HomeMy WebLinkAbout13.D.1. River District Trunk Sewer Reconstruction Project No. 2007-1-Res. No. 6535 and Res. No. 6536
13. f). 11
CITY OF SHAKO PEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: River District Trunk Sewer Reconstruction, Project No. 2007-1
DATE: November 21,2006
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is a report from Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. on the River
District trunk sewer reconstruction for Adams Street to Fuller Street. Also attached is
Resolution No. 6535, a resolution receiving a report and ordering preparation of plans
and specifications for the River District reconstruction and Resolution No, 6536, a
resolution requesting U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) to conduct studies to
determine the feasibility of developing a streambank protection project for the River
District sewer reconstruction from Shumway Street to Fuller Street.
BACKGROUND:
On April 18, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6910, a resolution ordering
the preparation of plans and specifications on the River District trunk sewer
reconstruction from Adams Street to Fuller Street. The Bonestroo proposal to prepare
plans and specifications, included a report for the River District trunk sewer
reconstruction alternatives. The report is attached and has been sent to the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers as well. A presentation on the final report will be done by Bonestroo
representatives at the Council meeting.
The first draft report was presented to Council on July 25,2006. Direction was given on
the 1 st draft for the final report completion.
A meeting was held with Congressman Kline's office and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
representatives to discuss potential funding of riverbank stabilization. For potential
funding to be obtained, the USACOE's need a resolution accepting the report and a
resolution requesting the USACOE to conduct a study for streambank protection project.
The report is attached for Council review and acceptance along with Resolution 6535 and
Resolution No. 6536 needed by the USACOE for potential funding of riverbank
stabilization. The particular funding program is known as Emergency Bank Protection -
Section 14.
.
One issue for the City is whether to proceed with the reconstruction of the River District
sewer without funding for riverbank stabilization. This decision can be made once plans
have been completed and response given by USACOE to the City's request for a study.
Staff would propose to complete the plans and specifications and submit resolutions to
the USACOE for inclusion for a Section 14 project. The USACOE indicated that the
project would still qualify, even if the pipe is relocated and reconstructed before
riverbank stabilization, This process is exactly the same as the project done in 1999, in
which the City received Section 14 funding after the pipe was relocated.
At this time, itis important to proceed with final design and to submit resolutions for the
USACOE to proceed with a study for riverbank stabilization.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 6535.
2. Deny Resolution No. 6535.
3. Adopt Resolution No. 6536.
4. Deny Resolution No. 6536.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No.1, to adopt Resolution No. 6535 for the report to be
accepted and submitted to the USACOE. Staff also recommends Alternative No, 3,
adopting Resolution No. 6536 in order to apply for a possible Section 14 U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers project for streambank protection in this area. Previously, an
extension agreement was executed by the City with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik &
Associates to prepare plans and specifications for this project.
ACTION REQUESTED:
1. Offer Resolution No. 6535, A Resolution Receiving a Report and Preparation of
Plans & Specifications for the River District Trunk Sewer Reconstruction, from
Adams Street to Fuller Street, Project No. 2007-1 and move its adoption.
2, Offer Resolution No. 6536, A Resolution Requesting U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to Conduct Studies to Determine the Feasibility of Developing a
Streambank Protection Project for the River District Trunk Sanitary Sewer, from
Shumway Street to Fuller Street Along the South Bank of the Minnesota River
and move its adoption. ~.~
t;c
Bruce Loney
Public Works Director
BUpmp
ENGR/2007PROJECT/2007R1VERDISTRICT/WORD/MEM6535-6536
I
RESOLUTION NO. 6535
A Resolution Receiving A Report
And Preparation of Plans & Specifications
For The River District Trunk Sewer Reconstruction,
From Adams Street To Fuller Street
Project No. 2007-1
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 6410 adopted April 18, 2006, a report has
been prepared by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. under Bruce Loney,
Public Works Director, with reference to the improvements of the River District Trunk
Sewer by reconstruction, river bank protection, and appurtenant work and this report was
received by the Council on November 21,2006.
WHEREAS, the Council has considered the improvements of said River District
Trunk Sewer Reconstruction in accordance with the report, at an.estimated total cost of the
improvements of$3,491,306.00.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. That the report for the River District Trunk Sewer Reconstruction - Phase III is
hereby accepted.
2. That the improvement is necessary, cost effective and feasible and is ordered as
hereinafter described:
River District Trunk Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction, from Adams Street to
Fuller Street.
3. Bruce Loney, Public Works Director, is hereby designated as the engineer for this
improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such
improvements.
4. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of the 2007-1 Public
Improvement. Program.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of ,2006.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ENGR/2007PROJECf/2007RIVERDISTRlCT/WORD/RES6535
RESOLUTION NO. 6536
.A Resolution Requesting U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers
To Conduct Studies To Determine The
Feasibility Of Developing A Streambank Protection Project
For The River District Trunk Sewer Reconstruction - Phase III
From Shumway Street To Fuller Street
Along The South Bank Of The Minnesota River
WHEREAS, the Minnesota River has and is eroding the river bank in areas in the
City of Shakopee; and
WHEREAS, this erosion of the river bank is threatening to damage the City's
Trunk Sanitary Sewer along the Minnesota River; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee is desiring to stabilize the river bank to protect
a major trunk sanitary sewer.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. Requests the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to conduct studies to determine the
feasibility of developing an emergency streambank or shoreline protection
project, from Shumway Street to Fuller Street, at the south bank of the Minnesota
River in Shakopee, MN under the authority provided by Section 14 of the 1946
Flood Control Act, as amended.
2. The City Council acknowledges that it is aware of the Section 14 local
responsibilities and that the City has the ability to proceed within 12 months if it
is found feasible and advisable to develop a streambank or shoreline protection
project at the Minnesota River in Shakopee, MN. The City Council further
acknowledges that it would be required, before construction commences, to enter
into a contractual agreement to provide such local cooperation as may be
prescribed by the Secretary of the Army.
3. The City Clerk of the City of Shakopee shall be, and is hereby, directed to
transmit three copies of this resolution to the District Engineer, St. Paul District,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 190 5th Street East, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-
1638.
Adopted in session ofthe City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 2006.
Mayor of the City of Shako pee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ENGRl2007PROJECT12007RIVERDlSTRICTfWORDlRES6536
)S-OL ),
.
.
.
-
. Table of Contents
.
..
. Executive Summary ...,..... ....... ...... ................................, ......... .... ,.....,.... .......ES-l
. Project Description ... ...... .....".., '.... ......, .., .... .......... .................., ......... ............... ..1
Existing Conditions..................,...,.,...,...............................,.....,......................... ,2
. Flow Conditions.. ... ....... ........ '" ........... ......... .... ...,... .......... ........ ..... ... .... ... ,2
. Existing Sewer Alignment .. ......... ..............,... ..., .... ,...... ... ........ .... ........... ..2
.' Geotechnical Assessment......................................,......................,............3
Property Ownership ,........................................................,......,.................3
.' Army Corps of EngineerslMN DNR .. ......... .;................................ ........ ...3
Ie Wetlands .... .....,. ....,............. ..... ..; ....... ... ......... ,...............,. ............ ,... ....... ..4
.' Existing Utilities...........,...,......,.....,................................................,.........5
.' Analysis of Alternative Improvements........ .................................... .............. ....6
Section A Improvements..... ........ ....... ....... .....; ... ... .........,. ...... ......,... ....;....7
. Construction in New Trench. .......... ........................ ....... ...... .........7
. Construction Utilizing the Existing Trench ......................... ....;....8
. Section B Improvements......,...........................................,.....................;..8
Relocation to Further South ofthe River......................................8
. Reconstruction in Existing Trench....................... ................. ........9
. Analysis...........,..................................................................,........;,..........1 0
. Recommended Alternative ............... .............. .......... ...... .... ...; ,. ;... ..... ....... ....... .11
Funding....................................,........................................................................ .12
. Recommended Project Funding.............., ........ ........ ......... .................... ..12
. Federal/COE Section 14 Funding .... .... ............ ........ ....... .............. ....... ...12
. Tables
. Table 1 - Recommended Project Cost................................................................ll
.
. Figures
. Figure 1 - Project Location
~ Figure 2a & 2b - Existing Interceptor Plan and Profile
. Figure 3 - Geotechnical Boring Location Map
. Figure 4 - Property Owners
. Figure 5 -100 Year Flood/Wetland Analysis
Figure 6 - Alternative Analysis (Sections A & B)
. Figure 7 - Section B Improvements - River Alignment Plan & Profile
.
. Attachments
. A Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Review
. B Project Site Photographs
. C COE.Section 14 Information
.
- City of Shakopee
.
. West River Interceptor -Phase III
.
.
.
.'
-
. Executive Summary
. The purpose of this report is to develop afeasible alternative to replace 4,000-Jeet of the
..
. West River Interceptor in Shakopee, Minnesota. The replacement project would be
.; constructed as the third phase of improvements to the West River Interceptor.
.
.' The existing interceptor was constructed in 1960. The existing interceptor pipe is in poor
. condition and for approximately r,OOO-feet is located extremely close to the Minnesota
. River. High river levels have eroded the riverbank adjacent to the existing pipe and an
.
. unstable environment exists. If left unattended, the interceptor pipe could collapse
. resulting in a significant overflow to the river.
.
. The existing alignment extends along property owned by the Minnesota Department of
.' Natural Resources, is situated within the DNR lOO-yearflood elevation and portions are
. located in wetland. Geotechnical borings performed as part of this study indicate that the
. area primarily consists of fill material containing a clay, gravel and silty sand mix,
.
. Bedrock was encountered at several borings indicating that rock removal would be
. required for sewer construction,
'.;
. Alternatives analyzed as part of this report include:
. . Construction of a lift station and force main
.
Construction of a gravity interceptor along existing bituminous path
. .
- . Replacing the existing interceptor pipe using pipe bursting technology
. . Construction of a gravity sewer extending beneath Levee Drive
e
. . "~- , . Constructing the gravity sewer within the existing sewer trench
. . Constructing a gravity sewer in a new trench adjacent to the existing
.
trench
.
. . Relocating the interceptor farther away from the river
.
. The recommended alternative to improve Phase III of the West River Interceptor is to
. construct the initial 2,700-feet of the alignment in the existing sewer trench, to relocate
'.
~ City of Shako pee ES-I
. West River Interceptor- Phase III
.
.
.
.
.
.
. the final1,300-feet of the alignment to a new trench further from the river and to include
. riverbank stabilization for the final 1,000-feet of the alignment by using rip-rap and
~ geotextiles with natural plantings. The primary reason for the recommended alternative
. is to provide a new interceptor located in a stabile environment, to eliminate the existing
.
. risks, to minimize the adverse effects of high river levels, and to provide an adequate area
. for riverbank stabilization. The estimated cost of improvements is $3,828,806, It is
. recommended that the City of Shakopee pursue Federal funds, both through the U.S.
. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, and the Corps of Engineers (COE) Section 14
'. Program, to assist in stabilizing the riverbank in the vicinity of the final 1,000-feet of the
. recommended alignment.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
'.
.
.
.
' .
.
.
.
.'
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. City of Shakopee ES-2
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
.
.
.
.- Project Description
.
. The subject project, West River Interceptor - Phase III (West River Interceptor) is a
. sanitary sewer interceptor line located along the Minnesota River in northwest Shakopee, .
. Minnesota, The project area is shown in Figure 1. The West River Interceptor was
. constructed in 1960 and currently serves five City sanitary sewer sub-districts; sub-
.
. districts RD (River District)-A, RD-B and sub-districts WD (West District)-A, WD-B
. and WD-C, as well as Rahr Malting. The West River Interceptor initiates at the
.. intersection of Adams Street and First Street as a 15-inch diameter S.c.P, sewer and
. extends in an easterly direction for approximately 4,000-linear feet before connecting
.' with a newly constructed interceptor near Highway 101. Ultimately, the flow is conveyed
. to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services. (MCES) Lift Station L-16 and
.
- pumped to the .MCES Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Facility located in the City of
. Shakopee;
.
. As discussed previously, the West River Interceptor is the third phase of improvements
It administered by the City to provide for long-term reliable sanitary sewer service for the.
. River District, Central District and West District. Studies performed in the 1980's, 1990's
. and the early 2000's indicated that the sanitary line was in poor condition with root
.
. intrusion, sags, and off-set and leaky joints. In addition to the existing physical
. conditions, the studies detailed the risks associated with the location of the interceptor
. and identified several locations where erosion of the riverbank had threatened the
.\ stability of the interceptor pipe. In the late 1990's and early 2000's, the City
. administered two projects (Phases I & II) to improve downstream segments of the West
. River Interceptor. As part of these improvements, the interceptor was relocated away
.
. from the river. Riverbank stabilization was incorporated to protect segments of the sewer
. which were susceptible to the Minnesota River. Funding and design services were
. provided by the Army Corps of Engineers (COE) through their Section 14 Program to
. protect infrastructure.
.
;. The objective of this report is to detail a feasible alignment to replace and improve the
.
. Phase III section of the West River Interceptor.
.
.. City of Shako pee 1
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
.
.
. Existing Conditions
.
. ~ Flow Conditions
. Flow conditions were analyzed using City of Shakopee Comprehensive Plan (Tier II
. Sanitary Sewer Plan - WSB & Associates October 5, 2000), discussions with City staff,
. and discussions with Rahr Malting.
.
.
. As mentioned previously, the West River Interceptor conveys flow from five City
. sanitary sewer sub-regions as well as Rahr Malting. Rahr Malting currently discharges
. both domestic and process wastewater into the West River Interceptor. Rahr's process
. wastewater is discharged through an inlet sewer at Clay Street. Rahr's domestic
. wastewater is discharged through lateral connections located at three locations, Adams
. Street, Clay Street and Pierce Street. Rahr is planning on eliminating their discharge of
.
. process wastewater from the interceptor by the end of the year 2007; their domestic
- wastewater will continue to be conveyed by the interceptor.
.,
II ~ Existing Sewer Alignment
. A plan and profile ofthe existing interceptor is provided in Figures 2a & 2b. Attachment
. Bshows photographs ofthe interceptor alignment as well as the surro~nding area.
.
.
. The existing interceptor initiates at the intersection of Adams Street and First Street as a
. fifteen-inch sewer at an elevation of 70S. I-feet and extends in an easterly direction at a
. slope of 0.19%. The interceptor culminates along the south bank of the Minnesota River
. as an IS-inch sewer at a depth of 70 1. 96-feet and a slope of 0.21 %. The total length is
. approximately 4,000-feet. A portion of the existing alignment was constructed in rock.
e
--,
.
. The alignment is difficult to access in most locations. At the western end of the
. alignment, the interceptor extends through wooded parcels, and motorized access is not
. available along this segment. The interceptor extends along a paved path for a short
. length near the middle of the route. However, as the interceptor extends eastward and
. gets closer to the Minnesota River, the alignment veers away from the paved path,
.
. extending along an unpaved path located approximately 10-feetfrom the river. At higher
. river stages, the interceptor and the path can become completely submerged.
. " City of Shakopee 2
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
.
.
. The original project record plans show one service lateral along the 4,000-foot route.
. However, according to existing inspections and studies, twelve service laterals have been
.
. identified along the route. Apparently, as the adjacent area developed the additional
. service laterals were constructed.
.
. > CJeoteclunicalJ\ssessnaent
. A geoteclunical assessnaent was performed by American Engineering and Testing (AET)
. in May of2006. Sixteen soil borings were performed in the vicinity of the existing route.
.
. Two additional borings (Soil Borings 17 and 18) were performed at the top of the bluff
. along Levee Drive. Each boring was performed to fifteen-feet or until refusal. Most
. borings were performed using hollow stemmed auger and split spoon samples were taken
. every 5-feet. At two locations, a hand auger was required to perform borings due to poor
. access at the requested boring location. Boring logs are attached. to this docrunent as
. J\ttachment A Figure 3 shows the boring locations.
.
.
.
mgeneral, the borings indicate that much of the area is overlain with fill material
/
. containing a naixfure of clay, gravel, sand and silty sand. The soil is generally of loose to
. medium-dense consistency with softer soils identified in Borings 8 and 9.
.
. Bedrock was encountered at several locations. Borings 18, 17, 16, 15, 12, 6 and 1 were
.
. obstructed at elevations above the probable new interceptor invert.
.
. > Property Ownership
. The existing property owners are provided in Figure 4. Much of the land in the vicinity of
e
-- the existing interceptor is owned by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
. (MN DNR). The City has drainage and utility easenaents around the existing interceptor.
.
.
. > Army Corps of En~neerslMN DNR
. As shown in Figure 5, the entire existing alignment is located within the existing Army
. Corps of Engineers (COE) designated 100 Year Flood Elevation as well as the State pf
. Minnesota determined floodway. The COE will have involvement in approving any
. project located within the 100-year flood plain if the project affects an existing wetland.
-
. City of Shakopee 3
. West River Interceptor -' Phase III
.
.
.
.
. The MN DNR would have involvement if any fill were required to complete the project
. because it is within the COE determined floodway or if the existing geometry of the
.
. floodplain were to be altered in any way due to construction.
.
. The COE may be available to assist in funding a portion of the project. Section 140fthe
. 1946 Flood Control Act provides authority for the COE to prevent erosion damages to
. public facilities, such as bridges, roads, public buildings, sewage treatment plants, water
. wells, and schools. Information related to the COESection 14 program is included in this
.
. report as Attachment C. The maximum Federal cost for project development and
. construction of anyone project is $1,000,000 and each project must be economically
. justified, environmentally sound, and technically feasible. The COE expenditure requires
. a 35% local match.
.
. In 2000, the COE provided Section 14 assistance to the City for riverbank stabilization of
.
. the Phase II improvements project. It is expected that the riverbank stabilization portion
. of the Phase III improvements would be considered for funding assistance. Graphic 1 in
. Attachment B shows the Phase II location and the stabilization of the buried pipe with
. np-rap.
.
. );> Wetlands
. ~
. A desktop wetland assessment, using National Wetland Inventory Data, and a site visit
. were performed for the purpose of providing information relative to the presence of
. w~tlands in the project area. The information obtained through this effort is shown on
. Figure 5. The project area falls within portions of floodplain forest and upland areas.
.. Prominent species that are present on site include; wood nettle, silver maple, green ash,
. reed canary grass, stinging nettle, cottonwood, elm and maple. The following categories
. were identified using the Cowardin Wetland Classification System:
.
. . PUBF (Palustrine, unconsolidated bottom, semipermanently flooded): these are
. usually deep marshes with cattail, pond weed, and water lily.
. . PEMC (Palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded): these are typical shallow
. marshes dominated by cattail.
.
.
. City of Shakopee 4
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
.
.
. . R2UBH (Riverine, lower perennial, unconsolidated bottom, permanently
.
flooded): river system.
.
.
. A site visit confirmed that wetland delineation should be performed along the alignment
. during the design phase ofthe project. An Army Corps of Engineers permit is required if
. wetlands within the floodplain will be impacted due to construction of the new
. interceptor.
.
.
. ~ Existing Utilities ,
. Existing utilities in the vicinity of the project area are shown in a general way on the
. individual plan and profile sheets; The utilities that may impact the alignment routing
. analysis include stormwater, overhead electrical, existing sanitary sewer interceptor, and
. the Rahr Malting outlet pipe,
.
.
. There are six stormwater outlets that will be affected by the construction of the new
. interceptor alignment. Each stormwater outlet will be redesigned and reconstructed to
. improve stormwater flow to the river and minimize the impact to erosion of the riverbank
.
. Electrical lines will be avoided, if possible. Assistance from the Shakopee Public Utility
. Commission (SPUC) will be requested if needed.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
. City of Shakopee 5
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
i.
.
.
.
. Analysis of Alternative Improvements
.
. In assessing improvement methods, several alternatives were initially considered but
. eliminated due to their inherent impracticality. These improvements include:
. . Lift station and force main --:- eliminated due to the many service
.
connections, limited available property for lift station siting and rock
.
. removal. for force main. construction.
. . Gravity interceptor along existing bituminous path - eliminated due to the
. insufficient cover for construction.
. ., Pipe bursting -eliminated due to the existing service connections requiring
. . excavation, pipe bursting would not improve existing sags and pipe
.
bursting in rock trench poses risks.
.
. ., Gravity sewer extending beneath Levee Drive - eliminated due to the
. excessive rock removal that would be required to constructthe interceptor
. and the risks associated with rock removal in a residential area
.
. The elimination of the options listed above leaves the proj ect with limited alternatives for
. improvement. With the lack of available space for anew alignment (due to existing
.
. topography, location and elevation of rock and the location of existing homes), the only
. alternatives for improvement are to reconstruct the interceptor in the existing sewer
. trench or to construct the interceptor adjacent to the existing interceptor.
.
. The analysis of alternative improvements will be performed in two sections, as shown in
. Figure 6. Section A will assess' the initial 2,700-feet of the alignment. This seCtion
.
. extends from the intersection of Adams and First Street and ends near the location at
. which the alignment approaches the southern bank of the Minnesota River. Much of this
.. section is over 200-feet from the riverbank and due to its location is not currently in
. danger of being impacted by high river levels. However, as mentioned previously, it is
. recommended that this section be replaced due to its documented condition.
.
. Section B will assess the final 1,300-feet of the alignment. This section initiates where
.
. Section A ends, near the location at which the alignment approaches the river, and
e
. City of Shakopee 6
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
.
.
. extends to the east to the end of the Phase II River Interceptor. Much of this alignment is
. located very close to the river and is frequently affected by high river levels. As
.
. mentioned previously, this section is recommended to be replaced and reinforced due to
. its current condition and location.
.
. >- Section A Improvements
. Construction in New Trench
. In this alternative, the interceptor would be constructed in new trench adjacent to the
.
. existing trench. The existing trench and. interceptor would remain in service during
. construction: Some rock removal would be required to construct the new interceptor in a
. new trench. Additional fill would be required in some locations to provide adequate
. cover for the pipe. Bypass pumping would be required when the connection to the
. existing interceptor system is made. . However, the existing interceptor system would
. remain in service during most of construction.
.
.
- There are some advantages to realigning the interceptor and constructing in a new trench,
. Among these advantages are;
. . The potential for improved access for maintenance and operations
". . Minimal bypass pumping during construction.
.
.
. There are numerous disadvantages to this alternative including;
. . The construction of a new trench would require significant
. quantities of rock removal
. . Extra fill would be required to provide sufficient cover for portions
e of the interceptor pipe
.
. . Extra fill in thefloodway would trigger a DNR pennit
. . There are limited locations to which the interceptor could be
. relocated
. . Moderate amount of clearing and grubbing and utility coordination
. would be required
.
. . Erosion control would be required to stabilize the area
.
. City of Shakopee 7
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
.
.
.
: Construction Utilizing the Existing Trencb
. In this alternative the new interceptor would be constructed in the existing sewer trench.
. Portions of the existing interceptor would be taken out of service during construction and
. bypass pumping would be required as the interceptor is constructed. Manholes would be
. replaced and lateral connections would be improved.
.
: There are advantages to utilizing the existing trencb for constructing the Section A
. portion ofthe interceptor. Among these advantages are;
. .' The elimination of rock removal during construction
. . Sufficient. cover exists above the proposed pipe elevation, no fill
. would be required
.
: There are disadvantages to this alternative including;
. · Utilizing the existing trench does not in itself iniprove access to the
. interceptor
. · Interceptor would remain in a less than ideal location
: . Moderate amount of clearing and grubbing and utility coordination
. would. be required
. · Erosion control would be required to stabilize the area
.
. ~ Section B Improvements
. The Section B portion of the interceptor project will be analyzed to determine the most
: feasible alternative for completing tbe project Two alternatives will be addressed.
.
. Relocation Further to the South of the River
. Description: Extending from the end of Section A, this alternative has the final 1,300-
. feet of interceptor constructed adjacent to the Minnesota River in a new sewer trench
. located approximately 25..Jeet south of the existing sewer, Plan and profile of this
: alternative is provided in Figure 7:
.
.
. ~~~. 8
. West Riverlnterceptor - Phase 111
.
.
.
.
. Discussion: Relocating the interceptor line further from the river will allow for
. riverbank stabilization to take place. The interceptor's stability will be further enforced if
.
. riverbank restoration efforts are included in the project.
.
. Construction of a new sewer trench in this area will require some rock removal.
. Construction near the base of the existing gazebo will be difficult and will require pipe
. jacking or boring (See Graphic 3 in Attachment B). An access trail for maintenance and
. operations would be constructed above the pipe,
.
.
. Positive attributes associated with this alternative include:
. . Moves interceptor further away from river to allow for riverbank
. stabilization
. . Improves. access to the interceptor along river
.
. . Riverbank stabilization (potentially with COE funding assistance)
.
. Negative attributes associated with this alternative include:
. . Rock removal during construction along the river
. . Difficult construction
.
Funding through COE in question - potentially no funding available
. .'
.
. Reconstruction in Existing Trench
. Description: Extending from the end of Section A, this alternative would utilize the
. existing sewer trench to reconstruct the finall,300-feet of interceptor.
.
e Discussion: Utilizing the existing sewer trench to reconstruct the interceptor near the
.
. river would eliminate rock removal during construction. An access trail for maintenance
. and operations would be constructed above the pipe.
.
. Positive attributes associated with this alterative include:
. . No rock removal would be required during construction
.
. . Lowercost in comparison to new trench alternative
. . Gazebo would not impact construction
. City of Shakopee 9
. West River Interceptor - Phase III _
.
.
.
.
.
: Negative attributes associated with this alternative include:
. · Location would still be impacted by high river levels
. · Ability to stabilize is minimal due to existing erosion along riverbank
. . Access trail would be difficult to construct
: · Qver time the riverbank would erode and the pipe would fall into the river
. if the riverbank is not stabilized
: )> Analvsis
. Section A
. With the significant amount ofrock excavation required to construct a new trench and the
: limited locations at whicb the interceptor could be relocated, it is evident that the most
. feasible option in Section A is to replace the interceptor in the existing sewer trench. It is
. understood that, at some locations, due to existing topography and unforeseen
. circumstance, the existing trench. alignment or the trench itself may not be the most
. practical location for the pipe. However, these decisions will be addressed as the design
. process moves forward.
.
: Section B
. Reconstructing the interceptor by utilizing the. existing sewer trench would not eliminate
. or reduce the risks that seasonal high river . levels pose to the interceptor. There is little
. land available to provide long-term stability to the interceptor on the access trail at its
. current location. Relocating the interceptor further to the south will allow the City to
. reduce the impact and risks associated with high river levels and stabilize the riverbank.
: The relocated interceptor will also be more accessible for City maintenance and
. operations staff.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. City of Shako pee 10
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
.
.
: Recommended Alternative
. The recommended alternative to replace Phase III ofthe West River Interceptor is:
. .' Section A - Replace the interceptor sewer in the existing sewer trench
. · Sections B - Construct the interceptor sewer along the river in a new sewer trench
: located approximately 25-feet south of the existing location and stabilize
. approximately 1,000-ft ofthe riverbank.
.
. The total cost ofthe recommended project will be$ 3,491,306. A cost breakdown ofthe
. recommended project is provided below. Plan and profile of the recommended
. alternative is shown in Figure 7.
.
.
. Table 1- Recommended Project Cost
. Description Total Costs
. Mobilization $ 50,000
. Clear & Grub $ 45,000
. Bypass Pumping $ 62,000
15" Gravity $ 486,000
. 18" Gravitv $ 264,000
. 18" Gravity Jacked $ 40,000
. C1PP RemaininQ Sewer $ 64,000
Stormwater Outlet $ 270,000
. Connect to existing MH $ 3,500
. Latera/Connections $ 22,000
. 6 ft dia MH Std 10ft deep $ 51,000
. Riverbank Stabilization $ 1,080,000
Other Stabilization $ 160,000
. CI 5 100 100% Crushed (path) $ 48,000
. Bituminous (path) $ 43,695
A. R.OCk Removal $ 57,750
_ Fill $ 12,500
. Select Granular (trench) $ 33,600
. Sub-total $ 2,793,045
. ContinQencies (25%) $ 698,261
. Total Project Cost $ 3,491,306
.
.
.
.
.
. City of Shakopee 11
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
.
.
. Funding
.
. ~ Recommended Project Funding
. Approximately 53.3% ($1,871,000) ofthe project cost will be funded through the City of
. Shakopee Sanitary Sewer Fund. 7.7% ($270,000) of the project cost will be funded
. through the City of Shakopee Storm Sewer Fund. The remaining 38% ($1,350,000) of
.
,. the project cost could be funded through the Army Corps of Engineers Section 14
. program or Federal assistance.
.
. ~ Federal/ COE Section 14 Funding
. Federal assistance,eitherthrough The Army Corps of Engineers or other forms offederal
. funding would greatly assist in protecting the interceptor pipe from. high river levels. The
.
. COE Section 14 program was briefly discussed in the Existing Conditions section of this
. report.
.
. The Federal budget operates on an October 1 st through September 30th fiscal year. Thus,
. fiscal year 2007 begins in October 2006 and runs through September 30, 2007. Federal
. funding fora project of this type would be obtained through the House of Representatives
. Budget Committee. Funding is determined in the Budget Committee report. which
.
. usually is submitted in May.
.
. Remaining funds, if any, are distributed through the COE Section 14 program. In order
. to obtain COE Section 14 funds a resolution from the project sponsor mUst be submitted
. to the local (St. Paul) district of the Corps of Engineers. A sample resolution is attached
. to this report as Attachment C, The sample resolution is designed to introduce the COE
e
. to the project and allow the COE to determine whether the project fits the Section 14
. program guidelines. The COE operates on the same federal government fiscal year of
. October 1 through . September 30, The COE has indicated that the earliest Section 14
. funds would be available would be the fiscal year 2008 (October 1, 2007 to September
. 30, 2008). TheCity could construct the Phase III pipe replacement project in 2007 and
. the COE could construct the riverbank stabilization project in 2008.
.
.
.
. City of Shakopee 12
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
/~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
'.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. FIGURES
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
CD
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. City of Shako pee '.
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
.
. - - _......-- -...--- -
',,---' " l '- - - ,/ -
...... . ,
. - [~-~ l. - i I I
. l__ ~ I I
I
. I
. I
I
. ,."" ------ - ,-- -- -- --.J..,
[ !
. I I
. I I
1 I
i
. I
. Hennet~- County I I
. ~l I I
'--
. -\ I.
. 1 I
; I
I
. I I
. Carver County , I
8 I
. 8 I
.. '\ J~ I
. :,{, ~.~~~--'" . ~,
1 "", -~ ' I
- ,r-~J;J -<II Project Area r .
- ~ r- l"'''1 i
. lr~ r;\ \~~ .~
1 8 I I
: I.~ 1 Shakopee I @!
-I { ~ 4'
_ I ,0 l. ,Jl I I
I
-V ~ -,@ I
I
: (' Scott County // I
. I~ (
.. !, j
: d'> ~ -- I r
I
r
. c.~ "..-L~ I
I
. I I
. /-j I I
. A~ I J I
. -L___ _______-_--1___ u__ I
- - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -
. n Bonestroo
. PROJECT AREA
. -=- Rosene
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 1\11 Anderlik & I
. Associates I
INTERCEPTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY Engineers & Architects I
.
. Figure 1 August 2006
--- -
.
. ,;tfit- -- '---'--- / / _.1 a 0 I , 1 a
. f.~1~1f.] /./]1lL1! I 10Ill11 ~7TI-! hJJJlJJ' I ;' 0 ~J 1]""" ~ ST:iI9ioO~D~L~c;NDS~t;~~Y RIP-R4P '
. ';r-,ji'~!'!.~ ,/ J I I U1J \ /A_ 4. TONS RA.NOOM RIP-RAP
"'" - ,- T----1 -: 'co QO' 1:"0 'VA_ 16 LIN. Ft Ie C.M PIPE CULVERT
. NORTH -{ r---_;:::--.--L. - I } '94 'V<<'l'\ STA.,23+'I'O PLACE SPILLWAY
! Vi I T --T 1___ ' ,!!! .... o-? \')"0 ;r: S.Cl._YDS, HAND PLACED'RIP-RAP
~ / I 1 I. - ~ ~;- fa TONS RANDOM RIP-RAP
. i! ,,~~ / I L_ / j' I l~ I UT~ I i...", I n. i [J I \ ' ><1 ff " ~". ~ ,,' c.~,,~ '""'"
. ~ z/{r--dJ- I/,~ JJj ,"", ~.~ I ~ ..
" 0 rn '< ,(/"
r WATER SURFACE SEPT, 22., 1959' 685.6 ,':; I r-- a: I ,,- .' . L ..",,:.
. EXTREME HIGH WATER \952. '716'Y /' ~ } j ITJ7bf U I ID-: ~;I!J r-r- I ~:::----I17:.-=l ,r<l'~" :
. /' : :L-L I. ;;; .. !l 0 -- ::;; ~ ,:g~!JTi --.~'.J' - :. -
~ :t Ol! f!! &&I '. -' n l~ f4 :r ~ Z ID ~. :;~o..: _CQ-~;; ..
"rr1 '" ;, 3: Z ~ Z j' - j' -,;t ~ ":' :c.. !!!"r:[L r-.. '" , ,
. i'i,' r;'~';t '~:cl 1/ g rn b 1"~rr_J'L 0/''": ",.., , -"::"'r:!:t '
~l' I' - I. I - f _ I ~ "" en :c t" J: I") Q r fit oct' .. I- J- I , l-
. ~Iiili O\~ ~ ;; IT'~ - ;; ~ ~ J J ~ f "'\,..."''' T&-- -=.~ :~~l ; g IT/ ;
. ill *'llll'-S '0'-<< :':'i?{"f; I.JJ I I J 1 jI Ti;r; V r FfF- /~!~ .. ;;// j / m~ ';'/~~:~~~JIft..~ velT;
. tl ,!f(]; co~ {o"u~:Pt.Q6 ~,\\\_~/f~'- '1D -r==; I ~.L I I It r 'r"; " -I { l' / --- ~~ LlJ 6Xfi.H;t',J ~~ '~~I' ~~,--~-- ~tt
. I, .__}~ I! I s_\\~fjl ...... Ib~'- ~ I -f!2:<f --:-' ,~~_....-_~J ~~
,j ,I --:: . I ( I :' \ :? Jk:!. J:g .-- I '8Q_9- I 1- r--",. no.a' '8".J ,~ -' .. - :~
: -, I I -'-~-L- -,- \!! II 0 j.. .. --' 107,8" '" /I ill . ~(!II r ' ':Ii:
r l ~,J.--____ -., d __- _ m - sr.$' -' III CCl-,'-n ".
. il-i'~~! I of -.---.:;;l~,~- -~Ift =----_ ~ ' " ~ - I IJ. I no) I ~ ~ ... ~ Ta-, -- ' '-,1
. lil,UI' ~I' gjl X7::;:::::::'~~":::'i::::.--~-:::=-==-'"'='..-~-- : I ~~f~ll'l S 11 UJg7 ~ "-. ---1J "."1'-
.I~: UJ ----'t:::.J: ___ ---..., ~ _____ -_ __ {' ..,.. J:I ~ .. ;- -j' - !i! I ~I ;"N_-
~ei~ .., ____ __:;.--/' - '- _. - -- s_ 7" -- ~ : -.l'l ... .. :: c: ~: ;: ...; , .,; ,
. I !i,~~:i, ::: /'../;;;:::6;- ";';-/~I I r- ~8ASE LI.,E --. . ~~-;--- L1 ., "'. I -r--r==rF -'~: : ::" :: "'il ..' I --~
. ..I. I
~I; ! ~ /",507 "'! l~i r- S7'IfEET ! --. - '--1/ .' / . ... it ~ ., - .... ,,,[
. ~ /' /7' ~l'~O!t1 U -W,j III^/ / 1--'lr-~--:-=-B!~'~~~11.Jj 1 J j I ~; ~'I-f~'-'~' ~>'--:~:I
. //. j; - ~I I I ^ , ~~ vi:;.. -----~~ t:,i" LJ - " ~ ""<,,,::,;,;-1
, 1!1.1..... ~ :,.:::! ~ -.TOR . '::--180' Q;jf ..-,~.!
. /,'L '" :; IlL - "):! , '" ~e:,.Mt;_~,..~.oa-:----S1'._ -_ :::r i' . ::.: " - -i'-- !
MH !i" '~_~ :.. _ '--- - ;~ it 37.00 ~"--. --- so' '~!',' ,'-:,-'" [
. "";..;1-,, ",0;;,..... ;j~I;Q I ~II T"J r 1 I. '~~I /;/ I -=--~--";':: !]j., c:~~t~ \
'''",j " .. -::J:J.../, I 1 /, /1,1' I --, - --r.;~,.."""",. :
.. ..:.."....:'-~, ':
- ..~ ," - ". .:
. . -1-- - --.- ..,
7Z0 - - -. - 1"--
: . '" .' - _-, ~:~ ~~~- ec =" ~ >_ - -'~~~; i
. flil! '- :- ..--=~:: -- - . ,- i ~;;,.~<;;-
. ~!\\!\; 710 -~~;~~--~. ~ - - . - .. - . .'--"~~"~.~:~
'I -\.1 i . ---=lttt~ ._- --..... - ~~. . ii;! "i-. ,,:~":'
. ~i 111' _'- u. ." ~'-~'::~~',{~
QI,".I ~ _. 3i' . --. '. ."~;1"-~--
, I- -- --- -'-.---,'-- """- -
_ 1111' "7-05 . . -. ~-' "-,.' ,.'-'
l;p ; I ! ! : ' ., --.- . - - "- -. - ~ ,>' ::~:.r~~'~
. tt*' =.'- -.-~ . ,- -'--" -'w-
. l ! !j'I't 700 ".. _ . ..::::_~~'~ -:~_ == _ -:', - ~-~.- __ ~ - - - . ""-' . :.' -. -'>. ~~,,:;::
,:l~ ~ _ _ --- -,-,1-,._ 1--- _,..;c 1---"-, __ ' .. -,._-_"t" -
:~lHi . - -=-=.-:__--r-:7_~~. _:>~__ .. .' -.. - ::c't;t!!,_
e "1 i~!!~.~ 695 __ _. __ __, ___ - __~~ - _._ -. - - - -, _c-:" - !
.- il,';l; - . ,==: -= _~ ~ ~= ~F:>= _ '. =. ',. '. '- , ~ " ~ _. ,~:;:;:,:,j 1
. <c' _ ! _. . _ '. __~.:... ____ ~_,__ ::;;., . . . - - ,',-- ,'-' ,.-,.: 1-:~;,_'_'<1:-;"f.:r,,__
~ 690 _ _, _.._ - - .- , . I~,;., y.;~::"ili.&!'i;':, .-~ i
. "_ -:-: _~:=-:---. n=~:-:- ._-~. :::.---_.. -- - S-H-Ak0P~E'I~f&R~~r.4R-'~.;';:' \
_ __ .. _ _ ,_ _ . i~ ~~ ~ ..:::_ _ ~::-'. _~ ;; _ , _; . . _ _ __-- ~= _--= .. _ .._ ,_ _< -, . _:J::~'-,_::,,?_:' 4k-:- ,-' ;l: ',":~'i>~~ <,:' _ .
. 665 - -.;~ u .- - - TOtTZ IONr.',D.,~~r;-'I;~i";.} " - ' ;" ,
-. _ -- _ - I - ,-. -Vl Y.~Y~~t, .. -, ",,-, ,,'
r ._ ____>-0-_ _ ,_ ._, , , .' - ~, AlIft J(:"~~~ -ll'JioPi!_, - P- 'if;'.'" ".,,~-
, ._ _ _._ '__ _ .':"1-_"- 1-- -- - :.,__ ~ =-:.- __.' "",,,- I!'!r~: tn~~ ~~: - -' .~oI:: .-
, ' '. -$~~li' ",.- ,-,-
. _ ___-_ '="== _, _ 1-_ _ --- '\ 'ENGINEERS:-~.t.-r:t{::'f&ilf"i'!:, ,:,!'" ,-"
_ ... __ .. r- . ,..,' ".-.' ',. ,.".....-'" ,', .........;.. . ::0'
. '.1-- _.. . 111.5111"'0 IM_.' Ctllln"'MAT'[lIl~lO"""'If""~IG n:~J!~"rf!"~"r''!!
_ _ ___ -c . - - s.,.."'."...... 1'JUr,1' I ....~ 111M. T, U!r1rlll' ~'f-',
. :" - -+--~-,. - : , ' - ~,' :. ~- ...-.,,:~~~:;"~~-
. _ 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 II' 12 1<1 14 15 16 17, IS' .1_9-' 20'-' "%1 2;'t-, ~~IJII..T 11-7-61'-. ftK' .,. _,c:: - H - ...., I~. -
. I'LATE,-~~CP!LI!."",A. .AlII&llCI 1 I' ,SUlSEr -'NO-'[' .~ J" ",
fMlll'llG(lHSl'UrCll'..o;..., u..' .. _ \ . .n. ',! :
. '. ",.1 . ...... .
. __ i" { . :i!. ,Of _ .;L . ~i-~::f~J. t-,~~;~~~,t,:~-,,,k"_I.t~" "
. BonestrooReport Figure 2a
.
.
. '- - - - - - -.--.-' ---- .- - ',...
. -.---- .-.- - -- "-
. STA. 24.;~ PloACE SPlloloWAY ST.' 27.97 PloACE Spll.l.WAY STA 29+2S F'_'CE SFIL,LWAY ST. 39"f7 Fl.ACE Sp!l.loWAY ! STA.47"'53 PloACE SPfloloW^' STA_ 47.13 Spfl.loI.IIAY
. 50 SQ,yOS HAND PloACE~ R'F_RA112 Sc. Y-'S ",\NO Plo',CED RIP-RAP 20 so Y' ,- H"": 1" '''E~ R,F-RAp 17 S';'.YO!; HAND PLACED RIP-RAP . ' +Q SOJOS HAND PloACEI> !'tIP-RAP ~I SQ.Yl>"AMO F.o>.cao
" Q TON RANDOM RrP- R.1P 4-2 TO~, "_AI',OO'" Rlp- RAF 14 TOrlS RANDOM RIO'R_'F 39 1'01;5 "_ANOOM RfF.RAP 36 TONS RANDOM PIF-RAP 36 Tal. R1MDOM
12 LIN_F"T 18 ':M_ PIPE CUloVERr 16 _fN F1 IS"O_'" p,FE CUl.V"R1' f6 lo1",_.r 18";: M PIPE .UloYERT 15 L.N 1'1' IS" C,M PIPE CUl.vERr 16 loiN F"7 18"C.1< FIPF CULVERT is LI; Ie" 1:-...._1'
. ,STA, 38.40 pl..ACE SPlloLw.' I
. STJ. .~T'5.4. PI..ACC SPIL':..~AY .., 13 SQ.YOS. HANO PlACE!J RIP.RA? c: " ... ......
.. ZI :.~_ :OS "~'1D Fl.A~_D RfP-RA, 36 TOilS RANOO/l, RIP-RAP. .T'. 47-'00 Tv ,TA 413~J_ Pl.ACE 0
14 .ON. RAN~OM RIP-R~P 16 L'" FT IS" CM g',., UloVE'" e., ~vNS RANOO/. RIP- RAI? "!
NORi>l '0 L'N 0'1' 18 CM PIPE CUt.VERT. '" ' ,'~ - ~ ii;:
. J SiA 35-...- S c CLAC~ SPtt.loWA~ 15 sr... 4Z~13 TO STA. 4~ +60 P'_ACE S'A 43' 00 l'v STA _!:-foOO Pl.ACE .. .. ..
_ 35 TON~ RANOOM RIP- R AP .. 160 TON. R~NOOM RIP- RAP .: TONS RANjO", r.. I p. !'t AP_ Ii! ::; -
L 22 SO ,os "AND ?l.ACEO RIP.IIlA;:' " . " :::
. 16 L'J..l i='T ie.:: \J !='tPc CULVERT ~ ~)oo ~
w 2<<~
· ~ ~~fl~
c ~ j - ~ N Ii)
.... .. ' "'.. N ,.....;:. \-
, ..~ .. i::-::!:!, .. -.. i RlVE R .. .": % ~: ~ .. . ....- % '\
. *" II ~Q<n N 7 l\f % '"':.: = - m - ~ .....itv 2 tI'l ~ .1 -, .. -"
_. _ -.0;: _ .. - .. . - llCI:i .)<0 0 :: roo . -
:, : _ ! I ,~ _ ... ... ~ !! . ~ ~ '" ~.: M INN E SOT A ! ~ ~ ~ !:! z ,;, % -' "" '!!! i ~.~ i ~ z;, ---1-r- - 1 '" i
i' , : ~::::;; .:. ~ ~ f ~ ~. ~. ; :; ;, ,;. · :" ~ zl' ,;, 1 -'~, i ~ i ~ --- :: I ,~ '
. I 1\ ! '~. _J ; j~: ~ i ,\ \ \ CORPORATE 7 1-IM~liS i ~ ~ ~ i;f1I." +~ ~ -A\ ~~ i i i .J._------r---- il rT ;.:rrr \.
. ; , Z I" ':' o:i:jo I I, i I ! \ __._--' i ' I 1 1 I ~--L. i.---"'-' 'I '. \; FRONT W 1ST, 0 I .
:J:: = +- I.II~ I <, . i: !' I ,. ---r-- "I \, I ~.~'
. ,:'; %!" -!!OJ L \ I "I \ ' - ,] ',[ 1 \ ,: I , i II 'I i \' i Ii 'I "'\.
IIIl '[ : 1 I ' , - - \ \ ,\ . :' I . '\ I I '
; ! : ,,\ \, \ - \1' t. ,,\ r~ I \ \ '. / \ \ I ! I ~ \ ~41,..~.j ;: \ . '
. ' ! i ' \! \ \ Y ~ \1 . I lee ~,.~ ~a7- II! ~ III I ~ v'i \ \ \'/, j 1 i ; I ,'.i/ L: '--~ iI i ~
f I ' ; I !Df" I ~ ,'f -==- I I 'I' I ,I' 1,,/ ....
. I;", \i \ . "P.: ,,~~ ~-- \,,"5_18 'I' ,\ ; III --""'-- ~2~t'l' ,,-/[ --P 7' 1t il L.& (""C".'. ~ r rr ,,,. I ~ !
i I . s_ao i ~ ' f ' I / !~ I.;... ....wwa....~ -- , BLUFF" L '---
I: 1Ji~' -- - ~ \ I i I I' f SP,".',uAVS "'U~ I ~'C.; .,.....'-"",.. .....,20-~, ~ ===r L,J.. auJEIR.OUE A8lJT"'2l'lT R.Mll'Rll. .' j .0
. I iii! ' , I I i III il . I I ,'~\\ +- ~,I '" "".--
v: _ ... ! ..I! i! \ fl I III i "! '"' '" I
. I ii I: i J" " ," II I "" "'1111 nJ";"oo ....,1 . I. !.. II n:n i! "98.j ! 1..,0' .~'O' ,I~!l ;90.l, i ,,0.0,1 ...a'" I I~l .. I I ,. ~ '11\
~ :/~ ,Ill I! _., I.~ · q I I! . !' .~ 'I ~! : ~ 2o.iJ~~ J irel -~ ~ ," !, I . - ; ~ ~::; '0 I \
. ~,j', I" '1~ I! l~ i 'I!~~ 1,1 li i ~ I I ~ I ~I! I; 'T~~lll.. ~.. ~ II~! i! I I~ I ~H ~ ~~
.: '" ~ ! Q: I . \' I I" '" ,. I 1..-."0
· ~~ -:1 I i Ii DJIIJ III I r l.flTTT ..11 '. 'I I, \ I I I . !!~ I Ii I 0' DJ~I!'-I ~~s
. ~'i" 1 'c ,'. -; a:' 1! I '" ~; ~ I I' ., , ~ I I ~ , I. ~~
Q ~ i I ~ I':: ! 'g ! i i ~ i ! i ; H -: I i I ~ I ' Ii ~ ~ ~ -, ~ f-
~::> 1 I a._ i 0 I 3: I . -' I -"0 :: !' 3:, 2 ...:;-:r-
. lL . ,.. . I! I _ · wi : '_ ~ ..j i i :" 'K I , I I I '. I i Ii I 2 ;. · I "_' ~ ..1- . _. . ~ · ~ _" ~..l kl
. '." . _' _ . I ... T 1
~t "-SASE .loINE ......It O~ FIRST ST. S. T. H_ NO.169 S-T_H. ND.IOI .. '~ i
. 1--- f- -T -- '=-- 1"'-- r --I- ' - .. ~::- - - ~E= . i-'-=3: - - . I q '-- -1---- -:-- --l- -"
_ _ _ _.: ,-7 I__~: ,-- ,-- ~ "_+-H'~ _-.--F~"'-H-_- u":"~ - --t-. - -':':'_--. 1
I---~ :-;0.. _., e-;:.::: " _, -I .. ~:: _~..:_ H_ -;-I, - 1= '-:'-'-'.'- -, . - .,~--
. ' - .. --- - - -.- - -:r - I - , - ., -,.... -. - - ---
I-- + ._f--... _ 1---'-=-. __ _.._ _. .! _,' _ ' - __ ---- -:-:_!- _ .___ __~ -.. _ :~.., ~ --. = _u__ -
720 ___ .._ -- --=_ ':'-::', - '. u_ __: _- _: _ . ~ _ 7'. -=t:::=:= , -..:.. - _=E.. - - : - 1--- --. - - - -=-- - 720 l":
. ,: _ i--':. - - ...: -'- --. i-., _' , - 'I ' --.+ - -":-"" " ~ - -..- .. .- -_--r::::-- - -
,__ _ "="'_ _ _ _ __. _ __ 1_ i- -1 _, ' 'r __ C"_ '--="-t:, .. ,'-- --:-=: ""-:_ _ -- . - --: =_~:_:=t- '0_ . -"' - -1--'. - - -- -' ._-. --,
~ ,_ __ ~ __ ._ ~_ l' ,.).- -. _< ~ ---~ --~-~- :--::r.., -~ - ---.--~....- .- -..--
. I-- - --- . ~- - "-i 'I -'1 ~ - - -. -- " ._-----. -- --- ,--
::=- ___ ,~_ __, _ _. I" ::::: . r '. c--- - I~ '1 .- -- f:- - . ,I-- - ----- = I-- 1-----
115 -::_ 'i-' _ _ . _, _ ! -! I _-_, -I - - - - _j-, _ _. - ..=-:. .:="-=- =. -I- - -==- -r=:.:- .' -'- 115 .-.
. ,1=::; -F' :;;.~--::-:o;~:..;:!". :..- __ -<'! i j' I I :-_ __'..). '_ 'L __, ~' --- j-'- -,'-r-_ :;.; '- 1:-_- - - -:-:..:- -":",-j:;r-::::F --: ~ _-t=;:: .~- ..
t-----. _ ~.~ "'N ,. 0 I _ .r- -- -------- ~~ _#::::.- . ~_.. r - - -ro--o .. -
~l _ '! i--, l _, _ _.II'- _ _ .. _ _ _ ' _ _ '_ ~ : ~ I _ +-F"" 101:' . r.!'lIlYN WNl _I - - - \".1- - - - - '- - -- -;::: - -- - - =- f'C'-.- - .
. ol!' ::=~-""":-S:'~ ~ ' ;1"-\_ _. t /I'v'-l. I? __ -- _ -iI' "[\:: t-.::- ,- - ~: :-:~:_., ':-.oii-'_:". r::.E:-.' ~~t::"=-=-=-:ll:t= --;;::. -:-::-,"':"-:.r-:='-:'--~ '-;....,- :{-.=::_-
:. I 7/0 1--. :-~ r;,<>:: _. _ . ~ I I \ ! r I":.... ~. ! _ \" _IS: - 111 t ' /1-- -'-= ; - /- .l.- ~. . - - i- - 110
,'Ii ._ t---- --'-u =~_,.,...'/ ~ .{ ~ ~.. \: t,r \'- ,-=:-.! --:; fI -, -"- :_:L -:::: :\;.- ~;;.--;.- ,"- - -.. .::.=-~.
. :!1: ;;>;;_-:~J;"'~_~ ilf;.;;.~;:~__ ~.~ t.L~ ..:t NJ ''7''''~:;';-~> ..1---1-,-- -, .1/ i.:: - i -" --', -:1= -'-- - d --- r::\:,-- '-:"\, I-=-I=:.:i-, "1:-:-:::' .-
"11 _ _ _. _ ---'0') ,," _ , I " , .'. ...-- 1-- i- - j,-/ "-
_\.' ! :" _ -IE: E.C'=--. ,.~ ~ - II :., _ . ~~: "/ R:),,~ - =. -=r--"- 1'-'" t---. -- =-= - ,- -
. ,111,i 105 It. _-..... -~- -_:~ .__'- --- , _ _.~: c:.K. ~_ j ._--__ _- ;: j ::-t:... l-' :' - '-~!. __l--'-- -..., .- ~ ::--=.;= =_ ,--:::__ _" ,=,~_ ~-_-- f-:. 70S
I I :: -- - ':::;l' --I - - -,., '- -: - ,-- - c'- [oF_:=. --- +-- -,. .;.;- - :-.;:. - 1---1-.-.--
,I",' - ---- I I:--:l:...-- '(a-". fr ." ,u_'-'__ -,.."' i::: =-.-:_~--t_'::-:;:.. =- -- C :_..:--:- ~,
. H-itTrJil, I i. -- r-- ~-~ I- .- _ _ -- ~_ "'" ,,:.:-- -::' ,- ::-.l~ -- _ . -- - - -c--= -.=::::- - -=- - .~:: --, ~, .;:0' - -
: Ill: 100 = i::. .:.::~ ~ >-. - _:n. <oJ _ 1:7"7" ~-_(- -- :\:.. -. - r ,,-:: ::.: T-::"" ~': - -. 1-- - _a:~ 700
a i II, :~I __' - .; ;;:..: ! ...- - I :'-' , ,- -- - . - - ~- '-. '~-I-' ---.' -,:.. :: - -, '- - =- - ---=- . - - '"- \' .... - - _::::-
... -i,e'S = _~: ":::'F-:::-.:::'- ,..--~_.-~. I ~-. --;; =\ifr'.. ,- l ..:::::~_:=.. -.:: i-.._ ,- :-.- =r- -.::.: .-~__-:_- -. u - 12't - ~_-'- -.- 0
i i ii;:1 __ - .e::. _ _ - ___ .. '<>: =..:..!.-. -"":-" -' . - - - '0:::,.. - -- ---~ - - ,- .:-: .--:-- 1-0, EO - -.. - :
. _ laoYa~1 ::-..:._ - . - -"- -q ~ _'..:.11 .. -, -- ~- -.- .-' -;: -:= .-' -- . - I-.:::t--:."' -- -,.. -- F. -- r- --~;~ ,. .,~ ..
. _......... r------ _ . .. _ .. - (1 f - . - . _. -- ~., . -
. 't',< 'l:;!~~ 59~ =-:. _. :J". _.:.:.._. _ __ -..:._ I (d , _ _ _, ---__ __.:: _c. :... - :- r-_..-+- - .. :. - --' - - -; l ~ - E ,--;--",", 695
. ....'~:.1:; -- ,~= -';.=.:--.;~~: :-.:!:::::{7-'''--'--- --,"'-'-- -+::.-: .'-, --:.. ~':'- _.: --- -"'-':.l::.-i--l~-:t- -'.=--:.- ~_::o:: .-:-:. =::- - ~=j -l-'~~"'" ~ ~.-- --- :
~ I = _ ~. __ _' . _, 1 _ f . _ ~ -.. - - ,- --r -- ' , - -" . -- . -- ;..... -, ~ - - ' -., - b::::.::L. 1 r :
. ~! ~ ~ "an E: ~..;;. ':ii>=>-.7-' =...:=: ..:- --~-'-: ~- i. .:- .: I :. --: -I 1 -...:.:.::~ ~ !:. 1_ -- i, -- :;- f= c.:iJ!__ .. l-' =-~ ,_=t -::, ..-;:~_:.. ,- rf -- -= - '"
~ __ -:= -=1:' ,-- '" - ii ,..- --'. I '!- ---r-' -r" --I ' - --, ,-~- ,-1-- :1 -- j-:>' -=..-:-
. f--- _'_ :_'.';':_ _ . _ '::._ __ -'I::::' ---"' t ,:- '. ---:1 -. : '-~ -- 'i . -'--f: -::: -/;- .....::. .-::; .. --1_ -- --:+ -' -.- -l.~;- SHAK.OPEE INTERCEPTOR SEWER -
_. _ 1------"" ___ -,-., . ,-- .--,- l- - -1--'----...- -- ~ .--, . - .. "" ,
~. ,_.. i -:__~- - -=: _7.:=1r-: i.:: u, I - -'-i - :=:E-_ '::- .' I. .~;:. - -:-b - -'- i:; - t::. :.-1 .--- t_-== --- :.."' ~ -- l'
. 685 '-_ .:- .. _.:::: _ __;:_ ,- ,- - - I -:-::t::..; ...,. ,__ ! - =- - . T- ":i -: =-1 -" -j-, ~. -=-~ ... - "'- ..- TOLTZ, KING OUVA~NDERSON
/'" _ - ':' _ _:' =='"-=: 1:-.:-' _--:-::'~'~~-.=7.1 _ - ~ -:~ _ ., ' ::.t.::.. ,-- - - - I . i'! -;;:: - ... -F:::- - , - ~r.- - l= :"71=-:: - =: ~c:.-~.'::: : I--~:: '
. _ ..._ .. "'-I'-'-:;;' _ .._ .. ._'t:. __ . -L- ,:..:.::t::'"" _ '.-' _ t-..: I..:.:..J;::: -- ...it. -F- ..1:: _._+m' !:=-' ~"'- - _::.:... -.~ -.,.?j AND ASSOCIAT S INC.
~ F- - -- _. - _ - - - .- t--=:: - -- ~ - .' - "- . - ~- - -l -- - - JJ - - /---, - - -, k - _. !-. +- - I----i'":l:- -L I sr. "AUlo.MlNN1!SOTA
~_ :-;';'_-':-1::' . __~'.- __ '_: _:_-. . :~~ . -I--";:'i-_'-::::-~ _-_!=:. __ _--_'. 7. ":;_.+.:.::, ___ _"r _ !-. _ -. '--' _ _ -- : -.:: . :,: - ENGINEERSANOARCHliECTS
._ 680 __ . :.:::.:.:..... ~ I-.~. _. _ I. h _." . ~.. ., r.::::::: _ .... _. __. ~ -:=.:.. ~ . _ _. =;..:.:. - . - I-- - - . -- -::t= j:::: !-- !:--' ...... ...... ,..."'..... - -.... MY .<.. -. .. ...... eo.
. -I i--E-- - .., -::_~::::: :~ _ ~.; -7. -. _ '~. -_j --'" j.: _-: - _.., --; _ -::; u _.::- - ~d --"I ~-~ -- - _ ::: == - -_~ . ---;: _.: ' : - .... - - - -<q . -.=:.!--~ ,- -:_':_.:0':- ~~ .'<1 ,....... ....n..';......A........' 255'~S
__ -'''1---=~ _- _: ::::-.:::l:I-::;; _ - .., ~_-,! ,_: --, _I---<!-f _ _ ., _ ---. .-01 __ ~ - I-:'-' ::_-::j "'1!t-:-.; ':.s:r::.::j ......... -::..:.~t:".:; ':a.~1 ..... ...'!n..... ....'...4....'.u. ,-
. ' r' ..,. -I' ~ -;;::. ~-.... ~_. ~__ ... .......'. _ j.-.....,. -f; . . . F.J.M. UIlllll'"".U....lUI'~._.......,_tJ.'t'4 AG:'"'
_ .__ . ._ 1-.._ ...__ __ e-;--=_ .___ __ ~ I .. _ __ _ __ _, _._ _ ,_L___ _ ,.... .'" -.. '" '-'r - I -:;; i--- - . - - J ' ~-, -:J':1oJ. /;/Ed__..~_,-", D .
_ . __.. _ _ _!.. -r- .-- . .J--<" -.. ~~. t1I -4-- ,q.... .,.n-4~_ _ _. _ ~"';'=-:-.- r- . ~ - . .. ~. - ,.. . . ~ :t1f,C.~D'. <
___ __"---<-. l:~- _::=~:E-'':'':-=-_. ,~~-i -'-=-i -::-=:"' ~-~:t:..-:L ,-1,-:-,1..:+::- C;;.. ...:.~,-::::..l-! -__-=- "'..,.::L-=-~~ L~tL'\::. ~1:~:.\ F~...; ..;:4.;:5.6# .r._.._ 7l!" ,2 '
. -_ 2J Z4 25 a6 27 2S 29 30 31 3, 33 34 35 36 37 36 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 4649 A~.eUIl.T 11-6-61 U.I<_ '!~
. ",,,-..Tt.,_,.t.,,_~"I...It."'. tfUUllG SHEET NO 2 - ;;,
"""I&IDtIllC:I,,"tCQ CIIC.. n.' . . .
~ ". SAi\l~ ("O-(JI-:J' ~~;
. . __ 'd .._ _.___ __~_J_ ._._______-..:.~_.--.,_J_~"C" - ,l-.__......__ --.-
. Bonestroo Report Figure 2b
.-
.
.
.
. I
. j
I
i
. f
i I
. i - I
I i
. I
-
f
. ! I
i -
. I ~
! i I
. I \
i \
i 50"l1'-~1'.j'C-~ j \
i
. -- I
""I~~€ I - -
i \
( i !
. I \
I
. / i -
/ ;
. /
. I
f ~-----------
. f
. f \
. I
f "'11'11'11"50"11'- i<I'iEI"o
. ) I
. /
/
. / I
. I
.
.
.
e- /
o c<$11l"
= e ~.B ~
t)~~.!!!~.~
/" CJ) CJ) w u..l: d
. t:Ul"OO <.~
.il~t:l:Jo>J
<(<(1!Z
. - ~C~! ~
e ----------
\ -
. ~------ ~ \
\
------ \..--L-.-
. --r-- - -
. / I-
Z
. \~ W
:::E
~t5
. 0::5
. (J)a..
WW
\ \ .--' zO::
. i ZO::lIl
\ \
\ _OZ
. \ ::EI-O
\ \ 0..-
J W~
--u u
. i W 0:: g
LEGEND WWt!)
. ---- .ST-206 a..~Z
-r 0-0::
. r SOIL BOR ~O::g
\ ING LOCATION <(W
\ \ J:~
. ~~~ (J)O::
.----,
l-
(/)
w
3:
0 14Q
, 280
SCALE ,
I
.-- ,- -- -,
- - -- -" ---
_..__ .. .._ _ _ h
. _, _ _ , _ ,_, ___ _ _ __'_'_,__" _,_ _ _,_, ____ _ _ _,__,__ h ,__ ____, _,_ ,_ _ __ _ _,
. I
.
. I DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT I
. KAREN S & JEFFREY M FRANA
. DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT
ODNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT '
. DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT j
. DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMEN\ .,( .
/; MARL YN & MARY J ESTENSON . ~
. Minnesota River \ RANDY NELSON ~ \
. --',,_ \ MARLYN & MARY J ESTENSON 07
_ --_\ ~ EVARD D & ELIZABETH A SAGER
. KAREN S & JEFFREY M FRAN" "-',_ \ RONALD F SCHMITT
. \. JASON D EIMERMANN
HALBERT A & BONNIE NOTERMANN i
. \ ./ ASSOC~ TED CAPIT"'- CORPORATION
. DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMEN~ /// SHAKOPEE HRA i
/~/% CI1Y OF SHAKOPEE
. DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMEN\ ' , ./ ,CHARLES A& RITA MAE PASS
,// / /' // CI1Y OF SHAKOPEE
_ DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT /' ,/' //./ 200 LEVEE DRIVE ASSOC L TD
. DNR REAl ESTATE MANAGE"EN - DNR REAl ESTATE MANAGEMENT / / ~ /CnYO'5HAKOPEE
· ' / '0' / /DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT /' / /' / /
. DNRREALESTATEMAN"AGEM,EN\ ~" " ~' /ijHOWARD C & GEORGINA KROHN / // / / /,///" /CI1YOFSHAKOPEE ,
_ _ " I / ./ ~/ /:ASSOCIATEDCAPITALCORPORA;JPN ./ / /' ///' / //
. RAHRMALTINGC~ ,._ _ ! ~ ' ~~ASSOCIATEDCAPITALCORPO ION / /// //// ,
DNRREALESTATEMANAGEMEN~, \' \ /; -/ ~ / ,/ h / / / ./.- '
. DNRREALESTATEMANAGEMEN~', // ./~ .. .// . I
. DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMEN~-' ' ' · /' /./ '
DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMEN \ j /1 . /' ./
. RAHR MALTING co. . - /' 7 '"" '\. I
. . '~ .. , ,,/ ,./ ", \,::: CI1Y OF SHAKOPEE i
. LEO SlEBENALE'" " . · '. .' \ · g ~'" G.
: STATE 0> MINN DEPT 0> TRANSP, .. 'lI.. 0 [ . a> 1Il " 'scon COUNTY HRA . ,
. \' ~ First KEVIN L FEL TS\~ DAVE DENISON :
. G) \ ,- \ FREDERICK M PETERS9N \\ BRANDON ~ & TASIA" M BEARD :
7 ALL ' ~ \ EDWARD B & LORRAINE E FONNIER
. "7 EN M & KATHRYN PLAISTED \ ' I'
_ ' - RONALD G WEINZIERL
. ,,' n f\. \-\ R MAL 1 \ N G , \ ,BOOYAAH PRO~E~TIES LLC
en f"J' ' \ " -; \ BOOYAAH PROPERTIES LLC
. E \\ NDRWERNSTATESPOWERCO \ .~ \'oOYAAH PROPERTIES li.C
~ \ _ '~n\ RAHR MALTING CO \ \ MARK L & KARl S HOUSER
e 4- LEO SIEBENALER DNR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT \' \ MARK L & KARl S HOUSER
. 'DNR REAL-ESTATE MANAGEMENT ROBERTT PICH \ TOTAL PARTNERS LLC
ASSOCIATED CAPITAL CORPORATioN TOTAL PARTNERS LLC -
. ASSOCIATED CAPITAL CORPORATION :
ASSOCIATED CAPITAL CORPORATION
. :
I
.
. '--- --- h'_h_ _ _ _ ___ __ _ _,_ .. _ ,_ __, "_h_ '_ _ _, _ _ _,_, ______ ____ _h_, ',',,'__, _ --,,'" , , ,_______ ,_ n ,_,_ ,_____, ,_ __ _H_ _____,__'_,__.- ",..,_____,___ _ ____."__ __ ,__, , _'h_ ,_ _,_ _ ___,___,____ _, _,,__,____ ___ hU _h"__'_ _,h__h __h __ _,,_ _h__'_,__ __ _,__, __._, _ '__"-h ____ _____ _ __ _,._u_ _, _'_
.
. PROPERTY OWNERS JLIJ Bonestroo
. ' -=- Rosene.
. SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA . . Existing Phase III Alignment "1\1'1 Ande~lrk&
INTERCEPTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY 1 \l1 ASSOCiates
. Figure 4 August 2006 Engineers & Architects
.
_____..~_~__ _~_......._. m"____'...____ .~_._ _~_ _.~...~.___.__.__..__
.,._,_ ___'_',d_,_' .__,,_._ ____,'_..n_'____'__'~ _'____ ____W .___. _n_,__,_. _,_.,_,,__ _'____ n._._____"__'___ _ _,,___, __."...___._ _'" .._____,,,____ __. '."____ _.__",,__ _"_,,,_..___,,_. _____ ",__ __, ,_ ., I
. < . ... I I
. .;, . ,_.>-'" .,.... I'
1: ,'.( low
:\ ..,T. ", .;..' , Ii. .
. :i{ .< . .-, ," i. r .:,~ It I 'I
., .,;!. , .l:L ,..' Jr
~ i ... ~',Po""1f'r
.., I
. I
. '
. I
e'
! I
.' i I
ei "
.' i :
, i !
e, ,I
I
. I
.i ~. 1 i I
.i .-'. L-t:
, ~ .- .--- - - ;e . ~ i I
.... '\ .....
. &~ _. ....- ~" 1 ,
. "," .....,... l~- ..:1' V' 4 I
i" . - T "I r~
e, ' .' t' If: '1\. ~ I , I
.' '1j. ..... ,\ f ."~ '~.. J I
' " r ~ r~ .
\..;. - . .. ~
. X "..~ ;:1:, ~... i i I
: _ .... ~ .J,..j; II. ., . I
. ....~I .t;L:;.," I'~ J...- , " I
! , " - ~ljc ~ It. ~~ , . . I !
. - ~" '" ..\t. 7' -." r. "1 ~ , ~ · . ~ '-:., ~ i
. . Hf \y ~I"J .,., ~ ~ " I
, .' .. Br-'60N .'~i. .. · ... . . _f!" '~. ~ . .,~ ~ ~ ~ ...
. If!" . \:.I 1" , . (- . fl"r' '- I. ~ 1-
" -!~!~r. '"'1.. ....~\. ,.. ~.. - 'lJ... . t~~:, . -'''. ~ i
. ~ . I ,. _ . -- ~ .~~ .;.; . ~;:Jo'"" - ~.. ~ I ~
- . .... "'--' .M C ?- Ji · 1
" l . - . I - _1 .~ I ..
. ~' L. -. . .~ ~ -- I c.:o :-.- , .., _ "yO .. .:. W.J. j ,
a "".- n '\. I J[ _J '" (I _.~
,. . I. .. _- ~ 't~.. .
e. ,"" - A (Jl~.~~Al ~.....lt4^. . _ .&.dl.....,J, r - - _...~ ~ I
, 1 ~ ~~ r~",:'5lI' --"- · "-. -. ~ .J ". I
. V .r'\ .J' ..;.r:1-\ ~,~ >.. -_. . ~
. . · -...- I -I . ""11'" Cf) .. I
'" .. .... . -
, ~ .., ... '"'-""': ... . -~' t . ~ --. \.. . -4 " ,- _ , \
. - .....".~$~ ('J.'" -' 1 j .." .,. - " ., ~. . I "':.i 0 i' r-t- (~...~ 1-;:: .. j : I
, . , ' .~,,~ __... . t "'""'''''' ,l.. .: \.I......P f:' ~ '~..--!. .& I -.... ~ :
. J' · , .... ". . -.... -I " . r .. r -'~ . , _ _ _ . ..._ ! ~~ ~, r 1, " I
" ,- t ... ~.....~ 6 :,- d ~'- I e -Ilk' .",,- - ';"'~ · 'I
- -' '~'- " ' .--'- ..-:: ~ n.v . ,~,;.~'~T:., - ,", - .' . _~t !
~ . - ~ .,.-.~ \ '.,...' - ....... I
! -""" . ~-,. - 1 ~.. JIl! ~.. "'...-1 II". ~ .
. ~ , J....-- , ~ W~,2... I. >' .,lfj, ".'t.'1l -; Np,oposedSewe'A1ignment I
t. 4 to ~-......!I! 1r"'~' ,
.' , . _. '- -~ L- _.. .. ..' _ ~~.' ~.,,"If. l . ~..-;: . J Possible Wetland Boundary ,~
I ___ ru'. ... .. ~.~ ,;,".. . f . ~..:. ... . 0100 Yea, Floodplain '
. - :",-;-- - - .i ~ · r ' . '- ~ !,.. -, ~ ~ _ ~ 1~M.. --?: ..' 0 N~tional Wetlands Inventory t
- . .. Q. ~'V " "~' . '. ''),. --:d;, ,l~ . r. - --!'-' a City of Shakopee I
. - -) r u.~. Jb. ,L!~~"a. " '- ."l~~~
- '!....~...,.,-.;,I. '=' , ~. 'P~, - .-~- " I
- I _ _ .... ..._ - - . ." t... . ~ ........, I _ _,,_ _ -I
. .. I". .' . (.. ~ ..,1.1' "1 ", IiIo' 4t\. '.- '''-~l.'. ~'". ~..~...... . r - . \ "
I \~:""\ .... - , W.Jr<....... , ~~~' _ .. f I I
" ._' ,:'.,...... . /it. f'" '''"7.'~ ';t "lit! . - Ii' .. 1 I
. ~ .J r' "', - ..... ~ \c.&.I,.. .." . ~ -~ - 4m to-." - ~.- ...... "'.' '..........J. .
, , 1L.' .. ~ ." '1 "". }f~" , -~.., Y 't\,. l ....:J"... y ~ '"
_I ',~ _.'-. 'n- --~. - -~-= - ~_L_ .c!!!l._ l t..! ~- <--- '" .- - ~ ..-:: - -. .....- j I
.- '_d_" __ ,___."__d________",_"__"'_"___ ..._....__ ..-___,_._ d',,__ .M'_ ._.." ______. _,___._ ___._.. __,__"",___._._. _..___ ..-"'-- -,- '''-'''------'-- d'__'___,,__..___________,__,....____.___,___ ,_,,_,_________,._'_____M'_,,____n_""_"_ I
. ~ 11 ~ Bonestroo I
. 100 YEAR FLOOD/WETLAND ANAL YSIS .... Rosene I
. G Anderlik & I
. SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA '\J' Associates I
.' INTERCEPTOR FEASIBILITY STUDY Engineers & Architects
Figure 5 August 2006
.
~---------- -,----- ---- --- -.,.---
.
. -------
. --------
. ' ----
, -- ---
; ----
. ; --- -----------
. --
. _____ n_
--~-
. ------------- ------- - -- --,,-
--
. --
. -----
. -.--- --- -. ----.--
I - ----.--.
. ! !
, '
. I .; :
, '
i '
ei
e\
e
.
.
.
.
.
. '
. '
. " ~" I
.,'
, ' .
. I .f!.. - " '
, ,,-
, . ' ' A' " ·
. I .. ' I ~~
, .' _, T 1
.i -0 . ... '
, . ... .~ -
. I - ~. ~ · .' -:' ,u., ..- Ji. ,~ 1
I c:::..-r 0. . '
. ' .' . ~ tP' " ,>, ... ~ .,' -"
I ... 2 -' ". > .' itl'JI
, ~ - - ",' ~
. I - - "'- · ' - ,.J
~ ' . - ~. _, _~. '. ., , 'J<< '
. I ...' ,- · .."r" . .,..~ j
I . ,.'<.1 ' " ,..,~ ....A- .- ,
...., . -..... ' . - .
. i ...... \' . .~ < · - ~,.... .:I t. J" · -.
. " _-,,,-, . ;..., _ ~ ~. . _ _ '. I
. I I.. .""'J..-.... . .}- ., .....! . · _:: e; "l-" -. i
,I::' ...._L' ~ - -"" - ~~.
_ ! ._ _ _ ' " " '.-d 0 _. - .};........ ' "~I"t,' ·
. \ ~ilI;S.--'-_.~""~..-_. .' . ,\.<.---' '-.~'..~".' \~~~'._"'.'..~:}~~'~i"..'...:~~ \'~' .." ~~~~~. ,-: .' l'li--'.'-~'-
. I ~' .-:- - '- . · ,..;;pJ->:-'" . ,',' - ,I .'
, .' _ _ _ . _' .~. V..... ' , ..'
: IL:.: . _ " _ . -' ' I- .:,,~. - ,..,. ' ,.s. · ,.' ",,"
, ' . "" I ' . ~ .?, , . "." --' .~. ,.' ·
e I . _ ._<, ,J_"" _ .., -, ,,' -" · - ~'",~ ,~.. ,,'....~. ., I
, .,," . ...' ~, ~.. '\I~' _" . '" C .... -." .
.! .~_.~(,\ .1..' .' '! '. .' · ""-.?>;~." '.-r,,~.i',)-.~~;i;:~~~"..' j !iii..' ~~~~.._-.:fEdE) 'l~~'
~_ _ . '.... .' _ ' "" ....!t"'- ..... " .~,. . ""_~fl:.1lJ . ...~. "- 1l..~..J J,. f1? . ·
___ ... . . .,'_' .,' rr . · '
. ______ 0 /. . ,- '. ~ ~ ~~ i' !t<'c .",'-: -.... ',.!.4""" . ~
________ _' ' _ _ _ '. .,,:l.... ",,;>;T' , --, ~. ,/!< . ~ -.
. _. _.' . . . __' __ _ __ -"," ..' _,c'- ft>.'
________________ . ... .. . a . S' t ~M'. fltt+~ c,,"'-'JL--~ l~ ~ ...o#r........ ~ ':f' J
. ALTERNA-r,,, ______.___ ~_. ~._~. ....::. ~ /j'....~:'\r j ,j;" .. -~."". · ~. ~-" '-~' 1\0 ~I.~..t' rr-l .
"vE/MPRO . =-4' . , . · ~ 1 I ........ . .' ,.' ~ - ,,,",I\,' .,,: '
. VEMENT A _ ___ __ -~ .: '"-.r"'r ~ .. ...'... ."'''' ,.l:' ,-,\:, i' , r ,,.,..,' ..,. I I
NAL -- ~-.-,.\ I:'i' · ':.Ii . ow' ... · ·
. SHAKOPEE YSIS --- - -, . · c ..,....:, - : ~ ctJ. : · ill;, :;.,0 ~~" I. I" ",' -n'~' ;' '. j I
MI ~ .. -- lIS 'W:I . ". ._co. ~-' '
. INTERCEPTOR NNESOTA ,,-. - --- .___~~t~~ ~.- -- " It (: f~'-{ "P{' Q '. !
Figure 6 J FEASIBILITY S .--, .--. -- . 'i-= _..' t ,-,_1fo:4t . .~.. I
. u/y2006 TUDY' - .-- . ....... .,'
-- -- . - ::;;; ~.: \ '
___ _.._ I
----~-~-~----_.__.!
Se f ~ Bonestroo
__ C Ion A Improvem t -=- Rosene
en s ~ Anderlik &
__ Section B 1m 1\11 Associates
provementc Engineers & Archit
~ ech
.'
. I ...
.1
. "
_ - V /
e. ' ---- '", J
I '
, ~ '
, ' '
, , J ------ '-
. J ~ ~ '- '
,/' '-
. / // ~ .... '- 11 I rT"il
, /,' .~ ! i
.. ,/ '- >.. \ hl, \'i
I / ," ' '
I '- '.,.," · '
I ~ '" " hi' ·
I ' ' · .. ·
. I (/ '-, ~ ' ill- e I ! j
I '\ "- J. ~1 ...--~ /~~----' ~ C 0-
J ' ' ' --- .' ...
. / ' ' _ ,-.C. ~ ------- c.---' ~ .."
, , ,~ .--.- - 0"
. . ,/ ! ", . ' -------- .~!
, " __ L :tn.'"
._. /:'_ '-, ~"2"'" ..-mAR- !:;~ <1
/: ' .-;", '- 'ON''',rr ."., '
/ " - ~ ~ .P
// I ~II~ __-==------~---- _ ,r-- ,.1. I
.' ./ .. ..'- _ _ ,- / .,.' '
./ ,// R ___=_ 1;Y-----'" _.---- --------------- 'r - ~ ' ' f, ·
,/ /' ---- ----~ ' ' / ------- ~. ,..'
// ,-' /,/,/.~' r.-, . . _ """"'" " . \\I . '.. : - . \..Me .~" -- I.",'
. /' / ' , '(;J '-Y' . . . i---ry--" ",,' =' . ~. A ' ~ ",' UI~i5;!;
.# / w/ . ' ~., ~- - . - ..-- .-' -- - -~-ic---i ~ /;''/ :;;",UUI
_ .,- /- / . . .' _.' ' _ ,= ,= . . '.'-
/,;'. . 0<' ,/ . ' '~ . ./'/ . '. , -' - - ; fO - .' -.' C- _.="'- - -- · ,-,'
/ 5 -- /.. . ' ..' - ,. . --- - ~ ' "" '"
. /., /' """ ! 'I', " . . ",., " ',,-, ~ fliF" -' ~ ~~~' - ': . --=" ,~;;! ',.'
~ ./' ",_po- " . ,. " . " 1:..'-'--- """ ' ., - - ~ - - - - --,' ~. ,...
. /~~"",,,,,,,,.,, ~' d~"" . ~~' . uu ~.J )~~ ~ 1/' r....i>.r "~---.---:.::--.: -==== ==:-~~;./. ~ 1;;0"'" I
/- ~<> ,~..,." , ~, ,>-un' ,~ ~ " ' \ - L" "'<' 'aOE' ~ ,-.'
./' . ~~ ' = '. .~, _,' ' ,,~ '"', ~ , V / w ,,' L.......!'-LJ' ._-=- ""0 "
,/ .~.;r~ ,~ _, , '0' """"""GAZE. BO '. -=' --~ l;;~!<iE ~ Iii
. // , A, _ ':' _ g "'""""" ' ~. ~ ~~~i ~ ~ J
/ .' ,.... .'
. / ../5- '''''''''''''" ,/ " · ..
. / ~~ - ~
_.' ' rn
- . -~'/~/ ~ '
. ~ ,/~ '
, ,~\ i/"' · · ·
.. " ____ L ~~~~~
. mT1T __ \ . ' _ _ 0",..0-
, I --- - \ - ;;"~~'
. - " . - - I l'Q ~-=-~~ !lj
, ,_ I ..~.~~'
, . ..' ...~.x~
. _ A w~.~.,
32+00 ,,,: ,:'1'_" ,,"":
36+0-;- ,:1::: ., :::: ::1
'. :\ :1
: I -27061130412
SHEU NUhtBER-
I FIG 7~
-
.
.
.;
-
.
.
tt
.
.
.
.
.
~
.
.
.'
.
.
. ATTACHMENT A
. Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Review
-
.
.
.\
.
.
.
.
.
~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.'
'.
.
-- City of Shakopee
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
CONSULTANTS
D AMERICAN . ENVIRONMENTAL
l ENGINEERING . GEOTECHNICAL
. MATERIALS
TESTING, INC. . FORENSICS
,.==",.,''''....~
REPORT OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
\ AND GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW
r
PROJECT: REPORTED TO:'
RIVER INTERCEPTOR BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
WEST OF TH 101 2335 WEST HIGHWAY 36
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ST.PAlJL,~ 55113
)
ATTN: ROBERT O'CONNELL
AET JOB NO: 01-02982 DATE: AUGUST 25, 2006
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a subsurface exploration program and geotechnical review we
recently conducted for the River Interceptor located along the Minnesota River to the west ofTH 101
in Shakopee, Minnesota. The scope of work is outlined in our May 9,2006 proposal letter to you.
Formal acceptance to proceed with this work was then received from you on May 10,2006. The
authorized scope of work is as follows:
. Drill eighteen (18) standard penetration test borings to "practical obstructio~" on rock with a
, maximum depth of 16'.
,
. Conduct basic soiLlaboratory testing (9 water content and 2 sieve analysis tests).
. Prepare this geotechnical engineering report.
I
The scope of work is intended for geotechnical purposes only. This scope is not intended to explore
for the presence or extent of environmental contamination at the site. '
,
\
I
This document shail not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval of American Engineering Testing, Inc,
f 550 Cleveland Avenue North. St. Paul, MN 55114
Phone 651-659-9001 . Toll Free 800-972-6364. Fax 651-659-1379. www,amengtest.com
Offices throughout Florida, Minnesota, South Dakota & Wisconsin
AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
AET #01-02982 - Page 2 of 9
PROJECT INFORMATION
The project involves reconstruction of the interceptor located on the south side of the Minnesota
River, with the new interceptor having a revised alignment (compared to the interceptor currently in
place). The subject segment of interceptor is generally located from about Adams Street on the west
side to near theTH 101 Bridge on the east side. The exact alignment and invert elevations are
currently not available to us. However, we understand the eastern portionofthe new alignment will
- be relatively close to the Minnesota-River. The general location of the alignment is defined by the
. borings shown on the attached figures.
The presented project information represents our understanding of the proposed construction. This
information is an integral part of our engineering review. It is important that you contact us if there
are changes from that described so that we can evaluate whether modifications to our
recommendations are appropriate.
SITE CONDITIONS
Logs. of the test borings are attached, The logs contain information concerning soil layering, soil
classification. and soil/rock description.
The boring logs only indicate the subsurface conditions atthe sampled locations and variations often
occUr between and beyond borings.
Borings #15 and #16 were relatively close to the river, and access and apparent stability for the drill
rig was questionable, Accordingly, hand auger borings were put down in these locations. These hand
augers encountered fill, with varying soil types. The hand augers "refused" at depths of 4.5' and 1.5'
at Boring #15 and #16, respectively. We do not know the nature of the obstruction. Limestone
~. outcrops were noted 15' south of Boring #15.
.
.
.
- AET #01-'-02982 - Page 3 of9
.
..
41: Ofthe remaining borings, only four of the borings (#2, #3,#8 and #9) reached the full depth without
.
. encountering bedrock. These borings extended into natural alluvium (water-deposited soils), but
. were overlain by fill materials. The fill is mostly dolostone gravel at Borings #2 and #3. At these
./ locations, there is a chance that the dolostone gravel could be colluvium (rock materials which fell
I. into place by gravity rather than placed by man), The alluvial soils are variable,' including fine
-.
. alluvial sandy silts, lean clays and fat clays, and coarse alluvial sands to silty sands.
Apparent bedrock was reached at 12 ofthe test boring locations. The bedrock encountered is part of
the Shakopee Formation, and is comprised of a magnesium/calcium carbonate dolostone. As the
sampling was mainly done by augering into the weathered zone of the rock, acCurate description of
the rock is not possible. This particular rock is known to contain intermittent and discontinuous
layers of shale. Sandstone layers and lenses are also commonly found, The bedrock typically has near
vertical joints, is often highly fractured and is known to have solution cavities.
The depth to the apparent dolostone at the 12 loc~tions ranges from 2' to 12' beneath the surface. The
average depth to bedrock at these 12 locations is a little over 7'. We were usually able to auger into
the dolostone with the hollow stem auger, indicating the upper zone is very weathered to weathered.
. Penetration into the rock generally ranged from near nothing to 41h The average depth of penetration
. into the rock with the hollow stem auger was about 1.7' at the 12 locations. The auger refusal is a
. strong indication of "practical obstruction,"
-
.'
- The soils above the dolostone are either fill or alluvium; and soil types are quite variable, including
. clays, silts and sands. Obvious fill included pieces of brick, concrete, glass and woo& Trace roots
. and organic soils are also sometimes present.
.
.
.
.
. I
!
.
.
-
-- AET #01-02982 - Page 4 of9
.
-
eJ Water Level Measurements
. The boreholes were probed for the presence of ground water, andwater level measurements were
. taken. The measurements. are recorded on the boring logs. A discussion of the water level
. measurement methods is presented in the attached sheet entitled "Exploration/Classification.
.
- Methods. "
Although many of the borings were near the river~ ground water levels only entered three of the
boreholes at depths ranging from 8' to 91/2 beneath the surface (Borings #4, #8 and #9). These water
levels appeared in borings extending over 10' deep, and within profiles having more permeable soil
layers near the bottom. Many of the borings had moderate to slow draining soils in the lower portion
ofthe profile, and as long~term monitoring was not performed, sufficient time was then not given for
water levels to rise and stabilize in the boreholes. Generally, ifgiven sufficient time, water levels
would have likely risen to elevations at least as high as the river level at that time. During
construction, it should then be recognized that water levels can appear(eventhough not shown on
the logs) and can be generally similar in elevation to the fluctuating river levels. Perched water levels
are also possible which may result in water appearing at more shallow depths~
.
. Ground water levels usually fluctuate. Fluctuations occur due to varying seasonal and yearly rainfall
. and snow melt, as well as other factors.
'.
e RECO~ENDATIONS
.
- Utility Support/Installation
.
. Although pipe invert depths are not available, the boring information suggests a variety of soil
. conditions will be encountered. In some cases, we assume it will be necessary to excavate into the
. rock. It will be preferable to set pipes at elevations higher than the "practical obstruction" shown on
. the logs. Greater depths will likely result in the need for hard rock excavation techniques.
.
'.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
- AET. #0 1-02982 - Page 5 of 9
.
.
.' In those areas where pipes are placed within zones of rock (in the form of bedrock, cobbles, boulders
. or debris in fill),subcutting and granular bedding placement should take place to avoid point loads
. on the pipe.
.
. In some cases, the pipes will extend into unstable ground conditions, either in the form of soft clays,
.
. .loose silts or unstable soils created by the ground water condition, Dewatering should be performed
. as needed to improve stability of the trench bottom and to facilitate pipe placement and backfilling,
. Granular bedding should be placed beneath the pipe, and in more extreme instability cases, there may
. ,
. be a need for a thicker bedding or a coarser gravel bedding. In this later case, a geotextile fabric or
other means offilter transition shouldbeprovided to prevent internal erosion of fines into the open c
.
. void space of the rock.
.
.' For additional details regarding the above needs, please refer to the attached sheet entitled "Bedding!
. Foundation Support of Buried Pipe,"
.
.
. Utility Backfilling
. We refer you to the attached standard sheet entitled "Standard Recommendations for Utility Trench
. Backfilling" for general recommendations. The on-site soils can be reused as backfill, provided
. organic soils are removed and the soils can meet specified compaction levels (if needed). The
e primary qualification relates to the rock materials. With largerrock pieces, void space can be created,
.
. which can allow for eventual internal erosion ("piping" into the void space). Unless surface
e subsidence is acceptable, we then recommend the rock be crushed to a base-like gradation
. specification if they are to be used. The base gradation specification can be relaxed to a degree
. consistent with the function of the overlying land.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
t) AET #01-02982 - Page 60f9
.
.
. Constructabilitv Issues
.
. . Rock Excavation
. The Shakopee Formation tends to<have thicker stratification (layering), which means horizpntal
., bedding planes have greater vertical separation. In bedrock removal operations, bedding I?lanes are
. relied upon to serve as planes of weakness for ripping, chipping or blasting procedures.
.
.
. If utilities need to extend to the dolostone bedrock, you should anticipate the bedrock will have to be
. removed by hard rock techniques; such hard rock techniques include blasting (ifperrnitted), or line
. drilling and pneurnatic/hydraulic percussion procedures, This'strategy will have cost impact to the
. bids forthis work. The specifications could also bewritten to require the contractor to determine the
.
~ excavation ability of the rock on their own through test pits or other means. Alternatively, a
. competent excavation contractor could be hired to perform test pits and bedrock removal operations
. before going out to bids.
.
. Proximity to River
.
- Portions ofthealignrnent are planned to be relativelyc10se to the Minnesota River. Grade in this area
. is relatively close to the Minnesota River level (and can actually be below the river during flood
. stages). Therefore, it will be important to schedule the work during a time when the river level is
. low. Depending on the level, significant water may enter open cuttrenches, In some cases, it maybe
- necessary to provide sheeting or other means of water cut-off; or use another method of utility
., installation (e.g., directional drilling/tunneling); Our scope does not include design of such systems
.
. or methods,
.
. Oversized Particles
. Some of the overburden soils above the bedrock will include larger rock particles which can
. complicate excavation procedures. It is possible some of these rock particles may be quite large.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. \/
.
.
~
- AET #01-02982 - Page 7-of9
.
-
.1 Fill Soils
. If specified compaction levels are needed to avoid surface subsidence or support of a structure)
. specified' compaction levels may be. difficult to attain. Some of the soils will be' "wet" of the
. optimum water content, and would then require scarification and drying to near the optimum water
. content ifreused.Presence of organics and debris can also affect compaction; and should be avoided.
.
.
. CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING
.
. !
The recommendations in this report are based on the subsurface conditions found atour test boring
.
. locations. Since the soil conditions can be expected to vary away from the soil boring locations, we
. - recommend on-site observation by a geotechnical engineer/technician during construction to evaluate
~ these potential changes. Soil density testing should also be performed on new fill placedin order to
. document that-specifications for compaction have been satisfied.
.
.
' -
. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
.
. The final' subsurface explo~ation program consisted of 16 standard penetration test borings and 2
.
. hand auger borings, performed from May 24 t030, 2006. Locations and elevations were surveyed
e and provided by you.
.
. We refer you to the standard sheet entit1~d "Exploration/Classification Methods" for details on the
e drilling and sampling methods, the classification methods, and the water level measurement
. methods. Data sheets concerning the USC System, the descriptive terminology and the symbols used
.
. on the boring logs are also attached.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- AET #01.:.02982 - Page 80f9
.
.
~' LIMITATIONS
.
. The data derived through this sampling and observation program have been used to develop our
. opinions about the subsurface conditions at your site, However, because no exploration program can
. reveal totally what is in the subsurface, conditions between borings and between samples and at other
. times, may differ from conditions described in this report. The exploration we conducted identified
subsurface conditions only at those points where we took samples or observed ground water
. conditions. Depending on the sampling methods and sampling frequency, every soil layer may not be
. observed, and some materials or layers which are present in the ground may notbe noted on the
. boring logs.
. If conditions encountered during construction differ from those indicated by our borings, it may be
. necessary to alter our conclusions and recommendations, or to modify construction procedures, and
the cost of construction may be affected.
. The extent and detail of information about the subsurface condition is directly related to the scope of
. ,the exploration. It should be understood, therefore, that information can be obtained by means of
. additional exploration,
.
. STANDARD OF CARE
.
. Our services for your project have been conducted to those standards considered normal for services
.
. of this type at this time and location: Other than this, no. warranty, either express or implied, is
. intended.
.
. CLOSURE
.
. To protect you, AET, and the public, we authorize use of opinions and recommendations in this
. report only by you. and your project team for this specific project. Contact us if other uses are
. intended. Even though this report is not intended to provide sufficient information to accurately
. determine. quantities and locations of particular materials, we recommend. that your potential
. contractors be advised of the report availability.
. If you have any questions. regarding the work reported herein, or if we can be of further service to
. you, please do not hesitate to contact me.at (651) 659-1305 or lvoyen@amengtest.com.
.
.
.
.
.
.
'.
..
.
.
. AET #01-02982 - Page 90f9
-
.
. Report Prepared by: Report Reviewed by:
. American Engineering Testing, Inc. American Engineering Testing, Inc.
.
. k..~~ ~~
.
.
. JefferyK. Voyen, PE Chad Underwood, PE, PG
Vice President, Geotechnical Division Senior Geotechnical Engineer
. MN Reg. #l5928
.
. Attachments:
Bedding/Foundation Support of Buried Pipe
. Standard Recommendations for Utility Trench Backfilling
. Figure 1 - Boring Locations, West Segment
. Figure 2 - Boring Locations, Central Segment
. Figure 3 - Boring Locations, East Segment
Subsurface Boring Logs
. Sieve Analysis TestResults
. Exploration/Classification Methods
. Boring Log Notes
. Unified Soil Classification System
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. BEDDING/FOUNDATION. SUPPORT OF BURIED PIPE
.
. GENERAL
e This page addresses soil bedding and foundation support of rigid pipe, such as reinforced concrete, and flexible
pipe, such as steel and plastic. This does not address selection of pipe based on loads and allowable deflections,
. but rather addresses the geotechnical/soil aspects of uniform pipe support. Bedding/foundation support needs
. relate to local conditions.directly beneath and to the sides of the pipe zone, which may be influenced by soft in-
situ ground conditions or by soil disturbance due to soil sensitivity or ground water. Bedding relates to granular
. materials placed directIybeneath the bottom of the pipe (usually 4" to 6" thick), which is intended to provide
. increased support uniformity. We refer to foundation soils as thicker layers of sands and/or gravels (beneath the
bedding zone) intended to. provid~ increased foundation strength. support, usually needed due' to soft, unstable
. and/or waterbearing conditions.
. GRANULAR BEDDING
. With circular pipes, high local Joads (approaching pomt loads) develop if pipes are placed on bard surfaces. Load
. distribution is improved by placing granular bedding materials beneath the pipe, which are either.shaped to match
the pipe bottom or are placed without compaction. to allow "settling in:" The bedding should be placed in such a
. manner that the pipe will. be at the proper elevation and slope when the pipe is laid on the bedding. Common
. bedding material is defmed in MnlDOT Specification 3149.2F, Granular Bedding. Published documents
recommend rigid pipes havinga diameter of 12" to 54" be placed on a bedding thickness of 41', which increases to
. 6" of bedding for pipe diameters ranging from 54" to 72", Beyond a 72"diameter, the bedding thickness can be
. equal to the pipe outside diameter' divided by 12. Typically, the need for bedding under small. diameter pipes (less
than 12") depends Dnthe pipe designer's specific needs, although in obvious point loads situations (bedrock,
- cobbles, significant coarse. gravel content), bedding is recommended. Note that bedding should also account for
. larger diameter bells at joints.
. FOUNDA TION FILL ..--....
. Positive uniform strength is usually compromised in soft or unstable trench bottom conditions. In this case, deeper
subcuts and foundation fill placement is needed beneath the pipe. In moderate instability conditions, improvement
. can likely be accomplished with. a thicker bedding layer. However, in more significant instability situations,
. particularly where ground water is present, coarser materials may be needed. to provide a stronger foundation.
Thicker gravel layers can also be a favorable media from which to dewater. The following materials would be
. appropriate for stability. improvement, with the. coarser materials being appropriate for higher. instability / ground
. water cases.
· Fine FiIter Aggregate -Mn/DOT Specification 3149.21
. . Coarse Filter Aggregate -MnIDOT Specification 3149.2H
. When using a coarser material which includes significant'void space, we highly recommend enveloping the entire
gravel layer within a geotextile fabric.. The gravel material includes open void sp-ace, and the fabric acts as a
. separator which minimizes. the intrusion of fmes into the open void space. If an additional granular bedding sand
. is used.above foundation gravel, the fabric would also prevent downward infiltration of bedding sand into the rock
.. void space,
. Although it is preferred to not highly compact thin granular bedding zones directly beneath the pipe center, it is
e desirable to compact the foundation materials to prevent more significant pipe settlement. We recommend
foundation fill be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the Standard" Proctor density (ASTM:D698). It is not
. possible to test coarse rock fill, although this material should still be well compacted! tainped.
. Often, pipes entering structures such as catch basins, lift stations, etc., enter the structure at a higher elevation
. than. the structure bottom, and are therefore placed on the structure backfIll. Fill beneath these pipes should be
. considered foundation fill. Depending on the flexibility of the connection design, it may. be nec,essary to increase
the minimum compaction level to reduce differential settlements, particularly with thicker fills. '
.
. SIDE FILL SUPPORT
If the pipe designer requires support from the side fill, granular bedding should also be placed along the sides of
. the pipe. In poor soil conditions, the sand fill may need to be placed laterally up to two pipe diameters on both
. sides of the pipe. With rigid pipe, compacted sand placement up to the spring line (within the haunch area) is
usually sufficient. With flexible pipe, side fill should be placed and compacted at least to the top of the pipe. For
. positive support, it is very important to properly compact the sands within the haunch area. .
. 0IREPOI7(03/04) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS FOR UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILLING
. GENERAL
. Clayey and silty soils are often difficult to compact, as they may be naturally wet or may become. wet due to ground
. water or surface/rain water during construction. Soils will need to be placed within a certain range of water
(moisture) content to attain desired compaction levels. Moisture conditioning to within this range can be time
. consuming,. labor intensive, and requires favorable weather.
. The degree of compaction and the soil type used for backfill within open cut utility trenches depends on the function
. of the overlying land surface. Details are as follows:
. ROADWAYS
e Where trenches are located below roadways, we recommend using inorganic fill and compacting these soils per
. Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3Fl (Specified Density Method). This specification requires 100% of the Standard
Proctor density in the upper one meter sub grade zone, and 95% below this. Note that this specification includes
. moisture content range requirements which are important for proper subgrade stability.
. Where available soils are wet or of poor quality, it may be possible to use the "Quality Compaction Method"
. (Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3F2) for soils below the upper one meter subgrade zone if you can tolerate some
. subsidence. However, a high level of stability is still important within the upper subgrade zone and recommend th2t
. the "Specified Density Method" be used in this upper subgrade area. We caution that if backfIll soils in the lower
trench area are significantly unstable, itmay be difficult or even impossible to properly compact soils within the
. upper one meter subgrade zone. In this case, placing a geotextile fabric directly over the unstable soils can-aid in
. offsetting the instability.
. STRUCTURAL AREAS
. If fIll is placed beneath or within the significant zone of influence of a structure (typically a 1: 1 lateral oversize zone),
the soil type and minimum compaction level will need to be evaluated on an individual basis. Because trenches result
. in variable fill depths over a short lateral distance, higher than normal compaction levels and/or more favorable
. (sandy) soil fill types may be needed. If this situation exists, it is important that special geotechnical engineering
review be performed.
- NON-STRUCTURAL AREAS
. In grass/ditch areas, backfill soils should be placed in reasonable lift thicknesses and compacted to a minimum of
. 90 % of the Standard Proctor density (ASTM :0698) and/or per the Mn/DOT "Quality Compaction Method. "If lower
. compaction levels are attained, more noticeable subsidence at the surface can occur. Steep or high slopes require
special consideration. .-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. 01REP018(02/01) AMERICAN ENGINEERJNG TESTING, INC.
.
.
.
.
Z86ZO-tO 'oN
' " R01' J.:ilY
810sauUlur 'd' , 90/SZ/80 :UVa
, .n aa OJf8qS'
luatlIllas lsa' ,ojd""jUI 'OA
1\\ .snOnEao'l Q " " rn
\. . DUI.lO.
I \ \ \ ,a · I IDlllDM
\ \ I \ \'.. \ 1
_ S S ~ L- J.-S .J- S,:::\ \='.:: r "C"\
_ -.- -.- -. r- -r---r ---r -r .' . \, \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \ ' \
\ \ 1 I I \ 1 \ L-~'
,
_. 14" .
1 ,/.
l-- ./ ,"
" ~-.lS, ~ '.
rf f f f f ~~~ -r
. -.- -r _ -r- -r- ...., C-c->( ...-- -r ~. \ I 1 \ \ \ "",1 \
T '"T" \ ~ r \ \ \ I \ \ \ \ \ \ . \ -:}'. \ \ \ .\ /.\ ~ \ \ \
\ I 1 1 I I, \,'" ,\'.\ \ \ 1 \ 1- ~'f. \ " ,,\ "\" \I ' L- -
\ \ I \ \. I _ I \. \ \ \ \..l-: .. t...J--.J-- J,..-.:J-, .J-- -1
:c- L ,_ . ~" ,'- ..J...-.-l-: ~ 1-- .-1-- ..J L .-L: -k -r -r . r ---c~~ -+: -r- '
: "._ ' ",' -r -r ~ -r- ---r-~ C ~ --1: _1.~,V:\,..!sl \ \ ,
-r~ ,f' . \ ' \ \"" I \ AI - ~" \ \
. "\ \_,\:::1 \ \' . ,.," " ' ,:;.'1"'1 L \ \ . ·
1 \ ..t"fiC',,\0'J;\.~,/': r , >1 J\ " \, \ us I \ \ , . 1 .' ,.,'
\,'_,' __';~!1 ,1.1 .' '\1'__\ I ~\_,___~,:__::t~:~'~~'~ I. \ - \~l '- S S'S ..J-. ,...J L- .J-- ....L
.' C' \ , .... '\ . \. ' -....... --- " .
. ~----' ~ .' .'
k-+.9'S .' -.'as c.' .:.
. ,_~' '~, ~\" r--r, -r-, -r--~17/r-r-r, -r--('
'1\:'" "",0I""l . \, .' \ \'''. /,' \ \ \ \ \ \
'\\_ ,\,. \, \, ,\, , \" " \", ,\, \," .Y,,',)" .~ ,,' 1l-1- 1-,'1-1::
, .J.- ..J-- ..J-- ..J-- .-l L-- ..J-- .-\.\/: \ ~ ~ ~
" \1"~c::r 1"~t::: :::cf--SZ 'i " \ " \ \
I 1\ \ .1 I 1 / Y .". L-- ..J-- ..J-- ..J-- ..J.-
.:J-, ..J-- ..J-- ..J-- ..J \I
~-----
r---
"IO,"UDlW'. d' "''''"'' '",vo
. 1) OJf8QS' .
1u.mll.!> 18.11U';) , >Old''''IUI >>AIl!
. .SUOQ8 .
J-..J-.- -->- __ ,.0'}llu!>08 'Z .
-r --r T -r ~\ \ IDIfl~I.>I
I \ . I I. I ...,. , \ \
\ I \ I' I I \ \ \ I I . I 1.- .-L-J...- ~ J-- --
_ .J- ...J.- ....J.-~ ~ . L- ..J-.- ~ .l- c-L-- ....l-- - . .
'. r-r -r ---n- -'-r ~ r--r-- ----r -r-~ -
:\' --C "\ - 1"" ---r- ---'t ~ -r ---tC -'-r -r ~ I I I II I I I I I I I
\I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ I I \ \\ \ \. \ 'L-\' I ..' ~ ...
I I I I I ,\ \ II I \ \ . \. I ... '. .J-...---L'\ ... ..... "~c::<~
1-l-l-ll- :\'F?~.J-...r~;:f\\" ;)'s\:t:*~-r'\ · .' ;. .... ~ ....'-r ~
. " .',. ." ".. ' . . \ '. ,;I'u'" ,." 'i ' (\ ..-' " " .
, -r- " ----r -r ,\' ~:::::r-:,5~ 01 ,'I I \ ,.!,\ \ ,-, ,. I '/ I I .. ~..
--r --r\" ,\' ,_.' ',\,' ,.' . '" 'i' .0..... .;\
. . .o'"" " ,......
" . , ., . ..' ,." , ,.' , ' ",. . ,.'" "
. . .. ., I 1....rA.I",A..".\. \ ,f'!'. I I ",.'fl, I lil,})~\.I.. II ......... ~
I " I I. . I' 'j , \ II ." . I \. t' I III II
< . ..j" 'I>";:"" ",'.il"..' lid' . 5 ''''0\1' .... ...' .-')~:' '
.< I I I ,<' . . ." .' . "'," :;..... ,,' --..' .._.<.<J'~~ : '-. ,-f'e ..-
\. I "._ I , ' \. I t \ I_ . ,. s' . .... ,~~/,.t,~ ..j::)----
.J3 ..J-.- ..J-.-..J-.- ... . . ......, ~.. . /'
:..... u. . .' '. :.__ _ ....' ..' . . <.. .' . ,.u'.-' ,. . ' .' ..',', .
. '., . . ._;~ ,. .'_ . .0' ~. -18' -r -r "'1 I'T hT" .. ...-~
,0 . u_ -, . .."... ......,,- -;:\ ',' .
- . . .... '-. ." ., .'
~_'~.:>' (::cd0:::C:'f.F~~=:L,----S-r -r"'1 "'$ I I' I I I' r.' I. III I \
_.m:.", ;./ ," ',: O! t 1- I --j-.J .. t \ I. I \ I \' I \I I I \
: ." . . " ,i 1,,1 II\: '\:-. ...' . __ I l..J....- ..J....- ..J....- ..J "L- ..Jl-- .J.- ..J....- :::
'- J-. ..J....-..J....- ..J....- ..J....- ..J P ~_~,::::;C ...... -:1." \~ ',"'t" -r..
r ---r- ...... -r ---r- ...... "'1 f I \ - 'I I\" I I I I \
,\ I I I I' I \ I 1\\ I I I 1\
I . I' I I I I L- ..J....- ..J....-..J....- ..J....- ..J....- ..J L- ..J....- ..J....- ..J....- '
-L- J.- J-, J-- ...J
r- -r....- -r ...... ...... "'1 r --I -r- -r
---r-~-"\ I I I I I I I \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ I I I I I I \ \ \ \
\ \ \- J.- .-1- ....l-
........ L-- ..J....- ..J....- ..J....- ..J....- ..J....- ..J r-r-r-~
\ \ ---r- ...... -c ---r- f "'1
\ ,I I \' I 1\ \ \ \
\ I I I I 1\ \ \ \
. \ _J--J--~ \- J-, -1- -
.
rr'f~'.~o=--'rif~~-;:~~-' ..~yi~---v=-t-=\ y~*:~~'-'\
\<1 C?~:;:F.I I I \ I \ I. I \ ' I I I \ I \ , ,
I o. ,?'is . I I \ \ \ \ I I I I I \ I , \ \
\, ,. 1<\' o. I I I I , I ' L l-l-l-l--c -,:J L,-l--c.J-.J-...J--- j
J- ..JL .-1-- --L _ J:: +.-1-- .J-J-- -,:J . . ~ ---r -"If - -r -. r - -r -r ~ --r\ \
.-r-r.-r--rr.-T-r-r-r-r~ f I I \1 I I I \ . \ \. \ M
I I , ' II I , I \ \ I I ,\It- -\ I \ I \-- ~
\ I \ 1\ \ ' \ \ I \ \ \ \ II \ I \. I \ ,
\ \ I \ \ _ L ~ .J L- .-l-- ..J- Jl- - J..-. ~ L - .l- .-1-- -1--
_ .-, r- -r -rr -r -r -:\
FIGURE 3' . ' II \ ' \
. Bonng L I \
. Ri ocations' Ea
verInterceptor 'Sh . ' st Segment
, akopee MO
DATE, 0SI15I\l6 ' IUnesota
AET JOB N
o. 01-02982
.
-Il AMERICAN
. ! ENGrnEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. . TESTING, INC.
. 01-02982 , 1 (p. lofl)
AET JOB NO: LOG OF BORlNGNO.
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, WestofTH 101; Shakopee, MN
. . -
- FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
DEPTH SURFACE .BLEV A TION: 714.6 GEOLOGY MC S AMPLE REC
. IN N TYPE IN.
FEET MA TERlAL DESCRlPTION WC DEN LL PL &-#20
. M I~ .
. 1- 28 55 5
. 2 - FILL, mixture of Clayey sand and silty sand, a FILL -
. little organic clay with gravel, trace roots 14 M IX 55 2
. 3 -
~
. 4 -
. 5 - II M IX 55 8
.
6-
. .
WEATHERED DOLOSTONE, light brown, ~ SHAKOPEE
. 7- I\~oist, very dense [Textural Classification: _ FORMATION 50/.5 M 55 3
. Gravel with sand and silt{GP)l r
END OF BORING - REFUSAL TO HSA @
. 7.4'
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. -
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. DEPTH: DRlLLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
. DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE ATTACHED
0-7.4' 3.25" HSA . DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
. 5/25/06 12:20 None 7.4 . None SHEETS FOR AN
7.4
. EXPLANATION OF
.
~g~8:TED: 5/25/06 TERMlNOLOGY ON
. .
. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 69 TI-llSLOG
. 06/04
.
_I] AMERlCAN
. 1, ,ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. ' TESTING, INC.
. - ,
AET JOB NO: ' 01..02982 LOG OF BORING NO_ 2 (p.l ofl)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH 101; Shakopee, MN
. DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 715.7 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORA TOR Y TESTS
. IN N MC TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL 0.#20
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
. ~
. , I - 25 M SS 14
.
2- FILL, gravelly silty sand, trace roots, brown and -
. M X
black 27 SS 13
. 3-
~
. 4-
12
. FILL, mixture of sandy lean clay and silty sand FILL MX
5- with gravel, brown and dark brown " 25 SS 17
.
. 6- H
. T- FILL, mostly dolostone gravel with silty sand, iJ
light brown , M X
. 8- 29 SS 7
,
,
. 9 H'
. I TOPSOIL OR ij
. 10- LEAN CLA Y WITH SAND, pieces oflight 32 M X I 5S 13
brown dolostone, black, hard (CL) (may be fill) FILL
. Il- ~
. ,
12 - 12
. , 22 M X SS ]6
. 13- LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, brownish gray and FINE
gray-mottled, very stiff to stiff, laminations of ALLUVIUM H
. 14 - silty sand (CL) I iJ
. 15 - 9 M X SS 16
.
. 16 END OF BORING
.
e
.
.
.
.
. ,
. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
. DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER TIffiATTACHED
0..14W 3.25" HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
. , 5/25/06 ]:20 16,0 None 16.0 None SHEETS FOR AN
. ,EXPLANATION OF
. ~8~pL1TED:, 5/25/06 TERMINOLOGY ON
. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 69 THlSLOG
. 06/04
.
. _I]. AMERICAN
. l. . ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. _ TESTING, INC.
. AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO_ 3 (p. 1 of 1)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH 101; Shakopee, MN
. DEPlli SURFACE ELEVATION: 714.1 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
. IN N MC
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN_ WC DEN LL PL 0-#20
. FILL, mostly silty sand, trace roots, black FILL
. 1 18 M SS 12
. 2
. 42 M SS 4
. 3
. 4 FILL OR
. .. FILL, mostly dolostone gravel with silty sand, COLLUVIUM
5 brown and lighfgray (may be colluvium) 22 M SS 3
.
6
. .;-
. .i:: 7
. ~--~: 8' 13 SS 3
.~:;- 9
. ~.-
. .~-- IO 64/.5 SS 3
. _.11
e_ 12 --".
. 13 LEAN CLAY, trace shells, gray, firni (CL) 7 SS 13
.
. 14
. 15 FAT CLAY, a little gravel, black, firm (CH) 6 SS 10
.
16
. END OF BORING
.
e
.
.
.
.
.
. DEPlli: DRILLING MElliOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
. DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE A IT ACHED
0-14W 3,25" HSA DEPlli DEPlli DEPTH FLUm LEVEL LEVEL
. 5/25/06 2:20 16.0 None 16.0 None SHEETS FOR AN
. EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY ON
. COMPLETED: 5/25/06
. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 69 TillS LOG
06/04
.
. ,
. I] AMERlCAN
. l ' ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. TESTING, INC.
. AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO_ 4 (p. lofl)
. ,
PROJECT: River Interceptor, WestofTH 101; Shako pee, MN
. DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 703.8 GEOLOGY SAI\1PLE REC FIELD & LABORA TOR Y TESTS
. IN N MC TYPE IN.
FEET MATERlALDESCRlPTION' . WC DEN 'LL PL ~/o-#20
. M I~
. 1 - 5 SS 7
. 2 - LEAN CLAY WITII SAND; trace mots, shells I FINE r--
. 3 - and wood, black, firm (CL/OL) (may be fill) ALLUVIUM 7 M IX SS 14
., " OR FILL
~
. 4-
, 1.;
. 5- , 6 M X SS 8 33
.
6'- fl
.
1J ,
. 7
. 8 - LEAN CLAY, trace roots, gray (CL) FINE 6 M X SS 12 31
ALLUVIUM
. 9 - ':
. CLA YEY SAND, brown, soft (SC) MIXED YLo
ALLUVIUM
10 * W X SS 10
. APPARENT WEATHERED DOLOSTONE ~ SHAKOPEE*i
END OF BORING - REFUSAL TO HSA @ **FORMATICN
. lOA'
. *1/.5 + 1/.5 + 50/.3
. ,
.
.
.
.
.
.
G
.
.
.
. "
. I-
. DEPTH: DRlLLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRlLLlNG WATER
. 0-10.4' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME DEPTH DEPTI1 DEPTI1 FLUID LEVEL LEVEL THE ATTACHED
. 5/26/06 9:35 10.4 10.4 None 9.6 SHEETS FOR AN
"
. EXPLANATION OF
I TERMlNOLOGY ON
. COI\1PLETED: 5/26/06
. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 69 1HlSLOG
06/04
.
.
. ~ AMERICAN
. A ENGnffiERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. TESTING, INC.
. AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORlNG NO. . 5 (p. 1 of 1)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH 101; Shakopee, MN
. DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 707.6 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
IN N MC
. FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL . PL '/0-#20
.
. M ~ SS 4 .
I - 3
. 2- . ~
. 9 M X SS 8 .
. 3 - FILL, mixture of clayey sand and sandy lean
, "
. 4- clay, a little gravel, possible cobble at 4', trace ~
roots, black and dark brown
. J.d
5 - FILL 8 M X SS 6
.
6- 'f1
.
ij
. 7 -
. 8 - 5 M X SS 12 25
. 9 f1
. ij
. 10 - FILL, mostly sandy' lean clay with gravel, trace 6 M X SS 9
roots, brown and dark brown
. ll- f1
. 12 - ~ :t ij
WEATHERED DOLOSTONE, light brown, 7' ~ SHAKOPEE .
. 13- moist, dense [Textural Classification: Gravel ~ '7' FORMATION 32 M X SS 13.
. with silty sand (GP)] ~ ~
T5
. END OF BORING- REFUSAL TO HSA @
13.7'
. '.
. .'
.
.
e .
.
.
.
. . -
. .
. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
. DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE A IT ACHED
0-13.7' 3.25" HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
. 5/26/06 10:35 13.5 None 13.4 None SHEETS FOR AN
. EXPLANATION OF
. ~8~8:TED: 5/26/06 TERMINOLOGY ON
. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 69 nnSLOG
06/04
.
.,
_I] AMERICAN
. A ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. TESTING, INe.
. AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO. 6 (p. 1 of 1)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH 101;Shakopee, MN
. DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 710.0 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
. IN N MC TYPE IN.
FEET MATERIAL DESCRlPTION WC DEN LL PL &-#20
. FILL, mixture of silty sand and lean clay with FILL ~
. 1 - gravel, possible cobbles, pieces of concrete, 9 M SS 13
. trace Toots, dark brown
2- -
. WEATHERED DOLOSTONE, light brown, ~ SHAKOPEE * M X SS 8
. 3 - \~ojst, very dense [Textural Classification: FORMATION
Gravellv sand with silt (SP-SM)l I -
. END OF BORING,. REFUSAL TO HSA @
. 3,3'
*4/.5 + 18/.5 + 50/.3
.
.
.
. .
'.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
. .'
.
.
0
. .
. .
. .
.'
.
.
. DEPTH: DRlLLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFERTO
. DATE TIME SAMPLED . CASING CAVE-IN DRlLLING WATER THE ATTACHED
0-3.3' 3.25" HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
. 5/26/06 10:55 3.3 None . 3.3 None SHEETS FOR AN
-
. EXPLANA T10N OF
.
. ~g~8~TED: 5/26/06 TERMlNOLOGY ON
. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 69 TIllS LOG
06/04
.
.
. Il AMERICAN
. l ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. TESTING, INC.
. .
AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO. 1. (p. 1 of1)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH 101; Shakopee, MN .
. DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 714.8 FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
. IN GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL 0-#20
. FILL, mixture of clayey sand and silty sand, a -
. I\little gravel. brown and dark brown. ... .. (f--:- M ~
I - 7 SS I3
. 2- FILL, mixture of clayey sand and sandy silt, -
. trace gravel and glass, pieces of brick, black 15 M X SS 8
. 3 -
~ .
,
. 4 .
FILL U
. 5 - 5 M X SS I3
. FILL, mixture of silty sand, a little silt and
, 6- gravel, trace roots, black and brown ~
7- )J
8 M X SS 15 .
8-
~ ~
9 ~
U
.
10- CLA YEY SAND, trace roots, black to dark .. TOPSOIL 8 M X SS 15 15
11- brown, film (SC) B
12 . 1 l\A <'<' 1
~~ATHERED DOLOSTONE, light brown, I .-
moist very dense *SHAKOPEE
END OF BORING - REFUSAL TO HSA @ FORMATION ..
12.1'
.
.
. .
.
.
.
DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS .
. NOTE: REFER TO
. DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER TI-IE ATTACHED
0-12' 3.25" HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
. 5/26/06 11:45 12.1 None 12:1 None SHEETS FOR AN
. EXPLANATION OF
.. ~g~8:TED: 5/26/06 TERMINOLOGY ON
DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 69 . TillS LOG
. 06/04
.
.
_I]. AMERlCAN
l ' ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
: . JESTING, INC.
tt 01-02982 .
AET JOB NO: LOG OF BORING NO. 8 (p.l of1)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, WestofTH 101; Shakopee, MN
. DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: '706.2 FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
. IN GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC
FEET. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL o-#20(
. I\~ILL, mostly clayey sand, trace roots, black and FILL I
. I - dark brown . / : : M ~ SS
7 15
.
2- '--
.. SILTY SAND, fme grained, grayish brown, C .: COARSE X
moist, loose (SM) (may be fill) . , :- :' ALLUVIUM 16 M SS 4
. 3- - -: ORFILL
. - ~
4-
. :u
5 - X
. SAND WIlli SILT, fmegrained, gray, 2 VI SS 14
waterbearing, very loose (SP-SM/SM) .
. 6- ~
. '::: COARSE .
. 7 - - '.: ALLUVIUM 1J .
. ' , y X 14-
" - 4 SS 14 23
8- SIL TY SAND, fme grained, gray, wet, very - ,
loose (SM) , - ~
9- , . .
:u
10 - SANDY SILT, grayish brown, wet, very loose W X SS 14
I
II - (ML) ~
. -, FINE
ALLUVIUM
12- . :u
LEAN CLAY, gray, soft, laminations of wet silt 3 M/W X SS 18 29
13- and silty sand (CL)
14 , , E I
, . .
SILTY SAND, fme grained, gray, wet, very , , COARSE
15 - ' , X
loose (8M) , . ALLUVIUM 2 W SS 18 .
. ' -
. .
16 . .
- END OF BORING
. ..
.. .
.
.. .
. ..
.
.1 .
. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
. DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE AD ACHED
. 0-14'h' 3.25" HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
'.' ,5/25/06 3:00 6.0 4.5 4,5 None SHEETS FOR AN
5/25/06 3:15 13.5 12.0 13.5 8.0 EXPLANA TION OF
I BORlNG 5/26/06 8:00 16.0 14.5 10.5 8.5 TERMINOLOGY ON
j. COMPLETED: 5/25/06
. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 69 THIS LOG
06/04
.
.
ell AMERlCAN
. 1 .. I"NGINEERlNG SUBSURFACE BORING LOG'
. TESTING, INC.
. AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO, 9 (p.1of1)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH 101; Shakopee, MN
. DEPTH SURFACEELEVATlON: 706.6 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD &LABORATORY TESTS
.; IN N MC
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL 0-#20
.,
. 1 7 M ss 18
. 2 FILL, mixture oflean clay and sandy silt, trace' FILL
. roots, black and grayish brown
3 6 'M Ss 4
.
. 4
. .'
5 .' 2 W SS IS
I SILTY SAND, fme grained, grayish brown, wet, "
6 very loose, lenses of silt and lean clay (SM) .'
" COARSE
7 " ALLUVIUM
-' 4 SS 14
8 .' -
.'
9
10 SILTY SAND, fine grained, gray, wet, very
loose, laminations of silt (SM) 2 W SS 16 22 30
II
12
. SILT WITH SAND, grayish brown, wet, very 2 W SS 18
I3 loose, laminations of silty sand (ML/CL)
.
. 14
. 15 LEAN. CLA Y, trace roots, dark gray, very soft
(CL) I M SS 18 35
. 16
. END OF BORING
.
.'
/
,.
'..
.
.
.
.' DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTp: REFER TO
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
. 0-14~' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL THE ATTACHED
. 5/26/06 1:05 6.0 4,5 6.0 None SHEETS FOR AN
- 5/26/06 1:10 11.0 9.5 9.5 8.0 EXPLANATION OF
RIN 5/26/06 1:20 16.0 14.5 14.2 12.9 TERMINOLOGY ON
- COMPLETED: 5/26/06
. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 69 5/26/06 1:45 16.0 None 13.8 12.4 THIS LOG
. . 06/04
.
.
_I] AMERICAN
. l ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
" TESTING, INC.
. AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO, 10 (p. lof 1)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH 101; Shakopee, MN .
. . 734.8 .. FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION:
. IN GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL 0-#20
. -
. .
. 1- 4 M X SS 8
. 2.-:- - .
. ]- 7 M X SS 4
~ F1LL, mostly silty sand, a little gravel, brick and FILL - -
clinkers, black, a little brown R
. 4- ti
.' 5~ M X SS
. 11 10
. 6- ft
~ 7- lJ
. 8- 10 M X SS 10 4
E 9- .
10- WEATHERED DOLOSTONE, light brown, W SHAKOPEE* 50/.5 M X SS 3
~rOist, very dense [Textural Classification: / *FORMATIO
. Gravel with silty sand (GP)l
END OF BORING -REFUSAL TO HSA @
'. 10'
.
.
. ....
.
. .
.
. .
r
4ft.
.
.
.
.
.'
. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
.' DATE TIME SAIv1PLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE A IT ACHED
0-9W 3.25" HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
i 5/26/06 12:30 10.0 None 10.0 None SHEETS FOR AN
- EXPLANATION OF
COMPLETED: 5/26/06 TERMINOLOGY ON
DR: SG LO: SB Rig: 69 TillS LOG
,
06/04
.
. ~ AMERICAN
. l ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. TESTING, INe.
. AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO. 11 (p~ 1 of 1)
. .. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH 101; Shakopee, MN
. DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 712.8 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
. IN N MC
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL b-#20
.' FILL, mostly sandy silt, trace roots, black .
. I - 8 M X 55 8
. 2- FILL, mixture of gravel, clayey sand and silty FILL -
~ 3 - sand, brown and.dark brown II M X 55 4 ...
- R .
4- iJ
.
5 - 13 M IX 55 9
GRAVELLY SILTY SAND, brown, moist, COARSE
6- medium dense, lenses oflean clay (SM) (may be . ALLUVIUM R -
fill) OR FILL
7 - iJ
- . 50/,3 M X S5 4
8 - WEATHERED DOLOSTONE, light brown, "7 SHAKOPEE
07
moist~ very dense [Textural Classification: ~ FORMATION
.9 ... Gravel with silty sand (GP)J ~ ..
END OF BORING - REFUSAL TO HSA @
9.5' 0
'.
.'
~
.
.
.
.
.
. -
.
. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFERTO
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
. 0-9.4' 3.25" HSA - DATE TIME DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL THE A IT ACHED
~ 5/26/06 11:20 8,0 None 9.4 . None SHEETS FOR AN
~ .. EXPLANATION Of
~gNf,t~TED: 5/26/06 TERMlNOLOGY ON
.
.. DR: SG LG: SB Ri~:69 THIS LOG
___~ 06/04
,
.
_I] AMERICAN
. l ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. TESTING, INe.
. AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO. 12 (p. 1 of 1)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH101; Shakopee,MN
..' . FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 711.9 GEOLOGY MC S AMPLE REC
. IN N TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL '/0-#20
FEET . MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
. .
FILL, mostly silty sand, a little gravel, trace
- I - roots, black FILL 8 M SS 8
. 2- FILL, mixture of silty sand and clayey sand, a ~
.' f\iittle gravel. trace roots, brown and black / - COLLUVIUM M-X
GRA VEL WITH SILTY SAND, apparent - OR HIGHLY 57 SS 8
. 3 - cobbles, brown, lUoist, very dense (GP) WEA THEREI
'=" SHAKOPEE
- R
. 4 - FORMATION
END OF BORING - REFUSAL TO HSA @ 4'
-; ..'
.
p
.
.
\
.
..
It
<0
it
.
.
. .
.'
.
. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS . NOTE: REFER TO
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRJLLING WATER
.' 0-4' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL THE A IT ACHED
5/24/06 . 3.5 4.0 4.0 None SHEETS FOR AN
~ ,
- EXPLANATION OF
. ~g~L~TED: 5/24/06 TERMINOLOGY ON
.. DR: SS LG: SB Rig: 69 THIS LOG
. 06/04
.
.
. ~ AMER.ICAN
. ! . ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
.. TESTING, INe.
- AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO_ 13 (p. 1 of 1)
. ,
PROJECT: River Interceptor, WestofTH 101; Shakopee, MN
. DEPTII SURFACE ELEVATION: 708.4 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
. IN N MC TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL '10-#20
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
./ M ~
. I - 6 SS 16
FILL, mixture oflean clay, sandy silt and silty FILL
. 2- sand, possible cobbles, trace roots, black and -
.' gray X
3- 27 M SS 13
. - E ,
.. 4- " - HIGHLY
.: GRAVELLY SILTY SAND, brown, moist, . WEATHEREI
5- medium dense, lenses of clayey sand (SM) '. SHAKOPEE 17 M X SS 6
. .. FORMATION
6-
7 WEA THERED DOLOSTONE, light brown, ;,L SHAKOPEE 50/.5 M X SS 4
moist, very hard [Textural Classification: Silty ~ FORMA TION
8- i\sand with gravel (SM)l /
END OF BORING- REFUSAL TO HSA @ ;
8.0'
,
,
.
. -
-
0
.
.
. -
.
.
'. DEPTII: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
.' DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE ATTACHED
0-8' 3.25" HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLillD LEVEL LEVEL
~" 5/24/06 6.0 8.0 8.0 None SHEETS FOR AN
~ EXPLANATION OF
. ~g~L<fTED: 5/24/06 TE~OLOGY ON
. DR: SS LG: SB Rig: 69 TIllS LOG
, 06/04
.
.
· rJ AMERICAN
. l ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. TESTING, INe.
_ AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO. 14 (p. 1 of 1)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH101; Shakopee, MN
. DE~TH SURFACE ELEVATION: 710.8 GEOLOGY N MC SAMPLE REC FIELD&LABORATORYTESTS
. FEET MATERlAL DESCRlPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL . PL 0-#20
.
.'. '. ], _ FILL, mostly gravelly silty sand, trace roots, 14 M I V 58 7
black 'If
. 2 '. f-
.1 ~ IV
" " 3 _ FILL, mostly lean clay'with sand, a little gravel, 14 M I^ 88 5
- ~ R
. 4 ~ tl
a ~ .'
. 5- ~ ~
. WEATHERED DOLOSTONE, light brown, ~ SHAK,OPEE 42 M I ^ 55 8
.. 6 - moist, dense to very dense [Textural p FORMATION r::;
_ Classification: Gravel with silty sand (GP)] ~ H
. 7- ~ u
. ~ * M IV 58 12
8- ~ fA
.. ." END OF BORING - REFUSAL TO HSA @- .
8.3'
. *12/5 + 33/.5 + 50/04
. .....
. J
. '.
. .'
. .
-
4IJ. '
.
-
i-
f)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.' DEPTH: DRlLLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
. SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
. 0~8.3' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL THE ATTACHED
.' _ 5/25/06 10:20 8.0 None 8,3 None SHEETS FOR AN
. . _ . EXPLANATION OF
.. BIlRINC; -
. COMPLETED: 5/25106 TERMINOLOGY ON
. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: 69 THIS LOG
06/04
.
.
· El AMERICAN
. A ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG .
. TESTING, INC.
.7
- AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO. 15 (p.1ofl)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH 101; Shakopee,MN
. DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 710.4 GEOLOGY MC S AMPLE REC FJELD & LABORATORY TESTS
.' IN N TYPE IN.
FEET MA TERlAL DESCRlPTION WC DEN LL PL fr#20
. FILL, mostly silty sand with gravel, apparent
. 1 - cobbles, trace roots, black M, DS
-
. 2 FILL, mixture ofIean clay and sandy lean clay,
. FILL M DS
-- 3 - trace roots, brown
. M DS
. 4 FILL, mixture of sand with silt and lean clay M DS
. .
. \with sand, a little gravel light brown I
END OF BORING- Refusal to HA at 4.5'
.
. Note: Other attempts obstructed at more shallow
. depths. Also, limestone outcrops noted
. 15'S of boring.
_.
. .
.
.
. ,
.
. .
.
.
.
.
-
~ .
.
.
.
.
.
.
. DEPTH: DRlLLING METHOD . WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
. DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRlLLING WATER THE ATI ACHED
0-4W Hand AUl!er DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
~. 5/30/06 9:30 4.5 None SHEETS FOR AN
. EXPLANATION OF
.
~g~L~TED: 5/30/06 TERMlNOLOGY ON
. .' .
. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: HA TIllS LOG
06/04
.
.
ell AMERICAN
. l ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
e TESTING, me.
- . 16 (p. 1 of 1)
AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO.
. PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTHlOl; Shakopee, MN
- DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 711.6 GEOLOGY MC S AMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
. IN . N TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL '~#20
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
. .
. FILL, mostly silty sand with gravel, apparent -
cobbles, trace roots, dark brown to black FILL M DS
. I -
. END OF BORING- Refusalto HA at 1.5'
.
. Note: Fourth attempt. Others obstructed at more
. shallow depth.
. -
. "
,~
.'
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.,
.
.
.
-
e
.
.
.
. c
. - ..
. DEPTH: DRILLING l\1ETHOD WATER LEVEL l\1EASUREl\1ENTS NOTE: REFER TO
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
. 0-1 Y, Hand AUl!:er . DATE TIl\1E DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL THE ATIACHED
. 5/30/06 10:00 1.5 None SHEETS FOR AN
. EXPLANATION OF
.
~g~L~TED: 5/30/06 TERMINOLOGY ON
. . . rnSLOG
.. DR: SG LG: SB Rig: HA
. 06/04
.
.
. n M1ERlCAN
. fiJENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. TESTING, INC.
- _ AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO. 17 (p.1 ofl)
.' PROJECT: River Interceptor, West ofTH 101;Shakopee, MN
- DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION' 732.9 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
. IN' N MC
. FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN_ WC DEN LL PL Wo-#20
.1
. I FILL, mixture of gravel and silty sand, trace' 17 M 1\ SS 10
- roots and glass, possible cobbles, black and . If"
. brown'
2 ~
.' . 3 FILL, mostly clayey sand; trace roots, dark 5 M IX ss 3
. - brown and brown
, / ~
. 4 FILL ~
. 5 - 4 M Ix ss 8
. FILL, mixture of clayey sand and sand with silt,
. 6 - a little gravel, brown. 'B
. 7- Li
. 8 _ 3 M X SS 5
'. ~
~ 9 ~
~ Li
." 10 - GRA VELLYSAND WITH SILT, apparent COARS): X
" cobbles, fine to medium grained, brown and ALLUVIUM 21 M SS 6
. ]] _ grayish brown, moist, medium dense, lenses of
clayey sand (SP-SM) , ,
. ]2 ' W
.' ~A THERED DOLOSTONE, Ii.ght b!own;, ~ 7' SHAKOPEE X
, mOIst, very dense [Textural ClassIficatIon: ~7 FORMATION SO/A M SS 4
. 13 -i\Gravellv silty sand (SM)l /
END OF BORING -REFUSAL TOHSA @
. 13' "
.
. "
e '.
4;
.
.
.
. /
.
. "
. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
. D TE SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
. 0-13' 3.25" HSA A TIME DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL THE ATIACHED
. 5/24/06 ,12.0 13.0' 13.0 None SHEETS FOR AN
. EXPLANATION OF
B .
. 2g~L~TED: 5/24/06 ' TERMlNOLOGY ON
. DR: S8 LG: SB Rig: 69 THlS LOG
06/04
.
.
· El AMERICAN
. l. ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
. . TESTING, INC.
- AET JOB NO: 01-02982 LOG OF BORING NO. 18 (p.1 of 1)
. PROJECT: River Interceptor,WestofTH 101; Shakopee, MN
. 735.7 .. FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: SAMPLE REC
. IN GEOLOGY N MC
FEET MATERIAL DESCRlPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL. \10-#20
. J
FILL, mostly sandy silt, a little gravel, trace M J
. ] - roots and clinkers, dark brown 28 SS 13
. . ... ~
2 - -
. FILL, mixture of gravel and silty sand, brown FILL 32 M X SS 10
.. 3 -
J1
. 4 - h
. .. J.d
5 - FILL, mostly silty sand with gravel, black and 50/.3 M X SS 3
brown
. END OF BORING - REFUSAL TOHSA @
. 5.4'
. .
.
.
-
.,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.'
.
. DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO
. DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER THE ATTACHED
0-5.4' 3.25" HSA DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
. 5/24/06 5.3 5.4 5.3 None SHEETS FOR AN
. EXPLANATION OF
-
. ~g~pt1TED: 5/24/06 TERMINOLOGY ON
. DR: SS LG: SB Rig: 69 TIllS LOG
. 06/04
.
.
.
.
.
.
. SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST RESULTS
.
. PROJECT: AET JOB NO.: 01-02982
. RIVER INTERCEPTOR, W OF TH101
. SHAKOPEE,M~ESOTA DATE: AUGUST 25,2006
.
- TEST METHOD: AET T-SOP #01-LAB-040
. (General Conformance with Mn/DOT 5-692,2)
. RESULTS:
.
. Sample Designation 8 9
.
. Sample Depth 7'-8W 9112'-11'
. Dry Sample Weight (gms) 276.32 256.16
.
~ Sieve Size. or Numher Percent Passing by Weight
- #4 100 100
. #10 100 100
. #40 100 100
.
. #100 56 65
. #200 14 30
.
. Note: The small sample size limits the accuracy of the test, and the sample may not necessarily
. be representative of the entire layer shown on the boring log. '
~
. j{, u:; ~
., Reviewed by:
.'
.
.
.
.
.
.
. 01 LAB043 (2/06) AMERICAN ENGlNEERING TESTING, INC.
.
.
.
.
- EXPLORA TION/CLASSIFICATION METHODS
. SAMPLING METHODS
. Split-Spoon Samples (SS) - Calibrated to N60 Values
. Standard penetration (split-spoon) samples were collected in general accordance with ASTM:D 1586 with one primary modification.
The ASTM test method consists of driving a 2" O.D. split-barrel sampler into the in-situ soil with a 140-pound hammer dropped
. from a height of30" . The sampler is driven a total of 18" into the soil. After an initial set of 6", the number ofharnmer blows to
- drive the sampler the fmal 12" is known as the standard penetration resistance or N-value, Our method uses a modified hammer
. weight, which is determined by measuring the system energy usmg a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) and an instrumented rod.
. In the past, standard penetration N-value tests were performed using a rope and cathead for the lift and drop system. The energy
. transferred to the split-spoon sampler was typically limited to about 60% of it's potential energy due to the friction inherent in this
system. This converted energy. then provides what is knoWIi as an N60 blow count.
. Most of todays drill rigs incorporate an automatic hammer lift and drop' system, which has higher energy efficiency and
. subsequently results in lower N-values than the traditional N60 values. By using the PDA energy measurement equipment, we are
. able to determine actual energy generated by the drop hammer.. With the various hammer systems available, we have found highly
. variable energies ranging from 55 % to over 100 %. Therefore, the intent of AET's hammer calibrations is to vary the hammer
weight such that hammer energies lie within about 60% to 65% of the theoretical energy of a 140-pound weightfalling 30". The
. current ASTM procedure acknowledges the wide variation in N-values, stating that N-values of 100% or more have been observed.
. Although we have not yet determined the statistical measurement uncertainty of our calibrated method to date,. we can state that the
accuracy deviation of the N-values using this method are significantly better than the standard ASTM Method.
.
. ,
. Disturbed Samples (DS)/Spin-up Samples (SU)
Sample types described as "DS" or "SU" on the boring logs are disturbed samples, which are taken from the flights of the auger,
. Because the auger disturbs the samples, possible soil layering and contact depths should be considered approximate;
. Sampling Limitations
- Unless actually observed in a sample, contacts between soil layers are estimated based on the spacing of samples and the action of
. drilling tools. Cobbles, boulders, and other large objects generally cannot be recovered from test borings, and they may be present
m the ground even if they are not noted on the boring logs.
.
. CLASSIFICATION METHODS
Soil classifications shown on the boring logs are based on the Unified Soil Classification (USe) system. The use system is
.. described m ASTM:D2487 and' D2488. Where laboratory classification tests (sieve analysis or Atterberg Limits) have been
. performed, accurate classifications per ASTM:D2487 are possible, OtherWise, soil classifications shown on the boring logs are
visual-manual judgments. Charts are attached which provide information on the use system, the descriptive terminology, and the
. symbols used on the boring logs.
. The boring logs include descriptions of apparent geology. The geologic depositional ori~in of each soil layer is interpreted primarily
. by observation of the soil samples, which can be limited. Observations of the surrounding topography, vegetation, and development
. can sometimes aid this judgment.
. W A 'fER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
. The ground water level measurements are shown at the bottom of the boring logs. The following information appears under "Water
e Level Measurements" on the logs: .
. Date and Time of measurement .
. . Sampled Depth: lowest depth of soil sampling at the time of measurement
.. . Casing Depth: depth to bottom of casing or hollow-stem auger at time of measurement
. Cave-in Depth: depth at which measuring tape stops in the borehole
. . Water Level: depth in the borehole where free water is encountered
. . Drilling Fluid Level: same as Water Level, except that the liquid in the borehole is drilling fluid
The true location of the water table at the boring locations may be different than the water levels measured m the boreholes. This is
. possible because there are several factors that can affect the water level measurements in the borehole. Some of these factors
. include: permeability of each soil layer in profIle, presence of perched water, amount of time between water level readings,
presence of drilling fluid, weather conditions, and use of borehole casing.
. SAMPLE STORAGE
. Unless notified to do otherwise, we routinely retain representative samples of the soils recovered from the borings for a period of 30
- days.
.
. OlREP051C(09/03) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
.
.
.
.
. BORING LOG NOTES
~ DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS TEST SYMBOLS
.
. Symbol DefInition Symbol DefInition
CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test
. B,H,N: Size of flush-joint casing DEN: Dry density, pef
. CA: Crew Assistant (initials) . . DST: Direct shear test
. CAS: Pipe casing, number indicates nominal diameter in E: Pressuremeter Modulus, tsf
inches HYD: Hydrometer analysis
. CC: 'Crew Chief(initials) LL: Liquid Limit, %
COT: Clean-out tube LP: Pressuremeter Limit Pressure, tsf
. DC: Drive casing; number indicates diameter in inches OC: Organic Content, %
. DM: Drilling mud or bentonite slurry PERM: Coefficient of permeability (K) test; F - Field;
. DR: Driller (initials) L - Laboratory
DS: Disturbedsample from auger flights PL: Plastic Limit, %
. FA: Flight auger; number indicates outside diameter in qp: Pocket Penetrometer strength, tsf (approx.imate)
. inches qc: Static cone bearing pressure, tsf
HA: Hand auger; number indicates outside diameter qu: Unconfmed compressive strength, psf
. HSA: Hollow stem auger; number indicates inside R: Electrical Resistivity, ohm-ems.
. diameter in inches RQD: Rock Quality Designation of Rock Core, in percent
LG: Field logger (initials) (aggregate length of core pieces 4" or more in length
. Me: Column used to describe moisture condition of as a percent of total core run)
... samples and for the ground water level symbols SA: Sieve analysis
. N (BPF): Standard penetration resistance (N-value) in blows per TRX: TriaxiaI compression test
. foot (see notes) VSR: Vane shear strength, reinoulded (field), psf
. NQ: NQ wireline core barrel VSU: Vaneshearstrength, undisturbed (field), psf
PQ: PQ wireline core barrel WC: Water content, as percent of dry weight
. RD: Rotary drilling with fluid and roller or drag bit %-200: Percent of material fmer than #200 sieve
. REC: In split-spoon (see notes) and thin-walled tube
sampling, the recovered length (in inches) of STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NOTES
. sample. In rock coring, the length of core recovered (Calibrated Hammer Weight)
. (expressed as percent of the total core run). Zero The standard penetration test consists of driving a split-spoon
indicates no sample recovered. sampler with a drop hammer (calibrated weight varies to
. REV: _Revert drilling fluid provide N60 values) and counting the number of blows applied
. SS: Standard split-spoon sampler (steel; 1%" is inside in each of three 6" increments of penetration. If the sampler is
diameter; 2" outside diameter); unless indicated driven less than 18" (usually in highly resistant material),
. otherwise permitted in ASTM:DI586, the blows for each complete 6"
. SU Spin-up sample from hollow stem auger increment and for each partial increment is on the boring log.
... TW: Thin-walled tube; number indicates inside diameter For partial increments; the number of blows is shown to the
in inches nearest 0.1' below the slash.
., WASH: Sample of material obtained by screening returning
.... rotary drilling fluid or by which has collected inside The length of sample recovered, as shown on the "REC"
the borehole after "falling" through drilling fluid column, may be greater than the distance indicated in the N
. WH: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod and column. The disparity is because the N-value is recorded below
hamriJer the initial 6" set (unless partial penetration defmed in
. WR: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod ASTM:DI586 is encountered) whereas the length of sample
. 94mm: 94 millimeter wireline core barrel recovered is for the entire sampler drive (which may even
. ~: Water level directly measured in boring extend more than 18").
. \l: Estimated water level based solely on sample
appearance
.
.
. 01REP052C(Ol/05) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
.
.
.
,
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AMERICAN ~
ASTMDesignations: D 2487, D2488 ENGINEERING fiJ '
TESTING, INC. -
Soil Classificati6n Notes
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory TestsA Group Group NameS ABased on the material passing the 3-in
Svrnbol ~75-mm) sieve. ,
Coarse-Grained - Gravels More Clean Gravels Cu:::4 and I~Cc~3" GW Well graded gravel" If field sample contamed cobbles or
oils More than 50% coarse Less than 5% boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or
than 50% fraction retained finesc Cu<4 andlor 1>Cc>3" GP Poorly graded gravel boulders, or both"to group name.
etained on on No.4 sieve cGravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual
No. 200 sieve Gravels with Fines classify as ML or MH GM ' Silty gravel" ,-" symbols:
Fines more GW.GM well-graded gravel with silt
than 12% fines C Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelr-,u1 GW.GC .well-graded gravel with clay
GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt
Sands 50% or Clean Sands Cu~ and I~Cc~3" SW Well-graded sand GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay
more of coarse Less than 5% DSands with 5 to 12% fines require dual .
fraction passes finesD Cu<6 and I>Cc>3" SP' Poorly-graded sand' symbols:
No.4 sieve SW-SM well-graded sand with silt
Sands with Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand"-H.' SW-SC well-graded sand with clay
Fines more SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt
than 12% fines 0 Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand"-H.. SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
ine-Grained Silts and Clays inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above CL Lean clay-'-M
oils 50% or Liquid limit less "A" line! (Dloi
ore passes, than 50 PI<4 or ylots below ML Silt,,-I;;M ECU': D60 /DIO. CC =
he No. 200 "A" line - DlOx D60
ieve . - organic liQuid limit-oven dried <0 75 OL Organic c1ay-'-M-N F. ", , ,
. . . . .' If sod contams> 15% sand, add "WIth
see Plasticity LIquId hImt - not dned Organic siltK.1-MO sand" to group n;;:me. '
hart below) , Glflines classify as CL-ML, use dual
Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clay-L-M ~bol GC-GM, or SC-SM.
Liquid limit 50 If lines are organic, add "with organic
or more PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic silt"-'-M fines" to group name.
JIfsoil contains~15% gravel, add "with
., organic LiQuid limit-oven dn,'ed 075 OH Organic claycJ::M; EV, el" to group name,'
. . . , . <. If Atterberg limits plot is hatched area,
10.., LiquId ]umt - not dried Organic siltKL-M-Q soils is a CL-ML silty clay,
~ ~ighly organic Primllrily organic matter, dark . PT PeatK KIf s~i1.contain~ ]5 :? ~9% plus I~o. 200
Moil in color and organic in odor ad~ WIth s.and aT ~Jth grave ,
_ ' whIchever IS predommant.
t . Llfsoil contains~30%plusNo. 200,
.11III SIEVE ANALYSIS ,50 7 / predominantly sand add "sandy" to
~ - ~--""+--""'------1 ~~as:,~:::"~-':'::;''':''":. group name. '
~t 321"1% "... 10 20 40'8:) .1A02lXI / Mf'-"" N 0
"n 0 50 , I s01l contams ~30% plus o. 20 ,
eo ~d"A"-line '. .u"
. !!:., HcrizonIaIBlR.4IoLL'25.ii / v':"" ,),. ~,,/ predommantly gravel, add gravelly
.11III '" 20 ~ 40 ,,*,Pl'O,n(LL.2O) .5/ I,,~. .'0' to group name_
-. Cl g:;: ~""\J'''n. / ,).c.,,/V NPI>4an, dplotsonorabove"A"line.
z ~ Vertical atLLa 16to PI tr:7 ;' ''';''' _ _ _ _
..lit. ~ '" 000.15/nm .. ~ 5 30 ,,*,R'0_9(~)' / G OPI<4 or plots below "An line.
'4" a; 1\ ~ ~ / / r--/ PP,I plots on a.-above, "An line,
..I. ~.. '" I K ,/ dv V QPl plots below "A" line.
, '4. ~ o.'2.5rrm 20 /' .<:1 / RFiber Content description shown below.
IN / "IVv~
20 80 , /'
l'f-. o.,o_075/nm 10 /I ,
~ t .- 1 --.
I .
0, ., '" ,"Xl 417 T, I
.. Ill. " "0 '_0 00 .. 00 10 1. 20 30 40 50 l3C ]0 60 90 100 110
~ , PARTICLE SIZE IN IIIiIWMETERS UQUlO UMIT (LL)
4 ~ c...g;.'o;';""" c.'~'.~1S'.. Plasticity Chart
^ ADDITIONAL TERMINOLOGYNOTESUSED BYAETFORSOIL IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION
Grain Size Gravel Percenta!!es Consistency of Plastic Soils Relative Density of Non-Plastic Soils
Term Particle Size Term Percent Term N-Value. BPF Term N-Value. BPF
Boulders Over 12" A Little Gravel 3% - 14% Very Soft less than 2 Very Loose 0- 4
Cobbles 3" to 12" With Gravel 15% - 29% Soft 2 - 4 Loose 5. 10
Gravel #4 sieve to 3" Gravelly 30% - 50% Firm 5 - 8 Medium Dense I I - 30
Sand #200 to #4 sieve Stiff 9 - 15 Dense 31 - 50
Fines (silt & clay) Pass #200 sieve Very Stiff 16 - 30 Very Dense Greater than 50
Hard Greater than 30
MoisturelFrost Condition Laverin!! Notes Fiber Content of Peat OrganiclRoots Descriotion lifno lab tests)
(MC Column) Laminations: Layers less than Fiber Content Soils are described as onzanic. if soil is not peat
D (Dry): Absense of moisture, dusty, dry to y." thick of Term (Visual Estimate) and is judged to have sufficient organic fines
touch, differing material content to influence the soil properties. Slir!hrlv
M (Moist): Damp, although free water not or color. Fibric Peat: Greater than 67% orf!anic used for borderline cases.
visible. Soil may still have a high Hemic Peat: 33 - 67%
water content (over "optimum"). Lenses: Pockets or layers Sapric Peat: Less than 33% With roots: Judged to have sufficient quantity
W (Wet! Free water visible intended to greater than y." of roots to influence the soil
Waterbearing): describe non-plastic soils. thick of differing properties.
Waterbearing usually relates to material or color. Trace roots: Small roolS present, but not judged
sands and sand with silt to be in sufficient quantity to
F (Fr(lzen): Soil frozen " significantly affect soil properties.
-
.01 CLS021 (2/04) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. ATTACHMENT B
. Project Site Photographs
~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
0
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. City of Shakopee
.
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
,-....---.-.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~_.~
.--,
. I
.
Ie I
.
Ie
:. I
:. I
I. I
Ie
I
:. I
:.
I
:. I
.
I
I. I
.
I
.
. I
. I
. I
. I
. I
. I
.
.
.
.
.
I.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:.
ie
I.
Ie
Ie
Ie
I.
Ie
I.
L_ - - - ~- - -----------_.--~- - ----'--- --- -- -------- -- -------------- ,----- -- ~--
I-~/-----'
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
It
.t
.
'.
.
..
'.
.
_ __ _ __ ~________~___ ____ _d~_________'__ _.________~_ ____ _______~_ -_ --'_-'--_ - -- - --- ------ ------ ------ ------~--------------.--.----.--'--- ----~..------- --- -----~ - ----.-~------------- --.
.-----_,-------"
I:
.
.
.
.
I:
.
'.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. ~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
'.
.
.
.
.
. Graphic 8. The interceptor in the vicinity of Clay Street is very close to residential
. homes and electrical utility lines. In this area the interceptor would be replaced in the
. existing trench if possible.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. ATTACHMENT C
.
. Corps of Engineers
. Section 14 Information
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. City of Shako pee
. West River Interceptor - Phase III
.
.
.
.
.
. Emergency Bank Protection
.
-Section 14
.
What the Cor s Can Do
.
. '\ :;r Section 14 of the 1946 Flood Control Act, as amended,
. permits construction of bank protection works to
endangered highways, highway bridge
. and other essential, important public
such as municipal water supply systems and
. disposal plants; churches, hospitals, schools
. and nonprofit public services; and known cultural
sites that are endangered by flood-caused bank or
. shoreline erosion. Repair, restoration, and/or
. modification of the eroding streambank is allowed.
. Procedures followed for Section 14 projects are designed to expedite implementation. The time
. required from initiation of a study to award of a construction contract should not exceed .12
months.
. Section 14 covers only protection of important and essential public facilities which serve the
. general public. In addition to major highway systems of national importance, eligible highways
. may also include principal highways, streets and roads of special and significant importance to
. the local community. Examples are arterial streets, important access routes to other communities
and adjacent settlements as well as roads designated as primary farm to market roads,
. Privately owned riverfront and privately owned facilities are not eligible for protection under the
. Section 14 authority. Erosion protection is not eligible under Section 14, if the problem is caused
. by the design or operation of the facility itself or by inadequate drainage or lack of reasonable
maintenance. Repair of the facility itself is also excluded under Section 14.
.
~ A bank protection project must be designed to bean effective and successful operation. Each
project constructed must be economically justified and the maximum federal expenditure per l
. project is limited to $1,000,000. If the project cost exceeds the $1 million federal cost limit, the
. difference must be provided by local cash contribution. Studies are accomplished at full federal
expense up to $40,000, and the remainder is cost shared. Projects are cost shared. Non-federal
. interests are required to contribute a minimum of 35 percent of the project costs, of which at least
. 5 percent of the total cost must be contributed in cash.
. Local Res onsibilities
. Local sponsorship fora Section 14 project must be provided by a state, local agency or Indian
e Tribe empowered with sufficient legal and financial authority to comply fully with all required local
. cooperation and participation. The local sponsoring agency must agree to:
.
. 1. Provide without cost to the United States all.lands, easements and rights-of-way
necessary for construction of the project.
. 2. Accomplish without cost to the United States all required alterations and relocations in
. sewer, water supply, drainage and other utility facilities.
3. Hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction works, not
. including damages during construction, operation and maintenance that are due to the
. fault or negligence of the United States or its contractors.
4. Maintain the project after completion.
. 5. Assume full responsibility for all project costs in excess of the federal cost limit of $1
.
.
.
.
.
.'
.
. million or to satisfy local cost sharing requirements.
. 6. Provide a cash contributions for project costs in proportion to any special benefits to non-
public property,
. 7. Contribute a minimum of 35 percent up-front financing for construction. At least 5 percent
. of the total cost must be a cash contribution.
. Sam Ie Resolution
. Be it resolved that the (City Council, Tribal Council, County E~oard of Commissioners, etc.)
. requests the U.S: Army Corps of Engineers to conduct studies to determine the feasibility of
. developing an emergencystreambank or shoreline protection project at (location) under the
. authority provided by Section 14 of the 1946 Flood Control Act, as amended.
. The (City Council, etc.) acknowledges that it is aware of the Section 14 local responsibilities and
that the (City, etc.) has the ability to proceed within 12 months if it is found feasible and advisable
. to develop a stream bank or shoreline protection project at (location). The (City Council, etc.)
. further acknowledges that it would be required, before construction commences, to enter into a
contractual agreement to provide such local cooperation as may be prescribed by the Secretary
. of the Army.
. The (Clerk, Secretary, etc.) of the (City Council, Tribal Council, etc,) shall be, and is hereby,
. directed to transmit three copies of this resolution to the District Engineer, St. Paul District, U.S.
. Army Corps of Engineers, 190 5th Street East, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1638.
. Signed (Mayor, Chairman, etc,)
. Date (Date)
. Point of Contact: (Name, Title, Address, Phone Number)
.
. How to Re uest a Stud
. An investigation under Section 14 may be initiated after receipt of a formal request from the
. . prospective sponsoring agency. An example of an acceptable resolution is given above. This
. request and any further inquiries concerning an emergency bank protection project should be
made directly to:
. St. Paul District, Corps of Engineers
. Project Management Branch
. St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1638
. Contact Person:
e (Listed at the bottom of this page)
- District internet page: www.mvp,usace.army.mil
. Related Pro'eets and Studies:
. . Chippewa River at Biq Bend , Minnesota - Stream Bank Protection
. . Emerqencv Streambank Protection. Section 14. Brooklvn Center, Minn.
. Erosion alonq Hiqhwav 2, Red Lake River. Crookston. MN
. . Minnesota River Stream bank Protection. Shakopee. Minnesota
. . Mississippi River, Aitkin County State Hiqhwav 10, Palisade. Minn.
. . Red River of the North Stream Bank Protection at Farqo. North Dakota
. St. Cloud. Minn. Emeraencv Stream bank Protection.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . Stream Bank Protection: Section 14. PUq Hole Lake, Minnesota
.
.
. Point of contact for this page:
. Joseph Mose Joseph.H.Mose@mvp02.usace.army.mil
651-290-5567 651-290-5258 (fax)
.
.
-
e
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
e
.
.
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.