limit on a year-round basis. After the initial construction of the site improvements, the site will be accessed only occasionally by vehicles and equipment to maintain the equipment on the site. During construction the applicant shall either obtain a permit from Hennepin County to access the property directly from the County Road or the applicant should be responsible for improving Larkin Road to their proposed access to accommodate construction vehicles. After construction is completed, the applicant shall either adhere to the posted 4-ton load limit of the roadway or shall be responsible for improving the condition of the roadway up to their access to allow for heavier vehicles to access Larkin Road to their main entrance. If the roadway is improved, vehicles can then access the site only from County Road 116 and would need to obtain a permit from public works for approval for driving past the posted weight limit signs. The level of improvement will be dependent on the needs of Wright Hennepin for vehicle access to the site. 19835 LARKIN RDCORCORAN, MN 553407400 CO RD NO 116CORCORAN, MN 5534019625 LARKIN RDCORCORAN, MN 55340LARKIN ROAD7241 CO RD NO 116WRIGHT-HENNEPINCOOPERATIVEELECTRICASSOCIATION19910 LARKIN RD19910 LARKIN RDCOUNTY ROAD 1160+001+002+003+004+005+006+007+008+009+0010+00S89° 13' 02.33"E127.91'N72° 35 ' 35 .97 "E36.32 'L=285.718Δ=18.1894R=900.000L=434.715Δ=27.6748R=900.000R40'R40'CONNECTING TO EXISTING ROADGAP BETWEENPROPOSED ANDEXISTING ROWEXISTING ROWPROPOSED ROW12'12'12'12'12'12'12'80'LOT 1OUTLOT A BLOCK 1135.65'135.01'491.45'476.97 448.00'271.29'270.01'100'10'10'7'10'GAS PIPELINE EASEMENTDESCRIBED IN DOC. NO.9565121EASEMENT DESCRIBED INPARTIAL RELEASE RECORDEDAS DOC. 4795747EASEMENT DESCRIBED INPARTIAL RELEASE RECORDEDAS DOC. 4795747UTILITY EASEMENTGAS PIPELINE EASEMENT DESCRIBEDIN DOC. NO. 9530432APPARENT LOCATION OFEXISTING EASEMENT ASDESCRIBED IN DOC. 10874109(PART OF DOCUMENT IS ILLEGIBLE)UNITED POWER EASEMENTDESCRIBED IN PARTIALRELEASE RECORDED ASDOC. NO. 483920725'FIG-01LARKIN ROADINTERSECTIONLAYOUTDATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.:DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:227701081-145\\us0242-ppfss01\shared_projects\227701081\drafting\Task 145_Wright Hennepin Substation\5_DESIGN\1_CAD\2 EXHIBITS\Larkin Road Intersection Layout CRJ 1_2022_0203.dwg DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:2/18/2022 3:00:47 PM CLIENT:CITY OFCORCORANLARKIN ROAD INTERSECTION LAYOUT CORCORAN, MN PROJECT TITLE:CRJCHK'D BY:NPWAPP'D BY:SKHCERTIFICATION:1800 PIONEER CREEK CENTERMAPLE PLAIN, MN 55359PHONE: 763-479-4200FAX: 763-479-4242WWW.STANTEC.COM2/1/202202/1/2022 ISSUED FOR REVIEW 0 2/2/2022 ISSUED FOR REVIEW 0 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: CONDEMNATION Court File No. 27-CV-22-484 Wright-Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association, a Minnesota cooperative Petitioner, v. Susan Sween, as Trustee of the George H. Deziel Revocable Trust dated February 6, 2001; United Power Association, n/k/a Great River Energy, a Minnesota cooperative; Shamrock Golf, Inc., a Minnesota corporation; CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp. a Delaware corporation; City of Corcoran, a Minnesota municipal corporation; also unknown persons claiming any right, title, estate, interest or lien in the real estate described in the Petition herein, and any unknown heirs or devisees, if any, of any party that may be deceased, and including unknown spouses, if any, and all others, Respondents. ORDER APPROVING PETITION AND TRANSFERRING TITLE AND POSSESSION The condemnation Petition in the above matter came on for hearing on Petitioner's Petition and its Motion for an Order Transferring Title and Possession before the Honorable Jamie L. Anderson, Judge of District Court, on February 16, 2022, at 1:15 P.M., in the District Court of Hennepin County, via Zoom. Marc W. Sugden, of the law firm of Pemberton Law, P.L.L.P., appeared on behalf of the Petitioner Wright-Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association. David L. Sienko of the law firm of LeVander Gillen & Miller, P.A., appeared on behalf of Respondent Susan Sween, as Trustee of the George H. Deziel Revocable Trust dated February 6, 2001 . Thomas Atmore, of the law firm of Martin & Squires, P.A., appeared on behalf of Respondent Shamrock Golf, Inc. Respondents United Power Association, n/k/a Great River Energy, CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp., and City of Corcoran did not make an appearance. The parties who appeared at the hearing submitted this stipulated order to the Court. The notice of the objects of the Petition and the time and place of hearing thereof were served upon the parties named in the Petition at least twenty (20) days before said Petition was presented to the District Court. The names of all persons appearing of record or known to the Petitioner to have any right, title, or interest in and to the real estate described in the Petition were named therein, together with the nature of the ownership of each, as ascertained by Petitioner. That proof of service of the Petition for Condemnation and Motion for Transfer of Title and Possession under Minnesota Statutes Section 117.042 and Notice of Intent to Take Possession upon the parties is on file with the Court. Based on all files and in this proceeding, the parties stipulation, and being fully advised in the premises, the Court finds that the allegations of the Petition are true; that the procedures used are in accord with the statutes governing the acquisition of property by condemnation by the Petitioner; and that the taking herein is for a public purpose. The Court further finds that the Petition is in due form as required by the applicable Minnesota Statutes. The Court further concludes that, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 117.042, Petitioner possesses the right to utilize and has demonstrated the need to acquire title to and possession of the subject real property located in Hennepin County, prior to the time the Court appointed condemnation commissioners can reasonably be expected to have filed their awards. EXHIBIT A That partofthesouth555.56 feet ofthewest 470.00 feet oftheSouthwest QuarteroftheNorthwest Quarter of Section 25, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the southerly right-of-way line of Larkin Road. Except the west 40.00 feet thereof. Corcoran II Substation Summary Wright-Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association (WH) is applying for Administrative Approvals from the City of Corcoran to build an electric substation called “Corcoran II Substation” located at address 7400 Co Rd No 116, which constitutes an Essential Services as described in Section 1020 and shown in Section 1030.090. Great River Energy (GRE), WH’s wholesale electric transmission supplier, owns the existing 69-kV transmission line along County Road 116 and will provide the 69-kV power source. As part of the overall design GRE will install new structures along the existing transmission line and on the southwest corner of the property to feed the substation. The substation design will have provisions to “double-end” in the future which will allow WH to double its load capacity and network distribution feeder capabilities if future residential and commercial load continues to grow in the area. Included in our application we have applied for a preliminary plat for the entire existing parcel split accordingly and wetland waiver request for the remaining parcel not affected by the Corcoran II Substation. WH’s Corcoran II Substation will consist of approximately four and a half (4 1/2) acres. The contemplated substation and preliminary plat in relation thereto wil l allow WH to better serve its members in the area and will accommodate anticipated residential and commercial in this area for years to come. Additional information on the variance request is per 1070.040 Subd. 2(B) Site Breakdown will consist of: • WH’s substation design requires approximately 2.6 acres for the substation (including .40 acres for driveway and parking, .23 acres for stormwater management, and .75 acres fenced in area) + 1.7 acre for City of Corcoran property setbacks + .3 acres for the ROW dedication +.4 acres for the county setbacks resulting in the need for approximately a 5-acre site. This design adheres to the standards set forth in the National Electrical Safety Code, which governs electric utility designs. • Electrical substations are needed based on current and future electrical demands. This site is required due to the demand of electrical growth forecasted in the Corcoran area and to continue to serve reliable electricity during normal and inclement weather. Furthermore, this site is optimal for WH due to the proximity to the GRE transmission lines. The placement of the GRE transmission lines in this area were outside of WH’s control, and WH now desires to construct the substation in this location so that it ha s a minimal impact on future commercial and residential development. • Electrical substations are designed and constructed in commercial, urban, and rural settings, and they consist of small footprints in the overall area the substation serves. Given WH’s willingness to comply with the City’s screening requirements, the presence of the substation will not alter the essential character of the locality, whether existing now or in the future. • Like water & sewer, electricity is considered an essential service. To strike the best balance of cost to ratepayers and meet standards in public safety, local reliability, and service quality, we desire to have the substation located in the general vicinity of the benefitting consumers that will use the power the substation produces in their homes and businesses at the size as shown on the attached designs and profiles. Additionally, as previously indicated, the substation will be located adjacent to the existing GRE transmission lines. • WH has incorporated Corcoran’s comprehensive plan with forecasted electrical demand when selecting the location and size of the site. PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR THECORCORAN II SUBSTATIONJANUARY 2022VICINITY MAPCONTACTSINDEXNOTESPROJECT TITLEFeet020004000C01COVER SHEETLEGEND: X.X%COCODMPDESIGNED:LIC. NO.:DATE:DAVID M. POGGIDRAWN:CHECKED:DMPKEB44573I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPAREDBY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.01-18-2022CIVIL METHODS, INC.P.O. Box 28038St. Paul, MN 55128o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.comDATE / REVISION:SHEET NO:3/10/2022 10:00 PMPrint Date:File Loc:C:\CM\Civil Methods, Inc\CMI - Documents\7. Projects\0727_Corcoran Substation 2021\08_DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS\C3D\Sheets\00_COVER.dwg CORCORAN II SUBSTATIONWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP. ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONCORCORAN, MN01-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION01-28-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION03-14-2022 Revised per City review.PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTALOWNER:Wright-Hennepin Cooperative ElectricAssociation6800 Electric DriveRockford, MN 55373Attn: Curtis CordtPh: 763.477.3000SURVEY:Meyer-Rohlin Land Services708 1st Avenue NE, #1Buffalo, MN 55313Attn: Abram Niemela, PLSPh: 763.682.1781CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL:Civil Methods, Inc.1551 Livingston Avenue, Ste. 104West St. Paul, MN 55118Attn: Dave Poggi, PEPh: 763.210.5713CITY / LGU:City of Corcoran8200 County Rd 116Corcoran, MN 55340Attn:Ph: 763.420.2288WATERSHED DISTRICT:Elm Creek Watershed ManagementCommission (ECWMC)3235 Fernbrook LanePlymouth, MN 55447Attn:Ph: 763.553.1144 C10SITE LAYOUTDMPDESIGNED:LIC. NO.:DATE:DAVID M. POGGIDRAWN:CHECKED:DMPKEB44573I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPAREDBY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.01-18-2022CIVIL METHODS, INC.P.O. Box 28038St. Paul, MN 55128o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.comDATE / REVISION:SHEET NO:3/11/2022 11:56 AMPrint Date:File Loc:C:\CM\Civil Methods, Inc\CMI - Documents\7. Projects\0727_Corcoran Substation 2021\08_DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS\C3D\Sheets\01_Layout.dwg CORCORAN II SUBSTATIONWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP. ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONCORCORAN, MN01-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION01-28-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION03-14-2022 Revised per City review.Feet05010028'24'10' X.X%C20GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANDMPDESIGNED:LIC. NO.:DATE:DAVID M. POGGIDRAWN:CHECKED:DMPKEB44573I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPAREDBY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.01-18-2022CIVIL METHODS, INC.P.O. Box 28038St. Paul, MN 55128o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.comDATE / REVISION:SHEET NO:3/11/2022 11:55 AMPrint Date:File Loc:C:\CM\Civil Methods, Inc\CMI - Documents\7. Projects\0727_Corcoran Substation 2021\08_DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS\C3D\Sheets\02_Grading.dwg CORCORAN II SUBSTATIONWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP. ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONCORCORAN, MN01-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION01-28-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION03-14-2022 Revised per City review.Feet03060 C30EROSION CONTROL PLANDMPDESIGNED:LIC. NO.:DATE:DAVID M. POGGIDRAWN:CHECKED:DMPKEB44573I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPAREDBY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.01-18-2022CIVIL METHODS, INC.P.O. Box 28038St. Paul, MN 55128o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.comDATE / REVISION:SHEET NO:3/11/2022 12:40 PMPrint Date:File Loc:C:\CM\Civil Methods, Inc\CMI - Documents\7. Projects\0727_Corcoran Substation 2021\08_DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS\C3D\Sheets\03_Erosion.dwg CORCORAN II SUBSTATIONWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP. ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONCORCORAN, MN01-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION01-28-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION03-14-2022 Revised per City review.Feet03060 C31SWPPPDMPDESIGNED:LIC. NO.:DATE:DAVID M. POGGIDRAWN:CHECKED:DMPKEB44573I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPAREDBY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.01-18-2022CIVIL METHODS, INC.P.O. Box 28038St. Paul, MN 55128o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.comDATE / REVISION:SHEET NO:3/11/2022 11:17 AMPrint Date:File Loc:C:\CM\Civil Methods, Inc\CMI - Documents\7. Projects\0727_Corcoran Substation 2021\08_DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS\C3D\Sheets\04_SWPPP.dwg CORCORAN II SUBSTATIONWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP. ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONCORCORAN, MN01-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION01-28-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION03-14-2022 Revised per City review.GENERAL PERMITAUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE STORMWATER ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY UNDER THENPDES/SDS PROGRAM (MNR100001):LEGENDHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE AHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE BHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE CHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE DLEGENDHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE AHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE BHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE CHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE DHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE BHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE CHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE A/DHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE B/DHYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE C/DFeet020004000 C40DETAILSDMPDESIGNED:LIC. NO.:DATE:DAVID M. POGGIDRAWN:CHECKED:DMPKEB44573I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPAREDBY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.01-18-2022CIVIL METHODS, INC.P.O. Box 28038St. Paul, MN 55128o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.comDATE / REVISION:SHEET NO:3/10/2022 8:54 PMPrint Date:File Loc:C:\CM\Civil Methods, Inc\CMI - Documents\7. Projects\0727_Corcoran Substation 2021\08_DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS\C3D\Sheets\05_Details.dwg CORCORAN II SUBSTATIONWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP. ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONCORCORAN, MN01-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION01-28-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION03-14-2022 Revised per City review. C41DETAILSDMPDESIGNED:LIC. NO.:DATE:DAVID M. POGGIDRAWN:CHECKED:DMPKEB44573I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPAREDBY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.01-18-2022CIVIL METHODS, INC.P.O. Box 28038St. Paul, MN 55128o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.comDATE / REVISION:SHEET NO:3/10/2022 8:54 PMPrint Date:File Loc:C:\CM\Civil Methods, Inc\CMI - Documents\7. Projects\0727_Corcoran Substation 2021\08_DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS\C3D\Sheets\05_Details.dwg CORCORAN II SUBSTATIONWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP. ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONCORCORAN, MN01-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION01-28-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION03-14-2022 Revised per City review. C42DETAILSDMPDESIGNED:LIC. NO.:DATE:DAVID M. POGGIDRAWN:CHECKED:DMPKEB44573I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPAREDBY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.01-18-2022CIVIL METHODS, INC.P.O. Box 28038St. Paul, MN 55128o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.comDATE / REVISION:SHEET NO:3/11/2022 11:58 AMPrint Date:File Loc:C:\CM\Civil Methods, Inc\CMI - Documents\7. Projects\0727_Corcoran Substation 2021\08_DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS\C3D\Sheets\05_Details.dwg CORCORAN II SUBSTATIONWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP. ELECTRIC ASSOCIATIONCORCORAN, MN01-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION01-28-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION03-14-2022 Revised per City review. River BirchBetula nigra 'Heritage'Burr OakQuercus macrocarpaBlack Hills White SprucePicea glauca 'Densata'Lawn Seed Mix (See Landscape Set, L-2)NOTE:1. See LANDSCAPE set for additional notes, plant list, andwetland buffer maintenance plan.2. See CIVIL set for stormwater area seed mix3. See CIVIL set for erosion control4. All plant material shall be guaranteed for one yearfollowing the date of building occupancyCALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL BEFORE YOU DIGLegend + NotesEastern Red CedarJuniperus virginianaSkyline HoneylocustGleditsia tricanthos var. inermis 'Skycole'Tompa Norway SprucePicea abies 'Tompa'Lanham's Beehive SprucePicea abies 'Lanham's Beehive'Stormwater Seed Mix (See Civil Set)Swamp White OakQuercus bicolorAL-01BL-01Norway SprucePicea abiesWetland Buffer + Monuments (See Civil Set)Fragrant SumacRhus aromaticaBud's Yellow DogwoodCornus alba 'Bud's Yellow'Isanti DogwoodCornus sericea 'Isanti'copyright © 2022 studio gro, pllcLANDSCAPE PLANL-01Corcoran // SƵbstation CORCORAN, MNPrinted at 22 x 34scale 1" = 40'0' 40' 80'Owner:Wright-Hennepin ElectricRockford, MNDrawn by: sksChecked by: sksDate | Draft:1-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Set3-14-2022 Revised Per City Review BACKFILLHARDWOOD MULCHTOP OF ROOT BALL3; DIAMETEROF ROOT BALLSHRUB PLANTING - SECTION (TYP.)Not to ScaleBSTAKE (ONLY IF REQUIRED)PRIMARY ROOTROOT BALL3; DIAMETEROF ROOT BALLNot to ScaleATREE PLANTING - SECTION (TYP.)SLIGHTLY LESS THANDEPTH OF ROOT BALLBACKFILLCOMPOSTHARDWOOD MULCHGENERAL NOTES1. See Civil set for all project general notes2. See CIVIL set for erosion control3. See CIVIL for stormwater area seed mixTREE AND SHRUB PLANTING1. Tree and shrub stock shall conform to all state requirements for nursery stock.2. If the tree or shrub is container grown, score or prune the outside of the root ball to redirect circling fibrous roots.Carefully remove soil from the top of the root ball until the primary root is located.3. If the tree or shrub is balled and burlapped, carefully remove soil from the top of the root ball until the primary root islocated. Prune or remove any winding or girdling roots.4. Cut any wires, wire baskets, and/or containers and carefully remove from the tree root ball before placing in theplanting hole. Dispose of properly.5. Carefully remove all twine, cords, and/or wraps and remove from the root ball before placing in the hole. Dispose ofproperly.6. Scarify the sides and bottom of the planting hole.7. Make certain the planting depth is correct by locating the primary root. This is the top of the root ball. The top of theroot ball shall be elevated above the finished grade at the time of planting. The elevated distance shall be equivalentto the caliper size. For example, the top of a tree root ball for a 2" caliper tree shall be 2" above the finished grade.8. Carefully place the tree in the hole.9. Loosen backfill before filling planting hole. Fill planting hole half way with excavated planting soil. Water to eliminateair pockets. Do not tamp.10. Finish filling planting hole, tamp soil gently, and water immediately. Do not place backfill on top of the root ball, asdetermined by the primary root.11. Apply a 2" layer of double shredded, non-dyed, hardwood mulch above the compost. Maintain a 4" distance from thetrunk flare.12. Do not fertilize.13. Stake trees, only if necessary, to stay in plumb position.14. Prune tree to remove structural defects or to improve tree structure at the time of planting.COMPOSTPlanting DetailsPlanting NotesPlant Requirements and Plant ScheduleYEAR 1Establishment SPRING SEEDING:·Site Preparation: Late April - May.·Seed Installation: May 1 - June 1.Maintenance (same growing season):·Weed Control: Mow to a height of 6-8 inches once per month until September 30.·Weed Control: Spot spray invasive species while on-site for mowing maintenance.Establishment FALL SEEDING:·Site Preparation: Late August through early September.·Seed Installation: Late September to freeze-up.Maintenance (following growing season-spring following dormant fall seeding):·Weed Control: Mow to a height of 6-8 inches once per month until September 30.·Weed Control: Spot spray invasive species while on-site for mowing maintenance.YEAR 2Maintenance:·Weed Control: Mow to a height of 6-8 inches one time between June 1 and August 15 -before weeds set seed.·Weed Control: Spot spray invasive species while on-site for mowing maintenance.YEAR 3Maintenance:·Weed Control: Mow as necessary to a height of 6-8 inches to control persistent annual andperennial invasive species.·Weed Control: Spot spray invasive species while on-site for mowing maintenance.LONG TERMMaintenance:·Weed Control Options:··Spot Spray: Spot spray invasive species as needed.··Burn: Burn in a 3-5 year rotation, alternate spring and fall, if possible.··Hay: Hay in a 3-5 year rotation, late summer or early fall. Alternate with burning, ifpossible. Haying can be used as a substitute for burning.··Consecutive Burn: Burn consecutively for two years to clean up rough-looking sites.NOTEHerbicide spray must be approved for use in/adjacent to water/wetland.Wetland Buffer Maintenance PlanDrawn by: sksChecked by: sksDate | Draft:1-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Setcopyright © 2022 studio gro, pllcLANDSCAPE PLANL-02Corcoran // SƵbstation CORCORAN, MN Owner:Wright-Hennepin ElectricRockford, MN3-14-2022 Revised Per City Review Plan ViewBirds Eye View - Southwest CornerBirds Eye View - Northeast CornerDrawn by: sksChecked by: sksDate | Draft:1-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Setcopyright © 2022 studio gro, pllcLANDSCAPE PLAN-RENDERED PLAN VIEWL-03Corcoran II SƵbstation CORCORAN, MN Owner:Wright-Hennepin ElectricRockford, MN3-14-2022 Revised Per City Review Western Property LineNorthern Property LineEastern Property LineSouthern Property LineDrawn by: sksChecked by: sksDate | Draft:1-18-2022 Preliminary Plat Review Setcopyright © 2022 studio gro, pllcLANDSCAPE PLAN-RENDERED SECTIONSCorcoran II SƵbstation CORCORAN, MN Owner:Wright-Hennepin ElectricRockford, MNL-043-14-2022 Revised Per City Review Corcoran II Substation Outbuilding Material Board Wall Materials: The walls of the outbuilding will be constructed of a splitface or textured concrete block. There are several pigments available for these blocks. We plan on using the ‘Natural Gray’ color but are open to alternatives. Outside face of textured block Pigments available for splitface concrete block. We plan on using ‘Natural Gray’ for our outbuilding. Roofing Materials: The roof of the outbuilding will be sheathed with painted steel roofing. We will be using roofing that is like what is shown below. We plan on using ‘Ash Gray’ roofing panels but are open to alternatives. Ribbed metal roofing of a similar type will be used in construction. Ribbed metal roofing comes in a variety of colors which can be changed to suit the design requirements.We plan on using ‘Ash Gray’ roofing. Chain Link Fence Slatting: If required, Wright-Hennepin will install chain link fence slatting to help block the view of the interior of the substation. The project will require approximately 710 feet of slatting. We would install beige slatting but would be open to other colors if beige is unacceptable. A sample of the slatting is shown below. Cross-section of slatting Parking Lot Illumination: For lighting the parking lot, we will be placing two pole-mounted “cobra head” style lights. These lights will have either brown or gray exterior paint and be 162 wa tts. They will be mounted on wood or fiberglass poles. The poles will be 30 feet long and be buried at 10% of their length + 2 feet. The fixture heights will be at 27 feet. Cobra head light mounted on wooden pole. Detail of cobra head light. Security Illumination: For security lighting, we will use two twin LED lights with a motion sensor mounted above the doors of the outbuilding. One will be pointed towards the parking lot and the other will be pointing towards the interior of the substation. The lights are 26.6 watts. The sensors are adjustable for time, sensitivity and distance and can detect occupancy up to 72’ away. We plan on installing dark bronze fixtures. Lights will have a shutoff on the inside of the outbuilding in the event that an issue arises. This twin LED light is the style we plan on installing. Sensor detail Sensor control detail 11' - 11"18' - 0"N.T.S.FINISHEDGRADE = ±1009.33'-8" x 8'-0"FLUSH STEELDOORDECORATIVETEXTURED BLOCK3'-8" x 8'-0"FLUSH STEELDOORSTEEL ROOFING12418'-0"N.T.S9' - 4"2' - 7"..\..\..\02_RECEIVED-BACKGROUND\201221_WHE Substation Sample Pics\IMG_0183.jpgV02ARCHITECURAL ELEVATIONSCIVIL METHODS, INC.1551 Livingston Avenue, Suite 104West St. Paul, MN 55118o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.comWRIGHT-HENNEPIN ELECTRICROCKFORD, MNOWNER:TITLE:SHEET NO:CORCORAN, MNCORCORAN II SUBSTATIONSOUTH ELEVATIONWEST ELEVATIONSAMPLE IMAGE WH’S VISION To benefit our members, WH and its diversified businesses will outperform our competitors and sustain top 10 percent results in satisfaction, financial management, safety and reliability through 2022. WH’S MISSION We deliver the power, products and competitive pricing essential for improving the quality of life of the members and communities we serve. Values That Guide Us The needs of members always come first. To make sure of that, we follow the guidance of the seven cooperative principles adopted by the International Co-operative Alliance. THE SEVEN COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLES 1.Voluntary and Open Membership 2.Democratic Member Control 3.Member’s Economic Participation 4.Autonomy and Independence 5.Education, Training and Information 6.Cooperation Among Cooperatives 7.Concern for Community PlymouthPlymouth CorcoranCorcoran RogersRogers OtsegoOtsego Hanover AlbertvilleAlbertville Maple Plain Maple Plain DelanoDelano RockfordRockford BualoBualo MonticelloMonticello WaverlyWaverly MontroseMontrose CokatoCokato Howard Lake Howard Lake Maple Lake Maple Lake South Haven South Haven AnnandaleAnnandale ClearwaterClearwater WEBSITE whe.org EMAIL info@whe.org PHONE (763) 477-3000 This Cooperative is an equal opportunity provider and employer. • Member-owned, not-for-profit electric utility that provides power to rural Wright and Western Hennepin Counties • Serves more than 57,000 member-consumers (approximately 64% Residential and 36% Commercial & Industrial based on kWh) • More than 2,000 live in Corcoran • Established in 1937 and headquartered in Rockford, Minnesota • Democratically-elected nine-member board • Employs approximately 150 full-time employees • Electric rates are very competitive with other area power suppliers • WH has returned more than $82 million in capital credit refunds to its members since 1957 Facts about Wright-Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association (WH): Corcoran Substation Information: •Why is Wright-Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association (WH) building a substation? o There is an urgent need for additional infrastructure to facilitate the scale and scope of new development (a new development or developments) in the Corcoran area and to ensure reliability for current residents. o Based on residential and commercial growth trends, the load on the existing substation located at Larkin Road and County Road 116 is expected to increase by 50% over the next five years. o The existing substation location will not accommodate expansion due to its limited parcel size and capacity. o The location of the proposed substation is consistent with the City of Corcoran’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. o Unless WH builds now, we cannot assure adequate reliability for City residents after this year. o The new substation will ensure WH will continue to provide reliable electricity to members in the Corcoran area for decades to come. •What will the project look like? o The property size is 5.30 acres. o The substation size within a fenced area is .75 acres. o WH will dedicate 1.78 acres (33.5% of the land acquired) to the City of Corcoran to construct a linear park and walking paths. o The map on the left shows the location. The map on the right is a mockup of the site after completion. o The site will be professionally landscaped, including the maximum number of trees and shrubs given the space available. o WH will meet and exceed all City requirements. o Comply with all MN local noise standards and ordinances. o Adhere to all building and zoning requirements. • Why did WH choose this location? o A robust due-diligence process was completed to identify a site that met all of the specifications for a new substation along with applicable zoning requirements. o More than 10 locations were considered, and at least 10 landowners were contacted by WH’s legal counsel. o This location was selected because it is: Located along an existing transmission line that has enough capacity to accommodate future residential and commercial developments. The existing transmission line borders two of the four sides of the parcel. Accessible to WH vehicles. Once constructed, there will be little traffic to and from the site. Accessible to existing distribution lines in the public Right-of-Way. Optimal location in the WH distribution grid for serving the immediate growth and development needs of the City and for delivering high reliability to current members. Large enough to accommodate flexible landscaping options. Located on an undeveloped parcel of land. o After extensive research, we can find no evidence that property values are impacted by a substation near the location. o This location will avoid the need for building new high voltage transmission lines. o WH’s application has been submitted and deemed complete by the City. o The City’s Parks and Trails Commission voted unanimously (5-0) on February 17, 2022 to recommend the project. o The substation allows the City to execute its plan for growth by providing adequate power and helps avoid the need to construct additional transmission lines through the city. o WH is a not-for-profit and all costs to provide reliable electricity are shared by the members through their electric rates. Affordable electricity is one of our top priorities, and costs of each project are carefully considered. Wright -Hennepin -City of Corcoran Proposed Substation March 3, 2022 About Wright-Hennepin •Fourth largest cooperative in Minnesota •Owned by the members we serve, including 2,246 in Corcoran •Provide service to 57,000 consumers in northwestern Hennepin and Wright Counties •52% Hennepin County •47% Wright County •We are local, headquartered in Rockford, MN. Our 150 employees live and work in the area’s communities, including Corcoran •In business since 1937 •Approximately 69,000 meters Why are we here? •To accommodate existing development and future growth, the City of Corcoran requires the addition of significant new electric service capability •The current electric distribution infrastructure is inadequate to serve this growth •Consequently, the area requires a new substation to ensure safe, reliable and affordable power for area homes and businesses City of Corcoran 2040 Comprehensive Plan Corcoran Members •WH currently services 2,246 members •New Services by Year: •2018: 97 services •2019: 86 services •2020: 150 services •2021: 210 services •In 2021 future 825 lots were added •30.9% growth in new services since 2018! Corcoran Development Movement Wright-Hennepin’s Response •In response to the City’s power needs, WH launched a comprehensive evaluation and due diligence process to identify sites for a new substation •This process evaluates sites using a range of criteria including: •Power reliability needs •Power quality needs •Access and proximity of electric infrastructure (distribution and transmission lines) •Access and proximity of Right-of-Wa y •Land availability •Community impacts •Zoning requirements •City needs •Costs •Other requirements •Consequently, the number of feasible sites was limited Current Substation •Existing Corcoran Substation –Located on southeastern corner of Larkin and County Road 116 –Constructed in 1952 –Load forecasted to exceed baseline capability by 2023 –Can not accommodate additional distribution feeders –Current small footprint does not meet new setback requirements nor allow for expansion •This is not a feasible site for expansion or redevelopment and an alternative is required Initial Site Pursued in 2020-21 •Site: –2.26 acres on southern end of Shamrock property –Location allowed WH to meet current load growth –Located adjacent to an existing transmission line –Undeveloped land –Consistent with the City of Corcoran’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan •City Feedback –Location was near existing neighborhoods –Wanted WH to look further north away from adjacent residential properties –Site variance from city required to construct on this property Current Load Growth Future Load Growth Extensive Evaluation of Other Sites •WH evaluated more than 10 sites, including: •Undeveloped commercial lots in business park •Lots west on Larkin •Sites south and north on County Road 116 •Contacted 10 property owners soliciting interest •Other sites proved infeasible for a variety of reasons: •No willing seller •Insufficient Right-of-Way •Inadequate transmission •Insufficient size •Inadequate access •Significant landowner disruption Example: Sufficient Feeder Space Plan Avoids Installation along Larkin Road Plan Includes Installation along Co Rd 116 Current Development Site •Intersection of Larkin and County Road 116 –Immediately across from current substation –Undeveloped land with no existing residences adjacent to site –Zoned Mixed Residential (RMF-2), allows for siting of essential services including substations with no variance required –Large enough to accommodate flexible landscaping options –Unencumbered future Right-of-Way for distribution feeders –Sufficient access –Ensures reliable electricity to Corcoran residents for decades to come * The City’s Parks and Trails Commission voted unanimously (5-0) on February 17, 2022 to recommend the project. Zoned Mixed Residential (RMF-2) •City Code Section 1040.065, Subd. 6(A) permits Essential Services in RMF-2 Districts via Administrative Permit •Essential Services are permitted in any zoning district pursuant Section 1030.090, Subd. 2. •Essential Services and Essential Services Structures, which include substations, are defined in Section 1020.020. Site Overview •Site Details –5.30 acres –1.78 acres of linear walking trial and park dedicated to support comprehensive city plan –Set back: 65’ feet from County Road 116 Right-of-Way –Other city setbacks and berms from fence and driveway •Landscaping –Design completed by landscape architect –Vegetation: maximum planting given spacing available •6 varieties of trees –Canopy and evergreen•3 types of shrubs/bushes •Multi-grasses used Linear Trial and Park •WH will dedicate: •1.78 acres of linear walking trial and park dedicated to support comprehensive city plan •Value: $164,308 for the park site Landscape Plan is Extensive •Substantial screening on all sides (maximum trees and shrubs given space available) View from County Road 116 View from Larkin Road Conclusion •In response to City growth needs, WH must build a new substation. •WH identified the site at the intersection of County Road 116 and Larkin Rd. after a comprehensive evaluation of all relevant needs and impacts. •The proposed site provides low operational risks, minimal community impact, and allows WH to maintain system reliability going forward. •Capacity on existing substation will be exhausted as early as 2023. •Unless WH builds now, we cannot assure adequate reliability for City residents after this year. •WH is securing this site for the benefit of Corcoran residents for years to come. Questions? 1 Kendra Lindahl, AICP Subject:FW: Please pass this along Attachments:markup_1746.png From: haley sween <haley.sween@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2022 11:37 AM To: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Please pass this along To: Corcoran Planning Commission Members I am reaching out to you to voice my opposition to the Wright‐Hennepin Electric Cooperative request to build a new electric substation at East Larkin Road and 7400 co rd 116. This location is currently zoned mixed residential and I feel it would not be a good fit. It is my understanding there is a property available that is near the industrial park and is already zoned for Commercial and light Industrial. A residential area is not the appropriate location for building an electric substation and I would please ask you to consider the other alternatives more suitable. The Wright‐Hennepin development will have a significant and long term impact on the future of the City. Yes, Corcoran does need an upgrade in the transmission of electricity but this should not be done at the expense of the neighboring properties and the overall aesthetics of our gateway to the city. It will be detrimental in many ways. Does the City of Corcoran really want a large substation as a focal point on the main gateway to the City? The proposed new substation will dwarf the currant substation...which is a historic eyesore. The substation is considered "essential" but what is also essential is the character of our beautiful city. The City of Corcoran's own Vision Statement says: "The City of Corcoran will become a vibrant, connected community while preserving its natural character and agricultural roots." Currently, there is significant change happening in the Corcoran area. Our City Council and Planning Commission has a monumental responsibility to methodically and thoughtfully guide future development so as the residents and City, as a whole, can be proud. Please deny the Permit Application by Wright‐Hennepin Electric and re‐direct this project from East Larkin Rd and 116 residential area to an already designated Industrial/Commercial zone, where it belongs. Please pass this along to those noted in the attached images. Thank you, ‐Haley From: dsdeziel@aol.com <dsdeziel@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 11:30 AM To: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Cc: dunebuggysuz@gmail.com Subject: Say No! Please use the 40 acres that was donated to the city.South of Shamrock Golf To: Corcoran Planning Commission Members I am reaching out to you to voice my opposition to the Wright-Hennepin Electric Cooperative request to build a new electric substation at East Larkin Road and 7400 co rd 116. This location is currently zoned mixed residential and I feel it would not be a good fit. It is my understanding there is a property available that is near the industrial park and is already zoned for Commercial and light Industrial. A residential area is not the appropriate location for building an electric substation and I would please ask you to consider the other alternatives more suitable. The Wright-Hennepin development will have a significant and long term impact on the future of the City. Yes, Corcoran does need an upgrade in the transmission of electricity but this should not be done at the expense of the neighboring properties and the overall aesthetics of our gateway to the city. It will be detrimental in many ways. Does the City of Corcoran really want a large substation as a focal point on the main gateway to the City? The proposed new substation will dwarf the currant substation...which is a historic eyesore. The substation is considered "essential" but what is also essential is the character of our beautiful city. The City of Corcoran's own Vision Statement says: "The City of Corcoran will become a vibrant, connected community while preserving its natural character and agricultural roots." Currently, there is significant change happening in the Corcoran area. Our City Council and Planning Commission has a monumental responsibility to methodically and thoughtfully guide future development so as the residents and City, as a whole, can be proud. Please deny the Permit Application by Wright-Hennepin Electric and re-direct this project from East Larkin Rd and 116 residential area to an already designated Industrial/Commercial zone, where it belongs. Owner of Shamrock Golf Dave Deziel Thank you, From:Jessica Beise To:Kendra Lindahl, AICP; Dwight Klingbeil Subject:FW: opposition to WH Coop Electric substation( co rd 116 and Larkin) Date:Tuesday, February 22, 2022 9:17:52 AM From: Gerard Weber <mtwebers@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2022 7:07 PM To: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: opposition to WH Coop Electric substation( co rd 116 and Larkin) Would you please forward this to the City of Corcoran Planning Commission? Thank you We are members of the George Deziel (dec) family. Our late mother and George are sister and brother. Our cousins own the Shamrock golf course on county road 116. We want to express opposition to the proposed request for an electric substation at 7000 co. rd.116 by the Wright-Hennepin Electric Cooperative. Our understanding is that our Uncle's estate is zoned for mixed residential. We also understand that there is an Industrial/Commercial property nearby. It seems to us that a substation would better fit near businesses and factories, for example, rather than near residential housing. I'm sure that you are aware of some of the environmental and health risks. These concerns could be amplified when the "double end" feature of this substation goes on line for future demand. In summary, land use is better served by staying with the original zoning and denying the permit. Sincerely yours, Gerard R. Weber James H. Weber Mary Ann Mathison Nancy Ann Cesaro From: John Elsen <elsenjf1@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 10:14 AM To: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Please deny the Permit Application by Wright-Hennepin Electric To: Corcoran Planning Commission Members I am reaching out to you to voice my opposition to the Wright-Hennepin Electric Cooperative request to build a new electric substation at East Larkin Road and 7400 co rd 116. This location is currently zoned mixed residential and I feel it would not be a good fit. It is my understanding there is a property available that is near the industrial park and is already zoned for Commercial and light Industrial. A residential area is not the appropriate location for building an electric substation and I would please ask you to consider the other alternatives more suitable. The Wright-Hennepin development will have a significant and long term impact on the future of the City. Yes, Corcoran does need an upgrade in the transmission of electricity but this should not be done at the expense of the neighboring properties and the overall aesthetics of our gateway to the city. It will be detrimental in many ways. Does the City of Corcoran really want a large substation as a focal point on the main gateway to the City? The proposed new substation will dwarf the currant substation...which is a historic eyesore. The substation is considered "essential" but what is also essential is the character of our beautiful city. The City of Corcoran's own Vision Statement says: "The City of Corcoran will become a vibrant, connected community while preserving its natural character and agricultural roots." Currently, there is significant change happening in the Corcoran area. Our City Council and Planning Commission has a monumental responsibility to methodically and thoughtfully guide future development so as the residents and City, as a whole, can be proud. Please deny the Permit Application by Wright-Hennepin Electric and re-direct this project from East Larkin Rd and 116 residential area to an already designated Industrial/Commercial zone, where it belongs. John F. Elsen From: Laurie Daniels <danielslaurie827@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 2:24:40 PM To: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Opposition to new substation. To: Corcoran Planning Commission Members I am reaching out to you to voice my opposition to the Wright-Hennepin Electric Cooperative request to build a new electric substation at East Larkin Road and 7400 co rd 116. This location is currently zoned mixed residential and I feel it would not be a good fit. It is my understanding there is a property available that is near the industrial park and is already zoned for Commercial and light Industrial. A residential area is not the appropriate location for building an electric substation and I would please ask you to consider the other alternatives more suitable. The Wright-Hennepin development will have a significant and long term impact on the future of the City. Yes, Corcoran does need an upgrade in the transmission of electricity but this should not be done at the expense of the neighboring properties and the overall aesthetics of our gateway to the city. It will be detrimental in many ways. Does the City of Corcoran really want a large substation as a focal point on the main gateway to the City? The proposed new substation will dwarf the currant substation...which is a historic eyesore. The substation is considered "essential" but what is also essential is the character of our beautiful city. The City of Corcoran's own Vision Statement says: "The City of Corcoran will become a vibrant, connected community while preserving its natural character and agricultural roots." Currently, there is significant change happening in the Corcoran area. Our City Council and Planning Commission has a monumental responsibility to methodically and thoughtfully guide future development so as the residents and City, as a whole, can be proud. Please deny the Permit Application by Wright-Hennepin Electric and re-direct this project from East Larkin Rd and 116 residential area to an already designated Industrial/Commercial zone, where it belongs. Sent from my iPhone From:raskobhtc@gmail.com To:Kendra Lindahl, AICP Cc:Suzie Sween Subject:Interim City Administrator Jessica Beise Date:Tuesday, February 22, 2022 8:13:08 AM Would you please forward this to the City of Corcoran Planning Commission. Thank you, Matt Raskob To the Chairman, Dean Jacobs, Corrine Brummond, Jim Shoulak, Mark Lanterman and Jay Van Den Einde, This letter is to voice my opposition regarding the location of the proposed Wright- Hennepin Electric Coop Substation on 7400 county road 116 and Larkin Road. -This will be a permanent eyesore to a major gateway of Corcoran. This large substation will dwarf the current substations in Corcoran and will have greater visibility in the proposed location. -the location of the substation should be in the commercial/industrial district and not on a residential/mixed residential property. -it will negatively impact the surrounding residential properties and their marketability, a large noisy substation is inconsistent with the current zoning and future uses. -the loud humming noise pollution, (The proposed Linear park and nearby residents may hear it from as far as 1,000 feet when background noise is minimal, such as at night) -presence of High voltage EMF's (electromagnetic fields in proximity to the substation. (Cancer and health issues are said to be some risks). Do you want this to be the new Monument when entering Corcoran? Wright Hennepin has been trying to expedite this process...is it to slip it by the residents so push back will be minimal? I have read Wright Hennepins Corcoran II Substation Summary which was submitted to City staff with their application. It contains Wright Hennepin "talking points" such as: -"it's very common to have these located in residential districts" (my counterpoint: when a public utility has the governmental hammer of eminent domain, could this skew the incidence of higher residential numbers? Just because it is "common" it does NOT make it the right thing). -It's a "small footprint" (counterpoint: a 2.6 acre footprint is not small and what about the footprint it makes in the sky?) -There will be "screening" (counterpoint: will the chain link fence be 57' tall to cover the poles? Will the 12' building and 23' electrical apparatus be covered by seedling trees and a berm?) -it is an "essential service" (counterpoint: "Essential Service is not a valid argument for location). The Wright Hennepin talking points are misleading and they are trying to minimize the substation's impact on the City and its people. Some real Facts regarding the Substation: According to the Corcoran II Substation Specifications submitted by Wright Hennepin; The design provides for two 115 Kv substation transformers. Each transformer holds an approximate range of 2,000 gallons of oil each. This means there would be 4,000 gallons of oil along with additional oil circuit breakers and other equipment which could contain additional hundreds of gallons of oil. With designated wetlands located about 250 feet from the proposed substation and the soil is sandy/silt, the dangers of leakage, or even a possible high voltage explosion, would seem a distinct possibility. Although the substation design provides for berms and a catch-pond, possible high voltage events are very difficult to predict along with the possible containment of oil especially during an explosive event. If a leak or explosion occurred, it could cause oil to access the wetlands and the environmental impact would be significant. There are Earth currents in proximity of electrical substations. Basic electrical engineering indicates that all electrical currents that leave the electric supply substation must return to the source substation. The return currents flow both through the neutral conductors on the power poles and through the earth called "earth currents." Homes and businesses close to the substation will receive significantly higher earth currents than other homes and businesses further away from the substation since the "target" of all the earth currents from all directions will be the substation. The earth currents can result in stray voltages at all locations that are grounded to the earth (which includes all homes and businesses that are required to be grounded to the earth per the National Electrical Code (NEC). These stray voltages will occur on all conduction paths within the homes and business, including all wiring and plumbing within. These are only a few important facts that you won't be given by Wright-Hennepin. Don't be fooled. As important advisors to the council I sincerely hope you are able to make your recommendations on a wide variety of information and input by residents. Not only on a narrow batch of information given to you by the electrical company itself. It's understood, Elected officials cannot be experts in every field they vote upon. Many times we as citizens along with our representatives, rely on our governmental "experts" and the information they give us...which isn't always proven true. Please, in your consideration of this project, keep in mind the best way forward isn't always the easiest. Don't be rushed. Advise against consent of the Permit request by Wright-Hennepin. Consider a moratorium until alternatives can be independently researched and residents can be fully informed. Encourage Wright Hennepin to run an open house to discuss the project, answer questions and inform the public. This could put residents at ease. Consider the Howard Lake Substation that Wright-Hennepin successfully razed and rebuilt on the same site. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fqwd7xu1toE Truly consider alternative sites and ideas. Most often than not, the best alternative is not the easiest or the cheapest. The City of Corcoran should demand better and the residents and businesses deserve better. Sincerely, Matt Raskob From: Mike Elsen <elsen07@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 5:34:17 PM To: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Please deny the Permit Application by Wright-Hennepin Electric - electric substation at East Larkin Road and 7400 co rd 116 To: Corcoran Planning Commission Members I am reaching out to you to voice my opposition to the Wright-Hennepin Electric Cooperative request to build a new electric substation at East Larkin Road and 7400 co rd 116. This location is currently zoned mixed residential and I feel it would not be a good fit. It is my understanding there is a property available that is near the industrial park and is already zoned for Commercial and light Industrial. A residential area is not the appropriate location for building an electric substation and I would please ask you to consider the other alternatives more suitable. The Wright-Hennepin development will have a significant and long term impact on the future of the City. Yes, Corcoran does need an upgrade in the transmission of electricity but this should not be done at the expense of the neighboring properties and the overall aesthetics of our gateway to the city. It will be detrimental in many ways. Does the City of Corcoran really want a large substation as a focal point on the main gateway to the City? The proposed new substation will dwarf the current substation...which is a historic eyesore. The substation is considered "essential" but what is also essential is the character of our beautiful city. The City of Corcoran's own Vision Statement says: "The City of Corcoran will become a vibrant, connected community while preserving its natural character and agricultural roots." Currently, there is significant change happening in the Corcoran area. Our City Council and Planning Commission has a monumental responsibility to methodically and thoughtfully guide future development so as the residents and City, as a whole, can be proud. Please deny the Permit Application by Wright-Hennepin Electric and re-direct this project from East Larkin Rd and 116 residential area to an already designated Industrial/Commercial zone, where it belongs. Thank you. From: Steve Daniels <bulgeinboxers@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 2:28:32 PM To: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Opposition to new substation. To: Corcoran Planning Commission Members I am reaching out to you to voice my opposition to the Wright-Hennepin Electric Cooperative request to build a new electric substation at East Larkin Road and 7400 co rd 116. This location is currently zoned mixed residential and I feel it would not be a good fit. It is my understanding there is a property available that is near the industrial park and is already zoned for Commercial and light Industrial. A residential area is not the appropriate location for building an electric substation and I would please ask you to consider the other alternatives more suitable. The Wright-Hennepin development will have a significant and long term impact on the future of the City. Yes, Corcoran does need an upgrade in the transmission of electricity but this should not be done at the expense of the neighboring properties and the overall aesthetics of our gateway to the city. It will be detrimental in many ways. Does the City of Corcoran really want a large substation as a focal point on the main gateway to the City? The proposed new substation will dwarf the currant substation...which is a historic eyesore. The substation is considered "essential" but what is also essential is the character of our beautiful city. The City of Corcoran's own Vision Statement says: "The City of Corcoran will become a vibrant, connected community while preserving its natural character and agricultural roots." Currently, there is significant change happening in the Corcoran area. Our City Council and Planning Commission has a monumental responsibility to methodically and thoughtfully guide future development so as the residents and City, as a whole, can be proud. Please deny the Permit Application by Wright-Hennepin Electric and re-direct this project from East Larkin Rd and 116 residential area to an already designated Industrial/Commercial zone, where it belongs. Sent from my iPhone From: Susan Woll <sue@knodeinsurance.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 10:39 AM To: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Please deny the Permit Application by Wright-Hennepin Electric - electric substation at East Larkin Road and 7400 co rd 116 To: Corcoran Planning Commission Members I am reaching out to you to voice my opposition to the Wright-Hennepin Electric Cooperative request to build a new electric substation at East Larkin Road and 7400 co rd 116. This location is currently zoned mixed residential and I feel it would not be a good fit. It is my understanding there is a property available that is near the industrial park and is already zoned for Commercial and light Industrial. A residential area is not the appropriate location for building an electric substation and I would please ask you to consider the other alternatives more suitable. The Wright-Hennepin development will have a significant and long term impact on the future of the City. Yes, Corcoran does need an upgrade in the transmission of electricity but this should not be done at the expense of the neighboring properties and the overall aesthetics of our gateway to the city. It will be detrimental in many ways. Does the City of Corcoran really want a large substation as a focal point on the main gateway to the City? The proposed new substation will dwarf the currant substation...which is a historic eyesore. The substation is considered "essential" but what is also essential is the character of our beautiful city. The City of Corcoran's own Vision Statement says: "The City of Corcoran will become a vibrant, connected community while preserving its natural character and agricultural roots." Currently, there is significant change happening in the Corcoran area. Our City Council and Planning Commission has a monumental responsibility to methodically and thoughtfully guide future development so as the residents and City, as a whole, can be proud. Please deny the Permit Application by Wright-Hennepin Electric and re-direct this project from East Larkin Rd and 116 residential area to an already designated Industrial/Commercial zone, where it belongs. Best regards, Susan E. Woll Knode & Associates, LLC 331 Main Street Po Box 40 Palisade, Colorado 81526 (970) 464-5661 (O) (970) 464-5951 (F) Email: Sue@knodeinsurance.com From:Jessica Beise To:Kendra Lindahl, AICP; Dwight Klingbeil Subject:FW: Regarding: Opposition to permit request for Wright Hennepin Coop Electric substation 116 and Larkin Date:Tuesday, February 22, 2022 8:04:50 AM Attachments:image.png From: Suzie Sween <dunebuggysuz@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2022 4:33 PM To: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Cc: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Regarding: Opposition to permit request for Wright Hennepin Coop Electric substation 116 and Larkin To Interim City Administrator Jessica Beise. Would you please forward this to the City of Corcoran Planning Commission. Thank you To the Chairman, Dean Jacobs, Corrine Brummond, Jim Shoulak, Mark Lanterman and Jay Van Den Einde, This letter is to voice my opposition regarding the location of the proposed Wright-Hennepin Electric Coop Substation on 7400 county road 116 and Larkin Road. -This will be a permanent eyesore to a major gateway of Corcoran. This large substation will dwarf the current substations in Corcoran and will have greater visibility in the proposed location. -the location of the substation should be in the commercial/industrial district and not on a residential/mixed residential property. -it will negatively impact the surrounding residential properties and their marketability, a large noisy substation is inconsistent with the current zoning and future uses. -the loud humming noise pollution, (The proposed Linear park and nearby residents may hear it from as far as 1,000 feet when background noise is minimal, such as at night) -presence of High voltage EMF's (electromagnetic fields in proximity to the substation. (Cancer and health issues are said to be some risks). Do you want this to be the new Monument when entering Corcoran? Wright Hennepin has been trying to expedite this process...is it to slip it by the residents so push back will be minimal? I have read Wright Hennepins Corcoran II Substation Summary which was submitted to City staff with their application. It contains Wright Hennepin "talking points" such as: -"it's very common to have these located in residential districts" (my counterpoint: when a public utility has the governmental hammer of eminent domain, could this skew the incidence of higher residential numbers? Just because it is "common" it does NOT make it the right thing). -It's a "small footprint" (counterpoint: a 2.6 acre footprint is not small and what about the footprint it makes in the sky?) -There will be "screening" (counterpoint: will the chain link fence be 57' tall to cover the poles? Will the 12' building and 23' electrical apparatus be covered by seedling trees and a berm?) -it is an "essential service" (counterpoint: "Essential Service is not a valid argument for location). The Wright Hennepin talking points are misleading and they are trying to minimize the substation's impact on the City and its people. Some real Facts regarding the Substation: According to the Corcoran II Substation Specifications submitted by Wright Hennepin; The design provides for two 115 Kv substation transformers. Each transformer holds an approximate range of 2,000 gallons of oil each. This means there would be 4,000 gallons of oil along with additional oil circuit breakers and other equipment which could contain additional hundreds of gallons of oil. With designated wetlands located about 250 feet from the proposed substation and the soil is sandy/silt, the dangers of leakage, or even a possible high voltage explosion, would seem a distinct possibility. Although the substation design provides for berms and a catch-pond, possible high voltage events are very difficult to predict along with the possible containment of oil especially during an explosive event. If a leak or explosion occurred, it could cause oil to access the wetlands and the environmental impact would be significant. There are Earth currents in proximity of electrical substations. Basic electrical engineering indicates that all electrical currents that leave the electric supply substation must return to the source substation. The return currents flow both through the neutral conductors on the power poles and through the earth called "earth currents." Homes and businesses close to the substation will receive significantly higher earth currents than other homes and businesses further away from the substation since the "target" of all the earth currents from all directions will be the substation. The earth currents can result in stray voltages at all locations that are grounded to the earth (which includes all homes and businesses that are required to be grounded to the earth per the National Electrical Code (NEC). These stray voltages will occur on all conduction paths within the homes and business, including all wiring and plumbing within. These are only a few important facts that you won't be given by Wright-Hennepin. Don't be fooled. As important advisors to the council I sincerely hope you are able to make your recommendations on a wide variety of information and input by residents. Not only on a narrow batch of information given to you by the electrical company itself. It's understood, Elected officials cannot be experts in every field they vote upon. Many times we as citizens along with our representatives, rely on our governmental "experts" and the information they give us...which isn't always proven true. Please, in your consideration of this project, keep in mind the best way forward isn't always the easiest. Don't be rushed. Advise against consent of the Permit request by Wright- Hennepin. Consider a moratorium until alternatives can be independently researched and residents can be fully informed. Encourage Wright Hennepin to run an open house to discuss the project, answer questions and inform the public. This could put residents at ease. Consider the Howard Lake Substation that Wright-Hennepin successfully razed and rebuilt on the same site. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fqwd7xu1toE Truly consider alternative sites and ideas. Most often than not, the best alternative is not the easiest or the cheapest. The City of Corcoran should demand better and the residents and businesses deserve better. Sincerely, Suzie Sween Trustee of the George Deziel Property Corcoran, MN From:Jessica Beise To:Kendra Lindahl, AICP; Dwight Klingbeil Subject:Fwd: Pleas don’t give them the permit Date:Tuesday, February 22, 2022 7:00:07 AM Get Outlook for iOS From: Tony & Sharon Raskob <tsraskob@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 6:09:40 AM To: Suzie Sween <dunebuggysuz@gmail.com>; Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov>; Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Pleas don’t give them the permit To: Corcoran Planning Commission Members I am reaching out to you to voice my opposition to the Wright-Hennepin Electric Cooperative request to build a new electric substation at East Larkin Road and 7400 co rd 116. This location is currently zoned mixed residential and I feel it would not be a good fit. It is my understanding there is a property available that is near the industrial park and is already zoned for Commercial and light Industrial. A residential area is not the appropriate location for building an electric substation and I would please ask you to consider the other alternatives more suitable. The Wright-Hennepin development will have a significant and long term impact on the future of the City. Yes, Corcoran does need an upgrade in the transmission of electricity but this should not be done at the expense of the neighboring properties and the overall aesthetics of our gateway to the city. It will be detrimental in many ways. Does the City of Corcoran really want a large substation as a focal point on the main gateway to the City? The proposed new substation will dwarf the currant substation...which is a historic eyesore. The substation is considered "essential" but what is also essential is the character of our beautiful city. The City of Corcoran's own Vision Statement says: "The City of Corcoran will become a vibrant, connected community while preserving its natural character and agricultural roots." Currently, there is significant change happening in the Corcoran area. Our City Council and Planning Commission has a monumental responsibility to methodically and thoughtfully guide future development so as the residents and City, as a whole, can be proud. Please deny the Permit Application by Wright-Hennepin Electric and re-direct this project from East Larkin Rd and 116 residential area to an already designated Industrial/Commercia 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. TO:Corcoran City Council FROM:Kevin Shay through Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE:March 16, 2022 for the March 24, 2022 City Council Meeting RE:Final Plat and Final PUD Development Plan for “Cook Lake Highlands” at 19220 County Road 10 (PID 25-119-23-14-0003) (City File 21-057) 60-DAY REVIEW DEADLINE:April 11, 2021 1.Description of Request The applicant, Trek Real Estate and Development, Inc., is requesting approval of the final plat and final PUD (planned unit development) development plan for “Cook Lake Highlands.” The final plat is only reviewed by City Council. 2.Background The developer submitted a similar plan that was denied by the City Council on April 22, 2021. The developer then met with residents and Council members, revised the plans and submitted a new application. The City Council voted 3-1 to approve the rezoning to PUD, preliminary PUD development plan and preliminary plat on May 27, 2021. 3.Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission reviewed the application on March 3, 2022. There was one resident who spoke about the application regarding the lighting and a possible trail connection between Applewood Pointe, the single family cul-de-sac and the Bass Lake Crossing trail. This trail was only present in the first Parks Commission meeting on February 18, 2021, and was eliminated following that meeting. The plans approved by the Council on May 27, 2021 did not include a trail connection between the villas and Applewood Pointe and it was not included as a condition of approval. The Planning Commission voted 3-0-2 (Brummond and Van Den Einde abstained) to recommend denial of the final PUD request and did not provide a recommendation on the applicant’s PUD amendment request for additional signage. 4.Analysis of Request A.Level of Discretion in Decision Making The City’s discretion in approving a final PUD is limited to whether the proposed plan is in substantial conformance with the preliminary PUD development plan. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the final PUD development plan. Agenda Item: 8b. Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 2 March 24, 2022 The City’s discretion in approving a final plat is limited to whether the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the City’s subdivision and zoning ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the final plat. B. Consistency with Ordinance Standards Staff has reviewed the application for consistency with Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and City Code requirements, as well as City policies. The City Engineer’s comments are incorporated into this staff report, the detailed comments are included in the attached engineering memo and the approval conditions require compliance with the memo. Final PUD Development Plan Staff finds the final PUD development plan is consistent with the approved preliminary plans. However, there are a number of conditions that must be addressed prior to release of the final plat and authorization to begin construction. The entire project will be built in a single phase which includes: • 19 single family homes (reduced from 20 as required by the preliminary approvals) • 100 senior co-op units (102 were approved in the preliminary plans and the applicant reduced the units) • Daycare • Assisted living and memory care facility with 27 units. (32 were approved in the preliminary plans and the applicant reduced the units) The overall post-development net density is estimated to be 9.0 which falls within the 8-10 units per acre expected in the mixed-use land use area. A final calculation will be made after plans have met all conditions of approval. Building Design Standards The applicant has provided building renderings and elevations for the proposed structures. The City has adopted design standards as part of the Zoning Ordinance and guidelines as part of the Southeast District Plan and Design Guidelines. This section will evaluate the buildings and their compliance with the Zoning Ordinance building design standards and if they meet the goals of the Southeast District. The Southeast District guidelines identify that the buildings should fit with the agrarian contemporary, farmhouse and arts and crafts prairie styles. 1. Single Family Villas The single-family villa renderings are sample products from M/I Homes and vary from 1,734 – 1,935 square feet and all include 2-car garages. All the single-family villas are subject to the following standards listed in Section 1040.040, Subd 8: Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 3 March 24, 2022 A. Front Elevation: 1. Definition: i. For the purpose of this Section, front elevation shall be the elevation facing the front lot line on the street of the mailing address for the property when the property has more than one front lot line. 2. Materials used: i. The front elevation shall have material consisting of brick, stone, stucco, fiber cement board, redwood, cedar or other similar materials. A minimum of two different materials is required, except that brick may be used on the entire elevation. ii. Vinyl siding is permitted when combined with the materials listed in Subd. 8.A.2.i of this Section. A minimum of 3 different variations in color, style and/or material is required. For example, if vinyl siding is used, the home shall have combination of each lap, shake or board and batten plus brick or stone. The percentage of each used material/style of materials used shall be shown on the plans. iii. Except for brick, stucco and/or natural or artificial stone, the front elevation shall have no more than 75% of one type of exterior finish. The percentage of materials used shall be shown on the plans. 3. Architectural Elements: i. The front elevation façade shall consist of doors, windows and variations of the wall face with the use of pilasters or columns, wainscots, canopies or other architectural elements. 4. Design: i. Front elevations shall be varied with a minimum of five different styles provided in the development. ii. Homes in proximity to each other shall not look alike in terms of the combination of color of siding, accent and roofing materials. The home under consideration will be compared to the two homes on each side and to the three homes directly facing it. B. Garages: 1. The garage shall not comprise more than 55 percent of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage. This standard is based on the measurement of the entire garage structure and not on a measurement of the garage door or doors only. Corner lots are exempt from this requirement on one street elevation. 2. Garage doors shall be architecturally styled (this includes details such as raised panels, accent color, windows, etc.) to match the exterior design of the home. C. Roof: 1. Roofing materials including asphalt shingles, wood shingles (including shake), concrete, clay, ceramic tile roofs or residential steel roofing material (with hidden fasteners) are required on all roofs. 2. Overhangs must be a minimum of 12 inches. D. Other Elevations: 1. Equal architectural treatment on all sides of the building (materials, articulation, etc.) shall be used for all new residential construction when located on or visible from a street or public park. Each elevation facing a street or public park should use a minimum of 2 different materials and/or styles compatible with the front elevation as Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 4 March 24, 2022 described in this Section. All other elevations shall make a good faith effort to demonstrate that elements of the front elevation have been considered for incorporation on these elevations. 2. Each side elevation shall have at least one window or door opening. 3. A maximum of 18 inches of the foundation wall may be exposed on any elevation. The applicant provided seven M/I Home elevations with material square footages indicated in the elevations. Staff has determined that the majority of the elevations comply with the design standards in the ordinance, however some of the 3-car garage models shown exceed the maximum allowed garage face. These do not meet ordinance requirements and will not be permitted. Staff has worked with M/I Homes on previous projects and is confident that the elevations can be revised to comply with the ordinance. If the home elevations can’t meet the Zoning Ordinance standards a PUD amendment would be required. 2. Applewood Pointe Apartment The Applewood Pointe senior co-op building is 4-stories and has a building footprint of 49,846 square feet and is subject to the standards for apartments listed in Section 1040.070, Subd. 8 as follows: A. Unit Size: Floor Area: Five hundred (500) square foot minimum floor area for efficiency apartment units. Minimum eight hundred (800) square feet for a one-bedroom unit plus one hundred (100) square feet for each additional bedroom. Seven hundred (700) square foot minimum floor area for one-bedroom apartment dwelling units in retirement housing developments, plus one hundred (100) square feet for each additional bedroom. Garages, breezeways and porch floor spaces shall not be credited in determining the required floor area of units B. Parking: The design and maintenance of off street parking areas and the required number of parking spaces shall be in accordance with Section 1060.060 of this title. Private driveways for garages in townhouse developments shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') in length to allow vehicle parking on the driveway. C. Trash Handling and Recycling: All trash, recyclable materials, and trash and recyclable materials handling equipment shall be stored within the principal structure, totally screened from public view by the principal building, or stored within an accessory structure constructed of building materials compatible with the principal structure, enclosed by a roof, and readily served through swinging doors. D. On Site Screening: All mechanical equipment, utility meters, storage and service areas and similar features shall be completely screened from the eye level view from adjacent properties and public streets, or designed to be compatible with the architectural treatment of the principal structure. E. Building Design and Materials-Multi-family (stacked): All buildings shall be designed to accomplish the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. Building materials shall be attractive in appearance, durable, and of a quality which is both compatible with adjacent Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 5 March 24, 2022 structures and consistent with the City's standards for the district in which it is located. All buildings shall be of good aesthetic and architectural quality, as demonstrated by the inclusion of elements such as accent materials, entrance and window treatments, contrasting colors, irregular building shapes and rooflines, or other architectural features in the overall architectural concept. a. Major exterior surfaces on all walls facing a public street, park or open space shall include a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the combined area of all building facades of a structure shall contain following permitted major exterior materials: face brick (glazed or unglazed), clay faced tile, stone masonry (granite, limestone, marble, slate, sandstone, or quartzite). 2. Accent materials may include: finished texture stucco (cement or synthetic), natural or cultured stone, exterior finished wood siding (painted, stained, or weather sealed), exterior finished metal siding (factory finished), exterior finished vinyl siding or fiber cement siding in lap or panel design (color impregnated or painted). Panel seam lines shall be architecturally integrated into the building design so that they are not visible. Seam lines can either be filled, covered with accent material or some other method to make seam lines invisible. Accenting materials and design shall be included on all facades. 3. All building and roofing materials shall meet current accepted industry standards, and tolerances, and shall be subject to review and approval by the City for quality, durability, and aesthetic appeal. The applicant shall submit to the City product samples, color building elevations, and associated drawings which illustrate the construction techniques to be used in the installation of such materials. 4. If complementary building styles, materials, and color schemes are proposed for a development, the developer shall submit to the City a plan showing the distribution of the styles, materials, and colors throughout the development. 5. All townhome designs shall comply with the standards in Section 1040, Subd. 9 (RMF-1 Design Requirements). F. Parking Lot Screening: 1. The light from automobile headlights and other sources shall be screened whenever it may be directed onto residential windows. 2. When required parking areas abut any residential district, the edge nearest the lot line shall be completely screened to a height of at least three and one- half feet (31/2') above the parking grade. Such screening shall either be constructed of durable building materials designed in harmony with the principal structure or accomplished through use of earth mounds and/or landscape materials as approved. Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 6 March 24, 2022 3. When the design of the site is such that parking occurs in the front yard, a minimum of ten feet (10') landscaped area shall be provided between parking and building, in addition to the required setbacks. G. Recreational Facilities: On site recreational facilities, such as swimming pools, tennis courts, play equipment, walking trails, gardens, and basketball courts, that are suitable for the projected population of the development shall be provided when the nearest public park is more than one-half (1/2) mile or across a thoroughfare or arterial roadway from the development. H. Common Areas. The following minimum requirements shall be observed in the RMF-3 district governing common areas: 1. Ownership: All common areas within an RMF-3 development not dedicated to the public including, but not limited to, open space, driveways, private drives, parking areas, play areas, etc., shall be owned in one of the following manners: a. Condominium ownership pursuant to Minnesota statutes 515A.1-106. b. Twinhome or townhome subdivision common areas shall be owned by the owners of each unit lot, with each owner of a unit having an equal and undivided interest in the common area. 2. Homeowners' Association: A homeowners' association shall be established for all townhome developments within the RMF district, subject to review and approval of the City attorney, and shall be responsible for all exterior building maintenance, approval of any exterior architectural modifications, landscaping, snow clearing and regular maintenance of private driveways and other areas owned in common when there is more than one individual property owner having interest within the development. The applicant provided a building rendering and elevation with a material table for the Applewood Pointe senior co-op which includes materials consistent with the ordinance standards. The building uses rock face block, brick veneer, manufactured stone and various sidings to create visual breaks in the building. 3. New Horizon Academy Daycare The applicant has worked with staff since the preliminary approvals to bring the building into compliance with the architectural standards in the ordinance. The applicant provided colored building elevations for the daycare which show a combination of stone veneer, fiber cement shake siding and fiber cement horizontal siding in earth tone colors. The daycare building incorporates a prairie style architecture identified in the Southeast design guidelines with a low pitch roof with wide eave overhangs, the geometric windows and the horizontal patterns of the wall materials. Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 7 March 24, 2022 4. Rivers of Life Memory Care The applicant provided colored building elevation for the memory care which uses cultured sone veneer, LP lap siding and LP shake siding as building materials with earth tone and blue colors. The building design incorporates elements of prairie style architecture consistent with the goals of the Southeast Design Guidelines. The architecture elements included are the low pitch roof with wide eave overhangs, the geometric windows and the horizontal patterns of the wall materials. This building and the daycare are similar in architectural style to form a cohesive image along the streets. Retaining Walls There are a number of retaining walls to achieve the desired grading on the site with the largest at a height of roughly 14 feet. Engineering is reviewing certified designs for all the walls that exceed four feet in height. Utilities The City Engineer’s memo provides detailed utility comments. This project will extend municipal sewer and water through the site. The City ordinance requires developers to stub sanitary sewer, water and streets to the property line, which means development of this infrastructure makes development possible for adjacent properties. The developer is dedicating a 0.30-acre parcel, shown as Lot 3, Block 2 on the eastern boundary of the plat, to allow for construction of a City owned, operated and maintained booster station. The booster station is needed for continued and expanding water service to the residents of the City. The developer is continuing to work with the cities of Corcoran and Maple Grove and the Metropolitan Council to finalize easements and agreements for the utilities, particularly for the area on the east side of the project behind Applewood Pointe. No construction will be permitted until all agreements are finalized and recorded. Transportation The plan shows a 60-foot right-of-way with a 30-foot street section for 74th Avenue and the new cul- de-sac street. A 26-foot-wide driveway is proposed to serve the senior co-op. Improvements are proposed to the intersection of 74th Avenue and County Road 10 including a dedicated eastbound left turn lane and westbound right turn lane on County Road 10. Additionally, a 20-foot fire lane is proposed which wraps around the north and east sides of the senior co-op building. The eastern portion of the fire lane is located within an existing Metropolitan Council access easement. The applicant has been working with the Metropolitan Council to revise the existing easement to include new language allowing joint access through the area. Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 8 March 24, 2022 The access provided for the daycare and memory care uses is proposed to be a shared access on the daycare lot. A shared access and maintenance easement agreement has been submitted and is being reviewed with the City Attorney. The City Engineer’s memo provides more detailed transportation comments. The draft resolutions require compliance with the engineer’s memo. Stormwater The plans show a number of stormwater ponds on site to comply with City, Watershed and State requirements. The City’s engineer’s memo addresses the changes needed to comply with the requirements. Wetlands Section 1050.010 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes standards for the wetland overlay district. This includes establishment of wetland buffer strips with an average buffer width of 25 feet plus a 15-foot structure setback from the buffer. Wetland buffer signs are required to be installed at each lot line where it crosses a wetland buffer, and where needed to indicate the contour of the buffer, with a maximum spacing of 200 feet of wetland edge. The plans comply with these standards. A wetland buffer planting and maintenance plan has been submitted for review and approval by the City. Landscaping The applicant is required to provide one overstory tree for each dwelling unit for the single-family villas and senior co-op. For the non-residential uses including the daycare and memory care the applicant is required to provide one overstory tree per 1,000 square feet of gross building floor area or one tree per 50 lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is greater and One understory shrub for each 300 square feet of building or one tree per 30 lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is greater. The overstory trees may be substituted with understory or ornamental trees at a ratio of 3 to 1. The table below indicates the landscaping required for each site and the landscaping provided. The applicant must revise the landscape plan to include the correct number of overstory or evergreen trees on the Applewood site. A setback reduction from 100 feet to 50 feet was approved as allowed by Section 1060 of the Zoning Ordinance along the south lot line of the daycare and memory care, which allows the reduction by right if additional landscaping is provided. The ordinance requires 1 overstory deciduous tree, 1 Use Trees Required Trees Provided Shrubs Required Shrubs Provided Single Family Villas 38 88 0 0 Senior Co-op 100 86 0 486 Daycare 22 22 43 128 Memory Care 24 31 69 70 Total 184 240 112 709 Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 9 March 24, 2022 overstory coniferous tree, 2 ornamental trees, and 10 understory shrubs per 100 ft. of the project site where the reduction is requested. This is in addition to the site landscaping required as shown above. This requires an additional 3 overstory deciduous trees, 3 overstory coniferous trees, 6 ornamental trees and 30 shrubs each for the daycare site and the memory care site. These plantings are indicated on the landscape plan. The plans meet the ordinance requirements. Lighting The applicant provided a photometric lighting plan which shows the proposed streetlight locations and illumination levels for the site. Street lighting will be provided by Wright Hennepin Electric. Cut sheets for the proposed street lighting have been provided to the City which comply with City standards. Streetlights are generally located on the sidewalk side of the street. PUD Amendment - Signage Chapter 84 of the City Code regulates signage. The PUD approvals did not grant any flexibility from the sign standards. The applicant is now requesting that the PUD preliminary approvals be modified to allow additional signage. The applicant is requesting freestanding signage in the following locations: • One monument sign on the east side of the shared access for the daycare • Two monument signs for the memory care, one on the west side of the shared access and one sign on the south west side of the lot. • One monument sign on the east side of the private drive for the senior co-op Section 84.05 of the City Code allows two 32-square-foot signs at the primary entrance of a subdivision or medium and high-density apartments and one 16 square-foot sign at a secondary entrance. The Applewood Pointe monument sign complies with the size and height requirements in the City Code. Non-residential uses (daycare and memory care) are allowed one 32-square-foot sign each with a maximum height of six feet. The proposed daycare monument sign complies with the Sign Ordinance requirements. The applicant has provided sign designs indicating that the memory care is proposing a 36-square foot and a 40-square foot monument sign which are nine feet eight inches and 13 feet eight inches in height, respectively. The size, height and number of monument signs requires flexibility as part of the PUD. The applicant has submitted a narrative which addresses the requested flexibility and provides reasoning for the request which stipulates that the building design does not leave room for a wall sign and instead they are requesting a second monument sign. Staff is supportive of the request for a second monument sign with the absence of the wall sign. However, the applicant must provide additional details about the landscaping around the base of the signs as required by ordinance. Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 10 March 24, 2022 • The City Council should discuss the requested PUD flexibility and could modify Condition 14 of the PUD resolution if they do not support the request. The ordinance requires signs to be set back 10 feet from the property line and outside the sight visibility triangle. The plans appear to comply, but the site plan must be updated to confirm compliance. The applicant is showing wall signage for the following structures: • Applewood – no signage proposed on the building • New Horizons Daycare – the building is proposed with a total of three wall signs. Two containing a logo with lettering on the east and south elevation and a third wall sign consisting of only a logo is shown on the west elevation. • Rivers of Life Memory Care – no signage proposed on the building Section 84.05 of the City Code allows one wall sign at the primary entrance, not to exceed 10% of the primary building face. For the New Horizon’s building this would allow a single 224 square foot wall sign on the west elevation where the entrance is located. The applicant’s proposed signage is 33 square feet for each of the wall signs containing lettering and 24.5 square feet for the wall sign with only the logo. This is a total of 90.5 square feet or roughly 40% of the allowable signage area. However, the applicant is exceeding the number of allowed wall signs by two. Staff is supportive of adding a second wall sign for the increased visibility along County Road 10 but does not support a third wall sign being added. The draft resolution includes a condition to reduce the number of wall signs to two. • The City Council should discuss whether the signs should be allowed (either two as recommended by staff or the three requested by the applicant) and the elevations where they support the additional signage. • The City Council could recommend modifications to Condition 14 of the staff report regarding wall signage if they support the applicant’s request for three wall signs. Trails and Sidewalks The 2040 Parks and Trails Plan map shows an off-road trail that runs along the western property line abutting the Bass Lake Crossing development and an on-road trail that runs along County Road 10. The on-road trail will be constructed when the improvements to County Road 10 are completed by Hennepin County. The off-road trail was constructed with the Bass Lake Crossing development and an easement was put in place for a portion of the trail on the Cook Lake property. The Cook Lake Highlands site plan preserves the trail in its existing location and will have it run through the backyard of the single- family villa lots. The easement and trail are already in place for the “Bass Lake Crossing” portion of the trail. Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 11 March 24, 2022 A trail is shown running along the eastern border of Corcoran and Maple Grove. There was discussion of locating this trail within the Metropolitan Council’s access drive. The City of Maple Grove has decided to locate the trail in Maple Grove directly east of the access drive. This development will provide a trail connection to the Maple Grove trails. Trails will be maintained by the City according to City trail policy and sidewalks will be maintained by building management or homeowners. A sidewalk is shown on both sides of 74th Avenue for the entire length from the western boundary to County Road 10. Park Dedication Calculation The applicant was approved as part of the preliminary approvals to dedicate Outlot C to the City in exchange for no park dedication fees on the single family villa homes. No improvements are planned for Outlot C. With the dedication of Outlot C and waiving of the single family villa fees, the remaining park dedication fees are as follows: 100 senior living x $3,141 = $314,100 (27 memory care units / 146) x 21.41 x $4,498 = $17,809 1 daycare facility x $4,498 = $4,498 TOTAL = $336,407 The final park dedication calculation will be based on the fee schedule in place at the time of release of the final plat. Final Plat The final plat is for 24 lots and 5 outlots. The final plat is consistent with the preliminary plat. Conclusion Staff finds that the proposed plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and preliminary PUD approvals. The staff report noted the outstanding issues that must be addressed and staff has included conditions in the attached resolution to address these issues. 5. Recommendation Move to approve: a) Resolution 2022-22 approving final PUD plan b) Resolution 2022-23 approving the final plat and development contract Cook Lake Highlands FP and Final PUD (city file 21-057) 12 March 24, 2022 Attachments 1. Resolution 2022-22 approving final PUD development plan 2. Resolution 2022-23 approving the final plat and development contract 3. Draft Development contract 4. Site Location Map 5. Engineer’s Memo dated February 23, 2022 6. Applicant’s Narrative dated February 22, 2022 7. Plan drawings dated February 10, 2022 8. Building and Elevation Drawings 9. Resident Comments City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-22 Page 1 of 5 Motion By: Seconded By: APPROVING FINAL PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR “COOK LAKE HIGHLANDS” AT 19220 COUNTY ROAD 10 (PID 25-119-23-14-0003) (CITY FILE 21-057) WHEREAS, Beth Hustad of Trek Real Estate and Development, Inc. (“the applicant”) has requested approval of “Cook Lake Highlands” a mixed-use subdivision on property legally described as follows: See Attachment A WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the plan, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA, that the Corcoran City Council approves the request, subject to the following conditions: 1. A final PUD development plan is approved to create 24 lots and 5 outlots for “Cook Lake Highlands”, in accordance with the plans and application received by the City on December 3, 2021 and additional materials received on January 11, 2022, February 10, 2022 and February 22, 2022, except as amended by this resolution. 2. Approval is contingent upon City Council approval of the final plat. 3. Approval is subject to the preliminary approvals (Resolutions 2021-84 and 2021-85). 4. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the City Engineer’s memo, dated February 22, 2022. 5. The plans must be updated to show all easements on the preliminary plat. 6. Drainage and utility easements must be shown on the perimeter of each lot and over all outlots. City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-22 Page 2 of 5 7. PUD flexibility is granted to establish the following lot standards for this development: RMF-2 District Standards Shoreland Overlay Standards Proposed PUD Standards Single Family Apartment All uses Single Family Villas Senior Co- op Daycare Memory Care Minimum Lot Area 6,000 sq. ft. 1 acre 20,000 sq. ft. 6,750 sq. ft. 4.47 acres 1.88 acres 2.14 acres Minimum lot width 60 feet 100 feet 125 feet 50 feet <125 feet <125 feet <125 feet Front, From Major Roadways* 100 feet 100 feet N/A N/A N/A 100 feet (60 feet with landscaping) 100 feet (60 feet with landscaping) Front, From all other streets 25 feet 25 feet N/A 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Side 10 feet 30 feet N/A 5 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet Rear 25 feet 25 feet N/A 30 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Maximum Principal Building Height 35 feet 35 feet 25 feet 35 feet 49 feet 22 feet ~23 feet *Major Roadways are Principal Arterial, A Minor Reliever, A Minor Expander and A Minor Connector Roadways as shown on the 2030 Roadway Functional Classification map in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. **Internal: 20 feet between attached or multi-family principal structures separated by common area. 8. All garages must have a minimum 22-foot wide parking area between the garage and right-of-way that does not overlap into sidewalks, drives or streets. 9. Driveways may not encroach in the drainage and utility easements on the side yards. Landscaping and Lighting 10. The applicant shall revise plans to include the required 100 overstory trees (or equivalent) on the senior co-op lot (Lot 1, Block 2). 11. Lawn sprinklers/irrigation systems (if provided) shall all have rain sensors to limit unnecessary watering. 12. The developer must create a master HOA that shall be responsible for maintenance of the following: a. Landscaping and any irrigation in the common areas. b. Wetland and pond buffer areas. c. Sidewalks d. All common areas, including signage, lighting and landscaping in those areas. e. The master document can assign responsibility to individual lots provided each benefiting property has clear roles and responsibilities. 13. Any request to for the City to inspect the required landscaping in order to reduce financial guarantees must be accompanied by recertification/verification of field inspection by the project Landscape Architect. A letter signed by the project Landscape Architect verifying plantings (including wetland and pond buffers) have been correctly installed in compliance with the plans and specifications will suffice. City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-22 Page 3 of 5 Signage and Fencing 14. A PUD amendment is approved to allow signage in the following locations: a. A 32 square foot project sign on the east side of the shared access entrance for the apartment/co-op. b. A 32 square foot project sign on east side of the shared access entrance for the daycare. c. A 36-foot and a 40-foot monument sign on the north and south sides of the lot according to the submitted site plan. d. Two wall signs for the day care on the east elevation and the south elevation. One wall sign must be removed from the daycare to include a total of two wall signs. 15. Three temporary construction signs are approved. One per lot for the apartment, daycare and memory care. 16. Sign permits are required prior to installation of any permanent or temporary signs. Wetlands 17. A wetland buffer planting plan and maintenance plan must be submitted for review and approval by the City. 18. All permanent wetland buffer monument signs must be erected along the wetland buffer line as required by Section 1050.010, Subd. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance. a. Wetland signs shall be purchased from the City. b. The final locations must be inspected and approved by City staff. c. Monuments and signs shall be installed prior to approval of the building permit. Streets, Parking and Utilities 19. The development shall comply with the City’s requirements regarding fire access, fire protection and fire flow calculations, the location of fire hydrants, fire department connections and fire lane signage. 20. A letter or easement document for approval of the fire lane location within the existing Metropolitan Council easement must be provided to the City. 21. Proof of easement vacation shall be provided to the City for the portion of the existing Metropolitan Council easement crossing the property. 22. The shared access for Lot 1 and 2, Block 1 requires a shared access easement and maintenance agreement to be approved by the City Attorney and recorded with the final plat 23. No parking is allowed on the private drive. The street shall be signed for no parking. Park Dedication City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-22 Page 4 of 5 24. Park Dedication will be satisfied cash-in-lieu of land, subject to the following conditions: a. Park dedication shall be subject to park dedication fees in place when the final plat is released for recording. b. Park dedication is due for 100 senior living units, 27 memory care units and one commercial daycare facility. c. Outlot C shall be dedicated to the City. The preliminary approvals granted waiving of the park dedication fees for the 19 single family villa homes in exchange for Outlot C. Miscellaneous 25. The developer shall deed Lot 3, Block 2 to the City of Corcoran by warranty deed. 26. The following documents must be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and recorded at Hennepin County: a. An executed Joint Powers Agreement for the County Road 10 entrance street construction and the stormwater ponds located in the City of Maple Grove. The agreement shall be with the cities of Corcoran and Maple Grove and the Metropolitan Council for these improvements. b. Stormwater Maintenance Agreements (multiple agreements will be required for the three different ponding areas). c. Shared access and maintenance agreement for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 (daycare and memory care buildings). d. Maintenance and Encroachment agreements for landscaping in the public right-of- way. e. Association documents. f. Access and maintenance easement between the developer and the Metropolitan Council for access to the lift station on PID 2511923140004. g. Access and maintenance easement between the developer and the City of Corcoran for access to the booster station on Lot 3, Block 2. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 24th day of March 2022. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-22 Page 5 of 5 ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director ATTACHMENT A All that part of Section 25, Township 199, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follow: All that part of the East ½ of the Northeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ lying North of County Road No. 10; the East ½ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northeast ¼ and commencing at the Northwest corner of the East ½ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northeast ¼ of said Section; thence parallel with the East line of said Section 1085 feet; thence at right angles West 557.7 feet; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to place of beginning. EXCEPT that part of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 25, Township 119, Range 23 Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence on an assumed bearing of North 01 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds West, along the East line of said East Half of Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, a distance of 50.58 feet; thence South 88 degrees 50 minutes 44 seconds West 168.59 feet to the West line of the East 168.59 feet of said East Half of Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and the point of beginning; thence continuing South 88 degrees 50 minutes 44 seconds West 305.00 feet; thence South 01 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds East 175.00 feet; thence North 88 degrees 50 minutes 41 seconds East 305.00 feet to said West line of the East 168.59 feet; thence North 01 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds West, along last said line, a distance of 175.00 feet to the point of beginning. City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-23 Page 1 of 4 Motion By: Seconded By: APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR “COOK LAKE HIGHLANDS” AT 19220 COUNTY ROAD 10 (PID 25-119-23-14-0003) (CITY FILE 21-057) WHEREAS, Beth Hustad of Trek Development Inc. (“the applicant”) has requested approval of “Cook Lake Highlands” a mixed-use subdivision on property legally described as follows: See Attachment A FURTHER, that the development contract for said plat shall be completed by city staff and the Mayor and that the City Administrator be authorized to execute the development contract on behalf of the City; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that it should and hereby does approve the request for a final plat for Cook Lake Highlands, subject to the following conditions: 1. A final plat is approved to create 24 lots and 5 outlots for “Cook Lake Highlands”, in accordance with the plans and application received by the City on December 3, 2021 and additional materials received on January 11, 2022, February 10, 2022 and February 22, 2022, except as amended by this resolution. 2. Approval is contingent upon City Council approval of the final PUD development plan for Cook Lake Highlands. 3. The development contract must be executed by the developer and the City and must be filed with the final plat. 4. Development is subject to all conditions of the “Cook Lake Highlands” preliminary plat and preliminary PUD approvals (Resolutions 2021-84 and 2021-85). 5. Park dedication shall be cash-in-lieu of land as described in Resolution 2021-85. 6. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the City Engineer’s memo dated February 23, 2022. 7. Drainage and utility easements must be provided over all wetlands, wetland buffers and ponds. Final easement location shall be determined by City staff. 8. The applicant must provide proof of vacation of existing Metropolitan Council easements for access to the lift station and execution of new access easements. 9. The applicant shall provide the Metropolitan Council SAC determination prior to finalizing the development agreement. City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-23 Page 2 of 4 FURTHER, that the following conditions be met prior to issuance of building permits: 10. All permanent wetland buffer monument signs must be erected along the wetland buffer line as required by Section 1050.010, Subd. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance. a. Wetland signs shall be purchased from the City. b. The final locations must be inspected and approved by City staff. c. Monuments and signs shall be installed prior to approval of the building permit. 11. The applicant must file the final plat at Hennepin County within 2 years of the date of approval or the approval shall expire. 12. Record the approving resolutions and associated documents at Hennepin County and provide proof of recording to the City. 13. The applicant shall provide proof of recording the final plat and related documents at Hennepin County. FURTHER, that the following conditions be met prior to release of remaining escrow: 14. Lot corner monuments shall be installed as required by the Subdivision Ordinance. A financial guarantee shall be required to ensure installation per city requirements. 15. Park dedication is due as required by the preliminary PUD development plan approval, prior to release of the final plat for recording. 16. The applicant must file the final plat at Hennepin County within 2 years of the date of approval or the approval shall expire. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-23 Page 3 of 4 Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 24th day of March 2022. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-23 Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENT A All that part of Section 25, Township 199, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follow: All that part of the East ½ of the Northeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ lying North of County Road No. 10; the East ½ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northeast ¼ and commencing at the Northwest corner of the East ½ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northeast ¼ of said Section; thence parallel with the East line of said Section 1085 feet; thence at right angles West 557.7 feet; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to place of beginning. EXCEPT that part of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 25, Township 119, Range 23 Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence on an assumed bearing of North 01 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds West, along the East line of said East Half of Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, a distance of 50.58 feet; thence South 88 degrees 50 minutes 44 seconds West 168.59 feet to the West line of the East 168.59 feet of said East Half of Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and the point of beginning; thence continuing South 88 degrees 50 minutes 44 seconds West 305.00 feet; thence South 01 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds East 175.00 feet; thence North 88 degrees 50 minutes 41 seconds East 305.00 feet to said West line of the East 168.59 feet; thence North 01 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds West, along last said line, a distance of 175.00 feet to the point of beginning. (reserved for recording information) DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) COOK LAKE HIGHLANDS This DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (this “Contract”) dated ____________________, 2022, is entered into by and between the CITY OF CORCORAN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”), and Trek Real Estate and Development, Inc. (the “Developer”) and shall be effective upon full execution by the City and the Developer. The City and the Developer are sometimes collectively referred to herein as the “parties” or each a “party”. 1. REQUEST FOR PLAT APPROVAL. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for Cook Lake Highlands (referred to in this Contract as the "plat"). The land is situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, and is legally described in the attached Exhibit A (the “Subject Property”). 2. CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL. The Developer shall enter into this Contract, furnish the security required by it, and record the plat upon City approval with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles. 3. RIGHT TO PROCEED. Unless separate written approval has been given by the City, within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct sewer lines, water lines, streets, utilities, public or private improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Administrative Services Director, 2) the necessary security has been received by the City, 3) the plat, development contract and other associated documents have been recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder's Office and proof of recording has been provided to the City, and 4) the City has authorized the Developer to proceed, in writing. However, the Developer may be allowed to begin grading the site when items 1, 2 and 4 of the previous sentence have been satisfied. 4. PHASED DEVELOPMENT. If the plat is a phase of a multi-phased preliminary plat, the City may refuse to approve final plats of subsequent phases if the Developer has failed to fulfill all obligations in this Contract and the failure has not been remedied. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until Development Contracts for such phases are approved by the City. Park charges and area charges for sewer and water referred to in this Contract are not being imposed on outlots, if any, in the plat that are designated in an approved preliminary plat for future subdivision into lots and blocks. Such charges will be calculated and imposed when the outlots are final platted into lots and blocks. - 2 – 5. PRELIMINARY PLAT STATUS. If the plat is a phase of a multi-phased preliminary plat, the preliminary plat approval for all phases not final platted shall lapse and be void unless the initial phase is final platted into lots and blocks, not outlots, within two (2) years after preliminary plat approval. 6. CHANGES IN OFFICIAL CONTROLS. For two (2) years from the date of this Contract, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan or official controls shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications of the approved final plat unless required by state or federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Contract to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by state law, the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Contract. Notwithstanding the provisions of this paragraph, in the event that changes to federal or state law prohibit or limit the City’s authority to collect the costs of off-site improvements for this project as contemplated in Section 9 herein and the parties do not mutually agree to remain bound to the terms contemplated in said Section 9, the City shall have the right to substitute off-site improvement cost collection provisions which are: 1) in compliance with applicable law; and 2) which result in reasonably comparable cost contribution from the Developer. 7. DEVELOPMENT PLANS. The plat shall be developed in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, the written terms herein shall control. The plans are: Exhibit A – Legal Description Plan A – Final Plat, dated _____ Plan B – Final Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan, dated _____ Plan C – Final Sanitary Sewer, Watermain and Storm Sewer Plan, dated ____ Plan D – Final Tree Preservation and Reforestation Plan, dated _____ Plan E– Final Landscape Plan, dated _____ Plan F – Permanent Traffic Control Plan, dated _____ Plan F– Revised Preliminary Plat, dated ____ 8. IMPROVEMENTS. The Developer shall install and pay for, without limitation, all of the following improvements: • Streets • Sanitary Sewer • Watermain • Surface Water Facilities (pipe, ponds, rain gardens, etc.) • Grading and Erosion Control • Sidewalks/Trails • Street Lighting • Underground Utilities • Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs • Landscaping • Tree Preservation • Wetland Mitigation and Buffers • Monuments Required by Minnesota Statutes • Miscellaneous Facilities - 3 – In addition to the above-listed improvements, Developer shall be responsible for all other costs necessary to construct the improvements pursuant to the City-approved plans. The Developer shall submit plans which have been prepared by a competent registered professional engineer to the City for approval by the City Engineer or designee. The Developer may instruct its engineer to provide full-time field inspection personnel in order for the Developer's engineer to be able to certify that the construction work meets the approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City's discretion and at the Developer's expense, have one or more City inspectors and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part-time basis. The Developer, its contractors and subcontractors, shall follow all instructions received from the City's inspectors. The Developer and/or the Developer’s engineer shall provide for on-site project management. The Developer's engineer is responsible for design changes and contract administration between the Developer and the Developer's contractor. The Developer or his or her engineer shall schedule a pre- construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at City Hall with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. All labor and work shall be performed and completed in the best and most workmanlike manner and in strict conformance with the approved plans and City Engineering Design Standards. No deviations from the approved plans and Standards will be permitted unless authorized by the City Engineer or designee. The Developer agrees to furnish to the City a list of contractors being considered for retention by the Developer for the performance of the work required by the contract. The Developer shall not do any work or furnish any materials not covered by the plans and special conditions of this contract, for which reimbursement is expected from the City, unless such work is first approved in writing by the City Engineer or designee. The Developer shall be responsible for construction of all improvements in conformance with the approved plans, City Engineering Design Standards and Standard Details. 9. OFF-SITE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. The City intends to make improvements to County Road 10 at the intersection of the future 74th Avenue providing access to the site. The public improvements are more fully detailed in the Feasibility Study dated May 29, 2020, prepared by Wenck Associates, Inc. The developer agrees to fund off-site improvements as noted in this Contract. a. The following improvements are required with Cook Lake Highlands. The City shall design, bid and manage the projects and the developer shall pay for the following improvement, which shall be paid at the time the final plat is released for recording: • The developer shall provide a financial guarantee to the City for the cost of the County Road 10 improvements (estimated at $850,000) including the construction of the turn lane into the development and access road through the intersection of 73rd Ave. The road corridor will be graded to the subgrade elevation with the development grading and the city project will include the construction of the roadways and storm sewer systems. The utility relocations will be completed by the developer as part of the site improvements. The development contract will include $775,000 in the letter of credit and $75,000 cash escrow for design. When the City bids the project, the City will reduce the letter of credit by $775,000 and require the developer to provide cash escrow based on the final bid amount. If Hennepin County, the City of Maple Grove or the Metropolitan Council financially participates in the project, the financial guarantee from the developer would be offset by these other funds. - 4 – b. The developer agrees to pay the City the cost of these improvements as outlined above. The City will notify the developer of required reimbursement under this paragraph for design and construction of such improvements. The costs to be reimbursed include the actual cost to the City for construction of the improvements plus the allocation of the engineering, legal, administrative and other similar costs of the project based on the relative construction costs of the improvements. The developer reserves the right to be refunded for any unused portion of the estimated cost versus the actual cost of each improvement. c. The developer agrees to pay the City the cost to manage runoff from the City of Corcoran through a Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Maple Grove. 10. CONTRACTORS/SUBCONTRACTORS. City Council members, City employees, and City Planning Commission members, and corporations, partnerships, and other entities in which such individuals have greater than a 25% ownership interest or in which they are an officer or director may not act as contractors or subcontractors for the public improvements identified in Paragraph 8 above. 11. PERMITS. The Developer shall obtain or require its contractors and subcontractors to obtain all necessary permits, including but not limited to: • Hennepin County for County Road Access and Work in County Rights-of-Way • Minnesota Department of Health for Watermains/Wells • NPDES Permits • MPCA for Sanitary Sewer and Hazardous Material Removal and Disposal • DNR for Dewatering and Work in Protected Waters • City of Corcoran for Building Permits and Building Demolition • MCES for Sanitary Sewer Connections • Watershed Permits 12. TIME OF PERFORMANCE. The Developer shall install all required public improvements in this phase by October 31, 2023, with the exception of the final wear course of asphalt on streets. The City will not accept new public streets in Cook Lake Highlands until 80% of the homes in Cook Lake Highlands have received a certificate of occupancy and the streets have weathered a full winter season. Final wear course placement outside of this time frame must have the written approval of the City Engineer. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 13. LICENSE. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with plat development. 14. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS. Haul routes for vehicles used in transport of materials shall be designated by the City Engineer. The City Engineer has discretion to change the designated haul routes at any time in event of unforeseen circumstances. This Agreement may be terminated and all work on the Subject Property may be halted by the City for Developer’s failure to use the designated haul routes or for any other violation of this Agreement. - 5 – 15. GRADING PLAN. The plat shall be graded in accordance with the approved grading drainage and erosion control plan, Plan "B". The plan shall conform to City of Corcoran Engineering Design Standards. 16. EROSION CONTROL. Prior to initiating site grading, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented by the Developer and inspected and approved by the City. Erosion control practices must comply with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Best Management Practices. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements which the City determines would be beneficial. The City is an MS4 City and all erosion control shall comply with the Corcoran City Code and the Corcoran Engineering Design Standards. No development, utility or street construction will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the approved erosion control plan. Further, the City shall have the authority to stop work on the Subject Property and/or withhold additional building permits or certificates of occupancy in the event that the Developer fails to comply with the approved erosion control plan. 17. STREET MAINTENANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION. The Developer shall be responsible for all street maintenance until the streets affected by the project are accepted by the City. Warning signs shall be placed when hazards develop in streets to prevent the public from traveling on the same and to direct attention to detours. If and when streets become impassable, such streets shall be barricaded and closed. In the event residences are occupied prior to completing streets, the Developer shall maintain a smooth surface and provide proper surface drainage to ensure that the streets are passable to traffic and emergency vehicles. The Developer shall be responsible for keeping streets within and without the subdivision swept clean of dirt and debris that may spill, track, or wash onto the street from Developer’s operation. 18. OWNERSHIP OF IMPROVEMENTS. Upon completion of the work and construction required by this Contract and acceptance of the work by the City, the public improvements lying within public easements or right-of-way shall become City property. This provision shall not apply to private improvements (e.g. private retaining walls) which encroach upon public easement or right-of-way, and such encroachments shall be subject to any applicable and separate encroachment agreement. Prior to acceptance of the improvements by the City, the Developer must furnish the following affidavits: • Record Drawings • Certification from the Registered Land Surveyor that land corner monuments and wetland buffer signs have been installed according to the approved plans. • The warranty/performance financial guarantee 19. PARK DEDICATION. The Developer shall dedicate to the City the park as shown on the preliminary plat. The Developer shall also dedicate to the City the trail easements identified on the preliminary plat, except as modified by the approving resolutions and construct all trails as shown on the plans. The developer shall construct the bituminous trails in the subdivision and shall work with the city on the final location within the public park. No credit shall be given for trail construction. Credit shall be given for the net area of the park land and trail easement area. The remainder of the required park dedication shall be satisfied with cash-in-lieu of land. Park dedication shall be obtained based on the phase being platted. Cook Lake Highlands will have a combination of park land dedication and cash-in-lieu of land. Prior to release of the final plat, the Developer shall satisfy the park dedication requirements for this - 6 – phase by a cash contribution of $336,407.00. The charge was calculated in accordance with Section 955 of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance as follows: 100 multifamily units x $3,141.00 ($314,100.00) plus (27 memory care units / 146) x $4,498 ($17,809.00) plus 1 daycare facility x $4,498 ($4,498.00) = $336,407.00. WATERMAIN / STORAGE TRUNK LINE AREA CHARGE (TLAC). This plat is subject to a watermain/storage trunk line area charge (TLAC). The charge is calculated as follows: 21.56 net acres (based on pre- developable area) $7,475.00 per acre = $161,161.00. Future phases shall be cash with the final plat for each future phase subject to the then-current rates. 20. WATER CONNECTION CHARGE. This plat is subject to a water connection charge calculated as follows: 19 single family units x $1,219.00 per unit ($23,161.00) plus 100 multifamily units x $975.00 ($97,500.00) plus 27 memory care units x $975.00 ($26,325.00) plus 1 daycare x $1,219 ($1,219.00) = $148,205.00. The fees shall be paid at the time of building permit. Future development shall be cash at the time of issuance of each building permit at the then-current rates. The developer will be responsible for payment of the then-current water connection charge set by the City of Maple Grove. 21. SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE AREA CHARGE (TLAC). This plat is subject to a sanitary sewer trunk line area charge (TLAC). The charge is calculated as follows: The charge is calculated as follows: 21.56 net acres (based on pre-developable area) x $7,189.00 per acre = $154,994.84. Future phases shall be cash with the final plat for each future phase subject to the then-current rates. The developer will also be responsible for payment of the then-current SAC fee set by the Metropolitan Council. The applicant must provide a SAC determination from the Metropolitan Council and fees will be based on that determination. 22. SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION CHARGE. This plat is subject to a sanitary sewer connection charge calculated as follows: 19 single family units x $1,219.00 per unit ($23,161.00) plus 100 multifamily units x $975.00 per unit ($97,500.00) plus 27 memory care units x $975.00 ($26,325.00) plus 1 daycare x $1,219 ($1,219.00) = $148,205.00. The fees shall be paid at the time of building permit. Future development shall be cash at the time of issuance of each building permit at the then-current rates. 23. BUILDING PERMITS/CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY. A. Prior to issuance of building permits other than the model home; utilities, curbing and one lift of bituminous shall be installed on public streets. B. Utilities shall be installed and reasonable access to the lot from a public street shall be provided prior to issuance of a model home permit. Once model home will be allowed per product type (single family, twin home, townhome, etc.) per development and shall be on lots acceptable to the City. C. No sewer and water connection permits may be issued until the utilities are tested and approved by the City Engineer. D. The Developer shall comply with the City of Corcoran Engineering Design Standards. - 7 – E. Prior to issuance of building permits, wetland buffer monuments shall be placed in accordance with the City’s zoning ordinance. Monument signs shall be purchased from the City. The land surveyor must certify that the wetland buffer signs have been installed in accordance with the approved plans. F. Failure to fulfill any of the terms of this Contract by the Developer, including nonpayment of billings from the City, shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties, the halting of all work in the plat, and/or the denial of certificates of occupancy. G. If building permits are issued prior to the acceptance of public improvements, the Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion of public improvements and damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, their contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, employees, agents, or third parties. No sewer and water connection permits may be issued until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities are tested and approved by the City Engineer. 24. STREET REGULATORY SIGNS/TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS. Street name signs shall be installed by the Developer in accordance with the City of Corcoran Engineering Design Standards. The Developer shall install traffic control signs in accordance with the plan approved by the City Engineer and Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. All signs must be installed prior to final building inspection approval or earlier if necessary as determined by the City Engineer. 25. STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION AND OPERATION COSTS. The developer shall pay for and install all street lights. The street light shall be of a design approved by the City. The developer shall be responsible for street light operation and maintenance costs until such time as the City accepts the public street where the streetlights are located. After the acceptance the City shall be responsible for all costs, subject to the street lighting policy. The costs of operation are dependent upon the operation costs for Wright Hennepin Electric under contract franchise with the City of Corcoran. 26. RESPONSIBILITY FOR COSTS. A. Except as otherwise specified herein, the Developer shall pay all costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the development of the plat, including but not limited to legal (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees), planning, engineering and inspection expenses incurred in connection with approval and acceptance of the plat, the preparation of this Contract, review of construction plans and documents, and all costs and expenses incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting development of the plat. The City may require Developer to post funds in an escrow account, at its discretion. In the event the cash escrow amount is insufficient, Developer shall post additional escrow funds as determined by the City Planner within ten (10) days of written demand. Failure to make payment of the additional escrow amount shall permit the City to supplement those amounts from any other sureties posted by Developer. B. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers, employees, and agents harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers, employees, and agents for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorneys' fees. - 8 – C. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Contract, including engineering and attorneys' fees. D. The Developer shall pay, or cause to be paid when due, and in any event before any penalty is attached, all special assessments referred to in this contract. This is a personal obligation of the Developer and shall continue in full force and effect even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it. E. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Contract within thirty (30) days after receipt. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of eight percent (8%) per year. Further, the City shall have the right to access Developer’s posted security to obtain reimbursement for unpaid invoiced amounts. Should Developer’s security be insufficient to cover any amounts owed to the City and unpaid after invoicing, the City may assess such amounts against the Subject Property. Developer, on behalf of itself and it successors and assigns, hereby waives any assessment notice requirements and any right to appeal such assessment pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429. F. In addition to the charges and special assessments referred to herein, other charges and special assessments may be imposed such as but not limited to sewer availability charges ("SAC"), City water connection charges, City sewer connection charges, and building permit fees. 27. SPECIAL PROVISIONS. The following special provisions shall apply to plat development: A. Compliance with the conditions of the original approvals, including the Preliminary PUD plan (Resolution 2021-84), the Preliminary Plat (Resolution 2021-85), PUD Final Development Plan (Resolution 2022-22) and Final Plat approval (Resolution 2022-23) is required. B. Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall convey the Park to the City by warranty deed, free and clear of any and all encumbrances. Before the City signs the final plat, the developer shall convey the required trail easements to the City in a form satisfactory to the City. C. The Developer shall post a $2,400.00 security for the final placement of interior subdivision iron monuments at property corners. The security was calculated as follows: 24 lots at $100.00 per lot. The security will be held by the City until the Developer's land surveyor certifies that all irons have been set following site grading and utility and street construction. In addition, the certificate of survey must also include a certification that all irons for a specific lot have either been found or set prior to the issuance of a building permit for that lot. D. The Developer must obtain a sign permit from the City Building Official prior to installation of any subdivision identification signs. E. The Developer shall include the “City of Corcoran’s Standard Detail” (all applicable sections) in the contract documents of their improvement project. 28. MISCELLANEOUS. A. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect even if the - 9 – Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in conjunction with a sale of the entire land, the Developer may, without the consent of the City, assign this Contract to a limited liability company or other entity in which the Developer or an affiliate thereof has a controlling membership or other controlling ownership interest, provided that such assignee assumes in writing the obligations of Developer under this Contract and all posted security correspondingly secures the performance of the assignee. B. Certain retaining walls will require a Building Permit. Retaining walls that require a building permit shall be constructed in accordance with plans and specifications prepared by a structural or geotechnical engineer licensed by the State of Minnesota. Following construction, a certification signed by the design engineer shall be filed with the Building Official evidencing that the retaining wall was constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. All retaining walls identified on the development plans or by special conditions referred to in this Contract shall be constructed before any other building permit is issued for a lot on which a retaining wall is required to be built. C. Appropriate legal documents including, but not limited to, those regarding Homeowner Association documents, conservation easements, covenants and restrictions, as approved by the City Attorney, shall be filed with the Final Plat. D. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Contract. E. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. G. This Contract shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. The Developer covenants with the City, its successors and assigns, that the Developer has fee title to the property being final platted and/or has obtained consents to this Contract, in the form attached hereto, from all parties who have an interest in the property; that there are no unrecorded interests in the property being final platted; and that the Developer will indemnify and hold the City harmless for failure to fulfill any of the foregoing covenants. H. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. I. The Developer represents to the City that the plat complies with all city, county, metropolitan, state, and federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, - 10 – zoning ordinances, and environmental regulations. If the City determines that the plat does not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow construction or development work in the plat until the Developer does comply. Upon the City’s demand, the Developer shall cease work until there is compliance. J. The Contract may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original. K. The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all issues relating to this Contract and any action brought to enforce rights or obligations herein shall be brought in Hennepin County, Minnesota. L. All exhibits, plan documents, City approval documents, and City planning or engineering memos referenced herein are hereby incorporated into and shall become a part of this Contract as if attached hereto. M. Upon completion of construction, the Developer shall provide the City with as-built records of all soil corrections and utility infrastructure installations made by the Developer on the Subject Property or within any affected public right-of-way. N. Upon completion of installation of the same (as applicable), any sanitary sewer installed on the Subject Property shall be televised at the Developer’s expense and the Developer shall submit a recording of the same to the City for the City’s records. O. The Developer shall install railings adjacent to slopes on the Subject Property in compliance with the building code, as determined by the Building Official. 29. DEVELOPER’S DEFAULT. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer, except in an emergency as determined by the City, is first given notice of the work in default, not less than 48 hours in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a court order for permission to enter the Subject Property. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part to the Subject Property and the Developer, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, hereby waives any right to appeal said assessment. 30. WARRANTY/PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The Developer shall submit either 1) a warranty/maintenance bond for 100% of the cost of the improvement, or 2) a letter of credit or performance bond for twenty-five percent (25%) of the amount of the original cost of the improvements. A. The required warranty period for materials and workmanship for the utility contractor installing public sewer and water mains shall be two (2) years from the date of final written City acceptance of the work. B. The required warranty period for all work relating to street construction, including concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, materials and equipment shall be subject to one (1) year from the date of final written acceptance, unless the wearing course is placed during the same construction season as the bituminous base course. In those instances, the Developer shall guarantee all work, including street construction, concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, - 11 – material and equipment for a period of two (2) years from the date of final written City acceptance of the work. C. The required warranty period for sod, trees, and landscaping is one full growing season following installation. Following construction, a certification signed by the design landscape architect shall be filed with the City evidencing that the sod, trees, and landscaping was installed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. 31. SUMMARY OF SECURITY REQUIREMENTS. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this contract, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements, and construction of all public improvements, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit, in a form acceptable to the City, from a bank, cash escrow or a combination cash escrow and Letter of Credit ("security") for $5,418,963.28, which represents 100 percent of the estimated cost of the Improvements. The letter of credit shall include an automatic renewal clause. The letter of credit shall guarantee to the City the construction and satisfactory completion of all items to be completed by the developer; that the letter of credit shall be reduced from time to time as work is performed and accepted in a satisfactory manner; that the City Engineer may reduce the letter of credit to the amount reasonably estimated by the City Engineer to be necessary to cover the remaining construction obligations; however, the letter of credit shall not be reduced below the amount estimated by the City to cover all obligations of development including payment of costs and expenses incurred by the City for legal, engineering, planning and any other costs until a maintenance bond for period of one year, satisfactory to the City Attorney and the City Engineer has been provided by the Developer or its subcontractor. - 12 – The amount of the security was calculated as follows: ESTIMATED COSTS ITEM City Project (1) Developer Installed (2) Total Sanitary Sewer System $412,365.00 $412,365.00 Watermain System $481,350.00 $481,350.00 Stormwater System $410,700.00 $410,700.00 Street Construction $775,000.00 $1,145,542.00 $1,920,542.00 Street Lighting $72,500.00 $72,500.00 Grading/Erosion Control $1,490,823.00 $1,490,823.00 Landscaping/Tree Preservation $277,636.00 $277,636.00 Setting Iron Monuments $5,900.00 $5,900.00 Installing Wetland Buffer Monuments* $3,150.00 $3,150.00 SUB-TOTAL: $775,000.00 $4,299,966.00 $5,074,966.00 City Design, Inspection and Administration (8%) $343,997.28 $343,997.28 Total: $775,000.00 $4,643,963.28 $5,418,963.28 Total Project Cost $5,418,963.28 (1) Public Improvement/City Project. City to own and maintain after development complete. (2) Developer Installed Public Improvements. City to own and maintain after development complete. This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. If a letter of credit is used to post any portion of the security, the bank shall be subject to the approval of the City Administrator. The City may draw down the security, without notice, for any violation of the terms of this Contract or upon receipt of notice that the security will be cancelled or otherwise lapse prior to the end of the required term and no City- approved replacement security has been provided. If the required public improvements are not completed at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the security, the City may also draw it down. If the security is drawn down, the proceeds shall be used to cure the default. Upon receipt of proof satisfactory to the City Engineer or designee that work has been completed and financial obligations to the City have been satisfied, with City Engineer or designee approval the security may be reduced from time to time by 75% of the financial obligations that have been satisfied. Twenty-five percent (25%) of the public improvement and landscaping amounts certified by the Developer's engineer shall be retained as security until: (1) all improvements have been completed; (2) iron monuments for lot corners have been installed; (3) all financial obligations to the City, both actual and anticipated, have been satisfied; (4) the required "record" plans have been received by the City; (5) a warranty security is provided; and (6) the public improvements are accepted by the City. 32. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Developer shall take out and maintain or cause to be taken out and maintained until six months after the City’s acceptance of the public improvements: A. Commercial general liability insurance (including operations, contingent liability, operations of subcontractors, competed operations and contractual liability insurance) together with an Owner’s Contractor’s Policy with limits against bodily injury, including death, and property - 13 – damage (to include, but not be limited to damages caused by erosion or flooding) which may arise out of Developer’s work or the work of any of its subcontractors. B. Limits for bodily injury or death shall not be less than $750,000.00 for one person and $1,500,000.00 for each occurrence; limits for property damage shall not be less than $2,000,000.00 for each occurrence. C. Worker’s compensation insurance, with statutory coverage, if applicable. D. Developer shall file a Certificate of Insurance with the City Administrator prior to commencing site grading. The City and the City Engineer shall be named as Additional Insureds on a primary and non-contributory basis on the Certificate. The Certificate shall be modified to bear the following language: “Should any of the above policies be canceled, materially changed, or not renewed before the expiration date thereof, the issuing company shall give thirty (30) days written notice of the same to the Certificate Holder. In the event of cancellation due to non-payment, ten (10) day’s written notice shall be given to the Certificate Holder.” Developer shall be responsible for providing the above language to its insurer. The City does not warranty that these amounts will be sufficient to cover all Developer liability related to the work on the Subject Property and Developer shall be responsible for conducting its own analysis of the appropriate levels of coverage. 33. SUMMARY OF CASH REQUIREMENTS. The following is a summary of the cash requirements under this Contract which must be furnished to the City at the time of final plat approval: Water Supply Trunk line area charge (TLAC) $ 161,161.00 Sanitary Sewer Trunk line area charge (TLAC) 154,994.84 Park Dedication 336,407.00 Engineering Design Escrow 75,000.00 Engineering Escrow 75,000.00 TOTAL CASH REQUIREMENTS LEVIED: $ 727,562.84 34. NOTICES. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the following address: _______________________________ _135 Crabapple Lane_____________ _Excelsior, MN 55331_____________ - 14 – Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Administrator at the following address: Corcoran City Hall, 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340. The Developer shall notify the City within five (5) days of change of address. [Signatures on pages to follow] CITY OF CORCORAN: BY: ______________________________________ Tom McKee, Mayor (SEAL) AND _____________________________________ Jessica Beise, Interim City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of ________________, 20____, by Tom McKee and by Jessica Beise, the Mayor and Interim City Administrator of the City of Corcoran, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. ______________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DEVELOPER: By: ______________________________________ Its: ______________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of ________________, 20____, by __________________________________ the ____________________________________ of ______________________________________ on its behalf. ______________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 EXHIBIT A (the “Subject Property”) All that part of Section 25, Township 199, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follow: All that part of the East ½ of the Northeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ lying North of County Road No. 10; the East ½ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northeast ¼ and commencing at the Northwest corner of the East ½ of the Southeast ¼ of the Northeast ¼ of said Section; thence parallel with the East line of said Section 1085 feet; thence at right angles West 557.7 feet; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to place of beginning. EXCEPT that part of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 25, Township 119, Range 23 Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence on an assumed bearing of North 01 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds West, along the East line of said East Half of Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, a distance of 50.58 feet; thence South 88 degrees 50 minutes 44 seconds West 168.59 feet to the West line of the East 168.59 feet of said East Half of Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and the point of beginning; thence continuing South 88 degrees 50 minutes 44 seconds West 305.00 feet; thence South 01 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds East 175.00 feet; thence North 88 degrees 50 minutes 41 seconds East 305.00 feet to said West line of the East 168.59 feet; thence North 01 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds West, along last said line, a distance of 175.00 feet to the point of beginning. FEE OWNER CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT _______________________________________________________, fee owners of all or part of the Subject Property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the Subject Property owned by them. Fee Owners further consent to the recording of the Agreement against the Subject Property. Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2_____. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2____, by ______________________________________________________. ________________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 MORTGAGEE CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT _______________________________________________________, which holds a mortgage on the Subject Property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, agrees that the Development Contract shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2_____. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ________________, 2_____, by __________________________________________________________________________. ________________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 CONTRACT PURCHASER CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT _______________________________________________________________, which/who has a contract purchaser's interest in all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, hereby affirms and consents to the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the Subject Property in which there is a contract purchaser's interest. Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2_____. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ________________, 2____, by ____________________________________________________________________________. ________________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Hennepin County Natural Resources Map Date: 8/27/2020 Comments: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2020 1 inch = 800 feet Legend FEMA Floodplains - 100 Year A AE FLOODPLAIN AH AO AE FLOODWAY DNR Buffer Protection - Public Waters Undefined General Development Natural Environment Natural Sensitive Recreational Development Special Protection Wetlands Potential Wetland - HCWI Probable Wetland - HCWI Probable Wetland - NWI PID: 2511923140003 Address: 19220 CO RD NO 10, CORCORAN Owner Name: ALBERT SCHOMMER ESTATE Acres: 27.31 ¯ Memo To: Kevin Mattson, City of Corcoran From: Kent Torve, City Engineer Steve Hegland, PE Project: Cook Lake Highlands Final Plat/PUD Plan Review Date: February 23rd , 2022 Exhibits: This Memorandum is based on a review of the following documents: 1. Cook Lake Highlands, ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey, Prepared by Sunde Land Surveying, dated March 2nd, 2020. 2. Cook Lake Highlands Plans, Prepared by Civil Site Group, dated January 11th, 2022. 3. Cook Lake Highlands Plat, Prepared by Civil Site group, no date provided. 4. Cook Lake Highlands SWPPP, Prepared by Civil Site Group, dated November 29th, 2021. 5. Comment Response Letter, Prepared by Civil Site Group, dated January 11th, 2022. Comments: General: 1. Consistent with the review process, a comment response letter shall be provided in response to the following comments provided in this Memorandum in which the applicant provides a written response to each item. 2. In addition to engineering related comments per these plans, the proposed plans are subject to addition planning, zoning, land-use, and other applicable codes of the City of Corcoran. 3. Final approval by the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission must be attained before any site grading or activity may commence. 4. For any site activity (demo, grading, utilities, etc.) no closures or restrictions of any kind shall be imposed upon the public use of County Road 10 without the County’s permission. Should any lane restrictions be necessary, the Contractor shall notify the County at least 48 hours in advance and provide a Traffic Control Plan. 5. An encroachment agreement shall be required for all site improvements or items placed within the City ROW or easements. 6. A portion of the runoff is routed to the SE of the site through the City of Maple Grove and treated within stormwater ponds within the City of Maple Grove. The city has begun preliminary conversations with the City of Maple Grove on the implementation of this approach. The City will need to negotiate a stormwater agreement with the City of Maple Grove. Both upfront and maintenance costs in the agreement shall be the responsibility of the developer. 7. The applicant will be relocating a met council access road to the lift station and associated easements. The applicant shall be responsible for meeting all Met Council requirements for the relocation of the access road and the agreements and easement vacations and new easement agreements shall be the responsibility of the applicant. February 23rd , 2022 Cook Lake Highlands Kevin Mattson Page 2 of 5 8. The turn lane and a portion of the site access shall be constructed as part of a City led project. A portion of the project may be paid for by the City of Maple Grove and Met Council. The applicant shall be responsible for all project costs which are not incurred by other agencies. 9. A shared access agreement will be required for the eastern access between the City of Corcoran, MCES, the developer and potentially the City of Maple Grove. Plat: 1. The applicant shall have all drainage and utility easements provided and shown and all platting requirements met per the City Code. Drainage and utility easements (5’ – 10’) shall be provided along property lines, as standard per City requirements. 2. Wetland buffer to be contained within D&U easement. Revise easement: a. Lot 12 Block 3 3. Verify with public safety if an access easement is necessary over the fire access lane. If required, entire access should be covered by an access easement. a. Emergency access road alignment, dimension, and construction materials shall be reviewed by met council Erosion Control/SWPPP 1. A SWPPP is provided in the applicants plan set. The NPDES construction stormwater permit shall be obtained prior to any site disturbance activities. 2. The city of Corcoran is an MS4 community. The city will perform periodic stormwater inspections onsite to periodically inspect that the responsible parties are following the site SWPPP requirements. Transportation 1. All 28’ roads shall be signed no parking on one side of the roadway with no parking signs required within all cul-de-sacs. Public safety to review final sign locations and comments will be provided. a. Add “no parking this side of street” signs to non-sidewalk side New St. b. No parking signs should be installed on both sides of 74th Ave. 2. Sidewalk on east side of New St to be 1’ off ROW. 3. Revise bituminous curb along emergency access to be concrete curb and gutter 4. Include pedestrian ramp crossing 74th Ave on west side of access to senior housing 5. Revise emergency access off 73rd st to allow fire truck to access without driving over radii. This may require adjusting access locations or may be accomplished with new truck turning movements. 6. Shift the emergency access road to the east where adjacent to the booster station. Site Plans 1. The existing and proposed drainage and utility easements shown shall be clearly labeled on all plan drawings. The wetland buffer zones shall also be clearly identified and labeled. a. Show D&U Easements on the grading plan sheets 2. Street lighting locations shall be reviewed by public safety additional comments to be provided. At a minimum street lighting should be added along 3. the south side of 74th Ave. February 23rd , 2022 Cook Lake Highlands Kevin Mattson Page 3 of 5 4. Show pond maintenance bench/access routes. Grading shall reflect these locations. Grading /Stormwater 1. Reference the City of Corcoran Stormwater Guidelines for Development Review for standards for stormwater systems and modeling. 2. Applicant shall ensure WCA permits are obtained before grading activities are allowed. 3. Provide P8 or a similar calculation to demonstrate that the site meets the total phosphorous and total suspended solids reduction standards for all treatment practices. 4. The wetland buffer zones and wetland buffer signage shall also be clearly identified and labeled. 5. All pedestrian ramps shall be ADA compliant and detailed designs shall be provided for all landings showing elevations in compliance with those requirements. o Provide intersection details 6. Label clearly on plans EOF’s for all areas where water will be collected including all low areas in roadways and greenspaces. 7. All drainage swales shall maintain a minimum of 2% slope and all slope should be 4:1 or flatter unless approved by the city engineer. o Public safety should review slopes along emergency access to confirm they are manageable with the emergency equipment. o Extend retaining wall along north side of emergency access on north property line. Grades exceed 3:1 at tie in point. o Revise grading around pond filtration basin 1C to be no greater than 4:1 o Revise grading in rear yards of lots 11, 12, 13 block 3. Slopes are shown as flat at 2.5:1 o Extend retaining wall to the south along west side of emergency access or revise grading to be no greater than 4:1 o Slopes along the south and east side of pond 1C are shown at 3:1. These are assumed to be a low maintenance seeding. 8. Revise common drainage swales or easements as noted below (to be verified when easements are shown, appear to be out of easement) o Revise drainage swales in rear yards of lots along the west property line to be within the D&U easement or provide additional easement o Revise drainage swale in rear yard of lot 17 block 3 to be within D&U easement or provide additional easement. o Revise drainage swale in rear yard of lots 10 and 11 block 3 to be located further north as to not drain to the northwest corner of the home on lot 11. Provide additional easement for drainage swale on lot 11 o Revise drainage swale between lots 12 and 13 to be within the D&U easement or provide additional easement 9. All walls higher than 4’ shall be designed by a certified engineer and the design and certification of those walls shall be provided to the city. o An encroachment agreement shall be required for all site improvements or items placed within the City ROW or easements. 10. Install storm sewer in rear yard of lots 1-10 for sump connections and underneath bituminous trail to drain to offsite wetland. 11. Install draintile per City Detail STR-4 February 23rd , 2022 Cook Lake Highlands Kevin Mattson Page 4 of 5 12. Sumps will be required in all storm structures with drops in of 18” or greater as well as the last accessible structures prior to stormwater basins. o CBMH-104 o CB-12 o CB-22 o CBMH-33, flatten grade to MH-32 (Install tiered drop, add additional manhole to flatten grades. Extend rip rap to normal water level for energy dissipation 13. No profiles shown for private storm sewer. Show profiles for all storm sewer 14. North of the single-family homes there is a significantly eroded slope (gully) which could be a risk to downstream water quality. This area should be restored as part of the development. Coordinate with City a construction plan for the eroded gully. Debris shall be removed from gully and area restored to protect slopes from further erosion. 15. Bituminous trail along 74th Ave adjacent to Filtration Basin 1c shall have area graded on back side large enough for small utility installation and as a safety buffer. Area shall be a maximum of 10:1 slopes. 16. Elevate berm of Filtration Basin 1C to 968.95 or higher to maintain a 1’ deep EOF. 17. TRM proposed for pond EOFs is no longer specified with “Category 4”. Please reference updated MnDOT categories for TRM. 18. Draintile should have a minimum grade of 0.5% to prevent clogging. 19. Provide cleanout at all draintile/underdrain bends and upstream of connections. 20. Make HWL label legible for FILT Basin 1C. 21. Revise model or plans to correspond. a) The OS detail 2 shows outlet at invert of 957.42. Current model shows invert at 956.0. If model is revised, submit updated model for further review. b) Set incoming drain tile to allow 0.5 feet between the bottom of the structure and the outlet invert. 22. Provide routing of filtration to the draintile prior to discharge to structure in HydroCAD. 23. Provide reach summaries for each individual collective drainage DA-1 through DA-4 area in the Hydrocad model. Watermain/Sanitary Sewer 1. MCES utilities will be impacted by the proposal. Applicant shall get written approval form MCES that all work and relocation activities are approved by them. 2. Gas, electric, and other private and public utilities are located adjacent and/or on the property. Preservation of existing easements and coordination with all public and private utilities must be conducted prior to commencing any grading or construction. 3. Generally valves shall be located at all intersection as one less valve than the number of legs. Valves should typically be located out from the end radius points unless specific circumstances don’t allow. a. Intersection of 74th Ave and New St. relocate to end rad on New St b. Intersection of 74th Ave and senior center access relocate to north side of street, valve to remain within ROW. c. Intersection of 74th Ave and 73rd Ave. d. 74th Ave STA 21+31 relocate valve to be on opposite side of street. February 23rd , 2022 Cook Lake Highlands Kevin Mattson Page 5 of 5 4. Show removal of existing temporary hydrant at connection to watermain on west end of 74th Avenue 5. Place additional hydrant at high point near intersection of 74th Ave and New St. a. Check spacing to see if we can eliminate west hydrant 6. Hydrant spacing to be reviewed by public safety and additional comments will be provided. 7. Relocate hydrant and gate valve at the entrance to be on the backside of the proposed sidewalk. 8. Revise location of hydrant at memory care to be within the 74th ROW. 9. Provide 18” minimum vertical separation between watermain and storm sewer pipe/structures. Revise watermain or storm sewer accordingly a. 74th Ave (Approximate stationing) i. Verify separation at storm structure STA 10+90 ii. STA 15+40 iii. STA 17+40 iv. STA 20+20 v. STA 21+70 vi. STA 23+00 vii. Verify separation at storm crossing STA 23+70 b. New St. i. STA 10+60 ii. Verify separation at storm structure STA 12+60 iii. STA 13+65 10. Provide stationing on sanitary/water plan view sheet C4.4 to verify any potential conflicts. 11. Provide velocities for the following sanitary sewer runs (additional drops may be required if velocities are above maximum per ten states standards) a. Sanitary MH 1 to Sanitary MH 2 b. Sanitary MH 2 to Sanitary MH 21 c. Sanitary MH 3 to Sanitary MH 4 12. Show storm sewer crossing in profile between Sanitary MH-2 to MH-3 13. Revise west invert in Sanitary MH 2 to be 0.10’ higher than downstream invert or install drop. This may be impacted by maximum velocity requirements commented on previously. 14. Revise west invert in Sanitary MH 3 to be 0.10’ higher than downstream invert or install drop. This may be impacted by maximum velocity requirements commented on previously. 15. All utilities within shared corridor with Met Council and City of Maple Grove will require additional review, coordination and approval with those entities. End of Comments Cook Lake Highlands Project Narrative 6.8.2021 Amended 1.1.21 Final Plat and PUD The following changes have been made to the PUD and Preliminary Plat for the PUD and Final Plat Application. 1. The unit count has been reduced by seven units. 154 units to 147 units • Applewood Senior Co-op 102 reduced to 100 units. • Memory Care 32 units reduced to 27 units. • Single Family, per the City Council reduced from 20 units to 19 unit 2. Title revealed a gap parcel along the property line which will be added to our Final Plat adding 6,624 square feet of land. 3. Trek Development and The Metropolitan Council have drafted an Easement Agreement for the shared use and maintenance of the Fire-lane and L-80 Lift Station access. The Metropolitan Council is currently reviewing the Agreement. 4. NHA has revised their sign plan and would like to propose two building/wall signs, a monument sign on the north side of the property, and a Sun Logo on the front (west) wall of the building. • New Horizon Academy is requesting two building (wall) signs, one on the south and one on the east wall of the building, one sun logo sign on the west side of the building, and one freestanding monument sign on the north side of the property to help create a more established presence in the growing Corcoran community. The signage requested would not only enhance the school’s professional appearance in the community, but also build confidence for potential families who are looking for a high-quality education for their young children. With each building sign being approximately 30 square feet and a proposed sun logo sign being much less than that, the total signage area is well under allotted signage area requirements. The proposed signage would increase the required awareness and visibility from all access points that is needed by New Horizon, making the school much easier to locate no matter what direction a family is originating from. If families do not know we exist, or they cannot find us easily, they will certainly enroll elsewhere. Even if they are not interested in enrolling right now, the proposed signs would increase the chance they will remember us for when they or someone they know may require our services in the future. It is no surprise that this also directly affects enrollment and therefore business dollars. In fact, the Out of Home Advertising Association of America, Inc. proves with research that signage increases business by 15%. As we enter the Corcoran community with this signage, we can ensure that our families will be able to locate us more easily, feel comfortable stopping in to learn more about us, and ultimately trusting their children with us. 5. New Horizon has revised the building elevations to more closely reflect the styles depicted in the design guidelines, more particular to the Prairie Style, focusing on extended overhangs, lower hipped roofs, horizontal banding and pilasters. 6. The Rivers of Life Memory Care has revised their sign request to include a 40 square foot monument sign located on the South side of the building site/lot, and a 36 square foot entrance monument sign at the entrance of the site on 74th street. The memory care Prairie Style roofline is designed with a very deep soffit. This Prairie Style design feature does not leave room on the building for a sign band. In exchange for building signage the Memory Care is asking for two site monument signs at the entrance of the building and on the Northeast corner of the lot. We are requesting PUD flexibility for Cook Lake Highlands Signage Plan for reasons we believe are consistent with CHAPTER 84 of the Corcoran City Code related to Temporary Sign and Sign Permit Provisions. We are requesting PUD flexibility for the following: • Three Temporary Construction/”Coming Soon” signs ( Memory Care, Child Care and Applewood) • Memory Care – One additional Monument Sign, one 40 square foot sign to be located on the northeast corner of the Memory Care lot within the setback, and one sign to be located at the entrance of the Memory Care on 74th. • New Horizon Academy is requesting two wall signs with one on the south wall and one on the east wall, and a Sun Logo over the entrance on the west wall. The area of the front (west) wall of the building is 132’ x 17’ = 2,244 square feet. Total signage proposed with “Sun” is 91 square feet or 4% of front wall area. Chapter 84 of the City Sign Code states that the intent of the ordinance is to establish a comprehensive system of sign control that achieves balance … Our request for PUD flexibility is consistent with • Encouraging the effective use of signs as a means of communication for businesses, organizations, and individuals in the City of Corcoran - The permanent signs placed on the south side of the Memory Care lot, adjacent to CSAH 10 will most effectively (currently 6100 traffic count trips) and safely communicate its presence. • Our request for signage visible from CSAH 10 will help provide for adequate way- finding in the community, thus reducing traffic congestion and confusion, increasing traffic safety. • Helps provide adequate means for business and housing identification, advertising and communication. • The Memory Care monument sign and the Childcare wall signage along and visible from CSAH 10 is consistent with each building design and architecture which has been designed to align with the City’s design and architectural standards. preventing any concern of unsightly and chaotic signage which may have a blighting influence on the city. The proposed signs are not excessive in size and number, eliminating the probability that they obscure one another to the detriment of the economic and social well-being of the city. We are requesting one permanent monument sign along CSAH 10 and not proposing to install an entrance monument sign at the entrance/ intersection. • The sign plan considers the safety and welfare of the residents living, and traveling to and from the neighborhood, minimizing hazards to vehicles and pedestrians. • Directly across the CSAH 10 the property is guided Mixed Use and is currently being used as a public park with banner signage – this adjacent /neighboring use may eliminate possible concerns of any adverse effects our signage may have on nearby public and/or private property. • Our PUD plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Thank you for your time and consideration. Please contact me to discuss any questions or concerns you may have. Sincerely, Elisabeth (Beth) Hustad Trek Real Estate and Development UNIT19UNIT17UNIT23UNIT21UNIT27UNIT25UNIT20UNIT24UNIT22UNIT28UNIT26UNIT18UNIT4UNIT6UNIT7UNIT8UNIT1UNIT5UNIT9UNIT10UNIT11CONFERENCEUNIT16JAN.STORAGENURSECOVEREDPORCHSPRINKLERSMECHSPAKITCHENSUNROOMELECUNIT15UNIT14UNIT13UNIT12OFFICEKITCHENSTORAGEUNIT228'-7 7/8"18'-0"23'-6 7/8"25'-0"9'-0"15'-11 1/8"26'-0"STORAGESTORAGELAUNDRYLAUNDRYI.T.UNIT325'-7 25/32"14'-7 3/8"8'-5 3/4"9'-0"16'-0"12'-6 1/4"16'-2"EAST DININGCORRIDORCORRIDORLIVING AREACORRIDORCORRIDORLIVING AREAMAIN DININGLIVING AREARECEPTIONVESTIBULENORTH DININGCORRIDORACTIVITY DESKLIVING AREACORRIDORCORRIDOR LIVING AREATLTTLTTOILETSTAFFSTOR.STORAGE6'-6"56789SHORELANDOVERLAY LINELOT 11.88 ACLOT 14.65 ACNEW ROW LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINENEW ROW LINEFEMA FLOODPLAIN LINE20'X30' EMERGENCYOVERFLOW. INSTALL MNDOTCATEGORY 4 TURFREINFORCEMENT MAT ANDMNDOT CATEGORY 4 EROSIONCONTROL BLANKET.TURF REINFORCEMENT MATSHALL BE SOIL FILLEDWETLAND BUFFERLOT 22.14 ACPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPOSEDSENIOR(102 UNITS)25' BLDG. STBK30' BLDG. STBK2 25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK30' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK100' BLDG. STBK30' BLDG. STBK 30' BLDG. STBK 25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK100' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK3 PONDPONDWETLANDWETLANDWETLAND4 5 6 7 8 9 101MEMORY CARE(24,349 SF)PROPOSEDDAYCARE(13,298 SF)NOPARKINGBSTR.PUMPSTATION11BLOCK 1BLOCK 2BLOCK 1 BLOCK 3 BLOCK 3PONDGHOST PLATGHOST PLATD&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINED&UEASEMENTLINENOPARKINGOTL. B0.06 ACOTL. A0.32 ACOTL. C8.37 ACOTL. C8.37 ACOTL. D0.07 ACPOND/ FILTRATIONBASIN 1D30' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBKOTL. E0.009 ACNOPARKINGCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSD&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENT LINE25' BLDG. STBKLOT 20.31 AC25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK1213141516171918OTL. F1.25 ACBUFFER INFO25' AVG. BUFFER AREA=30,939 SFPROP. BUFFER AREA= 33,659 SFNOPARKINGNOPARKINGFIRE TRUCK TURNINGMOVEMENTFIRE TRUCK TURNINGMOVEMENTCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202048776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.11/29/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.0SITE PLANOVERALL6/18/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .. .. .. .SITE AREA TABLE:SITE PLAN LEGEND:TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGSSIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED.HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGNNP = NO PARKING FIRE LANEST = STOPCP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLY01" = 80'-0"80'-0"40'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPRIVATE CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PADOR WALK) SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FORAGGREGATE BASE & CONCRETE DEPTHS, SEEDETAIL.PROPERTY LINECURB AND GUTTER-SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUTGUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLANBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. SEE GEOTECHNICALREPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE & WEAR COURSEDEPTH, SEE DEATIL.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSTOCITY OF CORCORAN NOTES:1.CONTRACTOR SHALL GET A SIGN PERMIT FROM THE CITY OF CORCORAN PRIORTO THE CONSTRUCTION OF ANY SIGNS.CITY CONCRETE SIDEWALK PAVEMENT. SEE DETAIL.1.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND LAYOUT OF ALL SITE ELEMENTS PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,LOCATIONS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES, EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, UTILITIES, BUILDINGS AND PAVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR ISRESPONSIBLE FOR FINAL LOCATIONS OF ALL ELEMENTS FOR THE SITE. ANY REVISIONS REQUIRED AFTER COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION, DUE TOLOCATIONAL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE CORRECTED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO OWNER. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THEENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS. STAKE LAYOUT FOR APPROVAL.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING A RIGHT-OF-WAY AND STREET OPENING PERMIT.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED IN THE GEO TECHNICAL REPORT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY COORDINATES AND LOCATION DIMENSIONS OF THE BUILDING AND STAKE FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE OWNERSREPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF FOOTING MATERIALS.5.LOCATIONS OF STRUCTURES, ROADWAY PAVEMENTS, CURBS AND GUTTERS, BOLLARDS, AND WALKS ARE APPROXIMATE AND SHALL BE STAKED IN THEFIELD, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.6.CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FACE OF CURB. BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE FOUNDATION. LOCATION OF BUILDING IS TOBUILDING FOUNDATION AND SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.7.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OR SAMPLES AS SPECIFIED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTPRIOR TO FABRICATION FOR ALL PREFABRICATED SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING, FURNISHINGS,PAVEMENTS, WALLS, RAILINGS, BENCHES, FLAGPOLES, LANDING PADS FOR CURB RAMPS, AND LIGHT AND POLES. THE OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TOREJECT INSTALLED MATERIALS NOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.8.PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH TRUNCATED DOME LANDING AREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH A.D.A. REQUIREMENTS-SEE DETAIL.9.CROSSWALK STRIPING SHALL BE 24" WIDE WHITE PAINTED LINE, SPACED 48" ON CENTER PERPENDICULAR TO THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. WIDTH OFCROSSWALK SHALL BE 5' WIDE. ALL OTHER PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE WHITE IN COLOR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED OR REQUIRED BY ADA OR LOCALGOVERNING BODIES.10.SEE SITE PLAN FOR CURB AND GUTTER TYPE. TAPER BETWEEN CURB TYPES-SEE DETAIL.11.ALL CURB RADII ARE MINIMUM 3' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, NUMBERS, AREAS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO SITE IMPROVEMENTS.13.FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS.14.PARKING IS TO BE SET PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR TO EXISTING BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.15.ALL PARKING LOT PAINT STRIPPING TO BE WHITE, 4" WIDE TYP.16.BITUMINOUS PAVING TO BE "LIGHT DUTY" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEE DETAIL SHEETS FOR PAVEMENT SECTIONS.17.ALL TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN ARE TO BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE WITH A CONSTRUCTION FENCE AT THE DRIP LINE. SEE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTS.18.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITYLOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.SITE LAYOUT NOTES:OPERATIONAL NOTES:BLOCK 1, LOT 1:SNOW REMOVAL: ALL SNOW SHALL BE MOVED TO LANDSCAPED AREA ORHAULED OFFSITETRASH REMOVAL:TRASH REMOVAL SHALL OCCUR: IN TRASH ENCLOSURE.DELIVERIES:DELIVERIES SHALL OCCUR FRONT DOOR.BLOCK 1, LOT 2:SNOW REMOVAL: ALL SNOW SHALL BE MOVED TO LANDSCAPED AREA ORHAULED OFFSITETRASH REMOVAL:TRASH REMOVAL SHALL OCCUR: IN TRASH ENCLOSURE.DELIVERIES:DELIVERIES SHALL OCCUR FRONT DOOR.BLOCK 2, LOT 1:SNOW REMOVAL: ALL SNOW SHALL BE MOVED TO LANDSCAPED AREA ORHAULED OFFSITETRASH REMOVAL:TRASH REMOVAL SHALL OCCUR: IN BUILDING.DELIVERIES:DELIVERIES SHALL OCCUR FRONT DOOR.BLOCK 2, LOT 2:SNOW REMOVAL: ALL SNOW SHALL BE MOVED TO LANDSCAPED AREA ORHAULED OFFSITETRASH REMOVAL:TRASH REMOVAL SHALL OCCUR: IN BUILDING.DELIVERIES:DELIVERIES SHALL OCCUR FRONT DOOR.Zoning:Existing Zoning: RMF-2 ( Mixed Residential District, 8-10 u/a)2040 Land Use Guide:Mixed ResidentialProposed Zoning/ Land Use:PUDOverall Net Density:Max=198 units/lots (10 u/a) - Met CouncilMin=158 units/lots (8 u/a) - Met CouncilMax=166 units/lots (10 u/a) - City of CorcoranMin=133 units/lots (8 u/a) - City of CorcoranBlock 1, Lot 1, Kid Day Care: 0 unitsBlock 1, Lot 2, Memory Care: 32 unitsBlock 2, Lot 1, Senior Living:102 units Block 3, Villa SF lots 50' x 125' min.: 20 lotsTOTAL: 154 units/lotsTYPICAL VILLA HOMESINGLE FAMILY LOT INFORMATION:LOT NUMBERPAD SIZELOT LINED & U EASEMENT10' FRONT & REAR5' SIDE (TYP.)BUILDING SETBACK20' FRONT30' REAR5' SIDES/ 25' SIDE ROW40'x70'PADROW LINECURB LINEMINIMUM LOT SIZE:6,750 SFSHORELAND OVERLAY LINEPROPOSED WETLAND BUFFER AREA UNIT19UNIT17UNIT23UNIT21UNIT27UNIT25UNIT20UNIT24UNIT22UNIT28UNIT26UNIT18UNIT4UNIT6UNIT7UNIT8UNIT1UNIT5UNIT9UNIT10UNIT11CONFERENCEUNIT16JAN.STORAGENURSECOVEREDPORCHSPRINKLERSMECHSPAKITCHENSUNROOMELECUNIT15UNIT14UNIT13UNIT12OFFICEKITCHENSTORAGEUNIT228'-7 7/8"18'-0"23'-6 7/8"25'-0"9'-0"15'-11 1/8"26'-0"STORAGESTORAGELAUNDRYLAUNDRYI.T.UNIT325'-7 25/32"14'-7 3/8"8'-5 3/4"9'-0"16'-0"12'-6 1/4"16'-2"EAST DININGCORRIDORCORRIDORLIVING AREACORRIDORCORRIDORLIVING AREAMAIN DININGLIVING AREARECEPTIONVESTIBULENORTH DININGCORRIDORACTIVITY DESKLIVING AREACORRIDORCORRIDOR LIVING AREATLTTLTTOILETSTAFFSTOR.STORAGE6'-6"R300'60'28'F-F R1 5 '31'R184.5'18'9'26'R5'26'NEW ROW LINE7'75.8'151' PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE SURMOUNTABLECONC. CURB,TYPNEW ROW LINE26'9'18'R5'R2 5 0 'R250'R40'12'2'12'12' 2'12'12'14'60' 28' F-F R300'R40'R4 0 '2'12'12' 2'12'12'14'25' BLDG. STBK25' PKG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK30' BLDG. STBK50' PKG. STBK10' PKG. STBK25' PKG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK25' PKG. STBK100' BLDG. STBK10' PKG. STBK30' BLDG. STBK30' BLDG. STBK50' PKG. STBK100' BLDG. STBKMEMORY CARE(24,349 SF)PROPOSEDDAYCARE(13,298 SF)NOPARKINGBSTR.PUMPSTATIONBLOCK 1BLOCK 2BLOCK 1GHOST PLAT9'18' 26'ST10' PKG. STBK 26'D&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENT LINE12'5' CURBTRANSITION (TYP.)5' CURBTRANSITION (TYP.)STRIPING, YELLOW(TYP.)R20'11'5'7'26'26'R5'R6'R15'5'26'R15'STRIPING (TYP.)STRIPING (TYP.)STRIPING (TYP.)HEAVY DUTY BIT. PVMT. MATCHEXISTING PAVEMENT SECTION (TYP.)HEAVY DUTY BIT. PVMT.MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENTSECTION (TYP.)2' GRAVEL SHOULDER (TYP.)2' GRAVELSHOULDER (TYP.)B618 CONC.CURB, TYPB618 CONC.CURB, TYPSTRIPING (TYP.)EXISTING STRIPING(TYP.)POND/ FILTRATIONBASIN 1D6' CURB TAPER (TYP.)NOPARKINGCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSD&U EASEMENTLINE74TH AVENUED&U EASEMENTLINE73RD AVENUE25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK8,922 SF8,550 SFOTL. F1.25 ACR20'R20'10'X20' EMERGENCYOVERFLOW. INSTALL MNDOTCATEGORY 4 TURFREINFORCEMENT MAT ANDMNDOT CATEGORY 4 EROSIONCONTROL BLANKET.TURF REINFORCEMENT MATSHALL BE SOIL FILLEDNOPARKINGR3'33'16'8'C.S.A.H.NO. 10R12'R45'R1'R5'R3'R52'21'6'9'R61'141743 PARKING STALLS 87321 PARKING STALLSLOT LINEBIT. PVMT.,TYPB612C&G,TYP.PVMT. STRIPINGTYP.CONC. WALK, TYPACCESSIBLE PARKINGSPACE, INCL.SIGNAGE, STRIPINGAND RAMPS32 SF MONUMENTSIGN. COORD.W/ARCH'L.ROW LINEROW LINELOT LINERIBBONCURB6' TALLORNAMENTALFENCEB618 CONC.CURB, TYPB618 CONC.CURB, TYPROW LINECROSSWALKSTRIPING, TYPSTHCPVMT.STRIPINGTYP.OTL. A0.32 AC8' BIT. TRAIL, TYP93FIRE LANETURN AROUND32 SF MONUMENTSIGN. COORD.W/ARCH'L.STB612 C&G, TYP.ACCESS EASEMENTLINECONC. WALK,TYPRIBBON CURB7' CONC.WALK, TYPD&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINEPED. RAMP PERMNDOT (TYP.)STREETLIGHT (TYP.)10' CURBTRANSITION (TYP.)STRIPING, YELLOW(TYP.)PED. RAMP(TYP.)STREETLIGHT (TYP.)STREETLIGHT (TYP.)CONC. WALK,TYP6' TALL ORNAMENTALFENCE4' TALL ORNAMENTAL FENCESURMOUNTABLECONC. CURB, TYPGATEGATEGATELOT 11.88 ACLOT 22.14 ACLOT LINE 3PLAYGROUNDAREATRASH ENCLOSUREAREA, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSSTREET LIGHT (TYP.)STREET LIGHT (TYP.)ACCESSIBLE ROUTEARROW. DO NOT PAINT,FOR CODE REVIEWONLY, TYP.ACCESSIBLE PARKINGSPACE, INCL. SIGNAGE,STRIPING AND RAMPS,TYP.HCHCDEVELOPMENTSIGN5' CONC.WALK, TYP5' CONC.WALK, TYP8' BIT. TRAIL,TYP8' BIT. TRAIL,TYP8' BIT. TRAIL,TYPRET. WALLTRASH ENCLOSURE AREA, SEEARCH'L PLANS FOR DETAILS22275 SURFACEPARKING STALLSB612 C&G, TYP.32 SF MONUMENTSIGN. COORD.W/ARCH'L.STROW LINEROW LINE20' WIDE BIT. FIRE LANEBOOSTER STATIONBY CITY.7LOT LINEB612 C&G, TYP.CONC.WALK,TYPLOT 14.65 ACACCESSIBLE RAMP (TYP.)3' CURB TAPER (TYP.)MOD. BLOCKRETAINING WALLAND RAILING.STREET LIGHT (TYP.)6" SHOE FORMEDBITUMINOUS CURB,PER CITY DETAIL, TYP.LOT LINELOT 20.31 AC260'X13' BOCCECOURTNPNPNPNPGENERATOR ANDTRANSFORMER CONC. PAD,SEE ELECTRICAL PLANSCONC. STOOPCOVEREDPORCHPED RAMP,TYP.CONC. WALK,TYP3 COMPACT STALLSHCCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATE DESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202048776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.11/29/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.1SITE PLAN SE. .. .. .. .. .. .01" = 40'-0"40'-0"20'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRSITE PLAN LEGEND:TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGSSIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED.HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGNNP = NO PARKING FIRE LANEST = STOPCP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLYPRIVATE CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PADOR WALK) SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FORAGGREGATE BASE & CONCRETE DEPTHS, SEEDETAIL.PROPERTY LINECURB AND GUTTER-SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUTGUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLANBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. SEE GEOTECHNICALREPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE & WEAR COURSEDEPTH, SEE DEATIL.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSTOCITY CONCRETE SIDEWALK PAVEMENT. SEE DETAIL.SHORELAND OVERLAY LINEPROPOSED WETLAND BUFFER AREA UNIT20UNIT24UNIT22UNIT28UNIT26UNIT18UNIT4UNIT6UNIT7UNIT8UNIT1UNIT5UNIT9UNIT10UNIT11CONFERENCEUNIT16STORAGENURSEKITCHENELECOFFICEKITCHENSTORAGEUNIT2LAUNDRYI.T.UNIT325'-7 25/32"14'-7 3/8"8'-5 3/4"9'-0"16'-0"12'-6 1/4"16'-2"MAIN DININGLIVING AREARECEPTIONVESTIBULENORTH DININGCORRIDORACTIVITY DESKLIVING AREACORRIDORCORRIDOR LIVING AREATLTTOILETSTAFFSTOR.STORAGE6'-6"56789R300'60'28' F-F R30'R94.1 'R1 5 '31'R184.5'18'9'26'R5'26'7'75.8'18'9'26'20'20'PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE SURMOUNTABLECONC. CURB,TYP26'9'18'R5'OVERFLOW. INSTALL MNDOTREINFORCEMENT MAT ANDMNDOT CATEGORY 4 EROSIONTURF REINFORCEMENT MATWETLAND BUFFER SIGN (13 TOTAL),COORDINATE FINAL LOCATION W/ CITY/WATERSHED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION,TYP. SIGNS TO BE PURCHASED FROMCITY/ WATERSHED.WETLAND BUFFERR2 5 0 ' 60' 28' F-F R300'WETLAND LINEBUFFER LINEPROPOSEDSENIOR(102 UNITS)25' BLDG. STBK25' PKG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK30' BLDG. STBK10' PKG. STBK25' PKG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK25' PKG. STBK10' PKG. STBK 25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBKMEMORY CARE(24,349 SF)NOPARKINGBSTR.PUMPSTATION10' PKG. STBKOHW1111,541 SFBLOCK 2GHOST PLAT26'D&U EASEMENTLINED&UEASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENT LINER20' 5'NOPARKING10' PKG. STBK9'26'26'20'R5'R12'R12'R5'R3'R5'R6'R15'R5'R25' R21'R6'R6 ' R 1 5 'R15'R3'R3'R5'7' 5'5'26'26'26'R15'R35'R100'R55'WETLAND LINEBUFFER LINESURMOUNTABLECONC. CURB,TYPROW LINEFEMA LINESTREETLIGHT (TYP.)6' CURB TAPER (TYP.)NOPARKINGCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSD&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINE74TH AVENUED&U EASEMENTLINE73RD AVENUED&U EASEMENT LINE25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK1250'x65'PAD1340'x70'PAD1440'x70'PAD1540'x70'PAD1640'x70'PAD7,199 SF8,922 SF8,550 SF7,153 SF6,606 SF 11,781 SF 14,714 SFFILTRATIONBASIN 1COTL. F1.25 AC50'x65'PADBUFFER INFO25' AVG. BUFFER AREA=30,939 SFPROP. BUFFER AREA= 33,659 SF5' ROAD SETBACKFROM BUFFER15' STRUCTURESETBACK FROM BUFFERR20'R20'22'TYP.54.4'56.1'74.2'62.2'56.5'15'15'26.5' 25'10'X30' EMERGENCYOVERFLOW. INSTALL MNDOTCATEGORY 4 TURFREINFORCEMENT MAT ANDMNDOT CATEGORY 4 EROSIONCONTROL BLANKET.TURF REINFORCEMENT MATSHALL BE SOIL FILLEDR50'PED. RAMP(TYP.)NOPARKINGNOPARKINGR3'33'16'8'EMERGENCY OVERFLOW.INSTALL MNDOT CATEGORY 4TURF REINFORCEMENT MATAND MNDOT CATEGORY 4EROSION CONTROL BLANKET.TURF REINFORCEMENT MATSHALL BE SOIL FILLEDR12'R45'R1'R5'R3'R52'21'6'9'R61'1443 PARKING STALLS 87321 PARKING STALLSCONC. WALK, TYPACCESSIBLE PARKINGSPACE, INCL.SIGNAGE, STRIPINGAND RAMPS32 SF MONUMENTSIGN. COORD.W/ARCH'L.ROW LINEROW LINELOT LINERIBBONCURB6' TALLB618 CONC.CURB, TYPB618 CONC.CURB, TYPCROSSWALKSTHCOTL. A0.32 AC8' BIT. TRAIL, TYP332 SF MONUMENTSIGN. COORD.W/ARCH'L.STB612 C&G, TYP.CONC. WALK,TYPRIBBON CURB7' CONC.WALK, TYPD&U EASEMENTLINESTREETLIGHT (TYP.)10' CURBTRANSITION (TYP.)STRIPING, YELLOW(TYP.)PED. RAMP(TYP.)STREETLIGHT (TYP.)STREETLIGHT (TYP.)4' TALL ORNAMENTAL FENCESURMOUNTABLECONC. CURB, TYPGATELOT LINE 3TRASH ENCLOSUREAREA, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSSTREET LIGHT (TYP.)ACCESSIBLE PARKINGSPACE, INCL. SIGNAGE,STRIPING AND RAMPS,HC5' CONC.WALK, TYP5' CONC.WALK, TYP8' BIT. TRAIL,TYP8' BIT. TRAIL,TYPRET. WALLTRASH ENCLOSURE AREA, SEEARCH'L PLANS FOR DETAILS20' WIDE BIT. FIRE LANE222ACCESSIBLE ROUTEARROW. DO NOTPAINT, FOR CODEREVIEW ONLY, TYP.75 SURFACEPARKING STALLSBIT. PVMT.,TYPB612 C&G, TYP.PVMT. STRIPINGTYP.CONC. WALK, TYPACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE,INCL. SIGNAGE, STRIPING ANDRAMPS, TYP.32 SF MONUMENTSIGN. COORD.W/ARCH'L.LOT LINERIBBON CURB150' STBK. LINEFROM OHWSTLOT LINEWETLAND LINEBUFFER LINEWETLAND LINEBUFFER LINEROW LINEROW LINE20' WIDE BIT. FIRE LANEWATERLINE(AT TIME OF SURVEY)FEMA LINEBOOSTER STATIONBY CITY.781310210GARDENLOT LINE B612 C&G, TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.CONC.WALK,TYPCONCRETEPATIOBIT. PVMT. MATCH CURRENTDRIVE LOCATION.FIRE LANE SIGN,TYP.COORD. W/FIREMARSHALLOT 14.65 ACACCESSIBLE RAMP (TYP.)3' CURB TAPER (TYP.)MOD. BLOCKRETAINING WALLAND RAILING.4' TALL ORNAMENTAL FENCE &GUARDRAIL, TYPRETAININGWALL, TYPSTREET LIGHT (TYP.)STREET LIGHT (TYP.)HCHCRETAININGWALL6" SHOE FORMEDBITUMINOUSCURB PER CITYDETAIL, TYP.6" SHOE FORMEDBITUMINOUS CURB,PER CITY DETAIL, TYP.INSTALLSALVAGEDGUARD RAILLOT LINELOT 20.31 AC260'X13' BOCCECOURTRETAININGWALL5' ROAD SETBACKFROM BUFFER15' STRUCTURESETBACK FROM BUFFER5' ROAD SETBACKFROM BUFFER15' STRUCTURESETBACK FROM BUFFERWETLAND BUFFER SIGN (18 TOTAL),COORDINATE FINAL LOCATION W/ CITYPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, TYP. SIGNSTO BE PURCHASED FROM CITY.WETLAND BUFFER SIGN (3 TOTAL),COORDINATE FINAL LOCATION W/ CITYPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, TYP. SIGNSTO BE PURCHASED FROM CITY.NPNPNPNPNPNPNPHCGENERATOR ANDTRANSFORMER CONC. PAD,SEE ELECTRICAL PLANSCONC. STOOP3 COMPACT STALLSHCCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATE DESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202048776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.11/29/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.2SITE PLAN NE. .. .. .. .. .. .01" = 40'-0"40'-0"20'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRSITE PLAN LEGEND:TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGSSIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED.HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGNNP = NO PARKING FIRE LANEST = STOPCP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLYPRIVATE CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PADOR WALK) SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FORAGGREGATE BASE & CONCRETE DEPTHS, SEEDETAIL.PROPERTY LINECURB AND GUTTER-SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUTGUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLANLIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. SEEGEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE &WEAR COURSE DEPTH, SEE DEATIL.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSTOCITY CONCRETE SIDEWALK PAVEMENT. SEE DETAIL.PROPOSED WETLAND BUFFER AREA UNIT4UNIT6UNIT7UNIT8UNIT1UNIT5UNIT9UNIT10UNIT11CONFERENCEJAN.STORAGENURSECOVEREDPORCHSPRINKLERSMECHSPAKITCHENSUNROOMUNIT13UNIT12OFFICEKITCHENSTORAGEUNIT228'-7 7/8"LAUNDRY I.T.UNIT325'-7 25/32"14'-7 3/8"8'-5 3/4"9'-0"16'-0"12'-6 1/4"16'-2"EAST DININGMAIN DININGLIVING AREARECEPTIONVESTIBULENORTH DININGCORRIDORACTIVITY DESKLIVING AREACORRIDOR CORRIDOR LIVING AREATLTTOILETSTAFFSTOR.STORAGESHORELANDOVERLAY LINE60'28'F-FROW L INE PRO P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE R300'R300'ROW L INE PRO P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEWETLAND LINEBUFFER LINEOTL. B0.06 AC74TH AVENUE 30' B L D G . S T B K 40'x70' PAD 2 30' BLDG. STBK50' PKG. STBK10' PKG. STBK100' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG . STBK25' PKG . STBK25' BLDG. STBK60'30'B-B2 5 ' B L D G . S T B K 40'x 7 0 ' PAD 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40'x70' PAD 1 MEMORY CARE(24,349 SF)40'x 7 0 ' PAD 40'x 7 0 ' PAD 40'x 7 0 ' PAD 40'x 7 0 ' PAD 40'x 7 0 ' PAD 40'x 7 0 ' PAD BLOCK 1 BLOCK 3 PONDGHOST PLATGHOST PLATROW L I N E D&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINED&UEASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENT LINER20.7'R100'STSURMOUNTABLECONC. CURB,TYPR O W L I N E ROW LINEROW L I N EROW LINEPOND/ FILTRATIONBASIN 1D30' B L D G . S T B K 25' B L D G . S T B K STREETLIGHT (TYP.)6' CURB TAPER (TYP.)CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITS1250'x65'PAD1340'x70'PAD1440'x70'PAD1540'x70'PAD1640'x70'PAD1740'x70'PAD1940'x70'PAD1840'x70'PADR100'R150'FILTRATIONBASIN 1CP A D 22' TYP. 22' TYP. 50' 50' 5 4 . 4 '74.2'62.2' 56. 5 ' 15' R50'5'1'9.3'PED. RAMP(TYP.)AMENDED SOILSAREA, SEEDETAILSN E W S T .C.S.A.H.4.1'6'ROW LINELOT LINEB618 CONC.CURB, TYPB618 CONC.CURB, TYPOTL. A0.32 ACROW L INE 8' BIT. TRAIL, TYP8' BIT. TRAIL, TYPB612 C&G, TYP.CONNECT INTOEXISTING TRAIL, TYPCONC. WALK,TYPRIBBON CURBSTRIPING, YELLOW(TYP.)PED. RAMP(TYP.)STRIPING, YELLOW (TYP.)CROSSWALKSTRIPING, TYPSTREETLIGHT (TYP.)CONNECT INTOEXISTING ROAD, TYPSURMOUNTABLECONC. CURB, TYPLOT 22.14 AC3MOD. BLOCK RETAININGWALL WITH NO FINESCONCRETE. (MAX DEPTH IS36" FROM FACE)TRASH ENCLOSUREAREA, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSSTREET LIGHT (TYP.)5' CONC.WALK, TYPOTL. E0.009 ACGENERATOR ANDTRANSFORMER CONC. PAD,SEE ELECTRICAL PLANSCONC. STOOPCOVEREDPORCH3 COMPACT STALLSCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATE DESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202048776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.11/29/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.3SITE PLAN W. .. .. .. .. .. .01" = 40'-0"40'-0"20'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRSITE PLAN LEGEND:TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGSSIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED.HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGNNP = NO PARKING FIRE LANEST = STOPCP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLYPRIVATE CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PADOR WALK) SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FORAGGREGATE BASE & CONCRETE DEPTHS, SEEDETAIL.PROPERTY LINECURB AND GUTTER-SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUTGUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLANBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. SEE GEOTECHNICALREPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE & WEAR COURSEDEPTH, SEE DEATIL.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSTOCITY CONCRETE SIDEWALK PAVEMENT. SEE DETAIL.TYPICAL VILLA HOMESINGLE FAMILY LOT INFORMATION:LOT NUMBERPAD SIZELOT LINED & U EASEMENT10' FRONT & REAR5' SIDE (TYP.)BUILDING SETBACK20' FRONT30' REAR5' SIDES/ 25' SIDE ROW40'x70'PADROW LINECURB LINEMINIMUM LOT SIZE:6,750 SFSHORELAND OVERLAY LINEPROPOSED WETLAND BUFFER AREA 18'9'26'PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPRO P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPRO P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINE WETLAND LINEBUFFER LINEPROPOSEDSENIOR(102 UNITS)25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK25' BLDG. STBK PONDPONDWETLANDWETLANDWETLAND5 6 7 8 9 10 10' PKG. STBKOHW1140'x70'PAD 40'x70'PAD 40'x70'PAD 40'x70'PAD 40'x70'PAD BLOCK 3ROW LINE D&UEASEMENTLINEPARKING10' PKG. STBK20'R5'R12'R1 2 ' R3'R6'R6 'R15'R5'26'26'R35'R100'R55'WETLAND LINEBUFFER LINE150' STBK. LINEFROM OHWLOT LINESURMOUNTABLECONC. CURB,TYPROW LINE ROW LINEOTL. C8.37 ACOTL. C8.37 ACWETLAND LINEBUFFER LINEFEMA LINEFEMA LINEWATER LINE ATTIME OF SURVEY30' BLDG. STBK STREETLIGHT (TYP.)CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSD&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENT LINE1250'x65'PAD1340'x70'PAD1440'x70'PAD1540'x70'PAD40'x70'PADR100'R150'50'x65'PAD50'x 7 0 ' P A D BUFFER INFO25' AVG. BUFFER AREA=30,939 SFPROP. BUFFER AREA= 33,659 SF5' ROAD SETBACKFROM BUFFER15' STRUCTURESETBACK FROM BUFFERWETLAND BUFFER SIGN (18 TOTAL),COORDINATE FINAL LOCATION W/ CITYPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, TYP. SIGNSTO BE PURCHASED FROM CITY.22' TYP. 50' 5 4 . 4 '56.1'74.2'62.2' 56. 5 ' 15'15'2 6 . 5 '25'R50'PED. RAMP(TYP.)NOPARKINGNEW ST.CONTRACTOR TOREPAIR ERODED GULLY.COORD. W/CITY FORREPAIR REQUIREMENTS20' WIDE BIT. FIRE LANEBIT. PVMT.,TYPRIBBON CURBLOT LINEWETLAND LINEBUFFER LINE81310GARDENB612 C&G, TYP.BIT. PVMT. MATCH CURRENTFIRE LANE SIGN,TYP.COORD. W/FIREMARSHAL4' TALL ORNAMENTAL FENCE &GUARDRAIL, TYPRETAININGWALL, TYPSTREET LIGHT (TYP.)HCRETAININGWALL5' ROAD SETBACKFROM BUFFER15' STRUCTURESETBACK FROM BUFFERSETBACK FROM BUFFERWETLAND BUFFER SIGN (18 TOTAL),COORDINATE FINAL LOCATION W/ CITYPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, TYP. SIGNSTO BE PURCHASED FROM CITY.NPNPHCCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATE DESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202048776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.11/29/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.4SITE PLAN NW. .. .. .. .. .. .01" = 40'-0"40'-0"20'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRSITE PLAN LEGEND:TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGSSIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED.HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGNNP = NO PARKING FIRE LANEST = STOPCP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLYPRIVATE CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PADOR WALK) SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FORAGGREGATE BASE & CONCRETE DEPTHS, SEEDETAIL.PROPERTY LINECURB AND GUTTER-SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUTGUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLANBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. SEE GEOTECHNICALREPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE & WEAR COURSEDEPTH, SEE DEATIL.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSTOCITY CONCRETE SIDEWALK PAVEMENT. SEE DETAIL.TYPICAL VILLA HOMESINGLE FAMILY LOT INFORMATION:LOT NUMBERPAD SIZELOT LINED & U EASEMENT10' FRONT & REAR5' SIDE (TYP.)BUILDING SETBACK20' FRONT30' REAR5' SIDES/ 25' SIDE ROW40'x70'PADROW LINECURB LINEMINIMUM LOT SIZE:6,750 SFPROPOSED WETLAND BUFFER AREA SHORELANDOVERLAY LINEWETLAND DIMPACT=9758 SF(0.22 AC)SEE THE COOKLAKE MAPLEGROVE PLANSFOR WETLANDIMPACTS WITHINMAPLE GROVEWETLAND A-2IMPACT=6287 SF(0.14 AC)WETLAND A-1IMPACT=2846 SF(0.07 AC)BUFFER INFO25' AVG. BUFFER AREA=30,939 SFPROP. BUFFER AREA= 33,659 SFCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202048776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.11/29/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.5WETLAND IMPACTPLAN. .. .. .. .. .. .01" = 80'-0"80'-0"40'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRWETLAND IMPACT PLAN LEGEND:PROPERTY LINEIMPACTED WETLANDWETLAND BOUNDARYWETLAND IMPACTWETLANDTOTAL WETLANDAREA(ACRE)IMPACTED WETLANDAREA(ACRE)A-15.94.01A-25.94.14BNO LONGER AWETLANDD0.220.22TOTAL0.220.37 NEW ROW LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINENEW ROW LINEFEMA FLOODPLAIN LINE20'X30' EMERGENCYOVERFLOW. INSTALL MNDOTCATEGORY 4 TURFREINFORCEMENT MAT ANDMNDOT CATEGORY 4 EROSIONCONTROL BLANKET.TURF REINFORCEMENT MATSHALL BE SOIL FILLEDOVERFLOW. INSTALL MNDOTREINFORCEMENT MAT ANDMNDOT CATEGORY 4 EROSIONTURF REINFORCEMENT MATSHALL BE SOIL FILLEDWETLAND BUFFER SIGN (13 TOTAL),COORDINATE FINAL LOCATION W/ CITY/WATERSHED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION,TYP. SIGNS TO BE PURCHASED FROMCITY/ WATERSHED.WETLAND BUFFERPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPOSEDSENIOR(102 UNITS)2 3 PONDPONDWETLANDWETLANDWETLAND4 5 6 7 8 9 101 MEMORY CARE(24,349 SF)PROPOSEDDAYCARE(13,298 SF)BSTR.PUMPSTATION11POND/ FILTRATIONBASIN 1DCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITS1213141516171918BUFFER INFO25' AVG. BUFFER AREA=30,939 SFPROP. BUFFER AREA= 33,659 SFEOF=988.90EOF=967.955 - BS3 - CS3 - SB3 - WP7 - BA11 - HL23 - CK2 - HL27 - CK5 - HL25 - CK3 - HL24 - CK5 - SS5 - SS9 - HA25 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ2 - RP2 - RP2 - RP1 - BS1 - BS1 - CO1 - CO1 - BS1 - BS3 - CO14 - HD21 - SM211 - CE1 - SS1 - SB1 - HA15 - NW25 - NW23 - RP3 - RB10 - NW22 - RB20 - HA210 - SS9 - SM25 - CE14 - SM24 - CE5 - CE28 - HD7 - HD6 - HA28 - HA24 - MYJ4 - MYJ55 - PMD3 - SB4 - HA4 - HA8 - BA3 - SB5 - RP25 - CE5 - MYJ4 - CA25 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - CA25 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ3 - RP3 - RP1 - CO1 - CO1 - BS1 - BS2 - CO15 - MYJ1 - RM4 - WP3 - SM4 - RO7 - BS3 - BS3 - SB3 - BS3 - BS6 - WP3 - WP2 - RM1 - RM1 - CK37 - PM6 - RP1 - RM2 - RM18 - NW216 - CE11 - HJ4 - CK5 - CK11 - HL29 - HL214 - CA211 - PN7 - HL214 - PN10 - CA24 - SS7 - SS11 - HL23 - SS16 - AN6 - NL23 - AN9 - NL12 - HD9 - SS6 - CK19 - SS12 - HL216 - SM28 - GC3 - HL25 - GC19 - NL12 - SS19 - CA24 - HD6 - SM27 - CA27 - CA217 - MD14 - CA221 - CE5 - HA25 - HG6 - HA26 - HG17 - HA27 - HG3 - HA27 - CE7 - HG19 - HA25 - HG20 - HA211 - SS23 - SS4 - HG25 - HD1 - RP7 - RO11 - CA24 - SM27 - HD2 - CS10 - CA26 - SS8 - MD6 - SS19 - CA231 - MD7 - BA4 - SM13 - HD3 - SB1 - SB1 - SB7 - BS3 - SO3 - SO8 - RM1 - RM3 - BS3 - CS3 - BA2 - RO2 - RO5 - SO3 - SM3 - SO3 - SM4 - SO2 - SO1 - SM2 - SM5 - BA11 - BA2 - HA2 - RM2 - HA2 - HA1 - RB4 - BS2 - RO1 - RB1 - RB2 - RP1 - RB4 - BS1 - RB2 - RO1 - RB4 - BS1 - RB2 - RO1 - RB2 - RP1 - RO1 - RB4 - RP1 - RB1 - RB4 - BS1 - RBREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.0LANDSCAPE PLANOVERALL6/18/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .. .. .. .Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202026980KEVIN TEPPENLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.11/29/2101" = 80'-0"80'-0"40'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGENDPROPOSED PERENNIAL PLANT SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUB SYMBOLS - SEEPLANT SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED EVERGREEN TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED CANOPY TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANT SCHEDULEAND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESEDGINGLANDSCAPE NOTES:1.WHERE SHOWN, SHRUB & PERENNIAL BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED WITH 4" DEPTH (MINIMUM AFTER INSTALLATION AND/OR TOP DRESSING OPERATIONS) OF SHREDDED CYPRESS MULCH.2.ALL TREES SHALL BE MULCHED WITH SHREDDED CYPRESS MULCH TO OUTER EDGE OF SAUCER OR TO EDGE OF PLANTING BED, IF APPLICABLE. ALL MULCH SHALL BE KEPT WITHIN AMINIMUM OF 2" FROM TREE TRUNK.3.IF SHOWN ON PLAN, RANDOM SIZED LIMESTONE BOULDERS COLOR AND SIZE TO COMPLIMENT NEW LANDSCAPING. OWNER TO APPROVE BOULDER SAMPLES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.4.PLANT MATERIALS SHALL CONFORM WITH THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN STANDARDS AND SHALL BE OF HARDY STOCK, FREE FROM DISEASE, DAMAGE ANDDISFIGURATION. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING PLUMPNESS OF PLANT MATERIAL FOR DURATION OF ACCEPTANCE PERIOD.5.UPON DISCOVERY OF A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE QUANTITY OF PLANTS SHOWN ON THE SCHEDULE AND THE QUANTITY SHOWN ON THE PLAN, THE PLAN SHALL GOVERN.6.CONDITION OF VEGETATION SHALL BE MONITORED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT. LANDSCAPE MATERIALS PART OF THE CONTRACTSHALL BE WARRANTED FOR ONE (1) FULL GROWING SEASONS FROM SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION DATE.7.ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SHALL RECEIVE 4" LAYER TOPSOIL AND SOD AS SPECIFIED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS.8.COORDINATE LOCATION OF VEGETATION WITH UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD UTILITIES, LIGHTING FIXTURES, DOORS AND WINDOWS. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE IN THE FIELD FINALLOCATION OF TREES AND SHRUBS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.9.ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE WATERED AND MAINTAINED UNTIL ACCEPTANCE.10.REPAIR AT NO COST TO OWNER ALL DAMAGE RESULTING FROM LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S ACTIVITIES.11.SWEEP AND MAINTAIN ALL PAVED SURFACES FREE OF DEBRIS GENERATED FROM LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S ACTIVITIES.12.REPAIR AT NO COST TO THE OWNER IRRIGATION SYSTEM DAMAGED FROM LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.13.PROVIDE SITE WIDE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN AND INSTALLATION. SYSTEM SHALL BE FULLY PROGRAMMABLE AND CAPABLE OF ALTERNATE DATE WATERING. THE SYSTEM SHALLPROVIDE HEAD TO HEAD OR DRIP COVERAGE AND BE CAPABLE OF DELIVERING ONE INCH OF PRECIPITATION PER WEEK. SYSTEM SHALL EXTEND INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THEEDGE OF PAVEMENT/BACK OF CURB.14.CONTRACTOR SHALL SECURE APPROVAL OF PROPOSED IRRIGATION SYSTEM INLCUDING PRICING FROM OWNER, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.SHRUB & PERENNIALS WILL BE DETAILED AT TIME OF EACH LOTS CITY SUBMITTAL AND ENTITLEMENT APPROVALS NEW ROW LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE NEW ROW LINEMEMORY CARE(24,349 SF)PROPOSEDDAYCARE(13,298 SF)BSTR.PUMPSTATIOND&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINEPOND/ FILTRATIONBASIN 1DCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSD&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENTLINE5 - BS3 - CS3 - SB3 - WP7 - BA11 - HL23 - CK2 - HL27 - CK5 - HL25 - CK3 - HL24 - CK5 - SS5 - SS9 - HA25 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ2 - RP2 - RP2 - RP1 - BS1 - BS1 - CO1 - CO1 - BS1 - BS3 - CO14 - HD21 - SM211 - CE1 - SS1 - SB1 - HA15 - NW25 - NW23 - RP3 - RB10 - NW22 - RB20 - HA210 - SS9 - SM25 - CE14 - SM24 - CE5 - CE28 - HD7 - HD6 - HA28 - HA24 - MYJ4 - MYJ55 - PMD3 - SB4 - HA4 - HA8 - BA3 - SB5 - RP25 - CE5 - MYJ4 - CA25 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - CA25 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ5 - MYJ3 - RP3 - RP1 - CO1 - CO1 - BS1 - BS2 - CO15 - MYJTREESQTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYCO5True North Kentucky Coffeetree / Gymnocladus dioica `UMNSynergy` TM2.5" Cal. B&BBA7Boulevard Linden / Tilia americana `Boulevard`2.5" Cal. B&BEVERGREEN TREESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYBS9Black Hills Spruce / Picea glauca `Densata`2.5" Cal. B&B YCS3Colorado Spruce / Picea pungens6` B&B B&BRP9Red Pine / Pinus resinosa6` B&BWP3White Pine / Pinus strobus6` B&B B&BORNAMENTAL TREESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYSB5Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry / Amelanchier x grandiflora `Autumn Brilliance`#20 CLUMPClumpRB5River Birch / Betula nigra2.5" Cal. B&BSHRUBSQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZENATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYCK19King`s Gold False Cypress / Chamaecyparis pisifera `King`s Gold`#5 CONTCE25Baton Rouge Dogwood / Cornus alba 'Minbat' TM5 GAL.HA1Annabelle Hydrangea / Hydrangea arborescens `Annabelle`#5 CONTPotHL221Little Quick Fire Hydrangea / Hydrangea paniculata `Little Quick Fire`#5 CONTPotMYJ30Maney Juniper / Juniperus chinensis `Maneyi`#5 CONTSS21Sem Ash Leaf Spirea / Sorbaria sorbifolia `Sem`#5 CONTPotSM241Miss Kim Lilac / Syringa patula `Miss Kim`#5 CONT YYGRASSESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZENATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYHA253All Gold Japanese Forest Grass / Hakonechloa macra `All Gold`#1 CONTPERENNIALSQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZENATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYHD56Delta Dawn Coral Bells / Heuchera x `Delta dawn`#1 CONTNW230Walkers Low Catmint / Nepeta x faassenii `Walkers Low`#1 CONTPLANT SCHEDULE : BLOCK 1 LOT 1TREESQTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTSCO4True North Kentucky Coffeetree / Gymnocladus dioica `UMNSynergy` TM2.5" Cal. B&BBA8Boulevard Linden / Tilia americana `Boulevard`2.5" Cal. B&BEVERGREEN TREESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTSBS2Black Hills Spruce / Picea glauca `Densata`2.5" Cal. B&BYRP11 Red Pine / Pinus resinosa6` B&BORNAMENTAL TREESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTSSB6Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry / Amelanchier x grandiflora `Autumn Brilliance`#20 CLUMPClumpSHRUBSQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZENATIVE PLANTSCE25Baton Rouge Dogwood / Cornus alba 'Minbat' TM5 GAL.CA29Arctic Fire Dogwood / Cornus sericea `Arctic Fire`#5 CONTHA8Annabelle Hydrangea / Hydrangea arborescens `Annabelle`#5 CONT PotMYJ58Maney Juniper / Juniperus chinensis `Maneyi`#5 CONTPERENNIALSQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZENATIVE PLANTSPMD55Pardon Me Daylily / Hemerocallis x `Pardon Me`#1 CONTPLANT SCHEDULE : BLOCK 1 LOT 2COMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZELower Basin Native Seed MixMNDOT 34-262 WET PRAIRIE, PER MNDOT SEEDING MANUALSPECIFICATIONS (2014)Seed MixShooting Star No Mow Fine Fescue Mix / No MowSeed MixSeed MixDog Park Mulch / Playground SurfacingOrganic mulch specifically preoduced for use in playgrounds. Shall knittogether to form matted, accessible surface, shall be treated withanti-microbial agent.#10 CONTBlue Grass Based / SodCommercial grade, locally grown, "Big Roll" preferredSodGROUND COVERSCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202026980KEVIN TEPPENLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.11/29/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.1LANDSCAPE PLAN SE. .. .. .. .. .. .01" = 40'-0"40'-0"20'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGENDPROPOSED PERENNIAL PLANT SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUB SYMBOLS - SEEPLANT SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED EVERGREEN TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED CANOPY TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANT SCHEDULEAND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESEDGINGBLOCK 1 LOT 1BLOCK 1 LOT 2 PROPOSEDSENIOR(102 UNITS)BSTR.PUMPSTATION1 - RM4 - WP3 - SM4 - RO7 - BS3 - BS3 - SB3 - BS3 - BS6 - WP3 - WP2 - RM1 - RM1 - CK37 - PM6 - RP1 - RM2 - RM18 - NW216 - CE11 - HJ4 - CK5 - CK11 - HL29 - HL214 - CA211 - PN7 - HL214 - PN10 - CA24 - SS7 - SS11 - HL23 - SS16 - AN6 - NL23 - AN9 - NL12 - HD9 - SS6 - CK19 - SS12 - HL216 - SM28 - GC3 - HL25 - GC19 - NL12 - SS19 - CA24 - HD6 - SM27 - CA27 - CA217 - MD14 - CA221 - CE5 - HA25 - HG6 - HA26 - HG17 - HA27 - HG3 - HA27 - CE7 - HG19 - HA25 - HG20 - HA211 - SS23 - SS4 - HG25 - HD1 - RP7 - RO11 - CA24 - SM27 - HD2 - CS10 - CA26 - SS8 - MD6 - SS19 - CA231 - MD7 - BA4 - SM13 - HD3 - SB1 - SB1 - SB7 - BS3 - SO3 - SO8 - RM1 - RM3 - BS3 - CS3 - BATREESQTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYRM15Northwood Red Maple / Acer rubrum `Northwood`2.5" Cal. B&B B&BSO6Swamp White Oak / Quercus bicolor2.5" Cal. B&B B&BRO11Red Oak / Quercus rubra2.5" Cal. B&BBA7Boulevard Linden / Tilia americana `Boulevard`2.5" Cal. B&BEVERGREEN TREESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYBS23Black Hills Spruce / Picea glauca `Densata`2.5" Cal. B&B YCS2Colorado Spruce / Picea pungens6` B&B B&BRP7Red Pine / Pinus resinosa6` B&BWP13White Pine / Pinus strobus6` B&B B&BORNAMENTAL TREESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYSB8Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry / Amelanchier x grandiflora `Autumn Brilliance`#20 CLUMPClumpSHRUBSQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZENATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYCK16King`s Gold False Cypress / Chamaecyparis pisifera `King`s Gold`#5 CONTCE44Baton Rouge Dogwood / Cornus alba 'Minbat' TM5 GAL.CA2111Arctic Fire Dogwood / Cornus sericea `Arctic Fire`#5 CONTHJ11Little Lime Hydrangea / Hydrangea paniculata `Jane` TM#5 CONTPotHL253Little Quick Fire Hydrangea / Hydrangea paniculata `Little Quick Fire`#5 CONTPotMD56Russian Cypress / Microbiota decussata#5 CONTPN25Bird`s Nest Spruce / Picea abies `Nidiformis`#5 CONTPotPM37Nana Black Spruce / Picea mariana `Nana`#5 CONTPotSS100Sem Ash Leaf Spirea / Sorbaria sorbifolia `Sem`#5 CONTPotSM7Dwarf Korean Lilac / Syringa meyeri `Palibin`#7 CONTSM226Miss Kim Lilac / Syringa patula `Miss Kim`#5 CONT YYGRASSESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZENATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYHA270All Gold Japanese Forest Grass / Hakonechloa macra `All Gold`#1 CONTPERENNIALSQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZENATIVE PLANTS POLLINATOR FRIENDLYAN39Silver Mound Artemisia / Artemisia schmidtiana `Nana`2.5" Cal. B&B B&BGC13Biokovo Cranesbill / Geranium x cantabrigiense `Biokovo`#1 CONTHD61 Delta Dawn Coral Bells / Heuchera x `Delta dawn`#1 CONTHG34Guacamole Plantain Lily / Hosta x `Guacamole`#1 CONTNL34Little Trudy Catmint / Nepeta x `Psfike` TM#1 CONTNW218Walkers Low Catmint / Nepeta x faassenii `Walkers Low`#1 CONTPLANT SCHEDULE : BLOCK 2 LOT 1TREESQTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTSRM1Northwood Red Maple / Acer rubrum `Northwood`2.5" Cal. B&B B&BBA3Boulevard Linden / Tilia americana `Boulevard` 2.5" Cal. B&BEVERGREEN TREESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTSBS3Black Hills Spruce / Picea glauca `Densata`2.5" Cal. B&BYCS3Colorado Spruce / Picea pungens6` B&B B&BPLANT SCHEDULE : BLOCK 2 LOT 2COMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZEShooting Star No Mow Fine Fescue Mix / No MowSeed MixSeed MixBlue Grass Based / SodCommercial grade, locally grown, "Big Roll" preferredSodGROUND COVERSCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202026980KEVIN TEPPENLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.11/29/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.2LANDSCAPE PLAN NE. .. .. .. .. .. .01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGENDPROPOSED PERENNIAL PLANT SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUB SYMBOLS - SEEPLANT SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED EVERGREEN TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED CANOPY TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANT SCHEDULEAND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESEDGINGBLOCK 2 LOT 2 PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE2 3 WETLANDWETLAND4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 MEMORY CARE(24,349 SF)11D&U EASEMENTLINED&UEASEMENTLINECONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITS12131415161719182 - RO2 - RO5 - SO3 - SM3 - SO3 - SM4 - SO2 - SO1 - SM2 - SM5 - BA11 - BA2 - HA2 - RM2 - HA2 - HA1 - RB4 - BS2 - RO1 - RB1 - RB2 - RP1 - RB4 - BS1 - RB2 - RO1 - RB4 - BS1 - RB2 - RO1 - RB2 - RP1 - RO1 - RB4 - RP1 - RB1 - RB4 - BS1 - RBTREESQTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTSRM2Northwood Red Maple / Acer rubrum `Northwood`2.5" Cal. B&B B&BSM9Autumn Splendor Sugar Maple / Acer saccharum `Autumn Splendor`2.5" Cal. B&BRB12River Birch / Betula nigra2.5" Cal. B&BBS16Shiloh Splash Birch / Betula nigra `Shiloh Splash`2.5" Cal. B&BYHA6Prairie Pride Common Hackberry / Celtis occidentalis `Prairie Pride`2.5" Cal. B&BSO14Swamp White Oak / Quercus bicolor2.5" Cal. B&B B&BRO11Red Oak / Quercus rubra2.5" Cal. B&BBA16Boulevard Linden / Tilia americana `Boulevard`2.5" Cal. B&BEVERGREEN TREESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMECONTNATIVE PLANTSRP8Red Pine / Pinus resinosa6` B&BPLANT SCHEDULE : BLOCK 3COMMON / BOTANICAL NAMESIZEShooting Star Dry Short Parairie Mix / Dry Short Prairie Seed MixShooting Star Native Seed: Dry Short Prairie Seed Mix.Seed MixLower Basin Native Seed MixMNDOT 34-262 WET PRAIRIE, PER MNDOT SEEDING MANUALSPECIFICATIONS (2014)Seed MixShooting Star No Mow Fine Fescue Mix / No MowSeed MixSeed MixBlue Grass Based / SodCommercial grade, locally grown, "Big Roll" preferredSodGROUND COVERS13,639 sf196,696 sfCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202026980KEVIN TEPPENLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.11/29/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.3LANDSCAPE PLAN W6/18/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .. .. .. .01" = 40'-0"40'-0"20'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGENDPROPOSED PERENNIAL PLANT SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUB SYMBOLS - SEEPLANT SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED EVERGREEN TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED CANOPY TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANT SCHEDULEAND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESEDGINGBLOCK 3 PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPRO P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINE PROPOSEDSENIOR(102 UNITS)PONDPONDWETLANDWETLANDWETLAND5 6 7 8 9 10 11D&UEASEMENTLINECONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSD&U EASEMENTLINED&U EASEMENT LINE121314152 - RO3 - SO3 - SM4 - SO2 - SO1 - SM2 - SM2 - HA2 - HA1 - RM4 - WP3 - SM6 - RP7 - RM1 - RB4 - BS2 - RO1 - RB1 - RB2 - RP1 - RB4 - BS1 - RB2 - RO1 - RB4 - BS1 - RB2 - RO1 - RB2 - RP1 - RO11 - HL29 - HL214 - CA211 - PN7 - HL214 - PN3 - SS4 - SS10 - CA24 - SS7 - SS11 - HL23 - SS16 - AN6 - NL23 - AN9 - NL9 - HD12 - HD9 - SS1 - RP11 - CA21 - RM4 - WP3 - SM6 - RP11 - HL29 - HL214 - CA211 - PN7 - HL214 - PN10 - CA24 - SS7 - SS11 - HL23 - SS16 - AN6 - NL23 - AN9 - NL12 - HD9 - SS1 - RP11 - CA213 - HD1 - SB7 - BS2 - RO3 - SO3 - SM4 - SO2 - SO1 - SM2 - SM2 - HA2 - HA1 - RB4 - BS2 - RO1 - RB1 - RB2 - RP1 - RB4 - BS1 - RB2 - RO1 - RB4 - BS1 - RB2 - RO1 - RB2 - RP1 - ROCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202026980KEVIN TEPPENLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.11/29/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.4LANDSCAPE PLAN NW6/18/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .. .. .. .01" = 40'-0"40'-0"20'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRSHRUB AND PERENNIAL PLANTING SPECIES WILL BE IDENTIFIED ATTIME OF INDIVIDUAL LOT APPROVALS.LEGENDSEE SHEET L1.0 FOR LEGEND AND PLANT SCHEDULE REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.5LANDSCAPE PLANNOTES & DETAILS. .. .. .. .. .. .Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture5000 Glenwood AveGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cCOOK LAKE HIGHLANDS Corcoran, Minnesota 135 Crabapple Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 TRAK REAL ESTATE & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:200112/5/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL3/15/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL6/7/21 CITY RESUBMITTAL11/29/2021 CITY RESUBMITTAL. .. .12/15/20 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KIT, DKDK, MP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .202026980KEVIN TEPPENLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.11/29/211.ENTIRE SITE SHALL BE FULLY IRRIGATED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT IRRIGATION SHOP DRAWINGS FOR REVIEWAND APPROVAL BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.2.SEE MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR IRRIGATION WATER, METER, AND POWERCONNECTIONS.3.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND/ABOVE GROUND FACILITIES PRIOR TO ANYEXCAVATION/INSTALLATION. ANY DAMAGE TO UNDERGROUND/ABOVE GROUND FACILITIES SHALL BE THERESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH CORRECTING DAMAGES SHALL BE BORNEENTIRELY BY THE CONTRACTOR.4.SERVICE EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE PER LOCAL UTILITY COMPANY STANDARDS AND SHALL BE PERNATIONAL AND LOCAL CODES. EXACT LOCATION OF SERVICE EQUIPMENT SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR EQUIVALENT AT THE JOB SITE.5.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH LOCAL UTILITY COMPANY FOR THE PROPOSED ELECTRICAL SERVICE ANDMETERING FACILITIES.6.IRRIGATION WATER LINE CONNECTION SIZE IS 1-12" AT BUILDING. VERIFY WITH MECHANICAL PLANS.COVAGE.7.ALL MAIN LINES SHALL BE 18" BELOW FINISHED GRADE.8.ALL LATERAL LINES SHALL BE 12" BELLOW FINISHED GRADE.9.ALL EXPOSED PVC RISERS, IF ANY, SHALL BE GRAY IN COLOR.10.CONTRACTOR SHALL LAY ALL SLEEVES AND CONDUIT AT 2'-0" BELOW THE FINISHED GRADE OF THE TOP OF PAVEMENT.EXTEND SLEEVES TO 2'-0" BEYOND PAVEMENT.11.CONTRACTOR SHALL MARK THE LOCATION OF ALL SLEEVES AND CONDUIT WITH THE SLEEVING MATERIAL "ELLED" TO2'-0" ABOVE FINISHED GRADE AND CAPPED.12.FABRICATE ALL PIPE TO MANUFACTURE'S SPECIFICATIONS WITH CLEAN AND SQUARE CUT JOINTS. USE QUALITY GRADEPRIMER AND SOLVENT CEMENT FORMULATED FOR INTENDED TYPE OF CONNECTION.13.BACKFILL ALL TRENCHES WITH SOIL FREE OF SHARP OBJECTS AND DEBRIS.14.ALL VALVE BOXES AND COVERS SHALL BE BLACK IN COLOR.15.GROUP VALVE BOXES TOGETHER FOR EASE WHEN SERVICE IS REQUIRED. LOCATE IN PLANT BED AREAS WHENEVERPOSSIBLE.16.IRRIGATION CONTROLLER LOCATION SHALL BE VERIFIED ON-SITE WITH OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.17.CONTROL WIRES: 14 GAUGE DIRECT BURIAL, SOLID COPPER IRRIGATION WIRE. RUN UNDER MAIN LINE. USEMOISTURE-PROOF SPLICES AND SPLICE ONLY AT VALVES OR PULL BOXES. RUN SEPARATE HOT AND COMMON WIRE TOEACH VALVE AND ONE (1) SPARE WIRE AND GROUND TO FURTHEST VALVE FROM CONTROLLER. LABEL OR COLOR CODEALL WIRES.18.AVOID OVER SPRAY ON BUILDINGS, PAVEMENT, WALLS AND ROADWAYS BY INDIVIDUALLY ADJUSTING RADIUS OR ARCON SPRINKLER HEADS AND FLOW CONTROL ON AUTOMATIC VALVE.19.ADJUST PRESSURE REGULATING VALVES FOR OPTIMUM PRESSURE ON SITE.20.USE SCREENS ON ALL HEADS.21.A SET OF AS-BUILT DRAWINGS SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON-SITE AT ALL TIMES IN AN UPDATED CONDITION.22.ALL PIPE 3" AND OVER SHALL HAVE THRUST BLOCKING AT EACH TURN.23.ALL AUTOMATIC REMOTE CONTROL VALVES WILL HAVE 3" MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3/4" WASHED GRAVEL UNDERNEATHVALVE AND VALVE BOX. GRAVEL SHALL EXTENT 3" BEYOND PERIMETER OF VALVE BOX.24.THERE SHALL BE 3" MINIMUM SPACE BETWEEN BOTTOM OF VALVE BOX COVER AND TOP OF VALVE STRUCTURE.IRRIGATION NOTES:FACE OF BUILDING, WALL, OR STRUCTUREMIN. 3" LAYER OF ROCK MULCH AS SPECIFIED. PROVIDE SAMPLE TOLANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATIONFINISHED GRADECOMPACTED SUBGRADEWATER PERMEABLE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC AS SPECIFIED18" - VERIFY W/ PLANAGGREGATE MAINTANENCE STRIPN T SSTAKED LANDSCAPE EDGER AS SPECIFIED, SEE MANUFACTURER'SINSTRUCTIONS AND SPECS. FOR INSTALLATION AND PLACEMENTSLOPE - MIN. 2%, MAX. 5:1VERIFY W/ GRADING PLAN1Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPERENNIAL BED PLANTINGN T SPLANT TOP OF ROOTBALL 1-2" ABOVE ABOVESURROUNDING GRADEROOTS AT OUTER EDGE OF ROOTBALL LOOSENED TOENSURE PROPER BACKFILL-TO-ROOT CONTACTSLOPE SIDES OF HOLE OR VERTICAL SIDES AT EDGE OFPLANTING BEDEXISTING GRADEROCK OR ORGANIC MULCH, SEE GENERAL LANDSCAPENOTES AND PLAN NOTES FOR MULCH TYPE. KEEPMULCH MIN. 2" FROM PLANT STEMBACKFILL AS PER SPECIFICATIONDO NOT EXCAVATE BELOW ROOTBALL.SIZE VARIESSEE LANDSCAPE PLANMODIFY EXCAVATION BASED ON LOCATION OF PLANTMATERIAL AND DESIGN OF BEDS OR OVERALL PLANTPLACEMENT4DECIDUOUS & CONIFEROUS SHRUB PLANTINGN T SPRUNE AS FIELD DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPEARCHITECT TO IMPROVE APPEARANCE (RETAINNORMAL SHAPE FOR SPECIES)PLANT TOP OF ROOTBALL 1-2" ABOVE ABOVESURROUNDING GRADEROOTS AT OUTER EDGE OF ROOTBALL LOOSENED TOENSURE PROPER BACKFILL-TO-ROOT CONTACTSLOPE SIDES OF HOLE OR VERTICAL SIDES AT EDGE OFPLANTING BEDEXISTING GRADEROCK OR ORGANIC MULCH, SEE GENERAL LANDSCAPENOTES AND PLAN NOTES FOR MULCH TYPE. KEEPMULCH MIN. 2" FROM PLANT TRUNKBACKFILL AS PER SPECIFICATIONDO NOT EXCAVATE BELOW ROOTBALL.THREE TIMES WIDTHOF ROOTBALLRULE OF THUMB - MODIFY EXCAVATION BASED ONLOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL AND DESIGN OF BEDSOR OVERALL PLANT PLACEMENT3THREE TIMES WIDTHOF ROOTBALLDECIDUOUS & CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTINGN T SPRUNE AS FIELD DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPEARCHITECT TO IMPROVE APPEARANCE (RETAINNORMAL TREE SHAPE)THREE 2"X4"X8' WOODEN STAKES, STAINED BROWNWITH TWO STRANDS OF WIRE TWISTED TOGETHER.STAKES SHALL BE PLACED AT 120° TO ONE ANOTHER.WIRE SHALL BE THREADED THROUGH NYLONSTRAPPING WITH GROMMETS. ALTERNATE STABILIZINGMETHODS MAY BE PROPOSED BY CONTRACTOR.TRUNK FLARE JUNCTION: PLANT TREE 1"-2" ABOVEEXISTING GRADEMULCH TO OUTER EDGE OF SAUCER OR TO EDGE OFPLANTING BED, IF APPLICABLE. ROCK OR ORGANICMULCH, SEE GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES AND PLANNOTES FOR MULCH TYPE. KEEP MULCH MIN. 2" FROMPLANT TRUNKEXISTING GRADECUT AND REMOVE BURLAP FROM TOP 1/3 OF ROOTBALL. IF NON-BIODEGRADABLE, REMOVE COMPLETELYSLOPE SIDES OF HOLE OR VERTICAL SIDES AT EDGE OFPLANTING BEDBACKFILL AS SPECIFIEDCOMPACT BOTTOM OF PIT, TYP.RULE OF THUMB - MODIFY EXCAVATION BASED ONLOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL AND DESIGN OF BEDSOR OVERALL PLANT PLACEMENT2 XXXXAS1FRONT ELEVATIONASA 3/8"=1'-0" 1 FRONT ELEVATION A - STONE Drawing No.No.Revision1Community:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416786.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comBP 02/08/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNASPENCUSTOMER-- -- XXXXBS1FRONT ELEVATIONBSA 3/8"=1'-0" 1 FRONT ELEVATION B - STONE Drawing No.No.Revision1Community:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416786.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comBP 02/08/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNASPENCUSTOMER-- -- XXXXCS1FRONT ELEVATIONCSA 3/8"=1'-0" 1 FRONT ELEVATION C - STONE Drawing No.No.Revision1Community:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416786.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comBP 02/08/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNASPENCUSTOMER-- -- A A A B 3/16"=1'-0" 1 SIDE ELEVATION 3/16"=1'-0" 2 REAR ELEVATION 3/16"=1'-0" 3 SIDE ELEVATION 4 ROOF PLAN ROOF PLAN NOTES 3/16"=1'-0" AS2ROOF PLANASEXTERIOR ELEVATIONSDrawing No.No.Revision1Community:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416786.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comBP 02/08/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNASPENCUSTOMER-- -- CS-PFADD SHEETROCK TO FINISH GARAGE ALL WALLS & CEILINGS*** FIRE TAPED ONLY *** D W CS-PFDW1/4"=1'-0" 1 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN AS4MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLANAS1/4"=1'-0" 4 OPTIONAL MORNING ROOM 1/4"=1'-0" 3 OPT. LIFESTYLE KITCHEN 1/4"=1'-0" 2 OPT. ANGLED ISLAND Drawing No.No.Revision1Community:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416786.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comBP 02/08/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNASPENCUSTOMER-- -- FLOOR PLAN NOTES LEGEND FLOOR AREAS (S.F.) 1/4"=1'-0" 5 OPTIONAL DINING ROOM CABINETS 1/4"=1'-0" 1 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN AS5UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLANASDrawing No.No.Revision1Community:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416786.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comBP 02/08/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNASPENCUSTOMER-- -- FLOOR PLAN NOTES LEGEND FLOOR AREAS (S.F.) XXXX1 2 3/8"=1'-0" 1 FRONT ELEVATION B - STONE Drawing No.Revisions / Custom OptionsCommunity:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416763.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comAddition:BS1FRONT ELEVATIONBA BP 02/13/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNCEDARWOODCUSTOMER-- -- XXXX1 2 3 4 3/8"=1'-0" 1 FRONT ELEVATION C - STONE Drawing No.Revisions / Custom OptionsCommunity:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416763.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comAddition:CS1FRONT ELEVATIONCA BP 02/13/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNCEDARWOODCUSTOMER-- -- XXXX2 1 3 4 3/8"=1'-0" 1 FRONT ELEVATION D - STONE Drawing No.Revisions / Custom OptionsCommunity:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416763.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comAddition:DS1FRONT ELEVATIONDA BP 02/13/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNCEDARWOODCUSTOMER-- -- 3/8"=1'-0" 2 COLUMN DETAILS XXXX1 2 3 4 3/8"=1'-0" 1 FRONT ELEVATION E - STONE Drawing No.Revisions / Custom OptionsCommunity:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416763.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comAddition:ES1FRONT ELEVATIONEA BP 02/13/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNCEDARWOODCUSTOMER-- -- XXXX1 2 3 5 4 4 3/8"=1'-0" 1 FRONT ELEVATION G - STONE Drawing No.Revisions / Custom OptionsCommunity:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416763.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comAddition:GS1FRONT ELEVATIONGA BP 02/13/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNCEDARWOODCUSTOMER-- -- DW 48" X 60" MECHANICALPAD WITH 30" CLEARSPACE AS PER CODE(HIGH EFFICIENCY FURNACE)RETURN AIR CHASE) OPTIONAL HUMIDIFIER ADD SHEETROCK TO FINISH GARAGE ALL WALLS & CEILINGS*** FIRE TAPED ONLY *** DWAIR EXCHANGER USB DW 1/4"=1'-0" 1 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Drawing No.Revisions / Custom OptionsCommunity:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416763.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comAddition:BS4MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLANB1/4"=1'-0" 2 OPT. LIFESTYLE KITCHEN 1/4"=1'-0" 3 OPT. ANGLED ISLAND 1/4"=1'-0" 4 OPT. MORNING ROOM 1/4"=1'-0" 5 OPT. LAUNDRY ROOM CLOSET BP 02/13/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNCEDARWOODCUSTOMER-- -- FLOOR PLAN NOTES LEGEND FLOOR AREAS (S.F.) 1/4"=1'-0" 1 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Drawing No.Revisions / Custom OptionsCommunity:Address:City:Sheet Title:5354 Parkdale Dr. #100St. Louis Park, MN 55416763.586.7200Lot: Block:Date ByThese plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes. Alldrawings and specifications are instruments ofservice copyrighted by M/I Homes, Inc. and must bereturned upon request. These plans are forconstruction purposes only. These plans may varyfrom model homes and marketing materials.Contractor to verify suitability of plans with owner.These plans are exclusive property of M/I Homes.Model:Elevation:Client:This drawing is intended to be printed at 22"x34". Drawing is half scale when printed at 11"x17" Date: Drawn By: Job #XXFinal ApprovalDateminneapolispermits@MIHOMES.comAddition:BS5UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLANBBP 02/13/2018 -------COMMUNITYSTREET ADDRESSCITY, MNCEDARWOODCUSTOMER-- -- FLOOR PLAN NOTES LEGEND FLOOR AREAS (S.F.) 1ST FLOOR100' -0" 2ND FLOOR110' -11 1/4" 3RD FLOOR121' -11 1/8" 4TH FLOOR132' -11" ROOF BEARING HT.141' -10 3/4" ROOF142' -4 3/4" S2 MB MS MS S3S1 MB MS S2 MBALUMINUM STOREFRONT VINYL WINDOWS & SLIDING PATIO DOORS, TYP. THROUGHOUT PREFINISHED METAL HVAC LOUVERS; PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT EXTERIOR FINISH PREFINISHED METAL RAILING CAST STONE SILLS & CAP; TYP. AT MASONRY MAX. HT.149' -0" S4 1ST FLOOR100' -0" 2ND FLOOR110' -11 1/4" 3RD FLOOR121' -11 1/8" 4TH FLOOR132' -11" ROOF BEARING HT.141' -10 3/4" ROOF142' -4 3/4" VINYL WINDOWS & SLIDING PATIO DOORS, TYP. THROUGHOUT PREFINISHED METAL HVAC LOUVERS; PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT EXTERIOR FINISH PREFINISHED METAL RAILING CAST STONE SILLS & CAP; TYP. AT MASONRY MB S5 S2 S4 MS MB S2 S1 MAX. HT.149' -0" S1 S4 EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE HORIZONTAL COMPOSITE SIDING & TRIM VERTICAL COMPOSITE SIDING & TRIM VINYL SHAKE SIDING PANEL COMPOSITE SIDING & TRIM ARCHITECTURAL ASPHALT SHINGLES STANDING SEAM METAL PANELS CMU MB MS S1 S2 S4 S3 AS SS COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 7% 9% 9% 51% 24% EXTERIOR MATERIALS WOOD LOOK COMPOSITE SIDINGS5 COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 0% 29% 13% 32% 26% EXTERIOR MATERIALS COURTYARD -MAIN ENTRY COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 0% 11% 17% 46% 26% EXTERIOR MATERIALS COURTYARD -EAST ELEVATION 1ST FLOOR100' -0" 2ND FLOOR110' -11 1/4" 3RD FLOOR121' -11 1/8" 4TH FLOOR132' -11" ROOF BEARING HT.141' -10 3/4" ROOF142' -4 3/4" MAX. HT.149' -0" S4S2 S5 MB S4 S1 S5 MB MS MB 1ST FLOOR100' -0" 2ND FLOOR110' -11 1/4" 3RD FLOOR121' -11 1/8" 4TH FLOOR132' -11" ROOF BEARING HT.141' -10 3/4" ROOF142' -4 3/4" MAX. HT.149' -0" S1 S4 S2 MS MB 1ST FLOOR100' -0" 2ND FLOOR110' -11 1/4" 3RD FLOOR121' -11 1/8" 4TH FLOOR132' -11" ROOF BEARING HT.141' -10 3/4" ROOF142' -4 3/4" MAX. HT.149' -0" S1 S4 S2 S3 MB S1 MS S5 S4 S2 S3 MB S5 S4 S2 COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 2% 11% 7% 57% 23% EXTERIOR MATERIALS COURTYARD -SOUTH ELEVATION COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 2% 0% 18% 56% 24% EXTERIOR MATERIALS WEST ELEVATION -SOUTH LEG COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 3% 12% 5% 56% 24% EXTERIOR MATERIALS SOUTH ELEVATION 1ST FLOOR100' -0" 2ND FLOOR110' -11 1/4" 3RD FLOOR121' -11 1/8" 4TH FLOOR132' -11" ROOF BEARING HT.141' -10 3/4" LOWER LEVEL89' -0" ROOF142' -4 3/4" MAX. HT.149' -0" S1 ?S2 S3 S4 S2 S1 S4 S2 S3 MB CMUMBCMUCMU 1ST FLOOR100' -0" 2ND FLOOR110' -11 1/4" 3RD FLOOR121' -11 1/8" 4TH FLOOR132' -11" ROOF BEARING HT.141' -10 3/4" LOWER LEVEL89' -0" ROOF142' -4 3/4" MAX. HT.149' -0" S3 S4 S1 S4 S2S2MS S4 S2 MB S3 RETAINING WALLS COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 13% 6% 5% 55% 21% EXTERIOR MATERIALS EAST ELEVATION COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 3% 6% 12% 52% 27% EXTERIOR MATERIALS NORTHEAST ELEVATION 1ST FLOOR100' -0" 2ND FLOOR110' -11 1/4" 3RD FLOOR121' -11 1/8" 4TH FLOOR132' -11" ROOF BEARING HT.141' -10 3/4" LOWER LEVEL89' -0" ROOF142' -4 3/4" MAX. HT.149' -0" S4 S2 MB S1 MS S4 S1 S5 S1S4 MB S2 1ST FLOOR100' -0" 2ND FLOOR110' -11 1/4" 3RD FLOOR121' -11 1/8" 4TH FLOOR132' -11" ROOF BEARING HT.141' -10 3/4" LOWER LEVEL89' -0" ROOF142' -4 3/4" MAX. HT.149' -0" S1 S4 S2 S3 MB S4 S2 1ST FLOOR100' -0" 2ND FLOOR110' -11 1/4" 3RD FLOOR121' -11 1/8" 4TH FLOOR132' -11" ROOF BEARING HT.141' -10 3/4" ROOF142' -4 3/4" MAX. HT.149' -0" S4 S2 MB S1 S4 S2 S3 S4 S2 MS MB S3 S5 COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 17% 3% 9% 48% 23% EXTERIOR MATERIALS NORTH ELEVATION COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 14% 14% 0% 50% 22% EXTERIOR MATERIALS WEST ELEVATION -NORTH LEG COLORED ROCK FACE BLOCK MASONRY BRICK VENEER MANUFACTURED STONE TOTAL SIDING & TRIM OPENINGS -WINDOWS, DOORS, LOUVERS 8% 9% 13% 48% 22% EXTERIOR MATERIALS COURTYARD -NORTH ELEVATION CEMENTITIOUS SHAKES - LIGHT GREY CEMENTITIOUS LAP SIDING - DARK GREY ASPHALT SHINGLES - BLACK SIMULATED STONE VENEER - ABSAROKA TUSCAN LEDGESTONE CEMENTITIOUS TRIM, FASCIA & SOFFITS -IVORY STOREFRONT -CLEAR ANNODIZED ALUMINUM FENCING Copyright 2021 DJR Architecture, Inc. A2.1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS CORCORAN, MN RIVERS OF LIFE -CORCORAN 21-111.00 12/28/21 PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT 1/8" = 1'-0"1 EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"2 NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"4 WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION AA 1 1 2 2 BB 3 3 4 4 C C OUTSIDE FACE OF WOOD STUD 48'-11 1/2" OUTSIDE FACE OF WOOD STUD 34'-4 1/2" OUTSIDE FACE OF WOOD STUD 48'-11 1/2"OUTSIDE FACE WOOD STUD98'-11 1/2"OUTSIDE FACE OF WOOD STUD 132'-3 1/2"OUTSIDE FACE OF WOOD STUD98'-11 1/2"48'-11 1/2"34'-4 1/2"48'-11 1/2"98'-11 1/2"132'-3 1/2"98'-11 1/2"PLAN NORTH 145 SF CONFERENCE 101 50 SF RESTROOM 11143 SF RESTROOM 135 1055 SF SCHOOL AGE 140 129 SF UTILITY 112 454 SF ONES 1 113 13 SF COT 129 840 SF PRE-K 2 134 840 SF PRE-K 1 130 454 SF ONES 2 117 654 SF TWOS 1 118 565 SF TWOS 2 121 704 SF THREES 2 127 703 SF THREES 1 12458 SF RESTROOM 126 58 SF RESTROOM 128 48 SF LAUNDRY 107 381 SF INFANT 1 105 111 SF STORAGE 143 50 SF RESTROOM 110 145 SF DIRECTOR 102 109 SF CORRIDOR 145 1261 SF LARGE MOTOR ROOM 141 73 SF CORRIDOR 146 291 SF CORRIDOR 104 613 SF LOBBY 103 381 SF INFANT 2 108146 SF CRIB 106 43 SF RESTROOM 136 43 SF RESTROOM 123 14 SF COT 125 252 SF KITCHEN 144 13 SF COT 114 57 SF RESTROOM 115 14 SF COT 116 136 SF STAFF 14243 SF RESTROOM 131 43 SF RESTROOM 13213 SF COT 133 43 SF RESTROOM 137 43 SF RESTROOM 138 13 SF COT 139 146 SF CRIB 109 14 SF COT 122 15 SF COT 119 43 SF RESTROOM 120 81 SF ENTRY 100 R SEH Project Checked By Drawn By Project Status Issue Date This drawing is an instrument of service and shall remain the property of Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH). This drawing, concepts and ideas contained herein shall not be used, reproduced, revised, or retained without the express written approval of SEH. Submission or distribution of this drawing to meet official or regulatory requirements or for purposes in connection with the project is not be construed as publication in derogation of any of the rights of SEH. N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T IO N Project Owner Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.All Rights ReservedCOPYRIGHT © 2022BUILDING LAYOUT PLANNEW HORIZON ACADEMYCORCORAN, MN165720 SB DKM Concept Design Set - 02.22.2022 - A1 1/8" = 1'-0"1 BUILDING LAYOUT PLAN REVISION SCHEDULE REV. # DESCRIPTION DATE F.F.E. 100'-0" 1 2 3 4 1 1515133 96 10 12 TYP. 12 TYP. 1212 TYP.TYP. 13 444 816 2 1 8 2 18 216 1 6 6108 12 TYP. 8 9 10 88 3 888888 98 106 6 21098 113 3 910 12 TYP. 12 TYP. 12 TYP. 4 4 4 8 16 2 1 2 16 1 668 12 TYP. 8 9108 8 388 8 888 A3 5 18 SIGN 'C' F.F.E. 100'-0" ABC 9 8 1016 6 111112 TYP. 12 TYP. 6 TYP. 1313 1 44 16 3 12 TYP. 13 3 6 8 4888 289810628 9810 166 8 1 1 112 TYP. 1 4 12 TYP. 3 6 4 888 2 8 98106 2 8 106 2 8 418812 TYP. 4 1 8 F.F.E. 100'-0" A 4 2 8 13 1 106 1 9 8 8 3 F.F.E. 100'-0" A 1 8 2 10 1 12 68 3 8 4 8 9 ELEVATION KEY NOTES # 1. STONE VENEER - SOUTHERN LEDGESTONE 'CHARDONNAY' BY CULTURED STONE 2. FIBER CEMENT SHAKE SIDING - HARDIESHINGLE - STRAIGHT EDGE PANEL 'NAVAJO BEIGE' BY JAMES HARDIE 3. FIBER CEMENT HORIZONTAL SIDING - HARDIEPLANK - SMOOTH - 'COBBLESTONE' BY JAMES HARDIE 4. ARCHITECTURAL PRECAST CONCRETE SILL 5. 3'-0" x 3'-0" STONE VENEER COLUMN. SEE STRUCTURAL FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 6. ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF ASSEMBLY 7. ELECTRICAL METER - PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT FINISH 8. 2x FIBER CEMENT TRIM - PAINTED TO MATCH 'SW6147' PANDA WHITE 9. 1x FIBER CEMENT TRIM - PAINTED TO MATCH 'SW6147' PANDA WHITE 10. 1x FIBER CEMENT FASCIA TRIM - PAINTED TO MATCH 'SW6147' PANDA WHITE 11. PREFINISHED METAL COPING - PAINTED TO MATCH 'SW6147' PANDA WHITE 12. ALUMIUNUM STOREFRONT FRAMING / GLAZING ASSEMBLY - TINTED INSULATED LOW-E GLASS WITH 'DARK BRONZE' ANODIZED ALUMINUM FRAMES 13. ALUMINUM DOOR / TRANSOM / GLAZING ASSEMBLY - TINTED INSULATED LOW-E GLASS WITH 'DARK BRONZE' ANODIZED ALUMINUM FRAMES 14. HOLLOW METAL DOOR AND FRAME - PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT FINISH 15. 14'-3" x 3'-7" EXTERIOR LED 'NEW HORIZON ACADEMY' AND 'SUN' SIGNAGE. SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. 16. LED LIGHT FIXTURE. SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 17. WALL MOUNTED CT CABINET - PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT FINISH 18. 7'-0" x 3'-6" EXTERIOR LED 'SUN' SIGNAGE SEE ALTERNATE #1: PROVIDE FIXED FIBERGLASS INSULATED WINDOW UNITS IN LIEU OF ALUMINUM STOREFRONT FRAMING. 3 11 1 4 F.F.E. 100'-0" T.O ENCLOSURE 106'-0" 3 11 1 4 F.F.E. 100'-0" T.O ENCLOSURE 106'-0" 3 11 1 4 F.F.E. 100'-0" T.O ENCLOSURE 106'-0" 3 11 1 4 F.F.E. 100'-0" T.O ENCLOSURE 106'-0" NORTH ELEVATION - EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS: STONE: 24% GLAZING: 20% SHAKE SIDING: 21% HORIZONTAL SIDING: 15% TRIM: 20% WEST ELEVATION - EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS: STONE: 29% GLAZING: 20% SHAKE SIDING: 22% HORIZONTAL SIDING: 9% TRIM: 20% R SEH Project Checked By Drawn By Project Status Issue Date This drawing is an instrument of service and shall remain the property of Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH). This drawing, concepts and ideas contained herein shall not be used, reproduced, revised, or retained without the express written approval of SEH. Submission or distribution of this drawing to meet official or regulatory requirements or for purposes in connection with the project is not be construed as publication in derogation of any of the rights of SEH. N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T IO N Project Owner Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.All Rights ReservedCOPYRIGHT © 2022EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSNEW HORIZON ACADEMYCORCORAN, MN165720 SB DKM Concept Design Set - 02.22.2022 - A2 3/16" = 1'-0"1 WEST ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"2 NORTH ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"3 NORTH ENTRY ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"4 SOUTH ENTRY ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"5 TRASH ENCLOSURE REVISION SCHEDULE REV. # DESCRIPTION DATE 1 - F.F.E. 100'-0" A B C A3 3 16 9810 166 8 1 13 131412 TYP. 3 6 TYP. 13 1 1 4 4 7 123 6 4 888 2 8 98106 2 8 9 8 1016 6 1131312 TYP. 1 412 TYP. 3 6 48 88 28981062810627 4 1 8 13 TYP. 4 18 15 841711 8 4 1 8 1 TYP. 8 SIGN 'B' 16 F.F.E. 100'-0" 1234 11313 TYP. 12 TYP. 1 13 10 8 SIGN 'A' A3 3 9 8 1016 628981016628981016628981016628106286 4 8 348 1 8488 1 1 13 12 TYP. 12 TYP. 1 13 8 4 8348184881814812 TYP. 13 4 81 3 8 14812 TYP. 13 16 EXTERIOR SIGN 'A'1'-2"1'-11"2'-6"7"14'-0"3'-11" 5'-9"12'-2" 17'-11" 33 '-0" TOTAL SF EXTERIOR SIGN 'B'1'-11"1'-2"3'-11"14'-0" 17'-11" 12'-2"5'-9"2'-6"7"33'-0" TOTAL SF ELEVATION KEY NOTES # 1. STONE VENEER - SOUTHERN LEDGESTONE 'CHARDONNAY' BY CULTURED STONE 2. FIBER CEMENT SHAKE SIDING - HARDIESHINGLE - STRAIGHT EDGE PANEL 'NAVAJO BEIGE' BY JAMES HARDIE 3. FIBER CEMENT HORIZONTAL SIDING - HARDIEPLANK - SMOOTH - 'COBBLESTONE' BY JAMES HARDIE 4. ARCHITECTURAL PRECAST CONCRETE SILL 5. 3'-0" x 3'-0" STONE VENEER COLUMN. SEE STRUCTURAL FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 6. ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF ASSEMBLY 7. ELECTRICAL METER - PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT FINISH 8. 2x FIBER CEMENT TRIM - PAINTED TO MATCH 'SW6147' PANDA WHITE 9. 1x FIBER CEMENT TRIM - PAINTED TO MATCH 'SW6147' PANDA WHITE 10. 1x FIBER CEMENT FASCIA TRIM - PAINTED TO MATCH 'SW6147' PANDA WHITE 11. PREFINISHED METAL COPING - PAINTED TO MATCH 'SW6147' PANDA WHITE 12. ALUMIUNUM STOREFRONT FRAMING / GLAZING ASSEMBLY - TINTED INSULATED LOW-E GLASS WITH 'DARK BRONZE' ANODIZED ALUMINUM FRAMES 13. ALUMINUM DOOR / TRANSOM / GLAZING ASSEMBLY - TINTED INSULATED LOW-E GLASS WITH 'DARK BRONZE' ANODIZED ALUMINUM FRAMES 14. HOLLOW METAL DOOR AND FRAME - PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT FINISH 15. 14'-3" x 3'-7" EXTERIOR LED 'NEW HORIZON ACADEMY' AND 'SUN' SIGNAGE. SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. 16. LED LIGHT FIXTURE. SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 17. WALL MOUNTED CT CABINET - PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT FINISH 18. 7'-0" x 3'-6" EXTERIOR LED 'SUN' SIGNAGE SEE ALTERNATE #1: PROVIDE FIXED FIBERGLASS INSULATED WINDOW UNITS IN LIEU OF ALUMINUM STOREFRONT FRAMING. EXTERIOR SIGN 'C' 24'-6" TOTAL SF 7'-0"3'-6"SOUTH ELEVATION - EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS: STONE: 21% GLAZING: 23% SHAKE SIDING: 21% HORIZONTAL SIDING: 16% TRIM: 18% HOLLOW METAL: 1% EAST ELEVATION - EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS: STONE: 25% GLAZING: 19% SHAKE SIDING: 21% HORIZONTAL SIDING: 17% TRIM: 18% R SEH Project Checked By Drawn By Project Status Issue Date This drawing is an instrument of service and shall remain the property of Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH). This drawing, concepts and ideas contained herein shall not be used, reproduced, revised, or retained without the express written approval of SEH. Submission or distribution of this drawing to meet official or regulatory requirements or for purposes in connection with the project is not be construed as publication in derogation of any of the rights of SEH. N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T IO N Project Owner Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.All Rights ReservedCOPYRIGHT © 2022EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSNEW HORIZON ACADEMYCORCORAN, MN165720 SB DKM Concept Design Set - 02.22.2022 - A3 3/16" = 1'-0"2 SOUTH ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0"3 EXTERIOR SIGN SCHEDULE REVISION SCHEDULE REV. # DESCRIPTION DATE 1 - R SEH Project Checked By Drawn By Project Status Issue Date This drawing is an instrument of service and shall remain the property of Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH). This drawing, concepts and ideas contained herein shall not be used, reproduced, revised, or retained without the express written approval of SEH. Submission or distribution of this drawing to meet official or regulatory requirements or for purposes in connection with the project is not be construed as publication in derogation of any of the rights of SEH. N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T IO N Project Owner Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.All Rights ReservedCOPYRIGHT © 2021MATERIALS BOARDNEW HORIZON ACADEMYCORCORAN, MN165720 SB DKM Concept Design Set - 02.22.2022 - A4 REVISION SCHEDULE REV. # DESCRIPTION DATE STONE VENEER -SOUTHERN LEDGESTONE 'CHARDONNAY' BY CULTURED STONE FIBER CEMENT SHAKE SIDING - HARDIESHINGLE -STRAIGHT EDGE PANEL 'NAVAJO BEIGE' BY JAMES HARDIE FIBER CEMENT HORIZONTAL SIDING - HARDIEPLANK -SMOOTH -'COBBLESTONE' BY JAMES HARDIE FIBER CEMENT TRIM -PAINTED TO MATCH 'SW6147' PANDA WHITE ALUMINUM STOREFRONT FRAMING -'DARK BRONZE' ANODIZED ASPHALT SHINGLES - TIMBERLINE HDZ -'BARKWOOD' BY GAF City Council meeting 3-24-2022, Cook Lake final plat approval To the Corcoran City Council, I spoke at the planning commission meeting on March 3, 2022 concerning Cook Lake final plat approval. I asked why the maps for Cook Lake Development didn’t show a trail from the north end of BLC offroad trail to the fire road on the north side of Applewood Pointe. Kevin Shay from Landform stated that there is no trail planned. This was a complete shock to me. Even a member of the planning commission had heard about the planned trail. This trail was to help compensate for the loss of trees along the BLC off road trail. This trail was promised to the BLC homeowners at multiple meetings with Beth. This trail is not meant to be maintained by the city of Corcoran. It could have a class 5 base or crushed concrete base and not have to be a 20’ easement. Kevin Mattson could determine the best base to use for the trail. This trail could run adjacent to the buffer zone. It could be classified as an interpretive trail that would view Cook Lake, wildlife, birds and various plants and trees. The Wetland Overlay District, Code section 1050.010, subd.5 (c), states that trails that serve as an interpretive function may be exempted from buffer and setback requirements. An easement will need to be recorded to document where the trail from outlot C crosses over to the fire road. The city received 8.37 acres of land, which is outlot C, in lieu of park fees in the amount of $87,932. The city paid $87,932 for this land that has no access to it and won’t be utilized by anyone. This not a good use of taxpayer dollars. This trail would be used by the 100 units in Applewood Pointe, BLC North and South and the 19 villas in Cook Lake Highlands. There will be approximately 500 people that will have access to the trail. It could also be used by the New Horizon children for field trips to teach them about plants, birds and wildlife in Corcoran. This trail would also allow everyone in the neighborhood to enjoy the same views of the lake and golf course that Applewood Pointe units will enjoy. The city has a tremendous natural resource in Cook Lake. It is one of only 5 named lakes in Corcoran. The views from Applewood Pointe are million dollar views of the lake and Rush Creek Golf course and should be shared with everyone in the neighborhood. When the 80 acres to the north of Bass Lake Crossing are developed, those families will also be able to enjoy the trail. I am requesting that the Developer be held to their promise and develop a trail from the offroad trail on the north end of Bass Lake Crossing to the fire road behind Applewood Pointe. The developer has been granted many exemptions to the Corcoran zoning ordinances for this PUD and should be obligated to follow through with their commitment to provide a quality interpretive trail. I ask that the council not approve the final PUD until the developer agrees to stand by their promise made to the BLC homeowners. Bass Lake Crossing North and South homeowners have many dogs. What a great trail to walk their dogs. Thank you, Lynn and Mary Alberts 7490 Fir Lane City Council meeting 3-24-2022, Cook Lake final plat approval To the Corcoran City Council, It has been brought to my attention that the Cook Lake Development does not include or show a trail from the north end of the BLC offroad trail to the fire road on the north side of Applewood Pointe. During the walkaround with Beth last fall, I asked her if a trail would be put in the place mentioned above. I was told that there could not be an asphalt path due to environmental reasons, but she would consider putting in a wood-chip trail. The new Applewood units (100) and the MI home development (19 units) will bring in many more residents who would benefit from access to this trail. As it stands today, this property purchased by the City of Corcoran has no access which means nobody can use it because it is not accessible. This new trail would allow everyone in the neighborhood to enjoy the views of Cook Lake and the Rush Creek golf course and make it easier to access other trails in the area. I am requesting that the developer be held to putting in a trail from the offroad trail on the north end of Bass Lake Crossing to the fire road behind Applewood Pointe. Sincerely, Matt & Becky Sumers 7485 Fir Lane Corcoran To: Corcoran City Council RE: Cook Lake Highlands final plat approval To the City Council, As residents of Corcoran living in Bass Lake Crossing, we have been following the discussion regarding the Cook Lake Development to the east of BLC. I recall that Beth Hustad of Trek Real Estate telling the council during 2 of the meetings that she would be willing to add in a walking trail connecting to the existing walking path between BLC and the proposed Applewood Pointe as compensation for the loss of trees and existing vegetation from the proposed development. The current trail is used by local residents and would also be available to be used by future residents of Applewood Pointe. We are asking the Council to require that Beth Hustad live up to her word add in this path before any final approval is granted. Thank you, Lauri and Tom Bolin 19336 74th Ave From:Kendra Lindahl, AICP To:Kevin Shay Subject:FW: Cook Lake Plat - Trail needs to be included in Plan Date:Wednesday, March 16, 2022 12:17:02 PM Please add to the file/packet Kendra Lindahl, AICP LANDFORM, Principal Planner Direct: 612-638-0225 From: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 11:16 AM To: Kendra Lindahl, AICP <KLindahl@landform.net> Cc: Dwight Klingbeil <DKlingbeil@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: FW: Cook Lake Plat - Trail needs to be included in Plan Another public comment email for the packet/file. Thanks, Natalie Davis McKeown Planner Direct: 763-258-4272 From: judy baluty <judy.2340@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 11:15 AM To: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Cook Lake Plat - Trail needs to be included in Plan Natalie, We are residents of Bass Lake Crossing and love the area! Contacting you today as we are very concerned and upset about where the trail is on the Cook Lake Development plans? How can there be no trail planned when it was discussed many times, how did it just get dropped? Very disappointing!! It is key for this development and was discussed many times with Beth in the meetings we attended online. The trail could be used by all to and see the same wonderful nature and views of Cook Lake. The area is beautiful for many to enjoy! We love the trail for exercise, socializing with neighbors, changes of color with the seasons, seeing Sandhil Cranes, deer, turkey and pheasants! We are asking for the developer of this to hold to promise and develop the trail from off-road trail on the north end of Bass Lake Crossing to fire road behind Applewood Pointe. The planner should adhere to follow through with commitment on this trail as promised. Simply put, the plans should NOT be approved until she agrees to put trail in. Please stand by your promise to this Bass Lake Crossing neighborhood by including a quality trail for all to enjoy. Please let me know you have received this and will include it in 3/24/22 Council package! Thank you so much Natalie! Sincerely, Judy & Paul Grannes 7498 Fir Lane Sent from Mail for Windows From:Kendra Lindahl, AICP To:Kevin Shay Subject:FW: Cook Lake Highlands trail Date:Thursday, March 17, 2022 1:13:08 PM Kendra Lindahl, AICP | Principal Planner Tel: 612-638-0225 Mob: 612-290-8102 Email: KLindahl@landform.net The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and destroy any copies of this information. -----Original Message----- From: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2022 12:40 PM To: Kendra Lindahl, AICP <KLindahl@landform.net> Cc: Dwight Klingbeil <DKlingbeil@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: FW: Cook Lake Highlands trail Another public comment email. Natalie Davis McKeown Planner Direct: 763-258-4272 -----Original Message----- From: Steve <stevem1000@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2022 12:29 PM To: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Cook Lake Highlands trail Good morning Natalie. Will you please insert this in the March 24 council meeting packet. Council members, It was some of the neighbors understanding that Beth Hustad would build a trail from Bass Lake Crossing near the Lake extending around Applewood to the fire road. This was made as a concession with some other things to mitigate the neighbors objection to all the PUD variances. She was firm that it would not be asphalt. However, we are hoping that it is a class 5 or something similar so that it will last. When you think about this trail, between both sides of Bass Lake Crossing, Applewood condos and the Cook Lake villa homes, that would be 270 homes with access to the https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url? a=https%3a%2f%2fpath.so&c=E,1,B4DMv2P-w0LxlE2ncJiHKgAm8Om1izjnpplKtBBKOaXkf- D1ueaKzv4J0B_sNVDCP7fZWR5XLhOPGoZhraDcgI1cYuCwNaAeK5yVyGpGq7PJm8H2xhCaHN7wDWe4&typo=1 it will be heavily used. Thank You Steve Mueller Bass Lake Crossing Sent from my iPad From:Kendra Lindahl, AICP To:Kevin Shay Subject:FW: Cook Lake Highlands - March 24, 2022 City Council Meeting Date:Wednesday, March 16, 2022 8:20:25 AM For the file. Kendra Lindahl, AICP LANDFORM, Principal Planner Direct: 612-638-0225 From: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 7:09 AM To: Kendra Lindahl, AICP <KLindahl@landform.net>; Dwight Klingbeil <DKlingbeil@corcoranmn.gov>; Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Fwd: Cook Lake Highlands - March 24, 2022 City Council Meeting Get Outlook for iOS From: icy7rain@aol.com <icy7rain@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 8:54:58 PM To: Jessica Beise <jbeise@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Cook Lake Highlands - March 24, 2022 City Council Meeting Jessica, Please include this email in the City Council's Agenda Packet for March 24, 2022. Also, if you would, please respond that you received our email. Thank you. Dear Corcoran City Council, Looking at the maps of the Cook Lake Highlands development, we are concerned that we do not see the trail included from the north end of the Bass Lake Crossing off road trail to the fire road on the north end of Applewood Pointe. Beth Hustad had mentioned to the Bass Lake Crossing homeowners that she would establish a trail between these points. The City of Corcoran received 8.37 acres of land, in lieu of park fees. The city paid the developer $87,935 for this land that has no access to it and won't be utilized by anyone. We are desperately in need of trails and having this empty land, makes no sense at all. The current Bass Lake Crossing trail is used extensively by the residents of both the North and South Bass Lake Crossing neighborhoods, not to mention the addition of all the new residents that will be moving into Applewood Pointe, the planned 19 Villas and the children of the New Horizon's daycare facility in the Cook Lake Highland development. The developer has been given practically everything she wanted for the PUD, can't we at least have her put in a much-needed trail. Thank you. Dennis & Ruby Schmid 7442 Fir Lane 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. Agenda Item: 8c. TO: Corcoran City Council FROM: Kevin Shay through Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: March 16, 2022, for the March 24, 2022 City Council Meeting RE: Request Cedar Creek Energy on behalf of Linda Lohn for a Zoning Amendment for Ground Mounted Solar (city file no. 22-005) 120-DAY REVIEW DEADLINE:May 18, 2022 1.Description of Request The applicant, Cedar Creek Energy, has requested an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to manage the size of ground mounted solar energy systems based on the AC kilowatt size rather than as part of the allowed detached accessory structure square footage limitations. 2.Background In 2016, the City adopted an ordinance allowing community solar gardens and accessory solar structures in all districts. In 2017, the amended the ordinance to prohibit Community Solar Gardens, but continue to allow property owners to install small-scale ground-mounted or roof-mounted SESs as accessory uses. The applicant is submitting a zoning amendment request after submitting a permit (city file 21-053) for ground mounted solar equipment greater in size than allowed in the current ordinance. 3.Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 3, 2022. The applicant was the only person present to speak on the item. The Planning Commission voted 4-1 (Lanterman nay) to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation to allow ground solar independent of accessory structures. 4.Analysis Staff has reviewed the application for consistency with Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and City Code requirements, as well as City policies. A.Level of City Discretion in Decision-Making The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying an ordinance amendment. The proposed zoning amendment must be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The Zoning Ground Mounted Solar Energy Ordinance Amendment (22-005) 2 March 24, 2022 Ordinance is one of the enforcement tools used to implement the goals and standards set in the Comprehensive Plan. B. Consistency with Ordinance Standards The request from the applicant is to amend the solar energy standards within the performance standards of the Zoning Ordinance to limit the size of ground mounted solar systems by the AC kilowatt size of the system. The applicant indicated that the AC size limitation is similar to the guidelines of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC). The Minnesota PUC allows up to 40 AC kilowatt systems in a residential area. With the current solar technology this equates to approximately 3,400 square feet of ground mounted solar energy systems. The size of the solar energy system would not be tied to the size of the lot. As technology improves the maximum size of the panels would decrease. The applicant stated that in the last 3 years they have seen the size needed for a 40 KW system decrease by 900 square feet. The Zoning Ordinance currently limits ground mounted solar energy systems by considering them accessory structures. This limits the size of the solar system based on the size of the property and other accessory structures present on a given property. The table showing the total accumulated footprint of accessory structures (including ground mounted solar) allowed based on the property size is shown below. Staff has concerns with limiting solar energy systems based on AC kilowatt size. This method will result in a changing size standard as the systems and technology of solar panels progresses. It would also be difficult to answer resident questions and determine the size of the ground mounted solar system without knowing the exact model they would install. Therefore, staff is not recommending proceeding with the applicant’s proposal. Ground Mounted Solar Energy Ordinance Amendment (22-005) 3 March 24, 2022 Staff researched how other communities handle ground mounted solar energy systems in residential districts. The communities handle solar energy systems in the following manner. • Maple Grove – allows ground mounted solar systems in only the rear yard with no size limitation. Not permitted in front or side yards. Solar arrays are subject to the setback standards for the zoning district. • Hugo – allows ground mounted solar systems and considers them as accessory structures. The size allowed is based on the size of the property and is taken out of the total accessory structures allowed. The ground mounted solar are subject to the accessory structure setback for the district. This is the similar to the current Corcoran solar standards with a difference in the size allowed. • Rogers – allows ground mounted solar systems in all residential districts up to 5% of the lot area independent of the allowable accessory structure size limitations. The ground mounted solar are subject to the accessory structure setback for the district. The size limitation for Rogers allows a much larger amount of solar than Corcoran’s current solar standards. Staff recommends amending the ordinance to allow solar energy systems independent from other accessory structures. This would allow ground solar according to the accessory building size table above without counting other accessory structures. Meaning the amount shown in the table would be a properties allowance for accessory structures and they could have an equal area of ground solar energy systems. The change to the ordinance is shown in the table below: Table 1 – Types of Solar Energy Systems Type District Application Required Special standards Building Integrated SES All Districts Building Permit Building-integrated Solar Energy Systems are subject to all required setback, land use, and performance standards for the district in which the building is located. Building or Roof Mounted SES All Districts Certificate of Compliance Non-residential rooftop systems may be pitched at an angle greater than 5% and shall be screened from the adjacent public right-of-way and adjacent residential structures. Ground Mounted Solar Energy Ordinance Amendment (22-005) 4 March 24, 2022 Table 1 – Types of Solar Energy Systems Type District Application Required Special standards Accessory Ground Mounted Solar Energy Systems UR, RR Certificate of Compliance for Residential Uses; Site Plan required for non-residential uses; CUP as required by Section 1030.020, Subd. 4, E Panel coverage shall conform to the accessory building size requirements of Section 1030.020, Subd. 4, E., except: 1. Solar energy system size shall be considered independent from other accessory structures. 1.2. The total footprint shall be calculated as the area of the solar collector surface. 2.3. The maximum solar panel coverage allowed for parcels over 10 acres is 3,969 feet. Approval of this draft ordinance amendment would affect all properties in the UR and RR zoning districts. For reference, the Lohn’s property is 2.54 acres and would be allowed 1,656 square feet rather than the 3,085 square feet they requested as part of their initial application. The City Council has three options for approval. 1. Move forward with staff and Planning Commission recommendation to allow solar energy independent from other accessory structures. 2. Move forward with applicant recommendation to regulate based on AC kilowatt size. 3. No change to the current ordinance. Ground Mounted Solar Energy Ordinance Amendment (22-005) 5 March 24, 2022 5. Recommendation Move to approve the following, as recommended by the Planning Commission: a. Ordinance 2022-454 amending Section 1060.110 (Solar Energy Systems) of the Zoning Ordinance and b. Resolution 2022-25 approving findings of fact for the amendment c. Summary Ordinance 2022-455 Approval of the ordinance amendment and resolution approving findings fact requires a 3/5 vote by the City Council. Approval of the summary publication ordinance requires a 4/5 vote by the City Council. Attachments 1. Ordinance 2022-454 Amending Ground Solar Standards 2. Resolution 2022-25 Findings of Fact for Amendment 3. Summary Ordinance 2022-455 4. Applicant Narrative dated January 18, 2022 5. Solar Site Plan dated January 18, 2022 6. Lohn Comment Letter dated January 2, 2022 7. Maple Grove Solar Ordinance 8. Hugo Solar Ordinance 9. Rogers Solar Ordinance City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2022-454 Motion By: Seconded By: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF TITLE X (ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE CORCORAN CITY CODE RELATED TO GROUND SOLAR STANDARDS (CITY FILE 22-005) THE CITY OF CORCORAN ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Amendment of the City Code. The text of Chapter 1060.110 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Corcoran City Code is hereby amended by deleting the stricken material and adding the underlined material as follows: Subd. 2. Development of Solar Energy Systems. A. Solar Energy Systems shall be permitted in the City of Corcoran according to Table 1 of this section. Table 1 – Types of Solar Energy Systems Type District Application Required Special standards Building Integrated SES All Districts Building Permit Building-integrated Solar Energy Systems are subject to all required setback, land use, and performance standards for the district in which the building is located. Building or Roof Mounted SES All Districts Certificate of Compliance Non-residential rooftop systems may be pitched at an angle greater than 5% and shall be screened from the adjacent public right-of-way and adjacent residential structures. Accessory Ground Mounted Solar Energy Systems UR, RR Certificate of Compliance for Residential Uses; Site Plan required for non-residential uses; Panel coverage shall conform to the accessory building size requirements of Section 1030.020, Subd. 4, E., except: 1. Solar energy system size shall be considered independent from other accessory structures. 1.2. The total footprint shall be calculated as the area of the solar collector surface. City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2022-454 Table 1 – Types of Solar Energy Systems Type District Application Required Special standards CUP as required by Section 1030.020, Subd. 4, E 2.3. The maximum solar panel coverage allowed for parcels over 10 acres is 3,969 feet. Section 2. Effective Date This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its adoption. ADOPTED by the City Council on the 24th day of March 2022. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-25 Page 1 of 1 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINDINGS OF FACT FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF SECTION 1060.110 OF CORCORAN ZONING ORDINANCE (CITY FILE 22-005) WHEREAS, Cedar Creek Energy (“the applicant”) has requested an amendment to the ground mounted solar energy standards; and WHEREAS , staff has analyzed the request and recommended allowing more area for ground mounted solar energy systems, but using a different method than the applicant proposed; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request at a duly called Public Hearing and recommends approval, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA, that it does approve an amendment to Title X (Zoning Ordinance) of the City Code to amend the ground mounted solar energy system standards, based on the following findings: 1. The proposed amendment would be consistent with State law and the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed amendment would allow for consistent ground mounted solar energy system size independent of accessory structures. 3. The proposed amendment is easy to understand and implement consistently. 4. The proposed amendment continues to scale the allowable ground mounted solar energy system with the size of the property. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 24th day of March 2022. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota Page 1 of 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-455 Motion By: Seconded By: CITY OF CORCORAN SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 2022-454 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF TITLE X (ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE CORCORAN CITY CODE RELATED TO GROUND SOLAR STANDARDS (CITY FILE 22-005) Title X of the City Code of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota, is hereby amended to revise the standards for ground mounted solar energy systems of the Zoning Ordinance of the Corcoran City Code. A printed copy of the entire amendment is available for inspection by any person at City Hall during the City Clerk’s regular office hours. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 24th day of March 2022. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director Existing Zoning and proposed: We request that the accessory use ordinance (1030.020, Subd. 4, E), as it pertains to solar energy systems (1060.110), be amended to limit ground mounted systems based not on their square footage but on their AC kilowatt (KW) size. Instituting an AC size limitation will fall more in line with the guidelines of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC), which allows up to 40 kilowatt (AC) systems for residential use. With the currently available technology this would limit the size of a ground mounted solar array at 3,400 square feet. The nature and reason for request: With the advancement in solar technology, the wattage of the panels that make up a solar array have increased dramatically over time. As panel wattages continues to increase there will be a concurrent decrease in the total square footage needed for a solar array. In the past 3 years we have seen the square footage required for a 40 kW (AC) system decrease by roughly 900 sq ft. This is due to the increased wattage of the solar panels while maintaining the same or similar dimension per panel. We have no reason to believe these efficiencies will change, as panel wattages typically increase by 5 – 15 watts each year. per Intended use of Property: The increase in panel wattage and efficiency is crucial to the adoption of solar. As more households have adopted all electric appliances, water heaters and furnaces, along with the increase in utility rates, this will only drive up demand for electricity. Also, with the advancements made in battery technology and affordability there will be additional demand for solar arrays, as the two are often installed together. With the incorporation of batteries into solar systems this provides homeowners the ability to store the excess power produced. This stored energy can then be saved for power outage events or when the solar array is not producing power (e.g. nighttime). The Swanson’s are forward thinking individuals that have updated their home to be fully electric. As part of that, they also wish to insulate themselves from the possibility of being displaced by a power outage which would disrupt the heating, cooling, water, and waste systems at the house, as well as their medical devices. Nature of uses of adjacent properties/Impacts on adjoining properties and mitigating measures to minimize/impact on traffic: Understandably most ground mounted solar arrays of this size will be in large lot residential areas presumably with neighbors. Modern solar panels are designed with more uniform appearances, slimmer frames and incorporate anti-glare properties. Placing solar in the rear of the property is the simplest way to prevent them from being seen. Also incorporating native vegetation to screen the array has been an effective way to hide or obstruct such arrays from public view, including road traffic. As stated in section 1060.110, Subd. 3, 8, B the ordinance calls for specific vegetation as ground cover as well as screening. We implement these techniques when necessary, however the type of ground mount system that will be installed on this project is a low impact system that leaves the ground cover intact with a max height of 9’ 2”. With the very hardy tree line that runs the boarder of the property and the structures in the front of the property the current site conditions are perfect to screen this array not only from neighboring properties but traffic. Potential environmental impact, and measures to avoid, minimizer those potential impacts: Compared to other sources of power production, solar has a vastly more positive impact on the environment. While the manufacturing of solar materials does incur some impact on the environment, the benefits that those materials serve are net positive when considering things such as carbon emissions. Solar arrays typically have little to no impact to their surrounding areas. This cannot be said for other power sources. UMMSPTBACGTACBTBTBPOFFOPMLCAC INV CP INV INV INV SITE PLAN-1 LINDA LOHN - 56.000kW DC, 39.200kW AC PV-1.0 3 SITE PLAN-1 SCALE: 1"=10'-0" INDEX INDEX NO. DESCRIPTION SITE PLAN-1 SITE PLAN-2 GENERAL NOTES ENLARGED SITE PLAN MOUNTING DETAILS STRUCTURAL DETAILS STRING WIRING DIAGRAM SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM ELECTRICAL CALCULATION PLACARD SPEC SHEET(S)-1 SPEC SHEET(S)-2 PV-1.0 PV-1.1 PV-2.0 PV-3.0 PV-4.0 PV-4.1 PV-5.0 PV-6.0 PV-6.1 PV-6.2 PV-7.0 PV-7.1 PV-1.0 1 VICINITY MAP SCALE: NTS PV-1.0 UTILITY:WH ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE SYSTEM INFORMATION DESIGNER/CHECKED BY: SP/LS PROJECT NUMBER:CCEN-003479 SCALE:AS NOTED PAPER SIZE:36"x24" DATE:10/1/21 REV:A ENGINEER OF RECORD DC SYSTEM SIZE: 56.000KW AC SYSTEM SIZE: 39.200KW MODULES: (140)JINKO SOLAR JKM400M-72HL-V INVERTER: (1)SOLAREDGE TECHNOLOGIES SE5000H-US(240V,1PH) (3)SOLAREDGE TECHNOLOGIES SE11400H-US(240V,1PH)(240V,1PH) OPTIMIZER: (140)SOLAREDGE P401 OPTIMIZER SOLAR PV SYSTEMFORLINDA LOHN9735 TAMIAMI TRAIL, CORCORAN, MN 55340.45° 7'55.78"N 93°35'38.10"WAPN:091-192-313-0002DESCRIPTION REV DATE AHJ:MN-CITY OF CORCORAN CEDAR CREEK ENERGY 10361 JAMESTOWN ST NE, BLAINE, MN, 55449. CONTRACTOR INFORMATION: ALEX GAST ALEX.GAST @CEDARCREEKENERGY.COM PH:763-450-9765 MN ELECTRICAL LICENSE:EA006457 GENERAL LICENSE:BC638279 PERMIT PLAN A 10/1/21 APPLICABLE CODES 2020 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE 2018 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE 2020 MINNESOTA BUILDING CODE ADDITIONALLY, CONFORM TO ALL LOCAL ORDINANCES AND REQUIREMENTS DESIGN CRITERIA WIND SPEED: 115MPH SNOW LOAD: 40PSF HIGH DESIGN TEMPERATURE = 32°C LOW DESIGN TEMPERATURE = -26 °C ARRAY LOCATION DISTANCE BETWEEN EQUIPMENT FROM TO DISTANCE(F T) ARRAY 1 PV INVERTER-01,02 20 ARRAY 2 PV INVERTER-03,04,1 PV INVERTER-01,02,03 PV AC COMBINER PANEL 3 PV INVERTER-04 PV AC DISCONNECT 1 PV AC DISCONNECT 150A DER PANEL 340 150A DER PANEL TESLA POWERWALL II -1 5 150A DER PANEL TESLA POWERWALL II -2 5 150A DER PANEL DER UTILITY AC DISCONNECT 1 OF 2 DER UTILITY AC DISCONNECT 1 OF 2 BACKUP GATEWAY 2 1 BACKUP GATEWAY 2 BACKUP PANEL 1 PV AC COMBINER PANEL DER UTILITY AC DISCONNECT 2 OF 2 340 DER UTILITY AC DISCONNECT 2 OF 2 TAP BOX 1 TAP BOX MAIN METER 1 MAIN METER OFF PEAK METER 1 OFF PEAK METER OFF PEAK PANEL 1 MAIN METER MAIN SERCVICE PANEL 1 PV-1.0 2 AREIAL VIEW SCALE: NTS ARRAY LOCATION (N) PV INVERTER-04 (ARRAY MOUNTED) (N) PV INVERTER-03 (ARRAY MOUNTED) (N) PV INVERTER-02 (ARRAY MOUNTED) (N) PV INVERTER-01 (ARRAY MOUNTED) 20' DC TRENCHED CONDUIT RUN RESIDENCE (N) 150A PV AC COMBINER PANEL (ARRAY MOUNTED) (E) 200A MAIN METER (EXTERIOR WALL OF THE BUILDING) (E) 200A MAIN SERVICE PANEL (INTERIOR WALL OF THE BASEMENT) 340' AC TRENCHED CONDUIT RUN NOTE: 1. NO CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH EXITING OVERHEAD LINES 2. PV UTILITY DISCONNECT IS ·LOCATED WITHIN 10' OF MAIN SERVICE/BILLING METER ·VISIBLE,LOCKABLE,READILY ACCESIBLE AND 24/7 ACCESS 3. DESIGN COMPLY WITH NEC AND NEC690 4. LABELS SHALL BE WEATHERPROOF,DURABLE,AND PERMANENTLY MOUNTED 5. 24/7 UNSCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS TO METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECTS. 6. SECONDARY INTERCONNECTION. 7. INVERTERS ARE UL1741 RATED. 8. MODULES ARE UL1703 RATED. ACCOUNT #120-1253-2400 METER #336993993 (N) PHOTOVOLTAIC ARRAY ON THE GROUND ARRAY-01 ARRAY-02 (N) PV AC DISCONNECT (ARRAY MOUNTED) (N) TAP BOX (EXTERIOR WALL OF THE BUILDING) (N) BACKUP GATEWAY 2 (EXTERIOR WALL OF THE BUILDING) (N) 150A DER PANEL (EXTERIOR WALL OF THE BUILDING) (N) TESLA POWERWALL II -1 (INTERIOR WALL OF THE BASEMENT) (N) TESLA POWERWALL II -2 (INTERIOR WALL OF THE BASEMENT) (N) 200A BACKUP PANEL (INTERIOR WALL OF THE BASEMENT) (E) 200A OFF PEAK PANEL (INTERIOR WALL OF THE BASEMENT) (E) OFF PEAK METER (EXTERIOR WALL OF THE BUILDING) (N) DER UTILITY AC DISCONNECT 1 OF 2(EXTERIOR WALL OF THE BUILDING) (N) DER UTILITY AC DISCONNECT 2 OF 2(EXTERIOR WALL OF THE BUILDING) 13'-2" 117'-2" 13'-2" 117'-2" Previous Permit Plans not in Compliance with City Code UMMSPTBACGTACBTBTBPOFFOPMLCAC INV CP INV INV INV SITE PLAN-2 LINDA LOHN - 56.000kW DC, 39.200kW AC PV-1.1 1 SITE PLAN-2 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" PROPERTY LINE PV-1.1 UTILITY:WH ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE SYSTEM INFORMATION DESIGNER/CHECKED BY: SP/LS PROJECT NUMBER:CCEN-003479 SCALE:AS NOTED PAPER SIZE:36"x24" DATE:10/1/21 REV:A ENGINEER OF RECORD DC SYSTEM SIZE: 56.000KW AC SYSTEM SIZE: 39.200KW MODULES: (140)JINKO SOLAR JKM400M-72HL-V INVERTER: (1)SOLAREDGE TECHNOLOGIES SE5000H-US(240V,1PH) (3)SOLAREDGE TECHNOLOGIES SE11400H-US(240V,1PH)(240V,1PH) OPTIMIZER: (140)SOLAREDGE P401 OPTIMIZER SOLAR PV SYSTEMFORLINDA LOHN9735 TAMIAMI TRAIL, CORCORAN, MN 55340.45° 7'55.78"N 93°35'38.10"WAPN:091-192-313-0002DESCRIPTION REV DATE AHJ:MN-CITY OF CORCORAN CEDAR CREEK ENERGY 10361 JAMESTOWN ST NE, BLAINE, MN, 55449. CONTRACTOR INFORMATION: ALEX GAST ALEX.GAST @CEDARCREEKENERGY.COM PH:763-450-9765 MN ELECTRICAL LICENSE:EA006457 GENERAL LICENSE:BC638279 PERMIT PLAN A 10/1/21 (N) PHOTOVOLTAIC ARRAY ON THE GROUND RESIDENCE PROPANE SEPTIC 300'-7" 304'-8" 253'-10" 265'-10" DETACHED STRUCTURE DRIVE WAYTAMIAMI TRAIL40'-4" 72'-9" 111' 217'-9" Previous Permit Plans not in Compliance with City Code 1-2-2022 Linda & Barry Swanson 9735 Tamiami Trail Corcoran, MN 55340 To Whom It May Concern, My name is Barry Swanson, my wife is Linda Lohn-Swanson. Linda has lived at 9735 Tamiami Trail since 1978, 43 years ago. She raised her sons here and offered her time to the city of Corcoran as a Police Reservist for over 5 years. Linda and I were married in 2000 and have continued to reside here today. As we tell our friends, we plan to be here until they carry us out feet first. As a result of that we have had to consider the possibilities of what types of problems we might incur. Our home is total electric, we rely on electric for all our needs from heat to cooling, medical devices and food preparation and storage. Over the years we have faced power outages, but now as we are into our 70’s we need to be prepared for our remaining years in our home. We have seen over the years where our electric needs have increased as the years have passed. When Linda moved in, she was thrilled with the home as it had more than one outlet in each room. Then, over the last 43 years, found a continual need to upgrade the electric needs to keep up with the demands of maintaining a functioning home. Linda and I recently had to have major work done to improve our electrical system, this included going to a 400-amp panel. This after we had a fire in the meter box on the house and the wiring behind it. We nearly lost our home to fire because of these increased electrical needs. It is our hope to never have that type of problem again. We also want to know that in the event of a power outage we will not have to be displaced or lose our property to heat or cold or lose the use of our electrically powered medical devices. We have considered many ways of providing for our health and wellbeing in our “Golden Years”. Which as I am sure you know are not always Golden. The addition of a solar system that guarantees us the resources we need to remain in our home, is one area that, with your help, we can accomplish. As a matter of impact on the community, the panels would be placed in our backyard and only visible from our house or if you were on our property. They will not impact water flow or any other acts of nature in or near our property. Thank you for your consideration, Barry & Linda Swanson And so; Good by Good Luck And may the Good Lord take a liken to you. 2/17/22, 2:54 PM Maple Grove, MN Code of Ordinances 1/4 (a) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (b) (1) a. b. (2) a. b. c. i. ii. iii. (3) a. Sec. 36-833. - Geothermal, solar, and wind energy conversion systems. Geothermal system...... Permitted accessory use in all zoning districts on the condition it meets the requirements of this section and other provisions of the Code. ..... Coils and piping may not cross lot lines without recorded easement from the effected property. ..... Upon determination by the city that encroachment of coils and piping into drainage and utility easements does not interfere with the city's use of the easement, coils and piping may cross into drainage and utility easements with the city's written permission subject to conditions determined by the city. ..... Systems that are proposed under wetland types 1 and 2 shall require approval from the city engineering department in addition to any other permits required for by any other governmental entity. System shall not be allowed under wetland types 3 through 7, or in any Minnesota Department of Natural Resources protected waters. ..... Systems shall meet Minnesota Department of Health Standards (Minnesota Rules chapter 47- 25, part 18.31 and part 70.50 (2009) and any amendments thereto). ..... Photovoltaic system and solar thermal system...... Nonresidential zoning districts...... Permitted accessory use if on a building or in rear yard. Must be screened from adjacent lots pursuant to subsection 36-817(b). ..... Conditional use if in front or side yard. ..... Residential zoning districts...... Permitted accessory use if on a building (both principal and accessory buildings) or in a rear year. Must be screened from adjacent lots pursuant to subsection 36-817(b). Panels on buildings shall not hang over edge of roof. ..... Not permitted in front or side yards. ..... For lots subject the shoreland district: ..... Not allowed within the 75-foot shoreland setback if not on a building; ..... Panels on boat lifts under two square feet is size shall be a permitted use; ..... Panels on boat lifts greater than two square feet in size shall be a conditional use and, in addition to the reviews and approvals required, shall be subject to the review and recommendation of the city lake quality commission. ..... Requirements for all zoning districts. ..... Solar thermal piping shall match roof or solar collector color. ..... 2/17/22, 2:57 PM Hugo, MN Code of Ordinances 1/5 (a) (b) (c) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (d) (1) a. b. c. d. e. (2) a. b. c. Sec. 90-278. - Solar energy systems. Unlawful unless conditions met. It is unlawful for any person to construct, erect, install, or maintain a solar energy system in the city, except in conformance with this section. Purpose and intent. The purpose of this section is to allow for the generation of renewable energy within the City of Hugo. Promoting the safe, effective, and efficient use of solar energy, may reduce the onsite consumption of fossil fuels and utility-supplied electric energy while avoiding adverse impacts on the community at large. General standards for all solar energy systems. Solar energy systems must conform to all of the following standards: A building permit shall be required for the erection of solar energy system. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the operator must provide evidence of an agreement with the local utility. Off-grid systems shall be exempt from providing evidence of an agreement with the local utility. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to secure any solar energy easements, if applicable, to protect solar access for the system (as per MN Statute Section 500.30). Solar energy system components shall be labeled with the manufacturers name and address, model number, and serial number. All exterior electrical or other service lines shall be buried underground. The collection system may be placed overhead near substations or points of interconnection to the electrical grid. Exceptions may be granted in instances where shallow bedrock, water courses, or other elements of the natural landscape interfere with the ability to bury lines. All solar energy systems shall be in compliance with the adopted city and state building code, electrical code, and plumbing code, as amended and receive any necessary permits or approvals from any regulatory agency having jurisdiction. Solar farms. Solar farm interim use permits. An interim use permit application must be submitted for approval by the planning commission and city council before a permit is issued for a solar farm. The information required and the procedure to be followed for all solar farm interim use permit applications shall be the same as that required for a conditional use permit set forth in subsections 90-37(a) and (b). In addition, the applicant shall submit supplementary information pertaining to the nature of the solar farm including: Total square footage of the solar energy system. Total energy production for the site. To scale horizontal and vertical (elevation) drawings. Drawings must show the location of the system on the property including the property lines and proposed fencing or vegetative buffer. Decommissioning plan. Performance standards for solar farms. Solar farms shall be erected and maintained to meet the following standards. Solar farms shall be located on a minimum lot size of ten acres within the Long Term Agricultural (LA), Agricultural (AG), Rural Residential (RR), and Future Urban Service (FUS) zoning districts. Solar farms may also be located in any other zoning district only in the floodplain, as long as all other conditions are met. Solar farms shall be 50 feet from all property lines and public road rights-of-way. Ground mounted solar energy systems shall not exceed 15 feet in height at any point when oriented at 2/17/22, 2:57 PM Hugo, MN Code of Ordinances 2/5 d. e. f. (3) a. b. c. d. e. f. g. (4) a. b. c. (5) maximum tilt. Solar farms shall be enclosed by approved perimeter fencing or adequate vegetative buffer for screening. Exception may be granted if the natural landscape provides screening from all public right of ways and neighboring properties. The owner/ operator of the solar farm shall provide the city with evidence that the solar energy system is functioning properly. This shall be provided at any time deemed necessary by the city. The owner/operator shall submit a decommissioning plan for the solar farm to ensure that the owner/operator properly removes the equipment and facilities upon the end of the project life, abandonment, expiration, or termination of the interim use permit. If the solar energy system remains nonfunctional or inoperative for a continuous period of 12 months, the system shall be deemed abandoned and shall constitute a public nuisance. The owner shall remove the abandoned system at their expense after a demolition permit has been obtained within 90 days after notice has been given. Removal includes the entire structure including transmission equipment, structures and foundations, and the restoration of soil and vegetation. The owner/operator shall provide a current-day decommissioning cost estimate, and shall post financial security in a form acceptable by the city. This estimate must include an inflationary escalator, in an amount determined by the city, which will allow the city to remove the solar farm from the property after the 90-day period has elapsed. Criteria of approval of a solar farm. An application for a solar farm interim use permit may be granted only upon finding that all of the following criteria have been met: The applicant owns the property or has secured a proper lease agreement on the property, unless the city council determines that unique conditions or circumstances warrant special arrangement. The proposed solar farm is allowed as a principle use in the respective zoning district and conforms to this chapter. The proposed solar farm is keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter. The construction of a solar farm shall not impede the city's ability to implement its comprehensive plan. The proposed solar farm is compatible with the present character of the surrounding area. The proposed solar farm shall have a set date in which the permit shall be reviewed or terminated. The proposed solar farm shall be subject to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for the permission of the use. Conditions of approval. In permitting a new solar farm interim use permit or amending an existing solar farm interim use permit, the planning commission may recommend and the city council may impose additional conditions and requirements to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding area and the community at large, mitigate unfavorable consequences of activities resulting from the solar farm, enforce laws and regulations, and ensure compliance with the conditions of the permit. These conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: Limitations on period of use and operation. Buffering and screening measures. Approval periods between one to twenty-five years. Renewal of a solar farm interim use permit. Because of its temporary nature, an interim use permit for a solar farm shall not be renewed. Continuation of a solar farm beyond the date of expiration of its interim use permit requires approval of a new interim use permit. 2/17/22, 2:57 PM Hugo, MN Code of Ordinances 3/5 (6) a. b. c. (7) (8) a. b. (9) a. b. c. (10) (e) (1) a. b. c. d. (2) Interim use permit nontransferable. Solar farm interim use permits do not run with the land. The permit is not tra from person-to-person, and shall expire if there is a change in ownership of the property, unless the following cond met: The new permit holder must own the property or have a written lease agreement with the property owner stating the land will continue to be used for the production of energy via a solar farm. The new permit holder shall abide by all requirements of the original permit, including, but not limited to, posting financial security to the city for decommissioning, as outlined in subsection (2)f. The transfer of the permit must be approved by the city and filed accordingly. Basis for denial. In order to recommend denial of an interim use permit, the planning commission must find that the proposed use will not meet one or more of the conditions found in subsection (d)(3) of this section. Suspension and revocation. The city council may suspend or revoke an interim use permit upon failure of the interim use, or the interim use permit holder, owner, operator, tenant, or user, to comply with city codes, the laws of the State of Minnesota, the approved plans, or the conditions of approval, or by which that activities allowed under the permit adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare. A suspension or revocation of an interim use permit shall be preceded by written notice to the permit holder and a hearing before the city council. The notice shall provide at least ten days' notice of the time and place of the hearing and shall state the nature of the violations. The notice shall be mailed to the permit holder at the most recent address listed on the application. Expiration and termination. An interim use permit shall expire and the interim use permit shall terminate at the earlier of: The expiration date established by the city council at the time of approval, but in no case more than 25 years from the date of approval. Occurrence of any event identified in the interim use permit for the termination of the use. Upon an amendment to the City Code that no longer allows the interim use. Issuance of permit. The community development director or designee shall, within ten days of city council approval of any interim use permit, provide one copy of the completed permit to the applicant, the city clerk, and for permits issued in the floodplain district or shoreland district, to the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources. Accessory solar energy systems. Accessory solar energy systems building permit. A building permit application must be submitted and approved by the building official before an accessory solar energy system is installed. The information required and the procedure to be followed for all accessory solar energy system applications shall be the same as that required for a building permit. In addition, the applicant shall submit supplementary information pertaining to the nature of the accessory solar energy system including: Total square footage of the solar energy system. Total energy production for the site. To scale horizontal and vertical (elevation) drawings. Drawings must show the location of the system on the building or on the property including the property lines and proposed screening, if required. Accessory commercial or industrial solar energy systems building permit. All commercial or industrial solar 2/17/22, 2:57 PM Hugo, MN Code of Ordinances 4/5 (3) a. 1. 2. b. 1. 2. 3. c. 1. 2. d. energy systems will require submittal for approval by the community development director or designee before a permit is issued for any accessory solar energy system. This submittal process will require the same application and supplementary information required in (e) (1). Denial of a building permit request may be appealed to the planning commission by following the procedures outlined in section 90-37.1. Performance standards for accessory solar energy systems. Accessory solar energy systems shall be erected and maintained to meet the following standards. Setbacks for accessory solar energy systems are as follows: Ground or pole mounted solar energy system panels shall conform to all setback requirements for accessory uses in the district in which they are located. Roof mounted solar energy systems shall abide by all manufacturer specifications and requirements. Coverage requirements for accessory solar energy systems are as follows: Ground mounted solar energy systems are considered accessory structures. The size of the system (sq. ft.) will be calculated as part of the maximum combined number and size of accessory structures allowed by lot size. The number and size of accessory structures permitted are as follows: Lot size Maximum Number of Accessory Structures Allowed Maximum Combined Size of Accessory Structures (Square Feet) Under 1.5 acre 1 260 1.5 to 2.99 acres 2 1,500 3 to 4.99 acres 2 2,000 5 to 9.99 acres 2 3,500 10 or more acres 3 5,000 Roof mounted systems are not accessory structures and are excluded from size and number calculations for accessory structures. A variance application may be submitted if the ground mounted solar energy system exceeds the limits for maximum combined size of accessory structures, but does not meet the definition of a solar farm. Height requirements for accessory solar energy systems are as follows: Ground or pole mounted solar energy systems shall not exceed 15 feet in height when oriented at maximum tilt. Roof mounted solar energy systems shall not project vertically more than the height requirements of the district in which they are located. Screening requirements for accessory solar energy systems are as follows: 2/17/22, 2:57 PM Hugo, MN Code of Ordinances 5/5 1. 2. e. f. g. (4) a. b. d. Residential roof mounted solar energy systems are not required to be screened by this section. Commercial or industrial roof mounted solar energy systems shall be installed such that it is compatible with the building architecture. Architectural standards as found in the commercial and industrial guidelines, a PUD, or other architectural conditions shall apply. Except in the agricultural and long-term agricultural zoning districts, no ground or pole mounted solar energy system shall be located or protrude in front of the principle building on the site, in relation to any public street. Roof mounted solar energy systems shall not extend beyond the perimeter of the building on which the system is mounted or built. Exterior piping for solar hot water systems shall be allowed to extend beyond the perimeter of the building. If the solar energy system remains nonfunctional or inoperative for a continuous period of 12 months, the system shall be deemed abandoned and shall constitute a public nuisance. The owner shall remove the abandoned system at their expense within 90 days. Removal includes the entire structure including transmission equipment, structures and foundations, and the restoration of soil and vegetation. Criteria for approval of an accessory commercial or industrial solar energy system. An application for an accessory commercial or industrial solar energy system permit may be granted only upon a finding that all the following criteria have been met: The applicant owns the property or has a leasing contract with the owner of the property. The proposed solar energy system conforms to this chapter. The proposed solar energy system shall be subject to, by agreement with the property owner or lease holder, any conditions that the city deems appropriate for permission of the use. (Ord. No. 2016-475, 12-21-2015) 2/24/22, 1:01 PM Print Preview https://rogers.municipalcodeonline.com/book/print?type=ordinances&name=Sec_125-93_-_Alternative_Energy_Systems_Performance_Standards 1/2 Sec 125-93 - Alternative Energy Systems Performance Standards (a)Solar (1)In general. Solar energy systems shall be permitted in all zoning districts, subject to the standards of this Article. Solar collector surfaces and all mounting devices shall comply with the minimum yard requirements of the district in which they are located. Screening of solar collector surfaces shall not be required. (2)Building-Mounted Solar Energy Systems a.Notwithstanding the height limitations of the zoning district, building mounted solar energy systems shall not extend higher than three feet above the ridge level of a roof on a structure with a gable, hip, or gambrel roof and shall not extend higher than 10 feet above the surface of the roof when installed on flat or shed roof. b.The solar collector surface and mounting devices for building-mounted solar energy systems shall be set back not less than one foot from the exterior perimeter of a roof for every one foot that the system extends above the parapet wall or roof surface, if no parapet wall exists, on which the system is mounted. Solar energy systems that extend less than three feet above the roof surface shall be exempt from this provision. c.All solar energy systems using a reflector to enhance solar production shall minimize glare from the reflector that affects adjacent or nearby properties. Measures to minimize nuisance glare include selective placement of the system, screening on the north side of the solar array, modifying the orientation of the system, reducing use of the reflector system, or other remedies that limit glare. (3)Freestanding Solar Energy Systems a.Freestanding solar energy systems, measured to the highest point of the system, shall not exceed the height of the principal structure or 20 feet, whichever is less. Freestanding solar energy systems up to 16 feet in height shall be subject to the minimum yard requirements of an accessory structure. Freestanding solar energy systems greater than 16 feet in height shall be subject to the minimum yard requirements of a principal structure. The required yard shall be measured from the property line to the closest part of the structure at minimum design tilt. b.In all the districts except A, the area of the solar collector surface of freestanding solar energy systems shall not exceed five of the lot area. Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary, the maximum area of solar energy systems shall be calculated independently of the floor area of all other accessory structures on the zoning lot. c.The supporting framework for freestanding solar energy systems shall not include unfinished lumber. d.All abandoned or unused freestanding solar energy systems shall be removed within 12 months of the cessation of operations. e.All solar energy systems using a reflector to enhance solar production shall minimize glare from the reflector that affects adjacent or nearby properties. Measures to minimize nuisance glare include selective placement of the system, screening on the north side of the solar array, modifying the orientation of the system, reducing use of the reflector system, or other remedies that limit glare. 2/24/22, 1:01 PM Print Preview https://rogers.municipalcodeonline.com/book/print?type=ordinances&name=Sec_125-93_-_Alternative_Energy_Systems_Performance_Standards 2/2 (4)Administrative Review Process a.In General. The Zoning Administrator shall have up to 15 working days following the submittal of a complete application to approve or deny such application. The Zoning Administrator may impose such conditions and require such guarantees deemed reasonable and necessary to protect the public interest and to ensure compliance with the standards and purposes of this zoning ordinance and policies of the comprehensive plan in addition to building permit review. b.Submittal Requirements. An application for a solar energy system shall be filed on a form approved by the Zoning Administrator. In addition, the applicant shall submit the following:(1)Writ10evidence that the electric utility service provider that serves the proposed site has been informed of the applicant’s intent to install a solar energy system, STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 10a. Council Meeting: March 24, 2022 Prepared By: Maggie Ung Topic: Combine, Close Out and Create Funds Action Required: Approval Summary: On January 31, 2022 the City of Corcoran completed transition to BS&A general ledger module. With the transition to the new software, staff was able to review the general ledger and is proposing the combining and closing out a few funds and to create one additional fund. There are currently funds in the Banyon software that has never been used: Economic Development Authority Fund (203) and Rolling Hills Rd Project Fund (801). Comp Plan Update Fund (800) was last used in 2008 and the funds have been transferred out to the General Fund. The Escrow Fund (500) was established in 20 05 to track escrow payments given to the City and the Investment Control Fund (999) was created in 2009 to separate invested cash. Following GFOA best practices, having separate funds is unnecessary as these are reported in the Annual Financial Report under the General Fund . Additionally, investment is already separately tracked in its own asset account and is reported as restricted cash. Escrows are reported as liability accounts and will be tracked with the BS&A building development module. Staff recommends combining these funds in the general ledger with the General Fund (100) to align with the Annual Financial R eport. The following capital project funds are recommended to be consolidated into a new fund called the Pavement Management Fund (408). These will be tracked in separate departments in order to reorganize and simplify the general ledger: Asphalt Maintenance Fund (305), Rolling Hills/Lark in Overlay Fund (426), Gleason/66th Parkway Extension Fund (427), Appaloosa Woods Street Improvement Fund (428), Corcoran Trail East/West Fund (429), City Center Drive Fund (431) and CSAH 101/105 Ave Fund (432). The consolidation helps simplify the overall general ledger and for reporting and tracking purposes. Financial/Budget: There is no financial or budget imp act. Options: 1.Approve Resolution 2022-26 Combine, Close Out and Create Funds. 2.Decline Resolution 2022-26 Combine, Close Out and Create Funds. Recommendation: Approve Resolution 2022-26 Combine, Close Out and Create Funds. Page 2 Council Action: Consider a motion to approve Resolution 2022-26 Combine, Close Out and Create Funds. Attachments: 1.Resolution 2022-26 Combine, Close Out and Create Funds City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-26 Page 1 of 2 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION TO COMBINE, CLOSE OUT AND CREATE FUND S WHEREAS, the following funds have never been used: Economic Development Authority Fund (203)and Rolling Hills Rd Project Fund (801); WHEREAS, Comp Plan Update Fund (800) was last used in 2008 and the funds have been transferred out to the General Fund; WHEREAS, the Escrow Fund (500) was established in 2005 to track escrow payments giv en to the City and the Investment Control Fund (999) was created in 2009 to separate invested cash; following GFOA best practices, this is unnec essary as escrows can be tracked in separate liability accounts and investment can be tracked in a separate asset account, therefore, these funds shall be combined with the General Fund (100); WHEREAS, the following funds will be consolidated into a Pavement Management Fund (408) and tracked in separate departments in order to reorganize and simplify the general ledger: Asphalt Maintenance Fund (305), Rolling Hills/Larkin Overlay Fund (426), Gleason/66 th Parkway Extension Fund (427), Appaloosa Woods Street Improvement Fund (428), Corcoran Trail East/West Fund (429), City Center Drive Fund (431) and CSAH 101/105 Ave Fund (432); NOW THEREFORE BE IT BE RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Corcoran, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, hereby closes out funds 203, 800 and 801, combine funds 500 and 999 into the General Fund, and combine funds 305, 426, 427, 428, 429, 431 and 432 into a newly created Pavement Management Fund. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean City of Corcoran March 24, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022-26 Page 2 of 2 Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 24th day of March, 2022. ________________________________ Tom McKee – Mayor ATTEST: __________________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 MEMORANDUM 105 South Fifth Street, Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net DATE March 17, 2022 TO Jessica Beise, Natalie Davis McKeown CC City Council, Planning Commission, Parks & Trails Commission FROM Kendra Lindahl, City Planner RE Active Corcoran Planning Applications Projects/Comments in blue italics are new The following is a summary of project status for current, active projects: 1.Pioneer Trail Industrial Park (formerly Highway 55 Business Park) (PID 32-119-23-34-0013, 32- 119-23-34-0007, 32-119-23-43-0005 and 32-119-23-43-0006) (city file no. 21-047). The City Council reviewed a concept plan on November 22, 2021 and generally indicated support. Staff has been preparing an EAW for the site. As the developer has refined the plans, they are requesting a second Council review as they are now requesting PUD approval for reduced setbacks. The City Council reviewed and provided comment on February 24th. The City Council is expected to order distribution of the draft EAW for review and comment at the March 24th Council meeting. 2.NE District Plan and Design Guidelines (City file 21-050). The City received a planning grant from Hennepin County. Staff held a second open house on March 15th for public information. The draft is scheduled for review by the Planning Commission at their April 7th meeting. The public hearing is scheduled for May 5th at the Planning Commission for City Council action on May 26th. The moratorium is set to expire on June 10, 2022. 3.Final Plat and Final PUD Development Plan for “Cook Lake Highlands” at 19220 CR 10 (PID 25- 119-23-14-0002) (City file 21-057). Trek Real Estate has submitted the application. The item was reviewed at the March 3rd Planning Commission and the City Council action is expected at the March 24th meeting. 4.Wright Hennepin Electric Preliminary Plat, Site Plan and Administrative Permit at 7400 CR 116 (PID 25-119-23-23-0001) (city file 22-004). The applicant has submitted an application for a new electric substation. The application is scheduled for the February 17th Parks and Trails Commission, a public hearing at the March 3rd Planning Commission and March 24th City Council action. 5.City wide Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Ground Mounted Solar (City file 22-005). On behalf of Barry Swanson and Linda Lohn-Swanson, Cedar Creek Energy has submitted a request for an amendment to allow larger footprint ground mounted solar on residential parcels. This item was reviewed at the March 3rd Planning Commission and action is expected at the March 24th City Council meeting. 6.PUD Sketch Plan for “Corcoran Farms Business Park” at 20130 Larkin Road (PID 26-119-23-13- 0006) (city file no. 22-006). The applicant has submitted as sketch plan for five industrial buildings totally 726,396 sq. ft. They are requesting a PUD to allow reduced setbacks. The City Council reviewed and provided comment on February 24th. Staff is drafting the EAW and the City Council is expected to order distribution of the draft EAW for review and comment at the May 26th Council meeting. Agenda Item: 11a. MEMORANDUM 2 7. Final Plat and PUD Final Plan for “Bellwether 8th Addition” (PID 12-119-23-21-0001) (city file no. 22-007). Pulte has requested approval of 95 lots in the southwest corner of the project. This phase will also include dedication of public park. The item is scheduled for Planning Commission review on April 7th and City Council action on April 28th. 8. Final Plat and PUD Final Plan for “Amberly 2nd Addition” (PID 01-119-23-34-0002) (city file no. 22-008). Pulte has requested approval of 51 lots in the northwest corner to complete the Amberly subdivision. The item is scheduled for Planning Commission review on April 7th and City Council action on April 28th. 9. Site Plan, Interim Use Permit and Variance for “Westside Wholesale Tire” at 19950 75th Ave (PID 26-119-23-14-0018) (city file no. 22-011). Westside Tire has submitted the application for development of the lot to resolve a code compliance issue. The item is scheduled for a public hearing at the Planning Commission on April 7th and City Council action on April 28th. 10. PUD Final Plan and Final Plat for Rush Creek Reserve 2nd Addition (city file no. 22-012). The applicant has submitted the application for the 2nd Addition and staff is reviewing for completeness. This phase includes 106 units (29 single family detached homes, 16 twin homes, 24 villa homes and 27 townhomes). The item is scheduled for Planning Commission review on April 7th and City Council action on April 28th. 11. Preliminary Plat and Variance for “Kariniemi Meadows” at 23185 CR 10 (PID 18-119-23-11- 0002) (city file no. 22-013). The applicant has submitted an application for approval of a 10 lot residential subdivision. Staff is reviewing the item for completeness. The item is tentatively scheduled for review at the March 17th Parks and Trails Commission, a public hearing at the May 5th Planning Commission and May 26th City Council action. 12. Rezoning, Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development for Pulte for “Walcott Glenn” (PIDs 36-119-23-44-0013, 36-119-23-44-0009, 36-119-23-44-0008, 36-119-23-44-0010, 36- 119-23-44-0014, 36-119-23-44-0031, 36-119-23-44-0024, 36-119-23-44-0033 and 36-119-23-44- 0030) (City file no. 22-015). The plans include 44 single family homes, 85 townhomes and a public park. The item is tentatively scheduled for Parks and Trails Commission review on April 21st, a public hearing at the May 5th Planning Commission and action at the May 26th City Council meeting. 13. Final Plat for “Garages Too” (PID’s 35-119-23-44-0004 and 35-119-23-41-0002) (city file no. 22- 016). The final plat for the mini-storage/self-storage facility is currently incomplete, but will be scheduled for City Council review when the missing items are received. 14. Final Plat and PUD Final Plan for “Bellwether 9th Addition” (PID 01-119-23-34-0002) (city file no. 22-017). The final plat is for 37 lots. The item is scheduled for Planning Commission review on April 7th and City Council action on April 28th. 15. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Ditzer Garage at 9320 Cherry Lane (PID 12-119-23-43-0013) (city file 22-020). The application is currently being reviewed for completeness, but is tentatively scheduled for a public hearing at the May 5th Planning Commission and May 26th City Council action. 16. Wawra Ag Preserve at 21401 Larkin Road (city file 22-021). The application is currently being reviewed and will be scheduled for City Council action in April or May. 17. PUD ordinance amendment (city file 22-022). This is a city-initiated ordinance to amend the final PUD development plan process. This is scheduled for a public hearing at the April 7th Planning Commission meeting and April 28th City Council. The following projects were recently acted upon and will be closed out: 1. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Ordinance Amendments (city-initiated) (city file 21-051). Planning and Engineering staff have been working on ordinance updates required to comply with State MS4 standards. The ordinance amendments were reviewed at a public hearing at the Planning Commission on January 6th and the Commission continued the item to the February 3rd meeting and recommended approval. City Council approved the item on February 24th. MEMORANDUM 3 2. Final Plat and PUD Final Plan for “Bellwether 7th Addition” (PID 01-119-23-43-0009) (city file no. 21-060). Pulte has submitted an application for 17 lots on the former Schober Homestead property. The item was reviewed at the February 3rd Planning Commission and approved at the February 24th City Council meeting. 3. ATC-TMO T-Mobile Site Plan Amendment at 7201 CR 101 (PID 25-119-23-44-005) (city file no. 22- 014). The applicant submitted an application to add ground equipment at an existing telecommunications tower and staff is reviewing for completeness. This application was administratively approved. City of Corcoran 2022 City Council Schedule Agenda Item: 12. March 25 th – Special Council Meeting • City Administrator Interviews -- Lunch at 12 PM/Interviews at 2:30 PM April 14, 2022 Work Session (Tentative) Code Enforcement Review and Priorities for 2022 April 14, 2022 • Fire Department Annual Reports • Years of Service Recongition – Jesse Olson • Years of Service Recongition – Duane Hochstetler • Memorial Bench Program • Rush Creek Reserve Turn Lanes – Award Bids • Award Bids – Road Materials • Policy for Tabling Planning Items • Solicitors, Peddlers, Transient Merchant Ordinance • RFP for Logo • Weater Supply Planning – Financial Analysis April 28, 2022 (Mayor McKee Not in Attendance) • Active Corcoran Planning Applications • Financial Performance Report • Bellwether 8th Addition FP and FPUD (city file 22-007) – tentative • Amberly 2nd Addition FP and FPUD (city file 22-008) – • Karineimi Meadows PP (city file 22-013) – tentative • NE district plan update (city file 21-050) • Rush Creek Reserve 2nd FPUD and FP/DA (city file 22-012) – tentative • Pulte Walcott Glen – Rezoning, PUD plan and Preliminary Plat (city file 22-015) - tentative May 12, 2022 Work Session (Tentative) • Natural Resources May 12, 2022 • NE District Plan and Design Guidelines update standards (Moratorium expires 6- 10-2022) • Watershed Commissioner Guenthner – Presentation • Boardwalk at Bellwether RFP • Memorial Bench Program • Gateway Sign Discussion Page 2 of 3 • Westside Tire Variance, SP and IUP (city file 22-011) May 26, 2022 Work Session (Tentative) • May 26, 2022 • Active Corcoran Planning Applications • NE District Plan and Design Guidelines update standards (Moratorium expires 6- 10-2022) • EAW Decision – Hwy 55 Business Park • Three Rivers Park District – Diamond Lake Regional Trail Presentation June 9, 2022 • 2021 Audit June 23, 2022 • 2023 Budget Priorities • Active Corcoran Planning Applications July 14, 2022 July 28, 2022 • Financial Management Plan Update • Active Corcoran Planning Applications • Financial Performance Report August 11, 2022 August 25, 2022 • Active Corcoran Planning Applications September 8, 2022 • 2023 Preliminary Levy • Levy Insert Document September 22, 2022 • Active Corcoran Planning Applications October 13, 2022 Page 3 of 3 October 27, 2022 • Active Corcoran Planning Applications • Financial Performance Report November 10, 2022 • Construction Hours Review – Annual After Change in 2021 • Park Signs Plan November 24, 2022 • Active Corcoran Planning Applications December 8, 2022 • Public Hearing – 2023 Proposed Budget and Property Tax Levy • 2023 Full-time, Part-time, and Seasonal Wage Schedule • 2023 General Fund Budget and Property Tax Levy • 2023 Fee Schedule • 2023 Water and Sanitary Sewer Budget • 2023 Goal Setting Date December 22, 2022 • Active Corcoran Planning Applications