PC Staff Report 09-18-2018CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: September 18, 2018
CC DATE: October 8, 2018
REVIEW DEADLINE: October 30, 2018
CASE #: 2018-17
BY: MW
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The applicant has an existing septic system that does not meet current standards and will need to
be replaced within the next two years. The applicant is requesting a variance to place a mound
septic system eight feet from the property lines and 15 feet from the top of the bluff, with new
tanks replacing the existing tanks 20 feet from the top of the bluff and a pump line within the
bluff setback and impact zone. The proposed septic system is being sized to accommodate the
possible addition of a sixth bedroom to the existing five-bedroom house. A variance is required
because Chapter 19 requires that septic
systems be setback 10 feet from property lines
and 50 feet from the top of the bluff, and
Chapter 20 prohibits the removal or alteration
of vegetation and grading within 20 feet from
the top of a bluff.
LOCATION: 821 Creekwood Drive
(PID 250260900)
APPLICANT: Gene and Lois Sipprell
821 Creekwood Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55318
PRESENT ZONING: A-2
2030 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density
ACREAGE: 1 DENSITY: NA
PROPOSED MOTION:
“The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the
placement of the pump line within the 50-foot bluff setback area and 20-foot bluff impact zone,
a 30-foot bluff setback variance for the tanks and a 20-foot bluff and 9-foot property line
setback variance for the mounds and dispersal area, subject to the conditions of approval and
adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation.”
(Note: A motion for denial and appropriate findings of fact are also included at the end of the
report.)
821 Creekwood Drive
Planning Case #2018-17
Page 2
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING:
The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed
project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The city has a relatively high
level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established
standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicants recently purchased this
property. During the purchasing process,
they were informed that the septic
system was inadequate and would need
to be replaced within the next two years.
They also wish to size the system to
accommodate a future sixth bedroom.
Their septic system installer informed
them that a double-mound system would
be required and that due to the location
of the house, well, and disturbed nature
of the soils near the house, the septic
system would need to be located within
the 50-foot bluff setback.
The proposed septic system would be
approximately eight feet from the
property lines and 15 feet from the top of
the bluff, with tanks located 20 feet from
the top of the bluff. The pump line would
be within five feet of the top of the bluff
at its closest point.
The septic installer has stated that the
proposed tank and septic locations are required due to the location of the home’s sewer line and
existing tanks. Similarly, the location of the pump line is dictated by the location of the tanks and
mound system. The installer is proposing locating the double-mound system in the northeast
corner of the lot to maximize its distance from the bluff, and because it is the only area of the
property that he believes has suitable contours and soils for the mounds. The installer has stated
that there is not sufficient space on the property to accommodate the septic system outside of the
50-foot bluff setback.
821 Creekwood Drive
Planning Case #2018-17
Page 3
The applicant has stated that the requested variance is necessary to address the deficiencies of
their existing septic system, and to allow for the addition of an additional bedroom on the
property.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 1 - General Provisions, Section 1-2, Rules of Construction and Definitions
Chapter 19 - Water, Sewers and Sewage Disposal, Article IV, Subsurface Sewage Treatment
Systems, Sec. 19-67, Amendments
Chapter 20 - Zoning, Article II, Division 3, Variances
Chapter 20 - Zoning, Article II, Division 4, Nonconforming Uses
Chapter 20 - Zoning, Article X, “A-2” Agricultural Estate District
Chapter 20 - Zoning, Article XXIII, Division, Sec. 20-906, Alternative Lot Size Requirements in A-
2 and RR Residential Zoning Districts
Chapter 20 - Zoning, Article XXVIII, Bluff Protection, Sec. 20-1403, Removal or Alteration of
Vegetation
Chapter 20 - Zoning, Article XXVIII, Bluff Protection, Sec. 20-1404, Topographic
Alterations/Grading and Filling
Chapter 20 - Zoning, Article XXXI, Bluff Creek Overlay District, Sec. 20-1564, Structure Setbacks
Note: Most of the applicable setback standards are located in Chapter 19; however, Chapter 19
does not have a specific variance procedure so the variance is being granted from the general
zoning code using the procedure outlined in Chapter 20.
BACKGROUND
County records indicate that the home was built in 1975.
On September 21, 1984, the city issued a permit for a 634 square foot addition.
On October 14, 1991, the city passed ordinance number 152, which created the city’s bluff
protection ordinance.
On August 22, 1994, the city expanded the bluff protection ordinance to cover the entire city.
On December 14, 1998, the city passed ordinance number 286, which created the Bluff Creek
Overlay District.
On February 8, 1999, the city passed ordinance number 289, which governed the installation and
maintenance of septic systems and established a 20-foot bluff setback.
On May 23, 2011, the city passed ordinance number 523, adopting Carver County Ordinance 67-
2010 by reference and establishing the current 50-foot bluff setback for septic systems.
821 Creekwood Drive
Planning Case #2018-17
Page 4
SITE CONDITIONS
The property is zoned Agricultural Estate District (A-2) and contains a bluff. Portions of the site
are also located near the Bluff Creek Overlay District. This zoning district requires lots to be a
minimum of 2.5 acres, have front yard and rear setbacks of 50 feet, side yard setbacks of 10 feet,
and limits parcels to a maximum of 20 percent (20%) lot coverage. Structures are required to be
30 feet or the existing distance from the top of the bluff, with no topographic or vegetative
alterations permitted within 20 feet from the top of the bluff. Structures must also be setback 40
feet or the existing distance from the Bluff Creek primary zone and no site disturbances are
permitted within the first 20 feet or first 50 percent (50%) of existing setback from the primary
zone. Chapter 19 requires septic systems to be setback 50 feet from bluffs.
The lot is a non-conforming, 43,600 square feet lot. The existing structure meets the front, rear,
and side setbacks, with a deck encroaching approximately 10 feet into the 30-foot bluff setback.
The house appears to meet the 40-foot setback from the Bluff Creek primary zone. The existing
septic tanks are located approximately 20 feet from the top of the bluff.
NEIGHBORHOOD
Vogel Addition
The property is an unplated lot
near the Bluff Creek Golf Course
and Vogel Addition. The
property is accessed by
Creekwood Drive, a private road
serving the golf course and six
residential properties. All of the
residential properties are on
septic and well. Municipal
services are not expected to
become available in the near
future.
Variances within 500 feet:
1985-03 - 815 Creekwood Drive: Denied - Minimum lot size for subdivision to create a 3.56-
acre lot and a 1-acre lot; was subsequently litigated with settlement to create two lots with 2.28
acres each.
2010-05 - 845 Creekwood Drive: Approved - Retaining wall within bluff impact zone.
821 Creekwood Drive
Planning Case #2018-17
Page 5
ANALYSIS
Septic and Pump Tanks
The applicant is proposing placing the
septic and pump tanks behind the house,
20 feet from the top of the bluff. The
applicant has stated that this location is
necessitated by the placement of the
home’s existing sewer line and the
elevation of the sewer pipe. The existing
tanks are also located in this area.
The proposed location is an already
disturbed area of the site that would need to be further disturbed to fill the existing tanks. It is also
outside of the 20-foot Bluff Creek primary zone do not disturb area and 20-foot bluff impact zone.
Staff believes that the proposed location for this portion of the system is reasonable and should not
significantly impact the bluff.
For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the 30-foot bluff setback variance for the septic
and pump tanks.
Pump Line
The applicant’s proposed location for the pump line is determined
by the locations of the pump tank and the mound. The applicant has
stated that physical features of the property prevent any alternative
placement of the pump line.
As the applicant has noted, the ultimate location of the pump line
will be determined by the location of the tanks and the mound
system. Since the location of the tanks is predetermined by the
home’s sewer line and the pump line’s exit from the pump tank is
dictated by the location of the house and deck, the location of this
feature cannot be significantly altered. Since the pipe is entirely
below ground, staff’s largest concern would be the removal of
vegetation, especially mature trees that would accompany its installation. The proposed location
mostly avoids the woods, and staff encourages the applicant to take all possible steps to minimize
tree loss associated with its installation. Staff believes that the proposed location of this portion of
the system is necessary, and cannot be significantly improved upon.
For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the variance from the 50-foot bluff setback and 20-
foot bluff impact zone for the pump line.
821 Creekwood Drive
Planning Case #2018-17
Page 6
Mound System
The applicant has stated that the proposed location for the mound
system, shown in green, is necessary due to the contours of the
property. They have stated that state code requires a mound septic to be
set on a contour for the length of its rock bed and that this consideration
requires the double-mound system as well as the proposed placements
of both mounds and their drain fields. The applicant’s installer has
indicated a strong preference for placing a mound system on an area
with at least a 1-2% slope.
Staff asked the applicant to address the possibility of installing a Type
III septic system. The applicant’s installer has indicated that the
presence of disturbed soils in the middle of the yard makes it difficult
to be certain that an installed system would perform adequately in that
area. They have stated that disturbed soils, such as appear to be present
in that area, have a higher chance of failing to accept effluent long
term, of undertreating effluent, and of discharging untreated effluent.
They note that the best soils with sufficient slope and contours are
always the best choice for locating a septic system.
In reviewing the proposed location for the double-mound system, staff was very concerned to notice
that it is adjacent to a swale that handles a large amount of stormwater runoff from Bluff Creek Golf
Course and directly discharges into Bluff Creek, a state classified impaired water. Staff also
observed that a large head cut is present in this area and that it is actively eroding the bluff directly
downstream from the proposed location. For these reasons, Water Resources is recommending
denial of the variance request unless it can be demonstrated that no other location or system is
feasible.
Staff consulted with Carver County’s Soil and
Water Conservation District’s Conservation
Technician, Chip Hentges, regarding the
proposed location of the double-mound
portion of the system. He indicated that the
largest concern from the County’s perspective
was that the proposed mound system stay clear
of the drainage swale located near the 928
contour. It is Conservation Technician
Hentges’ opinion that by grating 1-foot lot line
setbacks it should be possible to shift the
system to the southeast so that the toe of the
southern mound’s sand is clear of the 30-foot
bluff setback indicated on the survey.
821 Creekwood Drive
Planning Case #2018-17
Page 7
He also notes that the rock bed locations should be able to work in their proposed areas.
Building Inspector Tessman also reviewed the proposed septic system’s location and design. He
recommends that the mounds be pushed forward to within 1 foot of the property line and that the
mound ratio be changed from 3:1 to 4:1. Both of these modifications would increase the distance
from the toe of the proposed mound system to the top of the bluff.
Based on these reviews and the importance of protecting Bluff Creek, staff is recommending that a
20-foot bluff and 9-foot property line setback variance be given for the mound portion of the
system, rather than the 35-foot bluff and 2-foot property line setback variance the applicant is
requesting.
Impact on Neighborhood
The largest impact on the neighborhood will be the loss of the
wooded area in the northeast of the property. Most of the
surrounding properties have heavily wooded yards; however,
several other properties do have mostly open front yards.
Many components of the septic system would be located
below grade and would not be expected to have any visual
impact on the neighborhood. The applicant intends to install
landscaping to minimize the visual impact of the above-grade
portions of the system.
SUMMARY
Staff believes that a variance is necessary to accommodate a new septic system; however, the bluff
is already beginning to head cut and the removal of vegetation, disruption of soil, and other
elements involved with septic systems could exacerbate the existing erosive issues. Staff believes
that the septic system’s design and location can be adjusted to provide for an increased distance
between portions of the septic system and the bluff. Staff recommends that a modified version of the
proposed variance, which allows the septic system to be located closer to the property lines but
requires a larger bluff setback than the applicant is requesting, be approved.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommend that the City Council
approve the placement of the pump line within the 50-foot bluff setback area and 20-foot bluff
impact zone, a 30-foot bluff setback variance for the tanks and a 20-foot bluff and 9-foot
property line setback variance for the mounds and dispersal area, subject to the conditions of
approval and adopt the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation:
1. The applicant must apply for and receive all necessary permits from the relevant
agencies.
821 Creekwood Drive
Planning Case #2018-17
Page 8
2. The applicant shall work with city, county, and watershed staff to maximize the
system’s distance from the bluff, minimize its impact on the bluff, and avoid
impacting the existing drainage swale.
3. The applicant shall minimize tree loss, and shall, to the greatest extent possible, avoid
removing mature trees within 20 feet of the top of the bluff.
4. A new 1” = 20’ scale survey showing the final location of the septic and pump tanks,
pump line, mound, and drain field shall be provided as part of the permitting process.
5. The area around the septic system mounds shall be landscaped so as to minimize its
visual impact.
Should the Planning Commission recommend denying the variance request, it is recommended
that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion and attached Findings of Fact and
Decision:
“The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments recommends that the City Council deny the
variance request to place a pump line within the bluff setback and impact zone, the 30-foot bluff
setback variance for the tanks, and the 35-foot bluff setback variance and the 2-foot property line
setback variance for the mound system, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision.”
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation Approval
2. Findings of Fact and Recommendation Denial
3. Development Review Application
4. Narrative
5. Certificate of Survey
6. Miscellaneous Septic Documents
7. MPCA Documents
8. HomeStead Septic Systems Response to Supplement Variance
9. WRC Memo on 821 Creekwood
10. Building Memo on 821 Creekwood
11. Environmental Resources Specialist Memo on 821 Creekwood
12. Public Hearing Notice Mailing List
G:\PLAN\2018 Planning Cases\18-17 821 Creekwood Drive Variance\Staff Report-821 Creekwood Drive_PC.doc
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
(APPROVAL)
IN RE:
The application of Gene and Lois Sipprell for the installation of a septic system within the
required bluff setback and impact zone on a property zoned A-2 - Planning Case 2018-17.
On September 18, 2018, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by
published and mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District A-2.
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density.
3. The legal description of the property is:
The west 152.3 feet of the east 355.85 feet of the north 286.0 feet of the south 572 feet of the
Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SE ¼ of SE ¼) of Section 26, Township 116,
Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota.
4. Variance Findings – Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance:
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive
plan.
Finding: The intent of the city’s bluff protection ordinance is to ensure that vegetation
and soils located near and on bluffs are not distributed in a manner that has the potential
to create erosive conditions or otherwise negatively impact the bluff. The city also
requires septic systems to be setback from property lines and road right of ways in order
to minimize the potential for these systems to negatively impact adjacent property owners
or interfere with the installation of utilities or other features commonly found in right of
ways. In this case, there are no adjacent residential properties and the street is a private
one, so the there is less concern for waiving the required property line setbacks. By
granting a variance to the property line setbacks, the required bluff setback variance is
minimized and the septic system can be placed further away from the more sensitive
portions of the bluff.
2
Granting a variance to allow a single-family home with no ability to hook up to
municipal utilities to install a septic system is consistent with the comprehensive plan,
and the proposed variance is in harmony with the intent of the zoning code.
b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems.
Finding: Due to the existence of bluffs on the property, the dimensions of the property,
the placement of the house, nature of the contours, and characteristics of the soil, the
septic system must be placed in the northeast corner of the property. This placement
requires variances from the bluff setbacks, impact zone, and property line setbacks. City
sewer and water will not be available for the property in the near future and a functioning
septic system is required to have reasonable use of the property.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The lot is a non-conforming lot of record that was created before the existing
district standards, bluff protection, and septic system ordinances were created.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: Many components of the septic system would be located below grade and would
not be expected to have any visual impact on the neighborhood. The applicant intends to
install landscaping to minimize the visual impact of the above-grade portions of the system.
The surrounding residential properties are also located on large lots and are served by septic
systems.
f. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: This does not apply to this request.
5. The planning report #2018-17, dated September 18, 2018, prepared by MacKenzie Walters,
is incorporated herein.
3
RECOMMENDATION
“The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments recommends that the City Council
approves the placement of the pump line within the 50-foot bluff setback area and the 20-foot
bluff impact zone, a 30-foot bluff setback variance for the tanks and a 20-foot bluff and 9-foot
property line setback variance for the mounds and dispersal area, subject to the conditions of
approval:
1. The applicant must apply for and receive all necessary permits from the relevant
agencies.
2. The applicant shall work with city, county, and watershed staff to maximize the
system’s distance from the bluff, minimize its impact on the bluff, and avoid
impacting the existing drainage swale.
3. The applicant shall minimize tree loss, and shall, to the greatest extent possible, avoid
removing mature trees within 20 feet of the top of the bluff.
4. A new 1” = 20’ scale survey showing the final location of the septic and pump tanks,
pump line, mound, and drain field shall be provided as part of the permitting process.
5. The area around the septic system mounds shall be landscaped so as to minimize its
visual impact.”
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 18th day of September, 2018.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
Chairman
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
(DENIAL)
IN RE:
The application of Gene and Lois Sipprell for the installation of a septic system within the
required bluff setback and impact zone on a property zoned A-2 - Planning Case 2018-17.
On September 18, 2018, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by
published and mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District A-2.
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density.
3. The legal description of the property is:
The west 152.3 feet of the east 355.85 feet of the north 286.0 feet of the south 572 feet of the
Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SE ¼ of SE ¼) of Section 26, Township 116,
Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota.
4. Variance Findings – Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance:
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive
plan.
Finding: The intent of the city’s bluff protection ordinance is to ensure that vegetation
and soils located near and on bluffs are not distributed in a manner that has the potential
to create erosive conditions or otherwise negatively impact the bluff. The bluff near the
proposed location for the septic system is already subject to a large amount of runoff that
has created a head cut which is actively eroding the bluff downstream from the proposed
location. Furthermore, runoff from this area directly discharges into Bluff Creek, a state
classified impaired water. It would not be in line with the intent of this Chapter to allow
the removal of vegetation and disruption of soils that could exacerbate these issues.
b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
2
Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems.
Finding: A type III septic system could be installed in the flat portion of the yard away
from the top of the bluff. Since there is an alternative location for a septic system that
meets city code, the applicant does not have a practical difficulty.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The lot is a non-conforming lot of record that was created before the existing
district standards, bluff protection, and septic system ordinances were created.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: The area where the applicant is proposing to install the septic system is heavily
wooded and many mature trees would need to be removed. Most of the residential homes
in the vicinity are setback within existing woods; removing these trees would noticeably
alter the character of the neighborhood.
f. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: This does not apply to this request.
5. The planning report #2018-17, dated September 18, 2018, prepared by MacKenzie Walters,
is incorporated herein.
RECOMMENDATION
“The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments recommends that the City Council
deny the variance request to place a pump line within the bluff setback and impact zone, the 30-
foot bluff setback variance for the tanks, and the 35-foot bluff setback variance and 2-foot
property line setback variance for the mound system.”
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 18th day of September, 2018.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
Chairman
COMUUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTIIIENT
Planning Division -77@ Market Boulevard
Mailing Address- P.O. Bnlx147, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: (952) 227 -1300 / Fax: (952) 227 -1 1 10
Submittal Date:
*crTYorurAl,rHAssltr
APPLICANON FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
9/v,/aarc pc Date:allli' ,/ i!- cc Dare Afillg- 6o-Day Review o"," te I t t- [ r f
(Refer to the appropiate Applicatbn Checklist for required submiftal informatiln that must a@mpany this application)
n
tr
n
I Comprehensive Plan Amendment......................... $600 n SuUaivision (SUB)
I Minor MUSA ]ine for failing on-site sewers..... $100
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
I Single-Family Residence.......... ...$325
E ltt Others........ ...........$425
lnterim Use Permit (lUP)
f] tn conlunction with Single-Family Residence..$325
E all others........ ........... $425
Rezoning (REZ)
! ehnned Unit Development (PUD) .................. $750I Minor Amendment to existing PUD................. $100n nttOthers........ ...........$5oo
Sign Plan Review...^... ......$150
Site Plan Review (SPR)
E lOministrative........... .$100
f] Commercial/lndustrialDistricts* ...$500
Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area:(- thousand square feet)
"lnclude nunber ol 94$[49 employees:*lnclude number of ne1gemdoyees:E Residential Districts ... $500
Plus $5 per dwelling unit (_ units)
n Create 3 lots or less ............ .........$300
n Create over 3 |ots..................,....$600 + $15 per lot(_ lots)
! Metes & Bounds (2lots) ...............$300
E Consolidate Lots...... ..$150
D t-ot Line Adjustment......................................... $1 50
n FinalPlat............. .......$700
(lncludes $450 escrow for attorney costs)*
'Addltional escrow may be required for other applications
through the dereloprnent contract.
n Vacation of Easements/Flight-of-way (VAC)........ $300
(Additional recordirg fees may apply)
n WettanO Alteration Permit (WAP)
n Single-Family Residence........... . $150E rulOthers........ ......... $275
fl Zoning Appeat....... ......... $100
n Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA)................. $500
S!: When muttlple appllcatbns are proossed @ncurrenily,
the appropriate fee shall bc charged lor each appllcatlon.
n
n
/n
F
Property Owners' List within 5O0' lcityto generate after pre.apflication meetirg) $3 per address(- addresses)
Escrow for Recording Documents (check allthat apply)$50 per document
tr.
E
E ConOitional Use Permit
E Vacation
fl Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.)
lnterim Use Permit
Variance
Easements (_ easements;
E Site Plan Agreement
E Wetland Alteration PermitE oeeos
TOTAL FEE:
Description of Proposal:
Property Address or Location: PJ / C rc e ,(w ra)5 /rzzt Z /at rn4/. ff 3tF
Parcel#:LegalDescription: Jee Ene /a SzJ Se *fktnt,t f S f</zzzZ.rl=
Total Acreag., / , DD I ttcrtiWetlands Present? tr
Present Zoning:Select One Select One
Present Land Use Designation' Select One Requested Land Use Designation:Select One
Existing Useof Property: Rzl, J -enf;a /
lves E tto
Requested Zoning:
nCfreck box if separate narrative is attached.
Section 1:allthat
Section 2:lnformation
APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as applicant, represent to have obtained
authorization from the propefi owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to
the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. lf this application has not been signed by
the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. This application
should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this
application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I
further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to
any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Name:Contact:
Phone:Address:
City/StateZip:
Email:
Signature:Date:
PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do,
authorize the filing of this application. I understand that cnnditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those
conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep myself informed of
the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. lfurther understand that additionalfees may
be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the
study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Name: lre*e " /a;! 9fP!!4 \ Contact- -fum2,
Address: F dt Cre e ,Qtua/ 5 h1/1-p
Cell'1 ll as.(o 'mzr/ {r3 7
Emair: SipZQOl/U/Yl/V" Z/z
Signature:8,/zO /eazrP
This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by
applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist
and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural
requirements and fees.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A
written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application.
PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable)
Name: & ba la bu,v lamZs/z.ra! 5t 4-?G.entaet 0tt/,vZ.d
Address: /ru ( 4a d*'t rzJ Z<vz Phone:
City/StateZip: 5./t,(a?ez 4fr't/ 'frl Z?b ta - JzO - 7€{,
Email: 4*
Cell:
Fax:
Cell:
Fax:
Who should receive copies of stafl reports?"Other Gontact lnfornration :
Name:El'Property Owner
Applicant
Engineer
Other"
n
ETtI
Via: p'Email
Via: fl Email
Via: NlEmail
Via: f]Email
$uaiteo Paper Copy
f]_tvtaiteo Paper Copy
fiuaiteo Paper Copy
E tvtaileo Paper Copy
Address:
City/StateZip:
Email:
I]{STRUCTIOIIIS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your
device. PRINT FORM and deliver to cfty along with required documents and payment. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital
copy to the city for processing.
SAVE FORM PRINT FORM SUBMIT FORM
Section 3:Owner and lnformation
Section 4: Notification lnformation
The Narative for the 821 Creekwood Drive, Chaska, MN 55318
(Mailing Address)
Submitted by homeowners: Gene and Lowie Sipprell
August 20, 2018
0n May 29,2018, we purchased 821 Creekwood Drive as our primary residence. As
part ofthe process we requested that the lot be surveyed, septic and water systems
be tested. The results indicated the septic system was found to be inadequate to
current standards and would need to be replaced within two years. As we inquired
into this process we learned if we ever wanted to add another bedroom we would
need to have a double mound system. We consulted septic system installer Dale
Denn of Homestead Septic before the purchase ofthe home. He drew up two or
three different double-mound systems providing a way for water movement across
the property.
In fune, 2018, we met with the city representatives at the proposed new site for the
septic system. They advised that the only location for a double mound system
would be in the far north eastern corner ofour lot and a variance would be needed
to address the requirement setback to be 50 feet from the bluff.
July, 2018, Sathr-Berquist, Inc of Wayzata completed two surveys: surface lot and
bluff elevation. [See previously submitted documents)
August, 2018, we met with the neighbors including Michael Cohrs, General
Manager/Course Superintendent of Bluff Creek Golf course that adjoins our
property. They are supportive of installing the new septic system. Our realtor, Rick
Brama has advised us on a landscaper who could provide us with a beautiful design.
Consequently, we are confident that we can install the required septic system and a
beautiful landscaping area that will enhance our neighborhood.
We look forward to answering any questions the city may have and moving forward
so we can complete the septic system installation and landscaping this Fall.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Rev. Dr. Gene Sipprell
(es2-797-2027)erW
HomeStead Septic System Services
1108 Goldenrod Lane
Shakopee, MN 55379
MPCA Licensed #583
Dale Denn - Owner
Cell Phone: 612-310-7887
I lomcsteadsepti c(g)outlook. com
Septic System Variance:
Property: 821 Creekwood Drive
Chaska, MN 55318
A variance is needed that is within the 50 foot bluff setback ordinance.
In general, there are three situations whereby components of the new Mound Septic System will
be within 50 feet of the Bluff:
1. Septic and Pump Tanks
2. Pump line from pump tank to the Mound
3. The Mound
The reasons for the variances is as follows:
l. Septic and Pump tanks have to be where they are as that is where the old tanks are thus
the sewer line from the home comes out in that vicinity and the elevation of the sewer
pipe dictates where tanks need to go.
2. The pump line from the pump tank thus has to start at the pump tank location and
continue to the Mound. Physical features disallow any options to where the pump line
can be run.
3. The Mound has been located where it is due to the fact that the soils in this area are un-
disturbed, verses somewhat disturbed soils in the lawn area from initial construction. I
know that large trees indicate the most natural soils. Secondly, the contours are ever so
slightly undulating outside of where I set the Mound that is it difficult to set a Mound on
a definite contour to meet the Septic Ordinance. Lastly, if all of the Mound has to be
outside of the 50 foot bluff setback, there literally is not enough room to place any part of
the septic system.
By Dale Denn
Owner
aaaoaaaaaataa,laaaaaaa.}ota+oa+oaataattttoaataat
a.}oaoi Mound Septic Design I
t-o+;
? DArE: s,rTl2otr sa+9+ CLIENT: f+;o**s6o* SITE: 821 Creekwood Drive t&
; Chaska, MN 55318 +
&o+**t DESTGNER: Dale J Denn soi Homestead Septic &'
+ 1108 Goldenrod Lane It
9 Shakopee, MN 55379 fl
: MpCA License #583 "e
; ceil: 612-31&7887 .$,
4!+ Email: Hom esteadseptic@outlook.com n--os+,
f For new corstruction lots, all septic sites shall be protected in the field with fencing/identification up to I.+ the time of installation. Existing home lots, do not disturb septic site and keep all heavy equipment and a
3 vehicles off of the site. Any trees that need removal must be done without rubber tired equipment, ie, a
; track machines to avoid soil compaction and undue disturbance. cut tree trucks as close to surface as ?S possible and leave stumps intact, do not excavate. Grinding is ok with a portable grinder. 3+
*.}-t.; contoct Dole Denn with ony questions, comments, or concerns about this septic site. t.tk' $
+# This Cover Poge with Deigner Signoture, electronic or o terwiy-, hereby ceffies thot t hove +
- completed this septic design in occordance with olt applicoble Stote Septic Rules. Loal rules mav ?+ vory from Stote Rules. tnstotler to verfu all ospecis of opplicobte Locol Rules ond setback thot moy ;t be more rcstrictive thon stote Rules. Locol tlnits ol Govemments ore required to pubtish any rule or t
: portion thereol thot difurs from stote Rules. consult with Locol llnit of Governmenl- soy.
+
a
?; ur,rflrr\Ll( SIGNATIIRf, MpCACf,RT# DATti Y{+,-&
**+*
6 €'+ + + 4 € e + 6 g'+ 4 + + 's * + + { + 6 &.* + e e * {, + s + e + t$ 6 + €r * & + s..., $, *. ;1
s + + t c o + o a $ + + $ + + + + + + a c + o (} + +, $ + i) t c + t o + + t t t o t f + + *$+
* 821 Creekwood Drive O,el
I Design Notes: O*+
3 System is for a 6 bedroom Home. Soils only accommodate a Pressurized Mound Septic. Mound is g
6 spfft into two equal units on account of slope, short contours, drainage swale, and bluffline. fr*&
t Each Mound hatve will have the sandbed and laterals at the same elevation based on sandbed *#-
$ elevation of Unit 1. End feed from pump each unit, essentially center feeding Mound ". riJffl rnit. g
*\F+ Finish Mound as one unit and build saddle to divert all rain and snow melt. f
Pump station is designed for a dual pump arrangement with an alternating dose panel. Each
Mound half will have its olvn pump and be controlled by the dosing panel. Use either a dual
pump line, one for each mound half, or a single pump line with Check Valves properly installed
off of each pump. Calculate flow for each pump based on one half of total flow plus drainback.o.' See design and pump pages.
i, Install pump line deep as possible and reverse pitch pump line so that all portions of pump line, drain back into pump tank.
Pump and fill old septic tanks.
Tree and brush removal necessary rvith some large trees to be removed. Cut stumps close to .i
ground as possible and leave stumps intact. Only track machine shall be used in tree removal .,1
process to protect soils from undue disturbance and compaction.
Tight access for septic tank truck. Tree trimming requircd on residence trees and neighbors trees.
Variances to bluff for septic and pump tank, and for unit I of Mound ma1. be neccssary from Cit1,.
Bluff line approximated and not set officialll' b1.' elevation or sun,e\'or. Sun,eving and plotting of
all septic tanks, pump tanks, selyer lines, antl both rock and sandbed absorption units suggestcd to
ascertain all setbacks to properfy- lines and bluff.
44vt',trl
I
.L
I
t,
I
l_.
I
J
t_.
. u_].
l
!,
j
:l
funp, Ue4rs *&
d+ {ttt{- )-'1ultV
I
jrli.t,il
I
r lv'u'El4 /A,
*fr7$
??.6
?L, 3
eff,e ??,,
r'i .;'
Ll
I,
llll
I
I
I
I
:
I
I
r:'r-- -.- --- il
.; \,t !/
7'lt..t-'tl.:-r"4'. ;';;7,a,)1€
d
y,iyytr
ti* ?f'
tiuq
*:
tifi E"
sar u€{fttd** lE
odfr*,n*e
?
''d
;
t|-\. -tt4
*-f,Ppy I
M^T*I,tF- -I
/
/ )*,
l.---/""l,/
11 (-
;1
I
{#
I
I
wffil
nound 6PttT
rttrP Tdo ,'iaiet ailttS'
s*ila +u#r€14-
gfu4E ELEI/, \
(a-ruvBg'P,8:
+4t
/
L
ry!
/io*t
E'
* fil
\
-l r*& i
T,,
I r5'f t ,',.1
-l
C
Preliminary
Evatuation Worksheet
1. Contact lnformation v 04.17.7018
Property Owner/ Ctient:Date:
Project lD:
Phone:
5t73t2018
Site Address 821 Creekwood Drive, Chaska
Emai[:
Maiting Address:
LegaI Description:
Parcel lD:Latitude:Longitude:
2. Flow and General System lnformation
A. Client-Provided lnformation
Project Type:Ne',v Construction Replacement Expansion
Project Use: Residentiai
Residential use: # Bedrooms
Other Establishment:
# Adutts
ln-home business (Y/N):
Water-using devices:
(check all thot apply)
Dwetting Sq.ft.
# Chitdren
lf yes, describe
Unfinished Sq. Ft.:
# Teenagers:
Garbage Disposal/Grinder
Sewage pufirp in basement
Large Bathtub >40 gallons
Clothes Washing Machine
Dishwasher
' Water Softener*
Iron Filter*
High Eff. Furnace*
Ctear water source
Hot Tubt
Sunrp Pump*
Self-Cleaning Humidifierl
should not go into system
Additional current or future uses:
Anticipated non-domestic waste:
The above is complete & accurate:
None
None
B. Designer-determined flow lnformation
Client signoture & dqte
Attach additional informotion os necessory.
Design Ftow:GPD
mg/L TSS:
Anticipated Waste Type:Residentiat
BOD:mg/L Oi[ & Grease:
3. Preliminary Site lnformation
A. Well information Describe a[[ wetls within 100'of proposed SSTS: attach additional information if required.
Additionat Weil tnformation:
mg/L
Preliminary
Evaluation Worksheet ffim :.,.iiqNig E ? C,35TN
Site within 200'of noncommunity transient wett {Y/N)
Site within a drinking water suppty management area (Y/N)
Site in a inner wetthead management zone {Y/N)
Buried water suppty pipes 50 ft of proposed system (Y/N;
Site located in a shoreland district/area?
Ctassification Tank Setback:
Site located in a ftoodplain?
Etevation of ordinary high water levet:
Ftoodptain designation/elevation (1 OYR):
Ftoodptain designation/elevation {100YRi:
County GIS
Easements
Property Lines
Yes, source:
Yes, source:
Yes. source:
Yes, name:
ft. STA Setbk.:
Yes, Type(s):
ft Source:
ft Source:
ft Source:
Plat Map Other:
Wdl(s)
OHWL '. Other:Btuff
D
E
Property Line ld / Source:
lD distance of relevant setbacks
Owner
on map:
Sunrey
Water
Building(s)
4. Preliminary Soil Profile lnformation From Web Soi[ Survey {attach map & description)
Slope RangeMap Units:
List tandforms:
Landform position(s):
Parent materiats:
uptand ptain
Back/ Side Stope
Titt
Depth to WatertabteDepth to Bedrock/ Restrictive Feature
I SeRtic Tank Absorption Fietd- At-grade
Mao Unit I
-_.,__^ | Septic Tank Absorption Fietd- MoundKailngs I
I
L_Eptl. Tank Absorption Fietd- Trench
5. Local Government Unit lnformation
Name of LGU
LGU Contact
LGU-specific setbacks
LGU-specific design requirements
LGU-specific instaltation requirements
Notes
Carver County
952-361-1870
More restrictive - varify
More restrictive - large septic tank sizing
Same as 7080
it Il7 r,..!"I-f,f- i, ,-t i ru :.-:-
45IS{
I
4E'JA:
I
Soil Map-Calver Ccunty, l\4innesota
4q/ll,X
Web Soil Sirrvey
Nailonal Cooperative Soil Survey
,14,' .19 15 ill I
,i1"i1[L '1rtC'I(i
I
+l' .1(i I I.J
14 4! lt tJ
4ry!S20
i-,
f,l
i1
Map Scalet 1 : 1,700 if l)intccl on A larxlsclgl (1 1" x 8,5'') sheet,
N0-
I
-
-
l\osotm2m3mU\ N4ap prole(tron: Wclt l4crrator C.onrercoodrrritej: \4/Glq4 Fdxe trcs: tJI}.4 Zone 15N \rycA84
rir! NaturalResourcesI :,' Conservation $ervice
5t23t2018
Page 1 of 3
,J_
v
ll
't'"'
45.?:80
:-
F,1
,' {t lr
fiB
"#S,".
S,r ffi
l*i1, lfl
m
,t'r,ffii'
Map unit Description, Lester-Kilkenny loams. 2 to 6 percent slopes. eroded--carver county.
Minnesota
Carver County, Minnesota
KB2-Lester-Kilkenny loams,2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: f9j2
Elevation. 700 to 1.600 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 23 to 35 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 50 degrees F
Frost-free period. 155 to 200 days
Farmland classification. All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Lester eroded, and similar sol/s 60 percent
Kilkenny. eroded. and similar solls. 40 percent
Estmaies are based on observations. descnpfions. and transecls of
the mapunit.
Description of Lester, Eroded
Setting
Lattdform. Moraines
Landform position (tuvo-dimensional). Backslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-s/ope shape Linear
Parent material: Till
Typical profile
Ap-}to8inches. loam
Bt - I to 35 rirches clay loam
Bk - 35 to 58 inches. loam
C - 58 b 8A inches: loam
Properties and qualities
S/ope:2to5percent
Depth to restrictive feature. More than 80 inches
Natural drainage c/ass: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat).
Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 43 inches
F requency of floodrirg. None
Frequency of pondrng. None
Calcium carbonate. maximum in profile. 25 percent
Gypsum. maximum in profile 1 percent
Available water storage in profite High (about 10.5 rnches)
lnterpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated) None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group. B
Ecological sife. Loamy Upland Savannas (Rt03xy020t/N)
Forage suitability group: Sloping Uptand. Acid (G103XS006MN)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
5123t2018
Page 1 of 2
Map Unit Descriptron: Lester-Kilkenny loams. 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded--Carver County.
Minnesota
Hydric so/ rafing No
Description of Kilkenny, Eroded
Setting
Landform. Moraines
La n d fo rm p ositi o n (tv,ro-d i m e n s i o n a I ) : Backslope
Down-slope shape. Linear
Across-s/ope shape Linear
Parent ntaterial. Till
Typical profile
Ap - 0 ta 11 inches. loam
Bt- 11 to 35 inches: clay loam
2Bk.2C - 35 to 60 rriches: Ioam
Properties and qualities
Slope:2to6percent
Depth to restrictive feature More than 80 inches
Natural drainage c/ass. Moderately well drained
Capacity of the most timiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):
Moderately high (0.20 to 0.60 in/hr)
Depth to water fable. About 20 inches
Frequency of floodrirg. None
Frequency of pondrng. None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 20 percent
Gypsum. maximunt in profi[e. 1 percent
Available water storage in profile. High (about 10.5 inches)
lnterpretive groups
Land capability classification (trrigated) None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated) 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group. CID
Ecological srb: Clayey Upland Forests (F103XY026MN)
Forage suitability group: Sloping Upland. Acid (G103XS006MN)
Hydric so/ rafrng: No
Data Source lnformation
Soil Survey Area. Carver County Minnesota
Survey Area Daia: Version 14 Oct 4 2017
: -.j Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
Naiional Cooperative Soii Survey
5t2U2A18
Page 2 ai 2
Fietd
EvaIuation Worksheet
1. Project lnformation v 04.17.7018
Property Owner/Ctient:Project lD:
2. Utility and Structure lnformation
Utitity Locations ldentified Gopher State One Call
Existing BuildingsLocate and Verify (see Site Evoluotion mop )
3jit" l^f."*tim
Improvements Easements Setbacks
Vegetation type(s)
Percent stope
Stope shape
Describe the ftooding or run-on potentiat of site
Describe the need for Type lll or Type lV system
Woods and lawn
)J Stope direction
Landscape position
E--+LA>L
Linear, Linear Shoulder
BuiLd saddte upstope of Mound to divert rain and snow mett.
Note
Elevations and Benchmarks identified on map? (Y/N)
Proposed soiI treatment area protected? (Y/N)
yes
Yes lf yes, describe
4. General Soils lnformation
Originat soils (Y/N):
disturbed areas (Y/N):
Yes lf no. describe:
lf yes, describe:Fitted, compacted,
5oiI observations
A soiI observation
were conducted in the proposed system location
in the most timiting area of the proposed system
(Y/N)
(Y/N)
(Y/N)
(Y/N)
Yes
Yes
Number of soiI observations:SoiI observation [ogs attached Yes
Percotation tests performed & attached Yes
No
4
5. Phase l. Reporting lnformation
Depth Elevation
Periodicatly saturated soit:
Standing water:
Bedrock:
Required separation:
Max depth of system:
ln
in
in
in
in
95.2 fr
fr
ft
Soil Texture:
Percolation Rate:
Soit Hyd. Loading Rate:
Contour Loading Rate:
Ftoodptain Etev. ( 1 0 yrl:
Ftoodptain Etev. i1 00 yr):
Differences between soil survey and field evatuation:
Site evatuation issues / comments:
Anticipated construction issues:.-t r _-1 /-i7\ ri t ,
LO
36
ctay [oam
28.00 min/inch
gpdlftz
gpd/ft
feet
feet
0.45
17
NA
NA
Percotation Test Data fyt .,'i,i i, ii,...,n'i.i.i., , - .
Project lD:
P1Test hote: #1 Location:Depth.':
EtevationSoiI texture description
Depth (inl I SoitTexture
0-12 Loam
12 in. for mounds &. at-
grades, depth of
absorption area for
trenches and beds
Reading Start Time End Time Start Reading
(in)
End Reading
(in)
Perc rate
(mpi)
96 Difference
Last 3 Rates
Pass
1
Z
3
4
11:00 AM
1'l:23 AM
11:50 AM
11:20 AM
11:44 AM
12:10 PM
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.2
7.2
7.1
25.0
24.7
23. 3
NA
NA
7.4
NA
NA
Yes
Chosen Percotation Rate for Test Hote #1
Test hote: #2 Location:
SoiI texture description:
Depth**:
Etevation:
Depth (in t I Soit Texture 12 in. for mounds &. at-
grodes, depth of
obsorption area for
trenches ond beds
o-12 Ioam
pZ
Reading Start Time End Tirne Start Readirrg
{in)
End Reading
(in)
Perc rate
(mpi)
96 Difference
Last 3 Rates
Pass
1
2
3
4
11:05 AM
11:30 AM
1 1:55 AM
11:25 AM
11:50 AM
12:15 PM
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.3
7.3
7.7
28.7
77.0
2.6.3
NA
NA
6.6
NA
NA
Yes
28.0Chosen Percotation Rate for Test Hote mpl
95.75
25.0
97.5
Percotation Test Data .1, i li $ :;tiT A iror i-U-; i *f -*r:i:'{:Aai- ira:}';CY
1. Contact lnformation Project lD.v 04.17.201
Property Owner/Client:
2. General Percolation lnformation
Diameter Date prepal'ed and/or soaked:
Method of scratching sidewatt:Nai[ in board
ls pre-soak required-?
Soak* start time:
lf No, low long for 12" to soak away
Soak* end
time:
Method to maintain 12 in of water during soak
" Not required in fast perc soils
large bins and siphon hose
3. Summary of Percolation Test Data
Percolation Rate (maximum of atl tests attached) =
4:40 of soak
28.00
Additional Perc. Test Data a ar
Project lD:
Test hote: #3 Location:
SoiI texture description:
Depth"*:
Etevation
inches
feet
Depth (in) | SoilTexture
12 in. for mounds &
grades, depth of
obsorption area for
trenches and beds
at-
0-12'Ioam
p3
Reading Start Tirne End Time Start Reading
(in)
End Reading
(in)
Perc rate
(mpi)
,".6 Difference
Last 3 Rates Pass
1
2
3
4
11:10 AM
1 '1 :35 AM
12:03 PM
11:30 AM
11:55 AM
12:23 PM
8.0
8.0
8.0
6.8
6.9
5.8
16.7
18.2
16.7
NA
NA
8.3
NA
NA
Yes
Chosen Percolation Rate for Test Hote #3
Test hote: #4 Location:
SoiI texture description:
Depth"*:
Etevation:
inches
feet
Depth (in) | SoitTexture
'. 72 in. for mounds & ot-
grodes, depth of
obsorption area for
trenches ond beds
Reading Start Time End Time Start Reading
(in)
End Reading
(in1
Perc rate
(mpi)
% Difference
Last 3 Rates Pass
1
7
?
NA
NA
NA
NA
Chosen Percotation Rate for Test Hote #4 mpi
93.75
18.0
Soit Observation Log
Project ID:v 04.17.20'18
Client:Location / Address:
ioil. parent material(s): (Check att that appty) Outwash Lacustrine Loess Till Alluvium Bedrock Organic Matter
-andscape Position: (check one) Surnnrit shoulder Back/Side Slope Foot Slope .Toe Slope Stope shape Linear, Linear
IVegetation: l trees and gta
Weather Conditions/Time of Day:
SoiI survey map Llnits:lester kittkerrny Stope ltJ 3.0 Etevalion:l 95.75
am ctear to partly cotudy Date 05/73t18
Observation #/Location :B1 Observation Type:Probe
Depth (in)Texture Rock
Frag. Yo
Matrix Cotor(s)Mottte Col.or(s)Redox Kind(s)Indicator(s)
l-"------ Structure-----------l
Shape Grade I Consistence
1oYR 2/1 FriabteGranutar Moderate0-8 Loam .35%
1oYR 3i2 FriabteGranutar Moderate8-14 Loam .35%
1Oyr 33 Firm
Moderate14-27 Ctay Loam .35%Btocky
Av 4t4 Firnr
Moderate72-36 Clay Loam <35'/,Btocky
Comments Redox at 28"
hereby certify that I have completed this work in accordance with all applicable ordinances, rules and laws
Dale Denn
i6effirer-,rnspector)
583
-fi-rcente #l
5t2312018-1fi6-(Signature)
I
I
Soil Observation Log
v 04,17 .2018Project lD:
Client:Location / Address:
ioit parent materiat[s): (Check att that appty) Outwash ]Lacustrinc Locss Till Alluviunr Bedrock organic Matter
Landscape Positiot.r: (check one) Sunillrit ShoLrlder Back/Sicle Slope Foot Slope 'Toe Siope Stope shape Linear. Linear
IVegetation:l ag tand
Weather Conditions/Time of Day:
Soil survey map units Iester Stope %3.0 ELevation (ft): | 93.75
am partty ctor"rdy Date:05t73t18
Observation #/Location :B3 Observation Type:Probe
Depth (in)Texture Rock
Frag. 26
Matrix Cotor(s)Mottte Colorls)Redox Kind(s)I nd ica tor( s )
l-------- Structure-----------l
Slrape Grade I Cortsisterrce
1oYR 2/1 Friabte
Granutar Moderate0-8 Loam <35'l'
'1oYR l/2 Friabte
Granular Moderate8-14 Loam ,35%
10yr 3/2 10yr 3/ 4 Firm
Moderate14-22 Clay Loam .35%Blocky
lQtt 1l-1 Firm
Moderate22"36 C[ay Loam <35%Btocky
comments ReDox <o 2g
I
Additional Soil Observation Logs
Project lD:
Ctient Localion / Address:
Soi[ parent material(s): (Check att that appLy) O0hvash Lacustrirre Loess Tili Alluviunr Bedrock Organic lvlatter
Landscape Positiorr: (check one) Srimnlit 'Shoulclcr Back/Siclc Slopc Foot Slope Toc Slope Slope shape Linear, Linear
I
Vegetation: I [rees arrd grassr
Weather Conditions/Time of Day:
ls I Soit sLrrvey map units Lester Stope %3.0 Etevatjorr: | 97.5
am partty ctoudy Date:a5/?3/18
Observation #/Location :87 Observation Type;Probe
Depth (in)Texlure Rock
Fras. 7o
Matrix CoLor(s)Mottte Cotor(s)Redox Kind(s;lndicator(s)l-------- Structure--I
Shape Grade I Consislence
1OYR 2/1 FriableGranular Moderate0-8 Loam "35%
1oYR 3/2 Friab(eGranutar Moderate8'14 Loam .35%
1Oyr 3/3 Firm
Moderale14-77.Clay Loam .35%Btocky
1"9vt!"/!Firm
Moderate22-36 Ctay Loam ,35'/o Btocky
Comments ReDox riu 30
Design Summary Page
1. PROJECT INFORMATION v 04.17.2018
Property Owner/Ctient
Site Address
EmaiI Address
Project lD:
Date:
Phone:
821 Creekwood Drive, Chaska 5/27/7018
2. DESIGN FLOW & WASTE STRENGTH Attach dato ! estimate basis for Other Estoblishments
Design Ftow
BOD
LeveI
GPD
mg/L
5e{ect
Anticipated Waste Type Residentiat
TSS:mgll Oi[ & Grease mg/L
Treatment Treatment Level C for residentiol septic tonk effluent
3.HOLDING TANK SIZING
Minimum Capacity: Residentiat -400 gat/bedroom, Other Establishment Design Ftow x 5.0. Minimum size 1000 gattons
Code lvlinimum Hotding Tank Capacity:
Recommended Hotding Tank Capacity:
Ga[[ons
Gattons
in
in
Tanks or Compartments
Tanks or Compartments
(Set @ 7576 tank capacity)Type of High Level Alarm:
Comments:
4.SEPTIC TANK SIZING
A. Residential dwellings:
Number of Bedrooms (Residentiat)
Code tAinimunr Septic Tank Capacity
Recommended Septic Tank Capacity
Gatlons
Gatlons
in Tanks or Compartments
Tanks or CompartmentsIN
Efftuent Screen & Atarm (Y/N)Model /Tvne: INo
Other Establishments:
Waste received by
Septic Tank Capacity
Septic Tank Capacity
r & Atarm (Y/N):l--
GPD l--louvt Hyd. Retention Time
Code Minimum
Recommended
Efftuent Screen
Gattons
Gattons
ln
ln
Tanks or Compartments
Tanks or Compartments
[--l Modet/rype'
5.PUMP TANK SIZING
Pump Tank 1 Capacity (Minimum): l- r SOO-lCut
Pump Tank 1 Capacity (Recommenaua),1-- O lCuf
purnp 1i--zq.tlcplul totut rt"ua[-zi+ lrt
Pump Tank 2 Capacity (Minimum):[----_lc"t
Pump Tank z capacity (Recommena"oy,[-----lcut
er*p zl---lcem rotut n"uo[--_-lrt
suppty Pipe uia. Flu'lin uose Vot:J- na,o lg"r Suppty Pipe t-ria.l--l oor" vot,l--_lcur
B.
SYSTEM AND DISTRIBUTION TYPE
Design Summary Page
Project lD:
Bed:
Dispersal ar"u [----l rt'Sidewatl. o"ptr, l---lin Maximum s"o o"ptnT-ltn
a"a wiotr,[-__lrt e"a l"ns*'[----_lrt Designed a"O o.ptn[---__lin
Mound:
DispersaI a.uul- zso.o_lrtt a"o l"ngtnFEI--lrt seo wiothl--6-o-lrt
Absorption wiou', [ho -l rt Ctearr Sand r-irtl--l.o -lrt Berm width to rzt[---lrt
Upstope Berm widthl--e.t-.lrt Downstope e"r*l-- 13.6 lrt EndsLope Berm widthl- r tZ_lrt
Total System l.ng*,[-ta8]a lrt system wi.rt [--lq3-lrt Contour Loading Rut"lJI-1,1", r,,
Soi[ Treatment Type:l Mound
top of block, garage @ 100
MPCA System rvp",l--- ryp"Tl DistribLrtion Media:
100
i ,,rtinl*u. Req'd Separutlon'[--:O-linches I :nlf,
Code Max System Depth: f A4orrnd linches
Soit Texture,l-auy fou* I Layers with ,35?,i Rock Fragments? (yeslno)l Nol
Percolation nut.' l- zs.oo li pt lf yes, describe below: un rock and layer thickness,
amount of soit credit and any additional information for
addressing the rock fragments in this design.
Contour Loading nrt"'l--lz -l
SOIL TREATMENT AREA DESIGN SUMMARY
Seasonal water tabte at 28"
Dispersatar"u[---___lrt' sidewattoup*,[----lin rrench wiotr,l-lrt
Totat Lineat r""t[---lrt No. of lrun.n"r[---_l Code Max. Trench n"pt,l---lin
Contour Loading nut"l--_lrt Min. Lengthl--lft Desisrred rrerrch o*p*,[----_lin
CCt ID:
9.Additionat lnfo for At-Risk, HSW or Type lV Design
Level &Equal Pressure Distribution
No. of lut"rutrl--l__l Perforation Spu.ingl : -ltt Perforation oiameterl-Ja -lin
Lateral Diu*"t"rl--L5o-lin Min Dose votrr.l- +g lgur Max Dose vorrr"[- zzs lgut
Etevation
(ft)
Pipe Size
1in)
Pipe
Votume
(gat/ft)
Pipe
Length (ft)
Perf Size
(in;
Spacing
(ft )
Spacing
(in)
Non-Level and Unequal Pressure Distribution
Lateral 1
Lateral 2
Lateral 3
Lateral 4
Lateral 5
Lateral 6
Minimum Dose
Votume
[-lru,
Maximum Dose
Votume
[---I*u,
s"a wiatr,[--__lrt a.a rung*,[-]rt Finished Huisht l--****lrt
contour Loading nut"l--lgat/ft upstope s"rr[----lrt Downstope e"r*[---lrt
Endstope g.r,nl---ltt
A. Starting BOD Concentration = Design FtowX Starting BOD (mg/L) X 8.35 + 1,000,000
B. Target BOD Concentration = Design FtowXTarget BOD (mg/L) X 8.35: 1,000,000
Lbs. BoD To Be Remor"a,l--l
PreTreatment Techrrology:
Disinfection Technology:
*Must Meet or Exceed Target
*Required for Levels A & B
C. Organic Loading to Soit Treatment Area:
10. Comments/Special Design Considerations:
Design Summary Page
rr. i Il
:ON
have completed this work in accordance with att appticabte ordinances, rutes and laws.
581
(License #)
5 / 8 /?018
(Date)
I hereby certify that I
Dale Denn
{Designer)(Signature)
system l"ret l--lrt
Project lD:v 44.17.7A18
A. Rock Volume:
{[-6*l
{Rock Betow Pipe + Rock to cover pipe lpipeoutsidertio. -2incillXBed Length X Bed Widtlt = Volume
in+):17 ftx tt3
ydr
ydr
Divide ft3 by 27 ft3/ydr to catculate cubic yards:
Add 30r"d for constructabitity:
ftr + 27
ydt x 1.3
B. Catcutate Clean Sond Vatume:
Volume Under Rack bed: Averoge Sand Depth x iledio Width x lAedis Length = cubic feet
ftx rr x l--rzio -lr
Divide ftr by 2z ftr/yd3 to calcutate cubic yards:
Add 30?i for constructabii.ity:
ftr + 77
yd3 x 1.3
ydl
ydj
For a Mound on a siope fram Q-1%
Volume from Length = ({Upstope Mound Height -1) X Absorption Width Beyond Bed X Media Bed Length)ft 1) x ft
Volume from Width = {{Upslope Mound Height -1) X Absorption Width Beyond Bed X Media Bed Width)
fr -1) x
Totat Cleofi Sand Volume: Volume f rom Length +Vo{ume f rom Width * Volume lJnder Medio
ftr =
For a Mound on a slope greater than 1%
Upslope Volume : ((Upslope tvlound Height - 7 ) x 3 x Bed Length] = Z= cubic feet
ft-1) x 3.0fr x ft3
ftl
ftl
DawnslopeVolume: l{Downslope Height - 1) x DownslopeAbsorption Width xMedio Lengthl *Z= cubic feetfr-1) x ftx
Endslope volume: (Downslope lvlound Height - 1) x 3 x lledia width = cubic feet
fr-1) x 3.0ft x
Total Cleon Sond Volume: Upslope Volume * Downslope Vo{ume + Endslope Yolume + Volume tJnder l,tediof--E8f---l rt, * [--Jrss,o-l rt, * [-- :+z -l 11, * l-- 030.0-111,= f 2 .,ftr
C. Catculate Sondy Berm Volume:
TatolBSrm:lolurryllpprox): ((Avg.MoundHeight-0.5fttopsoit)xMoundWidrhxMoundLength) +2
0.5 )ft x -1ft'
Total lilaund volume - clean Sand volume -Rock volume = cubic f eet
ftr ftr
Divide ftl by 77 ftr/yd3 to catculate cubic yards
Add 30:/" for constructabititv:
ftl 27 ydl
ydl 1.2
D. Calculate Topsoit lAoterial Valume: Totol Maund Width X Totol nound tengtn f S yt
ftx fr x 0.5 fr ftl
ydr
yd'
Divide ft) by U ftr/ydr to catculate cubic yards:
Add 30,o/" for constructabitity:
ftl
yd3
77
1.3
175.4 6.0 562.5
20.8
77.1
6.0 630.0
79.7
103.6
125_0 378.1+/
6.0 )t 1
1't58.0
7395.7
88.7
115.3
ftr =
29.4 148.4 7183.4
1 05.1
80.9
Basic Pump Setection Design Worksheet
1. PUMP CAPACITY Project lD:v t)4.17.2018
PumpinE to Gravity or Pressure Distribution:Pressure
i. lf pumping to gravity enter the gallon per minute of the pump:
2- lf pumping to a pressurized distribuiron system:
3. Enter pump description:
t 10 - 45 gpm)
29.0
Demand Dosrng
7.
A.
p
L.
HEAD RTQUIREMENTS
ftevation Difference IL
ft
ft tdm to spc.cial equipmfit. et.. )
betsreen pump and point of discharge:
Distribution Head Loss:
Additionat Head Loss:
rdJ,t ,.a irLirur. LurJ arl TrdiLrL r'pe Pg: I'Jr.(
r : i !-, n ii*
-r.:,
.i.5
1- Suppty Pipe Diameter:
2. Supply Pipe Lenglh:
in
rr rrt.j.i
f . i
:.:
a.t:.
Friction Loss in Plastic Pipe per 1Ooft frcm Tabte l:
filction Loss =ft pcr 'l00ft of pipe
Determine Equivatent Pipe Length from pump discharge to sotl dispersal area discharge
point. Estimatc by addiog 251', to suppl_v pipe tength for fitting toss. Supply Pipe
Length (D.2) X 1.25 = €quivalent Pipe Length
fr x i.25 ii. :
G. CalcutateSupptyFrictionLossbymuitiplyingFrictionLossPer TOOrtiljflctlbytheEquivalentPipeLength {LineF) anddividebyl00.
Suppty Friction Loss =
ft per 100ft X 100
I DistribrJtion Head Loss
,i:l-:l..llYl.lllt'it"'tt.," t-lJf t
-
f !'r,-r:,sr:r,-. lJistr il.'rJtl(-)rI l:;r:,i..r! ()rl i\iltril)rrilll /:\1-/*r;alli-] t-lea{lI[..,;ri,r'.. i)r] i'r rr.-1,Lrr, . Di5l-r il]rrtiurl 1.'jor k:l rerr-.t:
ftifu l: r rrrIr ril Av{}r-a1g€} H€}i}d Distribtltiorr Heacl Loss
Jr1
./1 l-frt !-
"l i)l I
U Tatal Hedd requirement is the sum of the Elevdrion Difference
the Suppty Friction Loss iline G )
(Line Ai, the Distfibution Hcad Loss iLine B). Additional Head Loss (Line C), and
ft ft it
3. PU/TP SELECTION
A pump must be selected to dellver at ieast 29 .O GPM iline 1 or Line 2) v/ith at teast 27 .4 feet of total head.
Comments:
=T o'4 lft
()fr#tr t,
Stvracr
TqF ltrls rr r
Peocunra
Pressure Distribution
Design Worksheet Ifi"t.MINHESOTA POLLUTIOH
COHTROL GTNCY
t([ 1o__l-4i:3] +r= [-3-l
3. Designer Setected Number of Loterats
Cannot be less than line 2 (accept in at-srodes]4. Select Perforotion Spacing:
5. Select Perforatlon Diometer Size:
Project lD:v 04.17.2018
taterats Does not apply to at-grades
taterats
*-,*,;-,-*,
1. Media Bed Width:
Z. Minimum Number of Laterals in system /zone = Rounded up number of [(Media Bed Width - 4] + 3l + 't .
l-10-hr
6. Lengfh of Loterals = Media Bed Length - 2 Feet. | '" -'- ":;;1*;#t";t"*x;;;ffii--"---"-rlI - zft = [--To lrt Perforotion con not be closer then t foot from edge.138 I
7. Determjne the Number of Perforaticn Spoces . Divide the Length of Laterols by the perforotion Spocing and
round down to the nearest whote number.
Number of perforation spaces [ * ]n * l- : lrt = l-l__lspaces
Number of Perforotions per Loterol is equat to 1.0 ptus the Number of perforotion Spaces. check tabte8. betow to verify the number of perforations per tateral guarantees less than a 10% discharge variation. The
vatue is doubte with a center manifotd.
Perforotions Per Lateror =f lz--lspaces + 1 = l=3 lperfs- per Laterar
9' Totol Number of Perforations equats the Number of Perforations per Laterat muttiptied by the Number ofPerforoted Laterals.
I " lPerf' Per Lat. x I 3-lNumber of perr. Lat. = f 3, -lTotat Number of perf.
10. Setect Type of tAonifotd Connection (End or Center):
11. Select Laterol Diometer (See Toble) :
f- E,rd
_l
llsoI tn
I ro lrt
l-*Trq-*li,
|i{i'nrT xuq$erof Perfrrtiom Per Laterrlto Guarantee <"l0$ Dix}urge vlriatim
'/.. lrrh Pduifimr TIll lnrh Perfontionr
Perforutioo Spacinf lFeet)
Pipe 0ianreter {lncher}Perfotrtion Sp*irg
(Fee0
Pipe tlirmetrr tlnriler)
I t1{t!t I 1 11{r11 I t
2 t0 l3 t8 30 60 2 il t6 1l 34.68
211 0 t2 r6 79 5{2!t 10 t{20 ]t 6-l
3 I 1',).{6 15 52 3 9 l.t 19 l0 60
li l6 lnch Perforaticnr 1/8 lrrh Perfsrsfionr
Perforathn Sprcing (Feetl Pipe 0iraetx {lrrlx:}Perfontion Spacirq
(Feet)
Pipe D,iarneter {tncires}
I ,11*1'.r 2 3 t ll{lri i 3
7 12 1E 26 {{87 2 2t 33 .{4 71 r4?
1li lz 17 24 .{0 80 2lt 20 30 .t1 69 r35
3 tz l6 2l i7 75 3 20 t9 1!{4 128
14.
15.
17.
U.
Pressure Distribution
Design Worksheet
ff* :,ri\rlt\#
Calculate the Square Feet per Perforation. Recomnended value is4-11 ftz per perforotion.
Daes not appty to At-Grades
Bed Area = Bed Width {ft} X Bed Lengrh (fr}
[-rolr.x l--:a-l rr
b. Squore Foot per Perforotion = Bed Areo divided by the Totat Number of Perforations.
l-Jao-]r,,. f- , lperforations = f n, -lfr?/perforations
13. Setect tulinimum Average Heod:[-r7-lr,
Seiect Perforation Dischorge {GPM) based on Table:f tr.-lGpm per perforation
Determine required Flow Rate by muttiplying the Tota! Number of Perfs. by the Perforatian Discharge.
16.
17
I iq le"rr' x l-Tz,--lGpM per perforation = [ ,t_l
Valume of Liquid Per Foot of Distribution piping iTobte il):
Volume of Distribution Piping =
= fNumber of Perforoted Loterals X length of Laterals X (Votume of
Liquid Per Foot of Distribution Pipingl
t--3 I x [- :o-lr, x[-T11olgar/rt
18. Minimum Delivered voiume = votume of Distribution piping X 4
f--rrs_lgub x 4 F;_lGarrons
r'i'.r'i,:ij f, I fj,,
4r5
GPM
GaItons/ft
Table ll
Volume of Liquid in
Pipe
Liquicl
Per Foot
(G.:llons)
Comnrents/SpeciaI Desigrr Considerations:
*-^. 1''i: r!\
125
0. I10
o.-t70
0.3ao?
Pump Tank Design Worksheet (Demand Dose)gm J..!:,T;;'i .;;i.'-;;, "''
DETERAAINE TANK CAPACITY AND DIMENSIONS Project lD:v 04.17.2018
1. A.
B.
Design flout tDesign Sum. t Al :
Min. required pump tank caPacity:
GPD
Gal C.Recommended pump tank capacity:
C.
D.
E.
Tank Manufacturer:Brown Wilbert B. Tank Model:
Capacity f rom manufacturer:
Gatlons per inch from manufacturer:
Liquict depth oi tank from manufaclurer:
Note: Design @lculations ore bosed on this specific tonk.
Substitutifig a differcnt tonk rnodel witl change the pump
float or timer settings. (ontact designer if chonges ore
ne(essary.
1 500
DETERA,TINE DOSING VOLUME
Catculate volume to Cover Pump {The intei of the pump must be at least 4-inches from rhe botiom oi the pump tank a z inches of water covering the pump is
recommended )
iPump and btock height * 2 inchesl X 6ollons Per lnch tTC ot lEl
in + 2inchesi X Gattons Per lnch
Minimum De{ivered Volume . 4 X Votum€ of Distribution piptng:
- Line 17 ol the Pressure Distribution or Line 11 oJ Non-levet
Calcutate Maximum Pumpout Volume t25\. of Design Ftowt
(minimum dosel
Design Flolv:GPD 0.25 Galions (maximum dose)
450
48
6
7
Selecl o pumpout wlume thot meets both tAinimum artd lAoximum:frr^i.
[alcutatc Doses Pet Day = Design F{ovi * Delivered Votume
Calcutate Drarnback:
A. Diometd o[ Supply Pipe=
B.Length of Suppiy Pipe -
Volume oJ Liquid Per Lineat Foot o{ Pipe =
lfeer.
Gailons/ftC.
D.Drdinback = Length of Supply Pipe X Volume of Liquid per t ineal F@t of pipe
frx gaL/ft 19.1
9.Total Dosing volume - Delivered Volume glus Droinbock
$at +gat -Gaitons
10- Minimum Aiarm Votume = Depth of aiarrn t2 or 3 inchesl X gail.ons per inch of tank
inX 9at/in =Gillons
774
900 4.42
! Volume of Liquid in
, Pipe
Pipe
Diameter
(inches)
Liquid
Per Foot
(Gallons)
o.o45
1.25 o.078
1.5 o.1 10
?4.170
?o.380
I 4.661
DEMAND DOSE FLOAT SETTINGS
i'l - Calcutate Float Separation Distonce using Dosing volume .
Iotol Doring volwne tcallons per lnch
gat/irt =
12. il,'easuring from bottom of t.tnk:
A. Distonce toset Pump Olf Fbot ='Pump - btock height = ? inches
lnches ior Dose: 8.8 in
in
in
in
in +in=Aiarm Depth
Pump On
Pump Of f
77.8
24.8
,*
9D.0;al
Z6l G;l
jBLi 6dl
Distance to set Pump On Float=Distonce to Set pump.Off Float , Float Seporotion Distance
in lfi =
- Dstance Lo set Pump-On Flool,n, t--t -l . Alarnt Depllt i2-3 iriche5l{. Dislancp to sel A,lorm Float
I
'2/ e/1.
,2.m
4 f u/ao,e
Property:
HomeStead Septic System Services
I 108 Goldenrod Lane
Shakopee, MN 55379
MPCA Licensed #583
Dale Denn - Owner
Cell Phone: 612-310-7887
Homesteadseotic@outlook.com
821 Creekwood Drive
Chaska, MN 553 18
Response to supplement Variance request:
I . There are not two different septic locations. Please see the desigrr or the drawing page
that is attached to this letter. The Mound has to be split into two equal parts due to the
nature ofthe contours on the property. A Mound Septic has to be set on a contour for the
full length of its rockbed according to Minnesota 7080 Code. The contours in this case
are not continuous enough to site the full length ofthe rockbed. Thus there are two parts,
not two sites.
2. Furthermore, based on contours alone and the nature of the contours indicated above, it is
not feasible to simply begin to move, shift or slide the system anywhere from where it is
now sited. I spend time with the laser level establishing contours initially and they just
where not very conducive to set a full length Motmd practically anywhere on the site.
The contours, and the slope, 2nsthgl imFortant and code aspect ofdesigning a septic,
both work best where the Mound is now designed. Out in the lawn area towards the
home, the contours are short, and become nonlinear, and the slope drops to nearly zero.
In other words, slightly undulating in different directions making it difficult to set a
Mound with the highest level ofconfidence in longevity. Zero slope meets the code, but
it is riskier to place as Mound on zero percent slope that is slightly undulating because the
effluent is more difficult to evaluate where it will go and pond and soak up. A definitive
slope defines clearly the direction of effluent flow. I always try to avoid siting a Mound
on slope less t}tan 1-27o.
3. Thirdly, it is much more risky for a Designer. and the Homeowner to have a Type III
septic system verses a standard type I. Going out into the lawn towards the home has
soils that have some indication of disturbance, most likely from the home building
process. This disnubance can include mixing of soils, addifion fill soil spread over
natural soil, soil compactiorq slow percolatiorl all ofwhich become much less suitable
for the performance of a septic system of almost any sort. A few soil samples cannot tell
the whole story with soils that have been altered or impacted by construction activity.
The may not accept effluent over a long time, the emuent may not be treated as
effectively as a soil with its natural properties oftexture and structure, and the effluent
may hit compacted layers and move laterally and potentially discharge at some point
being untreated septic eftIuent. Disturbed soils are much higher risk of failing to take
effluent and failing to treat eflluent. The best soils with suffrcient slope and contours are
always the best choice in protecting the environment and protecting public health and
safety.
By Dale Denn
Owner
l,l
nall,<o SPtrl
'#,^7i''u
shr,/a J't*lEla'
<-cL
gfi^L EtE)/,
(a- rrv aa' P,B,
t49!
,#$',*'1
$0E','
(iELL
/ r""tz7a44
RoaTE
r^#
.68t
fiar czetkdffi iX
',yt
*'-, ,2
2.,
o,2A*,?-J
a,x\
w._li,&
I
Ip
I
I
9rs
n,-{
Z/
^.-,/N_.,/
,//
// @-x,-:',
f_4tir6'J\,.:V4- -e 'ir', J,Y' /'*-'@
L-
P,tl \11.-E*,
"rrntL s;prtc ttr./k
MacKenzie,
Per Krista, Water Resource comments are as follows:
I would recommend denial, as there are some significant stormwater concerns that would very likely be
made worse by the proposed location of the system. It’s my understanding after talking with Eric and
Chip, and meeting on site, that there is an alternative location and system that is feasible. I would like
the applicant at the very least to provide an argument as to why an alternative location and system
could not be used.
Concerns are as follows:
• The current proposed location is directly adjacent to a swale that is taking a large amount of
stormwater runoff from the Golf Course and directly discharging into Bluff Creek, which is classified as
an impaired water by the state, and currently under a TMDL.
• There is a large head cut, which is already actively eroding the bluff directly downstream from
the proposed location.
Mackenzie, do you mind sending an electronic copy of the proposed plan to Terry and Chip if you have it
(cc’d). I would like their comments included as well.
Vanessa
Vanessa Strong
Water Resources Coordinator
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PH. 952.227.1168
FX. 952.227.1170
www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us
MacKenzie,
My recommendation would be to push the mound placement towards the front yard setback (toe of
mound slope to within 1 foot of the front yard setback) which would increase the distance of the mound
from the bluff setback. I would also recommend the mound ratio be changed from 3:1 to 4:1, which
would also increase the distance between the toe of the mound to the bluff setback.
Thank you,
Eric Tessman
Building Inspector
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PH. 952.227.1194
FX. 952.227.1190
www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO: MacKenzie Walters, Assistant Planner
FROM: Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resources Specialist
DATE: September 18, 2018
SUBJ: 821 Creekwood Rd, Variances to construct a septic system
The lot has a number of existing mature trees covering the bluff, setback area and up into the
yard. All of the proposed septic locations are sited within the wooded areas of the lot and close
to or within the bluff setback. Removing mature trees at the top of the bluff exposes the area to
potential erosion issues. Staff recommends that sites outside of the bluff setback that remove as
few trees as possible are the preferred locations for a septic system.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COLTNTY OF CARVER )
I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on
September 6,2018,the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen'
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public
Hearing to Consider a Variance Application to Install a Septic System within the Required
Subsurface Sewer Treatment Systems Setbacks, Front Yard Setback, and Fluff Setback
and ImpactZone at82l Creekwood Drive, Planning Case File No. 2018-17, to the persons
named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to
such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail
with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those
appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by
other appropriate records.
Subscribed and swom to before me
h JtAii rir-. SirL(Lirve
3J *, pubtic-Mirf,resota
z g^*l11tF^!'ql!^{q,
-3J 1 2ol e
thisrdldav oTSFPX--,rWl , 2018.
Disclaimer
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used
as one. This map is a iompilation of records, informaton and data located in various
city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area sfown: ?P
is'io be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the
Geographic lnformation System (GiS) Data used to prepare this map a;e error free, and
the dity does not represe;t that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or
any olier purpose requiring exacting measurement of dislance or direction or precision
in ihe depicii6n of geographic features. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant
to Minnesota Staiutei 5466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map
acknowledges that the city shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all
claims, ani agrees to deiend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and.all
claims'broughi by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the
user's access or use of data provided.
Disclaimer
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used
as one. This map is a iompilation of records, information and data located in various
city, county, stati and federal offices and other souroes regarding the area shown, and
is'io be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the
Geographic lnformation system (Gls) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and
the dity does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigatonal, tracking or
any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direciion or precision
in ihe depiction of geographic features. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant
to Minnesota Staiutes 5466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map
acknowledges that the Cit, shall not b€ liable for any damages, and expressly waives all
claims, ani agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all
claims broughi by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the
user's access or use of data provided.
(TAX-NAME)
(TAX-ADD-L1)
(TAX-ADD-L2>r, <<TAX-ADD-L3)
( Next Record ><TA)(-NAM E)
(TAX-ADD-LI)
(TAX-ADD-L2), (TAX-ADD-L3)
SUBJECT
PROPERry
.9
-t
9r>o
Eo6v .6
EEH
5E>t F<Ed;A P.E!.F'E5E:oL:3ob
ooo
?Ets
Est! hhEt!
EE66 ecE.85EeoBg
e'E a
.Y= O
B bb_-tE-^
EE!o< o:=oo
sqEo 96Eec
8:a Ee65E5t'896
.:i e
iEeE; EE.g:";g
; EEE!.EE Ei€FEL: -!idd bi.
.12
q)\q
E"g
e5B
6E=.
E EiEo;< 9.E
EE:oL:3cb
ooo
?EF
5PeEEr
Et!
EEE6 dc8.85Eeoeg
@- g'6
t o6.Y= O
a bEtE-o
c;o8efo< a
5fl8
:26 oE:3E6C
o g--
1 5'=AE}
'EgB,lE!iio{-*
: EFTo oE.=
FT.;g
EHHE
EEPgl'd6 b
Oo
o.c
o
fo
G)
.t)o
0)
E-
CNc
oo
E
o)E
U)co
CL
o
!
o
0)o
o
co
l=tflol>r
dl
-9 I
otcl
.el-cl
ol
ot!,
ct
oo
o
o
os
co
9,
o,(!
E
co
(!oola
o
Lopoo
3.v.o
o)Lo
No
o'6
J
06
<iz(n
ooFF
a;L
0)
-o
Eo.Co
fr,=EfrgEE
oo '6o: .a.t * o'=..O o:= E
$ g: e.Eb sO arveP pEP.!I E s-
= oE-6 P
= ==+ 6
T H BEE
=Y:oo-c 6i!? o9cE E.A
E IE H e
BSEeF.c=EbEk 3 *E o
iEgsF
=)O-rN(v)$
Enr
,P 85#-c-
,L=
8,8 E-o-c-(!.9=
rO>
>o QE=/'\
€Eore oc
-9=oro o_.=
le,:ElL L -
IEg Elc o=
l.e9P
l€ p'E
t= L )ls(E0
l.Q. .-l
15 t, ti
l*o 3.9lo I Y
lQ-v. ilfc-cI= G€lo_(,=
lo o-ol-c o--olFoo
I
.v
E
o
Eo'=
fo
ts
NI
oUl
-lol
$?IoEl
-o -:l
sHt
sElo=t'6'kt
HEI
;.31
>, ol'6
'lol 3E}
ootrtrooo!+a o.=
aa 9.o= Eo-orgE I
T E€EtrT
P bE'- <-oo o-
=CN
Z,bEo
Eqf
IH€ fi
IHTE
IE BE
leEsl'6.E A
15Es
o)E
os
oc
o
E
o)
.E
o
o)
.9,.cF
Eo
o
@'ro6t
6
o)
-o
E
o)
o-
o)
U)
l>rl(s
oc
oo
=tro.9co'=orE'=OE-Eoo
=o=s,o-.=*EotroSoo-
zgo(Estr
(E
.9,o
otr
oo
=tr
9.9.=o
EEEE
.e6Eo,EDo-.E
EE
ol!C'-
ogz8
or!
-trtr
IEso I iit
o,=
=oI=gOr! .tr
BE
:i
IEooco
o-
'c
o
Goo
a,
E
F€
o
Go
oU ..o9cc,oo
o=OE
=ooo
I ii)
o,=
=o
*-ggOGEE€
=t
.go
ieEgg;=E
=E;IEE
B:fie.HElIeeEe
= E -ElE 3'E o'6
HE Elfr st.E€
EE]}H3EEEE
HEIgEIUEgEEY Olo--- OO sr F
fiEIEfiNBH#E
SEIEi?EEeE
=..2
ooooE
oc
o
o)
E
lol-c
l!toILlothto.l-ol.lcl(5
lo_lol5lol0)lalo
J-lcl(E1='t=,tot>\
eEg e.e -- uEE E 3o-olP =_o-c- x Io .9)E 6 .t!2
= O > 't-j eO C-L tr A c> qr g o-.o .9E€6 EX ,3
E E;$ ggeE
l3efi PE EEe
IEE EE:CSE
lEise EgEfr
lfEoEIEss
l: B5-Pag€ E
ItE=EEeEEl-c o--o =ll- o o o-6i d+
,ilol
otclol
EI
elotolEI
ololot
ol>tol
9e
Oc_o
5.sOo3!raEo-
9.Eof(,FO
co<
ootrtr(EEEPaD o.=
aa 9.9=E
a1 (Dlt
BE8
s $€Etr3p bE.=
=Eo o-:a zbqo
IE EitoE !/
l-Fg file9p
IE P E
IE BE
lH e;lp-ol'6 -tr a
]5Efi
otr
(u
E
o)E
C,
o).c
.9.cF;E
ci
@
Lo
-o
E
o)
o.
o)
C,)
(EIEIJtlol=lr-
3grXo8ao
a;
=aD
-oo)
3o
'6
oE
o
poEoo
CLa
oL(E
ooop
06 ..o9trtroo
o=OEfooo
iHHTHaEgI
;EeE Eg : ACTE;
tElc:E€:EiEi
EHEEffiia
iffi#ffi
nal:=,o)o)o:=
=-O)>r
i'6o9
)^:
0: I)9t
= o.:'() ')o
= o'itr- o.
c o'
Pgoq)-E6'tEpolcoo;Eo=oc
Li-oE
3€e-Y
OHad
z
@d
tr1 d.E GtEda1 dd ooooc{aoooooood? F888888889E k===3==>=9d uJ v v v :z >a !z !z :z r!l: d u.r trJ uJ uJ trJ trJ uJ lrlir(.ruuuJlrJrrJlrJuJrlJd.,: :d G.e, d. G.t d, d. l)E :<o(Ju()uL)(JU!,)< 6 r.. oornt.rt Fl Ln Lr1 N'r - i\ - F F. .r ...l <l' N OA =i\F.F. l'- oo oo oo q).1
ooNoroFr.n rnLno66F.NNN$ $s\q;.i
^.;
in.!(o(D(D l.o(oom iri iri c.r - or or or o or Ftr,;
"5 - o\ A d ob d, oi, & F
^'- i .tl .n .l Fl ."1 .'{ Fl Fl t"{
=;;;+mlftan(naornanq L/i Ln tn r.n Ln Ln ttt Ln !n Lo l/)<, rai Lri Ln L.i Ln Ln Ln !n Ln ln Ln
YzZZZZZZZZZZ
^r==-- tr tll
:;==*==r==r==
Lr' a< Ld.cEN.{ :lO L^ooaSS Eoooooo
-'-4:zOOOOOOa<:>oooooo^jB=i<===3=3E
lr r r! -:z >a !z:z:z Y (Jn ; ; = trJ uJ r! trJ LlJ t! !'l
=YY._YuJtrJl....., rJuJu).E:=r=5555569
x lri Lal Ln o o u) lr1 F{Lnu)^g3333FF3SSSX
zoFzou<EojO+<fr8
r - V aloS> qq-9Y,4 E=o
319=6e;?==gEoiii=335Y>a1,??91 teIEEsI
===E===EE=?3R88R38R8388
PHHEFEFHRsH
=ilfiHfiilHhH}HHtc.i--6iNNN.{N.\r.!