My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2020_0518_CCPacket
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2020
>
2020_0518_CCPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/7/2022 9:35:26 AM
Creation date
1/7/2022 9:34:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
5/18/2020
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
569
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The proposed development generally meets all land use and zoning requirements as <br />outlined above. For the items listed in Table 4 that exceed the city’s code, the proposer <br />will seek a conditional use permit (CUP). <br />10. Geology, Soils, and Topography/Land Forms <br />a. Geology – Describe the geology underlying the project area and identify and map any <br />susceptible geologic features such as sinkholes, shallow limestone formations, <br />unconfined/shallow aquifers, or karst conditions. Discuss any limitations of these features <br />for the project and any effects the project could have on these features. Identify any <br />project designs or mitigation measures to address effects to geologic features. <br />According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) conducted for the site <br />(Braun Intertec, September 2014) bedrock geology on the project site consists of Middle <br />Ordovician, Decorah. The Decorah Shale is a green, calcareous shale with thin limestone <br />interbeds. <br />The surficial geology consists of Pleistocene-age Grantsburg sublobe till deposits, which <br />are typically loam-textured till, ranging from loamy sand to clay. They can be oxidizing <br />gray to yellow-brown in color and are commonly banded with reddish-brown Superior <br />lobe till or sand. <br />There are no known sinkholes, shallow limestone formations, unconfined/shallow aquifers, <br />or karst features present within or near project limits. <br />b. Soils and Topography – Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications <br />and descriptions, including limitations of soils. Describe topography, any special site <br />conditions relating to erosion potential, soil stability, or other soil limitations, such as steep <br />slopes or highly permeable soils. Provide estimated volume and acreage of soil <br />excavation and/or grading. Discuss impacts from project activities (distinguish between <br />construction and operational activities) related to soils and topography. Identify <br />measures during and after project construction to address soil limitations including <br />stabilization, soil corrections, or other measures. Erosion/sedimentation control related to <br />stormwater runoff should be addressed in response to Item 11.b.ii. <br />6 <br />According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, there <br />is one soil type within the site—urban land. Due to the location of the site and the <br />classification of the soil, the soil type is not rated for an erosion hazard rating, meaning <br />that erosion is unlikely under ordinary climatic conditions. <br />Table 5: Soil Types Within Project Limits <br />Erosion Hazard Percent of Project <br />Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name <br />Rating Limits <br />1039 Urban LandNot Rated100 <br /> <br /> <br />6 <br />Available at https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm <br />Twin Lakes Station 8 March 2020 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.