Loading...
07 15 2025 CC Agenda PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA July 15, 2025 at 6:00 PM Mendota Heights City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights 1.Call to Order 2.Roll Call 3.Pledge of Allegiance 4.Moment of Silence in Memory of Officer Scott Patrick, EOW July 30, 2014 5.Approval of the Agenda The Council, upon majority vote of its members, may make additions or deletions to the agenda. These items may be submitted after the agenda preparation deadline. 6.Public Comments - for items not on the agenda Public comments provide an opportunity to address the City Council on items which are not on the meeting agenda. All are welcome to speak. Individuals should address their comments to the City Council as a whole, not individual members. Speakers are requested to come to the podium and must state their name and address. Comments are limited to three (3) minutes. No action will be taken; however, the Mayor and Council may ask clarifying questions as needed or request staff to follow up. 7.Consent Agenda Items on the consent agenda are approved by one motion of the City Council. If a councilmember requests additional information or wants to make a comment on an item, the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. Items removed from the consent agenda will be taken up as the next order of business. a.Approve Minutes from the July 1, 2025, City Council Meeting b.Acknowledge Minutes from the May 13, 2025, Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting c.Acknowledge Minutes from the June 10, 2025, Parks and Recreation Commission Work Session d.Acknowledge the May Par 3 Financial Report e.Adopt Resolution 2025-42 Final Payment and Acceptance of Fire Station Roof Page 1 of 107 Replacement f. Approve the Hiring of a Public Works Maintenance Worker g. Adopt Resolution 2025-44 Formally Accepting Donations from the Heussner Family h. Adopt Resolution 2025-43 to Reject Bids for the Kensington East Street Improvements i. Approve Developer's Agreement for the Cobalt Business Center j. Approve a Massage Therapist License k. Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Holy Family Maronite Catholic Church l. Approve Contract to Grind Brush at City Transfer Site m. Approve Purchase of Public Works Truck from Inver Grove Ford n. Approve Claims List 8. Presentations a. City of Mendota Heights Speed Camera Update b. Highway 62 Speed Limit Presentation 9. Public Hearings 10. New and Unfinished Business a. Request for Proposals--Ivy Hills Park Playground 11. Community / City Administrator Announcements 12. City Council Comments 13. Adjourn Next Meeting August 6, 2025 at 6:00PM Information is available in alternative formats or with the use of auxiliary aids to individuals with disabilities upon request by calling city hall at 651-452-1850 or by emailing cityhall@mendotaheightsmn.gov. Regular meetings of the City Council are cablecast on NDC4/Town Square Television Cable Channel 18/HD798 and online at TownSquare.TV/Webstreaming6 Page 2 of 107 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA DRAFT Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, July 1, 2025 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, was held at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Levine called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Councilors Lorberbaum, Paper, Mazzitello, and Maczko were also present. Councilor Paper left the meeting at 8:03 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Levine presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Mazzitello moved adoption of the agenda. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PUBLIC COMMENTS Bob Klepperich, 1092 Vail Drive, commented about bikes on the trail system and asked for a campaign to clarify City policies related to the right-of-way for bikers versus walkers and electric bikes on the trails. He commented that while there are many responsible bike riders, there are also those racing at high speed on bikes with disregard for those walking or mowing lawns. He asked if there were regulations for electric bikes. He stated that there should be polite reminders and possibly policies developed if none exist. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Levine presented the consent agenda and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilor Lorberbaum moved approval of the consent agenda as presented, pulling item b. a. Approval of June 17, 2025, City Council Minutes b. Approval of June 17, 2025, Council Work Session Minutes c. Acknowledge Minutes from the May 27, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting d. Approve Resolution 2025-34 Proclaiming July 2025 as “Parks and Recreation Month” 7.a Page 3 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 2 of 12 e. Approve Resolution 2025-35 for a Joint Powers Agreement with the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program f. Approve Bank Account Changes g. Approve May 2025 Treasurer’s Report h. Approval of Claims List Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS B) ACKNOWLEDGE THE JUNE 17, 2025, COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES Councilor Lorberbaum commented that she was not present at the meeting and will be abstaining from this vote. Councilor Mazzitello moved to approve THE JUNE 17, 2025, COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Abstain: 1 (Lorberbaum) PRESENTATIONS A) RECOGNITION AND PRESENTATION OF LIFE SAVING AWARD Ralph Heussner commented that he and his wife have been residents for 40 years, and on June 4th, he collapsed while mowing the lawn. He stated that he has no memory of that day or the week that followed, and all the information came from his wife and medical providers. He was told that most people do not survive a cardiac arrest at home, and that he had died and came back. He stated that without the first responders, the quick action of his neighbor, and the CPR knowledge of his wife, he would not be back. He also thanked those who had sent him notes in his recovery. He thanked everyone who helped bring him back. Police Chief Kelly McCarthy provided information on the medical response call of a male having a heart attack that first responders responded to on June 4, 2025. First responders worked alongside friends and neighbors in delivering life-saving interventions. Carol Heussner expressed gratitude for the service the first responders provided to save her husband. PUBLIC HEARING No items scheduled. NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS FY2024 AUDIT REPORT Caroline Stutsman, BerganKDV, presented the Annual Audit Review for 2024, reporting a clean, or unmodified opinion. Page 4 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 3 of 12 Councilor Mazzitello thanked Finance Director Kristen Schabacker for her wonderful work. Mayor Levine echoed the thanks to Finance Director Kristen Schabacker and her team. B) CITY COUNCIL GOVERNING PRINCIPLES City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked to consider Resolution 2025-41, establishing City Council governing principles. Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2025-41 ESTABLISHING CITY COUNCIL GOVERNING PRINCIPLES. Councilor Lorberbaum seconded the motion. Further discussion: Councilor Lorberbaum asked and received confirmation that this information would be posted on the website for all to see. Councilor Maczko thanked City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson for drafting the document and capturing the comments and discussion of the Council. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 C) RESOLUTION 2025-36 APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MCMILLAN ESTATES TO SUBDIVIDE THREE (3) EXISTING PARCELS INTO SIX (6) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCELS LOCATED AT 1707 DELAWARE AVENUE AND ITS ADJACENT VACANT PARCELS OWNED IN COMMON (PLANNING CASE 2025-03) Community Development Manager Sarah Madden provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked to consider Resolution 2025-36, approving a Preliminary Plat of McMillan Estates. Mayor Levine acknowledged that there has been a public hearing on this topic, and many written comments have been received. Councilor Mazzitello asked and received confirmation that the City's deadline to act on this application is August 19th. He asked about the process that would be followed if the preliminary and final plats are approved, and if there are additional wetland impacts proposed in the building process of the homes. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that if they get to the building permit phase and the homeowner realizes that there would be additional wetland impacts, the homeowner would need to apply for their own wetland permit application. She commented that, because there would be no more exemptions available, mitigation would need to then be provided. Councilor Mazzitello asked if there is a timeframe between preliminary and final plat, meaning that there would be a set time within which the final plat would need to be presented if the preliminary plat is approved. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden stated that the preliminary plat would be valid for one year before it expired. She stated that within that timeframe, the final plat would need to be presented, or an extension could be requested. Page 5 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 4 of 12 Councilor Paper referenced proposed condition nine and asked the process to have land rather than a fee for park dedication. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that the default process would be a land dedication, but staff did not recommend land dedication because of a lack of planning for park property in this area. She commented that often the City accepts cash in lieu of land for park dedication. Councilor Maczko stated that his concern would be that they approve the plat, which shows driveways and building pads, and asked if it would be the responsibility of the City to ensure that it could be constructed to prevent the situation that a future lot owner must later deal with wetland impacts that could exist. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden stated that staff did ask the applicant to consider driveway and grading impacts that may be relevant for wetland impacts. She commented that the plan prepared is a result of that conversation. She commented that two of the wetland impact areas are related to driveways. She stated that if a future property owner chooses to modify that plan, they would need to provide the necessary data to support that type of application. Councilor Maczko asked if the width of the driveway and grades are shown in the plan to ensure that someone could develop where the plat states they could. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden stated that the location of the driveways and contour information is shown on the plat, and the minimum driveway width is shown. Councilor Maczko commented that lots five and six seem to be of concern. He asked if these homes would be sprinkled because of the longer cul-de-sac. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that home details are not required as part of a preliminary plat. She stated that there is water service and extension provided for a new fire hydrant on the new cul-de-sac. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that he was not able to find a requirement that the Orchard homes must be sprinkled. He stated that it could be added as a requested condition if desired. He stated that 20-foot-wide driveways were required for Sunfish Lake, but the Fire Code has been updated, and one- and two-family homes are now exempt from that requirement. He stated that the Council could make the requirement that the homes be sprinkled due to the length of the cul-de-sac. Councilor Maczko referenced condition 15, which was added by the Planning Commission, related to the public right-of-way. He stated that they do not know if that property would be developed and asked if they should require that. He noted that they are in the process of recodification of the City Code, which would solidify the 500-foot maximum length for a cul-de-sac and could prevent the northern property owner from developing off Delaware. He stated that, from a public safety point of view, he does not like long cul-de-sacs. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden provided additional details on the requirements for platting and planned connection. She explained that if the 500-foot language is further solidified in the City Code, related to cul-de-sac length, the property to the north could request a variance to extend the right-of-way, or they could construct an L-shaped road, which would extend and connect to Delaware. Page 6 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 5 of 12 Councilor Maczko commented that it was a reasonable decision in the past to bring the existing cul-de- sac to the property line, which provided for the opportunity of this property owner to develop, and would think it makes sense to do the same in this scenario to protect the rights of the northern property owner to develop. Councilor Lorberbaum commented that this is a preliminary plat, and there are conditions placed upon the approval that must be met for the final plat. She referenced the issue of tree preservation and asked if the applicant must attempt to show tree removal and replacement, even though they will not be building the individual homes. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden confirmed that it is accurate. Councilor Lorberbaum referenced lot six, noting that there is no guarantee that the driveway will be in the proposed location, although she recognized that it would be the most feasible location. She stated that a driveway in that location may harm the roots of trees on a neighboring property and asked if that is allowed. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden explained that the City reviews the width, location, and grade of a driveway, and a driveway permit can include tree mitigation measures. She stated that the City does not review that level of impact to trees when reviewing a driveway permit. Councilor Lorberbaum asked if lot six would not be viable if there is no other placement for the driveway that would not impact neighboring trees. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that lot six meets all City requirements under the preliminary plat application. She stated that based on the urban forest preservation ordinance, staff would attach condition 16 to any applicable permits. Councilor Lorberbaum restated that the city, in its approval, is saying that the lot is a viable lot. Community Development Manager restated that the lot meets the minimum dimensional standards of city code. Councilor Maczko asked if the driveway could be moved closer to the wetland to avoid damage to trees. He recognized that trees of neighbors that could be impacted. He recognized that someone has the right to develop a property, but did not believe they have the right to impact someone else’s property. He stated that they should express that concern now, as they do not want damage to private property. He stated that there is a way that could be rectified through the development, as the driveway could be moved over, which would require wetland mitigation that could be provided by the developer, but perhaps not by individual property owners. He recognized that not all future property owners complete their own due diligence and often just trust their realtors. He did not want to be in a situation where someone would need a variance because they could not build according to the plans. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that the driveway going back to the home pad would follow the natural ground, and a certified arborist would provide protection measures for any trees that may be impacted. He stated that the driveway meets the requirements of the City Code, and a condition has been added that a certified arborist would need to review and approve the impact. He stated that the developer could also approach the neighboring property owner with an offer of settlement as well. Page 7 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 6 of 12 Councilor Maczko commented that he would like the details hashed out in the final plat to address this concern. He stated that there is a right to develop, but he also wants to ensure that what is planned could be constructed, so the onus is not passed to an unsuspecting property owner. Mayor Levine asked if there is a place to do that in the resolution. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that the City can place a condition upon a preliminary plat related to wetland impacts and mitigation. She stated that condition 16 addresses those concerns. She stated that a timeline for the development of the individual homes is not required at this time in the process, and the level of impact to the wetlands has been shown as required. Mayor Levine restated that the city can put in a condition, because it is not known exactly where the driveway is going to go. Councilor Lorberbaum recognized that lot six is viable even though there is a concern with harm to trees on a neighboring lot not in the development. City Attorney Amy Schmidt stated that by approving the preliminary plat, the Council is not saying this is a buildable lot as presented, but instead meets the dimensional requirements of the City Code and based upon the information provided and reviewed. She stated that all of the information is public and would continue to be available. She stated that it is important to note that it is not the duty of the City to protect every property owner into the future. The application is designed to review and approve whether all requirements of the preliminary plat have been met. She stated that conditions could be placed upon the preliminary plat approval to ensure that those could be addressed by the time of the final plat. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that the developer could be asked to mark out the property line every 50 feet, and if there are significant trees on the neighboring property, an assessment could be done before the final plat. Mayor Levine commented that the Council has read the written comments and hopes that all questions have been answered. She stated that the applicant would be invited to speak, and if a resident had a new concern or information, they could also speak. Spencer McMillan, applicant, stated that he had sent a letter related to the extension of the right-of-way. He stated that in regard to park dedication, land versus fee, and noted that a requirement for land would place a burden on the development. He explained that this process started 18 months ago with three lots to minimize impacts to the wetland and land, but that was not allowed by City Code. He stated that the requirements to build the cul-de-sac added a large cost, which then led to this development proposal. He stated that they are investing in the infrastructure, and the six lots support the cost to construct the cul-de- sac. He commented that they are dedicating all the land for the construction of the cul-de-sac, along with the right-of-way to Dakota County along Delaware. He noted that there are 5.5 acres of wetland on the property as well, so, along with the dedicated land as mentioned, additional park dedication would impact the viability of the project. He stated that the home on lot six would be further away from the existing homes than the existing homes are from each other. He stated that they tried to minimize impacts to the wetlands and follow all requirements of the City Code. Page 8 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 7 of 12 Councilor Mazzitello thanked the applicant for his letter, which mentions that the dedication of the right- of-way to the northern property would adversely impact his proposed subdivision, and asked for more information. Mr. McMillan stated that he has three young children, and he would like them to grow up and build a home at the end of the cul-de-sac. He stated that if the cul-de-sac were extended north, that would impact the viability and value of their property. He stated that it is not their intention to extend the cul-de-sac north, and he did not believe it was a requirement of the City Code or under Minnesota State law. Jim Kolar, 1695 Delaware, stated that he has always been supportive of the development and would plan to match the density, but this would hold him hostage on the back portion of his property. He stated that the right-of-way extension would be 88 feet. He commented that statements have been made that access to his property could come from Delaware, but he did not believe that to be the case. He believed that the alternative was unreasonable, as a 1,200-foot roadway would be required to support four homes. He stated that the developers of Ridgewood were required to extend that nub, which provided Mr. McMillan to extend to his property, and was asking for the same opportunity to be provided to his property. He stated that if the cul-de-sac were extended north to the Bader property and touched on Foxwood, potentially through an emergency gate, that would solve the issue of public safety concerns. He stated that an L roadway would require his home to be torn down. He stated that this would leave him as the only undeveloped ten-acre parcel, and the back portion would become landlocked. He stated that the 88-foot right-of-way would harmonize the interests of everyone. He referenced the statement that the extension would devalue the McMillan property, but noted that Mr. McMillan is doing the same to the properties currently on the cul-de-sac, which will be extended for his development. He stated that failure to plan for this connection would significantly devalue his property and the ability to develop the property. He stated that if he is provided with the right-of-way extension, he would do the same if/when his property is developed. He stated that although the Council is not required to do certain things, they are also not precluded from doing so. He asked the Council to balance the rights of all parties. Mike Bader, 1297 Knollwood Lane, commented that his parents purchased the property on Delaware and were held hostage by the poor planning of Foxwood. He stated that the ability to develop is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and makes sense. He stated that private landowners should have the right to develop their property. He echoed the comments of Mr. Koehler and asked the Council to make up for previous mistakes in Foxwood, which limited the ability of other properties to develop. Shawn Fahnhorst, 1767 Ridgewood Drive, stated that he has been advocating for the mitigation of disruptions in the neighborhood by the dedication of public space. He suggested perhaps a multi-modal trail which could run along the street. He stated that he would be willing to offer part of his front yard to continue the trail to Marie Avenue. John Weikert, 1737 Delaware Avenue, stated that the Council has a moral and ethical responsibility to the citizens now and the citizens of the future. He stated that lot six will clearly have a negative impact on the property values of the surrounding neighbors. He commented that people purchased their lots looking out onto the grasslands. He asked if the proposed driveway would be at grade level, noting that the lot floods. Mayor Levine thanked everyone who provided public input throughout the review process. Councilor Mazzitello stated that there was a recent development that was controversial with neighboring property owners. He stated that there is a luxury of time as the deadline is in the middle of August. He Page 9 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 8 of 12 asked if the Council would be interested in following a similar process to table the request and have a subcommittee of the Council meet with the residents and then approach the developers with an ask to determine if there is a middle ground. He commented that process made the previous apartment project better as the concerns of the residents were met and the developer was allowed to construct their project. Councilor Maczko stated that, from his perspective, it would be the neighborly thing to do. He was unsure of the level of neighborhood and developer interaction that had occurred. He stated that it is clear that the developer has the right to develop the property, but neighbors do have concerns. He believed that there is a responsibility to ensure the plans can be constructed as presented. He did not believe a developer has the ability to physically impact things on neighboring properties, such as trees. He stated that if there are conditions for lot six, those should be memorialized to ensure future property owners could find that information. He stated that he would like to find something that everyone could accept and feel okay about, and would be open to the process described by Councilor Mazzitello. Councilor Lorberbaum commented that she had met with several neighbors, and they would like the opportunity to speak with Mr. McMillan and discuss this matter. She also supported the concept proposed by Councilor Mazzitello. She stated that the Planning Commission did a wonderful job and understood their role that they must approve something if the plan follows ordinances, but it also hurt their hearts to vote yes. She stated that two weeks ago, draft revisions to the city’s subdivision code were discussed by the City Council. She reiterated that the purpose of the subdivision ordinance is to safeguard the best interests of the city, to assist the subdivider in harmonizing their interest with those of the city, provide for an attractive, orderly, economic, and safe development of land and urban services and facilities, and to protect the character and symmetry of the neighborhoods in the city while preserving and enhancing the value and economic use of property. Councilor Paper commented that he is open to that idea, as it resulted in a better project in the end. He stated that he would prefer to accept the parkland dedication, which could create a nature trail in an incredible area. Mr. McMillan stated that he is fully in support of the concept as he wants to work with neighbors and would like to collaborate. City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson commented that they would need to determine who on the Council would be a part of the discussions. She noted that in the case of the Plaza, they had two Council members. She noted that there is an August 19th deadline for this application review. Councilor Mazzitello stated that part of the reason they are redoing Title 11 is to align the Zoning Code with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that there are at least three policy statements within the Comprehensive Plan related to future planning, proper planning for future growth and development, and connectivity. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan trumps city code. Councilor Mazzitello moved to table CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2025-36 TO THE AUGUST 6, 2025, COUNCIL MEETING AND SCHEDULE A MEETING BETWEEN RESIDENTS AND THE DEVELOPER BETWEEN THEN AND NOW TO WORK OUT THE ISSUES. Councilor Lorberbaum seconded the motion. Further discussion: Mayor Levine appreciated all the comments that had been made and believes that this will result in a better product for the community. Page 10 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 9 of 12 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 D) RESOLUTION 2025-37 APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FENCE EXCEEDING 6-FT IN HEIGHT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1341 CHERRY HILL ROAD (PLANNING CASE 2025-07) Community Development Manager Sarah Madden provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked to consider Resolution 2025-37 approving a variance to allow the construction of a nine- foot fence on the property located at 1341 Cherry Hill Road. Mayor Levine acknowledged that it would only be a portion of the fence that exceeds nine feet and noted that the condition sufficiently addresses the tapering. Councilor Mazzitello asked about the distance of the taper and how that would be regulated. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden explained that the Planning Commission discussed this, noting different methods of taper that could be chosen. She stated that the Council could further define that within a condition if desired. She stated that the applicant agrees with the taper method but was unsure what that would look like until information is provided by the contractor. Councilor Mazzitello asked how the distance of 15 feet was determined. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden explained the methodology of her recommendation. Councilor Maczko stated that he would prefer to respond to the taper suggested by the applicant, as it would be hard to dictate what would look right and determine what that distance would be. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden stated that when there is a taper, it is typically terraced, but that can vary, and that is why the condition was not specified. Mayor Levine commented that staff and the Planning Commission did a great job. She stated that the proposed fence will be an improvement over what currently exists. Danny Michel, applicant, stated that he originally requested the nine-foot fence but prefers the taper method as discussed by staff. He stated that it would perhaps make sense to have a straight-line taper to match the contours of the property. He stated that he is not planning to have the taper along the length of his property and would like to taper after the 15 feet, perhaps to the midline, and then have six-foot fencing. Councilor Mazzitello stated that staff would then decide through the fence permit if the taper is reasonable. Councilor Lorberbaum moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2025-37 APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FENCE EXCEEDING 6-FT IN HEIGHT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1341 CHERRY HILL ROAD. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Page 11 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 10 of 12 E) RESOLUTION 2025-38 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR GLENN BARON (REPRESENTING THE HEIGHTS RACQUET & SOCIAL CLUB) FOR THE OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL RECREATION USE LOCATED AT 1415 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD (PLANNING CASE 2025-08) Community Development Manager Sarah Madden provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked to consider Resolution 2025-38 approving a Conditional Use Permit Amendment for the outdoor commercial recreation use located at 1415 Mendota Heights Road. Councilor Maczko asked and received confirmation that the parking would be paved and striped. Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2025-38 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR THE OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL RECREATION USE LOCATED AT 1415 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD (PLANNING CASE 2025-08). Councilor Maczko seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 F) RESOLUTION 2025-39 APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE REAR YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW THREE-SEASON PORCH ADDITION LOCATED AT 2150 AZTEC LANE (PLANNING CASE 2025-09) Community Development Manager Sarah Madden provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked to consider Resolution 2025-39, approving a variance request at 2150 Aztec Lane. Councilor Mazzitello commented that he lives in a similar neighborhood with lots platted under the current minimum requirements. He stated that he does have a four-season porch on his home, which also encroaches on the back setback. He asked if a variance was previously approved for the deck and addition on this property. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that she was unable to find prior record of variance approvals for this address. She stated that she did find a building permit record that the addition was constructed in 1978 or 1979, and a variance may not have been required at that time. Councilor Maczko stated that some of the Friendly Hills properties in his neighborhood back up to marshland that will never be developed. He stated that this property similarly backs up to the CDA property, which may not be developed. He stated that he wanted to ensure that this approval would not violate any past variance conditions. Councilor Mazzitello recognized that there are new impervious surface rules adopted with the Zoning Code and recognized the work of Planning Commissioner Johnson to ensure that this request would be compliant. Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2025-39 APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE REAR-YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A THREE-SEASON PORCH ADDITION LOCATED AT 2150 AZTEC LANE (PLANNING CASE 2025-09). Councilor Lorberbaum seconded the motion. Page 12 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 11 of 12 Further discussion: Mayor Levine commented that she is pleased to see residents improving their properties and neighbors supporting that action. She recognized that this is a process, but noted that the Council wanted to provide an opportunity for residents to improve their homes and maintain the character of these areas. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 G) RESOLUTION 2025-40 APPROVING A MRCCA PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT APPLICATION FOR NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY (XCEL ENERGY) TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 24-FOOT X 24-FOOT CONCRETE PAD FOUNDATION AND PREFABRICATED STRUCTURE AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 800 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY (PLANNING CASE 2025-10) Community Development Manager Sarah Madden provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked to consider Resolution 2025-40, approving a MRCCA Permit and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Amendment for Northern States Power Company (Xcel Energy) to allow site improvements at the property located at 800 Sibley Memorial Highway. Councilor Maczko asked what the building will look like. Grant Pinska, Xcel Energy, commented that the building would be like other buildings on the site and would be almost completely screened from most residential properties. He stated that it would be a metal frame building painted blue. Councilor Maczko commented that he is unhappy with the fence that was put on the other side of the property. Mr. Pinska replied that it is part of the electrical portion of the site. Councilor Lorberbaum asked for information on the red circles shown on one of the maps. Community Development Manager Sarah Madden replied that it is a utility map. Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2025-40 APPROVING A MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA (MRCCA) PERMIT AND AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) TO XCEL ENERGY AND FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 800 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY (PLANNING CASE 2025-10). Councilor Maczko seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson announced upcoming community events and activities. Page 13 of 107 July 1, 2025, Mendota Heights City Council Page 12 of 12 COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilor Maczko recognized the lifesaving awards that were presented tonight and recognized the value that the public safety team provides to the community. He recognized that the early intervention efforts of the spouse and neighbor made all the difference, also noting the quick response of a paid-on-call firefighter who lives in the area. He encouraged all residents to become CPR knowledgeable and stop to help a neighbor in need. He stated that he also shares the concern related to trail bikes, noting that he had a near miss on a trail with children on motorized bikes on the trail. He stated that electric motors will need to be addressed, as it is creating a hazard on the trails. He stated that he received many phone calls when the speed limit on 62 was increased and encouraged residents to attend or watch the July 15th Council meeting, where MnDOT will provide information on their practice to set speeds. Councilor Lorberbaum recognized an Islamic holiday observed on July 5th. She encouraged everyone to come watch the fireworks on July 4th and reminded residents of the reason for the holiday. Councilor Mazzitello complimented the Planning Commission for its large agenda and thoughtful discussion the previous week. He also recognized the work of Community Development Manager Sarah Madden for her outstanding work on the many planning cases. He stated that while he enjoys the controlled fireworks displays, he cautioned residents against using fireworks on their personal property or in their neighborhoods, as some pets and veterans do not enjoy those sounds. He commented that 56 people signed the Declaration of Independence, some of whom are well known and others who are not, providing additional information on six lesser-known signers. Mayor Levine acknowledged all of those who were involved in the lifesaving award presentation and event. She also recognized the heavy lift of staff in the items presented tonight. ADJOURN Councilor Mazzitello moved to adjourn. Councilor Maczko seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Mayor Levine adjourned the meeting at 8:56 p.m. ____________________________________ Stephanie B. Levine Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Nancy Bauer City Clerk Page 14 of 107 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PARKS AND RECREATION MEETING MINUTES MAY 13, 2025 The May meeting of the Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Commission was held on Tuesday, May 13, 2025, at Mendota Heights City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve. 1. Call to Order – Chair Jaffrey Blanks called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Roll Call – The following Commissioners were present: Chair Jaffrey Blanks, Commissioners: Jennifer Weichert, Jo Schifsky, Michelle Muller (arrived at 6:31 p.m.), Daniel Van Lith, and Michael Toth; absent: Commissioner Dan Sherer and Student Representative Evangeline Fuentes. Staff present: Parks and Recreation/Assistant Public Works Director Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Program Coordinator Willow Eisfeldt, Recreation Facilities Coordinator Trey Carlson, and Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek. 3. Pledge of Allegiance The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 4. Approval of Agenda Motion Schifsky/second Weichert, to approve the agenda. AYES 5: NAYS 0 Commissioner Muller arrived. 5.a Approval of Minutes from March 11, 2025, Regular Meeting Motion Weichert/second Muller, to approve the minutes of the March 11, 2025, Parks and Recreation Commission Regular Meeting.AYES 6: NAYS 0 6. Citizen Comment Period (for items not on the agenda) None. 7. Acknowledgement of Reports Chair Blanks read the titles of the three updates (Par 3, Park Improvement, Recreation, Park System Master Plan, and Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan Updates) and polled the Commissioners for questions. 7.a Parks Improvement Project Update Parks and Recreation/Assistant Public Works Director Meredith Lawrence reviewed the parks improvement projects that were approved as part of the 2025 budget and provided a status update on each project. 7.b Recreation Update Recreation Program Coordinator Willow Eisfeldt provided the recreation update, highlighting recent and upcoming events and activities. She noted that the Parks Celebration event has been rebranded as Heights Fest and provided an overview of the planned activities. Commissioner Toth asked for more information on the name change. Page 15 of 107 7.b Ms. Eisfeldt provided additional information on the rebranding of the event to better reflect Mendota Heights. Commissioner Weichert stated that many young families in her neighborhood enjoyed the Touch a Truck event this past weekend. 7.c Par 3 Update Recreation Facilities Coordinator Trey Carlson reviewed the Par 3 update, noting the soft opening at the end of March for a few days, which was very popular. He stated that the season officially opened on April 10 and provided statistics on the course so far this season. The implementation of the new software has been successful. He provided an update on course conditions, maintenance, summer programs, and leagues. Commissioner Weichert asked how the rounds from March and April compare to the previous year. Mr. Carlson replied that there was a slightly higher number of rounds in 2025. Ms. Lawrence replied that in 2024, they were open eight more days than in 2025. She believed that the increase in rounds was due to the software, which allows customers to book a tee time online. It was estimated that about 50 percent of the tee times are being made online. She commended Mr. Carlson and his staff for making the software implementation a success, as this was a big step for the City and staff. Commissioner Schifsky asked how the new software is being advertised to users. Mr. Carlson commented that they made customers aware of the new software at the soft opening in March, used social media and the City website, and have brochures available at the clubhouse. Commissioner Muller commented that the system is very user-friendly and is the same system used by another course. She was impressed by the number of schools that are golfing at the Par 3 and asked how they coordinate with the school groups. Mr. Carlson replied that the school groups call, and he works with them to schedule times. He estimated 12 schools that use the course. He stated that they have hosted a JV exhibition tournament and have another school tournament coming up. Commissioner Muller asked about Youth on Course and whether they would be implementing that. Ms. Lawrence commented that the goal for this year is to get the online tee time software up and running well, and Youth on Course is a goal for next year. Chair Blanks commented that it is great to see the continued growth of the course. 7.d Commission Work Plan Update Parks and Recreation/Assistant Public Works Director Meredith Lawrence stated that the Commission Work Plan, approved at the March meeting, was included in the packet. She provided an update on the status of items within the plan. Page 16 of 107 Commissioner Weichert stated that she would like to work with Mr. Carlson to provide input on the desires of the senior community for programming opportunities. She asked if there has been progress on seeking grant opportunities. Ms. Lawrence identified grants that the City routinely applies for in the parks system. She noted a new staff member has joined the city’s team and can assist with grant writing. She stated that the Master Plan consultant also identified park grant opportunities that the City can pursue. Commissioner Schifsky suggested looking at opportunities that could combine both teen and senior programming. 7.e Parks System Master Plan Update Parks and Recreation/Assistant Public Works Director Meredith Lawrence stated that staff continues to work with the consultant to complete the Parks System Master Plan, which will be finalized, adopted, and implemented. She stated that a draft was provided to the Commission tonight to review prior to the release to the public. She noted that a presentation of the final plan will be made at the June 17 City Council meeting, and the Commission is invited to attend. 8. New Business 8.a Ivy Hills Playground Replacement Recommendation Parks and Recreation/Assistant Public Works Director Meredith Lawrence provided background information on the playground at Ivy Hills, the existing conditions, and why the playground is planned for replacement. She stated that the Commission provided consensus to staff to move forward with the RFP and provided additional comments on the changes the City Council made to the RFP in a desire to have more creativity in the proposals received. She stated that six proposals were received from five qualified vendors, which were reviewed by the subcommittee, which narrowed the proposals to four for community engagement. She presented the four proposals. Commissioner Weichert commented that woodchips are not accessible for people in wheelchairs. Ms. Lawrence agreed and noted that although woodchips are considered accessible, they are not easy to traverse through. Commissioner Schifsky stated that accessibility is not just related to wheelchairs, but can also include people who have an unsteady gait, people with walkers, seniors, and parents with strollers. She agreed that it is challenging and also had input related to the merry-go-round being an accessible feature. Ms. Lawrence reviewed the tactics for community engagement, the engagement that occurred for this project, and the input received on the different proposals. She stated that the 2025 budget for this project included $160,000 from the general fund for the project, along with $20,000 for the increased size of the playground from the special park fund, for a total of $180,000. She asked that the Commission make a recommendation on this project tonight in order to move forward to the Council. She commented that because of the delays at the Council level, it would be anticipated that this project would take place in September. Chair Blanks invited residents to provide input. Page 17 of 107 Adina Overbee, 1200 Sylvandale Rd, commented that they are frequent users of the parks with their grandchildren. She stated that the park is not just for children, but for everyone. She stated that she likes option three because of the colors, as she found that more attractive to the eye and in scale with the remainder of the park. She understood that some people like bright colors, but asked if the rubber surface could be a lesser tone, such as green. She stated that she would not put a lot of value in the online survey, as that encouraged people to vote multiple times. She stated that people voted many times, which skewed the results, and believed the survey should have restricted users to only one vote. She thanked the Commission and staff for their work and looked forward to the updated playground. Ms. Lawrence commented that any of the proposed colors can be changed if desired, but acknowledged that people may have voted for a playground proposal because of the colors. She asked the Commission to focus on the features rather than the colors, as the colors could be changed. Commissioner Toth stated that the Commission has been asked to recommend one of these proposals. He commented that it appears the engagement system in place has failed them. He stated that if there were residents who could consistently vote, that would seem to have been a waste of time. Commissioner Muller commented that the residents who attended in person voted only one time. Commissioner Toth asked how they could fix the system going forward and what the Commission should base its decision on. Ms. Lawrence provided background information on the system used to complete previous park surveys and the negative input received from residents related to that system. She stated that for this survey, they used the same process as Valley View Heights. She stated that when she completed the survey, to get a better understanding of the user experience, she did not notice something that encouraged users to take the survey again. She commented that there may be data available that shows the IP address of the user, but she did not pull that data for tonight’s meeting. She stated that she would be open to using another platform. Commissioner Weichert suggested allowing only one vote per household. Chair Blanks commented that many households have more than one person, and they should each be allowed to vote. Ms. Lawrence commented that there were children from the same household who were both allowed to vote for their choice. She asked the Commission to look at the features and consider the input of the residents. She commented that these are locked in prices, and if they start over, they may not receive the same quality. Chair Blanks commented that they are basing this conversation on assumptions and fear that people were voting multiple times. He stated that could have happened, but it is not a fact that occurred. He stated that for his household, there could have been five responses because he would have voted, and he would have allowed each of his children to vote. Commissioner Weichert asked why children are being allowed to vote. Page 18 of 107 Chair Blanks replied that the children are the ones using the playground and, therefore, should have a voice. Commissioner Weichert commented that the playground should be for more than just children. Commissioner Muller commented that people on the Commission have children and grandchildren and will make a recommendation using the resources that have been provided. Commissioner Schifsky stated that the subcommittee had strong feelings about this playground being accessible and multigenerational, with equipment that many different ages can use. She commented that language was removed from the RFP by the Council, which is frustrating. She stated that there is a high senior population in this area, and they do not want to spin around, which is the accessible feature that has been proposed. Commissioner Muller commented that there are many options for color tones, and agreed there are more natural tones that could be chosen. Ms. Lawrence stated that if there are specific color tones, she can work with the vendor to have new renderings made before the Council meeting. She stated that the vendors have not received any funds from the City to provide descriptions and renderings, and therefore wants to be fair in stating that any of the options could have different colors. Commissioner Van Lith recognized that this playground is in full sun and therefore would be interested in the recommendation of the vendor on what colors will be best to not be too hot in the sun. Ms. Lawrence stated that in the future, if they want specifics, it is best to provide that in the RFP. Chair Blanks suggested that the discussion be narrowed to options two and three, and they received all the votes from the in-person survey and also scored highly in the online survey. He stated that personally, he likes option three as he felt that was the closest to the requirement of accessibility. Commissioner Van Lith asked how the poured rubber holds up over time. Ms. Lawrence replied that there is currently a dual surface of poured-in-place and woodchips at Mendakota, noting that has held up pretty well. She recognized that the extreme temperature swings of Minnesota are tough on materials. She noted that material is still in good shape 12 years after installation. Commissioner Weichert suggested taking dollars away from a feature to provide the poured-in- place surfacing to the swings, which a senior may use. Ms. Lawrence stated that she did ask all the vendors if it would be possible to change out the spinner with an accessible swing and reviewed the input she received from the vendors. She noted that some vendors would need to redesign their proposal because of the required fall zone, or additional cost would be added to add more poured-in-place surfacing. She noted that the swing does have a higher cost than the spinner. She explained that it is not as easy as it sounds to remove a piece and add a piece in that spot. She noted that shade was also something highly discussed, but was not required as part of the RFP. She did not believe that Page 19 of 107 any of the playgrounds provide a sufficient amount of shade, which would push them forward for that reason. Commissioner Weichert stated that perhaps some trees could be planted. Ms. Lawrence commented that they could plant trees, but recognized that it will take time for them to provide shade. Commissioner Muller commented that she had heavily used the Ivy Hills Park when her kids were younger. She believed that option three is a similar design to the current playground and commented that younger children do like to spin. She stated that option two does have monkey bars/climbing feature, which is a feature that users requested. She stated that while she does not love the height of option two, that feature does seem to provide some shade within. She did not believe that the survey results should be disregarded, as she only took the survey once. Commissioner Toth commented that during the subcommittee, they thoroughly discussed the proposals, noting that it was not an easy process. He stated that they attempted to find the best fit for all. He stated that for option two, the tall tower was a feature people liked, while options one and two provide features for everyone. He liked the gameboard feature, as that is something all users could enjoy. Commissioner Schifsky stated that kids voted from the schools as well, noting that her teenagers all liked the tall tower feature. She commented that the miracle machines are cool but often become broken. She stated that she thinks the music pieces provide a multigenerational feature that will also hold up well. She was frustrated as she did not believe the proper information was relayed to vendors to get the results they wanted based on the City Council’s change in scope. Ms. Lawrence agreed that option two was very popular with students. She stated that she spoke with Webber Recreation, and there is a warranty on the feature. She commented that while the City has not used all the vendors, she has received positive input from cities that have used them in terms of warranty. She believed that each option has components for each age group and includes a warranty. Commissioner Toth asked if two proposals could be selected and sent to the City Council, allowing the City Council to make the final choice. Ms. Lawrence stated that she is asking the Commission to make a recommendation, and the recommendation the Commission makes is its choice. She stated that she would like to bring this to the Council next week to ensure they could complete a 2025 installation. Commissioner Weichert stated that perhaps they could narrow it to two vendors and communicate their concerns, which would allow them to adjust their proposals in order to provide the desired outcome. Chair Blanks stated that there was a subcommittee that had already narrowed down to these options. Ms. Lawrence stated that she sent the RFP to nine vendors, and they received six proposals from five vendors, which were narrowed to four proposals. She stated that she then spoke with each vendor to ensure they met the requirements of the RFP. She noted that public Page 20 of 107 engagement was then completed, and she followed up with the vendors to ask about switching pieces or adding poured-in-place surfacing. She stated that if additional work is wanted, she would need very clear direction as to what they would want done. She reminded the Commission that the budget is set for this project, and if there are additional delays, this would not be installed in 2025. Commissioner Schifsky stated that she felt there were clear expectations for the RFP, and the Council made different choices. Ms. Lawrence stated that the RFP from the Parks Commission required an accessible swing, and the City Council had concerns that was too narrow of a scope and that the swing would not fit. She stated that the Council wanted the proposals to be more open-ended, which is why, rather than requiring certain items, they were encouraged. She confirmed that it was the direction of the Council that changed the RFP. She stated that if there is a desire for the vendors to change the proposals, she would want to consult with the City Council to ensure the vendors are not wasting their time. Commissioner Schifsky stated that the biggest reason for requiring the accessible swing was to provide a feature that would be multigenerational. Ms. Lawrence replied that staff did due diligence in estimating which features could fit within the space, and the Council was aware that there was potential for the features to fit, but did not want to limit the creativity and scope of the vendors. Commissioner Muller commented that this is the third playground she has been involved with and asked why this is different than the others. Ms. Lawrence provided background information on the previous playground process and noted that Marie was the first playground they used the RFP process in 2020, and they did not require an accessible feature. She stated that Valley View Heights also did not require an accessible feature. She stated that this is the same process used for Valley View Heights and recognized that they began to bring in the accessible feature with this park, as that is a priority for the parks system. She stated that it is important that they provide a playground that everyone can use and that will be a part of the parks system going forward. She recognized that it might be a little more work, but she believes that every resident should have an opportunity to recreate. Commissioner Van Lith stated that it sounds like the subcommittee came up with an idea, and the Council widened the scope. He stated that he would support asking for more options for accessibility rather than the spinning feature, as it appears they would be settling. Chair Blanks commented that would impact the budget and therefore would most likely not be an option. Commissioner Muller commented that it is frustrating when the Commission makes a recommendation, and that is changed by the City Council. She stated that she would be nervous to make the request and waste time for the Council not to change its mind. Ms. Lawrence commented that the Council was not against a swing but did not want to limit the feature to only a swing. She confirmed that the spinning feature is more affordable and fits within the proposals, which is most likely why three vendors chose that option. Page 21 of 107 Commissioner Weichert referenced the price of option one, which would have additional space within the budget, which may allow them to rework the concept. Chair Blanks noted that option only received three percent of the votes, so that is not the option the residents want. Ms. Lawrence stated that the cost option one did not include installation, noting that once installation is added, that would not leave space in the budget for another feature. She stated that all proposals were within a few dollars of each other, with maintenance and installation. Commissioner Muller stated that she has three children and not all children like all features. She stated that some kids do like spinning. She stated that a senior can spin their grandchildren on the feature. Commissioner Weichert commented that seniors like the motion of swinging. Commissioner Muller asked if there is a price point for the spinning feature from Weber. Commissioner Schifsky stated that she could not find that. Commissioner Muller commented that could be a similar add-on request to the shade feature in a previous playground proposal. Commissioner Schifsky stated that in terms of accessibility, the poured-in-place surface provides accessibility to the feature. Ms. Lawrence stated that the poured-in-place surface has a cost of about $30,000. She stated that Webber submitted two proposals, as they could provide an inclusive feature and another without the feature. Commissioner Muller commented that the poured-in-place is a good feature. Ms. Lawrence stated that in reviewing the proposals pretty closely and in speaking with residents, option three provides the most accessible playground, as it is not just one feature that becomes accessible with the poured-in-place surface. She stated that option two provides the wow factor with the height and climbing features. She stated that while option four is great, it does not include an accessible feature. She stated that option one is great, but did not receive much support from the public. She stated that it seems that, based on the conversation of the Commission, the input of the public, and a staff perspective it seems that options two and three best fit the vision for this playground. Commissioner Muller commented that she likes the net circle swing and the variety of the swing options provided in option three. She stated that option three also provides different options to get on and off for those playing tag. Motion Blanks/second Schifsky to recommend option three for the playground replacement at Ivy Hills Park.AYES 6: NAYS 0 Chair Blanks asked if there is input on the color, noting that the City Council will ultimately choose the color, as they changed the colors during the last playground process. Page 22 of 107 Commissioner Schifsky stated that she likes the colors as proposed, as they look fresh, inviting, and match the benches already there. The resident commented that she would change out the white color as it will become dirty quickly. Ms. Lawrence commented that they can state they do not want white, but was unsure how specific they can be on the house feature. Commissioner Schifsky noted that color options may not be a choice on the house feature. Chair Blanks stated that he recommended leaving the choice of color for the City Council to decide, and the Commission agreed. (Recreation Program Coordinator Willow Eisfeldt, Recreation Facilities Coordinator Trey Carlson, and Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek left) 8.b Preliminary Budget FY2026 Discussion Parks and Recreation/Assistant Public Works Director Meredith Lawrence stated that staff have begun the budget discussions for the upcoming season. She explained that typically the budget discussion spans two meetings, with a recommendation from the Commission being made at the June meeting. She reviewed the budget timeline for the City and noted that the parks and Par 3 Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) were included in the Commission packet. She recognized that not everything included in the CIP for each year will likely be included in the final budget, but explained that once the Parks System Master Plan is completed, they will be updating the Parks CIP to describe more accurately what can be done in each year. She noted that projects should be prioritized in the case that not all projects are accepted by the Council for the budget. She reviewed the projects that were included in the 2025 budget, which was a total of about $318,000. She reviewed the projects that were proposed for 2026 within the CIP. Commissioner Weichert asked how often the Valley picnic shelter is used, as she could only recall two events in 34 years. She noted that is a high cost for an item that is not often used. Ms. Lawrence commented that she tends to think that shelter is not often used because of the poor condition and lack of power. She stated that with the greenway and trails, she believed that the picnic shelter would be used more. Commissioner Muller commented that the Girl Scouts use that facility for their bridging ceremonies. Commissioner Weichert commented that the seniors are being ignored, along with football, lacrosse, and soccer. Chair Blanks asked that all Commissioners hold their comments until the presentation is completed. Ms. Lawrence stated that the 2026 projects within the CIP have a total of $580,000, which is similar to other cities of this size spend annually on Parks capital, but that is a large number compared to what the Council has approved in the past. She stated that it is the decision of the Commission as to how much discussion happens tonight, as this will continue to the next meeting as well. She provided a brief overview of the approved 2025 projects and proposed Page 23 of 107 projects for 2026 and future years for the Par 3, noting that those items are discussed separately. She confirmed that the 2025 and 2026 Par 3 projects are self-funded from the course revenue. Chair Blanks stated that ideally, he would like to hold a meeting to discuss this in June. Ms. Lawrence commented that she does not yet have any topics for the June meeting, and therefore the June meeting could be solely focused on this topic. Commissioner Muller recognized that there were projects deferred from 2025 and suggested that at the June meeting, staff highlight the projects from 2025 that were deferred. Ms. Lawrence reviewed the 2025 budget priorities of the Commission and highlighted the items that were deferred. Commissioner Weichert stated that she would like information on how much the shelters are used, as that can help to determine whether shelters should be refurbished or removed. Ms. Lawrence stated that she can bring forward that information, but not all people who use the shelters reserve them. She noted that Mendakota does not allow shelter rentals during tournaments, which also skews results. Commissioner Weichert commented that she often has people approach her home for shelter from a storm because there is nothing available at the park. Chair Blanks asked that all Commission members send a list of their questions to Ms. Lawrence prior to the June meeting. A deadline of May 25 was provided to the Commission to provide that input. Commissioner Schifsky asked for input on whether the County would contribute to a shelter along the greenway. Ms. Lawrence provided a brief update and noted that she can provide more information at the June meeting. 9. Old Business None. 10. Staff Announcements Parks and Recreation/Assistant Public Works Director Meredith Lawrence shared the following announcements: •Thanked her staff as it has been a busy spring preparing for programming and the opening of the facilities. Touch-A-Truck was a big success, and she looked forward to the rebranded Heights Fest. She encouraged the Commission to check out the website and see the updates that have been made. •Other events can be found on the City’s website 11. Student Representative Update None. Page 24 of 107 12. Commission Comments and Park Updates Commissioner Weichert •It is wonderful to see people picking up trash in the parks. Commissioner Schifsky •Thanked everyone for the attention to Ivy Hills. The park looks lovely as vegetation has begun to bloom. •Civic Center has been active with ball games. Commissioner Muller •Rogers Lake and Kensington both look great. Commissioner Van Lith •Noticed a ball game at Victoria Highlands tonight. •Marie is well-used by many different users and many different activities. Commissioner Toth •Asked if the portable bathroom at Valley View could be tucked back a bit, as it is an eyesore. Ms. Lawrence commented that the bathroom was placed in that location because of the accessibility challenges at that park, but noted that they could review the location. Chair Blanks •Valley is getting lots of use. •Excited to have Music in the Parks returning to Market Square. •Appreciated the signs asking people to leave the ducks alone at Mendakota. 13. Adjourn Motion Toth/second Schifsky to adjourn the meeting at 9:05 PM AYES 6: NAYS 0 Minutes drafted by: Amanda Staple TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Page 25 of 107 This page is intentionally left blank CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commission Work Session June 10, 2025 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a work session of the Parks and Recreation Commission, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN 55118. CALL TO ORDER Chair Jaffrey Blanks called the meeting to order at 6:33pm. Commissioners Jo Schifsky, Michael Toth, Jennifer Weichert, Daniel Van Lith and Dan Sherer (arrived at 8:11pm) were also present. Commissioner Michelle Muller and Student Representative Evangeline Fuentes were absent. City staff present included Meredith Lawrence, Parks and Recreation Director/Assistant Public Works Director, Trey Carlson, Recreation Facilities Coordinator, Willow Eisfeldt, Recreation Program Coordinator, and Eydie Myers, Parks and Recreation Intern. Department Updates Director Lawrence introduced Parks and Recreation Intern Eydie Myers and discussed the projects she will be working on this Summer. Director Lawrence provided an update on the 2040 Park System Master Plan and invited Commissioners to attend the consultant’s presentation at the City Council meeting on Tuesday, June 17 at 6:00pm. Director Lawrence provided an update on the Ivy Hills Park Playground project, notifying Commissioners that the City Council decided to reject all project bids and a new Request for Proposals will be brought to the July 8 Parks and Recreation Commission for review. FY2026 Budget Recommendation Director Lawrence provided an overview of the budget process and answered questions about the specific projects listed in the Capital Improvement Plan. After discussion, the Commission’s 2026 Project Recommendations include the following: 1. Dog Park Water Source 2. Tot Lot Water Source 3. Wentworth Park Hockey Board Replacement 4. Wentworth Park Basketball Court Expansion 5. Playground Replacement (based off staff recommendation) 6. Valley Park Picnic Shelter Refresh 7. Bocce Ball Court Addition to Park (staff will research potential locations) 8. Hagstrom-King Ballfield Infield Resurfacing Staff let the Commission know they will notify them when the Parks, Recreation, and Par 3 budgets will be reviewed by the City Council so they can attend and listen to the discussion if they would like. The commission adjourned the meeting at 8:19pm. Minutes Taken By: Meredith Lawrence, Parks and Recreation Director/Assistant Public Works Director Page 26 of 107 7.c This page is intentionally left blank 7.d REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Acknowledge the May Par 3 Financial Report ITEM TYPE: Consent Item DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation CONTACT: Meredith Lawrence, Parks and Recreation/Assistant Public Works Director Trey Carlson, Recreation Facilities Coordinator ACTION REQUEST: Acknowledge the May Par 3 Financial Report. BACKGROUND: The Monthly Par 3 Dashboard is attached for Council review. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: Monthly Expenditure-May is attached. ATTACHMENTS: 1.2025 May P3 Budget to Actual 2.May Financial Dashboard Par 3 CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Premier Public Services & Infrastructure, Economic Vitality & Community Vibrancy Page 27 of 107 MONTHLY EXPENDITURE REPORT MAY 2025 MENDOTA HEIGHTS PAR 3 BUDGET TO ACTUAL REPORT May 2025 (41.67% OF YEAR) May REVENUES May YTD YTD YTD BUDGET 2025 2025 %2024 GREENS, LEAGUE & TOURN FEES $220,000 $42,165 $74,608 33.91%$61,454 RECREATION PROGRAMS $50,000 $1,964 $40,903 81.81%$36,723 CONCESSIONS $36,000 $7,585 $11,406 31.68%$9,695 SUNDRY REVENUE $0 $50 $75 100.00%$100 INTEREST $1,000 $0 $0 0.00%$0 INSURANCE CLAIM $0 $0 $0 0.00%$0 PAR 3 FUND REVENUE TOTAL $307,000 $51,764 $126,991 41.37%$107,972 EXPENDITURES May YTD YTD YTD BUDGET 2025 2025 %2024 CLUBHOUSE SALARIES $48,200 $5,418 $8,755 18.16%$12,009 ADMINISTRATIVE SALARIES $69,821 $5,115 $18,581 26.61%$14,715 FICA/PERA $21,137 $1,954 $4,632 21.91%$3,452 MEDICAL INSURANCE $18,517 $1,543 $4,286 23.15%$3,143 U/E & W/C INSURANCE $3,900 $6,931 $8,687 222.75%$4,928 RENTALS $8,000 $1,780 $1,780 22.26%$1,427 UTILITIES $16,483 $1,533 $4,858 29.47%$4,411 PROFESSIONAL FEES - AUDIT $3,500 $0 $0 0.00%$0 PROF FEES - CONSULTING FEES $3,100 $703 $1,866 0.00%$664 PROF FEES - GROUNDS MGMT $7,250 $0 $0 0.00%$0 PROF FEES - GROUNDS WAGES $27,000 $3,226 $4,927 18.25%$5,217 PROF FEES - TREE MAINTENANCE $5,000 $0 $0 0.00%$0 LIABILITY/AUTO INSURANCE $5,000 $0 $4,495 89.90%$4,100 OPERATING COSTS/SUPPLIES $17,300 $3,145 $5,327 30.79%$4,576 FUEL $3,000 $327 $609 20.32%$373 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE $65,000 $10,022 $28,977 44.58%$13,607 SUNDRY/DUES/MILEAGE/CLOTHING $10,250 $950 $3,202 31.24%$3,058 ONLINE REG & CREDIT CARD FEES $11,600 $1,335 $4,213 36.32%$3,222 $16,191 PAR 3 EXPENDITURES TOTAL $344,058 $43,983 $105,196 30.58%$95,093 Page 28 of 107 Mendota Heights Par 3 Community Golf Course May 2025—Financial Summary May—Tee Time Reservation Breakdown: Online Tee Times=1574 (54% of Total Tee Times) Phone/Walk in Tee Times= 1359 (46% of Total Tee Times) Year to Date Budget Overview—May: Current Operating Surplus as of May, 2025: $21,795 Operating Surplus as of May, 2024: $12,879 Monthly Revenues vs. Expenditures Month Revenues Expenditures Net March 2025 $14,117 $10,742 $3,375 April 2025 $35,483 $16,671 $18,812 May 2025 $51,764 $43,983 $7,781 Golf Round Totals: 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 March 748 0 0 261 308 April 1678 896 1181 1923 2078 May 2285 2797 2923 2664 3043 Total 4711 3693 4104 4848 5429 Golf Rounds by Category: 2025 Regular Senior Junior Veteran Second Round Senior Pass Footgolf Punch Card March 127 8 10 0 1 2 0 160 April 984 129 95 3 36 33 8 790 May 1858 311 131 10 56 23 34 620 Total 2969 448 236 13 93 58 42 1570 Monthly Notes: o When accounting for total monthly rounds, staff track punch card sales as (10) rounds of golf. For March the course sold 16 punch cards, in April the course sold 79 punch cards and in May the course sold 62 which are then multiplied by 10 to get the total rounds tracked for that month—160, 790 and 620 respectively. Category 2025 Budget 2025 YTD Actual % of Budget 2024 YTD Revenues $307,000 $126,991 41.37%$107,972 Expenditures $344,058 $105,196 30.58%$95,093 Net Position -$21,795 -$12,879 Page 29 of 107 o When reporting the Tee Time Reservation Breakdown, the tee times booked reflect how the punch card rounds are used. o If someone buys a punch card in April, they may only use it four times. They also could use the punch card one time for a call-in tee time and three times for separate online tee times Page 30 of 107 7.e REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Adopt Resolution 2025-42 Final Payment and Acceptance of Fire Station Roof Replacement ITEM TYPE: Consent Item DEPARTMENT: Engineering CONTACT: Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director ACTION REQUEST: Approve Resolution 2025-42, to accept the work and approve the final payment for the Fire Station Roof Replacement. BACKGROUND: A complete replacement of the roof over the original fire station footprint was recently completed. The project was awarded to Palmer West Construction for their low bid of $318,800. City Council also approved a change order of $5,746 to install a safety railing ($2,558) and modify a portion of the roof on the fire station addition ($3,188). The total construction costs are $324,546. In addition to the roof replacement, the solar system was required to be removed and reinstalled. The reinstallation of the solar system is scheduled for completion on July 3 under a contract with Ideal Energies for $23,228. The third-party consultant fee of $23,218 will also be able to be closed upon the solar installation. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: The City Council awarded this project to Palmer West Construction Company at their March 18, 2025, City Council meeting for the low bid of $318,800.00. The final payment for this contract is $43,156.00 including the previously approved change orders of $5,746. The total project cost of $367,246 is under the estimated budget of $400,000. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Resolution 2025-42 Accepting Final Payment and Fire Station Roof Replacement CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Premier Public Services & Infrastructure Page 31 of 107 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2025-42 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WORK AND APPROVE THE FINAL PAYMENT FOR THE FIRE STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT. WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract with the City of Mendota Heights on the 25 day of March, 2025, with Palmer West Construction Company, has satisfactorily completed the improvements for the Fire Station Roof Replacement, in accordance with such contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that work completed under said contract is hereby accepted and approved; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on such contract in the amount of $43,156.00, taking the contractor’s receipt in full. Adopted by the Mendota Heights City Council this 15 day of July, 2025. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ______________________________ Stephanie B. Levine, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Bauer, City Clerk Page 32 of 107 7.f REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Approve the Hiring of a Public Works Maintenance Worker ITEM TYPE: Consent Item DEPARTMENT: Administration CONTACT: ACTION REQUEST: Approve the hire of Andrew Phomphakdy as a Public Works Maintenance Worker at a rate of $30.20 per hour per the 2024-2025 Teamsters Union contract. BACKGROUND: The City conducted a robust hiring process including two rounds of interviews for the Public Works Maintenance Worker position. The new Public Works Maintenance Worker employee will join the parks maintenance team in Public Works. Staff selected Andrew Phomphakdy to recommend to City Council for the position. Andrew has previously worked for the City of St. Louis Park public works in the streets department. Prior to that, he has also worked both as a business analyst and served in the National Guard. Staff are confident that Andrew will make a great addition to the public works team. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: The Public Works Maintenance Worker position is a budgeted position. The pay for this position will follow the 2024-2025 Teamsters union contract, which has a range of hourly pay for 2025 of (step one) $30.20 to $39.69 (Step 4). Staff recommends hiring Andrew Phomphakdy at step one ($30.20 per hour) of the maintenance worker pay scale. ATTACHMENTS: None CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Premier Public Services & Infrastructure Page 33 of 107 This page is intentionally left blank 7.g REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Adopt Resolution 2025-44 Formally Accepting Donations from the Heussner Family ITEM TYPE: Consent Item DEPARTMENT: Police CONTACT: Kelly McCarthy, Police Chief ACTION REQUEST: Approve Resolution 2025-44 Accepting donations from the Heussner family. BACKGROUND: Minnesota State Statutes §465.03 "Gifts to Municipalities" requires that all donations be accepted by resolution. On July 1, 2025, after the lifesaving awards, members of the Heussner family wanted to show their appreciation to first responders and left donations at the Police Department. Nate Heussner donated $100 in Chipotle gift cards and $100 in Door Dash gift cards, and Carol and Ralph Heussner left a check for $50.00. The police department does not solicit monetary donations and does not normally accept them. In this instance, and if the council agrees, it feels appropriate to accept the donations and distribute the gift cards to the Mendota Heights Fire Department and MHealth responders, and to put the $50.00 towards food for the next police department meeting. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1.Res. 2025-44 Heussner Donation Acceptance CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Inclusive and Responsive Government Page 34 of 107 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2025-44 ACCEPTING DONATIONS FROM THE HEUSSNER FAMILY WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights desires to follow Minnesota Statute §465.03, “Gifts to Municipalities”; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statutes require a resolution to accept gifts to municipalities; and WHEREAS, the city has previously acknowledged gifts with a resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights has duly considered this matter and wishes to acknowledge the civic-mindedness and generosity of citizens and officially recognizes their donations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights formally accepts a donation of gift cards for $100 to Chipotle, and $100 to Door Dash from Nate Heussner, and $50 from Carol and Ralph Heussner to be distributed to the Mendota Heights Fire Department, MHealth responders and the Mendota Heights Police Department. Adopted by the Mendota Heights City Council this 15th day of July, 2025. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ______________________________ Stephanie B. Levine, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Bauer, City Clerk Page 35 of 107 7.h REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Adopt Resolution 2025-43 to Reject Bids for the Kensington East Street Improvements ITEM TYPE: Consent Item DEPARTMENT: Engineering CONTACT: Lucas Ritchie, Assistant City Engineer Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director ACTION REQUEST: Adopt Resolution 2025-43 rejecting bids for the Kensington East Street Improvements project. BACKGROUND: Council ordered the Kensington East Street Improvements in adopting Resolution 2025-26 at their May 6, 2025, meeting, and directed staff to prepare plans and specifications for this street reconstruction project. The plans were approved and authorized to bid at the June 17, 2025, meeting. Two (2) bids, detailed below, were received in the Mendota Heights Council Chambers on Wednesday, July 9, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. for the Kensington East Street Improvements. NAME OF BIDDER AMOUNT OF BID Minnesota Paving & Materials $1,125,703.68 McNamara Contracting $1,422,035.00 Minnesota Paving & Materials submitted the lowest responsible bid of $1,125,703.68, which is approximately 16% higher than the Engineer's Estimate of $974,225.22. The Kensington East Street Improvements were initially proposed as part of a larger project, which included adjacent roadways to the north of Mendota Heights. This larger project was divided into two phases, one in 2025 and one in 2026, due to funding and staffing limitations during the 2025 construction season. As larger roadway improvement projects typically benefit from economies of scale and yield Page 36 of 107 more competitive unit pricing and overall bids submitted, staff are recommending rejecting the bids received for the Kensington East Street Improvements and instead recombining this project with its northern counterpart, anticipated for construction in 2026. Additional Council action will be required in the future to approve the combined project. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: The estimated project costs and low bidder anticipated costs are further expanded below including indirect costs for administration, engineering, finance, legal, etc.: Project Total Total Estimated Costs Minnesota Paving – Low Bid Costs Percent Difference Street Improvements $614,488.81 $728,890.42 - Indirect Costs for Street Improvements (20%)* $122,897.76 $145,778.08 - Total Costs for Street Improvements $737,386.57 $874,668.51 +19% Trail Improvements $81,090.41 $93,495.47 - Indirect Costs Trail Improvements (20%)* $16,218.08 $18,699.09 - Total Costs for Park Improvements $97,308.50 $112,194.56 +15% Storm Sewer Improvements $159,003.45 $132,761.02 -17% Water Improvements $10,587.00 $14,025.07 +32% Sanitary Improvements $34,398.75 $26,325.07 -23% Total Cost for Utility Improvements $203,989.20 $173,111.16 -15% Saint Paul Regional Water Service Watermain Replacement $74,603.97 $130,144.78 - Indirect Costs for SPRWS (15%) $11,190.59 $19,521.72 - Total Cost for SPRWS Improvements $85,794.56 $149,666.50 +74% Total Improvement Cost $974,172.39 $1,125,641.84 - Total Indirect Costs for City* $150,306.44 $183,998.90 - Total Cost $1,124,478.83 $1,309,640.73 +16% Rounded Total Cost $1,124,480 $1,309,640 - Page 37 of 107 While City utility funding sources are showing a net negative from estimated bid prices to bid prices received, street and trail improvement, of which are funded through the Municipal Levy, reflect a significant net increase and represent a larger share of the overall cost burden. Since special assessment amounts are derived from the total street improvements costs based on the City’s current policy, the estimated special assessment amounts have increased by nearly 20% following the bid opening. Staff recommends that the City Council reject all bids received for the Kensington East Street Improvements. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Res. 2025-43 to Reject Bids for the Kensington East Street Improvements 2.Kensington East Bid Abstract CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Premier Public Services & Infrastructure Page 38 of 107 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2025-43 RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS FOR THE KENSINGTON EAST STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (PROJECT #202506) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the proposed construction of bituminous pavement reclamation, aggregate base, concrete curb and gutter, concrete curb and gutter repair, catch basin repair, bituminous surfacing, storm sewer, ADA improvements, water main maintenance, and appurtenant work of rehabilitating Abbey Way, Canton Court, Haverton Circle, Haverton Road, Morson Circle, and Winthrop Court, bids were received, opened, and tabulated according to law and the following bids were received complying with said advertisement: NAME OF BIDDER AMOUNT OF BID Minnesota Paving & Materials $1,125,703.68 McNamara Contracting $1,872,576.00 and WHEREAS, the Public Works Director recommended that the lowest responsible bid submitted by Minnesota Paving and Materials of Rogers, Minnesota, along with all other submitted bids be rejected. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council as follows: 1. That the bids for Kensington East Street Improvements project are hereby received and rejected. 2. That the bid of Minnesota Paving and Materials of Rogers, Minnesota, submitted for the construction of the above described improvements be and the same is hereby rejected. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this fifteenth day of July, 2025. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Stephanie B. Levine, Mayor ATTEST _________________________ Nancy Bauer, City Clerk Page 39 of 107 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Kensington East Street Improvements MH202506 7/9/2025 ITEM NO.SPEC. NO.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ENGINEER'S ESTIMATED QUANTITY ENGINEER'S ESTIMATED UNIT PRICE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATED AMOUNT BID UNIT PRICE BID AMOUNT BID UNIT PRICE BID AMOUNT 1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION L.S.1.0 $69,000.00 $69,000.00 $54,000.00 $54,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 2 2101.502 CLEARING AND GRUBBING 4" AND LARGER DIAMETER TREE 5 $1,075.00 $5,375.00 $1,002.83 $5,014.15 $1,100.00 $5,500.00 3 2101.502 TREE TRIMMING Each 5 $532.50 $2,662.50 $501.41 $2,507.05 $550.00 $2,750.00 4 2104.503 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER - B618 L.F.2,750 $5.30 $14,574.02 $10.67 $29,342.50 $20.00 $55,000.00 5 2104.503 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER - B624 L.F.30 $5.83 $174.89 $28.09 $842.70 $20.00 $600.00 6 2104.503 REMOVE STORM SEWER PIPE (12"-15" RCP)L.F.123 $16.86 $2,073.25 $20.22 $2,487.06 $25.00 $3,075.00 7 2104.503 REMOVE STORM SEWER STRUCTURE (2x: 2'x3' CBs + 2x 48" CBMHs)Each 4 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 $611.38 $2,445.52 $1,100.00 $4,400.00 8 2104.503 SAWING CONCRETE DRIVEWAY L.F.188 $5.00 $940.00 $4.22 $793.36 $1.00 $188.00 9 2104.503 SAWING BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY L.F.285 $3.00 $855.00 $3.02 $860.70 $1.00 $285.00 10 2104.503 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)L.F.572 $3.00 $1,716.00 $2.82 $1,613.04 $1.00 $572.00 11 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS TRAIL PAVEMENT S.Y.137 $1.50 $205.50 $18.35 $2,513.95 $30.00 $4,110.00 12 2104.504 REMOVE CONCRETE TRAIL PAVEMENT S.Y.50 $15.09 $754.57 $17.22 $861.00 $50.00 $2,500.00 13 2104.504 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S.Y.261 $17.38 $4,535.71 $13.97 $3,646.17 $50.00 $13,050.00 14 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S.Y.469 $11.37 $5,330.69 $11.75 $5,510.75 $30.00 $14,070.00 15 2104.518 SALVAGE BRICK PAVERS S.F.300 $9.30 $2,788.93 $16.05 $4,815.00 $10.00 $3,000.00 16 2106.507 EXCAVATION - COMMON C.Y.1,775 $19.75 $35,056.25 $25.95 $46,061.25 $30.00 $53,250.00 17 2106.507 SUBGRADE/AGGREGATE BASE CORRECTION EXCAVATION OUTSIDE THE AREA OF INFLUENCE OF CONTRACTOR INSTALLED UTILITY TRENCHES (SEE SPECIAL CONDITIONS - SECTION 2)C.Y.1,032 $25.00 $25,800.00 $30.06 $31,021.92 $30.00 $30,960.00 18 2108.504 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, TYPE 5 S.Y.3,406 $2.00 $6,812.00 $2.01 $6,846.06 $2.00 $6,812.00 19 2123.510 ADA COMPLIANCE SUPERVISOR L.S.1 $1,750.00 $1,750.00 $100.28 $100.28 $300.00 $300.00 20 2123.510 COMMON LABOR HR 10 $91.00 $910.00 $100.28 $1,002.80 $75.00 $750.00 21 2123.510 DOZER WITH OPERATOR HR 10 $202.50 $2,025.00 $198.22 $1,982.20 $125.00 $1,250.00 22 2123.510 2 CU YD FRONT END LOADER WITH OPERATOR HR 10 $187.50 $1,875.00 $153.51 $1,535.10 $125.00 $1,250.00 23 2123.510 SKID STEER (BOBCAT) WITH OPERATOR HR 10 $160.00 $1,600.00 $135.04 $1,350.40 $125.00 $1,250.00 24 2123.510 BACK HOE WITH OPERATOR HR 10 $240.00 $2,400.00 $204.38 $2,043.80 $125.00 $1,250.00 25 2123.510 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM)HR 10 $125.00 $1,250.00 $212.60 $2,126.00 $125.00 $1,250.00 26 2215.504 BITUMINOUS STREET PAVEMENT RECLAMATION (8" NOMINAL DEPTH)S.Y.12,384 $4.47 $55,328.17 $8.00 $99,072.00 $17.00 $210,528.00 27 2215.509 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 (RECYCLED, ON-SITE), IN PLACE (P)TON 948 $28.00 $26,544.00 $10.61 $10,058.28 $15.00 $14,220.00 28 2215.509 1 1/2" SCREENED CLEAN ROCK TON 155 $43.00 $6,665.00 $42.94 $6,655.70 $45.00 $6,975.00 29 2232.504 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (1.5" NOMINAL DEPTH) (PRIOR TO WEAR COURSE)S.Y.191 $9.00 $1,719.00 $2.01 $383.91 $10.00 $1,910.00 30 2360.504 3" TYPE SPWEA240B WEARING COURSE FOR TRAILS S.Y.137 $28.25 $3,870.25 $56.14 $7,691.18 $90.00 $12,330.00 31 2360.504 3" TYPE SPWEA240B WEARING COURSE FOR DRIVEWAYS S.Y.469 $25.00 $11,725.00 $55.75 $26,146.75 $90.00 $42,210.00 32 2360.509 TYPE SPWEA340C WEARING COURSE, IN-PLACE (FIRST LIFT = 2.5")TON 1,916 $70.50 $135,078.00 $86.74 $166,193.84 $90.00 $172,440.00 33 2360.509 TYPE SPWEA340C WEARING COURSE, IN-PLACE (SECOND LIFT = 1.5")TON 1,150 $88.50 $101,775.00 $87.80 $100,970.00 $90.00 $103,500.00 34 2451.507 GRANULAR BACKFILL (CV)C.Y.459 $20.00 $9,180.00 $48.00 $22,032.00 $40.00 $18,360.00 35 2502.501 IRRIGATION SYSTEM REPAIR Each 49 $375.00 $18,375.00 $476.34 $23,340.66 $335.00 $16,415.00 36 2503.503 4" PVC STORM SEWER PIPE DRAIN L.F.60 $65.99 $3,959.55 $38.13 $2,287.80 $40.00 $2,400.00 37 2503.503 12" RCP STORM SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS V L.F.129 $75.03 $9,678.65 $72.34 $9,331.86 $75.00 $9,675.00 38 2503.503 15" RCP STORM SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS V L.F.15 $75.03 $1,125.42 $79.43 $1,191.45 $82.00 $1,230.00 39 2506.502 CONNECT 4" PVC STORM SEWER PIPE DRAIN TO EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE Each 2 $850.00 $1,700.00 $917.22 $1,834.44 $415.00 $830.00 40 2506.502 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER PIPE (12"-15" RCP)Each 4 $1,572.39 $6,289.54 $1,045.51 $4,182.04 $1,715.00 $6,860.00 41 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (2'x3' CATCH BASIN)Each 2 $4,250.00 $8,500.00 $2,327.15 $4,654.30 $7,500.00 $15,000.00 42 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (48" DIA. CATCH BASIN MANHOLE)Each 2 $5,500.00 $11,000.00 $3,209.02 $6,418.04 $9,000.00 $18,000.00 43 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (48" DIA. STORM SEWER MANHOLE)Each 2 $5,500.00 $11,000.00 $3,210.35 $6,420.70 $9,500.00 $19,000.00 44 2506.502 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING (STORM SEWER MANHOLE)Each 1 $1,065.00 $1,065.00 $995.38 $995.38 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 45 2506.502 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING (STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN)Each 23 $1,437.75 $33,068.25 $600.00 $13,800.00 $1,500.00 $34,500.00 46 2506.502 ADJUST FRAME & RING CASTING (SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE)Each 19 $1,597.50 $30,352.50 $1,200.00 $22,800.00 $1,500.00 $28,500.00 47 2506.502 INSTALL CASTING (NEW), INCLUDING CRETEX PLASTIC ADJUSTMENT RINGS Each 2 $1,265.00 $2,530.00 $4,797.71 $9,595.42 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 48 2506.502 CONSTRUCT RAIN GARDEN S.Y.300 $75.04 $22,511.34 $82.58 $24,774.00 $20.00 $6,000.00 49 2506.502 REPLACE VALVE BOX, INCLUDING PARTS Each 5 $1,005.50 $5,027.50 $2,500.00 $12,500.00 $3,500.00 $17,500.00 50 2506.502 ADJUST VALVE BOX, INCLUDING PARTS Each 10 $654.08 $6,540.75 $1,050.00 $10,500.00 $1,500.00 $15,000.00 51 2506.502 ADJUST CURB STOP, INCLUDING PARTS Each 7 $505.50 $3,538.50 $500.00 $3,500.00 $500.00 $3,500.00 52 2506.502 SACRIFICIAL ANODE RETRO-FIT (2x 32# MAGNEISIUM ANODES)Each 15 $1,352.88 $20,293.26 $3,603.75 $54,056.25 $3,500.00 $52,500.00 53 2521.518 6" CONCRETE WALK (PEDESTRIAN RAMPS, LANDINGS, & TRANSITION PANELS)S.Y.267 $84.89 $22,665.08 $122.07 $32,592.69 $190.00 $50,730.00 54 2521.518 TRUNCATED DOME PANEL S.F.157 $71.36 $11,203.30 $60.17 $9,446.69 $60.00 $9,420.00 55 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 (HAND FORMED)L.F.2,750 $29.13 $80,095.52 $30.00 $82,500.00 $45.00 $123,750.00 56 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B624 (HAND FORMED)L.F.30 $34.95 $1,048.52 $32.09 $962.70 $45.00 $1,350.00 57 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN VALLEY GUTTER (3FT) (HAND FORMED)S.Y.305 $82.50 $25,162.50 $132.12 $40,296.60 $84.00 $25,620.00 58 2531.504 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S.Y.261 $83.00 $21,663.00 $89.20 $23,281.20 $180.00 $46,980.00 59 2540.618 INSTALL SALVAGED PAVER DRIVEWAY S.F.300 $18.38 $5,514.75 $32.09 $9,627.00 $25.00 $7,500.00 60 2564.502 TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL L.S.1.0 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 61 2564.502 INSTALL SIGN POST Each 7 $65.00 $455.00 $250.71 $1,754.97 $105.00 $735.00 62 2564.502 INSTALL SIGN TYPE C Each 5 $52.50 $262.50 $50.14 $250.70 $210.00 $1,050.00 63 2564.502 INSTALL SIGN TYPE SPECIAL Each 14 $52.50 $735.00 $45.13 $631.82 $265.00 $3,710.00 64 2564.518 SIGN TYPE C S.F.45 $28.50 $1,282.50 $32.09 $1,444.05 $42.00 $1,890.00 65 2564.518 SIGN TYPE SPECIAL S.F.124 $32.00 $3,968.00 $30.08 $3,729.92 $37.00 $4,588.00 66 2573.501 EROSION CONTROL SUPERVISOR L.S.1 $8,500.00 $8,500.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $750.00 $750.00 67 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT(S)L.S.1.00 $3,925.00 $3,925.00 $501.41 $501.41 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 68 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION DURING CONSTRUCTION Each 27 $85.01 $2,295.14 $125.35 $3,384.45 $168.00 $4,536.00 69 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE COMPOST L.F.504 $3.65 $1,839.60 $3.01 $1,517.04 $4.00 $2,016.00 70 2574.507 SELECT TOPSOIL BORROW (LV)C.Y.127 $50.17 $6,371.01 $62.57 $7,946.39 $65.00 $8,255.00 71 2574.508 FERTILIZER TYPE 3 LB.19 $1.83 $34.71 $0.98 $18.62 $4.00 $76.00 72 2575.508 SEED MIXTURE 25-151 LB.19 $7.51 $142.75 $4.86 $92.34 $10.00 $190.00 73 2575.508 HYDROLIC STABILIZED FIBER MATRIX LB.297 $2.15 $638.87 $1.21 $359.37 $10.00 $2,970.00 74 2575.508 SODDING TYPE LAWN S.Y.847 $16.02 $13,568.94 $19.00 $16,093.00 $17.00 $14,399.00 75 2575.523 APPLICATION OF WATER FOR TURF, AFTER 30 DAYS MG 46 $60.60 $2,787.75 $66.06 $3,038.76 $65.00 $2,990.00 76 2582.503 12" SOLID LINE WHITE-EPOXY L.F.345 $12.36 $4,264.20 $7.02 $2,421.90 $7.00 $2,415.00 77 2582.503 4" SOLID LINE WHITE-EPOXY L.F.110 $8.16 $897.60 $10.03 $1,103.30 $21.00 $2,310.00 TOTAL $974,225.22 $1,125,703.68 $1,422,035.00 Minnesota Paving & Materials McNamara Contracting BID ABSTRACT PROJECT: PROJECT #: Date: PROJECT TOTAL Page 40 of 107 This page is intentionally left blank 7.i REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Approve Developer's Agreement for the Cobalt Business Center ITEM TYPE: Consent Item DEPARTMENT: Engineering CONTACT: Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director ACTION REQUEST: Approve the Developer's Agreement for the Cobalt Business Center. BACKGROUND: A building permit has been submitted for the redevelopment of Le Cordon Blue at 1315 Mendota Heights Road. A Developer's Agreement is not typically used for this type of activity, but with the relocation of a city-owned pond, staff determined an agreement would better protect the city. The Developer's Agreement requires Letters of Credit (LOC) for the installation of the public and private storm sewer improvements at twenty-five percent (25%) of the total cost of the improvements. The cost of this work is estimated at $289,530, resulting in a LOC of $72,382.50. The city also requires security for Erosion and Sediment control, which is calculated at one hundred and twenty-five percent (125%) of the erosion and restoration costs, estimated at $81,207 for a LOC of $101,508.75. In addition to the above site costs, the forest preservation permit for this site requires an escrow of $71,800 which will be provided under a third LOC. This amount is calculated at $100 per caliper inch of the total 718 caliper inches required to be replaced. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: Endeavor Development is providing Letters of Credit naming the City of Mendota Heights for improvements at the Cobalt Business Center. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Cobalt Business Center - Development Agreement - 07.07.2025 CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Economic Vitality & Community Vibrancy, Premier Public Services & Infrastructure, Environmental Sustainability & Stewardship Page 41 of 107 173594522v3 Page 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this __ day of July, 2025, by and between the City of Mendota Heights, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the "City"), and Cobalt Business Center, LLC, (the "Developer"). WHEREAS, the Developer has made application to the City Council for approval of the Cobalt Business Center located at 1315 Mendota Heights Road within the corporate limits of the City legally described on Exhibit A, attached hereto (the "Development"); and, WHEREAS, the City Council has on June 17, 2025, granted vacation of a drainage and utility easement for storm water purposes to relocate a storm water storage pond on Lot 7, Block 1, Mendota Heights Industrial Park Plat, hereinafter described, all in accordance with the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual promises and conditions hereinafter contained, it is hereby agreed as follows: 1.DEVELOPER IMPROVEMENTS: The Developer will construct at Developer's expense the following improvements according to the following terms and conditions: A.The Developer shall do all site grading, common greenway and open spaces, storm water storage ponds, surface drainage ways and the sodding of boulevards, all in accordance with the grading, drainage, landscaping and site plans attached as Exhibit B (“Plans”). The Plans are hereby approved by the City, except for building permit review and approval by City staff. Any changes to the Plans during construction shall be submitted to the City for approval and no changes shall be made by the Developer until approval is obtained from the City. B.The Developer shall control soil erosion ensuring: 1.The Developer has submitted an erosion control plan, detailing all erosion control measures to be implemented during construction as part of the Plans. 2.Appropriate control measures as required by the City Engineering Department shall be installed prior to development and as may be necessary to control erosion. 3.Land shall be developed such that adequate erosion and siltation controls can be provided as construction progresses. 4.The Developer shall not locate its equipment within the public right- of-way adjacent to this development without the express written Page 42 of 107 173594522v3 Page 2 consent of the Public Works Director. C.The Developer shall be responsible for maintaining the location of and protecting curb stops, water services and sewer services. Any service or curb stop damaged as a result of the construction work being performed by the Developer or any of its contractors or subcontractors shall be repaired or replaced, at the Developer’s expense, as specified by the City. The Developer shall make all adjustments to the curb stops to bring them flush with the topsoil (after grading) or driveway surface. D.The Developer shall be responsible for street maintenance resulting from construction work being performed by the Developer or any of its contractors or subcontractors, including maintenance of curbs, boulevards, sod and street sweeping until the project is complete. The Developer shall maintain all streets free of debris and soil that has resulted from the work being performed by the Developer or any of its contractors or subcontractors until the development is completed. Warning signs shall be placed when hazards develop in streets and directing attention to detours. The repair of any damage done to the streets or public utilities by Developer or any of its contractors or subcontractors, shall be at the cost of the Developer. E.The Developer shall dedicate by easement the drainage and storm water holding pond required by the City via a separate easement agreement. The Developer shall be responsible for storm sewer cleaning and holding pond dredging within the Development, as required, by the City. The City and Developer shall enter into a drainage, utility, and storm water holding pond easement prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Development in a form agreed upon by City and Developer. The easement shall be recorded against the Development. The City will retain future pond maintenance responsibilities unless the maintenance is caused from negligence of the Developer. F.The Developer shall be responsible for securing all necessary approvals and permits from all appropriate federal, state, regional and local jurisdictions prior to the commencement of site grading or construction. G.Tree Protection and Clearing. The Devloper shall submit a Forest Management Plan. Prior to the clearing operation being initiated, all clearing limits and trees to be protected as determined by Developer shall be clearly marked. Tree protection fencing shall be installed and maintained until after grading is complete. H.Warranty of Title. By its execution hereof, Developer hereby warrants and represents that it has the exclusive and marketable fee title to the subject property. Developer further warrants and represents that there are no liens or encumbrances against the title, and that it is fully authorized to execute this agreement as the fee owner of the subject lands. I.Fire Hydrants. Fire Hydrants shall meet the requirements of the standards for the Installation of Water Mains from Saint Paul Regional Water Services. Page 43 of 107 173594522v3 Page 3 2.DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPER IMPROVEMENTS ESTIMATED COST: As allowed by Title 12-1G-4(B) of the City Code of the City of Mendota Heights, performance of construction elements required to comply with this chapter shall be given in amounts determined to be sufficient to reasonably ensure compliance in the construction of the following Developer Improvements: A.Site infrastructure (storm water storage pond and related storm water inflow and outflow utilities and improvements): $289,530 B.Erosion control: $81,207 SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR EROSION CONTROL (125%): $101,508.75 SECURITY REQUIREMENT FOR SITE INFRASTRUCTURE (25%): $72,382.50 TOTAL DEVELOPER ESCROW: $173,891.25 3.CONSTRUCTION OF DEVELOPER IMPROVEMENTS. A.Construction. The construction, installation, materials and equipment shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the City. B.Inspection. All of the work shall be under and subject to the inspection and approval of the City and, where appropriate, any other governmental agency having jurisdiction. C.Faithful Performance of Construction Contracts and Security. The Developer will fully and faithfully comply with all terms and conditions of any and all contracts entered into by the Developer for the installation and construction of all Developer Improvements. Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, for the purpose of guaranteeing the performance by Developer of the construction of the Developer Improvements in a timely and proper manner, Developer or its general contractor shall furnish the City with the security defined in Section 2 above (“Security”) in the form of one the following as determined by Developer: (i) a Performance Bond to the City of Mendota Heights in a form to be approved by the City Attorney; or (ii) a letter of credit in a form reasonably agreed upon by the parties, from a bank acceptable to the City; or (iii) a cash escrow. The City may draw down the Security for any violation of the terms of this Agreement upon written notice and 30 day opportunity to commence and continue to cure any default provided to Developer, and notice as required under the letter of credit. If the Security is drawn down, the draw shall be used to cure the default. Additionally, Developer guarantees and agrees that, should the City of Mendota Heights need to apply a claim on said Security, that Developer shall pay all attorney's fees and administrative expenses associated with said action. D.Security Terms. The Security provided by the Developer or its general contractor's Page 44 of 107 173594522v3 Page 4 shall be issued for a period of time not less than one (1) year in duration and shall be reduced as setforth herein. With City administrative approval, the Security shall be reduced from time to time as Developer Improvements are completed and financial obligations are paid, but in no case shall the security be reduced to a point less than 10% of the original estimated construction costs of the Development Improvements until: (1) all Developer Improvements have been completed; (2) all financial obligations to the City satisfied; and (3) the required “as-built” drawings have been received by the City.Any reduction in the Security shall be made by City staff in accordance with the following procedure. Developer shall provide written notice to the City requesting a reduction in the Security. The Developer notice shall include evidence of completion and payment of the Developer Improvements for which a reduction is requested, together with the cost of the completed Developer Improvements. The City shall inspect the improvements and evidence provided by the Developer and shall approve or deny any requested reduction in the Security with specific reasons for denial within 30 days. E.Warranty. Developer hereby guarantees the workmanship and materials for a period of one year following the City's final written administrative acceptance of the Developer Improvements; provided that the City shall inspect and administratively accept or reject the Developer Improvements in writing with 30 days after notice of completion from the Developer. Security shall be reduced down to 10% during the one-year warranty period. F.Binding Effect. The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto and shall be binding upon all future owners of all or any part of the Development and shall be deemed covenants running with the land. References herein to Developer, if there be more than one, shall mean each and all of them. The Agreement, at the option of the City, shall be placed on record so as to give notice hereof to subsequent purchasers and encumbrances of all or any part of the Development and all recording fees, if any, shall be paid by the Developer. 4.GENERAL REQUIREMENTS A.Landscaping. A final landscaping plan has been developed and submitted to the Community Development Manager by Developer as part of the Plans. In addition the following modifications to the landscape plan shall be implemented subject to final modifications by the Community Development Manager: 1.As allowed by Title 12-1D-13-2(D)(4) of the City Code of the City of Mendota Heights, Security shall be provided by the Developer in an amount equal $71,800, which amount is calculated as $100 per caliper inch for the 718 caliper inches required to be replaced. The Security shall be conditioned upon reimbursement of all expenses incurred by the City for engineering, legal or other fees in connection with making or completing such improvements. The Security shall be provided Page 45 of 107 173594522v3 Page 5 prior to the issuance of any building permit and shall be valid for a period of time equal to one full growing season after the date of installation of the landscaping. The City may accept a letter of credit, cash escrow or equivalent as Security in an amount and under such conditions as the City may determine to be appropriate. Upon expiration of the time period, inspections will be conducted by City staff to verify satisfactory completion of all conditions. After satisfactory inspection, the Security shall be returned. If the requirements are not satisfied, the City may use the Security to satisfy the requirements. The City may also use the Security for maintenance of erosion control or to satisfy any other requirements of this Agreement or the City Code. 2.The owner, tenant and their respective agents shall be jointly and responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping in a condition presenting a healthy, neat and orderly appearance and free from refuse and debris. Plants and ground cover which are shown on the approved landscape plan and which have died within one (1) year after completion and acceptance by the City shall be replaced as soon as seasonal or weather conditions allow. B.Trash Receptacles. Two trash receptacle areas have been designated on the site plan for the entire building. All tenants of the building will be required to utilize these trash receptacles or will be required to store trash internally. C.Signage. A signage plan shall be submitted by the Developer and submitted and subject to review and specific approval of City Staff. All proposed signage for the development shall conform to the signage plan before any sign permits can be issued. D.Rooftop Mechanical Units. The Developer shall provide additional information regarding any potential visibility of rooftop mechanical units to ensure compliance with the City Code requirements. E.Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Developer shall indemnify and hold harmless the City of Mendota Heights, its agents and employees from and against any and all claims, damages, losses or expenses, including but not limited to attorney's fees, arising out of the issuance of this Developer's Agreement by the City of Mendota Heights and/or arising out of the performance or non-performance of its obligations hereunder by Developer. F.Certificate of Occupancy. After the Developer has completed the construction of the Developer Improvements and other work required of it under this Agreement, the City shall issue a certificate of occupancy with 21 days after written request from the Developer or other lot owner within the Development, unless denied as set forth below. The certificate of occupancy shall be in recordable form and may be recorded against the Development. Upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy, Page 46 of 107 173594522v3 Page 6 the Developer, its successors and assigns, and all future owners of the property shall be released from all obligations to construct the Developer Improvements under this Agreement, except that any warranty and maintenance obligations remaining thereafter shall continue to remain. If the City shall refuse or deny to provide a certificate of occupancy in accordance with the provisions of this Section, the City shall provide the requesting party with a written statement indicating in detail in what respects the construction of the Developer Improvements are not completed, or any other failure or default under this Agreement, and what measures or acts will be necessary, in the opinion of the City, in order to obtain a certificate of occupancy. The written refusal or denial of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall be provided by the City within the same 21- day period during which a certificate of occupancy would be issued. G.Transfer of Property. In the event that the Developer sells the Development to an independent third party, then, within 15 days after request by Developer, the City shall acknowledge and certify certain facts in connection with this Agreement and the status of construction of the Developer Improvements. The City shall provide this certification to Developer and any potential buyer of the Development. The certification shall reference the following: (i) that the Developer and buyer may rely on the representations and agreements made by the City in the certification; (ii) the status of the completion of the Developer Improvements; (iii) the amount of any Security remaining and that any remaining amounts will be returned to Developer and not the buyer; (iv) that the Developer and not the buyer remain responsible for obligations under this Agreement, and that buyer and any subsequent owners of the Development are hereby released from all obligations under this Agreement; (v) whether or not there exists any defaults, events of default, or conditions which with the passage of time or giving of notice would constitute a default under this Agreement; and (vi) if applicable, that this Agreement is completed and hereby terminated and of no further force and effect. Page 47 of 107 173594522v3 Page 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Developer have caused this Agreement to be duly executed on the date and year first above written. In the presence of: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Stephanie B. Le vine Mayor Nancy Bauer City Clerk IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Developer have caused this Agreement to be duly executed on the date and year first above written. In the presence of: COBALT BUSINESS CENTER LLC Its Page 48 of 107 173594522v3 Page 8 Exhibit A to Developer’s Agreement Legal Description of Development Lot 6, Block 1, MENDOTA HEIGHTS INDUSTRIAL PARK, Dakota County, Minnesota. AND That part of Lot 7, Block 1, MENDOTA HEIGHTS INDUSTRIAL PARK, lying South of the Easterly extension of the South line of Lot 5, Block 1, MENDOTA HEIGHTS INDUSTRIAL PARK, through Lot 7 to the East line of said Lot 7, Dakota County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) Page 49 of 107 173594522v3 Page 9 Exhibit B to Developer’s Agreement Plans Page 50 of 107 STORMWATER POND PROPOSED BUILDING623' x 280'174,288 S.F.SITEC-0.0PERMIT SET COVER SHEET 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700COBALT BUSINESS CENTERMENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTAVICINITY MAPNOT TO SCALESHEET INDEXCOVER SHEETEXISTING CONDITIONSC-0.0C.1.0SWPPP NOTES AND DETAILSSHEET TITLENO.ARCHITECT MOHAGEN HANSEN1000 TWELVE OAKS CNETER DRIVE STE 200WAYZATA, MN 55391CONTACT: BRIAN HUNKEEM: bhunke@mohangenhansen.comPROJECTLOCATIONGENERAL CONTRACTOR DEVELOPERENDEAVOR DEVELOPMENT 200 SOUTHDALE CENTERMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55435CONTACT: EVAN MATTSON EM: evan@endeavorshield.comPH: 952-426-7400PH: 651-343-1118PERMIT SETSITE PLANC-3.0GRADING PLANC-4.0C-4.2C-5.0 UTILITY PLANC-6.0C-6.1DETAIL SHEET 1 FOREST MANAGEMENT PLANL-1.0L-1.1ALLIANT ENGINEERING, INC.733 MARQUETTE AVE STE 700 PH: 612-758-3080 / FX: 612-758-3099CONSULTANTCIVIL ENGINEERCLARK WICKLUNDLICENSE NO. 40922LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTEM: cwicklund@alliant-inc.comMARK KRONBECK, PLA, ASLALICENSE NO. 26222EM: mkronbeck@alliant-inc.comMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-2340SURVEYOR DETAIL SHEET 2 DANIEL EKREM LICENSE NO. 57366EM: dekrem@alliant-inc.comTREE INVENTORYEROSION CONTROL PLANC-4.1LANDSCAPE PLANL-2.0L-2.1PHOTOMETRIC PLANLANDSCAPE DETAILSP-1.0COBALT BUSINESS CENTERDEMOLITION PLANC-2.0C-6.2MNDOT DETAILSTBDC-5.1 WATERMAIN PLAN AND PROFILEPage 51 of 107 85485685886086286486686886686888 2 8 8 08788768748 7 2 87 08688668648 6 28608588 5 6 8 5 4852 848 850 852 854 856 858 860 84 8 85 0 85 2 85 4 85 6 85 8 86 0 862 864864 862862862852860850 8 5 0 870870872874 876 878880882884886890892874876878880882884868 864 862 860 866866866 N89°52'24"E 881.26 N0°11'53"W 500.03N89°52'24"E 888.46 N0°15'16"W 423.94R=434.70 L=76.50 Δ=10°04'59" C.Brg=N5°17'45"W C=76.40 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDENTERPRISE DRSITE C-1.0COBALT BUSINESS CENTERPERMIT SETEXISTING CONDITIONS733 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 www.alliant-inc.com Suite 700 Lot 6, Block 1, MENDOTA HEIGHTS INDUSTRIAL PARK, Dakota County, Minnesota. AND That part of Lot 7, Block 1, MENDOTA HEIGHTS INDUSTRIAL PARK, lying South of the Easterly extension of the South line of Lot 5, Block 1, MENDOTA HEIGHTS INDUSTRIAL PARK, through Lot 7 to the East line of said Lot 7, Dakota County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 1. Monuments placed (or a reference monument or witness to the corner) at all major corners of the boundary of the property, unless already marked or referenced by existing monuments or witnesses to the corner are shown hereon. 2. Address of the property is 1315 Mendota Heights Road and indicated on map. 3. The property lies within Zone X (unshaded - areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain) of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Community Panel No. 27037C0081E, effective December 2, 2011. 4. The area of the above described property is 440,946 square feet or 10.123 acres. 5. Contour lines depicted hereon are based on ground measurements and referenced to North American Vertical Datum of 1988(NAVD88). Benchmark: Top nut of Hydrant located at the southeast corner of subject property and has a elevation of 882.97 ft. 6(a). No zoning information provided. 7(a). Exterior dimensions of all buildings are shown at ground level. 8. Substantial features observed in the process of conducting fieldwork, are shown hereon. 9. There are 524 regular parking stalls and 13 handicapped parking stalls on site. 11(a). The locations of existing public utilities on or serving the property are depicted based on Gopher State One Call Ticket Nos. 250761178 & 250761125, available city maps, records and observed evidence locations. Lacking excavation, underground utility locations may not be exact. Verify critical utilities prior to construction or design 13. Names of adjoining owners are depicted based on Dakota County GIS tax information. 16. There was no observed evidence of earth moving work or building construction at the time of our field work. 17. We are not aware of any proposed changes in street right of way lines or observable evidence of recent street or sidewalk construction or repairs. TABLE A ITEMS The following are survey related exceptions set forth in Schedule B, Part II of the herein referenced Title Commitment: Item No. 12: Drainage and utility easements as shown on the recorded plat of Mendota Heights Industrial Park, recorded July 22, 1969, as Document No. 363029. Depicted on survey. NOTE: As evidenced by Declaration Vacating Private Easements dated October 3, 1978, recorded January 9, 1979, as Document No. 529936, all railway easements shown on the plat which were not dedicated as a public easement were vacated. Item No. 13: Declaration of Covenants by Northland Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, dated October 31, 1978, recorded December 21, 1978, as Document No. 528779. Affects property; not plottable. As amended by Amended, Extended and Restated Declaration of Covenants dated July 31, 1987, recorded August 6, 1987, as Document No. 799509. As affected by Waiver Letter dated May 3, 2004, recorded November 17, 2004, as Document No. 2268025. Affects property; not plottable. Item No. 14: Declaration of Covenants by The Northland Company, a Minnesota corporation, dated December 23, 1986, recorded January 15, 1987, as Document No. 762195. As amended by Amended, Extended and Restated Declaration of Covenants dated July 31, 1987, recorded August 6, 1987, as Document No. 799509. Affects property; not plottable. Item No. 15: Easement for drainage and utility for storm water purposes, together with any incidental rights, in favor of the City of Mendota Heights, a municipal corporation, as contained in the Easement Agreement, dated October 15, 1996, recorded November 6, 1996, as Document No. 1386087. Depicted on survey. Item No. 16: Memorandum of Ground Lease Agreement by and between CEC Investment LLC, as Landlord, and CEC Holdings LLC, as Tenant, dated September 30, 2004, recorded December 13, 2004, as Document No. 2275506. As affected by Limited Warranty Deed dated February 1, 2011, recorded May 3, 2011, as Document No. 2798820. Affects property; not plottable. Item No. 17: Terms, conditions, covenants, reservations, regulations and easements as contained in the Private Water Main Agreement, dated March 22, 2005, recorded July 12, 2005, as Document No. 2338919. Depicted on survey. Item No. 18: Terms and conditions as contained in the Resolution No. 10-103, Approving a Conditional Use Permit for a Restaurant and Cafe, recorded December 17, 2010, as Document No. 2773148. Affects property; not plottable. Item No. 19: Riparian rights of others in and to wetlands crossing or abutting premises. No wetland flags were observed in the process of conducting the fieldwork. SCHEDULE B, PART II EXCEPTIONS VICINITY MAP LEGEND 1. This survey and the property description shown here on are based upon information found in the commitment for title insurance prepared by First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services, file no. NCS-1253903-MPLS, dated March 13, 2025. 2. The south line of Lot 6, Block 1, MENDOTA HEIGHTS INDUSTRIAL PARK is assumed to have a bearing of N89°52'24"E 3. All distances are in feet. 4. The property has vehicular access to Mendota Heights Rd and Enterprise Dr, public rights of way, via curb cuts. NOTES To Endeavor Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company and First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services: This is to Certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2021 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6(a), 7(a), 8, 9, 11(a), 13, 16 and 17 of Table A thereof. The field work was completed on April 17, 2025. Date of Plat or Map: __________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Daniel Ekrem, Professional Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 57366 Email: dekrem@alliant-inc.com CERTIFICATION Know what's below. Call before you dig. R Dial 811 0 SCALE IN FEET 25 50 100 N Page 52 of 107 N89°52'24"E 881.26 N0°11'53"W 500.03N89°52'24"E 888.46 N0°15'16"W 423.94R=434.70 L=76.50 Δ=10°04'59" C.Brg=N5°17'45"W C=76.40 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDENTERPRISE DRC-2.0COBALT BUSINESS CENTERPERMIT SETDEMOLITION PLAN733 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 www.alliant-inc.com Suite 700 Know what's below. Call before you dig. R Dial 811 LEGEND:DEMOLITION NOTES: Page 53 of 107 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDENTERPRISE DRSTORMWATER POND PROPOSED BUILDING623' x 280'174,288 S.F.20' FRONT PARKING SETBACK40' YARD BUILDING SETBACK20' FRONT PARKING SETBACK40' YARD BUILDING SETBACK10' FRONT PARKING SETBACK 30' YARD BUILDING SETBACK 10' FRONT PARKING SETBACK50' YARD BUILDING SETBACKC-3.0COBALT BUSINESS CENTER PERMIT SET SITE PLAN 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700Know what's below.Call before you dig.RDial 811SITE NOTES:SITE LEGEND:SITE DATA:Page 54 of 107 8548568588608628648668688668688 8 0 8 7 8 876874 8 7 2 87 08688668648 6 28608588 5 6 8 5 4852 848 850 852 854 856 858 860 84 8 85 0 85 2 85 4 85 6 85 8 86 0 862 864864 862862862852860850 8 5 0 870870872874 876 878880882884886890892874876878880882884868 864 862 860 866866866 N89°52'24"E 881.26 N0°11'53"W 500.03N89°52'24"E 888.46 N0°15'16"W 423.94R=434.70 L=76.50 Δ=10°04'59" C.Brg=N5°17'45"W C=76.40 STORMWATER PONDPROPOSED BUILDING 623' x 280' 174,288 S.F.850852852852852850848845856 854 852 850 848 846845844846838844 838xBERM:852.4C-4.0COBALT BUSINESS CENTERPERMIT SETGRADING PLAN733 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 www.alliant-inc.com Suite 700 LEGEND: GRADING NOTES: EROSION CONTROL SCHEDULE: EROSION MAINTENANCE: Page 55 of 107 854856858860862864 866 868 866 868 8828808788 7 6 8 7 48728708 6 8 8 6 6 8 6 4862860858856854852 848850852854856858860848850852854856858860862864 864862862 862852860850850 870 870 8 7 2 8 7 4876 87 8 880 882 884 886 890 892 874 876 878 880 882 884 868864862860866 866 866STORMWATER POND PROPOSED BUILDING623' x 280'174,288 S.F.850852852852852850848845856854852850848846845844846838844838xBERM:852.4 C-4.1COBALT BUSINESS CENTER PERMIT SET EROSION CONTROL PLAN 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700LEGEND:Page 56 of 107 C-4.2COBALT BUSINESS CENTERPERMIT SETSWPPP NOTES AND DETAILS733 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 www.alliant-inc.com Suite 700 EROSION CONTROL SCHEDULE: EROSION CONTROL GENERAL NOTES: ” WINTER STABLIZATION: DEWATERING: ACTIVE SWPPP LEGEND CONTRACTOR: OWNER/DEVELOPER: EROSION CONTROL RESPONSIBLE PARTIES: SWPPP INSPECTION: ENGINEER: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP WEB SOIL SURVEY MAP SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ POLLUTION PREVENTION ‐ FINAL STABLIZATION ‐ MANAGEMENT MEASURE CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE INFILTRATION BMP NOTES: WEB SOIL SURVEY LEGEND IMPAIRED WATER SPECIAL REQUIREMENT: Page 57 of 107 STORMWATER PONDPROPOSED BUILDING 623' x 280' 174,288 S.F. C-5.0COBALT BUSINESS CENTERPERMIT SETUTILITY PLAN733 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 www.alliant-inc.com Suite 700 UTILITY NOTES: LEGEND ” ” ” ” ” STORM SEWER SCHEDULE: (REFER TO PLAN VIEW FOR CB 4A) Page 58 of 107 850852852856 854STORMWATER PONDPROPOSED BUILDING 623' x 280' 174,288 S.F. Alignment - (1) PROFILE Alignment - (1) PROFILE C-5.1COBALT BUSINESS CENTERPERMIT SETWATERMAIN PLAN AND PROFILE733 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 www.alliant-inc.com Suite 700 UTILITY NOTES: ” ” ” ” ” Page 59 of 107 C-6.0COBALT BUSINESS CENTERPERMIT SETDETAIL SHEET 1733 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 www.alliant-inc.com Suite 700 EXPANSION JOINT DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 7 4 PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP NOT TO SCALE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN NOT TO SCALE 5 FINISHED GRADE (SURFACE VARIES) PAVED SURFACE (PAVEMENT TYPE VARIES) COMPACTED AGGREGATE BASE SIZE NO. 53 AT 95% PROCTOR DENSITY COMPACTED SUBGRADE13 1/2"5"8"7"12" CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER 6"R3"R3"1/2" PER FT. R1 2" R 1 2 "6"2" B612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER OUTFALL NOT TO SCALE 2 1.5" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE PER BRAUN GEOTECHNICAL REPORT MNDOT 2360 SPWEB240C MNDOT SPEC 2357 TACK COAT 1.5" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE PER BRAUN GEOTECHNICAL REPORT MNDOT 2360 SPWEB240C 6" AGGREGATE BASE PER MNDOT CLASS V IN SECTION 3138 2.5" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE MNDOT 2360 SPWEB540E MNDOT SPEC 2357 TACK COAT 2.5" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE MNDOT 2360 SPNWEB530B 8" AGGREGATE BASE PER MNDOT CLASS V IN SECTION 3138 APPROVED SUBGRADE APPROVED SUBGRADE LIGHT DUTY ASPHALT PAVEMENT HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT PAVEMENT 4" 4000 PSI CONCRETE PER MNDOT 2301 6" AGGREGATE BASE PER MNDOT CLASS V IN SECTION 3138 6" 4500 PSI AIR ENTRAINED CONCRETE 6" AGGREGATE BASE PER MNDOT CLASS V IN SECTION 3138 APPROVED SUBGRADE APPROVED SUBGRADE CONCRETE SIDEWALK HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT NOTE: AN ADEQUATE NUMBER OF LONGITUDINAL AND TRANSVERSE CONTROL JOINTS SHOULD BE PLACED IN THE PAVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI AND OR AASHTO REQUIREMENTS. EXPANSION JOINTS MUST BE FULL DEPTH AND SHOULD BE USED TO ISOLATE FIXED OBJECTS ABUTTING OR WITHIN THE PAVED AREA. REFER TO GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR ALL PAVEMENT, SUBGRADE PREPARATION, AND COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS 3 PAVEMENT SECTIONS NOT TO SCALE 6 STEEL TUBE CONCRETE BOLLARD NOT TO SCALE B612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER NOT TO SCALE 8 MODULAR CONCRETE BLOCK RETAINING WALL NOT TO SCALE 1 SURMOUNTABLE CURB AND GUTTER NOT TO SCALE 2.2 Page 60 of 107 866 C-6.1COBALT BUSINESS CENTERPERMIT SETDETAIL SHEET 2733 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 www.alliant-inc.com Suite 700 1 END OF LINE CLEANOUT NOT TO SCALE 2 IN LINE CLEANOUT NOT TO SCALE 3 WATERMAIN PIPE BEDDING NOT TO SCALE 4 12" CONCRETE PLUME NOT TO SCALE 5 MNDOT RIPRAP NOT TO SCALE SECTION PLAN VIEW ENLARGEMENT GRASSPAVE2 DETAIL6 LANE MARKERS FOR GRASSPAVE AREA7 GRASSPAVE2 AT TRAIL AND SIDEWALK8 SECTION PLAN VIEW CONCRETE PAVEMENT IN SPILLWAY SEE DETAIL 6 THIS PAGE CONDITIONS VARY AT BACK OF CURB SEE SITE PLAN SHEET C-3.3 INSTANCE OF CONCRETE SPILLWAYS FINISHED GRADE (SURFACE VARIES) COMPACTED AGGREGATE BASE SIZE NO. 53 AT 95% PROCTOR DENSITY COMPACTED SUBGRADE13 1/2"5"7"CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER 6"R3"R3"1/2" PER FT. R1 2" 6" CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER ON BOTH SIDES OF CONCRETE SPILLWAY CONCRETE SPILLWAY9 CONCRETE STEPS10 12" 12" CONCRETE CURB RETAINING WALL11 24" 12" 12"30"(SEE GRADING PLAN)48"GUARD RAIL60"TO FROST2" MIN.MIN.6" 1/2" PER FT. 5" 2" 5" 1 1/2" DIA. ROUND PIPE RAILING AND POSTS (TYP.) WITH PAINTED FINISH - DARK BRONZE COLOR SEE SITE PLAN FOR LOCATION. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED #3 REBAR AT EACH NOSING 1/2" RADIUS (TYP) 6" SLEEVE TO ACCEPT RAIL POST GROUT INTO PLACE (TYP) DOWELS AT 18" O.C. WRAP FOR EXPANSION MATCH TO CONCRETE PAVEMENT SEE SITE PLAN 1/2" EXPANSION MATERIAL (TOP & BOTTOM OF DOWELS) WASH PROVIDE GROVE AND SEALANT AT GROUT, TYP. COMPACTED GRANULAR BASE 1/2" EXPANSION MATERIAL BETWEEN WALL AND CONCRETE SIDEWALK BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT IN PARKING LOT CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE CURB RETAINING WALL AGGREGATE BASE COURSE COMPACTED SUB GRADE TO 98% PROCTOR DENSITY CONCRETE SIDEWALK 48" HT. 2" DIA. 440 STAINLESS STEEL TUBE GUARD RAIL SET INTO TOP OF CONCRETE CURB, GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR APPROVAL PROVIDE 1/2" EXPANSION MATERIAL IN RAILING SLEEVE 2" RADIUS 2" 440 STAINLESS STEEL TUBE GUARD RAIL CROSS BARS, TYP. #4 EPOXY COATED REBAR REINFORCEMENTS 12" O.C. BOTH WAYS, TOP AND BOTTOM #5 EPOXY COATED REBAR REINFORCEMENTS 12" O.C. BOTH WAYS, EACH FACE MAINTAIN A MIN. OF 2" OF COVER BETWEEN REBAR AND EDGE OF POURED WALL 2"x4" KEY TYP. 2" 1" PVC PIPE WEEP 8' O.C COARSE GRAVEL TO WEEPS, TYP. 58" 12"24"22" 10" WASH 12" WIDE WING WALL BEYOND STEPS BUILDING FACADE 1/2" EXPANSION JOINT BETWEEN BUILDING AND WING WALL #4 EPOXY COATED REBAR 12" O.C. BOTH WAYS #4 EPOXY COATED REBAR 12" O.C. BOTH WAYS TRANSITION TO STANDARD CONCRETE SIDEWALK NOTE: PROVIDE 12" OF 3/4" CRUSHED STONE BEHIND WING WALL FOR DRAINAGE 12" TREAD 6" RISER #4 x 2' LENGTH EPOXY COATED REBAR VERTS 12" O.C. #4 EPOXY COATED REBAR HORIZONTAL REINFORCEMENTS 12" O.C. 1/4" PER 1' 1 PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR RAILING Page 61 of 107 C-6.2COBALT BUSINESS CENTER PERMIT SET MNDOT DETAILS 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700MN DOT PEDESTRAIN RAMP DETAILS1Page 62 of 107 STORMWATER PONDPROPOSED BUILDING 623' x 280' 174,288 S.F.850852852852852850848845856 854 852 850 848 846845844846838844 838xBERM:852.4L-1.0COBALT BUSINESS CENTERPERMIT SETFOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN733 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 www.alliant-inc.com Suite 700 Know what's below. Call before you dig. R Dial 811 REPLACEMENT CALCULATIONS LEGEND: PLAN NOTE: TREE PROTECTION SHALL BE PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR AS REQUIRED TO ENSURE SURVIVABILITY OF EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN. NO HEAVY EQUIPMENT SHALL BE STORED WITHIN THE TREE DRIP LINE AS DESIGNATED ABOVE. ELEVATION 4' ORANGE SNOW FENCE WITH POSTS 8' O.C. AT DRIP LINE OF OUTER MOST BRANCHES DRIP LINE TREE PROTECTION FENCE NO SCALE2 TREE PRESERVATION NOTES: Page 63 of 107 L-1.1COBALT BUSINESS CENTER PERMIT SET TREE INVENTORY 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700Know what's below.Call before you dig.RDial 811Page 64 of 107 STORMWATER POND PROPOSED BUILDING623' x 280'174,288 S.F.850852852852852850848845856854852850848846845844846838844838xBERM:852.4 3 - PO4 - BH3 - SL2 - BH1 - AP1 - RB1 - SW1 - RB1 - SW1 - RB1 - CH7 - BBH7 - BBH1 - AP4 - GLS9 - AWS4 - GLS3 - BBH3 - CH2 - RB2 - CH3 - SL1 - RB1 - PO1 - SW1 - SW8 - GFS6 - BBH9 - BMJ3 - BMJ11 - GFS18 - CLB8 - AFS8 - AFS8 - PBC8 - PBC7 - BMJ7 - GFS5 - BBH7 - BMJ5 - GFS1 - NF1 - NF1 - NF1 - NF1 - NF1 - NF3 - BF3 - AP3 - BF3 - BH3 - BF1 - SW1 - AE1 - AE1 - AE1 - SW6 - AWS4 - AWS7 - AWS7 - BMJ5 - BBH6 - HL4 - SB1 - SB1 - SB1 - SB1 - SB1 - SW1 - SB1 - PO1 - SW1 - PO1 - PO1 - PO3 - AE4 - AP4 - AWS7 - AWS6 - AB9 - PBC6 - GLS3 - GLS3 - GLSGRANITE LANDSCAPE BOULDERSTO BE POSITIONED INTO THEFACE OF SLOPE, APPROX. 30% OFBOULDER SHOULD BE BURIEDINSTALL "HYDROGROW" SOIL AMENDMENT (SUPPLIEDWITH GRASSPAVE2 SYSTEM) AND OVER SEED ORHYDROSEED WITH TURF SEED MIX, SEE LEGENDL-2.0COBALT BUSINESS CENTER PERMIT SET LANDSCAPE PLAN 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700Know what's below.Call before you dig.RDial 811LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTSLEGENDLANDSCAPE NOTES:LANDSCAPE SCHEDULEPage 65 of 107 L-2.1COBALT BUSINESS CENTER PERMIT SET LANDSCAPE DETAILS 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700Know what's below.Call before you dig.RDial 811L-2.14MULCH AT SIDEWALKNOT TO SCALENOTES:1. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLAN SHEET NOTES FORCOLOR AND TYPE OF MULCH.CONCRETE SIDEWALK2" MIN.MULCH TO BE LEVEL AT SIDEWALKMULCH SEE NOTES4" TYP.PLANTING SOILDEPTH VARIESSEE LANDSCAPE PLAN NOTESFILTER FABRICMIRAFI OR EQUALL-2.15MULCH AT SODNOT TO SCALENOTES:1. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLAN SHEET NOTES FORCOLOR AND TYPE OF MULCH.SOD2" MIN.POLY EDGINGMULCH SEE NOTES4" TYP.PLANTING SOILDEPTH VARIESSEE LANDSCAPEPLAN NOTESFILTER FABRICMIRAFI OR EQUAL12" SPIKEMULCH TO BE LEVEL WITH FINISHED GRADEPERENNIAL PLANTINGNOT TO SCALEL-2.13EQUAL SPACINGPERENNIALS (TYP.),PLANT IN STAGGEREDROWS UNLESSOTHERWISE SHOWN ONLANDSCAPE PLANMIN. 3"-4" DEPTHHARDWOOD MULCH OVERFILTER FABRIC, SEE NOTESFOR TYPE & COLOR.MIN. 12" PLANTING SOIL ASSPECIFIED, SEE NOTES.UNDISTURBED ANDUNCOMPACTEDSUBGRADEL-2.12SHRUB PLANTINGNOT TO SCALEPROVIDE MULCH, DO NOT BURY STEMS ORTRUNK. SEE NOTES FOR TYPE AND DEPTHREQUIRED.UNDISTURBED ANDUNCOMPACTED SUBGRADEPRUNE DEAD AND BROKEN BRANCHESROOT BALL SHOULD SITDIRECTLY ON TOP OFUNDISTURBED SOIL.BACKFILL WITH TOPSOILFROM HOLE AND WATERTHOROUGHLY. PROVIDEPLANTING SOIL ASSPECIFIED IN NOTES.PROVIDE FILTER FABRIC,MIRAFI OR EQUALPLANT TOP OF ROOT BALL 1-2" ABOVESURROUNDING GRADE.PREPARE PLANTING AREA 3XTHE DIAMETER OF THEROOTBALLL-2.11TREE PLANTINGNOT TO SCALENOTES:1. TREE STAKING IS OPTIONAL.2. DO NOT PRUNE THE TREE AT PLANTING. PRUNE ONLY CROSSOVER LIMBS, CO-DOMINANT LEADERS ANDBROKEN OR DEAD BRANCHES.3. FOR TREES IN CONTAINERS, REMOVE CONTAINER PRIOR TO PLANTING. FOR BARE ROOT TREES, PLACETREE IN MIDDLE OF PLANTING HOLE, SPREAD ROOTS OUT RADIALLY FROM THE TRUNK AROUND THEPREPARED HOLE.PREPARE PLANTING AREA 3X THEDIAMETER OF THE ROOTBALL OR PERPLAN IF PLANTED IN A BIORETENTIONOR LARGER PLANTING AREAPLACE ROOTBALL ON UNEXCAVATED OR TAMPED SOILEXPOSE TRUNK FLARE,DO NOT PILE MULCH AGAINST TREE TRUNKMULCH RING, DIAMETER PER PLAN ORLANDSCAPE NOTES. PLACE MULCH SO NOT INCONTACT WITH BASE OF TREE.COMPLETELY REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ALLTWINE, ROPE AND BASKETS. DISPOSE INTOPROPER LOCATION.TAMP SOIL AROUND ROOTBALL BASE FIRMLY WITH FOOTPRESSURE SO THAT THE ROOT BALL DOES NOT SHIFT.PLANTING SOIL, BACKFILL PLACED IN 6" LIFTSGUYING PLANSODUNDISTURBED SUBSOILROOTBALLPRUNE DEAD AND BROKEN BRANCHES16" POLY STRAP, 40 MIL. 1-1/2" WIDE1 FLAG PER WIRE3-GUY CABLES, DOUBLE STRAND, 14 GA. WIRESAT 120° SPACING, SEE GUYING PLAN18" MIN.MACHINE EDGE V-DITCH AROUNDALL TREES IN SODDED AREAS2"X2"X24" WOODEN STAKE AT AN ANGLELANDSCAPE NOTESSEEDING NOTESPage 66 of 107 ENTERPRISE DRSTORMWATER PONDPROPOSED BUILDING 623' x 280' 174,288 S.F. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.9 1.1 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.8 1.5 1.9 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.5 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.9 1.8 2.5 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.7 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.8 1.7 1.3 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.9 2.1 2.7 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.3 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.9 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.3 2.4 2.3 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.3 2.1 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.9 1.9 2.2 2.4 2.4 2.1 1.8 2.9 2.5 1.8 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.9 2.4 2.9 2.3 2.8 3.6 3.8 3.5 2.8 2.3 1.8 1.7 2.2 2.7 3.4 3.8 3.7 3.0 2.5 1.9 1.6 2.1 2.6 3.2 3.8 3.8 3.2 2.6 2.1 1.6 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.7 3.8 3.4 2.7 2.2 1.7 1.8 2.3 2.8 3.5 3.8 3.5 2.8 2.3 1.9 1.7 2.2 2.6 3.4 3.8 3.7 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.6 2.1 2.6 3.1 3.7 3.7 3.2 2.5 3.9 3.3 2.1 1.3 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.9 2.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 1.3 3.5 2.5 3.2 3.7 1.5 1.5 1.9 2.0 2.9 3.8 3.0 2.2 2.0 1.6 1.4 1.8 2.0 2.7 3.8 3.4 2.4 2.1 1.7 1.4 1.7 2.0 2.5 3.5 3.7 2.6 2.1 4.0 3.7 2.3 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 3.8 4.3 3.3 3.5 2.2 1.5 1.2 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.1 3.7 6.1 4.0 3.7 2.3 1.6 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.1 3.8 5.9 2.9 3.4 2.2 1.5 1.3 1.1 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 3.6 4.1 2.1 2.9 2.1 1.6 1.4 1.2 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.9 2.0 2.6 1.8 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.7 1.3 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.9 1.8 1.6 2.4 2.8 2.5 2.3 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 1.3 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.8 2.2 1.8 1.6 1.3 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.4 2.0 2.3 2.7 2.9 2.0 1.5 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.3 2.0 2.1 3.5 3.5 2.1 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 1.1 1.8 1.6 4.1 3.6 2.2 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.9 1.9 2.1 3.1 3.3 2.1 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 2.9 3.4 2.3 2.7 1.8 1.4 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.1 4.4 5.0 2.2 2.5 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.2 3.8 6.1 2.0 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.8 1.3 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.1 4.4 4.7 1.8 2.6 2.2 1.8 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 2.5 3.2 2.1 2.7 1.9 1.4 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.9 1.9 1.9 2.9 3.3 2.1 1.4 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 1.1 1.8 1.7 3.9 3.7 2.3 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.4 2.1 2.1 3.4 3.6 2.2 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.4 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.9 2.0 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 1.3 2.0 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.0 1.5 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.0 1.9 1.5 2.0 2.3 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.2 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 2.1 2.6 2.0 2.3 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.3 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.1 4.3 3.9 2.2 2.6 2.0 1.6 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.2 4.3 5.2 2.5 2.9 2.0 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.2 4.4 5.0 3.4 3.5 2.2 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.1 3.9 3.7 4.1 3.6 2.2 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.7 3.5 4.4 2.4 3.5 3.7 2.9 2.9 3.2 2.8 3.1 4.2 4.2 3.9 3.8 4.1 4.7 4.3 3.9 3.8 4.1 4.7 4.3 3.9 3.9 4.3 4.9 4.3 4.0 4.0 4.4 4.9 4.3 3.9 4.0 3.0 3.3 2.1 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.8 3.5 3.9 3.2 3.9 4.0 3.8 3.7 4.0 3.6 3.9 4.4 4.9 5.1 5.1 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.3 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.2 5.1 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.3 5.1 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.2 4.8 4.2 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.4 3.6 4.0 3.9 3.2 4.7 4.4 2.6 1.5 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.7 1.8 3.1 3.3 2.3 2.6 2.7 2.8 3.1 3.4 3.0 2.9 3.1 3.6 3.9 3.9 4.0 3.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.5 3.0 2.8 2.9 3.2 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.3 3.8 3.7 2.5 1.6 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 1.9 2.6 2.7 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.2 2.5 2.8 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.9 3.0 3.1 2.7 2.6 3.0 3.1 3.0 2.7 2.6 3.0 3.1 3.0 2.6 2.6 3.0 3.1 3.0 2.6 2.7 3.0 3.1 2.9 2.6 2.7 3.1 3.1 2.9 2.5 2.8 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.1 2.9 2.5 2.8 2.6 2.2 2.0 2.3 2.6 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.5 2.4 2.6 2.1 1.6 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.9 1.7 2.1 2.1 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.5 2.8 2.7 2.3 2.2 2.6 2.8 2.7 2.2 2.2 2.6 2.8 2.6 2.2 2.2 2.6 2.8 2.6 2.2 2.3 2.7 2.8 2.5 2.2 2.3 2.7 2.8 2.5 2.1 2.3 2.7 2.8 2.4 2.2 2.4 2.8 2.8 2.4 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.0 1.9 2.0 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.5 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.7 1.8 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 2.1 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.0 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.8 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.5 2.0 2.4 2.5 2.1 1.7 1.4 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.3 1.9 1.5 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.2 1.9 2.8 3.1 3.1 3.1 2.2 1.5 1.0 0.9 1.2 1.9 2.6 3.1 3.2 3.1 2.4 1.6 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 1.0 1.8 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.0 2.2 1.3 0.8 0.6 1.0 1.7 2.8 3.1 3.0 3.1 2.4 1.4 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.5 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.4 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.1 1.8 2.7 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.3 1.6 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.7 1.3 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.2 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 BB BBBB AA2 AA2 AA2 AA4 AA4 AA4 AA4 AA4 AA4 AA4 AA4 AA4 AA4 AA4 AA4AA4AA4AA4AA4AA4AA4AA4AA4AA4AA4AA4 Luminaire Schedule Symbol Qty Label Arrangement Description Tag LLF Luminaire Lumens Luminaire Watts Total Watts 3 BB Single GARDCO OPF-S-A04-740-BLC ON 20FT SSS POLE 3FT BASE 0.900 10663 90.68 272.04 3 AA2 Single NV-W2-T2-64L-53-40K7 WALL MOUNTED AT 24FT 0.900 11661 99 297 23 AA4 Single NV-W2-T4-64L-7-40K7 0.900 15301 136 3128 Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min GROUND CALCS Illuminance Fc 0.35 6.1 0.0 N.A.N.A. PROPERTY LINE Illuminance Fc 0.01 0.2 0.0 N.A.N.A. PARKING LOT Illuminance Fc 1.58 4.4 0.4 3.95 11.00 TRUCK LOT Illuminance Fc 1.67 5.3 0.0 N.A.N.A. P-1.0COBALT BUSINESS CENTERPERMIT SETPHOTOMETRIC PLAN733 Marquette Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 www.alliant-inc.com Suite 700 GENERAL NOTES: 6130 Blue Circle Dr., Minnetonka, MN 55343 Ph 952-217-0400 - Fax 952-930-1632 www.pulseproducts.com PHOTOMETRIC SCHEDULE: Page 67 of 107 This page is intentionally left blank 7.j REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Approve a Massage Therapist License ITEM TYPE: Consent Item DEPARTMENT: Administration CONTACT: Nancy Bauer, City Clerk ACTION REQUEST: Approve a massage therapist license pending a successful background check. BACKGROUND: Chasity Smith has submitted a massage therapist license to work at Hush Therapeutic Massage in Mendota Heights. She has completed the massage therapist license application. The Mendota Heights Police Department is currently processing the background check on the applicant. The issuance of the license will be dependent on the successful completion of a background check. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: None CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Premier Public Services & Infrastructure, Economic Vitality & Community Vibrancy Page 68 of 107 This page is intentionally left blank 7.k REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Holy Family Maronite Catholic Church ITEM TYPE: Consent Item DEPARTMENT: Administration CONTACT: Nancy Bauer, City Clerk ACTION REQUEST: Approve a temporary on-sale liquor license for Holy Family Maronite Catholic Church and the use of the City Hall parking lot for overflow parking during their festival. BACKGROUND: State Statues and City Code states no person shall sell or give away liquor without first having received a license. A temporary on-sale liquor license shall be granted only to clubs and charitable, religious, or non-profit organizations for the sale of intoxicating liquor. The licenses are subject to final approval by the Director of Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement. Holy Family Maronite Catholic Church, located at 1960 Lexington Avenue, is planning their annual festival on their property September 6-7, 2025. They have submitted their application for a temporary on-sale liquor license for the sale of wine and beer at their festival. Holy Family Maronite Catholic Church has also requested use of the City Hall parking lot for overflow parking during their festival. On Saturday, September 6, 2025, there are no events scheduled. On Sunday, September 7, 2025, the ball field is being used for baseball. Staff will let them know of the parking lot use availability. It should be noted that temporary on-sale liquor licenses have been issued in the past to charitable, non-profit, and religious organizations within the City with no negative reports. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: None CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Economic Vitality & Community Vibrancy, Premier Public Services & Infrastructure Page 69 of 107 This page is intentionally left blank 7.l REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Approve Contract to Grind Brush at City Transfer Site ITEM TYPE: Consent Item DEPARTMENT: Public Works CONTACT: John Boland, Public Works Superintendent ACTION REQUEST: Approve a proposal from Dakota Wood to grind up to $17,500 of brush into wood chips located at the city's transfer site. BACKGROUND: Public Works staff has disposed of tree debris in the past by hauling it to various sites that accepted material for free. Several years ago, most sites began charging the City fees for disposal. Staff began storing trees and brush at the City transfer site, located in the area of the Bourne property site, with the idea of grinding material on-site to limit hauling distances. Staff received quotes from several local brush grinding vendors that ranged in price from $6.50 - $8.50 per cubic yard of ground and hauled material. Staff will retain some grindings for use in the park system. Dakota Wood had the low bid at $6.50 per cubic yard of hauled material. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: This item will be paid using the tree removal budget. ATTACHMENTS: None CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Premier Public Services & Infrastructure Page 70 of 107 This page is intentionally left blank 7.m REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Approve Purchase of Public Works Truck from Inver Grove Ford ITEM TYPE: Consent Item DEPARTMENT: Public Works CONTACT: John Boland, Public Works Superintendent ACTION REQUEST: Approve the purchase of a 2026 F550 Ford truck cab and chassis from Inver Grove Ford, and an upfit with dump body and hydraulics from Towmaster. BACKGROUND: As part of the 2025 Parks budget, $81,000 was budgeted for the purchase of a replacement truck with dump body for the Parks Department. This truck will be replacing a 2012 Ford F450 with a dump body. This truck will have a gas engine, and otherwise be identical to the truck that the City purchased in 2020 for the Streets Department. The dump body will be made to fit the chip box for chipping brush that is used on the Street truck now. Staff received pricing from Midway Ford with the state contract, Inver Grove Ford, and Towmaster: Midway Ford: $50,270.41 with trade Inver Grove Ford: $48,792 with trade Towmaster-upfit: $35,427 FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: The replacement is included in the 2025 budget. The truck from Inver Grove Ford, and the upfit from Towmaster, will have a total price of $84,219. This price is over budget by $3,219 and funds are available from the General Fund balance. ATTACHMENTS: None CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Premier Public Services & Infrastructure Page 71 of 107 This page is intentionally left blank Page 72 of 1077.n Page 73 of 107 Page 74 of 107 Page 75 of 107 Page 76 of 107 Page 77 of 107 Page 78 of 107 Page 79 of 107 Page 80 of 107 Page 81 of 107 Page 82 of 107 Page 83 of 107 Page 84 of 107 Page 85 of 107 8.a REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: City of Mendota Heights Speed Camera Update ITEM TYPE: Presentation DEPARTMENT: Administration CONTACT: Cheryl Jacobson, City Administrator ACTION REQUEST: Police Chief McCarthy will provide a brief update and progress report on the Speed Safety Camera System implementation. BACKGROUND: As part of a four-year pilot program through the state of Minnesota, the Mendota Heights Police Department is implementing a new Speed Safety Camera System to deter speeding and reduce traffic accidents near schools and in residential neighborhoods. Enforcement begins August 1. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: None CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Premier Public Services & Infrastructure Page 86 of 107 This page is intentionally left blank 8.b REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Highway 62 Speed Limit Presentation ITEM TYPE: Presentation DEPARTMENT: Engineering CONTACT: Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director ACTION REQUEST: Representatives from the Minnesota Department of Transportation will present information on State Highway 62. BACKGROUND: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) completed an Engineering and Traffic Investigation on Minnesota Trunk Highway 62 from the junction with Minnesota Trunk Highway 55 to the junction with Interstate 494. This study was completed to ensure uniform and consistent speed zones per the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD). Based on investigation results, MnDOT recommended that the existing 55 MPH speed limit from the junction with Minnesota Trunk Highway 55 to a point approximately 1120 feet east of the intersection with Mendota Road on Highway 62 increase to 60 MPH. The recommendation has been authorized as the new speed limit for this segment and was signed in June. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: There are no fiscal or resource impacts with the presentation. ATTACHMENTS: 1.MNTH 62 CS 1918 Speed Limit Authorization and Map CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Inclusive and Responsive Government Page 87 of 107 Page 1 of 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRUNK HIGHWAY SPEED LIMIT AUTHORIZATION Control Section: 1918 Trunk Highway: MNTH-62 Order Number: 2023-M-19 County: Ramsey District: 5-Metro Location: East junction of MNTH-55 to east junction of ISTH-494 As authorized in Minnesota Statutes, Section 169.14, it is hereby ordered that the following speed limits are approved and shall be put into effect on the described roadway or sections thereof. Date traffic control devices were verified or modified by MnDOT staff implementing this authorization: Date Signature Title (RETURN COPY TO CENTRAL OFFICE WHEN COMPLETE) AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE (MS 169.14) NOTE: Reference points (R.P.) shown above are for state reference point system. 60 miles per hour between R.P. 117+00.835 (the east junction with Trunk Highway 55) and R.P. 022+01.069 (the east junction with Interstate 494) Digitally signed by Kenneth Johnson Date: 2024.04.02 15:57:07 -05'00' Page 88 of 107 Page 89 of 107 Page 90 of 107 Zone Location Time Weather Road Type Machine E.B. 85% Tile 63 Pace 56 to 65 87.2% in 10 pace Observer W.B. 85% Tile 65 Pace 55 to 64 78.9% in 10 pace PASSENGER CARS, PICKUPS,VANS TRUCKS & BUSES Bound WEST Bound EAST Bound WEST Bound T. A.T. % VEHICLES T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % 80 79 78 |1 109 100.0% 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 |1 108 99.1% 70 1 109 100.0% 69 |||3 107 98.2% 68 |||3 104 95.4% 67 1 108 99.1%|1 101 92.7% 66 4 107 98.2%||||| ||7 100 91.7% 65 5 103 94.5%||||| 593 85.3% 64 5 98 89.9%||||| 588 80.7% 63 9 93 85.3%||||| ||||983 76.1% 62 8 84 77.1%||||| |674 67.9% 61 12 76 69.7%||||| ||||| |||13 68 62.4% 60 12 64 58.7%||||| ||||| |||13 55 50.5% 59 11 52 47.7%||||| ||||| |11 42 38.5% 58 15 41 37.6%||||| ||||| 10 31 28.4% 57 10 26 23.9%||||| |6 21 19.3% 56 8 16 14.7%||||| ||7 15 13.8% 55 5 8 7.3%||||| |68 7.3% 54 1 3 2.8% 53 2 2 1.8%|12 1.8% 52 |11 0.9% 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 MN/DOT 21273 (2-2000) (6-2009)| SPEED SAMPLE #1 Road No Ref Pt MNTH 62 ClearCounty Stalker DSR 2X Radar A. Hogan At a point approximately 500 feet east of MNTH 13 4-Lane Divided Concrete Roadway 55 0830 Date Day EAST Dakota 10/19/2023 Thursday | |||| ||||| ||||| | ||||| ||||| ||||| ||| ||||| |||| ||||| ||| ||||| ||||| || ||||| ||||| || VEHICLES STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIELD SPEED SURVEY SHEET ||||| | || ||||| ||||| | ||||| ||||| ||||| M.P.H. Page 91 of 107 Zone Location Time Weather Road Type Machine E.B. 85% Tile 65 Pace 56 to 65 72.2% in 10 pace Observer W.B. 85% Tile 65 Pace 56 to 65 82.4% in 10 pace PASSENGER CARS, PICKUPS,VANS TRUCKS & BUSES Bound WEST Bound EAST Bound WEST Bound T. A.T. % VEHICLES T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % 80 79 78 77 1 108 100.0% 76 75 74 73 1 107 99.1% 72 1 106 98.1%||2 108 100.0% 71 |1 106 98.1% 70 1 105 97.2%|1 105 97.2% 69 1 104 96.3% 68 1 103 95.4%|||3 104 96.3% 67 4 102 94.4%|||3 101 93.5% 66 3 98 90.7%|198 90.7% 65 6 95 88.0%||||| |||8 97 89.8% 64 5 89 82.4%||||4 89 82.4% 63 4 84 77.8%||||| ||||| 10 85 78.7% 62 8 80 74.1%||||| ||||975 69.4% 61 11 72 66.7%||||| ||||| ||12 66 61.1% 60 13 61 56.5%||||| ||||| ||12 54 50.0% 59 14 48 44.4%||||| ||||| |11 42 38.9% 58 6 34 31.5%||||| 5 31 28.7% 57 7 28 25.9%||||| ||||| 10 26 24.1% 56 4 21 19.4%||||| |||8 16 14.8% 55 5 17 15.7%|||38 7.4% 54 4 12 11.1%|15 4.6% 53 4 8 7.4%||24 3.7% 52 2 4 3.7%|12 1.9% 51 1 2 1.9%|11 0.9% 50 49 48 1 1 0.9% 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 MN/DOT 21273 (2-2000) (6-2009)| SPEED SAMPLE #2 Road No Ref Pt MNTH 62 ClearCounty Stalker DSR 2X Radar A. Hogan At a point approximately 1900 feet west of Lexington Ave S 4-Lane Divided Concrete Roadway 55 1115 Date Day EAST Dakota 10/16/2023 Monday | | | |||| ||| ||||| | ||||| | | | ||||| || |||| |||| ||||| ||| ||||| ||||| | ||||| ||||| ||| VEHICLES | | STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIELD SPEED SURVEY SHEET ||||| |||| |||| || ||||| ||||| |||| ||||| | M.P.H. Page 92 of 107 Zone Location Time Weather Road Type Machine E.B. 85% Tile 60 Pace 51 to 60 83.0% in 10 pace Observer W.B. 85% Tile 60 Pace 52 to 61 90.9% in 10 pace PASSENGER CARS, PICKUPS,VANS TRUCKS & BUSES Bound WEST Bound EAST Bound WEST Bound T. A.T. % VEHICLES T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % 80 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 70 1 112 100.0% 69 1 111 99.1%|1 110 100.0% 68 67 1 110 98.2%||2 109 99.1% 66 65 2 109 97.3%|1 107 97.3% 64 |1 106 96.4% 63 3 107 95.5% 62 3 104 92.9%||2 105 95.5% 61 3 101 90.2%||||| |6 103 93.6% 60 6 98 87.5%||||| ||||| ||12 97 88.2% 59 6 92 82.1%||||| ||||| ||||| 15 85 77.3% 58 13 86 76.8%||||| ||||9 70 63.6% 57 9 73 65.2%||||| |||8 61 55.5% 56 12 64 57.1%||||| ||||| 10 53 48.2% 55 19 52 46.4%||||| ||||| ||||14 43 39.1% 54 7 33 29.5%||||| ||||| ||12 29 26.4% 53 9 26 23.2%||||| ||||| 10 17 15.5% 52 8 17 15.2%||||4 7 6.4% 51 4 9 8.0%||2 3 2.7% 50 3 5 4.5%|1 1 0.9% 49 1 2 1.8% 48 47 1 1 0.9% 46 45 44 43 42 41 MN/DOT 21273 (2-2000) (6-2009)| SPEED SAMPLE #3 Road No Ref Pt MNTH 62 ClearCounty Stalker DSR 2X Radar A. Hogan At a point approximately 50 feet west of the MNTH 62 to SB ISTH 35E Ramp 4-Lane Divided Concrete Roadway 55 0930 Date Day EAST Dakota 10/19/2023 Thursday | || | | ||||| |||| ||||| ||||| || ||| ||| ||| ||||| | VEHICLES | |||| ||| | STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIELD SPEED SURVEY SHEET ||||| ||||| ||||| |||| ||||| || ||||| |||| ||||| ||| ||||| | ||||| ||||| ||| M.P.H. Page 93 of 107 Zone Location Time Weather Road Type Machine E.B. 85% Tile 61 Pace 52 to 61 84.4% in 10 pace Observer W.B. 85% Tile 60 Pace 52 to 61 90.7% in 10 pace PASSENGER CARS, PICKUPS,VANS TRUCKS & BUSES Bound WEST Bound EAST Bound WEST Bound T. A.T. % VEHICLES T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % 80 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 1 109 100.0% 67 1 108 99.1% 66 1 107 98.2% 65 3 106 97.2%|1 108 100.0% 64 2 103 94.5%|1 107 99.1% 63 4 101 92.7%||2 106 98.1% 62 2 97 89.0%||||4 104 96.3% 61 4 95 87.2%||||| 5 100 92.6% 60 6 91 83.5%||||| |||8 95 88.0% 59 10 85 78.0%||||| ||||| ||12 87 80.6% 58 9 75 68.8%||||| ||775 69.4% 57 13 66 60.6%||||| ||||| ||12 68 63.0% 56 13 53 48.6%||||| ||||| ||||| 15 56 51.9% 55 11 40 36.7%||||| ||||| ||||| 15 41 38.0% 54 13 29 26.6%||||| ||||| |||13 26 24.1% 53 6 16 14.7%||||| |6 13 12.0% 52 710 9.2%||||| 5 7 6.5% 51 2 3 2.8%||2 2 1.9% 50 1 1 0.9% 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 MN/DOT 21273 (2-2000) (6-2009)| SPEED SAMPLE #4 Road No Ref Pt MNTH 62 ClearCounty Stalker DSR 2X Radar A. Hogan At a point approximately 1400 feet west of MNTH 149/ Dodd Rd 4-Lane Divided Bituminous Roadway 55 1215 Date Day EAST Dakota 10/16/2023 Monday | | ||| || | ||||| ||||| ||| ||||| ||||| ||| |||| || |||| ||||| | VEHICLES || | STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIELD SPEED SURVEY SHEET ||||| ||||| | ||||| ||||| ||| ||||| | ||||| || ||||| ||||| ||||| |||| M.P.H. Page 94 of 107 Zone Location Time Weather Road Type Machine E.B. 85% Tile 65 Pace 54 to 63 77.8% in 10 pace Observer W.B. 85% Tile 63 Pace 55 to 64 83.8% in 10 pace PASSENGER CARS, PICKUPS,VANS TRUCKS & BUSES Bound WEST Bound EAST Bound WEST Bound T. A.T. % VEHICLES T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % 80 79 78 77 76 1 108 100.0%|1 111 100.0% 75 1 107 99.1% 74 73 72 71 70 |1 110 99.1% 69 2 106 98.1% 68 1 104 96.3% 67 3 103 95.4%||2 109 98.2% 66 3 100 92.6%||||| |6 107 96.4% 65 6 97 89.8%||2 101 91.0% 64 2 91 84.3%||||4 99 89.2% 63 8 89 82.4%||||| ||||| 10 95 85.6% 62 11 81 75.0%||||| ||785 76.6% 61 10 70 64.8%||||| ||||| |11 78 70.3% 60 4 60 55.6%||||| ||||| ||||| ||17 67 60.4% 59 8 56 51.9%||||| ||||| |||13 50 45.0% 58 12 48 44.4%||||| ||||| ||||| |16 37 33.3% 57 8 36 33.3%||||| |6 21 18.9% 56 9 28 25.9%||||| 5 15 13.5% 55 9 19 17.6%||||410 9.0% 54 510 9.3%||26 5.4% 53 3 5 4.6%|||34 3.6% 52 1 2 1.9% 51 1 1 0.9% 50 |11 0.9% 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 MN/DOT 21273 (2-2000) (6-2009)| SPEED SAMPLE #5 Road No Ref Pt MNTH 62 ClearCounty Stalker DSR 2X Radar A. Hogan At a point approximately 2400 feet east of MNTH 149/ Dodd Rd 4-Lane Divided Bituminous Roadway 55 1345 Date Day EAST Dakota 10/16/2023 Monday | | ||| ||| ||||| | || || | ||||| ||| ||||| |||| ||||| ||| ||||| ||||| | ||||| ||||| |||| VEHICLES | STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIELD SPEED SURVEY SHEET ||||| |||| ||||| ||| | ||||| ||| ||||| ||||| || M.P.H. Page 95 of 107 Zone Location Time Weather Road Type Machine E.B. 85% Tile 61 Pace 53 to 62 84.5% in 10 pace Observer W.B. 85% Tile 62 Pace 54 to 63 80.7% in 10 pace PASSENGER CARS, PICKUPS,VANS TRUCKS & BUSES Bound WEST Bound EAST Bound WEST Bound T. A.T. % VEHICLES T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % 80 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 |1 109 100.0% 70 |1 108 99.1% 69 68 1 110 100.0%||2 107 98.2% 67 66 3 109 99.1%|1 105 96.3% 65 |1 104 95.4% 64 3 106 96.4%|1 103 94.5% 63 2 103 93.6%||||4 102 93.6% 62 4 101 91.8%||||| |6 98 89.9% 61 9 97 88.2%||||| ||||9 92 84.4% 60 9 88 80.0%||||| ||||| ||12 83 76.1% 59 15 79 71.8%||||| |6 71 65.1% 58 7 64 58.2%||||| ||||| |||13 65 59.6% 57 12 57 51.8%||||| ||||952 47.7% 56 13 45 40.9%||||| ||||| |11 43 39.4% 55 10 32 29.1%||||| ||||| ||12 32 29.4% 54 8 22 20.0%||||| |6 20 18.3% 53 6 14 12.7%||||4 14 12.8% 52 4 8 7.3%||||| 510 9.2% 51 1 4 3.6%||25 4.6% 50 1 3 2.7%||2 3 2.8% 49 48 1 2 1.8%|1 1 0.9% 47 46 45 44 43 42 1 1 0.9% 41 MN/DOT 21273 (2-2000) (6-2009)| SPEED SAMPLE #6 Road No Ref Pt MNTH 62 ClearCounty Stalker DSR 2X Radar A. Hogan At a point approximately 375 feet east of Charlton St 4-Lane Divided Bituminous Roadway 55 1030 Date Day EAST Dakota 10/17/2023 Tuesday ||| ||| | ||||| ||||| || ||||| ||||| ||| || |||| ||||| |||| ||||| |||| VEHICLES | | | STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIELD SPEED SURVEY SHEET | ||||| ||||| ||||| ||| ||||| | |||| ||||| ||||| ||||| ||||| || M.P.H. Page 96 of 107 Zone Location Time Weather Road Type Machine E.B. 85% Tile 67 Pace 59 to 68 73.6% in 10 pace Observer W.B. 85% Tile 66 Pace 55 to 64 69.0% in 10 pace PASSENGER CARS, PICKUPS,VANS TRUCKS & BUSES Bound WEST Bound EAST Bound WEST Bound T. A.T. % VEHICLES T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % 80 79 78 |1 116 100.0% 77 76 |1 115 99.1% 75 |1 114 98.3% 74 73 1 110 100.0%|||3 113 97.4% 72 1 109 99.1%|1 110 94.8% 71 1 108 98.2% 70 2 107 97.3%||2 109 94.0% 69 3 105 95.5%|||3 107 92.2% 68 4 102 92.7%|1 104 89.7% 67 6 98 89.1%|||3 103 88.8% 66 7 92 83.6%||||| ||7 100 86.2% 65 10 85 77.3%||||4 93 80.2% 64 6 75 68.2%||||| |6 89 76.7% 63 12 69 62.7%||||| |6 83 71.6% 62 9 57 51.8%||||| ||7 77 66.4% 61 7 48 43.6%||||| ||||| ||12 70 60.3% 60 12 41 37.3%||||| ||7 58 50.0% 59 8 29 26.4%||||| ||||| ||||14 51 44.0% 58 3 21 19.1%||||| ||||| ||12 37 31.9% 57 6 18 16.4%||||425 21.6% 56 4 12 10.9%||||421 18.1% 55 4 8 7.3%||||| |||8 17 14.7% 54 ||||4 9 7.8% 53 2 4 3.6%|||3 5 4.3% 52 1 2 1.8% 51 1 1 0.9%|1 2 1.7% 50 |11 0.9% 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 MN/DOT 21273 (2-2000) (6-2009)| STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIELD SPEED SURVEY SHEET |||| || | ||||| ||| ||| VEHICLES | ||||| | |||| ||||| ||||| || ||||| |||| ||||| || ||||| ||||| || ||||| | ||||| || ||||| ||||| ||||| | | || ||| |||| | | Date Day EAST Dakota 10/17/2023 Tuesday Stalker DSR 2X Radar A. Hogan At a point approximately 1700 feet west of MNTH 3/ S Robert Trl 4-Lane Divided Bituminous Roadway 60 1130 SPEED SAMPLE #7 Road No Ref Pt MNTH 62 ClearCounty M.P.H. Page 97 of 107 Zone Location Time Weather Road Type Machine E.B. 85% Tile 69 Pace 58 to 67 70.9% in 10 pace Observer W.B. 85% Tile 67 Pace 58 to 67 81.1% in 10 pace PASSENGER CARS, PICKUPS,VANS TRUCKS & BUSES Bound WEST Bound EAST Bound WEST Bound T. A.T. % VEHICLES T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % T. & B. T. A.T. % 80 79 78 77 76 75 1 110 100.0% 74 1 109 99.1% 73 5 108 98.2% 72 71 3 103 93.6% 70 3 100 90.9%||2 111 100.0% 69 7 97 88.2%|||3 109 98.2% 68 4 90 81.8%||||| ||7 106 95.5% 67 4 86 78.2%||||| |699 89.2% 66 9 82 74.5%||||| |693 83.8% 65 10 73 66.4%||||| ||||| ||12 87 78.4% 64 15 63 57.3%||||| ||||| |11 75 67.6% 63 5 48 43.6%||||| ||||| ||12 64 57.7% 62 9 43 39.1%||||| |6 52 46.8% 61 6 34 30.9%||||| ||||| |||13 46 41.4% 60 8 28 25.5%||||| |||8 33 29.7% 59 7 20 18.2%||||| |||8 25 22.5% 58 5 13 11.8%||||| |||8 17 15.3% 57 4 8 7.3%|||39 8.1% 56 2 4 3.6%|16 5.4% 55 |||35 4.5% 54 1 2 1.8%|12 1.8% 53 52 |11 0.9% 51 50 49 1 1 0.9% 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 MN/DOT 21273 (2-2000) (6-2009)| STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIELD SPEED SURVEY SHEET | ||||| || ||||| VEHICLES | |||| || ||||| ||||| |||| ||||| | ||||| ||| |||| ||||| |||| ||||| ||||| ||||| ||||| ||||| ||| ||| ||||| || |||| | | ||||| Date Day EAST Dakota 10/17/2023 Tuesday Stalker DSR 2X Radar A. Hogan At a point approximately 150 feet west of MNTH 3/ S Robert Trl 4-Lane Divided Bituminous Roadway 60 1215 SPEED SAMPLE #8 Road No Ref Pt MNTH 62 ClearCounty M.P.H. Page 98 of 107 10.a REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: July 15, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Request for Proposals--Ivy Hills Park Playground ITEM TYPE: New and Unfinished Business DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation CONTACT: Meredith Lawrence, Parks and Recreation/Assistant Public Works Director ACTION REQUEST: Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the playground replacement at Ivy Hills Park. BACKGROUND: In early January, the Parks and Recreation Commission established a subcommittee that met with staff and developed criteria for a RFP (Request for Proposals) to solicit proposals to replace the existing playground. The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the RFP at their January work session and the consensus of the members present agreed with the scope of the project. The City Council reviewed the RFP at their January 21 meeting and asked for changes. The City Council then formally approved the RFP at their February 4, 2025 meeting. Staff invited reputable playground contractors to submit responses and use their professional expertise and creativity to develop a unique play structure plan within the budget. The City received six proposals from five different qualified vendors. Staff notified the subcommittee of the number of proposals received and the subcommittee reviewed and narrowed down the proposals to four to begin community engagement. Staff conducted community engagement with roughly 650 responses throughout many mediums of engagement--online survey, open house and meetings with students in the schools. The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the results of community engagement and reviewed the proposals in relation to accessibility, features, and colors. The Parks and Recreation Commission recommended the approval of a playground from Webber Recreation at their May 13 meeting. Staff presented the playground proposal recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission to the City Council at their May 20 meeting. The City Council approved the rejection of the bids and asked staff to develop a new RFP based on their desired change in Page 99 of 107 scope for the project. A new RFP was developed based on the information the City Council requested be added to the scope of the project including the following: a bid alternate for an accessible swing, the requirement of pour-in-place surfacing for all accessible features, and an increase in budget for the project by $20,000. Based on the extensive feedback received already and the Council's direction on moving this project forward, staff have elected to disband the subcommittee and develop a staff committee to narrow down the projects to three for the Parks and Recreation Commission to review. In addition, staff have received direction not to engage the community again on this project. The revised playground RFP was presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission for review on Tuesday, July 8. The Parks and Recreation Commission voted 7-0 in favor of the updated RFP. With rebidding this project, the new playground installation will occur in the Spring of 2026. FISCAL AND RESOURCE IMPACT: There is no cost associated with the release of the RFP. The 2025 budget included $160,000 from the City's General Levy to cover the expenses of this project. Based on the scope of the project, staff recommended an additional $20,000 for the project be contributed from the Special Park Fund. Additionally, the City Council has given direction that they would like an additional $20,000 added to this project total after reviewing the original bids received. Thus, the RFP includes a base bid not to exceed amount of $200,000. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Ivy Hills RFP after Rejection 062525 CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY: Economic Vitality & Community Vibrancy, Premier Public Services & Infrastructure, Inclusive and Responsive Government Page 100 of 107 City of Mendota Heights REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS IVY HILLS PARK PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT 645 Butler Avenue Mendota Heights, MN 55118 PROPOSAL DEADLINE: August 28, 2025  10:00am Released: July 16, 2025 Page 101 of 107 Section 1: General Information 1). Contract Administration All correspondence regarding this Request for Proposals (RFP) and the proposed services must be addressed to: Meredith Lawrence, Parks and Recreation Director/Assistant Public Works Director City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Phone: 651-255-1354 Email: mlawrence@mendotaheightsmn.gov Submission must be sent by email. One hard copy PDF of the proposal and any relevant attachments (including a display poster board) should be sent to the mailing address above and be received prior to the proposal deadline. 2). Tentative Timeline Due Date: 10:00am on August 28, 2025 (includes both digital and physical submission) Review by Parks and Recreation Commission on or before October 14, 2025 City Council Approval of Project on or before October 21, 2025 Notification of Award on or before October 24, 2025 Playground should be installed as soon as possible after signed contract. 3). Acceptance of Proposals Contents The contents of this RFP and the proposal will become contractual obligations if a contract ensues. Failure of the consultant to meet these obligations may result in cancellation of the award. All information in the proposal is subject to disclosure under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13—Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. By submitting a proposal, notwithstanding the provisions of Minnesota Statutes § 13.591, subd. 3(b), Respondents acknowledge that their proposals will be made public in their entirety to further the vital decision-making process included in the consideration of proposals. By submitting a proposal, Respondents consent to this data disclosure and waive any claim against the City of Mendota Heights regarding the disclosure of the data pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 13.08. Section 2: Project Overview 1). Project Overview and Purpose The purpose of the RFP is to obtain site plan design and quotes to include demolition and disposal of current playground equipment, any necessary sitework, an expanded container, playground equipment, inclusive play features, poured-in-place rubber and engineered wood fiber surfacing including installation for the playground site at Ivy Hills Park, 645 Butler Avenue, Mendota Heights, MN 55118. The Parks and Recreation Department is challenging Respondents to use their professional expertise and creativity to develop a unique play structure. 2). Owner The City of Mendota Heights is the Owner. All work shall be on public property. The contractor shall, at all times, confine operations to stay within the limits of the property. Any repairs or restorations Page 102 of 107 required outside the property limits due to the contractor’s carelessness shall be repaired by the contractor at their expense. Section 3: Proposals To be considered, each Respondent must submit a complete response to this RFP, using the format provided. The proposal must be signed in ink by an official authorized to bind the submitter to its provisions. The proposal must include a statement as to the period during which the proposal remains valid. This period must be at least one hundred forty (140) days from the due date for this proposal. Respondents shall include one digital and one hard copy of their proposal document. Respondents may submit up to two proposals/designs. 1). Specifications A. The structure shall meet and comply with all current ADA Legislation and ASTM F1487 and include demolition and disposal of current playground equipment (options of reuse off-site of existing equipment should be noted in proposal), any necessary sitework, an expanded container and playground footprint, playground equipment with inclusive features, poured-in-place rubberized and engineered wood fiber surfacing including installation for the playground site. B. All equipment must meet age-related design criteria suitable for 2-5-year olds and 5-12 year olds and be IPEMA certified. C. The recycled wood timber container expansion must be included to meet the design of the updated enclosure attached and match the color and style of the existing container timbers to remain. The existing container does not need to be completely replaced but must have portions replaced to ensure it meets ADA requirements and safety standards. It is anticipated that the existing container timbers to be replaced will be salvaged from the existing infrastructure; however, container replacement may require select timbers to be furnished by the contractor if salvaged timbers are deemed unusable or are insufficient to meet any modified measurements of the container. a. To allow for adequate playground access space meeting current ADA requirements for a pedestrian ramp, the existing bituminous surface access shall be removed and replaced with a concrete pedestrian ramp. Bituminous surface removal limits shall be limited to only what is necessary to remove to achieve ADA compliance within the pedestrian ramp but may require removals up to the connecting trail system through Ivy Hills Park. D. The City requires Respondents to include the following features when developing renderings: a. At least five swings that may include any of the following types: i. Parent/child swing ii. Belt swings (minimum of 2) iii. Toddler swing iv. Multi-user swing or arch swing with sensory seat b. A merry-go-round or similar feature that an individual can fully utilize without transferring from a wheelchair c. A dramatic play element d. A communication board e. At least two slides f. At least two vinyl coated steel benches with backs anchored in the ground within the container area. Retaining and reinstalling the two existing blue playground benches is acceptable. If new vinyl coated steel benches are selected for use, the two existing blue playground benches shall be removed from the site. Page 103 of 107 g. Poured-in-place surfacing shall be included to access all-inclusive features. Engineered wood fiber surfacing shall be utilized through the remainder of the playground container. E. Respondents are required to include in their playground design features that provide opportunities for improved balance, coordination, upper body strength, lower body strength and imagination for users of all ages (monkey bars, pull-up bars, large slides). F. Wear pads must be installed below the bottom of slides and swings. G. The playground container is currently 3,815 square feet. The new playground will be increased to 4,472 square feet. The attached map outlines the container space available for expansion in green and pink. a. Expansion of the northeast section of the playground container is anticipated to require saw cutting and removal of a portion of the existing concrete pad used for bicycle storage and trash collection to better align the container’s perimeter with the adjacent trail system. The anticipated concrete removal limits can be seen on the attached playground map. b. It is not a requirement that the sandbox remains. Thus, Respondents are welcome to propose using that space for different features within the playground design. c. Respondents have the option to show creativity in response to the container’s contents and/or shape. Due to in place infrastructure, expansion to the southwest is prohibited. Any additional expansions beyond that shown should not infringe within the drip line of existing trees. H. The site shall have signage information provided appropriate to the structure/area. If signage includes photos of individuals, the photo must include a diverse group of users. I. All plastic and coating products must be UV and color stabilized to resist fading. J. Supplier must be able to provide a tool kit for fasteners, parts manual (both hard copy and electronic) and a touch up paint kit for all structure colors. K. All parts must have a corrosion resistant finish and be capped on the top end. L. All metal decks must be manufactured from sheet steel conforming to ASTM specification A-569 and be finished with a vinyl coating. M. All connecting hardware used must be zinc plated or stainless steel, free of protrusions, vandal resistant and have a tamper proof design. A service kit for tamper proof fasteners must also be provided. N. The color pallet for the playground is requested to portray bright colors. O. ALTERNATE A – In lieu of the merry-go-round or other feature for wheelchair use without an individual transferring from their chair, an inclusive swing shall be identified for both space and cost. This alternate shall be allowed to exceed the identified playground budget limitation and shall include the deduction price of the alternate wheelchair inclusive feature. 2). Submission Requirements Each of the following items shall be considered an integral part of the contractor’s proposal and shall be submitted to the City on or before the date and time as stated: 1. One copy of a completed and signed Proposal Form. 2. A list of all base materials 3. A list of all equipment included in the plans, with quantities. 4. One display board to be used for in-person engagement meetings 5. One copy of a play area equipment layout drawing to scale showing layout, safety zones, accessibility, border and outside dimensions. 6. One bound notebook or plan size sheet of all components and features specific to the project. 7. One complete copy of all warranty information. 8. The contractor shall indicate all deviations from the specifications. Page 104 of 107 9.Provide a letter from the manufacturer or an independent consulting firm stating all equipment meets the current ASTM F1487 standards 10.Estimated timeline for construction. a.The installation of the entire playground must be completed by paid professional staff. Any deviation from the use of paid professional installers must be approved by the Parks and Recreation Director. 11.Documentation that all equipment quoted is covered by product liability insurance. 3). Project Budget The fee proposal must not exceed $200,000 and must include all elements associated with the project, including procurement of all documents, demolition of existing equipment, new container materials and installation for area of expansion, installation of replacement recycled wood timbers in areas where unsafe, surfacing, structures, delivery, installation, construction permits, taxes and service charges. Each firm is requested to provide the maximum amount of play activities for that fee. 4). Proposal Receipt Proposals must arrive at the Mendota Heights City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN 55118 on or before 10:00 AM on Thursday, August 28, 2025. Section 4: Playground Regulatory Compliance Each playground proposal must meet the following regulatory compliance requirements: 1.All equipment provided and all areas around and between equipment must comply with the most current Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) guidelines and The American Society for Testing and Material (ASTM) standards. It is the responsibility of each bidder and manufacturer to be aware of these guidelines. Please list all deviations where your proposal does not comply and explain each in detail when submitting the proposal. Equipment that requires intensive labor measures or modifications, after installation, such as the cutting of bolts, to bring equipment into conformance with CPSC and ASTM will not be accepted. As recommended by CPSC, a project specific maintenance manual shall be provided at the end of the project. 2.The entire playground must meet the current requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and ASTM F1487. 3.All equipment must be IPEMA certified. 4.All surfacing materials must meet current CPSC guidelines, ASTM F1951 and ASTM F1292 standards, as well as be IPEMA certified. a.Once installation is complete on all equipment, the supplier must provide a formal safety audit of the installed equipment. The audit must document that equipment meets all current standards listed above. Final payment for the structure, payment for base materials and installation will not be processed until after the safety audit inspection and document has been completed and delivered from a certified playground inspector. CPSI documentation must be included. Section 5: Proposal Selection Responses to this RFP will be evaluated based on the following process: 1.Staff will review the firm’s response to the RFP and determine if the proposal meets all criteria for consideration. 2.A Parks and Recreation staff subcommittee will narrow down the complete proposals to the top three designs to be reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission. Page 105 of 107 3. The Parks and Recreation Commission will review the top three playground renderings determined by the staff subcommittee and make a recommendation to the City Council on the desired playground for the park. 4. City staff will present the Parks and Recreation Commission’s recommendation to the City Council for a final decision. 1). Award of Contract The City of Mendota Heights will award one contract for this entire project to the Respondent who submits a proposal that meets all performance and required criteria as set forth by this RFP. Section 6: Proposal and Project Terms and Conditions The following terms and conditions apply to this RFP and to the Project: 1. The City of Mendota Heights is not liable for any cost incurred by the prospective firms prior to the signing of the contract. 2. The contents of this proposal will become contractual obligations if a contract ensues. Failure of the selected consultant to accept these obligations may result in cancellation of the award. 3. The City of Mendota Heights reserves the right to award the total proposal, to reject any and all proposals in whole or in part, and to waive any informality or technical defects, in the City’s judgment. In determination of award, the qualification of the proposal submitter, the conformity with the specifications of services to be supplied and delivery terms will be considered. 4. The city assumes no responsibility or liability for costs incurred by Respondents prior to the submission of a proposal. Total liability of the City of Mendota Heights is limited to the terms and conditions of this RFP. 5. The successful Respondent will be required to furnish appropriate certificates of insurance as part of the final contract negotiations. 6. The contractor shall pay all sales, consumer, use and other taxes required to be paid by them in accordance with the law of the place where the work is to be performed. 7. The contractors shall provide and maintain all necessary temporary enclosures and barricades to adequately protect the work and materials from the elements and persons not involved with construction. The contractor shall remove all temporary enclosures, barricades and fences upon completion of the work. 8. The contractor shall provide for and be responsible for protection of existing pavements, utilities, fencing, etc. In general, all existing materials, surfaces, sod, etc., to remain which are affected by the work shall be repaired and restored to an original and functional condition. 9. Before making any shipment of materials to the site, the contractor shall ascertain whether the site is in a condition to receive the shipment. Where this provision is neglected and material is delivered to the site when the latter is not in condition to receive it, such materials shall be properly stored elsewhere at the contractor’s expense and adequate insurance coverage provided for off-site storage. 10. The contractor shall provide storage as required to protect and preserve all materials stored at the site. Materials are not to be stored directly on the ground. Storage of materials is to be confined to areas designated by the City. The city will not sign for or be responsible for materials delivered to the site. a. Equipment delivered early will not be paid in full. Full payment of structure and installation will be paid when installation is complete and a compliance audit has been received. Page 106 of 107 11. Working hours shall be from 7:00am- 8:00pm on Monday-Friday and 9:00am-5:00pm on Saturday and Sundays. 12. All work areas shall be returned to a condition equal to or better than was in existence at the beginning of the project. All construction debris, including excavated soil, shipping materials including cardboard, pallets, etc. shall be removed and disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City. Page 107 of 107 Dakota County, Maxar, Microsoft 0 20 SCALE IN FEETDate: 1/9/2025 Ivy Hill Playground Existing Playground 3,815 Square Feet Northeast Addition 492 Square Feet +12.9% Increase to Ex Northwest Addition 165 Square Feet +4.3% Inc to Ex