Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-06 Regular Packet Public1 COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL November 6, 2024 12800 RAVINE PARKWAY SOUTH COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA 55016 COUNCIL CHAMBER - 7:00 PM 1 Call to Order 2 Pledge of Allegiance 3 Roll Call 4 Open Forum 5 Adoption of Agenda 6 Presentations A Mayor for a Day Staff Recommendation: Appoint Lily Schmitt as Mayor for a Day on November 6, 2024. 7 Consent Agenda A City Council Special Meeting Minutes (2024-10-02) Staff Recommendation: Approve the October 2, 2024, Special Meeting Minutes. B City Council Regular Meeting Minutes (2024-10-02) Staff Recommendation: Approve the October 02, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes. C City Council Special Meeting Minutes (2024-10-16) Staff Recommendation: Approve the October 16, 2024, Special Meeting Minutes. D City Council Regular Meeting Minutes (2024-10-16) Staff Recommendation: Approve the October 16, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes. E Public Services Commission Meeting Minutes (2024-07-15) Staff Recommendation: Approve the July 15, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes. F Planning Commission Meeting Minutes (2024-08-26) Staff Recommendation: Accept and place on file the minutes from the August 26, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. G Massage Therapist License - Lisa Christine Ramos Staff Recommendation: Authorize issuance of a Massage Therapist License to Lisa Christine Ramos. H Single-occassion Gambling Permit - Strawberry Fest Bingo Staff Recommendation: Authorize issuance of a single-occassion gambling permit to Loriann Olsen on behalf of Strawberry Fest to conduct bingo at River Oaks Golf Course (11099 Highway 61, Cottage Grove) on February 22, 2025. I Rental License Approvals Staff Recommendation: Approve the issuance of rental licenses to the properties in the attached table. 2 J 2025-2026 Police Officers Labor Contract Staff Recommendation: Approve the 2025-2026 labor contract with the Police Officers union. K Metro Transit Network Now Comment Letter Staff Recommendation: Approve submittal of the comment letter to Metro Transit on their Network Now plan. L Washington County 2025-2029 CIP Response Letter Staff Recommendation: Approve the response letter to the Washington County 2025-2029 Draft CIP. M Joint Powers Agreement Between Washington County and the City of Cottage Grove for a Mass Community Notification System Staff Recommendation: Authorize executing the Joint Powers Agreement between Washington County and the City of Cottage Grove for a mass community notification system. N Updated Ambulance Purchase Authorization Staff Recommendation: Authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign the sales quote for the purchase of a Ford E- 450 Road Rescue Ultramedic from Everest Emergency Vehicles with an estimated cost of $293,627.00 and an estimated delivery of December 2025. O Authorization to order 2025 Fire Tender Staff Recommendation: 1) Authorize the order of the 2025 Fire Tender utilizing the Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing Group. 2) Approve Resolution 2024-155, Declaring the official intent of the City of Cottage Grove to reimburse certain expenditures from the proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City with respect to equipment (Fire Tender). P Utility and Engineering Building Change Order # 3 Staff Recommendation: Approve Change Order #3 for the Utility and Engineering Building which results in a reduction in project costs in the amount $9,159.33. Q Goodview Avenue Well Sealing Project Final Payment Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2024-152 approving the final payment in the amount of $29,062.15 to Mineral Services Plus, LLC for the Goodview Avenue Well Sealing Project. R Gateway North Second Addition – Preliminary and Final Plat Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2024-153 approving the Preliminary and Final Plat to be called Gateway North Second Addition in order to create two parcels (a 7.89-acre parcel for Kohl’s and a new 1.03- acre parcel for Chase Bank). S Hometown Fiber Broadband Aware Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of the scope of work and services proposed by Hometown Fiber for the Broadband Aware program, at a cost of $22,528. 8 Approve Disbursements A Approve Disbursements 9 Public Hearings 10 Bid Awards A Low Zone Water Tower Bid Award Staff Recommendation: 1) Adopt Resolution 2024-151 awarding the bid for the Low Zone Water Tower to Landmark Structures 1, LP in the total amount of $5,183,000.00. 2) Approve Resolution 2024-156, Declaring the official intent of the City of Cottage Grove to reimburse certain expenditures from the proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City with respect to the construction of the Low Zone Water Tower. B Kingston Park Electrical Improvements-Bid Award Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2024-154 awarding the bid for Kingston Park Electrical Improvements to Killmer Electric in the total amount of $152,345. 11 Regular Agenda 3 12 Council Comments and Requests 13 Workshops - Open to Public 14 Workshops - Closed to Public 15 Adjournment 1 City Council Action Request 6.A. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Administration Agenda Category Presentation Title Mayor for a Day Staff Recommendation Appoint Lily Schmitt as Mayor for a Day on November 6, 2024. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. Mayor for a Day Essay 1 City Council Action Request 7.A. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Administration Agenda Category Action Item Title City Council Special Meeting Minutes (2024-10-02) Staff Recommendation Approve the October 2, 2024, Special Meeting Minutes. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. 2024-10-02 City Council Special Meeting CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE  12800 Ravine Parkway South  Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016 www.cottagegrovemn.gov  651-458-2800  Fax 651-458-2897  Equal Opportunity Employer COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL October 2, 2024 12800 RAVINE PARKWAY SOUTH COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 SPECIAL MEETING - TRAINING ROOM - 5:30 P.M 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Bailey called the Special Meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Tammy Anderson called the roll: Council Member Khambata-Here; Council Member Olsen-Here; Council Member Thiede-Here; Council Member Garza-Arrived after Roll Call; Mayor Bailey-Here. 3. AGENDA A. Cannabis Business - Zoning Standards Staff Recommendation: Receive information regarding the proposed Zoning Standards and provide feedback. Mayor Bailey stated that our City Attorney, Kori Land, will walk us through this and welcomed her. Attorney Land stated we’ve broken this into two segments because the legislation in 2023-2024 is about changes, so, it’s a lot of rules, a lot of regulations. There are basically two parts to it: 1) The registration process the City will have to adopt; we can no longer license any of these uses, but we can register them. 2) The Zoning, which is the bigger piece, and that’s where we can have our focus on health, safety, and welfare regulations as well as time, place, and manner restrictions that the legislature has allowed cities to impose. Because we have obviously a bigger process when we go through a Zoning Ordinance Amendment, it has to go to the Planning Commission for a public hearing and a recommendation, and then it can go to the Council; we need a little bit more rope on that one, so we wanted to get the zoning piece in front of you to make sure that you’re comfortable with it so we can get it in front of the Planning Commission. This gives us just a little bit more time to do that. As you know, we have a moratorium on all of the cannabis uses; so, our CBD Ordinance, which we have in place today is what it is and it’s allowed to be continued, but no new cannabis uses can come in through December 31, 2024. The legislature in their 2024 session said all moratoriums have to expire on January 1, 2025. It’s not that they’ll be ready to do anything on City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 2 of 15 January 1, but that’s when everybody’s moratorium has to expire. So, just in case they magically get everything together and are ready to issue their licenses, we want to be ready with our Ordinances by then. Just to make sure we get through our process in a timely manner with Zoning first and then we’ll adopt all the City Code things together. I will come back to you at another workshop to discuss the City Code Registration Process Amendments because there are things that you need to kind of work through on how you want to implement and whether or not you want to allow. If you have any questions along the way, some of it I might say we’ll talk at the next meeting and some of it we can answer and address tonight. So, we’ll try to get through it as painlessly as possible, but it is a lot of information and it’s a lot of new things. To remind you, what we have on the books today is from the 2022 legislation, which is the low potency; we called it at the time cannabinoid, or CBD, that’s our ordinance that’s on the books so we licensed CBD, but that is now called lower-potency edibles. So, basically, it’s everything that’s under .3% THC, it is made from a hemp plant product, and they’re putting that into a category of low potency. So, that’s what we have today, we allow low-potency edibles in B-3, P-B, and MU Zoning Districts. We do have buffer zones that are applied to those Zoning Districts; for example, we have 1,000 feet between cannabis uses, we have 1,000 feet from schools and parks. I don’t think we did daycares because it just got a little bit too convoluted with all the residential daycares. So, we do have those buffer zones applied to the lower- potency uses, and we also restrict the number of licenses. We’ve only had one apply: High North grabbed that one in the MU Zoning District, so they are the only existing low-potency edible cannabis use; they’re the only company in town that can sell any kind of cannabis. Now, in the 2023-2024 legislation, the legislature has decided there are 13 different kinds of cannabis uses; fortunately, a lot of these can be lumped together. So, we don’t have to zone each and every use because they kind of go in the same categories of uses: So, it’s the adult use and regardless of whether it’s the adult use or low potency, they all fit into these categories. There are two kinds of low potency: Beverages and edibles. Beverages can be sold at on-sale liquor establishments and off-sale liquor establishments; we currently prohibit that and other cities do as well. So, you can prohibit that, but the law allows it, and there are a lot of other cities that have just sort of let the market do what it does and let businesses do it without cities imposing any regulations on it. So, the low potency is retail beverages and edibles. Then there’s adult use retail, that’s a separate category. A lot of those uses on the previous page with the microbusiness and the mezzobusiness, those are really manufacturing. There’s a lot of material in my memo that helps outline all of this, but the micro and mezzo business are basically your seed; so they’re cultivating, harvesting, manufacturing a product, and then actually selling it in a retail store, and it can also get an onsite consumption license. It’s the farm-to-table approach for cannabis; the microbusiness is just a smaller scale than the mezzobusiness, so there are statutory regulations around what kind of size, the maximum size. But just to be aware, the legislature did give themselves the authority to basically waive those limitations, so they can allow more and they can allow bigger if they think it’s appropriate. So, then there’s manufacturing, wholesaling, transporter; those are all very industrial kinds of uses. So, that’s why we’ve clumped the manufacturing industrial kind of use. Then, of course, there’s the farm use, which is the cultivation. So, those are the basic categories we’ll be talking about. I City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 3 of 15 put some maps in your packet, so we’ll be going through the maps to make sure that you’re comfortable with the use in these zones, which are in these areas. You can really picture them opening up in these particular areas if you’re comfortable with that. Lower-potency edibles are in the B3, PB, and MU, so that’s where they are currently allowed with buffers for permitted uses. We’re recommending a little bit differently, now that we’ve seen there’s only one. We had some other stores request to apply, but we have the moratorium in place so they couldn’t; there have been a couple of tobacco shops who’ve expressed interest. These are the only Zoning Districts where they would be allowed, and our recommendation is a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) so no more permitted use; they would have to come to the City for a CUP. We would still use the 1,000-foot buffer between cannabis uses so we don’t get kind of a cluster of stores in any one location, but we would remove the other buffers, so, no 1,000-foot from schools or parks. Council Member Olsen said when we went through the exercise of updating all of our City Ordinances, etc., one of the things we talked about was the solicitation of CUPs vs. standard permits. So, how do you apply that logic to this? Attorney Land replied these uses are special; they need extra special loving care because cannabis, especially adult-use retail, is not Federally legal, right? So, it’s illegal under the Federal law; it’s still a catch business, so we need to have extra conditions on it. Here’s the real key because we have no authority to license these uses anymore, we can only register them; if they violate a provision of our Code, if it’s an emergency, we can shut them down right away. If it’s a public health, safety, welfare issue, we can shut them down for up to 30 days, that’s our max, that’s all we get to do, and the Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) can unlock the door, they can overrule us. Our only control is through Zoning; if one of these businesses turns out to be a bad actor, we can revoke their CUP and there’s nothing OCM can do about it. Council Member Olsen said that answers the question, thank you. Attorney Land said so the question on low potency is are you okay with removing the buffer zones and allowing basically these low-potency shops, like High North today, in any of these spots on the map that are in B3, MU, and PB? We would just have the distance between stores, so you couldn’t have a gazillion stores in every strip mall because they’d have to have 1,000 feet between them. Council Member Khambata asked what’s to prevent these low-potency establishments from being able to sell higher-potency stuff in the future? Say something at the State level comes down, for instance the State Statute that says our moratorium has to expire at the end of the year, if next year they say you can’t restrict or zone it by potency, then you’re going to have establishments that are going to say we’re already here and we want to sell it. What recourse or leverage will we have in a scenario like that? Attorney Land replied we can’t predict what the legislature is going to do, so I think what we need to go on is a history of what we know, and that is High North has been a good corporate citizen. I do believe they did fail the one compliance check we did, but actually just about every shop that I represent in every city did fail. There’s just been too much misinformation out there City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 4 of 15 about who can purchase these products. But other than that, I think they’ve been a good citizen; I don’t think they’ve had like a line out the door for their products, they haven’t had a bunch of teenagers hanging out there. So, I don’t think that these low-potency shops are your high risk, they are technically Federally legal because they are a hemp product, under .3% THC, so they are not considered a drug. Now, granted, you take too many of them and I can guarantee you it will treat them like they were on drugs, but they are Federally legal. So, the low-potency ones I don’t think we’re as concerned about. We still have a CUP if they’re a bad actor, but they would have to go through the State licensing process to become an adult-use retail; right now, estimates are that it costs about a million dollars to open an adult-use retail store because of all the security measures that have to go into it. I don’t think that is going to change that easily to make them just be able to flip the switch to adult use. So, are we comfortable that this is a good spot for low-potency stores, retail stores? Mayor Bailey replied yeah. Council Member Garza said I apologize for being late, but I have some questions. For these retail-sales stores, are those different than liquor stores? Attorney Land replied we don’t zone liquor, so they can basically go in any commercial Zoning District. Council Member Garza asked so why is there a difference between this and the liquor stores? Attorney Land replied this is what the Council discussed back in 2022 when the legislation became effective was this is where they felt that cannabis-type businesses should go because they’re more of a freeway than a neighborhood business. Mayor Bailey asked don’t we have proximity, though, to certain similar stores out there? Attorney Land replied yes, we do, based on distance. Mayor Bailey said I remember Council discussed another one that wanted to come in across from Top Ten, and they weren’t allowed to do that. Council Member Garza said I just wondered why there was a difference with these two types. Attorney Land said it was decided and we went through a very lengthy process in discussing where you wanted these uses and discussed all the different zones, and it was just felt like these higher-traffic commercial zones were more appropriate for any kind of a cannabis use. Council Member Olsen asked what would your recommendation be? Attorney Land replied I’m actually comfortable that these stores are not high risk; we still need to do compliance checks on them because it is still a 21 and over product with 21 and over employees, so we will still be doing the recommended enforcement standpoint and we will still be monitoring them. But I just don’t see them as high target, given that adult use is going to become legal, I don’t think that they’re high risk. Mayor Bailey stated I’m good with this. My question is along West Point Douglas Road, isn’t there a tobacco place going in by the Bulletin License Center? Attorney Land replied yes, and it does qualify. Mayor Bailey said I just didn’t see the color, that’s why I was questioning it. Mayor Bailey said I just want to make sure that we weren’t excluding anything. Council Member Thiede asked that’s in the PB area, right? Attorney Land confirmed that. City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 5 of 15 Council Member Olsen asked Administrator Levitt if she had concerns about that and she did not. Attorney Land said with adult-use retail, now we’re applying our buffer zones: So, it’s 1,000 feet from schools, which is the maximum we can do per the legislation; 500 feet from a park attraction, so, it’s not the park border, it’s the park attraction that would attract minors, so its a playground, its a restroom, its a pavilion, its a picnic table, those kinds of things, we even included disk golf features. So, we really tried to be mindful of where the park attraction itself was located and then out 500 feet. So, the school buffer is yellow, the park attraction buffer is blue, and then we also did daycares in a commercial Zoning District because this is just clearly the commercial area. I know we discussed before about daycares in residential zones, it gets a little too complicated, but we felt like it was important that you don’t want cannabis use, especially adult-use cannabis use, right next to a daycare that happens to be in the same mall or next to it; as in this case, O2B Kids is located next to a strip mall. So, we feel that was an appropriate, compatible use, so we wanted to apply the 500 feet from a daycare rule if the daycare’s in a commercial Zoning District. So, those are the pink buffers in the upper-left corner. Council Member Khambata said so there’s really only like a couple places in town where it would be allowed once you apply all those buffers. Attorney Land said once you apply the buffers, if you look at the green boxes, those are the parcels of land where adult-use retail could be sold. Now, the MU with the green bubble around it, that green bubble is representing High North. We don’t know that High North is necessarily going to stay low potency or whether it’s adult use, but we put a green bubble around it because it exists today. So, that green bubble may or may not be there, and the buffer between cannabis uses can’t be applied until we know for sure we have a cannabis use. So, today we have one in this location, but again, that green bubble may not be there next year. Attorney Land stated let me just show you another option if you feel like this is a little too restrictive for adult-use retail, knowing that first of all, that the lower potency can go anywhere in the zone, adult-use retail would be limited to green boxes; if you feel like that’s not enough options, we offered a reduced buffer from schools to 500 feet, and we remove the buffer around High North, because again we don’t know what they’re going to do. So, you take off that green bubble and it opens up all those other uses around Target, but then it opens up, all of the yellow ones, the schools, shrunk. So, here you can see the yellow eats up a lot more of the pink and here it shrinks it just a little bit, opens up a few more green boxes. Just to see what it would look like; I don't know if that is something that you want to allow from schools, just to be a little bit closer, or if you’d want to change the one for parks. We can make the bubbles anything you want if you feel like you need to open up more spaces. Council Member Olsen said I’m looking at potential use, I’ll just say obviously we have Holiday Train in those areas; would restrictions go on during certain times then? Attorney Land replied no. City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 6 of 15 Council Member Garza said so my question again is how does this restriction relate to liquor stores? Because we have quite a few of those in the areas that you have on this map and all, but will those be the same type of restrictions? Do we want them by schools, do we want them by parks? This would just be adult use, right? Attorney Land replied no, I don’t think it is, and I think that the marijuana is significantly different than alcohol, and we don’t have any restrictions from other uses for liquor stores. Council Member Thiede said I guess I would have a tendency to go more restrictive, it can always get less restrictive but we’re not going to ever probably get more restrictive. Council Member Khambata said I agree with Dave. Mayor Bailey said so here’s my question, though; so, you’re agreeing to hold back, which is High North? Attorney Land stated right. Mayor Bailey asked if they decided they wanted to do the adult use, would they be able to do that? Attorney Land replied yes, they would because they are outside of the yellow and outside the orange; so, you take away the green and all of that pink ball around Target would be eligible. Mayor Bailey stated okay, because as I’m looking at it, maybe I’m just saying it wrong, is the green their proximity? Attorney Land replied yes, the green bubble is solely because of them, so they can be in it and then nobody else would be. Mayor Bailey stated correct, but the bubble, does that go into the yellow and from the school? Attorney Land replied it does, but it just overlaps. It wouldn’t be allowed in the school here either, but High North is south, I’m thinking outside of the yellow. Mayor Bailey stated I just didn’t know where. Attorney Land stated it’s a little hard to tell specifically where it is, but. Council Member Thiede stated you couldn’t have another retail shop inside that green, okay? And High North is actually outside of the yellow or outside of that orange. Mayor Bailey said so the green is just the distance of what did you say it was? Attorney Land replied 1,000 feet from other cannabis uses. Mayor Bailey said okay, and the only reason I bring it up is we already know that they move from the one location so that they can sell what they did from this location and turn around and now you can’t sell the next thing there; so, I’m thinking they’re probably going to wave their finger at us, going what are you guys doing? Because they’ve been trying to follow our rules. Attorney Land said yes, like I said, they’ve been a good corporate citizen, I think Mayor Bailey said yes, I think so, too. So, if that’s the case, because right now they’re the only one anyway, but if that’s the case, that’s not going to cause them issues with these other yellow or with the 1,000. Attorney Land said here’s the nice thing about putting all this in Zoning, right? Like Council Member Thiede got us to the point of let’s start more restrictive, and if we find out that we need to or can loosen it up, we’ll do that later. Because when you put something in Zoning, uses become legal by conformity. So, if you change the restriction to try to make it harsher, they will not have to comply once they are established. So, we can’t go a bigger buffer later; City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 7 of 15 you start bigger and then we can contract it if we find it’s too restrictive. The other thing that’s nice about Zoning is if we find out that by a foot or two, High North is accidentally in the yellow bubble, they can apply for a variance. So, that’s another tool in Zoning that allows a special exception. So, Option 1 is what I’m hearing, and that was confirmed. Administrator Levitt asked Attorney Land you have the performance standards for the hours of operation; who dictates that? Attorney Land replied well, State law says it can’t be before 10:00 a.m., and cities can restrict it but 9:00 p.m. is the earliest you can restrict it; they can be open as late as 2:00 a.m. under State law. But I did obviously the most conservative is 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; you could allow them to be open late, you could say hours of operation per State law, and then they can just decide their own. I just put 9:00 p.m. because if it’s a retail, I don't know why it needs to be open past 9:00 p.m., as typically retail stores are not. Mayor Bailey stated we’re open until 10:00 p.m. Council Member Olsen said there are some retailers who are open later, obviously, but he asked Administrator Levitt if she had a thought on kind of how you’d like to see that play out? Administrator Levitt replied no, this is really your conversation, what times you want. Council Member Thiede said again, I’d probably lean toward the more restrictive, and if we get a lot of people complaining, saying I’m losing all this business because I have to close an hour earlier than I want to, then we can make changes. Council Member Khambata said I was going to say if I’m a business owner, I might find the sales after 9:00 p.m. was probably low anyway. I would be fine closing at 9:00 p.m., but like if somebody complains about it, thinks it should be later, then we can just say the State says. Attorney Land said and there’s no onsite consumption, so it truly is just basically like off-sale retail. Council Member Khambata said I don't know, I guess could that could be something we change later on, too, right? Attorney Land replied absolutely. Council Member Khambata said again, why try to fix a problem that doesn’t exist here; if somebody has a problem with 9:00 to 5:00, come and tell us. Council Member Olsen said if we give them, let’s say 10:00 to 10:00, that doesn’t mean they can’t close earlier than 10:00. Attorney Land said right, they can choose; Council Member Olsen said but that’s their ceiling, so I would suggest that. Mayor Bailey said I personally would, not all of my stores that I operate close at 10:00, some close at 8:00, and it’s relative to the area. I think if we did 10:00, that is enough. Because if they try to say they want to go to 11:00 or something, most of our Business Districts, including some of our bars and restaurants, aren’t open past. Council Member Thiede asked why did you choose 9:00 p.m. in the first place? Attorney Land replied because that’s what State law says is the earliest you can require them to close, so I was just again being conservative. Mayor Bailey stated since it’s required kind of early, before 10:00, I’m guessing if we do 10:00 to 10:00, it’s a 12-hour day. City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 8 of 15 Council Member Olsen said and if they choose to do something earlier than that, that’s possible. Mayor Bailey said it’s their choice, but I’m not interested in going past 10:00 p.m. Attorney Land stated now we’re going to get into the nitty gritty, low-potency beverages. We talked about this last year when the legislature said beverages are now allowed at liquor stores. There’s a lot of them out there, but cities don’t regulate them. So, there’s a lot of liquor stores knocking at your door for over a year to try to sell them. On-sale liquor establishments, bars and restaurants, can sell it as well under the new law right now. So, I wanted to revisit this to just gauge your position to see if it’s changed. You still can prohibit it, most cities are not, at least for liquor stores for sure. I did have my meeting, this same presentation in Stillwater last night, and they do not want their on-sale bars and restaurants to be selling this. So, we don’t want to be the test case; they have 41 on-sale liquor licenses in town and it could be a very big problem to try to manage so they didn’t want to be the first to have every bar and restaurant selling THC beverages. You only have 8 on-sale liquor licenses, and I don’t think every one of them would choose to sell this, so you could let the market just dictate it if you want to and allow it in on-sale and off-sale for that matter. So, I put the stars and triangles to show where we have on-sale and off-sale liquor, so these are the potential locations where they would be sold. Public Safety Director Koerner stated outside of Minnesota, even down in Florida, it’s just commonplace. So, I think you just leave it, let it be part of what it already is. Attorney Land stated our recommendation actually is it’s basically a permitted use in any Zoning Districts without any buffer zones, so not requiring to be 1,000 feet from each other, and I know the liquor stores already have that. Part of the reason is let’s just say it became a problem with overserving, we already have an on-sale liquor license penalty grid to deal with the businesses that are a problem; whether it’s liquor or with cannabis, we will address it one way or the other through their liquor license. So, if you want to allow them in on-sale, I think we have the ability to try to rein it back in if it becomes a problem business and just let it be, month to month we figure it out. Mayor Bailey stated so we’ll let the market dictate it in this case. It’s low potency pretty much out there everywhere. Council Member Khambata stated whether we regulate it or not, they’re going to do it. Where to her point, just like with overserving alcohol, if an establishment is overserving, then they’re going to risk their liquor license, which is a lot more valuable than selling whatever product they’re selling and deal with it on the back end. Council Member Olsen said I’m assuming I know the answer to this question already, but I just want to ask for the sake of me being able to sleep at night. Can people be pulled over and charged with DUI for use of this stuff? Attorney Land replied yes, it’s the same. Currently, obviously, there have been people pulled over for being high; the problem is we don’t, I don't know with the beverages if there’s any difference than with the smoking. I don't know if we can tell when they took it. We certainly have drug experts that we use with the DUI enforcement. City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 9 of 15 Council Member Olsen asked is that a thing? Council Member Khambata said they have a pilot program, and they have like a pilot test program for testing for THC. Director Koerner said I know they’re talking about that, but the answer is yes, we can enforce under the influence of alcohol, THC, all of that. It’s just more of a challenge that sometimes you’d have to call in a Drug Recognition Expert; right now, most of those would come from State Patrol. Council Member Olsen said yeah, because they can’t blow, right? You’d have to get blood in order to identify what the substance is. Director Koerner said this morning we arrested a woman for too many pills, so we had to do the blood draw and all that. Sergeant McCormick said essentially, it’s if it impairs your ability to operate a vehicle. Council Member Olsen said okay, so your authority is broad enough for it; Attorney Land said oh, yeah. Council Member Olsen said okay, I would say just let it be then. Attorney Land stated so now we’re getting into the Industrial Zone. As you know, we have a big Industrial Park, all of a couple areas with the buffer zones I think we’re pretty confident we can assume we want them to stay doing it; so the buffer zone around them is 1,000 feet from their use, that bubble will stay and in the parks and in the residential. We added a residential bubble, and it has to be 500 feet from residential, because with manufacturing there’s a stink, and we know these people already have an odor that we have not quite figured out how to manage yet. We are in the Performance Standards going to recommend that we actually adopt an Odor Ordinance because they have been a problem, they don’t seem to care, and we don’t know how to get a good handle on it without any standards in place. Council Member Thiede said I thought all this had been taken care of because we haven’t heard about that. Council Member Olsen stated I did, too, because we addressed all that when they came to town. Attorney Land stated we actually did, we required them to put in odor mitigation, we required them to do testing and sufficient testing. Everybody that was on board at the time is now gone, and nobody knows how to use their equipment. We need to readdress it, and we need to make sure nobody else comes to town and has a problem. So, we can do that, fortunately. Council Member Khambata asked so with that in mind, is 500 feet from a residential area the appropriate distance to mitigate that aspect? Attorney Land replied it’s breathing distance; honestly, if the wind’s blowing in the right direction, you can’t get away from it. Now, you are fortunate that you happen to have the same City Attorney who actually drafted the Odor Ordinance in South St. Paul, which has now gone to the Federal Court of Appeals and withstood the challenges that the big giant Sanimax attorneys brought and it is valid. And so we’re going to take that Ordinance, which has been held to be constitutional, nondiscriminatory, and modify it to fit our purposes. So, we can get there with an Odor Ordinance, enforcement is tricky. Council Member Khambata said I was going to ask what are the teeth of that Ordinance? Attorney Land replied, fines are going to be the teeth. City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 10 of 15 Council Member Thiede asked so have we had actual complaints? Attorney Land replied that’s the tricky thing about an Industrial Park; nobody wants to rat out their neighbors because everybody kind of has their own issues, right, in an Industrial Park. Council Member Thiede stated I know that the people who were most vocal lived right north of the Industrial Park, right? Director Koerner said I’m not aware of any complaints to the Police Department about the odor; it’s usually the noise from some of the others. Mayor Bailey stated this question is for my knowledge: So, when we approved at the time Leafline Labs, we were very specific about the odor and the scrubbers and stuff that might affect, was it Pennsylvania or Philadelphia or someplace that had issues; was that part of their Development Agreement with us? Emily Schmitz, Community Development Director, replied we didn’t have a Development Agreement; as part of the Resolution to their Site Plan that they have odor mitigation and all of the regulations are in there. They have not been held to probably to task on many things. Mayor Bailey said okay, and Director Schmitz said it’s because nobody’s complained, and that’s part of the issue is that there haven’t been complaints about it. We know that they do still have an odor, as witnessed today, but we just haven’t done anything to enforce it yet. And I’ll add part of their approval was to submit to us their testing in some different locations on the site on a regular basis, so I will add they have done that; but Kori makes a good point about how will we enforce this mezzo manger, which don’t ask me the details behind that, but that’s how odor is measured and that’s how they’re doing it on their site. It’s important to know that they are upholding and providing that data to us. Mayor Bailey said that’s the only reason and I’m totally in favor of the Odor Ordinance proposal that you’re talking about because my guess is and I don't know this for a fact, but they just expanded it, right? So, the way this is all going, my guess is they’ll probably expand again; Director Schmitz said they’ve already asked, and we told them we have a moratorium. Attorney Land stated so getting back to just apart from these lines, the purple, are all the areas where a cannabis manufacturing business can go; so, this is the micros, the mezzos, the manufacturing, the testing labs, and the medical combo, which is the seed to sale. We are recommending no sales in the Industrial Park and no onsite consumption; they simply aren’t set up for retail, and they’re not set up for that kind of an environment with all the truck traffic and everything else that’s going on. So, we are going to have that in the Performance Standards that in the I Zone and in the A Zone we’re not going to allow retail or onsite consumption, but otherwise the manufacturing will be allowed in any of the purple spots. Mayor Bailey said so the only other question that I have for Kori on this, so down from the red bubble to the left because there are a couple new housing developments going in down there, directly next to NorthPoint, so at the moment what you’re saying is 500 feet from? Attorney Land replied residential, and if you think it should be larger, this would be the time to talk about it. Mayor Bailey said I do, and Council Member Olsen said I think I do. Mayor Bailey asked what Council thought and said I’m thinking 1,000 feet. Council Member Olsen said yeah, that’s what I was thinking, too. Council Member Garza said and that’s probably not going to stop it, though. City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 11 of 15 Attorney Land stated at least there’s a buffer zone, at least there’s some distance from it. Council Member Olsen said the residents who decide to ultimately inhabit those homes are going to appreciate. Mayor Bailey said and that’s the only reason I’m bringing it up is I’m looking there and they could use some extra buffer in there, so. Attorney Land stated and we know those are now zoned residential, so regardless of the fact that there aren’t homes yet, we can put the yellow levels in there. Council Member Khambata said I think that the difference between 500 and 1,000 feet isn’t substantial in terms of the smell, but it’s livable and it’ll work with the number of those types of facilities. Ultimately, mitigating the overall effect of that type of manufacturing that this has on the residents. So, I agree with 1,000 feet. Attorney Land said and then cultivation is allowed in any AG Zone, obviously in the Industrial, too, because we do allow cultivation in the I Zones, and cultivation is part of the Micro, Mezzo business. Cultivation can be just obviously like a farm field outdoors or it can be indoors in a greenhouse or a hoop house type environment, so, those are allowed as well. They’re limited by State law on the size and the amount of blooming plants at one time; you can have a giant 100-acre field, but you can only have so many going to seed at one time. We are putting restrictions or putting size before you can even apply for a cultivation CUP, you have to have at least 20 acres to work with so that we have enough room to have a buffer zone so it’s not visible from the Right-of-Way; they can put screening up, just trying to put some distance between residential and the crop itself, which will smell when they go to cultivate it and harvest it. I learned last week that the hoop houses burp, and so when they burp, there’s an odor that goes out with it. So, again, we’re just trying to provide as much protection and buffer zone as we can from even just the cultivation crop itself. There will be no retail, no onsite consumption. All of the AG ones that are not in a bubble and all of the I Zones, if it’s not in a bubble, would be fair game for cultivation. So, it’s a lot of land. Council Member Garza asked are some of those green, the AG ones, are those already properties that are large enough to start operation? Attorney Land replied oh, sure, they’re all, I mean, there would have to probably be some land assemblage to get enough land to do it. There are some owners that own several parcels and could probably start today if they decided to do that, but otherwise these are all, a lot of them are just completely separate ownership, but they’re all zoned correctly. So, you get a developer in there and somebody with a big cannabis business; for example, Leafline could choose to buy up a bunch of farmland for their outdoor cultivation. They don’t have to all be on one site. Council Member Garza said so there’s also the energy gardens. Attorney Land said exactly, the solar farm is here. Council Member Khambata said can you give us examples of outdoor cultivation, is there a preferred method? Attorney Land replied no, because it’s not, especially in this climate. You can only get a few, maybe one-or-two crops in a season because of the harsh climate and the time it takes this to City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 12 of 15 grow, and it’s a very fickle crop. So, that’s why Leafline does everything indoors because they can control the environment. Mayor Bailey asked if somebody like Leafline comes in, do they have to own the land or can they lease? Attorney Land replied they can lease. Mayor Bailey said that little box between the new homes that are going off of 90th and Sandy Hills and they decide to cultivate their crop there and it has a smell, my question is how do we prevent or do something to keep it where it’s not in the core of our City, but where it would be on the farther outreaches? Council Member Thiede said we could say it’s only allowed indoors and not outdoors. Attorney Land replied we could prohibit all outdoor, but I’m not sure we can where it’s a licensed use. Council Member Thiede said well, if they want to go just outside the City limits and buy the land, they can. Mayor Bailey said well, I almost said MUSA, but the MUSA I don’t think, it’s right on the line there so you can’t say MUSA. Attorney Land agreed with that. Attorney Land noted we did put in a buffer zone, the State law requires a 6-foot fence around it. We’ve put there must be screening around the fence and we put a 300-foot buffer between the screening and the road or the property line, just to try to give it some distance from the crop. But, again, I don't know how you’d prevent odor from going over a buffer. Mayor Bailey said you don’t. Council Member Olsen said I’m going to assume that as this becomes more prevalent starting next year, there’s going to be more and more people who say oh, I’m going to get into this business, and they want to do it this way. So, it’s challenging to want to be business friendly but also protect the rights of residential homeowners and things like that because this is common, it just is. What are you getting from other communities that either you represent, are they having any problems on this cannabis issue? Attorney Land replied most are predicting that outdoor cultivation is not going to be super prevalent, but that’s a hope, right? I mean, if you do have a big giant area where they can go, you’re hoping it’s not because you have like Old Cottage Grove is going to be surrounded. Council Member Olsen said that’s what I’m saying. Attorney Land said so we can try to put some more parameters on it, some restrictions, it has to be, I mean, a lot of these are residential uses, or we could say from residential zones, we can put a bubble around those residential zones, and that would help a lot. That would reduce the space. Mayor Bailey said my biggest concern is anything that’s going to be, again, just kind of within that core where people are going to be living. Attorney Land said yeah, that would certainly eat up those little spots. Mayor Bailey said yeah, I’m most concerned about that. I mean, if you get out beyond Old Cottage Grove, I mean, that’s where the solar farms are now and that, I’m not as concerned out there. But even, think about it, I mean, we assume next year that the Tanks are going to start developing on the one side there, and then what if that lady down the street there, this whole Goebel thing, starts cultivating marijuana. Attorney Land asked do you want to see a 1,000-foot buffer zone in residential? Council Member Thiede said how about a mile? City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 13 of 15 Administrator Levitt asked is there anything that prevents us from doing a 40-acre minimum on the outdoor? Attorney Land replied no, we can do that, too, increase the size. Administrator Levitt stated that would push it away from the core of the larger lands. Mayor Bailey stated that’s really what I’m trying to do; I just want to somehow get it so that it’s not going to be in the core of our City. Council Member Olsen said so, theoretically, we can do the buffer and we can increase the size up to 40 acres. I would suggest both of those. Mayor Bailey said I agree. Council Member Garza said it seems like our City is going to be a target of this, especially for the cultivation. Council Member Olsen said we have land. Council Member Garza said we have land and we’re still close. Mayor Bailey said and that’s what I’m worried about. Council Member Olsen said it’s a blessing and a curse. Council Member Garza said right, and the other part that I wanted to say is because of the lottery situation that they have, most of those went to outside of Minnesota, so we’re going to have outside competition for our land to come and start growing stuff. Attorney Land said all right, we can make those changes, and that will be new math for our GIS guy. Performance Standards: For all, we’re going to put in just a general generic provision, you can’t be a nuisance, and so then that ties in all of those fabulous Nuisance Ordinances that we beefed up in here, noise, smell, junk, or anything. Then we’ll also be adopting an Odor Ordinance that gives some teeth to it. Security Plan: Depending on what they are and where they are, but they all are going to need some kind of a Security Plan. I don’t want our Planning Department trying to figure out what that looks like, so it’s got to be approved by Public Safety. No Home Occupations: So, nobody can be selling it out of their house. We’re going to say it out loud in our Code, and State law says it today, but I don’t trust State law. So, I’m going to say no, that is just not appropriate in residential zones. Parking: Also, for these Micro and the Mezzo businesses that have multiple kinds of uses mixed in, parking requirements are going to be for the most-intense use; so, we’re not going to like add on your manufacturing and your this and that and the other things. It’s going to be whichever one requires the most parking is the parking that we’re going to require. Signage: We can restrict them to two signs, so we’re going to do that. We’ll try to be as mindful as we can about everybody; we want free enterprise, we want people to do business if they can do it, but yet protect our residents, our citizens. Mayor Bailey asked just looking at this real quick, how much land is left for growth? Attorney Land asked in the Industrial Park? Mayor Bailey replied yes, on the Leafline site, I’m just curious if they can come, based on what we’re going to do, you’re going to say it has to be 40 acres; and that’s why I’m asking, I just want to make sure that they will be able to start, come to us and all, and say now we’re going to start growing outside. Director Schmitz said they actually asked that question already; they asked again this summer if they could just automatically start doing the outdoor grow, and we said no, we’ve got a moratorium and it’s a different use than what you’re approved for, so no. City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 14 of 15 Next Steps: •Take it to the Planning Commission on October 28. If they’re comfortable with it, we’ll just keep it moving along. •Bring the registration process to a workshop in late November, and then sync everything up in December, depending on how everybody is comfortable with it. If we need both meetings in December, we’ll do that, but we’ll just take everything up in the end. •There will be fees that we can impose with the registration process. They are not nearly as generous as the State gets to collect, but we do get something for registering all these businesses. State law says we have to register the retail ones; if we’re going to do the registration process, we have to do retail. I’m going to say fine, let’s do them all, so we’ll collect the fees on all of them. That way we know they’re there, we’ll know who’s doing what, where, and when. We’ll do the compliance checks when we can to make sure everybody’s got a CUP; that’s really the only way we can know who is in town. Attorney Land asked if there were any questions about the process, but none were asked. Mayor Bailey asked Attorney Land on a separate note, with this kind of stuff, so we had a situation that they have where we revoked that license, right? Under all of this new process, would we still be able to do that if something like that happens? Attorney Land replied we would revoke their CUP. Mayor Bailey stated, okay, I just wanted to make sure that that would still be possible. Attorney Land stated the OCM can control the license, but one of the conditions of a license is that it complies with local Zoning; so, that is our hook with these businesses to make sure they’re good. Of course, there are going to be many good businesses, so you can stay, but if you’re going to be a problem, we need to be able to address it. Our big hammer is revoking their CUP, because once they no longer comply with Zoning, the OCM can’t license them. Mayor Bailey stated okay, perfect. And that was my only reason for asking is it does seem to me that the State’s kind of saying we’ll allow everybody to grow, have fun, and that the cities are left trying to figure out how to make this work. Again, we’ve got some good business people in our community with this, and we obviously have the bad ones. Attorney Land said exactly, and we hope for the best and prepare for the worst; that’s my motto. Council Member Garza asked have we had conversations with Woodbury and how they have been doing it and everything? Attorney Land replied no. Council Member Garza said that I know they have medical up there, but I know that they probably got something out of that that they could share with us maybe. Attorney Land stated I haven’t talked to them. I checked everybody’s Zoning Ordinances around us to see if anybody’s adopted anything yet, and nobody has; St. Paul did a very, very minimal Ordinance Amendment, like a 300-foot buffer zone from something, schools, I think. But otherwise people are kind of waiting, and everybody’s in the same schedule we are, they City Council Special Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 15 of 15 know they need to do something by the end of the year, so it’s in process, but nothing’s been formalized yet. Council Member Olsen said they’re watching, just like everybody else. Attorney Land said yes, who’s going to go first? Council Member Olsen said we tend to be a trendsetter, so. Mayor Bailey said we were with the solar. Attorney Land said frankly, the model ordinance the OCM came out with was really unworkable; I mean, it had a few good nuggets in it, but it was just kind of a mess of spaghetti for the most part. Council Member Olsen said Woodbury is represented by Eckberg Lammers, and they tend to be similar, very conservative like this. I would be surprised if they do anything that’s any more liberal than what we’ve just discussed; in fact, I could see them tightening it up even more. Mayor Bailey said I agree with you. Council Member Olsen said it always feels good when your neighbors are kind of on the same page as us. Mayor Bailey said part of the reason we did that with Woodbury is because we were concerned that all these places that couldn’t go into Woodbury or the fee was too high in Woodbury, they’d just wind up here in Cottage Grove. So, we pretty much adopted the same rules and mirrored most of their ordinance; they’re pretty close. 3. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:24 p.m. Minutes prepared by Judy Graf and reviewed by Tamara Anderson, City Clerk. 1 City Council Action Request 7.B. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Administration Agenda Category Action Item Title City Council Regular Meeting Minutes (2024-10-02) Staff Recommendation Approve the October 02, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. 2024-10-02 City Council Meeting CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE  12800 Ravine Parkway  Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016 www.cottagegrovemn.gov  651-458-2800  Fax 651-458-2897  Equal Opportunity Employer COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL October 2, 2024 12800 RAVINE PARKWAY SOUTH COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 7:00 P.M 1. CALL TO ORDER The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota, held a regular meeting on October 2, 2024, at Cottage Grove City Hall, 12800 Ravine Parkway. Mayor Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience, staff, and City Council Members stood and recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Tammy Anderson called the roll: Mayor Bailey-Here; Council Member Garza- Here; Council Member Khambata-Here; Council Member Olsen-Here; Council Member Thiede-Here. Also present: Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator; Tammy Anderson, City Clerk; Ryan Burfeind, Public Works Director; Zac Dockter, Parks and Recreation Director; Conner Jakes, Associate Planner; Pete Koerner, Public Safety Director; Korine Land, City Attorney-LeVander, Gillen & Miller, PA; Brenda Malinowski, Finance Director; Emily Schmitz, Community Development Director; Nick Arrigoni, Deputy Fire Chief; Brad Peterson, Captain; Crystal Raleigh, Assistant Engineer. 4. OPEN FORUM Mayor Bailey opened the Open Forum. As no one wished to address the Council, Mayor Bailey closed the Open Forum. 5. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Motion by Council Member Olsen to approve the agenda; second by Council Member Thiede. Motion carried: 5-0. 6. PRESENTATIONS A. Proclamation - 2024 Fire Prevention Week Staff Recommendation: Proclaim the week of October 6 through October 14, 2024, as Fire Prevention Week. Deputy Fire Chief Nick Arrigoni thanked the Council for this proclamation and formally invited them to our open house on October 8, from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. We’re going to have kitchen fire demos, a cardiac arrest scenario, station tours, and apparatus tours. It should go without saying but probably most importantly is the ability for us to interact with our public and our citizens and let them know how we operate and who we are. City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 2 of 23 Mayor Bailey asked Council Member Olsen to read aloud the 2024 Fire Prevention Week Proclamation and he did so. Motion by Council Member Khambata to proclaim the week of October 6 through October 14, 2024, as Fire Prevention Week; second by Council Member Garza. Motion carried: 5-0. Mayor Bailey stated once again, to share with the public, the Fire Open House will be at the Central Fire Station on Tuesday, October 8, 2024. If there is not enough space in the parking lot at the Central Fire Station, you can park at St. Rita’s Church across the street, and there will be access to safely bring you across 80th Street. 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve the August 7, 2024, City Council Special Meeting Minutes. B. Approve the August 7, 2024, City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. C. Approve the August 21, 2024, City Council Special Meeting Minutes. D. Approve the August 21, 2024, City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. E. Approve the August 30, 2024, City Council Emergency Meeting Minutes. F. Accept and place on file the minutes from the July 22, 2024, Planning Commission Meeting. G. Approve the July 9, 2024, Economic Development Regular Meeting Minutes. H. Approve the May 13, 2024, Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Meeting Minutes. I. Approve the issuance of rental licenses to the properties listed in the attached table. J. Approve Resolution 2024-133 and the appointment of the election judges listed in Exhibit A for the General Election on November 5, 2024, and authorize the City Clerk to appoint additional election judges, as needed, to fill vacancies. K. Approve the 2025-2026 labor contract with the Firefighters Union. All wage and benefits costs have been budgeted for in the 2025 budget. L. Approve the 2025-2026 labor contract with the 49er’s Union. All wage and benefits costs have been budgeted for in the 2025 budget. M. Approve the Stipulation of Settlement for Parcel 14 by and between YG Properties, LLC and the City for the East Point Douglas Road and Jamaica Avenue Reconstruction and Signal Project and authorize payment of the balance of the settlement amount, $51,300.00. N. 1) Authorize the agreement between the City of Cottage Grove and Washington County Community Services for Coordinated Mental Health Response. 2) Authorize utilizing the Opioid Settlement to fund Cottage Grove’s portion of the Coordinated Mental Health Response agreement. O. Adopt Resolution 2024-139, authorizing execution of the 2025 DWI Traffic Safety Officer grant agreement with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety. P. Authorize the purchase of Zoll cardiac monitors (3), AEDs (5), and ventilators (3), including service plans, for a total of $229,488.31 paid over five years utilizing a no-interest payment plan of $45,897.65 per year. Q. Authorize the purchase of four (4) ballistic shields utilizing criminal forfeiture funds to be reimbursed by the Washington County Sheriff's Office. R. Adopt the Fire Department’s 5-Year Strategic Plan. S. Authorize the order of five (5) Dodge Durangos in 2024 during the State contract pricing vehicle ordering window. T. 1) Adopt Resolution 2024-134 Declaring Costs to be assessed for Removal of Noxious Weeds from Private Property. U. Authorize Resolution 2024-132, awarding the quote for boulevard tree trimming services to Birch Tree Care in the amount of $113,887 for the year 2024-2025 trimming season, and authorize the service agreement for the two-year tree-trimming project. V. Authorize Public Works to advertise and sell surplus property on Cranky Ape. City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 3 of 23 W. Authorize the City Administrator to enter into an agreement with Grey Cloud Township allowing City staff to perform roadway shouldering for Grey Cloud Township in lieu of detour compensation. X. Approve the Right-of-Entry Agreement as part of the Jamaica Avenue Trunk Storm Sewer Realignment Project with the Joan Glendenning Kennedy Family Limited Partnership, WAG Farms, Inc. Landowner, and Glendenning Farms, L.P. Y. Adopt Resolution 2024-140 awarding the 2024 Goodview Avenue Well Sealing Project to Kimmes Bauer Well Drilling, Inc. in the amount of $29,624.00 and the appropriate officials are hereby authorized to sign all necessary documents to effectuate these actions. Z. 1) Adopt Resolution 2024-136 declaring the costs to be assessed for the 2024 Pavement Management Project. 2) Adopt Resolution 2024-137 calling for a Public Hearing to be held on October 16, 2024, for the 2024 Pavement Management Project. AA. Adopt Resolution 2024-138 approving the plans and specifications and authorizing bidding for the Kingston Park Site Power Upgrade Project. BB. Approve the Summer Valley Right of Entry agreement with the South Washington County Watershed District subject to minor modifications by the City Attorney. CC. Authorize the submission of the Comment Letter to the Metropolitan Council on the Imagine 2050 Policy Plan. Council Member Olsen wished to pull Item O, 2025 DWI/Traffic Safety Officer Grant Agreement, on the Consent Agenda for further discussion and/or approval. Council Member Olsen stated this is an opportunity for us to authorize execution of the 2025 DWI/Traffic Safety Officer Grant Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, which our Public Safety team in Cottage Grove recently received. I pulled this item this evening so Captain Brad Petersen would have some time to tell us a little bit about what exactly this grant is going to be used for and how it will benefit the residents of Cottage Grove, especially in light of the fact that one of the very common things that we hear about from residents is traffic safety. This is definitely something we will put to good use, and I was hopeful Captain Petersen could tell us some more. Captain Petersen thanked Council Member Olsen for giving him this opportunity to highlight this important moment where we could announce to the public that we now have a fulltime Traffic Safety Officer, which formally began yesterday. This is 100% grant funded through the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic Safety; this is a fulltime position whose sole duty is to address traffic safety concerns. As Council Member Olsen stated, we all know that traffic safety is a major concern for residents in our community and we hear about that all the time. Unfortunately, our patrol officers just don’t have the ability or time to invest as much time as we would like them to have to address traffic safety concerns, but now we’ll have an officer whose sole job is to address traffic safety concerns in our community. As Council knows, we approved an ambitious Five Year Strategic Plan in May, and in the subsequent budget workshops, Council challenged us to seek grant funding to support many of those strategic goals and initiatives. Since those workshops, we’ve applied for three-to-four grants, one of them being this Traffic Safety grant, and we’ve got a couple more in the works; so, we’re hopeful we’ll have some more good news coming in the near future as well. Captain Petersen stated more about this Traffic Safety position: His sole duties will be enforcing impaired driving, speeding, distracted driving, seatbelt regulations, things of that nature, so there will be a component of strict enforcement. However, a lot of his responsibilities and duties will include public education as well, so he won’t be out there just writing tickets, it’s largely about educating the public as well. He’ll be held to performance metrics that are terms of the grant itself and also performance metrics that come down from the Towards Zero Deaths (TZD) program. As you know, for a long time we participated in the TZD grant programs, which funds additional enforcement hours for DWI enforcement, speed enforcement, seatbelt enforcement, etc. We will continue to do that as well, so we’re going to take a two-prong approach to traffic safety: We’ll continue to do our TZD grants, which provides overtime hours for officers to go out and provide that extra enforcement, and then we’ll also have Officer Lauden Rinzel, whose fulltime job will be traffic safety. City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 4 of 23 Council Member Olsen thanked Captain Petersen and stated it’s my understand that this is one of those grants where we can actually apply for it every year, is that right? Captain Petersen replied that’s correct. Obviously, at this point, there’s no guarantee that it will be renewable, but provided he does a great job, which I know he will, there’s a high likelihood that we’ll continue to renew that year after year. Council Member Olsen said okay, perfect. I also believe that the grant application itself was written by Sergeant Pat Young and yourself, right? Captain Petersen replied I had a small piece of it, it was largely Sergeant Young who deserves all the credit. Council Member Olsen said good, this is a really important thing. As we continue to evolve as a community and we continue to grow, those traffic concerns I think become a little bit more prevalent, and having somebody who’s fully dedicated to addressing those concerns is a big step in the right direction. So, thank you, make sure you thank Sergeant Young, and Officer Rinzel as well for being willing to do this because it’s a big job but it’s an important job. Captain Petersen replied certainly, thank you. Council Member Olsen and Mayor Bailey both said thank you. Motion by Council Member Thiede to approve the Consent Agenda; second by Council Member Garza. Motion carried: 5-0. 8. APPROVE DISBURSEMENTS A. Approve disbursements for the period of 8-30-2024 through 9-26-2024 in the amount of $9,060,329.34. Motion by Council Member Olsen to approve disbursements; second by Council Member Garza. Motion carried: 5-0. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None. 10. BID AWARDS A. Jamaica Avenue Trunk Storm Sewer Realignment Project - Bid Award Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2024-141 awarding the bid for the Jamaica Avenue Trunk Storm Sewer Realignment Project to New Look Contracting in the total amount of $298,439.00. Ryan Burfeind, Public Works Director, stated tonight is our bid award for this project, which has a long name. He stated I just want to quickly show where this work is happening for the Council’s benefit. This is along the east side of Jamaica Avenue, just south of 95th Street. Today we have a 54-inch trunk storm sewer pipe that goes into where the compost site used to be, where Kwik Trip will be going. This was a planned effort; we knew that we needed to get this down to what we call our stormwater flume, so it’s that long channel that brings all the water down to the pond on 100th Street and ultimately out to the Mississippi River. So, that’s an effort that we want to undertake this year for a variety of reasons: 1) It just has to do with the development of that site and getting things ready, dealing with some different issues of the DNR and such, so now is a prime time to get this done. 2) Just from a weather standpoint, fall going into winter, you can see how dry it’s been, so that’s the best time to get some of these stormwater projects done. Because it’s pulling water up Jamaica, it has to continue to flow water why we actually do this work. So, it’s a little bit of a challenging project, and it’s about 300 feet of storm sewer that we will be realigning down to the south. We actually got a very large number of bids, we received 10 bids. It’s always a bit of a challenge this time of year, and it really all depends on contractor availability; did they have a light workload in the fall where they want to keep their crews going? If that’s the case, you see really good bids. Contractors who are extremely busy and are City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 5 of 23 hoping maybe there’s not a lot of interest throw really high numbers at it, lots of overtime, just more expense on their end. You can see as reflected in the bids, our estimate was $400,000, and we came under that at $298,000; even though it’s quite a bit under, we’re still comfortable because you can see a nice range of those bids: Three were under the estimate, one was right near the estimate, and the rest were over. Clearly we have some contractors that have availability and opening to meet what’s a pretty tight schedule to get the work done before December. Director Burfeind said with that, the recommendation is on the screen, and I’m happy to answer any questions. Council Member Thiede asked have we ever used New Look Contracting in the past? Director Burfeind replied New Look is not someone that we’ve had a direct contract with before; they’ve been subcontractors on projects, and they are someone that’s been around the metro, so someone that we’re familiar with, just haven’t had a direct contract for. Council Member Thiede stated looking at those prices, we’re to assume that they probably had the resources available; do you think they’re just coming off a big project or something, just timing wise, or what do you think? Director Burfeind replied I think when you look at the estimate, when we’re estimating a project this time of year, it can be very challenging. So, I will say there’s some additional contingency that we always build in this time of year. Their pricing, if it was early spring, and we were bidding this out at a different time, maybe you’d expect that more, but because we have two other contractors just kind of slowly increasing an amount, it’s not something concerning. If our estimate was $450,000 and everyone was above that and one was at $300,000, that’s where we start to get concerned about such a large gap, so much money left on the table. But given kind of the incremental increase, we’re pretty comfortable with it. Council Member Thiede asked with this particular type of project, is there that much that’s really very difficult upon it? Director Burfeind replied I will say it’s a good question, there is a lot of bedrock, but we had good information on the bedrock because we just did that large culvert project in 2019 that we’re going to be tying into, so we have a good feel for where the bedrock is based on our soil borings. There can always be some flexibility, but we have a good idea on what’s called the hard bedrock they have to kind of jackhammer out and the soft bedrock they can dig out with their excavator. So, while there can be some range in that, that’s not something that one contractor could anticipate over another. We have soil borings at certain locations, and they really use that to inform their bid process. Other than that, there’s not really a lot of changes or inconsistencies in the project, no private utilities to deal with, no real challenges that we know of; obviously, once you dig into a ground, things can happen, but nothing that would be challenging. Council Member Thiede said okay, good, thank you. Council Member Khambata asked do you see this having a significant impact on traffic flow in that area? Director Burfeind replied that’s another good question. In general, we’re going to be trying to keep the work off to the side. The pipe isn’t very deep, it’s about 15 feet deep, but you can kind of see the blue lines where we’re extending with that time point, generally we’ve got a good kind of 12-foot setback from the curb. So, the goal is to minimize those traffic impacts, just from safety, there could be needs for one-lane traffic; I will say that south of 95th Street, that’s a little bit less of a challenge and the traffic kind of backs up from the signal during shift change, but that can kind of flow through. So, at the most, you’d have kind of a one-lane traffic closure. Council Member Khambata said okay, thank you. Motion by Council Member Khambata to Adopt Resolution 2024-141 awarding the bid for the Jamaica Avenue Trunk Storm Sewer Realignment Project to New Look Contracting in the total amount of $298,439.00; second by Council Member Thiede. Motion carried: 5-0. 11. REGULAR AGENDA - None. 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 6 of 23 Council Member Khambata said I looked up and found out that in September we had 20 days over 80 degrees, which is abnormally warm for September. So, I had the opportunity to take my kids out, and we’ve been trying out a different park every day in Cottage Grove in September, and I think we made it to about 15 parks on our dad days. I just have to say a huge shoutout to our Parks and Rec crew for taking such great care of our community and our parks. Mayor Bailey stated that’s a good callout. I did happen to bump into or saw Director Zac Dockter, as I had my grandkids out about a week ago at Glacial Valley Park, and they love the play equipment there, so it was pretty awesome. Council Member Olsen stated I’ll definitely echo Council Member Khambata’s comments about the Park and Rec team, and I would like to include River Oaks as well because I stopped by there over the weekend and it was busy as all get out on the golf course. So, people are certainly taking advantage of the nice weather; I know we started early this year and hopefully we’ll be able to play for quite some time yet, but I wouldn’t risk it. So, if you want to get out there, make sure you make a tee time. The course is in great shape and of course, you can grab some food and a cocktail or two when you’re done. Council Member Olsen stated I also wanted to congratulate our Cottage Grove Fire Department for their Fill the Boot campaign for MDA, which they started last weekend at Cub Foods. I believe they will have a table set up as well for donations at their upcoming open house; so far, they’ve been able to raise right around $1,700 for muscular dystrophy. That is a charity that means a lot to me; I was one of those kids when Jerry’s kids were on TV and my sisters and I would go around and we had our little donation can and we’d knock on doors. I had a grandmother who passed away at a pretty young age from multiple sclerosis, and MDA supports multiple sclerosis research, etc. So, this one hits pretty close to home. Council Member Olsen stated I also wanted to take a moment to formally congratulate our new Communications Manager, Phil Jents, on joining the team here in Cottage Grove. Phil is not a newbie as it relates to Cottage Grove, he actually grew up here and went to school here; he decided to fly the coop for a while, but ultimately, just like a homing pigeon, he found his way back, and we’re pretty happy to have you. So, welcome to the community once again, Phil, welcome to the team. I’m hearing great things, and I know you’re going to do great work for us. Council Member Olsen stated last, but certainly not least, a shoutout to the new Executive Director for SWCTC, my friend, Ann Schweisguth, who I think we all would agree is just flat out awesome at her job. Ann used to be Ann Simpson, she hasn’t lost anything with the name change, in fact, she’s probably gotten better. The SWCTC team has been operating with interim directors for several months, and Ann finally decided to take a bite out of that apple and put her name in the hat and become the Executive Director; so, welcome to your new role, Ann, and thank you for all you do in support of our community. Council Member Thiede stated at the end of this month, on October 26 is the Monster Bash parade. Monster Bash is associated with and managed by the Strawberry Fest Committee. So, if you want to be in the parade, you go to the Strawberry Fest website and press the Monster Bash button, and it’ll bring up the Monster Bash parade application if you want to be in that. The parade route is the same as it’s been for the last number of years, as long as I can remember, going from the SoWashCo Administration building across from McDonald's, and it goes down to Applebee’s. That will actually start at 10:00 a.m., and I think we’re going to have great weather for it, so I’ve heard. So, get excited about that. Council Member Garza stated I will mention some of the events that we have coming up in the month of October: •I think we touched a bit on the Teddy’s Heart Foundation fundraiser that’s coming up on October 5, that’s going to be at the Red Barn from 4:00-to-10:00 p.m., and it’s $20 per ticket, that’s going to be an awesome fundraiser. •On October 11, Park High School is having their homecoming parade, that starts at 5:15 p.m., so that should be a lot of fun. City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 7 of 23 •The Fire Department, as mentioned earlier, is having their open house on October 8, from 5:00-to-7:00 p.m. at the Central Fire Station. •We have another treat with the locally grown theater, they’re hosting a play at the City Hall amphitheater, and that’s at 5:30 p.m. on October 18; that play will be The Frankenstein Monster, so that should be a lot of fun. •Last, but not least, our Monster Bash parade, I’m excited for that; we participated last year with Strawberry Fest, so I’m hoping to do this again. Mayor Bailey said I have just a couple things and it’s a good piggyback. This coming Saturday, October 5, there are a lot of food opportunities in town: •The first one I want to mention and this is kind of cool because I got an email from the manager of Hy- Vee, as Hy-Vee as a company was named the #1 Grocer in America by USA Today; in recognition of this pretty distinguished honor, from 11:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. at the Cottage Grove location, they’re going to be providing free hot dogs, burgers, chips, and beverages. They’ll also have bouncy houses, yard games, and a whole bunch of other free things in the community. When I talked to Mike at the store, he literally said that they’ve got like 10,000 hot dogs and 10,000 burgers they’re giving away and it’s free. •Later on in the day, and this is the piggyback from Council Member Garza, from 4:00-to-10:00 p.m. at the Red Barn, $20 a ticket, is the Teddy’s Heart Foundation fundraiser. I encourage everybody to swing in and support that group. •On Saturday evening, the Masonic Lodge in Old Cottage Grove is having their annual spaghetti dinner. If you haven’t had it, it is amazing, and that is from 4:30-to-7:30 p.m.; adult tickets are $13, kids 8-to-12 are $7, and children younger than that are free. If you’re interested in any of those opportunities, maybe take a run down to Teddy’s Heart, I know they usually have different drawings and things there. Then maybe take a run out to the Masonic and have some dinner. Lastly, what I wanted to do is we’re getting close to the election, in just a little over a month, and I was just talking to our Parks and Recreation Director Zac Dockter, and in the upcoming weeks before the election, you’re going to hear a lot about the Preserve.Play.Prosper program that we’re looking at doing for our Parks Department here in Cottage Grove. Most of you probably got a flyer like this one that you can see on the screen there with a lot of information. I will just share with you a couple things real quick: •There is going to be a Facebook Live event, and we’ll be getting additional information out to the public where you can ask questions of me and Director Dockter and others if there’s something more that you’re not seeing on the Preserve.Play.Prosper website. •We’re also doing an open house with some pictures, etc., and that’s going to be at Hamlet Park, which obviously is one of the benefactors if this were to pass. I just wanted to throw that out there. •The other thing I was talking to our City Administrator, Jennifer Levitt, about is there are quite a few cities out there, other than the City of Cottage Grove, that is doing this particular type of proposal, a Local Option Sales Tax. Woodbury to the north of us is doing one, and in their particular case it’s for Public Safety for a new buildout of their existing building. Stillwater is doing something for parks. A lot of cities out there, if they don’t already have it, are in the process of doing it. One of the things I just wanted to share from a public standpoint is that I’ve been asked is what happens, what if it doesn’t pass? What if something doesn’t pass? The real answer is eventually we will build these additions, for example, with the Mississippi Dunes Park, along the backwaters of the Mississippi, eventually we would do it. That could be up to 25 years from now because we put everything on our Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The other question I get a lot is well, who really shops in Cottage Grove other than Cottage Grove citizens? Because anybody who’s looking to either support or not support this proposal in the Preserve.Play.Prosper website, there actually is a study that we had done a couple years from the University of Minnesota; based on data from a couple years ago, basically the Cottage Grove citizens make up about 68%-or-69% of the purchases within Cottage Grove, and about 31%-to-32% is actually from people outside of Cottage Grove. So, the reason that I believe and I’ll speak for myself, but I’ll mention it from a Council standpoint, the reason the Council decided to go City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 8 of 23 this particular direction versus let’s say a referendum question or just starting to pay for it over time is because if you do the Local Option Sales Tax, it’s not just the residents of Cottage Grove that are paying for this out of their property taxes. I believe that was part of the reason that we as a Council and our staff talked about how can we support our play and fun and things that we do in Cottage Grove but not necessarily have all the Cottage Grove citizens have to pay for the entire thing. So, that is the reason for this, but again, we just want you to vote, one way or the other, please vote, but please be informed when you go vote. If you have any questions, you can reach out to me or any of my partners on the Council, Director Dockter is always available. We do respond to any questions that come through to the website. If there’s anything that we can do to better help you understand this process and why we’re doing it, please don’t hesitate to ask. Our next item is a Workship, open to the public, and basically what it’s about is an update on the August 29 Severe Weather Emergency that we had when that storm came through our community. Council will be moving into the Training Room to get an update on where everything is at, costs and so on, and then we’ll be adjourning this meeting from there. So, everyone have a great evening 13. WORKSHOPS - OPEN TO PUBLIC - TRAINING ROOM A. August 29, 2024 - Severe Weather Emergency Update Staff Recommendation: Receive an update from staff regarding the State of Emergency issued on August 29, 2024. Mayor Bailey said I’m going to call the workshop to order; obviously, this is giving us an update on the severe storm that went through Cottage Grove on Thursday, August 29. He asked Administrator Levitt to begin. Administrator Levitt said a lot happened in about a six-hour window on August 29, and we thought it would be good for you to just hear the recap of what we responded to, the incident, go through our recovery, and then also talk about some of the additional costs and the implications of that. I have to tell you I could not be more proud of how the staff responded that night. We had trained and trained, and Gwen has trained us and continues to train us, and it showed in our response; we were a very well-oiled machine that night. They will have lessons learned in their slide when they talk through it, but I will tell you they’re being very hard on themselves on the lessons learned because I would not fault them for any of that because I thought that we really responded in an outstanding way. They’ve done just an absolutely excellent job. Now I will tell you at one point in the evening, when Brad and Dan Schoen were sitting in the Conference Room, they were writing every single call that was coming in with addresses, they were marking them and labeling them, there was a moment when I went, is this really happening? And then it felt like you know we do tabletop exercises in which we participated, they give you these little injections of scenarios and situations, and it felt like the inject button was like stuck. And it was like, Brad, is this really real, as we were going through it. So, I’d have to say the staff did an outstanding job. So, I will just say with a couple of their lessons learned, they’re very hard on themselves. So, I will turn it over to Captain Martin. Captain Martin stated when we talk about lessons learned, we as an Emergency Management team did an after- action review, went through a whole list of what we did well and what can we do better? An after-action review is not about pointing out things that went wrong or if circumstances that occurred because as Jennifer said, we did a lot of things really well, but there’s always room for improvement. So, when we talk about these lessons learned, it’s not because something went bad, it’s just ways to improve. A little over a month ago, we had a typical Minnesota weather day. The National Weather Service gave us a 2 out of 5 chance of severe weather. In fact, a severe thunderstorm warning was issued for the southern part of Washington County, which expired about 5:15 p.m. However, during that time, there was a significant amount of rain, lightning, and wind. The officers who were involved with the Park High School football game were safety planning; what do we do if this should affect the attendees? Then, at 5:15 p.m., things calmed down, we’re like okay, warning’s expired, no problem. All of a City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 9 of 23 sudden, about 5:30 p.m., we experienced what we later learned was a downburst, which occurs when winds in the storm start heading opposite each other. When that happens, you get this downburst and surface winds; so, when we talk about radar-indicated winds, radar indicates the winds up here or much further, but you get the point. And they were about 50-to-60 MPH gusts, which was not enough for a severe storm warning. Radar does not indicate the surface winds, and judging from the amount of damage, the National Weather Service later estimated we experienced 70-to-80 MPH winds. So, that is why we had the severe weather event outside of the severe weather warning. Public Safety personnel quickly became overwhelmed with about 30 Calls for Service. The damage that occurred, downed powerlines, downed trees, property damage, flooding, electrical hazards; we had several smaller little fires and then a confirmed fire in a business, which Deputy Chief Arrigoni will talk about during his slides. Thankfully, no injuries or deaths were reported during this. Public Safety Director Pete Koerner stated thank you to the photographer for many of these pictures. Mayor Bailey said I went in that house, as there was a worry that they were going to be home, that was scary. Captain Martin said so once this happened, the School District delays to start the football game, additional officers were called into work, Public Works and Parks did an all call for staff to return, as the Public Works answering service was being inundated by calls as well. Command staff reported to the Police Department, at City Hall, and decided we needed to set up the Emergency Operations Center (EOC). We received mutual aid from all of our partners, police, fire, and EMS. I would say we dusted off our All Hazard Plan that you haven’t seen this shiny new version yet, I’m still working on this 500-page plan, and you will be seeing it at some point. Our initial All Hazard Plan was drafted in 2004, it has gone through several revisions since then, and this year has been my year to revise it so you will see the new and improved version. But we still operate under that 2004 version, which has had some edits. I’m going to turn over the clicker to Captain Brad Petersen. Captain Petersen said I drew the short straw, I got to be the Incident Commander that night. So, it wasn’t high on my list of the things that I wanted to do, but it was a great experience. Gwen’s done a pretty good job of describing the initial Public Safety response, but I’ll go a bit further into the specific police response. One of the things that benefited us that night was that we had extra staffing working the football game, so this would have been even more overwhelming for police if we had been operating at our normal staffing levels of 4 or 5 officers; fortunately, we had about 3 or 4 additional officers to help with our response model. As Gwen said, they didn’t really fully comprehend the gravity of the situation yet, and they just started going to those Calls for Service as they started dropping in the queue. Of course, they were prioritizing them somewhat, but they didn’t quite understand the challenge that was going to be dropped on them once the full magnitude of the storm was realized. Sergeant Dan Schoen and Sergeant Mike McCormick did a really good job of implementing Incident Command, and one of the best things they had done was to notify our command staff quickly, rather than waiting longer to see how this thing was going to play out. This allowed us to then activate the EOC quickly and get citywide staff on board to start helping; so that would be one of my lessons learned that I’ll address here in a moment. Implementation of Incident Command, notifying Command staff quickly, and having mutual aid mobilized quickly from our surrounding communities because there was way too much workload for our handful of cops to address were key in this situation. I was at home at the time of the call, I got to the P.D. within a few minutes, and Dan and I were able to have a face-to-face handoff where we were briefed on the situation, and he handed over Incident Command to me. Schoen took over the operations side where I could focus on the big picture, and Schoen was handling the operations side, and we worked side by side. I had activated the EOC through Code Red, set up the seat of the EOC in the Minnesota Room. At that point, we started to triage calls and prioritize those Calls for Service and our response. So, that’s kind of a summary of Public Safety actions at a very high level. My first lesson learned is just trust the process, and by that, I mean we’ve gone through a lot of training and drills where we talk about and practice implementing Incident Command and about the EOC, and cooperating across departments, within the City and outside of the City. And it’s one thing to do it in training in a sterile environment, but when it happens in real life, it’s really overwhelming, it’s an “Oh, crap” moment for sure; and I found a lot of relief in that you trust in the process and knowing that, follow these steps and within a short amount of time, more and more resources will pull into the problem and it’ll get easier and easier as those resources come City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 10 of 23 online and that truly did happen. When I reflect on this incident, it seemed like I pushed the Code Red button and walked into the Minnesota Room, started some work, and I looked up and it felt like five minutes later I was surrounded by City staff and they were all working like a well-oiled machine. And that just brought down the stress level and it all got ten times easier as time went on. So, trust the process even if you feel overwhelmed because it works. The amount of communications that we had across the departments in the City was remarkable. I didn’t identify any particular friction points between the departments, and you know how truly unusual that is when we have a major incident like this, inevitably there’s going to be some friction points. I just didn’t experience that at all, and I think that’s because the team trained so well. I want to touch on mutual aid real quickly. As I said, this problem was way too big for us to handle on our own, and so it was crucial for us to get mutual aid involved, and they did an awesome job and helped us out immensely. As a reminder, when other communities have had their incidents, we’d go help them out, too. The GIS mapping was the coolest thing ever, I didn’t even think about this as a possibility; I was using the old- fashioned white board and that was working, but then all of a sudden, the GIS mapping came online and it was the coolest thing ever because now we could see the dots start popping up. Then we could kind of realize where the damage happened and start to distinguish was it a downed tree or was it a fire or was it flooding or anything like that. So, it really helped us visualize where the problem was and what the problems were and then immortalize all those different Calls for Service that were pending. The last part of Communications is a reminder that this is a critically important function that we notify the community of what’s going on and we deliver those messages to them that are in their public safety interest; and we gather the neighborhood or evacuate or shelter in place, things like that. For those of us in a Public Safety role, we’re putting out fires and responding to crimes in progress and all of that type of stuff, it’s not always the first thing we think about and we’re not really adept at delivering that message. So, it was extremely helpful and very well done to have the Communications team on board to handle that. I could look up and tell someone from the Communications team hey, I need you to tell the community to stay away from this particular neighborhood. I need to tell them stop moving our barricades, things of that nature, and then finally deliver that message when it is safe for the community to return. So, they did a remarkable job, and I just appreciated the role they played in this. Captain Petersen said so, I’ll now hand it over to Fire. Deputy Fire Chief Nick Arrigoni stated so in the very beginning of this, the very first call that dropped for service for us was Salons by JC, for a possible structure fire. So, they had black smoke reported coming out of their outlets, and so that was kind of an all hands, that was an all call for us, that was an all hands on deck type of response. I was also at home, and I was able to hop in my squad and respond from home directly to that scene. Chief Pritchard was already there, and I remember as I was getting my CAD computer set up, I was seeing these calls in pending, and I thought my computer was broken. Genuinely, I did, I was like this is backlogged from like multiple days of incidents; and I did a face to face with Chief Pritchard and I was like my CAD computer’s not working. He’s like nope, it is, like this is very real. So, we had at that point 20 calls, probably 20 emergency calls in pending. For us, obviously, the first priority is life safety, so we had to prioritize what we would have to answer immediately. We did not get the callback members that we would have hoped for; a lot of them, quite honestly, let us know on the back plate, I lost power and I was home with my kids, things like that where they had to make that choice and stay home. We relied heavily on our mutual aid in this as well, like Captain Petersen and Captain Martin said, so life safety was the first priority, property preservation was our second priority. So, in these calls, what did we need to respond to right away? Our challenge was at that time both Jon and I were on the scene of a possible structure fire. So, he actually, as this kind of played out, was able to cut me loose, and then you go into I have to do so many more things than we’re capable of doing right now, and what does that look like? So, we had to adjust how we would respond, typically; on any Calls for Service we had that night, we’d love to have an engine there or a ladder truck or something more than what we could provide on some of these calls. I asked Chief Pritchard, do you want me to go to the EOC, or do you want me to go back to the station and start answering some of these Calls for Service? That was one of our lessons learned is that we probably needed representation in the EOC sooner; ideally, that would be him as the Fire Chief, but a lesson learned for us nonetheless where I could probably step in and I did. I actually grabbed the multigas monitor and thermal imager, and I started prioritizing the calls that we needed City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 11 of 23 to get to right away, gas leaks that was leaking in houses that we know could turn into a structure fire quickly and things like the powerlines down and trees on house kind of went more to that like how do we stabilize this incident and we know we need to answer these higher-priority calls, and that any call could turn into a higher-priority call at any point. As soon as I started knocking these off the list, we’re going to be able to get ahead of this. Luckily for us, the Salon by JC it was not a huge incident; it was a little bit time consuming but the damage to the actual structure was minimal and we were able to cut those crews loose. Chief Pritchard was able to then go to the EOC, which helped tremendously, just a working collaboration with everybody else up there. We can get that 30,000- foot view now as more people started to come in; he was actually up here, I was able to kind of remove myself from the street level, answering physical calls, and manage the crews that we had at the fire station, which was something that was incredibly helpful. Like the lessons learned, we talked about we were task saturated right off the bat, and I think that second Deputy Chief that’s going to be starting soon will help that tremendously because it's hard for us to get out of the mix, right? No matter where you are in the rank structure, it’s hard to pull us away and say that’s not your job anymore, but this is a perfect example of that. So, we talked about setting up the future EOC in the larger training room and having that needed equipment and technology be present. He asked if there were any questions on the Fire side. Captain Martin stated just from an Emergency Management standpoint, just to add to this, our support person from Washington County came down and was in our EOC because at that point, we didn’t know how widespread or how site specific the damage was. It ended up being pretty specific to Cottage Grove, not all of Washington County, but he came down from a County perspective to help with that. We had talked about initially the EOC was set up in the Minnesota Room and then as it grew, it grew bigger. The folks who responded were able to kind of break out into some of the common areas, if you will, other offices, but ultimately having a bigger room in the future; again, nothing was wrong with the way it was set up, it wasn’t bad, it’s just how could we do a little better? Because I believe, Jennifer, you said there was a problem with the HVAC system. Administrator Levitt replied I was hoping one of the pictures will come up and we can talk about that. She stated here’s the one thing: You know, when you have the EOC, your adrenaline’s already kind of pumping, right? You’re kind of hot, but it was, man, it feels like it’s getting really hot in here, physically. So, I’m texting Adam Mosier, like something is wrong, like we’re really hot; and he’s like, oh, my gosh, you are really hot, it is like 80 some degrees and it’s just pumping out heat. So, I mean, we had some serious bonding time happening in the EOC that night. So, what happened was when the storm came through, somehow our HVAC system thought it was 5 degrees outside and so it converted from cooling to heating, and it just like pumped in the heat into that side. So, we’re all kind of sweating, I mean, it kind of felt like a sweat lodge in there for a bit. But, just so you know, there were some other things happening that night and we weathered it well; we were more invested in deodorant in the EOC offices or something. I will tell you the other thing that’s kind of funny is as Captain Petersen and I were sending the message out to activate the EOC, to notify directors, the next thing I received on my phone was is this for real? Like is this a test, or is this really for real? Because it was hard to know if you weren’t even within 5 miles of Cottage Grove, you didn’t know what had just happened. So, staff then started to report in from Finance and Administration to be able to assist. One of the things that we had to work with IT on was getting a phone system set up so we could route the actual calls to the office area of Public Safety, so we could start taking calls out of the call center that Public Works system was inundated with, and so we had all three IT folks in, being able to navigate that. Also, we had to figure out a workaround with the call service because they were sending us messages with all the calls, but we couldn’t get access to them; so, IT had to do a little end run around to be able to get us all of the calls that were sitting in the queue that were placing Work Orders at Public Works. One thing, too, that we learned in the process is that GIS mapping actually redlined our servers. So, Brian was already in the process of replacing our servers, but because we’re doing so much manual input onsite and then people remotely were consistently putting those dots in, our servers actually couldn’t withstand the load that was coming in, so we had a little bit of a delay on that. But now our servers by the end of the month will actually be updated, so we shouldn’t have that delay again. City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 12 of 23 It was helpful obviously to have Brenda there just to make sure as we’re sending our coding and accounting of it, as Gwen had hammered into us, we need to document, document, document. Brenda was good at making sure we had our codes out and that we were coding everything, getting that clarity out. It also provided us, when the mayor showed up to make that Emergency Declaration, he had seen it for himself; he had seen our reports, he saw our boards and where we were at, and that we were clearly overwhelmed with our own level of response, and so we were able to make that Emergency Declaration. So it was very helpful for all of you to be able to respond to let us know at 9:00 a.m. the next morning, going into a holiday weekend, that you were available to make that formal declaration. At that time, we thought we were going to get a County declaration as well, and so we thought we would be getting more cost reimbursement for that. Now, for us, it was also about trying to get the message out more accurately, right? Because we had a lot of property damage to homes, to cars, and things like that. So, we wanted to make sure our claim form was updated and really clear, making sure our internal communication with staff if people called us to file those claims, we weren’t going to argue with them, if it’s a boulevard tree or a private tree, we’re going to figure that out later. Let’s just get them the claim form and be able to get them moving in the right direction. I think one of the things, and I think Captain Petersen mentioned it, having more bodies in the actual building to be able to get a lot of work done; I mean, we didn’t need Joe answering phones, but we put him out in a pickup truck to be able to patrol, looking for manholes and covers off and the catch basins with floods and if roads were clear or not. Director Burfeind said he did a good job for us. Administrator Levitt said I got a two-for-one when I called Tammy because I got the City Clerk, and the beautiful thing is Tammy actually remembers all the Public Works _____, so she was able to come in and help with that; but then also get the Resolution working with the City Attorney that night on the Declaration and getting everything queued up and posted for 9:00 a.m. the next morning. So, by the time we left here at 11:30 p.m., all of those documents and things were already in order. Brenda helped with some policy stuff, making sure our internal communication was spot on because here’s the thing: We need to remember we’re an organization of 250 people, we needed to make sure that our internal team knew when they walked in the door the next morning exactly what to expect and how to operate. So, she made sure all of our front-desk staff knew what to say when people called, what were the procedures and policies. And then we also sent additional support down to Public Works because they were definitely going to be inundated with all those calls when daylight came about. As I mentioned, it was really important for us to have the IT staff there and the Communication staff because we were able to put that Emergency Alert banner on the website right away; we kept using those continuous updates throughout the event of what was happening. It was a great coordination with our Public Safety Facebook page and our general City one; we were good at creating those messages, making sure that we were getting it out. We were able to get that press release out that night before we left, and so by 5:00 a.m. the next morning, I made contact with the mayor; I know you were getting the same calls, they started really early contacting us for press coverage. So, I think we did an interview with every network, MPR as well, and so we had a lot of coverage of the event. I know there’s a lot of cameras out in the community, getting pictures of the different damage and the houses. We were really good about keeping ourselves from the media, they were updated, making sure we were getting accurate information out to the public. As I said, it’s really important that we continue to focus on any internal communications so that our employees are giving out the right information to residents all along the way. One of the big lessons learned is everybody wanted to know what happened; that’s why when we met that morning at 9:00 a.m., we still couldn’t tell you what happened, the National Weather Service still couldn’t tell us. I think it was funny one of you guys had talked to the National Weather Service and they were like, you had damage? Like they didn’t know anything until we sent them literally our spreadsheet of damage and pictures, and then they were only able to go back and evaluate the event and really tell us what hit us. I think that’s what was difficult, as we couldn’t explain to people what really happened; was it a tornado, was it straight-line winds, what was it? And I think that in a way did create some challenges for us to be able to communicate that message. So, I’ll turn it over to Tammy. Tammy said so like Jennifer said, honestly, I got the notice about Cottage Grove and I genuinely was like is this for real, Jennifer? And I called her and it was like she was on her cell and it was going in and out, and I was like gosh, this is the strangest thing. But, ultimately, after a few moments, that’s when we called Andy, our Chief Building City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 13 of 23 professional in, and right away we were kind of battling a time where it was getting dark, and so we sent him right out. So, he evaluated 14 homes that night, and they were coming in from residents who were telling us now that there were trees down on structures, things like that. He was able to take a look at 14 homes that evening, 2 more later on that week. There was just 1 home that he did condemn, the one that had the tree through it, which was awful. Come to find out, he worked closely with the folks who live there and with that condemnation, they could move right back in as soon as they were able to get a contractor to get those things fixed. So, it was a smooth process there. Ultimately, Jennifer touched on it as well, our Communications team was great about ensuring that our front- desk team knew what to say, what information can they provide, what’s happening, and questions related to that throughout the next week. They were helping them get through comments that they would hear from everyone. Final lessons learned, and this is me speaking for anybody who asked me about how I felt; it was really under this crunch time, right? Because it was getting dark, we didn’t know how bad it was initially, until we were updated. And I’ll turn it over to Ryan from Public Works. Ryan said during an event like this, Public Works and Parks really meld together into one entity because our guys are the ones out there getting the roads cleared and such. So, Zac got everything put together for me, and Zac called his own crew. I had called our on call, so, we have like an on-call supervisor every week that rotates for callouts; in the winter, it’s plowing, in the summer, it’s usually small stuff, branches in the road. So, I called him at 5:51 p.m., so right after the storm hit. Right after the storm cleared, my wife came home, and I said get in the car, because it was really bad, and we were going to go quick drive around. I made it, not barely clearing the neighborhood, and I couldn’t get anywhere. So, I called Noah, I said it’s an all call for all the Public Works and Parks; it’s amazing how that process works, right? Noah was at the hockey arena with his kid’s team or something, he had no idea the storm had hit like that because it was fine up on 80th Street, for the most part. So, he went through the process, he called all the foremen, the foremen called all their crews. Then I called all the other superintendents and Zac, and by 6:30 p.m., we had everyone out in the field except for a few stragglers who live a little further away. So, under a half hour. People are not expecting this, right? They’re at their kids’ activities, all the different things, and they were back, ready to go, with all their crews, all their equipment out, clearing roads. At the same time, I was talking with Jennifer and talking to Public Safety, seeing what was going on and letting them know that we have all of our staff coming in. Two of those were the GIS staff, one’s a dedicated GIS technician and the other one is Gavin, who is our Management Analyst, and he’s a really GIS guru; so Gavin is used to that because he actually was in the Public Works crew before he was promoted, Eric is not, he’s usually up in Engineering at City Hall. I called him in Stillwater and asked are you available? He said what do you mean am I available? I send well, we need GIS folks now to help us with this event, and he dropped what he was doing; he brought some dinner he was baking in the oven and he was there and really managed that. Actually, after the April snowstorm last year, we said we need a better way with GIS to map these events. So Eric actually last year had created an Emergency Response mapping tool, where you can actually go out and with your phone, with your iPad, whatever it might be, you can drop it in and say tree blocking road, tree partially blocking road, powerlines, flooding, whatever it might be, it’s right there, it’s ready to go. Or you can enter it manually, so when we were getting the calls coming in through 911 and Public Works, they can actually enter them in the EOC; so, that really helped other than the fact that we just buried that system and now we intend to fix that, like Jennifer mentioned. So, it was nice to see that tool used and then we learned a lot about it as well. Really, what we also did was the Public Works and Parks, so me and Zac, superintendents, we responded to the EOC once we got those field operations set. We had to meet down at Public Works to get the guys going, and the GIS staff responded right to the EOC. I won’t say a night like this wasn’t stressful; one of the most dangerous things our guys can do is head out when it’s getting dark, and they’re going to be in the dark, and they are cutting trees that are tangled in cars. We shouldn’t be touching things in powerlines, but it’s so dark out there. There’s just stress on trees, right? It’s not like dropping a tree in the road and blocking it up; you don’t know when you’re cutting through these how its going to let loose or really fall. So, a lot of stress for me, and I like that because it’s just one of the most dangerous things that you get into, but they did an awesome job; we had all the roads cleared by 11:30 p.m., with no injuries, no accidents, no incidents. And we really want to get the job done well, but that City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 14 of 23 night it was about cutting and pushing. We were just getting roads open, we were not cleaning roads up that night, that was for the following week. Some of the lessons learned: We have our 800 megahertz radios in Public Works that we can communicate with Public Safety, those are very important, and we’re actually in the process of getting new ones. Ours still work, but we’re getting new ones, upgrading them, because they are about ten years old. We were trying to operate, I think, on the same channel as the police, but there was too much going on. So, what we’ve determined is the leader, the foreman or whoever it might be on the crew, they’ve got 800 megahertz, they can hear full, but we’re going to use our Public Works channel for the field operations for our staff. It’s been said many times the GIS maps are really critical for mapping and reporting. We actually have made improvements with our Emergency Response mapping tool, based on all the use we got out of it. I think it’ll be even better for our use next time around, hopefully far down the road. Administrator Levitt stated and it was nice, too, because we’d already coordinated with Washington County, they were bringing ten trucks or more in the next morning, and we could already print maps with the whole route and stuff like that; they were already printed in color, it was all set up, and so the next morning they were literally just handing out maps to Washington County drivers when they came. So, mapping was extremely beneficial to make this a really efficient operation. Director Burfeind said another lesson learned: We had our foremen out in the field, all four of them were here, responded, but really they are hopefully experts in what is safe, what is unsafe. They supervise the crews, but really we learned in that instance we need them right in it with them because they have the most knowledge; like, we’re not touching that tree, if we try to cut that tree, it’s going to do this, and it’s going to be a huge safety issue. So, I think when you have someone like Gary or Jim Fohrman they’d be out in the field, they were in the EOC, but really to lead in the field operations I think would be a big benefit in a future event as well. Director Burfeind said the other lesson learned was using mutual aid. We don’t always do that in Public Works, it’s usually done in Public Safety, but Washington County coming in the next day will allow our City help with a major event; we would have been at this much longer than we would have been without that help. So, with that, going into just more information on the recovery and the costs, like I said, roads were open and passable by 11:00 p.m.; that was our main goal that night I think as a group as a whole, but Public Works’ first goal was to get those roads opened up. The next morning was the State of Emergency, and then we had the debris management cleanup plan. So, we had the decision that the City pick up all the tree debris, have folks place it behind the curbline and we’d pick that up first. That night it was tough, we knew this was a big event and how much time should we give them, so we did go with that month timeframe. I think how we saw people manage that, there was a lot of stuff in their yards, and I think we could go a little shorter if we did that in the future, just because they have to clean up their yards; so, I think in the first week or two, people really had that taken care of, but we just didn’t know that night. We just knew it was a big event and it would take a long time to clean it up. Residents also dropped off their debris at the compost site, free of charge. We had Public Works mutual aid help from Washington County, Burnsville, West St. Paul, and Newport; so, 570 regular hours, 126 overtime hours, and through our mutual aid pact that we are a part of through Public Works, there’s no reason for us to pay for that; so, we do not pay those cities back for that time, but we are part of that pact, so if they have a wind event, they have a tornado, they have an emergency, we’re there to help them in the future. For a cost summary, obviously we had a significant amount of unplanned expenses because of this event. The public assistance threshold is $600,000; like Jennifer mentioned, I think that night we thought there could be a declaration from the County, but we really didn’t have that. It was Cottage Grove and over to St. Paul Park that had damage, it wasn’t that much outside of that. That public assistance, this cost, that’s not for any private debris; that has to be very strict with FEMA rules, it has to be a tree that has blocked basically a roadway and there’s some amount of leaning trees to certain-degree angles, they’re very specific. Captain Martin stated yes, it’s got to be a 30-degree angle over public property for it to be reimbursable for removing it. Director Burfeind said and they’re not out there measuring that, it’s all a judgment call, but a lot of the work that we did obviously would not be FEMA reimbursable, so that’s how that works. Regular staff time: These are folks who are on regular time, they’re being paid anyway, they’re just doing a different job than we planned; it’s almost up to 3,000 hours, but just the cost of that is $123,000. Once again, City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 15 of 23 that’s budgeted, that’s regular time for Public Works and Park staff. City Equipment we were calculating using rates because we didn’t know what this equipment or whatever part of that was for a public emergency issue would have been reimbursable, up to $203,000. Once again, that’s not an expense of the City; that’s City equipment that we’re using, but FEMA has the rates that we would have used to apply to that. Obviously, there’s some fuel costs that plays into that a little bit. So, true expenses that we have to date: Overtime, about 700 hours, is $46,000. We’re running the compost site, too, and we had residents drop off their debris. We didn’t want them going back to our pile that’s on City property, we’re coming and going with trucks; so we really just had them go to the Rumpca Compost Site through the standard process, so that’s something we had to pay, $5,000. There was some but there wasn’t a lot of that material dropped off by residents. We did rent an additional skid steer because the #1 thing we can have in these events is skid steers and backhoes; we have three, and that is the bottom line, right? That’s what we use to pick up all these piles, so we immediately benefited with a fourth one for the month so we could keep this process moving. So, if you look at all the expenses, that first column talks about just the regular wages to date. The second column is all of the unbudgeted, the top three I talked about: Overtime, Compost Site with the residents to drop off, and Equipment Rental. So, stump grinding, that’ll be a 2025 expense; any stumps that were tipped over, our staff have ripped those out, and we’re mostly done, we did that with all of the debris pickup. They’re basically out of the ground and we can kind of do the last little bit with our equipment and pull them out. We don’t have the stump grinding equipment that can handle the remaining, so there’s about 86 stumps of the trees that we lost that have to be ground next spring. So, those are just cut flush to the ground right now; that is an expense that we will have in 2025. Topsoil is related to stump grinding, we have to fill the hole back in; we pay for the material, this is just the material cost that we’re estimating next year, about $12,000. The big one is the 162 boulevard trees that we did lose. So, on average with the contractor rates for the installation of those trees next year, looking at what that cost might be, it’s about $81,000 to plant those trees; that is above and beyond what we have in our Forestry budget. Our Forestry budget is already fully programmed because we already have 100 trees programmed to cut down this winter and then 100 to replant next year. So, this is fully above and beyond. There is nothing that we can cut out of the budget because those 100 trees planned for this winter have been identified as diseased or safety issues, so, those have to be cut down this winter. We can’t delay that work to plant these trees, and that’s our challenge right now. The $203,000 in Equipment I mentioned is not on here. And then we looked at mutual aid, the value of that is about $33,000 for all the other Public Works departments. Now, it gets to be a big number, but based on all the work we did, we figure about 25% of it was actually the trees in the roads; our thinking was some probably had to be cut down but they weren’t leaning over or were part of that private debris pick up. So, it feels like we’re getting close to that $600,000, but only 25% of that would’ve been really FEMA eligible. In terms of funding those expenses, right now there’s $300,000 in budget contingency for 2024. Jennifer, is there anything else you want to add? This is your specialty, but right now, the Fund Balance it looks like there’s funding to do this, but if there’s anything else you want to add, Brenda or Jennifer. Director Malinowski said I can talk about it. So, our Fund Balance Policy is remember, we have that Fund Balance Policy of 45%-to-55% of next year’s expenditures; and then per our new Fund Balance Policy, with funding those unbudgeted expenditures, we would still fall within that policy. Just a reminder, too, with the 2024 budget, we’re starting a budget contingency to help us with these types of events or to help us with obtaining our target at the end of each year per the Fund Balance Policy; we had $200,000 in the 2024 budget. With that, and that was per the FMP, it was one of the things that we talked about, and we agreed that that was a good thing. So, for 2025, we do have a budget contingency of $275,000. So, within that FMP, we are increasing that, but for this 2024 storm, we do have legally either that budget contingency to use or budgeted savings, and we can look at that more and build that fund. Director Burfeind said just some discussion items: I think one thing we want to mention, and we have seen this, this isn’t our first time doing a Citywide pick up. In 2021, we had previous straight-line winds, we did the Citywide pick up. I don't know for whatever reason this time we definitely saw a little more use of that, which is kind of unfortunate, because you had people who needed the help and others that were kind of taking advantage of that City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 16 of 23 free pick up. It’s really hard to argue that; our guys out in the field aren’t out there to argue with residents, they’re not going to try and nitpick, but it does get pretty obvious when you see an entire Ash tree dug up. Now, the one benefit is we got rid of a lot of Ash trees, whether they were blown down or residents said I’m going to cut it down right down, and the City can haul it away for me. I mean, there was a benefit to that, I will say, because those Ash trees are an issue in our community. There’s a lot of that trimming of healthy trees, and you can kind of tell when you’ve got all these branches with leaves on them and three weeks from the storm and then some on the streets. So, sometimes contractors are doing that; Gary and I were talking, a lot of contractors, most are doing the right thing, they had a truck right behind them to pick up all the work that they were doing. But we do know some were taking advantage of that, so, that’s just something to think about. When we do the free drop off at Rumpca’s, then you really know, and that’s a little more effort, right? You can’t just put it on your curb, people are using them a little more appropriately. We even had one where there was a guy dumping loads of tree debris from a dump truck in peoples’ yards on the Grove side because he knew it was getting picked up. Residents were reporting a dump truck just dumped an entire load of tree trimmings in my yard. I don't know exactly where we’re at with him, we were working with Public Safety on that issue; but just some cases of abuse that are kind of unfortunate, because you had people who actually needed the help and had some real damages from this event. One thing to think about is our giant piles of debris that we have on City property. I had a number in the budget, we were trying to estimate based on 2021, as we did pay Rumpca to grind that material that we had collected. At that time, based on that, we were thinking of a lot lower number. At Rumpca, we’ve been adding to the pile, and the night he went out and looked at it, his estimate right now is $100,000 to grind that pile that we have, to deal with it. The other option is we could look at a controlled burn on that pile in the winter; if you’re at the Dog Park, you can see it. The City owns property on the other side of the water from the Dog Park, behind the compost site. So, a controlled burn is an option we believe of that pile; but that’s something to think about because we want to plan that correctly as far as the wind, and we don’t want to have smoke going into the City proper. That pile would burn for a long time if we do decide to burn it. I think we want some feedback from Council on this; we have a huge expense if we grind it. I don’t think we have to, there are other options, we wouldn’t have to grind that whole thing; but we do have to deal with this pile because this is where we plan to expand the stormwater pond someday, a lot of that material is going to be used for development of future sites but it’s not happening immediately. We have to make a decision on which way do we go, so we’d like some Council feedback on that. Council Member Khambata asked is there a way to maybe cut it into smaller piles and use it as like for Fire training or something? Not that we do a lot of wildland forestry, but if it’s an opportunity to like get more familiar with the equipment; I mean, is there a way to kind of make the best use of it if we end up having to burn? Director Burfeind replied that’s something we could visit. Council Member Khambata said because it would be a pretty big fire to put out; so, I’m just kind of thinking outside the box because I know that either way you look at it, it’s going to be a challenge to deal with. Council Member Olsen asked so if you guys were to take on a controlled burn there, have you already partnered with the Fire Department on kind of how we would manage that? And, obviously, you’re going to need to have oversight at the pile until its gone, basically. So, there’s a labor expense associated with that; I mean, have you guys kind of done the math and looked at all that? Director Burfeind replied I’m pretty sure the pile is still growing, and today, tomorrow, and Friday is our last full Citywide cleanup. We kind of want to get some of those done, and we’re definitely going to have to partner with the Fire Department, no question. That’s not something that Public Works and Parks would kind of take on, on our own, but you’re right, I think we would need probably 24/7, I imagine, oversight of that pile, which is an overtime expense for that, for sure. Deputy Fire Chief Arrigoni said our Fire Marshal, Steve Zaccard, would definitely be the one that we can talk to about that, and he’d know best. Council Member Olsen said I mean, you’ve got to look at the cost-benefit ratio. Mayor Bailey said that’s a good point. Council Member Thiede asked how much of it would be actually wood that people could burn in their firepits or something like that? If you said somebody could come in and cut what they wanted, take it, how much would it deplete that pile? City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 17 of 23 Director Burfeind replied I mean, I think it would, it’s just hard because it’s all mixed together, obviously. I was going to take some pictures of it but it just doesn’t do it justice, the size and scope of it. It’s kind of blended together, all the branches and the trunks. So, it’s hard, because when we were taking it, we wanted really big pieces, so a lot of it is 8-or-10-foot chunks of 2-foot diameter trees. I think there’s a liability thing of having all the residents running chainsaws on the City property. I think it would be a real challenge; you would need equipment just because it all comes as one, and we’re using loaders to stack it. So, you would certainly need equipment to remove those larger pieces. There certainly is a lot of good wood in there, I hate to say, but I think there’s a liability component with that, too. Council Member Thiede said well, if we’re looking at the costs in terms of the controlled burn and how much that would ultimately cost, is it possible where there’s even some people that are professional-type people that come in and maybe even cut it into certain smaller pieces? There are people out there who sell firewood, there’s all the State Parks and things like that; it’d just be interesting to see, if you could take some pictures of it just to see what the possibilities would be. And I understand about just saying it’s a free for all and residents coming in with their chainsaws, but if it’s a little bit more controlled where people could come in, process it, take it because it’s part of their business. Director Burfeind said I think we could look at that; that’s one thing that we have not thought of, I could say, thinking like a contractor that would actually make firewood, and we’d actually have insurance with them and contractors. Administrator Levitt said I think it’s hard to know; Ryan, the last time I saw the pile it was probably about 40 feet high, how high is it? Director Burfeind said yes, its about that and its just gotten longer. Administrator Levitt said so, it’s like a massive game of Jenga. I think it would be extremely dangerous, and it is all intermixed. Council Member Thiede said you’ve got a lot of those people who take ropes and hang from trees and cut limbs off of trees and things like that. But, at any rate, it’d be interesting to see who would actually say, oh, yeah, and if you made a couple calls and they say, oh, nobody’s going to touch that, then you’ve got your answer. Mayor Bailey said so, what I think we should do is why don’t you get a; you said who’s going to get kind of a budget number? Director Burfeind said you could talk to our Fire Marshal, Steve, on the Fire Department; but if, as I’m thinking more about this, too, given the size of the pile, it’s likely that an outside company would come in and do a controlled burn as well. Council Member Olsen said and there’s going to be a ton of ash, and so you’ve got to mitigate that, too. Council Member Khambata said I have one more thought. So, right here, a lumber company came in and cleared for the farmer, would it be worthwhile to maybe put out for an RFP to a lumber company and see what they would charge us to remove that pile? Because there’s little effort on our part, and it’s one more alternative, but if they’re willing to go in and basically clear a hillside, then it feels like we’ve already done half the work for them. They just have to come with their qualified people and equipment and kind of sort through what they want, and maybe just see if they’ll bid for it. Council Member Olsen said when Rumpca grinds that, they just turn it into the mulch that they sell over the summer, right? Director Burfeind replied so all this grinding actually go to a place called District Energy to get burned, just because it’s a mix of soft woods and hardwoods. So, when they do their grinding, they’re not specifically pulling out hardwood, but maybe they would do some of that here, but mostly it goes to a place called District Energy, but even with that it’s still $100,000. Administrator Levitt said I should note the $100,000 would bump that $200,000 contingency. If we’re looking at the tree replacement, you can get the tree replacement at $198,000; so, it’s keeping you under that $200,000 contingency. If you desire to chip it or do anything more with that pile, it’s above and beyond the Council contingency. Mayor Bailey said so just as a side note, now the tree replacement, the goal here if you would, would be $160,000 for the boulevard trees that were lost; did you say on that other slide it was $81,000? Director Burfeind replied that would be our cost to replace those. Thinking that this is probably going to come forward, I had a conversation with Rick Hansen, and there are some dollars out there that we may be able to get that would replace the trees that were lost. So, that would probably take out that $81,000. I’ll talk with Rick to set up a City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 18 of 23 meeting with you guys, and he can guide us which direction to go in order to get those dollars. Because I was literally even talking about having his fund buy the trees that we put on our boulevards, put aside this issue; but he just said with those dollars, Minneapolis and St. Paul would want to do the same thing, and he doesn’t want to go that path. But for a storm replacement option he said he thinks he can get it done. I didn’t know what the number was until tonight. Council Member Olsen asked so then if you were able to achieve that goal, that would leave us enough contingency to deal with the grinding, correct? Mayor Bailey replied now that Jennifer said that, that’s where I’m trying to think is how do we push it down to that. Council Member Olsen said the fire idea is a good idea, and on first glance, you’re like yeah, let’s do that, but there’s a lot that goes into that. Council Member Thiede said I still don’t see why we don’t see what a professional can do with it; it’d be ridiculous not to have that checked out and let people come in and take it rather than having to pay all this money to do that. Mayor Bailey said I don’t disagree, I mean, it’s an option. Council Member Thiede said well, it sounds like everybody’s disagreeing. Council Member Olsen said no, no, no. I mean, when Tony brought it up, the first thing Ryan said was like hey, we didn’t think about that. Director Burfeind said I think we definitely have to look at that. Gavin was our Forester, and he’s now our Management Analyst, I mean that’s his area, right? So, I think he has to look at all the options. Mayor Bailey said yes, and if we could save the money. I guess the one thing you said, Dave, I just would be from a liability standpoint, having our citizens go in there. Council Member Thiede said yes, and I agreed with that. Mayor Bailey said but if we had somebody professionally do it and they wanted it. Director Burfeind said they’d be licensed and insured, and it’s really what they’re looking for, I’d say we’re probably fine, but they’ll have to judge the pile. And I think with those big trees, there’s some 40-inch diameter trees. Council Member Thiede said if you get a couple of those people to come in and take a look at it, and they’ll tell you right away I’m not going to touch that with a chainsaw. Director Burfeind said I think that’d be a project for Gavin, I think he could get people in there pretty quick to take a look at it, and I think by Friday we’ll be done working in there and we can get a good handle on this and stuff. Council Member Garza said and maybe there’s an opportunity for a mixture, right? Maybe we can get some people to come in and take what they want. Council Member Thiede said well, there might still be some stuff left if you get the majority of it out of there. Council Member Garza said that’d be good. Council Member Olsen said use it for bonfires and stuff, right? Council Member Khambata said that’s what I was thinking, if we have to babysit that fire, how long is that thing going to burn? Council Member Thiede said I’ll bring marshmallows. Director Burfeind said so, I think we definitely will look into that right away, and based on the State funding, one of our questions for the Council, just to help out on the thoughts was mandatory vs. volunteer boulevard tree replacement. But if the Council direction and if we can get funding to replace all 162, then we can do that. Mayor Bailey said if we can; otherwise, we need to, we can look at it. Council Member Khambata said I think, like for my 20%, if we have to choose between responsible cleanup of the damage and planting a bunch of new trees, I think the new trees get pushed down on the budget a year if we can’t get some other resources to help cover the cost of that. I think you have to prioritize planting new trees vs. mitigating the damage from the storm, I think mitigating the damage from the store is our first priority. Director Burfeind said the last one is the Tree Removal Policy, the Cleanup Policy, like I said, we hope we won’t have a storm like this for a long time, but seeing we definitely had some abuse and dealing with this pile, we’re kind of fortunate we have this land that’s not a pond yet. Working with our standards that we have to meet, it will be a pond someday, so we won’t always have this more convenient, out-of-the-way location. I mean, is that something that we still want to consider? And it’s a storm-by-storm basis, I guess, every storm is different; would you want changes to it? You do have the policy in front of you, any changes you’d like us to make, you know, basically where it allows us this longer period of time. So, we look at if we do this, it would be a shorter period of City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 19 of 23 time; I think we saw more of the abuse, later abuse, for example add to the actual pick up on the curbs vs. just opening up the compost site for free. Council Member Thiede said I wonder if you did something like this but people would have to register to have a pick up. So, if there was somebody that was way away from where the storm avenues, some of these piles, I’ve even seen things in Hidden Valley, which I don’t think, you know I didn’t have any real big issues. If they had to actually call in to order it, then they might have a hesitation about having this pile or I’m cleaning up this tree that I want them to clean up, and I’ll dump it on here for the City to pick up. They might be a little bit more hesitant to do that, maybe, unless they had a significant issue. Or you could bound the area; we had in there where the primary area was because of the GIS and things like that, maybe you bound that area where people can put stuff out. Again, that may not stop the dump truck from unloading a pile or something like that, but I would hope that with Public Safety, that somebody has an idea on that truck or license plate that you could get them for. Director Koerner said well, he left an invoice on the pile that this resident saw. Council Member Olsen asked Gary Orloff, since you live over there, and I know that a lot of the homes right around your neighborhood were affected, was it your observation that people were kind of like Johnny on the spot, they got right out there? Because I was driving around after a few days, when it was safer to do that, and that’s what I saw. I saw people out in their yards right away, even though it was a holiday weekend, they were working on it or whatever, and it felt to me like the people who had been most affected responded rather rapidly. So, if you talk about shortening the window, I think it might make some sense. What do you think? Gary replied I do, as Ryan said. After that 2 weeks, it was pretty much the back yard trees that were down, and the contractors were coming in. So, people wanted to be able to mow their yard, so they’re not going to leave them sit there for a month, and you could tell by the trees that were coming out were freshly cut. So, I do agree with this size storm, 2 weeks would be more than enough. Council Member Olsen said so, the feedback we got, or at least I got, and I think I can speak for the staff for the most part here, too, was extremely positive about the way the City handled this. If there was ever a situation that provided evidence that this team knows what the hell they’re doing and is all about taking care of residents, this was it. It was flawless. I mean, you put up some of your learnings or whatever, those were pretty minor things, not that I want to discount those, but I mean, you guys deserve huge credit, and I think you got it for the most part, I really do. I think the whole team was damned impressive and the residents see that. So, to take away that point about maybe we pick up a day at the end of the road, I think those are things where people are like, man, I love living in Cottage Grove; the City government really responds, but shortening it certainly is, that makes sense to me, but I don’t think you want to completely go away from it, that’s my two cents. Council Member Garza said so I live in that area as well that got hit really bad. So, right now, today, we still have piles on our corners or on the corners of our homes, but I’ve been watching these piles; and what’s happening like one tree fell on a house right behind my home, they just got contractors in there just this last week. When they were in there, they were removing the trees that were still falling over the roof because they had to replace the roof. So, those trees came up to the front now; so, right on Hefner, Hillside, and another street that starts with an H, all of those homes are, those people are actually just now getting their contractors to replace those roofs. So, I mean, we had a lot of damage in my neighborhood, we were the ones closed down, with a lot of trees on the roofs and stuff. But their contractors are just now contracting, and they are the ones that came and did some of that stuff; so, if you shorten that window, I just wonder is that where they would maybe call the City and say, hey, our contractors just came, and they’re the ones that put some more trees out there because they couldn’t do our roof without this. So, I don't know. Council Member Olsen said but that would be something their insurance company would take care of. Captain Martin said and that’s what I wanted to touch base on; when we talk about the City’s responsibility for critical infrastructure, we are out there clearing the roads, we have to cut down the trees that have fallen on the roofs that are in a 30-degree angle over the roofs, and we are responsible for those costs. And what FEMA tells people is that your responsible for the trees on your property, and you hopefully have homeowners insurance that will cover that expense for you. So, what happens with cities that experience these types of events is you have the policymakers who have to make a decision, knowing that FEMA will not reimburse us for, as the previous slide City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 20 of 23 said, approximately 25% of those costs. Had we had a Public Assistance Process, we could have submitted for it. Knowing that FEMA won’t reimburse us for all the debris management, as a policy group, do you still want to say that’s okay, we’ll shoulder the cost for you? And that’s going to have some budget implications. Or, do you say look, folks, there’s a certain amount of personal responsibility here, you need to be responsible for your own trees, and you need to work with your neighbors and homeowners insurance to cover those? So, that’s why in the existing policy it does say that privately-owned trees are the responsibility of the homeowner, not the responsibility of the City. Now if you were to have widespread damage that caused the homes to be obliterated, so when we talk about debris that affects the public health and safety, that debris is left to rot; that’s something’s that’s going to be jeopardizing public safety. So, this isn’t saying that every single storm the City’s going to act on, you’re responsible for your own stuff; it’s evaluated on a case-by-case basis, is it jeopardizing public safety as a whole instead of benefiting individuals. Those are just some of the things that we look at when it comes to reimbursement. Council Member Garza said so, with what you just said, did we just do a nice? Council Member Khambata said yeah, we did a really nice thing. Council Member Garza asked we just did a nice thing, then? Council Member Khambata agreed. Mayor Bailey said yeah, we never said we were going to do it all, whatever they had in their yards. Council Member Olsen said we have done it in the past. Director Burfeind said we did this in 2021. Council Member Garza said okay, that’s what I was wondering about. Director Burfeind said we have done it when it’s a large, Citywide event; so, in 2021, it didn’t impact certain areas, but it was a big event, it was in September, like the day before the Public Works open house, terrible timing, but that was a Citywide impact and we did a similar thing, and that’s kind of been the trigger in the past years. We didn’t do an Emergency Declaration in 2021, but it was almost to this scale, and that’s kind of maybe what tripped them into doing the pick ups. Council Member Khambata says I have three takeaways from this regarding like how long we should pick up: The GIS system was awesome for you guys to map where the stuff was down. Our Public Works crew that was clearing the roads, those trees were mapped with GIS and then they went back out and they cleaned that up. So, those trees, if they were boulevard trees, Public Works already cleaned up those trees when they cleared them in our subsequent days. Anybody who is paying a contractor to trim trees in their yard, the contractor’s price should include disposal and removal of those trees; so, I think the people who probably benefit the most from this policy are the contractors, who are charging full price but not removing those trees. I think between the GIS and Public Works taking their trees when they’re doing their specific work orders, and well-meaning contractors who are removing trees that they take down, I think 90% of the material is being removed anyway. Two weeks I think is pretty generous, and I think yet for the instances where somebody’s like hey, I can’t get to this, you know, they can call Public Works and ask them to come and do a specific pick up. I think the number of people who are going to call Public Works and go that extra step vs. like hey, if I put it on the curb, somebody’s going to take it away; if it’s like I have to go and ask for permission to have Public Works take it and have a justifiable reason, I think that would eliminate a lot of the abuse. I think between Public Works, GIS mapping, and tree contractors removing their own material, I don’t see a reason to give people the opportunity to abuse it. Council Member Garza said that’s ensuring they didn’t take advantage of it and I think the people around there; Council Member Khambata said and a roofing contractor, like you said, if it’s in the way, like that should be part of the roofing bid. That has nothing to do with it. Council Member Olsen said one thing is you should be talking to the insurance company. Mayor Bailey said what was happening, well, not everywhere, but was some of these contractors are going to these homeowners and taking down the trees or taking them off the house and putting them on the boulevard, and still charging the homeowner, but less, though. Administrator Levitt said yes, they were charging them less. Mayor Bailey said they were charging them less because they said the City was going to remove it. I thought somebody, Gary, did you guys talk to them? Gary replied I called a few of them up and said to quit doing that. Gary said there was one who said he never would have came in there, and so he did charge less to get in that quick. Ryan and I were chasing the crane guys around, and he even said we’re part of the deal, we’ve got people coming to pick this up yet today. So, when you were talking about those other ones getting removed, that is part of their deal; they’re getting paid, homeowners City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 21 of 23 insurance paid for that already. It was the private guys like came over on the Grove side and went in the back yards, and they, I mean, literally some of those piles would take us four hours; they took every tree down possible. Council Member Garza said well, that’s what my point is, though. So I see these trees that fell in the back yards, huge trees, they had the contractors come out, they cut the tree down, and they put it on the curb. And they received a discount for not having the contractor remove the trees, and they put it on us, pretty much, to remove them and I’ve seen a lot of that. Council Member Olsen asked Gary would you say a 2-week timeframe is probably adequate? Gary replied I would. Most of it, what we’ve seen all the way back to 1993 are the ones that I dealt with, that was a big one, and we did burn that pile; I was on the Fire Department and we did burn that one. But we should be out helping these ones that can’t afford to call a contractor, they’re using their own saws and mucking it up and bringing it out. Council Member Olsen said that’s what I saw when I was out in your neighborhood. Gary said but this storm, out of all the storms and I’ve been through quite a few, I’ve never seen contractors pile it up; even in 1993, the contractors hauled it away. This one literally and I was calling, I said I don’t want our residents being taken advantage of; if you charged them, you come back and get it, and some of them did come back and get it. Some were honest and said no, we came in, knowing we would only be here for X amount of time, get it on the loader and leave. But we should be helping the people that can’t afford a contractor, because that contractor’s charging them no matter what they’re telling you. Even the one guy offered me and Ryan to just leave, he hurried up and grabbed the pile, and he goes, I’ll give you the $400, that’s what I’m paying the guy to come grab it, behind you. Director Burfeind said yeah, we were yelling at one, and he’s like I’ve got the truck coming this afternoon and he’s obviously been fine. Gary said all the guys you’re seeing with the big trees in the back yards that used the cranes, they had people already hired out. They were coming from Iowa, out of state, they already have the people that take it away. Contractors did take advantage of not hauling it away, which is one of the biggest expenses of it vs. taking down a tree. Mayor Bailey said I know Wright was in there for Xcel; did they take all theirs, though? Director Burfeind said so that would be a lesson learned, and it was my last one to touch on for tree removal. They did, but they were piling it, and they were coming back 2-to-3 days later. They said that no, we will, but I said, well, how are we going to know? We’re just going down that road, we’ve got a skid loader going, Washington County doesn’t even know our town, like we’re picking it up. So, I think in the future, if we’re doing this, we’ve got to work with Xcel right away; I don't know if we’re going to get addresses, how we would do it, but our crews would have no idea that that’s a Wright Tree Service pile vs. one of ours. Mayor Bailey said that’s what I’m saying; so, I guess we as a Council would have the choice to say put everything down or not, right? I think the 2 weeks after is fine because I do believe what’s happening right now, even where I live, there’s people putting stuff down and I’m like I had nothing happen in my neighborhood, so. I don’t know, but to your point, though, on the other hand, I know Dave had mentioned that you could say, okay, if it’s right in this area and we’re only going to do that area; however, I do know off of Ideal, down from the football stadium, there was a massive tree over Ideal. I do think that the lesson learned in this particular case would be we say we’re going to cover all the boulevard trees, anything, obviously, that’s owned if you will by the City; and then maybe we say that we’ll cover the cost of them bringing it on their own down to Rumpca’s, but they have to do it or the contractors deal with their stuff. I agree with you, I think you’re going to have to figure that out with Xcel, however they manage that for the future, especially when we’re trying to go back through and clean things up. Director Burfeind said the timeframe is also critical just for resources, too. I mean, the phone calls that we continue to get throughout, and just the work orders that keep getting generated that pull people from some of the other things we need to do, is incredible because it’s a one-month period. Council Member Olsen said what I was going to say is if there was ever an argument for the way that we manage the budget and the way that we support the various departments and how that then translates into the service level that the residents of Cottage Grove have come to expect, this is it; I mean seamless, everybody jumped on it, great feedback from the residents with the rapid response, the road response. I know that I was texting Pete addresses from people calling me, and I know the mayor was getting calls. People see something like this and what City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 22 of 23 they say is what a blessing it is to live in this community. I mean, how grateful am I that we have such dedicated staff. There’s a huge amount of capital in that when it comes to the PR piece and those sorts of things that sometimes frankly the City doesn’t get. But this was front and center, like, hey, this is what you pay your taxes for, look at this, this was awesome, and we still deliver it at the second lowest per capita tax rate in Washington County. I mean you guys just deserve so much credit. And if it makes it easier to cut it down to 2 weeks and it still provides that same level of confidence and service that the residents have come to expect, but it also provides a little bit more of a reality check relative to what you guys are doing, I would fully support that. But I do not support not doing it at all. Mayor Bailey said so just a couple of quick questions on some of the takeaways that you guys had: I know I think Nick you had made a comment that one of the takeaways was instead of being over there, I’m assuming being in here, would that be the case? My question, though, from being up there and observing and watching, it seems like there was different, you guys had it broken out perfectly; you had a group over on the police side doing their stuff, the main room, social media was over in another area, Brenda was doing numbers on the other side and I can’t remember, there was something else. This is just me thinking out loud: Does it make sense to not necessarily have everybody in one big room? Captain Martin replied having a big room with groups of people is one way to do it. We have the St. Croix Room as a breakout room, we’ve got conference rooms throughout here, so absolutely you would still make use of these certain rooms. When you’re talking about an EOC activation and what all goes on with your Incident Command, your PIO, your Operations, your Logistics, your Planning; having people in a room so your planning person can go to your logistics person and say hey, I need this, rather than having to run to the next room is sometimes very helpful. So, having a bigger space, having room to expand more, and that’s what this room was designed for; its got the outlets in there and you set up these squares of tables. So, for the 2023 winter storm, we set up at Public Works, and that was fine. So, in the next storm, we may set up here and have 3 people here and think, oh, we should have set it up another place. Director Koerner said as the event continued, though, longer, we didn’t have everything by 11:30; normal daily operations would have to start in the morning, so we’re like why is this Communications team sitting here? So, we just started here and then we would have had to move them over to the other side. Mayor Bailey stated the only reason I asked about it is because I could see Jennifer walk out to talk to social media; hey, this is what you need over here is an example. Brenda, how much did we spend, I remember some of the things we were talking about, how much did we spend on that last storm? What are we talking about when we declare an emergency, what do we have to meet? He said the other question I had for that evening, so you guys were using the white board at first, and then it went over to GIS; was that always intended to be that way, was it always going to start with the white board and then go to GIS, or did somebody say hey, you know what, we got GIS, let’s use it. Do you know? Captain Martin said I think it’s both. I think when you start, it’s the handheld stuff, the incident objectives are often scrawled on a cocktail napkin because you’re catching somebody identifying, and you always start with the basic stuff, and then you expand with some of the technology. So, you will see that again. As we set up the next EOC, it will happen, hopefully not for a while, but it will happen; hopefully I won’t be out in Montana, agate hunting. But it will start with the old-fashioned pen and paper, and as people come in with the expertise, I can’t run the GIS application, but I don’t need to run the GIS application; I need to know the guy or gal who can do it and bring them in and things will progress. Mayor Bailey said I was amazed by how quickly everything happened and the great work all you guys did. Council Member Olsen said everybody across the board, and man, was it awesome. Gary said it was the smoothest operation through a storm I ever worked here; it helped me out tremendously, at Public Works, because we’re usually on our own through a storm like this, and I couldn’t believe how quick it happened and how quick we had the roads open. Like Ryan said, no one got hurt, the roads were open, and it was because of everybody. Council Member Olsen said and like Brad said, the training takes over, right? You train for it and it works. Gary said, and like I said, the residents were bringing us Chick-fil-A sandwiches, and the people loved the quick response and the service. Even other communities were calling me, saying God, I wish I lived in Cottage Grove, and people were hearing about it all over. Council Member Olsen said let them know we’re building. City Council Meeting October 2, 2024 Page 23 of 23 Director Koerner said yes, I took some eggrolls; they came out and gave the workers like 100 of them, the neighbors were so happy. Mayor Bailey said that’s very cool. Mayor Bailey asked is there anything else that staff needs on any of this, but there was not. 14. WORKSHOPS - CLOSED TO PUBLIC - None. 15. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Council Member Thiede, second by Council Member Olsen, to adjourn the meeting at 8:53 p.m. Motion carried: 5-0. Minutes prepared by Judy Graf and reviewed by Tamara Anderson, City Clerk. 1 City Council Action Request 7.C. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Administration Agenda Category Action Item Title City Council Special Meeting Minutes (2024-10-16) Staff Recommendation Approve the October 16, 2024, Special Meeting Minutes. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. 2024-10-16 City Council Special Meeting (1) CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE  12800 Ravine Parkway South  Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016 www.cottagegrovemn.gov  651-458-2800  Fax 651-458-2897  Equal Opportunity Employer COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL October 16, 2024 12800 RAVINE PARKWAY SOUTH COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 SPECIAL MEETING - TRAINING ROOM - 6:00 P.M 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Bailey called the Special Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Administrator Levitt stated Roll Call was done. Mayor Bailey noted Council Member Garza had not yet arrived but was en route. 3. AGENDA A. Metro Transit Network Now - Draft Plan Staff Recommendation: Receive the presentation from Metro Transit. Mayor Bailey stated we’re joined this evening by representatives from Metro Transit who will be speaking on what is now called Metro Transit Now. I was at TAB (Transportation Advisory Board) today, and there were a couple people from the Metropolitan Council sitting in, and they asked me what do you think about that? I said I’m going to hear more about it tonight because they’re going to be at my meeting. He introduced Cyndi Harper and Scott Thompson with Metro Transit and thanked both of them for coming tonight to share some concept ideas from Metro Transit that will incorporate Cottage Grove. Cyndi stated I’m the Manager of Route Planning for Metro Transit, and Scott Thompson is a Senior Planner for the Highway 61 corridor, including Cottage Grove. I’ll start off with an overview of what the process is in general, a little background information, and then Scott’s going to give information on probably what you are more interested in, which would be what’s actually happening in Cottage Grove. Mayor Bailey said I’m sorry to interrupt, but I should have had the City Council Members and City staff introduce themselves to you so you know who they are, and that was done. Cyndi asked so what is Network Now and why are we doing it? There are truly four reasons that Metro Transit has embarked on this project: 1) The last four-or-five years have been a very pivotal time in our history with COVID and unprecedented workforce shortages. We’ve seen a lot of our ridership decline, about 50% between 2019 and 2020; we are slowing rebounding, but this has also been tied to about a 30% decrease in the number of service hours that we operate per day. Also, this has resulted in us having just about 60 bus routes around the region that have been suspended; most of them are commuter and express routes, most were suspended in March 2020, when COVID first hit. So, we know that we have had that out there. 2) We have also seen, really in the last 4.5 years, that traffic patterns have changed coming out of COVID. We are definitely seeing in our commuter express market the impact of increased telecommuting, at least some days of the week, and the Metro Transit routes that have been mostly affected in terms of ridership, those routes that run all day that serve a variety of trip purposes. 3) Workforce has also been very important. We have had struggles with having enough operators, and I think we finally turned the corner on that with changes with our union contract, the wages, a few of the things in the economy and the marketplace that have changed; so, like many companies, back in 2021 and 2022, we were trying to hire as quickly as we could, but it was still causing us to miss a significant amount of scheduled services. So we ended up having to right size our service to match our workforce level. 4) Finally, we are growing; that’s the other City Council Special Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 2 of 9 reason we’re doing this project. There’s a regional sales tax that took effect last fall that covered transit. Also, we have currently four different major capital projects that are under construction, three of them are Bus Rapid Transit lines and then one is a light-rail line extension. Generally, we’ve not had more than one major capital project at a time; so, to have four, three of which open next year, is a pretty significant change for us. So, the short-term projects are really meant to last just between now and 2027, and it’s a vision or a framework, a plan that has really two angles: First of all, we need to resolve the status of these bus routes that are suspended. Also, many of those commuter express routes are supported by facilities, such as Park and Rides; so, we also need to figure out are we going to close those Park and Rides and dispose of the land, or what is it we’re going to do in terms of facilities as well as some bus stops around the region that we don’t have space as transit climbs up. Right now, we just kind of stick around but if there is no bus service, we need to resolve that as well. To get to the more fun part of this, is our opportunity to improve service with the new routes as well as redesigning the existing bus routes. Opportunities to improve frequency of service and stay on the service on the existing routes, how often the bus runs or the train runs, as well as how early in the morning, how late in the evening the service operates. Also, preparing for new metro transitways, so that would be light rail and Bus Rapid Transit. Then also opportunity for us to expand a new type of service for us, called Metro Wide Roads micro transit. So, as I mentioned, this is meant to be short-term plan revisions for 2027; it allows us to expand service regionally, we’re going to have about a 35% increase of in-service hours by the end of 2027, which is a significant increase in service, including coverage and mobility, both by expanding fixed route bus service and also metro micro service. It’s also an opportunity for us to redesign our express commuter services in order to meet the travel patterns that we’re seeing post-pandemic. The foundation for this work, summarized in a report that was released last fall, Establishing the Foundation, is really three pillars to this network reset: Performance, Policy, and Engagement. We started this project in early 2023, with significant public engagement, including over 6,000 comments in regard to surveys, community workshops, and other online engagement. I want to also point out the chart here, on the right, is a chart from our report, a sample of one of the significant changes that we have observed since the pandemic; the XX that’s across the bottom is hours, time of day, so this represents one 24-hour period, an average weekday, and then the YX is hourly boarding. The light-gray line is before the pandemic, what we were seeing in terms of ridership by hour. So, as you can see, there are two peak periods, corresponding roughly to 6-to-9 a.m. and 3-to-6 p.m., otherwise known as the a.m. and p.m. rush hours. The black line is what we’re seeing today. So, a couple of takeaways: Our ridership overall is still about 60% of what it was pre-COVID, so ridership overall is down, but particularly in the a.m. rush hour, where now we’re seeing much more of a gradual, kind of all-day build up to our busiest time of day, still in the evening. That difference between the peaks and the off peaks is much less than it was prior to the pandemic. So, all of the data that’s in that report, the trends that we’ve pointed out and the feedback that we received from the public resulted in these five guiding principles that we used to draft our Concept Plan; they include: 1) Adapting service to changes in market; 2) Preparing for new metro lines; 3) Maintaining reliability of our scheduled service; 4) Building on success to grow ridership; 5) Providing access for opportunities to focus on advancing equity. A couple of slides at the regional level here, hopefully these items in bold look somewhat familiar because these are our guiding principles. So, this Concept Plan is a good opportunity to grow ridership, including 65 existing routes where we have either frequency and/or span improvement, so that’s all the blue lines you see on the map; including 15 routes where we’re going to have service that runs every 15 minutes or better, we call those our high- frequency routes. Also restoring service on the blue and green lines, our light-rail lines, back to every 10 minutes. Also opportunity for additional service coverage; we have 8 new micro-transit domes, that’s what these green circles kind of all around the perimeter here represent. Micro is an on-demand service, it uses a much smaller bus, it’s not a fixed route, it just operates within a small doughnut of point-to-point service, and you use an app on your phone in order to request a bus arrive and come and get you. We have one of those domes right now in North Minneapolis, and we’re looking to add 8 more over the course of the next 3-to-3.5 years. The idea is the first last mile connection in areas where a traditional fixed route has challenges because there’s maybe not enough population and point of density to support that. This will bring those two transit centers and transitway stations to connect in with the rest of the network. City Council Special Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 3 of 9 Also, more than 20 routes, either covering the new areas in our new routes or existing routes where we’re doing extensions or changes, so that’s all these orange lines on the map. And all of this results in a 25% increase in the number of jobs that are accessible riding transit within 45 minutes for the average resident in the region. Also an opportunity for us to adapt service to meet these travel patterns; so, as mentioned in that chart with the curves on it, a couple slides ago, one of the primary differences that we’ve seen for 2019 is less a.m. rush hour activity, lower express ridership demand overall, and a significant decline in Park and Ride use. Prior to the pandemic, we had just over 18,000 cars a day that would park in a Park and Ride in the metro region somewhere, now we’re down to about 4,300 cars a day. That just shows you really how the bottom has dropped out of that traditional 9-to-5 office worker in the downtown Minneapolis, downtown St. Paul markets. As a result, we’re using Network Now as an opportunity to shift our strategy in how we serve the commuter express market; it’s something we are calling the Key Express Network, those are the purple lines that are on the map here. You can see there are 7 rows of routes that go into that network, that means that we will be essentially consolidating service in order to free up resources to reinvest elsewhere. So, the idea is that in each of the major corridors serving downtown Minneapolis, primarily, and to some degree also downtown St. Paul, there would be one Park and Ride and one express route that has service at least every 15 minutes during the rush hours, as well as having midday service. So, the idea is that there is still a collection point in each of these major corridors. Some folks maybe have to drive a little further to get to that collection point, but if you do, then the idea is that there’s service that is very usable for a commuter express market, but certainly not to the degree that we had had prior to the pandemic. This, paired along with our metro network, so that’s all the other colored lines you see on here, the green line extension, the orange line, the blue line, so on and so forth, it really kind of comes together to provide a network for all day, high frequency, limited-stop service, anchored at Park and Rides. I’d also like to point out the ridership line on the map here are other community express routes; these are also operating today and will continue to do so, but are not part of this Key Express Network in terms of having service every 15 minutes. Trips in the midday have much more limited service, and Scott will talk a little bit more about that with the Highway 61 corridor. So, this is the map that shows the overall change to commuter-oriented services: The blue routes are either Key Express Network routes or our normal metro transit lines and light-rail lines. The red lines are all the different lines that are proposed to be continued use under the Concept Plan here; there are a lot of red lines on the map, but you’ll notice many of them are pretty thin. The lines on this map correspond to the amount of service; so, what this really says is there are a lot of routes that we are proposing, and they are all currently suspended, none of these are operating today but we’re now proposing to restore. There are a lot of those routes, but many of them only had a handful of trips for each of those routes. Finally, the last slide before I turn it over to Scott to talk about the details for Cottage Grove: In our report, we did a lot of analysis in order to help us figure out what was the right balance for the routes that we put in the Concept Plan. So, this is just one example of charts that you’ll find in the report, out on our website, if you take a look. This particular one shows the number of people that will have access to high-frequency service; we define high-frequency service as every 15 minutes, and in this case it’s a 5-minute walk or roll to the bus stop for transit stations. So, the top chart refers to the entire region, all populations, the middle is just for people of color, and the bottom is representing low-income communities. All three of these are set up the same way with the number of people across the bottom and then the various plans are what you see from top to bottom. So, in all cases, the red is our Concept Plan, and the number of people that would be within a 5-minute walk or roll to more frequent service is significantly higher for what we’re proposing than either what we have today or what we had prior to the pandemic. Cyndi said now I will go ahead and turn this over to Scott to talk through Cottage Grove itself. Council Member Thiede said just out of curiosity, a few years ago, I attended most of the sessions for the DOT and the amount of vehicles, the 20-year-plan of vehicles and infrastructure and how those two things would be coming together and things like that. Have you kind of factored any of that into some of your stuff, where it may not be right today but there may be some decisions you make today that could accommodate the future when potentially you could get more autonomous? Obviously, the straight back and forth, if it’s a fixed route, is a lot easier than City Council Special Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 4 of 9 let’s say your micro, when you get to a certain point where you said people would get on it and put their destination. So, I’m just curious whether or not you’ve kind of factored that or if you’re looking at any of that. Cyndi replied yes, that’s a great question. A couple of thoughts on that: First of all, just a reminder this is a near- term plan, this is just for 2027. So, not directly taking any sort of autonomous vehicles into this. I will note, though, that there is one of the other suburban transit providers in the region, Southwest Transit, out in the Eden Prairie area, that actually just acquired an autonomous vehicle that they’re going to be using for their version of micro. It’s still very much in the testing phase and actually there still has to be a person on board the whole time, so it kind of defeats that purpose, but hopefully the idea is that technology will come along. Considering that labor is by far the most expensive part of providing transit service, that is certainly going to be a game changer. So, in terms of what’s in our plan today, I would say micro is sort of heading that way, but we don’t have anything in there that will preclude that. But, yes, I think when the technology comes along to the point where that’s actually a viable alternative at a mass scale, that’s when it will be taking the entire industry to develop that. Council Member Thiede said I know White Bear has their kind of pilot autonomous vehicle program, and I think it’s still running. Cyndi replied okay, and I know there’s one up in Grand Rapids as well. Council Member Thiede said but with White Bear, I’d have to look it up to find out what the actual, but they had some autonomous transit as well. Cyndi replied okay, that’s good to know. Scott stated so, as Cyndi said, what you really want to know about is what’s happening in Cottage Grove, what are we proposing here? So, this is a snapshot of what I’m going to detail in a moment. First of all, the map and route on the left-hand side is the commuter express service, Route 363, that is going to continue to operate as it does today. The new local Route 301, which is proposed from Cottage Grove up to Woodbury, and then discontinued service, Routes 361, 364, and 365; I want to preface that Route 363 has replaced those two routes, 361 and 365, since during the pandemic. So, here’s the proposed Route 301, and this is a new connection from Woodbury to Cottage Grove and operating through the center of Cottage Grove, connecting a number of destinations here, including Park High School, and it would originate at the Walmart at the south end. Then it will follow 80th Street across to Hinton Avenue-Radio Drive, ultimately to Valley Creek, and terminating at the new Gold Line station; so, it’s both a connection between Cottage Grove and Woodbury, but also a connection to the Gold Line. It’s operating every 60 minutes, weekdays only right now, as this is a test, this is a beginning. Council Member Thiede asked do you have some sort of agreement with Walmart for people parking at Walmart and getting on that? Scott replied well, this is really early on; this is a proposal, this is a Concept Plan, and it’s an important distinction here to say that these are concepts and proposals that we’re bringing to you and the public, and we want your feedback on it. Does this do what we really want it to do, connect the places that we want to? We’re also, Council Member Garza is part of the Red Rock Corridor, and we presented to those commission members a couple weeks ago, so we’re also aware of the Red Rock Corridor Concept Plans for this area. So, there’s a number of things here that we could consider; this is a connection that we’ve talked about for quite a long time as a possibility between Cottage Grove and Woodbury. Certainly, with the addition of the Gold Line, that really makes that an important new connection. Council Member Garza asked are we proposing micro runs in Cottage Grove as well or is that just in Woodbury? Scott replied not at this time. Right now, we have proposed eight micro zones, and most of those, as you heard at the Red Rock Commission, those are connected to mostly our aBRT (Arterial Bus Rapid Transit) or regional aBRT service and transit centers. Council Member Garza asked so if we are having the one pickup at Walmart and it looks like we’re just running down Radio Drive, what about the other side of Highway 61 or our senior living or any of those things? How are we looking to get our community accessible, up to Walmart? Scott replied that’s a good question, and this is one option for service from Cottage Grove to this connection to Woodbury, but certainly, as you know in the Red Rock Corridor study, there’s other possibilities for connections from Cottage Grove up to Woodbury. Cyndi said if I could add to that as well, please, two other things: So, first of all, there is also Transit Link service that serves Cottage Grove today that is open to anybody, and that is a system where you need to call ahead and City Council Special Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 5 of 9 make a reservation, it’s not on demand, so that’s a little bit different. But that service I’ll just say will continue to run, the Transit Link. Then also micro is, in every single community that we’ve been out to talk to, everybody wants micro. So, we’re going from one design in the past 3.5 years, we think that’s a good place for us to start, but it looks like that will not be the end of it. Like I said, every community we’ve been to they want to know when they’re going to get micro, and so this is where we’re starting, we needed to kind of get our feet underneath us. We’re going from essentially 5 buses to 50 buses that do micro, so that’s a significant increase, but there’s also a difference between each of these elements it’s maybe 5-or-6 square miles, they’re relatively small. So, we do that because we want to keep the average wait time under 30 minutes. So, it’s one thing, and many of the other suburban providers already have this type of service as well, it’s one thing for them to figure out how to do that in a one-community basis, we’re still working on how you do that on a more regional basis. I think we’ve heard definitely Cottage Grove would potentially be a good market for it, in terms of certainly land use patterns to support travel patterns and such. So, but I think right now we’re just trying to figure out how do we start this off, so the idea of connecting the transitways is where we start with that, but there’ll be another round of this stuff certainly. Council Member Garza said and you guys are aware that we are building a lot of new homes, single-family homes, different mix type of homes out there, so that’s going to increase, having some in Newport, too. Do you guys remember that there were roads to a circulator 30 years ago or so? So, that looks like a micro route that you guys had back then, I don't know, I never utilized it, but do we still, didn’t we have those, we stopped, and now we’re going back to micro routes? Cyndi replied my understanding is at that time, 25 years ago, those were fixed routes. So, if there was a more micro aspect to that, that predates. Scott replied actually, no, I think it was a little bit more extensive than what is out there today; the 225 and 227 are kind of the remaining routes from that, but it had more coverage, but they were fixed routes, yes. Cyndi said and the Route 301 is kind of a similar idea, in terms of we don’t necessarily do branding by individual cities anymore, like we did for Roseville and Edina had something similar, so we integrated them into our regular network. Council Member Khambata said so, at the bottom of that route where it intersects 80th and Hinton, we’re building 54 senior affordable housing units that are going to be a two-block walk from that bus stop. There’s also another cluster of apartments there that you can also service, so, I think the placement of that is good. The only thing I wish was different is, and this is a question for you guys, does this route just double back on itself, like it just goes up and down the same route? Scott replied yes. Council Member Khambata said rather than doing that, if it had some way to like jog a half mile down and catch the other senior complexes, that would be huge; but also, we have DARTS that runs one day a week. So, there might be an opportunity with our kind of local service that we do have to kind of funnel some of those people who are utilizing that service and coordinate it with this route. So, I think that’s something to look into. Rather than having a separate micro route, we already have a DARTS service that’s meant to serve people and get them just kind of around the community; but if that service can coincide with the timing at some of these stops, I think that could be another useful tool for them. Scott replied right, and again, this is a proposed route concept, and it doesn’t necessarily mean that we need to follow exactly what’s on the map here. But as we work with the cities on your Comprehensive Plans, your future plans, that’s really an important element that we want to consider as we’re looking at new service. I was impressed by the development that’s happening on the old City Hall site. Council Member Khambata said yes, I think there’s a lot of potential users very close to where and probably by no coincidence where you guys kind of wanted this to drop down into Cottage Grove. Mayor Bailey said so, let’s say the southern end there, by the Walmart parking lot, is there a plan then to be stops as it’s going all the way back up to Woodbury? Scott replied yes. Mayor Bailey said so, like Target, and then it would go up? Scott replied yes, correct. City Council Special Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 6 of 9 Mayor Bailey said okay, so that’s one; two is, and I’ll call it the elephant in the room if you want, because we hear about it, I’m on TAB, so I hear about this all the time, too, so crime. Crime is moving out to the suburbs, it appears and it feels that way, at least the way we’re hearing it from some TAB members, who are mayors and council people in some of these other suburbs. I do have a fear, a concern, that there’s going to be crime coming across and then they’re going to be dropping down into Cottage Grove. I do know in talking to the mayor of Woodbury, there’s already some concerns there, even just with a bridge that’s crossing to Oakdale and Woodbury, which is crazy to think a bridge is doing that. Is there a thought process on, I know you guys have Metro Transit police and so on, is there a plan to have coverage or? Cyndi replied so, a couple thoughts on that, and that speaks to what we hear all the time as well. On our website we have a whole list, a huge list of all the various initiatives and plans, and we’ve dealt with that. I would say I’m not especially concerned about this particular route, or this type of route, for a couple reasons: Most of what you’re hearing the concerns about is on the transitways, so the light rail lines or the services, which only have the presence of a driver in the front of the bus; even though they’re not police, it really does have a big, I’d say, calming effect. Also, the likelihood of somebody who takes the Gold Line maybe out of St. Paul, all the way to Woodbury, and then transfers to come here, that’s not something that people are planning to do; that’s just not what we’re seeing, in terms of the crime on that is more when you have some people who are unhoused and don’t have anyplace else to really be going. The fact that this is not running in the evenings I think cuts down on quite a bit of that. These routes, and we have these type of routes all around the region, these are not the routes that we’re having issues with when you hear about some of the things that are in the media and such. So, I think Woodbury is more concerned about that because that is the light transitway connection between them and St. Paul, downtown. But we have a lot of these types of routes, and these aren’t the ones that are causing concerns. Mayor Bailey said and then you had alluded to, I think you called it, is it Metro Link? Cyndi said, Transit Link. Mayor Bailey said we have some, and I’m just going to make my pitch, even though I know it’s just a pitch, the one biggest challenge I do hear from some of the people that use that in our community, especially our seniors, is a lot of them want to go to St. Paul, but the service doesn’t run past 6 o'clock? Cyndi said it runs from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mayor Bailey said and it doesn’t run on the weekends; Cyndi said that’s correct. Mayor Bailey said so if there is a pitch, I would just share with you I hear that a lot from our senior communities in Cottage Grove. As a matter of fact, there’s a particular individual that I think has me on email with Sue Vento, whom we both know very well, and our County Commissioner, Karla Bigham, just because of the concern of why can’t I get to my family over in St. Paul on the weekends for a birthday? Somebody has to come and get me, you know, those kind of things. So, I just want you to be aware of that. And in case we haven’t really officially said it as a City, I would be ecstatic for my family. So, don’t think, I don’t want you to get away from here going hey, Cottage Grove didn’t bring it up, either. You can add us to the list with everybody else because; Cyndi said I figured that was the case, and we did just bring that yesterday at the Washington County Board as well. Cyndi said yes, it’s duly noted. Council Member Garza said thank you for the opportunity to give us boarding events from up here, and you’ve seen the space that we use for the State Fair, our Park and Ride was packed beyond capacity. And I’m not thinking that our sporting events are going to bring us to that, but it would be nice to be able to connect to all of our sporting events that are happening here on the weekends because we don’t have any way to get there, so it’s just a thought. Scott said all right, so Route 363, this is a route that’s been operating since or during the pandemic; it was changed from the 361-365 combination, 361 is express service to downtown St. Paul, 365 to Minneapolis. With the changes in travel patterns that Cyndi described, the ridership just isn’t there right now to support two separate routes. So, we’re going to continue the 363 as it is today, serving the Cottage Grove Park and Ride and the Park and Ride at Lower Afton and then downtown St. Paul and Minneapolis. One of the new elements to this, and it isn’t unique to this route, is recognizing that there’s been a change in the way people want to travel to and from work, maybe they want to come home in the middle of the day; that’s kind of a new deal, so recognizing that on the 363, we’re going to introduce a new midday trip to serve that travel desire. City Council Special Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 7 of 9 Council Member Garza asked do you know the proposed route that it would go up and down? Is there any opportunity to make it rather than up and down, so that means cut across to the other side of Highway 61 and come back up? Is that a typical route, or is it just the one that’s going up to Woodbury? Scott asked are you talking about the 301? Council Member Garza replied yes, if it could swing back around and come back on that side of Highway 61 and come back around, and I don't know what St. Paul Park and Newport are using, or if it’s stopping there, but that would be a good way to connect those lines. Scott replied yeah, that type of service is one of the proposed routes, as you know, in the Red Rock Corridor that would do that. At this point, that’s not part of this, but that’s why we’re out here, to take comments about that kind of thing. Council Member Garza said well, I just want to make sure both side of Highway 61 are going to be covered; Scott replied right. Scott said lastly, discontinued service; as I said, we’re consolidating routes to just the 363, 361, 364, which had done some of that coverage that you described, and the 365 to Minneapolis. The other element of the 361 that is part of the discontinued services are what we call a local tail on the route, and the local tail came across 80th Street and up into north of 80th Street, is not coming back. Back in the day, the local tail was operated on both north and south of 80th Street; as the Park and Ride got more popular and of course the Park and Ride that we had originally was at 80th Street and Highway 61, at the shopping center. And then we went a number of places trying to find a permanent home for the Park and Ride, finally, we bought the property that we have now, it was Washington County’s proposed site. What we found was as that Park and Ride, even though it’s on the other side of Highway 61, with that new Park and Ride and the facility that we have and no space constraints at all, people voted with their feet. The local tails, both north and south, the ridership just kind of went away; we hung onto the north extension to pre-pandemic, but we were talking about maybe 3 or 4 a day on that segment, so that’s the rationale for that also. Council Member Khambata said I have a question about that. So, with Cottage Grove, St. Paul Park, the south end of Woodbury, and Newport, we’re talking about a population that’s got to be creeping up on 70,000 or 80,000 people. I guess I was a little surprised that ridership is so low. With that amount of people, our other demographics depict and tell us that there is a greater need than the number that’s actually utilizing it. So, I guess my question is, as somebody who grew up in Cottage Grove my whole life, I never went on public transit until I moved to Chicago, and then it was a matter of economics; because to drive through downtown took 2.5 hours, it didn’t matter what time of day, and the L-train was a 55-minute ride at the time. So, is it like a habit thing or human nature thing, like what’s driving people to not utilize the service even though there’s clearly a demonstrated need? Ryan replied there’s a couple pieces to that answer, I think there’s more than 2; but one of them, first of all, is generally all of our ridership on the express service is way, way down. We were at over 350 rides on the 365 prior to the pandemic, and now we’re at about 130, so, we lost a lot of ridership. And then the other important piece here, it kind of partially gets to your point of what’s going on here, the economics; downtown St. Paul has always been way cheaper to park than downtown Minneapolis. Now, our ridership to downtown Minneapolis is 82% of that, 135 rides per day are going to Minneapolis, and we’ve only got less than 20 people that are destined for downtown St. Paul. Although parking in both downtowns is now cheaper because of demand, parking in Minneapolis has always been way more expensive, and our office used to be in downtown St. Paul. I like to tell the story that back in the late 1970s, when we were in the now Ramsey County building, the American Center building, you could park downtown for about $1.50; 30 years later, you could still park in the parking lot over at Broadway and Kellogg for about $2. So, even as inflation has gone up, the real cost of parking in downtown St. Paul has gone down, and that has a direct relationship of peoples’ decision on whether or not to take transit, as you know from Chicago parking prices. Council Member Khambata said and I think it’s a timing thing, right? So, if I want to drive to St. Paul for a Wild game, I need to give myself 15, 20 minutes, and you’re right, parking, even for events is pretty reasonable in St. Paul. And it’s like if I was going to take a bus there, I mean it would take me at least an hour; so, the fiscal requirements and the time don’t add up to just driving. I think that’s the only reason why I would think that people don’t opt to use it. City Council Special Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 8 of 9 Cyndi said yeah, that’s the challenge with transit service for our outlying suburbs is the land use patterns for the most part, you have lower density; you are certainly more widely distributed, you don’t necessarily have always a good pedestrian network in terms of sidewalks and things like that to be able to access it. Generally, and this is going to be stereotyping and I don’t want to do that, but many of the riders who use our local service are right in Minneapolis and St. Paul are doing it because either they don’t have other good options available or because they live in areas where parking is tough; the University of Minnesota, for example, or it’s more expensive. Free parking is a huge deterrent, I guess I would say, to using our transportation. If you have an option, once you have a vehicle, you’re most likely to use it. So, the idea involves being fiscally competitive in the travel time because you have to have enough people, a number of people in small areas to be able to make stuff up; otherwise, you’re having to try to catch your ridership all the way along. In order to do that, it means you’re stopping at stops all along the way, which then slows it back down. So, yeah, that is definitely the challenge. For the most part, in a market area of 3 or 4 forms of transportation policy plan, like with Cottage Grove, would be those are areas that generally don’t support a significant amount of all day, high-frequency service; they’re more of an express market because your rates of auto ownership are high. So, they’re maybe taking a higher than desirable amount of a budget to do that, but once you have a car, you don’t have to put a dollar into the ignition every time you start it; so, people kind of start to separate the difference on that. Residents in this area tend to use transit for economic benefit or if it’s just because they don’t want to deal with congestion to get into downtown. There are definitely areas where there a fair number of more service industry-oriented type jobs in Cottage Grove that generally don’t pay quite as well, just like you see in many other cities. So that’s also a two-way thing, bringing people into the community to work as well as where are the residents trying to get; but the land use is definitely based on part of the infrastructure out here and we’re trying to fit in with that. It’s been a big challenge for 50 years. Council Member Khambata asked have you guys been able through your policies and routing in older, kind of legacy suburbs particularly, Fridley, Maple Grove, Brooklyn Park, where you’re still kind of out of the city center but a similar distance? Like how were you able to mitigate or are you still facing those same challenges in some of those other communities that are a little bit older and more established than we are? Cyndi replied that’s a great question. So, a community like Maple Grove, for example, doesn’t have all-day service, it’s express service only, and that’s just from the population perspective we’re looking at. With both Brooklyn Park and Maple Grove, there are over 70,000 residents in each of those cities. In the case of Maple Grove, we actually had to cut their routes as well, as Maple Grove doesn’t support all-day service because of the land usage. Brooklyn Park is a little different story, because there’s something else to Brooklyn Park; you have the part of Brooklyn Park I would say that is south of about 85th Avenue, or certainly south of Highway 610, that is much-higher density. When you look at your demographics, you look at income and a number of things, like the number of renters, things that are all showing higher-density factors that show a higher tendency to use transit. The southern part of Brooklyn Park in some ways matches up a lot more closely with Brooklyn Center and parts of North Minneapolis. So, that’s really a button door of the newer areas, I guess I would say, in Brooklyn Park, that 25 years ago were still agriculture. We have the same challenges in those areas, they just tend to be single-family homes that are for the most part starting at $400,000; if it goes by larger-increment lots with the streets, so to get from Point A to Point B it’s not a great network, so it’s much more challenging with only one way in and one way out in many of the subdivisions. Next Steps: Cyndi said this is our timeline; we’re at the point where we released our plan back in September, we are accepting public comments through November 15. There are lots of different ways for people to give comments, we have our folder for it out on the website, along with an electronic comment card, so that’s kind of the main way that people are communicating with us. But we also are out riding buses and trains with those paper copies of the comment cards and talking to customers, do you know what’s going on? Here are some changes. We also have pop-up events at transit centers and other locations throughout the region, popular gathering locations where we’re talking with customers. Certainly, any opportunities using social media and some of those channels as well. Any other opportunities in terms of being able to get feedback on other efforts that we have obtained that is helping us make sure that we hear from some of those groups that tend to be more underrepresented when it comes to communicating in a traditional outreach process. So, we’re really making sure that we hear about our process in all of our communities and also to provide transit. City Council Special Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 9 of 9 Council Member Olsen asked are you taking comments from municipalities, for example? I would assume, Jennifer, we would put one together based on what we heard here today. Administrator Levitt replied absolutely. Mayor Bailey said to add to that, Jennifer, maybe we could do some type of community outreach to funnel people their way, because I do believe kind of what’s been said here, real quick, is I have zero concerns with what you’re doing, adding that transit way, other than maybe a safety concern. But I do think somehow looping the other side of the highway; there’s a uniqueness in our community where one side feels different than the other side of our highway because we get all this and you guys get all that. It’s like I don't know how we’d figure that out, but if there is an option, so I think when we get it out to the community, I think you’re going to hear that from ours. It’s like yep, love it, but can you do something to get me over to that line so I can go into Woodbury. Council Member Garza said even with our Park and Ride, that’s not walkable, you can’t walk over there. Mayor Bailey said thank you to Cyndi and Scott for presenting this, and congratulated Scott on his upcoming retirement. Council Member Olsen said it’s good information, appreciate it. 3. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:52 p.m. Minutes prepared by Judy Graf and reviewed by Tamara Anderson, City Clerk. 1 City Council Action Request 7.D. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Administration Agenda Category Action Item Title City Council Regular Meeting Minutes (2024-10-16) Staff Recommendation Approve the October 16, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. 2024-10-16 City Council Meeting CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE  12800 Ravine Parkway  Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016 www.cottagegrovemn.gov  651-458-2800  Fax 651-458-2897  Equal Opportunity Employer COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL October 16, 2024 12800 RAVINE PARKWAY SOUTH COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 7:00 P.M 1. CALL TO ORDER The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota, held a regular meeting on October 16, 2024, at Cottage Grove City Hall, 12800 Ravine Parkway. Mayor Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience, staff, and City Council Members stood and recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Tammy Anderson called the roll: Mayor Bailey-Here; Council Member Garza- Here; Council Member Khambata-Here; Council Member Olsen-Here; Council Member Thiede-Here. Also present: Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator; Tammy Anderson, City Clerk; Ryan Burfeind, Public Works Director; Zac Dockter, Parks and Recreation Director; Conner Jakes, Associate Planner; Pete Koerner, Public Safety Aaron Price, Attorney-LeVander, Gillen & Miller, PA; Brenda Malinowski, Finance Director; Crystal Raleigh, Assistant City Engineer. 4. OPEN FORUM Mayor Bailey opened the Open Forum. As no one wished to address the Council, Mayor Bailey closed the Open Forum. 5. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Motion by Council Member Thiede to approve the agenda; second by Council Member Garza. Motion carried: 5-0. 6. PRESENTATIONS A. Terrance Patrick Cahill Award Recognition - Officer Sorgaard and K9 Odin Staff Recommendation: Recognize Officer Matt Sorgaard and his partner, K9 Odin, for their Achievements at the USPCA National Field Trials. Sergeant Nils Torning stated this evening I’m here to discuss the recent accolades of Officer Matt Sorgaard and his K9 partner, Odin. Officer Sorgaard was paired with Odin at the beginning of last year; during that time, he trained with the Washington County Sheriff's Office and they got him up to speed to be a patrol dog team. This past June, he attended his first Regional Trial, we certify with the United States Police Canine Association (USPCA), which is one of the hardest certifying boards in the country for police K9s; at a Regional Trial, he did fantastic and obtained City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 2 of 22 a fifth place overall finish and obtained the Top Rookie Dog Team Award, and that’s for the top new handler-new dog combination. In addition, he also received a Nationals qualifying score. At that point, Officer Sorgaard expressed interest in wanting to go to the national competition, which was held in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, at the start of October. The Public Safety Board was able to assist us in funding so he could make the trip down there to compete. There were 67 K9 teams in attendance from across the nation; they’re all the top K9 teams from the qualifying Regions. The certification test consists of the same thing as the Regional Certification Trial, which is Obedience, Article Search, which is searching for evidence, Box Search, which is searching for human odor, and Apprehension events. During the event, Officer Sorgaard did absolutely fantastic with his partner, Odin: He received first place for the Top Overall K9 Team and the combined apprehension score. He also received the Terrance Patrick Cahill Award, which is a prestigious traveling trophy, and that’s for the highest combined scores in obedience and apprehension work. He just barely missed the Top Overall Honors, receiving second place of the Overall K9 Team, just getting edged out by Washington County’s Deputy Brandon Yetter and K9 Huck, who happened to be his trainer for K9 School when he attended last year. So, I think Washington County left a little on the table for us, but we’ll work on that in the future here. Officer Sorgaard and Odin are a fantastic team, and they’ve done very well. Generally, Rookie K9 Teams don’t even go to Nationals, there’s no Rookie Dog Award because most don’t go; it’s usually the more experienced handlers and more experienced dogs. To go as a Rookie and get second place overall and win many of those awards is absolutely fantastic. It’s something that we’re really proud of for Officer Sorgaard and Odin. We again would like to thank the Cottage Grove Public Safety Board, as they help fund our K9 unit and they helped with the purchase and training costs of Odin and Officer Sorgaard. They also assisted us with the travel expenses to get to Baton Rouge, Louisiana. So, I’d like to just have a round of applause for Officer Sorgaard and K9 Odin, and everyone applauded. Mayor Bailey said it is amazing when you think about how far the two of you have come. I remember about a year ago when we were at Strawberry Fest and he decided he didn’t really want to do any work anymore; so, it was like, oh, my goodness, this is going to be fun. This is just amazing, and you acknowledged this already, but I do want to recognize the Public Safety Board because that was one of the issues, he wanted to go, and it proved extremely beneficial, as National Award winning is unbelievable. So, thank you to the Public Safety Board for helping finance our K9s within the City of Cottage Grove but also for this latest trip down to Baton Rouge so they could compete. You should all be proud, I am, that within the City of Cottage Grove we have the best of the best. It’s not just best of the best for our officers, but it’s also our K9. Council Member Olsen asked do we maybe want to get a picture with the Public Safety Board, is that okay? Mayor Bailey said absolutely, so come on up. Photos were taken with the Public Safety Board, Officer Sorgaard and Odin, Council members, and other police officers present, and everyone applauded. Mayor Bailey said thanks again and fantastic job! 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve the September 4, 2024 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. B. Accept and place on file the minutes from the August 13, 2024 meeting of the Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation. C. Authorize issuance of a single-occasion gambling permit to Mississippi River Valley Beyond the Yellow Ribbon to conduct a raffle at 12800 Ravine Parkway on December 1, 2024. D. Adopt Resolution 2024-144, Accepting donations for 2024. E. Approve the Accelerated Firefighter/Paramedic Recruitment Program agreement for Mike Dandle and Sam Anderson. F. Authorize staff to place the order of two Greensmaster eTriflex mowers in 2024 with receipt and invoicing to occur in 2025. G. Adopt Resolution 2024-148 restricting parking on the north side of 90th Street extending from Hadley Avenue to Greene Avenue, Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., and 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 3 of 22 H. Adopt Resolution 2024-149 approving the placement of stop signs for northbound and southbound traffic on Hemingway Avenue at 79th Street, which will make the intersection an all-way stop. I. Approve the Memorandum of Understanding between Ravine Parkway LLC and the City of Cottage Grove. J. Approve the Agreement between Washington Conservation District and Members of the 2025-2027 East Metro Water Education Program (EMWREP). K. Approve the 2025-2026 Service Agreement between Washington Conservation District and the City of Cottage Grove. L. Approve the Stormwater Management Facilities Agreement between the City of Cottage Grove and Independent School District #833. Council Member Olsen wished to pull Item D, Accept Donations, on the Consent Agenda for further discussion and/or approval. Council Member Olsen said this item is a recommendation to adopt a resolution accepting donations for 2024; we do this periodically throughout the year as donations come in, and we always like to take a minute to just recognize the people who are making an investment here in the City of Cottage Grove. In this case, it is a donation of $2,000 that was received from Chris Gehrman for one of our memorial benches in remembrance of Cole Gehrman. In case you’re not aware, our Parks and Recreation Department has a program through which you can ask for and receive a memorial bench to be placed in one of the City parks; they’re a really nice way for people to remember loved ones they have lost. I’ve seen a lot of memorial benches out there, maybe placed in their favorite place, and they can sit and talk to the person that the bench memorializes. I think it’s a very meaningful thing that we do. If you know of anybody who might be interested in that service, you can reach out to our Parks and Recreation Department, just call City Hall, 651-458-2800, and ask to be transferred, and they’ll help you with that. Motion by Council Member Khambata to approve the Consent Agenda; second by Council Member Garza. Motion carried: 5-0. 8. APPROVE DISBURSEMENTS A. Approve disbursements for the period of 9-27-2024 through 10-10-2024 in the amount of $1,561,696.95. Motion by Council Member Olsen to approve disbursements; second by Council Member Garza. Motion carried: 5-0. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Tall Weeds Assessment Hearing Staff Recommendation: 1) Hold the Public Hearing. 2) Adopt Resolution 2024-142, Adopting Service Charges for the Removal of Noxious Weeds and Plants from Private Property. Brenda Malinowski, Finance Director, stated this evening is a Public Hearing for Noxious Weeds, and we do this through our City Code process, specifically regarding plants and weeds in Zoning Districts. We state that on platted or developed lands within the City limits, it shall be unlawful to allow or permit any growth of grass or weeds to a height greater than 8 inches. We have a method to abate those conditions, and I have the process here to review with you: Our Code Enforcement Officer mails a notice to the property owner with 5 days notice to abate those conditions, and that happened 83 times in 2024. If that property owner does not abate those conditions within that timeframe, the City hires a contractor to abate the conditions, and that happened 12 times in 2024. An invoice City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 4 of 22 is then sent to the property for the cost that the City incurred to abate those conditions; the property owner then has the ability to pay that invoice. If they don’t pay it, then we go to Minnesota Statute Chapter 429 process, and that’s where we are this evening. At the last Council Meeting, we declared the costs, we sent a notice to these property owners of the Assessment Hearing tonight and published it as required. So, tonight we’re here to hold the Public Hearing. Once the assessment is approved, again the property owner will get another notice with 30 days to pay. If they do not, then we would certify it to be collected with the 2025 property taxes. Mayor Bailey opened the Public Hearing. Nancy Pryzbilla, 7764 Jocelyn Avenue South, Cottage Grove, stated as Director Malinowski was reading that, now if they have a wooded area in their yard, you can’t take out the buckthorn and the other weeds that are like up to hear is what I’m trying to figure out. Administrator Levitt stated with that specific item, it might be better for staff to address. These residences that are specifically on your roll this evening were in a maintained, more manicured state; none of them were related to buckthorn or wooded areas just for clarification. Mayor Bailey said I was going to say I don’t think if it’s something that’s tucked behind a house or something like that we typically don’t get involved in that. It’s more of what’s being seen from the street. Ms. Pryzbilla said, oh, from the street, so if it’s in the back yard it doesn’t apply. Mayor Bailey said if a neighbor is complaining, we might talk about that, but I don't know, honestly, if we’ve actually been in there. He asked Conner Jakes, Associate Planner, to speak on this as I know you’re the one who kind of helps with this. Associate Planner Jakes stated generally Code Enforcement, just for overall processes is complaint driven for the most part, whether that’s front yard or back yard. However, we do work with property owners as the process indicated; generally, it is specifically related to the grass height; weeds would fall under kind of a separate category, still 8 inches, but we work with property owners on that for the buckthorn removal. All the letters referenced tonight are properties related specifically to grass as the ordinance indicates, but generally it’s grass related. Mayor Bailey asked Ms. Pryzbilla if that answered her question and she said sure. As no one else wished to speak on this item, Mayor Bailey closed the Public Hearing. Motion by Council Member Thiede to Adopt Resolution 2024-142, Adopting Service Charges for the Removal of Noxious Weeds and Plants from Private Property; second by Council Member Khambata. Motion carried: 5-0. B. 2024 Pavement Management Hearing Staff Recommendation: 1) Conduct the Public Hearing for the 2024 Pavement Management Project. 2) Adopt Resolution 2024-143, Adopting the Assessment Roll for the 2024 Pavement Management Project. Ryan Burfeind, Public Works Director, stated tonight we’re hear to discuss the 2024 Pavement Management Project and kind of the final step in our process throughout the year and our Assessment Hearing. We always like to talk about the history of pavement management, and this map goes back to 2010, but pavement management has been happening since the mid-1990s with implementation of our Special Assessment Policy through our Infrastructure Management Task Force. So, there’s a long track record of doing these residential-type projects, along with some main roads that we’ve done as well throughout many decades here in Cottage Grove. The project area this year you can see on the map, just north of 80th Street, construction ranged from 1990 to 1994, so these were 30-to-34-year-old streets that we were completing the project on this year. What I really want to touch on from my perspective, before I turn it over to our Crystal Raleigh, our Assistant City Engineer, is talking about a couple of challenges we had this year and some more things we heard from the residents in the neighborhood; I really just want to speak to those directly. City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 5 of 22 First is the project schedule, and as we go through a project like this, we do a lot of notices on what’s happening, what’s the upcoming work, and we certainly heard some concerns from residents on how that changed throughout the summer. A lot of that was obviously rain delays; previous to this year, we had two years of very extreme droughts. This year, fortunately, for a lot of good reasons, we had a lot of rain, and it does make construction a challenge. I looked between the months of June, July, and August, and there were 39 days with rain; so, you’re really talking every other day or every third day with rain. In Cottage Grove directly, we had about 22 inches of rain, with the average being 13; so, we didn’t quite double our summer average, but we were close to double. Unfortunately, that has a major impact on projects like this, as a lot of work we physically can’t do while it’s raining, and with some of the work, we have to let the work dry out, like when it’s a gravel base you can’t be paving when it’s saturated. So, that certainly had an impact this summer. I do apologize to the residents for that because it’s something that’s out of our control, but we still want to deliver the project as fast as we can. I will say that the final substantial completion date with that wear course paving was set for August 30, and we did that on August 20; so, even with the rain, we still met our deadlines that were set in the contract. Director Burfeind said the other one is curb damage. When we’re done placing that new curb, and we put that first layer of asphalt, we have a big process there with a lot of equipment, and a big part of that is rolling that, getting that density, and getting that rolling pattern right up to the curb. Really, one of the failure points is actually where that pavement meets the curb, so it is very critical to get close. Something we do always see in any project is some damage to the curb; after that’s done, that requires some replacement. Unfortunately, with this project, we saw a much greater extent due to the work that the contractor did; so, about 15% of the curb had to be removed and replaced after that first base course of paving was done. This is something that the contractor did fully at their cost, there was no additional cost to the project, to the City, or to the residents from that. There were also additional impacts to driveway access, so although there was no cost, I do acknowledge that there certainly was an impact to the everyday lives of the folks in this neighborhood; that’s another thing that I’d like to apologize for, it’s something that maybe the City didn’t cause, but it’s still our project and we have to own that. I just want to really make mention of that directly. There was obviously some additional restoration reseeding that needed to be done and irrigation work, and that’s something that was also done by the contractor at no cost. So, while there was not the monetary side of it, there was certainly the impact to the daily lives of our residents, so I just wanted to make mention of those two issues. With that, I’ll turn it over to Crystal Raleigh, Assistant City Engineer, and she’ll talk more about some project specifics and then the assessment process. Mayor Bailey said sounds good, welcome Crystal. Crystal stated I appreciate Ryan talking through some of our project challenges, and I’ll talk through some of the project successes that we had. I’m going to share some before and after photos of the project: This is Jenner Avenue in front of you, and in that before photo, you’ll see a lot of that cracking, a lot of patching, and then in the after photo, we’ve got a nice, new, smooth mat of pavement out there. Jocelyn Avenue had a lot of pockets where water can collect in that before photo and get in there and freeze and break up that pavement. In the after photo, there’s a nice smooth pavement again. You’ll see in the before photo, kind of way in the back, you can see a manhole, and we were able to address several issues that we had out there with utilities with this project, so that was a success. On 79th Street, again more cracking, more patching, and I would note that the curb was 100% replaced with this project. The total project costs came in at $1,122,149.32; this bill gets paid between a variety of sources. Several sources are our own Utility Funds, so the Sanitary Sewer Utility, Water Utility, Stormwater Utility, and Streetlighting funds pick up significant shares of this project cost. Also, the General Levy does pay for a portion of the costs; on this one, the General Levy pays $488,048.71. The assessments, if approved tonight, would pick up the remainder of $502,685.69. On the screen are the assessable properties within this neighborhood, we had 79 assessable properties. You’ll see the two skinny blue slivers there, and those are City park properties, and the City does pick up the costs for the street improvements in front of City properties, so that is not included in that calculation to be assessed. Like I said, there are 79 assessable properties, in our Assessment Policy, we refer to these as Residential Buildable Lot Equivalents (RBLEs). The estimated assessment back at the beginning of the project, earlier this winter, was $6,647.65, and then every year the City does a Special Benefit Appraisal (SBA) to see what type of benefit the properties would have by having a nice, fixed street in front of their house. The SBA supports about City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 6 of 22 $7,500 of a benefit, so we never assess more than that amount, so our proposed assessment is in line with that. The actual assessment came in at $6,363.11, so we came in a little under budget on this project, so it dropped a little bit. If the property owners choose to pay this over 15 years, the average annual payment would be $591.40. Assessment Terms: If this is paid by November 15, there would be no interest charge if it’s paid in full. Partial payment is allowed, so a property owner could pay any portion more than $500 towards that assessment, and then the remaining unpaid portion would be payable over the next 15 years; that is subject to an interest rate that is 1.5% over our bond rate, so in this case, the interest rate would be 4.8%. Finally, deferral is available for those that meet the qualifications: Disabled, Military, 65 years of age or older; proof is needed for deferrals, and if anybody is interested in that, they can work with our Finance Department and Engineering to get that set up. It’s important to note that interest does still accrue during that deferral period. One more thing I wanted to note is we did receive two objections to the assessment, and the City Attorney is here to speak to those objections. With that, the recommendation is on the screen before you, and I’ll stand for questions. Mayor Bailey asked if we wanted the City Attorney to speak on the objections first. Administrator Levitt replied the two objections are in writing, in front of you, for this evening, and so that’s just to put those into the record. At this time, we’d be willing to stand for questions after you open the Public Hearing. Mayor Bailey asked if there were any questions for staff at this point from Council; none were asked. Mayor Bailey opened the Public Hearing. He stated he’d read the names of those who signed up to speak. He asked that they give their name and address for the record and would have up to three minutes to speak or ask questions. Our staff will take down some notes, and after all comments have been heard, staff will provide any feedback to those comments. Dan Sullivan, 7869 Jenner Avenue South, said I’m a 60-year resident of Cottage Grove. I’m here to actually request the Council to consider putting off a vote on a proposed amendment of the Prestige Estates pavement 2024 until January, 2025 or early spring. The reason for this request is we, the citizens of Prestige Estates, just literally got the notifications of the assessments in early October, and that only gives us 2 weeks since then. It really doesn’t give us enough time to examine the assessment rolls as citizens. So, I would like to request that that be put off until January or early spring. I also believe that the citizens in the neighborhood would appreciate delayed payment of the assessment until after the holiday season. I realize that this will create a strain probably on the finance of this project and the City staff having to redo a number of notices and communications with the County. I would also like to request a meeting with the City staff and the homeowners of Prestige Estates. As a longtime resident of Cottage Grove, I’ve seen many of these projects, my parents, my in-laws have all seen these projects go on, and this project did not go off as we thought it should have gone. I do appreciate the acknowledgement that it didn’t go as well as it could have. Some of the things that we kind of noticed is that the curbs were installed lower than the original; so, what you actually get is instead of it being sloped right in, now you get kind of like this little dip now right where it comes in, which causes a tripping hazard. Not all of our curbs are what I like to call the curbs of many colors because of the amount of curbing that had to be replaced, I think it’s more than 15%, at least it was on our street, it was probably closer to 50%. So, now, as you look down our street, the curbs are all different colors and if you look down it straight, they’re actually not even straight, they actually kind of have a little wave to them. My other question or my other concern or the neighbors’ concern was the original paved road needed to be cut up, patched up, and got beat up during the construction process to install the new curb sections. It kind of makes a lot of us wonder what kind of warranty are we going to get with this? A lot of us are being assessed 15% for over 15 years, we just don’t want to have to redo this in 15 years. I mean we’ve already paid for it once, this thing’s already been patched up, put together kind of mothballed, so I think we’d like to have some kind of reassurances that this thing is going to last for the time that we’re paying for it. Another question was the neighbors’ parking was very limited; so, my question would be can the construction equipment not be parked on the site? Can it be in the future projects maybe moved to the Public Works Department? A lot of times our parking is limited, and then we end up having to park even farther away because the construction equipment is sitting close to where we happen to live. The other thing that was brought up was the communication from the contractor on start dates was very poorly communicated. There were a couple times when they said on their website they were going to City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 7 of 22 start on a Monday, and literally they were out there on a Friday afternoon, when everybody had gone up to their lakes; so, a lot of neighbors had to run around and try to get people’s cars moved so they would still have access to them as this was being taken out. Lastly, I am currently a consultant for the electric company, and I’d like to suggest you find a new security measure for the streetlight’s splicing boxes. What’s in place can easily be accessed with a socket wrench, and the copper cables can be easily stolen out of the conduits; so, I think you’ve got some security issues there. That’s all I had, thank you very much. Eli Weinmann, 9488 79th Street South, said I’m here just to talk about one thing, and that is to explain why the special assessment is illegal. It boils down to just the requirement that the City has to prove that there’s a special benefit. So, they claim that the special benefit is given to us because the repair had increased our property value by at least $6,300. The City has not provided proof that the property values went up nor will they until this goes to District Court, so I’m just going to put aside the amount for now and just assume or pretend that the City feels that our properties’ values did increase. If a newly-paved road increases property value, that means than an older, degraded road decreases property value. This property value increase, assuming the City proves that there is one, is only realized if the homeowner sells their house at that moment in time when the road is new. Should the homeowner stay for another 30 years, the road is once again damaged and that means that the residents would have paid $6,300 and they would have gained $0 in special benefit. And now the City is once again going to ask them to pay for another road repair and claim that it’s going to raise their property value. I want to point out a couple of items that Council Member Olsen said during the last hearing that approved the road repair, I quote: “I’m a taxpayer, you’re a taxpayer, my kids go to school, your kids go to school. The City has assets it has to protect, that’s why we have a Police Department, that’s why we have a Fire Department, that’s why we have a Public Works Department, all us taxpayers pay into that.” He went on: “Part of the responsibility of the local government entity is to ensure every street in the City, which our assets are in good shape, because that allows us people to live in a community that people want to live in and feel safe and comfortable.” A couple things that I find very interesting about these statements, he listed all the things which the City maintains via taxes, suggesting the road repair fits into the same category. He also mentioned that the responsibility of local government is to ensure streets are in good shape. Lastly, he said that the reason to keep the roads in good shape is to allow the people to want to live here, a benefit for the City. A reason Council Member Olsen never mentioned for the road repair was to provide a special benefit to the residents. At the same hearing, when we questioned the special benefit, we were accused of not wanting to pay our fair share or wanting others to pay for the road, a gross misrepresentation of the challenges we brought up. It’s not about not wanting to pay for our fair share, it’s about doing it in the correct way, in a way that abides by the Constitution of Minnesota. The illegal use of special assessments to maintain roads needs to stop, you’re taking advantage of citizens that don’t know enough about the topic to challenge the predatory practice. Set taxes at the correct level in order to pay for the road repairs, that’ll give you a better idea of what the actual taxes are and perhaps a lot of City officials to think twice before bragging about the low level of taxes, something that also occurred in that meeting. So, today I fully expect the Council to approve the special assessment, not because they believe that they are in the right, but because it’s the easy way, it’s the way it’s been for many years. The alternative would mean doing actual work to change the process to balance a new budget, to raise taxes. So, if you sit here and legitimately tell us that you believe there’s a special benefit to us, the citizens you serve, you are lying to us, you are lying to yourselves. If you choose to address the items I brought up, we don’t need to hear anything about paying our fair share, we don’t need to hear any speeches about how we are one City, all we need to hear is one thing, and that’s explain how we are receiving a special benefit knowing that the road will degrade, reducing any property value gains, if any, and requiring another road project in the future. Jake Robinson, 9501 79th Street South, stated just to piggyback off of what Eli said as well, I’m here to petition that we do not adopt the assessment. There is no special benefit that a new road has to our properties, it’s insulting to pretend that it does, it doesn’t. In preparation for this, I actually had two appraisals done on my property, one before and one after, and it’s less than $1,000 property value, not $7,500. I took some pictures of the road, which apparently need to be replaced because they could potentially fail. Its never going to fail, that road was plenty thick, plenty fine. St. Paul Park has never replaced any of their roads, they don’t have the same thing where they go through and shake the property owners down; their roads could never fail, and I spend a lot of time down in St. City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 8 of 22 Paul Park. When you talk about special benefits, what about fire stations? What about properties near a fire station? Do we shake down those property owners because they’re all just real close to fire, therefore the Fire Department doesn’t have to go as far to service their house in case of a fire? And then also to piggyback off of the tax portion of it, how many assessments did we do this year, one? Just ours? If you spread that out amongst how many property owners and business owners in Cottage Grove, I don’t think that equates to $500 and some dollars for a property owner. I think if we do it the right way, spread it across, you can still do the work you want to do without lumping somebody with a $6,500 bill that needs to be paid. And also to piggyback off of it, I don't know how the $7,500 special benefit was attributed, but I’m assuming it has to do with aesthetics, and that goes right into what we’re talking about here. The curbs are not exactly how they’re supposed to be, they’re not lined up, they’re all different colors. The driveways don’t match the concrete in the driveways anymore, so what does that have? What benefit does that have to the property owner now? There is just no logic to this, there’s no logic, there’s no reason to it. I think this is just how it’s always been done. I can’t find any records that it’s ever been challenged in District Court, and I plan to explore all options in doing just that. Thank you. Nancy Schouveller, 7929 Jenner Avenue South, stated I just wanted to address Lake Jenner in front of my home and several other neighbors. It was very destructive to our property. I don't know what happened during construction, I know they put silt lining in the sewers there, I don't know if 79th or Jocelyn had their own private lakes, I do not know, but ours was terrible. Over Labor Day weekend, we had all that torrential rain, and we have a camera out in front of our house, and we were out of town, and it went all the way up to our boulevard tree and past and washed out everything that they did. I know my husband was in contact with you, thank you for your assistance in that. But I don't know if it’s been fixed because we haven’t had the major rainstorm, and I don't know if we’re going to encounter that again where it’s going to wash out our boulevards and destroy, I mean, it’s terrible, it was way past; so, I don't know if that has been addressed and if other property owners on the other streets had that issue. But with the pavement being not necessarily straight and the curbs, I don't know for drainage issues if we’re going to have that in our quadrant going forward. So, that is a concern, thank you. Steve Gunderson, 7774 Jenner Avenue South, I was the lucky one where Phase 1 ended at my property and Phase 2 started at my property, so I got to deal with it the whole shot. I live next door to the sod father, he’s crazy about his lawn, it’s been hellacious with this whole summer, it’s been bad. I was told my grass was going to look like, ‘cause I have to work hard to keep my grass, to keep up with that guy; I was told my grass was going to be restored to the level that it was before. They put topsoil down and made a little dip for me, so now I’ve got this dip; I bought my own sod, Dan coordinated sod for all of us on our street, we paid our money to get it, we laid it, and then they came out and ripped up the curb. They just painted it pink. I wanted to say to them just leave it, I’m good, ‘cause I didn’t deal with the sod again. Now the only piece of sod that looks good is the stuff that the contractor laid after the fact, right? The stuff I laid looks like garbage because they put topsoil down, and then it rained, and then it sank. I mean, it’s really, really frustrating. So, you’re gonna do what you’re gonna do, but it’s just really frustrating the way that this whole thing went down. It was really bad. Thanks. Dan Schouveller, 7929 Jenner Avenue, stated Myron has seen the videos, Myron has seen, we’ve been in communication. The contractor did come out after, did take care of things, but you know, it is so late in the season to try to seed or to do any of this, I did go out and I did buy sod from Gertens, and I sodded my whole front because I knew it’s too late, 100 bucks out of my pocket. And I think at the end of the day, having 3 guys come out, drop dirt, drop seed, everything they were doing they probably coulda did sod for a whole lot less money, and I’ll leave it at that. Mayor Bailey said thank you, I think we’ll speak to that in a little bit here. Duey (Duane) Peters, 9497 79th Street, stated I just kind of wanted to get in on the workmanship, the communication. I, like a lot of neighbors here, resodded their yard only to get pink lines put on the curbs and all the sod come out again, so we got to do it again. In that letter, they said that they would fix sprinklers if they wrecked ‘em; I dug mine out, put flags around ‘em, they still tore ‘em off, no one fixed ‘em. So, I think that the integrity of the road is also compromised; I mean, if you take a trencher and lay it down in a road, you’re not City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 9 of 22 compacting the soil back to what it was when the big machines were doing it. So, in my opinion, every place you pulled them curbs out, they ain’t gonna last 30 years, they’re gonna start sinkin’ and they’re gonna fall apart ‘cause water’s gonna get in there, it's gonna erode underneath there. I guess my question is, is did the City properly vet this company that did this work? Because I can guarantee you that, someone from the City told me that whoever did Phase 1, the crew that did Phase 1 was kind of a hack, or I can’t remember the term he used, but I’ve got news for you, that wasn’t their first job. So, someone must’ve known that this crew was not that good because when you look around on Jocelyn, their job turned out pretty nice, for the most part. They have a few curbs that were bad, but I’ll bet on 79th Street we took out 50% or better. So, I guess my question is does the City actually look out for the homeowners here, or do they take the lowest bid, and now we’re suffering the consequence of it because, granted, I ain’t gonna see that road deteriorate, I’ll be out of there long before that. But Jake and Eli and some of these younger ones, they’re gonna be there and probably get assessed again before we get to that 30-year mark. So, I guess my point is what did we really do here, did the City really do what they’re supposed to do to make sure that we got what we’re actually paying for? And the price, we’ve talked about the price, and the price is the price, but did the homeowners really get what they had comin’, or did they just kinda get passed over? I mean, there were places where they wouldn’t put the wings on the driveways, and the guy told me the reason he didn’t wanna put the wings on my driveway was because the seams on the curb didn’t line up, because they were formed the other way. And I said, come on, dude, I mean, you put the wings on there. Down the street, they put one wing on one side, didn’t put one on the other. So, I guess whoever vetted this company probably needs to look at their question and answer period again just to see, ya know, ‘cause this wasn’t, this didn’t turn out the way it should have. So, that’s all I’ve got to say. Milissa Fortuna, 7909 Jenner Avenue South, stated I just wanted to piggyback off the communication regarding when they had to rip up the curb to redo it. You know, we were super diligent in making sure that we followed the rules about when they first laid the curb, don’t drive over it, 7-to-10 days, make sure you park your cars out because you will not be able, you will damage the integrity of the curb. So, we were very respectful of that. They came in, they tore up the curb that they needed to tear up because it was not to the quality that it needed to be. Nothing was flagged off; we had to take it upon ourselves to protect the sections in our yard that they had replaced with whatever sticks were left over, whatever you call the tripods or whatever they’re called with the lights, to make sure that it was protected so nobody would park on it and nobody would drive on it. Nothing was ever communicated now you can drive on it again. It was almost like that curbing, it was put in, and we were never communicated when we could go over it again. So, I feel that the integrity of the new curbing that was put in or the replacement curbing that is of concern, as some of the other property owners mentioned, what is the integrity? How is it going to hold up? And I just wanted to make that known that the communication on that was really not what it should have been. So, thank you. Mayor Bailey asked if there was anybody else who wished to speak, and there was not. He stated before I close the Public Hearing, he stated we’ll start with Administrator Levitt and then kind of work our way around, and then maybe Council might have some questions, too. Administrator Levitt said I think what we’ve heard tonight is definitely the challenges that we had in regards to our communication, working with our contractor, and as we started off this evening, we started off acknowledging it didn’t go well. As I like to say, we had an operator on a roller who had a really bad day, and that, unfortunately, affected our residents, and so for that we apologize. I will reiterate they did not pay for it, the City did not pay for it, taxpayers did not pay for it. Those that put in their sod themselves, the contractor did work to replace that and to replace the irrigation. Sometimes they didn’t do a good job, right? And, so, unfortunately, we tried to do something right and they still got it wrong. So, it has taken a lot to continue to refix that. I know the Engineering team will address things more specifically in the items, but I do want to continue to acknowledge our apologies for that. You know the hundreds of miles of pavement that we’ve replaced over the years and have heard many stories, but maybe not as hard as this evening, and so we do apologize for that. In regards to the contractor, they were the low bid on the project, and Engineering can speak to it more, but they are a contractor that’s worked in our community many times and we have not had this issue. So, City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 10 of 22 unfortunately, if you can think in your mind having a bad day, that roller operator had a bad day, and they did strike the edge of that curb; that curb replacement really is important to ensure that we get the sealing of the asphalt to the actual edge of the curb so we don’t get penetration of water there. So, that is actually extremely important to us, and so that’s why we did hold the contractor to that standard. I’m sorry, mayor, you can tell that my engineering side of me just wants to go through a lot of the engineering, so I will stop talking about engineering and go back to some other items. The first resident indicated the challenge regarding paying this assessment. Council, I know when you look at a $6,000 assessment, I know that gives you pause, right? That is a large number, and especially when you look at a full curb replacement that is a hefty assessment. I know that you’re all looking at it with pause, and that any decision tonight you would make, you don’t make lightly, because that is a burden that our residents have to pay. But as we go through, for consistency with our policy with 45% assessment to the residents, I would caution you that consistency is extremely important; as Ryan says, we have assessed projects since 1996. In regards to delaying, there’s a few challenges: First of all, you know that you have set your Preliminary Levy for 2025. You cannot go higher on that levy, you are now capped. When you adopt your Final Levy, you can always go down but you cannot go up. In that levy, you already took into account what the debt issuance would be for this pavement management. So, the total project cost has already been paid out to the contractor, we’ve already made those payments, we have debt issuance. That’s like, for the residents, that’s like paying our mortgage; so, we still have to pay that next year. So, if we delay, there’s that issue financially of how you make up that difference to make that mortgage or debt payment. One thing that I would indicate is 7 months isn’t a lot, right, for residents to be able to save up; we did notify them in March of what the proposed assessment would be. So, I can recognize 7 months to save $6,000 can be challenging. I would encourage residents, this does not go on your taxes until May 2025, which is the first time you see it; you are able to make a full payment. So, let’s say on year 3 you have saved up the money to pay it in full off of your taxes, you can pay it in full at that time without additional interest being accumulated. So, you’re not locked in it for 15 years on that, so if you would like to save the money on the interest, you can pay it off early in full, or you can also make that minimum payment of $500 to reduce it. So, those are some options for residents in regards to the assessment. But, Council, I know you’re feeling it as you look at these numbers, those are big numbers, and so I just wanted to remind you of the financial obligation that we have as a City to pay our debt service, but then also just to remind residents different options of how you can financially bear that burden. Administrator Levitt stated I think at this point I will turn it over to the attorney to talk about the special benefit, and then we’ll go over to Engineering, and they can talk more about the specifics that we heard. Attorney Aaron Price stated with regard to the special benefit, as has been mentioned before, it’s measured by the increase in market value to the property as a result of the project itself. With regard to the appeal of that amount, that would actually be a fact issue, then, in District Court, where we would bring in our appraiser and establish that special benefit number of $7,500; then, correspondingly, the individual challenge in that amount would present their kind of benefit appraisal to establish, obviously, a number below that number. So, with regard to the appellate process and the special benefit, that’s kind of how that would work out. Again, with regard to the special benefit, it is that analysis of the increased market value to the property. Mayor Bailey said maybe one other thing, there was a comment regarding the constitutionality of it; do you want to speak on that, on assessments? Attorney Price replied the authority to impose a special assessment for street improvement projects or improvement projects does flow from the Minnesota Constitution where the legislature has been granted the authority to authorize local municipalities to levy and collect special assessments for local improvement projects. That authority is then codified under Statute 429.021, which authorizes the City to engage in street improvement projects through construction, deconstruction, or maintenance of pavement, gutters, sidewalks, things of that nature. The authority also flows from case law established through the District and Appellate Courts that have recognized that authority under Section 429 to impose special assessments for, again, local street improvement projects under that statutory authority. City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 11 of 22 Director Burfeind stated I’ll try to cover all the remaining questions that were more project specific, engineering related. I tried to take good notes throughout, I do apologize if I missed something, but I think I should be able to cover them in full. One thing with the curb change, the color, so after the curb was placed and there was a new curb that was placed slightly later with a curing compound we have to put on it, that’s kind of white in color; certainly, when some curb was placed several months later, it had a brighter look. That is something that fades together over time. Actually, on other projects when we do like a spot-curb replacement, that’s where you actually have a more long- term difference because you have curb that might have been 20 years old and now we have new curb with that curing compound. Here, it has all been placed this year, so it is something we expect to fade together, no different than a new development that kind of has curb placed in different ways and with driveways going in and out. So, that is pretty typical of a new curb section. I know it is visible today, there’s no question, and with that visibility, you can see where some of the new curb was. I gave a percentage as a general overall, I think there was reference to some streets did not have as much curb damage; certainly, Jenner Avenue had probably the most of that additional curb damage, unfortunately. Some concerns about the warranty, you know, what’s the longevity? Certainly, as a City, with the contractor we have a two-year warranty. Obviously we don’t have, per se, warranties on curb going forward, but really I want to address this very specifically. When we had to cut out that curb and patch it, that is actually very typical of a new road section. Any new development that we do in our town, they do the base course first, they do the curb and gutter, they place the wedge. After three years of homes being built, developers have to go and replace all the damaged curb, which can range from 5%-to-30%, and they do the patch under that base course. Patches in a wear course is a different story; we don’t have that, right? We have a patch underneath that wear course, and the wear course seals it up. It’s no different than actually all the manholes, all the gate cells, all the structures, which is part of the construction process where we actually have to cut them out, raise them to get ready for wear course patching. So, even without curb damage there would be those patches underneath the road, but that’s really need to be, it’s very standard, and any new road built today does have those. What would be a concern is if we had left the damaged curb; if we had left the damaged curb that had all that damage and the chunks taken out of it, and we tried to pave against that, it would not seal properly, and then water would infiltrate and that pavement would blow out. So, actually, when you think about longevity, if we had left the damaged curb, that would have created definitely a longevity issue. Parking issues were talked about and all the equipment. I will say with this project, due to the size, due to being right on 80th Street, we couldn’t have what we call a boneyard. Sometimes we’ll have a project with maybe like an old park area we’re redoing, and then they can store more materials there, they can put their equipment there. It would not be typical to make the equipment move, that would drive the project price up significantly as hauling in equipment is a major cost, mobilization, so that equipment really needs to stay on site during the project. If they had to have a separate truck driver bring that every day from Public Works to do the work, you would see greatly- increased costs. Unfortunately, here, we just didn’t have a space to have what we call that boneyard to park things off the road. There was also a mention of the streetlights; that’s something I would be happy to talk to Dan about, separately. Council is well aware we actually had some theft of our streetlight wires, not as much as other communities, but that’s an issue. We want good access to that splicing box; but with that, others have accessed it, too. So, I think it’s something the industry’s thinking about, I don’t think we have the answer for it yet, but certainly I’d be happy to talk more about it. Director Burfeind said there was talk about all the flooding in the roadway with that heavy rain this summer. That was not something we changed with the road, that is inland protection. So, the State mandates us to put in what we call inland protection, the catch basins, to keep sediment, gravel, and such, everything from getting into the storm sewer during construction. It’s kind of like a bag that goes underneath, and there’s a big kind of thing on the backside, and while that’s a mandate, it greatly reduces the capacity of those catch basins, there’s no question, but we are required to put that in. Unfortunately, the water just can’t get in like it normally does. That should be removed now, it’s removed when the project is done. There may still be some in, but that’s something that would be fully removed before winter and then you would not have that issue again. So, that flooding issue would not occur in the future, we made no changes to the storm sewer; I should preface that, there’s always massive rain City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 12 of 22 events, right? Storm sewers, even when they’re fully designed and operational, can operate at a ten-year rain event, so I shouldn’t say never; if we get a 100-year rain event, there’s areas around town where we do get flooding for a period of a few minutes while the water goes away. The other issue was just that discussion, more residents had the concern about longevity, I think I addressed that. Having that patch underneath the wear course is very typical, and there would be no concern for longevity of the roadway. In terms of communication, that was another thing that we discussed. With all the changes, that certainly could be better. I can say there was a specific concern about the second round of that curb and residents were maybe not given notice that they could drive on it again. We have a very set process with that curb; I mean, it’s done now, but I can certainly say we’ll discuss that with our project team to see what happened. There’s nothing I can do tonight to kind of rectify that situation, but we will definitely address it because that’s not something we want happening. We want good communication throughout the project, even when we’re reworking it. Director Burfeind said with that, I think that answers all the questions, but if the Council has more for me, I’m happy to answer them. Mayor Bailey said I have one question I’m sure you can answer. We kind of put together, obviously, this pavement management program so when a road gets, whether its completely redone with the road and the curb or a spot curb, whatever, can you speak a little bit towards what we’re doing now, as it relates to the future of these roads. Director Burfeind replied through the history of Cottage Grove and many metro cities, we would do what was called chip sealing; folks in the room probably saw that over the years where when a road’s new and every seven years we’d chip seal it, that was kind of our ongoing minor maintenance, as we call it, in our plan. Unfortunately, there have been changes in the asphalt over time, I won’t get into it, that’s a State of Minnesota thing, who really guides that. We saw the chip seal was not being as effective for the long term, so we made a switch and are actually doing Mill & Overlays. With those Mill & Overlays that we do, now going forward we’ve created a funding plan for that so we can kind of do that on a 15-to-18-year cycle, so residents would see that at that time. We’re looking to increase that life expectancy, and these roads were 30-to-34-years old, and we’re really looking to hit closer to that 40-year mark in the long term. Because this development does have new curbs in it now, we would incorporate that into our Mill & Overlay program. When we do a development or a neighborhood with spot-curb replacement, it’s really not conducive to do a Mill & Overlay because that curb is going to have to be replaced too soon. But because they do have all new curb, we would incorporate that into that program. Like I said, we’re really looking to do that Mill & Overlay at 15-to-20-year and then ultimately get 40 years of life out of our pavement sections. Mayor Bailey said but just so I’m clear and make sure I’m not going to say this incorrectly, but when we do those, that’s not another direct assessment to the homeowners, correct? Director Burfeind replied that’s correct, Mayor and Council, we do not assess for our Mill & Overlays. Mayor Bailey said that’s paid for by us, well, the citizens pay for it, but it’s everybody. Mayor Bailey asked if Council had any questions. Council Member Olsen thanked Ryan for the explanation and thank you as well to Jennifer and to the City Attorney for going through 429 and explaining how that works, statutorily. There was mention of did the City do its homework on the contractor? And I know you know that every time we enter into an agreement to do one of these projects, one of the questions you get asked, typically by me, is have we used this contractor before, do we know if they’re any good? In fact, I don’t even have to ask anymore because you just tell us. So, this is a contractor we’ve used before, right? Director Burfeind replied correct, yeah. Council Member Olsen said clearly, we haven’t had issues in the past to this degree, otherwise we would’ve blacklisted him, we wouldn’t have taken it. It was the low bid, and we’re actually required to take the low bid, so the good news is it’s a contractor we’ve used before, low bidder, so everything should be moving in the right direction. And here we have all these issues with communication and some of the execution of the work. So, what I’m curious about is when we do these projects, we always have an on site project manager; did this project manager adequately oversee this project? Were there periodic check-ins to make sure that things were going well? City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 13 of 22 And then, moreover, if we had these various communication issues, was that the responsibility of the construction team and their project manager, or how should that have all worked? Director Burfeind replied very good questions, Council Member Olsen, so we do have a project manager inspector that we hire directly through the City, not someone who works for the contractor. I think within their power and information they’re given, they did their job on this project. I will say there were changes with the rain delays and such, different things, but in terms of the real communication, the challenge is we physically can’t control when that contractor decides to do something different. We’re working as good as we can with him to get that information. One thing we do see with the wet summers, I will admit, is because we have sandy soils underneath, there are times where Cottage Grove honestly dries out first; Woodbury is all clay and maybe can’t work, and we do run into that situation where a contractor’s crew frees up and maybe that’s why they came on a Friday. I don't know the specific situation of why that happened, it’s certainly not something we want to see, but it is a contractor just trying to get their work done; but certainly when you’re dealing with resident impact, it’s very important that we keep with that schedule. There’s a benefit if we can get at it earlier, but people aren’t prepared for that, right, so, is that really a benefit? So, we can discuss that, but that’s not something they’re controlling because they’re not actually directing the contractor’s work, they’re out there to inspect the work while they’re doing it. So, definitely very good confidence in our project team and our inspector that we hired directly; I’ve worked with him for many, many years and he’s very experienced. So, no specific concerns there. Council Member Olsen said so, to follow up on that, some of the folks that spoke indicated that they had taken money out of their own pockets to do sod. I know that one of the specs when we do these kinds of projects is the contractor is supposed to leave any area that they’ve touched in a condition that is similar to before they touched it, and a lot of times they’ll do hydroseeding and things like that. So, I’m sure that our on-site inspector is aware of some of those challenges and discrepancies; will there be any activity in the spring to bring these properties back up to snuff? Director Burfeind replied that’s a good question. So, while we’re talking about the Assessment Hearing tonight, that is not closing out a project. So, we hold what’s called retainers, we haven’t fully paid the contractor because there’s work that they need to touch on; whether it’s the seeding, things are a little complicated with that sod because typically if there’s no curb issue and a resident chooses to sod, we’re not going to work on that sod. But because there was the additional curb damage, the contractor did that work to basically replace what residents had paid for out of their own pockets, so we’re going to have to look at that as well. But definitely we’re holding retainers, the contract is not closed out, and there is work again in the spring. That’s one thing I should’ve mentioned, there was reference to how late in the year it was; we don’t close this out and say well, we seeded it, we move on. We’ll be back and will continue to be back. Also, with the settlement, there was some reference to maybe if the dirt wasn’t compacted properly to the right degree, maybe there’s some settlement; that’s another thing that we would address. So, afterwards, me and the other project team members are definitely available to keep speaking at this meeting if residents have specific concerns, addresses, things that we need to be looking at, we will take those tonight to make sure they’re not getting lost. Council Member Olsen said thank you, and I was just going to suggest that, even for folks who aren’t here, your neighbors that weren’t able to be here tonight, if we have outstanding issues that have not been resolved, please make sure to let Ryan and the team know so that we can get those resolved in the spring. I realize that you don’t go through this all the time, but we do, and we hear many of the same concerns with regard to the condition of the front yard, driveways, things of that nature. The response when we get that information, when these projects are done, is always we need to make it right. And I think it was Duey, your speech resonated with me because basically what you were saying is hey, look, it costs what it costs, but dude, it should be right, and that’s where I’m at; for whatever we are looking at from an assessment perspective, I think the reasonable expectation on the part of the resident and this is true of any resident, any time we do a pavement management project, is it should be right. And you shouldn’t end up after the fact, going, man, this looks terrible, what did they do? How come this isn’t right? Why is my driveway messed up? The City has a long history of working with contractors, using that escrow money that we hold to ensure that in the spring, because things will change over the wintertime, the ground will shift, things will change. So, in the spring any outstanding issues need to get taken care of for you so at the end of the day, it costs what it costs but it’s right, that the value is there. And it doesn’t seem like that’s necessarily the case in every situation here. So, I can tell you Ryan is very diligent and very technical when it comes City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 14 of 22 to making sure that the project is executed the way that it should be. And, again, we have blacklisted contractors in the past. I’m glad to know this is a contractor we’ve used before, but something got messed up before the cake got baked, so, the good news is it’s not fully baked yet. Council Member Olsen said the last thing, Ryan, is testing. So, there was a comment about how long is it going to last, right? I know you do extensive testing on road projects before we even order the project because some roadways have a little bit longer lifespan, I know we do the thin overlays and things. How do we reassure the residents that what they’re getting now is going to be a high-quality product that’s going to last into the future? Because you’re right, nobody wants to get reassessed again in 15 years, no, that would be terrible, and it shouldn’t work that way. So, can you speak to that a little? Director Burfeind said when it comes to testing, which is done by a different third party, there’s a handful of them in the metro that are very reputable firms that do this work; so, really, every step of the way is tested. We have that Class 5 underneath, which we maybe have to supplement, we’re doing density testing on that, and we want full compactions so things aren’t settling in the roadway. When it comes to the asphalt, it’s the same thing; there are multiple different tests that we do on site. MnDOT actually also does bituminous plant inspections, so they’re actually looking at it where its actually produced, and we do that for our road projects. I will say not all cities actually do that for their residential road projects, sometimes they just do it where they’re mandated to do it; we choose to do it for these projects to make sure we’re really looking at it where it’s actually being produced. Concrete is the same way where we actually have all the testing with what’s the air count time, what’s the strength? And in some of these processes we actually go above and beyond even like the State standards when it comes to how we do the road. Density testing, we do things a little differently, where a lot of times they just cut cores in the road when its done; first of all, you now have a core and a hole in your road that you’re patching, so we do a different process with a nuclear density gauge, we’re actually looking at it throughout the paving process to make sure they’re meeting density. So, that is something that we have a full program for. Council Member Olsen said okay, thank you very much. I knew that you did a lot of that. I’m also aware that St. Paul Park does fix their roads, they’re working on 3rd Street right now; so, they have the same issues we have with benefit appraisals and all those kinds of things, and I know you do some work helping them out periodically. But I certainly appreciate your responses to the questions. I hope the residents can count on that anything that isn’t currently right we’re going to work hard to make right heading into either spring of next year or even if we get another year like last year, maybe we’ll be working into November, who knows? Thank you. Council Member Thiede said I guess this is more a financial question. I guess I’d like to know a little bit more precisely, you know, what it would cost us to say defer the payment until after the holidays with no interest charge during that time to the resident if you can do a calculation for me quick. Administrator Levitt stated as Brenda is coming, I did some quick math because I suspected that might come up. The first number that I will tell you is we anticipate approximately 30% of the payments to be made; so, that would be about $166,000 that we’re anticipating that would be paid, so that’s helping us pay our debt issuances. So, you’re going to lose that amount to make our first debt issuance payment. I’m sure Brenda is right now calculating the other number that you asked for, but just to give you a flavor of the magnitude of the dollars that we’re talking about. Director Malinowski stated it’s approximately about $200,000. Council Member Thiede said okay, and so what’s our ability to, if we consider that’s coming temporarily out of a fund somewhere and then it gets replaced after the start of the year. Administrator Levitt stated Mayor and members of the Council, I will tell you, you have set your Preliminary Levy to include that debt issuance; so, the $200,000 that Brenda is referencing, you would need to make an additional cut in your 2025 budget because you won’t be able to recover that payment of your debt issuance. Council Member Thiede replied well, you’ll recover it after they actually then pay in January or after the holidays. Director Malinowski said you wouldn’t get that interest back. Council Member Thiede said no, you’re not talking, that’s not the interest, right? You’re expecting. Mayor Bailey said here’s the thing, though, and we’re going to still see if any Council has questions, and I’ll let this gentleman come back up and ask his question. So, if you defer it this time, what about the next one? City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 15 of 22 Council Member Thiede replied well, this one is a special situation because it’s a lot later in the season, the issue is it’s right before the holidays. Unless we looked at it, I think a lot of the others are a little earlier in the year and such, right? Director Malinowski replied no. I believe that we were substantially complete even earlier than we had anticipated this year. Mayor Bailey said no, it’s typically October is when we do these special assessments, when we’ve done these road projects. So, all I’m saying is yes, there are some unfortunate things that happened in this particular project, but in the grand scheme of things, I don't know that delaying the payment or whatever, the process, until January is going to make any difference. Council Member Thiede said well, we’ve never had anybody request it before. Mayor Bailey said well, but us, it’s going to make a huge difference. Council Member Thiede said well, I don't know, it doesn’t sound like it’s that huge because it’s the impact of money and replacing it and so forth. We can talk, I don’t understand how it’s going to make that much difference if it gets replaced and a certain amount gets deferred and so forth. Council Member Khambata said Jennifer, you said that this would show up on the May 2025 tax statement, is that correct? Administrator Levitt replied that’s correct, that’s the first time they would see it because typically, we hold the Assessment Hearings in October, we give them that 30 days to pay; as a City, we legally have to certify our assessment rolls by the end of November to the County. That puts it on the assessment roll then in May, the first time. So, if we miss that certification to the County, you miss, in essence, an entire year because you’re not going to be certifying until later. That’s why that date is critical. So, just to let you know on how that certification works. Council Member Khambata said then another question I have might be more for Myron, and I think Steve Dennis, when he was on Council, he was also a member of the Pavement Management Task Force when the City had made that initial shift. If I understand from previous conversations about pavement management, the reason it was structured this way, with the 45% contribution, was to be more equitable, right? So, if we’re repaving 80th Street or Jamaica Avenue, which is an arterial roadway, the City’s footing the whole cost for those projects because it benefits everyone equally. But a better way to phrase this is the street that I live on, Eli shouldn’t have to pay for my street with his taxes if he’s never going to drive on my street, and that was the argument for the way it was split up between City and resident contributions. So, I think that’s sound reasoning. I mean, it’s a lot of money when it comes your turn, but to say for the last 30 years every homeowner on Jenner Avenue was paying for somebody else’s roadway that they’re never ever going to drive on, I could be frustrated about that as well if that were the case. Council Member Thiede said unfortunately, it was easy to start it, but it’s difficult to leave it because of, you know, just the equity and the situation and well, these people had to pay for this, and now all of a sudden, these people aren’t. So, I’m not questioning that at all, I was just looking at the holiday season and the request that was made. Council Member Khambata said this is tough work, that’s for sure, and I think, as Jennifer said, having a deadline to get these assessments to the County in order to get them on the tax roll makes it challenging to defer. I think the interest accrual part, you know, we just got done with budgeting, and I mean, we were talking about $50,000 items in our budget; so, to say that we’re okay incurring an unexpected interest charge of hundreds of thousands of dollars, I think that’s a hard no for me. Mayor Bailey stated I did not close the Public Hearing, so please, come on up. Steve Gunderson, 7774 Jenner Avenue, asked who was the on-site manager from the City who was out there? I’m retired, and I was out there almost every day, and I didn’t see a soul from the City. And then the other thing I wanted to have checked is the reference to Nancy’s Lake in front of her house; I had the same silt kit, whatever it’s called, that black thing in my storm sewer, right next to my house. They took it out, we had a little rain, and I still have a puddle, okay? So, it’s not draining like it drained prior. So, I don't know if that’s a grade issue or whatever, but I talked to that kid from Bolton & Menk, and he said that that was the issue, he thought that they were going City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 16 of 22 to get it right on the final grade. Now, I’m not an engineer, I don’t play one on TV, and I don’t know anything about what you do, so that’s really what I wanted to ask about. Council Member Olsen said can I ask you something, sir? And can Ryan chime in? So, you mentioned that in front of your home and then Nancy’s, you had essentially standing water, right? Mr. Gunderson replied yes, sir. Council Member Olsen asked and is that, Ryan, because of the work we were doing on the storm sewers at that time, or what exactly was that caused by? Or was it just a low spot? Director Burfeind stated the big rain event and the water, that was from the inland protection. If there’s an ongoing issue, we’ll definitely take the address, we can go out there, and we can take a look at it directly just to make sure there’s no lingering issues that were causing not all the water to drain. We do want that water to drain away. I think there was a reference to Lake Jenner, that was from the inland protection being in during the construction. Council Member Olsen said okay, all right, but we can go out there and look to make sure all the grading is right and everything? Director Burfeind replied yes. So, regarding Bolton & Menk, the way frankly cities are structured, you know, we do not have staff that serve in that role, so we have consultants that we work with; they’ve been in the industry a long time, have lots of experience, and frankly know more about even construction than anyone. So, those are the folks that are the day-to-day inspectors, and they are out there while the work is occurring. Mr. Gunderson said okay, just to clarify, the Bolton & Menk kid was out there, he was 25 years old, maybe; he didn’t have a lot of experience. Dan Schouveller, 7929 Jenner Avenue South, said I’m going to piggyback to Lake Jenner. The sewers on my side of the street and on the other and 7909, which is John and Milissa Fortuna, we have had continuous drainage issues for years. I’m hoping this solidifies it and clears it up, I’m not expecting it because we have it spring, we have it all the time; it’s been an ongoing issue, and I’ve been in the house for 15 years, they’ve been in in for 10, and we see it every year. So, I’m just saying this is not new. Council Member Olsen asked did they fix catch basins and stuff during this project? Director Burfeind replied so, we did do repairs to all the catch basins; there may be rings, there may have been settlement. Certainly, curb sections, the first ones that settle over time are the ones by the catch basins, those are the things that we’re fixing, and those are the issues we’re working to address with projects like this. Council Member Olsen said so he should leave you some information? Director Burfeind said yes, I think it’s something we can certainly look at come spring, but that is the type of things we’re addressing. We’re not adding storm sewer, we’re not adding catch basins; when you get those huge rain events, frankly, streets are going to get water in them. It’s just not practical in any street, in any city, to be able to capture every single really large, like the August 29 rain event. Council Member Olsen said but with the typical ones, you guys check all that, you take that opportunity to make sure everything’s working properly. Director Burfeind said we want everything to drain properly when we’re done, through the catch basins, so we can look at that for sure. Mayor Bailey said after we’re done with you, I’ll go ahead and close the Public Hearing so then Council can discuss, so go ahead. Eli Weinmann, 9498 79th Street, said thank you. So, a couple of counterpoints. First one, Council Member Tony, so, in regards to your street, you don’t expect anyone else to pay for it, that’s one way to do it, but everything else, there’s parks that I don’t use in Cottage Grove and I pay for them. I’ve never used the police force in Cottage Grove, we all pay for it equally, we don’t expect that the only people that pay for police are the ones that have to call them for something. So, it works to split it up. You could invite me over to your house, and I could visit you, and I would use your street, it works. Last time we were here, Mayor, you brought up that the only time that you City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 17 of 22 saw a project be voted down they had to come back several years later and the cost was double, and you said that, I think it’s the neighborhood you live in now, a lot of your neighbors were very upset by that. But why would they be upset if they’re getting the same special benefit in return? Because say it cost $12,000, well, they got $12,000, theoretically; we know it’s not actually working that way. So, my question is what happens to the special benefit when the road degrades, what happens to it? I can’t answer it, so, it’s not there. There has to be a special benefit. Mayor Bailey said well, and I think our attorney and our staff did say that legally, with special benefit appraisals it’s showing that. Now, you may not agree with that, and that’s fine. I may not have agreed with the amount of assessment that I got when my road was done in front of my house, but the reality is that’s what the price came to, and it was actually more than this project that was in your neighborhood, back then when I did, and that was many years ago. And yours was full curb, correct? The whole thing was full curb? Mine was too, back then, was full curb and street, so. Mr. Weinmann said just in terms of the project itself and just in the effort to maybe try to come to some resolution on it, it isn’t so much the money issue as it is the principle of it. But I remember a couple of sessions back, Council Member Khambata, you talked about it was the equivalent of doing a kitchen remodel, right? And I kind of go back to what Duey talked about, like if you did a kitchen remodel, that improves the value of your home, and therefore you’re experiencing the benefit of it. Well, what if you walked into your kitchen and the trim was all different colors, and it wasn’t done to the standard that it was supposed to be done to and things don’t match and they don’t work right? Yeah, they’re gonna come back and make it look right, and he’s telling us that the curbs are going to fade over time, but we can at least agree that the special benefit is the aesthetics of a new road in front of your house, correct? Mayor Bailey replied I don't know that I would say that, it probably adds to it, personally speaking for me. Council Member Olsen said there are several elements that go into the Special Benefit Appraisal. Mr. Weinmann said right, other than the fact that there’s probably, oh, you have a new road, so you don’t have to worry about a Special Benefit Assessment for 30 years, it’s a manufactured benefit. So, my point is the road looks the way it looks now. So, we’re arguing even the special benefit isn’t realized unless we sell the property right now, but you’re saying it doesn’t matter 30 years from now, it has a special benefit right now. It doesn’t matter that the curbs may blend in after 15 years, they don’t blend right now. So, I would at least ask and implore that there’s at least a revision to the estimate and to how much we’re paying for it because we definitely didn’t get what we paid for. I don't know if that comes from the contractor or what, but at least I would request that there’s a revision or a renewed estimate of the special benefit that is provided. Thank you. Mayor Bailey closed the Public Hearing. Mayor Bailey asked if there were any other questions Council has. I do want to add just a couple points of interest because I think it’s somewhat relevant. Every city makes a determination based on, in our case, the Pavement Management Task Force, and there was a process prior to the Pavement Management Task Force, which I think you were on and you were on and I know a few others that were, way back. The determination back then by that citizens group is here’s the better way of doing it. I don’t recall what it was before then, I don't know if it was 50%-50%, 60%-40%, with 60% being the homeowners, 40% being the City, I don’t recall. But they determined what that amount would be. I would tell you that there are cities out there right now, in the Twin Cities, that put 100% of the assessment on their residents. I don’t recall what St. Paul Park is, but it’s a lot higher than ours for their assessment process that they do. So, our citizens kind of came back to the Council and staff, and this is before I even became mayor, with what the plan was. The other thing is obviously we’re not happy with what the contractor did or the lack of communication. I will tell you there’s been other projects that we’ve had in our community, not specific to this particular contractor, where we basically told them they can’t do business in our community anymore because of the quality of the work that they did. We’ve also had situations where we required them to come back out, consistently, even above and beyond the escrow, to take care of issues. I know, like even in my neighborhood, they did not do sod, they did grass. Of course, when they did this grass, it was weeds, and I’m kind of like, I know one of you said your neighbor has got like the pristine lawn, well, that’s me; and it bothered the heck out of me that the bottom part of my yard City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 18 of 22 wasn’t looking the same as the rest of my yard. And I did some of the same things some of you did, it sounds like, so I do appreciate the fact that you’re all taking your property to heart because I did the same thing. I could’ve waited for the contractor to come back out and spread some more grass seed, but I’m like I’m just going to do it, I’m just going to get it done, I don’t want to wait. But I will say, whatever the issues are, we will address those. We’ve had this conversation, sod vs. grass seed, over and over and over again. I suppose at some point we can talk about this again, as a collective group. I’m personally a sod guy vs. throwing hydroseed out there, but again, that does raise the cost because there will be a cost factor to that, which unfortunately ends up getting passed along to the end user. I mentioned this briefly earlier, but there used to be a situation where we used to charge for Mill & Overlays and things like that; so, we would after a certain period of time come back into your neighborhood, do a Mill & Overlay, and then charge you for it. Because in between that, we used to do this chip sealcoating program, and we opted to not do that anymore; in doing that, the money that we were putting aside for that chip sealcoating, that money now goes directly toward Mill & Overlay, meaning we’re not assessing homeowners. So, we’re trying to do, from our standpoint, the best thing we can do in order to be fair to everybody. The other last thing I’ll just mention real quick on being fair is at some point, every single street, not arterials, but neighborhood streets are going to get done. So, whether it’s full-curb replacement, the street’s going to get redone, and the process is very similar to the same. That’s one of the challenges and the comments that we’ve had and talk about every year at budget is we have our staff go out and check roads and tell us can we get another year or two out of this road before we don’t have to make it a complete reconstruct. We’ve tried to get up to that point where it’s going to be okay and we don’t have to spend as much money. If we don’t have to spend as much money, that obviously means homeowners don’t. So, we’re very cognizant of that, I know I am, to make sure that we’re careful, but I also believe that our program is solid. I know there are some people out here that have some concerns about the benefit appraisal, and every one of you have the ability to contest it, like we got a couple letters, and if that’s the direction you want to go from a legal standpoint, that’s absolutely everyone’s right, that’s what’s there. So, I just, for me, from my point, yes, there was some stuff that maybe didn’t happen the way we would like it to happen, and I would be a little upset if I were in your neighborhood, too, with some of the things that were happening in your area; hopefully, some of that stuff we’re going to react to and we’ll kind of watch, I guess, to the future with this contractor, if he bids for other projects in our community in the future. But I think the project is what the project is, and I think this is the right thing to do is to move forward. Council Member Khambata said I’m really disheartened and frustrated at the experience that these people had with this project. I know that a lot of the aspects, a lot of the challenges that they faced, are things that were outside of our control. But I am hopeful because of the fact that we withhold a portion of that payment, and in the past that’s been a good mechanism to make sure that when challenges come up, that they get remedied and that they get remedied in the shortest amount of time possible. So, I know that staff is going to make sure that they’re holding the contractor accountable for these issues and that these will get done. I would like, for whatever it’s worth, my 20%, for staff to pay special attention to make sure that this stuff gets resolved right the second time with this contractor. Again, you know, they go in to fix something and they end up causing irrigation and sod damage; so, like from the customer experience, unfortunately, I think the people that are there doing the road are not thinking of it in a customer-service mindset. Like, hey, I have to be accountable to this homeowner for this project, the way somebody who would maybe go in and do a kitchen remodel would, right? They don’t, they maybe weren’t engaging directly with the constituents the way we do. So, I look at it from a customer-service perspective where like they didn’t get the level of service that I would expect for me or for you or for anybody else in the room. So, I think that’s where we didn’t have control of what happened initially, we didn’t have control of the weather, those were all things that were outside of our control as a City. But what is within our control is using that mechanism that’s built into the contract, withholding those funds, to make sure that these things do get addressed and they get taken care of properly. So, I just want to make sure that they know that I am resolved, and I know staff is resolved, to make sure that these things get addressed properly. Motion by Council Member Olsen to Adopt Resolution 2024-143, Adopting the Assessment Roll for the 2024 Pavement Management Project; second by Council Member Garza. Motion carried: 5-0. City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 19 of 22 Mayor Bailey said so before you leave, if there is anything that you need to bring up, and even after today, like I think Council Member Olsen mentioned, if there’s an issue maybe that you heard from a neighbor or something like that, I don’t live too far from you guys. So you know I can and I’ll say a family member lives in your neighborhood, so I’m over there periodically. So, I mean, if there is something you want me to see or staff to see, I’ll be more than happy to do that because I don’t want you to have to deal with something, like if it was flooding before and that doesn’t fix the issue, then we need to fix it, okay? Thank you, and I’ll leave it for staff then. C. Oltman Middle School - Easement Vacation(s), Drainage and Utility Easement, Access Easement Staff Recommendation: 1) Hold the Public Hearing regarding vacating, rescinding, terminating, and releasing a permanent easement and temporary easement for watermain for Lot 1, Block 1, New Oltman Middle School, and permanent easements for storm sewer for Lot 1, Block 1, New Oltman Middle School. 2) Adopt Resolution 2024-145 rescinding the July 17, 2024, City Council actions related to Oltman Middle School. 3) Adopt Resolution 2024-146 vacating, rescinding, terminating, and releasing a permanent easement and temporary easement for watermain for Lot 1, Block 1, New Oltman Middle School. 4) Approve the Permanent Access Easement for Lot 1, Block 1, New Oltman Middle School. 5) Adopt Resolution 2024-147 vacating, rescinding, terminating, and releasing permanent easements for storm sewer on Lot 2, Block 1, New Oltman Middle School. 6) Approve the Permanent Easement for Storm Sewer over a portion of Lot 2, Block 1, New Oltman Middle School. Associate Planner Jakes stated there are two easement vacations before you this evening; one is related to the private watermain and one is related to the storm sewer on the Oltman Middle School campus. As Council is aware, the School District is currently working through an administrative review approval for two building additions: One on the western part of the building for the cafeteria, and one on the south side of the building for a classroom addition. As part of all Site Plan applications, staff conducts a thorough review of the entire site, both existing easements and infrastructure to ensure that the easements are effective and providing what is necessary. The two easements before you this evening were found to need changes, which is why the item is before you. The first easement we’ll discuss is the Drainage and Utility Easement overlying the private watermain that loops around Oltman Middle School. Given the watermain is private, the City does not conduct maintenance of that watermain itself; however, the City does conduct routine maintenance related to the hydrants on site. So, each of the outdents shown along the blue area signifies a hydrant. The reason for these in the first place is for the City to conduct that maintenance; however, after review of the easement language, it wasn’t necessarily clear that the City was only conducting and accessing that easement area for hydrant maintenance. As a result, the proposed vacation is before you and proposed to replace that existing easement is an access easement that would overlay the entire parcel. In that easement language, staff worked with the City Attorney and School District to be sure that it’s solely for the hydrant maintenance. The second easement vacation before you this evening is related to the storm sewer on the western part of the Oltman campus, as signified in red on the screen before you. On the western part, there is a constructed stormwater pipe, as signified in green on the screen; the red signifies the existing easement locations. As you can see, the easement locations do not sufficiently cover the constructed pipe, as that was constructed in an incorrect location; however, it was field verified that it’s operating correctly so there are no issues there. Staff is proposing to vacate the easements on site and replace that with one new easement that sufficiently covers the pipe, allows us to conduct our long-term maintenance of that pipe, and access the allowed area and have sufficient space to do so. The recommendations are on the screen before you. I will note that all easement vacations require a Public Hearing, which is the first recommend on the screen. The second and third recommendations are to rescind the July approvals and vacate that watermain easement, and the fourth recommendation is to approve the access easement that overlays that entire parcel, solely for hydrant access. The fifth recommendation is to vacate that storm sewer easement, and the sixth, and final, recommendation is to approve the new storm sewer easement. With that, staff is available for any questions. Mayor Bailey asked Council if there were any questions for Connor, but there were none. City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 20 of 22 Mayor Bailey opened the Public Hearing. As no one wished to speak on this, Mayor Bailey closed the Public Hearing. Motion by Council Member Khambata to Adopt Resolution 2024-145 rescinding the July 17, 2024, City Council actions related to Oltman Middle School; second by Council Member Olsen. Motion carried: 5-0. Motion by Council Member Olsen to Adopt Resolution 2024-146 vacating, rescinding, terminating, and releasing a permanent easement and temporary easement for watermain for Lot 1, Block 1, New Oltman Middle School; second by Council Member Thiede. Motion carried: 5-0. Motion by Council Member Thiede to Approve the Permanent Access Easement for Lot 1, Block 1, New Oltman Middle School; second by Council Member Garza. Motion carried: 5-0. Motion by Council Member Garza to Adopt Resolution 2024-147 vacating, rescinding, terminating, and releasing permanent easements for storm sewer on Lot 2, Block 1, New Oltman Middle School; second by Council Member Khambata. Motion carried: 5-0. Motion by Council Member Khambata to Approve the Permanent Easement for Storm Sewer over a portion of Lot 2, Block 1, New Oltman Middle School; second by Council Member Olsen. Motion carried: 5-0. 10. BID AWARDS - None. 11. REGULAR AGENDA - None. 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS Council Member Olsen stated first, I want to make sure that everybody out there who’s watching this knows early voting is now available at the Washington County South Service Center, which is on the same campus as City Hall. If you are interested in taking advantage of that opportunity, they are currently open 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. You can vote absentee, in person, or by mail, and I believe next week you’ll also be able to go in on Saturday, starting next week. But early voting is now available. I want to encourage everybody in our community to maintain the sense of pride that we have as a State, here in Minnesota, with the highest voter turnout of any state in the nation, typically, during each election. It would be great to have all eligible voters be able to actually get out and cast their ballot, it’s important, and your voice matters, so please do that. Council Member Olsen said I just want to compliment the organizers for last week’s Cottage Grove Fire Department Open House. It was extremely well attended, lots of young families that I saw there, tons of stuff for people to do. We even had a number of our alumni firefighters on hand to be able to help with the Open House, which I thought was really special, and I could tell they were having a lot of fun. So, kudos to Chief Pritchard, Deputy Chief Arrigoni, I know Mike Dandl always has a hand in those things, and anybody else who may have had their fingers in getting that organized and put together. I think it was a hit with the residents and certainly was something to be proud of. Council Member Thiede said one thing I’ll just mention, with Halloween coming up, go get your costumes and everything; fortunately, I don’t have to put a costume on, I still scare people. So, a week from Saturday, October 26, is the Monster Bash parade; it starts at 10 o'clock and it runs from the School Administration Center down to Applebee’s, and it’s a great time. So, grab the kiddos and get on out there. City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 21 of 22 Council Member Garza said I’m going to jump on the bandwagon for Halloween celebrations. It looks like we’re going to have a really cool Skating Spooktacular up at the Ice Arena, that will be on October 30, and that should be a lot of fun. That will be following our Monster Bash parade. And then we’ll have our Pumpkin Chuck on November 1, and that’s a lot of fun. So bring your families, come out, and throw those pumpkins and watch them roll down the hill or from way high in the fire truck’s ladders. It’s a lot of fun, so if you have some time, come on out and have fun with us. Mayor Bailey stated this past Monday, we had the opportunity for two things: 1) We did a trail dedication to Katie and Conway Olson, down at Hamlet Park, which was a very nice event, well attended by the family. Katie wasn’t able to be there because she was sick, but her kids were all there, along with many of our staff; a couple of us from the Council, Council Member Garza joined us with her daughter, and a lot what I’ll call former elected officials from the area that were able to be there, just to acknowledge the amount of love that Katie and Conway Olson had for our community and the amount of time and effort that they gave back. As a matter of fact, while I was there, saying what I know about Katie and Conway Olson, it was interesting to hear other stories of things that were even before my time, about the fact that Conway Olson was one of the instrumental people to prevent Cottage Grove from being called Washington, instead of the City of Cottage Grove. By the way, Washington would have been both Woodbury and Cottage Grove together, as one city, so I thought that was kind of interesting. Your name came up a lot, Conner, about how excited they were about how much data they were going to give to you, so I figured you might enjoy that, but that was really cool. 2) Shortly thereafter, we did an open house at Hamlet Park, just to talk about the Preserve.Play.Prosper program, which of course is the Local Option Sales Tax that we’re looking to provide for three park amenities. Other than that event that we had, being able to share information with the public, this coming Monday, October 21, at 12 noon, Zac Dockter, Parks & Recreation Director, and myself are going to be doing a Facebook Live event. We’re going to be answering questions that have been asked about different things, why is it this, why are you doing that, what does this mean, what if it doesn’t pass, and that kind of stuff. But it’s also going to be an opportunity for the public, who are going to tune in to check it out, to ask questions, and we’ll answer them live. So, we’ll kick it off with some of the general questions that people have been asking us over the last few months about this program, and then if there are other questions or maybe we don’t quite answer it right, we’re going to take comments that come in, and they’ll be provided to Zac and I. Again, that will be this coming Monday, at 12 noon. I’m not going to say it’ll be an hour because some Facebook events last like 15 minutes or a half hour, but if people are interested and they’re asking questions, we’re going to be there. We want to make sure that our voters are very informed in their decisions. Mayor Bailey said then I’ll just throw out there, because you were just talking about holiday events, we have Locally Grown Theatre, who is actually going to be out here at City Hall on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, doing Frankenstein Monster as a play. It is free to the public, so I encourage you to stop out and check that out because we have a lot of things going on; we have the Monster Bash parade, as mentioned, we have Pumpkin Chuck, we’ve got Skating Spooktacular, and the Haunted Experience down at Zywiec’s, which is going on in the community. Mayor Bailey said and then I get to finally say yes, we’re getting into the Christmas holiday season. The Holiday Train has announced that they will be once again coming to Cottage Grove on Wednesday, December 11, at 5:15 p.m. They’re very excited, the gentleman that I speak with through CP Rail is, as a matter of fact, going to make a special trip down here with his kids to attend our event, which is the largest in the U.S., so I wanted to throw that out there. But even before that, I want to mention on Thursday, December 5, at 4:30 p.m., here at City Hall is our second annual Hometown Holiday Celebration. We’ve done other things with tree lightings in the past, but we really kind of made this thing a bigger event within our community. So, I encourage everybody to put those two dates specifically on your calendar, Thursday, December 5, the Hometown Holiday Celebration here at City Hall, and Wednesday, December 11, for the arrival of the Canadian Pacific Kansas City Holiday Train, down along Highway 61 and West Point Douglas Road. 13. WORKSHOPS - OPEN TO PUBLIC - None. City Council Meeting October 16, 2024 Page 22 of 22 14. WORKSHOPS - CLOSED TO PUBLIC - None. 15. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Council Member Olsen, second by Council Member Khambata, to adjourn the meeting at 8:58 p.m. Motion carried: 5-0. Minutes prepared by Judy Graf and reviewed by Tamara Anderson, City Clerk. 1 City Council Action Request 7.E. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Public Works Agenda Category Action Item Title Public Services Commission Meeting Minutes (2024-07-15) Staff Recommendation Approve the July 15, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. 7-15-2024 Public Services Commission Meeting MINUTES COTTAGE GROVE PUBLIC SERVICES July 15, 2024 COMMISSION 12800 Ravine Parkway South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Lisa Kons called the Public Services Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Kons asked everyone to stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Chair Kons was advised that Roll Call had been taken. 4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Vice Chair Ron Kath made a motion to approve the agenda; Commissioner Tracy Jenson seconded. Motion carried: 7-0. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. APPROVE MINUTES FROM THE MAY 20, 2024 MEETING Motion by Commissioner Jenny Olson to approve the May 20, 2024 meeting minutes; second by Commissioner Jenson. Motion carried: 7-0. 6. OPEN FORUM Chair Kons opened the Open Forum. As no one wished to speak, Chair Kons closed the Open Forum. 7. PRESENTATIONS A. CONSTRUCTION UPDATES Public Works Director Ryan Burfeind stated every year in the summer, I like to give an update on a lot of our current construction projects and let you know how they’re going. I’ll also touch on some of our big ones that are upcoming and the progress that we’re making on those. I’ll speak about a lot of our road projects first, then I’ll move into our Water Treatment Plant projects towards the end. East Point Douglas & Jamaica Avenue: This is our big two-year project. I’ve got two screens here showing all the areas of work; obviously, the main Jamaica Avenue and East Point Douglas intersection we completed last year. You can see the roundabout in Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 2 of 14 pink, that was our first phase we started this year, and that went really well. Even with all the rain, they were able to get that done actually a little bit early and got that open before July 4. Then they moved into Phase 4, that’s the area behind Target, where due to the road conditions and how old it was it needed to be total reconstruction. The challenge with that was the corridor is narrow enough that there’s no way to legally have two lanes of traffic with the construction going on. The one-way traffic flow was better than it was when the roundabout was being worked on, but it was still a little confusing. They’re actually wrapping up the first phase of that one-way traffic, and towards the end of this month, they’ll be switching to the second phase and building the other half of East Point Douglas Road. At the same time they’re going to be working on a Mill and Overlay of East Point Douglas Road, in the blue; that section’s just not as old, the curb’s in a lot better shape overall. The Mill and Overlay will kind of be in front of Menards and down to the townhomes there, so that will wrap up sometime in September, and then the project will be complete. So, we’re all very excited for that. Vice Chair Kath asked Director Burfeind, I noticed they also took all of the lights down along there, are they replacing them with new ones? Director Burfeind replied yes, that’s a good question. They’re updating to kind of a new standard we have of an overhead, I call it kind of a Cobra-head style, a little more decorative style light that you see around the East Point Douglas and Jamaica intersection. It will actually match what’s on 80th Street, between Keats and Jamaica. South District Street & Utility Project: The area highlighted in blue is the actual project that’s happening this year. You can see other roads, labeled 100th Street and Ideal Avenue, those were done the previous two years; 105th Street is a new road you can see towards the bottom of the screen, that was also complete two years ago. With the South District Street & Utility Improvements, the main X, where 103rd, Hadley, and 100th all realign, that’s following the County’s Southwest Arterial Study. I maybe talked about that some in the past where 100th Street is a City street right now, but long term that’s going to be turned over to Washington County. They don’t have any County roads in the southern part of Cottage Grove, and they want to have a County Road that serves this area and meets all the County higher-volume standards as this area develops. That will also provide access down to Grey Cloud Island, which is in the future guided as a County Regional Park. During this big X area realignment, it’s tough with the road closures, but it’s really important from a traffic flow standpoint. All the right angles and stop signs are not conducive to a County Road, so it’s been kind of a challenge this summer. Right now, for example, Hadley is closed north of 100th Street. In the next couple of weeks, they have to make that tie in of the new 100th to the old 100th, so actually that will be closed with a detour down on 105th. So, there are a lot of detours, a lot of challenges, but we appreciate everyone kind of living through it this summer as we do the best we can. With some of these closures, it just lets the work be done so much faster. We looked at trying to do more bypass lanes, and you spend a lot of money on those and it can drag the project out almost longer than the full construction season. So, we felt some of these detours and closures were the better way to do that project. There’s also a lot of development happening down here: This is where the NorthPoint development is; there’s a new development, Graymont Village. Kind of right along that X where it says ‘Proposed 100th Street’, that’s where a new apartment, Norhart, was approved. So, a lot of new development that will use these new roadways. Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) Intersection Improvement: Another smaller one that’s a good safety improvement down at River Oaks, that I think I touched on briefly last year. This will start construction very soon. It’s a City-led project, mostly funded by MnDOT, though, through several grants that we were able to get from them. To orient yourself, on the north side is River Oaks, and the bottom right is Zywiec’s Garden Center. Right now, there’s a median that has the full access, and this is what some people call a J-turn; you see a lot of them on Highway 52. This is a lot more compact; sometimes on Highway 52, those U-turns are pretty far removed, ¼ mile or more, but these are fairly close to the current intersection. What it does is it prevents that full cross-through movement, but you still have the U-turns on either end, so people can make the motions they need to make to go north or south. It doesn’t necessarily increase the capacity, it doesn’t make gaps for folks on Highway 61, but it eliminates those right-angle movements and right-angle crashes, which are by far the most severe type of crashes that can happen at these high speeds. It removes those and yes, you’re pulling out into traffic, but you’re going with the traffic. If someone were to make an error in that judgment, it’s more of a rear-end crash if there is an accident, it’s much less severe pretty much across the board. It really can help in some ways improve flow getting out; if you leave River Oaks after a big event, everyone wants to wait to take a left, so it just backs up. With this, you can’t take a left, so people are really forced just to take that right and make the U-turn; you can actually see that traffic start to flow a little better as well, so, that’s a major improvement. Commissioner Nate Lotts asked that exit coming out of the golf course there, are you going to have curbing put in, just to separate the inbound and outbound, so it will kind of coax them to the right? Director Burfeind replied it’s actually going to be more striping, but right at the X on there, that’s where that median is being filled in; so, it will actually be a continuous grass median. I think that’s what they’re looking at is more of that type of situation. Commissioner Lotts stated sweet, this is a gamechanger for that intersection. Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 3 of 14 Director Burfeind stated yes, it’s really good. We’re happy that MnDOT was supportive, we were able to get the grant. Just due to things out of our control, it was going to be more expensive, and then MnDOT actually awarded an additional $300K; so, it’s about $1M in grant funding for this project. So, we’re very excited about that. 2024 Pavement Management: A smaller project but still always important is our 2024 Pavement Management. These are our neighborhood reconstructs that we like to do every year; this is in the Prestige Estates neighborhood, north side of 80th Street, between Jamaica and Keats. Total reconstruct, new curb, new pavement, moving along pretty well. The curb is complete and half the paving was done, and they were doing additional paving today. So, we’re looking to wrap that up probably sometime in early August. I should mention Jamaica Avenue is a Mill and Overlay that’s currently happening. Traffic has been flipped to the other side; if everything goes well with the weather, we’re hoping to also have that complete by the end of July, early August. That will be a nice improvement in the condition of that road, as rutting is very bad on that to the point where we had a hard time even plowing it in the winter, as a lot of snow got left behind in those ruts. So, we’re very happy to have that project done. County Road 19A and 100th Street Realignment: This is a major project we’re working on with the County, it’s about a $47M project; to date, we’ve received $14M in grant funds for it, and we have requests in for an additional $21M-$22M through the Federal government. There’s about $11M between the County and City CIPs. So, we’re really looking for that final $21M-$22M in grant funding to round out this project. We could start construction in 2026, there’s probably some that we want to do and money we’d like to expend that year, into 2027, and potentially wrapping up in 2028. So, it is a two-year plus project, it’s very large. This is that whole realignment of 100th Street to go directly from the Jamaica Avenue and 100th intersection right over to the interchange of Highway 61 and County Road 19, in that direction. So, everything in purple, if you’re wondering what that color is there, that’s 3M land; we’re working with them on that, and they could either develop it themselves or actually sell for development with the construction of these roadways. So, that’s the purple areas are that are highlighted. With this, we’re slightly realigning Miller Road and County Road 19. Also, on the top there, that road coming in is an extension of the West Point Douglas frontage road. So, that comes out of the Jamaica roundabout right now and it kind of dead ends by Public Works; so, that would actually continue down to 100th Street. Real quickly, I want to just show that we actually created an animation that helps visualize this; we were able to take the County’s design profile and actually create an animation that shows what the roadway’s going to look like. So, I’ll play that on the screen here. It kind of shows the project area, and then we kind of fly into the western extent of the project, so at the Jamaica Avenue intersection. You can see the old 100th Street alignment, and here’s the new alignment, looking east with the new bridge off in the distance. So, this is looking to support both new development and existing businesses in the area. The Jamaica Avenue intersection/interchange has a lot of challenges, opens up over 500 acres of new land in the immediate area for development with good access to the highway. This is part of the Mississippi River Trail Corridor, so we’ll have new, obviously separated trails along this new roadway. Here’s the new road section, as you go east. You can see where Miller Road ties in here that’ll continue to go down to 3M. But the biggest part of the project is this bridge over the railroad tracks, which also crosses a major gas line and the Met Council sewer that serves the whole East Metro. So, a big bridge, just the construction alone is $10M. That’s a huge safety improvement for this area to have that crossing be a new intersection with Innovation Road, and then we end at a roundabout at the interchange. So, that’s what we’re trying to accomplish, it’s a huge project, always going for new grants as it’s a big undertaking. Chair Kons said that animation was very nice. Director Burfeind stated yes, and what’s really cool is with the actual profile, the CAD profiles and Google with imagery, it’s like we didn’t have to fly a drone through anything. For what you get, it’s very simple to create, so it’s amazing what you can do with technology. It helps show a lot more of what we’re doing. As much as an engineer, I love the slow way, on the screen here that really gives life to the project. Commissioner Lotts stated I was just getting ready to pull up Google Maps to figure out where that was, so that was key. Director Burfeind stated we also did that because in dealing with the grants, we’re submitting for these grants with the Federal government, we actually submit that animation as well, so it can help them see what we’re trying to accomplish. 3M Settlement Projects: Director Burfeind stated shifting gears real quick, as I wrap up, I’ll talk about some of our water projects. There’s a lot going on in this picture here, but really all I want to highlight is we have a whole bunch of interim treatment plants that continue to provide the City with water that meets all of the health-based values, all of the new EPA values that came out this year. We have two additional ones, you can see some pictures on the side, those kind of metal buildings are the two additional ones that we’ve recently constructed. Those two red boxes, the one that’s kind of on the southern part of the screen that says LZWTP; that’s a Low Zone Water Treatment Plant, that’s a permanent treatment plant that’s under construction right now and we’ll complete next year. There’s another one up by the Central Fire Station that I’ll talk about; that’s our second permanent Water Treatment Plant. Also, down by the Low Zone Water Treatment Plant, which is right by the intersection of 110th Street and Ideal, we have a new office building for part of our Public Works staff being constructed next to it. Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 4 of 14 So, first, with those two interim Water Treatment Plants, they’re continuing to serve our City with fully-treated water, just on a much more cost-effective structure. The actual treatment on the inside matches exactly what we would do in a permanent facility, and we’re actually going to move these vessels into our permanent Water Treatment Plant so we’re not wasting them. It’s all funded by the State and through 3M, but we want to be very good with those dollars; it’s still public money so we need to be very cost conscious. These are Well 9 and Well 11, and these just actually became operational in May. If you’ve gone to the archery range behind the Central Fire Station, there’s that little road that snakes down, and Well 9 is right along that road. Well 11 is right across the parking lot from the Splash Pad, so if you see that metal building, that’s what that is. This is a new technology for Minnesota, ion exchange; so, it’s the first time ion exchange has been used for PFAS treatment in the State of Minnesota. We actually did a big pilot study three years ago, funded by the 3M Settlement, to prove this technology; this building is about half the cost as if we would have had to have done a GAC treatment plant like we had been doing in this temporary scale. We’re very excited to have that up and running, and it’s working very well for our City. The Low Zone Treatment Plant is the first of our permanent treatment plants. You can see some construction photos here from over the winter. There was obviously no snow over the winter, so we were able to keep building it right through that season, so that worked out well. The bottom image is just a rendering of what it’s going to look like when it’s complete; that will be operational in May 2025, so less than a year from now. Right next to it is that new office building, so this is for our Utility and Engineering Divisions of Public Works. This has been in the works, separately, for a while because we are completely out of space at our facility, and this was the most practical way to relocate some of the divisions because it will be right by that treatment plant, so it will work really well with the Utility Division. The Engineering Division just works a lot with them, so that was another easier division to move, actually outside of City Hall, and that freed up space at City Hall. On the bottom is a rendering, and on the top is a picture I took last week, so it’s kind of that same view and how it’s coming together. We’re very excited to get that building open and operational over the winter. In the future, we would move all of Public Works and Parks there; this was built to expand to accommodate the whole department over time. Lastly, that Intermediate Zone Water Treatment Plant, this is our second of two permanent treatment plants that will serve our community. It’s going to go right behind the Central Fire Station, kind of north of those water towers. This is going to be a very similar facility to what is being built down by 110th Street, just larger, because it is about 2.5 times the capacity for treatment. This will serve everything kind of north and east of Highway 61. We’re doing our final design right now, we just got all the grant funding from the State to do that, and we look to start construction next spring. That’ll be a full two-year build, so it will be spring of 2027 when it would actually be completed. Here's just a rendering of what that one will look like. Obviously, it’s more in a residential area so we’re trying to make it so its aesthetically pleasing; with this facility, we’re really trying to mimic the Central Fire Station architecture. It’s a big building going into an area with homes, we’re very aware of that. So, we’re really trying to focus the design to minimize that impact, with semis not having to back up, so we’ll have drive through for everything. Any type of deliveries will be on far east side of the building, away from the homes. On a day-to-day basis, there’s maybe one or two Public Works pickups that come and go; the semis for changeouts of the treatment media, this will be an ion exchange treatment plant, like our new temporary ones, so that’s like once every six years. It’ll be a larger building, but it’s going to be very quiet and hopefully a good neighbor for those homes there. Director Burfeind stated that’s the last of my updates and asked if there were any questions, and none were asked. B. 2024 ANNUAL USE OF FORCE PRESENTATION Captain Brad Petersen stated thank you for giving me the time to talk about last year’s Annual Use of Force report. We’ve been doing this for a handful of years, and typically this happens in the winter or spring season; we postponed this presentation so that we could tackle the Police and Fire Departments’ Strategic Plans because those were more pressing issues. Captain Petersen stated I’m not going to paraphrase everything from the Chief’s Message, but I want to emphasize our Department’s profound commitment for community safety, progressive policies and tactics, innovative training, and state the fact that we are well ahead of the reform curve. We’ve been there for a number of years; typically, things that you’re seeing in the media and from politicians about changes and reforms to police policies and practices, we’ve done 5-to-10 years ago. That’s been a consistent theme in Cottage Grove for at least a decade now; things like crisis intervention training, deescalation, bars on certain tactics, we did that years and years ago, so, we’re well ahead of the reform curve on those things. As you know, things are changing very rapidly in law enforcement, and so we’re striving to be a very agile, adaptive, resilient agency and be very innovative and ever changing in the way we train and coach and train our officers. It’s all about being accountable to the community and emphasizing safety for all community members and our officers as well. Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 5 of 14 Mission Statement and Vision Statement As you know, these are brand new to our department with our new Strategic Plan. I just want to emphasize the fact that our Use of Force program in this report and doing things like what we’re doing tonight, having these forums with the community members, fits very well into our Strategic Plan. It’s very important for us to have these listening sessions and educate and listen to the public and adapt to what the public wants from us. We feel like we have a very good recipe for success when it comes to our tactics and training in our Use of Force program. What we’re doing here tonight is a very important piece of that puzzle. As I mentioned to the commission before, we’re looking at the commission to be our citizen advisory panel. We want to bring things to you, bring information to you, bring ideas to you, and you be that sounding board from the community back to us, to tell us whether this is a good idea or not. So, tonight, I’m bringing to you statistics and information about our Use of Force from last year. I’m really hopeful that you can give me some of your thoughts and guidance. Use of Force Report Procedures Just for those who don’t know and the listening audience, when there is a Use of Force incident, all officers are required to report that through a series of mechanisms. The sergeant will also respond to the scene and do an investigation. When that call is completed, the officers go through a reporting sequence where they report all the information that will then feed into our Use of Force Database. The sergeant does a QA on that, and then all that information, along with things like reports and squad video and the whole package then goes to a Use of Force Review Committee. Every single Use of Force that happens in Cottage Grove is reviewed by this committee on a quarterly basis. So, during that review, we’re doing things like deciding whether the Use of Force is reasonable, within policy, whether there is any equipment or training or policy issues, and we’re looking at every single Use of Force with a lens of was this preventable? Could we do this better? Would different pieces of equipment or a different tactic change the outcome and make it safer, reduce liability? Things like that. So, we’re really looking at every Use of Force under a microscope and trying to minimize the frequency that we use force. After that Use of Force Review Committee does their analysis, all that statistical information gets fed into a real time dashboard so we have access to literally any question you could ask about location, time, date, frequency, race, injuries; whatever you want to know, we can provide you real time information about that. Last Year’s Statistics I’ll just give it some context: As you know, our City’s population is growing rapidly. Along with that, our call volume is rising drastically. In the purple line, you can see our population, which is showing a slow, steady incline. In the light blue color, you can see how drastically our Calls for Service increased last year. Despite that, our crime rate is on a steady decline; so, to me, that says we’re doing something right. So, we had a little over 43,000 Calls for Service last year, and that’s everything from calls we get from Dispatch to our proactive checks of businesses, parks, vacation checks, that’s encompassing every single thing that we did last year. Of the 43,000+ Calls for Service, we only had 82 incidents that involved any amount of force at all. Just for your information, we require our officers to report very minimal Uses of Force, whereas other departments don’t require officers to report until higher thresholds. So, we’re capturing more of those incidents and more of that statistical data. Of those 82 incidents, there were 103 people involved. So, as you can imagine, sometimes we’re dealing with multiple people. We might do a felony stop on a vehicle and point our firearms at 4 people in that vehicle; so, that’s how we can get more people than incidents. On this graph, you can see our call volume steadily increasing over the last about 7 years, but despite that, our number of Uses of Force is remaining very stable. So, you’d expect and what you see in some other communities is that as the call volume increases, the Uses of Force follow that trend. Over the last decade here, we’ve really been emphasizing things like deescalation, crisis intervention training, changing our tactics, and those are things that are keeping our incidents of Use of Force down. Like I said, every time we have an incident, we’re looking at it through the lens of how can we prevent this in the future? The sheer fact is we can’t ever reach 0, using force is just an aspect of our job that’s going to happen sometime. Sometimes we have to use force, so it’s not completely avoidable, but there is plenty of opportunity to avoid Use of Force in some situations so we strive to achieve that. This graph shows that about 2/3 of our Use of Force is a response to a call that we’re dispatched to; so, it’s not something that we were self initiating, we’re not policing aggressively with an over zealous nature that’s then resulting in a lot of Use of Force. These are incidents that we’re getting called to, we’re kind of just dealt the cards that we’re dealt, and we have to deal with it to make sure that the victims, witnesses, community members are safe. Demographic Data You can see on the graph on the left that about 2/3 of the people that we use force against are not Cottage Grove residents; so, what we’ve learned over the last about 5 years is that about 2/3 of our crime is not committed by people who live in Cottage Grove. Our belief is that some of the people who are prone to crime use the suburbs as a soft target; they come here to commit retail theft and prey upon our community. So, naturally, their drawn to our attention and oftentimes they end up having Use of Force used against them. That kind of feeds into the data regarding race. You can see that we’ve got a pretty good dispersion Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 6 of 14 that closely mirrors the demographic composition of our community, but not quite. It’s not a direct translation because as I just said, people that we’re using force against aren’t our community members, so we can’t make that one-to-one comparison or apples-to-apples comparison. We have to take into account that the people that we’re using the force against are not from our community. So, I don’t put a whole lot of emphasis or stock on that statistic or that graph just because I know that it’s not showing that we’re using force disproportionately against any one particular race. The third graph shows what we’ve already known: Drugs, alcohol, and mental illness are huge contributors to Use of Force. So, we’re doing things with our Community Impact Team to reduce that effect. We’re out there in the community, trying to mitigate the amount and problematic nature of drug and alcohol abuse, putting a lot of assist on mental illness, homelessness, things like that. Particular Uses of Force Unarmed Tactics: This shows the different forms of unarmed tactics; escort hold, grappling, takedown, all the way to a higher level of force, which would be striking. Naturally, we’re using those lower levels of force more often than the more harsh forms of force, like striking. That is in line with our training, we want officers to use the minimal amount of force necessary to control a situation. So, I’m really happy when I see this graph, that we’re using those lesser forms of force more often than the higher levels of force. Intermediate Levels of Force: Taser, PepperBall, 40 mm. impact, OC sprays, and batons. We’re using the safest levels of force more often than we’re using those forms of force that are going to most likely cause injury. Don’t be freaked out by the number of uses of the Taser. As you’ll see here in a moment, those are threatened or displayed Uses of Force. So, even when an officer pulls out his Taser and says, “Do X, Y, and Z, or I’m going to use my Taser,” those are reported as an actual Use of Force. So, out of the 25 uses of the Taser, you’ll see that 20 of those were actual threats; so, we only used the Taser 5 times last year. PepperBall is a very successful tool that we implemented a couple years ago. You’re seeing that being used more and more often with a lot of success. The beauty of the PepperBall is that it’s a very, very safe tool; in fact, it’s our only non-lethal form of force. So, it’s very safe, very effective and you’re seeing that used more and more often. Baton hasn’t been used in literally two decades; so, this year we implemented a change where we’re actually giving our officers the opportunity to decide not to carry that anymore. About half of our officers decided to ditch that, and you’ll see in a later slide what they’re replacing that with. So, when I talk about the PepperBall, the thing that I like about that is it gives us a lot of options. Of course we have the option to impact the person with that pepper projectile, but there are a lot of other options; I can shoot the floor, the ceiling, the wall around them, and expose them to that chemical irritant. I can do warning shots, there are a lot of options besides just impacting the person. So, our officers are trained and coached to start with those safer and lower levels of force before they impact a person unless it’s absolutely necessary. What you’re seeing on this slide is that we didn’t impact anybody at all last year. We did area saturation, which means we shot around them, we used a lot of threats and displays of that tool. Lastly, on the right, you see the PepperBall Blast; I’ll save that discussion for a little bit later, that’s a new tool that we just implemented. Again, 40 mm. Impact, we didn’t actually deploy that at all last year, we took it out of the car, maybe threatened it or had it available to us, but we didn’t impact anybody with that. Police K9: We used the K9 a lot as a search and tracking tool, but we did not have any apprehensions or bite last year. Of course, there are times when we take the dog out, we might make its presence known, we may threaten its use, but we didn’t actually have any apprehensions last year. You can see how often it is being used to search wooded areas, buildings, etc., so it’s very useful. Chair Kons asked are any of these business related or workplace violence related, or are they all non-business? Captain Petersen replied all of the above. So, the numbers that you’re seeing are representative of everything from workplace, public venues, and private residences. If you have specific questions, I’ll be happy to jot that down and I can go right in and data mine that out. Restraints & Sedation: Captain Petersen stated this references our enhanced restraints. So, when somebody continues to be noncompliant, combative, resistant, do things that would cause self injury or injury to others, after they’ve been handcuffed, we have a number of ways that we can control them: Spit hood, so they’re not spitting at people. Hobble restraint conjures up an image of somebody being hogtied in the prone position; that’s not what we’re using that for. We restrain their feet together at the ankles, and then when we put them in a squad car, that leash is then secured in such a way that they can’t kick out windows and injure themselves in the back of the car. We would never ever hogtie somebody and put them in a prone position, especially for transport. Soft Restraints and Sedation aren’t functions of the Police Department; those are EMS functions that the ambulance crew would do, but they are techniques or situations that the Police Department and the EMS Department face a lot of liability and a lot of scrutiny, so we track those and report on those as well. Soft restraints would be when you put somebody on a stretcher in the ambulance, they’re essentially just soft handcuffs that bind their hands inside of the stretcher. As a last resort, we use chemical sedation, where they’re given a medication to sedate them and put them in a comatose state for lack of Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 7 of 14 better words so that they can’t harm themselves or somebody else on the way to the hospital. So, we see those being used fairly frequently. As I explained to you last year, we’ve had a couple individuals in our community in group home settings who are responsible for the bulk of these situations. We’re starting to get a handle on that; the one primary person, a juvenile, who we were having a problem with last year has since left; so, we’re not dealing with him, but there are a couple people that we deal with on a repeated basis that we have to use soft restraints and chemical restraints. We try our very hardest not to use this or be very smart about how we use them in these situations. Pursuits and Use of Force: Last year, we had 19 pursuits, which thankfully is down from the previous year; in 2022, we reported approximately 32 pursuits, if my memory serves me correctly. We only had to use Stop Sticks once and used the PIT maneuver three times. The Blocking Maneuver is a new technique that we implemented last year where we’re trying to mitigate the threat to the community that pursuits cause, and we’re doing that by essentially sacrificing our squads. We’re making intentional contact with the fleeing vehicle or a vehicle that we think might flee, blocking it in with physical contact at low speeds, causing minimal damage and preventing that vehicle from fleeing. We’re using this in situations where we might find a stolen vehicle that’s in a Walmart parking lot. Rather than waiting for that vehicle to leave, get on Highway 61, and then activate our lights, and giving that offender the opportunity to flee, we’ll just block it in, in the parking lot, and don’t ever give them the opportunity to flee. We’re also using this at the end of pursuits; so, when they surrender, crash, get spun out in a PIT maneuver, we’re using this technique to block them in so they can’t resume their flight. Vice Chair Kath stated I think we were presented at one time that the Police Department has drones and we follow; he asked so are pursuits part of a drone follow, too, then, these numbers we’re seeing? Captain Petersen replied no, this has nothing to do with drones; in fact, we’re not using our drones at all to track or pursue people who flee in a vehicle with our drone. We’re using State Patrol’s planes and helicopters for that. If somebody’s fleeing on foot, we would certainly use a drone for that, though. We can’t get our drones launched in time and they simply can’t fly fast enough to keep up with a fleeing vehicle. Deadly Force Incidents: As you know, deadly force incidents are a very rare thing, thankfully; we haven’t had one since 2019. However, our officers were kind of remotely involved in this incident in Woodbury within the last couple months; our officers were not the actual officers who used deadly force. Therefore, you’re not seeing it in these statistics. In Cottage Grove, a Cottage Grove officer has not used deadly force since 2019. Despite what the media and some politicians and that public narrative says, deadly force is very, very, very rare. I’m not saying that doesn’t mean it’s not very impactful in the community, it’s not something we should try to mitigate the effects of, but it’s simply to try to educate that it’s extremely, extremely rare. As you can see on the bottom of the slide, 0.00057% of any Calls for Service resulted in any use of deadly force. Injuries: Our tactics training, practices result in a high level of safety. So, last year, we only had five minor injuries to the subjects. Those five minor injuries also include things like they weren’t actually hurt, but they wanted to see a medic or our policy requires them to be checked out by a medic or they required some decon. For example, when we use PepperBall, our officers are required to do some decontamination to mitigate the prolonged effects of the PepperBall, and they’re required to be checked out by a paramedic. So, that’s going to be represented in the five minor injuries. We didn’t have any subjects that required transport or any significant medical treatment; likewise, we didn’t have any real significant injuries to our officers. We had one twisted ankle that resulted in a few hours lost. So, a very safe year for everybody involved, which we’re very proud of. Use of Force Review Committee Determinations When our Use of Force Review Committee takes a look at these incidents, first of all, we’re looking at is this reasonable, and is it within policy? 100% of those incidents were deemed reasonable and within policy. Five of them were identified as opportunities to improve, whether it was a training issue, tactics, doing a better report, things like that. We didn’t have any of those cases that were referred to Command for Internal Affairs investigations. Once again, I’m proud to say I think this is the third year in a row with zero citizen complaints regarding Use of Force; I don't know another agency that can report that same number. I can’t tell you how monumental, important, and hard to achieve that is; when we’re using force on people in the community, it’s not something that they’re happy about. Even if we do everything right, they’re very, very likely to call and complain or have ideas of how we could do it better. So, for three years in a row to say that we haven’t had any citizen complaints is a true testament to the fact that we’re doing everything right and our officers are doing things in a very professional manner. Use of Force Trends Some themes to sum this up: •Force, in general, is very seldom used; deadly force is extremely rare •Most of the time we’re resolving these incidents with deescalation, CIT strategies, or the mere threat or display of force being used •Very low injury rates, which indicates our tactics and training are very effective Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 8 of 14 •Our officers are doing a great job, they’re making great decisions, they’re being very professional, and they’re doing it in a way that represents the department very, very well Captain Petersen asked if there were any questions so far. Commissioner Jenson stated my question is not related to Use of Force, but the call volume seems like it really went up in 2023; any themes or is that something you guys are digging into to understand why? Captain Petersen replied sure, there are a couple of things that contribute to that: One is our community is growing, and so naturally, that’s just going to generate more Calls for Service. Probably the most significant reason there is a huge jump is we really stressed or exercised our officers to do a better job of documenting the work that they’ve been doing for years and years. So, over the years, they got kind of lax about logging in their park checks and their business checks and their community engagement; they were doing the work, they just weren’t hitting the keystrokes to give themselves and our department credit for the work they’re doing. So, we really stress we want you to log all of this, and that represents the bulk of that jump. Vice Chair Kath stated this is just a comment. As a commissioner and a resident, it just puts your mind at ease that you guys are doing such a great job. I just want to applaud you and the whole team of our officers and the work they’re doing. The thing that I heard, too, is you’re looking for improvement, too, even though you could rest on your laurels right now, pretty substantially, but you’re not; you’re constantly looking for process improvement and that’s important. So, thank you so much for that. Captain Petersen stated absolutely, I’ll make sure I bring that message back to the guys and gals. 2024 CGPD Training Plan Captain Petersen stated our Use of Force program and therefore our Use of Force statistics wouldn’t be so good if it wasn’t for our training program. Thanks to the support of our City leaders, with the HERO Center and the amount of time and money and resources that we have dedicated to training, that’s the only reason that I can report these numbers to you. It’s because we have the time, the money, the resources to invest in training. Statistically, we know that agencies that don’t invest in training pay more in lawsuits and liability and injuries in the long run. If you invest on the front end with training, you can mitigate those numbers. Our goal is to exceed the Minnesota POST Board standards for professionalism and professional development and make sure that our officers are very proficient in their duties. There are some skill sets that you don’t have time to look up, there is some information that we don’t have time to look up, there are lives on the line when we’re called upon to rescue a hostage; they need to be very, very skilled and knowledgeable about how to do that when those tactics are appropriate. Those are perishable skills, so we need to practice those throughout the year; even though we don’t actually do real-life hostage rescues very often, but when we’re called upon, the public demands that we’re good at our jobs. That requires training time. Also, there are those lower stress, lower-priority issues that the officers need to understand, too; they need to essentially know every law, every statute, every ordinance. When the public calls us there, they expect us to know all of that, and that requires training for officers to stay fresh and current on that. Our practices and laws are constantly changing, year to year to year; so, again, it requires a lot of training time. So, our goal is basically just to provide the best service to our citizens that we possibly can knowing that lives are at stake, there’s a lot of liability, there’s a lot of safety at risk. Training Emphasis Instructor and Leader Development: This past year we really wanted to emphasize leadership development. We had a lot of turnover this last year, we had a lot of promotions, a lot of people in new roles, just a lot of growth and a lot of newness in the department this last year. So, with that, we’ve devoted a lot of time to everybody understanding their roles and responsibilities and developing those new leaders in their roles. Risk Mitigation and Deescalation Strategies: We continued to emphasize risk mitigation and deescalation. Safer Vehicle Intervention Tactics: As I talked about, we had implemented a lot of tactics and training surrounding vehicles. What we noticed in 2022 is that a lot of our close calls and injuries and liability was in and around vehicle pursuits and Use of Force around vehicles and things like that. So, we put a lot of emphasis this past year in making that safer and smarter. As you can see from this chart, at a bare minimum our officers are getting 92 hours of In-Service Training per year. On the right, you can see how those numbers are devoted. It’s not 92 hours of shooting and wrestling, it’s everything from mental health awareness to officer wellness to First Aid, anything you can think of. The officers have an opportunity to go to professional development and leadership trainings and external courses; so, on average, our officers are doing about 150-200 hours of training per year. Of course, officers in specialties, like those who are S.W.A.T. members, might be doing 500 hours of training per year. PepperBall Blast As I said previously, we gave officers the opportunity to drop their baton this past year and most of them now are carrying the PepperBall Blast in its place. This is based on the PepperBall system, but it does not shoot a spherical ball that contains a pepper powder, it just shoots a cloud of pepper powder. Its got an effective range of about 10 feet; it can be used at a one-foot Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 9 of 14 standoff. It’s really intended as a self-defense tool, so if somebody’s attacking me, I can pull this thing out, deploy it, shoot a cloud of powder onto their face and deter them. It could also be used to buy me time, space, and distance because we know that we don’t want to be in the position where I’m close to an offender who’s attacking me and I don’t have time to think about my options and I need to make a snap decision under stress. So, this gives me an opportunity to use this, create some time, distance, and separation and either get away from the problem or use my tools and brain to control the problem in a smarter way. 2023/2024 Equipment & Policy Updates •One of the things we have been working on recently as we work through the budget process is getting new Tasers. So, Taser informed us at the end of 2024 that our current Tasers will no longer be supported after 2025. So, we’re working with Council to hopefully secure the funding to get new Tasers in 2025. I’ll leave it at that. •We also invested in robots and drones. Again, we’re trying not to put our officers in positions where they’re in harm’s way or we need to make decisions in close proximity with time compression. So, we’ll put technology in there to scout a location out or communicate with an offender or subject. That’s just safer for everybody involved. •This is a PepperBall pistol. Our C.S.O.s and Reserves were formerly carrying Tasers; we decided that the Taser is not the best tool for them. A Taser is really a control tool vs. a self-defense tool. So, we decided that this PepperBall pistol would be a better self-defense tool for them. So, they’ve been equipped and trained with this tool. We haven’t had any deployments yet, I don’t expect to have very many of these ever. I can’t think of a single Taser deployment from our Reserve or C.S.O. programs ever, so I think this will be very much the same. We probably will never have a deployment and if we do, it will be very few, but it gives them an option to defend themselves if they find themselves in that situation. Captain Petersen stated after everything I’ve talked about, I’d like to bring your attention to this incident. It talks about our officers demonstrating the best tactics, best practices, having great equipment, great training, working well as a team, and having a very good outcome. Without all those things we’ve been talking about tonight, this could have had a very different outcome: We were called to an address where family was calling 911, saying their family member was experiencing mental illness or a mental health crisis, and he was threatening to kill family. Our patrol officers arrived very quickly and evacuated the family members to safety. At that point, once the family members are out, and there’s nobody else in harm’s way, we could really slow down that incident, focus on creating time, distance, space, and negotiating with that subject and using our CIT skills. That’s exactly what we did, we made contact with the subject, who was inside, tried to use our negotiation skills. We even had S.W.A.T. negotiators come, try to talk this person out of the house. Meanwhile, our officers are using things like robots, drones, shields, PepperBall 40 mm., to have all those plans in place if we needed them. After a lengthy period of time, we realized that due to this individual’s severe mental health crisis, we weren’t going to be able to talk him out of the house. So, we implemented a tactical plan using PepperBall to coax him out of the house. That’s what we did, we used the PepperBall, he surrendered peacefully, and then we got him into custody and got him to the hospital where he needed to be to get care. So, it was a great outcome for everybody involved. Great demonstration of all these tools and tactics and policies that we have to have a safe outcome. 2023 Annual S.W.A.T. Report As you know, we have a multijurisdictional S.W.A.T. team that comprises about 70-to-80 members throughout the County. It’s a Tier-2 S.W.A.T. team, with Tier-1 being the highest, capable of everything including hostage rescues. So, the theme continues here where our call volume is increasing annually. The major reason for that is S.W.A.T. made a decision about two years ago to do a lot more proactive work, meaning we’re getting involved in community events. So, rather than responding reactively when there’s a problem, we’re deploying proactively to make sure or try to prevent problems. For example, at Strawberry Fest, you see S.W.A.T. officers there, at Lumberjack Days in Stillwater you’re seeing S.W.A.T. there to try to deter any problems; but also, we’re engaging the community and learning from the community, teaching the community, recruiting. It’s a great opportunity for S.W.A.T. to get out there and engage with the community. There were 64 missions last year, and a large number of those were those security missions or community engagement missions. In fact, 22 of them were QRF, 24 of them were PR events, very few of them were traditional S.W.A.T. missions. There were 5 warrant services, 1 hostage rescue, 0 barricaded individuals, and 3 mutual aid calls where we’re called to Hennepin County or Dakota County to help them out. So, really only less than 10 traditional S.W.A.T. missions, whereas in past years, you would see in the neighborhood of 20-to-30. Again, we’re teaching our officers to deescalate a lot of these situations, we’re not doing those high-risk search warrants that were really typical for S.W.A.T. to do in the past; we’re finding smarter ways to get those people into custody. We’re giving our patrol officers the tools and training to resolve a lot of these situations safely that would otherwise have been S.W.A.T. missions in the past. So, you’re seeing those traditional S.W.A.T. missions decrease. Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 10 of 14 We didn’t do any no-knock, nighttime search warrants last year. We do still reserve that ability to do those for very, very high- risk situations, but we did not have any last year. In past years, there had been very few of those as we’re doing things like surround and callouts, where we’ll show up to a search warrant, surround the house, use negotiators to call the subject out to us rather than doing those high-risk dynamic search warrants that aren’t safe or smart for anybody. S.W.A.T. Training Plan Our S.W.A.T. officers are getting a lot of training, and that’s by virtue of NTOA standards; they’re getting minimally 190 hours of S.W.A.T. training per year to stay proficient in all those high-risk skills and knowledge. 2023 S.W.A.T. Accomplishments •We ordered a brand new armored vehicle, so now we’re going to have three armored vehicles in Washington County. As you know, Washington County poses some geographical challenges with its shape; it’s very difficult to cover that county with our current two armored vehicles, response times are just not satisfactory. So, the Sheriff’s Office purchased a new BearCat, which will hopefully be here by the end of the year. •One of the kind of unique things that we’re doing is our negotiators and our tech operators are being cross-trained as tactical operators. What we found is as we try to use our negotiation skills and CIT, it was sucking our negotiators closer and closer to the problem where historically they would be in a command post, or a trailer, or someplace off site, communicating with the subjects. When they talk to some of these individuals, they’re having to be too close to the problem, which obviously causes some potential problems. So, we wanted to give them all the tools, training, skills to be comfortable in those situations. So, we’re cross-training them as if they were tactical operators, but their primary focus is still negotiations or operating drones, robots, things like that. Captain Petersen stated that was a lot of information, I tried to summarize it as much as possible, but I’d love to hear some of your thoughts or feedback guidance. Commissioner Kelsey Moyer asked for the robot operators, do they have certain training or programming that they go through, too, or how are they? Because you said there are drones and robots; so, I don’t really know what to picture when you say robots, I just don’t know how that works. Captain Petersen stated we have quite a number of different robots. So, some are very small, smaller than a shoebox, to some being as big as this podium, and they give us different capabilities. The small ones basically we can drive into a situation and just get to see what’s in there, but we can’t interact with the environment besides just seeing. We do have some that can do two- way communication, so we can drive that robot in there, have two-way visual and two-way communication where we can talk to a person from a safe distance. We have others that we can drive in that have manipulator arms that can grab things, lift things, carry things, do all the things that you see on the movies. Yes, to operate any and all of those, there is different degrees of training that our operators go through. So, the same thing for the drones, we have drones that are meant to be outside, we have drones that are meant to be inside to fly in confined spaces, and our operators are trained to fly those as well. Commissioner Moyer stated so, they’re not self-operated? There’s always somebody doing something. Captain Petersen replied there’s nothing autonomous, they’re always operated by a person. Commissioner Moyer asked for the PepperBall pistol, how will that be placed? I guess there will be training for that, but there’s also been an incident, “I thought I grabbed my Taser, but I grabbed my gun,” and that’s kind of the same structure. Is that something that is kind of like being focused on? Or are they placed on the same side, or how does that work? Captain Petersen replied for that very reason, our sworn police officers will never carry a PepperBall pistol. Only our non- sworn officers, our C.S.O.s and our Reserves, because they don’t carry a pistol. So, they’ll be carrying it on their duty belt, on their strong side; it’s very brightly marked, it’s yellow, and it doesn’t look like a firearm. But there will never be an opportunity for an officer to use that; we’ve written that into our policy that the sworn officers won’t even pick up that PepperBall pistol, they’re prohibited by policy from using it. Commissioner Moyer stated I would just think that would be hard in just such a quick decision, like how to, oh, gosh, what did I grab? Captain Petersen replied yes, that’s a real thing, and so we don’t want our officers carrying both, a pistol and a PepperBall pistol. Commissioner Moyer stated I like that, thank you. Chair Kons stated that was exactly my question, are officers still using Tasers and if no, were they going to replace them with the PepperBall pistol? So, the answer’s no, I got that, but that’s great news. One more quick question regarding the S.W.A.T. information that you just went over. You said you had 64 record-breaking missions, which is fantastic, but what I didn’t know is were they real events or were they practice events or were they partnerships with other communities? Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 11 of 14 Captain Petersen replied those were all real events. Let’s go back to that slide so I can cite stats. So, 24 of those were public relations events, so they invited us to come to talk to the Boy Scouts or they wanted us to do a recruiting table at Park High School for their career day; those would be PR events. The QRF event is more of a security mission where we’re invited to be there, three-or-four operators will be there for Strawberry Fest to try and deter or respond to any problems that happen. So, 46 of those events were proactive in nature, not real incidents; 6 of those were hostage rescue or warrant service, things of that nature. Chair Kons said that’s excellent; it sounds like you guys had a great year last year. Captain Petersen stated yes, and those are the years we like to see where we can get out and engage with the community and not respond to problems, that’s a great year. Chair Kons said thank you, well done, congratulations. Commissioner Jenson stated thanks for the data and the transparency. I really appreciate the balanced approach of safety for the community as well as for your officers, so that’s really good to see. Captain Petersen replied great, thank you. Chair Kons stated I echo that; thank you for your passion to keep our community safe, it’s much appreciated. Captain Petersen replied thank you. Commissioner Lotts stated I actually just came up with something. The new BearCat, have you guys determined like prestaging locations yet? Captain Petersen replied that’s still up to some discussion. The thought is the brand-new one will be at the Sheriff’s Office, of course, because they’re buying it. The old BearCat, which is probably going to be refurbished, the thought is that’s going to go to the Forest Lake-Hugo area, and they will keep our MRAP for now. So, there’s some discussion and some wiggle room of how we’re going to move those chess pieces around, but that’s the initial thought. Commissioner Lotts stated cool, I just wasn’t sure if we needed to start having some foresight for facilities to store this thing. Captain Petersen replied I wish, I would love to have the BearCat, but. 8. BUSINESS ITEMS A. HUNTING MAPS Captain Petersen stated before you is a memo that has the recommendations on it, the changes to the archery map. So, this is the 2024-2025 hunting season’s archery map, which you see displayed here. It has the recommended changes already made to it. I also have available the 2023-2024 hunting map, so the previous version, if you wish to see it and compare the changes. Essentially, the Planning Department has recommended a couple changes: We’re removing a parcel of land in the southwest portion of the City, which is adjacent to the DNR’s land, at about 103rd and Hadley Avenue. We’re removing two parcels of land at 90th and Keats, and a small piece of land by Hope Glen Farms and East Point Douglas Road, another small portion by Highway 61 and Kimbro Avenue, and two parcels in the north part of the City near 65th Street. The Police Department is a part of these recommendations if you so wish to discuss them or identify these a little bit closer on the map, we can work through that. Would you like to have that discussion at this time, or do you want to just go ahead with that recommendation? A female commissioner asked is it primarily because of development or because of requests from homeowners? Captain Petersen replied it’s all development related, so some of this has been rezoned or now it’s too close to something that developed on an adjacent parcel, so now it’s too close, things like that. I should also say that there haven’t been any significant changes to our hunting ordinances; as you can see from the memo, there were no hunting-related complaints last year. We did have a couple complaints of hearing gunshots throughout the town, and we had one complaint that an arrow ended up in my yard, but they weren’t hunting related. So, there were zero hunting complaints last year, so our ordinances are very effective, do what they’re supposed to do. Our hunting map is doing what it’s supposed to do, so we don’t see any reason at this point to make any significant changes other than those five minor changes that I outlined. Chair Kons asked can you circle the areas that you just mentioned that you’re going to remove? I wasn’t able to check that as fast as you said it. Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 12 of 14 Captain Petersen replied the first one is right down here, at 103rd and Hadley, this triangular, pink-shaped portion. Chair Kons asked so there’s no archery currently, or is this the proposed map? Captain Petersen replied both; so, formerly, there was hunting allowed in this triangular area. So, last year, you could hunt there, and we’re proposing now that there should not be hunting there. Chair Kons stated okay, so the pink is what we’re proposing, okay, got it. Captain Petersen stated 90th and Keats, which would be right in here; there were a couple spots where you could hunt. Chair Kons stated, okay, but there’s still 6 yellow plots right there, too. Is that okay? Council Member Thiede stated those are private residences, so they can hunt on their own land; obviously, you can’t go hunt on other property without permission. Chair Kons stated I’m good with that, I’m just trying to figure out why we moved some, but not others, but it’s a private residence, okay. Captain Petersen stated Hope Glen and East Point Douglas, right down in this area; I apologize, but I don't know the exact parcel. Chair Kons stated that’s okay, just the general area is good. Captain Petersen stated and 65th would be up in here somewhere. Chair Kons stated okay, thank you for that, I can figure it out that way. Captain Petersen stated so what we just talked about is related to archery; we’re not recommending any changes to the firearms map, so we don’t see any reason to change that based on the development or future plans at this point. Chair Kons stated I’m okay with moving forward with that recommendation. Motion by Vice Chair Kath that we accept the hunting maps as has been presented this evening. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lisa Rediske. Motion carried: 7-0. 9. COMMISSION COMMENTS - None. 10. STAFF REPORTS AND MATERIALS Gary Orloff, Superintendent-Streets, gave highlights of the Street Department, Forestry, and Stormwater work being done: •The big thing is we got the thin overlay started about two weeks ago, we’re out in old Cottage Grove, off of 77th Street, kind of by the old fire station there. A lot of pleased residents, it’s pretty much finished up those three streets off 77th that were in pretty bad shape. This year we’re looking at putting down about 2,000 tons in that process. •We have two interns that have started Emerald Ash Borer treatment; they have roughly about 450 trees to treat, and they do about 30 a day. •We have two sweepers out, sweeping the Business District, so anytime it hasn’t been raining, they’ve been out. •Mowing: We’ve got the big tractor out now in rural areas, so he can only make one pass back; again, that’s kind of been limited with the amount of rain, but we’re getting caught up on that. •Stormwater: Our guys are in catch basins that actually have cement rings in them, under that metal grate you see, so they’re doing what’s called a tuckpointing process. Between the rings, they tuckpoint and mud in there, and that prevents big cave-ins that can cause the road to cave in, and it’s up to a $5K process to get that thing back in. They can get in and out in about 20 minutes per catch basin. He asked if there were any questions, but none were asked. Director Burfeind stated there’s one other Public Works update I would like to add. That’s related to our lead service line inventory project. A little while back, the Federal EPA had revised the run of copper rules that required every water supplier in the country to inventory every water service connected to their water system, really looking for lead service lines. Now, what’s interesting in Cottage Grove is we know we do not have lead service lines, just from our experience and really how new of a city we are; but the challenge is you have to have proof of that, either through construction specifications or City Ordinance. In 1981, lead was just banned, so you know after that everything could not be lead, but there are about 1,300 homes that were built between 1958 and 1961 that were before our City Ordinance went into place requiring copper services. Those three neighborhoods, the south side of Highway 61, in that Thompson Grove neighborhood, and one in the Thompson Grove Estates, kind of by Armstrong Elementary, we know have copper water services, many of our employees live there. We know what’s in place, but you have to have proof. Unfortunately, constructions specs were by a different company, not the engineer, Bonestroo, that the City signed on with in 1961. So, we have to physically do survey inspections to show that. So, a lot of communities did a self-completed survey process so residents in those areas received a letter a few weeks ago with just a QR Code, and it’s very Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 13 of 14 simple. It goes right to a GIS database that we created, they just put their address, and then show a picture of their service line, it shows that it’s copper, which we know it is, and then it’s completed. So, about 100-to-150 of those have been completed, and we’re sending out another letter asking for residents to do the survey with another two-week window. But at that point, we will have to work to complete them all ourselves with our own staff, so it’s a little bit of an effort for our Utility Department, but it’s the requirement. We’re still better off than cities like St. Paul, who have over 100,000 services, and they’ve been doing this for years to try to document those. It’s a little bit of work, but if you hear about this letter that folks are receiving, I know when they got it, a few folks didn’t know if this was legitimate, wondered what is this, even though we have all of our information on there. It is the City of Cottage Grove asking for this for about those 1,300 homes. So, if you know someone who asks you about that, it is a survey we’re looking for them to complete. So, that’s my only update. Commissioner Lotts asked how many did you get back? Director Burfeind replied right now, we’re at about 150. So, we’re hoping with our second-round letter, if we can get to 300 or 400, we’re trying to get as many as we can without our staff. But it will be very quick; we’re actually planning to probably just start while we do our meter appointments and things like that, we’re doing them, naturally, to check more off. But we’ll just start either calling folks or just going door to door and seeing if they’re available, because it’ll take us about two minutes to complete it. So, it’s very quick. Commissioner Lotts stated that QR Code idea, whoever’s that was, was fantastic. I don’t know who generated that, but that’s a dynamite idea. Director Burfeind stated yes, it was actually really slick where our administration team could develop the code, and our own GIS staff could create the database, and it feeds right into a database that the State is looking for. So, it will go right to them, basically, so it’s very quick and efficient. Captain Petersen stated I gave you a copy of our Quarter 2 newsletter, so feel free to review that. Send any questions or concerns my way, and I’ll just highlight a couple of the major things: As you know, we implemented the new Strategic Plan, so we’re making tons of progress on that, and by all metrics and measures, officers in our department are doing a great job with all those goals and Strategic Plans. We’re very proud to say that we had CPR-AED saves in the last quarter, so our patrol officers saved four lives with the rapid response with CPR and AED in the last quarter. I’m excited to say that we just posted for our Embedded Social Worker position, so that’s going to be a great addition to our Community Impact Team; that’s going to really help address some of these community issues like homelessness, chemical abuse, alcoholism, mental illness, things like that. That’s kind of the missing link of our Community Impact Team, and so, getting that person on board is going to be a great asset. Along those same lines, we’re really close to implementing a Therapy/Service K9. So, we’re putting together the final pieces of that, a couple funding, policy, and acquisition pieces; I’m about 98% sure that that’s going to happen early in 2025, so that’ll be super exciting. Obviously, this is our busy season for community engagements and special events. So, our officers have been out hitting all those smaller events, lemonade stands, playing in the park, and things like that on a constant basis, all day long. We’re also planning and engaged in those bigger events like Strawberry Fest and our upcoming events, like Night to Unite, and things like that. So, we’re super busy engaging with the public. Upcoming Events: Night to Unite on August 6; the Cottage Grove Open House on September 16; a Citizens Academy is starting in October, so if you know anybody who wants to learn more about the department, engage with the department, we’re still looking for some people to fill up that Citizens Academy. Chair Kons asked how do you sign up for the Citizens Academy? Captain Petersen stated either follow the link from our website or any of our social media or call one of our Community Impact Team members, or really just talk to anybody and we’ll get them hooked up. Captain Petersen stated like I said, there’s tons of really good information in this newsletter, so when you get a chance to digest that, I’m sure you’ll have some questions or comments, so you can feel free to direct those my way at any time. Thank you. 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS Council Member Thiede stated good evening, everyone. One of the things I’ll say in terms of activity and you guys have got the presentations, too; we’ve got both the Fire Department and the Police Department Strategic Plans at Council, and had very good discussions and they were received very well. It was an excellent job that was done, so good work. Also, I guess one of the other things is we’re working on budget right now, so there’s a lot of that activity. Public Services Commission Meeting July 15, 2024 Page 14 of 14 We also just appreciate kind of a response back, but we just put out an offer for a new Communications Manager. So, if there are things that you think would be better on how we communicate to the public or internally, now is definitely a good time to kind of get some of those comments in. Talk to your peers and your network and everything else and just see if there’s certain things that people would like to see to get better, more complete communication. Because even sometimes when we think that we’re doing a good job of communication, you talk to somebody and they say, oh, gosh, I never heard about that, right? So, anything that we can do to improve that would be great. Talking about communication, I think you all should have recently received the Water Quality Report. I looked through it, it looked pretty good and everything, but definitely if you have any feedback or comments related to that and how there might be better ways to communicate things to the public, etc., that would be great to get feedback on. Council Member Thiede asked if the commissioners had any questions for him. Chair Kons stated this may not be a Cottage Grove question, but the construction on Highway 61 that they’re preparing for, “Expect Delays,” what are they doing? Council Member Thiede asked Director Burfeind to answer that. Director Burfeind replied that’s a good question. So, as you head north, I’m assuming you’re talking about into Newport, towards 494, that’s just some concrete pavement repairs. If you remember in Cottage Grove last year, it was much more extensive, but we were down to one lane for probably a couple months. This is just some smaller repairs they had to do to the concrete pavement, so it was just last weekend, then this coming weekend, assuming the weather cooperates, is when they’ll be doing it. So, it was down to one lane over this past weekend, as you probably saw. It is on the weekend, so that helps minimize that traffic delay. If everything goes well, they’ll do the same next weekend, and then wrap up that work. Chair Kons stated that’s huge, that’s great. Director Burfeind stated we reached out to MnDOT because the sign just said, “Starts July 12, Expect Delays,” and that’s very open ended. Chair Kons said, yes, we didn’t know what it was. Council Member Thiede asked so is the work on 80th Street where you’ve got Highway 61, that was not part of that work, was it? Director Burfeind replied no, that was separate. Council Member Thiede stated so, that was a separate thing, which I think caused a lot of people to be confused. So, that wasn’t related to the other, and it’s being done at night or over the weekends, right? Director Burfeind stated that’s correct. MnDOT did a redo; that was a MnDOT job because they own that 80th Street bridge, and then the interchanges there. That pavement was in terrible condition, so they finally fixed that. But I know it was very painful for that day and a half, during the day while they did that work. That’s a little bit of a Band-Aid; the City’s going to be redoing the rest of 80th Street in 2026, and they’re going to fully redo those interchanges as well, but the pavement was just so poor they had to do something. 12. ADJOURNMENT Vice Chair Kath made a motion to adjourn the meeting; a female commissioner seconded. Motion carried: 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:21 p.m. Minutes transcribed by J. Graf and reviewed by Kari Reubish. 1 City Council Action Request 7.F. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Community Development Agenda Category Action Item Title Planning Commission Meeting Minutes (2024-08-26) Staff Recommendation Accept and place on file the minutes from the August 26, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. Planning Commission Minutes 2024-08-26 COTTAGE GROVE PLANNING COMMISSION August 26, 2024 12800 Ravine Parkway South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 COUNCIL CHAMBER - 7:00 P.M. The Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the Council Chamber and telecast on Local Government Cable Channel 16. 1. CALL TO ORDER Frazier called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Pradeep Bhat-Here; Ken Brittain-Here; Jessica Fisher-Here; Evan Frazier-Here; Eric Knable-Here; Derek Rasmussen- Here; Emily Stephens-Absent. Members Absent: Emily Stephens Staff Present: Emily Schmitz, Community Development Director; Riley Rooney, Associate Planner; Zac Dockter, Parks & Recreation Director; Tony Khambata, City Council Liaison 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Knable made a motion to approve the agenda. Fisher seconded. The motion was approved unanimously (6-to-0 vote). 4. OPEN FORUM Frazier opened the open forum and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non -agenda item. No one spoke. Frazier closed the open forum. 5. CHAIR’S EXPLANATION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS Frazier explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council, and that the City Council makes all final decisions. In addition, he explained the process of conducting a public hearing and requested that any person wishing to speak should go to the podium and state their full name and address for the public record. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND APPLICATIONS A. Lot Split at 9016 Kimbro – Cases MS2024-016 & V2024-016 Al Stewart has applied for a minor subdivision to subdivide a 6.45 -acre parcel of land located at 9016 Kimbro Avenue South into two lots, a 3.1-acre parcel with the existing house and structures and a 3.35-acre buildable parcel, and a variance from the minimum 180-foot lot width at the road. Rooney summarized the staff report and recommended approval based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes - Regular Meeting August 26, 2024 Page 2 of 6 Frazier asked if there were any questions for staff. Brittain stated this looks familiar; have we seen this application before? Rooney replied no, but in the spring we saw a separate minor subdivision for an almost-identical parcel, just further south on Kimbro, but it has a similar layout. So, it will look very familiar. Fisher asked so when construction starts on the new parcel, will there be a required easement for that driveway since it will service both parcels? Rooney replied yes. So, the Right-of-Way is already taken along the road so they’ll have a Right-of-Way easement that will happen, but they already have that requested along Kimbro Avenue. Fisher asked because they’ll have to drive on Parcel A to get to Parcel B from that particular access, correct? Rooney replied no, so they’ll still have their existing access down here, so each of the parcels will have their own. Fisher said right, but will Parcel B still be able to access their parcel through Parcel A, or will that be completely separated? Rooney replied no, that will be completely separated. Brittain stated the drawing appears to show a connection point from that barn area to Parcel A’s driveway; is that not going to be there? Rooney replied I don’t believe so, but perhaps the person here on behalf of the applicant can answer that more specifically. Bhat asked so why is that requirement there if they have an 80 -foot minimum requirement for the approach? Rooney replied it’s essentially there to ensure that the lots are buildable for a future subdivision once utilities are built in tha t area. So, we just want to make sure that we’re keeping with the intent of the District to provide Low-Density areas. So, by having the wider frontage, usually you’re just going to have a wider lot in general; sometimes when there are subdivisions to divide the land, we wi ll go shorter if it makes sense within our Code. But typically we do want them larger, so that the lot is lower in density in general. Frazier asked if the applicant would like to approach the podium and add anything additional. Todd Olin said I’m with Land & Resource Consulting, I’m here on behalf of Al Stewart. Just a couple of additional details, Riley did a really comprehensive job of revealing all these. To answer the question if there is a connection there, there will have to be an easement over both the entrance on Parcel A and then a portion of Parcel B; but she’s correct in that if there’s no connection, no easements, and they will both have their independent accesses at the end of the day. What we were requesting is that both accesses on Parcel B be allowed to be maintained until a driveway is necessary on Parcel A, then we’d close the other one. So, at the end of the day, it would remain with one access per lot. Olin said one of the items I just want to point out, and I don't know if there’s two different things on the agenda to discuss, the plan itself and maybe the variance. On the variance, what we’re trying to do is save some character here; there’s a couple of outbuildings, they’re farm-type buildings, and I wouldn’t say they’re a staple of Cottage Grove, but they’re there and they’ve been there for a long time. What we’d like to do is be able to conform to all of the area community standards with the exception of the frontage and b e able to save those barns and the existing house and the septic that goes with the existing home. The configuration that you have on Parcel A is really a rendition that could be, but it really is dependent on when a building permit is requested, as there will be an architect that would design that to fit into that lot. We went out and did some soil borings to make sure that those areas do work and do perk; so, we’re not creating a situation where we’re going through all these steps to do a split that doesn’t work at the end of the day anyway. The last thing I wanted to point out was under all other bulk area standards, the intent is followed with the exception of that frontage. Because we have 6.6 acres and change and your minimum lot standard size is 3 acres, and then of course there are setbacks and everything else that applies, but we can conform to all those things with the exception of that frontage and still following intent. Olin said I’m here for questions if you have any. Frazier asked commissioners if there were any questions for the applicant. Rasmussen stated it sounds like you guys did your homework with the soil borings and all that investigation. I’m just looking at this drawing, and there seems to be a lot of grade change. I can’t really tell if it’s going down or up, but I thi nk it’s down, but the house fits on that hill and the septic without any concerns. It seems like it’s kind of all built on a hill is what it looks like here. Olin replied that’s correct. The grade falls somewhat gently away from the road, but then once it gets behind the existing septic and barn, then it kind of flattens out and then does rise towards the west. I picked a point where it tucks into the hill so they’d have a view out over the lower area, but again, the septics would work based on the grades. Of course, when we do septics, they have to remain native soils; what we do as a first step is we go out and we would in this case remove some trees but then fence them so nobody would drive over them and compact Planning Commission Minutes - Regular Meeting August 26, 2024 Page 3 of 6 them, and they would stay the way they are. So, we picked spots where we knew the grades would work. If there’s a different configuration, they’ll have to go through that again, and I suspect they will when the building permit is applied for. Rasmussen said I couldn’t tell looking at this if it was sloped down or upwards, but hearing that it goes up makes a little more sense, thank you. Frazier opened the public hearing. I’m Chris Meyer, I’m the next-door neighbor, and I’m quite familiar with the lay of the land because I used to own that also. It’s quite a drainage easement, pretty much where that new lot land is going to be. And where that driveway would be, there would have to be some area where that water can come through because in the spring when there’s a big snow melt, it’s like a river. I’m not too concerned about my property being affected, but I just had a question about how they would take care of that. Frazier asked okay, as far as the drainage easement goes, if they’ve taken care of that and thought of that? Meyer said when I was there, I did the split, 3 acres off, and the City came out and they told me if I ever had a problem with those 2 old outbuildings, I couldn’t replace them because of the easement. So, that driveway is going to be in part of the drainage easement. So, I’m just wondering how it will be addressed. As no one else spoke, Frazier closed the public hearing. Frazier asked Rooney if she wanted to answer the question about the drainage easement and what’s going on, on that side of the property. Rooney replied I am no engineering expert; however, from my perspective as a planner, the driveway meets all setbacks proposed for the District, so we don’t have any concern, at least for setbacks, on our end. As for drainage, I would probably typically defer to a drainage expert, perhaps Todd Olin can answer some questions; otherwise, we can always ask. Schmitz stated so with drainage, we’d certainly look at that with a driveway permit within the Right-of-Way; we certainly wouldn’t allow for construction of a driveway or any infrastructure that would impact drainage into an adjacent property. We’ll have to do some looking into the easement that I’m not familiar with, so we’ll need to dig into that to be sure that anything that’s proposed isn’t impacting a condition of an easement that exists. Frazier stated I guess my concern is at this point, there’s no proposal to actuall y build on this property. So, what we’re looking for is just making sure that this split that we’re making is making two buildable lots; so, I guess the concern at this point is do we believe that this drainage issue may cause an issue with buildability on the property or are we confident that this is not going to be an issue, as far as getting to the point where now we’re talking about a driveway that can’t be there. Schmitz replied no, I’m certain that there’s a way that we would work through if there was a challenge as it relates to drainage. Frazier said all right, thank you. Frazier asked if there were any further questions. Fisher stated I don’t have a question, but I just wanted to speak on the variance because variances are typically granted when there’s some sort of hardship that isn’t made by the person who owns the property. Considering where the septic line is and you had mentioned it specifically, so I see what you did with the variance and why you’re asking for it, and it makes sense to me. My only concern is going back to the easements, because everything’s fine and dandy until someone drives on someone else’s property and makes somebody angry; so, I would just be aware of that as they go through their approval process if that is going to stay connected like it looks like it is in the plan, that those agreements are clear because we don’t want people fighting. Rooney replied we would want to ensure that those are taken into hand before a building permit is addressed on that parcel. Fisher stated and I would imagine if someone is going to build a driveway back there, they would build it so it wouldn’t wash out every year ; so, hopefully those things can be addressed as they go. Frazier asked if there were any further comments or discussion from the commission; there were none. Fisher made a motion to approve the minor subdivision and variance at 9016 Kimbro, subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Rasmussen seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6-to-0 vote). 7. PRESENTATION A. Preserve.Play.Prosper Campaign Dockter stated I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you tonight about the Preserve.Play.Prosper Plan, which is basically an opportunity for our residents to vote on reinvesting in the parks and outdoor spaces in Cottage Grove. Parks and recreation is a point of pride in Cottage Grove and we see that in how our facilities are being used and how Planning Commission Minutes - Regular Meeting August 26, 2024 Page 4 of 6 the growth of those facilities are being used; I’m sure you as commissioners see it, that every time we build a neighborhood, people are pretty excited to get their new neighborhood park and use the facilities, whether its trails, park facilities, programs, events, or whatever it is. We’re seeing that growth in Cottage Grove with the growth of the community and just with the excitement of the investments we’ve made. It’s getting harder and harder to make those capital investments, so we always take a lot of pride that our oldest and smallest parks are just as well maintained as our largest and newest parks; but it’s those capital investments that kind of catch up to you, those multimillion dollar investments that are just hard to keep up with. We haven’t had a parks capital referendum in over 40 years, as 1984 was the last time we had one of those. We’ve been doing a lot of studying, trying to figure out what residents want in their Parks & Recreation system. If you go on the website, there are like 5 or so different surveys; the most recent was the 2022 survey, which was called the Reimagine Recreation Survey. But we kind of compiled all those different surveys and all that different data, and we came up with a list of what we thought the community wanted in their Parks & Recreation system for today and then also in the future. And then we tried to put those into three distinct projects; so, really what I want to make sure the commissioners know and what the community knows is that this wasn’t a knee-jerk reaction; this is 5, 10 years in the making. These studies go back 10 years, so it’s taken a lot of work and a lot of listening to the community, trying to get to a point where we think we’re asking the community to vote on something that we think they want. So, introducing the Preserve.Play.Prosper Plan, based on the feedback we had three projects at $36 million that we’re asking the community to consider. The three projects are: Upgrade and enhance Hamlet Park; Create a new 33.3-acre, nature-based park at Mississippi Dunes Park; and Transformation of the River Oaks Golf Course and Event Center into a year-round recreation destination for all ages. Hamlet Park: Is our oldest and largest park in Cottage Grove. The proposed $17 million plan for that project specifically would: • Upgrade the playground equipment • Build a new four-season recreational building • Install a small splashpad • Create a new skateboard park • Build an amphitheater • Create an art walk/sculpture garden with benches and informational kiosk • Add a synthetic turf sports field with lighting in the existing location of the current soccer -football complex • Finish the south baseball park complex by constructing those last two baseball fields and the additional parking lot • Finishing off the roads and trails and landscape that go with all of that Mississippi Dunes Park-Create the First Public Park Along the Mississippi River: This is an opportunity to create recreational access to the Mississippi River in Cottage Grove, as we just recently acquired 33.3 acres through some grants and different funding mechanisms. This $13 million investment would: • Restore and preserve natural habitat, which is probably over 80 percent of the property is actually preserving and restoring natural habitat on the shoreline and up into the land • Build up the shoreline along the river • Provide recreational river access for canoes, kayaks, small boats, and fishing; it is a shallow area down there, mostly 2-to-3 feet deep, but there is a channel that goes from Mississippi Dunes park land out to the main channel that’s about 6-to-7 feet, so we can get smaller vessels out there • Construct new and enhanced existing walking and hiking trails • Create a nature-based playground • Provide space for outdoor classrooms • Build an interpretive learning center • Add facilities for nature activities and picnicking Transform River Oaks Golf Course and Event Center: One of the things I want to make sure is noted here is you’re not going to hear a lot about golf; River Oaks is a golf course and Event Center, but we’re trying to find different ways for the community to use it. We love River Oaks Golf Course, people use it in a myriad of ways, and we want to make sure we get more people down there using it in different ways. The proposed $6 million plan would: • Install multisport simulators • Add pickleball/event court in the bocce ball area; bocce ball wouldn’t go away, it would be a complement to that Planning Commission Minutes - Regular Meeting August 26, 2024 Page 5 of 6 • Create a new winter mountain biking 5-km. course, which could also be used for running 5Ks and cross country • Upgrade the building, with the simulator we’ll be connecting the two buildings so that we can seamlessly work between both buildings for food and beverage service, too • Enhance the patio dining area • Build a 9-hole Himalayan putting green course designed for all skill levels Dockter said the Preserve.Play.Prosper. Plan is designed to invest in parks and recreation and deliver activities and offerings that our residents want. We’re trying to find a responsible way to do it with the taxpayer money; to fund the proposed investment, the City’s asking the residents to consider a half-percent Local Option Sales Tax as part of the general election on November 5. Each project needs to stand on its own merits: So, Hamlet Park is $17 million, Mississippi Dunes is $13 million, and River Oaks is $6 million, all of which total $36 million. That’s spread out over a 25-year period. If all of the projects were to pass, it doesn’t mean all of these projects will get funded and would be done in the first year; they would be done over the course of time, depending on how that revenue comes into the City. Local Option Sales Tax: One thing about the Local Option Sales Tax is first of all, it’s a half-percent local sales tax and it’s taxed just like any other product or service in the community. • Over 31 percent of the contributions would come from outside of Cottage Grove, so nonresidents would be contributing over 31 percent of the revenue. That’s data from the University of Minnesota study, an independent study done by them that basically offers how much of nonresident-generated revenue there would be. We think that number will grow over time, as the community grows, as industry grows in Co ttage Grove, etc. • The average resident would be at about $23 per year in sales tax. Just for reference, it’s a half -cent for every $1 spent, or 50 cents on $100. Dockter said I think it’s important to know that you are probably spending your money on other Local Option Sales Tax projects across the metro; so, this is just a quick map of communities that either have a Local Option Sales Tax in place or are considering a Local Option Sales Tax in the coming election. So, you can see it covers the metro pretty well, just for reference. On the Ballot - One Project, Three Locations: Because the State requires that each project stands on its own merits, there are three questions on the ballot: So, Hamlet Park, Mississippi Dunes Park, and River Oaks will each have a separate question. It’s important to know that if the residents vote for just 1 of those 3 projects, it’s a half-percent sales tax; if they vote for all 3, it’s still a half-percent sales tax. So, let’s just say Hamlet Park were to be approved, and the other 2 projects were not approved, that revenue would obviously allow us to build the Hamlet Park project faster. Once you pay for that project, once you get to that cost of $17 million, that tax is over, it goes away. So, if it takes 7 years, it takes 7 years; if it takes 20 years, it takes 20 years. Obviously, after 25 years, if you don’t make it there, it still comes off. Dockter said with that, I will stand for questions. Frazier asked if the commissioners had any questions: Fisher asked so if they’re all approved, is there a priority? Like, what’s going to get funded first, second, and third? Dockter replied that’s a great question; yes, so we actually do have a 3-tiered plan. Unfortunately, I don’t have that with me, but each park has three different tiers of how we would bond. The first bond would be about $16 million, and we would fund $16 million of improvements across the 3 different projects. Obviously, if only 1 or 2 of the projects were approved, then we’d have to reprioritize again. But, yes, we have a 3-tiered system on how those would get implemented, trying to focus on what’s going to have the greatest impact and most immediate impact. Bhat asked how many responses did you receive for the questions that you sent out or the survey that you conducted? Dockter asked for the Reimagine Recreation survey? Bhat replied yes. Dockter replied for that particular survey, I want to say we were at over 2,500, but then there was also a project that we did with the middle school, and that was another 700 or 800; so, it was kind of a hodgepodge of numbers, but it was over 3,000 responses. If you go back to the community survey, I think with the community survey it was another 2,000 responses. Rasmussen asked with the growth in Cottage Grove, has your budget been increasing with the tax base over the years and we’re just not keeping up for these bigger projects, or how does that look? Dockter replied yes, so as the community grows and the levy grows to allow us to keep maintaining the facilities, it just doesn’t allow for like the capital investments. As an example, I’ve been here for almost 25 years, and I used to build playgrounds for $25,000, now they’re $100,000, and those are dollars that just, you still have to pay for fuel, you still have to pay for labor, you still have to pay for equipment, you still have to pay for seed and fertilizer. So, we’re able to keep up with those things, it’s Planning Commission Minutes - Regular Meeting August 26, 2024 Page 6 of 6 those big capital investments that we’re just starting to fall behind on. And the City does a great job; we have a couple different funding mechanisms for some of those things, but it’s these big -ticket items that we’re struggling to kind of keep maintaining. Frazier asked if there were any further questions or comments, but there were none. Frazier thanked Dockter for being here tonight and telling us about the plan. Dockter said and if I may, there’s one more thing: I always like to say there are no secrets. Everything’s on the website, which is phenomenal, there are layers and layers of information. And if there’s something on there that doesn’t look right or doesn’t smell right or you have questions on, please call me or email me; I promise you I will tell you the answer. At the end of the day, it’s up to the people to vote, and we’ll take it from there. 8. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 22, 2024 Rasmussen made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 22, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. Brittain seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6-to-0 vote). 9. REPORTS A. RECAP OF AUGUST CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS Schmitz provided a summary of actions taken at the August 7 and August 21, 2024, City Council meetings. Schmitz asked Khambata if he had anything else to add. Khambata said we, as a Council, are working our way through the annual budget, which is always a long process . I just wanted to add with the Preserve.Play.Prosper. Plan, I had gotten several questions about why we’re doing it through Local Option Sales Tax; and the best answer I could give is because as much we as a community enjoy our parks, they are a nonessential service. So, just as we did with the Community Center that was proposed a couple years ago, whenever a big capital expenditure like this comes up, that is a little bit difficult to classify as in frastructure or roadwork, we always want to try to get the broadest feedback possible; and the best way to do that is by putting it on the ballot. Khambata said that’s all I have to say about upcoming projects and budgets, but I’m open for questions, so if anybody has any questions, please throw them at me. Frazier said thank you; he asked if there were any questions for Council Member Khambata, but there were none. B. RESPONSE TO PLANNING COMMISSION INQUIRIES – None. C. PLANNING COMMISSION REQUESTS – None. 10. ADJOURNMENT Rasmussen made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Fisher seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6-to-0 vote). The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m. 1 City Council Action Request 7.G. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Administration Agenda Category Action Item Title Massage Therapist License - Lisa Christine Ramos Staff Recommendation Authorize issuance of a Massage Therapist License to Lisa Christine Ramos. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. Memo - Public Safety 1 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator FROM: Tammy Anderson, City Clerk DATE: November 6, 2024 RE: Massage Therapist License - Lisa Christine Ramos Discussion On August 22, 2024, Lisa Christine Ramos applied to operate as a licensed massage therapist at the business named Whole Health Massage of Cottage Grove, at the address of 8800 East Point Douglas Road South, Cottage Grove, MN 55016. The Public Safety Department conducted a background investigation and did not find anything that would constitute a basis for denial of the application. Proof of Education/Certificate The City of Cottage Grove requires that proof of education/certification in compliance with our City Code be sent directly to us from the institution, program, or examining board. Transcripts were received from Fox Valley School of Massage, which Public Safety determined is not an accredited school. The City Ordinance requires one of the requirements listed below and Ramos was able to provide her NCBTMB certificate. Must meet one of the following: • Graduation from an institution or program in massage therapy that is accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education. • Passing results of Massage and Bodywork Licensing Examination {MBLEx) administered by the Federation of State Massage Therapy Boards (FSMTB), or the National Certification Exam for Therapeutic Massage (NCBTMB) or National Certification Exam for Therapeutic. Recommendation Authorize issuance of a Massage Therapist License to Lisa Christine Ramos. Attachments 1. Memo - Public Safety 2 1 City Council Action Request 7.H. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Administration Agenda Category Action Item Title Single-occassion Gambling Permit - Strawberry Fest Bingo Staff Recommendation Authorize issuance of a single-occassion gambling permit to Loriann Olsen on behalf of Strawberry Fest to conduct bingo at River Oaks Golf Course (11099 Highway 61, Cottage Grove) on February 22, 2025. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. Public Safety - Memo 1 City Council Action Request 7.I. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Community Development Agenda Category Action Item Title Rental License Approvals Staff Recommendation Approve the issuance of rental licenses to the properties in the attached table. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. Rental License Approvals CC Memo 2. Rental License Approvals Table TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator FROM: Samantha Drewry, Code Enforcement Officer DATE: October 31, 2024 RE: Rental License Approvals Background/Discussion Rental licenses are required for nonowner-occupied residential properties (City Code Title 9-13, Property Maintenance, and Title 9 -14, Rental Licensing) and are issued on a biennial basis. The licensing process includes submittal of the rental license application, payment of $180, and public criminal history report. Rental inspections are conducted on all rental properties as part of the licensing process. Once all information has been sub - mitted and the inspection satisfactorily completed, the Council must approve the license prior to it being issued. The properties listed in the attached table have completed the licensing process and are ready to have their licenses issued following Council approval. Recommendation Approve the issuance of rental licenses to the properties in the attached table. 2024 RENTAL LICENSES CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL - NOVEMBER 6, 2024 RENTAL LICENSE NUMBER PROPERTY STREET #PROPERTY STREET NAME PROPERTY OWNER RENT-002500 7032 Homestead Avenue South Blanche, Victor Paul RENT-002520 8934 Grenadier Avenue South Ifeoma Amaikwu-Cley 1 City Council Action Request 7.J. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Administration Agenda Category Action Item Title 2025-2026 Police Officers Labor Contract Staff Recommendation Approve the 2025-2026 labor contract with the Police Officers union. Budget Implication All wages and benefits included in the 2025 budget. Attachments 1. 20241030 PO Contract Memo 2. 2025-2026 PO Contract- Final Introduction The City and the Police Officers labor union have tentatively agreed to 2025 - 2026 labor agreement, subject to City Council approval. Background Management staff and representatives of the labor union met on two occasions and were successful in reaching a two-year tentative agreement for 2025 - 2026, subject to City Council approval. Wages The contract calls for a cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) of 3.0% in each of the two years. Additionally, the contract calls for a 6% market adjustment in 2025 and a 3% market adjustment in 2026. A new pay plan will be implemented. It will roll longevity into the pay plan to create a 9- year step plan. Currently, it is a 36 month pay plan with longevity steps out to 13 years. It allows us to start new hires anywhere on the pay scale. Currently, a field training officer (FTO) receives one day off per phase they work with a trainee. With the new contract, they will receive one hour of overtime pay for each shift they work with a trainee. Minnesota Paid Leave The state of Minnesota will be implementing a new Paid Leave law in 2026. The parties did not agree on any split that differs from the statutory default 50/50 split on the payroll tax. Annual Leave The end-of-the-year cap has been increased from 264 hours to 280 hours. It also memorializes that new employees will receive a 40-hour Annual Leave bank. Uniform Allowance The annual uniform allowance will increase 3.0% per year for each employee. Employees assigned to SWAT will receive an additional $250 per year and employees assigned to Mobile Field Force will receive an additional $200 per year. Earned Safe and Sick Time (ESST) The parties agree that employees in the union are eligible for ESST. However, as essential employees, employees in the bargaining unit agree they cannot use the weather event provision of the law. To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator From:Joe Fischbach, HR Manager Date:October 30, 2024 Subject:2025 - 2026 Police Officers Labor Contract Vehicle Use The police department has implemented a new vehicle use policy. Union members agree to the terms and conditions of said policy. Other Provisions Union members received pay and benefits that were not specifically referenced in their contract. Paid Parental Leave, Employee Recognition and Advanced Resignation provisions have been added to the labor contract. They will enjoy the same benefits of the policies as Non-represented employees, as approved by the City Council. Action Staff is recommending Council approve the 2025 - 2026 labor contract with the Police Officers union. All wage and benefits costs have been budgeted for in the 2025 budget. LABOR AGREEMENT CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES Representing: PEACE OFFICERS JANUARY 1, 2025 - DECEMBER 31, 2026 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Provision Page I Purpose of Agreement 2 II Recognition 2 III Definitions 2 IV Employer Security 3 V Employer Authority 4 VI Union Security 4 VII Employee Rights - Grievance Procedure 4 VIII Savings Clause 6 IX Constitutional Protection 7 X Seniority 7 XI Discipline 8 XII Work Schedules 9 XIII Overtime Pay 10 XIV Court Time 10 XV Call Back 10 XVI Standby 10 XVII Legal Defense 11 XVIII Job Posting 11 XIX Probationary Periods 11 XX Uniforms/P.O.S.T. License 12 XXI Holidays 13 XXI Annual Leave 13 XXIII Bereavement Leave 14 XXIV Short-Term Disability Benefits 15 XXV Jury Duty 16 XXVI Injury on Duty Policy 16 XXVII Advanced Resignation Policy 17 XXVIII Paid Parental Leave Policy 17 XXIX Recognition Awards 17 XXX Vehicle Use Policy 17 XXXI Duration 17 APPENDIX A Wage Schedule 18 APPENDIX B Insurance 20 2 LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC. 2025 - 2026 ARTICLE I. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT is entered into as of November 6, 2024 between the CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA, hereinafter called the EMPLOYER, and the LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC., Local 571, hereinafter called the UNION. The intent and purpose of this Agreement is to: 1.1 Establish hours, wages and other conditions of employment. 1.2 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes concerning interpretation and/or application of this Agreement. 1.3 Specify the full and complete understanding of the parties. 1.4 Place in written form by Agreement, the terms and conditions of employment which will be in effect for the duration of this Agreement as specified in Article XXVIII. ARTICLE II. RECOGNITION 2.1 The EMPLOYER recognizes LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC., as the exclusive representative as certified by the Bureau of Mediation Services, Case No. 25PTR0202 as said unit: All peace officers subject to licensure employed by the City of Cottage Grove Police Department, Cottage Grove, Minnesota, who are public employees within the meaning of Minn. Stat. 179.03, subd. 14, excluding supervisory and confidential employees. 2.2 In the event the EMPLOYER and the UNION are unable to agree as to the inclusion or exclusion of a new or modified job position, the issue shall be submitted to the Bureau of Mediation Services for determination. ARTICLE III. DEFINITIONS 3.1 UNION: LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC., Local 571. 3.2 UNION MEMBER: A member of LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC., Local 571 3 3.3 EMPLOYEE: An employee whose classification is within the exclusively recognized bargaining unit. 3.4 PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEE: Any employee who is working in a position for the initial twelve-month period of employment. 3.5 REGULAR EMPLOYEE: An employee whose position with the City is for an ongoing (non-temporary) period and who has successfully completed the probationary period. 3.6 DEPARTMENT: Police Department of Cottage Grove 3.7 EMPLOYER:The City of Cottage Grove 3.8 DEPARTMENT HEAD: The Public Safety Director for the EMPLOYER - appointed authority also known as the Police Chief 3.9 OVERTIME:Work performed at the express authority of the EMPLOYER in excess of the employee's scheduled shift. 3.10 SCHEDULED SHIFT:A consecutive work period including rest periods and a lunch break. The EMPLOYER shall establish the EMPLOYEE'S schedule for the upcoming calendar year and make it available to the EMPLOYEE no later than December 15th of the preceding year. 3.11 SHIFT CHANGE: A normal change in work schedule in a twenty-four (24) hour period with eight (8) hours between shifts. 3.12 REST BREAK: A period during the scheduled shift during which the employee remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties. 3.13 LUNCH BREAK: A period during the scheduled shift during which the employee remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties. 3.14 SENIORITY: Length of continuous service with the bargaining unit. 3.15 SEVERANCE PAY: Payment made to employees upon termination of employment. ARTICLE IV. EMPLOYER SECURITY 4.1 The UNION agrees that during the life of this Agreement, bargaining unit employees it will not cause, encourage, participate in, or support any strike, slowdown or other interruption of or interference with the normal functions of the EMPLOYER. 4 ARTICLE V. EMPLOYER AUTHORITY 5.1 The EMPLOYER retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all manpower, facilities, and equipment; to establish functions and programs; to set and amend budgets; to determine the utilization of technology; to establish and modify the organizational structure; to select, direct and determine the number of personnel; to establish work schedules; and to perform any inherent managerial function not specifically limited by this Agreement. Any terms and conditions of employment not specifically established or modified by this Agreement shall remain solely within the discretion of the EMPLOYER to modify, establish or eliminate. ARTICLE VI. UNION SECURITY 6.1 The EMPLOYER shall deduct from the wages of employees who authorize such a deduction in writing, an amount necessary to cover monthly union dues. Such monies shall be remitted as directed by Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc. 6.2 The UNION shall designate employees from the bargaining unit to act as a steward and an alternate and shall inform the EMPLOYER in writing of such choice and changes in steward and/or alternate. 6.3 The EMPLOYER shall make space available on the employee bulletin board for posting union notice(s) and announcement(s). 6.4 Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc. agrees to indemnify and hold the EMPLOYER harmless against any and all claims, suits, orders or judgments brought or issued against the City as a result of any action taken or not taken of the City under the provisions of Article VI, Section 1. ARTICLE VII. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 7.1 Definition of a Grievance - A grievance is defined as a dispute or disagreement as to the interpretation or application of the specific terms and conditions of this Agreement. 7.2 Union Representatives - The EMPLOYER will recognize representatives designated by the UNION as the Grievance representatives of the bargaining unit having the duties and responsibilities established by this Article. The UNION shall notify the EMPLOYER in writing of the names of such UNION representatives and of their successors, when so designated. 7.3 Processing of a Grievance - The processing of grievances, as hereinafter provided, is limited by the job duties and responsibilities of the employees and shall, therefore, be accomplished during normal working hours only, when consistent with such employee duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved employee shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in pay when a grievance is 5 investigated and presented to the City during normal working hours, provided that the employee has notified and received the approval of the designated supervisor who has determined that such absence is reasonable and would not be detrimental to the work programs of the City. 7.4 Procedures - A grievance as defined by Article 7.1 shall be resolved in conformance with the following procedures: Step 1 An employee claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement shall within twenty-one (21) calendar days after such alleged violation has occurred, present such grievance to the Captain for the division. The Captain will discuss and give an answer to such Step 1 grievance to the employee and the Union within ten (10) calendar days after receipt. A grievance not resolved in Step 1 and appealed to Step 2 shall be placed in writing, setting forth the nature of the grievance, the facts on which it is based, the provisions of this Agreement allegedly violated, and the remedy requested and shall be appealed to Step 2 within ten (10) calendar days after the Captain’s final answer in Step 1. Any grievance not appealed in writing in Step 2 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. This step shall be omitted if the Department Head is also the immediate supervisor. Step 2 If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the employee and discussed with the Director of Public Safety. The Director of Public Safety shall give the Union the City's Step 2 answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 2 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 2 may be appealed to Step 3 within ten (10) calendar days following the final Step 2 answer. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 3 If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with the City Administrator or designee. The City Administrator or designee shall give the Union the City's answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 3 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 3 may be appealed to Step 4 within ten (10) calendar days following the City Administrator or designee's final answer in Step 3. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 4 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 4 A grievance unresolved in Step 3 and appealed to Step 4 shall be submitted to arbitration, subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations Action of 1971, as amended. For grievance matters involving written disciplinary action, discharge, or termination, the assignment of an arbitrator shall be consistent with Minnesota Statute 626.892. For all other 6 grievances the selection of an arbitrator shall be made in accordance with the “Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances” as established by the Bureau of Mediation Services. The selection of an arbitrator shall be made in accordance with the "Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances", as established by the State Bureau of Mediation Services. If the employee or the EMPLOYER representative is on vacation, sick, or absent from work, the time for the processing of such grievance will be extended by that time. 7.5 Arbitrator's Authority A. The arbitrator shall have no right to amend, modify, nullify, ignore, add to, or subtract from the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The arbitrator shall consider and decide only the specific issue(s) submitted in writing by the City and the Union and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other issue(s) not so submitted. B. The arbitrator shall be without power to make decisions contrary to or inconsistent with, or modifying or varying in any way, the application of laws, rules or regulations having the force and effect of law. The arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days following close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later, unless the parties agree to an extension. The decision shall be binding on both the City and the Union and shall be based solely on the arbitrator's interpretation or application of the express terms of this Agreement and to the facts of the grievance presented. C. The fees and expenses for this arbitrator's services and proceedings shall be borne equally by the City and the UNION, provided that each party shall be responsible for compensating its own representatives and witnesses. If either party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings, it may cause such a record to be made, providing it pays for the record and provides the arbitrator with a copy at no cost to the arbitrator. If both parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings, the cost shall be shared equally. 7.6 Waiver - If a grievance is not presented within the time limits set forth above, it shall be considered waived. If a grievance is not appealed to the next step within the specified time limit or any agreed extension thereof, it shall be considered settled on the basis of the City’s last answer. If the City does not answer a grievance or an appeal thereof within the specified time limits, the Union may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that step and immediately appeal the grievance to the next step. The time limit in each step may be extended by mutual agreement of the City and the Union. ARTICLE VIII. SAVINGS CLAUSE 8.1 The Agreement is subject to the laws of the United States, the State of Minnesota, and the EMPLOYER. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction, from whose final judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within the time provided, such provisions shall 7 be voided. All other provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. The voided provisions may be renegotiated at the request of either party. ARTICLE IX. CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION 9.1 Employees shall have the rights granted to all citizens by the United States and Minnesota State Constitutions. ARTICLE X. SENIORITY 10.1 A policy of seniority based on total service within the bargaining unit shall be formulated that will give regular employees with longer period of service an opportunity for promotion and also to provide employment security, provided the employee is qualified. 10.2 There shall be a seniority list established which shall be based on total continuous service within the police officers' bargaining unit. 10.3 In the event of layoff, the reduction of the work force will be accomplished on the basis of seniority. Employees shall be recalled from layoff on the same basis of seniority. No new employee shall be. hired until the layoff list has been exhausted. Employees laid off will have an opportunity to return to work within two years from their layoff date. Employees recalled shall report to work within two weeks after notice was sent to their last known address. Failure to report as stated above, employee forfeits their recall right. 10.4 No regular employee shall be laid off out of turn on the seniority list within the bargaining unit. 10.5 Employees hired before January 1, 2010; Vacation periods shall be selected on the basis of SENIORITY of total service within the DEPARTMENT, whether employment was full or part time, until December 15th of the previous year for the months January through June 30th. The City has until December 30th to approve or deny such requests. Vacation periods shall be selected on the basis of SENIORITY of total service within the DEPARTMENT, whether employment was full or part time, until March 15th for the months July 1st through December 31st. The City has until March 30th to approve or deny such requests. The City has ten (10) day to approve or deny all other time off requests. 8 Employees hired after January 1, 2010; Vacation periods shall be selected on the basis of SENIORITY within the bargaining unit until December 15th of the previous year for the months of January through June 30th. The City has until December 30th to approve or deny such requests. Vacation periods shall be selected on the basis of SENIORITY within the bargaining unit until March 15th for the months of July 1st through December 31st. The City has until March 30th to approve or deny such requests. The City has ten (10) day to approve or deny all other time off requests. 10.6 Any employee exercising rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act will accrue seniority during the term of such leave. ARTICLE XI. DISCIPLINE 11.1 The City will discipline employees for just cause only. Discipline will be in the form of: A. Oral reprimand; B. Written reprimand; C. Suspension; D. Demotion; E. Discharge. 11.2 Suspension, demotion and discharge will be in written form. 11.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension or a demotion shall become part of the employee's personnel file and shall be read and acknowledged by the employee. An employee will receive copies of reprimands, suspensions, demotions, and discharges. 11.4 Employees may examine their own individual personnel record at reasonable times, under the direct supervision of the City. 11.5 Grievances pertaining to this Article shall be initiated by the Union in Step 2 of the grievance procedure, under Article VII. 11.6 Discharges shall be preceded by a 5-day unpaid suspension, during which time the employee shall be granted an opportunity to provide additional information (commonly referred to as a Loudermill hearing) relevant to the City’s intention to discharge. 9 11.7 Suspensions for disciplinary reasons may be made for periods not exceeding thirty (30) working days in any twelve (12) month period for just cause. The Department Head shall provide the employee with a written statement of the reasons for the suspension within twenty-four (24) hours of the employee’s receipt of the notice of the suspension. Upon the request of the employee or their representative, made within five (5) days prior to the suspension, the employee shall be granted an opportunity to provide additional information though a Loudermill hearing relevant to the City’s intention to suspend the employee. 11.8 Employees shall not be questioned concerning an investigation of disciplinary action unless the employee has been given an opportunity to have a UNION representative present at such questioning. ARTICLE XII. WORK SCHEDULES 12.1 The sole authority to establish and revise work schedules is that of the EMPLOYER. The normal work week shall be an averaged forty (40) hours. The work year will be 2080 hours. At the beginning of each year, each employee’s work schedule commitment will be credited for 96 hours for holidays, leaving a work schedule commitment of 1984 hours. In no case shall an employee work more than 2080 hours in any one calendar year at straight time (paid work time, compensatory time, annual leave time, ninety-six (96) hours holiday time, and training time will be credited toward 2080 hours.) 12.2 The City will give five (5) calendar days' advanced written or oral notice to the employees affected by the establishment of workdays different from the employee's regular work schedule. Written notice shall not be given on days off. 12.3 The City may change the schedule of an employee with less than five (5) calendar days' advanced notice, after exhausting all other avenues of filling that shift prior to the schedule change. In the event that work is required because of an emergency situation, such as, but not limited to, fire, flood, snow, sleet, civil unrest or breakdown of municipal equipment or facilities, no advance notice need be given. An employee working other than the normal workday shall not normally be scheduled to work more than the regular patrol shift; however, each employee has an obligation to work overtime or callbacks, if requested, unless unusual circumstances prevent them from so working. 12.4 An employee who is scheduled to work during changes in daylight savings time shall account for the time change as follows: Employees working one hour longer than their normal shift shall receive one (1) hour pay at one and one-half (1 ½) time the employee's base pay rate. Employees working one hour less than their normal shift shall submit a time off request that deducts one (1) hour from their Annual Leave or comp time bank. 10 ARTICLE XIII. OVERTIME PAY 13.1 Employees will be compensated at one and one-half (1-1/2) times the employee's regular rate of pay for hours worked in excess of the employee's regularly scheduled shift. Changes of shifts do not qualify an employee for overtime under this Article. 13.2 Overtime will be distributed as equally as practicable. The parties recognize that special circumstances exist-that officers in different classifications or assignments may have more or less opportunity for overtime pay. 13.3 For the purpose of computing overtime compensation, overtime hours worked shall not be pyramided, compounded, or paid twice for the same hours worked. 13.4 An Employee may request that each hour of time eligible for overtime under this Article, in lieu of payment, be accumulated as compensatory time at the rate of 1½ hours for each eligible hour, provided that the maximum compensatory hour balance for each Employee shall at no time exceed 80 hours. All compensatory time shall be taken at the discretion of the Department Head. A supervisor may authorize the taking of up to two scheduled shifts at the discretion of the Chief or a designated supervisor. 13.5 State and federal grants stipulating that overtime will be paid in wages rather than compensatory time shall be paid in overtime and not compensatory time. ARTICLE XIV. COURT TIME 14. 1 An employee who is required to appear in court during their scheduled off duty time shall receive a minimum of three (3) hours pay at one and one-half (1½) times the employee's base pay rate. 14.2 An employee who is required to appear in court and the court appearance is canceled less than twenty-four (24) hours before the employee's scheduled appearance shall be entitled to overtime pay as provided in Section 14.1. ARTICLE XV. CALL BACK 15.1 An employee called in for work at a time other than their normal scheduled shift will be compensated for a minimum of three (3) hours pay at one and one half (1- 1/2) times the employee's base pay rate. ARTICLE XVI. STANDBY 16.1 Employees required by the EMPLOYER to standby shall be paid for such standby time at the rate of one hour's pay for each hour on standby. 11 ARTICLE XVII. LEGAL DEFENSE 17.1 The EMPLOYER shall carry and pay for $500,000 of insurance covering employees for claims made against them for (1) negligent operation of a City vehicle; (2) false arrest; (3) false imprisonment or detention; and (4) malicious prosecution. No employee will be covered for personal injury arising out of the willful violation of a penal statute ordinance committed by or with the knowledge or consent of any employee. 17.2 Any employee who is charged with a traffic violation, ordinance violation or criminal offense arising from acts performed within the scope of their employment, when such act is performed in good faith and/or under direct order of their supervisor, shall be reimbursed for reasonable attorney's fees and court costs actually incurred by such employee in defending against such charge. ARTICLE XVIII. JOB POSTING 18.1 Regular non-supervisory job vacancies shall be filled on the concept of promotion from within, provided that applicants: A. have the necessary qualifications to meet the standards of the vacant job; and B. have the ability to perform the duties and responsibilities of the vacant job. 18.2 The City has the final decision in the selection of employees to fill posted jobs, based on qualifications, abilities and experience. 18.3 Job vacancies will be posted for fourteen (14) calendar days so that interested employees can be considered for such vacancies. 18.4 Assignment to investigations will be made at the sole discretion of the EMPLOYER. The Director may renew or terminate this assignment based upon the job performance of the employee while assigned in this capacity. ARTICLE XIX. PROBATIONARY PERIODS 19.1 All newly hired or rehired employees will serve a twelve (12) month probationary period. The probationary period may be extended for an additional three (3) months upon written notice, stating the reason for the extension by the EMPLOYER to the Union, with written consent of the Union to the EMPLOYER. 19.2 All employees will serve a twelve (12) month probationary period in any job classification in which the employee has not previously served a probationary period. 19.3 At any time during the probationary period, a newly hired or rehired employee may be terminated at the sole discretion of the EMPLOYER. 12 19.4 At any time during the probationary period a promoted or reassigned employee may be demoted or reassigned to the employee's previous position at the sole discretion of the EMPLOYER. ARTICLE XX. UNIFORMS/P.O.S.T. LICENSE 20.1 The EMPLOYER agrees to pay $1,072 in 2025 and $1,105 in 2026 as uniform allowance, maintenance, upkeep and repair for all bargaining unit employees listed in this Agreement. Said style and color of uniforms are to be selected by the Police Chief. The EMPLOYER shall provide the required uniform allowance on a debit card. The balance on the card shall not exceed $1,950. The debit card shall be set up in such a way to allow the employees to remove funds via an ATM machine. The EMPLOYER will comply with applicable state law regarding provision of personal body armor. 20.2 Any purchases made and/or cash withdrawn from an ATM within 60 calendar days prior to an employee's voluntary resignation or retirement on the uniform debit card will require reimbursement to the City for said purchases and withdrawals. The Employer may grant a waiver of this provision for replacement or repair of material damaged in the line of duty, or at the employer's discretion. 20.3 Upon commencing employment, newly hired employees shall receive an initial issue of necessary uniform items. New employees will not receive the uniform allowance until one year following the date of hire. The uniform allowance will be prorated. The month an employee passes their probationary period will not count towards the prorated allowance. 20.4 Initial Issue Payback - a) If employee fails to complete the probationary period they must reimburse the City for initial issue costs not recoverable to the City. b) If an employee voluntarily resigns within their probationary period, they will be required to reimburse the City of Cottage Grove for the costs of the initial provision of uniforms and equipment. c) This language does not apply when resignation is due to performance issues. 20.5 The EMPLOYER will pay the full cost of each sworn officer's P.O.S.T. license, including initial and renewal fees. 20.6 Employees participating in SWAT will receive an additional $250.00 per year deposited on their debit card as per 20.1. Employees participating in Mobile Field Force will receive an additional $200.00 per year deposited on their debit card as per 20.1. Employees will only receive one allocation per year. The employee will not receive the $250 or $200 in the calendar year in which they are selected for SWAT or Mobile Field Force. 13 ARTICLE XXI. HOLIDAYS 21.1 In lieu of having the holiday off with pay or receiving premium pay for a working holiday, each employee will receive 60 hours of pay at their regular rate of pay with the first check in June of each year. Each employee shall receive another 60 hours of pay at their regular rate of pay with the first paycheck in December of each year. 21.2 Employees who start or leave employment during the year shall have this holiday compensation in Article 21.1 prorated at 10 hours of regular pay per complete month of employment. 21.3 Floating Holiday - To be scheduled with the permission of the employee's supervisor. The Floating Holiday will cover the employee's whole, regularly scheduled shift. To receive the floating holiday, a new employee must start working before July 1st. ARTICLE XXII. ANNUAL LEAVE 22.1 Each full-time employee shall earn annual leave at a monthly rate which will total the following amount of annual leave: 0 through 4 years City employment 152 hours per year 5 through 9 years City employment 176 hours per year 10 through 14 years City employment 200 hours per year 15 through 19 years City employment 232 hours per year 20+ years City employment 248 hours per year Employees currently earning 192 hours/year of Annual Leave will stay at the accrual rate until they reach 10 years of service. At the start of employment, employees shall be credited with at least forty (40) hours of annual leave that they can use before it is earned. Annual leave shall be accrued at the accrual rates as the employee works, and the total number of earned annual leave hours shall be provided to the employee each pay period. If an employee fails to make it to one year of employment, the 40 hours of Annual Leave will not be paid out. 22.2 Except in the case of injury or illness, annual leave may only be taken upon approval of the employee's supervisor, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. 22.3 Annual leave earned shall be accrued and the total number of earned annual leave hours shall be provided to the employee each pay period. Annual leave with pay may not be taken unless it has been earned. Except in the case of injury or illness, no employee shall be allowed to take more than 160 consecutive hours of annual leave at one time. 14 22.4 Employees who terminate employment with the City and have annual leave time remaining shall be paid for their accrued annual leave, except for probationary employees who have not achieved regular status employment. 22.5 An employee who uses annual leave for illness or injury may be required to present evidence that they are again able to perform the duties of their employment. 22.6 Annual leave must be taken in increments of no less than one-half (1/2) hour. 22.7 No employee may carry over more than 280 hours of accumulated annual leave from one year to the next. In the event that an employee has in excess of 280 accumulated hours of annual leave after completion of the last full pay period in the calendar year, the employee's accrued annual leave shall be reduced to 280 hours. 22.8 Once per year, on either the first pay period after April 1 or the first pay period after October 1, any employee who has completed at least seven (7) years of service with the City may exchange up to twenty-four (24) hours of accumulated annual leave for payment equal to twenty-four (24) hours of pay at their current rate. Any employee who has completed at least fifteen (15) years of service with the City may exchange up to forty (40) hours accumulated annual leave for payment equal to forty (40) hours of pay at their existing rate. 22.9 MN Paid Leave. The parties have not agreed to alter the 50% employer/50% employee premium contribution formula outlined in Minn. Stat. Sec. 268B.14, Subd. 3. 22.10 Employees will receive the same benefits as the non-represented employee group regarding the Earned Safe and Sick Time (ESST) Policy in the Personnel Policy, as approved by the City Council. The parties agree that the weather event provision in the statutory ESST law outlined in Minnesota Statute Section 181.9447, subdivision 1, clause (4) is waived as to its application for all positions in the bargaining unit. ARTICLE XXIII. BEREAVEMENT LEAVE 23.1 Each full-time employee may request up to three (3) shifts of bereavement leave in the event of a death in the immediate family. Immediate family is defined as: spouse, parent (including stepparent or legal guardian), child (including stepchild/foster child), sibling (including stepsibling), grandparent, grandchild, parent-in-law, brother/sister-in-law, and son/daughter-in-law. The City Administrator or designee will be responsible for approving or denying requests for bereavement leave. Bereavement leave shall not be charged against an Employee's leave balance. 15 ARTICLE XXIV. SHORT-TERM DISABILITY BENEFITS 24.1 Short-term disability benefits shall be paid to such an employee who shall have missed twenty (20) consecutive working days' employment due to illness or injury. 24.2 The amount of the short-term disability benefit payable shall be the difference between the employee's regular rate of pay, in effect at the time of the injury or illness, unless otherwise approved by the City Administrator or their designee and any payment(s) the employee receives or anticipates receiving in the nature of wage loss replacement whether it be from Long-term Disability, Personal Short- term Disability, workers compensation, PERA disability, OASDI, personal injury protection, or any other source, payable from the 21st working day following the employee's initial absence from work due to injury or illness and continuing fora maximum of ninety (90) working days. The intent of this benefit is to make employees whole for qualifying illnesses and/or injuries. 24.3 Any employee receiving payments under the short-term disability benefit plan shall not accrue annual leave during the period of time of disability. In order to qualify for short-term disability benefit, the employee shall submit medical documentation from a physician certifying that the first twenty (20) consecutive working days of the employee's absence was due to injury or illness. 24.4 In order to continue receiving short-term disability benefits, an employee must submit medical documentation substantiating the disability for the duration of the disability at the City's request from a physician certifying that the absence from work is due to injury or illness. 24.5 The employee shall further provide the City a release of medical information authorizing the City or its agents access to the employee's medical records relevant to the specific injury or illness in question for the purpose of sustaining disability. 24.6 The employee shall, if required or requested, submit to an examination at the City's expense by a physician designated by the City in order to verify the injury or illness claimed by the employee. 24.7 Before qualifying for short-term disability benefits, an employee must complete all required City forms. In order to continue to receive short-term disability benefits, all required City forms must remain in effect for the duration of the disability. 24.8 Each new event which results in short-term disability benefits shall be preceded by a new waiting period of twenty (20) consecutive working days. Each new event shall be subject to the provisions of the Article. 24.9 If an employee returns to work on a part-time basis during the ninety (90) day benefit period, each day in which the employee is able to work four (4) or more 16 hours per day shall count as one (1) day toward the ninety (90) day benefit period. Each day in which an employee is able to work less than four (4) hours per day shall count as one-half (1/2) day toward the ninety (90) day benefit period. 24.10 Effective May 21, 2012, a short-term disability bank (Bank) will be established. This Bank will assist an employee get through the 160-hour waiting period before short- term disability benefits start. The maximum number of hours in each employee's Bank will be 80 hours. Each new and current employee will start with 25 hours in their Bank. Each employee will accrue 1 hour into their Bank per pay period, up to the 80-hour maximum. Employees must reach the 160-hour waiting period to receive this benefit, no exceptions. This benefit will be paid retrospectively. Once the employee qualifies for short-term disability benefits, all accrued Bank hours will be used to replace unpaid (if any), Annual Leave and Compensatory time hours an employee used to get through the 160-hour waiting period. Bank hours will always replace any unpaid hours first. Bank hours are not transferable to another employee. Bank hours will not be paid out when an employee leaves City employment. In order to receive this benefit, the employee must comply with the provisions of Articles 24.1 through 24.9. ARTICLE XXV. JURY DUTY 25.1 An employee who serves on jury duty shall be entitled to receive their usual compensation for those hours missed from work resulting from actual jury service, subject to a deduction in the amount of compensation received for such jury duty. 25.2 Employees assigned to jury duty will be responsible for their normal scheduled shift hours of work, reduced by the amount of time served on jury duty. An employee required to report for jury duty will be assigned to the day shift. If the employee is excused from jury duty, they must return to work and complete the scheduled shift. ARTICLE XXVI. INJURY ON DUTY POLICY 26.1 Employees injured while on duty shall be paid their regular rate of pay for a period not to exceed sixty (60) working days, beginning with the first (1st) working day after such injury. All Workers' Compensation benefits paid during this period will be either assigned to the City or be deducted from the employee's regular rate of pay. Also, during this period, no time shall be charged against the employee's annual leave or other accumulated benefits. On duty shall mean all work assigned by and paid for by the City. 26.2 The City agrees to pay a reasonable replacement cost for an employee's glasses, hearing aid, or any other type of prosthetic device broken while in the performance of duties. 17 ARTICLE XXVII. ADVANCED RESIGNATION POLICY 27.1 Employees will receive the same benefits as the non-represented employee group regarding the Advanced Resignation Policy in the Personnel Policy, as it may be amended from time to time in the City’s discretion. ARTICLE XXVIII. PAID PARENTAL LEAVE POLICY 28.1 Employees will receive the same benefits as the non-represented employee group regarding the Paid Parental Leave Policy in the Personnel Policy, as it may be amended from time to time in the City’s discretion. ARTICLE XXIX. RECOGNITION AWARDS 29.1 Employees will receive service recognition payments and awards as detailed in the Public Purpose Policy, as approved by the City Council. ARTICLE XXX. VEHICLE USE POLICY 30.1 Members of the bargaining unit will be covered by the Vehicle Use Policy in the Cottage Grove Police Department Policy Manual as it may be amended from time to time in the City’s discretion. ARTICLE XXXI. DURATION 31.1 This Agreement shall be effective as of the 1st day of January 2025 and shall remain in full force and effect until the 31st day of December 2026. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement this 6th day of November 2024. FOR THE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC. ________________________________ ________________________________ Mayor Steward ________________________________ ________________________________ City Administrator Business Agent 18 APPENDIX A WAGE SCHEDULE Police Officer Step start 6 months 12 months 18 months 24 months 30 months 36 months 5 Years 7 Years 9 Years 73%75%78%81%83%85%91%94%97%100% Starting 1/1/2025- 3% COLA, 6% Market Adjustment Hourl y rate $40.7 9 $41.90 $43.58 $45.25 $46.37 $47.49 $50.84 $52.5 2 $54.1 9 $55.8 7 Starting 1/1/2026- 3% COLA, 3% Market Adjustment Hourl y rate $43.2 3 $44.42 $46.19 $47.97 $49.15 $50.34 $53.89 $55.6 7 $57.4 5 $59.2 2 The City maintains the right to start a new employee at any step it deems appropriate. The City and Union agree to use Minneapolis/St. Paul metro area cities with populations between 25,000 and 65,000 for wage comparisons in the subsequent labor contract. The parties further agree to use Lakeville even if their population is over 65,000. The parties will use the latest Met Council population estimates available as of the first negotiating session. Cities that contract out their police services will not be included in the comparison. 1. Employee(s) expressly authorized by the EMPLOYER to perform full-time detective duties shall receive a differential of five percent (5%) above their hourly rate. 2. Employee(s) expressly authorized by the EMPLOYER to perform as a full-time K- 9 officer shall receive a differential of five percent (5%) above their hourly rate. 3. Employees will only be eligible for one, five percent (5%) differential. 4. Both parties acknowledge that employees who are certified paramedics are retired as primary response paramedics. If the employee wants to keep their paramedic certification, the City will continue to pay for their training and certification. 5. A promoted employee will start at the beginning salary for the position they were promoted to except if the promoted employee is earning more than the beginning salary of the position they are promoted to, they will advance to the next highest pay grade for that position and remain in that pay grade for a period of twelve (12) months from the date of promotion. 19 6. The parties recognize that Nine Dollars ($9.00) of the monthly salary has been negotiated in lieu of giving up personal days. 7. The parties agree to meet by end of the first quarter 2025 to roles, responsibilities and pay for an Officer in Charge (OIC) designation. If the parties can agree to terms, a memorandum of understanding will be executed for implementation in first quarter 2026. If an agreement cannot be reached in first quarter 2025, discussions will be tabled until negotiations for the 2027 contract. 8. All Employees assigned as a Field Training Officer (FTO) will be compensated at a rate of one (1.0) hour of overtime for each shift worked as an FTO. The one (1.0) hour of overtime would be in addition to hours worked during that shift. All FTO hours will be paid out and cannot be earned as compensatory time. APPENDIX B Insurance 20 1. The EMPLOYER shall pay a maximum contribution per month per employee. The contribution may be used toward the premium for group medical coverage. 2025-2026 Health Insurance Employer Contribution HSA Plan Single- 100% of premium Single + One- 70% of premium Single + Children- 70% of premium Family- 70% of premium HSA Elect Plan Single- 100% of premium Single + One- 70% of premium Single + Children- 70% of premium Family- 70% of premium Both plans have a $4,500- Single and $9,000- Family, EE + One and EE + Children, deductible. However, the employee will be responsible for $2,500- single and $5,000- all others, of the deductible amount. The remainder will be covered by the employer through a HRA. Of the $2,500/$5,000 amount the employer will contribute $1,400/$2,800 into the employee's HSA, on a matching basis. The employer contribution amount is provided on a matching basis of 2 (two) employer dollars for every 1 (one) dollar contributed by the employee, up to the annual employer maximum. The employer HSA contributions will be made in two equal payments, the first pay dates in January and July. Both plans will have an imbedded deductible. There is an 80/20 payment arrangement once the deductible is met, whereby the insurance company pays 80 percent and the employee/employer pays the other 20 percent, up to an out-of-pocket maximum. The out-of-pocket maximums are $5,800- single and $11,600- Family, EE + One and EE + Children. If the employee/employer experiences out of pocket costs, the employer will cover up to the $1,300- Single and up to the $2,600- Family, EE + One and EE + Children. Employees currently receiving waiver compensation will continue to receive waiver compensation. It will be $225/month for full-time employees and $112.50/month for regular part-time benefit eligible employees. Employees who waive but do not receive waiver compensation may still waive but will not receive any waiver compensation. All new employees must enroll in a minimum of single medical coverage. If an employee receiving waiver compensation elects City insurance and then waives again in the future, they will not be eligible for the waiver compensation. The City will reconvene the Insurance Committee if significant changes to the health insurance plan design are anticipated. 21 2. The EMPLOYER agrees to pay the premium for a Twenty Thousand Dollar ($20,000) life insurance policy on each employee. 3. The City shall contribute up to $29.00 per month per employee for a long-term disability policy. This policy will be a taxable benefit to the employee and will be reflected as such on their paycheck. 4. A reduction in total benefits shall be negotiated by the Union and the City. 5. Each employee shall contribute 2% of their gross salary through payroll deduction to an individual Health Care Savings Plan. 1 City Council Action Request 7.K. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Community Development Agenda Category Action Item Title Metro Transit Network Now Comment Letter Staff Recommendation Approve submittal of the comment letter to Metro Transit on their Network Now plan. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. Metro Transit Network Now CC Memo 2. Metro Transit Network Now - Comment Letter TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator FROM: Conner Jakes, Planner DATE: October 31, 2024 RE: Metro Transit Network Now Comment Letter Background Metro Transit has opened the public comment period for their plan to address current public transit needs – Network Now. The Network Now plan is Metro Transit’s vision for transit service that best meets the needs of the region through 2027. Metro Transit, at the October 16 City Council Workshop, provided the City Council with a brief overview of Network Now and how the plan specifically impacts Cottage Grove. Staff has reviewed the plan and provided comments in the attached letter based on the City Council’s feedback at the October 16 workshop. The public comment period is open to the public through November 15, 2024. Recommendation Approve submittal of the comment letter to Metro Transit on their Network Now plan. Attachments: Network Now Comment Letter CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE ⚫ 12800 Ravine Parkway ⚫ Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016 www.cottage-grove.org ⚫ 651-458-2800 ⚫ Fax 651-458-2897 ⚫ Equal Opportunity Employer November 6, 2024 Adam Harrington Director of Service Development, Metro Transit 719 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 RE: City of Cottage Grove Comments on Network Now Dear Mr. Harrington, The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove would like to thank your team for presenting at the workshop meeting on October 16. The comments the Council made at the workshop meeting regarding the draft plan are summarized below: • The Council is excited about the proposed micro zones. We would like to have a dedicated micro zone to serve our growing business park. • The Council emphasized the importance of continuing engagement with community stakeholders, such as connecting with the local DARTS service to further provide effective local service. • The Council suggested the following for continuing to improve the outlined service offerings: o Connect the south side of Highway 61 as the proposed routes (301 & 363) begin and terminate north of Highway 61. Recently, a large number of new homes have been constructed south of Highway 61 and multiple senior living facilities are located south of Highway 61. o Connect more residents to Route 301 by proposing a loop route instead of the same route traveling to and from the City of Woodbury. o Further utilize the Park and Ride in Cottage Grove to provide service to regional events such as sporting events. The Park and Ride has had great success for State Fair service throughout the years. o Expand the service area and days/hours of operation of the current Transit Link service to include weekends and later hours on weekdays. The Council thanks you for the opportunity to comment on Network Now and looks forward to working with Metro Transit to progress transit in the City of Cottage Grove. If there is anything that we can do to assist you in the City of Cottage Grove, please contact me at mbailey@cottagegrovemn.gov Sincerely, Myron Bailey Mayor, City of Cottage Grove 1 City Council Action Request 7.L. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Administration Agenda Category Action Item Title Washington County 2025-2029 CIP Response Letter Staff Recommendation Approve the response letter to the Washington County 2025-2029 Draft CIP. Budget Implication Attachments 1. Washington County 2025-2029 Draft CIP Response Letter_2024-10-30 CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE  12800 Ravine Parkway  Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016 www.cottagegrovemn.gov  651-458-2800  Fax 651-458-2897  Equal Opportunity Employer October 30, 2024 Mr. Wayne Sandberg, P.E., Public Works Director/County Engineer Washington County Department of Transportation and Physical Development 11660 Myeron Road North Stillwater, MN 55082-9573 Re: Draft Washington County 2025-2029 CIP Dear Mr. Sandberg: The partnership between the city and county is crucial for providing a great place for residents to live and businesses to thrive. The City of Cottage Grove appreciates the continued collaboration and relationship between our staffs as we work towards a shared goal of maintaining existing and providing new amenities and infrastructure to meet the needs of our community. The City of Cottage Grove especially appreciates this opportunity each year to review the County’s priorities for the next 5 years as shown in the draft 2025-2029 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and provide comments on how those priorities may align with those of the City of Cottage Grove. One of the key priorities for the Cottage Grove community as it relates to projects across the county is the continued progress on the County 19A & 100th Street Realignment Project. While Cottage Grove continues to aggressively pursue grant opportunities to close the funding gap, we are quickly approaching the point of losing grants funds that have already been secured if the project does not move forward. Currently, the Washington County CIP shows $3,000,000 in design in 2026. Cottage Grove requests that a portion of the design funding be moved to 2025, which Cottage Grove is committed to cost share in. It is critical that the final design and environmental process be completed, so there is a clear and accurate understanding of project costs and challenges. Also, this will provide more details on potential phasing options, to ensure the project can be started and grant funds can be expended. The City’s specific comments on the CIP are as follows: Facility Projects •Park Grove Library Improvements (BSD-PGL-2001) $12,000,000 is included in the CIP for improvements to Park Grove Library, funded by 2027 bond proceeds. With design beginning in late 2024, and construction from fall 2025 – fall 2026, Cottage Grove requests to be involved throughout this process. This is an important facility in our community, located in an area that has seen significant growth in high density housing in recent years. Cottage Grove strongly supports improvements to this important facility, to ensure it meets the needs of our community for generations to come. Mr. Wayne Sandberg Draft Washington County 2025-2029 CIP October 30, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Park Projects •Ravine Regional Park Land Acquisition As development continues to fill in west of CSAH 19 (Keats Ave), interest continues to grow for new development on the east side of the road. Included in the 2017 Cottage Grove Ravine Regional Park Master Plan is an expansion of the park boundary, east of CSAH 19 and south of 80th Street. Cottage Grove encourages Washington County to begin planning for land acquisition following the approved master plan. •Cottage Grove Ravine Regional Park Lighted Trails (PARK-4006) The City of Cottage Grove encourages continued investment into this park to expand its recreational options, through additions like the lighted trails and possible future consideration of winter multi-use trails. Cottage Grove would support a future state bonding request to fund construction of lighted trails in Ravine Regional Park. •Grey Cloud Island Regional Park Master Plan Cottage Grove believes an updated Master Plan with approval from all stakeholders is critical before any physical investment is made. To that end, the City of Cottage Grove is requesting that Washington County complete a full revision of the 1994 Grey Cloud Island Regional Park Master Plan. As Cottage Grove develops a large community park on the former Mississippi Dunes Golf Course property, this will help to ensure City and County efforts to improve regional recreational opportunities in this area complement each other and inefficiencies of service are avoided. •Park and Trail Long-Range Planning (Park-1001) The City of Cottage Grove would like to see funding towards a cooperative effort between the City, County and State to begin master planning a trail route that connects Point Douglas Park (via the Point Douglas Trail) to Cottage Grove Ravine Regional Park. We see that missing link in the regional trail system as the next great opportunity for Washington County to expose residents and visitors to our rivers, park spaces, greenways and the historic Highway 61 corridor. Cottage Grove has started discussion with MnDOT on this topic, to look at opportunities to include pedestrian facilities in future intersection improvements along the corridor. We believe a collaborative effort between all three agencies is necessary to make this pedestrian link a reality. Road and Bridge Projects •CSAH 19 & 80th Street Intersection (RB-2667) Included in the CIP for 2026 is an intersection improvement at the CSAH 19 & 80th Street intersection. Cottage Grove is actively working with Washington County on the design of these improvements. The City is supportive of continued grant applications to secure funding for the project. Mr. Wayne Sandberg Draft Washington County 2025-2029 CIP October 30, 2024 Page 3 of 4 •CSAH 13 – CSAH 20 to Hargis Parkway (RB-2672) While this project is not located within Cottage Grove, it is located along a key connection point with the City of Woodbury. Cottage Grove supports these improvements, currently programmed for construction in 2027. Our team would greatly appreciate continuing to be involved in discussions as design of the improvements along the County Highway 13 (Radio Drive) corridor are determined. •CR 74 – County 38 to Geneva Avenue (RB-2675) Cottage Grove supports the proposed study and repairs to CR 74 and the adjacent ravine in the City of Newport. This is a much-needed improvement, located along and west of the Cottage Grove city limits. Over the years, Cottage Grove has made a concerted effort to work with developers to reduce runoff rates to this ravine compared to the undeveloped condition. We appreciate the collaboration on this project between Washington County, City of Newport, City of Cottage Grove, and the South Washington Watershed District. •CR 19A & 100th Street Realignment (RB-2685) Cottage Grove continues to strongly support the implementation of the first phase of the SW Arterial Project, through the realignment of CR 19A & 100th Street, and appreciates the ongoing collaboration with Washington County. Cottage Grove continues to see rapid growth in this area of the community, which further drives the need for this improvement. As stated in the introduction to this letter, completing final design and environmental review in 2025 is critical to ensuring we are prepared to begin construction and not lose out on the significant grant funding that has been obtained to date. •CSAH 19 – Dale Road to US Trunk Highway 61 (RB-2687) With ongoing development in this area of Cottage Grove, and potential development interest ranging from single family homes, multi-use, and commercial, this study is well timed. The development of this study will position the County and City of Cottage Grove well for the additional development by proactively planning for the future needs of this major corridor. •CSAH 20 – CSAH 22 – Military Road (RB-2691) Cottage Grove anticipates the area around Jamaica Avenue (CSAH 20) from 70th Street (CSAH 22) to Military Road to be fully developed in the coming years. Included in the CIP in 2028 is the reconstruction of CSAH 20 (Jamaica Avenue) from 70th Street to Military Road. Cottage Grove supports this project, including the planning and design efforts in 2025-2026. This will be a positive improvement to this developing area and help ensure both vehicles and pedestrians are able to travel in this area of the city efficiently and safely. •CSAH 39 & TH 61 Interchange (RB-2815) As Cottage Grove moves into the design phase of the 2026 80th Street Improvement Project from Highway 61 to Ideal Avenue, collaboration with MnDOT and Washington County on the interchange will be critical to make this a successful project. Cottage Grove appreciates both agencies working with Cottage Grove to make this an all-encompassing improvement in this busy area of the community. Mr. Wayne Sandberg Draft Washington County 2025-2029 CIP October 30, 2024 Page 4 of 4 •CSAH 22 – CSAH 19 to CSAH 13 Study (RB-2817) In response to the draft 2024-2028 Washinton County CIP, Cottage Grove requested this study be completed. The City appreciates the inclusion of $300,000 in 2027 to complete this effort and guide future improvements along the corridor. Records Management System (RMS) Appropriation •Given the interminable problems with CentralSquare, the City of Cottage Grove would support a 2026 appropriation request by Sherrif Dan Starry for an RMS/CAD/Mobile/JMS replacement. Over the years, stakeholders’ concerns with CentralSquare’s systems have been repeatedly voiced and now it is clearly apparent that a wholesale system change-out is necessary. All agencies have worked hard together to make the current system work. Additionally, we would advocate for a collaborative effort of all law enforcement agencies to review RFPs for a cloud-based application that would allow each agency to manage its own system while facilitating data sharing. The City of Cottage Grove values our current and continued partnership with the Washington County Sheriff’s Office, and we look forward to engaging in further discussions and cooperative solutions. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Washington County Draft 2025-2029 CIP. Through the continued coordination and cooperation with Washington County, we believe we have been able to provide exceptional amenities, pedestrian facilities, and public infrastructure to increase our level of service, improve the livability of our community, and promote business growth and expansion. Successful projects are hinged on partnerships, the County 19A & 100th Street Realignment project is a great example of this partnership. The ongoing collaboration and coordination between the City and County will be critical as we work to deliver this key infrastructure project. We look forward to continuing the collaboration with Washington County to meet the capital needs in our community. Sincerely, Jennifer Levitt City Administrator CC: Washington County Commissioners Cottage Grove City Council Members Kevin Corbid, Washington County Administrator 1 City Council Action Request 7.M. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Public Safety Agenda Category Action Item Title Joint Powers Agreement Between Washington County and the City of Cottage Grove for a Mass Community Notification System Staff Recommendation Authorize executing the Joint Powers Agreement between Washington County and the City of Cottage Grove for a mass community notification system. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. Cottage Grove JPA for Mass Community Notification System 1 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator FROM: Pete Koerner, Public Safety Director DATE: November 6, 2024 RE: Joint Powers Agreement Between Washington County and the City of Cottage Grove for a Mass Community Notification System Discussion In 2012, the City entered into an agreement with the Washington County Sheriff’s Office for use of OnSolve CodeRED, a cloud-based software solution for mass community notification. This system employs internet mapping capability for geographic targeting of calls, coupled with a high-speed telephone calling system. The calling system is capable of delivering customized pre-recorded emergency messages directly to mobile phones and home and business landlines, whether answered by an individual or an answering machine. For more than 25 years, CodeRED has helped organizations and agencies in the U.S. deliver emergency alerts quickly and reliably to help save lives. The City of Cottage Grove, specifically the Cottage Grove Public Safety Department, has utilized CodeRED for numerous City events, emergency alerts, general notifications, and daily scheduling operations. Additionally, CodeRED is capable of messaging all City employees with routine notifications or in the event of an emergency. Our current agreement with Washington County will expire on December 31, 2024, and the County requested that we review the new agreement that will go into effect on January 1, 2025, and obtain the appropriate signatures. The agreement was forwarded to our City Attorney, reviewed by Attorney Aaron Price, and approved to move forward. Recommendation Authorize executing the Joint Powers Agreement between Washington County and the City of Cottage Grove for a mass community notification system. Attachments 1. Cottage Grove JPA for Mass Community Notification System 2 1 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN WASHINGTON COUNTY AND THE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE FOR A MASS COMMUNITY NOTIFICATION SYSTEM THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between political subdivisions organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota. Washington County, hereinafter “County”, and the City of Cottage Grove, hereinafter “City”, are the parties to this agreement. WHEREAS, both political subdivisions, through their law enforcement agencies, manage threats to public health, safety, and welfare. WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute Section 471.59, commonly known as the Joint Powers Act, provides that two or more governmental units may, by agreement, jointly exercise any power common to the contracting parties. WHEREAS, the County has entered into a contract for a Mass Community Notification System, hereinafter “System”, for the purpose of sending mass notifications to homes, businesses, and mobile phone devices. WHEREAS, the County has agreed to purchase sufficient minutes annually to assist the agencies within Washington County to provide necessary mass emergency notifications. WHEREAS, the City is in need of having the ability to communicate with the public in a timely manner during both emergency and non-emergency situations. WHEREAS, at the request of the City, the County is willing to provide a System to meet this need. NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in Minnesota Statute Section 471.59, and in consideration of the mutual covenant contained herein and the benefits that each party hereto shall derive, the County and City hereby agree to the following terms and conditions. PURPOSE The purpose of this joint powers agreement is set forth in the recitals contained above, which are incorporated by reference and fully set forth herein. COUNTY’S RESPONSIBILITIES 1. The County agrees to enter into a contract for the purchase of sufficient minutes annually for the System. 2. The County will develop a policy related to the use and maintenance of the System. 2 3. The County will assign an employee as the System administrator. 4. The County agrees to train the Emergency Communications Response Center, hereinafter “ECRC”, personnel in the operation of the System. 5. The County will periodically test the System to ensure it is operating properly. 6. The County will monitor the number of minutes used by all agencies to ensure there is sufficient minutes available in the event of an emergency. CITY’S RESPONSIBILITIES 1. The City will conform to the policy developed by the County related to the use and maintenance of the System. 2. The City’s representative will be responsible for notifying the County’s ECRC for emergency notifications. Emergency notifications are defined in the policy as those that are related to public safety or public health. 3. The City’s representative will be responsible for determining the content of any emergency notification message, in addition to the geographic area the message is to be sent. 4. The County’s ECRC personnel will assist in preparing emergency notifications and will be responsible for initiating the call procedures through the System at the direction of the City’s representative. 5. The City’s representative has the option to send general notifications through a web-based server, or the City’s representative may contact the ECRC to send general notifications on their behalf. General notifications are defined in the policy as those that are for the purpose of public notification and do not meet the criteria of an emergency notification. TERM OF AGREEMENT The term of this agreement shall begin on January 1, 2025, the date of the signature of the parties notwithstanding. This agreement will remain in effect until such time as one or both parties terminate the agreement as provided herein. TERMINATION The County may cancel this agreement with or without cause at any time upon giving a thirty (30) days’ written notice to the City Administrator or designee. The City may cancel this agreement with or without cause at any time upon giving a thirty (30) days’ written notice to the County Sheriff or designee. 3 COST AND PAYMENT The minutes purchased by the County annually will be used for all emergency notifications at no cost to the City. The County will monitor the number of minutes available. If the number of minutes available becomes insufficient, the County, at its discretion, will bill the City for general notification minutes used at a rate of $0.25 per minute. These funds will be retained by the County for the sole purpose of purchasing additional minutes. The City shall pay the County within thirty (30) days of being invoiced. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Nothing within this agreement is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties or as constituting the City as the agent, representative, or employee of the County for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. ASSIGNMENT The City shall not assign any services contemplated under this agreement. AUDITS, REPORTS, RECORDS, AND MONITORING PROCEDURES/RECORDS AVAILABILITY & RETENTION Pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 16C.05 Subdivision 5, the City will: 1. Maintain all books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices that are related to and/or relevant to this agreement. 2. Agree that the County, the State Auditor, or legislative authority, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may deem reasonably necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices that are related to and/or relevant to this agreement. The City agrees to maintain these records for a period of six (6) years from the date of the termination of this agreement. INDEMNIFICATION The City agrees it will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County, its officers, and employees against any and all liability, loss, costs, damages, and expenses which the County, its officers, or employees may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay arising out of the negligent or willful acts or omissions of the City in the performance of this agreement. The liability of the parties under this agreement shall be governed by Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59 Subdivision 1a. Each party to this agreement shall be liable for its own acts or omissions and shall not be liable for the acts or omissions of any other party to this agreement. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS The City agrees that in order to protect itself, as well as the County, under the indemnity provisions set forth above, it will at all times during the term of this agreement, keep in force the following insurance protection in the limits specified: 4 1. Maintain membership and participation in the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust or commercial general liability insurance with contractual liability coverage in the amount of the City’s and County’s tort liability limits set forth in Minnesota Statute Section 466.04 and as amended from time to time. 2. Automobile coverage in the amount of the City’s and County’s tort liability limits set forth in Minnesota Statute Section 466.04 and as amended from time to time. 3. Worker’s compensation in statutory amount. Prior to the effective date of this agreement, the City will furnish the County with certificates of insurance as proof of insurance. This provision shall be set as a condition subsequent; failure to abide by this provision shall be deemed a substantial breach of contract. Any policy obtained and maintained under this clause shall provide that it shall not be cancelled, materially changed, or not renewed without thirty (30) days’ notice thereof to the County. DATA PRACTICES All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated for any purpose by the activities of the City, because of this agreement, shall be governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as amended, and the Rules implementing the Act now in force or as amended, as well as federal regulations on data privacy. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this agreement by their duly authorized officers: WASHINGTON COUNTY CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE _____________________________________ _____________________________________ County Board Chair Date Mayor Date _____________________________________ _____________________________________ County Administrator Date City Clerk Date Approved as to form: _____________________________________ Assistant County Attorney Date 1 City Council Action Request 7.N. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Public Safety Agenda Category Action Item Title Updated Ambulance Purchase Authorization Staff Recommendation Authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign the sales quote for the purchase of a Ford E-450 Road Rescue Ultramedic from Everest Emergency Vehicles with an estimated cost of $293,627.00 and an estimated delivery of December 2025. Budget Implication Approved for the 2024 budget, but delays pushed delivery to 2025. Attachments 1. Cottage Grove New Road Rescue E-450 Quote 10.22.24 1 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator FROM: Pete Koerner, Public Safety Director DATE: November 6, 2024 RE: Updated Ambulance Purchase Authorization Discussion In June 2022, the Cottage Grove City Council authorized a purchase agreement to purchase a new ambulance to replace an aging ambulance. The City Council authorized a purchase agreement with an estimated cost of $305,000.00. At the time of the authorization, the anticipated delivery was late 2024. The purchase had been an approved budget purchase, but delays have moved back the delivery date. Due to manufacturing delays and shortage of chassis available for ambulances, the Fire Department had an opportunity to re-evaluate the previous ambulance design without further delaying delivery time. This evaluation included opportunities for cost-savings and discussions with Cottage Grove Public Works Mechanics on how truck design and chassis type could improve maintenance costs and efficiencies. After careful evaluation, with input from Public Works Mechanics and Firefighter/Paramedics and EMTs, the Fire Department has decided to go to a “van” type chassis (Type 3 ambulance) instead of the previously planned larger and more expensive truck-type chassis. The change to the van-type chassis along with changes to other design elements has allowed the cost of the ambulance to be decreased by approximately $12,000.00. The ambulance is estimated to be delivered in December 2025. Recommendation Authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign the sales quote for the purchase of a Ford E-450 Road Rescue Ultramedic from Everest Emergency Vehicles with an estimated cost of $293,627.00 and an estimated delivery of December 2025. Attachments 1. Cottage Grove New Road Rescue E-450 Quote 10.22.24 2 1 City Council Action Request 7.O. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Administration Agenda Category Action Item Title Authorization to order 2025 Fire Tender Staff Recommendation 1) Authorize the order of the 2025 Fire Tender utilizing the Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing Group. 2) Approve Resolution 2024-155, Declaring the official intent of the City of Cottage Grove to reimburse certain expenditures from the proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City with respect to equipment (Fire Tender). Budget Implication Included in the 2025 preliminary Budget and Financial Management Plan. Attachments 1. Authorization to Order 2025 Tender 2. CC Memo Fire Tender 3. 2024-155 Reimbursing Resolution Fire Tender To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator From:Peter J Koerner, Director of Public Safety Nick Arrigoni, Deputy Fire Chief Date:November 1, 2024 Subject: AUTHORIZATION TO ORDER 2025 TENDER Introduction During 2025 budget meetings, along with our fleet reduction plan to better utilize our current apparatus and response model, we proposed ordering a tender, budgeted at $650,000.00. This order is to replace the current 1996 Volvo Tanker/Pumper that has exceeded its end-of- life service of 20 years. The tender replacement was also included in the financial management plan and in the 2025 preliminary budget. (1996 Volvo Tanker/Pumper) Tenders (sometimes with water pumps) serve areas without fire hydrants to transport water to the scene to support fire suppression. The current Cottage Grove tender holds 2,000 gallons of water. We would purchase a tender with a water pump which would allow us to use it as a secondary engine. Through research, it has been determined that multiple vendors have “stock” chassis available. The benefit of using a stock chassis is its availability. Most chassis are not available for 9 to14 months from time of order. The truck then needs to be built at its respective facility, making the delivery time up to 24 months. It has been determined by the department that purchasing a stock chassis will allow us to accept delivery of a truck sooner than any other option. A stock chassis will also allow us to have a cost savings of up to 20% compared to a custom build. This option also comes with everything we were planning to outfit the truck with. Vendors only order a certain number of chassis a year. Once they are gone, most require you to wait until the next year. To ensure the lowest price and availability of a chassis, it is important that we place an order in 2024. If we are unable to place our order, we will drastically delay the arrival of the tender. The Fire Department evaluated the Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Venture and there were no vendors or products that meet the needs of this purchase. Since Rosenbauer and the City of Cottage Grove are members of Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing Group which is a statutory-compliant cooperative purchasing cooperative, the Fire Department and Rosenbauer will utilize a contract through Sourcewell to purchase the tender. Recommendation Authorize the order of the 2025 Fire Tender utilizing the Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing Group. To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator From:Brenda Malinowski, Finance Director Date:November 6, 2024 Subject:Equipment-Fire Tender Background A reimbursement resolution is required to issue tax exempt bonds per regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States of America when costs are to be reimbursed with the bond issue. The City intends to issue debt for the equipment purchase of the Fire Tender as identified in the 2025 Budget and Financial Management Plan. The bond issue will occur in 2025 and expenditures may happen before the issuance of the debt, so a reimbursing resolution is needed. At this time, the resolution lists the entire budget amount of the purchase, but the amount of the debt issue will be lower due to savings from purchasing a “stock” chassis. Recommendation Approve Resolution 2024-155, Declaring the official intent of the City of Cottage Grove to reimburse certain expenditures from the proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City with respect to equipment (Fire Tender). CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2024-155 DECLARING THE OFFICIAL INTENT OF THE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM THE PROCEEDS OF BONDS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CITY WITH RESPECT TO EQUIPMENT (FIRE TENDER) WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service has issued Treas. Reg. § 1.150-2 (the “Reimbursement Regulations”) providing that proceeds of tax-exempt bonds used to reimburse prior expenditures will not be deemed spent unless certain requirements are met; and WHEREAS, the City of Cottage Grove Minnesota (the “City”) expects to incur certain expenditures that may be financed temporarily from sources other than bonds, and reimbursed from the proceeds of tax-exempt bonds; and WHEREAS, the City has determined to make this declaration of official intent (the “Declaration”) to reimburse certain costs from proceeds of bonds in accordance with the Reimbursement Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City proposes to undertake the purchase of fire equipment within the City (the “Equipment”). 2. The City reasonably expects to reimburse the expenditures made for certain costs of the equipment from the proceeds of bonds in an estimated maximum principal amount of $650,000. All reimbursed expenditures will be capital expenditures, costs of issuance of the bonds, or other expenditures eligible for reimbursement under Section 1.150-2(d)(3) of the Reimbursement Regulations. 3. This Declaration has been made not later than 60 days after payment of any original expenditure to be subject to a reimbursement allocation with respect to the proceeds of bonds, except for the following expenditures: (a) costs of issuance of bonds; (b) costs in an amount not in excess of $100,000 or 5 percent of the proceeds of an issue; or (c) “preliminary expenditures” up to an amount not in excess of 20 percent of the aggregate issue price of the issue or issues that finance or are reasonably expected by the City to finance the Equipment for which the preliminary expenditures were incurred. The term “preliminary expenditures” includes architectural, engineering, surveying, bond issuance, and similar costs that are incurred prior to commencement of acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of the equipment, other than land acquisition, site preparation, and similar costs incident to commencement of construction. 4. This Declaration is an expression of the reasonable expectations of the City based on the facts and circumstances known to the City as of the date hereof. The anticipated original expenditures for the Equipment and the principal amount of the bonds described in paragraph 2 are consistent with the City’s budgetary and financial circumstances. No sources other than proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set aside pursuant to the City’s budget or financial policies to pay such Equipment expenditures. 5. This Declaration is intended to constitute a declaration of official intent for purposes of the Reimbursement Regulations. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Minnesota, this 6th day of November 2024. Myron Bailey, Mayor ATTEST: Tamara Anderson, City Clerk 1 City Council Action Request 7.P. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Public Works Agenda Category Action Item Title Utility and Engineering Building Change Order # 3 Staff Recommendation Approve Change Order #3 for the Utility and Engineering Building which results in a reduction in project costs in the amount $9,159.33. Budget Implication This change order results in a net project cost reduction of $9,159.33. Attachments 1. CGUE_Kraus-Anderson CORs October 2024_CORs 10-22 Kraus-Anderson Construction 501 South 8th Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 Phone: (612) 332-7281 Web: www.krausanderson.com October 30, 2024 Ryan Burfeind, PE Public Works Director City of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Re: Change Order Requests for October 2024 City of Cottage Grove Utility & Engineering Building 10795 Ideal Avenue South Cottage Grove, Minnesota Dear Mr. Burfeind, We respectfully submit the following change order requests (COR) for approval at the Cottage Grove City Council meeting on November 6, 2024: • COR #10 – $951.50 o PCO 15, PR #9 – Adding two outlets to water service room A132. • COR #11 – $1,025.00 o PCO 47, RFI #28 – Concrete remobilization for brick ledge, originally left out to facilitate steel. • COR #12 – $24,738.26 o PCO 38, PR #11 – Earthwork/utility changes per PR #11 in response to Dept. of Labor review. • COR #13 – $1,543.00 o PCO 50 – CMU remobilization for 8-foot section on mezzanine following AHU install. • COR #14 – ($5,350.00) o PCO 27 – Credit back for mechanical roof curbs, installed by mechanical contractor. • COR #15 – $4,593.00 o PCO 25, PR #10 – Vapor barrier added scope per PR #10. • COR #16 – ($46,235.09) o PCO 45, PR #13 – Credit back for removals, concrete flatwork and paving per PR #13. • COR #17 – $1,522.50 o PCO 17, RFI #12 – Add cove/radius at joint between perimeter curb and floor in Room A275. • COR #18 – $2,117.50 o PCO 51, PR #14 – Adding electrical receptacles in Rooms A103 and A110 per PR #14. • COR #19 – $1,502.00 o PCO 52 – Modifications to mezzanine railing gate including cut out channel to correct swing. • COR #20 – $303.00 o PCO 53 – Additional labor to remove water on mezzanine prior to topping slab placement. • COR #21 – $1,337.00 o PCO 69 – Two (2) surface mounted bollards added on east side of parking garage. • COR #22 – $2,793.00 o PCO 54 – Grinding, surface prep and epoxy coat flooring below water softener in Room A132. In addition to the COR’s listed above, the following changes will be at no cost (net $0 change) to the owner: • PCO 28 – $5,380 cost from WS 05B (Spartan). Cost backcharged to WS 23B contract (SCR). o Roof frame additional labor related to missed coordination for roof drains and exhaust fans. • PCO 44 – $11,330 cost from WS 03A (Axel Ohman). Cost backcharged to WS 23B contract (SCR). o Trench drain 4-inch mud slab requested by plumbers. Constructability request. The COR’s noted above combine to a net credit back to the project of ($9,159.33). The remaining construction contingency (orig. $470,000) less pending COR #11 and COR #13 is $461,490.57. The remaining owner’s contingency (orig. $214,000) less pending COR #10, COR #12, COR #15, and COR #17 through COR #22, and adding credits back for COR #14 and COR #16, is $211,344.37. To have questions answered or schedule a time to meet and discuss the attached COR’s further, please contact Ben Albrecht at 763.401.2465 (ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com). Sincerely, Kraus-Anderson Construction Ben Albrecht Assistant Project Manager Kraus-Anderson Construction cc: Lee Mann, Stantec Dan Kjellberg, Kraus-Anderson Construction Rachel Struckman, Kraus-Anderson Construction Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 1087 Ideal Avenue S Cottage Grove UE Building 2310312-02 COR # 10.00 Date:8/27/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 15 - Wold PR #9: Water Service Room Power Update 1 $951.50 Electrical per Wold PR #9.Fobbe Electric, Inc. $951.50 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 10875 Ideal Ave S Cottage Grove UE Building 2310312-COR # 10.00 Date:8/27/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 15 - Wold PR #9: Water Service Room Power Update 1 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #9.Axel H. Ohman, Inc. $0.00 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Insert Owner Logo COMPANY NAME & LOGO Fobbe Electric Inc Date :7/31/24 Contact Info and Address 111 Meadowlark Drive Delano MN 55328 PCO #:$15 Project Manager: PR/SI #9 Description Cost Labor Total 540.00$ Materials and Equipment Total 325.00$ Tax on Materials and Equipment Only -$ Self Performed Subtotal 865.00$ 10% Overhead and Profit 86.50$ Self Performed Total 951.50$ Subcontractors -$ 5% Overhead and Profit on Subs -$ Subcontractor Total -$ TOTAL COST OF CHANGE 951.50$ Signature: Labor By Task Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Adding 2 outlets in room A132 4 135.00$ 540.00$ -$ -$ -$ Sub-Total 540.00$ Materials and Equipment By Task Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Conduit, boxes, THHN wire, and misc electrical material 1 325 325.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Sub-Total 325.00$ Sub-Contractor Proposals Total Cost -$ -$ -$ -$ Sub-Total (Attach Sub-Contractor Proposals)-$ Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below (5% is the max allowed on subcontractors) <<< Provide Sales/Use Tax Total City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building (10% is the max fee allowed on CO's) Description of Work Notes/Attachments (Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below) (Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below) PROVIDE DETAIL BREAKDOWN BELOW: COST SUMMARY Contractor acknowledges no other Costs assciated with this PCO. 1 Struckman, Rachel From:Jordan Boeser <Jordan@axelohman.com> Sent:Monday, August 5, 2024 7:55 AM To:Struckman, Rachel Cc:Albrecht, Ben Subject:RE: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 15_PR 9 Water Service Room Power Update CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. No costs for us, looks like just an electrical change. Thanks JORDAN BOESER Estimator / Project Manager Cell: 612-490-3724 Jordan@AxelOhman.com From: Struckman, Rachel <rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com> Sent: Friday, August 2, 2024 2:59 PM To: Jordan Boeser <Jordan@axelohman.com> Cc: Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com> Subject: FW: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 15_PR 9 Water Service Room Power Update Importance: High Jordan, As of today, we have not seen any pricing from you for PCO 15/PR 9. Will Axel have any costs for this PCO or can we close this out as a no cost change? Thank you, Rachel Struckman | Senior Project Coordinator rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com | direct 612-255-2378 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 501 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 office 612-332-7281 | krausanderson.com Together, strengthening the communities we serve Attachments: Wold PR #9 dated 5/13/24 We have reviewed the PCO and acknowledge that it is a “no change” item and does not affect our completion date. Signed By: Date: Company Name: 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 Request For Proposal Project: 2310312- PCO #: 15 Cottage Grove UE Building 1087 Ideal Avenue S Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Date: 05/14/2024 To: Dan Schauer, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ben Albrecht, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ryan Burfeind, City Of Cottage Grove Lee Mann, Stantec Jordan Boeser, Axel H. Ohman, Inc. Jacob Wollensak, Wold Architects & Engineers Kayla Simpson, Wold Architects & Engineers Ryan Fobbe, Fobbe Electric, Inc. Please provide a cost breakdown in accordance with the Contract Documents and a Summary for the Change described herein and on the attachments (if any) listed. All responses are required within seven (7) days. This is not an authorization to proceed with the work described herein unless and until approved by the Owner. On approval, this change will be included in a Change Order, which will provide the formal Contract Cha nge. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Please provide a cost estimate per the attached Wold Architects and Engineers PR #9 dated May 13, 2024 regarding water service room power update. PROPOSAL REQUEST Distribution: ☐ Ryan Burfeind, CG ☐ Adam Moshier, CG ☐ Dustin Phillips, KA ☒ Be Ben Albrecht, KA ☒ Jake Wollensak, Wold ☒ Kayla Simpson, Wold ☒ Pat Jansen, Wold ☒ Ryan Rossborough, Wold ☒ Sean McNamara, Wold ☐ Doug Galloway, Wold ☒ Derek Peterson, Wold ☐ Kal Jackman, BKBM ☐ James Dorr, BKBM ☐ Kyle Kucharski, BKBM ☐ Lee Mann, Stantec ☐ Dave Sanocki, Stantec ☐ Eric Vidden, Stantec City of Cottage Grove Utility & Engineering Building Kraus-Anderson Attn: Dan Kjellberg/Rachel Struckman 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 612.332.7281 dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com / rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com Submit an itemized (labor and material) quotation for the proposed modifications to the contract documents as described herein within 21 days of receipt. If a cost is not submitted within 21 days, this Proposal Request can be accepted at no additional cost. Written approval is required prior to proceeding with this change. COST EXPECTATIONS: ☐ DEDUCT ☐ NO COST ☐ ADD PR: 09 Comm: 232010 Const. Pkg: [Status] Item Description 9 Water Service Room Power Update 9.1 See plan on sheet E2.11a – MAIN LEVEL POWER PLAN – AREA ‘A’ for additional outlets in Water Service Room A132. 9.2 See sheet E5.01 – PANEL SCHEDULES for revised schedule. Attachments: E2.11a, E5.01 Issued By: Kayla Simpson Date: 5/13/2024 GENERAL SHEET NOTESKEYED SHEET NOTESDWWD60"60"60"ABABABAB ABEWCABABABABABABABABABABAB ABAB60"60"JFB1JFB1AB46"46"46"JFB2JFB2JFB2JFB2JFB2JFB2ABABAB24"ABEWC46"46"46"46"46"46"46"46"46"46"AB AB ABAB AB46"46"JJ JJJJJJJJABJFB1J JTWPJJJJJJ JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJAB AB46"46"A. SOME NOTES MAY NOT APPLY TO THIS SHEETS.B. ALL BOXES, CONDUIT AND WIRING TO BE CONCEALED. NO EXPOSED BOXES, CONDUIT AND WIRING SHALL BE ALLOWED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.C. COORDINATE DEVICE LOCATIONS WITH OTHER TRADES INCLUDING HVAC EQUIPMENT, DUCTWORK, SPRINKLER PIPING AND BUILDING STRUCTURAL MEMBERS.D. NO MULTI-BRANCH CIRCUIT ALLOWED. PROVIDE A SEPARATE NEUTRAL WITH EACH CIRCUIT.E. VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ROUGH-IN REQUIREMENTS OF ALL OWNER FURNISHED EQUIPMENT PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN.F. CIRCUIT WIRING IS NOT SHOWN EXCEPT FOR SWITCHING INTENT OF FIXTURES AND CONTROL OF DEVICES.G. GFCI RECEPTACLES SHALL BE WIRED TO PROTECT ONLY THE DEVICES IN THAT OUTLET BOX. DOWNSTREAM DEVICES SHALL NOT BE PROTECTED BY GFCI.H. CIRCUIT NUMBERS SHOWN ARE FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES AND ARE FOR DISTINGUISHING CIRCUITS. RECORD AS-BUILT CIRCUITING IN A TYPED AND DATED PANELBOARD SCHEDULE.I. PROVIDE SEPARATED CONDUITS FOR ALL EMERGENCY CIRCUITS, DO NOT COMBINE WITH NORMAL BUILDING WIRING.J. COORDINATE HEIGHTS OF ALL DEVICES WITH MILLWORK AND MODULAR FURNITURE SHOP DRAWINGS PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN.K. OFFSET BACK TO BACK BOXES AT LEAST 12 INCHES EXCEPT IN RESIDENT ROOMS WHERE PUTTY-PADS SHALL BE PROVIDED (3M MPP+ OR EQUIVALENT).L. ALL RECEPTACLES TO BE HOSPITAL GRADE.M. ALL RECEPTACLES TO BE TAMPER RESISTANT.N. SEE BRANCH CIRCUIT CONDUCTOR SIZING SCHEDULE ON SHEET E0.00O. SEE FLOORBOX AND POKE-THRU SCHEDULE ON SHEET E6.20.P. SEE MOTOR AND EQUIPMENT SCHEDULE ON SHEET E6.40.Q. REFER TO MECHANICAL SHEETS FOR EXACT MOTOR LOCATIONS.1. REFER TO VIEW D4 ON SHEET E7.10 FOR DATA ROOM DETAILS.2. PROVIDE HUBBELL 45' INDUSTRIAL CORD REEL WITH 20A GFCI MODULE, WALL MOUNTED, PART NUMBER BRY45123GF20.3. PROVIDE HUBBELL 45' INDUSTRIAL CORD REEL WITH 20A GFCI MODULE, CEILING MOUNTED, PART NUMBER BRY45123GF20.4. PROVIDE CONNECTION FOR HOTSY PRESSURE WASHER.5. PROVIDE CONNECTION FOR IR CONTROL PANEL.6. PROVIDE CONNECTION FOR DF CONTROL PANEL.7. PROVIDE 208V 3P CONNECTION FOR GARAGE DOOR MOTOR, COORDINATE BREAKER REQUIREMENTS WITH MANUFACTURE. ASSUME 2HP FOR BIDDING, TO BE CORRECTED AS RFI AFTER PURCHASE.8. PROVIDE 208V 3P CONNECTION TO OVERHEAD CRANE SYSTEM, COORDINATE LOCATION AND BREAKER REQUIREMENTS WITH MANUFACTURE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. ASSUME 2HP FOR BIDDING, TO BE CORRECTED AS RFI AFTER PURCHASE.9. PROVIDE BUCK/BOOST TRANSFORMER. 208V INPUT, 240V OUTPUT.10. PROVIDE 240/1 RECPTACLE.11. PROVIDE CONNECTION FOR CO/NO2 SENSORS.12. PROVIDE 120V POWER FOR SINK/TOILET MOTION SENSORS IN THIS ROOM.13. PROVIDE CONNECTION FOR HEAT TRACE. COORDINATE WITH MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR.14. PROVIDE 120V CONNECTION FOR FIRE SUPRESSION CONTROL PANEL. COORDINATE WITH MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR.ABCDE1345261.1D.1C.11.4D.4D.6B.5C.5WATERSERVICEA132STREETLIGHTSTORAGEA131WATERMETERROOMA130STORAGEA126MECH/ELECA125ELECTRICALROOMA127JC / MAINT.A124ADA TOILETA121ADASHOWERROOMA117PERSONALSTORAGEA116CIRC.A115QUIETROOMA114CIRC.A112STAFFROOMA110JC.A123WORKROOMA109OFFICEA106OFFICEA105SMALLCONFERENCEROOMA104OPENOFFICEA103TOILETROOMA102LOBBYA101VEST.A100CONF. RM.A111CHANGINGROOMA119SHOWERROOMA118TOILETROOMA128WASHROOMA136TOILETROOMA113OFFICEA108OFFICEA107VEHICLEGARAGEA134L-1L-2L-1/2L-1/4 L-1/4L-1/4L-1/4L-1/4L-1/2L-1/2L-1/1L-1/1L-1/1L-1/1 L-1/1L-1/5 L-1/5L-1/5 L-1/5L-1/3 L-1/3L-1/3L-1/3L-1/3L-1/3L-1/35L-1/35L-1/35L-1/35L-1/32L-1/34L-1/34L-1/32L-1/34L-1/36L-1/32L-1/32L-1/33L-1/33L-1/33L-1/22L-1/20L-1/24L-1/25L-1/23L-1/21L-1/19L-1/27L-1/27L-1/27L-1/29L-1/26L-1/28L-1/30 L-1/31L-1/8L-1/8L-1/8L-1/8L-1/14 L-1/16L-1/33L-1/18L-1/18L-1/18L-1/18L-1/18L-1/18L-1/17L-1/17L-1/17L-1/15L-1/15L-1/15L-1/13L-1/13L-1/13L-1/12L-1/12L-1/12L-1/10L-1/10L-1/10L-1/10L-1/7L-1/7L-1/6L-1/7L-1/6L-1/6L-1/9L-1/9L-1/9L-1/11L-1/11L-1/11L-1/2L-2/5L-2/5L-2/5L-2/5L-2/1L-2/1L-2/1L-2/1L-2/1L-2/1L-2/3L-1/42L-5/2L-2/3L-5/2L-2/3L-1/42L-1/41L-1/38,40L-1/42L-1/42L-1/42L-1/42UH-1UH-2IR-4IR-1VP-1IR-5IR-2IR-3IR-6CUH-1B-1B-2GMU-1P-2P-1WH-1WH-2SITEDISTRIBUTIONGEN DOCKGD-1L-2/20L-2/20L-2/20L-2/20L-2/20L-1/42L-1/423333322222L-2/24L-2/24 L-2/28L-2/28L-2/30L-2/26L-2/26L-2/29L-2/29L-2/223P-4L-3DF-1DF-2DF-3DF-6DF-5DF-4L-3/20L-3/20L-3/20L-3/20L-3/22L-3/22L-1/37L-1/39L-1/5 L-1/5P-2 VFD P-1 VFD65 P-3L-3/38,40,42L-4L-4/1,3,5L-4/2L-4/4 L-4/6L-4/7L-4/7L-4/9L-4/11L-4/8,10,12L-4/21,23,25L-4/19L-4/19L-4/19L-4/19L-4/19L-4/19L-3/41L-4/277L-4/29,31,3391010L-1/4L-5L-6T-111111111111L-4/421L-4/42L-4/42L-4/42111L-1/35L-1/35L-1/35L-1/351212L-1/34L-1/34L-1/34121212L-1/36L-1/36L-1/3611L-1/34L-2/3L-2/3L-2/3121L-4/1113112L-1/2L-1/2L-1/21L-5/2L-5/2L-5/2L-5/2111L-1/42L-5/4L-5/41L-5/8,10,12L-5/13,15,1711GD-6GD-577L-5/14L-5/142TYPEDESCRIPTIONFLOOR BOX (FB) & POKETHRU (PT) SCHEDULEFACEPLATECOVERGENERAL NOTESA. CONTRACTOR TO REQUEST DIMENSIONING OF FLOORBOXES FROM ARCHITECT/ENGINEER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.B. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY FLOOR TYPE (CARPET OR TILE) PRIOR TO ORDERING.C. PROVIDE (1) 3/4" CONDUIT FOR POWER AND ROUTE AS REQUIRED.D. PROVIDE (2) 1-1/4" CONDUIT FOR LOW VOLTAGE AND ROUTE TO NEAREST ACCESSIBLE CEILING SPACE ABOVE AS REQUIRED.E. PROVIDE DEVICES AND PLATES AS INDICATED ON PLANS AND SPECS.F. PROVIDE LABELING FOR EMPTY CONDUITS IN A MANNER THAT INDICATES TO WHICH FLOOR BOX/POKE-THROUGH THE CONDUIT IS ASSOCIATED.G. PROVIDE UTP CABLES AS SPECIFIED UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON PLANS. FB13-GANG, 4 POWER, 2 DATA, RECESSED DUAL SERVICE FLOORBOX CAST IRON, ROUND WIREMOLD RESOURCE RFB4E SERIES OR APPROVED EQUAL (2)DUPLEX FACEPLATE FOR POWER WIREMOLD RFB6DP OR APPROVED EQUAL (1) STYLELINE FACEPLATES FOR SIGNAL WIREMOLD RFB6GFI OR APPROVED EQUALFLUSH, FLANGED LIDBRUSHED ALUMINUM FINISHSUITABLE FOR TILE/CARPET INSTALLATIONWIREMOLD CT2 OR APPROVED EQUALPROVIDE SILICON BEAD AROUND OUTER EDGE OF COVER TO SEAL FROM MOISTUREFB25-GANG, 8 POWER, 2 DATA, RECESSED DUAL SERVICE FLOORBOX CAST IRON, ROUNDWIREMOLD RESOURCE RFB4E SERIES OR APPROVED EQUAL(2)QUADPLEX FACEPLATE FOR POWERWIREMOLD RFB6DP OR APPROVED EQUAL(2) STYLELINE FACEPLATES FOR SIGNAL WIREMOLD RFB6GFI OR APPROVED EQUALFLUSH, FLANGED LIDBRUSHED ALUMINUM FINISHSUITABLE FOR TILE/CARPET INSTALLATIONWIREMOLD CT2 OR APPROVED EQUALPROVIDE SILICON BEAD AROUND OUTER EDGE OF COVER TO SEAL FROM MOISTUREFEDCBA12345678EMNNorthCheck:Drawn:Date:Comm:License Number:I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensedunder the laws of the State ofScale:Date5/13/2024 11:04:38 AMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 New Utility Building Elec.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 New Utility Building Elec.rvtCITY OF COTTAGEGROVENEW UTILITY &ENGINEERINGBUILDINGE2.11aMAIN LEVELPOWER PLAN -AREA 'A'12800 RAVINE PKWYCOTTAGE GROVE, MN 5501610875 IDEAL AVENUE S.COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016S MCNAMARAD PETERSON10/26/2023232010MINNESOTA10/26/2023BRADLEY R. JOHANNSEN43936PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER1/8" = 1'-0"ML POWER PLAN AREA 'A'E11 : 95FLOOR BOX SCHEDULEF3RevisionsDescription Date NumADD #1 11/14/2023 1PR #9 5/13/2024 2111 FEDCBA12345678EMNNorthCheck:Drawn:Date:Comm:License Number:I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensedunder the laws of the State ofScale:Date5/13/2024 11:04:38 AMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 New Utility Building Elec.rvtCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 New Utility Building Elec.rvtCITY OF COTTAGEGROVENEW UTILITY &ENGINEERINGBUILDINGE5.01PANELSCHEDULES12800 RAVINE PKWYCOTTAGE GROVE, MN 5501610875 IDEAL AVENUE S.COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016S MCNAMARAD PETERSON10/26/2023232010MINNESOTA10/26/2023BRADLEY R. JOHANNSEN43936PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERNOTES:Load Types (LT): COOL - Summer Cooling, ELEV- Elevator, EQ - Equipment, EX -Existing, GND - Grounding, HEAT - Winter Heating, KTCH-Kitchen, L MTR - Largest Motor, LTG -Lighting, MTR - Motor, RCPT - ReceptacleBreaker Types (BT): AF = Arc Fault, GF = Ground Fault Circuit Interrupt, GE = Ground Fault Equipment Protection (30mA), SH = Shunt Trip, EX= Existing, NX = New Breaker For Existing Panel, M = MeteredEST. DEMAND CURRENT:36 ACONNECTED CURRENT:34 ARCPT 3060 VA 100.00% 3060 VAESTIMATED DEMAND:13094 VAMTR 8906 VA 107.58% 9582 VACONNECTED LOAD:12328 VALTG 380 VA 125.00% 475 VALOAD CLASSIFICATION CONNECTED DEMAND ESTIMATED PANEL TOTALSTOTAL AMPS:38 A 32 A 33 ATOTAL LOAD:5 kVA 4 kVA 4 kVA41 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 4239 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 4037 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 3835 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 3633 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 3431 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 3229 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 3027 SPARE -- 20 A 1 0.0 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 2825 SPARE -- 20 A 1 0.0 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 2623 SPARE -- 20 A 1 0.0 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 2421 SPARE -- 20 A 1 0.0 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 2219 SPARE -- 20 A 1 0.0 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 2017 -- -- -- -- -- 0.9 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 1815 -- -- -- -- -- 0.9 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 1613 GD-6 MTR 20 A 3 0.9 0.4 1 20 A RCPT WATER SERVICE A132 1411 -- -- -- -- -- 0.9 0.9 -- -- -- -- -- 129 -- -- -- -- -- 0.9 0.9 -- -- -- -- -- 107 GD-4 MTR 20 A 3 0.9 0.9 3 20 A MTR GD-5 85 SITE LTG 20 A 1 0.4 0.9 1 20 A RCPT COLD STORAGE 63 FILLING STATION MTR 20 A 1 0.8 0.4 1 20 A RCPT GARAGE COUNTER 41 ROOF GFCI RCPT 20 A 1 0.4 1.1 1 20 A RCPT A130, A131 2# BT LOAD DESCRIPTION LT BKR PPHASEA kVAPHASEB kVAPHASEC kVAP BKR LT LOAD DESCRIPTION BT #FED FROM:DISTRIBUTIONBUS AMPS:MAINS AMPS:MAINS TYPE: SPECIAL:MOUNTING:SURFACEA.F.C....SEE SHORT CIRCUIT STUDYLOCATION:ELECTRICAL ROOM A127VOLTAGE:208Y/120 V. 3 ø 4 W.PANELBOARD: L-5NOTES:Load Types (LT): COOL - Summer Cooling, ELEV- Elevator, EQ - Equipment, EX -Existing, GND - Grounding, HEAT - Winter Heating, KTCH-Kitchen, L MTR - Largest Motor, LTG -Lighting, MTR - Motor, RCPT - ReceptacleBreaker Types (BT): AF = Arc Fault, GF = Ground Fault Circuit Interrupt, GE = Ground Fault Equipment Protection (30mA), SH = Shunt Trip, EX= Existing, NX = New Breaker For Existing Panel, M = MeteredEST. DEMAND CURRENT:4 ACONNECTED CURRENT:4 AESTIMATED DEMAND:960 VACONNECTED LOAD:960 VAXX_SPEC 960 VA 100.00% 960 VALOAD CLASSIFICATION CONNECTED DEMAND ESTIMATED PANEL TOTALSTOTAL AMPS:4 A 4 ATOTAL LOAD:0 kVA 0 kVA41 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 4239 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 4037 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 3835 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 3633 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 3431 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 3229 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 3027 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 2825 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 2623 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 2421 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 2219 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 2017 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 1815 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 1613 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 1411 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 129 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 107 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 85 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 63 -- -- -- -- -- 0.2 0.2 -- -- -- -- -- 41 A131 XX_S... 20 A 2 0.2 0.2 2 20 A XX_S... A131 2# BT LOAD DESCRIPTION LT BKR PPHASE AkVAPHASE BkVAP BKR LT LOAD DESCRIPTION BT #FED FROM:T-1BUS AMPS:MAINS AMPS:MAINS TYPE: SPECIAL:MOUNTING:SURFACEA.F.C....SEE SHORT CIRCUIT STUDYLOCATION:STREET LIGHT STORAGE A131VOLTAGE:240/120 V. 1 ø 3 W.PANELBOARD: L-6RevisionsDescription Date NumADD #1 11/14/2023 1PR #9 5/13/2024 212 Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 10875 Ideal Ave S Cottage Grove UE Building 2310312-COR # 11.00 Date:9/12/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Additional remobilization and associated labor time holding out concrete brick ledge for steel erection, and pouring back later. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 47 - RFI #28: Missing Concrete for Brick Ledge at B-1.1 1 $1,025.00 Concrete/masonry per RFI #28.Axel H. Ohman, Inc. $1,025.00 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Address Hours Trade Hourly Rate Total Quantity Rate Total Total 2 Laborer $102.09 204.18$ 3 $18.00 54.00$ -$ Laborer Foreman $109.09 -$ 1 $75.00 75.00$ -$ Bricklayer $111.17 -$ 2 $18.00 36.00$ -$ Bricklayer Foreman $118.17 -$ -$ -$ Finisher $108.01 -$ -$ -$ 2 Finisher Foreman $115.01 230.02$ -$ -$ Carpenter $109.89 -$ -$ -$ Carpenter Foreman $116.89 -$ -$ -$ 49er/Operator $108.40 -$ -$ -$ 1 Truck Driver / Trucking $316.00 316.00$ -$ -$ Supervisor $164.00 -$ -$ -$ Time and a Half Premium $42.00 -$ -$ -$ Double Time $83.00 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 16.29$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Subtotals 750.20$ 181.29$ -$ 931.49$ Sub-Contracted Work 5%-$ Overhead & Profit 10%93.15$ Total Cost 1,025$ 247 West 61st Street Minneapolis, MN 55419 Scope of Work Description: Jordan Boeser Estimator / Project Manager Cell 612-490-3724 Office 612-861-6025 Email Jordan@axelohman.com Cottage Grove Utility and Engineering KA Ben 8.28.24 Project Total before overhead and profit General Contractor Attention Date Task Materials (with tax) / Equipment Sub-Contractors CompanyMaterial Dowel bars Tube epoxy Bags concrete Below are the costs to leave a portion of brick ledge out for steel erection (pr 28 pco 47) Labor Performance Bond for Extra Sales Tax Attachments: RFI #28 Response dated 7/30/24 We have reviewed the PCO and acknowledge that it is a “no change” item and does not affect our completion date. Signed By: Date: Company Name: 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 Request For Proposal Project: 2310312- PCO #: 47 Cottage Grove UE Building 10875 Ideal Ave S Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Date: 08/27/2024 To: Dan Schauer, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ben Albrecht, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ryan Burfeind, City Of Cottage Grove Lee Mann, Stantec Jordan Boeser, Axel H. Ohman, Inc. Jacob Wollensak, Wold Architects & Engineers Kayla Simpson, Wold Architects & Engineers Please provide a cost breakdown in accordance with the Contract Documents and a Summary for the Change described herein and on the attachments (if any) listed. All responses are required within seven (7) days. This is not an authorization to proceed with the work described herein unless and until approved by the Owner. On approval, this change will be included in a Change Order, which will provide the formal Contract Cha nge. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Please provide a cost estimate per the attached RFI #28 response dated July 30, 2024 regarding missing concrete for brick ledge at B-1.1. City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building CGUB RFI 28 Missing Concrete for Brick Ledge at B-1.1_Response Created by Rachel Struckman with Autodesk® Construction Cloud™ on Aug 27, 2024 at 3:17 PM CDT Page 1 of 2 RFI detail #28 Missing Concrete for Brick Ledge at B-1.1 Status Closed Created on Jul 26, 2024 by Ben Albrecht (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company) RFI type RFI with Consultants Ball in court Ben Albrecht (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company) Answered Jul 30, 2024 by Rachel Struckman (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company) Question Axel Ohman left out concrete for the brick ledge near grid B-1.1 to facilitate steel erection. Building the brick ledge out to facilitate upcoming brick work. Would it be acceptable with the design team to lay 1 course of 8" CMU block and fill solid instead of forming back and pouring concrete brick ledge? Thank you. Official response See BKBM's Comments By Rachel Struckman (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company) - Jul 30, 2024, 3:15 PM CDT Official response attachments RFI 028.PDF, Jul 30, 2024, 3:15 PM CDT Impact Cost impact - Schedule impact - Other attributes Priority Normal Discipline - City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building CGUB RFI 28 Missing Concrete for Brick Ledge at B-1.1_Response Created by Rachel Struckman with Autodesk® Construction Cloud™ on Aug 27, 2024 at 3:17 PM CDT Page 2 of 2 Category - Location - Location details Grid B-1.1 External id - Co-reviewer(s)Kal Jackman (BKBM Engineers) Responsible Subcontractor - Activities By At Rachel Struckman changed the status from Open Answered to Closed changed the watchers to Ben Albrecht (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company), Dan schauer (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company), Jordan Boeser (Axel H. Ohman, Inc) Rachel Struckman Aug 27, 2024, 3:16 PM CDT Kal Jackman changed the status from Open In Review to Open Answered Official response: See BKBM's Comments changed the official response attachment to: RFI 028.PDF. set Ball in court to Ben Albrecht (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company) Kal Jackman Jul 30, 2024, 3:15 PM CDT Ben Albrecht (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company) created this RFI in Open In Review status and set Ball in court to Kayla Simpson (Wold Architects & Engineers). Ben Albrecht Jul 26, 2024, 4:27 PM CDT 2024 BKBM Engineers. All rights reserved. This document is an instrument of service and is the property of BKBM Engineers and may not be used or copied without prior written consent.C BKBMENGINEERS6120 Earle Brown Drive, Suite 700Minneapolis, MN 55430Phone: (763) 843-0420Fax: (763) 843-0421www.bkbm.comDATEPROJECT #DRAWN BYCHECKED BYIssued For07/30/202423253.00KAJKTKRFI 028City of Cottage Grove New U&E Building10875 Ideal Ave SCottage Grove, MN 55016RFI 028 - BKBM ResponseT/BRICK LEDGESEE ARCHNOTE: SEE PLAN AND SCHEDULES FOR WALL AND FOOTING REINFORCEMENTSEE CIVIL FOR PAVINGVENEER, SEE ARCHSLAB ON GRADE, SEE PLANSTEEL STUD, BY SUPPLIER 8" LEDGESEE PLANBOND BREAKS5.20114SECTIONPROVIDE A TOTAL OF 3-#4 DOWELSW/STD HOOK AT STEEL STUD CURB(1 BAR EA CORNER). DRILL ANDADHESIVE WITH A MINIMUM OF 8" OFEMBEDMENT INTO FOUNDATIONWALL.6" MIN 1' - 2"1' - 2"SC4CP1CF4 C1ACF4-0CP3WF2-0 WF1-4 20S5.201__TYP 3 SIDESTOF 95IER 99' - 10"AB11.1- MODIFIEDYELLOW HIGHLIGHT =BKBM'S UNDERSTANDING OFSTEEL STUD LEDGE FIXS2.01aFOOTING ANDFOUNDATIONPLAN - AREA A Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 10875 Ideal Ave S Cottage Grove UE Building 2310312-COR # 12.00 Date:9/12/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Added material and labor per PR #11 design changes following Department of Labor review comments. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 38 - Wold PR #11: DLI Review Revisions 1 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #11.SCR Central Division 2 $24,738.26 Earthwork per Wold PR #11.Miller Excavating, Inc. $24,738.26 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove From: Jesse Widmer <Jesse.Widmer@scr-mn.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 3:28 PM To: Struckman, Rachel Cc: Albrecht, Ben Subject: RE: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 38_PR 11 DLI Review Revisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. No cost. Jesse Widmer SCR - Project Manager Cell Phone 320.492.1964 Jesse.widmer@scr-mn.com From: Struckman, Rachel <rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 2:59 PM To: Jesse Widmer <Jesse.Widmer@scr-mn.com> Cc: Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com> Subject: FW: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 38_PR 11 DLI Review Revisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Jesse, Will SCR have costs for this PCO or can we close this out as a no cost change? Please advise. Thank you, Rachel Struckman | Senior Project Coordinator rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com | direct 612-255-2378 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 501 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 office 612-332-7281 | krausanderson.com Together, strengthening the communities we serve From: Struckman, Rachel Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 8:55 AM To: 'Jesse.Widmer@scr-mn.com' <Jesse.Widmer@scr-mn.com>; 'Steve St. Claire' <steve.st.claire@millerexc.com>; 'mindy.hackett@millerexc.com' <mindy.hackett@millerexc.com> Cc: Kjellberg, Dan <dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com>; Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com>; Jacob Wollensak <jwollensak@woldae.com>; 'Kayla Simpson' <ksimpson@woldae.com>; 'Lee.Mann@stantec.com' <Lee.Mann@stantec.com>; Attachments: Wold PR #11 dated 7/19/24 We have reviewed the PCO and acknowledge that it is a “no change” item and does not affect our completion date. Signed By: Date: Company Name: 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 Request For Proposal Project: 2310312- PCO #: 38 Cottage Grove UE Building 10875 Ideal Ave S Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Date: 07/24/2024 To: Dan Schauer, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ben Albrecht, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ryan Burfeind, City Of Cottage Grove Lee Mann, Stantec Jacob Wollensak, Wold Architects & Engineers Kayla Simpson, Wold Architects & Engineers Steve St. Claire, Miller Excavating, Inc. Mindy Hackett, Miller Excavating, Inc. Jesse Widmer, SCR Central Division Please provide a cost breakdown in accordance with the Contract Documents and a Summary for the Change described herein and on the attachments (if any) listed. All responses are required within seven (7) days. This is not an authorization to proceed with the work described herein unless and until approved by the Owner. On approval, this change will be included in a Change Order, which will provide the formal Contract Cha nge. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Please provide a cost estimate per the attached Wold Architects and Engineers PR #11 dated July 19, 2024 regarding DLI review revisions. PROPOSAL REQUEST Distribution: ☐ Ryan Burfeind, CG ☐ Adam Moshier, CG ☐ Dustin Phillips, KA ☒ Be Ben Albrecht, KA ☒ Jake Wollensak, Wold ☒ Kayla Simpson, Wold ☒ Pat Jansen, Wold ☒ Ryan Rossborough, Wold ☐ Sean McNamara, Wold ☐ Doug Galloway, Wold ☐ Derek Peterson, Wold ☐ Kal Jackman, BKBM ☐ James Dorr, BKBM ☐ Kyle Kucharski, BKBM ☒ Lee Mann, Stantec ☒ Dave Sanocki, Stantec ☒ Eric Vidden, Stantec City of Cottage Grove Utility & Engineering Building Kraus-Anderson Attn: Dan Kjellberg/Rachel Struckman 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 612.332.7281 dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com / rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com Submit an itemized (labor and material) quotation for the proposed modifications to the contract documents as described herein within 21 days of receipt. If a cost is not submitted within 21 days, this Proposal Request can be accepted at no additional cost. Written approval is required prior to proceeding with this change. COST EXPECTATIONS: ☐ DEDUCT ☐ NO COST ☐ ADD PR: 11 Comm: 232010 Const. Pkg: [Status] Item Description 10 DLI Review Revisions 10.1 See revised sheet C401R – SANITARY SEWER & WATERMAIN PLAN & PROFILES for updated hydrant. 10.2 See revised sheet C501 – DRAINAGE PLAN & PROFILES for updated normal water elevation at the storm water pond, stormwater inlet structures and pipes. 10.3 See updated plan on sheet C502 – DRAINAGE PLAN & PROFILES. 10.4 See revised sheet C503 – DRAINAGE PLAN & PROFILES for additional pipe. 10.5 See sheet G003 – CONSTRUCTION, STAGING, & GENERAL NOTES for updated storm sewer schedule. Attachments: C401R, C501, C502, C503, G003 Issued By: Kayla Simpson Date: 07/19/2024 SSWR EX MH - MH 3 -STA - (6+50.00) 770 780 790 800 810 820 770 780 790 800 810 820 803.86804.30+50 804.77802.61+00 805.75801.0805.96801.42+00 806.18802.5806.40803.53+00 806.61804.7806.83805.94+00 807.06805.7807.30805.55+00 806.36804.9805.06804.26+00 804.93803.4803.27803.16+75 EX. 150'-8" P V C S D R 3 5 @ 3.75%EX MH 9STA 1+00RIM 804.77DEPTH 18.89INV 785.88 8" SINV 785.88 8" EINV 785.88 8" WEX. 52'-8" PVC SDR 35 @ 1.00%EX PLUG 9ASTA 1+52INV 786.40 8" EINV 786.40 8" W90'-8" PVC SDR 35 @ 1.00%MH 1STA 2+42RIM 806.19DEPTH 18.90INV 787.30 8" EINV 798.38 6" NINV 787.30 8" W192'-8" PVC SDR 35 @ 1.00%MH 2STA 4+34RIM 806.99DEPTH 17.77INV 789.22 8" EINV 789.22 8" W230'-8" PVC SDR 35 @ 1.00%MH 3STA 6+64RIM 804.00DEPTH 12.49INV 791.52 8" W7.5' MIN. COVEREX. 20" DIP WM (RAW) EX. 24" DIP WM EXISTING FINISHED GROUND PROFILE PROPOSED FINISHED GROUND PROFILE 20" DIP24" DIPEX. 8" DIP WM 8" DIP WM MAINTAIN 2' SEPARATION. ADD 2" INSULATION.21" RCP8" DIP15" PVCMAINTAIN 2' SEPARATION. ADD 2" INSULATION.6" > 5" N770 780 790 800 810 820 770 780 790 800 810 820 806.84802.40+75 806.19802.31+00 803.11+50 45'-6" PVC SDR 35 @ 1.00%PLUG 1ASTA 2+42INV 798.83 5" SMH 1STA 2+42RIM 806.19DEPTH 18.90INV 787.30 8" EINV 798.38 6" NINV 787.30 8" W8" DIP8" DIP WM 60" DIA. DROP INLET MANHOLE8" DIP6" > 5" N6" X 5" SCH 40 PVC REDUCER>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>l l l l l l lllllllllllllllllll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l lll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>l>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>llUTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING (FFE 808.0) WATER POND REMOVE EX 8" PLUG, 1" CORP, CURB BOX, & 15' - 1" COPPER. CONNECT TO EX. 8" WM W/ 8" GV & BOX. 8" TEE 8" 45° bend 8" GV & BOX HYDRANT (10' BUILD) 8" X 6" TEE 6" GV & BOX 25' - 6" DIP WM HYDRANT 8" X 6" REDUCER 6" GV & BOX 6' - 6" DIP WM EX MH 9 EX PLUG 9A MH 1 MH 2 MH 3 PLUG 1A 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 8" PLUG REMOVE EX. PLUG & CONNECT TO EX. 8" PIPE 1+00HYDRANT 8" X 6" TEE 6" GV & BOX 45' - 6" DIP WM 6" X 5" SCH 40 PVC REDUCER & 5" PLUG SANITARY SEWER NOTES: 1.STATIONING IN PROFILE REFLECTS PIPE STATIONING. WATER MAIN NOTES: 1.ALL WATER MAIN SHALL BE DIP CLASS 52 WRAPPED IN POLYETHYLENE. 2.WATER MAIN SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 7.5 FEET OF COVER. 3.HYDRANT ELEVATIONS ARE GIVEN TO TOP NUT OF HYDRANT. N 0 25'50'SANITARY SEWER & WATERMAIN PLAN & PROFILESC401RWAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE:DATE:LIC. NO.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN.SHEET NUMBER DATENO SURVEY APPROVED DESIGNED DRAWN PROJ. NO. REVISION CHECKEDCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTACOTTAGE GROVE UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING193806146 PBW EPV DRS DRSENGINEERMINNESOTADAVID S. SANOCKI4097310/26/2023LMM 1 ADD #1 11/14/23 2 PR #06 04/09/24 3 PR #11 05/06/24 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>l l l l l l l l l llllllllllllllll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l lll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>l>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>llUTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING (FFE 808.0) STORM WATER POND BTM 792.0 NWL 797.0 HWL 800.0 EX STMH 108 EX OCS 109 EX CBMH 209 EX STMH 210EX CBMH 211 EX CB 212 EX FES 301 EX FES 302 FES 601 CBMH 602 CBMH 603 CBMH 604 CBMH 605 CBMH 606 CBMH 607 CBMH 611 CBMH 6131+001+00 2+003 + 0 0 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+001+001+004" DRAINTILE 4" DRAINTILE 20 CY CL. 3 RIP RAP PLUG 604A STRM FES 601 - CBMH 607 -STA - (7+00.00) 770 780 790 800 810 820 770 780 790 800 810 820 792.29804.50+50 798.00803.31+00 805.39803.4806.44802.82+00 805.14802.0805.94800.93+00 805.42801.4805.70802.54+00 805.97803.1806.24804.35+00 806.52805.5806.79805.66+00 807.53805.3806.21805.07+00 805.55804.1805.15803.77+75FES 601STA 1+00INV 797.00 27" E29'-27" RCP CL 3 @ 0.50%CBMH 602STA 1+29RIM 805.00DEPTH 10.86SUMP 794.14INV 797.14 24" SINV 798.88 18" NINV 797.14 27" W94'-24" RCP CL 3 @ 0.50%115'-21" PVC SDR 35 @ 0.50%CBMH 603STA 2+23RIM 805.22DEPTH 7.61INV 797.61 21" SEINV 797.61 24" NCBMH 604STA 3+38RIM 805.35DEPTH 7.16INV 798.19 21" EINV 801.67 15" SINV 798.19 15" NEINV 798.19 21" NWCBMH 605STA 5+03RIM 806.26DEPTH 7.24INV 799.01 18" EINV 801.30 15" SINV 799.01 21" W108'-18" PVC SDR 35 @ 0.50%133'-18" RCP CL 5 @ 0.50%CBMH 606STA 6+11RIM 806.85DEPTH 7.30INV 799.55 18" EINV 799.55 18" WCBMH 607STA 7+44RIM 805.14DEPTH 7.92SUMP 797.22INV 800.22 18" W8" PVC8" DIPEXISTING FINISHED GROUND PROFILE PROPOSED FINISHED GROUND PROFILE 6" DIP165'-21" RCP CL 3 @ 0.50%WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE:DATE:LIC. NO.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN.SHEET NUMBER DATENO SURVEY APPROVED DESIGNED DRAWN PROJ. NO. REVISION CHECKEDCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTACOTTAGE GROVE UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING193806146 PBW EPV DRS DRSENGINEERMINNESOTADAVID S. SANOCKI4097310/26/2023LMM N 0 25'50'DRAINAGE PLAN & PROFILESC501 STORM SEWER NOTES: 1.EXTEND 4" DRAINTILE 20' BOTH DIRECTIONS OUT OF ALL CATCH BASINS AT LOW POINTS. C503SEE SHEET C502SEE SHEET C502SEE SHEET C502SEE SHEET 3 05/06/24PR #11 STRM CBMH 604 - CB 612 -STA - (1+50.00) 770 780 790 800 810 820 770 780 790 800 810 820 807.50800.80+50 805.36801.21+00 806.29801.6806.88802.32+00 2+50CBMH 604STA 3+38RIM 805.35DEPTH 7.16INV 798.19 21" EINV 801.67 15" SINV 798.19 15" NEINV 798.19 21" NW21'-15" RCP CL 5 @ 0.50%CBMH 611STA 1+21RIM 806.32DEPTH 4.54INV 801.78 15" SINV 801.78 15" N60'-15" RCP CL 5 @ 0.50%CB 612STA 1+81RIM 806.17DEPTH 4.09INV 802.08 15" NSTRM CBMH 605 - CB 614 -STA - (1+50.00) 770 780 790 800 810 820 770 780 790 800 810 820 807.93805.40+50 806.26804.31+00 805.98803.3806.02802.72+00 2+50CBMH 605STA 5+03RIM 806.26DEPTH 7.24INV 799.01 18" EINV 801.30 15" SINV 799.01 21" W60'-15" RCP CL 5 @ 0.50%CB 614STA 1+81RIM 805.95DEPTH 4.24INV 801.71 15" N21'-15" RCP CL 5 @ 0.50%CBMH 613STA 1+21RIM 806.00DEPTH 4.59INV 801.41 15" SINV 801.41 15" NSTRM CBMH 604 - PLUG 604A -STA - (1+50.00) 770 780 790 800 810 820 770 780 790 800 810 820 806.35802.10+50 805.35801.21+00 807.97801.6803.62+00 78'-15" PVC SDR 3 5 @ 2 . 7 3 %PLUG 604ASTA 1+78INV 800.33 15" SWCBMH 604STA 3+38RIM 805.35DEPTH 7.16INV 798.19 21" EINV 801.67 15" SINV 798.19 15" NEINV 798.19 21" NW8" PVC8" DIP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>l l l l l l lllllllllllllllllll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l lll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>l>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>llUTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING (FFE 808.0) BTM 792.0 NWL 797.0 HWL 800.0 EX CBMH 209 EX STMH 210EX CBMH 211 EX CB 212 EX FES 301 EX FES 302 CBMH 603 CBMH 604 CBMH 605 CBMH 606 CBMH 607 CBMH 611 CB 612 CBMH 613 CB 6142+003 + 0 0 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+001+001+004" DRAINTILE 4" DRAINTILE 4" DRAINTILE RIP RAP PLUG 604A N DRAINAGE PLAN & PROFILESC502 0 25'50' STORM SEWER NOTES: 1.EXTEND 4" DRAINTILE 20' BOTH DIRECTIONS OUT OF ALL CATCH BASINS AT LOW POINTS.WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE:DATE:LIC. NO.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN.SHEET NUMBER DATENO SURVEY APPROVED DESIGNED DRAWN PROJ. NO. REVISION CHECKEDCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTACOTTAGE GROVE UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING193806146 PBW EPV DRS DRSENGINEERMINNESOTADAVID S. SANOCKI4097310/26/2023LMM C501SEE SHEET C501SEE SHEET 3 05/06/24PR #11 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>llllllllllllllllllllllllllll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>llllllllllllll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING (FFE 808.0) STORM WATER POND BTM 792.0 NWL 797.0 HWL 800.0 E OHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPEX STMH 107 FES 601 CBMH 602 CBMH 608 CBMH 609 CBMH 610 1+002+001+00 2+004" DRAINTILE 4" DRAINTILE 4" DRAINTILE 20 CY CL. 3 RIP RAP FES 610A STRM CBMH 602 - CBMH 610 -STA - (2+00.00) 770 780 790 800 810 770 780 790 800 810 820 805.66803.20+50 805.00802.71+00 804.34802.1804.05801.62+00 802.91801.4801.53+00CBMH 602STA 1+29RIM 805.00DEPTH 10.86SUMP 794.14INV 797.14 24" SINV 798.88 18" NINV 797.14 27" W60'-18" RCP CL 5 @ 0.50%39'-18" RCP CL 5 @ 0.50%CBMH 608STA 1+60RIM 804.21DEPTH 5.02INV 799.18 18" NWINV 799.18 18" S24'-18" RCP CL 5 @ 0.50%CBMH 609STA 1+99RIM 804.02DEPTH 4.64INV 799.38 18" NINV 799.38 18" SECBMH 610STA 2+23RIM 804.02DEPTH 4.52INV 799.50 12" NINV 799.50 18" SFES 610ASTA 2+60INV 801.52 12" S37'-12" R C P C L 5 @ 5.50%WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE:DATE:LIC. NO.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN.SHEET NUMBER DATENO SURVEY APPROVED DESIGNED DRAWN PROJ. NO. REVISION CHECKEDCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTACOTTAGE GROVE UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING193806146 PBW EPV DRS DRSENGINEERMINNESOTADAVID S. SANOCKI4097310/26/2023LMM N 0 25'50'DRAINAG PLAN & PROFILESC503 STORM SEWER NOTES: 1.EXTEND 4" DRAINTILE 20' BOTH DIRECTIONS OUT OF ALL CATCH BASINS AT LOW POINTS. C501SEE SHEET 3 05/06/24PR #11 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE:DATE:LIC. NO.Plot Date: 07/02/2024 - 3:06pmDrawing name: U:\193806146\CAD\Dwg\Plan Sheets\193806146_G003.dwgXrefs:, 193806146_BORDERTHE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN.733 Marquette Avenue, Suite 1000Minneapolis, MN 55402www.stantec.comSHEET NUMBER DATENO SURVEY APPROVED DESIGNED DRAWN PROJ. NO. REVISION CHECKEDCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTACOTTAGE GROVE UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING193806146 PBW EPV DRS DRSENGINEERMINNESOTADAVID S. SANOCKI4097310/26/2023LMMCONSTRUCTION, STAGING, & GENERAL NOTESG003 SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION: THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION ON THIS PLAN IS SHOWN TO UTILITY QUALITY LEVELS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LEGEND PROVIDED BELOW. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI/ASCE 38-02, ENTITLED STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA. UTILITY DESIGNATIONS ARE SHOWN ON DRAWING G0.02. UTILITY QUALITY LEVELS: LEVEL D - INFORMATION COMES SOLELY FROM EXISTING UTILITY RECORDS. LEVEL C - SURVEYING ABOVE GROUND UTILITY FACILITIES, SUCH AS MANHOLES, VALVE BOXES, ETC; AND CORRELATING THIS INFORMATION WITH EXISTING UTILITY RECORDS. LEVEL B - THE USE OF SURFACE GEOPHYSICAL TECHNIQUES TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE AND HORIZONTAL POSITION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. LEVEL A - THE USE OF NONDESTRUCTIVE DIGGING EQUIPMENT AT HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL POSITION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, AS WELL AS THE TYPE, SIZE, CONDITION, MATERIAL AND OTHER CHARACTERISTICS. PRIVATE UTILITIES ARE SHOWN IN THE LOCATIONS PROVIDED BY THE UTILITY OWNER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES: 1.ALL PERMITTEES, CONTRACTORS, AND SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PLAN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES PHASE II PERMIT) AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THEIR CONTENTS AND IS RESPONSIBLE TO COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS STATED WITHIN. 2.THE BMP'S SHOWN ON THE PLANS ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS. AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, THE PERMITTEE/CONTRACTOR SHALL ANTICIPATE THAT ADDITIONAL BMP'S MAY BE REQUIRED AS SITE CONDITIONS CHANGE AND SHALL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL BMP'S TO MEET APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS. 3.ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED PLANS AND SWPPP. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED PLANS SHALL REQUIRE WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE. PROJECT CONTROL NOTES: 1.ALL COORDINATES ARE WASHINGTON COUNTY COORDINATE SYSTEM 2.HORIZONTAL COORDINATES ARE BASED ON GEODETIC POSITION NAD 83 (1996 ADJUSTMENT) 3.VERTICAL ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NAVD88 4.PIPE LENGTH AND ELEVATIONS IN PROFILES ARE TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE NOTES: 1.INSTALL PVC SCHEDULE 40 CONDUIT CROSSINGS AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER IN FIELD. CONDUIT TO BE USED AT A LATER DATE BY PRIVATE UTILITY CONTRACTORS AND THE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE. 1.THE GRADING GRADE IS DEFINED AS THE BOTTOM OF THE SELECT GRANULAR BORROW OR AGGREGATE BASE WHERE NO SELECT BORROW IS PROPOSED. 2.SUITABLE GRADING MATERIAL ON THIS PROJECT SHALL CONSIST OF ALL SOILS ENCOUNTERED EXCEPT TOPSOIL, DEBRIS, ORGANIC MATERIAL AND OTHER UNSTABLE MATERIAL. 3.GRANULAR MATERIAL SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SPEC. 3149.2B 4.SELECT GRANULAR BORROW REGARDLESS OF SOURCE SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF MnDOT SPEC. 3149.2B2. 5.SLOPE DRESSING IS DEFINED AS THE INPLACE TOPSOIL OR OTHER SOIL PLACED DURING PRIOR CONSTRUCTION TO PROVIDE A MEDIUM FOR ESTABLISHING TURF. 6.ANY DEBRIS WHICH MAY BE ENCOUNTERED BY THE CONTRACTOR DURING GRADING SHALL BE DISPOSED OF BY THE CONTRACTOR OFF THE PROJECT RIGHT OF WAY IN A SUITABLE DISPOSAL AREA AS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. 7.BITUMINOUS AND CONCRETE ITEMS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION SHALL BECOME THE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE RECYCLED TO THE EXTENT ALLOWED IN THE BASE AND SURFACING ITEMS OR DISPOSED OF OFF OF THE RIGHT OF WAY IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT SPECIFICATION 2104.3C. 8.THE NEW UTILITY INSTALLATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS WHICH ARE DEEPER THAN THE SUBGRADE IMPROVEMENT ZONE SHOULD BE PERFORMED PRIOR TO SUBGRADE PREPARATION. PROPER BEDDING OF PIPES APPEARS ON THE ATTACHED SHEET ENTITLED "BEDDING/FOUNDATION SUPPORT OF BURIED PIPE." BACKFILL COMPACTION SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF MNDOT 2106.3F1 (SPECIFIED DENSITY METHOD). (INCIDENTAL) 9.MATERIALS DEFINED AS UNSUITABLE (TOPSOIL, ORGANIC, DEBRIS) MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE EMBANKMENT FOUNDATION. THE UNSUITABLE MATERIALS SHALL BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPEC. 2104 AND 2106. 10.WHERE SOILS ARE DRY AND STABLE, THE SUBCUT BOTTOM SHALL BE COMPACTED BY THE QUALITY COMPACTION METHOD AND INCLUDE A MINIMUM OF 4 PASSES WITH AN APPROVED ROLLER. COMPACTION SHALL BE COMPLETED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ENGINEER AND ACCORDING TO MNDOT SPECIFICATION 2106.3F2. 11.TEST ROLLING WILL BE REQUIRED. (INCIDENTAL) 12.IF INSTABILITY IS NOTED UNDER THE COMPACTION PROCESS, A COMPACTION SUBCUT SHALL BE PERFORMED. THE COMPACTION SUBCUT THICKNESS SHALL BE ONE FOOT, OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER, PAID FOR AS SUBGRADE EXCAVATION. 13.COMPACTION OF SUITABLE GRADING MATERIAL SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFIED DENSITY METHOD. 14.COMPACTION OF AGGREGATE BASE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFIED DENSITY METHOD. 15.PROVIDE FOR A UNIFORM BITUMINOUS TACK COAT BETWEEN ALL BITUMINOUS COURSES. THE TACK SHALL BE APPLIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT SPECIFICATION 2357. THE ROADWAY SURFACE SHALL BE CLEAN AND FREE OF DEBRIS PRIOR TO APPLYING TACK. BITUMINOUS TACK COAT MATERIAL SHALL BE APPLIED AT A UNIFORM RATE OF 0.03 TO 0.05 GAL/SQ YD BETWEEN NEW BITUMINOUS LAYERS PLACED THAT HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED TO TRAFFIC AND A RATE OF 0.07 TO 0.10 GAL/SQ YD ON TRAFFICKED BITUMINOUS SURFACES TO BE OVERLAID. THESE APPLICATION RATES ARE FOR UNDILUTED EMULSION (AS SUPPLIED FROM THE REFINERY) OR MC LIQUID ASPHALT. (INCIDENTAL) 16.ALL BITUMINOUS MIXTURES SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SPEC. 2360. 17.ALL BITUMINOUS FINAL SURFACES WILL BE SUBJECT TO STRAIGHT EDGE SMOOTHNESS REQUIREMENTS AS FOLLOWS: ·THE SURFACE OF THE FINAL TWO LIFTS PLACED SHALL SHOW NO VARIATION GREATER THAN 1/4 INCH FROM THE EDGE OF A 10 FOOT STRAIGHTEDGE LAID PARALLEL TO OR AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE CENTERLINE. ·SHOULDER SURFACING AND SURFACING ON TEMPORARY CONNECTIONS AND BYPASS SHALL SHOW NO VARIATIONS GREATER THAN 1/4 INCH FROM THE EDGE OF A 10 FOOT STRAIGHTEDGE LAID PARALLEL TO THE CENTERLINE. 18.PROVIDE A SAWCUT TO ENSURE A UNIFORM JOINT WHERE PLACING NEW PAVEMENT NEXT TO INPLACE PAVEMENT. 19.WHERE CONNECTING TO INPLACE ROADWAYS AT THE TERMINI OF PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION, CUT VERTICALLY TO THE BOTTOM OF THE INPLACE SURFACING OR TO THE BOTTOM OF THE NEW PROPOSED SURFACING, WHICHEVER IS DEEPER, THEN AT A 1:20 TAPER TO THE BOTTOM OF THE RECOMMENDED EXCAVATION. 20.PROVIDE 1:20 TAPERS WHERE APPLICABLE FOR CHANGES IN MATERIAL TYPES TO PREVENT AN ABRUPT SOIL DIFFERENTIAL. TAPERS BETWEEN PLASTIC AND GRANULAR SOILS SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED SO THAT THE GRANULAR SOIL OVERLAYS THE PLASTIC SOIL. 21.AS A PRECAUTIONARY MEASURE FROM A SOILS STANDPOINT, TRAFFIC LANES TO BE USED DURING CONSTRUCTION MUST BE DELINEATED TO KEEP VEHICLES A SAFE DISTANCE AWAY FROM THE ADJACENT EXCAVATION. THE DELINEATION SHOULD COINCIDE WITH POINTS ESTABLISHED BY PROJECTING 1:2 OR GREATER (FLATTER) SLOPE BETWEEN THE EDGE OF THE TRAFFIC SURFACE AND THE BOTTOM OF THE EXCAVATION. A 1:3 OR FLATTER SLOPE WILL BE REQUIRED IN SWAMP EXCAVATION AREAS. 22.THE TOP OF BACKSLOPES AND THE TOE OF FILL SLOPES SHALL BE ROUNDED TO NATURALIZE THE CONSTRUCTION EVEN THOUGH THE CROSS SECTIONS DO NOT SHOW ROUNDING. 23.THE CONTRACTOR IS HEREBY REMINDED OF THE RESPONSIBILITY UNDER STATE LAW TO CONTACT ALL UTILITIES THAT MAY HAVE FACILITIES IN THE AREA. CONTACT MUST BE MADE THROUGH GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL. 24.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES IN AREAS OF POSSIBLE CONFLICTS WITH PROPOSED UTILITIES. ALL LOCATING, GRADE CHANGES TO PROPOSED UTILITIES, CUTTING, INVERT CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS TO STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCTION CREW "DOWN TIME" AND ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENT RINGS REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT PROPOSED UTILITIES UNDER/OVER EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS INCIDENTAL. 25.IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO SEE THAT THE TEMPORARY EROSION ITEMS ARE USED THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT. WHENEVER PRACTICAL, EVEN THOUGH SPECIFIC LOCATIONS FOR THEIR USE MAY NOT BE DESIGNATED DUE TO CONSTRUCTION STAGING. 26.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDUCTING CONSTRUCTION IN A MANNER THAT WILL CONTROL EROSION, SEE THE EROSION CONTROL PLANS FOR SUGGESTED LOCATIONS AND DEVICES TO DO SO. 27.NO EXTRA PAYMENT WILL BE MADE FOR TEMPORARY STOCKPILING OF EXCAVATION, EMBANKMENT AND/OR BORROW MATERIAL. 28.WATER WILL BE REQUIRED FOR DUST CONTROL ON ALL GRAVEL SURFACES. 29.AS PART OF TRAFFIC CONTROL, WHEN CLOSING PATHS OR SIDEWALKS, PROVIDE SIGNAGE FOR USERS. PER THE MN MUTCD. 30.DO NOT BLOCK SIDEWALKS OR PATHS, WHICH REMAIN OPEN, WITH CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT OR MATERIALS. 31.PAVING JOINTS ON FINAL LIFT SHALL MATCH PROPOSED LANE LINES. CONSTRUCTION NOTES STORM SEWER SCHEDULE STRUCTURE TYPE STD PLATE CASTING DIA SPECIAL COMMENTS FES 601 FES STO-11 TRASH GUARD 27" CBMH 602 CBMH STO-6 R-3067-V 60"3' SUMP CBMH 603 CBMH STO-5 R-3067-V 48" CBMH 604 CBMH STO-5 R-3067-V 60" CBMH 605 CBMH STO-5 R-3067-V 48" CBMH 606 CBMH STO-5 R-3067-V 48" CBMH 607 CBMH STO-6 R-3067-VB 48"LOW POINT, 3' SUMP CBMH 608 CBMH STO-5 R-3067-VB 48"LOW POINT CBMH 609 CBMH STO-5 R-3067-VB 48"LOW POINT CB 610 CB STO-7 R-3067-VB 2'X3'LOW POINT FES 610A FES STO-11 TRASH GUARD 12" CBMH 611 CBMH STO-5 R-3067-V 48" CB 612 CB STO-7 R-3067-V 2'X3' CBMH 613 CBMH STO-5 R-3067-VB 48"LOW POINT CBMH 614 CB STO-7 R-3067-VB 2'X3'LOW POINT 3 05/06/24PR #11 Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 10875 Ideal Ave S Cottage Grove UE Building 2310312-COR # 13.00 Date:9/13/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Labor associated with block crew remobilization to complete last 8-foot wide section of CMU wall from the mezzanine floor to the roof deck following install of the air handling unit. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 50 - Axel Ohman: Access Panel in CMU 1 $1,543.00 Access panel in CMU.Axel H. Ohman, Inc. $1,543.00 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Address Hours Trade Hourly Rate Total Quantity Rate Total Total 4 Laborer $102.09 408.36$ -$ -$ Laborer Foreman $109.09 -$ -$ -$ 4 Bricklayer $111.17 444.68$ -$ -$ 4 Bricklayer Foreman $118.17 472.68$ -$ -$ Finisher $108.01 -$ -$ -$ Finisher Foreman $115.01 -$ -$ -$ Carpenter $109.89 -$ -$ -$ Carpenter Foreman $116.89 -$ -$ -$ 2 49er/Operator $108.40 216.80$ -$ -$ Truck Driver / Trucking $316.00 -$ -$ -$ Supervisor $164.00 -$ -$ -$ Time and a Half Premium $42.00 -$ -$ -$ Double Time $83.00 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Subtotals 1,542.52$ -$ -$ 1,542.52$ Sub-Contracted Work 5%-$ Overhead & Profit 0%-$ Total Cost 1,543$ Below are the costs to leave an access panel in our cmu (see 8.27 email) Labor Performance Bond for Extra Sales Tax Materials (with tax) / Equipment Sub-Contractors CompanyMaterial Total before overhead and profit General Contractor Attention Date Task 247 West 61st Street Minneapolis, MN 55419 Scope of Work Description: Jordan Boeser Estimator / Project Manager Cell 612-490-3724 Office 612-861-6025 Email Jordan@axelohman.com Cottage Grove Utility and Engineering KA Ben 8.28.24 Project Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 1087 Ideal Avenue S Cottage Grove UE Building 2310312-02 COR # 14.00 Date:9/13/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Credit back to owner for mechanical roof curbs. Curbs were installed by combined mechanical contractor for their equipment. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 27 - Jackson: Mechanical Roof Curb Credit 1 ($5,350.00)Mechanical roof curb credit.Jackson & Associates, LLC ($5,350.00)Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Jackson & Associates Date :8/2/24 1817 Buerkle Road White Bear Lake, MN 55110 PCO #:Curbs Project Manager: Kevin Borgstrom PR/SI #PR# Description Cost Labor Total 3,050.00$ Materials and Equipment Total 2,300.00$ Tax on Materials and Equipment Only -$ Self Performed Subtotal 5,350.00$ 10% Overhead and Profit -$ Self Performed Total 5,350.00$ Subcontractors -$ 5% Overhead and Profit on Subs -$ Subcontractor Total -$ TOTAL COST OF CHANGE (CREDIT)5,350.00$ Signature: Kevin Borgstrom Labor By Task Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost wood blocking 1,700.00$ epdm flashing 1,350.00$ Sub-Total 3,050.00$ Materials and Equipment By Task Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost wood blocking 865.00$ epdm flashing 1,435.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Sub-Total 2,300.00$ Sub-Contractor Proposals Total Cost -$ -$ -$ -$ Sub-Total (Attach Sub-Contractor Proposals)-$ City of Cottage Grove - New Utility (10% is the max fee allowed on CO's) Description of Work Notes/Attachments (Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below) (Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below) PROVIDE DETAIL BREAKDOWN BELOW: COST SUMMARY for Curbs Contractor acknowledges no other Costs assciated with this PCO. Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below (5% is the max allowed on subcontractors) <<< Provide Sales/Use Tax Total 1 Struckman, Rachel From:Albrecht, Ben Sent:Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:55 AM To:Struckman, Rachel Subject:FW: CGU&E - Mechanical Roof Curb Locations for Credit Rachel, Please add a PCO item to our log for roof curbs. Thanks! Ben Albrecht | Assistant Project Manager ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com | direct 612.255.2513 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 501 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 O(ice 612.332.7281 | Cell 763.401.2465 | krausanderson.com Together, strengthening the communities we serve From: Albrecht, Ben Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:55 AM To: Kevin Borgstrom <kevin@jaaroofing.com> Cc: Schauer, Dan <dan.schauer@krausanderson.com>; Struckman, Rachel <rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com>; Kjellberg, Dan <dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com> Subject: CGU&E - Mechanical Roof Curb Locations for Credit Hi Kevin, Following up on our phone conversation. With mechanical installing their own curbs and all curbs included in your work scope, looking for a credit back for mechanical curb material and labor at the following locations: · 14 exhaust fan locations EF1 to EF14 · Intake hood IH1 · Relief Hood RH1 · Condensing Unit C1 · Condensing Unit SS1 Please use our typical PCO form for showing the cost breakout. Thanks, Ben Albrecht | Assistant Project Manager ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com | direct 612.255.2513 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 501 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 O(ice 612.332.7281 | Cell 763.401.2465 | krausanderson.com 2 Together, strengthening the communities we serve Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 10875 Ideal Ave S City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 2310312-COR # 15.00 Date:10/16/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Vapor barrier added scope at canopy column, office parapet and exterior wall framing per PR #10. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 25 - Wold PR #10: Building Enclosure Const.Review & Carpet Rev 1 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #10.Axel H. Ohman, Inc. 2 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #10.Construction Systems, Inc. 5 $4,593.00 Waterproofing per Wold PR #10.Swanson & Youngdale, Inc. 7 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #10.Northern Glass & Glazing, Inc. 8 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #10.Commercial Drywall, Inc. 9 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #10.Molin Concrete Products Company, Inc. $4,593.00 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 1087 Ideal Avenue S City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 2310312-02 COR # 15.00 Date:10/16/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Vapor barrier added scope at canopy column, office parapet and exterior wall framing per PR #10. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 25 - Wold PR #10: Building Enclosure Const.Review & Carpet Rev 1 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #10.Spartan Steel Erectors, Inc. 2 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #10.Ebert Construction 3 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #10.Jackson & Associates, LLC $0.00 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove 1 Struckman, Rachel From:Jordan Boeser <Jordan@axelohman.com> Sent:Monday, June 24, 2024 10:33 AM To:Struckman, Rachel Cc:Albrecht, Ben; Kjellberg, Dan Subject:RE: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 25_PCO 10 Building Enclosure Constructability & Carpet Revisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I will update my plan set, let me know if not approved. No cost changes for me. JORDAN BOESER Estimator / Project Manager Cell: 612-490-3724 Jordan@AxelOhman.com From: Struckman, Rachel <rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2024 12:13 PM To: Jordan Boeser <Jordan@axelohman.com>; 'andrew.stumne@molin.com' <andrew.stumne@molin.com>; Perry Haberer <perryh@csiminnesota.net>; joshuam@csiminnesota.net; 'jon@spartansteelco.com' <jon@spartansteelco.com>; 'Ben Mach' <bmach@ebertcompanies.com>; 'David M. Bobo' <Dave.Bobo@syinc.us>; 'kevin@jaaroofing.com' <kevin@jaaroofing.com>; 'Jennifer Harmon' <jennifer@jaaroofing.com>; Patty <patty@jaaroofing.com>; 'nick@northernglassinc.com' <nick@northernglassinc.com>; 'craig@commercialdrywall.net' <craig@commercialdrywall.net>; 'Toby Helgeson' <thelgeson@ebertcompanies.com> Cc: Kjellberg, Dan <dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com>; Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com>; Jacob Wollensak <jwollensak@woldae.com>; 'Kayla Simpson' <ksimpson@woldae.com>; 'Lee.Mann@stantec.com' <Lee.Mann@stantec.com>; 'rburfeind@cottagegrovemn.gov' <rburfeind@cottagegrovemn.gov>; Schauer, Dan <dan.schauer@krausanderson.com> Subject: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 25_PCO 10 Building Enclosure Constructability & Carpet Revisions Team, Please see the attached PCO #25 regarding Wold PR #10 Building Enclosure Constructability Review & Carpet Revisions. Via:E-Mail RE:Job Name: Reference #:PR-10 Job #:108322 The following is our Change Order Request No.001 for the above referenced project. Total Qualifications: 1. 2. 3. 4. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this pricing. Should there be any questions regarding our Sincerely, July 26, 2024 proposal, please contact me at your earliest convenience. 4,593$ The work quoted above will proceed only upon receipt of a written change order. The price indicated is valid for thirty (30) days. dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com Dan Kjellberg Krause Anderson Construction 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 Dave Bobo Dave Bobo Waterproofing lead City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building The price indicated is for this change only and doesn't include any compensation for costs, which may be incurred as a result of delays or accelerations. The work quoted above will impact the contract schedule by the number of hours noted on the pricing breakdown. This is a revised change order per agreement reached on July 26th, 2024. Date:COR #: Reference #: Description Material # 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9.000% 10.000% Labor #Hours Type 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 36 ST 6 0 7 0 Miscellaneous # 1 2 3 9.000% 10.000% Swanson & Youngdale, Inc. - Drywall Division Sub-Total: Material Total: Tax: TotalLabor Rate -$ Description (Item 10.7, PR-10) 1 roll self-adhered waterproofing membrane (Item 10.8, PR-10) 2 rolls air shield self-adhered 4 gallons LMP permeable -$ 480.24$ 112.00$ Tax:-$ Subcontract 3,888.00$ Labor Total: Description Total Equipment Rental -$ OH&P:-$ Grand Total:4,593$ Miscellaneous Total:-$ Change Order Request Breakdown City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 7/26/2024 001 PR-10 This is a revised change order per agreement reached on July 26th, 2024. Other Sub-Total:-$ Carpenter Taper Plasterer Laborer 592.24$ 53.30$ Other Supervision 704.77$ Total Description OH&P:59.22$ Waterproofer 108.00$ 3,888.00$ 1 Struckman, Rachel From:Nick McGahey <nick@northernglassinc.com> Sent:Friday, August 2, 2024 3:18 PM To:Struckman, Rachel Cc:Albrecht, Ben Subject:RE: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 25_PCO 10 Building Enclosure Constructability & Carpet Revisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. No Change Nick McGahey Northern Glass & Glazing, Inc 165 W 88th ST Bloomington, MN 55420 O (952) 888-6327 F (952) 888-6342 From: Struckman, Rachel <rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com> Sent: Friday, August 2, 2024 3:08 PM To: Perry Haberer <perryh@csiminnesota.net>; Nick McGahey <nick@northernglassinc.com>; craig@commercialdrywall.net; 'andrew.stumne@molin.com' <andrew.stumne@molin.com> Cc: Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com> Subject: FW: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 25_PCO 10 Building Enclosure Constructability & Carpet Revisions All, As of today, we have not seen any pricing from you for PCO 25/PR 10. Will you have any costs for this PCO or can we close this out as a no cost change? Please advise. Thank you, Rachel Struckman | Senior Project Coordinator rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com | direct 612-255-2378 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 501 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 office 612-332-7281 | krausanderson.com Together, strengthening the communities we serve From: Struckman, Rachel Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2024 12:13 PM 1 Struckman, Rachel From:Jon Jochims <jon@spartansteelco.com> Sent:Tuesday, July 23, 2024 7:14 AM To:Struckman, Rachel Subject:Re: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 25_PCO 10 Building Enclosure Constructability & Carpet Revisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good morning, No change for us. On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 12:13 PM Struckman, Rachel <rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com> wrote: Team, Please see the attached PCO #25 regarding Wold PR #10 Building Enclosure Constructability Review & Carpet Revisions. If this PCO affects your work scope please respond within (7) days including appropriate back-up or this will be a zero cost change. Thank you, Rachel Struckman | Senior Project Coordinator rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com | direct 612-255-2378 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 501 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 office 612-332-7281 | krausanderson.com Together, strengthening the communities we serve 1 Struckman, Rachel From:Albrecht, Ben Sent:Wednesday, July 24, 2024 9:34 AM To:Ben Mach Cc:Struckman, Rachel Subject:RE: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 25_PCO 10 Building Enclosure Constructability & Carpet Revisions Thanks Ben. Please copy Rachel on all confirmation of cost or no-cost. Thanks! Ben Albrecht | Assistant Project Manager ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com | direct 612.255.2513 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 501 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 O)ice 612.332.7281 | Cell 763.401.2465 | krausanderson.com Together, strengthening the communities we serve From: Ben Mach <bmach@ebertcompanies.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 9:29 AM To: Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com> Subject: RE: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 25_PCO 10 Building Enclosure Constructability & Carpet Revisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good Morning Ben, Per our phone conversation, we have no cost associated with PCO #025. Thank you, Ben Mach I Project Manager / Estimator 23350 County Road 10, Corcoran, MN 55357 | Cell: 612-965-2361 | Phone: 763-498-7844 | Web www.ebertcompanies.com From: Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 3:08 PM 1 Struckman, Rachel From:Jennifer Harmon <jennifer@jaaroofing.com> Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2024 12:51 PM To:Albrecht, Ben Cc:Kevin Borgstrom; Paula Jackson; Struckman, Rachel Subject:Cottage Grove Utility Building - Forms for PR#10 (Confirming no cost change) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good Aernoon, Yes – Ben we are confirming that the PR#10 is a “No Cost Change” for us. Please let us know if you have any ques)ons. Thank you so much – Jennifer Jennifer Harmon Jackson & Associates LLC Main Office: 1817 Buerkle Road, White Bear Lake, MN 55110 Wisconsin Office: Wilson, WI Office: 651-395-4120 Email: Jennifer@jaaroofing.com | Website: jaaroofing.com From: Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com> Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2024 10:32 AM To: Kevin Borgstrom <kevin@jaaroofing.com> Cc: Paula Jackson <paula@jaaroofing.com>; Struckman, Rachel <rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com>; Jennifer Harmon <jennifer@jaaroofing.com> Subject: RE: Cottage Grove Utility Building - Forms for PR#10 Kevin, Per our discussion today, PR #10 should be a no cost change from Jackson. Please respond by email to confirm for our records. Planning to wrap this one up with the City today. Thank you, Ben Albrecht | Assistant Project Manager ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com | direct 612.255.2513 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 501 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 Attachments: Wold PR #10 dated 6/17/24 We have reviewed the PCO and acknowledge that it is a “no change” item and does not affect our completion date. Signed By: Date: Company Name: 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 Request For Proposal Project: 2310312- PCO #: 25 Cottage Grove UE Building 10875 Ideal Ave S Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Date: 06/20/2024 To: Dan Schauer, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ben Albrecht, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ryan Burfeind, City Of Cottage Grove Lee Mann, Stantec Jordan Boeser, Axel H. Ohman, Inc. Andrew Stumne, Molin Concrete Products Company, Inc. Nick McGahey, Northern Glass & Glazing, Inc. David Bobo, Swanson & Youngdale, Inc. Jacob Wollensak, Wold Architects & Engineers Kayla Simpson, Wold Architects & Engineers Ben Mach, Ebert Construction Perry Haberer, Construction Systems, Inc. Jon Jochims, Spartan Steel Erectors Craig Moeller, Commercial Drywall, Inc. Kevin Borgstrom, Jackson & Associates LLC Jennifer Harmon, Jackson & Associates LLC Please provide a cost breakdown in accordance with the Contract Documents and a Summary for the Change described herein and on the attachments (if any) listed. All responses are required within seven (7) days. This is not an authorization to proceed with the work described herein unless and until approved by the Owner. On approval, this change will be included in a Change Order, which will provide the formal Contract Cha nge. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Please provide a cost estimate per the attached Wold Architects and Engineers PR #10 dated June 17, 2024 regarding building enclosure constructability review & carpet revisions. PROPOSAL REQUEST Distribution: ☐ Ryan Burfeind, CG ☐ Adam Moshier, CG ☐ Dustin Phillips, KA ☒ Be Ben Albrecht, KA ☒ Jake Wollensak, Wold ☒ Kayla Simpson, Wold ☐ Pat Jansen, Wold ☐ Ryan Rossborough, Wold ☐ Sean McNamara, Wold ☐ Doug Galloway, Wold ☐ Derek Peterson, Wold ☐ Kal Jackman, BKBM ☐ James Dorr, BKBM ☐ Kyle Kucharski, BKBM ☐ Lee Mann, Stantec ☐ Dave Sanocki, Stantec ☐ Eric Vidden, Stantec City of Cottage Grove Utility & Engineering Building Kraus-Anderson Attn: Dan Kjellberg/Rachel Struckman 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 612.332.7281 dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com / rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com Submit an itemized (labor and material) quotation for the proposed modifications to the contract documents as described herein within 21 days of receipt. If a cost is not submitted within 21 days, this Proposal Request can be accepted at no additional cost. Written approval is required prior to proceeding with this change. COST EXPECTATIONS: ☐ DEDUCT ☐ NO COST ☐ ADD PR: 10 Comm: 232010 Const. Pkg: [Status] Item Description 10 Building Enclosure Constructability Review & Carpet Revisions 10.1 See revised detail A7 on sheet A0.000A – SITE PLAN for modified keynotes. 10.2 See revised detail F7 on sheet A0.000A – SITE PLAN for additional flashing detail callout. 10.3 See revised roof plan on sheet A2.095a – ROOF PLAN – AREA A for additional flashing detail callouts. 10.4 See revised roof plan on sheet A2.095b – ROOF PLAN – AREA B for additional curb detail callout. 10.5 See revised interior material finish/ color schedule on sheet A4.101 – DETAILS – GENERAL for modified carpet finishes. 10.6 See revised detail B4 on sheet A5.502 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR WALL for deleted cant and revised termination of weather barrier. 10.7 See revised detail D2 on sheet A5.502 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR WALL for added water-proofing membrane. 10.8 See revised detail D4 on sheet A5.502 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR WALL for deleted cant and added weather barrier. 10.9 See revised detail D6 on sheet A5.502 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR WALL for revised condition at base of wall. 10.10 See revised detail F5 on sheet A5.502 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR WALL for deleted insulation and added self-adhered membrane. 10.11 See sheet A5.502 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR WALL for additional flashing detail E5a. 10.12 See revised details C2, C4, and C6 on sheet A5.602 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR OPENINGS for modified position of steel angle. PROPOSAL REQUEST PR: 10 Comm: 232010 Const. Pkg: [Status] Page 2 Item Description 10.13 See revised detail D5 on sheet A5.602 for modified position of aluminum storefront system. 10.14 See revised detail F3 on sheet A5.602 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR OPENINGS for added sill sealer. 10.15 See revised details F5 and F7 on sheet A5.602 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR OPENINGS for revised position of aluminum sill and stool. 10.16 See revised detail C6 on sheet A5.603 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR OPENINGS for added weather barrier. 10.17 See revised detail D4a on sheet A5.603 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR OPENINGS for additional base of wall detail callout. 10.18 See revised detail D6 on sheet A5.603 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR OPENINGS for added steel stud with vertical slip connection and modified sealant thickness. 10.19 See revised detail F6 on sheet A5.603 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR OPENINGS for added self-adhered membrane. 10.20 See revised detail E7 on sheet A5.701 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR ROOF for modified position of flashing. 10.21 See revised details E5 and F5 on sheet A5.701 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR ROOF for added roofing membrane. 10.22 See sheet A5.702 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR ROOF for additional curb detail B3. 10.23 See detail D5 on sheet A5.702 – DETAILS – EXTERIOR ROOF for added weather barrier and roofing membrane. Attachments: A0.000A, A2.095a, A2.095b, A4.101, A5.502, A5.602, A5.603, A5.701, and A5.702. Issued By: Kayla Simpson Date: 06/17/2024 MH3MH4PLUG 4A MH 5 MH 6 PLUG 6A49'-4"32'-4"30'-8"32'-4"46'-8"97'-2"10'-6"6'-0"171'-4"157'-8"64'-4"60'-0"47'-0"92'-6"21'-2" 44'-0"16'-0" 26'-2"22'-2"17'-0" 12'-0" 3'-4"11'-4" 10'-0" 9'-0" 14'-0"7'-4"7'-4"47'-0"10'-6" A E H 1 4 6 H.5G WATER TREATMENT PLANT (NOT IN CONTRACT). SEE CIVIL FOR SITE EXTENTS. _______C7 A0.000A FLAG POLE. SEE SPEC FOR HEIGHT. SEE ELECTRICAL FOR LIGHTING. _______B7 A5.702 ALTERNATE NO. 1:SNOW MELT SYSTEM. SEE CIVIL AND MECHANICAL. PROVIDE 2" XPS INSULATION, TYPE IV 60 PSI TRASH ENCLOSURE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE FOR TRANSFORMER PAD, SEE CIVIL AND ELEC 10'-0"5'-8"1 8"PRE-FORMED SCREENING GATE PANEL 4" SLAB ON GRADE, (REFER TO CIVIL DRAWINGS) D7 A0.000A _______A7A0.000AF7 A0.000A _______ 10'-0" 4'-0"GATE WIDTH TO BE DETERMINED BY MFR.20'-0"BASEML 100'-0" PREFINISHED METAL COPING INCLUDING BLOCKING AND PLYWOOD AS REQUIRED FOR SLOPE CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE FOOTING AND FOUNDATION, SEE STRUCTURAL METAL GATE, SEE CIVIL CONC SLAB ON GRADE, SEE CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL _______F5 A5.502 PP08 10"PRE-FORMED SCREENING GATE PANEL 8'-0"PRE-FORMED SCREENING GATE PANEL 20'-0" PREFINISHED METAL COPING PRECAST STRUCTURAL CONCRETE (ACCENT: ETCH FINISH) F7 A0.000A _______2 3 BASEML 100'-0" D7 A0.000A _______ PREFINISHED METAL COPING INCLUDING BLOCKING AND PLYWOOD AS REQUIRED FOR SLOPE 12" DIA. SONOTUBE BEYOND AT ALL GATE POSTS DOWN TO 5' BELOW GRADE. PRE-FORMED SCREENING GATE PANEL CONC SLAB ON GRADE, SEE CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL _______B7 A5.501 _______C7 A5.501 1 1 _______E5a A5.502 3 F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A MN NorthCheck: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 krausanderson.com | 612 332 7281 6/17/2024 1:38:59 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New UtilityBuilding R1.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - NewUtility Building R1.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING A0.000A SITE PLAN 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 JCW KS 10/26/2023 232010 Minnesota 10/26/2023 John McNamara 24281 ARCHITECT 0 1" = 30'-0" SITE PLANF1 22'-6"45' 0 1/8" = 1'-0" TRASH ENCLOSURE ENLARGED PLANC7 6' 12' 0 3/8" = 1'-0" TRASH ENCLOSURE SECTIOND7 2' 4' 0 1/8" = 1'-0" TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONA7 6' 12' 0 3/8" = 1'-0" TRASH ENCLOSURE SECTIONF7 2' 4' Revisions Description Date Num Addendum No.1 11/14/2023 1 PR #05 03/20/2024 2 PR #10 06/17/2024 3 ROOF LEGEND EQUIPMENT CURB SUPPORTING PIPING OR CONDUIT. INSTALL MAXIMUM SPACING OF 6'-0" O.C. EQUIPMENT CURB AT MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SLOPE OF TAPERED INSULATION DIAMOND CRICKET (SEE TYPICAL DETAIL) SLOPED STRUCTURE ROOF LADDER ROOF DRAIN (R.D.) OVERFLOW DRAIN (O.R.D.) MECH HOOD ROOF EXHAUST SKYLIGHT VENT STACK, PIPE OR CONDUIT COMBUSTION STACK CRICKET FOR POSITIVE DRAINAGE _______F4 A4.201 _______E3 A5.701 _______E3 A5.701 _______E3 A5.701 _______E3 A5.701 _______E3 A5.701 B5 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ E5 A5.701 _______ F5 A5.701 _______NOTE: 2 1/2" BASE INSULATION THICKNESS AT CANOPY R02 R05 R04 R04 R04 R04 R04 R04 R04 R04 R04 C3 A5.702 _______ R01 R01 R01 R01 R01 D5 A5.701 _______LOW D5 A5.701 _______LOW D5 A5.701 _______LOW LOW _______E3 A5.701 _______E3 A5.701 R01 R01 R01 R01 ORD RD ORD RD ORD RD ORD RD ORD RD ORD RD ORD RD R01 R06 D5 A5.702 _______ R07 C6 A5.603 _______ LOW D4 A5.502 _______TYP HIGH D6 A5.603 _______TYP LOW D4 A5.502 _______ D6 A5.603 _______ TYP HIGH TYP LOW D4 A5.502 _______ D4 A5.502 _______D6 A5.603 _______ TYP HIGH TYP LOW D4 A5.502 _______ B4 A5.502 _______HIGH B4 A5.502 _______HIGH B4 A5.502 _______HIGH B4 A5.502 _______ B4 A5.502 _______ B4 A5.502 _______ F7 A5.701 _______ F7 A5.701 _______ C3 A5.702 _______ ROOF HATCH (30" X 54") _______E5a A5.502 _______E5a A5.502 2 2 ROOF KEY NOTES: R01 VENT THROUGH ROOF (VTR). SEE DETAIL AND MECHANICAL. R02 ROOFTOP AIR HANDLING UNIT (RTU) AS OCCURS. SEE MECHANICAL. R03 PIPING ROUTES AND STANDS. SEE MECHANICAL. R04 EXHAUST FAN (EF) AS OCCURS. SEE MECHANICAL. R05 INTAKE HOOD UNIT. SEE MECHANICAL. R06 COND. UNIT. SEE MECHANICAL. F5/A5.702 R07 RELIEF HOOD UNIT. SEE MECHANICAL. F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A MN NorthCheck: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 krausanderson.com | 612 332 7281 6/17/2024 1:39:01 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New UtilityBuilding R1.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - NewUtility Building R1.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING A2.095a ROOF PLAN - AREA A 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 JW KH 10/26/2023 232010 Minnesota 10/26/2023 John McNamara 24281 ARCHITECT ROOF PLAN GENERAL NOTES 1. TAPERED ROOF INSULATION AND CRICKETS SHALL SLOPE AT 1/4" PER 1'-0". THE THICKNESS OF THE BASE INSULATION IS TO BE 5 1/2". 2. SHOP DRAWING DESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF TAPERED INSULATION MUST ACCOUNT FOR CAMBER IN STRUCTURE TO INSURE THAT THE ROOF DRAINS AS DESIGNED. 3. AT MECH. OPENINGS AND CURBS ON ROOF, PROVIDE CRICKETS AS REQUIRED FOR POSITIVE DRAINAGE OR CUT OPENINGS IN FREE-STANDING CURBS AS AN ALTERNATIVE. 4. MECHANICAL ITEM LOCATIONS ARE SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. REFER TO MECH. DRAWINGS FOR EXTENT OF MECH. EQUIP. AND SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL ROOF PENETRATIONS. 5. ALL MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT, PIPING, CONDUIT, ETC. TO BE PAINTED. 6. COORDINATE ROOF AND OVERFLOW DRAIN LOCATIONS WITH STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS TO AVOID LOCATING ROOF OR OVERFLOW DRAINS OVER TOP OF BEAMS OR JOISTS. 7. REFER TO EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR LOCATION OF OVERFLOW SCUPPERS AND OUTFLOWS. 8. AT ALL LADDERS, TOP AND BOTTOM, PROVIDE AND INSTALL A 4'-0" X 4'-0" CONCRETE PAVER LANDING. 9. ROOF LADDERS WITH NUMBER IN PARENTHESIS INDICATE RELATIVE ROOF DECK ELEVATION DIFFERENCES, NOT INCLUDING PARAPET, VERIFY EXACT LADDER HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. 0 1/8" = 1'-0" ROOF PLAN - AREA 'A'F1 6' 12' KEY PLAN A B Revisions Description Date Num Addendum No.1 11/14/2023 1 PR #10 06/17/2024 2 1 ROOF LEGEND EQUIPMENT CURB SUPPORTING PIPING OR CONDUIT. INSTALL MAXIMUM SPACING OF 6'-0" O.C. EQUIPMENT CURB AT MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SLOPE OF TAPERED INSULATION DIAMOND CRICKET (SEE TYPICAL DETAIL) SLOPED STRUCTURE ROOF LADDER ROOF DRAIN (R.D.) OVERFLOW DRAIN (O.R.D.) MECH HOOD ROOF EXHAUST SKYLIGHT VENT STACK, PIPE OR CONDUIT COMBUSTION STACK CRICKET FOR POSITIVE DRAINAGE _______E3 A5.701 _______E3 A5.701 _______E3 A5.701 _______E3 A5.701 D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ D3 A5.702 _______ ORD RD ORD RD ORD RD ORD RD R04 R04 R04 R04 R04 R02 R02 B4 A5.502 _______TYP B4 A5.502 _______ B4 A5.502 _______ TYP TYP B4 A5.502 _______TYP F1 A5.701 _______ F1 A5.701 _______SIM 1 B3 A5.702 _______ 2 ROOF KEY NOTES: R01 VENT THROUGH ROOF (VTR). SEE DETAIL AND MECHANICAL. R02 ROOFTOP AIR HANDLING UNIT (RTU) AS OCCURS. SEE MECHANICAL. R03 PIPING ROUTES AND STANDS. SEE MECHANICAL. R04 EXHAUST FAN (EF) AS OCCURS. SEE MECHANICAL. R05 INTAKE HOOD UNIT. SEE MECHANICAL. R06 COND. UNIT. SEE MECHANICAL. F5/A5.702 R07 RELIEF HOOD UNIT. SEE MECHANICAL. F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A MN NorthCheck: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 krausanderson.com | 612 332 7281 6/17/2024 1:39:03 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New UtilityBuilding R1.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - NewUtility Building R1.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING A2.095b ROOF PLAN - AREA B 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 JW KH 10/26/2023 232010 Minnesota 10/26/2023 John McNamara 24281 ARCHITECT ROOF PLAN GENERAL NOTES 1. TAPERED ROOF INSULATION AND CRICKETS SHALL SLOPE AT 1/4" PER 1'-0". THE THICKNESS OF THE BASE INSULATION IS TO BE 5 1/2". 2. SHOP DRAWING DESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF TAPERED INSULATION MUST ACCOUNT FOR CAMBER IN STRUCTURE TO INSURE THAT THE ROOF DRAINS AS DESIGNED. 3. AT MECH. OPENINGS AND CURBS ON ROOF, PROVIDE CRICKETS AS REQUIRED FOR POSITIVE DRAINAGE OR CUT OPENINGS IN FREE-STANDING CURBS AS AN ALTERNATIVE. 4. MECHANICAL ITEM LOCATIONS ARE SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. REFER TO MECH. DRAWINGS FOR EXTENT OF MECH. EQUIP. AND SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL ROOF PENETRATIONS. 5. ALL MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT, PIPING, CONDUIT, ETC. TO BE PAINTED. 6. COORDINATE ROOF AND OVERFLOW DRAIN LOCATIONS WITH STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS TO AVOID LOCATING ROOF OR OVERFLOW DRAINS OVER TOP OF BEAMS OR JOISTS. 7. REFER TO EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR LOCATION OF OVERFLOW SCUPPERS AND OUTFLOWS. 8. AT ALL LADDERS, TOP AND BOTTOM, PROVIDE AND INSTALL A 4'-0" X 4'-0" CONCRETE PAVER LANDING. 9. ROOF LADDERS WITH NUMBER IN PARENTHESIS INDICATE RELATIVE ROOF DECK ELEVATION DIFFERENCES, NOT INCLUDING PARAPET, VERIFY EXACT LADDER HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. KEY PLAN A B 0 1/8" = 1'-0" ROOF PLAN - AREA 'B'F2 6' 12' Revisions Description Date Num Addendum No.1 11/14/2023 1 PR #10 06/17/2024 2 EARTH CONCRETE MASONRY/ STONE METAL WOOD INSULATION EARTH GRANULAR FILL SAND TERRAZZO TOPPING WIRE MESHCONCRETE/ PRECAST BRICK MORTAR NETBLOCK ALUMINUM OTHERFERROUS FINISHED PLYWOOD PARTICLE BOARDCONSTRUCTION LUMBER RIGID SPRAY FOAM GRANULAR LOOSEBATT MISCELLANEOUS EXISTING CUT STONE SYMBOLS EXISTING DEMOLISHED MISCELLANEOUS TILE ACOUSTIC TILE PLASTER ON METAL LATH EXPANSION JOINT MATERIAL METAL STUD WOOD STUD MASONRY BRICK & BLOCK CAVITY WALL GLAZED OPENING CONCRETE/ PRECAST PARTITIONS EXISTING EXISTING SYMBOLS DEMOLISHED A102 A102L 8'-8" C1 A5.2xx 2 GA2 W1 SF1 CW1 L1 D2 A4.2xx 2 DETAIL NO DRAWING NO DETAIL NO DRAWING NO DETAIL NO DRWG NO CURTAINWALL STOREFRONT LOUVER EXTERIOR WINDOWS WALL TYPES - INTERIOR HINGE SIDE BORROWED LIGHT DOOR OR WDW SWING & NO ROOM NAME REVISIONS ELEVATION NOTES APPLY MARKERBOARDS, TACKBOARDS, MAP RAILS NOTES, DIMENSIONS & DETAIL KEYS APPLY FROM NOTED DETAIL DETAIL REFERENCE OPENINGS, DEPRESSIONS OR AS NOTED ELEVATIONS GRIDS SECTIONS A102 3 B1 A4.1xx SYMBOLS 1 A4.7xx CLASSROOM 8'-0" MBD CEILING HEIGHT CEILING MATL/ FIN ACT 1/- ROOM NUMBER OWNER INFO, AS NEEDED LENGTH MATERIAL TYPE EXISTING WALL/ DOOR/ OTHER A102 CLASSROOM ART OR DEMOLISHED WALL/ DOOR/ OTHER C1 A5.1xx INTERIOR EXTERIOR MATCHLINE WALL TYPES - EXTERIOR WA-01 NON-BEARING WALL LINTEL SCHEDULE CLR MAS OPENING 4" WALL MASONRY LINTELS 1-#4 BOTTOM 4'-0" OR LESS 4'-1" TO 8'-0" 6" WALL 1-#4 BOTTOM 8" WALL 2-#4 BOTTOM 10" WALL 2-#4 BOTTOM 12" WALL 2-#4 BOTTOM 16" WALL NA 1-#5 BOTTOM 2-#5 BOTTOM 2-#5 BOTTOM 2-#5 BOTTOM CLR MAS OPENING 4" WALL STEEL LINTELS L3 1/2x3 1/2x5/16 4'-0" OR LESS 4'-1" TO 8'-0" 6" WALL 8" WALL 10" WALL 12" WALL 16" WALL 8'-1" TO 12'-0" 2-L2 1/2x 3 1/2x5/16 LLV 2-L3 1/2x3 1/2x5/16 2-L3 1/2x3 1/2x5/16 2-L5x3 1/2x5/16 LLV + 5/16x11 PLATE W8x10+ 5/16x15 PLATE L5x3 1/2x5/16 LLV 2-L5x3x5/16 LLV 2-L5x3 1/2x5/16 LLV 2-L5x3 1/2x5/16 LLV 2-L5x3 1/2x5/16 LLV + 5/16x11 PLATE W8x10+ 5/16x15 PLATE W8x15+ 5/16x15 PLATE W8x15+ 5/16x11 PLATE W8x15+ 5/16x9 PLATE W8x15+ 5/16x7 PLATE W8x15+ 5/16x5 PLATE NA 5 FINISHED FLOOR MARKER TRAY OFFICES WHEN MARKERBOARDS ARE PLACED IN A SERIES. TACKBOARD / MARKERBOARD GENERAL NOTES: MARKERBOARDS ARE TO BE CENTERED ON A WALL OR WITHIN A SPACE TYPICALLY, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEE INTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR TYPICAL LAYOUTS. 2. 1.3'-0" 4'-0" T.O. PRECAST 126'-0" BASEML 100'-0" T.O. MASONRY 116'-0" MEZZANINE LEVEL 111'-6" D E FD.1C.1 F6 A5.201 _______D.4 D.6C.5 A115B A124 A128 A126B A130A A130B A131A A131B W1 3 1/2" W1 3 1/2" W1 3 1/2" A276 W1 W1 _______F1 A4.701 12'-0" 12'-0" 12'-0" 5'-1"8'-6"8'-6"8'-6"4'-1"12'-0"12'-0"12'-0"12'-0"12'-0"2'-5"12'-0"12'-0"12'-0"12'-0"12'-0"10'-3 1/2"PT-6A10'-4"PT-6E14'-6"PT-6A10'-4"PT-6D14'-6"1 1 1'-2"7'-0" 3 3 3 3 3 F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A MN Check: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 krausanderson.com | 612 332 7281 6/17/2024 1:39:03 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New UtilityBuilding R1.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - NewUtility Building R1.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING A4.101 DETAILS - GENERAL 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 JW KH 10/26/2023 232010 Minnesota 10/26/2023 John McNamara 24281 ARCHITECT & AND @ AT ACT ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE AF ACCESS FLOORING AFF ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR ALT #__ ALTERNATE NUMBER ALUM ALUMINUM AP ACCESS PANEL AWC ACOUSTICAL WALL COVERING AWF ACOUSTICAL WALL FABRIC AWP ACOUSTICAL WALL PANEL B BLK BURNISHED CONCRETE BLOCK BLDG BUILDING BRK BRICK C BLK CONCRETE BLOCK CG CORNER GUARD CIP CAST-IN-PLACE CJ CONTROL JOINT CL CENTER LINE CLG CEILING CM CULTURED MARBLE CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CONC CONCRETE CONT CONTINUOUS CPT CARPET CRF CHEMICAL RESISTANT FLOORING CT CERAMIC TILE CTP COUNTERTOP CU CONDENSING UNIT CUH CABINET UNIT HEATER CW-__(#) CURTAINWALL TYPE DEMO DEMOLITION DF DRINKING FOUNTAIN DIA DIAMETER DN DOWN E PT EPOXY PAINT EIFS EXTERIOR INSULATION AND FINISH SYSTEM EJ EXPANSION JOINT ELEC ELECTRICAL ELEV ELEVATION EPDM ETHYLENE PROPYLENE DIENE MONOMER EWC ELECTRIC WATER COOLER EXIST EXISTING EXP EXPOSED FD FLOOR DRAIN SYMBOLS SYMBOLS SYMBOLS LINTEL SCHEDULE ABBREVIATIONS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE: 1. MASONRY LINTELS MAY BE USED FOR MASONRY WALL OPENINGS UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. THE HEIGHT OF THE MASONRY ABOVE THE OPENING IS AT LEAST EQUAL TO THE CLEAR WIDTH OF THE OPENING. B. THE LENGTH OF THE WALL AND DISTANCE TO THE NEAREST CONTROL JOINT ON EACH SIDE OF THE OPENING IS AT LEAST EQUAL TO THE CLEAR OPENING WIDTH. 2. USE STEEL LINTELS AT NON-BEARING WALL OPENINGS NOT MEETING MASONRY CONDITIONS. STEEL LINTELS BY MISCELLANEOUS METALS. 3. MASONRY LINTELS MAY BE USED FOR ANY LINTEL IN SOLIDLY GROUTED WALLS UP TO 8'-0" SPAN. 4. MASONRY LINTELS ARE 8" TALL LINTEL BLOCK FILLED WITH 3,000 PSI CONCRETE W/4 1/2" MIN FROM TOP OF LINTEL TO REINFORCING. 5 BEAR LINTELS 8" MINIMUM EACH SIDE OF OPENING, THEREFORE CLEAR OPENING PLUS 1'-4". 6. PROVIDE LINTELS FOR ALL OPENINGS NOT TIGHT TO DECK, INCLUDING MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL PENETRATIONS THROUGH MASONRY WALLS, INCLUDING DUCT OPENINGS, UNIT VENTILATORS, UNIT HEATERS, LOUVERS. 7. STEEL LINTEL PLATES SHOULD BE CENTERED IN THE WALL. EDGE OF PLATES SHALL BE A MINIMUM 5/16" FROM EACH SIDE. 8. REFER TO STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR MASONRY BEARING WALL LINTELS. 9. WHERE STEEL LINTELS ARE EXPOSED, SOAP CONCRETE BLOCK ON EITHER SIDE TO CONCEAL LINTEL IN MASONRY WALLS. 0 1/4" = 1'-0" MOUNTING TYPESD7 3' 6' FE FIRE EXTINGUISHER FF&E FIXTURES FFE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION FRP FIBERGLASS REINFORCED PANEL G BLK GLAZED CONCRETE BLOCK GA GAUGE GB GRAB BAR GRD BLK GROUND FACE CONCRETE BLOCK GST GLAZED STRUCTURAL TILE GWB GYPSUM BOARD HCAP HANDICAPPED HM HOLLOW METAL HT HOMOGENEOUS TILE ID INSIDE DIAMETER INSUL INSULATION L-__(#) LOUVER TYPE LAV LAVATORY LFD LINEAR FLOOR DRAIN LINO LINOLEUM LVT LUXURY VINYL TILE M/S MIRROR WITH SHELF MATL MATERIAL MAX MAXIMUM MBD MARKERBOARD MECH MECHANICAL MEF MOSAIC EPOXY FLOORING MIN MINIMUM MIR MIRROR MISC MISCELLANEOUS NIC NOT IN CONTRACT NO NUMBER NSF NON-SLIP FLOORING NTS NOT TO SCALE OH OVERHEAD P LAM PLASTIC LAMINATE P TILE PORCELAIN TILE PLAS PLASTER PT PAINT PTD PAINTED PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PWP PLASTIC (PHENOLIC) WALL PANEL QRT QUARTZ QT QUARRY TILE R RADIUS RAF RESILIENT ATHLETIC FLOORING RCP REFLECTED CEILING PLAN RD ROOF DRAIN RES RESILIENT RF RESINOUS FLOORING RFT RUBBER FLOOR TILE RH RELIEF HOOD RM ROOM RTU ROOF TOP UNIT RUB RUBBER RWL RAIN WATER LEADER SBD SMART BOARD SCHED SCHEDULE SD SOAP DISPENSER SF SQUARE FOOT (FEET) SF-__(#) STOREFRONT TYPE SGL SECURITY GLASS SHM SECURITY HOLLOW METAL SIM SIMILAR SND SANITARY NAPKIN DISPENSER SNR SANITARY NAPKIN RECEPTOR SST STAINLESS STEEL STN STONE STRUCT STRUCTURAL TBD TACKBOARD TEMP TEMPORARY TERR TERRAZZO TPH TOILET PAPER HOLDER TWC TACKABLE WALLCOVERING TYP TYPICAL UL UNDERWRITER'S LABORATORY UNO UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE UR URINAL USF URETHANE SLURRY FLOORING V PLAS VENEER PLASTER VAT VINYL ASBESTOS TILE VCT VINYL COMPOSITION TILE VIF VERIFY IN FIELD VTR VENT THROUGH ROOF VWC VINYL WALLCOVERING VWF VINYL WALL FABRIC W-__(#) WINDOW TYPE WC WATER CLOSET WD WOOD WSCT WAINSCOT WWF WELDED WIRE FABRIC INTERIOR MATERIAL FINISH/ COLOR SCHEDULE Key Item Manufacturer Color/ Finish 03 45 00 Architectural Precast Concrete Portland cement As specified Color: Color mix to match mortar sample. Aggregate-Color As specified Color: To match sample supplied by Architect Aggregate-Size As specified Color: To match sample supplied by Architect Finish As specified Acid Etched 04 20 00 Unit Masonry BRK-1 Brick 1 Color to match sample supplied by Architect Mortar Colorant As specified Color to match sample supplied by Architect 06 40 00 Architectural Woodwork (Benches) Hardwood - Stained Sherwin Williams Color to match sample supplied by Architect 06 65 10 Solid Surface Fabrications SSF-1 Solid Surface Fabrications Corian Color: Weathered Aggregate 08 14 00 Wood Doors Prefinished Stained Wood Door Masonite Color: Natural Birch Nutmeg 08 40 00 Aluminum Entrances, Storefronts, and Curtain Walls Sealant-CW/SF As specified Color: To match sample supplied by Architect 08 51 13 Aluminum Windows Sealant-Window As specified Color: To match sample supplied by Architect 08 71 00 Finish Hardware Butt Hinges-Exterior As specified US32D on stainless steel Butt Hinges-Interior As specified US26D on steel Flush Bolts As specified US26D on brass or bronze Exit Devices As specified US26D on brass or bronze Locks As specified US26D on brass or bronze Pulls And Push Plates/ Bars As specified US32D on stainless steel Coordinators As specified USP on steel Closers As specified Sprayed AL on cast iron or aluminum Protective Plates As specified US32D on stainless Steel Overhead Stops As specified US26D on brass, bronze, or steel Wall Stops As specified US26D on brass, bronze, or steel Magnetic Holders As specified Sprayed SA on cycolac Thresholds As specified Mill aluminum Weatherstrips And Sweep Strips As specified Clear anodized aluminum Key Cabinets As specified Gray enamel on steel Miscellaneous As specified US26D on brass or bronze 08 91 00 Louvers Prefinished Aluminum Ruskin Custom color to match the material in which louver occurs 09 21 16 Gypsum Board Painted Reveal Trim Fry Reglet Color: Dark Bronze 09 30 00 Tile P TILE-1 Porcelain Floor Tile Ergon Engineered Stone Color: Architect Resin/ New York Sand P TILE-2 Porcelain Wall Tile - Field Ergon Engineered Stone Color: Architect Resin/ E2EH London Smoke P TILE-3 Porcelain Wall Tile - Accent 1 Ergon Engineered Stone Color: Architect Resin/ E26L New York Sand Nat. P TILE-4 Porcelain Wall Tile - Accent 2 Ergon Engineered Stone Color: Architect Resin/ E2GL London Smoke Nat. P TILE-5 Porcelain Shower Tile Ergon Engineered Stone Color: Architect Resin/ E2G2 London Smoke Lapp. Grout- Porcelain Floor Tile As specified Color: As selected by Architect INTERIOR MATERIAL FINISH/ COLOR SCHEDULE Key Item Manufacturer Color/ Finish 09 65 00 Resilient Flooring VB-1 Vinyl Base Tarkett Color: TA4 Gateway 09 68 00 Carpet CPT-1 Carpet J + J Flooring Pattern/ Color: Oxford 7063 Modular/ 2398 Duck CPT-2 Carpet J + J Flooring Pattern/ Color: Madras 7065 Modular/ 2398 Duck 09 83 13 Acoustic Wall Panels AWP-1 Acoustic Wall Panel Kirei Color: EchoTile Sync/ 444 Smoke AWP-2 Acoustic Wall Panel Kirei Color: EchoTile Sync/ 442 Grey AWP-3 Acoustic Wall Panel Kirei Color: EchoTile Sync/ 365 Navy 09 91 00 Painting PT-1 PT 1-Exterior HM doors and frames Sherwin Williams Color: Black Magic SW6991 PT-2 PT 2-Exterior Misc. Metals, Mech. Piping, Equipment Sherwin Williams Color: Black Magic SW6991 PT-3 PT 3-Exterior Rooftop Equipment Sherwin Williams Color: Black Magic SW6991 PT-4A PT 4A-Interior HM Frames Sherwin Williams Color: Black Magic SW6991 PT-4B PT 4B-Interior HM Doors Sherwin Williams Color: Black Magic SW6991 PT-5 PT 5-Interior Misc. Metals Sherwin Williams Color: Black Magic SW6991 PT-6A PT 6A-Walls Sherwin Williams Color: Repose Gray SW7015 PT-6B PT 6B-Walls Accent Sherwin Williams Color: Granite Peak SW6250 PT-6C PT 6C-Walls Accent Sherwin Williams Color: Gauntlet Gray SW7019 PT-6D PT-6D Walls Accent Sherwin Williams Color: Dovetail SW7018 PT-6E PT-6E-Walls Accent Sherwin Williams Color: Marshmallow SW7001 PT-7 PT 7-Soffits Sherwin Williams Color: Marshmallow SW7001 PT-8 PT 8-Ceilings Sherwin Williams Color: Marshmallow SW7001 10 11 00 Visual Display Boards Anodized Aluminum Trim As specified Color: Clear Tackboard Narin Cork Color: Tan 10 14 19 Dimensional Letter Signage Anodized Aluminum Letters/ Numbers As specified Color: Clear Painted Letters/ Numbers As specified Color: 10 26 13 Wall Surface Protection Systems CG-1 Corner Guard InPro Color: 12 21 13 Horizontal Louver Blinds Blinds Levelor Color: 12 32 16 Plastic Laminate Casework Plastic Laminate Vert Surface Wilsonart Color: Oiled Legno 8846-58 PVC Edging-Countertop Wilsonart Color: Oiled Legno 8846-58 PVC Edging-Casework Wilsonart Color: Oiled Legno 8846-58 Grand total: 304 0 1/8" = 1'-0" A134 - VEHICLE GARAGE NORTH ELEVATIONF2 6' 12' Revisions Description Date Num Addendum No.1 11/14/2023 1 PR #01 02/05/2024 2 PR #04 03/19/2024 3 PR #10 06/17/2024 4 1 2 4 EXCAVATE AND BACKFILL WITH GRANULAR MATERIAL 2" PERIMETER INSULATION FOUNDATION WALL - SEE STRUCT 2" RIGID WALL INSULATION (CRUSHABLE BY FROST) CONC SIDEWALK OR BITUMINOUS - SEE CIVIL 4" CONC SLAB - SLOPE AWAY FROM BUILDING AT 1/8" PER FOOT - SEE STRUCTURAL 1" PERIMETER INSULATION THRESHOLD SET IN SEALANT DOOR AND FRAME CONC FOOTING - SEE STRUCT 4'-0" _______B7a A5.601 _______B4a A5.601 MAIN ENTRY SECONDARY ENTRY3 5/8"2 3/4"MASONRY WALL FLASHING BY MASON METAL FLASHING BY ROOFER NOTES APPLY A5.701 E7 GRID SEE WALL SECTIONS NOTE: ASSEMBLY FASTENED WITH SCREWS 1/2" PLYWOOD 3/4" PLYWOOD W/ 2- 3/8" x 6" LONG ANCHOR BOLTS @ 48' OC WOOD BLOCKING PRE-FINISHED MTL COPING CONTINUOUS KEEPER MAINTAIN 3/8" GAP - PROVIDE SEALANT BETWEEN WOOD & PRECAST TOP OF PRECAST SEE WALL SECTIONS 3/4"2"5 1/2"MIN2 1/2"VARIES VARIES MIN4"3/4"SELF-ADHERED MEMBRANE OVER WOOD BLOCKING 2 EXTERIOR INTERIOR PERIMETER INSULATION BASEML 100'-0" BRICK LEDGE SEE ELEVATION WEEP VENT WALL ASSEMBLY:E-BSxx FLOOR ASSEMBLY: • SEE WALL SECTION THROUGH-WALL FLASHING _______B7 A4.7058" MINNOTES APPLY A5.501 F1 VAPOR BARRIER 22 GA STAINLESS STEEL UV PROTECTION COVER; ADHERE TO TOP OF PERIMETER INSULATION, COVERAGE MUST EXTEND MINIMUM 8 INCHES BELOW FINISH GRADE. 8" MINNOTES APPLY A5.603 D4a NOTES APPLY A5.602 F7 2 ALUMINUM CURTAIN WALL SYSTEM - SEE PLAN EXTERIOR INTERIOR PERIMETER INSULATION BASEML 100'-0" BRICK LEDGE SEE ELEVATION PRECAST SILL - SHAPE FLOOR ASSEMBLY: • SEE WALL SECTION NOTES APPLY A5.502 D6 NOTES APPLY A5.601 D3 NOTES APPLY A5.603 F4 SEALANT WITH BACKER ROD (EACH SIDE) C BLOCK AS OCCURS COORD W/ PLAN SEALANT WITH BACKER ROD INSULATED PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANEL INTERIOR EXTERIOR GRID 2 4 2 4 2 4 EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY:E-PPxx GRIDLINE AS OCCURS - SEE WALL SECTIONS TOP OF PRECAST SEE WALL SECTION STEEL JOIST AND STEEL DECK AS OCCUR - SEE STRUCTURALMIN4"3/4"3/4"2"5 1/2"NOTES APPLY A5.502 F2 2 1/2" MINROOF ASSEMBLY AS OCCURS PREFINISHED METAL COPING ON WOOD BLOCKING WEATHER BARRIER CONTINUOUS FROM TOP OF WALL, LAP ONTO ROOF DECK RIGID WALL INSULATION: 2 1/2" RIGID INSULATION BONDED TO 3/4" FIRE TREATED PLYWOOD STEEL CONNECTION AS OCCURS - SEE STRUCTURAL 6" MIN AT JOIST POCKET, FILL FULL WITH RIGID INSULATION, AT BACK AND TOP OF POCKET COVER WITH 24 GA SHEET METAL FOR WEATHER BARRIER, BY INSULATION CONTRACTOR AT JOIST POCKET, GROUT VOID SOLID TO TOP OF DECK 2 REVEAL JOINT - CHAMFER CORNERS AT 45 DEGREES PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANEL 1"1/2" GALVANIZED STEEL HSS COLUMN (SEE STRUCT), PAINTED PT-2 1'-4"1'-4"5" 6" ACID WASHED PRECAST CONCRETE CAP, PITCHED AWAY FROM COLUMN ALL SIDES, COLOR; BLACK PROVIDE COLOR MATCHING SEALANT FOR ALL JOINTS PROVIDE BACKER ROD AND SEALANT AROUND COLUMN 4" NOMINAL PRECAST VENEER PANELS BELOW, PROVIDE QUIRK MITER CORNERS AND SEALANT AT ALL JOINTS.4"D2 A5.502 _______ MAINTAIN 3/8" GAP BETWEEN WOOD & BRICK - PROVIDE EXPANSION JOINT MATERIAL AND CONTINUOUS SEALANT WEEP VENT AT 24" O.C. INTERIOR EXTERIOR GRID 2 4 2 4 2 4 EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY:E-BSxx TOP OF MASONRY SEE WALL SECTION STEEL FRAMING AS OCCURS - SEE STRUCTURAL STEEL JOIST AND STEEL DECK AS OCCUR - SEE STRUCTURALMIN4"3/4"3/4"2"5 1/2"2 1/2" MINROOF ASSEMBLY AS OCCURS SPRAY FOAM INSULATION - FILL CAVITY COMPLETE AT PARAPET WRAP BEAM WITH 5/8" GWB ON 2 1/2" METAL STUDS - PROVIDE CONTINUOUS FIRESTOPPING BETWEEN GWB AND STEEL DECK MASONRY ANCHOR AS OCCURS RIGID WALL INSULATION: 2" RIGID INSULATION BONDED TO 3/4" FIRE TREATED PLYWOOD NOTES APPLY A5.502 F2 GRIDLINE AS OCCURS - SEE WALL SECTIONS PRE-FINISHED METAL COPING ON WOOD BLOCKING LAP ROOFING CONTINUOUS UP AND OVER BLOCKING AND ONTO FACE OF BRICK 6" MIN 5/8" GYPSUM SHEATHING 1/2" PLYWOOD WEATHER BARRIER TO CONTINUOUSLY EXTEND FROM FRONT FACE OF GYP SHEATHING, OVER TOP OF WALL PLYWOOD, DOWN FACE OF GYP SHEATHING AT ROOF SIDE, AND DOWN ONTO ROOF DECK WEATHER BARRIER - LAP UP TO TOP OF COPING 2 2 T.O. PIER SEE STRUCT T.O. ARCH CONC PIER 99'-10" T.O. PRECAST CAP 101'-10" SIDEWALK SEE CIVIL 10"10"4"1'-4" GALVANIZED STEEL HSS COLUMN (SEE STRUCT), PAINTED PT-2 PRECAST CONCRETE CAP, PITCHED 1/4" AWAY FROM COLUMN, TYPICAL PROVIDE BACKER ROD AND SEALANT AROUND COLUMN 4" NOMINAL PRECAST VENEER PANEL, PROVIDE QUIRK MITER CORNERS AND COLOR MATCHING SEALANT AT ALL JOINTS. MASONRY VENEER ANCHOR STAINLESS STEEL DRIP EDGE FLASHING NOTE; PROVIDE WEEP VENTS AT MITER CORNERS BELOW PRECAST CAP 1/4" ROPE WICKS; LOCATE AT QUIRK MITER CORNER JOINTS FLEXIBLE THROUGH WALL FLASHING, WRAP ONTO STEEL COLUMN AND TERMINATE BEHIND PRECAST CAP CAST IN PLACE NON-STRUCTURAL CONCRETE BASE NOTES APPLY A5.502 B2 1 MORTAR NET NOTES APPLY A5.501 F1 1 WATER-PROOFING MEMBRANE 2 ROOF ASSEMBLY AS OCCURS LAP ROOFING MEMBRANE OVER PARAPET AND EXTEND ONTO FACE OF BRICK, SHEATING, ETC. CANT STRIP AS REQUIRED BY ROOFING SYSTEM PREFINISHED GALVANIZED FLASHING OVER MEMBRANE UNDERLAYMENT - EXTEND TO FRONT FACE OF WOOD BLOCKING UNDER COPING (ONLY AT BUILT-UP ROOF SYSTEM) CONTINUOUS KEEPER AT PRE-FINISHED METAL COPING NOTE: ASSEMBLY FASTENED WITH SCREWS 1/2" PLYWOOD** 3/4" PLYWOOD ANCHORED TO BACKUP** - AT CMU, ANCHOR WITH TWO (2) 3/8"x6" LONG ANCHOR BOLTS AT 48" O.C. WOOD BLOCKING AS REQUIRED** PRE-FINISHED METAL COPING ROOF STRUCTURE AS OCCURS - SEE PARAPET SECTION DETAIL RIGID INSULATION - FILL CAVITY FULL AT PRE-FINISHED METAL COPING EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY AS OCCURS RIGID WALL INSULATION - SEE PARAPET SECTION DETAIL **NOTE:PROVIDE FIRE-TREATED PLYWOOD AND BLOCKING WHERE REQUIRED PER THE SPECIFICATIONS WEATHER BARRIER PRECAST CONCRETE 1" DEEP SAW CUT REGLET W/ SEALANT SECURE FLASHING TO CONCRETE 2 4"2" MINIMUM OVERLAP METAL FLASHING PREFINISHED METAL COPING AND SELF ADHERED MEMBRANE, WRAP UP AND UNDER FLASHING NOTES APPLY A5.701 B5 NOTES APPLY A5.701 C7 F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A MN Check: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 krausanderson.com | 612 332 7281 6/17/2024 1:39:05 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New UtilityBuilding R1.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - NewUtility Building R1.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING A5.502 DETAILS - EXTERIOR WALL 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 JW KH/MS 10/26/2023 232010 Minnesota 10/26/2023 John McNamara 24281 ARCHITECT 0 3/4" = 1'-0" SECTION AT STOOP - TYPICALF6 1' 2' 0 3" = 1'-0" FLASHING DETAILE5 3" 6" 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" COPING AT TRASH ENCLOSUREF5 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" BASE OF WALL DETAIL - E-BSxxD6 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" BASE OF WALL DETAIL AT CURTAIN WALLB6 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" PLAN AT PRECAST/ CBLKF1 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" SECTION AT PARAPET - ASSEMBLY E-PP06 & STEEL DECKB4 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" SECTION AT PRECAST REVEAL JOINTE1 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" ENLARGED PLAN - CANOPY COLUMNB2 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" SECTION AT PARAPET - ASSEMBLY E-BS06 AND STEEL DECKD4 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" CANOPY PIER SECTIOND2 1/2'1' 0 3/4" = 1'-0" COPING DETAIL AT PARAPETF2 1' 2' Revisions Description Date Num Addendum No.1 11/14/2023 1 PR #10 06/17/2024 2 0 3" = 1'-0" FLASHING DETAILE5a 3" 6" SEALANT BY MECH. PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF SLEEVE BIRD SCREEN ALUMINUM LOUVER CONT 12 GA CAVITY SEALING SLEEVE AT JAMBS & SILLS BY MECH EXTEND 4" PAST INT WALL FACE - INSTALL BEFORE LOUVER. SEAL TO CONC. W/ SEALANT. CONNECT DUCTWORK TO SLEEVE SEALANT & BACKER RODBR.LOUVER HEIGHT3/8" SEALANTSEALANT DRIP - OMIT AT JAMB SEALANT BY MECH PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF SLEEVE BIRD SCREEN ALUMINUM LOUVER CONT 12 GA CAVITY SEALING SLEEVE AT JAMBS & SILLS BY MECH EXTEND 4" PAST INT WALL FACE - INSTALL BEFORE LOUVER. SEAL TO CONCRETE W/ SEALANT, CONNECT DUCTWORK TO SLEEVE SEALANT & BACKER RODBR.LOUVER WIDTH3/8" SEALANTSTRUCTURAL PRECAST CONCRETE WALL SYSTEM FILL ALL VOIDS WITH SPRAY FOAM INSULATION AT PERIMETER, TYP. FILL ALL VOIDS WITH SPRAY FOAM INSULATION AT PERIMETER, TYP. 3" ALUMINUM LOUVER BIRD SCREEN ALUMINUM FLASHING INSTALLED OVER FLEXIBLE FLASHING W/ SEALANT JOINT AT TOP. ANCHORED TO CONCRETE WITH COUNTERSUNK S. ST. SCREW/ ANCHOR CONT ANCHOR BY LOUVER MFR FLEXIBLE FLASHING SEALANT W/ BACKER ROD OR BOND BREAKER TAPE CONT 1X2 TREATED WOOD BLOCKING 3/4" COMPOSITE SUB-SILL SET ON SILL SEALER 1/8" ALUMINUM SILL FLASHING BY LOUVER MANUFACTURER SEALANT & BACKER ROD W/ WEEP HOLES, EACH SIDE OR BAFFLES BR.LOUVER HEIGHTOF SILL & SEALANTVERIFY DIM.STRUCTURAL PRECAST CONCRETE WALL SYSTEM CORROSION RESISTANT FASTENERS AT ALL TREATED WOOD CORROSION RESISTANT FASTENERS AT ALL TRETEAD WOOD FILL ALL VOIDS WITH SPRAY FOAM INSULATION AT PERIMETER, TYP. TREATED PLYWOOD (3/4") CONTINUOUS KEEPER STRIP .125" ALUMINUM SILL. PROVIDE SEALANT FOR CLOSURE AT ENDS ALUMINUM FLASHING INSTALLED OVER WINDOW FLEXIBLE FLASHING. SEALANT JOINT AT TOP. ANCHORED TO PRECAST WITH COUNTERSUNK SST SCREW/ANCHOR SEALANT & BACKER ROD - EACH SIDE BY WINDOW INSTALLER ALUMINUM WINDOW ANCHOR SILL AT 24" OC (2 MINIMUM) WINDOW FLEXIBLE FLASHING EXTEND OVER FACE OF WALL MIN. 2" STRUCTURAL PRECAST WALL AS OCCURS; SEE PLAN BRAKE METAL SILL AND TRIM TO COVER ALL PLYWOOD AND WOOD BLOCKING TREATED PLYWOOD (1/4") PITCHED TREATED PLYWOOD (3/8") SILL SEALER AS SPECIFIED 1 FACE BRICK RETURN AT JAMB BEYOND SEALANT & BACKER ROD, EACH SIDE PAINTED GALVANIZED STEEL LINTEL & CLOSURE ANGLE - SEE STRUCTURAL FLEXIBLE THROUGH WALL FLASHING PREFINISHED METAL DRIP CUT BRICK AS REQUIRED FOR ANGLE MORTAR NET 1/4" ROPE WICK AT 2'-0" O.C. - LAY HORIZONTAL IN CAVITY 8" AND EXTEND UP WALL 8" - SECURE TO INSULATION WITH/ ADHESIVE CAVITY VENT FLASHING TERMINATION BAR WALL ASSEMBLY: E-BS06 NOTE: SEE WALL SECTIONS / EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR BRICK COURSING EXTERIORINTERIOR CAVITY VENT HOLLOW METAL (HM) FRAME - FILL SOLID WITH EXPANDING FOAM INSULATION NOTE: SEE OPENING SCHEDULE FOR FRAME DEPTH 1" 5/8" PLYWOOD BLOCKING 1/2" PLYWOOD BLOCKING 1 FACE BRICK RETURN AT JAMB BEYOND CONTINUOUS SEALANT & BACKER ROD, EACH SIDE PAINTED GALVANIZED STEEL LINTEL & CLOSURE ANGLE - SEE STRUCTURAL FLEXIBLE THROUGH WALL FLASHING PREFINISHED METAL DRIP CUT BRICK AS REQUIRED FOR ANGLE PLASTIC SHIM AS REQUIRED MORTAR NET 1/4" ROPE WICK AT 2'-0" O.C. - LAY HORIZONTAL IN CAVITY 8" AND EXTEND UP WALL 8" - SECURE TO INSULATION WITH ADHESIVE CAVITY VENT FLASHING TERMINATION BAR WALL ASSEMBLY: E-BS06 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT (SF) SYSTEM NOTE: SEE WALL SECTIONS / EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR BRICK COURSINGEXTERIORINTERIOR WEEP / CAVITY VENT SPRAY FOAM INSULATION COLD-FORMED STEEL STUD HEADER - SEE STRUCTURAL 5/8" PLYWOOD BLOCKING 1 FACE BRICK RETURN AT JAMB BEYOND CONTINUOUS SEALANT & BACKER ROD, EACH SIDE PAINTED GALVANIZED STEEL LINTEL & CLOSURE ANGLE - SEE STRUCTURAL FLEXIBLE THROUGH WALL FLASHING PREFINISHED METAL DRIP CUT BRICK AS REQUIRED FOR ANGLE PLASTIC SHIM AS REQUIRED MORTAR NET 1/4" ROPE WICK AT 2'-0" O.C. - LAY HORIZONTAL IN CAVITY 8" AND EXTEND UP WALL 8" - SECURE TO INSULATION WITH ADHESIVE CAVITY VENT FLASHING TERMINATION BAR WALL ASSEMBLY: E-BS06 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT NOTE: SEE WALL SECTIONS / EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR BRICK COURSING EXTERIOR WEEP / CAVITY VENT SPRAY FOAM INSULATION COLD-FORMED STEEL STUD HEADER - SEE STRUCTURAL 5/8" PLYWOOD BLOCKING ALUMINUM SUN SHADE BY STOREFRONT INTERIOR 1 EXTERIOR INTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY: E-BSxx 3" MIN M.O., NOMINALMASONRY, NOMINAL FRAME OPENING 3/16" MASONRY, ACTUAL 1/2" PLYWOOD BLOCKING SEALANT & BACKER ROD, EACH SIDE FLEXIBLE FLASHING TREATED WOOD BLOCKING ANCHOR AS REQUIRED 1"EXPANDING FOAM INSULATION DOOR AS SCHEDULED SPRAY FOAM INSULATION NOTE: SEE OPENING SCHEDULE FOR FRAME DEPTH HOLLOW METAL (HM) FRAME - FILL SOLID WITH EXPANDING FOAM INSULATION 5/8" PLYWOOD BLOCKING 1/2"BOND BREAKER CONTINUOUS SEALANT & BACKER ROD, EACH SIDE PLASTIC SHIM AS REQUIRED EXTERIOR INTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY: E-BSxx ALUMINUM STOREFRONT (SF) SYSTEM FLEXIBLE FLASHING EDGE OF STOOL BELOW EXPANDING FOAM INSULATION BY STOREFRONT (SF) SYSTEM INSTALLER 3" MIN 1/2" PLYWOOD BLOCKING SPRAY FOAM INSULATION SF SYSTEM / M.O., NOMINALMASONRY, NOMINAL SF SYSTEM, ACTUALMASONRY, ACTUAL EDGE OF SILL BELOW1/2"5/8" PLYWOOD BLOCKING 3/16"6"1 CONTINUOUS SEALANT & BACKER ROD, EACH SIDE PLASTIC SHIM AS REQUIRED EXTERIOR INTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY: E-BSxx FLEXIBLE FLASHING EDGE OF STOOL BELOW EXPANDING FOAM INSULATION BY STOREFRONT (SF) SYSTEM INSTALLER 3" MIN 1/2" PLYWOOD BLOCKING SPRAY FOAM INSULATION SF SYSTEM / M.O., NOMINALMASONRY, NOMINAL SF SYSTEM, ACTUALMASONRY, ACTUAL EDGE OF SILL BELOW1/2"5/8" PLYWOOD BLOCKING 3/16" ALUMINUM CURTAIN WALL (CW) SYSTEM 5 1/2"SEALANT STOOL AS OCCURS WOOD BLOCKING EXTERIOR CLADDING AND SILL AS OCCURS; SEE WALL SECTIONS COLD FORMED STEEL FRAMING AS OCCURS GWB AS OCCURS CAVITY VENT 1/2" PLYWOOD BLOCKING HORIZONTAL REINFORCING CONTINUOUS 1x2 TREATED WOOD BLOCKING 3/4" TREATED PLYWOOD SUB-SILL SET ON SILL SEALER 1/8" ALUMINUM SILL - ANCHOR SILL AT 24" O.C. (2 MINIMUM) SILL FLEXIBLE FLASHING - LAP 1" MIN ONTO FACE OF BRICK BELOW ALUMINUM FLASHING INSTALLED OVER SILL FLEXIBLE FLASHING. SEALANT JOINT AT TOP. ANCHORED TO BRICK WITH COUNTERSUNK SST SCREWS / ANCHORS CONTINUOUS SEALANT & BACKER ROD, EACH SIDE STOOL AS SPECIFIED OVER PLYWOOD BLOCKING - EXTEND OUT AT GWB FURRING CONDITION CONTINUOUS SEALANT & BACKER ROD ALUMINUM STOREFRONT (SF) SYSTEM FACE BRICK RETURN AT JAMB BEYOND CUT BRICK AS REQUIRED WEATHER BARRIER - APPLY CONTINUOUS OVER BLOCKING AND UNDER WINDOW FLEXIBLE FLASHING FILL VOID WITH EXTERIOR BATT INSULATION NOTE: SEE WALL SECTIONS / EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR BRICK COURSING EXTERIORINTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY: E-BSxx BRICK EXPANSION JOINT FILLER 3" MINSPRAY FOAM INSULATION CONTINUOUS 2x4 WOOD BLOCKING 1 CAVITY VENT 1/2" PLYWOOD BLOCKING HORIZONTAL REINFORCING CONTINUOUS 1x2 TREATED WOOD BLOCKING 3/4" TREATED PLYWOOD SUB-SILL SET ON SILL SEALER 1/8" ALUMINUM SILL - ANCHOR SILL AT 24" O.C. (2 MINIMUM) WINDOW FLEXIBLE FLASHING - LAP 1" MIN ONTO FACE OF BRICK BELOW ALUMINUM FLASHING INSTALLED OVER WINDOW FLEXIBLE FLASHING. SEALANT JOINT AT TOP. ANCHORED TO BRICK WITH COUNTERSUNK SST SCREWS / ANCHORS CONTINUOUS SEALANT & BACKER ROD, EACH SIDE STOOL AS SPECIFIED OVER PLYWOOD BLOCKING - EXTEND OUT AT GWB FURRING CONDITION CONTINUOUS SEALANT & BACKER ROD ALUMINUM WINDOW FACE BRICK RETURN AT JAMB BEYOND CUT BRICK AS REQUIRED WEATHER BARRIER - APPLY CONTINUOUS OVER BLOCKING AND UNDER WINDOW FLEXIBLE FLASHING FILL VOID WITH EXTERIOR BATT INSULATION NOTE: SEE WALL SECTIONS / EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR BRICK COURSING EXTERIORINTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY: E-BSxx BRICK EXPANSION JOINT FILLER 3" MINSPRAY FOAM INSULATION CONTINUOUS 2x4 WOOD BLOCKING 1 F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A MN Check: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 krausanderson.com | 612 332 7281 6/17/2024 1:39:07 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New UtilityBuilding R1.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - NewUtility Building R1.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING A5.602 DETAILS - EXTERIOR OPENINGS 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 JW KH/MS 10/26/2023 232010 Minnesota 10/26/2023 John McNamara 24281 ARCHITECT 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" LOUVER HEAD AND JAMBC1 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" LOUVER SILL AT PRECASTF1 1/2'1'0 3" = 1'-0" SILL DETAIL AT ALUMINUM WINDOW - ASSEMBLY E-PP06F3 3" 6" 0 3" = 1'-0" HEAD DETAIL AT EXTERIOR HM FRAME - ASSEMBLY E-BS06C2 3" 6" 0 3" = 1'-0" HEAD DETAIL AT ALUMINUM STOREFRONT (SF) - ASSEMBLY E-BS06C4 3" 6" 0 3" = 1'-0" HEAD DETAIL AT ALUMINUM STOREFRONT (SF) - ASSEMBLY E-BS06C6 3" 6" 0 3" = 1'-0" JAMB DETAIL AT EXTERIOR HM FRAME - ASSEMBLY E-BS06D2 3" 6" 0 3" = 1'-0" JAMB DETAIL AT ALUMINUM STOREFRONT (SF) - ASSEMBLY E-BS06D5 3" 6" 0 3" = 1'-0" JAMB DETAIL AT CURTAIN WALL (CW) - ASSEMBLY E-BS06D7 3" 6" 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" STOOL DETAIL AT WINDOW, STEEL STUD BACKUPD1 1/2'1' 0 3" = 1'-0" SILL DETAIL AT ALUMINUM STOREFRONT (SF) - ASSEMBLY E-BS06F7 3" 6" 0 3" = 1'-0" SILL DETAIL AT CURTAIN WALL - ASSEMBLY E-BS06F5 3" 6" Revisions Description Date Num PR #10 06/17/2024 1 5/8" PLYWOOD BLOCKING ALUM CURTAIN WALL PLASTIC SHIM AS REQ'D BRAKE METAL CLOSURE TRIM OVER WD BLOCKING 1/2" SEALANT AND BACKER ROD EA SIDE PREFINISHED SOLID METAL SOFFIT SYSTEM SET IN J-CHANNELS1'-4"3/4"1'-0" NOTES APPLY A5.501 E1 NOTES APPLY A5.603 F6 CEILING AS OCCURS, SEE RCP STEEL STUD W/ VERTICAL SLIP CONNECTION 1 1 PREFINISHED SOLID METAL SOFFIT SYSTEM SET IN J CHANNELS 6" COLD FORMED OUTRIGGER STUD; FILL CAVITY W/ SPRAY FOAM CONT FLUID-APPLIED WEATHER BARRIER (VAPOR PERMEABLE) OVER RIGID WALL INSULATION RIGID WALL INSULATION: 2" RIGID INSULATION BONDED TO 5/8" FIRE TREATED PLYWOOD 1'-4"3/4"1'-0" 16 GA PREFINISHED BRAKE METAL FASCIA/COPING; 1/2" PLYWOOD OVER WD BLOCKING; FILL VOIDS W/ EXT BATT INSUL ICE AND WATER BARRIER BY ROOFER STEEL ANGLE; SEE STRUCTURAL THROUGH WALL FLASHING; GROUT REMAINDER OF CAVITY BELOW WEEP VENT PREFINISHED GALV FLASHING BY MASON 1/4" ROPE WICKS ALUM TERMINATION BAR CAVITY INSULATION MORTAR NET BACKER ROD AND SEALANT STONE MASONRY VENEER; CUT AS REQUIRED MASONRY ANCHOR NOTES APPLY A5.501 E1 SELF-ADHERED MEMBRANE; LAP ONTO VERTICAL FACE OF PLYWOOD 1 10" 1'-4 1/2" 5 1/2" GRID 8" MINSTEEL LINTEL; SEE STRUCTURAL THROUGH WALL FLASHING; GROUT REMAINDER OF CAVITY BELOW WEEP VENT PREFINISHED GALV FLASHING BY MASON 1/4" ROPE WICKS ALUM TERMINATION BAR CAVITY INSULATION MORTAR NET NOTES APPLY A5.501 E1 MASONRY ANCHOR METAL FLASHING BY ROOFER ROOFING TERMINATION BAR STEEL DECK, SEE STRUCT; COVER UNDERSIDE OF DECK WITH SPRAY FOAM INSULATION AND INTUMESCENT COATING TO 2 FEET OUT FROM EXTERIOR WALL. AT INTERIOR, APPLY SPRAY FOAM INSULATION TO ENTIRELY ENCAPSULATE STEEL DECK AS SHOWN. INTUMESCENT COATING IS NOT REQUIRED AT INTERIOR. 5/8" PLYWOOD BLOCKING ALUM CURTAIN WALL PLASTIC SHIM AS REQ'D PREFINISHED BRAKE METAL CLOSURE TRIM SEALANT AND BACKER ROD EA SIDE PREFINISHED VENTED METAL SOFFIT ON HAT CHANNELS AND SUSPENDED STUD FRAMING 5/8" GWB ON METAL STUDS TO DECK FILL VOID BETWEEN DECK AND ANGLE WITH EXT BATT INSULATION STEEL BEAM, SEE STRUCT WEATHER BARRIER 1 CONTINUOUS ALUMINUM HORIZONTAL VENTILATION GRILLE SSF-1 WINDOW STOOL SEALANT PLYWOOD BLOCKING 5/8" GYPSUM BAORD ON 2 1/2" METAL STUDS CONTINUOUS ALUMINUM VERTICAL VENTILATION GRILLE STOREFRONT OR CURTAIN WALL SYSTEM AS OCCURS EXTERIOR WALL BEYOND, SEE PLAN FIN TUBE RADIATION ,SEE MECH.1 1/2"6" 4" A5.502 D6 NOTES APPLY A4.705 B7 A5.602 F5 A5.602 F7 4"BASE AS SCHEDULED _______D6 A5.5021 CONTINUOUS ALIMINUM HORIZONTAL VENTILATION GRILLE 1-1/2" X 3/16" MIN. COUNTERSUNK ROUND WOOD SCREW 4" O.C. 1-1/2" SOLID WOOD TOP, STAIN TO MATCH WOOD PANEL DETAILS SEALANT AND BACKER ROD 2-1/2" METAL STUD FRAMING PLYWOOD BLOCKING 5/8" GYPSUM BOARD CONTINUOUS ALIMINUM VERTICAL VENTILATION GRILLE CURTAIN WALL AS SCHEDULED EXTERIOR WALL BEYOND, SEE PLAN FIN TUBE RADIATION ,SEE MECH. P TILE-2 CT COVED BASE TRIM P TILE-11'-8"1'-6" AT BENCH 10" 3" F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A MN NorthCheck: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 krausanderson.com | 612 332 7281 6/17/2024 1:39:09 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New UtilityBuilding R1.rvt1 1/2" = 1'-0"Central: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - NewUtility Building R1.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING A5.603 DETAILS - EXTERIOR OPENINGS 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 JW MS/EK 10/26/2023 232010 Minnesota 10/26/2023 John McNamara 24281 ARCHITECT 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" CW HEAD AT METAL SOFFITD6 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" METAL SOFFIT AT STONEF6 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" DETAIL - HEAD AT CW 1 AND CANOPY TRANSITIONC6 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" SECTION AT OFFICE FIN TUBED4a 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" SECTION AT VESTIBULE / LOBBY FIN TUBEF4 1/2'1' Revisions Description Date Num PR #10 06/17/2024 1 60°30°NOTE: SEE ROOF PLAN FOR SLOPE. NOTE: SUMP MAY ROTATE 90 TO ACCOMMODATE ROOF RAIN/ STRUCTURE CONFLICT 4'-0" X 1'-4" AREA IN WHICH ROOF DRAIN AND OVERFLOW ROOF DRAIN CAN BE PLACED TAPERED INSULATION ROOF DRAIN WITH 2" OVERFLOW COLLAR - SEE MECHANICAL TYPICAL ROOF TAPER - SEE ROOF PLAN ROOF DRAIN - SEE MECHANICAL F3 A5.701 _______1'-0"4'-0"1'-0"2'-4" 1'-4" 2'-4" ROOF DRAIN TAPERED INSULATION AS OCCURS BASE INSULATION - SEE ROOF PLAN GENERAL NOTES FOR THICKNESS WATER STOP MASTIC, CONTINUOUS ROOF MEMBRANE ROOF DECK - SEE STRUCT LC DRAIN 1"2'-4" MAX 1"CONTINUOUS ROOFING MEMBRANE METAL COPING (FREE TO MOVE) METAL JOINT COVER 2' -0" 10' -0" M A X 1 ' -0 "COPING MUST BE INSTALLED TO ALLOW IT TO EXPAND AND CONTRACT AT JOINTS TYP FASTENER AT JOINT COVER SHOP FABRICATED PREFORMED CORNERS, TYPICAL FASTEN @ MIDSPAN ONLY B5a A5.701 _______ E5 A5.502 _______ C7 A5.701 _______ 2 SEE ROOF PLAN FOR PARAPET DETAIL REFERENCE (FIELD PAINT) COUNTERFLASHING TO MATCH COLOR OF BRICK BEYOND BRICK WALL BEYOND C7 A5.701 _______ B5 A5.701 _______ WEATHER BARRIER- EXTEND UP TO FRONT FACE OF BLOCKING AT COPING EPDM- EXTEND UP TO HORIZ METAL AND ADHERE TO WALL COUNTERFLASHING TO SET UNDER COPING AND EXTEND UP UNDER METAL FLASHING AT BRICK SEALANT COPING METAL FLASHING BY 04 20 00 OVERLAP2" MINNOTES APPLY A5.501 E1 BRICK SEALANT METAL COUNTERFLASHING TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION ALL SIDES: 1/2" PLYWOOD W/ 2X2 INSIDE CORNERS, ROOFING MEMBRANE, 16 GA PREPAINTED GALVANIZED SHEET METAL COVER CANT AS REQUIRED BY ROOFING SYSTEM FLASHING NOTE: WIDTH OF BOX TO BE 1'-0" FOR ONE PIPE PLUS 4" EACH ADDITIONAL PIPE STRUCTURE AS OCCURS FIRE STOP JOINT SYSTEM AT RATED ROOF DECK ROOF INSULATION PACK WITH EXTERIOR BATT INSULATION SEALANT AROUND ALL PIPES PIPES STACKED IN SAME HORIZONTAL PLANE- SEE MECHANICAL TOP TO BE REMOVABLE 12 2 2 6 62 2 4 42 12 2 2 6 62 2 4 2 48"456" PREFINISHED METAL FASCIA 16 GA PREFINISHED BRAKE METAL FASCIA/ROOF EDGE 16 GA PREFINISHED BRAKE METAL FASCIA/ROOF EDGE 6"16"12" PREFINISHED VENTED METAL SOFFIT ON HAT CHANNELS AND SUSPENDED STUD FRAMING PREFINISHED SOLID METAL SOFFIT STEEL DECK AND HSS EDGE, SEE STRUCT CONT WOOD CANT OVER BUILT UP WD BLOCKING 2 6 VAPOR PERMEABLE WEATHER BARRIER OVER 5/8" FIRE TREATED PLYWOOD WOOD BLOCKING AS REQ'D 2-1/2" HORIZ AND 3-5/8" VERT METAL STUD FRAMING T.O. ROOF EDGE BEYOND ROOFING MEMBRANE 2 PREFINISHED METAL FASCIA 16 GA PREFINISHED BRAKE METAL FASCIA/ROOF EDGE 16 GA PREFINISHED BRAKE METAL FASCIA/ROOF EDGE 6"16"12" PREFINISHED VENTED METAL SOFFIT ON HAT CHANNELS AND SUSPENDED STUD FRAMING PREFINISHED SOLID METAL SOFFIT STEEL DECK AND EDGE ANGLE, SEE STRUCT CONT WOOD CANT OVER BUILT UP WD BLOCKING 2 6 VAPOR PERMEABLE WEATHER BARRIER OVER 5/8" FIRE TREATED PLYWOOD WOOD BLOCKING AS REQ'D 2-1/2" HORIZ AND 3-5/8" VERT METAL STUD FRAMING ROOFING MEMBRANE 28"SAW CUT 1" DEEP REGLET IN PRECAST PANEL-SEAL COUNTERFLASHING IN REGLET W/ SEALANT FLASHING ANCHORED TO PRECAST @ 24" OC PREFINISHED METAL FLASHING BY ROOFER - ANCHOR W/ SST GASKETED SCREWS @ 24" OC PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL CANT AS REQUIRED BY ROOFING SYSTEM MFR ROOF SYSTEM - SEE ROOF PLAN JOIST POCKET (SEE STRUCT) STRUCTURAL DECK (SEE STRUCT) INTERIOR 2 4 EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY:E-PPxxMIN4"3/4"NOTES APPLY A5.502 F22 1/2" MINPREFINISHED METAL COPING ON WOOD BLOCKING WEATHER BARRIER CONTINUOUS FROM TOP OF WALL, LAP ONTO ROOF DECK 6" MIN STEEL JOIST AND STEEL DECK AS OCCUR - SEE STRUCTURAL ROOF ASSEMBLY AS OCCURS RIGID WALL INSULATION: 2 1/2" RIGID INSULATION BONDED TO 3/4" FIRE TREATED PLYWOOD STEEL CONNECTION AS OCCURS - SEE STRUCTURAL AT JOIST POCKET, FILL FULL WITH RIGID INSULATION, AT BACK AND TOP OF POCKET COVER WITH 24 GA SHEET METAL FOR WEATHER BARRIER, BY INSULATION CONTRACTOR AT JOIST POCKET, GROUT VOID SOLID TO TOP OF DECK 2 4 TOP OF PRECAST SEE WALL SECTION CONT KEEPER F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A MN Check: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 krausanderson.com | 612 332 7281 6/17/2024 1:39:11 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New UtilityBuilding R1.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - NewUtility Building R1.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING A5.701 DETAILS - EXTERIOR ROOF 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 JW KH/MS 10/26/2023 232010 Minnesota 10/26/2023 John McNamara 24281 ARCHITECT 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" ROOF CRICKET PLAN VIEWD3 1/2'1' 0 3/8" = 1'-0" ROOF DRAIN TYPICAL SUMP PLANE3 2' 4' 0 3/4" = 1'-0" ROOF DRAIN SUMP SECTIONF3 1' 2' NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL JOINT COVERB5a NOT TO SCALE COPING DETAILSE7 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" COPING AT WALL ELEVATIONB7 1/2'1' 0 3" = 1'-0" COPING AT WALL SECTIONC7 3" 6" 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" COUNTERFLASHING EDGEB5 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" PIPING BOXF7 1/2'1'0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" CANOPY ROOF EDGE - NORTHF5 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" CANOPY ROOF EDGE - WESTE5 1/2'1' 0 3" = 1'-0" FLASHING DETAIL AT PRECASTD5 3" 6" Revisions Description Date Num Addendum No.1 11/14/2023 1 PR #10 06/17/2024 2 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" DETAIL - PRECAST PARAPET SEPARATION CURBF1 1/2'1' 1 BLOCKING AS REQUIRED. SECURE TO DECK INSULATION STRUCTURAL DECK AS OCCURS TREATED WOOD CURB - VERIFY REQD HEIGHT BASED ON INSUL THICKNESS ROOFING SYSTEM BASE FLASH - CARRY OVER THE TOP OF THE CURB, SEAL ALL SIDES SHEET METAL CAP, SEAL @ ENDS WATERSTOP MASTIC GALV EQUIPMENT ANCHOR PLATE BY MECH, LAG BOLT TO CURB W/GASKETED WASHER 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 42 4 2 4 2 4 42 CANT AS REQUIRED BY ROOFING SYSTEM PIPING OR CONDUCT AS OCCURS MECH UNIT AS OCCURS VARIESABOVE FIN ROOF8" MINMIN 4 1/2" ROOFING SYSTEM STRUCTURE AS OCCURS PRE-MANUFACTURED ROOF CURB - INSTALLED BY MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR WOOD BLOCKING AS REQUIRED, TO MAINTAIN CURB 8" ABOVE ROOF - SECURE TO DECK CANT AS REQUIRED BY ROOFING SYSTEM BASE FLASH- CARRY OVER TOP OF CURB COUNTER FLASHING BY EQUIP SUPPLIER MECH EQUIP & COVER BY MECH OR BY EQUIP SUPPLIER 62VARIESABOVE FIN ROOF8" MINSHEET METAL FLASHING INSULATION THICKNESS VARIES ATTACHMENT PER ROOFING MFR REQUIREMENTS ROOF MEMBRANE STAINLESS STEEL CLAMPING RING PREFORMED PIPE FLASHING BOOT PREFORMED PIPE FLASHING BOOT VENT STACK (SEE MECH) ELASTOMERIC SEALANT FILL VOIDS W/ URETHANE FOAM INSULATION FIRE SEAL1'-0" MINVARIES 1" MIN CLEAR1 1/2"1/2"VARIESVERIFY2"10"4" MIN 2" VERIFY MIN NOTE: TREATED NAILER REQUIRED IF STACK EXCEEDS 1'-6" DIA 18 GA GI SLEEVE, FASTEN TO DECK BY MECH INSULATION, THICKNESS VARIES ROOF MEMBRANE ROOF FLASHING GALV METAL HOOD BY MECH STAINLESS STEEL CLAMP RING BY MECH SEALANT COMBUSTION STACK, VERIFY SIZE SEE MECH CONCRETE BLOCK THROUGH WALL DRAIN W/ REMOVABLE GRATE- SEE MECH ROOFING SYSTEM INSULATION NOTES APPLY A5.501 E1 WEATHER BARRIER GYPSUM SHEATHING ROOFING MEMBRANE 1 1 F7 A5.702 _______ ANCHOR FLANGE TO MASONRY, SEE MECH THREADED CONNECTION EXTERIOR WALL CAST METAL DOWNSPOUT NOZZLE, SEE MECH BACKER ROD AND SEALANT AROUND PERIMETER CORE DRILL MASONRY, SEE MECH4" TYPOPENING OF DRAIN, SEE ROOF PLAN SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS CURB W/ INTEGRAL FLASHING & INSULATION - EXTEND ROOFING MEMBRANE UP UNDER FLASHING AND SECURE INSULATED HATCH COVER AUTOMATIC HOLD OPEN SEE ROOF PLAN SIM STEEL ANGLE TYPICAL, SEE STRUCT _______D3 A5.702 CANT AS REQUIRED BY ROOFING SYSTEM SHEET METAL FLASHING TO COVER CANT (ONLY AT BUR)ROOFMAINTAIN8" ABOVEWOOD BLOCKING AS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN 8 ABOVE ROOF COVER EXPOSED WOOD BLOCKING W/ 5/8" GWB COORD. DIM WITH MECH COORD. DIM WITH MECHPRE-MANUFACTURED ROOF CURB - INSTALLED BY MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR SUPPLY/ RETURN DUCTWORK - SEE MECH COORD LOCATION AND SIZE 5-1/2" INSULATION AND VAPOR BARRIER TO COMPLETELY FILL VOID BETWEEN CURB AND DUCTWORK SEALANT JOINT ALL SIDES ROOF TOP UNIT ABOVE - SEE MECH D3 A5.702 _______ 3 '-0 " 2'-0"4"4"4"6"1"3"SET IN CONCRETE FILL W/ CONC PITCH 1/4" PER FOOT AWAY FROM BOLLARD TOP OF SLAB OR FINISHED GRADE FIELD PAINTED GALVANIZED 6" DIA STEEL PIPE PIPE BOLLARD CAP 4"3'-8"3'-6"8"8" 3/4" DIA LIGHTNING ARRESTOR SPIKE TO EXTEND 12" BELOW FOOTING. 4"x 4"x 3/16" STEEL SUPPORT PLATE 3/16" TO 1/2" STEEL PLATE STEEL CENTERING WEDGES CONCRETE 16 GA GALVANIZED CORRUGATED SLEEVE TAMPED WITH SCREENED DRY SAND 4" SAND 4" BROOM FINISHED CONC WOOD WEDGES WATERPROOF CONC CAULKING COMPOUND FLASH COLLAR FLAG POLE TRUCK BALL DRAIN 1/4"/FT COMPACTED SUBGRADE 3'-0" 3'-9"5'-0"1'-0"1'-4" 2'-2" BLOCKING AS REQUIRED. SECURE TO DECK INSULATION STRUCTURAL DECK AS OCCURS TREATED WOOD CURB - VERIFY REQD HEIGHT BASED ON INSUL THICKNESS ROOFING SYSTEM BASE FLASH - CARRY OVER THE TOP OF THE CURB, SEAL ALL SIDES SHEET METAL CAP, SEAL @ ENDS 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 42 4 2 4 2 4 42 CANT AS REQUIRED BY ROOFING SYSTEM VARIESABOVE FIN ROOF8" MINMIN 4 1/2" 1 F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A MN Check: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 krausanderson.com | 612 332 7281 6/17/2024 1:39:13 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New UtilityBuilding R1.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - NewUtility Building R1.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING A5.702 DETAILS - EXTERIOR ROOF 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 JW KH 10/26/2023 232010 Minnesota 10/26/2023 John McNamara 24281 ARCHITECT 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" EQUIPMENT CURBC3 1/2'1' 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" PENETRATION CURBD3 1/2'1' NOT TO SCALE MEMBRANE ROOF VENTF5NOT TO SCALE MEMBRANE ROOF COMBUSTION STACKF3 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" DRAIN AT CANOPYD5 1/2'1' 0 3" = 1'-0" DOWNSPOUT NOZZLE ELEVATIONE7a 3" 6" 0 3" = 1'-0" DOWNSPOUT NOZZLE SECTIONF7 3" 6" 0 1" = 1'-0" ROOF HATCHB5 9"1'-6" 0 1/2" = 1'-0" PLAN DETAIL AT INSUL. UNDER RTUD7 1'-6" 3' 0 1" = 1'-0" CONCRETE SPLASHBLOCKC7 9" 1'-6" 0 1/2" = 1'-0" BOLLARD DETAILC5 1'-6" 3' 0 1/2" = 1'-0" FLAGPOLE DETAILB7 1'-6" 3' Revisions Description Date Num PR #10 06/17/2024 1 0 1 1/2" = 1'-0" CURBB3 1/2'1' Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 10875 Ideal Ave S City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 2310312-COR # 16.00 Date:10/30/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Credits back for concrete flatwork and paving per PR #13. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 45 - Wold PR #13: Streets Plan, Plumbing, and Lighting Revisions 1 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #13.SCR Central Division 3 ($1,916.67)Earthwork per Wold PR #13.Miller Excavating, Inc. 4 ($29,223.22)Asphalt paving per Wold PR #13.McNamara Contracting, Inc. ($31,139.89)Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 1087 Ideal Avenue S City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 2310312-02 COR # 16.00 Date:10/30/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Credits back for concrete flatwork and paving per PR #13. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 45 - Wold PR #13: Streets Plan, Plumbing, and Lighting Revisions 1 $0.00 No cost change per Wold PR #13.Fobbe Electric, Inc. 2 ($15,095.20)Concrete paving per Wold PR #13.Ebert Construction ($15,095.20)Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove 1 Struckman, Rachel From:Jesse Widmer <Jesse.Widmer@scr-mn.com> Sent:Wednesday, August 14, 2024 9:02 AM To:Struckman, Rachel Cc:Albrecht, Ben Subject:RE: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 45_PR 13 Streets Plan-Plumbing and Lighting Revisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. No cost Jesse Widmer SCR - Project Manager Cell Phone 320.492.1964 Jesse.widmer@scr-mn.com From: Struckman, Rachel <rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2024 8:51 AM To: Jesse Widmer <Jesse.Widmer@scr-mn.com>; 'Fobbe Electric' <fe@fobbeelectric.com>; 'mindy.hackett@millerexc.com' <mindy.hackett@millerexc.com>; 'Steve St. Claire' <steve.st.claire@millerexc.com>; 'Toby Helgeson' <thelgeson@ebertcompanies.com>; 'Mike McNamara' <m.mcnamara@mcnamaracontracting.com> Cc: Kjellberg, Dan <dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com>; Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com>; Jacob Wollensak <jwollensak@woldae.com>; 'Kayla Simpson' <ksimpson@woldae.com>; 'Lee.Mann@stantec.com' <Lee.Mann@stantec.com>; 'rburfeind@cottagegrovemn.gov' <rburfeind@cottagegrovemn.gov>; Schauer, Dan <dan.schauer@krausanderson.com> Subject: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 45_PR 13 Streets Plan-Plumbing and Lighting Revisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. All, Please see the attached PCO #45 regarding Wold PR #13 – Streets Plan, Plumbing, and Lighting Revisions. If this PCO affects your work scope please respond within (7) days including appropriate back-up or this will be a zero cost change. Thank you, Rachel Struckman | Senior Project Coordinator rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com | direct 612-255-2378 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 501 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 office 612-332-7281 | krausanderson.com Together, strengthening the communities we serve Insert Owner Logo Miller Excavating Inc Date :10/24/24 3741 Stagecoach Trail N, Stillwater MN 55082 PCO #: 45 Project Manager: PR/SI # 13 Steve St Claire Description Cost Labor Total (1,044.33)$ Materials and Equipment Total (872.34)$ Tax on Materials and Equipment Only -$ Self Performed Subtotal (1,916.67)$ 10% Overhead and Profit Self Performed Total (1,916.67)$ Subcontractors -$ 5% Overhead and Profit on Subs -$ Subcontractor Total -$ TOTAL COST OF CHANGE (1,916.67)$ Signature: Labor By Task Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost SAWCUTTING & BIT REMOVAL CREDIT 1 EA (1,044.33)$ (1,044.33)$ -$ -$ -$ Sub-Total (1,044.33)$ Materials and Equipment By Task Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost SAWCUTTING & BIT REMOVAL CREDIT 1 EA (872.34)$ (872.34)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Sub-Total (872.34)$ Sub-Contractor Proposals Total Cost -$ -$ -$ -$ Sub-Total (Attach Sub-Contractor Proposals)-$ Description of Work (5% is the max allowed on subcontractors) Contractor acknowledges no other Costs assciated with this PCO. PROVIDE DETAIL BREAKDOWN BELOW: (10% is the max fee allowed on CO's) Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building COST SUMMARY Notes/Attachments (Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below) (Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below) <<< Provide Sales/Use Tax Total 1 Struckman, Rachel From:Mike McNamara <m.mcnamara@mcnamaracontracting.com> Sent:Thursday, August 15, 2024 5:53 PM To:Struckman, Rachel Cc:Kjellberg, Dan; Albrecht, Ben; Jacob Wollensak; 'Kayla Simpson'; 'Lee.Mann@stantec.com'; 'rburfeind@cottagegrovemn.gov'; Schauer, Dan Subject:RE: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 45_PR 13 Streets Plan-Plumbing and Lighting Revisions Attachments:PCO 45-PR 13 - McNamara Backup.xlsx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Rachel, Our changes for this would total ($29,223.22). Labor – ($8,631.07); Material – ($20,592.15). Please see attached for backup and let me know if you have any questions or need anything else. Thanks, Mike Mike McNamara McNamara Contracting, Inc. 16700 Chippendale Ave. Rosemount, MN 55068 651-322-5500 (office) 612-363-8191 (cell) From: Struckman, Rachel <rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2024 8:51 AM To: 'Jesse.Widmer@scr-mn.com' <Jesse.Widmer@scr-mn.com>; 'Fobbe Electric' <fe@fobbeelectric.com>; 'mindy.hackett@millerexc.com' <mindy.hackett@millerexc.com>; 'Steve St. Claire' <steve.st.claire@millerexc.com>; 'Toby Helgeson' <thelgeson@ebertcompanies.com>; Mike McNamara <m.mcnamara@mcnamaracontracting.com> Cc: Kjellberg, Dan <dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com>; Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com>; Jacob Wollensak <jwollensak@woldae.com>; 'Kayla Simpson' <ksimpson@woldae.com>; 'Lee.Mann@stantec.com' <Lee.Mann@stantec.com>; 'rburfeind@cottagegrovemn.gov' <rburfeind@cottagegrovemn.gov>; Schauer, Dan <dan.schauer@krausanderson.com> Subject: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 45_PR 13 Streets Plan-Plumbing and Lighting Revisions All, Please see the attached PCO #45 regarding Wold PR #13 – Streets Plan, Plumbing, and Lighting Revisions. If this PCO affects your work scope please respond within (7) days including appropriate back-up or this will be a zero cost change. Thank you, Rachel Struckman | Senior Project Coordinator rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com | direct 612-255-2378 SOV Item #Description Units Quantity Unit Price Total Price 3 Parking Lot Paving - Labor LS 1 56,750.00$ 56,750.00$ 4 Parking Lot Paving - Materials LS 1 136,000.00$ 136,000.00$ TOTAL 192,750.00$ SOV Detail Item #Description Units Quantity Unit Price Total Price Labor Per Unit Total Labor Material Per Unit Total Material Total Labor & Material 1 Parking Lot Base (1.75" LD, 3" HD) SPNWB430B Tons 1,300 74.00$ 96,200.00$ 23.00$ 29,900.00$ 51.00$ 66,300.00$ 96,200.00$ 2 Tack Gal 450 2.99$ 1,345.50$ 0.39$ 175.50$ 2.60$ 1,170.00$ 1,345.50$ 3 Parking Lot Wear (1.75" LD, 2" HD) SPWEB440F Virgin Tons 970 98.15$ 95,205.50$ 27.50$ 26,675.00$ 70.65$ 68,530.50$ 95,205.50$ TOTAL 192,751.00$ 56,750.50$ 136,000.50$ 192,751.00$ PCO #45/Wold PR #13 Deduct Quantities (1,260 SY of HD Pavement Deduct) Item #Description Units Quantity Unit Price Total Price Labor Per Unit Total Labor Material Per Unit Total Material Total Labor & Material 1 Parking Lot Base (1.75" LD, 3" HD) SPNWB430B Tons (208) 74.00$ (15,392.00)$ 23.00$ (4,784.00)$ 51.00$ (10,608.00)$ (15,392.00)$ 2 Tack Gal (63) 2.99$ (188.37)$ 0.39$ (24.57)$ 2.60$ (163.80)$ (188.37)$ 3 Parking Lot Wear (1.75" LD, 2" HD) SPWEB440F Virgin Tons (139) 98.15$ (13,642.85)$ 27.50$ (3,822.50)$ 70.65$ (9,820.35)$ (13,642.85)$ TOTAL (29,223.22)$ (8,631.07)$ (20,592.15)$ (29,223.22)$ 1 Struckman, Rachel From:Fobbe Electric <fe@fobbeelectric.com> Sent:Monday, September 30, 2024 3:04 PM To:Struckman, Rachel Cc:Albrecht, Ben Subject:RE: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 45_PR 13 Streets Plan-Plumbing and Lighting Revisions No pricing change on this sir. Please let me know if you need anything else from me in the meantime. Thanks Ryan Fobbe Fobbe Electric Inc 612-618-7220 From: Struckman, Rachel <rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2024 8:51 AM To: 'Jesse.Widmer@scr-mn.com' <Jesse.Widmer@scr-mn.com>; Fobbe Electric <fe@fobbeelectric.com>; 'mindy.hackett@millerexc.com' <mindy.hackett@millerexc.com>; 'Steve St. Claire' <steve.st.claire@millerexc.com>; 'Toby Helgeson' <thelgeson@ebertcompanies.com>; 'Mike McNamara' <m.mcnamara@mcnamaracontracting.com> Cc: Kjellberg, Dan <dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com>; Albrecht, Ben <ben.albrecht@krausanderson.com>; Jacob Wollensak <jwollensak@woldae.com>; 'Kayla Simpson' <ksimpson@woldae.com>; 'Lee.Mann@stantec.com' <Lee.Mann@stantec.com>; 'rburfeind@cottagegrovemn.gov' <rburfeind@cottagegrovemn.gov>; Schauer, Dan <dan.schauer@krausanderson.com> Subject: Cottage Grove Utility Building - PCO 45_PR 13 Streets Plan-Plumbing and Lighting Revisions All, Please see the attached PCO #45 regarding Wold PR #13 – Streets Plan, Plumbing, and Lighting Revisions. If this PCO affects your work scope please respond within (7) days including appropriate back-up or this will be a zero cost change. Thank you, Rachel Struckman | Senior Project Coordinator rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com | direct 612-255-2378 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 501 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 office 612-332-7281 | krausanderson.com Together, strengthening the communities we serve Corcoran, MN 55357 23350 County Road 10 Ph : 763-498-7844 Change Proposal Phone: Job:66056 City of Cottage G-Util-32B Con Number: Date: 1 9/26/24 To:City of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway S Cottage Grove, MN 55016-3195 Ph: (651)458-2800 Fax: (641)458-2897 Description:PCO 45 / PR 13 Proposed are the following changes: PCO 45 / PR 13 Response Concrete Materials = -$1,395.20 Concrete Labor - 10 Hrs @ $105.00/Hr = $1,050.00 Curb & Gutter = -$12,650.00 (See Attachedl) The total amount to provide this work is .................................................................................................. $-15,095.20 (Please refer to attached sheet for details.) If you have any questions, please contact me at 763-498-7844. Submitted by:Approved by: Date: Pricing subject to review/change if not approved within 14 days of receipt. Page 1 of 2 Corcoran, MN 55357 23350 County Road 10 Ph : 763-498-7844 Change Proposal 1 Price Breakdown Continuation Sheet Description:PCO 45 / PR 13 Description PriceMaterial Subcontract OtherEquipmentLabor Concrete Paving $-2,445.20$-1,395.20$-1,050.00 Curbs and Gutters $-12,650.00$-12,650.00 Subtotal:$-15,095.20 Total: $-15,095.20 Page 2 of 2 Attachments: Wold PR #13 dated 8/2/24 We have reviewed the PCO and acknowledge that it is a “no change” item and does not affect our completion date. Signed By: Date: Company Name: 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 Request For Proposal Project: 2310312- PCO #: 45 Cottage Grove UE Building 10875 Ideal Ave S Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Date: 08/12/2024 To: Dan Schauer, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ben Albrecht, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ryan Burfeind, City Of Cottage Grove Lee Mann, Stantec Jacob Wollensak, Wold Architects & Engineers Kayla Simpson, Wold Architects & Engineers Steve St. Claire, Miller Excavating, Inc. Mindy Hackett, Miller Excavating, Inc. Toby Helgeson, Ebert Construction Jesse Widmer, SCR Central Division Ryan Fobbe, Fobbe Electric, Inc. Mike McNamara, McNamara Contracting, Inc. Please provide a cost breakdown in accordance with the Contract Documents and a Summary for the Change described herein and on the attachments (if any) listed. All responses are required within seven (7) days. This is not an authorization to proceed with the work described herein unless and until approved by the Owner. On approval, this change will be included in a Change Order, which will provide the formal Contract Cha nge. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Please provide a cost estimate per the attached Wold Architects and Engineers PR #13 dated August 2, 2024 regarding streets plan, plumbing, and lighting revisions. PROPOSAL REQUEST Distribution: ☐ Ryan Burfeind, CG ☐ Adam Moshier, CG ☐ Dustin Phillips, KA ☒ Be Ben Albrecht, KA ☒ Jake Wollensak, Wold ☒ Kayla Simpson, Wold ☒ Pat Jansen, Wold ☒ Ryan Rossborough, Wold ☒ Sean McNamara, Wold ☒ Doug Galloway, Wold ☒ Derek Peterson, Wold ☐ Kal Jackman, BKBM ☐ James Dorr, BKBM ☐ Kyle Kucharski, BKBM ☒ Lee Mann, Stantec ☒ Dave Sanocki, Stantec ☒ Eric Vidden, Stantec City of Cottage Grove Utility & Engineering Building Kraus-Anderson Attn: Dan Kjellberg/Rachel Struckman 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 612.332.7281 dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com / rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com Submit an itemized (labor and material) quotation for the proposed modifications to the contract documents as described herein within 21 days of receipt. If a cost is not submitted within 21 days, this Proposal Request can be accepted at no additional cost. Written approval is required prior to proceeding with this change. COST EXPECTATIONS: ☐ DEDUCT ☐ NO COST ☐ ADD PR: 13 Comm: 232010 Const. Pkg: [Status] Item Description 5 Streets Plan, Plumbing, and Lighting Revisions 5.1 See revised sheets C601, C602, C603, and C604 – STREETS PLAN for updated curb and pavement limits. 5.2 See revised sheet M1.00a – PLUMBING PLAN – UNDERGROUND AREA ‘A’ for reduced size of storm main. 5.3 See revised sheet E1.11a – MAIN LEVEL LIGHTING PLAN AREA ‘A’ for updated lighting layout in room A124. Attachments: C601, C602, C603, C604, M1.00a, E1.11a Issued By: Kayla Simpson Date: 08/2/2024 FUTURE BUILDING EXPANSION STORM WATER POND SWALE FOR TANK OVERFLOW DISCHARGE FUTURE WATER SYSTEM EXPANSION AREA UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING (FFE 808.0) STORM WATER POND IDEAL AVENUE S.WATER TREATMENT PLANT FUTURE PUBLIC WORKS EXPANSION AREA 3 FT HIGH EARTH BERM3 FT HIGH EARTH BERMU E E E E E OHU CONSTRUCT CONCRETE HYDRANT PAD (TYP) 28' F-F CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DES. B618 (BY OTHERS)R20'-FR40'-FR40' -FR40'-FR4 0 ' - FR40'-FR4 0 ' - F SAWCUT & MATCH EX. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. PATCH BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. SAWCUT & MATCH EX. BITUMINOUS TRAIL. CONSTRUCT PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP. SAWCUT & MATCH EX. BITUMINOUS TRAIL. CONSTRUCT PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP. CONSTRUCT 24' F-F CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DES. B618 R20'-FR 2 5 ' - F R 2 5 ' - F R40'-FR20'-F4SW (TYP) 20 FT9 FT20 FT10 FT CONSTRUCT 6' SIDEWALK CONSTRUCT 20' X 20' CONCRETE PAD CONSTRUCT CONCRETE PAD FOR DUMPSTER LOCATION 18 FT10 FT 18 FT10 FT CONSTRUCT 2' WIDE CONCRETE BUILDING APRON BUILDING STOOP (TYP) REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS 24SW 6SW R15'- F R5'-F24 FT 24 FT18 FT CONSTRUCT 5.66' X 10' CONCRETE PAD BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT INSET B. REFERENCE TYPICAL SECTIONS. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT INSET B REFERENCE TYPICAL SECTIONS. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT INSET A. REFERENCE TYPICAL SECTIONS. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT INSET A. REFERENCE TYPICAL SECTIONS. CONSTRUCT 6' SIDEWALK. ALTERNATE NO. 1 SNOW MELT SYSTEM. REFER TO ARCH. FOR INSULATION. REFER TO MECH. FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. CONSTRUCT AGGREGATE BACKFILL & AGGREGATE BASE ONLY STREETS PLANC601 N 0 40'80'WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE:DATE:LIC. NO.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN.SHEET NUMBER DATENO SURVEY APPROVED DESIGNED DRAWN PROJ. NO. REVISION CHECKEDCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTACOTTAGE GROVE UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING193806146 PBW EPV DRS DRSENGINEERMINNESOTADAVID S. SANOCKI4097310/26/2023LMM 1 ADD #1 11/14/23 3 FT HIGH EARTH BERME E R 2 5 ' - F R 2 5 ' - F (TYP)20 FT10 FT 18 FT10 FT 18 FT10 FT 24 FTCONSTRUCT 5.66' X 10' CONCRETE PAD 3 FT HIGH EARTH BERMIDEAL AVENUE S.STORM WATER POND 28' F-F CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DES. B618 (BY OTHERS) R2 0 ' - F R40'- FR40'-FR40'-FR 4 0 ' - F 804.04 804.04 806.22 806.34 804.99 805.63 805.84804.54 805.95 805.59 806.18 806.08 805.97 805.82 804.95 805.67 807.82807.00 805.93 R20'-F806.24 808.21 805.50 808.46 808.49 807.89 806.11 806.46 807.75 805.70 805.86 805.60 806.57 806.73 806.69 806.59 807.12 807.23 807.01 806.92 808.50 808.08 807.86 806.01 806.20 4SW (TYP) 4SW CONSTRUCT AGGREGATE BACKFILL & AGGREGATE BASE ONLY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT INSET A. REFERENCE TYPICAL SECTIONS. CONSTRUCT 6' SIDEWALK. ALTERNATE NO. 1 SNOW MELT SYSTEM. REFER TO ARCH. FOR INSULATION. REFER TO MECH. FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. 807.48 STREETS PLANC602 N 0 15'30'WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE:DATE:LIC. NO.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN.SHEET NUMBER DATENO SURVEY APPROVED DESIGNED DRAWN PROJ. NO. REVISION CHECKEDCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTACOTTAGE GROVE UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING193806146 PBW EPV DRS DRSENGINEERMINNESOTADAVID S. SANOCKI4097310/26/2023LMM 1 ADD #1 11/14/23 SWALE FOR TANK OVERFLOW DISCHARGE UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING (FFE 808.0) CONSTRUCT CONCRETE HYDRANT PAD (TYP)R40'-FR 2 0 ' - F (TYP)20 FT10 FT CONSTRUCT CONCRETE PAD FOR DUMPSTER LOCATION 18 FT10 FT 18 FT10 FT CONSTRUCT 2' WIDE CONCRETE BUILDING APRON BUILDING STOOP (TYP) REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS 24 FTBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT INSET B. REFERENCE TYPICAL SECTIONS. 807.82 808.46 808.49 806.45 806.45807.12 807.23 807.16 806.81 806.42806.92 806.97 806.14 805.66 804.59 805.55 808.43 807.91 808.00 807.73 808.08 806.20 806.45 807.45 807.70 807.10 807.93 807.96 4SW BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT INSET A. REFERENCE TYPICAL SECTIONS. REFER TO MECH. FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.STREETS PLANC603 N 0 15'30'WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE:DATE:LIC. NO.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN.SHEET NUMBER DATENO SURVEY APPROVED DESIGNED DRAWN PROJ. NO. REVISION CHECKEDCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTACOTTAGE GROVE UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING193806146 PBW EPV DRS DRSENGINEERMINNESOTADAVID S. SANOCKI4097310/26/2023LMM 1 ADD #1 11/14/23 3 FT HIGH EARTH BERME R40'-FR40'-FSAWCUT & MATCH EX. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. PATCH BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. SAWCUT & MATCH EX. BITUMINOUS TRAIL. CONSTRUCT PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP. SAWCUT & MATCH EX. BITUMINOUS TRAIL. CONSTRUCT PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP. R 2 5 ' - F R 2 5 ' - F 20 FT 9 FTCONSTRUCT 6' SIDEWALK CONSTRUCT 20' X 20' CONCRETE PAD R15'- F R5'-F24 FT18 FT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT INSET B. REFERENCE TYPICAL SECTIONS. CONSTRUCT 28' F-F CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DES. B618 24SW 6SW 804.54 804.54 805.83 805.85 804.73 804.99 804.91 805.25 805.95 806.46 804.58 806.24 808.21 805.50 807.32 808.46 808.49 807.89 807.75 805.70 805.57IDEAL AVENUE S.CONSTRUCT 6' SIDEWALK. ALTERNATE NO. 1 SNOW MELT SYSTEM. REFER TO ARCH. FOR INSULATION. REFER TO MECH. FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. 807.48 TRUNCATED DOME PANEL (TYP)STREETS PLANC604 N 0 15'30'WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE:DATE:LIC. NO.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN.SHEET NUMBER DATENO SURVEY APPROVED DESIGNED DRAWN PROJ. NO. REVISION CHECKEDCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTACOTTAGE GROVE UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING193806146 PBW EPV DRS DRSENGINEERMINNESOTADAVID S. SANOCKI4097310/26/2023LMM 1 ADD #1 11/14/23 DWPLUMBING PLAN GENERAL NOTES:1. MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE LIMITATIONS AND/OR CONFLICTS RELATIVE TO THE EXECUTION OF HIS WORK PRIOR TO BID. VERIFY EXACT DETAIL OF INSTALLATION REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SYSTEMS SHOWN WITHIN SPACE INTENDED.2. ALL RISES AND DROPS IN PIPING ARE NOT NECESSARILY SHOWN. LAYOUT ROUTING AND COORDINATE WORK WITH OTHER TRADES BEFORE CONSTRUCTION.3. MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CUTTING AND PATCHING OF CONSTRUCTION UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANS. NO CUTTING OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS OR STRUCTURE WHICH WILL DETERIORATE THE INTEGRITY AND STRENGTH OF THE BUILDING WILL BE ALLOWED WITHOUT WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. 4. LOCATE ALL VALVES, METERS, GAUGES AND PIPING SPECIALTIES ABOVE ACCESSIBLE CEILINGS.5. COORDINATE ALL UTILITY CONNECTION SIZES, LOCATIONS, AND INVERTS WITH THE SITE UTILITY CONTRACTOR.6. INSTALL WALL HYDRANTS AT 2'-0" ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATION.7. THE MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL EXISTING CEILING TILES AND GRIDS BEYOND EXTENT SHOWN ON ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AS REQUIRED FOR INSTALLATION OF NEW WORK. ANY DAMAGED TILES AND OR GRIDS SHALL BE REPLACED WITH NEW TO MATCH AT THE CONTRACTORS EXPENSE.8. REFER TO PLUMBING RISER DIAGRAMS FOR ADDITIONAL PIPE SIZES NOT SHOWN ON DRAWING.9. PROVIDE AND INSTALL ALL LOW VOLTAGE WIRING TO ELECTRONIC PLUMBING FIXTURES IN A CONTINUOUS RACEWAY SYSTEM TO CONFORM TO ALL DIVISION 26 REQUIREMENTS. WORK TO INCLUDE TRANSFORMERS AS NECESSARY FOR THE CONNECTED QUANTITY OF FIXTURES, WIRING, CONDUIT, JUNCTION BOXES, AND FINAL CONNECTIONS. THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR WILL PROVIDE 120/1 VOLT POWER AND CONNECTIONS TO LINE VOLTAGE SIDE OF THE TRANSFORMER. REFER TO THE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.10. THE MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL REQUIRED REINFORCEMENT OF NEW AND EXISTING STRUCTURAL MEMBERS FOR MECHANICAL SYSTEMS. REFER TO "MECHANICAL SUPPORT REINFORCEMENT DETAIL" FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.PLUMBING PLAN KEYED NOTES:1BALANCE TO INDICATED GPM.2ROUTE OVERFLOW STORM DRAIN THRU WALL ASHIGH AS POSSIBLE.3PROVIDE HEAT TRACE FOR STORM DRAIN.COORDINATE WITH DIV. 26 FOR ELEC.CONNECTIONS. REFER TO DETAIL .4PROVIDE 1/2" SCW LINE TO WALL OUTLET BOX FORICEMAKER. PROVIDE WITH INLINE CARBON FILTERAND BALL VALVES ON BOTH SIDES. PROVIDE ASSE1022 BACKFLOW PREVENTER ON SUPPLY PIPINGWITH 1" INDIRECT WASTE PIPING TO FLOOR DRAIN.5PROVIDE 1/2" CW LINE TO WALL OUTLET BOX FORCOUNTERTOP ICEMAKER. PROVIDE WITH INLINECARBON FILTER AND BALL VALVES ON BOTHSIDES. PROVIDE ASSE 1022 BACKFLOWPREVENTER ON SUPPLY PIPING. PROVIDE 1"INDIRECT WASTE PIPING TO FLOOR DRAIN UNDERLARGE ICEMAKER.6ROUTE 3/4" DRAIN LINE FROM ROOF HYDRANT TOFLOOR DRAIN IN MEZZANINE MECHANICAL ROOM.7ROUTE PIPES TIGHT ALONG WALL BELOWMEZZANINE RAILING.8PROVIDE 1" CAPPED AND VALVED PIPE FOR LANDAPRESSURE WASHER. COORDINATE EXACTLOCATION.9PROVIDE 3/4" CW CONNECTION AT END OF TRENCHDRAIN FOR INTERNAL FLUSHING NOZZLE. SERVEDOWNSTREAM OF RPZ.10INLINE CATCH BASIN PROVIDED WITH THE TRENCHDRAIN.11PROVIDE WALL MOUNT CLEANOUT AT THE BASEOF ALL VERTICAL STORM DRAINS.12ROUTE ALL PIPES SO THEY ARE NOT VISIBLETHROUGH WINDOWS.13PROVIDE WALL MOUNTED COMPRESSED AIR HOSEREEL WITH QUICK DISCONNECT AND BLOWDOWNVALVE. REFER TO DETAIL ANDSPECIFICATION./E5M7.20014PROVIDE WALL MOUNTED WATER HOSE REEL.REFER TO DETAIL AND SPECIFICATION.15ROUTE 3/4" COMPRESSED AIR PIPING BLOWDOWNVALVE TO FLOOR.16DOMESTIC CLOTHES WASHER OUTLET BOX WITH 2"SANITARY AND 3/4" CW AND 3/4" HWCONNECTIONS./C5M7.50017PROVIDE 2" SANITARY CONNECTION TO LINEARFLOOR DRAIN. FLOOR DRAIN BY OTHERS.18PROVIDE WALL MOUNTED COMPRESSED AIR HOSEDROP WITH QUICK DISCONNECT AND BLOWDOWNVALVE. REFER TO DETAIL ANDSPECIFICATION./E3M7.200/B7M7.20019CONNECT 1/2" HOT WATER AND 1 1/2" WASTE FROMDISHWASHER TO THE SINK. REFER TO DETAIL/C1M7.30020ELECTRICAL ROOM. AVOID PIPING IN AREAINDICATED.21PROVIDE CONDENSATE DRAINS FROMNEUTRALIZATION TANK FROM VACUUM PUMPASSEMBLY. ROUTE TO FLOOR DRAIN.ABCDE1345261.1D.1C.11.4D.4D.6B.5C.5AREA 'A'AREA 'B'AREA 'A'AREA 'B'CO3" FWV UP3" V UP4" FWSS UP TOTRENCH DRAIN4" FWSSCOCOCO2" V UP2" UP TO FD4" SS UP2" SS UP2" SS2" SS UP2" UP TO FD4" SS UP2" SS UP2" SS UP4" SS2" SS4" SS4" SS8" CWI.E. 91'-4"BY MECHANICAL CONTRACTORBY SITE UTILITY CONTRACTOR5'-0"I.E. 90'-10"I.E. 92'-3"COI.E. 92'-4"14" SDCO4" UP TO HUB DRAIN4" UP TO FD3" UP TO FD2" V UP2" SS UP TO FD2" SS UP TO FD3" SS UP TO FD4" SS UP TO FD2" V UP2" V UP4" SS3" SS4" SSCO4" SS4" SSCO4" SSCO2" SS UP2072 SF2522 SF2541 SF5823 SF5791 SF8" SD UP8" SD UP5" SD UP5" SD UP5" SD UP2366 SF5" SD UP 2342 SF5" SD UP @1/8" PER FOOTCO10" SD13596 SF10" SD19387 SFBY MECHANICAL CONTRACTORBY SITE UTILITY CONTRACTOR5'-0"BY MECHANICAL CONTRACTORBY SITE UTILITY CONTRACTOR5'-0"CO10" SD12" SD19387 SF25210 SFCO8" SD9771 SF6" SD4708 SF8" SD7230 SF8" SD9771 SF10" SD11843 SF37053 SF10" SD11843 SFCOCO@ 1/8" PER FOOT@ 1/8" PER FOOT@ 1/8" PER FOOT@ 1/4" PER FOOT@ 1/4" PER FOOT@ 1/4" PER FOOT@ 1/4" PER FOOT@ 1/4" PER FOOT2" V UP2" V UP3/4" NPCW UPCONNECT TO END OF TRENCH DRAIN2" SS2" SS UPCOCO3" SS UP5" SSCOCOCOCO917174" SS4" SS2" SS4" SS4" SS2" SS UP2" SS UP3" SS4" SS4" SS4" SS4" SS UP2" UP TO FD2" SS UP2" V UP2" SS UP2" SS UP2" UP TO FD2" UP TO FD2" UP TO FD4" SS UP4" SS UP2" V UP2" V UP4" SS2" V UP2" SS UP TO FD2" SS UP2" V UP4" SS UP2" SS UP TO FD2" V UP2" SS UP4" SS2" SS UP2" V UP5" SD2072 SF4" SS5" SD2522 SFCO6" SD4708 SF5" SD2522 SF4" SS4" SS4" FWSS4" FWSS5" SD2366 SF8" SD5791 SF8" SD5823 SF4" FWSS2" UP TO FD2" V UP2" SS2" SS4" SS1KEY PLANABFEDCBA12345678MMNNorthCheck:Drawn:Date:Comm:License Number:I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensedunder the laws of the State ofScale:Date 501 South Eighth StreetMinneapolis, MN 55404krausanderson.com | 612 332 72817/18/2024 10:19:39 AMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove New UtilityBuilding MECH_central.rvt1/8" = 1'-0"Central: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove NewUtility Building MECH_central.rvtCITY OF COTTAGEGROVENEW UTILITY ANDENGINEERINGBUILDINGM1.00aPLUMBING PLAN -UNDERGROUNDAREA 'A'12800 RAVINE PKWYCOTTAGE GROVE, MN 5501610875 IDEAL AVENUE S.COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016PJRR10/26/2023232010MINNESOTA10/26/23PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERKEVIN MARSHALL239891/8" = 1'-0"E1PLUMBING PLAN - UNDERGROUND AREA 'A'RevisionsDescription Date NumPR #13 07/xx/2024 1 GENERAL SHEET NOTES KEYED SHEET NOTES D D D D D D DDDL OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS L OS 3 3 3 3OSL OS OS 33A. SOME NOTES MAY NOT APPLY TO THIS SHEET. B. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WIRING ALL ELECTRICAL ITEMS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING. C. ALL RECESSED LIGHTING FIXTURES IN LAY-IN CEILINGS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH 6' LONG FLEXIBLE METAL CONDUIT. D. ALL MOUNTING HEIGHTS FOR LIGHTING FIXTURES ARE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE FIXTURES UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE. E. SEE ARCHITECTURAL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR MOUNTING HEIGHTS OF EXTERIOR LIGHTING FIXTURES. F. CIRCUIT WIRING IS NOT SHOWN EXCEPT FOR SWITCHING INTENT OF FIXTURES AND CONTROL OF DEVICES. G. PROVIDE PROPER NUMBER OF CONDUCTORS TO ACHIEVE CIRCUITING AND SWITCHING SHOWN. H. CIRCUIT NUMBERS AT DEVICES CIRCUIT NUMBERS SHOWN ARE FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES AND ARE FOR DISTINGUISHING CIRCUITS. RECORD AS-BUILT CIRCUITING IN A TYPED AND DATED PANELBOARD SCHEDULE. BRANCH CIRCUITS SHALL BE SIZED ACCORDING TO THE CIRCUIT BREAKER RATING, UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON THE ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT SCHEDULE. I. SEE BRANCH CIRCUIT CONDUCTOR SIZING SCHEDULE ON SHEET E0.00. J. ALL OCCUPANCY SENSORS SHALL HAVE AUXILIARY CONTACTS OR ADDITIONAL DEVICES TO ENABLE HVAC INTERFACE. NORMAL OPERATING LIGHT FIXTURE. FEED FIXTURE USING EXISTING LIGHTING CIRCUITRY FROM NORMAL PANEL. A NL rl-1ab FIXTURE TYPE FIXTURE NOTES RELAY #/ PANEL CIRCUIT # SWITCHING SCHEME SWITCHED EMERGENCY LIGHT. FEED FIXTURE FROM EMERGENCY PANEL xx-x VIA EMERGENCY RELAY AS INDICATED ON PLAN. UNSWITCHED EMERGENCY LIGHT (NIGHT LIGHT). FEED FIXTURE FROM UNSWITCHED CIRCUIT IN EMERGENCY PANEL EHH1. 1. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE WATTAGE FOR A LIGHTING CIRCUIT WILL NOT EXCEED 3500 (277V) OR 1600 (120V) WATTS. 2. REFER TO DIVISION 23 SPECIFICATIONS FOR MORE INFORMATION ON BAS LIGHTING CONTROLS. EMERGENCY LIGHTING UNIT AND EXIT LIGHT. SUPPLIED WITH BATTERY. 1. EXIT SIGNS WITH EMERGENCY LIGHTING. 2. PROVIDE FLANGE KIT FOR LIGHT FIXTURE. 3. LIGHT FIXTURE TO BE CONTROLLED THTOUGH BUILDING PHOTOCELL. 4. PROVIDE 90 MINUTE BATTERY LOCATED IN BUILDING INTERIOR. 5. COORDINATE FINAL LIGHTING LOCATIONS WITH MECHANICAL. 6. COORDINATE LIGHT FIXTURE LOCATIONS DIV 23, FIXTURES TO BE MOUNTED BELOW DUCT WORK AND TIGHT AS POSSIBLE, ADJUST LOCATIONS AS REQUIRED. A B C D E 1 3 4 5 2 6 1.1 D.1C.1 1.4 D.4 D.6B.5 C.5 WATER SERVICE A132 STREET LIGHT STORAGE A131 WATER METER ROOM A130 STORAGE A126 MECH/ELEC A125 ELECTRICAL ROOM A127 TOILET ROOM A128 JC / MAINT. A124 ADA TOILET A121 ADA SHOWER ROOM A117 PERSONAL STORAGE A116 CIRC. A115 QUIET ROOM A114 CIRC. A112 CONF. RM. A111 STAFF ROOM A110 WORK ROOM A109 OFFICE A106 OFFICE A105 SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM A104 OPEN OFFICE A103 TOILET ROOM A102 LOBBY A101VEST. A100 VEHICLE GARAGE A134 JC. A123 OFFICE A108 OFFICE A107 A A A A A A A A A A A A A A AA G AAAA A A A AAAA A A A A BA B B A A A A AAAA A A A A A A A A A AAA A A CHANGING ROOM A119 SHOWER ROOM A118 D D D D D D D D D DDDDD D1 D1 D1D1 D1 D1 D1D1 D1 D1 D1D1 D1 D1 D1D1 D1 D1 D1D1 C C C C H H H H H H H H H H C C G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GG G G GG G G GG TOILET ROOM A113 WASH ROOM A136 C E1 E1 E1 E1 EM EM EM a a a a a aaaaa b b b b b bbbbb D1 D1 D1 C C G L-2/15 L-2/15 L-2/15 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/16 L-2/15 L-2/15 L-2/15 L-2/16 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/16 L-2/15 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/14 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/18 L-2/16 L-2/15 DISTRIBUTION L-1 L-2 SITE A A A A L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 L-2/17 B L-2/17 B L-2/17 EM EM EM EM E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 111 1 1 1 WW WW WW WWWWWW33 3 D1 D1 3434 34 3 3 4 2 3 L-3 L-4 61 F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 E MN NorthCheck: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 8/2/2024 2:09:44 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 New Utility Building Elec.rvt1/8" = 1'-0"Central: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 New Utility Building Elec.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING E1.11a MAIN LEVEL LIGHTING PLAN - AREA 'A' 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 S MCNAMARA D PETERSON 10/26/2023 232010 MINNESOTA 10/26/2023 BRADLEY R. JOHANNSEN 43936 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 1/8" = 1'-0" ML LIGHTING PLAN AREA 'A'E1 Revisions Description Date Num PR #13 8/2/2024 1 1 Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 1087 Ideal Avenue S City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 2310312-02 COR # 17.00 Date:10/30/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Providing a cove at mechanical curb to floor joint in room A275. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 17 - RFI #12: Fluid Applied Flooring/Carpet 1 $1,522.50 Cove at floor per RFI #12.Multiple Concepts Interiors, Inc $1,522.50 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Signature: Date of Acceptance: Name of Project: CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE UTILITY BUILDING Project Location: COTTAGE GROVE, MN KRAUS ANDERSON 26 First Avenue North - Waite Park, MN 56387 PROPOSAL Date: Quote #: Prepared By: Email: Mobile #: October 1, 2024 RFI #12 / PCO #17 SHAWN FIEDLER SFIEDLER@MCICARPETONE.COM 320-253-5078 Ph: (320) 253-5078 Fx: (320) 253-9458 Fax, Phone, Email or Contact: Notes: Proposal Submitted To: ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL: The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. This proposal may be withdrawn by MCI if not accepted within 60 days of proposal date above. This proposal is contingent upon final acceptance of contract language. PAYMENT TERMS: Net 30 days of invoice date using cash, check, or credit card. Any collection fees or attorneys fees incurred by MCI will be the responsibility of the buyer. A monthly service charge will be added at the rate of 1.5% per month (18% annum). We reserve the right to perfect mechanics lien rights when applicable. All materials are guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a substantial workmanlike manner according to specifications submitted, per standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire, tornado and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by Workmen's Compensation Insurance. If either party commences legal action to enforce its rights pursuant to this agreement, the prevailing party in said legal action shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorney's fees and costs of litigation relating to said legal action, as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. Street Address: City, State, Zip Code: Architect/Drawing Developer: Date of Drawings: Addendums: Install cove at floor to perimeter curb @ room A275, per RFI #12 / PCO #17. Labor: 10 hours @ $90/HR + 5% = $945.00 WOLD Materials: 550.00 + 5% M/U = $577.50 Total = $1,522.50 Typical floor prep is included in this proposal. Materials and labor for the amount of: Grinding, self-leveling, bead blasting or glue removal is not included unless noted above. Additional labor will be billed at $81.25 per hour plus the cost of any materials required. Includes final broom cleaning. Prior trades are responsible to clean any residue from floors left by their scope of work, otherwise charges will apply to clean. Proposal does not include removal of existing flooring or adhesives. Dumpsters not included. Post floor protection is not included. Initial moisture testing is included performed by 3rd party. Additional testing due to high moisture or special request will be billed at $80.00 per test and $.65 per mile from Richfield, MN. PROPOSAL NOTES: Attachments: RFI #12 Response dated 6/5/24 We have reviewed the PCO and acknowledge that it is a “no change” item and does not affect our completion date. Signed By: Date: Company Name: 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 Request For Proposal Project: 2310312- PCO #: 17 Cottage Grove UE Building 10875 Ideal Ave S Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Date: 06/05/2024 To: Dan Schauer, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ben Albrecht, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ryan Burfeind, City Of Cottage Grove Lee Mann, Stantec Shawn Fiedler, Multiple Concepts Interiors, Inc. Jacob Wollensak, Wold Architects & Engineers Kayla Simpson, Wold Architects & Engineers Please provide a cost breakdown in accordance with the Contract Documents and a Summary for the Change described herein and on the attachments (if any) listed. All responses are required within seven (7) days. This is not an authorization to proceed with the work described herein unless and until approved by the Owner. On approval, this change will be included in a Change Order, which will provide the formal Contract Cha nge. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Please provide a cost estimate per the attached RFI #12 response dated June 5, 2024 regarding fluid applied flooring/carpet. City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building CGUB RFI 12 Fluid Applied Flooring/Carpet_Response Created by Rachel Struckman with Autodesk® Construction Cloud™ on Jun 5, 2024 at 8:22 AM CDT Page 1 of 3 RFI detail #12 Fluid Applied Flooring/Carpet Status Closed Created on May 14, 2024 by Hannah Melin-Kapushinski (Multiple Concepts Interiors, Inc.) RFI type RFI with Consultants Ball in court Hannah Melin-Kapushinski (Multiple Concepts Interiors, Inc.) Answered Jun 5, 2024 by Rachel Struckman (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company) Question 1) Architect advise if Traffic Topping is applied to (horizontal/vertical) surface of mechanical concrete pads and (horizontal/vertical) surface of the perimeter curb. B7/ shows vertical surface of mechanical pads to be painted yellow. (see first PDF – Shop Drawing – Fluid Applied Flooring pg. 2) (CPT-1) CARPET SPEC NOTES: ASHLAR INSTALL, ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL SHOWED SQUARES (MONOLITHIC / QUARTER TURN) VERIFY IF ASHLAR INSTALL AS SHOW AND SPECIFIED IS WANTED? See Shop Drawing – Carpet Layout (attached). 3)(CPT-2) CARPET SPEC NOTES: SQUARE INSTALL, ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL SHOWED SQUARES (MONOLITHIC / QUARTER TURN) VERIFY IF MONOLITHIC OR QUARTER TURN INSTALL IS WANTED ON CARPET? See Shop Drawing – Carpet Layout (attached). 4)On the returned 07 92 00 – Joint Sealants Samples submittal, there is a note under WOLD stamp, “Sealant on materials to be painted to match paint color”. Please clarify if this is general note for painter. 2 physical sample colors were submitted for reference, no specific color was indicated to be used for joint sealants. Please clarify what color is wanted for joint sealants for resinous flooring areas. Official response 1. Traffic Topping to be applied to (horizontal/vertical) surfaces of perimeter curb. Traffic Topping not to be applied to (horizontal/vertical) surfaces of mechanical concrete pads. 2. CPT-1 to be J+J - Oxford 7063 Modular - 2398 Duck; Monolithic Install. 3. CPT-2 to be J+J - Madras 7065 Modular - 2398 Duck; Monolithic Install. 3. Disregard note. Sealant color to match adjacent materials. PE 85 MI Standard Gray to be used at resinous flooring areas. By Rachel Struckman (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company) - Jun 5, 2024, 7:49 AM CDT City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building CGUB RFI 12 Fluid Applied Flooring/Carpet_Response Created by Rachel Struckman with Autodesk® Construction Cloud™ on Jun 5, 2024 at 8:22 AM CDT Page 2 of 3 • • References Files (2) SHOP DRAWING - CARPET LAYOUT.pdf Shop Drawing - Fluid Applied.pdf Impact Cost impact - Schedule impact - Other attributes Priority Normal Discipline - Category - Location - Location details - External id - Co-reviewer(s) Responsible Subcontractor - City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building CGUB RFI 12 Fluid Applied Flooring/Carpet_Response Created by Rachel Struckman with Autodesk® Construction Cloud™ on Jun 5, 2024 at 8:22 AM CDT Page 3 of 3 Activities By At Rachel Struckman changed the status from Open Answered to Closed set Ball in court to Hannah Melin-Kapushinski (Multiple Concepts Interiors, Inc.) Rachel Struckman Jun 5, 2024, 7:49 AM CDT Kayla Simpson changed the status from Open In Review to Open Answered Official response: 1. Traffic Topping to be applied to (horizontal/ vertical) surfaces of perimeter curb. Traffic Topping not to be applied to (horizontal/vertical) surfaces of mechanical concrete pads. 2. CPT-1 to be J+J - Oxford 7063 Modular - 2398 Duck; Monolithic Install. 3. CPT-2 to be J+J - Madras 7065 Modular - 2398 Duck; Monolithic Install. 3. Disregard note. Sealant color to match adjacent materials. PE 85 MI Standard Gray to be used at resinous flooring areas. set Ball in court to Ben Albrecht (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company) Kayla Simpson May 30, 2024, 7:14 AM CDT Ben Albrecht changed the status from Open Waiting for Submission to Open In Review changed the due date to May 23, 2024 set Ball in court to Jake Wollensak (Wold Architects & Engineers) changed the ID to 12 changed the watchers to Rachel Struckman (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company), Dan schauer (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company), Ben Albrecht (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company) Ben Albrecht May 16, 2024, 7:58 AM CDT Hannah Melin-Kapushinski added a reference to a file SHOP DRAWING - CARPET LAYOUT.pdf Hannah Melin- Kapushinski May 14, 2024, 10:09 AM CDT Hannah Melin-Kapushinski added a reference to a file Shop Drawing - Fluid Applied.pdf Hannah Melin- Kapushinski May 14, 2024, 10:09 AM CDT Hannah Melin-Kapushinski (Multiple Concepts Interiors, Inc.) created this RFI in Open Waiting for Submission status and set Ball in court to Ben Albrecht (Kraus-Anderson Construction Company). Hannah Melin- Kapushinski May 14, 2024, 10:09 AM CDT 5' 0"10' 6"11' 10" 16' 9"17' 6"28' 0"9' 11"10' 2"5' 7"10' 2" 8' 3"8' 4"3' 1" 4' 9" 5' 6" 7' 4"17' 7"19' 11"20' 9"22' 9"25' 0"11' 10"14' 5"5' 8" 27' 10" 33' 6"42' 6"42' 8"5' 9" 26' 1" 31' 9"42' 6"42' 8"7' 0"7' 9"9' 11"15' 9"7' 4"8' 1"10' 4"15' 11"51' 2"75' 3"139' 7" 142' 7" MCI, Inc. 11149 Zeland Avenue North Champlin, MN 55316 P: 763-316-0810 1 of 3 S. CONC. - SEALED CONCRETE 3' 10"7' 2" 7' 7" 7' 9"9' 6"23' 0"23' 6"40' 10"10' 4"11' 7" 4' 0" 8' 4"10' 7"12' 0"19' 9"19' 9"32' 4"42' 11"66' 3" 66' 6" MCI, Inc. 11149 Zeland Avenue North Champlin, MN 55316 P: 763-316-0810 1 of 1 S. CONC. - SEALED CONCRETE TT - PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC TOPPING 4' 7"5' 11"1 0' 8 " 20' 9" 2 2' 6 "30' 0"41' 0"62' 4" 69' 11"87' 2"112' 11"40' 2"96' 8" 1' 0"1' 0"3' 7"4' 7"4' 11"5' 11"1 0' 8 " 1 0' 8 "16' 2"16' 2"19' 5"19' 5" 20' 9" 2 2' 6 " 2 2' 6 " MCI, Inc. 11149 Zeland Avenue North Champlin, MN 55316 P: 763-316-0810 3 of 3 S. CONC. - SEALED CONCRETE USF - URETHANE SLURRY FLOORING 1' 0" 10' 6" 11' 6"14' 0"14' 0"1' 0"2' 0"8' 11" 9' 11"12' 0"14' 0"0' 11" 9' 0" 10' 0"14' 0"14' 0"1' 0" 1' 0"1' 4"2' 5" 6' 6" 8' 11"11' 9"13' 1"0' 11" 8' 11" 9' 11"13' 11"13' 11"1' 1"1' 9"2' 8"4' 6"5' 1"6' 0"8' 11"10' 1"10' 2" 10' 3" 11' 5" 11' 8"20' 11"30' 11"31' 1"33' 3" 33' 10" 8' 1"9' 1"5' 8"19' 0"19' 0"25' 5" 31' 1" 14' 9"39' 2"1' 6"1' 10"3' 1"3' 3"7' 8" 8' 6"9' 8"16' 10" 33' 3"2' 6"5' 1"15' 1" 15' 1"15' 10"23' 5"MCI, Inc. 11149 Zeland Avenue North Champlin, MN 55316 P: 763-316-0810 1 of 1 CPT-1 - J+J - 2023 TEMPO - 1758 FINALE - 24" X 24"CPT-2 - J+J - INVISION TONE - 1758 FINALE - 24" X 24" VB-1 - JOHNSONITE - 4" COVED BASE - TV - TA4 GATEWAY Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 1087 Ideal Avenue S City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 2310312-02 COR # 18.00 Date:10/30/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Adding receptacles in room A103 and A110. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 51 - Wold PR #14: Room A103-A110 Receptacles 1 $2,117.50 Electrical per Wold PR #14.Fobbe Electric, Inc. $2,117.50 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Insert Owner Logo Fobbe Electric Inc.763-972-2621 Date :10/2/24 111 Medowlark Dr fe@fobbeelectric.com Delano, MN 55328 Ryan Fobbe PCO #:$51 Project Manager: Ben Albrecht 612-618-7220 PR/SI #14 Description Cost Labor Total 1,350.00$ Materials and Equipment Total 575.00$ Tax on Materials and Equipment Only -$ Self Performed Subtotal 1,925.00$ 10% Overhead and Profit 192.50$ Self Performed Total 2,117.50$ Subcontractors -$ 5% Overhead and Profit on Subs -$ Subcontractor Total -$ TOTAL COST OF CHANGE 2,117.50$ Signature: Ryan Fobbe Labor By Task Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Labor 8 hrs 1 135.00$ 1,080.00$ Coordination labor 2hrs 1 135.00$ 270.00$ -$ -$ Sub-Total 1,350.00$ Materials and Equipment By Task Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Conduit, boxes, straps, screws, etc 1 1 325.00$ #12 thhn wire 1 1 250.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Sub-Total 575.00$ Sub-Contractor Proposals Total Cost none -$ -$ -$ -$ Sub-Total (Attach Sub-Contractor Proposals)-$ Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below (5% is the max allowed on subcontractors) <<< Provide Sales/Use Tax Total City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building (10% is the max fee allowed on CO's) Description of Work Notes/Attachments (Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below) (Auto Fill from Sub-Total Below) PROVIDE DETAIL BREAKDOWN BELOW: COST SUMMARY Contractor acknowledges no other Costs assciated with this PCO. Attachments: Wold PR #14 dated 9/20/24 We have reviewed the PCO and acknowledge that it is a “no change” item and does not affect our completion date. Signed By: Date: Company Name: 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 Request For Proposal Project: 2310312- PCO #: 51 Cottage Grove UE Building 10875 Ideal Ave S Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Date: 09/25/2024 To: Dan Schauer, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ben Albrecht, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Ryan Burfeind, City Of Cottage Grove Lee Mann, Stantec Jacob Wollensak, Wold Architects & Engineers Kayla Simpson, Wold Architects & Engineers Ryan Fobbe, Fobbe Electric, Inc. Please provide a cost breakdown in accordance with the Contract Documents and a Summary for the Change described herein and on the attachments (if any) listed. All responses are required within seven (7) days. This is not an authorization to proceed with the work described herein unless and until approved by the Owner. On approval, this change will be included in a Change Order, which will provide the formal Contract Cha nge. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Please provide a cost estimate per the attached Wold Architects and Engineers PR #14 dated September 20, 2024 regarding room A103 and A110 receptacles. PROPOSAL REQUEST Distribution: ☐ Ryan Burfeind, CG ☐ Adam Moshier, CG ☐ Dustin Phillips, KA ☒ Be Ben Albrecht, KA ☒ Jake Wollensak, Wold ☒ Kayla Simpson, Wold ☐ Pat Jansen, Wold ☐ Ryan Rossborough, Wold ☒ Sean McNamara, Wold ☒ Doug Galloway, Wold ☒ Derek Peterson, Wold ☐ Kal Jackman, BKBM ☐ James Dorr, BKBM ☐ Kyle Kucharski, BKBM ☐ Lee Mann, Stantec ☐ Dave Sanocki, Stantec ☐ Eric Vidden, Stantec City of Cottage Grove Utility & Engineering Building Kraus-Anderson Attn: Dan Kjellberg/Rachel Struckman 501 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55404 612.332.7281 dan.kjellberg@krausanderson.com / rachel.struckman@krausanderson.com Submit an itemized (labor and material) quotation for the proposed modifications to the contract documents as described herein within 21 days of receipt. If a cost is not submitted within 21 days, this Proposal Request can be accepted at no additional cost. Written approval is required prior to proceeding with this change. COST EXPECTATIONS: ☐ DEDUCT ☐ NO COST ☐ ADD PR: 14 Comm: 232010 Const. Pkg: [Status] Item Description 14 Room A103 and A110 Receptacles 14.1 See revised sheets E2.11a – MAIN LEVEL POWER PLAN – AREA ‘A’ and E5.00 – RISER DIAGRAM for updated receptacle locations. Attachments: E2.11a, E5.00 Issued By: Kayla Simpson Date: 09/20/2024 GENERAL SHEET NOTES KEYED SHEET NOTES DW WD60"60"60"ABABABAB ABABEWC AB ABABABABABABABABAB AB AB AB 60"60"J FB1 J FB1 AB 46"46"46"J FB2 J FB2 J FB2 J FB2 J FB2 J FB2 AB ABAB 24" AB EWC 46" 46" 46" 46"46" 46" 46" 46" 46"46"AB AB ABAB AB 46" 46" J J J J J J J J J J AB J FB1 J J T WP J J J JJJ J J J JJ JJ JJ J JJJJJJ AB AB 46"46" 24" 66" A. SOME NOTES MAY NOT APPLY TO THIS SHEETS. B. ALL BOXES, CONDUIT AND WIRING TO BE CONCEALED. NO EXPOSED BOXES, CONDUIT AND WIRING SHALL BE ALLOWED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. C. COORDINATE DEVICE LOCATIONS WITH OTHER TRADES INCLUDING HVAC EQUIPMENT, DUCTWORK, SPRINKLER PIPING AND BUILDING STRUCTURAL MEMBERS. D. NO MULTI-BRANCH CIRCUIT ALLOWED. PROVIDE A SEPARATE NEUTRAL WITH EACH CIRCUIT. E. VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ROUGH-IN REQUIREMENTS OF ALL OWNER FURNISHED EQUIPMENT PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. F. CIRCUIT WIRING IS NOT SHOWN EXCEPT FOR SWITCHING INTENT OF FIXTURES AND CONTROL OF DEVICES. G. GFCI RECEPTACLES SHALL BE WIRED TO PROTECT ONLY THE DEVICES IN THAT OUTLET BOX. DOWNSTREAM DEVICES SHALL NOT BE PROTECTED BY GFCI. H. CIRCUIT NUMBERS SHOWN ARE FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES AND ARE FOR DISTINGUISHING CIRCUITS. RECORD AS-BUILT CIRCUITING IN A TYPED AND DATED PANELBOARD SCHEDULE. I. PROVIDE SEPARATED CONDUITS FOR ALL EMERGENCY CIRCUITS, DO NOT COMBINE WITH NORMAL BUILDING WIRING. J. COORDINATE HEIGHTS OF ALL DEVICES WITH MILLWORK AND MODULAR FURNITURE SHOP DRAWINGS PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. K. OFFSET BACK TO BACK BOXES AT LEAST 12 INCHES EXCEPT IN RESIDENT ROOMS WHERE PUTTY-PADS SHALL BE PROVIDED (3M MPP+ OR EQUIVALENT). L. ALL RECEPTACLES TO BE HOSPITAL GRADE. M. ALL RECEPTACLES TO BE TAMPER RESISTANT. N. SEE BRANCH CIRCUIT CONDUCTOR SIZING SCHEDULE ON SHEET E0.00 O. SEE FLOORBOX AND POKE-THRU SCHEDULE ON SHEET E6.20. P. SEE MOTOR AND EQUIPMENT SCHEDULE ON SHEET E6.40. Q. REFER TO MECHANICAL SHEETS FOR EXACT MOTOR LOCATIONS. 1. REFER TO VIEW D4 ON SHEET E7.10 FOR DATA ROOM DETAILS. 2. PROVIDE HUBBELL 45' INDUSTRIAL CORD REEL WITH 20A GFCI MODULE, WALL MOUNTED, PART NUMBER BRY45123GF20. 3. PROVIDE HUBBELL 45' INDUSTRIAL CORD REEL WITH 20A GFCI MODULE, CEILING MOUNTED, PART NUMBER BRY45123GF20. 4. PROVIDE CONNECTION FOR HOTSY PRESSURE WASHER. 5. PROVIDE CONNECTION FOR IR CONTROL PANEL. 6. PROVIDE CONNECTION FOR DF CONTROL PANEL. 7. PROVIDE 208V 3P CONNECTION FOR GARAGE DOOR MOTOR, COORDINATE BREAKER REQUIREMENTS WITH MANUFACTURE. ASSUME 2HP FOR BIDDING, TO BE CORRECTED AS RFI AFTER PURCHASE. 8. PROVIDE 208V 3P CONNECTION TO OVERHEAD CRANE SYSTEM, COORDINATE LOCATION AND BREAKER REQUIREMENTS WITH MANUFACTURE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. ASSUME 2HP FOR BIDDING, TO BE CORRECTED AS RFI AFTER PURCHASE. 9. PROVIDE BUCK/BOOST TRANSFORMER. 208V INPUT, 240V OUTPUT. 10. PROVIDE 240/1 RECPTACLE. 11. PROVIDE CONNECTION FOR CO/NO2 SENSORS. 12. PROVIDE 120V POWER FOR SINK/TOILET MOTION SENSORS IN THIS ROOM. 13. PROVIDE CONNECTION FOR HEAT TRACE. COORDINATE WITH MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR. 14. PROVIDE 120V CONNECTION FOR FIRE SUPRESSION CONTROL PANEL. COORDINATE WITH MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR. A B C D E 1 3 4 5 2 6 1.1 D.1C.1 1.4 D.4 D.6B.5 C.5 WATER SERVICE A132 STREET LIGHT STORAGE A131 WATER METER ROOM A130 STORAGE A126 MECH/ELEC A125 ELECTRICAL ROOM A127 JC / MAINT. A124 ADA TOILET A121 ADA SHOWER ROOM A117 PERSONAL STORAGE A116 CIRC. A115 QUIET ROOM A114 CIRC. A112 STAFF ROOM A110 JC. A123 WORK ROOM A109 OFFICE A106OFFICE A105 SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM A104 OPEN OFFICE A103 TOILET ROOM A102 LOBBY A101 VEST. A100 CONF. RM. A111 CHANGING ROOM A119 SHOWER ROOM A118 TOILET ROOM A128 WASH ROOM A136 TOILET ROOM A113 OFFICE A108 OFFICE A107 VEHICLE GARAGE A134 L-1 L-2 L-1/2 L-1/4 L-1/4 L-1/4 L-1/4 L-1/4 L-1/2 L-1/2 L-1/1 L-1/1 L-1/1 L-1/1 L-1/1 L-1/5 L-1/5 L-1/5 L-1/5 L-1/3 L-1/3 L-1/3 L-1/3 L-1/3 L-1/3 L-1/35 L-1/35 L-1/35 L-1/35 L-1/32 L-1/34 L-1/34 L-1/32 L-1/34 L-1/36 L-1/32 L-1/32 L-1/33 L-1/33 L-1/33 L-1/22 L-1/20 L-1/24L-1/25L-1/23L-1/22L-1/21 L-1/27 L-1/27 L-1/27 L-1/29 L-1/26 L-1/28 L-1/30 L-1/31 L-1/8 L-1/8 L-1/8 L-1/8 L-1/14 L-1/16 L-1/33 L-1/18 L-1/18 L-1/18 L-1/18 L-1/18 L-1/18 L-1/17 L-1/17 L-1/17 L-1/15 L-1/15 L-1/15L-1/13L-1/13 L-1/13 L-1/12 L-1/12 L-1/12 L-1/10 L-1/10 L-1/10 L-1/10 L-1/7L-1/7 L-1/6 L-1/7 L-1/6L-1/6 L-1/9 L-1/9 L-1/9 L-1/11 L-1/11 L-1/11 L-1/2 L-2/5L-2/5L-2/5L-2/5 L-2/1 L-2/1 L-2/1 L-2/1 L-2/1 L-2/1 L-2/3 L-1/42 L-5/2 L-2/3 L-5/2 L-2/3 L-1/42L-1/41 L-1/38,40 L-1/42 L-1/42L-1/42 L-1/42 UH-1 UH-2 IR-4 IR-1 VP-1 IR-5 IR-2 IR-3 IR-6 CUH-1 B-1B-2GMU-1 P-2 P-1 WH-1 WH-2 SITE DISTRIBUTION GEN DOCK GD-1 L-2/20 L-2/20 L-2/20 L-2/20 L-2/20 L-1/42 L-1/42 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2L-2/24 L-2/24 L-2/28 L-2/28 L-2/30 L-2/26 L-2/26 L-2/29 L-2/29 L-2/22 3 P-4 L-3 DF-1 DF-2 DF-3 DF-6DF-5DF-4 L-3/20 L-3/20 L-3/20 L-3/20 L-3/22 L-3/22 L-1/21 L-1/39 L-1/5 L-1/5 P-2 VFD P-1 VFD 6 5 P-3 L-3/38,40,42 L-4 L-4/1,3,5 L-4/2 L-4/4 L-4/6 L-4/7 L-4/7 L-4/9 L-4/11 L-4/8,10,12 L-4/21,23,25 L-4/19 L-4/19 L-4/19 L-4/19L-4/19 L-4/19 L-3/41 L-4/27 7 L-4/29,31,33 9 10 10 L-1/4 L-5 L-6 T-1 1 11 11 11 11 1 1 L-4/421 L-4/42L-4/42 L-4/42 1 11 L-1/35 L-1/35L-1/35 L-1/35 12 12 L-1/34 L-1/34 L-1/34 12 12 12 L-1/36 L-1/36 L-1/36 1 1 L-1/34 L-2/3 L-2/3 L-2/3 12 1 L-4/11 13 1 12L-1/2 L-1/2 L-1/2 1 L-5/2 L-5/2 L-5/2 L-5/2 1 1 1 L-1/42 L-5/4L-5/4 1 L-5/8,10,12 L-5/13,15,17 1 1 GD-6GD-5 7 7 L-5/14 L-5/14 2 L-1/19 L-1/37 3 3 3 3 TYPE DESCRIPTION FLOOR BOX (FB) & POKETHRU (PT) SCHEDULE FACEPLATE COVER GENERAL NOTES A. CONTRACTOR TO REQUEST DIMENSIONING OF FLOORBOXES FROM ARCHITECT/ENGINEER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. B. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY FLOOR TYPE (CARPET OR TILE) PRIOR TO ORDERING. C. PROVIDE (1) 3/4" CONDUIT FOR POWER AND ROUTE AS REQUIRED. D. PROVIDE (2) 1-1/4" CONDUIT FOR LOW VOLTAGE AND ROUTE TO NEAREST ACCESSIBLE CEILING SPACE ABOVE AS REQUIRED. E. PROVIDE DEVICES AND PLATES AS INDICATED ON PLANS AND SPECS. F. PROVIDE LABELING FOR EMPTY CONDUITS IN A MANNER THAT INDICATES TO WHICH FLOOR BOX/POKE-THROUGH THE CONDUIT IS ASSOCIATED. G. PROVIDE UTP CABLES AS SPECIFIED UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON PLANS. FB1 3-GANG, 4 POWER, 2 DATA, RECESSED DUAL SERVICE FLOORBOX CAST IRON, ROUND WIREMOLD RESOURCE RFB4E SERIES OR APPROVED EQUAL (2)DUPLEX FACEPLATE FOR POWER WIREMOLD RFB6DP OR APPROVED EQUAL (1) STYLELINE FACEPLATES FOR SIGNAL WIREMOLD RFB6GFI OR APPROVED EQUAL FLUSH, FLANGED LID BRUSHED ALUMINUM FINISH SUITABLE FOR TILE/CARPET INSTALLATION WIREMOLD CT2 OR APPROVED EQUAL PROVIDE SILICON BEAD AROUND OUTER EDGE OF COVER TO SEAL FROM MOISTURE FB2 5-GANG, 8 POWER, 2 DATA, RECESSED DUAL SERVICE FLOORBOX CAST IRON, ROUND WIREMOLD RESOURCE RFB4E SERIES OR APPROVED EQUAL (2)QUADPLEX FACEPLATE FOR POWER WIREMOLD RFB6DP OR APPROVED EQUAL (2) STYLELINE FACEPLATES FOR SIGNAL WIREMOLD RFB6GFI OR APPROVED EQUAL FLUSH, FLANGED LID BRUSHED ALUMINUM FINISH SUITABLE FOR TILE/CARPET INSTALLATION WIREMOLD CT2 OR APPROVED EQUAL PROVIDE SILICON BEAD AROUND OUTER EDGE OF COVER TO SEAL FROM MOISTURE F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 E MN NorthCheck: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 9/20/2024 2:34:04 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 New Utility Building Elec.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 New Utility Building Elec.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING E2.11a MAIN LEVEL POWER PLAN - AREA 'A' 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 S MCNAMARA D PETERSON 10/26/2023 232010 MINNESOTA 10/26/2023 BRADLEY R. JOHANNSEN 43936 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 1/8" = 1'-0" ML POWER PLAN AREA 'A'E1 1 : 95 FLOOR BOX SCHEDULEF3 Revisions Description Date Num ADD #1 11/14/2023 1 PR #9 5/13/2024 2 PR #14 9/20/2024 3 1 1 1 KEYED SHEET NOTES GENERAL SHEET NOTES LINE TYPES: EXISTING EQUIP/FEEDER TO REMAIN DEMOLISH OR RELOCATE EQUIP/FEEDER NEW OR NEW LOCATION OF EQUIP/FEEDER RL EX NL MAIN LEVEL L E N MCONNECTION/CT AND METERING CABINET TO UTILITY UTILITY TRANSFORMER 208V 3P, 4W MSB 800A 120/208V 3P,4W L-3 300A 120/208V 3P 4W L-1 200A 120/208V 3P 4W L-2 200A 120/208V 3P 4W ELECTRICAL ROOM A127 DISTRIBUTION SECTIONS 800A 208V GEN DOCK STATION 1 300A200A 200A L-4 200A 120/208V 3P 4W 200A SITE 200A 120/208V 3P 4W 200A SPD L-5 200A 120/208V 3P 4W 200A L-6 60A 120/240V 2PT-1 208V P 15KVA 150A 60A 2 3 PHASE FEEDER SCHEDULE (COPPER) FEEDER 3W FEEDER 4W ID (NO NEUTRAL)(WITH NEUTRAL) (AMPS)CONDUIT-PHASE-GROUND CONDUIT-PHASE-GROUND 20A (1) 1/2"C, 3#12+1#12G (1) 1/2"C, 4#12+1#12G 30A (1) 3/4"C, 3#10+1#10G (1) 3/4"C, 4#10+1#10G 40A (1) 3/4"C, 3#8+1#10G (1) 3/4"C, 4#8+1#10G 50A (1) 1"C, 3#6+1#10G (1) 1"C, 4#6+1#10G 60A (1) 1.25"C, 3#4+1#10G (1) 1.25"C, 4#4+1#10G 80A (1) 1.25"C, 3#3+1#8G (1) 1.25"C, 4#3+1#8G 100A (1) 1.5"C, 3#1+1#6G (1) 1.5"C, 4#1+1#6G 125A (1) 1.5"C, 3#1+1#6G (1) 1.5"C, 4#1+1#6G 150A (1) 1.5"C, 3#1/0+1#6G (1) 1.5"C, 4#1/0+1#6G 175A (1) 1.5"C, 3#2/0+1#6G (1) 2"C, 4#2/0+1#6G 200A (1) 2"C, 3#3/0+1#6G (1) 2"C, 4#3/0+1#6G 225A (1) 2"C, 3#4/0+1#4G (1) 2.5"C, 4#4/0+1#4G 250A (1) 2"C, 3#250+1#4G (1) 2.5"C, 4#250+1#4G 300A (1) 2.5"C, 3#350+1#4G (1) 2.5"C, 4#350+1#4G 400A (2) 2"C, 3#3/0+1#3G (2) 2"C, 4#3/0+1#3G 500A (2) 2"C, 3#250+1#2G (2) 2.5"C, 4#250+1#2G 600A (2) 2.5"C, 3#350+1#1G (2) 3"C, 4#350+1#1G 800A (3) 2.5"C, 3#300+1#1/0G (3) 2.5"C, 4#300+1#1/0G 1000A (3) 3"C, 3#400+1#2/0G (3) 3"C, 4#400+1#2/0G 1200A (4) 3"C, 3#350+1#3/0G (4) 3"C, 4#350+1#3/0G 1600A (5) 3"C, 3#400+1#4/0G (5) 3"C, 4#400+1#4/0G 2000A (6) 3"C, 3#400+1#250G (6) 3"C, 4#400+1#250G 2500A (7) 3"C, 3#500+1#350G (7) 3"C, 4#500+1#350G 3000A (8) 3"C, 3#500+1#400G (8) 3"C, 4#500+1#400G GENERAL NOTES: A. THE ABOVE FEEDER SCHEDULE IS A SCHEDULE OF TYPICAL FEEDERS AND SOME SIZES MAY NOT BE UTILIZED. B. CONDUCTOR AMPACITIES ARE BASED ON TABLE 310-15 OF THE NEC FOR COPPER CONDUCTOR AT 60 DEG C FOR 100A AND BELOW. AMPACITIES ARE BASED ON 75 DEG C FOR 125A AND ABOVE. C. FEEDER SIZES SHOWN ON THE RISER DIAGRAM INDICATE FEEDER AMPACITIES AND DO NOT NECESSARILY CORRESPOND TO CIRCUIT BREAKER AMPACITIES. CERTAIN FEEDERS MAY BE SIZED FOR THE DURATION FACTORS REQUIRED BY CODE AND/OR ARE OVERSIZED FOR VOLTAGE DROP. D. WHERE PARALLEL CONDUITS ARE INDICATED FOR A SINGLE FEEDER, EACH CONDUIT SHALL CONTAIN PHASE, NEUTRAL, AND GROUND CONDUCTORS INDICATED. E. CONDUIT ABOVE GRADE INDOORS SHALL BE EMT. CONDUIT ABOVE GRADE OUTDOORS SHALL BE GALVANIZED IMC OR RMC. F. EMT USED FOR PURPOSES OF SIZING CONDUIT. CONTRACTOR TO UPSIZE CONDUIT IF DIFFERENT THAN EMT. 1. PROVIDE FOX FAB #FFCC-A2-800-FT-U3-G-CRS- LA-AD-AD3 OR APPROVED EQUAL DOCKING STATION WITH REMOTE CAM LOCKS AND (1)30A 120V RECEPTACLES FOR SHORE POWER. SHALL BE SERVICE ENTRANCE RATED. 2. PROVIDE 208V PRIMARY 120/240V SECONDARY TRANSFORMER. SQUARE D #EE15S60H OR EQUAL. A. PROVIDE XHHW INSULATION FOR UNDERGROUND CONDUCTORS. B. PROVIDE GALVANIZED RIGID STEEL CONDUIT FOR EXPOSED EXTERIOR CONDUITS. C. ROUTE HORIZONTAL CONDUITS ABOVE BOTTOM CHORD OF BAR JOISTS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. ROUTE CONDUITS FROM WALL MOUNTED DEVICES VERTICALLY TO JOIST SPACE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. D. OBTAIN SHOP DRAWINGS OF EQUIPMENT AND COMPARE CONNECTION, LOAD, AND VOLTAGE INFORMATION TO CONTRACT DOCUMENTS BEFORE INSTALLING FEEDER CONDUITS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. BEFORE MAKING EQUIPMENT POWER CONNECTIONS, COMPARE EQUIPMENT NAMEPLATE DATA TO SHOP DRAWINGS AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. E. MOTOR FEEDERS SHOWN ON DIAGRAM FOR REFERENCE. REFER TO MOTOR SCHEDULE FOR MORE INFORMATION. F. REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR EXACT LOCATIONS OF EXTERIOR EQUIPMENT. G. COORDINATE ALL DEMOLITION WITH PHASING PLANS. SEE ELECTRICAL FLOOR PLANS AND ARCHITECTURAL PHASING PLANS. H. SEE GROUNDING DETAIL ON E7 SHEETS. F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 E MN Check: Drawn: Date: Comm: License Number: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed under the laws of the State of Scale: Date 9/20/2024 2:34:04 PMAutodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 New Utility Building Elec.rvtAs indicatedCentral: Autodesk Docs://232010 - MN CI Cottage Grove - New Utility Building/232010 New Utility Building Elec.rvtCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE NEW UTILITY & ENGINEERING BUILDING E5.00 RISER DIAGRAM 12800 RAVINE PKWY COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 10875 IDEAL AVENUE S. COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 S MCNAMARA D PETERSON 10/26/2023 232010 MINNESOTA 10/26/2023 BRADLEY R. JOHANNSEN 43936 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER N.T.S. RISER DIAGRAMF1 NOTES: Load Types: COOL - Summer Cooling, ELEV- Elevator, EQ - Equipment, EX -Existing, GND - Grounding, HEAT - Winter Heating, KTCH- Kitchen, L MTR - Largest Motor, LTG -Lighting, MTR - Motor, RCPT - Receptacle EST. DEMAND CURRENT:783 A CONN. CURRENT:768 A XX_SPEC 7200 VA 100.00% 7200 VA EST. DEMAND LOAD:281946 VA Spare 11700 VA 100.00% 11700 VA CONN. LOAD:276510 VA RCPT 39300 VA 62.72% 24650 VA Other 3660 VA 100.00% 3660 VA MTR 207017 VA 108.65% 224931 VA LTG 9034 VA 125.00% 11292 VA LOAD CLASSIFICATION CONNECTED DEMAND ESTIMATED PANEL TOTALS 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 L-6 150 A 2 150 A 480 VA 480 VA 7 L-5 200 A 3 200 A 4502 VA 3862 VA 3965 VA 6 L-4 200 A 3 200 A 13942 VA 12854 VA 13726 VA 5 CU-1 300 A 3 300 A 23886 VA 23886 VA 23886 VA 4 SITE 200 A 3 200 A 4000 VA 3800 VA 3900 VA 3 L-3 300 A 3 300 A 27014 VA 26960 VA 27128 VA 2 L-2 200 A 3 200 A 10359 VA 7911 VA 9962 VA 1 L-1 200 A 3 200 A 11409 VA 10814 VA 8100 VA CKT NAME SWITCH P FUSE SIZE PHASE A KVA PHASE B KVA PHASE C KVA NOTES FED FROM: BUS AMPS: SPECIAL: MAINS RATING:800 A MAIN DEVICE: A.F.C. RATING:SEE SHORT CIRCUIT STUDY LOCATION:ELECTRICAL ROOM A127 VOLTAGE:208Y/120 V. 3 ø 4 W. SWITCHBOARD: DISTRIBUTION NOTES: Load Types (LT): COOL - Summer Cooling, ELEV- Elevator, EQ - Equipment, EX -Existing, GND - Grounding, HEAT - Winter Heating, KTCH- Kitchen, L MTR - Largest Motor, LTG -Lighting, MTR - Motor, RCPT - Receptacle Breaker Types (BT): AF = Arc Fault, GF = Ground Fault Circuit Interrupt, GE = Ground Fault Equipment Protection (30mA), SH = Shunt Trip, EX = Existing, NX = New Breaker For Existing Panel, M = Metered EST. DEMAND CURRENT:64 A CONNECTED CURRENT:84 A XX_SPEC 6240 VA 100.00% 6240 VA ESTIMATED DEMAND:23047 VA RCPT 24540 VA 70.37% 17270 VA CONNECTED LOAD:30278 VA Other 0 VA 0.00% 0 VA LOAD CLASSIFICATION CONNECTED DEMAND ESTIMATED PANEL TOTALS TOTAL AMPS:99 A 94 A 68 A TOTAL LOAD:11 kVA 11 kVA 8 kVA 41 WASH RM A136 RCPT 20 A 1 0.2 1.6 1 20 A RCPT A124, 125, 126, 127 42 39 GF STAFF RM RANGE RCPT 20 A 1 0.2 3.1 -- -- -- -- -- 40 37 STAFF RM A110 MICRO RCPT 20 A 1 1.1 3.1 2 20 A XX_S... WASH ROOM DRYER GF 38 35 TOILET/QUIET A114,115 Other... 20 A 1 0.7 0.2 1 20 A Other... TOILET RMS A120, 121 36 33 STAFF RM A110 RCPT 20 A 1 0.9 0.5 1 20 A Other... SHOWER/CHANGING 34 31 STAFF RM A110 RCPT 20 A 1 0.2 0.7 1 20 A RCPT PERSONAL STOR A116 32 29 STAFF RM A110 RCPT 20 A 1 0.2 0.2 1 20 A RCPT STAFF RM A110 30 27 STAFF RM A110 RCPT 20 A 1 0.7 0.2 1 20 A RCPT STAFF RM A110 28 25 GF STAFF RM A110 FRIDGE RCPT 20 A 1 0.2 0.2 1 20 A RCPT STAFF RM A110 26 23 GF STAFF RM A110 DISH RCPT 20 A 1 0.2 0.2 1 20 A RCPT STAFF RM A110 FRIDGE GF 24 21 STAFF RM A110 RCPT 20 A 1 0.4 0.4 1 20 A RCPT STAFF RM A110 22 19 STAFF RM A110 MICRO RCPT 20 A 1 1.1 1.1 1 20 A RCPT STAFF RM A110 MICRO 20 17 OFFICE A108 RCPT 20 A 1 0.7 1.1 1 20 A RCPT WORK RM A109 18 15 OFFICE A107 RCPT 20 A 1 0.7 0.2 1 20 A RCPT WORK RM PLOTTER 16 13 OFFICE A106 RCPT 20 A 1 0.7 0.2 1 20 A RCPT WORK RM COPIER 14 11 OPEN OFFICE A103 RCPT 20 A 1 0.5 0.7 1 20 A RCPT OFFICE A105 12 9 OPEN OFFICE A103 RCPT 20 A 1 0.5 0.9 1 20 A RCPT CONFERNCE A104 10 7 OPEN OFFICE A103 RCPT 20 A 1 0.5 0.7 1 20 A RCPT OPEN OFFICE A103 8 5 CONF RM A111 RCPT 20 A 1 1.1 0.5 1 20 A RCPT OPEN OFFICE A103 6 3 CONF RM A111 RCPT 20 A 1 1.3 1.1 1 20 A RCPT OPEN OFFICE A103 4 1 CONF RM A111 RCPT 20 A 1 1.1 0.7 1 20 A Other... LOBBY A101,102 2 # BT LOAD DESCRIPTION LT BKR P PHASE A kVA PHASE B kVA PHASE C kVA P BKR LT LOAD DESCRIPTION BT # FED FROM:DISTRIBUTION BUS AMPS: MAINS AMPS:200A MAINS TYPE: SPECIAL: MOUNTING:SURFACE A.F.C....SEE SHORT CIRCUIT STUDY LOCATION:ELECTRICAL ROOM A127 VOLTAGE:208Y/120 V. 3 ø 4 W. PANELBOARD: L-1 NOTES: Load Types (LT): COOL - Summer Cooling, ELEV- Elevator, EQ - Equipment, EX -Existing, GND - Grounding, HEAT - Winter Heating, KTCH- Kitchen, L MTR - Largest Motor, LTG -Lighting, MTR - Motor, RCPT - Receptacle Breaker Types (BT): AF = Arc Fault, GF = Ground Fault Circuit Interrupt, GE = Ground Fault Equipment Protection (30mA), SH = Shunt Trip, EX = Existing, NX = New Breaker For Existing Panel, M = Metered EST. DEMAND CURRENT:83 A RCPT 11700 VA 92.74% 10850 VA CONNECTED CURRENT:78 A Other 0 VA 0.00% 0 VA ESTIMATED DEMAND:30000 VA MTR 8525 VA 106.97% 9119 VA CONNECTED LOAD:28230 VA LTG 8274 VA 125.00% 10342 VA LOAD CLASSIFICATION CONNECTED DEMAND ESTIMATED PANEL TOTALS TOTAL AMPS:89 A 66 A 86 A TOTAL LOAD:10 kVA 8 kVA 10 kVA 41 -- -- -- -- -- 0.6 0.8 -- -- -- -- -- 42 39 -- -- -- -- -- 0.6 0.8 -- -- -- -- -- 40 37 EF-6 MTR 20 A 3 0.6 0.8 3 20 A MTR EF-7 38 35 EF-3,4 MTR 20 A 1 1.1 0.8 -- -- -- -- -- 36 33 EF-1,2 MTR 20 A 1 1.1 0.8 -- -- -- -- -- 34 31 GARAGE CORD REELS RCPT 20 A 1 0.4 0.8 3 20 A MTR EF-5 32 29 GARAGE CORD REELS RCPT 20 A 1 0.4 0.4 1 20 A RCPT GARAGE CORD REELS 30 27 GARAGE CORD REELS RCPT 20 A 1 0.4 0.4 1 20 A RCPT GARAGE CORD REELS 28 25 GARAGE CORD REELS RCPT 20 A 1 0.4 0.4 1 20 A RCPT GARAGE CORD REELS 26 23 EAST GARAGE/COLD ST LTG 20 A 1 1.2 0.4 1 20 A RCPT GARAGE CORD REELS 24 21 MECHANICAL LTG 20 A 1 0.4 0.4 1 20 A RCPT GARAGE CORD REELS 22 19 WEST GARAGE LTG 20 A 1 1.6 0.9 1 20 A RCPT WATER METER/STORAGE 20 17 OPEN OFFICE LTG 20 A 1 1.0 1.4 1 20 A LTG LOWER LEVEL GARAGE 18 15 LOBBY/CONFERENCE LTG 20 A 1 0.9 0.9 1 20 A LTG SHOWER/LOCKER 16 13 DATA ROOM RCPT 20 A 1 0.2 0.9 1 20 A LTG OFFICES/STAFF RM 14 11 DAS EQUIPMENT RCPT 20 A 1 0.2 0.4 1 20 A RCPT DATA ROOM 12 9 ACCESS CNTRL CABINET RCPT 20 A 1 0.2 0.4 1 20 A RCPT DATA ROOM 10 7 MEZZ STORAGE A177 RCPT 20 A 1 1.3 0.4 1 20 A RCPT PROVIDER EQUIPMENT 8 5 GARAGE A134 RCPT 20 A 1 0.7 0.9 1 20 A Other... COLD STORAGE 6 3 TOILET/STORAGE RMS Other... 20 A 1 0.5 0.5 1 20 A RCPT GARAGE A134 4 1 GARAGE A134 RCPT 20 A 1 1.1 0.9 1 20 A RCPT GARAGE A134 2 # BT LOAD DESCRIPTION LT BKR P PHASE A kVA PHASE B kVA PHASE C kVA P BKR LT LOAD DESCRIPTION BT # FED FROM:DISTRIBUTION BUS AMPS: MAINS AMPS:200A MAINS TYPE: SPECIAL: MOUNTING:SURFACE A.F.C....SEE SHORT CIRCUIT STUDY LOCATION:ELECTRICAL ROOM A127 VOLTAGE:208Y/120 V. 3 ø 4 W. PANELBOARD: L-2 NOTES: Load Types (LT): COOL - Summer Cooling, ELEV- Elevator, EQ - Equipment, EX -Existing, GND - Grounding, HEAT - Winter Heating, KTCH- Kitchen, L MTR - Largest Motor, LTG -Lighting, MTR - Motor, RCPT - Receptacle Breaker Types (BT): AF = Arc Fault, GF = Ground Fault Circuit Interrupt, GE = Ground Fault Equipment Protection (30mA), SH = Shunt Trip, EX = Existing, NX = New Breaker For Existing Panel, M = Metered EST. DEMAND CURRENT:32 A CONNECTED CURRENT:32 A ESTIMATED DEMAND:11700 VA CONNECTED LOAD:11700 VA Spare 11700 VA 100.00% 11700 VA LOAD CLASSIFICATION CONNECTED DEMAND ESTIMATED PANEL TOTALS TOTAL AMPS:33 A 32 A 33 A TOTAL LOAD:4 kVA 4 kVA 4 kVA 17 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 18 15 SPACE -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- SPACE 16 13 -- -- -- -- -- 3.7 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 14 11 -- -- -- -- -- 3.7 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 12 9 IRRIGATION PUMP -- 90 A 3 3.7 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 10 7 -- -- -- -- -- 0.2 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 8 5 SITE LIGHT RCPT -- 20 A 2 0.2 0.0 1 20 A -- SPARE 6 3 -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 0.0 1 20 A -- TIMCLOCK / CONTACTOR 4 1 SITE LIGHT RCPT -- 20 A 2 0.1 0.0 1 20 A -- IRRIGATION CONTROL PNL 2 # BT LOAD DESCRIPTION LT BKR P PHASE A kVA PHASE B kVA PHASE C kVA P BKR LT LOAD DESCRIPTION BT # FED FROM:DISTRIBUTION BUS AMPS: MAINS AMPS: MAINS TYPE: SPECIAL: MOUNTING:SURFACE A.F.C....SEE SHORT CIRCUIT STUDY LOCATION:ELECTRICAL ROOM A127 VOLTAGE:208Y/120 V. 3 ø 4 W. PANELBOARD: SITE NOTES: Load Types (LT): COOL - Summer Cooling, ELEV- Elevator, EQ - Equipment, EX -Existing, GND - Grounding, HEAT - Winter Heating, KTCH- Kitchen, L MTR - Largest Motor, LTG -Lighting, MTR - Motor, RCPT - Receptacle Breaker Types (BT): AF = Arc Fault, GF = Ground Fault Circuit Interrupt, GE = Ground Fault Equipment Protection (30mA), SH = Shunt Trip, EX = Existing, NX = New Breaker For Existing Panel, M = Metered EST. DEMAND CURRENT:240 A CONNECTED CURRENT:225 A ESTIMATED DEMAND:86451 VA Other 60 VA 100.00% 60 VA CONNECTED LOAD:81101 VA MTR 81047 VA 106.60% 86397 VA LOAD CLASSIFICATION CONNECTED DEMAND ESTIMATED PANEL TOTALS TOTAL AMPS:225 A 225 A 226 A TOTAL LOAD:27 kVA 27 kVA 27 kVA 41 UH-1 MTR 20 A 1 0.7 2.0 -- -- -- -- -- 42 39 -- -- -- -- -- 7.1 2.0 -- -- -- -- -- 40 37 -- -- -- -- -- 7.1 2.0 3 30 A MTR P-1 38 35 MAU-1 MTR 20 A 3 7.1 2.9 -- -- -- -- -- 36 33 -- -- -- -- -- 7.1 2.9 -- -- -- -- -- 34 31 -- -- -- -- -- 7.1 2.9 3 40 A MTR AC-1 32 29 AHU-1A MTR 80 A 3 7.1 2.9 -- -- -- -- -- 30 27 UH-5 MTR 20 A 1 0.5 2.9 -- -- -- -- -- 28 25 UH-4 Other... 20 A 1 0.6 2.9 3 40 A MTR AHU-1B 26 23 -- -- -- -- -- 0.6 0.0 1 20 A MTR DF-8,9,11,12 24 21 -- -- -- -- -- 0.6 0.0 1 20 A MTR DF-3,6,7,10 22 19 EF-14 MTR 20 A 3 0.6 0.0 1 20 A MTR DF-1,2,5,6 20 17 -- -- -- -- -- 0.8 0.6 -- -- -- -- -- 18 15 -- -- -- -- -- 0.8 0.6 -- -- -- -- -- 16 13 EF-12 MTR 20 A 3 0.8 0.6 3 20 A MTR EF-13 14 11 -- -- -- -- -- 0.6 0.6 -- -- -- -- -- 12 9 -- -- -- -- -- 0.6 0.6 -- -- -- -- -- 10 7 EF-10 MTR 20 A 3 0.6 0.6 3 20 A MTR EF-11 8 5 -- -- -- -- -- 0.6 0.8 -- -- -- -- -- 6 3 -- -- -- -- -- 0.6 0.8 -- -- -- -- -- 4 1 EF-8 MTR 20 A 3 0.6 0.8 3 20 A MTR EF-9 2 # BT LOAD DESCRIPTION LT BKR P PHASE A kVA PHASE B kVA PHASE C kVA P BKR LT LOAD DESCRIPTION BT # FED FROM:DISTRIBUTION BUS AMPS: MAINS AMPS:300A MAINS TYPE: SPECIAL: MOUNTING:SURFACE A.F.C....SEE SHORT CIRCUIT STUDY LOCATION:ELECTRICAL ROOM A127 VOLTAGE:208Y/120 V. 3 ø 4 W. PANELBOARD: L-3 NOTES: Load Types (LT): COOL - Summer Cooling, ELEV- Elevator, EQ - Equipment, EX -Existing, GND - Grounding, HEAT - Winter Heating, KTCH- Kitchen, L MTR - Largest Motor, LTG -Lighting, MTR - Motor, RCPT - Receptacle Breaker Types (BT): AF = Arc Fault, GF = Ground Fault Circuit Interrupt, GE = Ground Fault Equipment Protection (30mA), SH = Shunt Trip, EX = Existing, NX = New Breaker For Existing Panel, M = Metered EST. DEMAND CURRENT:119 A CONNECTED CURRENT:112 A Other 3600 VA 100.00% 3600 VA ESTIMATED DEMAND:42788 VA MTR 36883 VA 105.91% 39062 VA CONNECTED LOAD:40519 VA LTG 380 VA 125.00% 475 VA LOAD CLASSIFICATION CONNECTED DEMAND ESTIMATED PANEL TOTALS TOTAL AMPS:117 A 107 A 115 A TOTAL LOAD:14 kVA 13 kVA 14 kVA 41 SITE LIGHTING LTG 20 A 1 0.4 0.5 1 20 A Other CO/NO2 SENSORS 42 39 -- -- -- -- -- 0.9 1.0 -- -- -- -- -- 40 37 -- -- -- -- -- 0.9 1.0 -- -- -- -- -- 38 35 GD-3 MTR 20 A 3 0.9 1.0 3 20 A Other CRANE SYSTEM 36 33 -- -- -- -- -- 0.9 0.9 -- -- -- -- -- 34 31 -- -- -- -- -- 0.9 0.9 -- -- -- -- -- 32 29 GD-1 MTR 20 A 3 0.9 0.9 3 20 A MTR GD-2 30 27 UH-2 MTR 20 A 1 0.5 0.0 1 20 A Other Other 28 25 -- -- -- -- -- 0.4 1.1 -- -- -- -- -- 26 23 -- -- -- -- -- 0.4 1.1 2 20 A MTR ACU-1 24 21 VP-1 MTR 20 A 3 0.4 0.4 -- -- -- -- -- 22 19 IR-1,2,3,4,5,6 MTR 20 A 1 0.2 0.4 -- -- -- -- -- 20 17 -- -- -- -- -- 2.9 0.4 3 20 A MTR VP-2 18 15 -- -- -- -- -- 2.9 0.2 1 20 A MTR IR-7,8,9,10,11,12 16 13 PW-1 MTR 40 A 3 2.9 0.7 1 20 A MTR UH-3 14 11 CUH-1 Other... 20 A 1 0.5 0.3 -- -- -- -- -- 12 9 P-3 MTR 20 A 1 0.9 0.3 -- -- -- -- -- 10 7 WH-1,2 MTR 20 A 1 1.2 0.3 3 20 A MTR P-4 8 5 -- -- -- -- -- 2.0 1.6 1 20 A MTR B-1 6 3 -- -- -- -- -- 2.0 1.6 1 20 A MTR B-2 4 1 P-2 MTR 30 A 3 2.0 1.0 1 20 A MTR GMU-1 2 # BT LOAD DESCRIPTION LT BKR P PHASE A kVA PHASE B kVA PHASE C kVA P BKR LT LOAD DESCRIPTION BT # FED FROM:DISTRIBUTION BUS AMPS: MAINS AMPS:200A MAINS TYPE: SPECIAL: MOUNTING:SURFACE A.F.C....SEE SHORT CIRCUIT STUDY LOCATION:ELECTRICAL ROOM A127 VOLTAGE:208Y/120 V. 3 ø 4 W. PANELBOARD: L-4 Revisions Description Date Num ADD #1 11/14/2023 1 PR #14 9/20/2024 2 1 2 2 Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 10875 Ideal Ave S City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 2310312-COR # 19.00 Date:10/30/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Cutting out channel and adjustments for railing gate on mezzanine. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 52 - CSI: Add-Cut Out Channel 1 $1,502.00 Add/cut out channel.Construction Systems, Inc. $1,502.00 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 10875 Ideal Ave S City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 2310312-COR # 20.00 Date:10/30/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Additional labor to remove water at mezzanine prior to topping slab pour. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 53 - Axel Ohman: Remove Water at Mezzanine 1 $303.00 Remove water at mezzanine.Axel H. Ohman, Inc. $303.00 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 10875 Ideal Ave S City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 2310312-COR # 21.00 Date:10/30/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Description: Two surface mounted bollards added on west side of cold storage area. AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 69 - CSI: Add Mounted Bollards on West Side of Cold Storage Area 1 $1,337.00 Add mounted bollards on west side of cold storage area.Construction Systems, Inc. $1,337.00 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Change Order Request Project: Cottage Grove, MN 55016 1087 Ideal Avenue S City of Cottage Grove New Utility & Engineering Building 2310312-02 COR # 22.00 Date:10/30/2024 Cottage Grove, MN 55016 To: Owner From: Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Minneapolis, MN 55404 501 South Eighth Street City Of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South AmountItem #Description Vendor PCO # 54 - MCI: Epoxy at Room 132 Under Water Softener 1 $2,793.00 Epoxy at room 132 under water softener.Multiple Concepts Interiors, Inc $2,793.00 Total For Change Order Signed: ____________________________Approved By: Submitted By: Date: __________________ Signed: ____________________________Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Date: __________________ Accepted By: Wold Architects & Engineers Signed: ____________________________Date: __________________ City Of Cottage Grove Signature: Date of Acceptance: Name of Project: CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE UTILITY BUILDING Project Location: COTTAGE GROVE, MN KRAUS ANDERSON 26 First Avenue North - Waite Park, MN 56387 PROPOSAL Date: Quote #: Prepared By: Email: Mobile #: October 22, 2024 Epoxy Coating A132 SHAWN FIEDLER SFIEDLER@MCICARPETONE.COM 320-253-5078 Ph: (320) 253-5078 Fx: (320) 253-9458 Fax, Phone, Email or Contact: Notes: -Room A132 - Water Service, pricing below to coat bottom pan and all surfaces of the curb with epoxy flake system to prevent damage to concrete curb and floor from water softener discharge. Proposal Submitted To: ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL: The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. This proposal may be withdrawn by MCI if not accepted within 60 days of proposal date above. This proposal is contingent upon final acceptance of contract language. PAYMENT TERMS: Net 30 days of invoice date using cash, check, or credit card. Any collection fees or attorneys fees incurred by MCI will be the responsibility of the buyer. A monthly service charge will be added at the rate of 1.5% per month (18% annum). We reserve the right to perfect mechanics lien rights when applicable. All materials are guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a substantial workmanlike manner according to specifications submitted, per standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire, tornado and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by Workmen's Compensation Insurance. If either party commences legal action to enforce its rights pursuant to this agreement, the prevailing party in said legal action shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorney's fees and costs of litigation relating to said legal action, as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. Street Address: City, State, Zip Code: Architect/Drawing Developer: Date of Drawings: Addendums: (Includes additional mobilization if needed to get water softener installed ASAP). Install Labor: 16 man hours @ $90/HR + 5% M/U = $1,512.00 WOLD Materials: 1,220.00 + 5% M/U = $1,281.00 Total = $2,793.00 Includes Tax Typical floor prep is included in this proposal. Materials and labor for the amount of: Grinding, self-leveling, bead blasting or glue removal is not included unless noted above. Additional labor will be billed at $81.25 per hour plus the cost of any materials required. Includes final broom cleaning. Prior trades are responsible to clean any residue from floors left by their scope of work, otherwise charges will apply to clean. Proposal does not include removal of existing flooring or adhesives. Dumpsters not included. Post floor protection is not included. Initial moisture testing is included performed by 3rd party. Additional testing due to high moisture or special request will be billed at $80.00 per test and $.65 per mile from Richfield, MN. PROPOSAL NOTES: 1 City Council Action Request 7.Q. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Public Works Agenda Category Action Item Title Goodview Avenue Well Sealing Project Final Payment Staff Recommendation Adopt Resolution 2024-152 approving the final payment in the amount of $29,062.15 to Mineral Services Plus, LLC for the Goodview Avenue Well Sealing Project. Budget Implication $29,062.15 - 3M Settlement Funds Attachments 1. 01-Final Well Sealing Letter To City 2. 02-Final Payment Goodview Well Sealing Resolution 2024-11-06 3. 03-Signed FINAL 4. 04-Consent of Surety 5. 05-IC-134 Mineral Services Engineers | Architects | Planners | Scientists Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110-5196 SEH is 100% employee-owned | sehinc.com | 651.490.2000 | 800.325.2055 | 888.908.8166 fax October 29, 2024 RE: Cottage Grove, MN Goodview Ave Residential Well Sealing SEH No. COTTG 162976 Ryan Burfeind Public Works Director City of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway S. Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Dear Mr. Burfeind: Please find enclosed the Final Application for Payment for the referenced project. The quantities completed to date have been reviewed and we hereby recommend approval for payment to Mineral Services Plus, LLC in the amount of $29,062.15. This amount represents 100% of the work completed with 0% held for retainage. The original contract amount for the project was $166,052.50. The final project cost was $121,680.50. The $44,372 savings was a result of six properties electing not to participate in the project and various under-runs on other bid items. If approved, please sign and forward payment along with a copy of the signed pay application to Mineral Services Plus, LLC, retaining the original for City records. Please contact me with any questions or comments. Thank you. Sincerely, Brad Swanson Construction Manager Enclosure CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2024-152 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $29,062.15 TO MINERAL SERVICES PLUS, LLC, FOR THE GOODVIEW AVENUE WELL SEALING PROJECT WHEREAS, the Public Works Director has certified that work has been satisfactorily completed; and WHEREAS, the original total contract amount was $166,052.50. The final construction cost was $121,680.50, which is $44,372.00 less than the contract amount. The reduced construction cost was primarily due to six properties electing not to participate in the project and various under-runs on other bid items; and WHEREAS, the project has been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the contract plans and specifications. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, County of Washington, State of Minnesota, that $29,062.15 be paid to Mineral Services Plus, LLC for the final payment for the Goodview Avenue Well Sealing Project. Passed this 6th day of November, 2024. Myron Bailey, Mayor Attest: Tamara Anderson, City Clerk 1 City Council Action Request 7.R. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Community Development Agenda Category Action Item Title Gateway North Second Addition – Preliminary and Final Plat Staff Recommendation Adopt Resolution 2024-153 approving the Preliminary and Final Plat to be called Gateway North Second Addition in order to create two parcels (a 7.89-acre parcel for Kohl’s and a new 1.03-acre parcel for Chase Bank). Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. Gateway North 2nd Addition CC Memo 2. Gateway North 2nd Addition Preliminary & Final Plat 3. Gateway North 2nd Addition Resolution - PP & FP TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator FROM: Conner Jakes, Planner DATE: October 31, 2024 RE: Gateway North Second Addition – Preliminary Plat, Final Plat Proposal KIN, Inc. (Kohl’s Department Stores, Applicant) has submitted an application for a Preliminary and Final Plat at 7990 Hardwood Avenue South. The subject site is located adjacent to Culver’s, U.S. Bank, and contains the recently constructed Chase Bank in the south parking lot. The Appli- cant is proposing to split 1.03 acres in order for the constructed Chase Bank site to be within an individual parcel. Location Map Review Schedule Application Received: October 1, 2024 Application Accepted: October 1, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting: October 28, 2024 City Council Meeting: November 6, 2024 60-Day Review Deadline: November 30, 2024 Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Jennifer Levitt Gateway North Second Addition – Preliminary Plat, Final Plat October 31, 2024 Page 2 of 5 Background At their July 28, 2002, meeting, the City Council approved an 88,000 square foot Kohl’s store with a future expansion of 20,000 square feet located on the east side of the building. In 2007, the City Council approved a preliminary plat, site plan, and cond itional use permit for a 3,954 square foot restaurant (Culver’s) with a drive-through to be constructed in the southwest corner of the Kohl’s lot as shown below. Culver’s Site At their July 19, 2023, meeting, the City Council approved a site plan review and conditional use permit for a 3,319 square foot bank (Chase Bank) with a drive -through to be constructed in the south parking lot of the Kohls site as shown in the image below. Chase Bank was constructed in 2023, and a Certificate of Occupancy was issued on September 25, 2024. Chase Bank Site Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Jennifer Levitt Gateway North Second Addition – Preliminary Plat, Final Plat October 31, 2024 Page 3 of 5 Planning Commission Meeting At their October 28, 2024, meeting the Planning Commission reviewed this request and held a public hearing. There were no residents that provided public testimony. Below is a summary of the Commission’s comments along with a summary response to the inquiry. • The newly created parcel already has a constructed building on it, why can we collect park dedication funds at this point? o Park dedication is triggered at such time a new lot is created and developed. In this scenario, Chase Bank was originally constructed within the existing Kohl’s parcel and the construction of Chase Bank did not trigger park dedication. However, due to the creation of the new 1.03-acre parcel in which the existing Chase Bank structure is located park dedication can be collected. In addition, at the time of original development of the Kohl’s site and structure park dedication funds were not collected. Should park dedication funds have been collected at the time of original development of the Kohl’s site, park dedication would not have been collected as a part of this application. Planning Considerations Zoning and Comprehensive Plan The subject site is zoned MU, Mixed Use District, and is guided as Mixed Use in the 2040 Com - prehensive Plan. The request is consistent with the City’s zoning ordinance and land use plan. The existing uses onsite are permitted and have appropriate approvals to operate. Preliminary Plat and Final Plat The application consists of a preliminary and final plat to split 1.03 acres of the southern parking lot in order for Chase Bank to be located and operate on an individual parcel. As part of the approvals for Chase Bank in 2023 (Resolution 2023 -092), the Applicant (Kohl’s) and Chase Bank entered into a private ground lease agreement. The private agreement allowed for the new con - struction of Chase Bank on the Kohl’s parcel and outlined maintenance requirements between the two parcels. At the time of approvals in 2023, both the Chase Bank and Kohl’s site met all applicable city ordinance standards. To note, per the conditions stipulated in Resolution 2023 - 092, a cross-parking agreement was required to be recorded due to multiple businesses being located on one parcel. Given the proposed plat would result in Chase Bank operating on an indi - vidual parcel, the cross-parking agreement is not necessary as both sites meet minimum parking requirements. The proposed preliminary and final plat would create a parcel own ed by Chase Bank who would then be responsible to uphold the conditions stipulated in Resolution 2023 -092. The submitted preliminary and final plat as shown below indicates the proposed 1.03 -acre parcel with Chase Bank and the proposed 7.89-acre parcel with Kohl’s. The Applicant has included the standard 10-foot interior perimeter easement adjacent to each prop erty boundary of the newly created parcel with Chase Bank. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Jennifer Levitt Gateway North Second Addition – Preliminary Plat, Final Plat October 31, 2024 Page 4 of 5 Proposed Preliminary and Final Plat Utilities The subject property is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). The con - structed site is connected to available sanitary, watermain, and storm sewer located adjacent to the property. The water service is connected to the 12-inch trunk watermain to the west, the sewer service connected to the 18-inch trunk sanitary sewer to the east, and the storm sewer connected to the existing structure on the southern side of the private parking lot. Surface Water Management/Grading The site grading for the project has met the surface water management requirements established by the State, Watershed District, and the City’s Surface Water Management Plan. Storm water is managed through a combination of storm sewer and drainage swales. The storm sewer is con - nected to the private storm sewer within the southern side of the private parking lot. The subject property has used stormwater best management practices (BMPs) on -site. These BMPs are re- quired to be maintained periodically to adhere to the surface water management requirements. Therefore, a private maintenance agreement was executed betwe en the City and the underlying property owner for maintenance of the private storm water system. Park Dedication City Code Title 10-4-3 requires park dedication be completed for all newly created lots. Park ded - ication can be satisfied through land dedication or a cash in lieu of fee. The City Fee Table outlines the cash in lieu of fee, which for a commercial subdivision is 4 percent of the land value. The Applicant will be required to pay a park dedication fee of $9,604.04 which is 4 percent of the land value for the newly created lot. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Jennifer Levitt Gateway North Second Addition – Preliminary Plat, Final Plat October 31, 2024 Page 5 of 5 Public Hearing Notices The public hearing notice for the October 28, 2024, Planning Commission meeting was published in the Saint Paul Pioneer Press and mailed on October 17, 2024, to 18 property owners that are within 500 feet of the proposed project. Staff has not received any comments at the time of writing the report. Recommendation That the City Council adopt Resolution 2024-153 approving the Preliminary and Final Plat to be called Gateway North Second Addition in order to create two parcels (a 7.89-acre parcel for Kohl’s and a new 1.03-acre parcel for Chase Bank). Attachments Gateway North Second Addition Preliminary and Final Plat CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2024-153 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT TO BE CALLED GATEWAY NORTH SECOND ADDITION IN ORDER TO CREATE TWO PARCELS (A 7.89-ACRE PARCEL FOR KOHL’S AND A NEW 1.03-ACRE PARCEL FOR CHASE BANK) WHEREAS, KIN, Inc. (aka Kohl’s Department Stores) has applied for a preliminary plat and final plat to create two parcels (a 7.89-acre parcel for Kohl’s and a new 1.03-acre parcel for Chase Bank) to be located on property legally described as: Lot 1, Block 2 Gateway North First Addition. Commonly known as 7990 Hardwood Avenue South, Cottage Grove, Washington County, State of Minnesota. WHEREAS, public hearing notices were mailed to surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the proposed development site and a public hearing notice was published in the Saint Paul Pioneer Press; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held the public hearing on this application on October 28, 2024; and WHEREAS, the public hearing was open for public testimony and testimony from the appli- cant and the public was received and entered into the public record; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously (6-to-0 vote) recommended approval of the preliminary plat to be called Gateway North Second Addition, subject to certain conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota, hereby approves the preliminary plat and final plat to create two parcels (a 7.89-acre parcel for Kohl’s and a new 1.03 -acre parcel for Chase Bank) to be located on property legally described above subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat shall be recorded with the Washington County Recorder’s Office prior to the issuance of any building permits. 2. Prior to the release of the final plat for recording, the park dedication fee of $9,604.04 shall be paid. 3. Preliminary and final plat approvals shall expire one (1) year after City Council approvals, unless a final plat has been recorded with the Washington County Recorder’s Office or the City Council approves an extension. 4. The final plat shall include any public drainage and utility easements required by the City Engineer. 5. The newly created 1.03-acre parcel (proposed Lot 2, Block 1 Gateway North Second Addition) shall abide by the conditions of approval stipulated in Resolution 2023 - 092. City of Cottage Grove City Council Resolution No. 2024-153 Page 2 of 2 Passed this 6th day of November 2024. Myron Bailey, Mayor Attest: Tamara Anderson, City Clerk 1 City Council Action Request 7.S. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department IT Department Agenda Category Action Item Title Hometown Fiber Broadband Aware Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the approval of the scope of work and services proposed by Hometown Fiber for the Broadband Aware program, at a cost of $22,528. Budget Implication The Broadband Aware program cost of services is $22,528 and will be funded through cost savings realized in the 2024 Information Services budget (0380-4370). Attachments 1. Hometown Fiber Proposal Add Alt One V1 R0 Cottage Grove 18 OCT 2024 1 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator FROM: Brian Bluhm DATE: November 6, 2024 RE: Hometown Fiber Broadband Aware Discussion Broadband Aware services provide essential information for informed decision-making regarding community development and infrastructure projects, such as street and utility upgrades. Understanding the current and future needs of telecommunication infrastructure requires expert analysis. Hometown Fiber and Broadband Aware Overview Hometown Fiber is a Broadband Consultant specializing in the Planning, Design, Construction and Management of Fiber Optic Networks. Transforming Communities into the Next Generation Broadband. The Broadband Aware program will establish a baseline of technical information, serving as a foundation for informed decision-making as commercial, industrial, and residential projects progress in the City of Cottage Grove. Key deliverables from the Broadband include: • Layered mapping for ESRI GIS • GPS positioning of identified field items • Photos of each asset • Identification of infrastructure type (phone, coax, fiber optic) • Ownership information for each asset • City ownership of all data collected Recommendation Staff recommends the approval of the scope of work and services proposed by Hometown Fiber for the Broadband Aware program, at a cost of $22,528. Attachments 1. Hometown Fiber Proposal Add Alt One V1 R0 Cottage Grove 18 OCT 2024 2 HOMETOWN FIBER 601 Carlson Parkway, Sute 1079 | Minnetonka, MN 55305 763-299 -9500 | yourhometownfiber.com HOMETOWN FIBER Own Your Future Proposal Cottage Grove Add Alternate One V1.R0 October 18, 2024 Submitted to: Crystal Raleigh, Assistant City Engineer craleigh@cottagegrovemn.gov Submitted by: Kyle Moorhead, President kyle@yourhometownfiber.com 612.778.8572 Broadband Aware Page 2 of 4 BROADBAND AWARE Broadband Aware services provide you with information needed to make informed decisions. Valuable information with community development and infrastructure projects such as, street and utility upgrades. Understanding the current and future needs of telecom munication infrastructure requires experts in broadband to complete. Hometown Fiber is here to help. Broadband maps available today are completed with information provided by others and not independently verified by industry professionals . The maps today are missing critical information such as location of in-field infrastructure. This produces inaccurate information which is being used to make multi-million-dollar decisions. If you do not know what infrastructure exists, how can you make good decisions about future projects? Hometown Fiber goes beyond the resources publicly available . We gather fundamental telecommunications information with our Broadband Aware services. Our process begins with boots-on-the-ground observations and documentation of existing key broadband assets begins the translation. Our in -field process achieves independently verified and up-to-date information. Once we have concluded the field work, our team reviews the data collected and identifies each serviceable location in categories of phone (DSL), cable (COAX), and fiber optic . This thorough field analysis of existing broadband technology gives you a photographic and technical review on the condition of existing systems and provides the data in creating a better path towards the goals. Our team then compiles the information into an easy -to-use GIS Interactive Map with logical layers showing infrastructure observed. • GIS map layers of telecommunication infrastructure we observe • Identify burial, aerial, phone, coax, fiber, and ownership • GPS location and photographs of infrastructure • Identify maintenance issues • Host GIS map layers on-line for one year • FCC challenges when discrepancies are observed • City-Wide, high-level network design Estimate Page 3 of 4 DELIVERABLES Broadband Aware achieves a baseline of technical information and is used as a foundation for informed decision-making as the projects progress. Hometown Fiber will provide the following Deliverables within Add Alternate 1: • Hometown Fiber field technicians shall visit Cottage Grove and document the city-wide telecommunication infrastructure we observe with boots-on-the-ground (weather dependent) • Provide an ESRI GIS map that includes o Multiple layers o GPS position of each field item observed o Photo of each item observed o Identify if it is phone, coax, or fiber optic infrastructure o Identify key items such as Central Offices, DSLAMs, or PON cabinets o Identify owner of infrastructure o The GIS map includes layers with location (within 10’) of infrastructure items observed o A one-page executive summary of our field verification findings o One-year of on-line map hosting o Cottage Grove will have the ability to download the GIS data • Building off of items observed in field we will create a city-wide, high-level, fiber-optic design o Multiple layers o Used to estimate cost per pass and where subsidy may be required o Lines identifying trunk, laterals, and drops o Symbols showing hand holes, multi -service terminals, splice locations, etc. o Design and cost to build estimate for a municipal network ADD ALTERNATE ONE: ESTIMATE FLAT FEE PRICE: $22,528 twenty-two thousand five hundred twenty-eight (U.S. dollars) Numerical Written The Fine Print Page 4 of 4 THE FINE PRINT… Our proposal and cost estimates herein are based on the following Rates, Fees and Terms. If additional work is required, outside this scope of work, Hometown Fiber will use these calculations to determine costs. Additional work requires prior approval to proceed. RATES All rates are calculated per-person, per-hour. Civil Engineers $160 Principal Consultants $150 Senior Consultants $120 Associate Consultants $80 Executive Assistants $50 FEES Mileage $ .67/mile/vehicle Travel Per Diem $200/person/day GIS Map Hosting $958/year Other expenses Cost plus 10% TERMS Hometown Fiber will honor the prices herein until December 31, 2024. Hometown fiber will lock the rates for the project upon receipt of authorization to proceed. Hometown Fiber works with Progress Payments: • Deposit 50% • Milestone 1 30% o Field-Work complete • Milestone 2 10% o Draft GIS map o Draft high-level design o Draft summary • Milestone 3 10% o Final GIS Map o Final high-level design o Final summary ANTICIPATED TIMELINE Hometown Fiber will start this work upon authorization to proceed and receiving a deposit. Hometown Fiber can conclude the work within three months from the start date. Authorization to proceed November 15, 2024 Field-Work complete (weather dependent): November 30, 2024 Draft issue December 16, 2024 Final issue December 30, 2025 1 City Council Action Request 8.A. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Finance Agenda Category Action Item Title Approve Disbursements Staff Recommendation Approve disbursements from 10-11-24 through 10-31-24 in the amount of $6,321,456.21. Budget Implication N/A Attachments 1. Expense Approval Report 11-06-2024 Council Meeting 2. Payroll Check Register 11-06-24 Council Meeting 1 City Council Action Request 10.A. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Public Works Agenda Category Action Item Title Low Zone Water Tower Bid Award Staff Recommendation 1) Adopt Resolution 2024-151 awarding the bid for the Low Zone Water Tower to Landmark Structures 1, LP in the total amount of $5,183,000.00. 2) Approve Resolution 2024-156, Declaring the official intent of the City of Cottage Grove to reimburse certain expenditures from the proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City with respect to the construction of the Low Zone Water Tower. Budget Implication $5,183,000 from Water Area Fund, Water Utility Fund, and bond proceeds. Attachments 1. CC Memo - Low Zone Water Tower 2. Resolution 2024-156 - Reimbursing Resolution Water Tower 3. Qualified Client Bid Results Ltr final 4. Low Zone Water Tower Resolution Bid Award 11-6-2024f 5. Low Zone Water Tower Bid Tab 6. Low Zone Water Tower Renderings To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator From:Brenda Malinowski, Finance Director Date:November 6, 2024 Subject:Low Zone Water Tower Background A reimbursement resolution is required to issue tax exempt bonds per regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States of America when costs are to be reimbursed with the bond issue. The City intends to issue debt for the construction of the Low Zone Water Tower as identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. The bond issue will occur in 2025 and expenditures may happen before the issuance of the debt, so a reimbursing resolution is needed. At this time, the resolution lists the entire amount of the project, but the amount of the debt issue will be lower due to contributions for the construction from the Water Area Fund and Water Utility Fund. Recommendation Approve Resolution 2024-156, Declaring the official intent of the City of Cottage Grove to reimburse certain expenditures from the proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City with respect to the construction of the Low Zone Water Tower. CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2024-156 DECLARING THE OFFICIAL INTENT OF THE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM THE PROCEEDS OF BONDS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CITY WITH RESPECT TO THE COTTAGE GROVE LOW ZONE WATER TOWER PROJECT WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service has issued Treas. Reg. § 1.150-2 (the “Reimbursement Regulations”) providing that proceeds of tax-exempt bonds used to reimburse prior expenditures will not be deemed spent unless certain requirements are met; and WHEREAS, the City of Cottage Grove Minnesota (the “City”) expects to incur certain expenditures that may be financed temporarily from sources other than bonds, and reimbursed from the proceeds of tax-exempt bonds; and WHEREAS, the City has determined to make this declaration of official intent (the “Declaration”) to reimburse certain costs from proceeds of bonds in accordance with the Reimbursement Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City proposes to undertake the Low Zone Water Tower Project within the City (the “Project”). 2. The City reasonably expects to reimburse the expenditures made for certain costs of the Project from the proceeds of bonds in an estimated maximum principal amount of $6,000,000. All reimbursed expenditures will be capital expenditures, costs of issuance of the bonds, or other expenditures eligible for reimbursement under Section 1.150-2(d)(3) of the Reimbursement Regulations. 3. This Declaration has been made not later than 60 days after payment of any original expenditure to be subject to a reimbursement allocation with respect to the proceeds of bonds, except for the following expenditures: (a) costs of issuance of bonds; (b) costs in an amount not in excess of $100,000 or 5 percent of the proceeds of an issue; or (c) “preliminary expenditures” up to an amount not in excess of 20 percent of the aggregate issue price of the issue or issues that finance or are reasonably expected by the City to finance the Project for which the preliminary expenditures were incurred. The term “preliminary expenditures” includes architectural, engineering, surveying, bond issuance, and similar costs that are incurred prior to commencement of acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of a project, other than land acquisition, site preparation, and similar costs incident to commencement of construction. 4. This Declaration is an expression of the reasonable expectations of the City based on the facts and circumstances known to the City as of the date hereof. The anticipated original expenditures for the Project and the principal amount of the bonds described in paragraph 2 are consistent with the City’s budgetary and financial circumstances. No sources other than proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set aside pursuant to the City’s budget or financial policies to pay such Project expenditures. 5. This Declaration is intended to constitute a declaration of official intent for purposes of the Reimbursement Regulations. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Minnesota, this 6th day of November 2024. Myron Bailey, Mayor ATTEST: Tamara Anderson, City Clerk Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 733 Marquette Avenue, Suite 1000 Minneapolis, MN 55402 October 24, 2024 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Cottage Grove City Hall 12800 Ravine Pkwy. S. Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Re: 1.0 MG Low Zone Elevated Tank Stantec Project No. 173420054 Bid Results Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council: Bids were opened for the Project stated above on October 24, 2024. Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Bid Tabulation for your information and file. A copy will also be distributed to the Bidders once the Project has been awarded. There were a total of 3 Bids. The following summarizes the results of the Bids received: Contractor Total Base Bid Low Gerard Tank and Steel, Inc. $4,350,000.00 #2 Landmark Structures 1, LP $5,183,000.00 #3 Caldwell Tanks, Inc. $7,574,000.00 The low Bidder on the Project was Gerard Tank and Steel, Inc. with a Total Base Bid Amount of $4,350,000.00. However, the low bidder does NOT meet the specified experience requirements. The bid documents require that the contractor has successfully constructed at least three composite elevated tanks at a minimum storage size of 1.5 million gallons. To date, Gerard Tank and Steel has not successfully constructed any composite elevated tanks of that size. The second bidder, Landmark Structures, meets or exceeds all the specified qualification requirements with a bid of $5,183,000. These bids compare to the Engineers Estimate of $5,985,000.00. These Bids have been reviewed and found to be in order. If the City Council wishes to award the Project to the Qualified low Bidder, then Landmark Structures 1 LP should b e awarded the Project on the Total Base Bid in the Amount of $5,183,000.00 . Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (612) 712-2069. Sincerely, STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC. Daryl Kirschenman, P.E. Enclosure CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2024-151 RESOLUTION AWARDING THE BID FOR THE LOW ZONE WATER TOWER PROJECT TO LANDMARK STRUCTURES 1, LP IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,183,000.00. WHEREAS, plans and specifications were completed according to City Standards and Specifications; and, WHEREAS, bids were requested to provide the necessary work; and, WHEREAS, three firms submitted bids; and, WHEREAS, the bid documents require that the contractor has successfully constructed at least three composite elevated tanks at a minimum storage size of 1.5 million gallons; and, WHEREAS, the low bidder, Gerard Tank and Steel, Inc. has not successfully constructed any composite tanks of that size and therefore their bid is rejected for failing to meet the bidder minimum qualification requirements; and, WHEREAS, the second low bidder, Landmark Structures 1, LP meets or exceeds all the specified qualification requirements for the project, with a bid of $5,183,000.00; and, WHEREAS, Landmark Structures 1, LP is found to be the lowest responsible and qualified bidder with a bid of $5,183,000.00; and, WHEREAS, it is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the project be awarded to Landmark Structures 1, LP in the amount of $5,183,000.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, County of Washington, State of Minnesota, that the Low Zone Water Tower Project be awarded to Landmark Structures 1, LP in the amount of $5,183,000.00. Passed this 6th day of November 2024. Myron Bailey, Mayor Attest: Tamara Anderson, City Clerk Project Name:City Project No.:Stantec Project No.:Bid Opening:Owner:Daryl Kirschenman, P.E.License No. 24744BID TABULATIONItem NumItem Units Qty Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price TotalPART 1 - SITE WORK:1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.002 CLEAR AND GRUB SITE LS 1 $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $26,000.00 $26,000.00 $46,000.00 $46,000.003 SALVAGE, STOCKPILE AND RESPREAD TOPSOIL LS 1 $46,000.00 $46,000.00 $24,000.00 $24,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.004 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY 50 $46.00 $2,300.00 $40.00 $2,000.00 $200.00 $10,000.005 CONNECT TO EXISTING 24" DIP WATER MAIN EA 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.006 24" DIP WATERMAIN, CL. 52. INCL. POLY WRAP LF 2 $2,300.00 $4,600.00 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 $2,500.00 $5,000.007 18" BUTTERFLY VALVE AND BOX EA 1 $10,200.00 $10,200.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $27,500.00 $27,500.008 REMOVE AND RELOCATED EXISTING, 16"X 6" TEE, 6" HYDRANT, 6" GATE VALVE AND BOX. Install 16" DIP d 16" COUPLINGLS 1 $23,000.00 $23,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $37,000.00 $37,000.009 18" DIP WATERMAIN, CL. 52. INCL. POLY WRAP LF 88 $230.00 $20,240.00 $200.00 $17,600.00 $500.00 $44,000.0010 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS LB 5000 $2.40 $12,000.00 $3.00 $15,000.00 $12.00 $60,000.0011 4' x 6' OVERFLOW SPLASH PAD EA 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $16,500.00 $16,500.0012 8" BOLLARD EA 2 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $925.00 $1,850.00 $500.00 $1,000.0013 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $42,000.00 $42,000.0014 AGGREGATE BASE (100% Crushed) BELOW BITUMINOUSTN 600 $30.00 $18,000.00 $30.00 $18,000.00 $70.00 $42,000.0015 AGGREGATE BASE (100% Crushed) DRIVEWAY REPAIR TN 800 $28.00 $22,400.00 $20.00 $16,000.00 $100.00 $80,000.0016 BITUMINOUS WEAR SPWEA340b TN 85 $200.00 $17,000.00 $120.00 $10,200.00 $300.00 $25,500.0017 BITUMINOUS BASE SPNWB330b TN 115.00 $175.00 $20,125.00 $110.00 $12,650.00 $70.00 $8,050.0018 SILT FENCE, MS LF 1200 $2.75 $3,300.00 $6.00 $7,200.00 $13.00 $15,600.0019 MnDOT SEED MIXTURE 25-131 AC 2 $3,000.00 $6,000.00 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 $10.00 $20.00TOTAL PART 1 - SITE WORK$378,165.00 $241,000.00 $630,170.00BASE BID - 1,000,000 GALLON COMPOSITE TANK20 1,000,000 GALLON COMPOSITE ELEVATED TANK WITH ACCESSORIES,PAINTING, ELECTRICAL, CONTROL ENCLOSURE, TANK MIXER, AND MATERIALS TESTING. OTHER ITEMS NOT SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO THE PROJECT AND INCLUDED IN THE LUMP SUM AMOUNT. THIS SHALL INCLUDE ALL APPLICABLE SALES TAXES. THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE BASE BID IS SHOWN IN THE DRAWINGS AS INDICATED IN THE SHEET INDEX AND NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS.LS 1 $3,726,835.00 $3,726,835.00 $4,683,000.00 $4,683,000.00 $6,705,830.00 $6,705,830.00I hereby certify that this is an exactreproduction of bids received.1.0 MG Low Zone Elevated TankCottage Grove, MinnesotaThursday, October 24, 2024 at 10:00 AM CDT173420054Bidder No. 1Gerard Tank and Steel, Inc. Landmark Structures 1, LPBidder No. 2Caldwell Tanks, Inc.Bidder No. 3173420054-Bid Tabs.xlsmBT-1 BID TABULATIONItem NumItem Units Qty Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price TotalBidder No. 1Gerard Tank and Steel, Inc. Landmark Structures 1, LPBidder No. 2Caldwell Tanks, Inc.Bidder No. 321 CITY LOGO'S EA 3 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 $6,000.00 $18,000.00 $6,000.00 $18,000.0022 STRUCTURAL FILL BELOW FOUNDATION CY 700 $100.00 $70,000.00 $80.00 $56,000.00 $200.00 $140,000.0023 COMMON EXCAVATION AND SITE GRADING LS 1 $160,000.00 $160,000.00 $185,000.00 $185,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00TOTAL BASE BID - 1,000,000 GALLON COMPOSITE TANK$3,971,835.00 $4,942,000.00 $6,943,830.00TOTAL PART 1 - SITE WORK$378,165.00 $241,000.00 $630,170.00TOTAL BASE BID - 1,000,000 GALLON COMPOSITE TANK$3,971,835.00 $4,942,000.00 $6,943,830.00TOTAL$4,350,000.00 $5,183,000.00 $7,574,000.00Phone:Email:nick@gerardtank.comestimating@teamlandmark.comsales@caldwelltanks.comSigned By: L. Joe GerardPatrick A. SmithTitle: PresidentCEO Sales ManagerBid Bond Bid Bond Bid Bond1, 2, 3, 4 1, 2, 3, 4 1, 2, 3, 4Bid Security:Addenda Acknowledged:(785) 243-3895 (502) 964-3361(817) 439-8888Christopher Lamon4000 Tower RoadLouisville, KY 402191540 East 11th StreetConcordia, KS 66901Landmark Structures 1, LP1665 Harmon Rd.Fort Worth, TX 76177Contractor Name and Address:Gerard Tank and Steel, Inc. Caldwell Tanks, Inc.173420054-Bid Tabs.xlsmBT-2 CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MN WATER TOWER LOGO DATE: 10-29-2024 PROJ. NO. 173420054 LOGO STACKED TEXT APPLIED IN 3 LOCATIONS VIEW 1: LOOKING SOUTH EAST FROM ALONG HWY 61 WATER TOWERWATER TOWER VIEW 1VIEW 1 N H W Y 6 1 CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MN WATER TOWER LOGO DATE: 10-29-2024 PROJ. NO. 173420054 LOGO STACKED TEXT APPLIED IN 3 LOCATIONS VIEW 2: LOOKING SOUTH WEST FROM EAST POINT DOUGLAS ROAD WATER TOWERWATER TOWER VIEW 2VIEW 2 N H W Y 6 1 CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MN WATER TOWER LOGO DATE: 10-29-2024 PROJ. NO. 173420054 LOGO STACKED TEXT APPLIED IN 3 LOCATIONS VIEW 3: LOOKING WEST FROM EAST POINT DOUGLAS ROAD WATER TOWERWATER TOWER VIEW 3VIEW 3 N H W Y 6 1 CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MN WATER TOWER LOGO DATE: 10-29-2024 PROJ. NO. 173420054 LOGO STACKED TEXT APPLIED IN 3 LOCATIONS VIEW 4: LOOKING NORTH EAST FROM HAMLET PARK WATER TOWERWATER TOWER VIEW 4VIEW 4 N H W Y 6 1 1 City Council Action Request 10.B. Meeting Date 11/6/2024 Department Parks and Recreation Agenda Category Action Item Title Kingston Park Electrical Improvements-Bid Award Staff Recommendation Adopt Resolution 2024-154 awarding the bid for Kingston Park Electrical Improvements to Killmer Electric in the total amount of $152,345. Budget Implication $152,345 from Park Improvement Funds. Attachments 1. 2-Bid Results Letter 2. 1-Resolution 3. 3- Abstract of Bids October 31, 2024 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Cottage Grove 12800 Ravine Parkway South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Re: Bid Results Kingston Park Electrical Improvements BMI Project No. 0N1.134360 Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council: Bids for the Kingston Park Electrical Improvements were opened on Thursday, October 31, 2024. A total of six (6) bids were received. Below is the summary of the bids: Contractor Base Bid 1.Killmer Electric Company, Inc.$152,345.00 2.MP Nexlevel, LLC $179,596.00 3.Collins Electrical Construction Company $189,374.25 4.Vinco, Inc.$194,655.00 5.Egan Company $216,602.50 6.Derau Construction, LLC $221,992.50 The low Bidder on the Project was Killmer Electric Company, Inc. with a Total Base Bid Amount of $152,345.00, which was under the Engineer’s Estimate of $200,000. If the City Council decides to award the Project to the low bidder, then Killmer Electric Company should be awarded the Project on the Total Base Bid Amount of $152,345.00. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (651) 968-7674. Sincerely, Bolton & Menk, Inc. Michael Boex, PE CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2024-154 RESOLUTION AWARDING THE BID FOR THE KINGSTON PARK ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT TO KILLMER ELECTRIC IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $152,345.00 WHEREAS, plans and specifications for the Kingston Park Electrical Improvements Project were completed according to City standards; and WHEREAS, bids were requested to provide the necessary work; and WHEREAS, six firms submitted bids; and WHEREAS, it appears Killmer Electric has provided the lowest responsible bid; and WHEREAS, it is the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Director along with the engineering project consultant that the bid be awarded to Killmer Electric in the total amount of $152,345.00 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, County of Washington, State of Minnesota, that the bid for the Kingston Park Electrical Improvements Project is awarded to Killmer Electric in the total amount of $152,345.00. Passed this 6th day of November 2024. __________________________ Myron Bailey, Mayor Attest: ___________________________ Tamara Anderson, City Clerk ABSTRACT OF BIDSKINGSTON PARK ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTSCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTAPROJECT NO. 0N1.134360Bid: October 31, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.1 2 3ITEM APPROX.NO. ITEM QUANT. UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT1 MOBILIZATION 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,231.00 $5,231.00 $9,200.00 $9,200.002 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $313.00 $313.00$4,950.00 $4,950.003 EROSION CONTROL SUPERVISOR 1 LS $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $210.00 $210.00 $3,752.00 $3,752.004 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION 1 EA $500.00 $500.00 $188.00 $188.00 $815.00 $815.005 SILT FENCE 60 LF $20.00 $1,200.00 $8.75 $525.00 $22.50 $1,350.006 STREET SWEEPER WITH OPERATOR 4 HR $500.00 $2,000.00 $268.75 $1,075.00 $295.00 $1,180.007 REMOVE LIGHTING UNIT FOUNDATION 2 EA $800.00 $1,600.00$1,295.00 $2,590.00 $810.00 $1,620.008 SALVAGE LIGHTING UNIT 2 EA $600.00 $1,200.00 $650.00 $1,300.00 $468.00 $936.009 REMOVE HANDHOLE 3 EA $170.00 $510.00 $600.00 $1,800.00 $645.00 $1,935.0010 REMOVE SERVICE CABINET WITH FOUNDATION 1 EA $800.00 $800.00 $750.00 $750.00 $1,293.00 $1,293.0011 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (TRAIL) 60 LF $15.00 $900.00 $15.00 $900.00 $10.00 $600.0012 REMOVE BITUMINOUS TRAIL 33 SY $100.00 $3,300.00 $50.00$1,650.00 $39.75 $1,311.7513 SERVICE CABINET A 1 EA $10,700.00 $10,700.00 $12,150.00 $12,150.00 $11,415.00 $11,415.0014 SERVICE CABINET PL1/PL2 2 EA $9,050.00 $18,100.00 $10,510.00 $21,020.00 $9,740.00 $19,480.0015 EQUIPMENT PAD FOR SERVICE CABINET A 1 EA $1,100.00 $1,100.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $2,510.00 $2,510.0016 EQUIPMENT PAD FOR SERVICE CABINET PL1/PL2 2 EA $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $4,450.00 $8,900.00 $2,150.00 $4,300.0017 LIGHT FOUNDATION DESIGN TYPE SPECIAL 8 EA $1,260.00 $10,080.00 $2,320.00 $18,560.00 $1,465.00 $11,720.0018 LIGHTING UNIT INCL LIGHT POLE AND LUMINAIRE (CONTRACTOR SUPPLIED) 8 EA $4,750.00 $38,000.00 $4,950.00 $39,600.00 $4,925.00 $39,400.0019 HANDHOLE 1 EA $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $2,100.00 $2,100.00 $1,615.00 $1,615.0020 1.5" NON-METALLIC CONDUIT, SCH 40 1,010 LF $13.00 $13,130.00 $16.50 $16,665.00 $9.76 $9,857.6021 3" NON-METALLIC CONDUIT, SCH 40 120 LF $20.00 $2,400.00 $19.00 $2,280.00 $17.17 $2,060.4022 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 10 AWG 3,600 LF $1.20 $4,320.00 $0.69 $2,484.00 $1.48 $5,328.0023 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 8 AWG 270 LF $1.50 $405.00 $1.10 $297.00 $1.67 $450.9024 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 6 AWG 410 LF $2.00 $820.00 $1.50 $615.00 $2.49 $1,020.9025 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 4 AWG 1,920 LF $2.40 $4,608.00 $2.30 $4,416.00 $4.05 $7,776.0026 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 3 AWG 440 LF $2.90 $1,276.00 $4.20 $1,848.00 $3.50 $1,540.0027 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 2 AWG 1,170 LF $3.30 $3,861.00 $3.50 $4,095.00 $3.78 $4,422.6028 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 1 AWG 1,230 LF $4.00 $4,920.00 $3.80 $4,674.00 $4.02 $4,944.6029 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 1/0 AWG 750 LF $4.50 $3,375.00 $5.00 $3,750.00 $4.91 $3,682.5030 PATCH BITUMINOUS TRAIL 33 SY $150.00 $4,950.00 $87.00 $2,871.00 $168.75 $5,568.7531 LOAM TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) 75 CY $40.00 $3,000.00 $62.00$4,650.00 $92.99 $6,974.2532 SEEDING, JRK WORLD CLASS SPORTS FIELD MIX 80/20 80 LB $12.00 $960.00 $20.75 $1,660.00 $15.50 $1,240.0033 HYDRAULIC MULCH MATRIX 1,210 SY $3.00 $3,630.00 $4.90 $5,929.00 $12.50 $15,125.00TOTAL BID: $152,345.00 $179,596.00 $189,374.25Collins Electrical Constr. Co.Killmer Electric Co., Inc. MP Nexlevel, LLCSt. Paul, MNCrystal, MN Annandale, MN Page 1 ABSTRACT OF BIDSKINGSTON PARK ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTSCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTAPROJECT NO. 0N1.134360Bid: October 31, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.ITEM APPROX.NO. ITEM QUANT. UNIT1 MOBILIZATION 1 LS2 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS3 EROSION CONTROL SUPERVISOR 1 LS4 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION 1 EA5 SILT FENCE 60 LF6 STREET SWEEPER WITH OPERATOR 4 HR7 REMOVE LIGHTING UNIT FOUNDATION 2 EA8 SALVAGE LIGHTING UNIT 2 EA9 REMOVE HANDHOLE 3 EA10 REMOVE SERVICE CABINET WITH FOUNDATION 1 EA11 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (TRAIL) 60 LF12 REMOVE BITUMINOUS TRAIL 33 SY13 SERVICE CABINET A 1 EA14 SERVICE CABINET PL1/PL2 2 EA15 EQUIPMENT PAD FOR SERVICE CABINET A 1 EA16 EQUIPMENT PAD FOR SERVICE CABINET PL1/PL2 2 EA17 LIGHT FOUNDATION DESIGN TYPE SPECIAL 8 EA18 LIGHTING UNIT INCL LIGHT POLE AND LUMINAIRE (CONTRACTOR SUPPLIED) 8 EA19 HANDHOLE 1 EA20 1.5" NON-METALLIC CONDUIT, SCH 40 1,010 LF21 3" NON-METALLIC CONDUIT, SCH 40 120 LF22 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 10 AWG 3,600 LF23 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 8 AWG 270 LF24 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 6 AWG 410 LF25 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 4 AWG 1,920 LF26 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 3 AWG 440 LF27 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 2 AWG 1,170 LF28 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 1 AWG 1,230 LF29 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1/C NO 1/0 AWG 750 LF30 PATCH BITUMINOUS TRAIL 33 SY31 LOAM TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) 75 CY32 SEEDING, JRK WORLD CLASS SPORTS FIELD MIX 80/20 80 LB33 HYDRAULIC MULCH MATRIX 1,210 SYTOTAL BID:4 5 6UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT$8,000.00 $8,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00$840.00 $840.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00$112.00 $112.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00$112.00 $112.00 $900.00 $900.00 $750.00 $750.00$4.48 $268.80 $27.50 $1,650.00 $5.00 $300.00$140.00 $560.00 $750.00 $3,000.00 $125.00 $500.00$1,271.20 $2,542.40 $1,200.00 $2,400.00 $860.00 $1,720.00$604.80 $1,209.60 $900.00 $1,800.00 $460.00 $920.00$483.84 $1,451.52 $600.00 $1,800.00 $250.00 $750.00$3,875.20 $3,875.20 $1,800.00 $1,800.00 $885.00 $885.00$4.48 $268.80 $8.00 $480.00 $15.00 $900.00$224.00 $7,392.00 $30.00 $990.00 $25.00 $825.00$14,087.36 $14,087.36 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,200.00 $12,200.00$13,087.35 $26,174.70 $10,250.00 $20,500.00 $11,500.00 $23,000.00$1,590.40 $1,590.40 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $1,800.00 $1,800.00$1,590.40 $3,180.80 $3,100.00 $6,200.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00$1,680.00 $13,440.00 $2,100.00 $16,800.00 $4,800.00 $38,400.00$4,092.14 $32,737.12 $5,225.00 $41,800.00 $5,100.00 $40,800.00$1,630.00 $1,630.00 $1,900.00 $1,900.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00$12.77 $12,897.70 $12.50 $12,625.00 $15.00 $15,150.00$93.18 $11,181.60 $15.50 $1,860.00 $25.00 $3,000.00$1.70 $6,120.00 $1.75 $6,300.00 $2.00 $7,200.00$2.59 $699.30 $2.25 $607.50 $5.00 $1,350.00$2.88 $1,180.80 $2.50 $1,025.00 $5.00 $2,050.00$3.80 $7,296.00 $4.00 $7,680.00 $6.00 $11,520.00$4.61 $2,028.40 $4.50 $1,980.00 $7.00 $3,080.00$5.40 $6,318.00 $5.00 $5,850.00 $8.00 $9,360.00$5.52 $6,789.60 $5.50 $6,765.00 $9.00 $11,070.00$7.11 $5,332.50 $6.50 $4,875.00 $10.00 $7,500.00$112.00 $3,696.00 $200.00 $6,600.00 $150.00 $4,950.00$95.20 $7,140.00 $55.00 $4,125.00 $25.00 $1,875.00$22.40 $1,792.00 $15.00 $1,200.00 $20.00 $1,600.00$2.24 $2,710.40 $9.00 $10,890.00 $3.75 $4,537.50$194,655.00 $216,602.50 $221,992.50Derau Construction, LLCBurnsville, MNVinco, Inc.Forest Lake, MNEgan CompanyChamplin, MN Page 2