3.5. Consider Land Sale for Construction of Ice Arena.t
I MEMORANDUM
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 9 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager
DATE: November 7, 1996
I SUBJ: Consider the Sale of Land to the Chaska /Chanhassen Hockey Association
Under Minnesota Statute, the city council must hold a public hearing when considering the sale
of public land. Staff published a notice in the Chanhassen Villager on October 31, 1996
regarding the proposed sale of land to the Chaska /Chanhassen Hockey Association for the
construction of an ice arena. The site is located on Lots 5 & 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Business
Park 5"' Addition.
Attached is a copy of a staff report /site plan review from the city council meeting of September
23, 1996, regarding the Hockey Association's request for land transfer.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Notice of Public Hearing
2. City Council minutes dated September 23, 1996
2. Staff Report/Site Plan Review dated September 18, 1996
MANAGER'S COMMENTS
' I asked staff to provide a list of projects /functions for which the city might have a need for this
property. The list is as follows:
' Public Works Expansion: The existing public works site will not meet our total land needs
as we move into the next century. We can accommodate an additional expansion on the site,
but storage will become critical. Although it is best to keep streets /parks /utilities at one site,
the close proximity of this site to the existing public works building could work, i.e. pull
utility operations out of the existing building and move them to this lot, which would
definitely help our storage needs for sand, gravel, pipes, hydrants, etc. The close proximity
' should allow for the sharing of equipment /manpower without being too inefficient; and
Mr. Don Ashworth '
November 7, 1996
Page 2
Composting: The existing site at Bandimere Park simply isn't working. Doing nothing is
not an alternative. When Bandimere becomes used as a park, composting operations will '
assuredly cease and the city will be in need of a site roughly the size of this site; and
Recycling: Another building expansion at public works will put the existing recycling center
(operated by Carver County) out of business at that location. Again, this becomes a
mandatory function which will necessitate finding another place for this operation.
I recognize the need for hockey within the community. However, I could not simply forget our
other needs. The functions outlined above will generate the necessity for additional land
acquisitions which, in all likelihood, will come out of the taxpayers pocketbook. '
Should the council decide that the sale to the Hockey Association was in the best interests of the
city, I would advise that we attempt to keep the sale to solely that portion of the site needed by '
the hockey facility, that the site plan be developed in such a fashion so as to allow multiple uses
of the parking lot, driveway, cross easements, etc. And finally, that restrictions be placed into the '
deed providing the city with a "first right of refusal" for a depreciated value for the structure
and /or remaining principal outstanding. The same should apply to any sale being considered for
any proposed use other than ice hockey. I
DWA (11 -7 -96)
g: \ad m i n \tg \hoc key ri n k. e
' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Notice is hereby given that the City of
' Chanhassen City Council willhold apublic
hearing on Tuesday, November 12,1996 at
7:30 p.m. The purpose of this hearing is to
consider the disposal of a certain tracts of
' land to the Chaska/Chanhassen Hockey
Association for the construction of an ice
arena. The site is located on:
Lot5, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Busi-
ness Park 5th Addition
Lot 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Busi-
ness Park 5th Addition
The hearing is being conducted in ac-
cordance with the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes Section 469.029. A plan showing
the location of the proposal is available for
public review at City Hall during regular
business hours.
All interested persons are invited to
' attend this public hearing and express their
opinions in regard to this proposal.
Todd Gerhardt
Assistant City Manager
937 -1900 ext. 119
(Published in the Chanhassen Villager on
Thursday, Oct. 31, 1996; No. 2826)
Affidavit of Publication
Southwest Suburban Publishing
State of Minnesota)
)SS.
County of Carver )
Stan Rolfsrud, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is the publisher or the authorized agent of the
publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Villager and has full
knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows:
(A) This newspaper has complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal
newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as
amended.
(B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No.,
was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said Notice
is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of the
newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabetfrom A to 7_, both inclusive,
and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition and
publication of the Notice:
abcdefghijkimnopgr tuvy�jf�z
Stan'i<olfsrud, General Manager
or his designated agent
Subscribed n sworn before me on
thig, day of 1996
Notary Public
s .rotes rs�r.+�x �.a•:•orsrrr+.r
r NZ
NOTAFW PODUC — . NNESOTA
MY C'.J- V% :iSSiON EXPIRES 1 -31 -00
RATE INFORMATION
Lowest classified ratepaid by commercial users for comparable space.........$11.00 per column inch
Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ............. .........................$11.00 per column inch
Rate actually charged for the above matter ......................... ..........................S7.67 per column inch
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilman Mason: Second.
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the construction plans and specifications for
Villages on the Ponds, Phase I dated September 16, 1996, prepared by BRW, Inc. and the PUD/Development
contract dated September 23, 1996, subject to the following conditions:
The applicant enter into the development contract and supply the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in
the amount of $1,076,000.00 and pay an administration fee of $106,905.00.
2. The applicant's engineer shall work with city staff in revising the construction plans to meet city standards.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark, I'm going to move items (g), (h) and 0) to item 13. Is there anyone here for any of those
items? Okay, if not we'll move along with the agenda.
VISITOR PRESENTATION: STEVE OLINGER, CHASKA /CHANHASSEN HOCKEY ASSOCIATION
(CCHA), ICE ARENA IN CHANHASSEN.
Public Present:
Name Address
Joe P. 1000 Lake Susan Hills Drive
Amy Erickson
Mark Austo
Brad H.
Chad Sullivan
Elizabeth Pirmell
Brian & Marge R.
Layton & Linda Zellman
Lynn Clemends
Bryan and Peter McGovern
Dave Erickson
Ken Knutson
Ray R.
Stan Schwarz
Brian Johnson
Ed Garden 764 Ashley Drive, Chaska
Rick Jackson
7090 Pimlico Lane
15980 Dutoit Road, Carver
7280 Cactus Curve
577 Concord Drive, Chaska
P.O. Box 5, Chanhassen
1281 Hillside Circle, Chaska
2290 Timberwood Drive
8699 Mary Jane Circle
900 Penamint Court
520 Pineview Court
645 Dresden Drive
60 Lake Drive East
2674 Spring Lake Road, Shakopee
2000 Scarborough Court, Chaska
8646 Chan Hills Drive
Mayor Chmiel: Todd, do you wish to say something?
Todd Hoffman: Sure can. I'd like to introduce Steve Olinger, the President of the Hockey Association.
Mayor Chmiel: I hope you're as fast as he is.
Steve Olinger: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. First I'd like to thank you for bringing this to the table. I
think there is a unique opportunity here to combine the efforts of city government, private individuals and private
business in trying to do something for the children of this community, and that is to build a partly funded hockey
arena. We're in desperate need of ice. There's a severe ice shortage at this time, and this is the only way that we
have been able to see that we can, and we can build in a short period of time. We believe it's a unique opportunity to
combine business and private individuals and the city in something that ... the children. We did a study and we found
PA
I
1
' City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
the only way to do it is each one of these entities holds a piece of the puzzle and the piece that the city holds is a
parcel of land that we could use. If we can get that we're confident that we can put together the rest of the pieces of
the puzzle to make this arena happen. I will now yield to Randy Mueller who is the Chairman of the ice arena task
force. I do want to say that, this not only counts for the children of Chanhassen but also Chaska, Victoria, and
Carver and even Minnetonka. I received a letter this morning from the President of the Minnetonka Hockey
1 Association and it reads as follows. Dear Chanhassen City Council. On behalf of the Minnetonka Youth Hockey
Association I would like to give our support for the building of a new ice arena in Chanhassen. MHYA has shared a
co- relationship with Chaska /Chanhassen Hockey Association... As part of this relationship, CCHA will make
available 300 to 500 hours of ice time in it's new arena to MHYA skaters. MHYA in return is willing to commit to
using these hours for the foreseeable future, helping to ensure that the new arena will be utilized at full capacity. We
hope the Chanhassen City Council will give it's support ... for our youth. Sincerely, Matt Thompson, President,
Minnetonka Youth Hockey Association. So you see this isn't just for the children here. It's for the children of half a
dozen communities around here. And we're just coming to ask that the city contribute the land for this so that we
can do the rest of the work... So right now I'll yield to Randy Mueller. A year ago I commissioned a ice arena task
force and Randy was the Chairman of that and he'll give his presentation and you can ask all your questions of him.
Thank you for your time.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.
Randy Mueller: Mayor and Council. Right now one of my colleagues, Mark Ekloh who also served on the task
force, to help me here in the presentation. The presentation that we're going to give to you is the same presentation
that we gave to the CCHA Board on May 6th and it really represents the findings of our task force, as well as our
reconi nendations and I'd like to be able to spend a few moments with you to go through some of those findings.
First of all, it's hard to read I know, but we were sanctioned and charged by the CCHA ... task force to really go out
and search getting as much information and as much data as possible just to find out exactly what kind of situation
the CCHA was in. Not only in meeting the needs of our youth but also vis a vis, our competition in District 6. For
those of you that don't know, District 6 is one of the most, if not the most competitive districts in the State of
Minnesota where we compete against the likes of Apple Valley, Bloomington Jefferson, Burnsville and others.
...compare their quality of ice time because they do have available ice versus what we're able to offer our kids. So
we did have a mission statement that we operated on. We had a lot of significant volunteers from the association that
are participating in the task force and we're please to show you our results from those. From that task force.
Basically on the next slide here, history in time that I'd like you to walk through. This is not something that
happened overnight. As Steve mentioned, really the task force was formed probably about a year ago and Steve
'
and ... Board have been working on this problem for some time and this history time line that you see here basically
says that we've been working this issue and problem for some time, and it probably came to a critical head last
winter when what I call the ice disadvantage really kicked in. A lot of parents were upset due to the fact that they
weren't getting the quality of ice necessary, not only to compete in District 6 but a lot of the kids in our program
' quite honestly were relegated to outdoor ice for their practice times and as you all know last winter was a very
difficult winter for all of us. Very cold. Poor weather conditions and the type of weather we had last winter wrecks
havoc on outdoor ice. I've got my son skated on a Squirt C team last year. Had one outdoor practice last January
because the conditions were so bad. So the quality of ice is very, very important to our program. And... because it's
such a team oriented sport, we need to have ice. We need to have the kids playing together in order to enhance their
skills and be competitive in this program. Some of our findings basically, and here's some of the facts. Due to the
growth in the community, and one thing that we're pretty proud of. This area is growing quite substantially. The
Chaska, Chan, Victoria, Carver, Minnetonka area. People are moving to this community to live here for the same
reasons we live here. And therefore they're bringing with them kids that want to get involved in hockey. So due to
the growth of the community. The existing indoor ice facility just will not be meeting it. It's not meeting it now and
' will not meet it in the future. I also want to emphasize, we're here representing the CCHA and our focus is on
hockey but there are other interests for the community at large, including figure skating clubs and other open skate
that are very important to the entire community. Basically we're asking the, and our total participants who will go at
61% until 1999, year 2000 and I think that's a conservative estimate. If one of this goes to District # 112 and looks at
the number of kids and what we ... that particular school district, which we're all a part of, you'll know it's supposed
to grow and the challenges that grow it's causing all of us. The biggest growth is going to occur, for those that are
not familiar with hockey, are going to occur at one of the senior levels. Bantam and Pee Wee. Bantam and Pee Wee
S
3
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
is where our kids really kick into developing advanced hockey skills. Therefore they require more ice. Therefore we
have this group of kids coming up through the program that are already at an ice disadvantage. At a time when they
need even more ice, it's not available. And we have a number of the coaches here that support the Bantam and Pee
Wee programs and they'll agree and contest to the fact that ... in order to be competitive. Our total estimated indoor
ice arena requirements will grow by 236% by the same year, 1999, year 2000. By the way, for those that don't
know. Our showcase arena, our only arena that we have right now is at the Chaska Community Center. One sheet of
ice. There is no ice available from the surrounding communities. They have none for sale and I think Steve
mentioned, Minnetonka will gladly purchase ice from us if they have an arena to purchase ice from. I mean their
demands for ice has also grown astronomically here so. Another key finding, we currently do not support the midget
or girls program. For those that don't know, the midget program are for those players that probably cannot compete
at the high school level but yet there's a lot of kids that want to still play hockey and skate and we don't have a
midget program now. We give this whole, the task force findings and why we sat on this task force is to encourage
participation and growth. We also do not have a girls program, which is an issue for us. Currently the girls within
our community, if they want to skate competitively, they participate in Eden Prairie. Eden Prairie likewise has a
similar problem with ice. Who knows what will happen in the future. Whether they'll support the girls of our
community to even have a girls program. So finally I kind of beat this up to death but again, outdoor ice is just not a
suitable alternative. I know a lot of people may think, well just flood an outdoor rink or get another outdoor rink. It
just does not work. The potential for injury exists, especially when these kids are flying at high speeds and trying to
playing a competitive game like this, it just won't work. But more importantly, just the weather extremes dictates a
very short season, if a season at all. I mentioned earlier that right now we believe from our findings, and this is
supported by some of the work we did, talking to some of the other programs in District 6, that our program was at a
disadvantage due to the lack of ice. Several of these programs, and you can look at the state champions. You know
Apple Valley, Bloomington Jefferson, and others that are in our district, I mean they're producing state champions
because they have multiple sheets of ice, which means they have more opportunities for kids to practice and
participate. The ice ... of 96 -97, when we started on this process, hopefully with the idea that we could find some
land so we could start the process to build an arena for this season. I think what's going to happen is the pains of last
year are only going to be worse this year. We've been unsuccessful thus far in finding that piece of land. That's why
we're here. And maybe we can minimize the pain by telling people it's coming maybe in the next year. It won't
happen this year obviously. We can't find ice from other associations. I mentioned that earlier. One thing that I
also want to highlight is that hockey in Minnesota is a very big deal. There are some significant economic benefits to
this community. If we had our own arena we could sponsor hockey tournaments or figure skating club type of
events. Charge admissions. The benefits associated with those types of tournaments is significant. Motel, gas, food,
clothing, you name it. People spend money when they go to hockey tournaments. We're not reaping those benefits
like other communities in our district. We appreciate in our findings again all of the communities that have
participated with us. Of course Chanhassen. Also other cities like Chaska and Victoria also have expressed an
interest in helping, but you've been generous in your time you've spent with us. Therefore our recommendations, I
think you're one slide ahead of me here Mark but, our recommendations are that we have made as a task force,
through the CCHA Board, that we need to build another ice arena. We're estimating right now that the cost of the
arena will be anywhere from $1 million to $1.5 million. Owned and operated by the CCHA. Financed through the
CCHA and we hope to be creative in some of our financing, as well as other participation from businesses in the
community and individuals. We believe the key to make this work, and to make the economics work of course is to
have the land. I mean without it, none of this will work. It's going to require multiple community participation in
the process. The fact that we can apply for again to be part of a tax free status, under Minnesota 501C, helps the
economics work in this situation. And another thing is we, more importantly have a vested interest in an asset that
will be with us for some time. And we can therefore derive full—of ice. One of the disadvantages of course of
owning a facility like this, that the CCHA recommends, is that we need to have strong management running the ice
arena to make sure that we do optimize, completely use the ice, including the sale of ice to other communities, as
well as addressing some of our own needs. And it may require some of the people within the CCHA securing a loan
and assuming some of the financial risk, but we believe we can address both of those disadvantages in this case. Our
next findings. We're talking about an arena that basically is going to be usable 6 to 7 months during the year. We
will be focused on that practice facility. We're not looking at building an alternative to the community center. A
very nice looking facility. It still is our showcase arena. We are looking for a facility that is quite usable during the
crunch period of time when we need it, like beginning here in the next month. The remainder of the year we're
basically suggesting that the building be closed down. The economics from our... don't support having a second
0
77
I I
1
' City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
' sheet of ice in this community during the summer months. Now we can discuss alternative uses of the building but to
invest the dollars required to have a second sheet of ice during the summer months, we don't see it at this time. Of
' course we believe something like this, our focus is on youth participation because it's a great opportunity for having
multiple communities, that we service, to make it all work and we're really like your support and business
participation. We do plan on hopefully, if we do get the piece of land, we are hoping that our CCHA steps up with
' volunteer labor to work. We have a number of people skilled in the trades that can help offset some of the costs
associated with putting this building together. It will be a challenge for our association and that's why we're here
tonight. I think we're up to the task. I do want to put up just some of the analysis and the data and I did give a copy
of this to Todd, or a handout for your reference. The very first slide that I do have is the CCHA required ice time per
' team by level and basically I want to draw your attention. The red is what we had available because of the one sheet
of ice. The green is what we need, and that's where we're at right now. And again as you add more people and more
youth and more participation, you can imagine the dramatic impact. The next slide basically shows the impact by
adding additional teams, and it's hard to read this right now but we don't have a JV program right now. We don't
have a midget program. We don't have a girls program, and we do expect significant on the bantam, pee wee and
squirt levels. The next slide is our projected total of participants. We're still accumulating the information regarding
this Hockey season. The number of participants we're going to have but you can kind of see, as a total growth, and
we believe this is conservative going from 360, or there about in 1995, last hockey season, to over 600 by the year
1999 -2000 hockey season. This next chart probably hits home the growth by participants per level for those in
hockey. You can see there is a big growth in the youth that are coming up through the program. I mean this is like a
tidal wave or what I like to say, a large pig going through a small snake because you've got all these kids coming and
we have no ice. Exactly what I see here and I don't know how the snake is going to open up wide enough to
consume the pig.
Councilman Mason: That's a new one on me.
Randy Mueller: Next slide Mark. This basically I think per their abilities to challenge again one just needs to
analyze. The red being, here's where we're at as of last year, `95 -'96 by level and you'll see already in the turquoise
`96 -'97 hockey season, the significant disadvantage that we already have. Anyway, summarizing all of the data.
Basically we had 601 hours to work with last hockey season. This hockey season, if we would have had our arena, 1
mean basically to meet status quo to be competitive in this district, we need to double the ice hours and we don't
' have it so it's going to be discouraging to a lot of parents. We're concerned that it may discourage additional
participation at a time when we need to encourage participation. And the last slide I do have is basically the pain
associated with what caused basically the reaction within our association to call a special meeting which I think was
what precipitated why the task force was founded to begin with. It's very visible that we just don't have the ice
to ... so that's all I have. I have a lot more detail that goes behind this information. More than willing to share any of
this analysis with you in further detail. Thank you for your time. Any questions you may have?
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Council have any questions?
Councilman Berquist: Not right now.
Mayor Chmiel: Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Are we going to be discussing this at a future time? How do you want to handle visitor
presentation?
Mayor Chmiel: Well I think the question should come forth at this particular time.
' Councilwoman Dockendorf: A couple questions, if you don't mind, for Todd. Have you talked lately with the land
CF with...?
Todd Hoffman: Not lately, no.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Not lately.
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Todd Hoffman: Not for months.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: What do you think the reality of her plans moving forward, and I'm speaking to, there's
a piece of property right across the road in fact where there's been some suggestions of an ice arena as part of a
larger sports complex.
Todd Hoffman: I couldn't offer...
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh really? Okay.
Todd Hoffman: I don't want to say it's a long shot or we're hopeful but I think... I believe she has spent as much
time with the City Council as of late as she has with staff...
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Have you determined...
Todd Hoffinan: The HRA received those reports, that report and you have a copy of it on Thursday night but it still
requires about, anywhere from 6 to 9 feet of excavation and then compaction as part of the construction. The
majority of the, the most significant soil corrections need to take place on the building pad. That 6 to 9 feet. 3 to 6
feet of excavation underneath the parking area.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Is there adequate parking in that area for that use?
Todd Hoffman: Yes there is. Yeah, we did a preliminary site plan and that's what we based the soil borings on.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: And if the land is muck, or excavated and filled, what's the estimated market value of
that piece of land?
Todd Hoffman: The lots 5 and 6, although they're just over 11 acres. Those of you who are familiar with it,
Highway 5 is to the north and Paisley Park is located here and the trees really stretch on this westerly side of the
property, and that's a nice barrier from the industrial park. Then there's a wetland which comes up out of Lot 4 that
stretches into Lot 5. Something like this configuration. There's also some wetlands in the back of the property.
Additional trees on this side so what we're talking about is this center area for construction. So even though there's
some open ground, the lots are still limited in the extent of development that could occur.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: If your ... is that just on the building and the soil corrections? No, that's all for me
Mayor Chmiel: Michael.
Councilman Mason: This would be for the CCHA Todd. You talked a little bit about managing the facility. How,
as a City Council person, let's just say I'm real concerned down the road that you might have some trouble with
management. I'm just throwing that out. I mean how do you see that happening? Are you going to contract that
out? Do you have people that are capable of doing that? And if you do have people that are capable of doing it,
what happens when their kids leave CCHA?
Mark Ekloh: I'm Mark Ekloh and I'm part of the Board here in terms of helping to get this thing going. Basically
the management of hockey arenas is an undergraduate program in the State of Minnesota. There are a number of
community colleges that offer it and most of the arenas in the Twin Cities are operated on a management basis where
there is a frill time employee that is employed for 6 months of the year who operates the facility. Has part time help
in terms of local kids running the zambonis. Working at the concession stands, etc, etc. Those people, there are
degree people. The best example would probably be Blake High School has one. Eden Prairie obviously has city
employees operating their facility, but there are a number of, Hastings. There are a number of facilities and rinks,
0
0
I
1
1
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Apple Valley, that have private individuals that they hire that work. It seems that it's a compliment to people who do
golf course work. So a lot of people that are the maintenance and people that run golf courses in the summer time,
turn out to be hockey arena managers in the winter time so they have that 6 months that they can do one or the other
so it seems that the intention of the association would not to be to have the association directly involved. There
would be a Board of Directors so to speak. We haven't decided ... but this has just been in our discussions that
there's too many disadvantages to members being directly involved and it's much more important to have a
professional manage on the staff. Actually operating the facility so that's what we would envision. The other
important part of having a manager and a professional staff operating it, and where we see that as, first of all the
important thing when you build an arena is we want the arena to be used as much as possible. 100% of the time. So
that person then becomes kind of a neutral individual. He sells hours to both Minnetonka, Eden Prairie, to Chaska,
whoever needs it and makes sure that it gets utilized. He's also the person that structures the tournaments and there
again in a hockey association or in a local rink, normally you'll see tournaments run at least on a monthly basis, if
not on a bi- weekly type basis. That brings more money into the association and also probably as importantly, it
brings a lot of people into the community, both in terms of staying overnight, eating, so on and so forth so it's a big
fund raiser, not only for the association but for the community as well. And we would envision this facility being
used on that basis too. That we want to have tournaments there and raise money for the association and we think that
would benefit the community as well.
Councilman Mason: Thanks. That's it.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
Councilman Senn: For the hockey association again. Your approach is commendable as it relates to doing the
private fund raising on the building and the parking, and the soil correction, etc, okay. I guess what I need to
understand is, we all know the piece of land we're talking about. What do you really want to do? Do you want a 99
year lease for a dollar? Are you looking for simply getting the property over? Can you be more specific in terms of
what you're looking to the city for?
Steve Olinger: We would like to purchase it for a dollar. That would be part of our...
Councilman Senn: Okay, so you need the underlying fee ownership?
Steve Olinger: Yes.
Councilman Senn: All right.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Steve. Did you have?
Councilman Berquist: Well I had a couple of questions, one of which was exactly that. From a lender point of view,
the CCHA has to own the parcel? Forgive me for sounding like a cynic but if the parcel were sold for a greatly
reduced dollar amount, and looking down the road 15 to 20 years from now, there was a decline in hockey or what
have you and the citizenry matures and they don't have any youth playing it anymore and the CCHA has this nice
hockey rink or building that can be used for something else. And now it's on the market. I'd like to see something
in there for protection of the city. I don't know how it could be done. Question for Todd and Todd is, how much.
That land was gotten as a result of tax forfeiture, right?
Todd Gerhardt: No ... delinquent or for the meeting of special assessments on the property which was about
$176,000.00.
Councilman Berquist: 176. Okay. And the CCHA is a non - profit, non -tax paying organization, right? Okay. So
currently we've got about $180,000.00 into it, give and take soil borings and a thousand bucks for preliminary design
with KKE. That kind of stuff. All right. I'd love to see it happen. I really hope this thing is able to get done. I
think this, given our previous conversations, you know I'm in support of it. Actually it's hard to say, go hell bent
u
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
for ... based on four soil borings, but I would certainly hope that you can make the thing go and I wish you well. I do
have questions regarding ownership of the land and protection of the city, I think that's all I've got.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Yeah. Would you like to come to the microphone please?
Mark Ekloh: Steve, can I ask you just a specific question? Just so I make sure we understand in terms of our
discussion in trying to meet your needs as well_ Protection of what? The financial investment that the city's made
or'?
Councilman Berquist: The City has spent obviously, you know thousand and thousands of dollars to provide
recreation opportunities for youth and adults in all of the facilities, to the best of my knowledge, are community
owned. This would be the first one that would not be community owned and the City would have no recourse for the
dollars, in essence, donated. So that's just something that needs to be worked out. I'm certain that it can be.
Mark Ekloh: Okay. I just wanted to make sure I understood.
Councilman Senn: You know Mark, maybe a different way to look at it would be if you sell it 20 years down the
road, maybe the City would like to recoup it's $200,000.00 investment or something like that.
Mark Ekloh: Something like that, I understand. I just wanted to know if it was a financial issue that the city wanted
to make sure it protected or if it was a concern about something else so I appreciate that.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Can I...?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, go ahead.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'm curious as to how your 501 C3 ... would be affected if you do start renting it out.
Does that affect your status as a non - profit? Or is it just a matter of looking at the books and if you're just breaking
even?
Steve Olinger: Yes...
Mark Ekloh: The other thing is the State Legislature 3 years ago, and we can get the Council a copy of that. Three
years ago was kind enough to pass legislation that allowed 501C3 corporations to own their own arenas and rent
them out and stuff like that and it was blessed by the boys over at the State of Minnesota.
Councilman Senn: Was that Mighty Duck legislation stuff?
Mark Ekloh: No, actually it was prior to that and then the Mighty Ducks followed after that, but there was actually
legislation that approved associations to own their own arenas and blessed the 501C3 status and there are a number
of arenas that are currently owned under that already in the State.
Councilman Senn: Does that same legislation then protect you on property taxes on the same basis?
Mark Ekloh: Yep. Yep. Yep. Makes it a non - profit, non - taxable scenario.
Mayor Chmiel: Good.
Todd Hoffman: Mayor, I think if I'd like to work towards a close so you can get onto your other agenda items. I'd
like to let Roger go ahead, I think he can get our hooks into the property in some fashion.
Roger Knutson: Yes. Mayor, if I could just make a comment on Councilman Berquist's concerns. Those concerns
can be dealt with in the documentation on restrictions on the use and things like that so that can be easily dealt with.
I
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
' Todd Hoffman: Specifically the association has met twice with the HRA. In May and then last Thursday evening.
The HRA gave the project it's blessing. Obviously they wanted to see the input from the City Council. That's why
the association is here this evening. Assistant City Manager Gerhardt recommended to the HRA that a task force be
formed if this received the Council's blessing this evening, for a Council member and member of the HRA,
association members, staff members from the different parties, to study the uses and take a look at the other alternate
' uses which would then no longer be viable on the property and then to initiate the planning and review process on
this as a whole so that's where we are this evening. Again if you see fit, I would recommend that you go ahead and
initiate that task force formation.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. All right. We have a couple things then to look at. Is to form the task force in itself. Do you
have a question before that?
' Councilman Senn: Yeah, if I could Don. In relationship to forming a task force, it seems to me that that becomes a
working group effectively to put this proposal together. I think before we do that we should simply schedule this
item on a future meeting. Set a public hearing effectively with the concept that the city will provide the land for the
situation and get past that point before we get into effectively a plan for implementation. And I think that could be
' done fairly quickly and having it then, it seems to me the next logical step is then to put together that task force to
work towards implementation of the deal but I think first you've got to kind of get the preliminary stuff.
I �
1
Mayor Chmiel: They've indicated they can't do anything with that rink this year to have it ready that quickly so I
think there's time limitations there that allow us sufficient time to go through that particular process. But I wouldn't
want to see this bogged down in any way. I would like to probably see that probably all take place within, do you
think take all this together within the next month?
Todd Hoffman: Yeah I think the, even though it's going to be next year, they have a lot of construction things and
site plan reviews and those type of things to take a look at so, we talked about a maximum two months review
process I think...
Councilwoman Dockendorf: You're not planning on surcharging the soil at all? So you don't need to get in there
yet this year?
Todd Hoffman: No, no.
Steve Olinger: If we could get some sort of a commitment in a short period of time. We can begin negotiations with
corporations who have expressed interest in helping us out. I don't want to go any further with those negotiations
until we know that we've got the land so I ask you.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, I think it's easier for us to give you that commitment, but I mean the first step is kind of
holding the public hearing and making sure that everybody's aware of it. And then if they're aware of it, then I think
we can give you whatever you want in terms of a blessing or whatever. I mean that's a vote that would be taken and
then beyond that you can go.
Councilman Mason: Can we do that public hearing two weeks from now? Put it on the agenda.
Don Ashworth: I think so.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, maybe get the newspaper to do a little article on it or something so people know about it.
Don Ashworth: Yeah. The only question really would be the hearing notice. But I think we can. Making the
assumption of say that it would be in for next Thursday. Not this Thursday. Next Thursday.
Councilman Mason: 7 to 10 days, isn't it?
4
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Don Ashworth: But there's no real requirements. If that's acceptable to the City Council because then it would,
you'd be notifying people literally 3 -4 days in advance. If your next meeting would be two weeks from today.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Are the surrounding property owners already aware of this discussion at all?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah Charles.
Charles Folch: I believe the next Council meeting is three weeks from tonight.
Mayor Chmiel: You're right. There are three weeks.
Councilman Mason: Way to go Charles. Well then I'd like to see that on the next Council agenda. Public hearing
for this.
Mayor Chmiel: All right, we can do that.
Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Todd Gerhardt: I don't want to pour water on the fire here. There have been other parties that have looked at this
site for other interests. Compost site. Future public works expansion. And my recommendation to the HRA was to
go through those priorities so that we can start the future planning of some of those locations, if you wish to see that
on the site. But that was my recommendation to the HRA. To try to prioritize the uses for that site and kind of
weigh out what's the best advantage, or the advantage the community would have...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. So with that, maybe we can get some additional information back from HRA is what you're
saying, or are you looking at public works to come up with some solutions as to the basic needs that they're looking
at too?
Todd Gerhardt: I want to get a group together to prioritize the uses for that site. Evaluating it as a hockey site.
Evaluating it as a potential public works expansion site. Evaluating it as a compost site. And then go through some
type of priority process identifying what the best use of that site would be. And not anticipating that it would take
that long to do.
Councilman Senn: Can you do that by next meeting?
Mayor Chmiel: Can you get that done in 3 weeks?
Kate Aanenson: No. I don't think so.
Todd Gerhardt: I would hope we could get some kind of preliminary analysis done by that time.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Maybe if we can go on that particular process. Did you have a problem Kate?
Kate Aanenson: Well I think Todd's right. I think there's other competing interests. That's why the
recommendation came forward to do the task force because now we're holding a public hearing based solely on this
and I think there's other interests, city interests on this piece of property. We want to make sure that we went
through a fair evaluation on that before we acquiesce the rights on that. Not to say that's not the best use of that but
we want to go through that process. There are some other interests, city uses that we need space for. So that's why
Todd's recommendation was, and the staff department heads talked about it. We felt the best way was to give us a
little bit of time to try to go through that process internally before we gave up on ... so when you said the public
hearing in 3 weeks, that wouldn't give us really, I'm not sure enough time to go through that process.
1111
n
U
n
LJ
D C
' City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilman Senn: Well I misunderstood on Todd's end because when you were suggesting a task force, I thought
you were being specific as it relates to this proposal. For the member of the Council and the HRA included on the
task force you said. Now are we talking two different things here?
Todd Hoffman: No, it's two different interpretations. ...recommendation that came out of the HRA was to form a
task force to look at all the issues and the variety of uses and that evening we talked about the members that would
be on there. We had staff members and HRA and City Council so everyone could keep up to speed. This piece of
property has been kicked around for years and we've talked about soccer fields. It also happens to be the underpass
location, the trail underpass location for the future Lake Ann Park underpass. That occurs on the east side of the
' property. Public works is currently using it as a temporary stockpile site so it's a public issue as to, and perhaps you
can go so far as to hold a public hearing on constructing an ice arena there... Assistant City Manager Gerhardt's
asking that that the other interests on a city wide level get their crack at the property as well.
' Councilman Senn: Well I assume that would happen on the public hearing process but I think more from a context, I
mean if we're going to follow that procedure, which is fine. This would be a lot more than a two month process. I
mean you're not going to put together a task force. Study all those issues. Produce a finding and bring it back to
HRA, City Council. Schedule a public hearing and everything like that in a month. Right?
Todd Hoffman: That is an in -depth process, you're correct. Like I say, it all depends on what the, who forms that
' task force and what they put into it. If Council's got some direction in that regard, we're willing to take it. You may
have opinions as well about the best use of the property that staff would be interested in hearing.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So you've already tentatively selected that task force members?
Todd Hoffman: No, we have not. We've just talked about what bodies it would be coming from.
Councilman Senn: What is that?
Todd Hoffinan: HRA. City Council. Hockey Association. Assistant City Manager Gerhardt. Planning staff
member. Park and Rec staff member.
Councilman Senn: Well, I'm sorry. I'm confused again. I mean it seems to me then that that's a group you're
putting together effectively over an ice arena proposal. Where's your people from public works? Where's your
people from, you know that are interested in using it for composting or soccer fields or whatever. See I'm hearing
two different things.
Todd Hoffman: Leave the hockey association out of it. Put your Public Works Director in there. I represent soccer.
Planning represents compost facility.
Councilman Senn: I don't think you need Council or HRA in it. I mean I think you guys ought to go put something
' together and bring it into us.
Todd Hoffman: We'd be glad to do that.
Mayor Cluniel: I think that would be much simpler. With that direction for staff to move in that particular way. I
would think so.
I Todd Hoffman: Will allow Assistant Manager Gerhardt to go ahead and formalize that and if it's prudent to put the
public hearing on in 3 weeks, we'll do that. If it's not, we'll postpone it another week.
Mayor Chrniel: As Todd mentioned, if he can have some preliminary kind of information from their input.
' Councilman Mason: If at all possible I'd like to see it in 3 weeks. I do also understand the limitations of staff and
how much work they do.
11
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Mayor Cluniel: Okay. Thank you. Go ahead.
Steve Olinger: I'd like to thank the City Council for taking this under consideration. I know that it's a complicated
issue and it's something that could be a political football but thank you for keeping an open mind on this. This
whole process began last spring when the Mayor... myself, members of the School District from Chaska, and ... part
of Chanhassen. He brought us all together and with the understanding that Chanhassen needs an ice arena. The
communities around us does not have that and this is an opportunity for Chanhassen to get an ice arena without
having to finance it. With having to just merely give us the land. It's a very generous offer. But it would be the only
privately financed arena in this area and that's something that Chanhassen can be proud of also. Along with the
hockey association, so please keep that in mind. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, appreciate it. All right, we'll move to the next item which is item number 3.
PUBLIC HEARING: ASSESSMENT HEARING FOR LAKE RILEY AREA TRUNK UTILITIES PHASE I,
PROJECT NO. 93 -32A.
Public Present:
Name Address
Wayne Holtmeier
8524 Great Plains Blvd.
Betty Aim Clark
8522 Great Plains Blvd.
Bud & Marian Paulson
8528 Great Plains Blvd.
Al Klingelhutz
8600 Great Plains Blvd.
Anita Beal 562 Mission Hills Way W.
Alicia Keane
566 Mission Hills Way W.
Mayor Chmiel called the public hearing to order.
Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of Council. We have our project engineer with us tonight to give
you a presentation, the final data and information regarding this improvement project. Following his presentation I'd
like to summarize some information from a number of appeals that we received and then turn it back over to City
Council for a formal hearing. With that, Dave Mitchell from OSM.
Dave Mitchell: Thanks Charles. Mr. Mayor, members of Council. I'm going to try to make this brief and get
through this rather quickly. I'd like to start off with just briefly going through what was included originally in Phase
I of the project. Primarily it was the watermain highlighted in red. As you very well know, this is part of a much
larger project that's currently being constructed this summer. This area was constructed in `94 -`95. There was also
a small part of the sanitary sewer that was installed by the developer of Mission Hills up to the south portion of
the ... property which is in this general area. Due to some ... that came up with this parcel of land down here, this
particular piece of watermain was not installed, but will be installed at a future date once development of that
property begins. What we're here for tonight is the assessment hearing for Phase L This next slide shows the
assessment area. Primarily the area being assessed for Phase I of the project includes the single family homes along
the south side of Lake Susan, the Mission Hills development, Tigua Lane, and a couple other large parcel properties
on the north side of Mission Hills as well as a portion of the Al Klingelhutz farm on the south side of TH 101.
We've got approximately 134 properties enrolled with this particular assessment. Some project summaries,
financing and project costs. The total construction cost for the project, Phase I, was $300,925.90. Engineering,
administrative and legal costs totaled $89,747.97. Slightly less than 30% of the construction cost, which is well
within normal ranges that we strive for. Easement acquisition for this particular phase cost the city $15,013.85 for a
total project cost of $405,687.72. Project funding down below shows a total project cost again of $405,687.72.
Proposed present assessments are $553,263.00 with the additional assessments being paid and future hook -up
charges. Again that's in the future when the other areas develop of $150,350.00. A footnote to the proposed
assessments. Over the project cost, you'll note that the anticipated revenues generated by the assessments exceeds
12
1
1
1
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation Director
DATE: September 18, 1996
SUBJ: Visitor Presentation, Steve Olinger, Chaska /Chanhassen
Hockey Association (CCHA), An Ice Arena in Chanhassen
Mr. Steve Olinger, President of CCHA will be present at Monday evening's City Council
meeting. It is Mr. Olinger's intent to make a presentation to the City Council in regard to
the potential of constructing an ice arena in Chanhassen. The hockey association is
seeking the Council's input on this proposal. I estimate this presentation will take 30
minutes.
The association is also appearing before the HRA (the owner of the property in question)
on Thursday evening, September 19 (a copy of the report being presented to the HRA is
attached).
c: Park and Recreation Commission
Planning Commission
Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager
Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
Charles Folch, City Engineer
Scott Harr, Public Safety Director
Steve Olinger, CCHA
Bob Kost, BRW
a:Apark \th \icearena.mem
CITY o -
�r
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Housing & Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation Director
1
DATE: September 13, 1996
SUBJ: Presentation of Preliminary Geo- Technical Evaluation for HRA Property; Lots 5
& 6, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 5 Addition (Proposed Ice Arena); Receive
HRA Guidance on Subsequent Proceedings
On May 16, 1996, the HRA authorized the preparation of a Geo - Technical evaluation report
(soils study) for the aforementioned property. Braun Intertec has completed this work based on
preliminary site plan work previously authored by BRW, Inc. Representatives of Braun Intertec
and BRW will be present next Thursday evening both to address the HRA and answer questions.
Representatives of the CCHA (hockey association) will also be present. The hockey association
will be appearing before the city council on Monday, September 23 during Visitor Presentations.
Staff awaits the HRA's guidance regarding this proposal.
Attachments
1. Preliminary Geo - Technical Evaluation.
2. Report to the HRA dated May 7, 1996.
1 HRA Minutes dated May 16, 1996.
4. Site Plan Alternatives A & B
c:
Mayor and City Council
Park & Recreation Commission
Planning Commission
Don Ashworth, City Manager
Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager
Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
Charles Folch, City Engineer
Scott Harr, Public Safety Director
Steve Olinger, CCHA
Bob Kost, BRW, Inc (agenda included)
Bruce Thorson, Braun Intertec(agenda
included)
gApark \th \geotechnical.e
a
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation Director
DATE: May 7, 1996
SUBJ: Construction of an Indoor Ice Arena, Chaska/Chanhassen Hockey Association
The Chaska/Chanhassen Hockey Association (CCHA) is seeking to construct an ice arena by the
end of the year. The Association has been exploring` potential locations in Chaska, Victoria and
Chanhassen. Both Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Berquist and others have inquired about the
appropriateness of Lots 5 and 6, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 5th Addition. These lots are
currently the property of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA).
The attached letter addressed to Mr. Steve Olinger, the President of the CCHA, has been
reviewed by the Association's committee working on this project. Mr. Olinger and/or other
members of the committee will be present at your May 16 meeting to elaborate on their plans.
Would the HRA be willing to lease /sell Lots 5 and 6 or a portion thereof to the CCHA for the
purpose of constructing an indoor ice arena? If so, would you consider a price of $1 for a 50 -100
year lease? Unbuildable soils have prohibited the development of these two lots to date. Would
the HRA consider assisting the Association with soil corrections?
As I stated in my letter fo Mr. Olinger, the extent of soil corrections is a "big" wild ^ card in this
entire scenario. Our inquiries with the previous owner (Opus Corporation) has`only substantiated
our speculation that a large percentage of the open land in Lots 5 and 6 is "bottomless." Records
of past soil exploration studies have not yet been located. If records cannot be located or if soil
borings were never completed, does the HRA wish to commission a soils survey?
The construction of an ice arena would provide recreation for our community, act as a gathering
point, and bring additional commerce to town. If Lots 5 and 6 do not work out, is the HRA
interested in seeing another location pursued?
The Association and I look forward to discussing this issue with you on the 16th.
1
/*
-At
-01
A
6
0
C:
N88
239-47 Ole
j
I Q) 0
cJ
p
20 to
0 �t�P
`0 r
ko N887 T
172
A
A
/ N 2 i9odoo"E 0
251201 /,>,-, /
L. 4 ,Ib//,/ (51.1 C-9748
I 1 0 A -. JOB"?
O. \oA q '54' . RZ600
C '56 05
C z94.63
200,08 4 : 10 ,3-
6 I/
0 6�
It
04 o U/I /I > 4.0i) N
00 A
\O
Drainage
I Utility Ea
C\j
A'
SI 1000 52 ,-, W I A6, -;;;1— 1 64.77
4 C) o
* 07' 'k -0-
00 0
cr 0
0
V:''p
52 N k
0,
sr
e
�
L
0
66 to
A
&
9 C,
99
I
4
-(0
(0 \ \ �
8 3
C)
A 0 ON
A Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Report
for BRW, Inc.
Proposed Chanhassen Ice Arena
Park Place
Chanhassen, Minnesota
FAi i
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
I Braun Intertec Corporation
14
BRAUN
I NTE RTEC
August 22, 1996
Mr. Bob Kost, ASLA
BRW, Inc.
Thresher Square
700 3rd Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Dear Mr. Kost:
Braun Intertec Corporation
6801 Washington Avenue South
P.O. Box 39108
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 -0108
612- 941 -5600 Fax: 941 -4151
Engineers and Scientists Serving
the Built and Natural Environments`
Project BABX -96 -549
Re: Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation for the Proposed Chanhassen Ice Arena, Park
Place, Chanhassen, Minnesota
We have completed the preliminary geotechnical evaluation for the proposed Chanhassen Ice
Arena on Park Place in Chanhassen, Minnesota. The purpose of the evaluation was to assist
you and other members of the design team in comparing the two sites and in preparing
preliminary designs for foundations, slabs and pavements. The evaluation was completed in
general accordance with our proposal to you dated July 10, 1996, authorized by you on
July 12, 1996.
Summary of Results
Four standard penetration soil borings were performed, two at each of the two proposed ice
arena locations. Borings ST -1 and ST -2 were performed at the Alternative A location and
Borings ST -3 and ST-4 were performed at the Alternative B location. The borings encountered
1 to 4 feet of topsoil overlying natural soils with the exception of Boring ST -3 which
encountered 6 1/2 feet of fill over natural soils. The natural soils consisted of predominantly
clayey sand and sandy lean clay with layers of silty sand and sandy silt. Consistencies ranged
from rather soft near the surface to stiff at depth. Groundwater was encountered at depths of
2 to 7 feet below the surface at the time of drilling and 4 to 5 1/2 feet below the surface twenty
days after drilling.
Summary of Analyses and Recommendations
The soil conditions encountered at the two locations were similar, with Boring ST -2 having the
shallowest depth of soft soils. It appears that soil conditions should be considered a minor
factor when comparing the two sites.
It is our opinion that the topsoil, existing fill and soft clays would not provide adequate support
for the proposed arena. We recommend removing the topsoil, fill and soft /loose soils to an
approximate depth of 6 1/2 to 9 feet below the surface. The excavation should be backfilled in
a controlled manner. The excavated soils will probably be too wet to reuse as backfill and fill.
Imported backfill and fill will likely be required.
BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 2
After the excavation and backfilling has been completed, it is our opinion that the proposed
building be supported with typical spread footings sized to exert a maximum net allowable soil
bearing pressure up to 3,000 pounds per square foot.
In the pavement areas, topsoil should be removed to at least 2 feet below the bottom of the
pavement in parking area, and 3 feet below the bottom of the pavement in truck and drive
areas. Some subexcavation of soft sandy lean clays may also be required. It will likely be
necessary to import granular backfill and fill for the pavement subgrade, unless drying weather
is available during subgrade preparation.
Additional Exploration
Once the location of the proposed arena has been decided, we recommend additional borings to
further define the required depths of excavation and backfill. The preliminary analyses and
recommendations of this report should also be reviewed.
' General
' Please refer to the attached report for a more detailed summary of our analyses and
recommendations. If we can provide additional assistance or observation and testing services
during construction, please call Matt Ruble at (612) 942 -4821 or Loren Braun at
(612) 942 -4817.
' Sincerely,
Matthew P. Ruble
Staff Engineer
I ' Bruce M. Thorson, PE
Principal /Senior Engineer
Attachment:
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Report
mpr \bmt:mjs \babx \georpt \96549
1
Table of Contents
r
Description Page
A . Introduction ................ ............................... I
A.1. Project ............. ............................... 1
A.2. Purpose ............ ............................... 1
A.3. Scope .............. ............................... 1
A.4. Available Information .... ............................... 2
A.5. Locations ........... ............................... 2
B . Results ................... ............................... 2
B .1. Logs .............. ............................... 2
B .2. Soils .............. ............................... 2
B.3. Groundwater ......... ............................... 3
B.4. Laboratory Tests ....... ............................... 3
C. Analyses and Recommendations ... ............................... 3
C.1. Proposed Construction ... ............................... 3
C.2. Discussion ........... ............................... 4
C.3. Building Pad Preparation .. ............................... 5
C.3.a. Excavation .... ............................... 5
C.3.b. Dewatering .... ............................... 5
C.3.c. Backfill and Fill . ............................... 5
C.3.d. Backfill and Fill Placement and Compaction .............. 6
C.4. Foundations .......... ............................... 6
C.4.a. Allowable Bearing Pressure ......................... 6
C.4.b. Frost Protection . ............................... 6
C.4.c. Settlement Estimates ............................. 6
C.5. Floor Slabs .......... ............................... 6
C.5.a. Subgrade Compaction ............................ 6
C.5.b. Vapor Retarder or Barrier .......................... 6
C.5.c. Modulus of Reaction ............................. 7
C.5.d. Expansion Joints . ............................... 7
C.6. Exterior Slabs ........ ............................... 7
C.6.a. Subgrades ..... ............................... 7
C.6.b. Frost Protection . ............................... 7
C.7. Utilities ............ ............................... 8
C.7.a. Subgrades ..... ............................... 8
C.7.b. Dewatering .... ............................... 8
C.7.c. Bedding ...... ............................... 8
C.7.d. Backfill ...... ............................... 8
C.8. Pavements ........... ............................... 8
C.9. Additional Exploration ... ............................... 9
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 2
Table of Contents (Continued)
Description
Page
D . Construction ............... ............................... 9
D.1. Observations ......... ............................... 9
D.2. Testing ............. ............................... 10
D.3. Proofroll ............ ............................... 10
D.4. Cold Weather ......... ............................... 10
E. Procedures .................. ............................... 10
E.I. Drilling and Sampling ... ............................... 10
E.2. Soil Classification . ............................... it
E.3. Groundwater Observations . ............................... 11
F. General Recommendations
F.I. Basis of Preliminary Recommendations ........................
F.2. Review of Design .....................................
F.3. Groundwater Fluctuations ................................
F.4. Use of Report ........................................
F.S. Level of Care ........................................
Professional Certification
Appendix
Boring Location Sketch
Descriptive Terminology
Log of Boring Sheets
11
11
12
12
12
13
BRAUN"
INTERTEC
A. Introduction
Braun Intertec Gorporonuto
6801 Washington Avenue South
P.O. Box 39108
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 -0108
612 - 941.5600 Fax: 941 -4151
Engineers and Scientists Serving
the Built and Natural Environments'
A.1. Project
BRW, Inc., is designing an ice arena on Park Place in Chanhassen, Minnesota. Two
alternative locations are being studied.
A.2. Purpose
The purpose of this preliminary geotechnical evaluation is to assist BRW and other members of
the project team in comparing the two alternative sites and in preparing preliminary designs of
foundations, slabs and pavements.
A.3. Scope 1996, proposal to ordace with
Our services were performed in general ac
zed us to proceed r u on 12. Our scope of services
Mr. Bob Kost of BRW. Mr. Kost a
was limited to the following items.
• Staking the boring locations and determining ground surface elevations at the boring
locations.
• Coordinating the locating of underground utilities near our boring locations.
• Conducting four penetration test borings to a depth of 20 feet in the proposed building
areas.
• Returning the samples to our laboratory for visual classification and logging by a
geotechnical engineer.
• Conducting a limited laboratory test program to assist in estimating soil properties or
conditions.
a
• Submitting a preliminary geotechnical evaluation report containing logs of the borings,
our analysis of the field and laboratory tests, and recommendations for earthwork,
i spread footing foundations and pavements.
BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 2
A.4. Available Information
We were provided with a plan titled "Chanhassen Park Place Ice Arena, Site Plan
Alternative A," and a plan titled "Chanhassen Park Place Ice Arena, Site Plan Alternative B."
These plans were produced by BRW. They were not dated and were hand - drawn. The
locations of the proposed ice arena and borings were shown on the plans.
A.5. Locations
The borings were located in the field by our drilling crew using the apparent property lines for
reference. Boring elevations were determined by the drilling crew using the -top nut of the fire
hydrant located on Park Place cul-de -sac with an assumed elevation of 150.0.
B. Results
B.1. Logs
Log of Boring sheets indicating the depths and identifications of the various soil strata,
penetration resistances, laboratory test data and groundwater observations are attached. The
strata changes were inferred from the changes in the penetration test samples and auger
cuttings. The depths shown as changes between the strata are only approximate. The changes
are likely transitions and the depths of the changes vary between the borings.
Geologic origins presented for each stratum on the Log of Boring sheets are based on the soil
' types, blows per foot, and available common knowledge of the depositional history of the site.
Because of the complex glacial and post - glacial depositional environments, geologic origins can
' be difficult to ascertain. A detailed investigation of the geologic history of the site was not
performed.
I B.2. Soils
Borings ST -1 and ST -2 were performed at the Alternative A location and Borings ST -3 and
' ST-4 were performed at the Alternative B location. The borings encountered 1 to 4 feet of
clayey sand and sandy lean clay topsoil overlying natural soils with the exception of Boring
ST -3. Boring ST -3 encountered 6 1/2 feet of sandy lean clay, clayey sand, silty sand and
poorly graded sand fill overlying natural soils. The natural soils primarily consisted of clayey
sand and sandy lean clay with layers of silty sand and sandy silt.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 3
The penetration resistance of the fill and topsoil varied from 4 to 6 blows per foot (BPF). The
penetration resistances of the clayey soils varied from 4 to 21 BPF, indicating they ranged from
rather soft at shallow depths to very stiff at depth. The penetration resistances of the natural
sands and silts varied from 8 to 18 BPF, indicating they were loose to medium dense.
B.3. Groundwater
Groundwater was observed at a depth of 2 to 7 feet below the surface elevation immediately
after withdrawal of the auger with the exception of Boring ST-4. Groundwater was not
encountered in Boring ST-4 immediately after withdrawal of the auger. Groundwater was
observed 4 to 5 1/2 feet below the surface 20 days after withdrawal of the auger at all of the
boring locations.
Due to the relatively impermeable nature of the soils, the hydrostatic groundwater level can be
difficult to determine. The water observed may have been perched on the clay soils as a result
of surface run -off or precipitation from rains. However, due to similar elevations between the
swamp and marsh area located southwest of the borings and the groundwater elevations, the
20-day observations likely represent the hydrostatic groundwater level. These depths
represented elevations (on our assumed datum) ranging from 138 1/2 at Boring ST -1 to 142 at
Boring ST -3. Seasonal and annual fluctuations of the groundwater level should be anticipated.
B.4. Laboratory Tests
Two tests were performed to evaluate the moisture contents of the natural clay and fill soils
encountered. These tests determined that the samples tested had moisture contents of 21 to
37 percent. -This indicated they were wet to very wet of their optimum moisture contents.
C. Analyses and Recommendations
C.I. Proposed Construction
BRW is preparing preliminary designs for an ice arena on Park Place in Chanhassen,
Minnesota. Based on our conversation with Mr. Bob Kost, we anticipate the finished floor
elevation will be 1/2 to 1 foot above the existing surface elevation, or about elevation 146 on
our datum at Site A, and elevation 147 at Site B. We have assumed there will be no
below -grade (basement or crawl space) spaces.
n
7
r
le BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 4
For the purpose of this report and without final load values, we have assumed that perimeter
wall footings will not exceed 5 kips per linear foot and column loads will not exceed 100 kips
per linear foot. We assume that distributed floor loads will be less than 250 pounds per square
foot (psf) and concentrated floor loads will be less than 1,000 psf. We assume that the parking
area will be used by light - weight trucks (pickups and cars). We assumed the truck and drive
areas will not be used by more than one fully loaded delivery or garbage vehicle per day.
We have assumed the floor system for the ice sheet will consist of a slab with refrigerant pipes
over a layer of insulation underlain by a granular layer with a heating system to prevent frost
from penetrating into the subgrade. A perimeter drain system is included to collect water from
melting ice sheets. We have also assumed that the floor area around the ice sheet will be
heated continuously during the winter.
If the proposed loads exceed these values, if the proposed grades differ by more than 1 foot
from the assumed grades, if the design location of the proposed arena changes, or if the arena
will not be heated during the winter, we should be informed. Additional analyses and revised
recommendations may be necessary.
C.2. Discussion
1
The borings encountered relatively thick topsoil and rather soft clays to depths of 6 1/2 to
' 9 feet. It is our opinion these soils are too soft to satisfactorily support foundations and slabs.
We recommend removing these materials and replacing them with compacted backfill.
Surcharging of the soft clay soils was considered but would not greatly reduce the amount of
' clay that could be left in place. Surcharging would also require a large construction delay
which may be impractical.
The soil conditions encountered at the two locations were similar, with Boring ST -2 having the
i' shallowest depth of soft soils. It appears that soil conditions should be considered a minor
factor when comparing the two sites.
' A swamp and marsh area is located south and west of the proposed arena location. The ground
surface elevations at the borings are slightly above the marsh and swamp elevations. The water
' encountered at the boring locations may be perched on the clay materials but it is likely the
water levels are near the hydrostatic groundwater levels due to the similar elevations. We
BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
' August 22, 1996
Page 5
anticipate the water will be encountered during excavation but will not enter the excavation in
large quantities or rapid velocities due to the relatively impermeable nature of the encountered
soils.
C.3. Building Pad Preparation
C-3-a. Excavation. We recommend removing the topsoil, fill and soft clay. See Table 1
below for the approximate recommended excavation depths.
Table I. Approximate Depths of Excavation
Approximate Surface
Elevation*
ST -1
ST -2
ST -3
ST-4
Approximate
Recommended Excavation
Dep th (feet)
Approximate Bottom
Of Excavation
Elevatio
144
7
137
145
138
146
137
146 1/2
137 1/2
* The boring elevations were determined by our drilling crew using the top nut of the
hydrant on the Park Place cul -de -sac as a reference with an assumed elevation of 150.0.
The excavation should be oversized. The recommended criteria for oversizing is 1 foot of
lateral excavation for each foot of fill placed below foundations. Oversizing the excavation will
Provide lateral stability to the foundations.
C-3-b- Dewatering. Based on the borings it is anticipated and recommended that sump pumps
be used to remove water from the excavation. Care should be taken to prevent disturbance of
the excavation bottom soils by construction equipment.
C- Backfill and Fill. Gravel, sand, silt or clay with a plastic index less than 25 may be
used to backfill the excavation. Sand or sandy gravel are the preferred materials. We
anticipate the excavated nonorganic lean clays will be too wet to be reused as backfill unless
they can be spread and dried. Because the bottom of the excavation will be wet, we
BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 6
recommend the initial 2 feet of backfill on the bottom of the excavation consist of a clean sand
with less than 50 percent by weight passing the number 40 sieve and less 5 percent by weight
passing a 200 sieve.
C.3.d. Backfill and Fill Placement and Compaction. Backfill and fill should be placed in
8- to 12 -inch thick lifts and compacted with a large vibratory compactor. Backfill should be
compacted to a minimum of 97 percent of its maximum dry density determined in accordance
with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Method D 698 (standard
Proctor).
CA Foundations
C.4.a. Allowable Bearing Pressure. Once the building pad is prepared as recommended
above, we recommend footings be sized to exert a maximum soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf.
C-4-b- Frost Protection. We recommend perimeter footings be placed a minimum of
3 1/2 feet below the adjacent exterior grade to provide adequate frost protection.
C-4-c. Settlement Estimates. We estimate total and differential settlement of the foundations
will be less than 1 inch and 1/2 inch, respectively, under the assumed loads.
C.S. Floor Slabs
C.S.a. Subgrade Compaction. Fill material placed below floor slabs and in interior utility
trenches should be compacted to a minimum of 97 percent of its standard maximum Proctor dry
density. Fill should be placed in 8- to 12 -inch thick lifts.
C.S.b. Vapor Retarder or Barrier. The insulation will serve as a vapor retarder for the ice
sheet floor. For the remaining floors, we recommend a vapor retarder or barrier be placed
beneath the slab if floor coverings or coatings less permeable than the slabs will be used.
Industry standards suggest covering the retarder or barrier with a layer of sand, but this
practice risks trapping water between the slab and vapor retarder or barrier.
August 22, 1996
Page 7
C.S.c. Modulus of Reaction. If sand fill is used, it is our opinion that a modulus of subgrade
reaction, k, of 250 pounds per square inch per inch of deflection (pci) may be used to design
the floor. If clay fill is used, we recommend it be covered with a minimum of 6 inches of road
base aggregate and a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pci be used to design the floor.
C.S.d. Expansion Joints. We recommend an expansion joint be provided around the
perimeter of the refrigerated ice sheet floor slab, separating it from the remaining floor slab
area. The thickness of this expansion joint should be at least 3/4 inch.
CA Exterior Slabs
C.6.a. Subgrades. We recommend topsoils be removed from beneath the proposed slabs.
Fills and backfills should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of their standard Proctor
maximum dry densities.
C-6-b. Frost Protection. Lean clays are frost - susceptible soils. If these soils become
saturated and freeze, 1 to 2 inches of heave may occur. This heave can be a nuisance for slabs
or steps in front of doors and at other critical grade areas. One way to reduce this heave is to
remove the frost - susceptible soils down to bottom -of- footing level and replace them with
nonfrost - susceptible sand or sandy gravel. Sand or sandy gravel with less than 5 percent of the
particles by weight passing a number 200 sieve is nonfrost- susceptible.
If this approach is used, we recommend a drain pipe be installed to remove any water that may
collect in the sand or sandy gravel. The bottom of the subexcavation should be graded so the
water flows to the center where it can be collected by the pipe and drained to a storm sewer,
another drain tile, or a water collector system for discharge.
An alternative method of reducing frost heave is to place a minimum of 2 inches of extruded
Polystyrene foam insulation beneath the slabs and extending about 4 feet beyond the slabs. The
insulation will reduce frost penetration into the underlying subgrade and thereby reduce heave.
Six to 12 inches of granular material is generally placed over the insulation to protect it during
construction.
' BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
' Page 8
C.7. Utilities
C.7.a. Subgrades. Trench bottoms shallower than 6 1/2 to 9 feet will have rather soft topsoil
or clay bottoms. It may be necessary to subcut 1/2 to 2 feet and backfill with stabilizing
aggregate to provide stable trench bottoms.
i
C.7.b. Dewatering. Groundwater will likely enter trenches extending more than 4 to
5 1/2 feet below the existing ground surface. We anticipate the trenches can be dewatered with
! sumps and pumps located in the sides of the trenches, or from within the stabilizing aggregate.
C.7.c. Bedding. It is our opinion the on -site materials not provide suitable bedding for
utility conduits. It will be necessary to import granular bedding for utility conduits.
C.7.d. Backlill. We recommend the backfill placed in exterior utility trenches be free of
vegetation and roots and have an organic content of not more than 10 percent. We recommend
fill placed in utility trenches under parking areas have an organic content of not more than
5 percent. Fill material placed within the upper 3 feet of the pavement section should be placed
' according to the procedures discussed in the following section.
' Fill material placed in utility trenches in green areas should be compacted to a minimum of
90 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density. In building and pavement areas,
' compaction criteria for the respective area should be followed. Excavated site soils will likely
be too wet to use as backfill beneath the building and pavement areas, unless they can be
spread and dried. Imported backfill will likely be required.
C.S. Pavements
We recommend removing the topsoil, fill and soft material to 2 feet below the bottom of the
pavement in parking areas and 3 feet below the bottom of the pavement in truck and drive
areas. (The bottom of the recommended gravel base should be considered the bottom of the
' pavement.) The resulting surface should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches and compacted to a
minimum of 95 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density. Drying weather will be
' necessary to achieve this compaction.
Backfill and fill placed below parking areas should have an organic content of less than
' 5 percent. Fill placed within the upper 2 feet of the subgrade should consist of a clean
imported sand with not more than 5 percent by weight passing the number 200 sieve and not
BRW, Inc.
—�
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 9
more than 50 percent by weight passing a number 40 sieve. The pavement section should
consist of a 1 1/2 -inch thick bituminous wearing course, 1 1/2 -inch thick bituminous base
course, and a 4 -inch thick aggregate base.
more
Backfill and fill placed below truck and drive areas should have an organic content of not
than 5 percent. Fill material placed within the upper 3 feet of the subgrade should be a clean
sand. The pavement section should consist of a 1 1/2 -inch thick bituminous wearing course,
1 1/2 -inch thick bituminous base course, and a 6 -inch thick aggregate base.
3 feet truck drive
Fill placed within the upper 2 feet of parking areas and the upper of and
areas should be compacted to a minimum of 100 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry
density. Backfill and fill material placed more than 3 feet below the parking and drive areas
should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density.
below The
If the scarified subgrade is unstable, a geotextile should be placed the clean sand.
elevations of the bottoms of the sand layers should be designed to provide drainage of water
entering the sand. Drain tile may be needed to accomplish the drainage. Water should be
routed to a sump and then drained by a pump or gravity to a storm sewer or low area of the
site.
C.9. Additional Exploration
Once the location of the proposed arena has been decided, we recommend additional borings to
further define the required depths of excavation and backfill. The preliminary analyses and
recommendations of this report should also be reviewed.
D. Construction
D.I. Observations
We recommend all excavation, footing, slab and pavement subgrades be observed by a
geotechnical engineer or a geotechnical engineering technician under the direction of a
geotechnical engineer to evaluate if the subgrade soils are similar to those encountered by the
borings and adequate to support the proposed construction. Oversize of excavations below
perimeter footing grades should be checked. These observations should be conducted prior to
placing backfills, fills or forms for footings.
BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 10
4
4
D.2. Testing
We recommend density tests of backfills and fills placed beneath footings, slabs and pavements.
gravel bas
We also recommend density testing of the compacted pavement subgrade and e
course. Samples of proposed backfill and fill materials should be submitted to our testing
laboratory at least three days prior to placement for evaluation of their suitability and
determination of their optimum moisture contents and maximum dry densities.
D.3. Proofroll
As a final check subsequent to placement of the aggregate base, we recommend that the entire
roadway be proofrolled. This precautionary measure will assist in detecting localized soft
spots. Any soft spots noted during the proofrolling process may require additional subcuts. A
qualified geotechnical engineer should observe the proofrolling process to make a final
evaluation of the subgrade.
D.4. Cold Weather
If site grading and construction is anticipated during cold weather, we recommend that good
winter construction practices be observed. All snow and ice should be removed from cut and
fill areas prior to additional grading. No fill should be placed on soils which have frozen or
contain frozen material. No frozen soils should be used as fill.
Concrete delivered to the site should meet the temperature requirements of ASTM C 94.
Concrete should not be placed upon frozen soils or soils which contain frozen material.
Concrete should be protected from freezing until the necessary strength is aain . Frost
should not be permitted to penetrate below footings bearing on frost - susceptible soil since such tt ed
freezing could heave and crack the footings and /or foundation walls.
E. Procedures
E.1. Drilling and Sampling
The penetration test borings were performed on July 23, 1996, with a core and auger drill
ger mounted on an all- terrain vehicl
equipped with 3 1/4 -inch inside diameter hollow -stem au e.
Sampling for the borings was conducted in general accordance with ASTM D 1586,
"Penetration Test and Split - Barrel Sampling of Soils." Using this method, the borehole was
advanced with the hollow -stem auger to the desired test depth. A 140 -pound hammer f ling
al
30 inches was then used to drive the standard 2 -inch split - barrel sampler a total penetration of
N
BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 11
1 1/2 feet below the tip of the hollow -stem auger. The blows for the last foot of penetration
were recorded and are an index of soil strength characteristics. Samples were taken at
2 1/2 -foot vertical intervals to the 15 -foot depth and then at 5 -foot intervals to the termination
depths of the borings. A representative portion of each sample was then sealed in a glass jar.
E.2. Soil Classification
Soils encountered in the borings were visually and manually classified in the field by the crew
chief in general accordance with ASTM D 2488, "Description and Identification of Soils
(Visual -Manual Procedures)." A summary of the ASTM classification system is attached. All
samples were then returned to our laboratory for review of the field classifications by a
geotechnical engineer. Representative samples will remain in our Minneapolis office for a
period of 60 days to be available for your examination.
E.3. Groundwater Observations
Immediately after taking the final samples in the bottoms of the borings, the holes were probed
through the hollow -stem auger to check for the presence of groundwater. Immediately after
withdrawal of the auger, the holes were again probed and the depths to water or cave -ins were
noted. The borings were rechecked for the presence of groundwater 20 days after withdrawal
of the auger.
F. General Recommendations
F.I. Basis of Preliminary Recommendations
The preliminary analyses and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data
obtained from the soil borings performed at the locations indicated on the attached sketch.
Variations occur between these borings, the nature and extent of which will not become evident
until additional exploration or construction is conducted. A reevaluation of the
recommendations of this report should be made after performing on -site observations during
construction and noting the characteristics of the variations. The variations may result in
additional foundation costs, and it is suggested a contingency be provided for this purpose.
To permit correlation of the soil data obtained to date with the actual soil conditions
encountered during construction and to provide continuing professional responsibility for the
conformance of the construction to the concepts originally contemplated in this report and to the
plans and specifications, it is recommended we be retained to develop and perform the
BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 12
recommended observation and testing program for the excavation and foundation phases of the
project.
If others perform the recommended observations and /or testing of construction, professional
responsibility becomes divided since, in doing so, they assume responsibility for evaluating that
the soil conditions throughout the construction areas are similar to those encountered in the
borings or recognizing variations which require a change in recommendations.
F.2. Review of Design
This report is based on the preliminary design of the proposed structure as submitted to us for
the preparation of this report. Because of the limited amount of information available, a
number of assumptions were necessary to permit us to make recommendations. It is
recommended we be retained to review the final design and specifications to determine whether
those assumptions were correct and whether any change in concept may have had an effect on
the validity of our recommendations, and whether our recommendations have been implemented
in the design and specifications. If we are not permitted an opportunity to make this
recommended review, we will not be liable for losses arising out of incorrect assumptions,
design changes, or misinterpretation or misapplication of our recommendations.
F.3. Groundwater Fluctuations
Water level readings have been made in the borings at the times and under the conditions stated
on the boring logs. These data have been reviewed and interpretations made in the text of this
report. However, it must be noted the period of observation was relatively short and that
fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur due to rainfall, flooding, irrigation, spring
thaw, drainage, seasonal and annual variations and other factors not evident at the time
measurements were made and reported herein. Design drawings and specifications and
construction planning should recognize the possibilities of variations.
F.4. Use of Report
This report is for the exclusive use of the addressee and the copied parties to use to design the
proposed structure and prepare construction documents. In the absence of our written
approval, we make no representation and assume no responsibility to other parties regarding
this report. The data, analyses and recommendations may not be appropriate for other
structures or purposes. We recommend parties contemplating other structures or purposes
contact us.
BRW, Inc.
Project BABX -96 -549
August 22, 1996
Page 13
F.5. Level of Care
Services performed by Braun Intertec Corporation personnel for this project have been
conducted with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession
currently practicing in this area under similar budget and time restraints. No warranty,
expressed or implied, is made.
Report Prepared By:
Matthew P. Ruble
Staff Engineer
Professional Certification
I hereby certify that this report was prepared under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered
Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
Bruce M. Thorson, PE
Principal /Senior Engineer
Registration Number: 10376
Appendix
OF
-l
\\
�1
I I • e
I � �
I e e e 1
1 I
e e
ST -2 A f
,/• ICE
e e e .
ARENA '
,
EXISTING
ST -1 CUL —DE —SAC
e
ee p
e e • q
I
e e
CHANHASSEN PARK PLACE ICE ARENA
ALTERNATIVE "A"
N 100 0 200'
SCALE 1" =200'
BRAUN"
INTERTEC
SOIL BORING LOCATION SKETCH
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
PROPOSED ICE ARENA
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
�I
�I
1�
I
1
i
i
R
oGP �o� ° • '1
1 ,
,
GE PREN A
ST -4 ;
ST -3
1011
„
,
„
L�I
1 NTERTEC
CHANHASSEN PARK p�ACE ICE ARENA
ALTERNATIVE "g^
SOIL BORING LOCATION SKETCH
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
PROPOSED ICE ARENA
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
100' 0
200'
SCALE 1" -200'
INT REVISION SHI
DRAWN BY: GMG 08 - -
App BY: LWB 08 -14 -96 OF
JW NO. BABX -96 -549
O *G - NO- A86549 FIGURE NO.
SCA 1"-200-
I
I„
„
I"
.11
,
,
oGP �o� ° • '1
1 ,
,
GE PREN A
ST -4 ;
ST -3
1011
„
,
„
L�I
1 NTERTEC
CHANHASSEN PARK p�ACE ICE ARENA
ALTERNATIVE "g^
SOIL BORING LOCATION SKETCH
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
PROPOSED ICE ARENA
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
100' 0
200'
SCALE 1" -200'
INT REVISION SHI
DRAWN BY: GMG 08 - -
App BY: LWB 08 -14 -96 OF
JW NO. BABX -96 -549
O *G - NO- A86549 FIGURE NO.
SCA 1"-200-
Desc riptive Terminology
Designation D 2487 -83
Standard Test Method for
CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES
CRITERIA FOR ASSIGNING GROUP SYMBOLS AND
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
GROUP
GROUP NAMES USING LABORATORY TESTS •
ML alt 10L
SYMBOL
GROUP NAME
r^ c o
GRAVELS
CLEAN GRAVELS
C.14 and I S C, S 3 •
GW
WelLgraa.d gravel'
0
More than SOX of
Las than 5% fines'
C < 4 and /or I > C > 3 •
GP
Poorly graded gravel
in . >
Z a..-
coarse Fraction
retained on
GRAVELS WITH FINES
Fines classify as ML or MH
GM
Siby qrOwl r+s
Fines classify as CL or CH
GC
Clayey gravel r•'
;t g
No. 4 siwe
More than 12% fin@$•
s�u d
SANDS
CLEAN SANDS
C 2 6 and 1 S C. < 3 •
SW
Wellgraded sand
C < 6 and /or 1 > C > 3 •
SP
Poorly graded sand
s Z
50% or more of
Less than SSG lines •
O e
V
se fiaction posses
SANDS WITH FINES
Fines classify as ML or MH
SM
Silty sand w
No 4 sieve
More than 12% Ones •
1 Fines classify as CL or CH
SC
Cayey sandw
`
inorganic
PI > 7 and Plots on or above 'A' line
CL
Lean e W
SILTS AND CLAYS
Uqvid limit
PI < 4 or plots below 'A' line h
ML
Silt W
organic
liquid him t •oven dried < 0.75
Ol
Organic day ham•
>
o a•,
hsss than 50%
Z e g
Liquid limit • not dried
Organic sib w•
pl plas on or above 'A' Una
CM
Fat day""
� o Z
Z
SILTS AND CLAYS
inor
% plots belaw'A' line
MH
Elastic silt .,.
o
Liquid limit
50% or man
organic
Liquid limit. oven dried <0.75
OH
Organic day suer
Liquid lim t. not dried
Organic sib ern
Hiohiy orqonic soils
Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor
PT
pea
s. toed on the mat nol passing the 3+n (75ynm) sieve.
�. 8 held sample mntwned oobbks and /or bouldea, add'wirh cebb4s amsd /or boulders° regroup name.
e. Grm+ls with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols.
GWGM we6gmdsd grovel with Pit
GWGC w4g,odsd grovel with clay
GP-GM poorly graded grovel with sib
GP-GC poorly graded gravel with cloy
J. Sonde with 5 to 12% fines requim dual symbols.
SWSM —%roiled sand with silt
Sw4C w.3groded sond with clay
SPSM poorly graded sand with silt
SPSC poorly graded sand with day
e. C •D,d'D C,. ID�t
0, ■D
L I sod co"al"s 2 15% sand, odd 'with Bond' to group name.
Z. tf hna class.Fy as C14k use dual symbol GC-GM, SC4M.
Is. IF fines am organic, add 'with organic final so grove name.
i. Y so•1 rrontcurs L 15% grovel, add *with graver to group name
j. 0 AR*rtwrg lirmn plot in hatched ores, sal is a CLML, silly clay.
L ! sod contact IS to 29t plus No. 200, add 'with and' or 'with grover whi h. is pmoomreant.
1. B soil oontota > 30% plus No. 200, predominantly sand, odd'andy' to group name.
re. 11 soil o"bi"s 130% pfw No. 200, predominantly grovel, odd "grouchy' to group name.
A _4 and plan on or above 'A' Una.
e. PI < 4 or plots below 'A' line.
�. Pt pion on or obow'A* Unit.
y. it pion 6.6. W line.
60
50
X
o a0
y ?
F 30
v
N 20
a
10
0
7
e
ML alt 10L
Ea—lion of •A•Jine E
Horizo ntol F1.4 to LL -25.S, �j
then P1.07 111.20) +J/
/
0
0 10 16 20 30 40 50
60
70 80 90 100 110
Eaorion of 'U' Inc
v.nkol or U.-16 to PI - 7,
then F1 -0.9 ILLS) /
LIQUID LIMIT (LL))
LABORATORY TESTS
DD
Dry Density, pcf
OC
Organic Content,
`JVD
Wet Density, pcF
S
Percent of Saturation,
MC
Natural Moisture Content, %
SG
Specific Gravity
LL
liquid limit, %
C
Cohesion, psF
PL
Plastic Limit, %
0
Angle of Internal Friction
PI
Plasticity Index, %
qu
Unconfined Compressive Strength, psF
P200
% Passing 200 Sieve
qp
Pocket Penetrometer Strength, tsF
Fb cla»ificalion of Fin- orained
sills and fln�yrdrwd fraction of
agar» sera.
0
Ea—lion of •A•Jine E
Horizo ntol F1.4 to LL -25.S, �j
then P1.07 111.20) +J/
/
vt�
•P
Eaorion of 'U' Inc
v.nkol or U.-16 to PI - 7,
then F1 -0.9 ILLS) /
le el-1001
MH of OH
oa
PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION
Boulders ............................ over 12"
Cobbles .............................3" to 12"
Gravel
Coars ........................... 3/4 "--3"
Fine ............................... No. 4-3/4"
Sand
Co arse ........................... No. 4 —No. 10
Medium .......................... No. 10 —No. 40
Fine ............................... No. 40 —No. 200
Silt ..... ............................... No. 200 —.005 mm
Cloy ... ............................... less than .005 mm
RELATIVE DENSITY OF
COHENSIONLESS SOILS
very loose ........................................... 0-4 B
loose ................. ............................... 5 -10 BP
m edium dense .. ............................... 11 -30 BPF
dense .............. ............................... 31 -50 BPE
very dense ............................................ 50+ B
CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS
very soft .............. ............................... 0 -1 B
soft ..................... ............................... 2-3 B
r ather soft ............ ............................... 4 -5 BP
medium ............... ............................... 6 -8 BP
rather stiff .......... ............................... 9 -12 B
stiff ................. ............................... 13 -16 B
very stiff .......... ............................... 17 -30 BP
hard ......................... ............................30+ BP
DRILLING NOTES �
Standard penetration test borings were advanced by
3 114 or 6 1/4' ID hollow-stem augers unless noted other-
wise. Jetting water was used to clean out auger prior to
sam pling only where indicated on logs. Standard penetration
test borings ore designated by the prefix 'ST' (Split Tube).
Power auger borings were advanced by 4' or 6' diameter,
confinuous -flite, solid stem augers. Soil classification and strai
depths ore inferred from disturbed samples ougered to the
surface and ore, therefore, somewhat approximate. Power
auger borings are designated by the prefix 'B'.
Hand probings were advanced manually with a 1 1/2'
diameter probe and are limited to the depth from which the
Probe can be manually withdrawn. Hand probings are
Indicated by the prefix 'H'.
SAMPLING: All samples are taken with the standard 2' O.D�
split°tube sampler, except where noted. TW indicates thin -wall
(undisturbed) sample.
BPF: Numbers indicate blows eer Foot recorded in standard
penetration test also known as N" value. The sampler is set
6' into undisturbed soil below the hollow-stem auger. Driving
resistances ore then counted for second and third 6' incremen
and added to get BPF. Where they differ significantly, they are
reported in the following form-211 2 for the second and thir
6 Increments, respectively.
WH: WH indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight
of hommer and rods alone, driving not required.
Wit: WR indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight
rods alone, hammer weight and driving not required.
NOTE: All tests run in general accordance with applicable
ASTM standards.
BRAUN
INTERTEC y
M
0
0
r
LOG OF BORING
PROJECT: BABX - 96-549
BORING: ST -1
GEOTECB NICAL EVALUATION
Proposed Chanhassen Ice Arena Locations
LOCATION:
Park Place
See attached sketch.
Chanhassen, Minnesota
DRILLER: M. McWilliams
METHOD: 3 1/4" HSA Std. Hmr.
DATE: 7/23/96
SCALE: V = 4'
Elev.
Depth
ASTM
144.2
0.0
Symbol
Description of Materials
BPF
WLI
Tests or Notes
SC
A
. CLAYEY SAND, fine - to medium- grained, with
fine GRAVEL, black to dark brown, wet.
Elevation Reference: The
(Topsoil)
reference used for the boring
elevations was the top nut of
6
SZ
the hydeant at the cul-de -sac
on Park Place with an assume
140.2
4.01
elevations of 150.0.
CL
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with fine GRAVEL and
strata and layers of Silty Sand and Poorly Graded
4
qu = 1.0 tsf
Sand with Silt, brown mottled with gray and dark
x
t
137.7
6.5
brown, wet, rather soft to medium.
(Glacial Till)
MC = 34%
SM
::
x 8
SILTY SAND, fine - to medium - grained, with fine
GRAVEL, grayish brown, wet to waterbearing,
135.2
9.0
-
loose.
(Glacial Outwash)
CL
12
qu = 2.2 tsf
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with lenses of Silty Sand
and Poorly Graded Sand with Silt, grayish brown to
MC = 21%
dark gray mottled with brown and reddish brown,
wet, rather stiff to stiff.
(Glacial Till)
15
An open triangle in the water
level (WL) column indicates
14
the depth at which
groundwater was observed
while drilling. A solid
triangle indicates the
groundwater level in the
boring on the date indicated.
Groundwater levels fluctuate.
Please refer to the discussions
3.7
20.5
12
in Sections B.3 and F.3 of our
report.
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 19' of hollow -stem auger
in the ground.
Water down 3' immediately after withdrawal of
auger.
Water down 5'5" twenty days after withdrawal of
the auger.
;;A nL
¢/n
Boring then backfilled.
nraun lntertec - Zs /ll /Y6
5T -1 page I of 1
PROJECT: BABX- 96-549 BORING: $T -2
GEOTECEWCAL EVALUATION
Proposed Chanhassen Ice Arena Locations LOCATION:
Park Place See attached sketch.
Chanhassen, Minnesota
DRILLER: M. Mewaliams METHOD: 3 1/4" HSA Std. Hmr. DATE: 7/23/96
Elev. Depth ASTM
145.3 0.0 Symbol Description of Materials 1BPF
144.3 1.0 CL SANDY LEAN CLAY, black, wet.
CL (Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with fine GRAVEL and a
trace of Silty Sand and Poorly Graded Sand with
Silt, brownish gray mottled with reddish brown,
medium, wet.
(Glacial Till)
JrulU I I GZAIN ULAY, with a trace of fine Gravy
seams of Silty Sand and Poorly Graded Sand with
Silt, brownish gray to dark gray mottled with
reddish brown and dark brown, medium to stiff,
wet.
(Glacial Till)
With fine Gravel below 11 1/2'.
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 19' of hollow -stem auger
in the ground.
Water down 7' immediately after withdrawal of
auger.
i
Water down 4'5" twenty days after withdrawal of
auger.
{ Boring then backfilled.
SCALE: 1• = 4'
Tests or Notes
qu = 0.2 tf
6
6 I = lqu = 1.0tsf
8 I 'Z I qu = 2.0 tsf
13
12
12
16
n
page 1 of 1
'
LOG
OF
BORING
PROJECT: BABX- 96-549 BORING: $T -2
GEOTECEWCAL EVALUATION
Proposed Chanhassen Ice Arena Locations LOCATION:
Park Place See attached sketch.
Chanhassen, Minnesota
DRILLER: M. Mewaliams METHOD: 3 1/4" HSA Std. Hmr. DATE: 7/23/96
Elev. Depth ASTM
145.3 0.0 Symbol Description of Materials 1BPF
144.3 1.0 CL SANDY LEAN CLAY, black, wet.
CL (Topsoil)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with fine GRAVEL and a
trace of Silty Sand and Poorly Graded Sand with
Silt, brownish gray mottled with reddish brown,
medium, wet.
(Glacial Till)
JrulU I I GZAIN ULAY, with a trace of fine Gravy
seams of Silty Sand and Poorly Graded Sand with
Silt, brownish gray to dark gray mottled with
reddish brown and dark brown, medium to stiff,
wet.
(Glacial Till)
With fine Gravel below 11 1/2'.
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 19' of hollow -stem auger
in the ground.
Water down 7' immediately after withdrawal of
auger.
i
Water down 4'5" twenty days after withdrawal of
auger.
{ Boring then backfilled.
SCALE: 1• = 4'
Tests or Notes
qu = 0.2 tf
6
6 I = lqu = 1.0tsf
8 I 'Z I qu = 2.0 tsf
13
12
12
16
n
page 1 of 1
r
r
LOG OF BORING
PROJECT: BABX- 96-549
GEOTECBMCAL EVALUATION
Proposed Chanhassen Ice Arena Locations
Park Place
Chanhassen, Mnnesota
DRILLER: M. McWilliams METHOD: 3 1/4" HSA Std. Hmr.
Elev. Depth ASTM
145.9 0.0 Symbol Description of Materials
FII.L , �, �, FILL: Sandy Lean Clay, black, wet.
(Topsoil)
143.9 2.0
FII.L FILL: Sandy Lean Clay with Clayey San.
Sand and Poorly Graded Sand with Silt, I
roots, brownish gray mottled with reddist
dark brown and black, wet.
139.4 6.5
BORING: ST -3
LOCATION:
See attached sketch.
DATE: 7/23/96 SCALE: 1" = 4'
BPF Tests or Notes
Silty 6 MC = 37°,6
apsoil and qu = 0.7 tsf
brown, _
4.
L>✓AN CLAY, with lenses of Sandy Silt and Silty
Sand, gray mottled with grayish brown, rather soft, 4
wet.
(Glaciofluvium)
CLAYEY SAND, with fine to coarse GRAVEL,
seams of Silty Sand, brown mottled with dark 8
brown, wet, medium to very stiff.
(Glacial Outwash)
11
21
19
—"— JL 1—tu 4 r , with tine to coarse
GRAVEL, dark gray, wet, stiff. 14
(G lacial Till)
END OF BORING
Water down 19' with 19' of hollow -stem auger in
the ground.
Water down 2' immediately after withdrawal of
auger.
Water down 4' twenty days after withdrawal of
auger.
Boring then backfilled
TMn.�sn.. _ OH'f ini
MC = 28%
LOG OF BORING 'I
s
PROJECT: BABX- 96-549
GEOTECEMCAL EVALUATION
Proposed Chanhassen Ice Arena Locations
Park Place
Chanhassen, Minnesota
r M. McWilliams METHOD: 3 1/4' HSA Std. Hmr.
epth ASTM 0.0 Symbol Description of Materials
CL LEAN CLAY, black, wet.
(Topsoil)
L42.41 4.0
BORING ST -4
LOCATION:
See attached sketch.
DATE: 7123/96
BPF �n
SCALE: 1• =4'
Tests or Notes
4
-- u-11 L 1-tu4 k-. A r, with a trace of fine Gravel,
brownish gray mottled with reddish brown, rather 4 1 qu = 0.8 tsf
soft. _
1.9 6 . 5 (Glacial Till)
CL SANDY LEAN CLAY, with fine to coarse
GRAVEL, with lenses of Silty Sand, Sandy Silt and 4 qu = 1.0 tsf
Poorly Graded Sand with Silt, brownish gray to
4 9.0 dark gray mottled with reddish brown, rather soft,
CL wet.
(Glacial Till) 8 qu = 1.3 tsf
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with fine to coarse
GRAVEL, with lenses of Silty Sand, Sandy Silt and
Poorly Graded Sand with Silt, brownish gray to
dark gray mottled with reddish brown, medium to 8 qu = 1.4 tsf
rather stiff, wet.
(Glacial Till)
� 11
SANDY SILT, with a trace of Sandy Lean Clay,
dark gray, medium dense, wet. 18
(Glaciofluvium)
END OF BORING.
Water not observed with 19' of hollow -stem auger
in the ground.
Water down 5' twenty days after withdrawal of
auger.
Boring then backfilled.
Brun Intertec - 8/22/96
ST4 page 1 of 1
ar wr or wr up WP so. IN sm um sm WE WE 4m a a a
i
D..t"g. A UtMny t..o...t
O
Q
h.tw.�.
UMV er wt
i
n eel w
/ t
/ IGIt�
.
- -- -- - - - - --
I Drain" a Ut1MtS [...went
m I
CHANHASSEN PARK PLAC]
ICE ARENA
SITE PLAN - ALTERNATIVE " A "
..wan
*r•+. N. "a ISM wnw w
e.�....r, .a .au n urwoom r- „fmrun
® r ...r_
NORTH SCALE 1• . S @'
60 PIN�
OUTLOT A
VWWB&
so�,t
t
Q
CHANHASSEN PARK PLACE
ICE ARENA
SITE PLAN - ALTERNATIVE '"B"
aarwe
tani� 4.w M 7fV1 •V 1►
W DNA ft-' Cana *• aa&W*aw NORTH SCALE t • . 30'
f Y t
Wahm" a moft1 i......t Wait, t..w.e
i , -- — - -- -- ,' OUTLOT A
Z c.ata.ta a wtatr iaaa.aat
a irp
N wo wo