Development Contract A616941N
Document No. A616941
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Certified Recorded on -September 22, 2015 3:57 PM
Fee $46 00
VIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
61County Y Recorder
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION OF LOT 3, BLOCK
2 OF MOLINE'S ADDITION
1817970
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
(Developer Installed Improvements)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
PAGE
1. REQUEST FOR PLAT APPROVAL................................................................................ SP -1
2. CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL............................................................................ SP -1
3. DEVELOPMENT PLANS................................................................:.....................I.......... SP -1
4. IMPROVEMENTS............................................................................................................. SP -1
5. NOTICE.............................................................................................................................. SP -1
6. OTHER SPECIAL CONDITIONS.................................................................................... SP -2
181797v1 i
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
(Developer Installed Improvements)
METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION OF LOT 3, BLOCK 2, MOLINE'S ADDITION
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
AGREEMENT dated May 26, 2015 by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a
Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"), and JOHN J. COREY AND KIMBERLY E.
COREY, husband and wife (the 'Developers").
1. Request for Subdivision Approval. The Developers have asked the City to
approve a metes and bounds subdivision of Lot 3, Block 2, Moline's Addition (referred to in this
Contract as the "subdivision"). The land is legally described on the attached Exhibit "A".
2. Conditions of Subdivision Approval. The City hereby approves the subdivision
on condition that the Developers enter into this Contract, furnish the security required by it, and
record the subdivision documents with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 30 days
after the City Council approves the subdivision.
3. Development Plans. The subdivision shall be developed in accordance with the
following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. The plans are:
Plan A: Lot Split Exhibit for 2061 West 65`" Street approved May 26, 2015, prepared by
Sathre-Bergquist, Inc.
Plan B: Grading and Erosion Control Plan dated October 31, 2014, prepared by Sathre-
Bergquist, Inc.
Plan C: Utility Plan dated October 31, 2014, prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc
4. Improvements. The party that secures a building permit for Parcel 1 shall be
responsible for installing the improvements shown on Plan B and Plan C and shall acquire all
necessary permits and post all necessary securities to perform the work.
5. Notice. Required notices to the Developers shall be in writing, and shall be either
hand delivered to the Developers, their employees or agents, or mailed to the Developers by
registered mail at the following address:
181797v1 SP -1
John J. Corey and Kimberly E. Corey
6409 Oxbow Bend
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or
mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Manager at the following address:
Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317,
Telephone: 952-227-1100.
6. Other Special Conditions.
A. FEES
The $10,393.55 cash fee and the fully -executed development contract must be submitted before the
subdivision is recorded. The cash fees were calculated as follows:
Partial Payment of Water Hook -Up Fee: 1 unit x $1,957/unit = $1,957.00
Partial Payment of Sewer Hook -Up Fee: 1 unit x $677/unit = $677.00
GIS fee: $25 (subdivision) + $10/parcel x 2 parcels = $45.00
Park Dedication Fee: I dwelling x $5,800/dwelling = $5,800.00
Surface Water Management fee: $1,914.55
Total Cash Fee = $10,393.55 .
B. BUILDING OFFICIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The existing structure on proposed Parcel l must be provided with sanitary sewer
connection — permit required.
2. Proposed Parcel 1 must be provided with separate sewer and water services (permit
required) before a building permit is issued.
C. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The City Attorney shall draft and the developer shall execute a "Grant of Permanent
Easement for Public Drainage and Utility Purposes" document. This document shall be
recorded with the metes and bounds subdivision.
2. A roadway, drainage and utility easement must be dedicated over the portion of the existing
cul-de-sac within the property and 15 feet beyond the edge of the road. This easement shall
be recorded with the metes and bounds subdivision.
3. Prior to recording the subdivision the developer shall pay the $45 GIS fee: $25
(subdivision) plus $10/parcel.
181797v1 SP -2
4. Before a building permit is issued for Parcel 1, the water service and sanitary sewer
service must be installed. The sanitary sewer is within West 65`h Street, therefore
installation of a sanitary sewer service will require cutting into and patching the City
street. A Work in Right of Way permit must be obtained before installing the water and
sanitary sewer service; an escrow for street repair to ensure that the street is restored shall
be part of the permit requirements. The estimated cost of the street repair was $10,000 in
2014. The escrow amount shall be adjusted according to the construction costs at the
time the Work in Right of Way permit is issued.
5. Sewer and water hookup charges are due for Parcel 1, a portion of which shall be
collected before the metes and bounds subdivision is recorded:
Water: '1 unit x $1,957/unit = $1,957
Sewer: 1 unit x $677/unit = $677
The remainder of the sewer and water hookup charges for Parcel 1 shall be collected with
the building permit.
6. If the final subdivision submittals are received after 2015, all fees shall be recalculated
based on the rates in effect at that time.
7. A plumbing permit is required for the private storm sewer; the plumbing inspector will
inspect the connection to the city storm sewer manhole.
8. On Parcel 1, the proposed home style as required by City Code Section 18-40 (4) 2 (iii) is a
slab -on -grade home. Based on Interstate Geotechnical Engineering's observations, the
groundwater elevation is 1.8 feet below the ground elevation of the soil boring. The
Developers must verify the surface elevation of the boring location to determine the
elevation of the groundwater; the lowest floor must be minimum three feet above that
elevation per City Code Section 18-40 (4) 2 (i).
9. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Contract. The
City is not a guarantor of the Developers' obligations under this Contract. The City shall
have no responsibility or liability to lot purchasers or others for the City's failure to enforce
this Contract or for allowing deviations from it.
10. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of
this Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion of this Contract.
11. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or
amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall
be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council.
The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver
or release.
181797v1 SP -3
12. Release. This Contract shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the
property . After the Developers have completed the work required of it under this Contract,
at the Developers' request the City Manager will issue a Certificate of Compliance. Prior to
the issuance of such a certificate, individual lot owners may make as written request for a
certificate applicable to an individual lot allowing a minimum of ten (10) days for
processing.
13. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in
addition to every other right, power or remedy, expressed or implied, now or hereafter
arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and
every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised
from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and
shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or
remedy.
14. Assignability. The Developers may not assign this Contract without the written permission
of the City Council. The Developers' obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and
effect even if the Developers sell one or both lots.
15. Soil Conditions. The Developers acknowledge that the City makes no representations or
warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for construction of the
improvements or any other purpose for which the Developers may make use of such
property. The Developers further agree that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the
City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions
arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless
hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City.
16. Soil Correction. The owner of Parcel 1 is responsible for the necessary soil correction work
on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developers concerning the nature
of suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may
exist. On lots which have no fill material a soils report from a qualified soils engineer is not
required unless the City's building inspection department determines from observation that
there may be a soils problem. On lots with fill material that have been mass graded as part
of a multi -lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall
be provided before the City issues a building permit for the lot. On lots with fill material
that have been custom graded, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall
be provided before the City inspects the foundation for a building on the lot.
17. As -Built Lot Surveys. An as -built lot survey will be required on all lots prior to the
Certificate of Occupancy being issued. The as -built lot survey must be prepared, signed,
and dated by a Registered Land Surveyor. Sod and the bituminous driveways must be
installed before the as -built survey is completed. If the weather conditions at the time of the
as -built are not conducive to paving the driveway and/or installing sod, a temporary
Certificate of Occupancy may be issued and the as -built escrow withheld until all work is
complete.
181797v1 SP -4
D. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES SPECIALIST CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Tree protection fencing will be required around any preserved trees. It shall be installed
prior to grading and located at the drip lines of the trees.
2. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with City Code Section 18-61. Unless
otherwise approved by the City, trees not listed in the City's approved tree list are
prohibited. The minimum tree size shall be two and one-half (2'h) inches caliper, either bare
root in season, or balled and burlapped. The trees may not be planted in the boulevard (area
between curb and property line). The lot purchaser shall sod the boulevard area and all
drainage ways on each lot utilizing a minimum of four (4) inches of topsoil as a base. Seed
or sod shall also be placed on all disturbed areas of the lot. If these improvements are not in
place at the time a certificate of occupancy is requested, a financial guarantee of $750.00 in
the form of cash or letter of credit shall be provided to the City. These conditions must then
be complied with within two (2) months after the certificate of occupancy issued, except that
if the certificate of occupancy is issued between October 1 through May 1 these conditions
must be complied with by the following July 1 st. Upon expiration of the time period,
inspections will be conducted by City staff to verify satisfactory completion of all
conditions. City staff will conduct inspections of incomplete items with a $50.00 inspection
fee deducted from the escrow fund for each inspection. After satisfactory inspection, the
financial guarantee shall be returned. If the requirements are not satisfied, the City may use
the security to satisfy the requirements. The City may also use the escrowed funds for
maintenance of erosion control pursuant to City Code Section 7-22 or to satisfy any other
requirements of this Contract or of City ordinances. These requirements supplement, but do
not replace, specific landscaping conditions that may have been required by the City
Council for project approval.
E. PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR CONDITION OF APPROVAL: Park fees of
$5,800.00 shall be paid for each new single-family lot prior to the recording of the property
deed.
F. PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Deeds shall submitted to the city for review and recorded at Carver County for the two
parcels.
2. A building permit shall not be issued unless all soil corrections have been completed as
indicated in Exhibits "B" and "C" titled "Subsurface Soil Investigation" dated October
25, 2014 and November 13, 2014, respectively.
3. Changes in Official Controls. For two (2) years from the date of this Contract, no
amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the
current urban service area, or official controls shall apply to or affect the use, development
density, lot size, lot layout or dedications of the approved plat unless required by state or
federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developers. Thereafter,
181797v1 SP -5
notwithstanding anything in this Contract to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by state
law the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive
Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this
Contract.
4. Iron Monuments. Before the security for the completion of utilities is released, all
monuments must be correctly placed in the ground in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 505.02,
Subd. 1. The Developers' surveyor shall submit a written notice to the City certifying that
the monuments have been installed.
5. Variances. By approving the plat, the Developers represent that all lots in the plat are
buildable without the need for variances from the City's ordinances.
6. Compliance with Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations. In the development of the plat the
Developers shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following
authorities:
a) City of Chanhassen;
b) State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions;
c) United States Army Corps of Engineers;
d) Watershed District(s);
e) Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions.
Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developers shall furnish the City with evidence
satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed
purchasers to enter into this Development Contract.
G. WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Total surface water management fees due prior to recording the property deed are
$1,914.55.
2. Erosion Control During Construction of a Dwelling or Other Building. Before a building
permit is issued for construction of a dwelling or other building on a lot, a $500.00 cash
escrow or letter of credit per lot shall also be furnished to the City to guarantee compliance
with City Code § 7-22.
[Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank.]
I817970 SP -6
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
13,
(SEAL)
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
Gerhardt, City Manager
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this -y4ay of
2015, by Denny Laufenburger, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manag , f th City of
Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation an pursuant to the
authority granted by its City Council.
OTAR UBLIC
i
.�D
KAREN J. ENGEL
Publ�:in
V�A#Notary
y Cam "- E VM Ja
181797A SP -7
DEVELOPERS:
John
E. Corey
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF A/�+�"` ) ,
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thisa6 day of
2015, by John J. Corey and Kimberly E. Corey, husband and wife.
NOTARY PUBLIC
j#7NataryPub11c-M1nn9sft1
M.DUNSMORE
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen r s Jan a,,10
7700 Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
952-227-1100
181797vl SP -8
EXHIBIT "A"
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY:
Lot 3, Block 2 of Moline's Addition according to the recorded plat thereof in Carver County,
Minnesota.
181797v1
EXHIBIT "B"
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
181797v1
Interstate Geotechnical Engineering, Inc
Patrick J Hines, PE
8167 100` St S
Cottage Ca W MN 55016
(612)414-5770
25 October 2014
Mr James Rudos
14846 Timber Hill Road
Minnetonka MN 55345
Re: Subsurface Soil Investigation
Proposed Single Family Residence
W of 2061 W 65' St, Chanhassen, Minn
In accordance with your authorization, I have completed the above referenced investigation
to determine site suitability for the proposed construction. A summary of my findings
together with boring logs and my conclusions and recommendations are presented in the
enclosed report.
I found, as you already have been briefed, more than usual problems with the site. There is
a total of 53/4'& 644 at the locations of Boring I & Probe 1A, respectively, of unsuitable soil
in the form of topsoil fill, general and varying fill, and buried original bumus. Below at fust
is a low sand content lean clay, generally dark in color, saturated, very soft to soft (w/depth).
It is "normally consolidated" (consolidated enough to only support its own weight, not
additional weight of fill soils or structures above). The overburdening fill has not been
inplace long enough to force further consolidation. The moisture content test in this material
indicated nearly 42%, high for a lean clay. This material extends only from 544 to T in
Boring 1, but from 644 to 8'/2'in Probe IA. The first 9" of this material in Probe IA is very
soft and is a borderline marl material. All of the aforementioned materials are unsuitable for
structure support should be removed. I do acknowledge that excavators are often reluctant
to excavate further once the buried organic soil is cleared, so understandings should be
inplace at the time of gathering bids.
Base soil below at first is a lean clay, a little sandy, dark gray, saturated, rather soft to
medium. It has inclusions of a poorly graded (biased finer grained) sand with a few fines,
also dark gray, saturated, loose to firm. Deepest soil, commencing at 11' in Boring 1, is a lean
clay, rather sandy, dark gray, pow gravel content, medium. Theses materials are glacial till.
The sand inclusions in the upper portion are glacial outwash. All of these base mineral soils
are suitable for residential construction, with conditions. Refusal to auger advancement was
not encountered by boring termination depth of 23', indicating lack of bedrock to this level.
Very importantly, groundwater was found in the main Boring at 1.8' (elev 96'/4±). It is
aquifer groundwater, but marginally so. It appears to be contained primarily in the sand
inclusions at 7'+. But it also is coming from the upper soft and very soft clay, possibly from
181797vl
Mr James Rados
25 October 2014
Page 2
the lower organic soil. Proper construction on the site (removing the softer lean clay,
promoting good site drainage) will mitigate some of this. Thus, water found presently can
be regarded as a maximum levet. Slab grade of the proposed residence should be set in
accordance with City requirements utilizing this level.
I recommend complete removal of all unsuitable soil which is likely to be the fill and buried
organic soil as encountered plus the overly soft clay found in both the boring and probe.
While this amounts only to another 1'!j in the vicinity of Boring 1, it is another 24 in the
vicinity of probe IA. As indicated, excavators maybe reluctant to excavate below organic
soil level, but it is necessary (see longer discussion in the report). It is so important that full
time inspection of the excavation by a soils engineer may be necessary. Of course, other
zones of unsuitable soil not represented by the boring and probe could still be encountered
due to the nature of small volume random sampling. Any other depths or zones of unsuitable
soil should be removed as well. You could lower footings somewhat so that you have to
provide less oversizing and not stray onto the neighbor's property. But footings here should
not be lowered so much as to rest directly upon the suitable base soil as it is only marginally
suitable. You need a little fill (2' is recommended) to spread footing loads out with depth.
Footings maybe generally designed allowing the usual 2000 psf foundation bearing capacity,
which will likely result in normal strip or pad footings.
Special attention is again drawn to the advisory that excavations be examined by the Soils
Engineer to verify soil boring results and to document adequacy of site preparation. Again
this is very important as how much softivery soft clay must be removed will require a high
degree of field judgment. Fill, as used, should be tested for compaction adequacy. Soil
correction should not be abated below slabs in any manner (ie, do not let the excavator try
to "trench around" slab areas).
Thank you for the opportunity to have been of service. If you have any questions on this, or
if I can be of assistance in any additional capacity, do not hesitate to contact me at your
convenience.
Sincerely,
juMIwATE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, Inc
Patrick J Hines, PE
?resident
enclosures
pll(SC
181797vl
SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL MTSTMATION
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
W of 2061 W W St, C6eattmea, Wunesota
Prepared by:
Interstate Geotechnical Engineering, Inc
5167 IW Street S
Cottage Grove MN 55016
25 October 2014
181797v1
ImtMb to Gestmhaka[ Pigfaearing, lu
PaHck 1 nine; Pa
9167 loop St
C*c F()r MN=16
(611) 4145770
REPORTop
SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Poll PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
West of 2061 W O' St, Chanhassen, Minnesota
25 October 2014
SCOPE OF SERVICE
Interstate Geotechnical Engineering, Inc, hereafter referred to as "TOB % was retained
by James Rudos, hereafter referred to as the "Client", to perform a subsurface soil
investigation on a parcel of land located as noted in the above title block. The purpose of
this investigation is, as this is a "lot split", to identify and evaluate soil and water properties
associated with the site with respect to constructing a single farm€y residence thereon.
One primary soil boring was performed hard andpowcr flight augermethods to a depth
of 23' within the project area. In addition, laboratory tests were run upon selected soil
samples, and a shallower probe was put down to further delineate depth and extent of
unsuitable soil. From the resulting data, conclusions are drawn regarding site suitability for
the proposed use and recommendations are developed, used upon information gathered to
date within the presently authorized scope of services, for site correction procedures and
foundation and slab design.
STTE OBSERVATION.
The general area is suburban residential in nature, moderate in elevation. Vicinity
structures varyin age and design, but are generally newer, in good condition. What is noted,
however, is that depths of installation seem to be rather shallow. This site is rather level in
terrain pattern, flat from street grade. There is an abandoned wastewater treatment mound
on the site. The site is covered mainly by short maintained grasses, with trees and brush,
mostly to the rear, and landscaping plants at various locations.
Proposed construction on the site is a single family residence. It most likely will be of
slab -on -grade or crawl space design configuration with attached garage. Location was not
known, butmost likely it will be at setbacks similar to those in the vicinity, possibly slightly
more to the front. Given site grade versus strwt level, the site will be built up I'-2' in any
event for positive drainage. It is assumed that the residence will be of usual wood frame
design with most building loads ttaraferred to exterior and interior strip footings at frost
protection depth (3.5' or greater below finished grade). This type of structure imparts
relatively light loads onto foundation soil.
BORING LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS
The boring and probe locations were determined by IGE and were based upon likely
location of the proposed construction, initial impressions and assumptions, accessability,
obstacles, etc. IGE also determined depths based upon nature of the proposed work, usual
and accepted practice and results of the investigation as it proceeded. All work was
181797vl
W of 2061 W 65- St, Cbaehaum Mica
-2-
performed in an attempt to obtain geotechnical data representative of the site. Refer to the
attached sketch for baring locations. In addition, they were marked in the field with lath.
As the west property line location was not totally assured, borings should be more
accurately located in the course of future site surveys.
Ground surface elevation at the boring and probe locations and at a few key
topographic points was determined to the nearest 0.1' using an engineer's level and
referenced to top nut of a fire hydrant on the south side of 65'" St W, approximately 150,
west of the area investigated, located as shown on the referenced sketch. As there was no
conveniently available sea level datum bench mark nearby, this temporary bench mark was
assigned an arbitrary reference elevation of 100.00. Elevations are shown on bore logs and
on the site sketch. Accuracy of this should not be taken as any greater than the methods
used would imply. Again, in the course of further site surveys, elevations of the boring and
probe should be more accurately determined in accordance with a sea level datum.
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The boring and probe were primarily accomplished by the Power Flight Auger (FA)
and Hand Auger (FIA) methods in accordance with ASTM D 1452, "Standard Practice for
Soil Investigation and Sampling by Auger Borings". As the hand augerupper portion of the
main boring was advanced in sandy soil, one supplemental test was performed using the
"Dynamic Cone Penetrometer" (DCP) method These procedures are described in
attachments at the back of the text portion ofthis report. The first attachment also describes
the soil classification system used (Unified - chart attached) and method of groundwater
measurement. A Professional Engineer personally performed the boring and probe and
immediately classified soils in the field. Soil strength was determined by said engineer
mostly on an empirical basis by such means of drilling ease or difficulty, nature of
recovered soil samples, consultation of laboratory and DCP test results, etc. Some samples
were bagged and returned to the soils laboratory for further examination and possible
testing. Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with ASTM standards.
SOIL BORING RESULTS
Attached is a log for the boring together with a key explaining terms and entries on the
log sheets. Results of the shallower probe are given in more summary form on the
continuation sheet of the log for the main boring. The depth of individual layers of soils
may vary somewhat from what is shown on the logs due to the inexact nature of auger
sampling and, most importantly, the occurrence of transi.ion between soil layers. Also be
advised that soil conditions not at the boring and probe locations may vary. Laboratory test
(moisture content) results are given in dae "w" coiutmt of the boring log at the appropriate
relative locations. The DCP test result is given in the right -most column of the boring log,
again at the appropriate relative location.
The borings show a condition of fill over original organic soil, with overly soft soil
below. The fill is 2'/4'in the main boring, slightly less in the probe, and consists of topsoil
fill [a variably sandy organic lean clay (OL), black] and a mixed scfi fill, most of it lean
clay, somewhat sandy, dark it. color (CL) with a little organic soil (OL). Below, to total
depths of 5/4'&61/4' in Boring I and Probe IA, respectively, is what appears to be buried
original humus, a lean clay, rather silty, highly organic (OL), black. In upper reaches it
181797vl
W of 2061 W 656 St, Chanhassen, Minn
-3-
might be a borderline sapric peat. The thickness together with the highly organic nature
could mean that this originated in a shallow depth swamp. As a minimum, these soils are
unsuitable for construction. Application of foundation loads upon them will undoubtedly
result in differential settlement and loss of value of the new structure. In addition, modem
building codes prohibit establishment of residential structures on or over organic or
otherwise unsuitable soil.
Below at first in Boring 1 is a lean clay, a little sandy, very dark to dark gray (CL),
saturated, very soft to soft (w/ depth). This appears to be a lacustrine (lake origin) deposit.
It is "normally consolidated" (consolidated enough to only support its own weight and
original soil weight above, not additional weight of fill soils or structures above). The
overburdening fill has not been inplaee long enough, geologically, to force further
consolidation. The moisture content test in this material is 41.99/o, high for a lean clay of
this nature. It is obviously near or over the liquid limit of this material (est 400/o+a. In such
a scenario, the material is very soft, prone to consolidation upon application of further
loads. This material extends only from 5'/4' to 7 in Boring 1, but from 6'/4'to 84= in probe
1 A. The fust 9" of this material in Probe 1 A is very soft and is a borderline marl material.
Base soil below at first is a lean clay, a little sandy (CL), dark gray, saturated, rather
soft to medium (confirmed by another moisture content test). It has inclusions of a poorly
graded (biased finer grained) sand with a few fines (SP), also dark gray, saturated, loose to
firm (as per DCP test result). Deepest soil, commencing at i l' in Boring 1, is a lean clay,
rather sandy, dark gray (CL), low gravel content, medium. Theses materials am glacial till.
Tire sand inclusions in the upper portion are glacial outwash. All oftbcw base mineral soils
are suitable for residential construction, with conditions.
Refusal to augeradvancementwas not encountered bypowerboring termination depth,
elevation 754, indicating lack of bedrock at least to this clevation.
Groundwater was found in the main boring as evidenced by standing water in the bore
hole after a standard period of monitoring, depth 1.8' (elev 906. This is a surprisingly
high level given the moderate elevation of the area and its seemingly well drained nature.
It is, however, aquifer groundwater, but marginally so. It appears to be contained primarily
in the sand inclusions at 7t. But it also is coming from the upper soft and very soft clay,
possibly from the lower organic soil, once a void (the bore hole) became available. Proper
construction on the site (removing the softer lean clay, promoting good site drainage) will
mitigate some of this. Thus, water found presently can be regarded as a maximum level.
It should be pointed out that most of the lower elevation sandier lean clay soils are
technicall saturated(all pores filled with water), butnotwaterbeatin (capable ofteleasing
this water). This is a normal condition for a soft to medium or better clay. As indicated, the
upper lean clay soils, being soft to very soft do release water.
However, be advised, as explained in the attachment, that groundwater may still occur
and vary according to various climatological and meteorological influences undetermined
within the time frame, scope and budget allowed in this investigation. In addition, area
developmentpatterns and drainage alterations can influence soil moisture and groundwater.
Bear in mind that indicated results are for time and conditions of testing only.
Refer to the boring and probe log for a more detailed description of soils and moisture
conditions encountered.
181797vi
W of 2061 W 6S° St Chanhassen, Minn
-4-
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following conclusions and recommendations am based upon interpreted results of
boring and probe logs, including laboratory tests, their relation to the planned work, and
other information. Because the boring, probe and tests represent a small portion of the site
in relation to the proposed area of work, ongoing review of construction should be carried
out. If excavations reveal subsurface soils of a different nature than, those observed in the
boring and probe, or if the location or elevations or type of the planned work are altered
significantly, the Soils Engineershould becontracted for possibly revised recommendations
or additional testing (see #b below and the following "Limitations of Investigation").
1. General Site Suitability:
Based upon interpreted results of the borings, it appears that the site has some
limitations regarding suitability for construction. These mainly consist of the presence of
fill over buried original topsoil, soft to very soft clay below (thickness vs*ying), high
groundwater on the site and the need to adapt the site in general for the intended use. These
limitations are correctable by adequate site correction, foundation engineering and further
monitoring of soils as construction proceeds.
2. Initial Site Pre aration:
This analysis is based upon the proposed structure being, as indicated earlier, of slab -
on -grade or crawl space design with attached garage, grade set to meet City requirements.
Exterior footings will be at least 3'/= below final grade. Interior footings could be at subslab
level ifplaced upon properly compacted fill. Unless marginal soils are left below correction
levels, some footings could be lowered if more convenient to deal with unsuitable soil
levels.
All organic, loose, frozen or otherwise unsuitable soil, uncontrolled fill, vegetation,
debris and boulders (3"+) and, most importantly in this case, the soft to very soft leen clay,
should be removed from the proposed building pad area, generally achieving the first
naturally occurring suitable soil, likely a rather soft to medium or better somewhat sandy
lean clay, with waterbearing sand inclusions. Boring evidence suggests that this will amount
to excavation depths of at least 7' and 02 at the locations of Boring 1 and Probe IA,
respectively. If working room is not adequate for safe excavation backslopes, or perhaps
just to control excavation and filling extent, footings could be lowered somewhat so that
proper ovcrsizing and a safe backstope, not straying onto the neighbor's property, can be
provided. But as base soils, even when corrected, are marginal at first, footings in this
vicinity should not be lowered so much as to rest on or near base soil. There should be at
least T of properly compacted fill below footings to allow some spread of foundation load
with depth. It is also noted that areas below stab areas should be corrected as well, not
attempting to trench around them.
Some discussion should be made about over -excavating out the soft to very soft lean
clay. Excavators are often reluctant to do this once buried organic soil is cleared Again it
is pointed out that field indications plus a laboratory test indicate this material to be soft to
very soft. It is estimated to have a coefficient of consolidation (c� of 0.15. Applying this
to the thickness of the soft layer (1'-2) and considering likely new stresses, if this material
were not removed, a long term settlement of approximately I" to 2" would result. This is
181797v1
W or 2061 W W St, Cbaabaswaq Mim
-5-
excessive for this structure. When obtaining excavation bids, this overexcavation necessity
should be clear to excavators so that problems, contractual or otherwise, are less likely to
occur later. During the construction phase, the amount ofexeavation of overly soft clay will
necessitate a high degree of judgment. It is possible that full time observation by a soils
engineer will be required.
Based upon the fact that the excavation will be below water level, water will enter and
accumulate in the excavation. This water should be controlled, such as bysumping or other
means, so that the bottom of the excavation can be viewed and so that water does not
interfere with compaction efforts in the lowest levels.
It should again be emphasized, however, that the estimated depths of excavation of
unsuitable soil given above are preliminary estimates based upon random but somewhat
targeted auger tests. These should be considered preliminary estimates only, to be verified
by actual excavations. In fact, for construction quanwty purposes, a small amount of
additional estimated excavation depth should be added to that given in the logs to
conservatively allow for variations and for inadvertent over -excavations which are
impossible to avoid when power machinery is employed for the purpose. It is especially
cautioned that there could be areas of unsuitable soil not represented by the boring and
probe to date. These zones could be grubbed out tree stump pits, an old basement, trash pits,
borrow pits, test excavations, utility trenches, etc. Excavators should be especially aware
of this possibility.
Excavated organic material, uncontrolled fill, wet unstable soil or other soil
contaminated with topsoil, vegetation, etc, should be disposed of offsite, or in landscaping
areas, where the bearing of weight will not be required There appears to be no opportunity
to salvage excavated mineral soil for re-usc as controlled fill as said excavated soil, even
if mineral soil, will be cohesive, overmoist and difficult to work with. The excavation
contractor will likely import a granular fill.
Refer to subsequent sections for more detailed and specific recommendations for site
correction recommendations for each structural component.
3. Foundations:
Forpurposesofproposed construction, foundations and fill to supportfoundations must
rest upon and over mineral (non-organic) soils of adequate bearing value. For the proposed
construction, a bearing capacity of 2000 pounds per square foot (psf) is typically targeted.
However, most single family residences actually bear much less, even under maximum
snow load
This analysis of soil for foundation purposes is based upon the location, design
configuration and grade indicated above. If there is any significant deviation from
assumptions indicated herein, then these recommendations may have to be reconsidered.
The site should be prepared as outlined in 42 above, removingunsuitable soil, including
the overly soft clay thatexists overthe building pad area, perfomring any further excavation
as necessary, controlling water that may enter the excavation and placing controlled fill
(minimum 2') as needed. This being done, perimeter and interior footings maybe generally
designed allowing 2000 psf foundation bearing capacity(likelyresulting in ordinaryspread
or pad footings). This value is recommended on the basis of the fact that the footing areas
will rest directly upon fill that has been compacted to the level specified in 45 below. This
181797vl
W of 2061 W 65" St, Chanbassen, Mian
.6 -
takes into account shear failure potential near footing levels and the nature of deeper soil
regarding settlement.
Fill, as required, should be placed, compacted, and tested as per the "Fill Placement"
(#5) section following.
The above should provide a factorofsafetyagainst foundation failure ofapproximately
3. Over-all and differential settlements should be less than 1/1" and '/4", respectively. if
footing conditions change from what has been assumed herein, further study and analysis
would be necessary.
If the site is graded to different levels than assumed above, if the type of building
proposed change, or if soils of a significantly different nature are discovered during
excavations, the Soils Engineer should be contacted for re -analysis and possibly revised
recommendations.
It is not recommended to place footings upon or over organic soil or any other
unsuitable soil or to deviate from recommendations contained herein as excessive
differential settlement of the structure could result.
4. Slabs:
Slabs and fill to support slabs should also rest upon and over mineral soil of adequate
density to resist settlement. Based upon boring evidence, base mineral soils on the site, with
uncontrolled fill, organic soil, vegetation and any other encountered unsuitable soil removed
and with controlled fill placed thereon as necessary are adequate for slab support. It is not
recommended to abate site preparation below slabs in any manner.
Slabs should have clearance from maximum anticipated aquifer, groundwater level and
should be protected from intrusion by surface waters. As indicated above, floor level of this
structure should be set in accordance with City requirements, utilizing the level of
groundwater found as a maximum level. Good site drainage, both at the time ofconstructinn
and for the life of the structure, is recommended.
S. Fill Placement:
Fill material, as required, should be mineral soil, free of debris, boulders and organic
material, of such suitable moisture content that it can be readily compacted to specified
levels. Fill should be placed and compacted in a manner that will allow complete
compaction ofthe total fill layer to 95%ofStandard Maximum Density according to ASTM
D 698. Frozen material should not be used in fill construction, nor should any part of the
completed fill be allowed to freeze.
A soil compaction test should be conducted for every two feet of fill in appropriate
segments of the area.
If crushed rock or any other very coarse granular soil or aggregate (>300/o 3/4" or
coarser) is used, the above Standard Maximum Density would not be applicable. In this
case, the fill should be compacted to 60% of Maxim index Density according to ASTM D
4253.
Top of fill should extend at least one foot horizontally beyond the structure pad or
footing limits. The fill surface may then extend downward and outward on a 1:1 slope to
competent soil. It is upon this basis that required oversizing should be computed.
181797vl
W of 2061 W 651° St, Chanhs m, Mann
.7-
6. Insxction and Testing:
The Client should retain a geotechnical engineering firm to inspect excavations, make
field judgments as to subsoil adequacy, and to carry out a program of field and laboratory
testing of engineered fill and possibly other materials. This firm should bear full
responsibility for knowledge of contents of this report and for proper interpretation and
correlation of data, and be prepared to make any further analysis as necessary. Again, this
is especially necessary in this case due to the high degree of judgment necessary regarding
first encountered clay soils.
7. Final Site Topography:
Final soil surfaces should be graded to provide adequate drainage from structures and
hard surfaces so that as little water as possible infiltrates into soils adjacent to the structure.
LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION
Interstate Geotechnical Engineering, Inc, has prepared this report using an ordinary
level of care and in accordance with generally accepted foundation and soil engineering
practices. Because the boring, probe and tests represent only a small portion of the total site
and for other reasons, Interstate Geotechnical Engineering, Inc, does not warrant that the
boring, probe and tests are necessarily representative of the entire site but only of the
boring, probe and test locations at the time of investigation. No warranty of the site is made
or implied.
The scope of this report is limited strictly to geotechnical issues which include
establishment of soil profile and only those conclusions expressly made. Please note that
this work is not intended to document the presence or absence of any environments!
contaminants at the site, nor for identifying applicable local, state or federal laws or
regulations of a non -geotechnical nature which may or may not be applicable to this site.
Further, Interstate Geotechnical Engineering, Inc, cannot be held responsible for facts not
disclosed.
The bore holes have backfilled the as well as possible using native cuttings. While the
deeper Boring I did not produce an Environmental Bore Hole as defined by Minnesota
Department of Health regulations, Bentonite was added to the cuttings during the
backfilling process. However, some continuing settlement may occur if construction does
not take place in the near future. If settlement does occur, the Client should backfill with
additional soil.
This report and all supporting information is furnished only to the Client and his assigns
for the designated purpose. No representations to other parties or for other uses are made.
Soil samples retrieved during the investigation process were classified in the field by
a Soils Engineer. Most of them were immediately discarded Samples returned to the
laboratory will be held for aperiod of 30 days unless a request is received to retain them for
a longer period.
181797vl
W of 2061 W 65" S6 Chmhasarn, Man
-8-
ENGINEER'S C
8_
EN INF R' .ERTIFICATE
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of
the State of Minnesota.
INTERSTATE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, Inc
Patrick 7 Hines, PE, President p�v%oaN3��F3 Date
Registration No. 12086 of
rzsas 1
Proofed by: SC I o STATE'pa
181797vl
METHOD OF INVESTIGATION
AUGER BORINGS
The Auger Boring procedure is one of the simplest methods of soil
vestigation and sampling, its limitations are that recovered samples are
disturbed samples, and that depth of possible investigation is limited by
various factors. Depending upon skill of the operator or crew chief,
various engineering properties of soil, such as soil profile, estimated
inplace strength, etc, may be determined by this method. It may also be
used to retrieve samples for laboratory testing and determination of
suitability of soil for other purposea.This describes the most often
procedures used.
In this procedure, augers are advanced into the ground by hydraulic/
mechanical means. At intervals, usually 5', the auger withdrawn and soil
samples are retrieved and classified, retaining samples as necessary for
ft.rcher analysis. Record data includes depth to changes in strata, descrip-
tion of soil in each major stratum, groundwater depth or elevation where
found, and other information. This is in accordance with the American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Designation: D 1452-80, "Scandaid
Practice for Soil Investigation and Sampling by Auger Borings".
Sometimes, hand auger borings of various types are used to accomplish
the same purpose. Hnwever, penetration depth is usually limited. Its adven-
tage is greater accuracy and the fact that a hand auger boring may be the
only type Possible where access is limited for power suxer machinery.
(over)
181797v1
Attachment to Lng ricenng Rep" interstate trcotechnical Engineering, Inc
METHOD OF INYES I WA t tON
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
'the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (MP) procedure is an inermirtgly accepted
method to investigate soil in limited zones, to augment existing testing, or to test in
relatively isolated or inaccessible areas. It is a relatively lightweight device that evaluates
soil consistency and density. It is "dynamic", versus static, in that it utilizes a fattmg
weight in the testing.
The device utilizes a 15# steel ring weight falling 20" on an E -rod slide (see sketch
below). At the end of the E -rod assembly is a specially shaped cone that is driven into the
soil by repeated drops of the hammer on the anvil. The cone is slightly enlarged a, its base
to minimize shaft resistance above. The test is either made at existing surface level, but
most likely through an angered hole (see separate "Auger Borings" procedure). Soil
profile is established through this latter procedure. At test depth, the cone is seated 2" (the
"set') into undisturbed soil for proper embedment. The cone point is then father driven
01," by the 15# hammer dropping 20". The blows to diive the cone 1'l," into the soil are
counted and recorded. Sometimes, a second and third penetration can be made in this
same set. By sualussively advancing the bora We and adding rods, tests can be made at
various levels. This procedure may be used to depths of up to 15 or 20 feet
re -Rad
' aaa"m nnrll
—r 1 i5 ro sM1er any a�Crrr
Sliding Drive Hammer Cone Point
181797v
iaterotate Geotecttnieai Engineering. Inc
UNMED son. CLASSTFICATION
Wja 1R.'viom
G,q�n
Trow voYuy
iaaoldlor7 dMorum k" akad°
fl
GW
wd:'Vadm ga.cb, ca+d.aW
C.. a• ra�v iw k C.. L_r ev-rm u<>
mill q. links Qo re
D.
3
3
F
i
c
:
[
C _
GP
PoatY Dadra ,We, paM•
,md mnurta. sulk a ro Om
g
0 :�
Na —.8 aii yaaarart npv:egcoµ, fa ow
GM d
4
Shylhy M. pnrd.,mdndl
i
MiROert Nmm pdnv ^A"
a'
u
mtmm
pp
Nrc m P.1. Im ihm .
-A^Ox wbh P.4
j
In+em a .De * erc bdry
p._
yP 3 Z t
akdrm a,e r.arins uu
-
:L3
oc
Cbr ay.d+. [rnd.urbKSv
ii •,i
Atte4npt':mw aio.a^A'
of mw,,myu
L
muaum
.y s
bm wrh P.4 [faro rhm Y
ti
a�
6
SW
'C
CeA"vrvn rMe cC,•IA=� an.v-lyNl
�#
�_
vnd,. Fnkmro0n»
Y
LR
D. G..0.
yq i
z
SP
PONY Crkd errd,. prardy
eL c
'
3
myd' kink m ro Mq
9,6 e
Na me»'np a0 Md+uaa,rauircrncu, .^m S W
3
� a t
aL
L
a€ n 0
%
$
SG! urA.. W d'o
-
°x �' =
Mala! Gums, sma. ••A•
Llmra Pbn{at.a na;hv[
1
P.1. Imsfm a
n1, P.J. bs.een a
hmdl.t¢e coo
L
SG
OW,y ,ate., wadck qla.
T,
E3 =s9
Aaalal4',mr, aDe,e "A.•
mNrnntuuu.dwl„m-
Im,
6<h
.�
cera
�
3 F e _ '"
brc cam P.1. prrary d+m'
Iroryek nu, xa .». fmf
ML
,Mfd..ab Cou, uu, auv.n
yb
Ane cards m dmY
Fa 3reY an °I Le. p�amma
F
dipAr O�,nmY
wxl ant au iw+en et „e
k+uWK dan et M„ ro my
`'q
30 y.u.d axb,
din Om,"Y, p.alp. da».
er,4A Lwin bnn x..r.: —�—'
vn
YCL
"MY P..n. vue;1.».km
^aQSad xr aeeam,rc
iL®wa ,mwnn. We
yd.»
n ;
tames. of a uL -
PI•d •Y.1v
q
OrpmK,dn and drtmx ,ala
_
OL
eta» di 1. P ,.q
V
a
IrcrpmK abs
§ 3
NN
dbtdmaagw fix ,.Cdr m
v 3]
diq\'4115
-� f=
CH
Irgpsnr ia» 0 heph Na.
10
L
A
U
0 10 w 10 .D '0 In '0 w sw Int
ON
Orwc da» a: mNnen a
G
bttr pWtMel. aw. n(A
E
}y�
S aj
Pr3*
W IXhY 11(.ly
L .Qeb L mr,
Pyr ,. Oi
181797vl
t
t 0
CM COo p � r a
pm _ k m
y 0 j •Ni
ky mftlY i} mN $ Yt
N � m
J m
�knlC � O. wu
ryHry� pVpYd ct mm � vi °m
ma c
a o 0
of W m
aW o�
L ,C
mV
S
m�O
ti v C
IL 4{ p W o
D U N N u
u 2c6
m 0 00 S
H r N y
a a u{ m
L O N m U
W
"J
I
m
ti
aPPt�imnCe P1'operLy Linc
o �
S'
181797vl
Patrick J Hines, PE yV- y~p_„V 8167 100th St S
Cottage Grove MIN 55016
Proposed Single Family Residence
PROJECT: Weat of 2061 W A$th St, Chanhassen, Hina
LOG OF BORING NO:
DEPTH SURFACEELEVATION: 98.1 SAMPLE LAS II OTHER TESTS
IN �-- GEOLOGY N W8
FEET DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION # TY?E R I W DE L.L
P.L. [ RA ue
LEAN CLAY, variably sandy, Organic (OL Topsoil
1 Black, w/ tr's mineral Soil, Fill N 1
j very moist, loose to firm y�
! , scmatto sandy, Pred 5& Gray (I.) Fill ( .2 HA
p w/ a little Organic So11, w/ tr
mist to moist loose to firm
3 LEAN CLAY, rather silty, Organic (OL) Buried 3 HA
Black, wi small roots, tr'a undecom- Hunan1.
4�posed vegetation, saturated, rather
borderline Septic Peat in soft
/�
,�.SAND,
a tt a sen y, ery ar to
Dark Gray (CL), very soft to soft (w/
d
Lacustrine
Deposit
Glacial
DRILLING DATA 61car, Loan
Y
y
4
5
HA
NA
poor y gra a ze f3-ne gr, w wl
W4'tR
iced, tr cs) w/ a few fines, Dark Gray
Till, w/
TM
DE>iN DCRN
OEGH YUglEYE
tEYEZ
C”. Chat
method, 3" Hand 6 4" Power F112ht•
Augers *Mobile H-31 Drill '
Rig on Dodge Power Wagon
(SP),'satuzated, loose to firm
Outwash
Y
6
FA
6 '
banded w/ LEAN CLAY, a little sandy,
inclusion
2.1'
Dark Gray (CL), saturated, rather soft
soft to medium 2 8}'+
10
more bands of clay, less of sand, w/
depth
IL
LHAN CLAY, rather sandy, Dark Gray
Glacial
N
7
FA
12
(CL), w/ a little gravel
Till
,saturated,
medium
N 181 FA
18
7j,
8113
SW 45 mph±. Bred
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
DRILLING DATA 61car, Loan
=AY�ZED 45;4G
UVEIN OR.WNG
W4'tR
DiTE
TM
DE>iN DCRN
OEGH YUglEYE
tEYEZ
C”. Chat
method, 3" Hand 6 4" Power F112ht•
Augers *Mobile H-31 Drill '
Rig on Dodge Power Wagon
_ �—
23 Oc 1 :29 None 3.8'
24 Oct I 13:51 5' 1.81
" '1
14:35
to 23'
6 '
3 '
C�:Ed; UCto crjr
son"g CcmDlated24 October 2014
2.1'
181797vl
MOLL BORING W(: -
(continued) 816, 100th Sc S
ftrrlekJ Rt..+y 71t Cottrg�. fm,ia MN 55016,
:�lu
LOG OF BORING NO: l
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 98.1 SAMPLE LAB A OTHER TESTS
IN GEOLOGY N WB FEET DESORIPTION ANO Gla551FiCATION N TYPE R Tr
LEAN CLAY, rather sandy, Dark Gray CL Glacial ial N 9 FA
wl tr to a little gravel Till
22 saturated, medium
23
End of Boring - No Refusal i �
i
181797v1
hole void backfilled wl native
'.ngs mixed w/ Bentonite on 24
,or 2014
Probe lA - Elev - 97.8
2 0-6j' Topsoil Fill, Fill (91 less
than Boring 1), Buried Humus
29 16j'-7' Lean Clay, possibly Marl,
30-i Gray, saturated, very soft
Jj 7'-8}' Lean Clay, rather silty, Dark
31I Gray, saturated, very soft tc
soft
32� 8}'-10}' Lean Clay wl band inclusions
Bark Gray, saturated, soft tc
mediun
33- Probe put down by power flight auger
method on 24 October 2014 d ummed«
34 ately backfilled w/ native cuttings
1mixed wl Bentonite
41
42
43
46�,
Patrick J Rime, PE
t PROJECT:___
5?.. .. 8167 LOCO St f
Cottage drove TIN 53016
BORING LOG YF.Y
LOG OF BORING
NO:
i
LOIEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION,
IN
GEOLOGY
N
— -'
WS
SAMPLE
LIB
S
OTHER
1�—
TEST
FEET pE SCRIPTION AND CLASSIF:CATlON
_ ..--
System, or to system as
1
M
TYPE R W
DEN
PZ
! 1
3n
I
i
i
I
i lE i
I
Ii-
t •I
i
EI
.i
•
Sol/ C7tsci[icaanr.r using
I
visual -manual ar27rr '_abora-
1 B�
tory methods, accrodiog to the
'::lfled Soil Ciasrifiention
5�
System, or to system as
1
ap;roprf ate
I I'�
]i
i
I
i lE i
I
Ii-
t •I
i
Or,In ` \�� 1
of SSU \
tt
fenetrati'n ,•Kn
Value - Surber j
6 blovs to driyf II
Split-8arral Sas-I
pler one foot
Eater Rearing
Y Yes
S ` No
Later ! _—..—
tete!
S, -bol
Sar., -If Nw.:*r _- - - —
IT icazfs ". ;;pe
rf Sato_r:
S"; STIfL-bard
she :b :• 7vYr
' 'r,k LE<IF SY�bi IG'J�1 r•!YT$ '
,•.t j t..•. I_ce"., w.••�-_.t�i� va. 1
181797vl
+� ! Ot6eL
1 ^rerrrary=
l9:
=YSCTC
I� iLik
t
.n,'ata
1 ;.c:
L_ _:_Pr..re
Center
LCT;0! of
"Roc w�trd
:a..t4� pATA
EXHIBIT "C"
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
181797v]
tF 1 UI"CF.STP7F [P- TEC'i':l: Fll EtG f'-1C1tJE W. :651 9 nt�i
Interstate Geotechnical Engineering, fuc
Patrick J Hines, PE
$167 10CM St 5
Coaag. C*o.e MN SS016
(612)414-57710
13 November 2014
Mr James Rudy q
14546 Timbcrhill Road
Minnetonka MN 55345
Re: Subsurface Soil Investigation
Proposed Single Family Residence.
W of 2061 W 65t° St, Chanhassen, Minn
I his is in response to your contact of recent regarding groundwater on this project. As you
know, I investigated the lot last month and issued a report dated 25 October 2014.1 fotntd
a total of 7 & 8112 of unsuitable soil at the locations of Boting I & Probe 1 A, respectively,
in the form of topsoil fill, general and varying fil], buried original humus and overlysoft clay
or marl. First suitable base soil is a loose to firm sand or a soft to medium lean clay. I
recommended removing thesematcrials and placing controlled fill, noting that you will have
to seriously control groundwater in the process. Regarding groundwater,) found it very high
on this site - at a stabilized level of 1.8'. As I understand it, I he City of Chanhassen has asked
if this water level will change as a result of site correction.
I used as a stabilized water level the 1.9 found it day atter the hand auger phase was
completed. I had encountered water while drilling and did achieve thebase granular soil that
first day. When I did the power auger phase, water was creeping up to nearly the same level
a few hours later, so I felt that the 1.8' is valid. I believe that, when you correct this lot,
controlling groundwater, and compacting fill, most likely granular, the groundwater will soon
rebound to its original level - I .fr as found in myboring. If you construct ordinary and gond
site drainage on your finished project, groundwater will not be affected by any artificial
recharge the result of your activities.
If you have any additional questions on this, or if I can be of assistance in any additional
capacity, do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience.
sincraely,
.....TATE GkOTECiiN1 nE (7ryINFERIAG, Inc
1j�� ,x�CK.l�kiy"9jSni. G'tCV^rM 01
3T�„'�GEha�kO Fd�y
1mL: t h .. ) ;. S t'� C7
1 71 :'. A
Patrick J Hines, PE C• a6 "1)1--
Prrsident ' et 6tare ilE " 4. '...,i 11"c iJ;VJS OF'i SiA?TE OF n:L\\=SOTA
pHlSC� Ga�etou6 ;v8 UA7E _11:& cr 't Y Mi:iiiES91A flu G. kJ. t z6r
181797v1
MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
MIN: 1008671-0504161542-5
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., as nominee for the
Lender FLAGSTAR BANK, FSB, a federal savings bank, its successors and assigns, which holds
a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing
Development Contract, agrees that the Development Contract shall remain in full force and effect
Dated this 20 day of 4 w, 2 2015.
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC
REGI TRATION SYSTEMS, INC.
BY: o .�
STATE OF hdirkliaxiA
�f� ss.
COUNTY OF I /AKLMID )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2015, by J w.t (7orr%&v the
ca l�rts.cP.�+ of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., a
Delaware corporation, acting solely as nominee for ,(he Lender Flagstar Bank, FSB, a federal
savings bank, on its behalf. / I ---------
NOT
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, MN 55121
Telephone: 651-452-5000
181797vl
Moi,, 6AYt
�lWY PUBLIC, WAYN5 COUNTY. MI
MYA402In$OakspidCounty' 'MI19