Laserfiche WebLink
Review File: Riverstone <br />Sketch Plan Exhibits <br />Engineering Review <br />March 29, 2017 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />If this process is pursued, the developer should consult with the LRRWMO Engineer before <br />beginning the study to discuss acceptable methodologies. <br />Stormwater Management Plan: <br />1. The proposed conditions section states 27.3 acres of new impervious will be created. The <br />next paragraph states 35 acres of new impervious will be created. The locations of these <br />areas must be identified in plan view. <br />2. The proposed infiltration areas do not meet the LRRWMO criteria for infiltration as <br />outlined below: <br />a. The volume to be infiltrated must be retained in the basin prior to any discharge <br />leaving the basin. The large infiltration basin does not retain any water prior to <br />discharge leaving the pond. <br />b. The bottom of the basin must be at least 3 feet above the ground water level, The <br />infiltration benches do not meet this separation requirement. <br />3. If water will be discharged directly to the infiltration area then allowed to overflow to the <br />pond, then a sump manhole or water quality treatment structure must be installed up stream <br />of the infiltration basin to capture sediment and debris. <br />4. Soil borings are required in the area of the infiltration practices to verify the soils are <br />suitable for infiltration. <br />5. Water cannot be directly discharged to the wetland. It must be treated as noted above. <br />6. Detailed procedures for constructing the infiltration basins and bringing them online will <br />be required in the final plans. <br />7. The narrative indicates 0.04 acres of wetlands will be lost. Wetland sequencing must be <br />provided to document this loss. If this area is larger than the de-minimus then mitigation <br />must be provided. <br />8. The table on page 4 lists Highway 10 as a discharge point. Drainage from this area does <br />not reach Highway 10. The railroad tracks block flow to the south. <br />9. The title of the HydroCAD models must be revised to include the project name and <br />designate Existing or Proposed conditions. <br />10. The rainfall used in the model must indicate Ramsey, not Andover. <br />11. The normal water level of the ponds is 866, the soils report indicates the groundwater level <br />was 858 — 860. This is 6 — 8 feet below the normal water level and could result in dry dusty <br />ponds. This possibility must be evaluated during development of the final plans. <br />12. The ponds must be less than 10 feet deep to comply with the recommended guidelines in <br />the Minnesota Stormwater Manual. <br />13. A Minimal Impact Design (MIDS) model or P8 model must be submitted showing the <br />water quality improvements provided by the stormwater system. <br />14. Staff downloaded the De Minimus calculation form and worked through it. This part of <br />Ramsey is in the 2,500 sq. ft. exemption area. The proposed impact is 1,742 sq. ft. This <br />is under the threshold; however, this wetland was described as seasonally flooded type. <br />Staff looked at the several aerial photos from different years in GIS and measured the <br />apparent area of the north east wetland for 1997. There were over 1.2 acres that appear to <br />be wet. The delineation lists the area of this wetland as 0.68 acres. <br />