Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2014-01-22 PACKET 05.A.
M N Cottage Grove I'here Pride an6 "O"'e" Meet To: Public Works Commission From: Ryan Burfeind, Graduate Engineer Date: January 16, 2014 Re: 2014 Pavement Management, Districts F1 & F4 — Receive Information Background On September 4, 2013 the City Council authorized a feasibility report for the Pavement Man- agement Area as outlined in the Capital Improvement Plan for two areas: 1) Area bound by south of 90th Street, east of Islay Avenue, north of Jareau Avenue, west of Jewel Avenue (District F1); 2) Area east of and including Jergen Avenue, west of and including Jareau Ave- nue, south of 91st Street and 93rd Street (a portion of District 174). The City Council held a workshop session on November 20, 2013 to discuss the various elements of the proposed im- provements. At the workshop, staff presented the preliminary findings of several different tests that were completed on the existing pavement, sub - grade, and utilities. Due to the poor pave- ment condition, along with good sub -grade soils and curb condition, a full pavement replace- ment and spot curb replacement was recommended for both areas. A neighborhood meeting for this project was held on December 12, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. at Cottage Grove Middle School. At this meeting a presentation was given on the scope of the proposed work, what to expect during construction, an outline of the assessment process, and the anticipated schedule for the project. Following the presentation, residents were given a chance to view bituminous core samples that were taken throughout their neighborhood, as well as other informational maps about the project area and the testing that was completed. There were 20 people in attendance. On December 18, 2013 the City Council approved the feasibility report and called for a public hearing to be held on January 15, 2014. Discussion Summary of Road and Infrastructure Improvements Road Rehabilitation: Full Road Reconstruction The rehabilitation method proposed for the streets in District F1 and District F4 is to remove the existing asphalt surface and replace it with a new surface, which will consist of two lifts of bituminous. Only spot curb replacement will be included as part of this project. Also proposed are some minor utility improvements for sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, and street lights. Public Works Commission 2014 Pavement Management, District F1 & F4 January 16, 2014 Page 2 of 2 The potential assessment for the improvements listed above is estimated at $3,031.66 per residential lot. Project Funding Analysis The total project cost for the road work, utility, storm sewer, and street light improvements is $3,636,313. According to the City's policy, 45 percent of the total project cost for road work and utilities is assessed against the benefiting properties. The total project value that is as- sessed residentially is $1,555,239 for the Districts F1 and F4. The Cost Estimate Summary can be viewed in Appendix C of the Feasibility Report. Staff anticipates the issuance of $3 million in G.O. Improvement (section 429) bonds to finance the 2014 PM Project. Such an is- suance would result in an estimated increase to the annual tax levy of 0.9 percent beginning in 2015. Minnesota State Statute 429 states that the assessment amount cannot be greater than the direct benefit to the property. A special benefit appraisal was ordered for properties within the F1 and F4 Districts. There was found to be a special benefit ranging from $4,100 to $5,000 per property for full pavement replacement, which is greater than the proposed assessment for the residential lots. Conclusion At the January 15, 2014 meeting, City Council ordered the 2014 Pavement Management project as outlined in the feasibility report and authorized the preparation of plans and specifications on a 5 — 0 vote. REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING ITEM # DATE 1/15/14 • • PREPARED BY Community Development Jennifer Levitt ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT STAFF AUTHOR COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST 1. Hold the public hearing for the 2014 Pavement Management Project, Districts F1 and F4. 2. Consider ordering the project. 3. Consider authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications, STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Hold the public hearing for the 2014 Pavement Management Project, Districts F1 and F4. 2. Adopt the resolution ordering the 2014 Pavement Management Project, Districts F1 and F4 and authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications. BUDGET IMPLICATION $ $ BUDGETED AMOUNT ACTUAL AMOUNT FUNDING SOURCE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ® MEMO /LETTER: Memo from Jennifer Levitt dated 1/9/14 ® RESOLUTION: Draft ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ® OTHER: Feasibility Report, Special Benefit Appraisals ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS 1 , City Administrator Date COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER Cottage A Grove h ere Pride and P ,, 5 peritV Meet To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator From: Jennifer M. Levitt, P.E., City Engineer Date: January 9, 2014 Re: 2014 Pavement Management, District F1 & F4 1. Hold Public Hearing 2. Order Project 3. Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications Background On September 4, 2013 the City Council authorized a feasibility report for the Pavement Man- agement Area as outlined in the Capital Improvement Plan for two areas: 1) Area bound by south of 90th Street, east of Islay Avenue, north of Jareau Avenue, west of Jewel Avenue (District F1); 2) Area east of and including Jergen Avenue, west of and including Jareau Ave- nue, south of 91st Street and 93rd Street (a portion of District 174). The City Council held a workshop session on November 20, 2013 to discuss the various elements of the proposed im- provements. At the workshop, staff presented the preliminary findings of several different tests that were completed on the existing pavement, sub- grade, and utilities. Due to the poor pave- ment condition, along with good sub -grade soils and curb condition, a full pavement replace- ment and spot curb replacement was recommended for both areas. A neighborhood meeting for this project was held on December 12, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. at Cottage Grove Middle School. There were 20 people in attendance. On December 18, 2013 the City Council approved the feasibility report and called for a public hearing to be held on January 15, 2014. All notices and publications have been completed according to State Statute. Discussion Summary of Road and Infrastructure Improvements Road Rehabilitation: Full Road Reconstruction The rehabilitation method proposed for the streets in District F1 and District F4 is to remove the existing asphalt surface and replace it with a new surface, which will consist of two lifts of bituminous. Only spot curb replacement will be included as part of this project. Also proposed are some minor utility improvements for, sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, and street lights. The potential assessment for the improvements listed above is estimated at $3,100 per resi- dential lot. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder 2014 Pavement Management, District F1 & F4 January 9, 2014 Page 2 of 3 Project Funding Analysis The total project cost for the road work, utility, storm sewer, and street light improvements is $3,636,313. According to the City's policy, 45 percent of the total project cost for road work and utilities is assessed against the benefiting properties. The total project value that is as- sessed residentially is $1,555,239 for the Districts F1 and F4. The Cost Estimate Summary can be viewed in Appendix C of the Feasibility Report. Staff anticipates the issuance of $3 million in G.O. Improvement (section 429) bonds to finance the 2014 PM Project. Such an is- suance would result in an estimated increase to the annual tax levy of 0.9 percent beginning in 2015. A special benefit appraisal was ordered for properties within the F1 and F4 Districts. There was found to be a special benefit ranging from $4,100 to $5,000 per property for full pavement replacement, which is greater than the proposed assessment for the residential lots. Project Option Discussion Option #1: Order the project as outlined in the feasibility report for Districts F1 and F4. The benefit of proceeding with the project is that project costs are stable and a good bidding environment exists, which reduces the burden to the general tax payers and the residents ad- jacent to the project who are paying assessments. Another result of the new pavement is re- duced maintenance costs associated with the streets in the project area. Those maintenance dollars and resources can then be reallocated to other parts of the community, which is a greater benefit to the general taxpayer. There are also similar benefits related to the repairs to the utilities in the project area. The CIP outlines a fiscally responsible plan to rehabilitate roads and utilities within the com- munity. By ordering the project, those plans stay true that document and the Council's direction given in the development of the CIP. Option #2: Do not order the project as outlined in the feasibility report for Districts F1 and F4. If District F1 and F4 improvements are not ordered, the roads will continue to deteriorate which will result in increased maintenance cost. Those costs are borne by all taxpayers, not just the property owners that live on those streets. As with any delayed project, there are increased costs related to commodities, labor, and economic conditions, which all relate to the construc- tion index. The end result is a typical increase of 2.5 percent to 8 percent annually for the project. When a pavement management project is delayed, it creates a domino effect by de- laying all future pavement management projects. The cost of the domino effect is hard to cap- ture, since there are pavement management projects planned each year into the future. The City's approach since 1994 has been to ensure a safe condition and preserve the structural integrity of roads in a fiscally responsible manner. Independent third party benefit appraisals conducted since 2007 have concluded that this program improves property values within the project areas, as compared to the existing deteriorated condition. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder 2014 Pavement Management, District F1 & F4 January 9, 2014 Page 3 of 3 It should be noted to Council per Minnesota State Statute 429,031 that the resolution must be adopted by four-fifths vote for the project to be ordered and the project to proceed. Recommendation It is recommended the City Council adopt a resolution ordering the project and authorize preparation of plans and specifications for the 2014 Pavement Management Project Districts F1 and F4. RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -XXX A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROJECT, DISTRICTS F1 AND F4 WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted on December 18, 2013, fixed a date for the Council to hold a public hearing, pursuant to Minn. Stat. Chapter 429.011 to 429.111, on the proposed improvement benefitting properties that include: District F1: 1. 91st Street S. from Islay Avenue S. to Jareau Avenue S. 2. 91 st Street S. from 91 st Street S. to cul -de -sac (8802 -8856) 3. 91st Street S. from 91st Street S. to cul -de -sac (8862 -8900) 4. Janie Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to 91st Street S. 5. Janero Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to 91st Street S. 6. Jareau Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to 91 st Street S. 7. Jareau Avenue S. from Jareau Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9021 -9069) 8. Jareau Avenue S. from 91st Street S. to 91st Street S. 9. 91st Street S. from Jareau Avenue S. to Jeffery Avenue S. 10. Jasmine Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to 91st Street S. 11. Jasmine Court S. from Jasmine Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9002 -9018) 12. Jasmine Avenue S. from Jasmine Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9047 -9085) 13. Jasmine Avenue S. from 91st Street S. to cul -de -sac (9103 -9140) 14. Jarvis Avenue S. from 91st Street S. to 92nd Street S. 15. 92nd Street S. from Jarvis Avenue S. to Jeffery Avenue S. 16. Jeffery Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to 93rd Street S. 17. Jeffery Avenue S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9029 -9069) 18. Jeffery Avenue S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9103 -9153) 19. Jeffery Avenue S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9203 -9227) 20. Jeffery Court from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac. 21. 93rd Street S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to Jergen Avenue S. 22. Jergen Avenue S. from 93rd Street S. to Jergen Bay S. 23. 92nd Street S. from Jergen Avenue S. to cul -de -sac 24. Jergen Court from Jergen Avenue S. to cul -de -sac 25. Jergen Bay from Jergen Avenue S. to cul -de -sac 26. Jergen Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to Jergen Bay S. 27. Jergen Avenue from Jergen Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9061 -9083) 28. Jensen Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to Jeffery Avenue S. District F4: 1. Jareau Avenue S. from to 91st Street S. to dead end (9499) 2. Jarrod Avenue S. loop from Jareau Avenue S. to Jareau Avenue S. 3. Jarrod Avenue S. from Jarrod Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9337 -9473) 4. 93rd Street S. from Jareau Avenue S. to Jasmine Avenue S. 5. Jasmine Avenue S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac 6. Jeffery Bay S. from Jeffery Avenue S, to cul -de -sac Resolution No. 2014 -XXX Page 2 of 2 7. Jeffery Avenue S. from 93rd Street S. to cul -de -sac 8. Jergen Avenue S. from 93rd Street S. to dead end (9495) 9. Jergen Place S. from Jergen Avenue S. to cul -de -sac WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the City desires to assess the cost of said improvements to all benefited properties. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, County of Washington, State of Minnesota: 1. Such improvement is necessary, cost - effective, and feasible as detailed in the feasi- bility report. The improvement shall include road rehabilitation, water, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and street lights. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered. 3. Bolton and Menk, Inc. is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. 4. The City Council declares its official intent to reimburse itself for the costs of the improvement from the proceeds of the tax exempt bond. Passed this 15th day of January 2014. Myron Bailey, Mayor Attest: Caron M. Stransky, City Clerk To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator From: Jennifer M. Levitt, P.E., City Engineer Date: January 9, 2014 Re: 2014 Pavement Management, District F1 & F4 1. Hold Public Hearing 2. Order Project 3. Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications Background On September 4, 2013 the City Council authorized a feasibility report for the Pavement Man- agement Area as outlined in the Capital Improvement Plan for two areas: 1) Area bound by south of 90th Street, east of Islay Avenue, north of Jareau Avenue, west of Jewel Avenue (District F1); 2) Area east of and including Jergen Avenue, west of and including Jareau Ave- nue, south of 91st Street and 93rd Street (a portion of District F4). The City Council held a workshop session on November 20, 2013 to discuss the various elements of the proposed im- provements. At the workshop, staff presented the preliminary findings of several different tests that were completed on the existing pavement, sub - grade, and utilities. Due to the poor pave- ment condition, along with good sub -grade soils and curb condition, a full pavement replace- ment and spot curb replacement was recommended for both areas. A neighborhood meeting for this project was held on December 12, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. at Cottage Grove Middle School. There were 20 people in attendance. On December 18, 2013 the City Council approved the feasibility report and called for a public hearing to be held on January 15, 2014. All notices and publications have been completed according to State Statute. Discussion Summary of Road and Infrastructure Improvements Road Rehabilitation: Full Road Reconstruction The rehabilitation method proposed for the streets in District F1 and District F4 is to remove the existing asphalt surface and replace it with a new surface, which will consist of two lifts of bituminous. Only spot curb replacement will be included as part of this project. Also proposed are some minor utility improvements for sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, and street lights. The potential assessment for the improvements listed above is estimated at $3,100 per resi- dential lot. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder 2014 Pavement Management, District F1 & F4 January 9, 2014 Page 2 of 3 Project Funding Analysis The total project cost for the road work, utility, storm sewer, and street light improvements is $3,636,313. According to the City's policy, 45 percent of the total project cost for road work and utilities is assessed against the benefiting properties. The total project value that is as- sessed residentially is $1,555,239 for the Districts F1 and F4. The Cost Estimate Summary can be viewed in Appendix C of the Feasibility Report. Staff anticipates the issuance of $3 million in G.O. Improvement (section 429) bonds to finance the 2014 PM Project. Such an is- suance would result in an estimated increase to the annual tax levy of 0.9 percent beginning in 2015. A special benefit appraisal was ordered for properties within the F1 and F4 Districts. There was found to be a special benefit ranging from $4,100 to $5,000 per property for full pavement replacement, which is greater than the proposed assessment for the residential lots. Project Option Discussion Option #1: Order the project as outlined in the feasibility report for Districts F1 and F4 The benefit of proceeding with the project is that project costs are stable and a good bidding environment exists, which reduces the burden to the general tax payers and the residents ad- jacent to the project who are paying assessments. Another result of the new pavement is re- duced maintenance costs associated with the streets in the project area. Those maintenance dollars and resources can then be reallocated to other parts of the community, which is a greater benefit to the general taxpayer. There are also similar benefits related to the repairs to the utilities in the project area. The CIP outlines a fiscally responsible plan to rehabilitate roads and utilities within the com- munity. By ordering the project, those plans stay true that document and the Council's direction given in the development of the CIP. Option #2: Do not order the project as outlined in the feasibility report for Districts F1 and F4. If District F1 and F4 improvements are not ordered, the roads will continue to deteriorate which will result in increased maintenance cost. Those costs are borne by all taxpayers, not just the property owners that live on those streets. As with any delayed project, there are increased costs related to commodities, labor, and economic conditions, which all relate to the construc- tion index. The end result is a typical increase of 2.5 percent to 8 percent annually for the project. When a pavement management project is delayed, it creates a domino effect by de- laying all future pavement management projects. The cost of the domino effect is hard to cap- ture, since there are pavement management projects planned each year into the future. The City's approach since 1994 has been to ensure a safe condition and preserve the structural integrity of roads in a fiscally responsible manner. Independent third party benefit appraisals conducted since 2007 have concluded that this program improves property values within the project areas, as compared to the existing deteriorated condition. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder 2014 Pavement Management, District F1 & F4 January 9, 2014 Page 3 of 3 It should be noted to Council per Minnesota State Statute 429.031 that the resolution must be adopted by four - fifths vote for the project to be ordered and the project to proceed. Recommendation It is recommended the City Council adopt a resolution ordering the project and authorize preparation of plans and specifications for the 2014 Pavement Management Project Districts F1 and F4. RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -XXX A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROJECT, DISTRICTS F1 AND F4 WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted on December 18, 2013, fixed a date for the Council to hold a public hearing, pursuant to Minn. Stat. Chapter 429.011 to 429.111, on the proposed improvement benefitting properties that include: District F1: 1. 91 st Street S. from Islay Avenue S. to Jareau Avenue S. 2. 91 st Street S. from 91 st Street S. to cul -de -sac (8802 -8856) 3. 91 st Street S. from 91 st Street S. to cul -de -sac (8862 -8900) 4. Janie Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to 91 st Street S. 5. Janero Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to 91 st Street S. 6. Jareau Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to 91 st Street S. 7. Jareau Avenue S. from Jareau Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9021 -9069) 8. Jareau Avenue S. from 91 st Street S. to 91 st Street S. 9. 91 st Street S. from Jareau Avenue S. to Jeffery Avenue S. 10. Jasmine Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to 91 st Street S. 11. Jasmine Court S. from Jasmine Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9002 -9018) 12. Jasmine Avenue S. from Jasmine Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9047 -9085) 13. Jasmine Avenue S. from 91 st Street S. to cul -de -sac (9103 -9140) 14. Jarvis Avenue S. from 91 st Street S. to 92nd Street S. 15. 92nd Street S. from Jarvis Avenue S. to Jeffery Avenue S. 16. Jeffery Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to 93rd Street S. 17. Jeffery Avenue S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9029 -9069) 18. Jeffery Avenue S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9103 -9153) 19. Jeffery Avenue S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9203 -9227) 20. Jeffery Court from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac. 21. 93rd Street S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to Jergen Avenue S. 22. Jergen Avenue S. from 93rd Street S. to Jergen Bay S. 23. 92nd Street S. from Jergen Avenue S. to cul -de -sac 24. Jergen Court from Jergen Avenue S. to cul -de -sac 25. Jergen Bay from Jergen Avenue S. to cul -de -sac 26. Jergen Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to Jergen Bay S. 27. Jergen Avenue from Jergen Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9061 -9083) 28. Jensen Avenue S. from 90th Street S. to Jeffery Avenue S. District F4: 1. Jareau Avenue S. from to 91 st Street S. to dead end (9499) 2. Jarrod Avenue S. loop from Jareau Avenue S. to Jareau Avenue S. 3. Jarrod Avenue S. from Jarrod Avenue S. to cul -de -sac (9337 -9473) 4. 93rd Street S. from Jareau Avenue S. to Jasmine Avenue S. 5. Jasmine Avenue S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac Resolution No. 2014 -XXX Page 2 of 2 6. Jeffery Bay S. from Jeffery Avenue S. to cul -de -sac 7. Jeffery Avenue S. from 93rd Street S. to cul -de -sac 8. Jergen Avenue S. from 93rd Street S. to dead end (9495) 9. Jergen Place S. from Jergen Avenue S. to cul -de -sac WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the City desires to assess the cost of said improvements to all benefited properties. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, County of Washington, State of Minnesota: 1. Such improvement is necessary, cost - effective, and feasible as detailed in the feasi- bility report. The improvement shall include road rehabilitation, water, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and street lights. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered. 3. Bolton and Menk, Inc. is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. 4. The City Council declares its official intent to reimburse itself for the costs of the improvement from the proceeds of the tax exempt bond. Passed this 15th day of January 2014. Myron Bailey, Mayor Attest: Caron M. Stransky, City Clerk Consulting Engineers & surveyors M J Cottage Grove h ere Pride and ,?r°sperlty Meet Feasibility Report for 2014 Pavement Management Project City of Cottage Grove, Minnesota December 2013 Project Number N15.106799 ® Consulting Engineers Surveyors NA F " 2035 County Road D East • Suite B • Maplewood, MN 55109 -5314 Phone (651) 704 -9970 • Fax (651) 704 -9971 www.bolton- menk.com December 18. 2013 Honorable Mayor and Cite Council City- of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkwav South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 RE: 2014 Pavement Management Project BMI Project No. N 15.106799 Honorable Mayor and Cite Council Members, Enclosed for your revie\v is the 2014 Pavement Management Project Feasibility Report. The project scope includes street rehabilitation and utilit }° repairs within pavement district Fl and a portion of F4. as identified in this report. This report describes the improvements necessary within the project area. Cost estimates for the proposed improvements are presented in the Report. We would be happy to discuss this report at your convenience. Please contact me at 651- 968 -7674 if von have any questions. Sincerely. BOLTON & MENK. INC. 461P &�� Mike Boex. PE DESIGNING FOR A BETTER TOMORROW Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT FEASIBILITY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ...................................................................................................... ............................... i Certification............................................................................................................. ............................... ii Ilit - oduction .............................................................................................................. ............................... Existing Conditions — Disctricts F I K F4 .................................................................. ............................... 2 Streets.............................. ............................... ................................................... ............................... 2 SanitarySeNver ................................................................................................... ............................... 5 WaterMain ........................................................................................................ ............................... Storm ...................................................................................................... ............................... i Proposed Improvements — Districts FI & F4 ............................................................. ............................... 5 Strects................................................................................................................ ............................... j SanitarSeN\ er .................................................................................................... ..............................6 WaterMain ........................................................................................................ ............................... 6 StormSewer ...................................................................................................... ............................... 6 StormWater Qualit} . .......................................................................................... ............................... 6 Proposed Improvements — Ti-ail ................................................................................ ............................... 6 Permitsand Easements ............................................................................................. ............................... 7 EstimatedCosts ........................................................................................................ ............................... 7 CostAllocatio►i .................................................................................................. ............................... 7 Financing........................................................................................................... ............................... 8 PublicHcaring ........................................................................................................... ..............................9 ProjectSchedule ....................................................................................................... ............................... 9 Conclusion And Recommendations .......................................................................... ............................... 9 Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota Table of Contents 2014 Pay anent Managcn►a►t Project Pagc i 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT APPENDIX Appendix A — Existing Pavement Condition Photos Appendix B — Figures .Figure 1 — Location Map Figure 2 — Streets - Year Constructed Figure 3 -- Pavement Condition Rating Figure 4 — Proposed hnprovements Figure 5 — Utility Repairs Figure 6 — Assessable Parcels Appendix C — Cost Estimate Summary Appendix D — Preliminan- Assessment Roll Appendix. E — Pavement Condition Overview Appendix F — Pavement Cores Appendix G — Falling Weight Deflectometer Appendix H — Milling Test Areas CERTIFICATION 1 hereby certifi! that this plan. specification. or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 0 4 -P & 1 90 Michael J. Bocti P.E. License No. 44576 Bolton &, Menk, Inc. Date: December 18. 2013 Cite of Cotta a Grove. Minesota Certification 2014 Pavcn►enl Management Proiccl Pagc ii 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT INTRODUCTION The Heritage Estates Addition. Ridgewood 1" through 7 "' Additions, and the Knollwood 1 through J` Additions hav been identified as candidates for rehabilitation during the 2014 construction season as a part of the City of Cottage Grove's ongoing roadway rehabilitation program. The Cite Council authorized preparation of this Rcport to determine the fcasibilitti- of rehabilitating those streets as a part of the 2014 Pavement Management Project. These residential neighborhoods are located cast of Jamaica Avenue and south of 90t" Street and are part of Pavement Management District Fl and a portion of F4, as shown on Figure 1 located in Appendix A. There are thirty -seven residential streets within these neighborhoods totaling approximately 26.000 lineal feet. The purpose of this report is to fiuther evaluate the work required for this street rehabilitation project, to provide an estimate of cost, and to establish a method of cost allocation or assessment in order to determine the physical and economic feasibility. This feasibility report examuies the following street segments: District F1: 1. 91" Street So. from Islay Avenue So. to Jareau Avenue So. 2 91 Street So. from 91" Street So. to cul -de -sac (8802 -8856) 3. 91st Street So. from 91`t Street So. to cul -de -sac (8862 -8900) 4. Jane Avenue So. from 90 Street So. to 91" Street So. 5. Janero Avenue So. from 90"' Street So. to 91s Street So. 6. Jarcau Avenue So. from 90 Street So. to 91" Street So. 7. Jareau Avenue So. from Jareau Avenue So. to cul -de -sac (9021 -9069) 8. Jareau Avenue So. from 91 Street So. to 91" Street So. 9. 91" Street So. from Jareau Avenue So. to Jeffery Avenue So. 10. Jasmine Avenue So. from 90 Street So. to 91" Street So. 11. Jasmine Court So. from Jasmine Avenue So. to cul -de -sac (9002 -9018) 12. Jasmine Avenue So. from Jasmine Avenue So. to cul -de -sac (9047 -9085) 13. Jasmine Avenue So. from 91 Street So. to cul -de -sac (9103 -9140) 14. Jarvis Avenue So. from 91" Street So. to 92 " Street So. 15. 92 " Street So. from Jarvis Avenue So. to Jeffery Avenue So. 16. Jeffer)� Avenue So. from 90 "' Street So. to 93` Street So. 17. Jeffery Avenue So. from Jeffery Avenue So. to cul -de -sac (9029 -9069) 18. Jeffer3• Avenue So. from Jeffery Avenue So. to cul -de -sac (9103 -9153) 19. Jeffery Avenue So. from Jeffery Avenue So. to cul -de -sac (9203 -9227) 20. Jeffery Court from Jeffery Avenue So. to cul -de -sac. 21. 93` Street So. from Jeffery Avenue So. to Jergen Avenue So. 22. Jergen Avenue So. from 93" Street So. to Jergen Bay So. 23. 92 Street So. from Jergen Avenue So. to cul -de -sac 24. Jergen Court fi Jergen Avenue So. to cul -de -sac 25. Jergen Bay from Jergcn Avenue So. to cul -de -sac 26. Jergen Avenue So. from 90 " Street So. to Jergen Ray So. 27. Jergen Avenue from Jergen Avenue So. to cul -de -sac (9061 -9083) 28. Jensen Avenue So. from 90 Street So. to Jeffery Avenue So. City of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project Page I 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT District F4: 1. Jareau Avenue So. from to 91x' Street So. to dead end (9499) 2. Jarrod Avenue So. loop from Jarcau Avenue So. to Jareau Avenue So. 3. Jarrod Avenue So. from Jarrod Avcnuc So. to cul -de -sac (9337- 9473) 4. 93` Street So. from Jarcau Avenue So. to Jasmine Avcnuc So. 5. Jasmine Avenue So. from Jeffer• Avenue So. to cul -de -sac 6. Jeffery Bay So. from Jeffery Avenue So. to cul -de -sac 7. Jeffery Avenue So. from 9 ) Street So. to cul -de -sac 8. Jergen Avenue So. from 93" Street So. to dead end (9495) 9. Jergen Place So. from Jergen Avenue So. to cul -de -sac EXISTING CONDITIONS - DISCTRICTS F1 & F4 STREETS The streets within District F1 and F4 are urban - residential and were originally constructed in the late 1980's and early 1990's. The exceptions are the Ridgewood 0 Addition (1979) and Ridgewood 7 "' Addition (1997). Generally. the streets are 32 feet wide (from face of curb to face of curb) with concrete curb and gutter. Prior to the Wal -Mart development. Jeffery Avenue had been classified as a collector roadway between 90 "' Street and its southernmost stub with the intent that it \rould be extended in the future. As a part of the Wal -Mart project, a permanent cul -de -sac \vas constructed on the southern plat line of Ridgewood 5 "' Addition and the collector classification effectively removed. This former collector street is approximately 44 feet wide (from face of curb to face of curb) with concrete curb and gutter. A visual inspection was performed in 2013 to evaluate pavement surface conditions. The inspection determined the pavement rating of these streets generally range from 50 -60. Pavements in the lower end of that range are considered fair and generally have major distress. In contrast, the 1994 Pavement Management Plan depicted PCPs (Pavement Condition Index) in the range of 74 -100. Per that plan, PCI's in those ranges are classified as "Very Good" to "Excellent ". Since 1994, pavement condition has continued to deteriorate and much of the pavements have distress and are "Fair ". Fignrre 2 depicts the age of the streets within the neighborhood and Figure 3 depicts the visual pavement rating for each street segment. In addition, there are sections of existing curb and gutter that have settled. cracked. or have other defects that will require replacement. Appendix A contains some representative photos of the existing pavement condition. It should be noted that the visual surface rating is a preliminary indicator of condition and potential rehabilitation techniques, it should not automatically dictate tlne final maintenance or rehabilitation. Factors such as traffic projections, pavement strength, and pavement structure condition should also be considered. PAVEMENT CORES Coring of the pavement was performed to determine the thickness of the existing street section and evaluate pavement condition. From the cores, it can be seen that the average section consists of 34 inches of bituminous over 7 -8 inches of gravel. City of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project Cage 2 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Existing Sheet Section No. Location Bituminous (in) Aggregate Base (i Condition 1 8859 91 Street 4" 6" * (Upper 1.5 ") 2 9099 Janero Avenue 3.25" 6.5" Good 3 9088 Jareau Avenue 3.75" 10.5" * (Upper 2 ") 4 9019 Jasmine Avenue 4.5" W Good 5 9022 Jeffery Avenue 4.25" 7" (Entire depth. broken) 6 9063 Jensen Avenue 3.75 "' 10.25" Good 7 9044 Jergen Avenue 3" 8 Good 8 9150 Jarvis Avenue 3.75" W * (Upper 2'') 9 9154 Jeffen• Avenue 45" 9" * (Upper 2 ") 10 9128 Jergen Court 3.75" 5.5" Good 11 9279 Jergen Avenue 3.25" 7.75" *(Entire depth. broken) 12 9247 Jeffery Avenue 3.75" W. *(Upper 2.5 ") 13 9334 93` Street 3.25" 7.5" * (Entire depth, broken) 14 9444 93 Street 3.25" 6.25" *(Upper 2 ") 15 9116 Jergen Bay 3,75" 6,75" Good 16 948792 n d Street 2.38" 7.13" * (Bottom 1") 17 9337 Jeffcn- Court 4,00" 6,00" * (Entire depth, broken) 18 9170 Jareau Avenue J 8 * (Entire depth) 19 9411 Jareau Avenue 3.25" 7.25" * (Entire depth, broken) 20 9340 Jarrod Avenue 3.00" 9.00" * (Upper 1.5 ") 21 9373 Jasmine Avenue 3.50" 8.00" * (Upper 2 ". broken) 22 9426 Jeffery Avenue 3,13'° 7.38" * (Entire depth, broken) 23 9448 Jergen Place 4,25" 6.25" * (Entire depth) 24 9338 Jergen Avenue 3.50" 7.50" Good Average 3.58" 7.60" * Asphalt stripping observed (varying severity), depths noted. Seventeen of the tweuty -four cores displayed degradation due to strapping. which is generally- described as the separation of aggregate from the asphalt due to moisture. The stripping found degrades the strength and durability of the pavement. Seven of the cores were noted as broken. meaning the stripping was severe enough that the top layer of bituminous fell apart as the core was extracted. The locations of stripping coincided with areas where Public Works has performed extensive maintenance via temporal•\• overlays and patching. The stripping appears to occur in irregular patters, however it appears to be most severe in the pavement of the 1990's. Pictures of two pavement cores can be seen in Appendix F. City of Cotlage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project Page 3 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT n• � �1�c•1 ►r�1>��i ��I►r� Due to the results of the cores and previous maintenance expended, the City decided to perform additional testing of the pavement to evaluate strength and condition of the pavement structure. Two additional testing methods were. performed: 1, Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) 2. Milling of test strips The falling weight deflectometer (FWD) is a non- destructive process used to evaluate pavement structural condition by providing an in - situ characterization of the pavement layer stiffness. The FWD applies dynamic loads to a pavement surface, simulating the magnitude and duration of a single wheel load. The downward movement (vertical deflection) of the pavement at various distances from the loading plate are measured with various sensors. These measurements help determine the overall pavement load rating. pavement layer characteristics and material properties (modulus). and subgrade strength characteristics (in -situ R- value). Detailed FWD results are listed in Appendix G. Milling of test strips was performed in order to evaluate the feasibility of a mill - overlay. Twelve test areas were milled to a depth of approximately 2- inches. These test strips nvcrc approximately 7.5 - feet Nvide and 25 to 50 -feet long. The purpose of the test strips was to determine the quantity and severity of cracking below the pavement surface and visually evaluate the underlying pavement condition. Ideally. milling the surface pavement w ill remove sur face distress and reduce both the number and severity of cracks in the remaining pavement, reducing the need for joint repair and subsequent reflective cracking. Pictures of the test mill strips are located in Appendix H. ADDITIONAL TESTING SUMMARY The FWD testing provides a pavement stiffness quantified as a modulus. With a few exceptions. the modulus of the bituminous layers intact (and without stripping) was much higher than those with severe stripping. However. due to the satidy su bgrade soils and good aggregate base, the pavement structure as a whole tested structuralh sound. Therefore, the issue facing the Cite is functional and not structural — meaning (lie recurrence of maintenance issues due to the relatively creak stripped pavement rrraterial raveling md breaking apart. The risks typical of all mill overlay projects, i.e. reflective cracking and the associated maintenance required were evaluated to determine acceptable risk levels. In nine of the twelve test mill areas, nulling was performed to evaluate the feasibility of removing the upper 2" of stripped material which was typically the most severe. In eight of those nine areas it was determined that the remaining pavement posed risk for excessive cracking. thin pavement layers, or raveling in the base course. In the three remaining test areas where stripping was not present, two displayed more severe cracking in the bituminous base course increasing the potential volume of reflective cracking. 2013 IMPROVEMENTS In the summer of 2013, permanent cul - - sacs were constructed at the ends of Jasmine and Jeffet - \- Avenue. The parcels adjacent to the new cul -do -sacs are considered a part of this pavement management project, are r eceiving* benefit and are therefore participating in the assessment. The costs to construct the cul - de - sacs are not included in this report and are therefore a cost savings to the project and subsequent assessments. Cily of Collage Grove. Minuesota 2014 Pavennent Management Proiect Page 4 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SANITARY SEWER The sanitary sewer system within the District F consists primarily of 8 -inch VCP and PVC. The only exception to this is a 12 -inch reinforced concrete pipe on Jasmine Avenue between 91" Street and 90 Street. The existing sanitary sewer has been televised to evaluate pipe condition. The televising reports show that the pipe is in good condition. However, Some problems encountered in the existing sanitary sewer were root intrusion. cracked pipe and sags. Miscellaneous structure repairs including patching, lining, and other repairs were noted during the inspections. WATER MAIN The water mains within the project area consist of 6. 8. and 24 -inch diameter ductile iron pipe. The mains were installed in conjunction with the development of the neighborhoods. The water mains are believed to be in good condition. However, a valve within Heritage Estates recently had the bolts replaced due to excessive corrosion and it's believed other valves in the area may be in a similar condition. Additionally, there are expected to he some valves which are not operational and will need to he addressed with the project. The valves will be operated and evaluated by Public Works prior to the start of the project. STORM SEWER Tile existing storm sewer has been televised to determine pipe condition and necessary repairs. In addition, storm structures were also inspected. Storm sewer mains are generally in good condition. However, some problems encountered in the existing storm sewer were cracked or broken pipes and duty lines. Miscellaneous structure patching, lining, and other repairs were noted during the inspections. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS — DISTRICTS F1 & F4 STREETS Due to the range of pavement ages within Districts F I and F4, two primary rehabilitation methods would typically be proposed, pavement replacement and mill- overlay. However. due to the observed depth and extent of the pavement stripping in the cores. the results of FWD and test milling, and extent of previous City maintenance. a mill and overlay is not recommended at this time. While some streets may be able to successfully accept a null- overlay, there does not appear to be a logical break within the project limits since the stripping is relatively random and severity of cracking in the base course varies greatly. Therefore, the project area was viewed as a whole for firture maintenance and system management. If broken up into individual segments, each roadway segment would perform differently and require different maintenance at different times since each rehabilitation has its own lifecycle. Due to the types of distress present in the existing pavement, the anticipated acceleration of deterioration due to asphalt stripping, and risks presented in previous sections of this report, the streets within F1 and F4 are proposed to undergo a fill pavement removal and replacement with 3.5 inches of new pavement. Since the concrete curb and gutter is generally in good condition, it is proposed to undergo spot replacement. Tile curb in poor condition will be evaluated for removal just prior to construction, but preliminary estimates indicate that 8 -10% will need to be removed and replaced. Where conditions are favorable, the goal is that the concrete curb and gutter last two pavement lifecycles. The wear Course is proposed to be virgin mix, excluding the use of recycled asphalt pavement (RAP). In locations where curb is replaced in front of driveways, curb will be removed and replaced and each driveway would be patched the entire width with in -kind materials as a part of the street rehabilitation process. Due to the nature of spot curb replacement, this patch typically extends a few feet behind the curb. Concrete pads for the community mailboxes will also be replaced as a pant of this project. City of Cottage Grovc. Minnesota 201.1 Pavement Management Proiect Page 5 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Restoration is anticipated to consist of screened Premium Topsoil Borrow with a blo%vn compost top - dressing and seed. Traffic signs are proposed to be replaced as a part of this project to meet federal retroreflectivit• requirements. hi addition, signs will be evaluated for conformance to the adopted City sign police and signs will be removed or supplemented as required. SANITARY SEWER lnline repairs are recommended to address cracks within the pipe. Where there are sags with a history of back -ups, it is recommended that the pipe be removed and replaced. The sanitary sewer manhole castings will be salvaged and reinstalled. The existing concrete adjusting rings will be replaced with new HDPE adjusting rings conform to current City standards. WATER MAIN It is proposed that broken valve top sections be removed and replaced as a part of this project. Inn the 14eritage Estates Addition, it is proposed that the valves be dug up and checked for bolt corrosion and replaced if necessary. As a part of this process, the valve box should be replaced in conjunction with that work. Also, there are some hydrants that should be adjusted. It is proposed to extend the hydrant barrel on each of these hydrants. Finally. concrete hydrant access pads are proposed to be installed at all hydrants un accordance with current City standards. STORM SEWER Generally speaking, the intent of this project is to rehabilitate the streets and not change existing drainage patterns. In -line repairs are recommended to address cracks, and leaking or offset joints. Structures in poor condition will be replaced to conform to current city standards. Adjustment rings for manholes will be replaced with HDPE rings. Catch basin rings will not be replaced unless the curb adjacent to them is removed, or failure of the rings has occurred. The existing castings will be salvaged. Miscellaneous structure patching, lining, and other repairs will be performed as needed. Public Works staff provided input on areas with historic drainage concerns. No major flooding or drainage issues were noted. therefore only minor curb grade modifications and valley gutter installations are proposed to facilitate drainage. Drainage inunediately adjacent to 90' Street will be addressed as a part of a future 90' Street project. STORM WATER QUALITY Storm eater quality innprovenrents are not required in this neighborhood due to no increase of impervious surfaeing. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS -TRAIL There is a wood -chip trail planned for the green space between the residential neighborhood and Wal- Mart. This trail is proposed to be constructed in the future once additional destinations and trail connections are available. Therefore, no improvements are proposed as a part of this project. Like the drainage issues along= 90 Street. improvements to the bihmninous trail adjacent to 90 ° ' are anticipated to be addressed when 90 ° i Street is rehabilitated. City of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Proiect Page 6 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PERMITS AND EASEMENTS Because the roadway construction is considered a maintenance project that would not create any new impervious surfaces and would not change the existing grade. hydraulics, or purpose of the roadway, the Phase II General Storm Water Permit from the MPCA would not be required for that portion of the work. It should be noted that the fixture trail north of Wahnart will require the following permits when that project moves forward: • Northern Natural Gas Pipeline encroachment agreement or permit for trail construction • MC ES encroachment agreement or permit for trail construction • NPDES Phase II General Sturm Water Permit if the area of disturbance is greater than one acre No additional drainage and utility easements are anticipated in the neighborhoods, however, this will be evaluated during the final design phase of the project. ESTIMATED COSTS Cost estimates for the improvements have been prepared and are included in the Appendix of this report. All costs for items to be constructed are based on anticipated writ prices for the 2014 construction season. All costs include a thirtV (30) percent allowance for indirect costs associated with the project (engineering, administrative. financing, and legal) as well as a ten (10) percent contingency. No costs are included for capitalized interest during the construction period or before assessments are levied. Following is an overall summary of the estimated costs: Estimated Cost Summary Location Estimated Project Cost Pavement Replacement $3,636,312.68 Total Estimated Project Cost: $3,636,312.68 Costs presented include 10% contingence + 30% indirect costs COST ALLOCATION Assessments for this proicct will be based upon the "Infrastructure Maintenance Task Force Special Assessment Police For Public Improvements." dated September 30. 2005, Revised August 8, 2012. All adjacent benefiting properties are proposed to be assessed. Per the Urban Residential policy, 45% of the project cost for both surface and subsurface improvements would be assigned to each individual residential lot on a unit basis. The intent of the City's police is to treat all properties within a residential development as similar individual units regardless of lot frontage. The amount assessed is based on the Cite standard street section cv en if the width is greater. City fiords would be responsible for the remaining 55% of the project costs. Per the policy. City - owned property was evaluated in the same manner as commercial /industrial lots where 100% of the project costs adjacent to the property are assessed. In areas where residential property was on the opposite side of the street of City property, half of the street width was assigned to the residential area and the other half to the Cite. The estimated proicct assessments are as follows: City of Cottagc Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project Page 7 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT CITY -OWNED PROPERTY: Estimated Cost Allocation Location Location Other Funds Y City Estimated Pro Cost Estimated Estimated Total Property Total Street Adjustment City Location Street Project Front Cost for Half of Property CostsA Cost ** oot`g� Adjacent to street" Assessment ($ /($/10 Cit y, Property (100% of Total) F I & F4 — Pavement $97,69 $ 1 39,70 20 $7.793,94 $ 1,' 9(,.97 $1.396,97 Replacement Totals: $1,396,97 Construction Cost. includes Street & Utilities x Total Project Cost (10% Contingence + 30% Indirect) Includes 50% reduction for property on one side of the street URBAN RESIDENTIAL LAND USE: Estimated Cost Allocation Location Location Other Funds Y Assessed Amount (4S% of Total) Estimated Pro Cost F I &. F4 — Pavement Replacement $2.091 $ 1.555.239, 19 S-3, / 2.68 Totals: $2,081,073.50 $1,555,239.18 $3,636,312.68 See Appendix C for Fund Breakout. II1cILides Cite fiinds. Estimated Cost Per Unit Location Assessable RBLE Units Assessed Amount (45 /o of Total) Assessed Cost Per RBLE Unit Pe►• Policy Special Benefit Appraisal F I & F4 — Pavement Replacement 513 $L555.239.18 S $3,031.66 Single knmily: 53,031.66 51131) Should the calculated assessment exceed the special benefit appraisal. the single - family assessments will be proposed to be capped at the amount of the special benefit appraisal. If needed. City fiends \\ ill cover the difference bete cell the calculated assessment and the benefit appraisal. FINANCING Assessments are proposed to be levied based on the City's current assessment police. The remainder of the project would be financed throug a combination of City fends such as tile General T1x Levv and Enterprise funds for items such as storm sewer improvements. Figure 6 depicts the assessable parcels for the project. City of Cottage Grove, Minncsola 2014 Pavement Management Project Page 8 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PUBLIC BEARING Because the properties within the project area benefit from the proposed improvements. and the project will be partially fimded through assessment, it will be necessary for the City to hold a public improvement hearing to receive comment on the proposed project and to determine fiirther action to be taken. PROJECT SCHEDULE Belo%% is the proposed schedule assuming starting construction in 2014: • 09/04/2013 Council Orders Feasibility Report • 11/20/2013 Council Workshop • 12/12/2013 Hold Neighborhood Meeting • 12/18/2013 Council Receives and Approves Feasibility Report Council Sets a Public Improvement Hearing Date • 01/15/2014 Council Holds Public Improvement Hearing Council Orders the preparation of the Plans and Specifications • 03/05/2014 Council Approves the Plans and Specifications • 04/03/2014 Project Bid Date • 04/16/2014 Contract Award + Spring 2014 Begin Construction + September 2014 Complete Construction • September 2014 Council sets Assessment Hearing Date • October 20 1 Council holds Assessment Hearing CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that this report be used as a guide for the layout, design. and cost allocation for the public improvements. It is finther recommended that the owners of properties within the project limits be notified of the proposed improvements in order to provide comment. To determine project feasibility, a comparison was made between the costs estimated herein and the costs experienced for other similar projects within the City. These comparisons. on a per linear foot construction cost basis (no indirect project costs), are shown in the following table: City of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project Page 9 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Cost per Unit Comparison 2014 Pavement Management Project (Estimated) $97.69 2013 Pavement Management Project (Bid Results) District C 1 & District C2 — Pavement Replacement Area $151.18 District C2 — Mill & Overlay Area $94.09 2011 Pavement Management Project (Bid Results) Pine Coulee /Countrvwood $68.49 Howard's Addition $63.18 2010 Pavement Management Project - River Acres (Bid Results) $69.14 2008 Pavement Management Project (Bid Results) 1 $96.00 From the tabulation above, it can be seen that the cost to rehabilitate in the pavement replacement areas are less than the costs from the 2013 Pavement Management Project. This is primarily due to the fact that the existing concrete curb and gutter is in better shape with less anticipated replacement and therefore less impact to existing driveways and boulevards. In addition, because the curb is being left in place, placing street light ivire in conduit is not being proposed. In fact, curb damage is estimated to be less than 2013's mill & overlay area. In contrast, the costs are slightly higher than 2011 due to the fact that this project includes streets with concrete curb and gutter and public sanitary sewer, storni sewer. and water main repairs. In addition, the street widths are significantly wider than the rural residential streets from 2010 and 2011. The project is financially feasible, with finding sources identified from the City as well as the benefited properties adjacent to the project. Financial responsibilities have been determined based on estimated project costs as well as adopted City policy. From an engineering standpoint, this project is feasible, necessary, and cost effective. Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 201.4 Pavement Management Project Page 10 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Appendix A Existing Pavement Condition Photos Cottage J Grove * here Pride an6Prosperity Meet Cite of ColtaQc Grove. Minncsola 201.1 Pavement Management Project 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT City of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project District F1 Approximate Location: 91 Street cul -de -sac. Irregular block cracking with open cracks (approximately 15'). District F1 Approximate Location: 91$" Street cul -de -sac. 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT District Fl Approximate Location: Jareau Ave cul -de -sac. City of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project District Fi Approximate Location: 91 Street Avest of Janero Ave. Blow patching present along street to patch deteriorating pavement. 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT I Cite of Cottage Grove. Minuc§ola 2014 Pavement Management Proiect District F1 Approximate Location: Jeffery Avenue approaching 90 "' Street District Fl Approximate Location: Jasmine Avenue cul -de -sac 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT District F1 Approximate Location: 9032 Jareau Avenue City of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavemeat Management Project District Fl Approximate Location: 93` Street cast of JcffcrN Avenuc 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT District F1 Approximate Location: Jergen Court Regular transverse (thermal) cracking with subsequent block craeki City of Cottage Grove, Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Proiect District F1 Approximate Location: Jeffeiy Court Blow patching of stripped pavement. 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT District R Approximate Location: 93" Street and Jasmine Avenue intersection Stripping and patching of the existing pavement. Seal coat pecking off pavement. District R Approximate Location: 9301 Jareau Avenue Ciq- of Cottage Grovc. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project 2014 PAVEMENT" MANAGEMENT over time. Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Proiect District R Approximate Location: 9336 Jeffery Avenue District R Approximate Location: 9492 Jarrod Avenue Curb to remain Crack is tiaht and there is no settlement or differential movement. Curb is fimctional. Curb to be replaced Curb that is cracked in multiple locations. has settled. or has raveled and open joints is proposed to be City of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 201.1 Pavement Management Project � AL 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Appendix B Figures Cottage Grove *115 ere Pridc and Q1p5 pedty Meet Cite of Cottage Grovc. Minnesota 20 14 Pavement Management Project 100 th St. N I f 7 , W* M C919ge Grove BOLTON 8. Ml= INC. C_Wtlnq Cn01.... ♦ Sy... j 11 T 1,11.11 COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA 2014 PAWAENt fAANA(,UA04t PROUt LOCATION MAP FIGURE 1 —rte-- — — — — — — — — — — — --- — — — — — — — — — — — ;o 0 jj ED w w w w @ 0 . w R V, c A t r R z o u z o u z o u z o u z o u z o u z z o u u z o u Z a Q w —rte-- — — — — — — — — — — — --- — — — — — — — — — — — ;o t y �i 11 .' i�0iv.. J A --- ------ -- t - � � � �. inn � � e w7lvnv7rt � �� � ��a: PP�� _ .r o�iY iJ A� �4)d4q Y Gi Pi GO z z z. Of U ZN 5a O F Zo 0 13 i-i ..Jy I t z �? a Z=p z = z t v o a . ' 1---- r--- - - - -- - Ewa— r m r r r SS' Na u 1 '�� y Car _ }� f � • n � i I 1 " �'► 1 I r r f , J tx 1 I 1 ! I 1 1 o n6n63 i oll%VnvUw n.'am coamr � ca lrrrje »'ryf i J 1 - - ------- — — — l - - — - — � 1 - - W' 1 y y 1 a j - � plus 1 �Jr 'nS - 1 •.:�t :i+ UtlStt':fi CKllfaM llt7 __ -- —_ LI ='JIB rt, Z u .21 Z 0 c 0 W � I 1 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — w+ - ell Ck, o . 50 Mv � I IL I� ipw OS 'JAY AVU — — — — — — — — — — — - Z u .21 Z 0 c 0 w+ L � fc'� Wt cg 55 � r rE L g� &� W¢ 3 z t � n hS Si �a � CJ NG v ni' W F J F 1.1 5 � t t , �•� � f ( I I J g � rvilvi J2 71Y Av3Uv!' - - `•'ps lIry 101,3VI � I 1 Fr i w z 1' T i d -- — ------- - - - - -- -- - - - -- --{ i P ♦ n Tae x.0alr , 1 T ♦��'♦ f a I Or ar, I 1 v z g IN I II, I.' ti:l �w 1 � • "'Ta - r ? r� 5 �` 1 T� �f x � a x � a{ 1 AY \91vf 1 R ` l <iR �. I as JAV �v Ol Us 4 W tl'.'_VI - 1 g ' F I { ��r r , rrrrrr�r • r rrr -r-r� ,x ILA, NUVI 1 '3xAroa�xtir �1 j '� — 1 ff I ix 1 lllalclsse 1 c . o --- — `os3nv Aviv ---- _ —__ -- '. - '- PMSVI9PCOlxIPt iSVt _ -- -- i ) I _ ate a � ;LJA- T --- -- -- 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Appendix C Cost Estimate Summary M e Cottage Grove �h�re Pride andP�osPerity Meet Cily of Cottage Grovc. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project _� _.__ / � � §� ,`! 8 S k }�� � � ! f : / � \(\ \ \( } �§ § � "R � 1, 1 � r .R d ca : §:Z \ ; || f � / g 12 )\) i ): :> § 7 � | \. 44 ¢\ | t! �$ i � / � � \ q , � , ! A A W 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Appendix D Preliminary Assessment Roll Cottage Grove IP ht`re Pride and Prosperi Meet City of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project Preliminary Assessment Roll District F1 Pavement Replacement Parcel ID District Owner Address Units $ /Unit Total /Unit 2102721110003 F1 ZERR MICHAEL P & BONNY J 9000 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110004 F1 TURNER PATRICIA A 9016 )ANTE AVE 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2102721110005 F1 PETERSEN NINA M & SHEENA M MONSRUD 9032 JANIE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110006 Fl FUCHS TERRY J & DANA) 9048 JANIE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110007 Fl NORDMAN ALAN H & JUDITH L 9064 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 102 72 1 110008 Fl DERRY WILLIAM L 9080 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.661 53,031.66 2102721110009 Fl WEST JASON T & )ACQBS JENNIFER 9096 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 102 7 2 1110010 Fl WESSINGER WILLIAM A & MARILYN 9112 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110011 FI LANE GABRIEL D 9128 MINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110012 Fl GUSTAFSSON JOHN A & LERIN M METZKE 9144 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110013 F1 ELTHON JUSTIN & CRYSTAL 8938 91ST SY S 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2102721110014 Fl GEYEN MARC & LINDSEY 8924 91ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2302721110015 2102721110016 F1 F1 GUY JEFFREYA & SANDRA D BUCHHOLZ DANIEL$ 891091ST STS 890091STST 1 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2102721110017 F1 HEMMESCH DEBRA G & TROY E 8886 91ST ST S 1 $3,031 -66 53,031-66 2102721110018 F1 KURT MICHAEL J & ELIZABETH A 888091ST STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110019 F1 WHEELOCK JEFFREY 5 & DENISE L 8874 91ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110020 F1 KLEIN JAMES R & KARYN L 8868 91ST ST 1 $3,03146 $3,031.66 2102721110021 Fl SOBY TIMOTHY M & LAWANNA C 8862 91ST ST S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110022 Fl ANDER5ON THOMAS J & LAURA M 885691ST STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 21027Z1110023 Fl UNDEMAN PHILIP G& PATRICIA A LINDEMAN 885091ST STS 1 53.031.66 53.031.66 2102721110024 Fl UNDSTROM KRIS R & CAROLYN M 8844 91ST ST 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2102721110025 Fl VANOVERBEKE JEFFREY E & CHRISTINA M VANOVERBEKE 8838 91ST ST S 1 $3.031.66 $3.031.66 2102721110026 Fl BERGDALUGHN E & ELIZABETH 8832 91ST ST 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110027 Fl HORNES)AMES D& REBECCA L SCHMIDTKE 882691STSTS 1 $3,031.66 $3,091.66 2102721110028 Fl HOFFROGGE DAVID PJ & TRACY L 8820 91ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110029 F1 SECRETARY OF HOU SING& URBAN DEVELOPMENT 881491ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110030 F1 WAGNER PHILIP AMOS & LINDA M $808 91ST $T 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110031 F1 ELLISON RAYMOND E & KAREN $ $80191 ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110032 Fl TAPE JERRY W & CINDY S 8803 91ST ST S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031166 2102721110033 F1 COOPER CRAIG D & NREKA L 8817 91ST ST 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110034 Fl RENARD RANDY & PAMELA 883191ST STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110035 Fl BIRKELANDJEREMY C 984591STST 1 $3,031.66 $3,03L66 2102721110036 F1 ROSE JENNIFER K & JEFFREY A 885991ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110037 FI KIBWANA THOMAS & YOLANDA 887391ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110038 FI PEREZ DAVID & HORACIO PEREZ $88791 ST STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110039 Fl ARMBRUSTER JOSEPH B & REBECCA 89019 IST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110040 Fl MARSHALL DONALD I & ALICE L 891591ST STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110041 F1 MALLAT TROY F & DIANA M 8929 91STST5 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110042 Fl AKAKPO YAO 894391ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110043 Fl PINAULT ASHLEY 895791ST STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 102 721 110044 Fl THORNTON ROBERT M JR & DIANE D 8971 91ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110045 1`1 MEIER JOHN O & JENNIFER L 898591ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110046 Fl GERHARDT KELLY G & LAURIE A 8999 91STST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031 -66 1102721110047 FI OTTE JOSEPH & CHRISTINE 9178 JANERO AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110048 Fl MARK EZEKIEL 9162)ANERO AVE 1 $3.031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110049 Fl KIMBALL SCOTT D & JOAN M 9146 JANERO AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110050 FI STRUVE JEFFREY & KATHLEEN M 9130 JANERO AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110051 Fl ASHENAFI GETAHUM H & SENAITK, BEDAS5O 9114 JANERO AVE 1 $3,03166 53,031.66 2102721110052 F1 SMITH DIANA 9098 JANERO AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110053 F1 SCHABACKER JEFFREY 5 & LYNN A 9082 JANERO AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110054 F1 51REK SHAUN R & AIMEE R WARNER 9066 JANERO AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110055 F1 NYQUIST GARY R & SHERYL) 9050 JANERO AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110056 Fl MILLER RALPH LJR & LINDA L 9034 JANERO AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110057 F1 SHERMAN MICHAEL F & SUSAN M 90181ANERO AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110058 F1 WATTERS JENNIFER M & JOSHUA R 9002 JANERO AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110059 FI WELLS WILLIAM L & RORANN 9001 JANIE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110060 Fl KUNZ ROBERT J & RITA K 9017 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 53,03L66 2102721110061 Fl IUNGWIRTH BRENDA A 9033 JANIE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110062 F1 RELOCATION PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT LLC 9049 JANIE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110063 FI RPM INV GROUP 9065 JANIE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110064 F1 HAMMARSTEN MARK A & CHRISTINE 9081 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 210272111006$ Fl ORUMM TODD G & LISA A 9097 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031 -66 2102721110066 F1 YOUNGQUIST GREGORY M & KARA L 9113 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110067 F1 LEWIS SCOTT M & NANCY JEAN 9129 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110068 F1 WENDEL T140MAS A & KAUP TRACY 9145 JANIE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110069 F1 MAURER WILLIAM E & JENNIFER S 9161 JANIE AVE 1 $3,03166 $3,031.66 2102721110070 Fl BERGER CHANCE L 9177 )ANTE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110071 F1 NGEH EVA K 9179 JANERO AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110072 Fl KOSKI DANIEL W & PAMELA J 9163 ) ANERO AVE 1 $3,031 -66 $3,031 -66 2102721110073 F1 KREMMIN CHRISTINE ANN 9147 JANERO AVE 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2102721110074 Fl KOGER ADAM J & CAIN M 9131 JANERO AVES 1 $3,03166 $3,031.66 2102721110075 Fl KNMMEK JOSEPH M & SAMUEL K MIMMEK 9115 JANERO AVE S I $3,031 -66 $3,031 -66 2102721110076 fl, BRIGGS SCOTT N & ANGELA M 9099 JANERO AVE 5 1 53,031,66 $3.031.66 Preliminary Assessment Roll District F1 Pavement Replacement Parcel ID District Owner Address Units $ /Unit Total /Unit 2102721110077 1`1 UDELHOFEN PHILLIP C & DEBORAH M FRAWER 9083 JANERO AVE 1 $3,031,66 $3,031.66 2102721110078 Fl BAHL THOMAS 0 & BARBARA ! 9067)ANERO AVE I $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110079 FI YZERMANS MARK F & DEEANN M DENNING 9051 JANERO AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110080 FI BROUWER SCOTT K & PEGGY S 9035 JANERO AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110081 F1 LARSEN BRENT T & JACQUELINE A 9019JANEROAVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2102721110082 F1 SILVERGLATE TRINA M 9003 JANERO AVE 1 $3,031,661 $3,031.66 2102721110083 F1 HASAN MIRJA M & KAOSAR 5 9013 91ST ST 1 $3,031.661 $3,031.66 2102721110084 Fl. LAFORGE JOANN M 9027 91ST ST T $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210001 F1 PIPER MARY L 9047 JASMINE AVE $ 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210002 Fl VOLK KAREN L 9053 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210003 Fl SORENSON ROGER W & SUSAN R 9067 JASMINE AVE S 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210004 Fl NIENOW JOSHUA &TANYA 9077 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210005 F1 DAVIS AARON 9048 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 202 7212 10006 F1 KEEN RENEE C 9030 JEFFERY AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210007 F1 JONES DONALD R 9022 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210008 FI BROWN CHRISTOPHER M & SUSANNAH K 9010 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210009 Fl MYCKELOY WESLEY L & PARIS A 9002 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210010 F1 OROPEZA J [SSE M 9001 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031,66 $3,031.66 2202721210011 F1 SPENCER CRAIG E & DARLENE L 9011 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210012 Fl JOHNSON STEVEN A & BARBARA A 9025 JEFFERY AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 220272121DO13 F1 MANSHIP JAMES L & BEVERLY A 9029 JEFFERY AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210014 Fl TOTH LAURA M & BRIAN S 9033 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210015 Fl JONES DAVID C & LAURIE LYNN 9041 JEFFERY AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210016 Fl NEUMANN ERIK E & DEBRA L 9055 JEFFERY AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210017 Fl ABBAS TROY M 9069 JEFFERY AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721210018 Fl GROVUM DAVID J & KATHERINE A 9198 91ST ST 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202 72 12 10019 Fl HAG[ NSKAYIAA 9098 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 202 72 12 10020 Fl CONLIN EDWARD) JR & DIANE 9088 JEFFERY AVE 1 53,031.66 S3,031.66 2202721210021 Fl DAVIS KYLE LIN 9078 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210022 F1 STRAFE LDA GARY D & RITA M 9068 JEFFERY AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210023 Fl ALLMAN GARY W & PATRICIA A 9058 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210024 F1 JANECEK JAMES E 9209 91ST ST S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031 -66 2202721210033 Fl RIDDLE DANIEL) & JENA M BECHEL 9139 JET EERY AVE 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210034 Fl SCHLEH JEFFREY J & LAURA l 9135 JEFFERY AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210035 Fl ENGLUND JONATHAN E & JESSICA K 9131 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210036 FI ANDERSON )UL(C K 9127 )[IT CRY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 220272121DO37 Fl WENE DANIEL 5 9123 JEFFERY AVE 1 53,031.66 53,031.66 2202721230038 Fl HOGSTAD HISAKO K 9119 JEFFERY AVE S 1 63,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210039 Fl COLLINS MICHAEL & ANNETTE L 9115 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210045 Fl ANDERSON TIMOTHY G & JEAN E 9098 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 53 2202721210046 F1 SPICER STEVEN M & CHERYL 9094 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 S3,031.66 2202721210047 Fl MARTIN JASON 1 & MICHELLE AM 9086 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721210048 Fl BRANNAN DEBORAH A PORATH & CHAD M WILHELM 9072 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210049 Fl BLACK DAVID M & KRISTINE C 9062 JENSEN AVE S 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210050 Fl UY JAMES 9052 JENSEN AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721210051 Fl ANDERSON DALE C & ROSEMARY E 9046 JENSEN AVE S 1 53,031,66 S3,03L66 2202721210052 F3 KATH RONALD M & KATHRYN 1 9038 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031 -66 2202721210053 F1 MIKE RYGH HOMES INC 9024 JENSEN AVE 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210054 FI SMITH BRIAN R & SARAH E 9014 JENSEN AVE S 1 $9,031.66 $3,031 -66 2202721210OSS Fl POKELA KEITH A & DARLA K 9008 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3.031 -66 2202721210056 F1 WIETGREFE WESLEY N & JEANNE 9004 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210057 Fl LEVAKE MICHAEL W & MARGARET 9087 JENSEN AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031,66 2202721210058 F1 HARPER CYNTHIA JEAN MOODY 9079 JENSEN AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210059 Fl DONLIN MMES J & VICKI L 9075 JENSEN AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210060 Fl NOLTE PAUL] & MARCY A BOVALD 9071 JENSEN AVE 1 $3.031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210061 Fl MAGEE ANDRAEA 9063 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3.031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210062 F1 SCHNEIDER DAVID & LINDA L PATTEN 9057 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210063 Fl SPEIRS BRUCE J & MICHELLE A 9051 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031 -66 2202721210064 Fl KOREN MARK A & ANNETTE M 9049 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3.031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210065 Fl BURCIAGA JOSE A & GLORIA 9039 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210066 Fl MILLER [LISA M 9027 JEI4SEN AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210067 Fl OLSON ANDREW M & TARA J HUXFORD 9017 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210068 Fl STROM BRAD L & JULIE M 9009 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210069 Fl BLOMGREN VICKIE l & DANIEL M 9005 JENSEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210070 F1 KRINGS JEAN M & DANIEL 1 90066 JERGEN AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210071 F1 JUSTICE DEREK H 9012 JERGEN AVE S 1 53,031.66 53,031.66 2202721210072 F1 MUSKOPF CLINTON R & DEBORAH K 9016 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031-661 $3,031.66 2202721210073 Fl VANG LA MEE & KONG PHENG & PAKOU VANG 9026 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3.031.66 2202721210074 Fl HEROFF JOHN C & JANEL D 9032 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210075 Fl OOMS ROGER R & KIM 1 9040 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031 -66 $3,031.66 2202721210076 Fl OTT JACKIE D & KATHLEEN M 9044 JERGEN AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210077 Fl THAO MAI M & NA YANG 9054 JERGEN AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3.031.66 2202721210078 Fl HOLMES GARY G & JUDITH A 9060 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210079 Fl DOUBLIN ROBERT N & KRISTI H 9070 ]ERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 Preliminary Assessment Roil District F1 Pavement Replacement Parcel ID District Owner Address $ /Unit Total /Unit 2202721210080 F1 ROHR KELSEY J & SHERRIE L 9080 JERGEN AVE 5 $3,031,66 53,031.66 2202721210081 Fl SCHMITT JAY 9084 JERGEN AVE5 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210082 Fl KVAM JAMES D 9096 JERGEN AVE 5 RI $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210083 F1 ROHR MARK P 9111 JERGEN AVE 5 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210084 F1 TOBRITZHOFER PAMELA) & ROBERT 9083 JERGEN AVE S $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210085 F1 FINK THOMAS A & CHERYL A 9081 JERGEN AVE $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210086 FI RASMUSSEN KURT K & COLLEEN M 9073 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210087 F1 ANDERSON MARK W & LORI A 9065 JERGEN AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031,66 2202721210088 Fl MCQUEEN REBECCA C 9061 JERGEN AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210089 Fl NEILSON MARK A & JOY M 9059 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 202 7212 10090 Fl KNUDTSON DONALD 6 & NANCY A 0053 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210091 Fl FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION 9043 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210092 FI KARELSIEFFREYR & SHERRY K 9035JERGENAVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210093 Fl KUHNS THOMAS 8 & AMY K 9031 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210094 Fl MANNING THOMAS ROBERT & FAY 9019 JERGEN AVE 5 1 $3,031,66 $3,031.66 2202721210095 Fl BREZINKA ZACHARY A 9007 JERGEN AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210096 F1 EDWARDS BRYAN D & ELLEN L 9003 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210107 Fl OLIVIER LLEWELLYN 9159 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210108 Fl BADGER ROBERT D 9151 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210109 El COLON JOSE A & MARIBEL 9143 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210110 Fl VIAENE KEVIN E & VICKIE L 9103 JEFFERY AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210111 Fl BCC HOLDINGS LLC 91 It JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210112 FI OAWSEY RANDALLA & DAWN M 9099 JENSEN AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031,66 2202721210113 Fl TUTHILL JULIE L 9095 JENSEN AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3.031.66 2202721210114 Fl HOOPMAN JUSTIN R 949892ND5T5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210115 F1 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORP 947692ND 5T5 1 $3,031,66 $3,031.66 2202721210116 F3 OLWELL MICHELE M 946492NOST5 1 S3,031.66 $3.031.66 2202721210117 Fl JORGENSON JENNIFER L 9197 JERGEN AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721210118 F1 SCHROEDER CYNTHIA 8 9189 JERGEN AVE 5 J 53,031.66 53,031.66 2202721210119 F1 VAN WIJK CARL L & ELIZE M 9104 JERGEN AVE 5 1 $3 ,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210120 FI LAWRENCE TODD 1 & JENNIFER M 9110 JERGEN BAY S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210121 Ft FRANCIS NICOLAS & SHERYL RICH][ 9116 JERGEN DAY 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210122 Fl OLDHAM SHAWN & HEIDI B 9122 JERGEN BAY S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210123 F1 NELSON MICHAEL B & KIMBERLY) 9128 JERGEN SAY S 1 $3,031,66 $3,031.66 2202721210124 FI WOLTIER EDWARD D & MARGARET K 9134 JERGEN BAYS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210125 TI RAMMER PAUL & JODI L 9176 JERGEN BAY 5 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210126 Ft TORRENS BENJAMIN W & HOLLY R 9182 JERGEN BAY S 1 $3,031.66 $3,0317 2202721210127 F1 KVAMME MICHAEL 5 & BRENDA L 9188 JERGEN BAY 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210128 Ft SHAHID NOREEN 9194 JERGEN AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210129 FI HMG JEREMY M 9200 JERGEN AVE 5 1 53,031.66 53,031.66 2202721210130 Fl KOO5MANFI JESSICA D &PHILLIP 949992ND 5T5 1 53,031.66 53,031.66 2202721210131 Fl BAKER KARRI L& THOMAS I SCHWINGLE SR 948792ND STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721210132 FI MANGUARDIA GRE AM & HURETH P MANGUARDIA 9455 92ND ST 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220001 Fl BECKER JASON D & MARISA L 9005 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220002 F1 WESTPHAL RALPH 9013 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031,66 53,031.66 2 202 72 12 2000 3 FI WITTENBERG KIMBERLYA 9021 JAREAU AVE I $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220004 FI SAYUNUS OWAIS & KISHWAR 9029 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031-66 $3,031.66 2202721220005 FI LINDAHL DUANE A & JILL M 9037 JAREAU AVE 1 53,031.56 $3,031.66 2202721220006 Fl BEARD TRAVIS N & JOAN M 9045 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220007 Fl GENET JOHN III & KRISTEN S 9053 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220008 Fl CRAIG EDWARD P JR & ANGELA M 9061 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220009 Fl ANDRES FRANK J & DEBRA A 9069 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2 2 02 72 12 20010 F1 SWEDZINSM PATRICK J & JENNIFER L 9077 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220011 F1 SULLIVAN DWIGHT T & MICHELLE L ROBERTS 9085 JAREAU AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220012 Fl DAWN HOWARD JR & DUANNE M 9093 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220013 Fl HELMERICK ARTHUR 1 & MARY J 9100 91ST ST 5 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 220272122DD14 Fl LACROIXIEREMY S & KIMBERLY A 930691 ST 5T 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220015 Fl BUETTNER PHILLIP 1 & JOY AJ 9112 91ST ST 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220016 F1 WINKLER DENNIS W & SANDRA D 9118 91ST ST 5 1 $3.031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220017 FI LARSON LEDEAN R & JUDITH 9113 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220018 FJ MULGREW DOUGLAS & SPEEOLING A & ANN-MARIE SPEEDI 9129 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220019 FI PADILLA MARVIN 9145 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220020 F1 SOLEM JOSEPH D &KATHLEEN 10W 9161 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031,66 2202721220021 Fl PETTEY ERIC L & CARRIE L 9177 JARVIS AVE 5 1 $3.031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220022 Fl SORENSON DANA SOREN & YARITZY SORENSON 9193 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220023 F1 LEVINGS HOMER &ELIZABETH 91209ZND STS I $3,03t.66 $3,031.66 2202721220024 F1 SWANSON COREY 1 & TRACY A 9126 92ND ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220025 Fl XIONG YEE R & XAO L 9132 92ND ST 1 53.031.66 53,031.66 2202721220026 FI MURPHY PATRICK D & KIMBERLEY L 9138 92ND ST S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220027 Fl SCOTT CHARLES P & BRENDA K 9192 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.661 $3,031.66 2202721220028 F1 HAYDEN JOHN E & DEBORAH J 9178 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220029 F1 HARTMANN LAURY K 9164 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220030 F1 STRAUSS MARTIN I & KAY M 9150 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220031 Fl LEFEBVRE MATTHEW J & DEANNA D 19136 JARVIS AVE S 11 $3,031.66 53,031.66 Preliminary Assessment Roll District F3 Pavement Replacement Parcel 1D District Owner Address Units $ /Unit Total /Unit 2202721220032 F1 THIELEN GREGORY J & DIANE 9122 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220033 Fl DUESCHER RITA MARIE 9108 JARVIS AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220034 Fl RHT WOODRIDGE LLC 9115 JAREAU AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220035 F1 VALERIUS JOHN A & MARY K 9125 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220039 1`1 BOBICK KURT F & JANET F 9004 ) AREAU AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220040 F1 RINGSTAD JAMES A& DANE H 9018 JAREAU AVES 1 $3,03 L.66 $3,031.66 2202721220041 Fl BRUCHEZ WENDY 1 9032 JAREAU AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220042 FI BATTALION PETER P 9046 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 202 72 12 20043 FS KUE XANG J & MAY VANG 9060 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220044 F1 UNDELLGERALD 9074 JAREAU AVES 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721220045 Fl HOLLERUNG GINA R & BARBARA 1 HOLLERUNG 9088 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220046 Fl UHLENDORF MICHAEL) & AMY J 9100 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220047 F1 O'BRIEN TIMOTHY T & LYNNE M 9110 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,0317 2202721220048 F1 DUFOUR RICHARD N & MARY 1 9120 JAREAU AVE N 1 $3,031.66 $3,0766 2202721220051 Fl WHITMORE BARRY C & CATHY L 9002 JASMINE CT 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220052 Fl HUEBSCH DEREK & AUSA 9004 JASMINE CT S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220053 F1 ROBERTSON ANGELA Jvi 9006 JASMINE CT S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 202 7212 20054 Fl VERDICK JAMES $ & HEATHER M 9008 JASMINE CT S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220055 Fl WIETECKI STEPHEN A & LORI A 9010 JASMINE CT S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220056 FI STREHLO CORISSA L 9012 JASMINE CT 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220057 F) HUESMANN MICHAEL & STOEHR JOKA & )OKAY STOEHR 9014 JASMINE CT S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220058 FI DELEON STEVEN & DIANA 9016 JASMINE CT 5 1 $3.031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220059 Fl DOCHNIAK CHRISTOPHER & DIANA 9018 JASMINE CT S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220060 Fl SISNEROS MICHAELP & ANESSA D 9020 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220061 F1 LANIK STEVEN 1 9044 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 202 7 2 12200 62 F1 BIENIEK JACK T & GEORGANNE M 9078 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220063 FI UEYONAHARA LAURA 9088 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721220064 FI SECRETARY OF HOUSING& URBAN DEVELOPMENT 919091ST STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220065 F1 BRAND ASHLEY 916691ST STS 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220066 Fl NICKLAY)OHN ROBERT &JUDITH 914491ST STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220067 FI FRETSCHEL SARAH E & JOHN R HANSON HI 9130 91ST $I S 1 53,031.66 53,031.66 2202721220068 Fl BANZ KEVIN R & MARI C 9124 91ST $T $ 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220069 Fl MURRAY SR TIMOTHY P & DIONE M 9003 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220070 Fl MCGOWAN PETER JOSEPH & LEA ANNA SAMS MCGOWAN 9011 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220071 FI CRUZ FRANK L G 9019 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220072 TI KORF MITCHELL D & CAROARAA 9031 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721220073 F1 MUFFAT JEFFRY C & JULIE Z 9085 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220074 Fl VANHOVEN PETER C & JULIA A 9091 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220075 FI MEYER HAROLD W & DENISE A 9125 9IST ST 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220076 F1 LOMAN JERRY M & JENNIFER J 913791ST STS 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220077 Fl PATTEN LINDA 9151 91ST STS 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721220078 F1 JONES CONNIE L 9108 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220079 F1 WOLTERING DAVID J & JILL M 9140 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220080 Fl SCHUCHTE GLEN A 9152 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220081 Fl NITZ PETER J & SHEILA A 9166 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3 53,031.66 2202721220082 Fl SMITH STEVEN NOBLE & JUDITH L 9174 ) ASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220083 FI LOONEY DANIEL! & BRIDGITT NN 9188 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202711220084 FI BISHMAN COREY M & MELISSA A 9187 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3.031.66 53,031.66 2202721220085 F1 PATRICK M LYNCH REV TRS 9179 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220086 FI IUDKINS JOHN D & PAMELA A 9161 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 202 72 121008 7 Fl SCHUMI MICHAEL & RUTH L 9155 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220088 FI HOVOE FRANK C & MARYANN 9141 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031,66 $3,031.66 2 2 02 72 12 20089 Fl HODGE ANTHONY A & SHAWNA R 9123 JASMINE AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220090 F7 LANZ JAMES W & KELLY J 9103 JASMINE AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220091 Fl RECHTZIGEL BETHANY A 919991ST ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220092 F3 DAVIS SHAVE R &JENNIFER 1 9118 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220093 FI CARTERIODIK 9136 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220094 FI QUAST DAVID E & CRISTINA M 9154 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220095 Fl NIELSEN PHILLIP R & LORI A 9172 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3.031.66 $3.031.66 2202721220096 FI BALDWIN BRIAN R & DAWN M 9166 92ND ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220097 F1 SHORT JOHN 1 JR & KIM M 9156 92ND ST 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220098 F1 MCMORROWJENNY &MATTHEW 915092ND STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220099 F1 HENDRICKSON CURTIS 914492ND ST 1 $3,031,66 $3,031.66 2202721230002 Fl SUNDEEN GREG A & SUSAN 1 913792ND ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031,66 2202721230003 F1 BORASH DANIEL ) & KAREN M 9131 92ND ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230004 Fl MORGAN CARRIEF 912592ND STS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230005 Fl DALE COBY J & LYNN M 9115 92ND ST S 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230006 Fl SCHANK VIRGINIA & WILLIAM 9105 92ND ST 1 $3.031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230007 FI HILL BRUCE A & KIMBERLEE A 9198 JARVIS AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230008 F1 DONOHUE ROBE RT J& ESTE LLA M 914392ND ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230009 Fl METZGER JOSEPH M & PATRICIA 9149 92ND ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230010 F1 HULL TIMOTHY! 915592ND ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230011 F1 SCHRENKLER DORIS M 9165 92NO ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240016 FI ANDERSON THOMAS IN & SHIRLEY D 9314 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 Preliminary Assessment Roll District F1 Pavement Replacement Panel ID District Owner Address Units $ /Unit Total /Unit 2202721240017 F1 CRAPPS JAY LEE 9302 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240029 Fl REIFFENBERGER MEGAN M 9319 93RD ST S 1 $3,031.66 $3,037.66 2202721240030 Fl ROSS SCOTT P & CLAIRE 1 9325 93RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240031 Fl POMEROY ROBERT SCOTT& PAULA 934393RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240032 Fl DARST ANDREW T & TARA 8 9357 93RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240033 Fl MCDONALD SCOTT & PATRICIA 9379 93RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240034 Fl RYAN CATHERINE M 9395 93RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2 20272 12400 35 Fl KIMMEN JESSICA & BRYAN WITSCHEN 9235 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240036 Fl SUTLIFF MICHAEL V &VALERIE 9247 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240037 Fl PALO RALPH E & BEVERLY J 9279 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240038 Fl AHLMAN MICHAEL & KIMBERLY S HOEPNER 9293 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240039 Fl LATTERELL DONALD & KELLEY B 9321 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240040 F1 TESC14LER DERE & KARIN MATHIESEN 9323 JEFFERY CT 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240041 Fl ETTEN MICHAEL D & TONI E 9325 JEFFERY CT 1 $3,031.66 $3,03166 2202721240042 F1 KARNES KEVIN R & JILL 9327 JEFFERY CT 1 $3,031,66 $3,031.66 2 202 72 124004 3 F1 IMESON ROBERT 9329 JEFFERY CT 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721240044 F1 GRAFF THOMAS) & DENISE M 9331 JEFFERY CT 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240045 FI KASA HEATHER & ERIC M 9333 JEFFERY CT 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240046 Fl OLDRE LISA A & KIRK G 9335 JEFFERY CT 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240047 PI HELLER KYLE & BRITTANY 9337 JEFFERY CT 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240048 FI CHEA HENG & CAP DAVAN 9339 JEFFERY CT 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721240049 F1 BAtLMAN BERNARD JR &BERNELOA 9341 JEFFERY CT 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240050 Fl JOHNSON SUSAN M 9334 93RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240051 F1 SCHOENHEIDER KEVIN D & SANDY 9336 93RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240052 F1 PANEK GEORGE C & SANDRA S 9388 93RD ST 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240053 Fl THORPE KARRIE ETAL 9402 93RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240055 F1 HEIN DELNO & DOROTHY 9140 JERGEN DAY S 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721240056 Fl PIERRE DAVID E & PATRICIA R 9146 JERGEN BAY S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240057 Fl NIEMALA ROBERT & DEBORAH 9152 JERGEN BAY S 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721240058 Fl HAIJBURTON RICHARD & RENEE 0 9158 JERGEN BAY S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240059 Fl DACK SCOTT T & AUDREY A 9164 JERGEN BAY 5 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721240060 F1 SUSAG JOHN R & USA A 9170 JERGEN BAY S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240061 Fl VOGT DALE F & CATHY A 9212 JERGEN CT 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240062 Fl WOOD KATIE L & LUKE P ALBERS 9218 JERGEN CT S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240063 Fl MARTIN JEFFREY 5 & KELLEY 9224 JERGEN CT S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240064 rJ NEUMAN PAUL I &JODIL 9230 JERGENCT5 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240065 F1 RUCKER THOMAS & LINDA L 9236 JERGEN CT S 1 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240066 Fl BACKBERG BLAINE R & MIA) 9242 JERGEN CT 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240067 F1 ABRAHAM THOMAS & BARBARA A L 9248 JERGEN CT S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240068 F1 LUMTSCH DANIEL C &LISA L 9254 JERGEN CT 1 $3,031.66 53,031.63 2202721240069 Fl ELTON RODNEY N & ROBIN D 92601E RGEN CT S I 53,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240070 Fl STOLTZ WILLIAM I & CERISSA A 9266 JERGEN CT S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240071 Fl VOGEL LEWIS M &KAYL£ENA 9272 JERGEN CTS 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240072 FI LEVANG RICHARD C & KRISTIN M 9278 JERGEN AVE 1 $3,031-66 $3,031.66 2202721240073 Fl CHALICH MICHAEL) & PEGGYJ 9279 JERGEN AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240074 FL GALLOWAY NICK 9281 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240075 F1 CHERVENY -RUNKE BRENDA) 9284 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 53,031.66 2202721240076 F1 THORNELL JOSEPH E 1R & LYNSEY R 9290 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240077 Fl SWITZER KIRK W & LISA M 92961E RGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240078 Fl LEE HSU YI 9444 93RD ST S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240079 F1 MCDANIEL TIMIA J & KELLY 9424 93RD ST S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240080 Fl CROOKS MARK W& SUSAN R 9415 93RD ST S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240081 F1 MOONE RONALD & RICHARD & RHODA MOONS 9433 93RD ST S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240101 FI LARSON CHRISTOPHER & JENNIFER 9285 JERGEN AVE S $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240102 Fl ROBERT MARK MANAGEMENT GROUP 9289 JERGEN AVE S $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240103 Fl WELLS FARGO BANK 9295 JERGEN AVE S $3.031.66 $3.031.66 2202721240115 FI DJORNBERG GLEN A & MARY B 9227 JEFFERY AVE 5 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240116 FI HOFFMAN CARISSA A & KATHRYN SLOAN 9223 JEFFERY AVE $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240117 Fl VORDERBRUGGEN DAVID E & ANDREA 9219 JEFFERY AVE S $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240118 Fl SMITH SCOTT 9215 JEFFERY AVE S d3.1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240119 Fl RUSSELL EDWARD PHILLIP &KIMDUN & KIMDUNG RUSSELL 9213 JEFFERY AVE S $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240120 Fl BILOTTA CHAD 9211 JEFFERY AVE S $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240121 Fl DUKIC MILAN & JEANNIE K 9209 JEFFERY AVE 5 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240122 F1 STOCKTON IR JAMES R &KATHLEEN 9207 JEFFERY AVE S $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240123 Fl KOSLOSKI LAURA 9203 JEFFERY AVE S $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240124 F1 THOMPSON MARK A & DEBRA L 9179 JEFFERY AVE S $3,031.66 $3,031.66 Totals $1,097,460.92 Preliminary Assessment Roll District F4 Pavement Replacement Parcel ID District Owner Address Units $ /Unit Total /Unit 2202721220036 F4 MERGENS VINCENT R & DIANE M 9135 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220037 F4 MORROW SHANNON 9145 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220038 F4 BACON BRADLEY T & KIMBERLY A 9155 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220049 F4 SENGER LAURENE R 9140 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031,66 $3,031.66 2202721220050 F4 OLSON DEBRA E & JANET L 9150 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220101 F4 JOLLY KURIAKOSE & MARIAMMA 9175 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220102 F4 PEDERSON LORI & LAVALLE JEROME 9156 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220103 F4 COMO CHERYL A 9168 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220104 F4 JENNINGS RONALD R & PATRICIA A 9170 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220105 F4 THOR YENG & XIONG VANG 9182 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721220106 F4 EBERT THOMAS J & MARY G 9167 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230012 F4 STANDFIELD JEANETTE B 9204 JEFFERY BAY 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230013 F4 CONSTABLE RICHARD C JR & DARLA D SENN 9206 JEFFERY BAY 1 $3,031,66 $3,031.66 2202721230014 F4 LEMAY PAUL W & VALERIE E 9210 JEFFERY BAY 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230015 F4 BANASZEWSKI RICHARD T & ANGELA M SLAVIK 9218 JEFFERY BAY 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230016 F4 BOE DONALD T & LINDA J 9222 JEFFERY BAY 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230017 F4 JOHNSON NICOLE L 9226 JEFFERY BAY 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230018 F4 WILSON JOHN R & MICHELLE M 9230 JEFFERY BAY 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230019 F4 CEKALLA DONALD J & JULIE A 9258 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230020 F4 RAYMOND KENT A & NICOLE M 9296 93RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031,66 2202721230021 F4 GEAR ALAN W & KATY L 9274 93RD 5T 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230022 F4 ROERING DANIEL P 9258 93RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.GG 2202721230023 F4 STEINMETZ ERIK 9287 93RD ST S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230024 F4 KU JOSHUA W & LEE XIONG 9265 93RD ST 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230025 F4 SCHULTZ NOEL P & KIM M 9374 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230026 F4 HOFFMAN STEVEN 1 & KIMBERLY A 9396 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230027 F4 HALVORSON SUSAN 9412 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230028 F4 ROBERTS SHIRLEY M 9438 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230029 F4 JARVIS ERBAYNE W & DEBORAH 5 9454 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230030 F4 SEVERSON JOSEPH & ALICIA SEVERSON 9470 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230031 F4 HAMILTON EFREM M & TRACIE M 9484 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230032 F4 W ENNER THOMAS E & KAREN A 9361 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230033 F4 VENTRELLADAVIDA &WHITNEY- &CLAUDETTE WHITNEY -V 9373JASMINEAVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230034 F4 PETERSON RON R & GAIL CORSON 9385 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230035 F4 LEE DAVID E & MARTHA 1 9407 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230036 F4 NASBY KEITH A 9429 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230037 F4 SAUERER PATRICK J & KATHRYN 9443 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230038 F4 KAMNIKAR BRIAN D & KAREN D 9465 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230039 F4 STACHOWIAK ROBERT & KATHLENE L BROWN 9499 JASMINE AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230042 F4 MCCONNELL JAMES & SHIREEN 9183 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230043 F4 TALLARICO SEAN P 9191 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230044 F4 MALLINGER JOSHUA J 9209 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230049 F4 VEESENMEYER ANTHONY J & NICOLE A MILLS 9194 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230050 F4 PETERSON LEON M & LISA M 9206 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230051 F4 VROMAN RYAN D & FAYE M 9228 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230052 F4 RUUD CYNTHIA 9240 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230053 F4 ZINS SCOTT W & JEAN K GARDNER ZINS 9262 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230054 F4 BERGE JASON & LAURIE 9284 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230055 F4 POMMERENING VINCENT J & MARY C 9306 JARROO AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230056 F4 TOPP BRYAN J & CHENILLE J 9328 JARROD AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230057 F4 SCHAFF KEITH A 9340 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230058 F4 NEUMANN SCOTT G & SUSAN C 9362 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230059 F4 KHAN SHAHRUKH 9384 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230060 F4 MCKEAGUE KARL 9406 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230061 F4 NELSON KENNETH 8 & KARRI C 9428 JARROD AVE J. $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230062 F4 BAKER PAUL A 9460 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230063 F4 MURRAY TIMOTHY P JR & LISA K MURRAY 9482 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230064 F4 ARCHAMBEAU DONALD A 9255 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230065 F4 ECKES CORY L & PAULINE M 9273 JARROD AVE 1 $3,03146 $3,031.66 2202721230066 F4 CHESLOG BRIAN D & DANIELLE D 9291 JARROD AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230067 F4 MEIER JAMES 8 & MARY PAT 9319 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 Preliminary Assessment Roll District F4 Pavement Replacement Parcel ID District Owner Address Units $ /Unit Total /Unit 2202721230068 F4 BENCKMANDYJ 9337 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230069 F4 KORNMANN ROBBY D 9355 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230070 F4 LEYDE MARK A & KATHLEEN M 9373 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230071 F4 GARCIA DAVID 9391 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230072 F4 KAUL JESSE A & REBECCA L BAHR 9419 JARROD AVE i $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230073 F4 CLAUSEN MARY I 9437 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230074 F4 MYERS DENNIS JAMES & JOAN E 9455 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230075 F4 VIEROW MARK & PATRICIA 9473 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230076 F4 SAND WADE K & NATALIE K 9477 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230077 F4 DACK SCOTT T & AUDREY A 9225 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230078 F4 SCHWARTZ CARL P & MICHELLE 1 9243 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230079 F4 MCDONALD CHARLES M & DEBORAH 9265 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230080 F4 ELLIS JANET R 9287 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230081 F4 W ESTON RYAN J & MELISSA L 9289 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230082 F4 VOGEL CHAD 9301 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031,66 2202721230083 F4 HOLMSTADT GALE & SANDERS & LEILANI K SANDERS 9323 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230084 F4 DUSH BRADLEY & THERESA 9335 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230085 F4 SCHRANKLER JAMES P & PAMELA 9357 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230086 F4 JUNGWIRTH CYNTHIA L 9389 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230087 F4 COLEMAN RYAN J 9411 JAREAU AVE $ 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230088 F4 SYVERSON JEREMY P & ANGELA J 9433 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230089 1`4 ANDERSON KENNETH L & KATHLEEN A ANDERSON 9455 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230090 F4 MEDINA LISA R 9477 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230091 F4 VOLNER RICHARD R & JOAN A 9481 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230092 F4 WOLKERSTORFER RONALD R & LORI 9499 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230093 F4 SCHUETH LON D 9238 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230094 F4 RIEPE WAYNE W & NANCY A 9254 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230095 F4 JOHNSON MICHELLE R 9276 JAREAU AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230096 F4 FRANKLIN LYNETTE G & MICHAEL J 9310 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230097 F4 GLASS DENNIS M & ANGEL L 9342 JAREAU AVE J. $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230098 F4 WACHTLER PAUL JOSEPH & CARINA 9364 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230099 F4 WILLOWS ANDREAA 9376 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230100 F4 PRALL MICHAEL T & HEATHER E 9398 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230101 F4 SPIESS CASEY & MOLLY 9400 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230102 F4 NOLAND ELLEN M 9422 JAREAU AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230103 F4 MORGEL MARK 9444 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230104 F4 OLSON BRADLEY D & MELISSA K 9466 JAREAU AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230105 F4 CHAVIE SHAWN 1 9495 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230106 F4 KATHLEEN A LUCKMANN TRS 9491 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230107 F4 BRUCE MICHAEL & NANCY CANDY 9489 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230108 F4 KALIS MATTHEW A & KELLY M 9485 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230109 F4 BHAKTA KIRIT 9484 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230110 F4 MUELLNER JOEL& KRISTINE LEMIRE 9486 JARROD AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230111 F4 EDWARDS MICHAEL P JR 9488 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230112 F4 KORBEL BRENT D & EMILY L 9490 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230113 F4 KLEINSCHMIDT KEVIN T & LISA M LANCRAIN 9492 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230114 F4 ADEREMI -ATA TOYIN M & OLUWOLE A 9496 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721230115 F4 STADLER KEITH M & SARAH A 9498 JARROD AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240015 F4 KOUBELE BRIAN & SHERYL 9336 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240018 F4 WALKER DUSTIN J 9488 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240019 F4 CONNER BRADLEY C & KATHLEEN M 9454 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240020 F4 BUI VU H & TRINH T NGUYEN 9426 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240021 F4 SMITH KERI & JASON JELINEK 9402 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031k6l $3,031.66 2202721240022 F4 LINDSTROM ]ON C & TINA M 9370 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240023 F4 LENZ MICHAEL G 9358 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240024 F4 THOMAS BRENDA 1 & ROBB P 9497 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240025 F4 ZYWIEC JOSEPH I 9471 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240026 F4 CARROLL ALONA 19433 JEFFERY AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240027 F4 PEPER GLEN C & SHARI l 19415 JEFFERY AVE 5 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240028 F4 PLETSCH THOMAS G 9399 JEFFERY AVE 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240082 F4 FROSCH STEVEN M & ASHLEY M 19304 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 Preliminary Assessment Roll District F4 Pavement Replacement Parcel ID District Owner Address Units $ /Unit Total /Unit 2202721240083 F4 LARSEN TRACI A K & WILLIAM D 9316 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240084 F4 HAWKINS CHRISTOPHER J & CHRISTINA A HAWKINS 9338 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240085 F4 ANDERSON KAREN L 9342 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240086 F4 MARSH PETER G & NANETTE L 9352 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240087 F4 BUETOW MARK A & KIMBERLY A 9374 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240088 F4 SKIFFINGTON TIMOTHY & JESSICA NATTERSTAD 9382 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240089 F4 BIEZE JENNA G & TIMOTHY A 9390 JERGEN Pl. S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240090 F4 LOSHEK ROBERT 1 & LAURA K 9398 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240091 F4 MIKHAIL WALID A 9406 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240092 F4 CARRINGTON NATHAN T & AMANDA 1 MARTIN 9416 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240093 F4 ANDERSON ERIC D & DIANE G 9424 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240094 F4 B10KNE LAUREN & LAVONNE 9432 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240095 F4 FIGLMILLER JOAN C & JEFFREY J 9440 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240096 F4 LICHTBLAU JAMES G & CAROLYN 9448 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240097 F4 BRANUM SCOTT & JAMIE W 9456 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240098 F4 DUNCAN AARON L 9464 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031,66 2202721240099 F4 FLUEGEL MATT W & SHANNON K 9480 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240100 F4 KOENIG MARY T 9490 JERGEN PL S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240104 F4 GOETZKE ALESHA K & ADAM T 9299 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240105 F4 HENSEL BRIAN M & JUANITA A 9307 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240106 F4 KUMMER EDWARD L & MATTHEW S BARRETTE 9313 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240107 F4 WAXLER KATHRYN M 9327 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240108 F4 NISTLER NATHAN J & ATHENA C 9339 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240109 F4 MOONE RONALD P 9347 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240110 F4 HANSON SCOTT 1 & JANET R 9359 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240111 F4 SCHUHWERCK JEFFRY P & DEBRA P 9365 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240112 F4 MARTIN ANTHONY & ROCHELLE 9377JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240113 F4 JOHNSON RYAN B 9483 JERGEN AVE S 1 $3,031.66 $3,031.66 2202721240114 F4 WEBER CHELSEY D 9495 JERGEN AVE S 1 S3,031.66 53,031.66 Totals 151 $457,780.66 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Appendix E Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Overview A visual inspection was performed in 2013 to evaluate pavement surface conditions by identifying various pavement defects. Pavements can deteriorate at different rates due to many factors, including: original construction procedures, construction materials, traffic volume, drainage characteristics, and subsequent pavement maintenance. Due to this, pavements constructed at the same time may not deteriorate at the same rate and may have different usefid lives. It should be noted that not all pavements with the same or similar PCI will look exactly the same. Various types and amounts of distress contribute to a particular PCI rating. Identifying the cause of the distress (load related vs. non -load related) is important in understanding the current pavement condition and potential rehabilitation methods. In addition, segments of the same street may in vary in condition and a representative rating for the majority of the segment is determined. Generally speaking, pavements deteriorate slowly over the first ten years and then tend to deteriorate more quickly. As pavement ages and surface cracking occurs, additional moisture is able to enter the pavement structure and accelerate deterioration. Early preventative maintenance can extend the life of pavement by protecting the pavement structure from the effects of moisture and weathering. If a pavement is left without maintenance, the pavement condition can deteriorate very rapidly towards the end of the lifecycle. This deterioration is illustrated in the following figure from the City's 1994 Pavement Management Plan: City of Cottage Grove, Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Figure E1- PCI vs Age I NUMBER VERBAL CONDITION - TYPICAL._MA I NTENANCE i RATIN RATING ,&j UPPING NUMBER RATING REEAIR COST /Lin.Ft. Exool loot — 9 0 pavements that Typical Str L i f e have little or $O no distress. `, $Sol coot ($2.25$3.50) Very Good \\ n Z Pavements that have \\ 5 70 a significant level \ of distress. \ non —lood re la t ed. \` 6 0 _ Good Pavements that have z p o significant level � 0 of distress. 1 F J 0 load related. 1 Overlay (S10,00430.00) Uj Fair t w — 40 d Povements that have [t, Poor major distress. u — 30 - Reconstruction \ ($40.00475.00) __ _20 Very Poor Pavements that have \�\ significant amounts of major distress. ` Failed 3 15 (YEARS) 120 25 I Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 201.4 Pavement Management Project 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Appendix F Pavement Cores Pavement Cores were extracted to determine the thickness of the existing street section and evaluate pavement condition. Based on the condition of the cores. we selected two extremes for an initial comparison by FWD analysis. Both roads were built during a similar tinieframe (1993 and 1994) and should have similar traffic. With a minor exception. the backcalculated modulus of the bituminous layer (E 1) is much higher where the layer is intact (Jergen Bay. Core 15) than where top -down stripping /raveling is observed and additional stripping was noted throughout the core (Jeffrey Court. Core 17). Core 15 — Jergen Bay Layer Modulus (ksi) Station Bituminous Aggregate Subgrade Value 0 459 43 18 30 118 411 54 18 30 226 475 36 20 65 309 683 9 31 54 429 175 19 35 62 Core 17 — Jeffery Court Layer Modulus (ksi) Station Bituminous Aggregate Subgrade Value 0 200 200 43 31 54 106 251 39 26 45 205 247 61 37 65 297 282 56 39 Cottage Grove "p6 &1e Pride -16" SPerity Meet Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Mauagenient Project 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Pavement Core #17: Jeffery Ct. core broken. severe stripping at top of core. extending entire depth. City of Collage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project Pavennent Core #1i: Jergen Bay S. core intact. 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Appendix G Falling Weight Deflectometer (m Cottage j Grove *h ('re Pride andPrOsPerlty Meet City of Cotlage Grovc. Minncsota 2014 Pavement Management Project Report of Pavement Testing and Repair Recommendations Various City Streets Cottage Grove, Minnesota Prepared for Professional Certification: I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Matthew S. Oman, PE Associate / Senior Enginee License Number: 43893 December 9, 2013 Project SP -13 -06655 PFrw N -a g38g3 0 WA OF Braun Intertec Corporation Braun Intertec Corporation 1826 Bucrlde Road Saint Paul, MN 55 December 9, 2013 Mr. Michael Boex Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2035 County Road D East, Suite B Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Report of Pavement Testing and Repair Recommendations Various City Streets Cottage Grove, Minnesota Dear Mr. Boex: Phone: 6,11.487.5245 Fax: 651.487.1812 Web: braunintertec.com Project SP -13 -06655 We are pleased to present this Pavement Testing Report for various Cottage Grove streets. The purpose of the testing was to characterize the existing base and subgrade and to evaluate the strength of the in- place pavement should a mill -and- overlay be performed. Please see the attached report for a detailed discussion on the test results and our recommendations. The report should be read in its entirety. Thank you for making Braun Intertec your pavement consultant for this project. If you have questions about this report, or if there are other services that we can provide in support of our work to date, please call Amy Grothaus at 651.261.7122. Sincerely, BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION P, I tv"—� ;: 61' /(/" Amy J. Groth Senior Project Manager /Fngineer Matthew S. Oman, PE Associate /Senior Engineer Pavement Testing Report A.A /EOE Pr©titliTtg entjince7i7?y (111d cnvironmenlyd Solutions since 1h57 Table of Contents Description Page A . Introduction ........................................................................................................ ..............................1 A.1. Project Description ................................................................................ ..............................1 A.2. Purpose .................................................................................................. ..............................1 A.3. Background Information and Reference Documents ............................ ..............................1 A.4. Scope of Services ................................................................................... ..............................1 B . Results ................................................................................................................ ..............................2 B.1. Pavement Core and Hand Auger Results .............................................. ..............................2 B.2. FWD Data Tabulations ........................................................................... ..............................4 B.3. FWD Results .......................................................................................... ..............................4 C. Basis for Recommendations ............................................................................... ..............................9 C.1. Design Details ........................................................................................ ..............................9 C.1.a. Potential Pavement Repairs ..................................................... ..............................9 C.1.b. Current Traffic .......................................................................... ..............................9 C.1.c. Anticipated Grade Changes ...................................................... ..............................9 C.1.d. Precautions Regarding Changed Information ......................... .............................10 C.2. Design and Construction Considerations ............................................. .............................10 C.2.a. Pavement History .................................................................... .............................10 D . Recommendations ............................................................................................ .............................10 D.1.a. Pavement Repair ..................................................................... .............................10 D.1.b. Design Sections ....................................................................... .............................11 E . Procedures ......................................................................................................... .............................12 E.1. Pavement Coring and Hand Augers ..................................................... .............................12 E.2. Falling Weight Deflectometer .............................................................. .............................12 E.2.a. Field Testing ........................................................................... .............................12 E.2.b. Deflection Data Analysis .......................................................... .............................12 E.2.b.1. Input Data ................................................................... .............................12 E.2.b.2. Adjustment Factors .................................................... .............................13 E.2.b.3. Analyses ...................................................................... .............................13 F . Qualifications ..................................................................................................... .............................14 F.1. Use of Report ........................................................................................ .............................14 F.2. Standard of Care ................................................................................... .............................14 Appendix A — Core Location Sketch Appendix B — Detailed FWD Results Appendix C — Modulus Summary A. Introduction A.I. Project Description This Pavement Evaluation Report addresses approximately 4.8 miles of bituminous City streets. The evaluation of the above streets included pavement coring and hand augers, followed by Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) testing. A.2. Purpose The purpose of the testing was to characterize the existing base and subgrade and to evaluate the strength of the in -place pavement should a mill- and - overlay be performed. A.3. Background Information and Reference Documents To facilitate our evaluation, we were provided with or reviewed the following information or documents: ■ A project location map, provided by Bolton & Menk, Inc (Bolton & Menk). ■ Pavement core and hand auger data provided by Bolton & Menk, and conducted by Northern Technologies, Inc. (NTI). ■ Aerial maps available from Google Earth. ■ Traffic data and construction history data provided by Bolton & Menk. ■ Soil maps available from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Web Soil Survey, AA Scope of Services Our scope of services for this project was submitted as a Proposal to Mr. Michael Boex, dated October 4, 2013. We received authorization to proceed on October 22, 2013. Our scope of services was performed under the terms of our September 1, 2013, General Conditions. Tasks performed in accordance with our authorized scope of services included: BRAUN INTERTEC Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 2 ■ Performing pavement coring and hand augers on project area streets not previously cored. This included the southern 1.3 miles (the northern 3.5 miles was cored by NTI). ■ Performing Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) testing on 4.8 miles of city streets at an approximate test interval of one test every 100 feet. ■ Preparing this report containing a project location sketch, a summary of all pavement core and hand auger results, FWD deflection data and analysis results, including spring load capacity (tons per axle), subgrade R- value, granular equivalency, and layer modulus. Also included is a discussion regarding the strength of the in -place pavement should a mill -and- overlay be performed. B. Results B.1. Pavement Core and Hand Auger Results Exploration locations 1 through 14 were performed by NTI and locations 15 through 24 were performed by Braun Intertec. All locations are shown on the attached sketch. For locations 15 through 24, the bituminous and aggregate base layer thicknesses were measured in the field. Thickness data for locations 1 through 14 was provided to us by Bolton & Menk, Inc. On average, the streets had approximately 3.6 inches of bituminous overlying 7.6 inches of aggregate base material. A summary of the data is provided in Table 1 and was used in the analysis of the FWD data. Cores 15 through 24 were returned to our office and were examined to assess bituminous material conditions. Conditions were also reviewed with Bolton & Menk staff. Material stripping or loss of material was observed in several of the cores. For the most part, this phenomenon was confined to the upper 1 to 2 inches of the core in the bituminous wear course; however, in some instances, stripping was present in both the wear and non -wear courses. In several of the cores, the material loss had deteriorated to the point of causing a separation or break in the upper 1/2 to 2 inches of the core, as noted in the Table. Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 3 Where present, this loss of material may diminish the life of an applied maintenance treatment, depending on the extent and severity of the stripping. Bituminous layers with low- severity stripping can often support pavement overlays, while more severe stripping may present problems during construction (such as the milling train breaking through the bituminous layer on thin pavements) and reduced support for overlays over the long term. Table 1. Bituminous Core and Nand Auger Results Location Street Bituminous Thickness (in) Aggregate Base Thickness (in) Core Condition /Notes 1* 91st Street S 4.00 6.00 Stripping in upper 1.5 inches of core 2* Janero Ave S 3.25 6.50 Good condition 3* Jareau Ave S 3.75 10.50 Stripping in upper 2.0 inches of core 4* Jasmine Ave S 4.50 8.00 Good condition 5* Jeffrey Ave S 4.25 7.00 Core broken; stripping throughout entire core 6* Jensen Ave S 3.75 10.25 Good condition 7* Jergen Ave 5 3.00 8.00 Good condition 8* Jarvis Ave S 3.75 8.00 Stripping in upper 2.0 inches of core 9* Jeffrey Ave S 4.50 9.00 Stripping in upper 2.0 inches of core 10* Jergen Court S 3.75 5.50 Good condition 11* Jergen Ave 5 3.25 7.75 Core broken; stripping throughout entire core 12* Jeffrey Ave S 3.75 8.00 Stripping in upper 2.5 inches of core 13* 93rd Street S 3.25 7.50 Core broken; stripping throughout entire core 14* 93rd Street S 3.25 6.25 Stripping in upper 2.0 inches of core 15 Jergen Bay 3.75 6.75 Good condition 16 92nd Street 2.38 7.13 Stripping in lower 1.0 inch of core 17 18 Jeffrey Court lareau Ave S 4.00 3.13 6.00 8.88 Cure broken; stripping throughout entire cure Stripping throughout entire core 19 lareau Ave 5 3.25 7.25 Core broken at top; stripping throughout entire core 20 Jarrod Ave S 3.00 9.00 Stripping in upper 1.5 inches of core 21 Jasmine Ave S 3.50 8.00 Core broken at top; stripping in upper 2.0 inches of BRAUN I NTT TEC Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 4 Location Street Bituminous Thickness (in) Aggregate Base Thickness (in) Core Condition /Notes core 22 Jeffrey Ave S 3.13 7.38 Core broken at top; stripping throughout entire core 23 Jergen Place 4.25 6.25 Stripping throughout entire core 24 Jergen Ave S 3.50 7.50 Good condition Average 3.6 7.5 *Cores I through 14 were performed by NTt. 6.2. FWD Data Tabulations A summary of the deflection data is available in Appendix B. For all tested routes, spring load capacity, effective GE, and effective subgrade R -value are shown. Section E.3.b.3 provides a summary of the data analysis methods used to obtain the above information. Included in Appendix C are backcalculation results using the Evaluation of Layer Moduli and Overlay Design (ELMOD) analysis tool. The ELMOD tool provides a layer modulus (kips per square inch) for each of the pavement layers by analyzing the pavement's response from the FWD. 13.3. FWD Results The deflection data analysis results are statistical estimates representing values calculated for the test locations along the roadway. The MnDOT TONN method is a conservative approach to assessing load capacity. The method takes the 15th percentile of spring -load capacity values (given in tons per axle) for a given segment of roadway, which means that 85 percent of the test points have a load capacity higher than the presented values. Effective R -value and GE use the same standard. Table 2 provides a summary of the input data provided for each test route. Thickness data was obtained from the bituminous core and hand auger results and traffic data was provided by Bolton & Menk. For streets that were not cored, construction history and proximity to cored streets were used to provide likely assumed thicknesses. IINICKIL�,.. Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 5 Table 3 summarizes the results for each of the roadways using ELMOD. Bituminous layer moduli ranged from 118 to 980; aggregate base moduli ranged from 24 to 65; and subgrade layer moduli ranged from 10 to 33. For those streets that were not cored, the assumed thickness data may have attributed to the high modi.ili restilts. Given the testing rate, variability in the raw and processed data is possible. The overlay requirement provided in Table 3 is the equivalent bituminous thickness that is required for 20 years of the anticipated traffic. This is what is needed to prevent failure -level fatigue (bituminous) or rutting (aggregate base / subgrade). Since most values are 0.0, the structural demand is generally very minor for the given traffic levels. In this case, functional issues, such as materials problems and associated surface distresses, are more likely to occur. R- values provided in the table were converted from the resilient modulus using FI MOD. Table 2. FWD Input Data .11 - 71 I kyI INTERTEC Core Data Core Data Aggregate Aggregate Bituminous Base Bituminous Base Length Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness Street From To (ft) AADT (in) (in) (in) (in) 91st Street 5 Cul 91st Street S Cul de sac 95 300 -- -- 4.00 6.00 de sac, West 91st Street S Cul 915t Street S Cul de sac 107 300 -- -- 4.00 6.00 de sac, East 91st Street S Islay Ave S Jareau Ave S 1401 500 4.00 6.00 4.00 6.00 92nd Street S lergen Ave S Cul de sac 176 300 2.38 7.13 2.38 7.13 92nd Street S Jarvis Ave 5 Jeffrey Ave 5 612 300 -- -- 3.75 10.50 93rd Street S JarPail AVP S lasminP AVP S 3X0 300 -- -- ssn s.na 3.25 7.50 93rd SO eet S Jeff ey Court Jergen Ave S 818 300 3.25 6.88 3.25 6.25 Janero Ave S 91st Street S 90th Street S 697 500 3.25 6.50 3.25 6.50 Jareau Ave S Cul Jarcau Ave 5 Cul do sac 194 300 3.75 10.50 de sac Jareau Ave S 90th Street 5 91st street S 510 1700 3.75 10.50 3.75 10.50 Jareau Ave S 91st Street S Dead End 2326 1700 3.13 8.88 3.19 8.06 .11 - 71 I kyI INTERTEC Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 6 BRAUN INTERTEC Core Data Core Data Aggregate Aggregate Bituminous Base Bituminous Base Length Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness Street From To (ft) AADT (in) (in) (in) (in) 3.25 7.25 Jareau Ave S Jareau Ave S Jarrod Ave 5 1378 300 3.00 9.00 3.00 9.00 (North) (South) Jarvis Ave 5 91st Street S 92nd Street S 583 300 3.75 8.00 3.75 8.00 Jasmine Ave 5 Jasmine Ave 5 Cul de sac 209 300 -- -- 4.55 8.00 Cul de sac West Jasmine Ave 5 Jasmine Ave S Cul de sac 83 300 -- -- 4.50 8.00 Cul de sac East Jasmine Ave S Dead End Jeffrey Ave S 715 500 3.50 8.00 3.50 8.00 Jasmine Ave 5 90th Street S Cul de sac 1207 500 4.50 8.00 4.50 8.00 Jeffrey Ave S Cul Jeffrey Ave S Cul de sac 161 300 -- -- 4.50 9.00 de sac (2) Jeffrey Ave S Cul Jeffrey Ave 5 Cul de sac 104 300 -- -- 4.25 7.00 de sac (3) Jeffrey Ave 5 Cul Jeffrey Ave S Cul de sac 24 300 -- -- 4.50 9.00 de sac (1) Jeffrey Ave S 93rd Street 5 Dead End 420 1700 3.13 7.38 3.13 7.38 4.25 7.00 Jeffrey Ave S 90th Street S Jeffrey Court 2259 1700 4.50 9.00 4.20 8.00 3.75 8.00 Jeffrey Bay Jeffrey Ave 5 Cul de sac 92 300 -- -- 3.75 8.00 Jeffrey Court Jeffrey Ave S Cul de sac 297 300 4.00 6.00 4.00 6.00 Jensen Ave 5 Jeffrey Ave S 90th Street S 1200 500 3.75 10.25 3.75 10.25 Jergen Ave 5 93rd Street 5 Dead End 714 1700 3.50 7.50 3.50 7.50 Jergen Ave Cu de Jergen Ave 5 Cul de sac 3$ 300 -- -- 3.00 8.00 sac Jergen Ave S Jergen Bay S 90th Street S 1118 1700 3.00 8.00 3.00 8.00 Jergen Ray S Jergen Ave S Cpl de sac 429 300 3 75 6.75 375 6.75 Jergen Court S Jergen Ave 5 Cul de sac 329 300 3.75 5.50 3.75 5.50 BRAUN INTERTEC Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 7 Table 3. ELMOD FWD Results Bituminous Aggregate Core Data Overlay Layer Modulus Base Layer Core Data Aggregate Street Aggregate To 11-Value (E1) Modulus (E2) Modulus (E3) Bituminous Base Bituminous Base Length Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness Street From To (ft) AADT (in) (in) (in) (in) Jcrgcn Place Jergen Ave 5 Cul de sac 345 300 4.25 6.25 4.25 6.25 Janie Ave S 91st Street S 9Uth Street S /48 500 -- -- 3.25 13,50 Jergen Ave S 93rd Street S Jergen Bay S 907 1700 3.25 7.75 3.25 7.75 91st Street 5 Jareau Ave 5 Jeffrey Ave S 1220 500 65 17 4.25 9.20 Table 3. ELMOD FWD Results NTE RTEC Bituminous Aggregate Subgrade Overlay Layer Modulus Base Layer Layer Requirement Street From To 11-Value (E1) Modulus (E2) Modulus (E3) (in) 91st Street S Cul 91x1 Slreel S Cul de sac 34 268 45 20 0.0 de sac, West 91st Street S Cul 91st Street 5 Cul de sac 33 341 43 20 0.0 de sac, East 91st Street S Islay Ave S Jareau Ave 5 29 406 65 17 0.0 91st Street 5 Jareau Ave S Jeffrey Ave 5 36 545 32 21 0.1 92nd Street S Jergen Ave S Cul de sac 38 359 32 22 0.3 92nd Street S Jarvis Ave S Jeffrey Ave S 37 760 30 21 0.2 Jasmine Ave 93rd Street S Jareau Ave S 43 371 47 25 0.0 S 93rd Street S Jeffrey Court Jergen Ave S 51 337 59 29 0.0 lanern Ave S 915t 5traat 5 90th Street 5 37 572 41 19 0 2 Jareau Ave S Cul Jareau Ave S Cul de sac 35 807 33 20 0.0 de sac Jareau Ave S 90th Street S 91st Street S 41 566 32 24 0.1 Jareau Ave S 91st Street S Dead End 42 520 42 24 0.3 Jareau Ave S Jareau Ave S Jarrod Ave 5 54 495 51 31 0.0 (North) (South) NTE RTEC Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 8 Street From To R•Value Bituminous Layer Modulus (Ei) Aggregate Base Layer Modulus (E2) Subgrade Layer Modulus (E3) Overlay Requirement (in) Jarvis Ave S 91st Street 5 92nd Street 5 37 325 47 21 0.0 Jasmine Ave S Cut de sac West Jasmine Ave 5 Cut de sac 32 238 26 19 0.0 Jasmine Ave S Cut de sac East Jasmine Ave S Cut de sac 16 631 38 10 0.0 Jasmine Ave S Dead End Jeffrey Ave S 54 206 48 31 0.0 Jasmine Ave S 90th Street S Cut de sac 30 285 24 17 0.1 Jeffrey Ave S Cut de sac (2) Jeffrey Ave S Cul de sac 41 183 27 24 0.0 Jeffrey Ave S Cut de sac (3) Jeffrey Ave S Cul de sac 44 469 45 25 0.0 Jeffrey Ave S Cut de sac (1) Jeffrey Ave S Cul de sac 35 321 42 21 0.0 Jeffrey Ave S 93rd Street S Dead End 51 236 55 29 0.1 Jeffrey Ave S 90th Street S Jeffrey Court 52 331 42 30 0.1 Jeffrey Bay Jeffrey Ave S Cut de sac 43 118 32 25 0.0 Jeffrey Court Jeffrey Ave S Cut de sac 58 245 50 33 0.0 Jensen Ave S Jeffrey Ave 5 90th Street S 42 915 26 24 0.4 Jergen Ave 5 93rd Street S Dead End 40 372 39 23 0.6 Jergen Ave Cut de sac Jergen Ave S Cul de sac 25 980 28 15 0.1 Jergen Ave S 93rd Street S Jergen Bay S 46 443 39 26 0.5 Jergen Ave 5 Jergen Bay 5 90th Street 5 49 764 29 28 1.0 Jcrgcn Bay S Jergen Ave S Cut de sac 42 440 32 24 0.2 Jergen Court S Jergen Ave S Cut de sac 32 198 48 19 0.0 Jergen Place Jergen Ave 5 Cul de sac 55 246 24 32 0.2 Janie Ave S 91st Street S 90th Street S 34 4SS 64 20 0.0 �- ►J INTERTEC Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 9 C. Basis for Recommendations C.1. Design Details C.1.a. Potential Pavement Repairs Based on our discussions with Bolton & Menk and the variable conditions of the streets within the project area, for ease of construction and equipment mobilization, we recommend that full - removal of the existing bituminous be performed on the tested streets. This is based on a number of factors and concerns regarding mill- and - overlay including: ■ Several of the locations were observed to have material stripping throughout the entire core in both the bituminous wear and non -wear courses. Due to the condition of the bituminous layers, there is a possibility that the remaining in -place bituminous will not support construction equipment. ■ It is possible that underlying bituminous layers that exhibit stripping will negatively affect the life of the overlay. ■ Bolton & Menk performed several test mills in the project area. These areas were found to be very thin and were easily broken apart. ■ The City's Public Works Department has had to perform numerous spot repairs throughout the project area. There is a good possibility that the underlying distresses will reflect through the new bituminous overlay. C.1.b. Current Traffic Traffic data was provided by Bolton & Menk and is shown in Table 2. C.1.c. Anticipated Grade Changes We expect that grade changes will be minimal for this project. Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 10 C.1.d. Precautions Regarding Changed Information We have attempted to describe our understanding of the proposed issues to the extent they were reported to us by Bolton & Menk. Depending on the extent of available information, assumptions may have been made based on our experience with similar projects. If we have not correctly recorded or interpreted the project details, we should be notified. New or changed information could require additional evaluation, analyses and /or recommendations. C.2. Design and Construction Considerations C.2.a. Pavement History Based on the information provided, the tested streets were constructed between 1979 and 1997 and vary between 16 and 34 years in age. Since that time, we understand that the streets have had frequent localized maintenance performed on them that includes patching and crack filling. The City is currently seal coating streets using a seven -year cycle. We understand that the tested streets have all been seal coated at least once, with some having been seal coated multiple times. To date, none of the tested streets have received a major repair, such as an overlay. We did not review condition data as part of this project; however, we understand that the tested streets likely have multiple distresses that are being concealed by the seal coat treatments. Given the age of the pavements and the likely distresses, we assume that most of the streets are within the major repair maintenance category. Pavements in this category are likely beyond benefitting from further preventive maintenance. Additionally, without repair, pavements within this repair category can deteriorate rapidly into the reconstruction category. Restoring these pavements now will be more cost - effective than further prolonging maintenance. D. Recommendations D.1.a. Pavement Repair We recommend the full removal of the existing bituminous pavement over the entire project area to the top of the aggregate base. This type of treatment can be expected to last about 15 to 20 years while reusing in -place materials and eliminating the potential for reflective cracking in the bituminous layers. MMUM (NTERTEC Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 11 Performing a full removal of the existing bituminous pavement will eliminate the potential for construction issues with milling. It also provides the benefit of fully removing the stripped bituminous layers and the potential for future issues. Following removal of the bituminous pavement, we recommended that the in -place aggregate be regraded and compacted. Following compaction, the aggregate base should be proof rolled to check for the presence of localized weak areas. The proofroll should be performed with a fully loaded truck. The proofroll should be observed by a geotechnical engineer or qualified observer. Any detected weak areas should be corrected prior to the placement of the new bituminous pavement. D.1.b. Design Sections For the residential streets with a reported ADT of 300 to 500, the projected 20 -year Bituminous Equivalent Single Axle Loads (BESAL) ranges from approximately 31,000 to 56,000 ESALs. The average R- value derived from FWD testing for these streets is 38. For these sections, the average in -place pavement section includes 3.8 inches of bituminous overlying 7.6 to 8.0 inches of aggregate base. Using this projected traffic and an R -value of 38, the required granular equivalency (GE) is approximately 10.0 inches. Following full removal of the existing bituminous pavement on these streets, a design section of 3.5 inches of new bituminous is recommended as per the minimum required bituminous. This follows the City's standard for residential streets. Underlying the bituminous is approximately 7.6 to 8.0 inches of existing aggregate base. Assuming the in -place aggregate base performs as a newly placed base layer, a GE of 15.88 inches is provided. For streets with a reported ADT of 1,700, the projected 20 -year BESALs is approximately 181,000 and the average R -value derived from FWD testing is 45. For these sections, the average in -place pavement section includes 3.5 inches of bituminous overlying 8.1 inches of aggregate base. The required GE for these streets is 10.14 inches. Following full removal of the existing bituminous pavement on these streets, the City's standard design section of 3.5 inches of new bituminous is recommended, overlying approximately 8.1 inches of existing aggregate base. Assuming the in -place aggregate base performs as a newly placed base layer, a GE of 15.88 inches is provided. The above designs are based on a 20 -year performance life. This performance life assumes maintenance, such as sealcoating and crack sealing, is routinely performed. The actual pavement life will vary depending on variations in weather, traffic conditions and maintenance. ja Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 12 E. Procedures E.1. Pavement Coring and Hand Augers Core locations 15 through 24 were selected by Bolton & Menk and were conducted by Braun Intertec on October 11, 2013. All cores were performed using a 4 -inch core barrel and the bituminous pavement was repaired with a cold -mix bituminous patch immediately after coring. The cores were measured to obtain approximate bituminous thickness and their material conditions were noted based on visual observation. E.2. Falling Weight Deflectometer E.2.a. Field Testing A Dynatest Model 8002E FWD was used for deflection testing. This equipment is a trailer- mounted device that measures the pavement deflection due to an applied impulse load. Four impulse loads were applied at each test point in a single direction of travel at an approximate interval of 100 feet. Field testing was conducted on October 9, 2013. Data collected by the FWD during testing include the deflections, impulse loads, pavement surface temperature, and the ambient air temperature. E.2.1b. Deflection Data Analysis E.2.11b.1. Input Data The following data are utilized as analysis inputs to generate structural information from the deflection data: ■ Traffic loadings (provided by Bolton & Menk) Pavement layer thicknesses (core and hand auger data, provided by NTI and Braun Intertec) • Subgrade soil type (Braun Intertec) • Pavement temperatures (Braun Intertec) • Previous day temperature (National Weather Service) • Pavement deflection data (Braun Intertec) f NTC RTC Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 13 E.2.b.2. Adjustment Factors Flexible pavement systems consisting of bituminous layers, aggregate bases, and subgrade soils, are normally frozen during winter and very weak during spring thaw. Deflection testing is normally not recommended during either season. Measured deflections in summer and fall seasons are adjusted to reflect spring season condition when the pavement system is in its weakest state. Seasonal correction factors recommended by MnDOT are used for this purpose. Deflection is inversely proportional to the stiffness of flexible pavements. Since stiffness in flexible pavements is temperature dependent, measured deflections are adjusted to the standard 80 degrees Fahrenheit for deflection data analysis using MnDOT procedure. The FWD equipment is equipped with an infrared temperature sensor for measuring pavement surface temperature. Using the BELLS model developed from FHWA -LTPP test sections, the mid -depth asphalt temperature is estimated from the surface temperature and previous day average air temperature. The resulting factor is used to convert the calculated mid -depth temperature to the standard 80 degrees Fahrenheit mid -depth temperature. The Temperature Adjustment Factor (TAF) and Seasonal Correction Factor (SCF) are then used to adjust the measured deflection to an equivalent spring season deflection at the reference temperature of 80F. E.2.b.3. Analyses The Braun Intertec Non - Destructive Testing (NDT) program was used for analysis of the deflection data to estimate the effective subgrade R -value and the effective GE. NDT incorporates flexible pavement thickness design relationships from MnDOT, along with those from the 1993 Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, published by AASHTO. The following briefly defines the parameters presented in this report: TONN Spring Load Capacity - The MnDOT TONN method (revised from MnDOT Investigation 603) is used for spring load capacity estimations. The TONN method uses pavement section information (bituminous thickness), FWD center deflections (normalized to 9 kips), and seasonal and temperature adjustment factors to provide an estimate of load capacity for a given pavement segment. Effective R -value - Effective R -value provides a measure of the stiffness of the pavement subgrade soil. R -value calculations are computed using the Hogg Model, which represents the subgrade as a soil mass of finite depth over a stiff layer. Hogg Model resilient modulus values are corrected for seasonal effects and for congruence to backcalculated resilient modulus values, and finally converted to R -value by the method described in MnDOT Investigation 201. fi lmma Bolton & Menk, Inc. Project SP -13 -06655 December 9, 2013 Page 14 Because Hogg Model- calculated R- values are relatively conservative compared to methods where an infinite half -space is considered, and seasonal adjustments are also used, we make no further reduction of the results for design purposes. Effective Granular Eauivalent (GE) - Effective GE provides values for the design of pavement structures in inches of MnDOT Class 5 aggregate base equivalent. GE requirements are based upon anticipated 20- year traffic loadings (ESALs) and the effective R -value of the subgrade. Laver Moduli - To estimate pavement layer moduli, we used the ELMOD backcalculation software from Dynatest, Inc. Moduli values were backcalculated for a three -layer system by the Deflection Basin Fit method. This method uses Odemark- Boussinesq equations to fit the measured deflection basin to that a theoretical pavement system using set convergence criteria. The overlay requirements are then calculated using these layer stiffnesses, ESAL estimates and rutting or fatigue failure criteria provided in ELMOD. We converted the subgrade moduli values to R -value using relationships established by AASHTO. Note that the raw backcalculated moduli presented in the report are not corrected for air and pavement temperature at the time of testing or seasonal variation, and the results could vary considerably if testing takes places during other seasons or times -of -day. Overlay requirements, however, do account for seasonal variation of pavement moduli. F. Qualifications F.1. Use of Report This report is for the exclusive use of the parties to which it has been addressed. Without written approval, we assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. Our evaluation, analyses and recommendations may not be appropriate for other parties or projects. F.2. Standard of Care In performing its services, Braun Intertec used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable members of its profession currently practicing in the same locality. No warranty, express or implied, is made. (TERT C Appendix A BRAUN INTFRT C W � Y.c a<8 �� 5 g � . tll( NJC , w p S133Mi$A11JEf1�kItlA LU NOLVn r m Z o H313US NOI1VOOl 3NOOS'IONIH711Iy n� 5 -1 - �- ��.��.• -a�� l�F �, cK -tr; �;::�,F �!-.:4 �- r:t:r: �za e� -r� i� - :. . ... . ... ..:. ..: .... .. ...f: �s -�' ��zttCt ia. e;'- r±>� -,'�: r:, .r t*s- •I___ -_._ ._ _ A % f � 41 o 1 .' 4E! �1 L'J 65 SI :�� �'1 � Y. R7 4:'} 15 fY• �- €23"�..(4..s -.�. �.___. -____ . —... __,_: �- «- ���_�_ N 4j / . L � o W j I I w cw 2 1 M! BG6.1 Ct]2c:p1 C�V 1H +'Y'S; n+E! dF F:D.14ti7 0 T!= M E LL 0 m U O a 0 00 m (�. N 00 N h nm p MM 0 by p If a M rym� n nom O Q `S V M• CJ• CO 00 'R m 9 L . M. VI t mHm- N [ t h N`N N h N L Mm H, O� M C_ 00 pl r l - a m 9 M p mW n� a M m W fV N h �y (� ��N-1 HaN tV N N�(V N N HInN N N �I,�N N. M.r-1 — p�m - H -E a - M S 0 m N fq H = VI o� N H 00 h 1D M '+ o? V M m ID fo wD q 1D O m m 1 H N m f4 fy M N ' 7 n0 ID m r/ Vl h lD W, 'A i o o V) IG C1 V M V 0 Vl€ V n N N(6 O ro H .�-1 q N4rni N N N -I�N .��+ NfN Ni N� . �. . M -t E. e e�-i cd . i . D % j.n+ "v H 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Of0 0 S O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0' 0 OIO o OO 0 0 O O 0 6 o 0 6 0 c; 0 o O.O O ' O i( O O!O O o O O p O O(O p O O O O O (O O O O {000 O O a /Jpp $0000do(0000d VI U v 000000000do H H H H H H HZH '-1 } N H N rJ 111111 N N W H N HdH H oo d o • coEO0000000 H1 � H a o W M n0 00 fA n0 1. 1 n0 f\ 00 n W W f` W W h n !� OD o W 11 f\ h W W n h L0 00 n h OD 00 n t� CO i 00 - no h t1 { I� W h T W e0 n0 n i� W np 1- 00 E C0 W W OO i n I W n T f0 h h n E h n n h n h h n h n n h h n n h h h h r n f: n. ?n H #H 1S n h H N h ! W N n H�, n n N N n! W N n Z NCH N W W N W o N_ Y M M H H m m H H m M H H M H E H m m H f H z:i M M H H M fn H H m M W H M m H M "m H H M H H M M M:M M m M m M m M m m M m Y Y m m 0 0 m(m O t 3 m m 0 0 N m m 0 0 N N m�m 0 0 HEH m m OIO N N m m O s O HiH m m O O HH m3m O 0 H H atm 0 0 N�ri� m m S)'O 1 m m O O HtH m: m}m O�O=O NiW N moi O O H N mtm OHO W`H m'm O €O H W m m m 0 0 0 H W N m m�m 0 0 N H_N 0 W. MlA c . M(M Vl {m M4M H'i -i � i MM MM u�. -1 i -I. -i MM M #M A u m 10, of of ri ri H t ri r i r+ a; of Tmi ati ri .-+ i-i Q. of .-i .+ cp i� �n 8 t mm H H rl rl W 'i ao a 4o , a0 . tD F H N H W E H W g 1D W l0 W rl H H U F .- .wmwHa� E M !n N ��H W r:�oo n fA Vl m iri io Vfin rZ r�IcoHWm !n Vl ® oo f € obiwwwco e € (( m § F ;MI �:tm mEn $ � � ao €io s M H;n '!'I ao r�io �. ui io.w m Ul'Ni E V)t m €Vl E m'M In !C L cJ { } } (M cf d MIN M M M t m M M M fl) h M $ ttl th € Vt c{ M J2 Vt } c( h L'1 M v CI N I t/t c} M jam' V) cf n i M E� r P=)eM Ift 1� Mm M n N lrf Z 'M oojao Q u7I_In 000000 Vl Ill M n'7 M M p M E4 p O 0���000000'o �1 fli M fit to l Ill M M S'o!� H H H j W rtl M ifl p p S M !!1 °og� ifl N @ N ( N p p o p 0 — -- S }� o m OIN n€ N to ao o n m H o v n m o In Prn In ao H'. o; H 'cf N! N N M ,1 H sf N 'OEH O m HIm N 1D H H N CO m m tpin N M Vl N W m M N M 40 H�m 11 H H {n M'O Do N p� HEN H;N C n:c1 {N so ri ri a, mtN H;m N N ri h V N M tM1 o1 f o N E V) Vf LE Vl� N a V1LV1 V1 N w v V)?y a � y a gN Ip� 7 i � 5 o �' Vl aI p • VJ; [ ' 2z' ; I fn'In Vlt Q�d T a > C ' H H Q T °i Q a C to m m L ` N Ql N Q T L y v �1� E VjQ Ti T v. i C`� C a: u vlv vroii�r v v L�m n rt VC v�u� n a vvv[ �i g a Y g {{ a o ro a ro'm a a a a -, v a ro .c,cv 8 ^ m of m�u_ m gg l0 4 v 3 � `a a Ci s �!v �i =�J V V UPti � � .t� p ia v�ir vita 444 I o4 I a € em z[ �c V) Q Ut V! > N VS W N 0 VI > " N O > N N a V Vl 'A e > N {{ ut >3 V� �+o u' M m y N !tn N i m NV• M M V1 V) V/ > '} V) }{ > a s €Q L L Q Vd L c Vl 4Q in L Lac Vt a a ¢Q L { { <QQQ¢ Qj,. 2 d<d N E@ ¢ C N N p 2 L 1!1 Vl N y, y 2 �� CTi L N l7 N { N ro b N @ r L H L € €N r � _C C` E N w M N EL �:� €� L � i L L ` dN �9E C W �n a men a C � }c m € m g 61 . C] i m b I -�, — ! m gg O L.J - -ai a o m E °1 s) ry v al v' a a I - - u m `R A a a v „H, E 7 U N U €„a 'a6 ' 4 v N VI N VI w3 u a VI N M E N L v VI VI N a VI N v) a° N Vl N m S �''a 6. a > > d d v) Y >> 4 ¢ N M a a > > uuu N i o V) >� >33> Vl VI > > 1 V) Vl >33> p = M Vi fn > a L' '" u Vl a > ¢ > Q a a C C a a C C did T� T dQE< T' T ¢d 1a AEU d!q ¢ q f � L - - ' a $$ Q > aN o m cicva° rn ° a wv io�a d `ro EEEE w,w ... C c u a C C G c o m ula a e c C C i s u�a c C Appendix C BRAUN INTERTEC ��11119 I�C�I��ill 1119119! IN 1 111 1 1 1 11 o���m�0�0 �oo�oom�o�e�oa i �t0iv0o vivaieneio�0o " "� °•I�° lol l oOOI II of iix���l mni iu ■oi 0 0 0 II� MEMO i nunn■ig ����niiii'I� �� 1111 ni s�'ases ooe,�e�oee�ssAA��saa� i a�lll!!!l��o�v,e°oo�� mm.�e�omoo�0000 omo IYIIe�o��MOevo��0i livid p i � vv �� o ��Eo onmoio� miii�lll inn m �i�A ni�lll� o ��iinomn �em�oA� �0�900� o�s � mum inom�n no0 �YIIII�� �IIII�I IIII 0 Hill 111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111 111 mII�IIIIIIIIN I� II III V 19 p� I A� 11111�1111��III ;1�911�Oni0�0���01■ oil ��IIIIIIIIIII ■111111 11 IIIIIIIIIII I ■III IN 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Appendix H Milling Test Areas In order to evaluate the feasibility of a mill - overlay. twelve test areas were milled to a depth of approximately 2- inches. These test strips were approximately 7.5 -feet wide and 25 -feet long. The purpose of the test strips was to determine the quantity and severity of cracking below the pavement surface. Pictures arc included for each mill area, prior to and after milling. Cottage Grove '(Ph ere Pride andproS"rity Meet Cio of Collage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Proiect 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Pavement cracking pattern more evident after milling. potential for reflective cracking. Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Froject Area A Approximate Location: 9044 lergen Avenue 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT t i 1 Cite of Collage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project Area B Approximate Location: 9334 93 Street P,Ivement stripping eslends down into the. bituminous base. 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Area C Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Proiect Pavement stripping extcuds down into the bituminous basc. 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Area D Approximate Location: 9138 92 "' Street h _ 1 71�pII p Cite of Cottage Grove. Ibiinnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project Mill exposes gravel base duc to thin pavement layer. 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Area E Maiorio, of pavement stripping removed. some transverse and longitudinal cracks exposed. Cily of Collage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Froiect 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Area F Location: 9019 Jasmine Avenue t � ti ! t. a. '- le i.. Cite of Collage Grove. Minnesota 201.4 Pavement Management Project 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Area G Majority of pavement stripping removed, thermal crack present but base in good condition. Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Proiect 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Milling surface reveals cracks in bitmWnous base, illustrates volume of potential reflective cracking, t City of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 201.1 Pavement Management Proiect Area H Approximate Location: 9295 Jergen A\'enne 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Area Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 201.1 Pavement Management Project Normal thermal crackhig present. 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Area J Some pavennent liolduig moisture. patchy asphalt stripping in bituminous base present. Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 201.1 Pavement Management Project 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT Area K Pay ement sU ipphig esleuds do%\ a into the bilmiuuous base. weak pay eiueut noted iu areas of strippint. Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pay ement Management Project 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT S Cite of Cottage Grove. Minnesota 2014 Pavement Management Project Area L Approximate Location: 941 Jeffery Avenue Paventenl stripphig extends tlo\cn into the bituutiituus base. A SPECIAL BENEFITS APPRAISAL RESTRICTED USE REPORT FORMAT (BRKW File No. 724) 4 SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES 2014 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROJECT SOUTH OF 90 STREET SOUTH & EAST OF ISLAY AVENUE SOUTH COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 VALUATION DATE: DECEMBER 5, 2013 FOR CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE ATTN: JENNIFER LEVITT, P.E. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR / CITY ENGINEER 12800 RAVINE PARKWAY SOUTH COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 Im PAUL J. GLEASON AND WILLIAM E. PETERSEN REAL ESTATE VALUATION SERVICES "Tot REAL ESTATE VALUATION SERVICES December 19. 201: Jennifer Levitt, P.E. Community Development Director / City Engineer City of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 RE: Special Benefits Appraisal Four Single - Family Residential Properties Cottage Grove 2014 Pavement Management Project South of 90 Street South and East of Islay Avenue South near Ms. Levitt: In accordance with your request, we are providing you with a special benefits appraisal pertaining to four residential properties located in an area proposed for roadway rehabilitation and utility repairs through the Cottage Grove 2014 Pavement Management Project. This appraisal is presented in a restricted use report format, in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. At the request of the City of Cottage Grove, we have made special benefit appraisals of four representative single - family residential properties fronting streets in the proposed project area. The purpose of the appraisal is to provide an opinion of the increase in market value, if any, to the subject properties as a consequence of the new street and utility improvements to be completed in 2014. The opinion of the value benefits resulting from the public improvement project is as of December 5, 2013, the date of inspection of the project area and subject properties. The intended use of the appraisal is for assisting; city officials in levying in an equitable manner special assessments to properties benefited by the improvement project. The intended users of the appraisal are City of Cottage Grove officials. The project area encompasses several residential neighborhoods located east of Islay Avenue South along the south side of 90` Street South. The streets to be rehabilitated and the proposed improvements are detailed within this report. RRK4N APPRAISALS, INC. 1600 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 314, ST. PAUL, PAN 55104 G51.646.6114 FAX 651.646.8086 vnvw.hrkw.com The value benefits, if anV-, of street, utility and other such public improvements accrue to the land component of a property, not to the value of buildings and other improvements on the land. Consequently. this special benefits analysis is limited to the valuation of only the land components of the properties appraised. The before- and -after valuation methodology has been used in this appraisal, which analyzes the market value of the subject land prior to the proposed project in relation to the market value of the land after the pro is completed. The difference between the before and after opinions of land value reflects the value of special benefits. In our opinion, the special value benefits to the subject properties resulting from completion of the 2014 Pavement Management Project as of December 5, 2013 are as follows: City of Cottage Grave 2014 Pavement Management Project # Address Ophion of Special Benefit 1 9129 Janie Avenue South $4,100 2 9063 Jensen Avenue South $4,600 3 9254 Jareau Avenue South $4,600 4 9236 Jcrgcn Court South $5,000 This appraisal assignment is not based on a requested minimum valuation or a specific valuation for approval of a loan. The opinions of market value and special benefits in the appraisal were developed independent of any undue influence. The appraised values assume all real estate taxes and special assessment balances. if any, have been paid in full. The values are gross values with no allowances made for brokerage commissions, real estate taxes or other carrying costs associated Nvith a property during its marketing period. The values are based on an exposure time of three to six months. This appraisal report has been prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) as promulgated by the Appraisal Foundation. The facts and information contained in this report were obtained from sources that are considered to be reliable and are true to the best of our knowledge and belief, but are not guaranteed. This appraisal report is contingent upon the assumptions and limiting conditions included within this report. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 2 Your attention is directed to the following report which summarizes the data. analyses and conclusions that support the opinions of value. Sincerely. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. Paul J. GI , son Certified General Real Property Appraiser Minnesota License #4003073 William E. Petersen Certified General Real Property Appraiser Minnesota License #4001649 BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTIES APPRAISEDILEGAL DESCRIPTIONS .................. 1 PURPOSE /INTENDED USE OF THE APPRAISAL /INTENDED USERS ............................ I PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED ................................................. ............................... I ZONING........................................................................................ ............................... I PROmcr ARIA AND StTBJLC'I' PROPRRTIIS LOCATION MA P .................. ............................... 2 SCOPEOF WORK .......................................................................... ..............................3 COMPETENCY PROVISION ........................................................... ..............................3 EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS AND HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS ....................4 MARKET VALUE DEFINITION ...................................................... ..............................5 CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS ................................ ..............................5 DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTIES .................................... ..............................7 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE ...................... ............................... 10 EXISTING STREET CONSTMTCTION DATES ....................................... ............................... I PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX MAP ................................................ ............................... 12 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ....................... ............................... 13 PROPOSED I\IPROVENIENTS MAP .................................................... ............................... 14 HIGHEST AND BEST USE ........................................................... ............................... 15 SPECIAL BENEFIT CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ..... ............................... 16 SPECIAL BENEFIT ANALYSIS PROCESS ................................... ............................... 17 SPECIAL BENEFIT OPINIONS .................................................... ............................... 17 EXPOSURETIME ....................................................................... ............................... 17 CERTIFICATION ......................................... . ........ .. ........................... I....................... 18 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS ........................................... ............................... 19 COMPANYPROFILE .................................................................. ............................... 23 IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTIES APPRAISED /LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS The owners, addresses. tax parcel numbers and legal descriptions of the four appraised properties are presented bclowv. A map depicting the area of the proposed project and the location of the subject properties is on the next page. The properties are described in greater detail later in this report. Subject Properties Summary Fee Owner Address Tax Parcel I.D. No. Legal Description I Scott M. & Nancy Jean Lewis 9129 Janie Avenue S. 21- 027 -21 -11 -0067 Lot 21, Block 3, Heritage Estates Addition 1) Andraea Magee 9063 Jensen Aventie S. 22- 027 -21 -21 -0061 Lot 5, Block 2, Ridgewood 3rd Addition 3 Wayne W. & Nancy A. Riepe 9254 Jareau Avenue S. 22- 027 -21 -23 -0094 Lot 2, Block 3, Knollwood 3rd Addition 4 Thomas J. & Linda L. Rucker 9236 Jergen Court S. 22- 027 -21 -24 -0065 Lot 22, Block 2, Ridgewood 61h Addition PURPOSE /INTENDED USE OF THE APPRAISAL /INTENDED USERS The purpose of the appraisal is to develop an opinion of the value of special benefits, if any. that will accrue to four single - family residential properties due to the proposed rehabilitation of their fronting streets by the City of Cottage Grove's 2014 Pavement Management Project. The intended use of the special benefits appraisal is to assist City of Cottage Grove officials in levying in an equitable manner special assessments to properties benefited by the improvement project. The intended users of the report are Cite of Cottage Grove officials. PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED The property rights appraised are those of the fee simple estate. ZONING The zoning of the appraised properties is as follows: 1 #1 Address Zonui = Des ration 1 9129 Janie Avenue South R -4, Low Density Residental 2 9063 Jensen Avenue South R -3, Single Family Residential 3 9254 Jareau Avenue South R -5, Meduni Density Resident 1 11 4, 9236 Jer =en Court South R -4, Loiv Density Residential BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE I F c �Tu a \x u l ✓ R i g at 1 � R t � N ee a •as �AV nv3i I I f v I 0S'IAV Otb7NVi l �� •I�TT� 1� INIfI1 'CX � -vif AVIiNV1 I O a _�.-; yU � �153AVNMbL a d ns �.v nv�aar " 6 R ° s I Fi ll * VS •IAV SNFtYT a � - fl p OS'IAV nVi W f 'tX IAY oovw A 16 tl 4 '. =12 !111. D___j 'G,'1AV 1915! �''�T Oy m�Cn� jNiUfl L lL 1 l'__'L 4=Z �, D r U 4 Lw 0) 0 L a u .C� U Q U U N W Ch Q w U z toi r. a Q Q a a Q 3 x x as SCOPE OF WORK The City of Cottage Grove is proposing to rehabilitate several streets in all established residential area east of Islay Avenue South along the south side of 90"' Street South. Project maps herein depict the area of the proposed improvements. The project is referred to as the Cite of Cottage Grove 2014 Pavement Management Project. At the request of the client, four representative residential properties located in the area of the proposed improvements project are appraised in this report. The opinions of special benefits, if any. accruing to to the appraised properties as a result of the project will be used by the client in determining the appropriate assessments to be levied against other properties within the project area. Since the benefits of public Improvement projects such as street rehabilitation accrue to the land component of properties only, the valuation in this report involves land only. Opinions of the market value of the subject properties have been developed in this appraisal using the Direct Sales Comparison Approach. This approach. which is the one most appropriate for valuing land, involves the comparison and analysis of land parcels recently sold which are similar to the land being appraised. The application of the Cost and income Approaches typically applies only when a property valuation includes buildings and other Improvements having contributory value. The subject land parcels are valued before and after completion of the proposed street and utility improvements. The difference between the before and after opinions of market value is the special benefit value attributable to the proposed project. This report is presented in the restricted use report format in compliance with the reporting requirements of Standards Rule 2 -2 (e) of the Uniform Standards of Appraisal Practice (USPAP). The results of the analysis and the conclusions pertaining to the value benefits to the subject properties are presented in all abbreviated manner in this report, at a level of detail sufficient for the needs of the intended users. Additional notes, analyses. and supporting data are retained in the appraisers' office workfile. The opinions and conclusions stated in this report may not be understood properly without additional information in the workfile. The report is intended to be read and used only by the intended users identified herein. COMPETENCY PROVISION Paul J. Gleason has been a full -time professional real estate appraiser since April 1992. William E. Petersen has been a full -time professional real estate appraiser since November 1986. Provided later in this report, are summaries of their professional qualifications. The educational training and extensive work experience of the appraisers, each of whom is licensed as a Certified General Real Property Appraiser, enable completion of this appraisal assignment in a professional manner consistent with the intent of the competency provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 3 EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS AND HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS An Extraordinary Assumption is defined in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) 2012 -2013 Edition c The Appraisal Foundation, Page U -3, as: An assumption, directly relatect to a specific assignment, ('is of the effective date ofassignment results, which, iff)und to be false, could alter the Appraiser's opinions or conclusions. A Hypothetical Condition is defined in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) 2012 -2013 Edition (' Appraisal Foundation. Page U -3, as: A condition, directly relotecl to a specific assignment, which is Contrary to what is known by the appraiser to exist on the effective date of the assignment results, but is us�ecl fiw the purpose of analysis. Comments A hypothetical condition in this appraisal is it is assumed, for the purposes of special benefits valuation, that on the effective date of valuation of December 5, 2013, in the before position on that day the streets in front of the subject properties were in their pre - improved state (old. worn and deteriorated) and later on that day. in the after position, the street rehabilitation had been completed. In actuality, the rehabilitation process had not begun on that date. but is rather planned to be completed in 2014. Applying the hypothetical condition facilitates completing a before- and -after valuation as of the effective date of valuation. See Contingent and Limiting Conditions, which are standard assumptions that apply to the appraisal, later in this report. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PACE 4 MARKET VALUE DEFINITION Market Value as defined by the United States Department of the Treasure through the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision is: The most 1)i-obable price which c► prope►•ty should bring in o competitive and open market under till conditions requisite to o fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeable and ossuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation o1'a sole cis of o specified dote mul the passing of title from ,seller• to buyer under conditions whereby: ♦ buver and seller are typically motivated: both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what he considers his own best interest: ♦ a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market: ♦ payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto: and ♦ the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. This definition is also recognized by the Appraisal Foundation and is part of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS This appraisal report is subject to the following Limiting Conditions and Assumptions: L The legal descriptions contained herein are assumed to be correct. 2. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for matters legal in nature affecting the property appraised or the title thereto, nor does the appraiser render any opinion as to the title, which is assumed to be good and marketable. The property is appraised as though tinder responsible ownership. 3. No survey has been prepared of the property by the appraiser and no responsibility is assumed in connection with such matters. Sketches in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. 4. Information furnished by others is assumed to be reliable. However, the appraiser assumes no responsibility for its accuracy. 5. In cases where no soil tests have been submitted, the appraiser has assumed a good subsoil condition, subject to visual observations noted in the report. 6. The appraiser assumes that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil or structures, which would render it more or less valuable. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for such conditions or for engineering that might be required to discover such factors. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 5 7. The appraiser is not required to give testimony or appear in court because of !laving made this appraisal with reference to the property in question, unless arrangements have been previously made. S. The distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the highest and best use of the property. 9. Tile Bylaws and Regulations of the professional appraisal organizations with which the appraiser is affiliated govern disclosure of the contents of the appraisal report. 10. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry Nyith it the right of publication. It may not be used for an }' purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is addressed without the written consent of the appraiser, and. ill any event, only with proper written qualifications and only in its entirety. 11. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, or a cope thereof, shall be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or any other media without written consent and approval of the appraiser. Nor shall the appraiser, firm or professional organization of which the appraiser is a member be identified without the written consent of the appraiser. 12.The value conclusion assumes all taxes and special assessments are paid in full. 13. The after improvements valuation in this appraisal assumes proposed improvements have been completed in accordance with the description of the proposed work provided to the appraisers by the Cite of Cottage Grove. Environmental Disclaimer: The value opinions in this report are based on the assumption that the subject properties are not adversely affected by the existence of hazardous substances or detrimental environmental conditions. A routine inspection of the properties did not reveal or indicate ail }' such conditions. In that the appraisers are not qualified in this field of expertise, the client is encouraged to retain an expert in such investigations, if so desired. BRKw APPRAISALS, INC. PACE 6 DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTIES Neighborhood The subject properties are located within an established. fully developed residential neighborhood in the south- central part of Cottage Grove. Primary access into the area is provided by U.S. Highway 10 /61 and Jamaica Avenue South, which meet at a nearby interchange around which is extensive commercial activity. The map on page 2 shows the residential area in which the subject properties are located. The oldest homes in the neighborhood, typically dating from the mid -to -late 1980s are located in the northwest sector, along the south side of 90` Street South, and in the central portion. The newest homes, built in the late 1990s, are generally in the southeast area. The client has requested a special benefit appraisal of four properties located within the area of the proposed project. The appraisers have selected four representative properties for the analysis. described below and depicted on later plat maps. 1. 9129 Janie Avenue South This is considered to be a typical and representative single - family property in the northwest portion of the project area. The rectangular lot has 64 feet of frontage on Janie Avenue South and the land area is 8.000 SF or 0.18 acres according to Washington County. The lot is miNvooded and the topography is generally level. The house on the lot was built in 1987. The fronting street was built the same year. 2. 9463 Jensen Avenue South This property, located in the northeasterly portion of the project area. is improved with a house built in 1991. The lot has 83 feet of frontage on Jensen Avenue South. The land area is 11,643 SF or 0.27 acres according to Washington County. The lot is generally level and unwooded. The fronting street was built in 1989. 3. 9254 Jareau Avenue South This property, located in the southwesterly portion of the project area, is improved with a house built in 1993. The lot has 70.69 feet of frontage on Jareau Avenue South. The land area is 13,621 SF or 0.31 acres according to Washington County. The lot is generally level and unwooded 4. 9236 Jergen Court South The fronting street was built in 1993. This property. located in the southeasterly portion of the project area, is improved with a house built in 1994. The lot has 4936 feet of frontage on the cul -de -sac of Jergen Court South. The land area is 20.687 SF or 0.47 acres according to Washington County. The unwooded lot is generally level at the front with a downward walkout slope at the rear. The fronting street was built in 1993. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 7 7 (0065 (0452) S I ( 0009 ) I W 120.00 125.00 Z L U 125.00 $ C�14) At D $ g (�) 125.00 5 $ (0051) 120.00 W 25.00 1 I (OW (0454) - - -- 9 16.60 0411 ) 125.00 110.00 0 8 22 8 ( oar$ W 3 S (9) tY z 10 S ($412) 130.53 , 125.00 120,00 q0 70.13 1. 9129 Janie Avenue South 7 21 3 ( 0 040) 22 yam. G9 23 i; •' % { U U �i 1 j i� ' !!� (0050) ,X > U) 41 26 2. 906: Jensen Avenue South BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 8 10079) (0 J - (0064) SOU 2 1 .5, 95. 2 _ I t19.nn (0094) .. 3 0 ✓ t 3 r (0066) �' - (0095) nn Y4•Vs ni � �i (0067) ;. 9254 Jarcau Avenuc South 4. 92 Jcrgcn Court South BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 9 (06b 10 20 pou) 8 (0058) -�_ c ���5' - //�J /■ /�� � - �� _Z2.y� (0069) ���;, i(I.. 21 !07.23 12 5S.7T 25 4 •1 \ (0046) v . 10 s� 5 24 4. 92 Jcrgcn Court South BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 9 (06b (00x5) � 23 `mo w• f,00Go) �' ���5' !07.23 12 5S.7T 110.00' 4 •1 \ (0046) v . 4. 92 Jcrgcn Court South BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 9 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE The area of the proposed project includes neighborhoods in the Heritage Estates Addition. Ridgewood I" through 7`" Additions and KnoliNvood I" through 3 " Additions. An engineering report of the existing streets and improvements in the project area dated November 201 3 ) was provided by the firm of Bolton & Menk, Inc. Streets The streets in the project area are urban - residential design and were originally constructed between 1979 and 1997, as depicted in the exhibit on page 1 1. The streets have concrete curb and gutter and are typically 32 feet wide from curb face to curb face, with the exception of Jeffery Avenue which is 44 feet wide. The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of the streets generally ranges from 50 to 60 on a scale of 1 to 100. Project area pavements at the lower end of the index are considered to be in fair condition and generally exhibit major distress. A PCI slap is on a following page. Core samples of project area streets indicate the average depth of existing bituminous paving to be 3.51; inches and the average depth of the aggregate base at 7.60 inches, as indicated in the exhibit on the next page. A common problem in the existing streets is stripping, which is described as the separation of aggregate from the asphalt due to moisture. Stripping is reportedly most severe in the streets constructed in the 1990s. Additional moisture will likely enter the pavement structure as more cracks appear and accelerate deterioration as the pavement ages. Sections of existing concrete curb and gutter have settled, cracked or have defects. Approximately 8-10% of the curb is in poor condition and requires removal and replacement. Sanitary Sewer The existing sanitary seAver pipe is generally in good condition although some areas exhibit root intrusion. cracked pipes and sags. Water Main Existing mains were installed with the development of the neighborhoods. The water mains are considered to be in good condition. However, some valves may heed corroded bolts replaced or miscellaneous repairs. Storm Sewer Storm sewer mains are generally in good condition. However. cracked or broken pipes and dirty lines are present in some locations. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 10 1p Jay N 0 0 O 0 0 - � - �����' � .�; _,.__ _� ..: �= � _ �-� � - -t i x.1. ZI; 1 7 ow T A- O L /* j ru Fill, D/ Inj kh Its m mv kvw 0 6;1 O bL lilt L4 FJ 11 A ji � D� Mil p r 'I IT _ ooa�a F—I I� U c [1S 1f 15 F-71 ti I E - I IMCW gvi LL aS ca ZI O cl A4 0 Z 0 ui U, o z r=-MLRM FJ 11 A ji � D� Mil p r 'I IT _ ooa�a F—I I� U c [1S 1f 15 F-71 ti I E - I IMCW gvi LL aS ca ZI O cl A4 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Streets Based on the deteriorated condition of the existing paving, types of distress present and the anticipated deterioration due to asphalt stripping, the streets within the project area are proposed to undergo a full pavement removal and replacement with 3.5 inches of new pavement. Existing concrete curb and gutter will undergo spot replacement as needed. Sanitary Sewer: Inline repairs will be made to fix cracks within the pipe. Existing pipe sags creating back -ups will be removed and replaced. Existing concrete adjusting rings will be replaced Nvith new HDPE adjusting rings to conform to current standards. The sewer manhole castings will be salvaged and reinstalled. Water Main Valve boxes with damaged top sections will have the top section replaced. Concrete hydrant access pads will be Installed at all hydrants. Storm Sewer Inline repairs Nvill be done to address cracked pipes and leaking or offset joints. Structures in poor condition Nvill be replaced. Miscellaneous structure patching, lining and other repairs will be performed as needed. Storm Water Ouality Since there will be no increase of impervious surfacing. no storm water quality improvements are required. Trail A wood -chip trail for the green space between the residential neighborhood and the new Wal -Mart on East Point Douglas Road is proposed to be constructed. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 13 illy_ L 01 All 11 ' - 11-- 11 -'. Im ]■ � W117L w 'u `�1 F-1 0 0 0 0 ou ED 1 ommmmmyn \ — O U O 0 CL. Q. ILI G CL I" 0. m CL -'. Im ]■ � W117L w 'u `�1 F-1 0 0 0 0 ou ED 1 ommmmmyn \ — O U O 0 CL. Q. HIGHEST AND BEST USE Highest and Best Use - Before Proposed Improvements As Vacant Li the case of all the subject properties, the highest and best use. as vacant. is for single - family residential purposes. The properties are located in an established single - family area, zoned and guided for residential purposes. As Improved Only the land components of the subject properties are being appraised. Therefore.. the highest and best use, as Improved, is not addressed. Highest and Best Use - After Proposed Lnprovements After the proposed street and utility improvements are completed, the highest and best use of the subject properties is unchanged relative to the before i nip rovemctits position. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PACE 15 SPECIAL BENEFIT CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS Before the proposed improvements, the streets in the project area are old and deteriorated. According to the engineering report by Bolton & Menk, Inc., the present pavement condition of the project streets is typically rated between 50 and 60, based on a scale of 1 to 100, with 100 representing top condition. It can be anticipated that further deterioration will result in a worsening of problems associated with advanced age, including accelerated asphalt stripping, improper drainage, uneven driving surfaces, increased formation of potholes, etc. It is recognized that the condition and quality of streets serving and fronting residential properties influences the value, curb appeal and general desirability of the properties. The proposed rehabilitation of roads serving the subject properties will substantially improve the safety, convenience and general appeal of access into and out of the subject properties. The project will reverse the deteriorating state of the existing streets and result in new surfacing, and in some areas, replacement of deteriorated concrete curb and gutter. 4. Safety aspects for vehicles traveling on a rehabilitated street are enhanced by the elimination of potholes, cracks, etc. Street icing problems are reduced as water is more efficiently diverted off the roadway surface that could otherwise collect in the deteriorated street areas during frost seasons. The proposed project improvements in some areas may result in some general benefit to neighborhoods and properties beyond the immediate subject neighborhoods. However. a significant amount of benefit resulting from the project is special, attaching to the properties directly fronting and accessing the rehabilitated streets, including the subject properties. 6. The special benefit accruing to each of the properties in the project area can vary somewhat from property to property. This is due to differences among the properties with respect to lot size. lot value, highest and best use (e.g.. whether tracts can be subdivided), and whether the property appraised fronts more than one street, among other factors. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 16 SPECIAL BENEFIT ANALYSIS PROCESS Arriving at an opinion of special value benefits accruing to each of the subject properties as a result of completion of the City of Cottage Grove 2014 Pavement Management Project is accomplished by developing "before improvements" and "after improvements" opinions of market value for each of the subject land parcels. The improvements on the land are concluded to have the same value contributions to the total property value in both the "before and after" improvements positions. Consequently, the extent of special value benefits from the public improvements project can be reliably derived by analyzing the value of the land only, by processing the Direct Sales Comparison Approach. The Direct Sales Comparison Approach, which involves the comparison of recently sold land parcels similar to the appraised property, is applied to the valuation of each of the subject properties. The Comparable salt; prices are analyzed and adjustments are made for value - related differences relative to the subject property. The result of the analysis and adjustments is the generation of a range of value indications for the subject land. The strengths and weaknesses of each comparable sale and its value indication are evaluated before arriving at a final value opinion for the subject land parcel. Retained in the appraisers" office work file for this assignment are market data. notes and other supporting information pertaining to the processing of the Direct Sales Comparison Approach in a before - and -after land value analysis for the subject properties. Shown below is the result of this analysis, presenting the opinion of the special benefit values as of December 5. 2013 resulting from the City of Cottage Grove 2014 Pavement Management Project. SPECIAL BENEFIT OPINIONS City of Cottage Grove 2014 Pavement Management Project # Address Opinion of Special Benefit 1 9129 Janie Avenue South $4,100 2 9063 Jensen Avenue South $4.600 3 9254 Jareau Avenue South $4 4 9236 Jergen Court South $5,000 EXPOSURE TIME Exposure time is defined as "the estimated length of time that the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal" (Source: 2012 -2013 Uniform Standards of Appraisal Practice. Page U -3). The exposure time for each of the subject properties is estimated at three to six months. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 17 CERTIFICATION The undersigned does hereby certify that in this appraisal report: I. This appraisal assignment is not based on a requested minimum valuation or specific valuation for approval of a loan. The opinion of market value identified in this report was developed independent of any undue influence_ 2. Neither our engagement to make this appraisal (or any future appraisals for this client), nor any compensation, therefore, are contingent upon the development or report of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the a►ilount of value estimate, the Attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of the appraisal. 3. Our engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. 4. We have no present or contemplated future interest in the real estate that is the subject of this appraisal report. 5. We have no personal interest or bias with respect to (lie subject matter of this appraisal report or the parties involved. C. To the best of our knowledge and belief the statements of fact contained in (his appraisal report upon which the analyses, opinions and conclusions expressed herein are based, are true and correct. 7. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are our personal, impartial, and unbiased analyses, opinions, and conclusions. 8. This appraisal report has been made in conformity with and is subject to the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct of the Appraisal Institute, and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. 9. No one provided significant professional assistance to the persons signing this certification. 10. We have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. 11. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. 12. As of the date of this report, Paul J. Gleason has completed the Standards and Ethics Education Requirement of the Appraisal Institute for Associate Members. 13. The by -larys and regulations of the Appraisal Institute govern disclosure of the contents of this appraisal report. 14. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraiser or the firm with which lie is connected, or any reference to (lie Appraisal Institute or MAT designation) shall be disseminated to the public through advertising media, public relations media, news media, sales media. or any other public means of communication without the prior written consent and approval of the undersigned. 15. We have the knowledge and experience to complete this appraisal in a competent manner. Neither our company, nor ourselves individually. have been sued by a regulatory agency or financial institution for fraud or negligence involving an appraisal report. 16. No services as an appraiser or in any other capacity have been performed regarding the property that is the subject of the report within the three year period immediately - preceding acceptance of this assignment. j -6�S / Paul J. Glea e n William E. Petersen Certified General Real Property Appraiser Certified General Real Property Appraiser Minnesota License #4003073 Minnesota License #4001649 BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 18 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS PAUL J. GLEASON PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS AND ASSOCIATIONS Candidate for Designation — The Appraisal Institute To date, all required courses for Appraisal Institute MAI designation have been taken and course examinations passed. Comprehensive Examination for MAI designation has been passed; Experience Requirement has been completed. APPRAISER LICENSE Certified General Real Property Appraiser — State of Minnesota — License #4003073 EDUCATION University of Wisconsin at La Crosse. Wisconsin — 1985 Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Administration PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Principal — BRKW Appraisals. Inc., St. Paul, MN, 2007 - present Staff Appraiser — BRKW Appraisals, Inc., St. Paul. MN, 1993 -2000 Appraiser — Certified Appraisers, Excelsior, MN, 1993 Appraiser — Stiles Appraisals, Inc., Plymouth. MN, 1992 -1993 Expert Witness Testimony — For real estate litigation in numerous condemnation commissioners' hearings, arbitration hearings and in District Court Presenter /Speaker at Minnesota Department of Transportation's 2012 Right Of Way Professionals Workshop, Brainerd. MN Presenter /Speaker at Minnesota Department of Transportation's 2010 Right Of Way Professionals Workshop, Breezy Point, MN Appraisal assignments have been completed for the following purposes: Condemnation — Partial and total acquisitions, in fee title and in easement form Property Damage Claims Litigation Special Benefits Valuation Mortgage Financing General Valuation Needs — Purchase negotiations, listing prices, internal family or partnership transactions, estate planning /taxes, marriage dissolution. etc. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 19 Professional Qualifications — Paul J. Gleason Page 2 PROPERTY TYPES APPRAISED Land — Commercial, industrial, residential acreage, agricultural, finished lots Commercial Buildings — Office. industrial, retail, medical office, auto dealerships Apartment Buildings /Complexes 1 -4 Family Residential — Single - family home. townhome, condo, duplex, fourplex PROFESSIONAL REAL ESTATE STUDIES Appraisal Institute courses, including all required for MAI designation: Course 110: Appraisal Principles (examination passed) Course 120: Appraisal Procedure's (examination passed) Course 210: Residential Case Study Course 310: Basic Income Capitalization Course 410: National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Course 420: Business Practices and Ethics Course 510: Advanced Income Capitalization Course 520: Highest and Best Use and Market Analysis Course 530: Advanced Sales Comparison and Cost Approaches Course 540: Report Writing and Valuation Analysis Course 550: Advanced Applications Numerous additional classes and seminars for appraisal pre - license and continuing education requirements, on an ongoing basis, from Appraisal Institute and other sources CLIENTS INCLUDE Cities of Afton, Austin, Apple Valley, Cambridge. Cottage Grove, Eagan, Inver Grovc Heights, Lino Lakes, Maplewood, Oak Park Heights, Owatonna, Prior Lake, Robbinsdale, Rochester. Savage. Wabasha and Woodbury Anchor Bank Associated Bank BMO Harris Bank N.A. Bremer Bank Dougherty. Molenda. Solfest. Hills & Eckberg, Lammers, Briggs, Wolff Bauer, P.A. & Vierling, PLLP Greene Espel PLLP Minnesota Bank & Trust Minnesota Dept. of Transportation Spire Federal Credit Union US Bank And various other individuals, attorneys. communities and counties Revised: June 2013 BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 20 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS WILLIA E. PETERSEN APPRAISER LICENSE Certified General Real Property Appraiser - State of Minnesota - License #4001649 EDUCATION D.D.S. Degree. School of Dentistry. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 1970 St. Paul Central High School, St. Paul, MN 1963 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE /EMPLOYMENT HISTORY Staff Appraiser — BRKW APPRAISALS, INC.. St. Paul, MN, April 1996 - Present Staff Appraiser - Dahlen & Dwyer, Inc.. St. Paul. MN, November 1986 - March 1996 Dentist, Northpark Dental Clinic. Blaine, MN. Jule 1972 - November 1986 Dentist, U.S. Army. July 1970 - Jule 1972 Appraisal assignments have been completed for the following purposes: Mortgage financing Condemnation /Litigation Estate Valuation PROPERTY TYPES APPRAISED Apartment Buildings Auto Service Centers Banks Churches Office Buildings Office- Sho Office- Warehouses Subdivision Land Client Consultation REO Portfolio Valuation Buy /Sell Decisions Manufacturing Buildings Medical Clinics Mini - Storage Mixed Use Properties Shopping Centers Single Family Homes Special Purpose Properties Railroad Corridors Recreation Facilities Restaurants Retail Stores Townhomes Convenience Stores Dealerships Gas Stations Vacant Land BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 21 Professional Qualifications — William E. Petersen Page 2 PROFESSIONAL REAL ESTATE STUDIES S.R.E.A. Course 101: "Introduction to Appraising Real Property ". 1987 S.R.E.A. Course 102: "Applied Residential Property Valuation ", 1988 S.R.E.A. Course 201: "Principles of Income Property Appraising ", 1987 S.R.E.A. Course 202: "Applied Income Property Valuation ", 1989 Appraisal Institute Course 410: "Standards of Professional Practice (Part A) ", 1991 Appraisal Institute Course 420: "Standards of Professional Practice (Part B)". 1991 Advanced Yield Capitalization. Prosource. 1993 How to Avoid Environmental Hazards Liability, Prosource, 1994 Discounted Cash Flow Analysis, University of St. Thomas, 1994 Appraisal 205: Office and Retail Appraisal, Prosource. 1995 Appraisal Institute Course 430: "Standards of Professional Practice (Part C) ", 2001 2003 National USPAP Standards and Ethics Update, Prosource, 2003 2005 National USPAP Update Course, Appraisal Institute 2005 2006 National USPAP Update Course. Appraisal Institute 2007 2008 National USPAP Update Course, Appraisal Institute 2009 2010 National USPAP Update Course. Appraisal Institute 2011 2012 National USPAP Update Course. Appraisal Institute 2013 Subdivision Valuation. Appraisal Institute 2009 Analyzing Tenant Credit Risk and Commercial Lease Analysis, Appraisal Institute 2011 Various other short courses and seminars. CLIENTS INCLUDE Anchor Bank Bremer Bank BMO Harris Bank Central Bank Dakota County Community Dev. Agenev Hennepin County Minneapolis CPED Minnesota Department of Transportation Ramsey County U.S. Bank TCF Bank Wells Fargo Bank Various municipalities, lacy firms. builders, developers, and investors Revised: June 2013 BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PACE 22 COMPANY PROFILE BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. 1600 University Avenue, Suite 314 St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 Phone: 651 -646 -6114 Fax: 651 646 -8086 email: brkAv44brkw,com Websitc: N NrAv.brkw.com BRKW Appraisals. Inc. (formerly known as Bcttcndorf Rohrer Knoche Wall, Inc.) is full service professional real estate appraisal company formed in 1991. The three principals have more than 90 years of combined experience in the valuation of a %vide variety of real estate. Located in the Midway area of St. Paul, we concentrate on the appraisal of real estate primarily in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, as well as outlying communities in Minnesota. Our extensive professional training and experience enable us to provide the expertise necessary for consistently reliable real estate valuation. Our appraisal reports are confidential documents completed in accordance with all current standards of professional appraisal practice and ethics. All of the appraisers employed by the company have the Certified General Real Property Appraiser license from the State of Minnesota. Our appraisers staN current with advances in appraisal techniques and the changing real estate market through continuing education programs. At BRKW Appraisals, Inc. we strive to build and maintain long- lasting relationships with our clients. Our goal is to provide high- quality professional real estate valuation services in a timely manner that is consistent with the needs of our clients. Apnraisal & Consultine Services Real Estate Appraisals Mortgage Financing Appraisals Condemnation /Litigation Appraisals Rcview Appraisals Real Estate Tax Abatements Special Benefits Analysis Expert Witness Testimony REO Portfolio Valuation Feasibility Studies Market Surveys Partial Interest Valuations Property Types Commercial Properties Multiple Family Residential Single Family Residential Subdivision Analysis Vacant Land Parcels Special Purpose Properties Gas Station / Convenience Stores Schools and Churches Recreation Facilities Railroad Corridors BRKW APPRAISALS, INC'. PAGE 23 APPRAISAL STAFF Michael J. Bettendorf, MAI — Principal Active as an appraiser since 1971. Michael has the MAI designation of the Appraisal Institute and specializes in commercial, industrial, multiple family, residential, and special purpose property appraisals with extensive litigation experience. Court appointed Commissioner in Ramsey County, past President of Minnesota Chapter A.LR.E.A. (1987), instructor of appraisal courses and seminars. Michael is a graduate of St. John's University. Licensed as a Certified General Real Property Appraiser. Marc E. Knoche, MAI — Principal and Managing Partner Marc has been an appraiser since 1982, and has the MAI designation of the Appraisal Institute. He specializes in commercial, industrial, multiple family. residential, vacant land, and special purpose property appraisals. Marc has done numerous condemnation acquisition appraisals and special benefit studies involving a wide variety of property types. Marc has extensive litigation / expert witness experience and has served as a court appointed commissioner. He is a Past President of the Metro /Minnesota Chapter of the Appraisal Institute (1992 & 1993). A graduate of Macalester College. Marc is licensed by the State of Minnesota as a Certified General Real Property Appraiser, Paul J. Gleason — Principal Paul has been appraising real estate since 1992. He has in -depth experience in the valuation of numerous real estate property types. Over the years, lie has developed special expertise in the valuation of land and in eminent domain appraising. Paul is graduate of the University of Wisconsin at La Crosse. Candidate for Designation of the Appraisal Institute and licensed as a Certified General Real Property Appraiser. Sean P, Butts — Associate Sean began appraising in 1992, specializing in commercial, industrial. multiple family. residential and recreational property (e.g.. golf courses). and joined our firm in 1997. After leaving BRKW Appraisals in 2006 for CSM Corporation. where lie spent six years in asset valuation and management. Sean returned to BRKW in 2012 to resume independent fee appraisal work. Sean is a graduate of St. Cloud State University with a Business degree with emphasis on Real Estate Appraising. Licensed as a Certified General Real Property Appraiser and a Candidate for Designation of the Appraisal Institute. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 24 Joseph P. Deutsch — Associate Joe has been appraising real estate since 1998, specializing in commercial properties. Types of property appraised include multi - family, industrial. office, retail, and special purpose properties. Joe worked for two years as a city building inspector prior to becoming an appraiser. Joe is a graduate of the University of Minnesota majoring in accounting and is a Certified General Real Property Appraiser as well as a Candidate for Designation of the Appraisal Institute. Terry A. Ward — Associate Terry has over 20 \ of experience in business management. operations and marketing. Since 2002, she began applying this experience to commercial real estate appraising. Types of properties appraised include office, industrial. hotel /motel. retail / comiercial, and other special use properties. She has a degree in Business Management from St. Cloud State University and a Mini Masters Degree in Real Estate Appraising from St. Thomas University. Terry is a Certified General Real Property Appraiser and a Practicing Affiliate of the Appraisal Institute. Mark A. Warren — Associate Mark is a third - generation real property appraiser and has been appraising since 2003. Types of property appraised include office, industrial, hotel /motel, retail /commercial, and other special use properties. Mark is a graduate of the University of Minnesota, is a Candidate for Designation of the Appraisal Institute. and is licensed as a Certified General Real Property Appraiser. William E. Petersen — Associate Bill has been an active appraiser since 1986 specializing in the valuation of commercial, industrial. multi- family. office and special purpose properties. Bill is a graduate of the University of Minnesota and practiced dentistry from 1.970 -1986 before becoming licensed as a Certified General Real Property Appraiser. BRKW APPRAISALS, INC. PAGE 25