City of Blaine City Council June 15, 2026 | 7:00 PM Blaine City Hall 10801 Town Square Drive NE Blaine, MN 55449 AGENDA 1. Call to Order by the Mayor 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Roll Call 4. Awards - Presentations - Organizational Business 5. Open Forum Open Forum is an opportunity for the public to share comments, concerns, or input on other items. While Open Forum is not intended to provide responses or discussion during the meeting, city staff will contact the speaker(s) after the meeting if follow-up is needed. Each speaker is limited to three minutes, with a maximum of 15 minutes set aside for Open Forum. 6. Communications 7. Approval of Consent Agenda: All items listed under the "Consent Agenda" are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. 7.1. 2026-130 Schedule of Bills Paid Sponsors: Jason Zimmerman, Finance Director 7.2. 2026-131 Approval of Minutes Sponsors: Cathy Sorensen, City Clerk 7.3. RES 26-129 Resolution Approving a Premise Permit for Lawful Gambling Activity for Blaine Youth Hockey at Pizza Pub Prime, 2190 105th Avenue NE Sponsors: Cathy Sorensen, City Clerk 7.4. 2026-132 Motion to Approve Payment to Axon Enterprises, Inc. for Police Department Interview Rooms Page 1 of 385 Sponsors: Brian Podany, Safety Services Manager/Police Chief 7.5. 2026-133 Motion to Authorize Temporary Removal of Parking Restrictions on 91st Avenue, 92nd Avenue, 92nd Lane and Baltimore Street to Accommodate Lettermen Sports Tent Sales on July 27, 2026 through August 2, 2026. Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering 7.6. RES 26-114 Resolution to Receive Petition and Order Public Hearing for Vacation of a Portion of the 30-foot Scenic Easement created by Document No. 303325, which is contained within Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Ball Road Industrial Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota; Vacation No. V26-06 Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering 7.7. RES 26-120 Resolution Accepting a Bid from Insituform Technologies USA, LLC in the Amount of $48,233.98 for the 2026 Storm Sewer Lining Project, Improvement Project No. U2614 Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering 7.8. RES 26-121 Resolution Accepting a bid from Fields Contracting LLC in the Amount of $138,370.00 for the 2026 Storm Outlet Project, Improvement Project U2616 Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering 7.9. 2026-134 Motion to Approve a Contract With Electric Pump for the purchase of Lift Station #12 pumps, Improvement Project No. U2608 Sponsors: Nick Fleischhacker, Public Works Director, Matt Withrow, Public Works Sewer/Storm Supervisor 7.10. RES 26-130 Resolution Accepting a Bid from Davey Resource Group in the Amount of $149,580 for the 2025 ReLeaf Grant Tree Inventory Project and Authorizing Execution of an Agreement Sponsors: Nick Fleischhacker, Public Works Director, Kristofer Paulseth, City Forester 7.11. RES 26-115 Resolution Supporting a Grant Application for The Active Transportation Local Pedestrian Facility Grant for the Pedestrian Bridge Over 105th Avenue Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director 7.12. RES 26-110 Resolution Granting a 10-Foot Variance from the 50-Foot Front Yard Building Setback and the 30-Foot Front Yard Parking Lot Setback Adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4195 123rd Lane NE (Jerry's Foods); and a 10-Foot Variance from the 30-Foot Front Yard Parking Lot Setback Adjacent to Page 2 of 385 Lexington Avenue for 4194 123rd Lane NE.(Multi-Tenant Building). HJ Development (Case File No. 26-0023/SLK) Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director 7.13. RES 26-111 Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Allow a 380 Square Foot Outdoor Dining Patio in a Town Commercial (B-5) Zoning District at 4194 123rd Lane NE. HJ Development (Case file No. 26-0024/ACK) Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director 8. 7:00 PM - Public Hearing and Items Published for a Certain Time 8.1. ORD 26-2607 Public Hearing and First Reading Ordinance Granting to Connexus Energy, a Minnesota Cooperative Association, Its Successors and Assigns, Permission to Construct, Operate, Repair and Maintain in the City of Blaine, Minnesota, an Electric Distribution System and Transmission Lines, Including Necessary Poles, Lines, Fixtures and Appurtenances, for the Furnishing of Electric Energy to the City, its Inhabitants, and Others, and to Use the Public Ways and Public Grounds of the City for Such Purposes, and Prescribing Certain Terms and Conditions Thereof Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering 8.2. ORD 26-2608 Public Hearing and First Reading Ordinance Granting to Northern States Power Company, D/B/A/ Xcel Energy, a Minnesota Corporation, Its Successors and Assigns, a Nonexclusive Franchise to Construct, Operate, Repair and Maintain in the City Of Blaine, Minnesota, an Electric Distribution System and Transmission Lines, Including Necessary Poles, Lines, Fixtures and Appurtenances, for the Furnishing of Electric Energy to the City, Its Inhabitants, and Others, and to Use the Public Ways and Public Grounds of the City for Such Purposes, and Prescribing Certain Terms and Conditions Thereof Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering 8.3. ORD 26-2609 Public Hearing and First Reading Ordinance Granting to Northern States Power Company, D/B/A/ Xcel Energy, a Minnesota Corporation, Its Successors and Assigns, a Nonexclusive Franchise to Construct, Operate, Repair, and Maintain Facilities and Equipment for the Transportation, Distribution, Manufacture, and Sale of Gas Energy for Public and Private Use and to Use Public Ways and Public Grounds of the City for Such Purposes; and Prescribing Certain Terms and Conditions Thereof Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering Page 3 of 385 9. Development Business 9.1. ORD 26-2606 Second Reading Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF) at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Montean Meadows (Mark Montean) (Case File No. 26-0017/SLK) Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director 9.2. RES 26-109 Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval to Subdivide 39.68 Acres into 86 Single Family Lots and 2 Outlots to be Known as Montean Meadows at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Mark Montean (Case File No. 26-0017/SLK) Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director 9.3. RES 26-98 Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit to Allow the Construction of 86 Single-Family Homes in a Development Flex (DF) Zoning District at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Montean Meadows (Mark Montean) (Case File No. 26- 0017/SLK) Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director 10. Administration 10.1. RES 26-113 Resolution Accepting a Bid from Park Construction Company in the amount of $577,651.95 for the 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project, Improvement Project No. T2605. Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering 10.2. RES 26-107 Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract to ODESA II in the Amount of $395,661.17 for the Jim Peterson Park Improvements Project, Improvement Project No. P2606 and Associated Budget Amendments Sponsors: Jerome Krieger, Park and Recreation Director 11. Other Business 12. Adjournment Page 4 of 385CITY OF BLAINE SCHEDULE OF BILLS PAID APPROVED ON 06/15/2026 FOR PAYMENTS THE WEEK OF 05/22/2026 Vendor Name Description Amount ALEX'S LAWN AND TURF LLC 2026 Blanket: Monthly Mowing; Tom Ryan Park $ 2,206.61 ALEXANDER WOODS HOA Refund of room deposit $ 500.00 ALMS AMANDA Senior program / van drivers $ 240.00 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Crimper tool: Mechanic shop $ 12.98 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Monitor Mount/ Folders/Markers/Chargers $ 101.48 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 4 Ethernet Interface Adapters $ 89.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Induction Heater : Shop $ 169.99 ANDREA HEIDI Professional Development Expense Reimbursement $ 391.81 ANOKA COUNTY 2026 Nearmap Aerial Imagery (GIS) $ 1,000.00 ANOKA COUNTY LICENSE BUREAU New Registration - PD #5363 $ 3,420.86 ANOKA COUNTY TREASURY DEPARTMENT Sundgaard DTF Vehicle (reimbursement to city by USPS) $ 14,284.15 AUTO AIR AND ACCESSORIES INC Replacement CSO truck topper purchase and install $ 3,597.00 AUTOWASH SYSTEMS INC Car Wash Chemicals & Check 5/01/26 $ 464.20 BADER COMPANIES PC26-0025_Incorrect Application $ 721.00 BCI CONSTRUCTION INC Aquatore Bandshell Construction, I/P 22-44 (Ref PO 23-4015) $ 3,083.44 BLAINE BROTHERS INC Cab lights; Log Truck 1288 $ 60.34 BLAINE BROTHERS INC Credit $ (37.10) BROOKS HENRY Tuition Reimbursement $ 900.00 BROWN SEAN Clothing and Uniforms - Sean B Team Apparel - 5 Work Shirts $ 263.99 CARPENTER SEAN Clothing and Uniforms - Sean C 6 Work Shirts $ 76.44 CENTENNIAL SCHOOL DIST 12 Senior program $ 2,145.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 750 Clover Leak Pkwy NE - Gas $ 83.37 CENTERPOINT ENERGY April 2026 Gas Service $ 1,620.49 CINTAS CORPORATION 2026 Uniform/Rug Towel Rentals $ 481.46 CINTAS CORPORATION MAYC Mats/Rugs $ 38.42 COMCAST Cable TV for Patrol for FY2026 $ 36.29 COMCAST MAYC - Cable TV $ 69.67 COMCAST Internet for Public Works $ 201.47 CONNEXUS ENERGY-UTILITY PAYMENTS April 2026 Electric Service $ 52,958.78 CORE & MAIN LP 1" Meters/Flanges/Gaskets/ Metal Iperls $ 923.67 CORE & MAIN LP Wired radios: water dept $ 26,730.00 CORE & MAIN LP SCADA Metric Remote readers: Water $ 813.73 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT Front Rcr Mount/ Extensions for Magnet Mounts: Unit 4654 & 4655 $ 662.00 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT Front Rcr Mount/ Extensions for Magnet Mounts: Unit 4654 & 4655 $ 662.00 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT Install Dirt Conveyor : Streets $ 4,173.00 CUSTOM TRUCK ONE SOURCE Repair to boom truck #2393 $ 572.00 D & G TIRE RECYCLE LLC Disposal of Used Tires from Fleet $ 729.75 ECM PUBLISHERS INC Advertising & Public Notices $ 69.50 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 2026 Public Hearing Notices $ 110.00 ECM PUBLISHERS INC Ad for medical bids $ 71.50 ECM PUBLISHERS INC Advertising & Public Notices $ 132.00 ECM PUBLISHERS INC Advertising & Public Notices $ 132.00 ECM PUBLISHERS INC Advertising & Public Notices $ 38.50 ECM PUBLISHERS INC Advertising & Public Notices $ 115.50 EDWARDS ALAN Softball Umpire Fees $ 536.00 Page 5 of 385EMBROIDERY & MORE TOO LLC Uniforms for PW Depts $ 170.50 EVERLIGHT SOLAR Permit Refund - B25-04227 Solar $ 80.00 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY Brake Parts: PD Stock $ 1,027.60 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY Brake Parts: PD Stock $ 110.62 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY Batteries: PW Stock $ 668.67 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY Brake Parts: PD Stock $ 245.80 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #2518 Perma Patch Asphalt Patch : Water Main Break Repair $ 7,080.48 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #2518 Meters/ Hydrant Markers/ Gaskets $ 46.48 FIELDS CONTRACTING LLC 2025 Storm Outfall Project, I/P 25-14 (U2514) $ 20,928.50 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET INC B/O Brake Pads: PD Stock $ 631.76 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET INC Hub Caps : unit 5265 (PD) $ 15.52 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET INC Exhaust : Unit 5288 (PD) $ 2,613.93 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET INC Exhaust : Unit 5288 (PD) $ 41.63 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET INC Control Arm : Unit 5351 (PD) $ 83.14 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET INC Manifold Studs and Nuts: Unit 5288 ( PD) $ 64.94 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET INC Window Switch/Vehicle 5221 : Control Arm/Veh 5328 $ 59.37 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET INC Brake Rotors/Pads: PD Stock $ 865.86 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET INC Brake Rotors/Pads: PD Stock $ 1,731.72 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET INC Window Switch/Vehicle 5221 : Control Arm/Veh 5328 $ 93.27 GLOWING HEARTH & HOME Permit Refund - B25-04237 $ 60.00 GOUGH JANE Employee Engagement Event - GAME ON!! Snacks $ 69.70 GRAINGER GP motor 10HP $ 2,068.29 GUARDIAN FLEET SAFETY LLC Police UTV upfitting $ 10,252.33 HAWKINS INC 2026 Water Treatment Chemicals $ 2,922.88 HAWKINS INC 2026 Water Treatment Chemicals $ 9,946.20 HAYLE BENJAMIN Conference and Travel Expenses $ 135.00 HYDRAULIC SPECIALTY INC 4 Grease Lines : Unit 1305 (Plow Truck) $ 267.74 IMAGE PRINTING & GRAPHICS INC Nameplate for Chambers $ 29.05 INSTRUMENTAL RESEARCH INC Water Sample Testing; 2026 Blanket $ 1,210.00 INTOXIMETERS INC (5) Replacement PBTs for patrol $ 2,175.00 ISOM HARLAN G Softball Umpire Fees $ 750.00 JEFF BELZER'S ROSEVILLE AUTO INC Trans Filters: PD Stock $ 1,237.50 JEFF BELZER'S ROSEVILLE AUTO INC Caliper Slide Pin Bolts : Unit 5346 (PD) $ 14.05 JOB GLORIA D Senior program $ 225.00 JOHNSON JOSEPH Reimbursement for CDL & Mileage; Joey Johnson $ 569.41 JOHNSON LITHO GRAPHICS OF EAU CLAIRE LTD May/June City Connect Newsletter $ 14,826.45 KNOBLAUCH JAMES Band for Sizzling Summer $ 500.00 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC Regency Kit/ Safety Air Coupler $ 20.15 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC Locate Paint: Water/Sewer $ 531.30 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC Credit $ (118.16) LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE TRUST-CLAIMS Workers Comp Insurance Claims $ 2,482.44 LRS PORTABLES OF MINNESOTA 2026 Satellite Rental - Parks $ 8,420.02 MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS Patching Material for Streets $ 248.83 MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS Patching Material for Streets $ 238.08 MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS Patching Material for Streets $ 337.92 MC TOOL & SAFETY SALES Over glasses Safety glasses $ 21.36 MENARDS - BLAINE Screws/Nuts/bolts: WTP 3 $ 61.44 MENARDS - BLAINE Roundup/ Cable Locks: All Parks $ 168.71 MENARDS - BLAINE Caulk gun, adhesive, insect killer $ 68.61 MENARDS - BLAINE Air filters, insect traps, tool, sponges $ 143.28 MENARDS - BLAINE Shop Towels: Signs $ 45.08 MENARDS - BLAINE Batteries, salt, air filters, earmuff $ 195.36 Page 6 of 385MENARDS - BLAINE Batteries, outlet plate, cartridges, tape $ 42.99 MENARDS - BLAINE PVC supplies, salt pellets $ 89.73 METRO SALES INCORPORATED Credit $ (531.14) METRO SALES INCORPORATED Copier Maintenance and Support $ 3,710.85 METRO SALES INCORPORATED Copier Maintenance and Support $ 398.82 METRO SALES INCORPORATED Copier Maintenance and Support $ 707.00 METRO SALES INCORPORATED Copier Maintenance and Support $ 817.14 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MCES Wastewater Services $ 477,884.43 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY Replacement CSO Truck-F150 $ 43,475.72 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY Replacement CSO Truck-F150 $ 43,475.72 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY Brakes : Unit 1289 (F-450) $ 510.19 MINGER CONSTRUCTION CO INC Lift Station 13 Force Main-Phase 2, I/P 23-30 (U2330) $ 214,928.00 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT - HAM LAKE String Trimmer for WTPs $ 360.79 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT - ISANTI Filters : PW Stock $ 192.56 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT - ISANTI DEF Filter kits: PW Stock/Tie Rods; Tractor 2396 $ 104.56 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT - ISANTI DEF Filter kits: PW Stock/Tie Rods; Tractor 2396 $ 125.91 MINNESOTA OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS Victim Services Training- Donaldson- Grant Reimbursed $ 200.00 MINNESOTA STATE COLLEGES OF UNIVERSITIES Senior program $ 408.00 MN METRO NORTH TOURISM March 2026 Lodging Taxes $ 14,854.09 MONTGOMERY CONNIE Reimbursement for Invisible Fence Repair, I/P 24-06 $ 309.00 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC Sensor/T-Stat/Gaskets: Mower 2431 $ 198.16 MUSKA ELECTRIC CO GPS Antenna Cable: Public Works $ 2,630.26 MUSKA ELECTRIC CO Bulk Water Station Cat 6 Run $ 668.80 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS NCPERS Group Life Insurance $ 1,056.00 NESVOLD RYAN Band for Sizzling Summer $ 300.00 NORTH COUNTRY CHEVROLET 2026 Chevy Tahoe Purchase $ 55,337.92 NORTH PINE AGGREGATE INC Water service removal: Water Proj 25-087 $ 5,283.00 NORTHERN SANITARY SUPPLY CO INC CH towels, hand soap, cleaner, polish $ 439.08 NORTHWAY SPORTS Window Regulator: UTV 5294 $ 124.99 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE INC Brake Rotor/Pad: PW stock $ 495.08 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE INC Filters: PW Stock $ 81.38 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE INC Filters : Unit 1267 $ 41.32 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE INC 5W50 Oil : Unit 5294 (PD) $ 12.99 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE INC Filters for PW Stock $ 48.89 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE INC Belt/ Filters/ Brake Calipers $ 81.52 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE INC Belt/ Filters/ Brake Calipers $ 223.88 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE INC Belt/ Filters/ Brake Calipers $ 8.46 OFFICE OF MNIT SERVICES Centrex Phone Lines $ 178.14 OPSAHL-MITCHELL WANDA KAY facepainting for Sizzling Summer $ 500.00 PAFFY'S PEST CONTROL INC PW monthly pest control $ 139.00 PLUNKETT'S PEST CONTROL INC Pest Control $ 3,760.40 POTTER GAVIN Reimbursement - Work boots - Seasonal $ 60.00 PRESCRIPTION LANDSCAPE INC Spring Perennial Cut Back - Various Medians $ 225.00 PRESCRIPTION LANDSCAPE INC Spring Perennial Cut Back - Various Medians $ 693.57 PRESCRIPTION LANDSCAPE INC Spring Perennial Cut Back - Various Medians $ 344.44 PRESCRIPTION LANDSCAPE INC Spring Perennial Cut Back - Various Medians $ 889.20 PRESCRIPTION LANDSCAPE INC Spring Perennial Cut Back - Various Medians $ 528.88 RCM SPECIALTIES INC 2026 Emulsion/Rock: Street Patching Material $ 777.24 ROADKILL ANIMAL CONTROL 2026 Blanket: Disposal of Dead Deer $ 387.00 ROADKILL ANIMAL CONTROL 2026 Blanket: Disposal of Dead Deer $ 516.00 SAFETYFIRST PLAYGROUND MAINTENANCE Aquatore Park repairs $ 2,511.00 SAM'S CLUB/SYNCHRONY BANK Program supplies $ 35.91 Page 7 of 385SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC PW Fuel Station Reconstruction Design Services-I/P 25-01 (F2501) $ 6,282.63 SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC Final Design & Construction Services, I/P 26-06 (T2606) $ 19,395.57 SOCIAL NEWS DESK INC Social Media Management System Annual Subscription $ 6,089.40 SORENSEN CATHY Anoka County Elections Training - parking/meals for Clerk/Deputy $ 48.99 STAND TALL INC Employee Training Session Sept 23 (payment 1 of 2) $ 1,500.00 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC Tires: PW Stock $ 1,096.00 SZYPLINSKI RICHARD J Senior program - Birthday entertainment $ 150.00 TAYLOR SCOTT Irrigation Reimbursement - Plow damage $ 12.94 THE DAVEY TREE EXPERT COMPANY Growth Regulator Application: Aquatore Park $ 1,355.00 THE PARC May 2026 Invoice for The PARC Membership $ 3,096.00 THORVIG ERIK Mileage Reimbursement (April and May) $ 255.93 TRDAN MICHELLE Reimbursement - Plants (Storm Sewer Outlet Project), I/P 25-14 $ 617.00 TREVIPAY Air Line/ Ball Valve : Shop $ 166.23 TRI-STATE BOBCAT INC (4) D Rings: Unit 2398 (Bobcat) $ 400.65 ULINE Chairs/labels: water Dept $ 852.98 ULINE Chairs for Plants/ Meeting Room $ 3,298.82 USA BLUEBOOK (#657220) Meter Liners/Freeze Plates: Water Dept $ 673.76 USA BLUEBOOK (#657220) Lab Supplies: Water Dept $ 2,431.75 USA BLUEBOOK (#657220) Water Level Readers/ Bags for Readers/Hydrant Sample Tap $ 263.00 USA BLUEBOOK (#657220) Water Level Readers/ Bags for Readers/Hydrant Sample Tap $ 601.71 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY LLC Lift Station #8 Breaker $ 2,000.12 WALTERS RECYCLING & REFUSE INC Garbage and Recycling Contract $ 534,764.50 XCEL ENERGY 4206 Woodland Pkwy NE - Signal $ 59.84 XCEL ENERGY 4131 Pheasant Ridge DR NE - Monument $ 11.53 XCEL ENERGY 9191 Lincoln St NE - Bandshell $ 210.88 ZIEGLER INC Generator PM agreement $ 5,906.75 ZIEGLER INC AES PM agreement $ 5,271.17 $ 1,699,791.11 Page 8 of 385CITY OF BLAINE SUBSET OF PAYMENTS BETWEEN $20,000 AND $50,000 FROM THE SCHEDULE OF BILLS PAID APPROVED ON 06/15/2026 FOR PAYMENTS THE WEEK OF 05/22/2026 Vendor Name Description Amount FIELDS CONTRACTING LLC 2025 Storm Outfall Project, I/P 25-14 (U2514) $ 20,928.50 CORE & MAIN LP Wired radios: water dept $ 26,730.00 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY Replacement CSO Truck-F150 $ 43,475.72 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY Replacement CSO Truck-F150 $ 43,475.72 Page 9 of 385CITY OF BLAINE SCHEDULE OF BILLS PAID APPROVED ON 06/15/2026 FOR PAYMENTS THE WEEK OF 05/28/2026 Vendor Name Description Amount ALLEGRA PRINT & IMAGING PD Staff Photos for Photo Wall with new rebranding $ 1,685.38 ALLEGRA PRINT & IMAGING Hultman business cards invoice 78282 $ 59.95 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Trailer Batteries & Mechanic Tools: Wrenches/Adjusting tool $ 50.21 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES SD cards, label tape, chair, post its, pen $ 199.98 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Trailer Batteries & Mechanic Tools: Wrenches/Adjusting tool $ 95.55 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Employee Recognition Gift $ 50.00 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES PW office tv mount, extension cord, outlet cover $ 15.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Supplies for MAYC $ 252.40 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES SD cards, label tape, chair, post its, pen $ 119.63 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Baggies for shirts and other supplies $ 35.10 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES GPS Cable Adapters $ 8.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Supplies for the tea party $ 50.65 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Lead/Copper sample bottles: Water $ 199.97 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 8 laptops for elections reimbursable through State VOTER funds $ 6,335.36 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Phone Cases for Interns $ 33.98 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES SIM Cards: Water $ 1,525.45 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Fabric Stakes for Community Gardens $ 51.78 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Office Equipment - Keyboard & Mouse $ 23.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Tennis net center straps $ 109.30 AMERICAN TEST CENTER Annual Inspections - Cranes/bucket truck $ 2,350.00 ANOKA COUNTY TREASURY DEPARTMENT Connect Anoka County Fiber $ 1,500.00 AUTO AIR AND ACCESSORIES INC AC Repairs: vehicles 5221 & 5296 $ 980.85 AUTO AIR AND ACCESSORIES INC AC Repairs: vehicles 5221 & 5296 $ 970.74 BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY Well Interference Response Plan, I/P 23-22 $ 5,171.50 BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY Large-scale Pilot Test Work Plan WTP No. 1, I/P 23-21 $ 5,178.50 BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY General Engineering Services $ 1,189.00 BATTERIES PLUS BULBS Batteries: Mower 2431 $ 505.80 BOERBOOM MARK GSMCON conference reimbursement/hotel/meals $ 902.29 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION Construction Materials Testing, LS13 Force Main-P2, I/P 23-30 $ 1,989.00 BROADWAY AWARDS INC Retirement Award for Officer Grant Breems $ 115.28 BRUCE ALLAN Irrigation Damage reimbursement $ 350.00 CARR'S TREE SERVICE INC Tree Removal/ Haul - Multiple sites $ 18,348.00 CENTRAL PRO SUPPLY Irrigation supplies; Stock $ 1,755.07 CENTURYLINK Public Works Internet Service $ 78.72 CHRONICLES IN HEALTH LLC Senior program $ 65.00 CINTAS CORPORATION 2026 Uniform/Rug Towel Rentals $ 215.46 CITY OF LEXINGTON Sewer System Usage Agreement - City of Lexington $ 11,528.17 CITY OF ST PAUL Hot Patch Mix: Street Department $ 362.28 COMCAST Fiber Internet Service $ 1,360.00 CONNEXUS ENERGY Lift Station 13 (9896 Naples St) Move Transformer, I/P 23-30 $ 7,330.00 D R HORTON INC Escrow Refund - 4742 132nd CT NE $ 4,900.00 D R HORTON INC Escrow Refund - 4730 132nd CT NE $ 4,900.00 D R HORTON INC Escrow Refund - 4736 132nd CT NE $ 4,900.00 D R HORTON INC Escrow Refund - 4727 132nd CT NE $ 4,900.00 Page 10 of 385D R HORTON INC Escrow Refund - 13075 Ghia ST NE $ 4,900.00 DAVE'S SPORT SHOP Uniforms for Youth Sports Program $ 7,541.00 FLAGSHIP RECREATION Jefferson Park - Concrete, mobilization, dumpster & installation $ 14,357.54 FLAGSHIP RECREATION Jefferson Park - Concrete, mobilization, dumpster & installation $ 17,230.19 FLAGSHIP RECREATION Jefferson Park - Wood Fiber installation and delivery $ 7,440.00 FREEMAN BRIANNA Mileage Reimbursement for Training - Brianna Freeman $ 27.51 GARY JOHN ANDERSON LANDSCAPING INC 109th Wall Repair $ 4,802.82 GERHARD JOSEPH Tuition Reimbursement $ 660.00 HAWKINS INC 2026 Water Treatment Chemicals $ 10,785.00 HAWKINS INC 2026 Water Treatment Chemicals $ 2,267.40 HOFFMAN & MCNAMARA COMPANY Trees for 2026 Arbor Day Tree Sale $ 29,097.00 IDEAL SERVICE INC Well 11 VFD Work; Water $ 630.00 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR INC Adobe Acrobat for Engineering $ 12.38 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR INC Monitors $ 1,145.30 INTELLIGENCE NEXUS LLC Annual Fee for Case Management Software $ 2,711.00 JOHNSTON RACHEL Home Improvement Grant Reimbursement $ 4,596.00 KNUDSON EVA May Employee Wellness Event Supplies $ 402.00 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC Sewer Tools: B/O Drill Set $ 938.28 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC Water/Sewer locate paint $ 294.00 MACK MICHAEL Home Improvement Grant Reimbursement $ 6,000.00 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY Fuel Delivery - May $ 14,517.67 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY Fuel Delivery - May $ 18,706.73 MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS Patching Material for Streets $ 158.98 MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS Patching Material for Streets $ 160.00 MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS Patching Material for Streets $ 158.98 MAYER ARTS INC Wizard of Oz class Instructor $ 600.00 MC TOOL & SAFETY SALES Water Supplies: Rain coats/Gloves/safety glasses $ 643.01 MENARDS - BLAINE PD Training Building supplies $ 139.92 MENARDS - BLAINE Meter maint. Supplies: Centennial Sq. Homes: Water $ 202.87 MENARDS - BLAINE Hose: Plant 4 $ 29.56 MENARDS - BLAINE Meter Mounting supplies: Water $ 32.52 MENARDS - BLAINE Irrigation Supplies/chlorine tablets: Parks $ 121.58 METRO SALES INCORPORATED Copier Maintenance and Support $ 235.00 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY Replacement Chief Vehicle (F150) $ 48,930.72 MINNEAPOLIS SAW COMPANY INC Forestry PPE: Cloggers $ 793.01 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT - ISANTI DEF Filter kits: PW Stock/Tie Rods; Tractor 2396 $ 219.12 MINUTE MAKER SECRETARIAL Minute Maker Secretarial $ 508.25 MINUTE MAKER SECRETARIAL 2026 Planning Commission Minutes $ 287.75 NORTH STAR KIDS PLAY LLC SAC Loan for Hyper Kidz_RES 26-80 $ 72,065.00 OPTUM FINANCIAL INC Account fee monthly FSA $ 80.25 PAFFY'S PEST CONTROL INC CH monthly pest control $ 85.35 PAFFY'S PEST CONTROL INC MAYC monthly pest control $ 59.75 PARENT BUILDERS INC Escrow Refund - 12942 Alamo CT NE $ 4,900.00 PHASOR ELECTRIC COMPANY Metal covers for exterior audio/visual boxes $ 524.00 PRINT CENTRAL Business Cards: Nathan DeBoer $ 39.00 PRO-TEC DESIGN INC Door Repair at Blaine Baseball Complex $ 769.54 REBYL SPORTS INC Team Apparel w/Blaine Logo - Building Inspections $ 610.42 REBYL SPORTS INC Team Apparel w/Blaine Logo - Building Inspections $ 135.54 REHBEIN'S BLACK DIRT Black Dirt: Street Dept $ 1,317.00 SCHERER BROS LUMBER CO Timber for Cribbing $ 1,029.89 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC Seed Starter/hydroulch Pellets: Storm $ 637.64 Page 11 of 385 STONE CREEK HOMES INC Escrow Refund - 2611 132nd Ave NE $ 5,000.00 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC Tires: PD 5031 $ 641.44 SYSCO MINNESOTA Senior program supplies $ 73.59 TACTICAL SOLUTIONS Calibration/Maintenance of radar and lidar units $ 1,540.00 T-MOBILE USA INC Search Warrant $ 50.00 T-MOBILE USA INC Search Warrant $ 50.00 T-MOBILE USA INC Search Warrant $ 115.00 TREVIPAY Water Meter Tools: Wrenches/Ratchets/Hammer Drill $ 491.68 TREVIPAY Water Tools: Chisel/scraper/pliers $ 342.40 VILLEGAS WESLEY Tuition Reimbursement $ 605.68 VOSS UTILITY & PLUMBING Escrow Refund - 12612 Central Ave NE $ 2,000.00 WALDRON CO. Consulting Services $ 1,640.30 WALTERS RECYCLING & REFUSE INC Organics Collection 2026 $ 150.00 WARGO NATURE CENTER Birding Hike Instructor $ 100.00 WARGO NATURE CENTER Birding Hike Instructor $ 100.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC Zest St Final Design & Construction Services, I/P 25-04 (T2504) $ 17,918.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC Engineering Svcs TH65 Frontage Rd Utility Improvement, I/P 21-01 $ 1,800.75 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC Jim Peterson Park Improvements for Hockey rink and Warming House $ 9,509.75 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC Prelim Design & Feasibility Report, I/P 26-05 $ 8,566.00 XCEL ENERGY April 2026 Electric $ 9,719.93 MUNIPLATFORM 2026B Bond Issuance - Distribution and Marketing Fees $ 750.00 S&P GLOBAL RATINGS 2026 Bond Issuance - Rating Agency Fee $ 12,200.00 $ 450,650.31 Page 12 of 385CITY OF BLAINE SUBSET OF PAYMENTS BETWEEN $20,000 AND $50,000 FROM THE SCHEDULE OF BILLS PAID APPROVED ON 06/15/2026 FOR PAYMENTS THE WEEK OF 05/28/2026 Vendor Name Description Amount HOFFMAN & MCNAMARA COMPANY Trees for 2026 Arbor Day Tree Sale $ 29,097.00 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY Replacement Chief Vehicle (F150) $ 48,930.72 Page 13 of 385 PAYROLL CHECKS & WIRE TRANSFERS MONTH: MAY 2026 PAYROLL CHECKS DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 05/07/26 VENDOR CHECKS CHECK # 80147 $1,196.68 05/07/26 EMPLOYEES DIRECT DEPOSITS $708,746.68 05/14/26 VENDOR CHECKS CHECK # $0.00 05/14/26 EMPLOYEES DIRECT DEPOSITS $61,523.74 05/21/26 VENDOR CHECKS CHECK # 80148 - 80154 $8,383.58 05/21/26 EMPLOYEES DIRECT DEPOSITS $712,341.25 WIRE TRANSFERS DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 05/07/26 STATE OF MINNESOTA PAYROLL TAXES $48,666.48 05/07/26 IRS PAYROLL TAXES $212,727.19 05/07/26 PERA RETIREMENT $215,127.18 05/07/26 MSRS, GREAT WEST, NATIONWIDE DEFERRED COMP & H.S.A $75,533.99 05/20/26 STATE OF MINNESOTA APRIL 2026 SALES TAX $51,375.00 05/18/26 21ST CENTURY BANK CREDIT CARDS $50,042.97 05/14/26 STATE OF MINNESOTA PAYROLL TAXES $3,182.00 05/14/26 IRS PAYROLL TAXES $18,386.65 05/14/26 PERA RETIREMENT $11,545.80 05/14/26 MSRS, GREAT WEST, NATIONWIDE DEFERRED COMP & H.S.A $0.00 05/21/26 STATE OF MINNESOTA PAYROLL TAXES $49,365.92 05/21/26 IRS PAYROLL TAXES $217,635.73 05/21/26 PERA RETIREMENT $213,314.40 05/21/26 MSRS, GREAT WEST, NATIONWIDE DEFERRED COMP & H.S.A $73,725.91 Page 14 of 385 City of Blaine City Council Workshop June 1, 2026 | 5:30 PM Blaine City Hall 10801 Town Square Drive NE Blaine, MN 55449 MINUTES NOTICE OF WORKSHOP MEETING In accordance with the provisions of Section 3.01 of the Blaine City Charter, a Council Workshop meeting is scheduled for the following purpose: 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Mayor Sanders at 5:30PM. 2. Roll Call PRESENT: Mayor Tim Sanders, Councilmembers Terra Fleming, Chris Ford, Leslie Larson, Chris Massoglia, Tom Newland, and Jess Robertson. ABSENT: None. Quorum Present. ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Erik Thorvig; Community Development Director Sheila Sellman; Safety Services Director/Police Chief Brian Podany; Finance Director Jason Zimmerman; Director of Administrative Services Scott Johnson; Director of Engineering Dan Schluender; Parks and Recreation Director Jerome Krieger; Economic Development Specialist Ruth Tucker; City Attorneys Eric Larson and Joe Van Thomme; Communications Manager Ben Hayle; and City Clerk Catherine Sorensen. 3. New Business 3.1. 2026-115 Municipal Cannabis Partnership Update (45 Minutes) Sponsors: Ruth Tucker, Economic Development Specialist Economic Development Specialist Tucker stated council has held multiple discussions regarding the selection of an operating partner for the city’s municipal cannabis retailer license, including review of materials submitted by Voyageur Cannabis and a presentation Page 15 of 385 from the city of Anoka regarding its municipal cannabis operation and potential partnership approach. At the previous meeting, council directed staff to further vet Voyageur Cannabis and continue discussions with the city of Anoka to better understand potential partnership terms. Both Voyageur Cannabis and the city of Anoka have expressed interest in partnering with Blaine to operate a cannabis retail facility under the city’s municipal license. Each option presents a different operational structure for council’s consideration. Additional information will confidentially be provided to council prior to the workshop. Staff requested the council select an operating partner and authorize staff to proceed with a letter of intent. Kevin Morelli, City of Anoka, suggested that a joint powers agreement may be considered as part of the negotiations as it may limit some of the liability for each jurisdiction. City Attorney Eric Larson outlined the need for both site control as well as the partnership between the cities in order to really begin the process, adding once a site has been acquired a more formal contract will be drafted and that the letter of intent could be accomplished by the end of July. Councilmember Fleming asked for input on the area of Blaine that may be best. Mr. Morelli said the border of the city is best to capture customers from other cities. Councilmember Larson said she felt comfortable with partnering with Anoka as they best understand city operations. Council consensus was to move forward with the City of Anoka to partner on Blaine's municipal dispensary license. Discussion was held on possible locations. Mr. Thorvig thanked council for the clear guidance on the partnership and said next steps will be identifying start-up costs, proforma on projected sales, and locations for upfront costs and said a letter of intent will be drafted in the near future. 3.2. 2026-116 City Attorney Contracts (30 Minutes) Sponsors: Scott Johnson, Director of Administrative Services Director of Administrative Services Johnson stated the current contracts for both civil and prosecution services with Eckberg and Lammers will end on December 31, 2026. In 2018, a request for proposals was conducted with seven proposals received, and three firms selected for interviews. City council directed staff to present contracts for both civil and criminal prosecution with Eckberg and Lammers for approval at the October 4, 2018, city council meeting. In 2023, the city council discussed whether to continue services with Eckberg Lammers or go out for RFP for legal services. The council chose to continue services with Eckberg and not do an RFP. Eckberg submitted a proposal for a three-year renewal of the contracts which commenced January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2026. The 2024- 2026 criminal prosecution agreement included a 3% increase each year of the contract. The 2026 annual fee for prosecution is $300,000. Given the expiration of the contract, the council can choose to go out for RFP or continue services with Eckberg and negotiate a contract. If the council chooses to continue services with Eckberg, the 2027 rate will be provided in a proposal from Eric Larson at Eckberg and Lammers (staff will provide the Page 16 of 385 proposal when received). Currently, the city has a hybrid agreement for civil legal services which includes a monthly retainer and an hourly rate. The hourly rate is dependent on the type of legal services required. Staff reviewed the proposal noting the fees in greater detail. City Attorney Van Thomme provided background information on the civil and criminal sides of the firm, discussed the number of cases that were addressed by the firm, and commented on other data. He noted Blaine was a very active municipality when it comes to civil cases, which was due to the high level of police presence in Blaine. Mayor Sanders stated the number of referrals for criminal matters was higher than other communities and questioned if this was due to population or geography. Mr. Van Thomme stated this would be hard to determine then explained his firm represents a number of cities and noted those with trunk highways receive a lot of traffic cases and cities with large retail, receive a lot of prosecution cases. City Attorney Larson explained he has enjoyed working for Blaine for the past three years and said it was his hope he would be able to continue with Blaine. Mayor Sanders stated he appreciated working with Eckberg and Lammers and commended them for the great work they were doing on behalf of the city. Councilmember Newland requested further information regarding the civil matters the city attorneys were addressing. Mr. Larson explained this work included the 105th redevelopment project and litigation with the City of Lexington. Councilmember Fleming appreciated how well Eckberg and Lammers knew the city council and staff members. Councilmember Massoglia reported he has been very happy with the services provided by Eckberg and Lammers. He stated he has felt well represented throughout the entire 105th redevelopment project. Councilmember Newland agreed and stated he would like to see the city remain with Eckberg and Lammers for continuity purposes. Safety Services Director/Police Chief Podany explained he has been very happy with the prosecution services provided by Eckberg and Lammers. Council consensus was to support renewing the Eckberg and Lammers contracts and forward with formal approval at a future council meeting. 4. Other Business 4.1. 2026-117 Early Voting Locations (15 Minutes) Sponsors: Cathy Sorensen, City Clerk City Clerk Sorensen stated a law change was approved in the last legislative session that Page 17 of 385 allows municipalities the option to be open for in-person absentee voting the full 46-day period, which begins June 26, or just the final 18 days for early voting, which begins July 24. The primary is held on August 11. Because the turnout for primary elections has historically been low, staff will work with Anoka County to shift in-person absentee voting for Blaine voters to the Anoka County Elections office from June 26 through July 23. Beginning July 24, Blaine voters will be able to vote in-person at City Hall and place their ballots in the tabulator directly, which has become increasingly important to voters and reflected in law changes this year which extended the early voting period from 7 days to 18 days. This shift will result in election judge cost savings of approximately $3,000, which does not include staff time to manage, close, and balance nightly. This shift will also help alleviate some of the impacts due to the planned construction and access changes to city hall. The 2022 primary had a total turnout of 13.48% and the 2024 state primary, which didn't have any city races, saw only 156 voters at city hall during the last week before the election. Staff will use the primary to gauge the impact on voters before making any decisions for the general election and will create a communication plan to inform voters about the availability of the longer period for early voting and other voting options. In addition, city hall will also be open for early voting on Saturday, August 8 from 9AM-3PM and until 5PM the day before the election. Councilmember Larson said she supported the proposed shift as a more efficient way to use taxpayer dollars. Police Chief Podany shared background information on FLOCK data in response to some recent social media activity and noted he wanted the council to be educated on how the department was using this technology. He commented further on how the retail unit is present at Northtown Mall now that Asia Mall is open. City Manager Thorvig provided the council with a construction update on the 105th Avenue redevelopment project. He noted a building permit has been issued for the parking ramp and staff was working with the developers' PR firm to align messaging for this project. Further information was provided regarding the progress that has been made on the roundabout. Councilmember Massoglia mentioned the possibility of an expanded 4th of July celebration to recognize the country's 250th year. Parks and Recreation Director Krieger noted the Blaine Festival will be donating an additional $10,000 to create an expanded fireworks display. Further discussion was held on the city's parade float. 5. Adjournment The workshop adjourned at 6:46PM. Page 18 of 385 City of Blaine City Council June 1, 2026 | 7:00 PM Blaine City Hall 10801 Town Square Drive NE Blaine, MN 55449 MINUTES 1. Call to Order by the Mayor The meeting was called to order at 7:03PM by Mayor Sanders followed by the Pledge of Allegiance and the Roll Call. 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Roll Call PRESENT: Mayor Tim Sanders, Councilmembers Terra Fleming, Chris Ford, Leslie Larson, Chris Massoglia, Tom Newland, and Jess Robertson. ABSENT: None. Quorum Present. ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Erik Thorvig; Community Development Director Sheila Sellman; Safety Services Director/Police Chief Brian Podany; Finance Director Jason Zimmerman; Director of Administrative Services Scott Johnson; Director of Engineering Dan Schluender; Parks and Recreation Director Jerome Krieger; City Attorney Eric Larson; Communications Manager Ben Hayle; and City Clerk Catherine Sorensen. 4. Awards - Presentations - Organizational Business None. 5. Open Forum Open Forum is an opportunity for the public to share comments, concerns, or input on other items. While Open Forum is not intended to provide responses or discussion during the meeting, city staff will contact the speaker(s) after the meeting if follow-up is needed. Each speaker is limited to three minutes, with a maximum of 15 minutes set aside for Open Forum. Mayor Sanders opened the Open Forum at 7:03PM. Page 19 of 385 Bill Hammes, 10423 Xylite Street, explained he served on the board of directors for SLP Youth Hockey. He shared his opposition to the proposed ordinance to increase the cap on charitable gambling sites from four to five locations. He discussed how this increase would adversely impact the SLP Youth Hockey organization and requested the number of charitable gambling sites remain at four. Bruce Manthei, 4101 99th Avenue NE, shared continued concerns regarding the electrical box location at 99th/Lexington Avenues. Dana Carlson, 287 117th Avenue NE, addressed the council regarding various family concerns. Steve Moe, SLP school district parent and youth sports supporter, shared his opposition to increasing the cap on charitable gambling sites from four to five locations. There being no further input, Mayor Sanders closed the Open Forum at 7:14PM. 6. Communications None. 7. Approval of Consent Agenda: All items listed under the "Consent Agenda" are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. Councilmember Newland noted he would be abstaining from Item 7.1 due to a potential conflict of interest. Councilmember Larson thanked the residents for their involvement in bringing forward speed humps for Quincy Boulevard. Motion adopted 6-0-1 (Councilmember Newland abstained). 7.1. 2026-118 Schedule of Bills Paid Sponsors: Jason Zimmerman, Finance Director 7.2. 2026-119 Approval of Minutes Sponsors: Cathy Sorensen, City Clerk 7.3. 2026-120 Approve Carnival License for Amusement Attractions for the Blaine Festival Page 20 of 385 Sponsors: Cathy Sorensen, City Clerk 7.4. 2026-121 Approve the 2026-2027 Liquor License Renewals Sponsors: Cathy Sorensen, City Clerk 7.5. 2026-122 Approve the 2026-2027 Vending Truck License Renewals Sponsors: Cathy Sorensen, City Clerk 7.6. 2026-123 Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Sgt. John Rice VFW, 1374 109th Avenue NE Sponsors: Cathy Sorensen, City Clerk 7.7. RES 26-102 Resolution to Approve a Temporary Road Closure of Davenport Street Between 105th Avenue and 109th Avenue on July 4 for the Annual Fireworks Display Sponsors: Brian Podany, Safety Services Manager/Police Chief 7.8. RES 26-95 Resolution Granting Final Plat Approval to Subdivide .69 Acres into Two Lots, to be Known as JJ Graham Addition at 2808 93rd Lane NE and 2811 93rd Avenue NE. James and Robin Obraske (Case File No. 26-0028/ACK) Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director 7.9. RES 26-97 Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a 3,000 Square-Foot Attached Garage (Accessory Building) in a Farm Residential (FR) Zoning District at 11770 Lexington Avenue NE. Matt & Molly Gamble (Case File No. 26-0016/SLK) Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director 7.10. RES 26-100 Resolution to Receive Petition and Order Public Hearing for a Vacation of a Portion of Wetland Boundaries Located at 11985 Lever Street NE, Lot 4, Block 1, Sunset Pond Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota; Vacation No. V26-04 Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering Page 21 of 385 7.11. RES 26-108 Resolution to Declare Cost to be Assessed, Order Preparation and Call for Hearing on Proposed Assessment for 2025 Street Rehabilitation Project, Improvement Project No. T2505 Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering 7.12. RES 26-87 Resolution for the Addition of Speed Humps on Quincy Boulevard Between Territorial Road and 109th Avenue as an Amendment to the 2026 Quincy Area Street Reconstruction Project, Improvement Project T2604. Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering 7.13. RES 26-112 Resolution to Receive Petition and Order Public Hearing for Vacation of a portion of the Ponding Drainage and Utility Easement as documented and recorded per Document No. 1979449.001, lying South of the North 105.00 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 31, Range 23, Anoka County, Minnesota; Vacation No. V26-05 Sponsors: Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering 8. 7:00 PM - Public Hearing and Items Published for a Certain Time 8.1. 2026-125 Public Hearing on Proposed Franchise Ordinances for Connexus Energy (Electric Energy), Northern States Power Company d/b/a Xcel Energy (Electric and Gas Energy) Sponsors: Erik Thorvig, City Manager City Manager Thorvig stated city charter states that two publications of the required public hearing occur in the city's official newspaper before any franchise ordinance is adopted or any rates charged by a public utility can be fixed by the council. The publications occurred on May 8 and May 22, 2026, in the Blaine/Spring Lake Park Life. Public comments will be accepted and received into the record, which allows the public to comment while providing time to ensure full compliance with notice requirements. Staff provided further information regarding the publication schedule for the proposed franchise ordinances. Mayor Sanders opened the public hearing at 7:18PM. Dale Sprouse, 12880 Lexington Avenue, stated he opposed the proposed franchise fees and likened this to an additional tax. He encouraged the city to be honest about what they were doing and call the franchise fee a city tax. There being no additional public input, Mayor Sanders continued the public hearing to the June 15, 2026, city council meeting. 9. Development Business Page 22 of 385 9.1. ORD 26-2606 First Reading Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF) at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Montean Meadows (Mark Montean) (Case File No. 26-0017/SLK) Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director Community Development Director Sellman stated the applicant is requesting a rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF) to construct 86 single family homes that are 70 feet wide. Director of Engineering Schluender addressed the roadway improvements that would be completed to 131st Avenue as part of this development and provided further comment on the proposed cost participation for the roadway and lift station improvements that would occur if the adjacent parcels were to develop in the next five years. Councilmember Massoglia clarified that assessments would only occur should other property owners sell their land for future development. He questioned if a property along 131st were to have a well or septic fail, could this property owner hook up to city water or sewer. Mr. Schluender clarified there were no assessments associated with this project but cost-sharing. He explained if someone's septic failed, for example, they could possibly connect to the system, but noted a larger number of lots connecting at the same time would assist with cost-sharing. Declared by Mayor Sanders that Ordinance No. 26-2606, “Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF) at 3621 131st Avenue NE,” be introduced and placed on file for second reading at the June 15, 2026 Council meeting. 9.2. RES 26-96 Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Expand an Existing Auto Repair Business into an Adjacent Tenant Space with Outside Storage of 6 Passenger Vehicles in a Light Industrial (I-1) Zoning District at 1550 91st Avenue NE, #306. Minnesota Performance (Case File No. 26- 0015/ACK) Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director Ms. Sellman requested the council consider a conditional use permit (CUP) amendment to expand into adjacent tenant space and for outdoor storage of no more than 6 passenger vehicles. Staff commented on the request further noting the planning commission recommended approval with conditions. Moved by Councilmember Newland, seconded by Councilmember Ford, to adopt a Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Expand an Existing Auto Repair Business into an Adjacent Tenant Space with Outside Storage of 6 Passenger Vehicles in a Light Industrial (I-1) Zoning District at 1550 91st Avenue NE, #306. Councilmember Newland commented on the applicant's past non-compliance issues with Page 23 of 385 city code. He reported these issues had been addressed and confirmed there are no active violations at this time outside of those being addressed as part of this application request. Ms. Sellman reported there were no violations currently, except for the cars being stored onsite, which would be addressed if this item were approved by the city council. Councilmember Newland encouraged the tenants within this building to work together to address the association bylaw concerns noting the city would not be stepping in to address these concerns. Councilmember Robertson asked if granting this additional parking would create a concern for the city due to the disparity that would be created for the other tenants within this business association. Ms. Sellman explained it was not the city's job to enforce the covenants for the business association. She reported this business was meeting city code requirements with the proposal and this was what the city was in charge of enforcing. She indicated the overall business association was required to have 82 parking stalls and 119 were provided. She stated how these parking stalls were divided between the businesses was determined by the business association and not the city. City Attorney Larson reported the city has the authority to make a decision on the conditional use permit with conditions. He explained he was comfortable with how the city was dealing with the business association or common interest community issues as well. He discussed how the applicant has the right to common elements then indicated it was not the city's role to interpret what the property rights were and how these rights should be enforced within a business association. He advised the applicant was taking the risk that if the CUP is approved with conditions, and the applicant does not have the rights, then the CUP has no force and effect. Councilmember Larson asked how a neighboring business could address a concern, if not the city. Ms. Sellman stated if there were cars parked in the six designated overnight spaces that were not the applicants, the tenants would have to work through this concern. Motion adopted 5-2 (Councilmembers Larson and Robertson opposed). 10. Administration 10.1. RES 26-107 Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract to ODESA II in the Amount of $395,661.17 for the Jim Peterson Park Improvements Project, Improvement Project No. P2606 and Associated Budget Amendments and Intrafund Transfers Sponsors: Jerome Krieger, Park and Recreation Director Park and Recreation Director Krieger stated the city council previously approved a budget for the Parks Capital Improvement Program for the Jim Peterson Park Improvements in 2023, 2024, and 2026. City council awarded WSB a contract to prepare final design of plans and specifications with File Motion No. 2025-132 on June 2, 2025. Improvements will include construction of a paved ice rink, parking lot expansion, water and sanitary sewer extensions to a warming house/concession building (future), storm sewer improvements and Page 24 of 385construction of a stormwater basin. Bids were received electronically at 2:00PM, May 14, 2026, for Project No. P2606. A total of 12 bids were received, ranging from $395,661.17 to $735,110.45. Bids have been checked and tabulated, and it has been determined that ODESA II LLC of Sauk Rapids, Minnesota is the lowest bidder. The Parks department has worked with this contractor on previous contracts. Staff recommends that the low bid be accepted, and a contract entered into with ODESA II LLC. City council is also asked to approve a 10% contingency to bring the total project budget to $435,227.29. The funding sources for this project are the Parks Capital Improvement Program budget funds and there are sufficient funds budgeted to cover these costs. Moved by Councilmember Fleming, seconded by Councilmember Larson, to adopt a Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract to ODESA II in the Amount of $395,661.17 for the Jim Peterson Park Improvements Project, Improvement Project No. P2606 and Associated Budget Amendments and Intrafund Transfers. Councilmember Massoglia confirmed no warming house was presently located at this park then asked if park dedication could be used for mowing and if the city can use these funds to maintain the parks the city already has. Mr. Kreiger explained a warming trailer has been located at this park and noted the proposal would be to pave the rink for year-round use. He noted park dedication funds can be used to enhance a park but cannot be used for park maintenance. Councilmember Massoglia indicated he was concerned with the comments he was receiving regarding the maintenance of the city's parks and the "no mow" zones and supported the council further discussing the city's park maintenance. He questioned if the city needed this outdoor rink when most of the hockey associations were using indoor ice. Councilmember Robertson agreed a larger discussion was needed regarding park trends and how park dedication funds can be better utilized by the city. City Manager Thorvig commented the warming house was a potential future expense and was not being proposed at this time. Councilmember Robertson reiterated she would like the council to have a larger discussion about this park and if a warming house was necessary. Councilmember Fleming agreed a larger discussion was needed to address park maintenance before moving this item forward. Councilmember Larson indicated this rink is the only Spring Lake Park youth outdoor rink in the city and commented on what a great experience it was for kids to be able to play hockey games outdoors. Mr. Krieger reiterated that the building was not being considered at this time, but noted funds had been set aside for a structure in the past for this park. Councilmember Massoglia stated the city was looking to add sanitary sewer and water to the park for a future building. Mr. Krieger commented water would be brought from the southern side to the northern side of the park as part of this contract. He indicated this option within the contract could be removed. He reported if the council did not support a permanent building at this park, a temporary warming house could be brought in going forward. Page 25 of 385 Moved by Councilmember Massoglia, seconded by Counfilmember Fleming table action on this item to the June 15 city council meeting so a workshop discussion could be held. Motion adopted 6-1 (Councilmember Newland opposed). 10.2. ORD 26-2604 Second Reading Ordinance Amending Chapter 22 Businesses Article VI. - Legalized Gambling Sec. 22-264(3) to Allow Up to Five Lawful Gambling Locations Per Organization Sponsors: City Council City Clerk Sorensen stated staff received a request from Blaine Youth Hockey that the council consider increasing the number of lawful gambling locations allowed per organization from four to five. The request was briefly discussed at the May 4 workshop and resulted in council direction to bring forward a proposed code amendment for formal consideration. First reading was held on May 18 with no discussion. Part of council's discussion during the workshop also included the possibility of removing the waiver of operational requirements and allow only organizations that have and maintain their principal business or operations in the city for two years preceding the request while operating in the city. The proposed ordinance includes two alternatives for council consideration: one that retains the waiver for up to five locations and one removing the waiver. Council should be aware that if the waiver is removed, then organizations from the trade area would not be allowed as well, but language could be incorporated to limit organizations outside of Blaine to the trade area only. In the event the council supports removing the waiver, any currently-licensed organizations outside of Blaine would be allowed to continue operating as long as they meet the requirements. Council is asked to hold second reading of a proposed code amendment that would allow a lawful gambling organization to hold up to five premise permits. Moved by Councilmember Massoglia, seconded by Councilmember Newland, to adopt the Second Reading of Ordinance No. 26-2604, Amending Chapter 22 Businesses Article VI. - Legalized Gambling Sec. 22-264(3) to Allow Up to Five Lawful Gambling Locations Per Organization. Councilmember Newland indicated he did not participate in pull tabs but appreciated the revenues that were gained for the community from charitable gambling. He explained he supported the city expanding from four to five locations for all organizations then recommended that premise permits only be granted to organizations in the immediate area. Friendly amendment moved by Councilmember Newland, seconded by Councilmember Massoglia, to limit lawful gambling licenses to the local trade area and remove the waiver. Ms. Sorensen indicated the current trade area includes Circle Pines, Coon Rapids, Ham Lake, Lexington, Lino Lakes, Mounds View, Shoreview and Spring Lake Park then confirmed the friendly amendment only included organizations from the trade area. Page 26 of 385 Councilmember Newland supported allowing the gambling licenses within the local trade area. Councilmember Robertson thanked staff for the clarification, noting the council was not trying to pick sides or a single winner but rather the city was working to address the requests of the current license holders. She appreciated the fact the entire trade area would be included in the motion and noted that all organizations would now be able to have up to five locations each to conduct charitable gambling. Ms. Sorensen recommended the outside organizations that have been granted a waiver be allowed to operate in the city until they no longer qualify. The council supported this recommendation. Amended motion adopted unanimously. 10.3. 26-124 Ratification of Local 340 (Police Sergeants) Labor Agreement for 2026-2028 Sponsors: Scott Johnson, Director of Administrative Services Director of Administrative Services Johnson stated the City of Blaine and Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc, Local #340 (Police Sergeants) have reached agreement on the labor contract covering the three years beginning January 1, 2026, through December 31, 2028. 1. Wage at 50% of market for 2026 with adjustments of 3% for each of the years covered under the labor contract. Changes to Sergeants pay and resulting changes to Captain pay, result in an overage for the 2026 budget set aside of $683. The $683 amount will be made up with current 2026 position openings in the PD. 2. Sick pay in this proposal aligns with what was approved for patrol officers with any employee new to the City being under a cap of 480, existing employees will maintain prior caps. 3. An annual increase of $50 to the City’s monthly contribution to the cafeteria plan. 4. Uniform allowances: $800 per year for 2026, $850 per year for 2027, and $900 per year for 2028 (Det. Sgt, Admin. Sgt., and Drug Task Force Sgt.). 5. Assignment Pay Changes: CSO Coordinator - $1.73 per hour, SWAT Team - $1.25 per hour, Emergency Management Sgt. - $500 yearly stipend, and Use of Force Instructor or Firearms Instructor - $1.15 per hour. 6. Employees will pay ½ of PMLL premiums. 7. Incidental technical and clean-up language changes. Moved by Councilmember Newland, seconded by Councilmember Robertson, to approve Ratification of Local 340 (Police Sergeants) Labor Agreement for 2026-2028. Page 27 of 385 Motion adopted unanimously. Mayor Sanders thanked staff for their work on this agreement. 11. Other Business Mayor Sanders read into the record the performance evaluation summary from May 18 of City Manager Thorvig and thanked him for his dedicated service to the City of Blaine. 12. Adjournment Moved by Councilmember Robertson, seconded by Councilmember Massoglia, to adjourn the meeting at 8:31PM. Motion adopted unanimously. Page 28 of 385 City of Blaine City Council Workshop June 8, 2026 | 5:30 PM Blaine City Hall 10801 Town Square Drive NE Blaine, MN 55449 MINUTES NOTICE OF WORKSHOP MEETING In accordance with the provisions of Section 3.01 of the Blaine City Charter, a Council Workshop meeting is scheduled for the following purpose: 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:32PM by Mayor Sanders. 2. Roll Call PRESENT: Mayor Sanders, Councilmembers Fleming, Massoglia, Larson, Robertson, Newland,and Ford. ABSENT: None. ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Erik Thorvig; Safety Services Director/Police Chief Brian Podany; Finance Director Jason Zimmerman; Accounting Manager Haley Chapman; Director of Engineering Dan Schluender; Communications Manager Ben Hayle; Public Works Director Nick Fleishhacker; Parks and Recreation Director Jerome Krieger; Project Engineer Brent Larson; and City Clerk Cathy Sorensen 3. New Business 3.1. 2026-125 Pulte Residential Concept for Property South of 125th Avenue and West of Zest Street (30 Minutes) Sponsors: Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director City Manager Erik Thorvig stated that the city council reviewed a concept plan in May 2025, which included 83 single-family lots measuring 65 feet wide and 91 townhomes. Council consensus at that time was to not support a land use change allowing townhomes, as several members preferred unique homes on larger lots. The applicant has since submitted a revised concept plan proposing upscale single-family homes on 70-foot lots alongside twin Page 29 of 385homes targeting move-down or retiree buyers, thereby ensuring alignment with the comprehensive plan's minimum density requirements. Haley Daily-Severs, Pulte Group, explained her group had a presentation for the McKinley/Kemp site and noted Pulte Group would be working with Jonathan Homes on this project. She reviewed the location of the wetlands on the McKinley/Kemp properties. She commented further on the agencies she would be working with to address the wetlands and endangered species. Nathan Fair, Jonathan Homes, introduced himself to the council and noted his company was a sister company to Hanson Builders out of Andover, Minnesota. He stated he has been doing business in Blaine for the past 15 years and was excited to be a part of this development team. Ms. Daily-Severs highlighted the diversity of housing within The Lakes neighborhood and discussed the plans for the McKinley/Kemp site at the corner of Lexington and Main. She noted differences in wetland protection required for this property compared to those in The Lakes neighborhood, explaining that the McKinley/Kemp site is guided for low-density residential development, permitting 2.5 to 6 units per acre. She stated that a project featuring 80-foot lots would not comply with low-density residential requirements, and a proposal with only 65-foot lots would similarly fall short. She emphasized that future density requirements will derive from the Metropolitan Council as comprehensive plans are updated. She shared further details on the Pulte Homes that included single-family 70-foot wide lots and would feature high-end move-up homes. She explained she took all the previous council feedback into consideration, as well as meeting the wetland and endangered species requirements, before bringing this plan back to the council. Mr. Fair discussed the homes he would be constructing, noting most of the lots would be 80 feet wide and would have a four-car garage with an option for a sport court. Mayor Sanders stated he believed the addition of Jonathan Homes would benefit this development. Councilmember Larson requested further information on which homes were Pulte and which were Jonathan Homes on the plan. Ms. Daily-Severs reported the 70-foot wide lots were Pulte and the 80-foot wide lots were Jonathan Homes. Councilmember Massoglia indicated there was a lot of space in the southwest corner of the parcel that was untouched. He suggested this corner be made an outlot and that the developer then work to incorporate 80 foot wide lots throughout the development. Ms. Daily-Severs reviewed the location of the wetlands and ditches. She discussed how the wetlands were impacting the amount of developable land and lot sizes. Councilmember Fleming thanked the developer for reworking the plans and appreciated the fact the developer would be constructing high level homes. Councilmember Newland supported the plans moving forward. Page 30 of 385 Councilmember Robertson thanked the developer for taking into consideration the feedback the council provided previously. She stated she understood this was a difficult parcel to develop given the wetlands and ditches. She asked if this development would be connected to Lakes Parkway. Director of Engineering Schluender stated this would be a discussion the council would have to have in the future. Councilmember Robertson indicated these would be important conversations for the council to have because this infrastructure would change the landscape of the entire area, adding she wanted to ensure the future fire station would have proper access to roadways. Councilmember Ford commented he supported the proposed development plans. Councilmember Larson asked if the future residents would participate in a cost share for the infrastructure. Mr. Schluender explained this would be part of the discussion the council has regarding the future infrastructure. Mr. Fair anticipated there could be some cost sharing with the developer, but noted this would not be a fully funded project by the developer. Councilmember Larson stated she appreciated the proposed housing plans and that there would be two different home builders in order to offer a variety of housing styles within this development. Mr. Fair thanked the council for the feedback and stated his next step would be to begin working with the DNR on the proposed plans. 3.2. 2026-126 Jim Peterson Park Improvements Project (30 Minutes) Sponsors: Jerome Krieger, Park and Recreation Director Parks and Recreation Director Krieger shared a background report. It was noted this item was tabled at the June 1, 2026 city council meeting to be brought back for the workshop on June 8, 2026. The council identified certain things they'd like to discuss at the workshop, including project scope and use of park dedication funds. Information will be presented at the workshop on legal use of park dedication funds. The city council previously approved a budget for the Parks Capital Improvement Program for the Jim Peterson Park Improvements in 2023, 2024, and 2026. City council awarded WSB a contract to prepare final design of plans and specifications with File Motion No. 2025-132 on June 2, 2025. Improvements will include construction of a paved ice rink, parking lot expansion (to accommodate lack of parking for baseball games and tournaments), water and sanitary sewer extensions to a warming house/concession building (to be discussed in the future), storm sewer improvements and construction of a stormwater basin. Bids were received electronically at 2:00PM, May 14, 2026, for Project No. P2606. A total of 12 bids were received, ranging from $395,661.17 to $735,110.45. The following three (3) lowest bids were received (full bid tabulation attached) and engineer’s estimates are as follows: ODESA II LLC $395,661.17 Dunaway Constrauction $463,330.55 Bituminous Roadways Inc. $519,799.25 Page 31 of 385Engineers Estimate $465,690.35 Mr. Krieger explained city council is also asked to approve a 10% contingency to bring the total project budget to $435,227.29. The funding sources for this project are the Parks Capital Improvement Program budget funds and there are sufficient funds budgeted to cover these costs. The project has been included in requests through the city's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) in 2023, 2024, and 2026 within the Parks Development Fund (404), which receives its operating revenues solely through park dedication fees. No property tax dollars are allocated to this fund. This project was previously identified in the CIP as projects PRK230500 - Jim Peterson Field and Hockey Lighting, PRK230600 - Jim Peterson Hockey Rink, and P2606 - Jim Peterson Parking Lot Expansion, with appropriations of $335,000 in 2023, $625,000 in 2024, and $174,950 in 2026, bringing the total project budget to $1,134,950. To date, $327,174 has been encumbered among the projects. He provided further information on the proposed hockey rink, noting the rink could be used for five pickleball courts in the summer months. Staff requested feedback from the council on how to proceed with the park improvements at Jim Peterson Park. Councilmember Massoglia stated his main concern was with the overall budget and the impacts to the city's parks. He indicated the perception at this time was that the city could not maintain the parks it already had and questioned if it was in the city's best interest to continue to expand the city's parks and park amenities. Councilmember Fleming inquired if people would reserve the hockey rink or would this rink be used for open skating. Mr. Krieger explained the rink would be used for open skating but could be reserved by local hockey associations. Councilmember Robertson commented she does not have any issues regarding the hockey rink, but did have questions regarding the warming house. She questioned how much of the $395,000 was for the utility connection for the warming house. Mr. Krieger reported none of the $395,000 was for the warming house. Councilmember Robertson suggested the areas of the park that are no longer being mowed be turned into community gardens, noting this may assist the city with long-term maintenance expenses. Mayor Sanders reported the council would be discussing park maintenance issues at the fall retreat. Councilmember Robertson explained she did not have a problem with the parking lot maintenance or the movement of the hockey rink at Jim Peterson Park. She stated her only concern was with the warming house. Mr. Krieger indicated when the park was built, sanitary sewer and a water line was run to the area to serve a future building. He offered further information regarding the full-time staff members that work to maintain the Lexington Athletic Complex and Jim Peterson Park in the summer months. He commented on how the new hockey rink would offer additional pickleball courts for the community. He stated as neighborhoods were developed throughout the city park land was dedicated to the city and now Blaine had 67 parks to maintain. Based on national averages, he stated the city should be closer to 40—some parks. Page 32 of 385Councilmember Fleming asked if the other hockey rinks in the city have warming houses or trailers. Mr. Krieger reported the city has warming houses. He stated he was looking at a small warming house (30' x 40') for Jim Peterson Park that would have an area to put on skates, family-style bathrooms and a concession area for the rink attendant. Councilmember Fleming questioned how much it would cost to install the utilities at a future date. Mr. Schluender estimated this cost to be $75,000. Councilmember Fleming commented she would like to see the park remaining as is with the installation of the utility lines. Councilmember Massoglia asked if the new rink was used last winter. Mr. Krieger reported the rink was used, but the city had to rent lights. He explained the proposed improvements would put lighting in place around the new rink. City Manager Thorvig reported the general skating rink would go away through the expansion of the parking lot. Councilmember Newland stated the lights made all the difference for this park and the hockey rink usage and said he supported expanding the parking lot to address the parking issues within Jim Peterson Park. He indicated moving the rink and creating additional pickleball courts was a great idea. In addition, he supported the city putting in the infrastructure for a future warming house now. He explained he looked forward to having a further discussion regarding the future maintenance of the city's parks. Councilmember Larson asked if soccer would go away at this park. Mr. Krieger indicated the city has gone away from soccer, given the proximity to the National Sports Center. Councilmember Larson explained her children play hockey and they utilize the outdoor rinks with lights. She supported the city moving forward with this project along with the installation of the utility lines and pickleball courts. Councilmember Ford stated he supported this project and agreed the park maintenance issues needed to be further discussed by the council. Councilmember Massoglia indicated he could support this project moving forward but encouraged the council to consider the overall long term cost to the city. He supported the council putting this project on pause until further discussions could be held by the council regarding long-term maintenance costs. Councilmember Fleming clarified for the record that funds have already been set aside for the improvement project at Jim Peterson Park. Mr. Thorvig reported this was the case. Councilmember Fleming suggested the council put all future park projects on pause until a future discussion could be had regarding overall park maintenance. Councilmember Massoglia reported the council has budgeted for park items into 2030 and he did not want the city to continue to overspend for park items when park dedication funds could be better utilitized. Mr. Thorvig reported in the 2026 CIP there were park improvement funds in the amount of $500,000 and $450,000 for trail maintenance. He commented further on the items that could and could not use park dedication fees. Page 33 of 385 Councilmember Robertson supported this project moving forward but would not support the expense for the installation of the utility lines. Mr. Krieger stated the lowest bid came in $70,000 below the engineer's estimate which would cover the cost for the utility line installation. He reiterated that this project was utilizing park dedication funds and not levy dollars. Project Engineer Brent Larson discussed how a water line would have to be installed as part of this project in order to assist with flooding the rinks. The concensus of the council was to direct staff to bring this item forward for consideration at a future council meeting. 3.3. 2026-127 2027 Budget - General Fund Budget and City Tax Levy (90 Minutes) Sponsors: Jason Zimmerman, Finance Director Finance Director Zimmerman stated at the February 18 city council workshop, staff outlined a draft 2027 budget calendar and several process improvements. Following this, the city manager and finance department held small-group sessions with council members throughout late March and early April to align on data-driven assumptions for operating, capital, and debt requirements, specifically focusing on maintaining current service levels. These discussions culminated in a set of council-driven considerations and themes for the 2027 budget, which were reviewed at the April 13 city council workshop and are outlined below: • Support for equitable staff compensation & professional development • Levy increases to support the reduction of debt; not new spending • Control costs through innovation & process improvement • Reduce reliance on the property tax levy • Leverage unrestricted reserves to fund nonrecurring items • Prioritize core municipal functions & customer service • Sustained investment in previously deferred infrastructure improvements • Consider future budgets and levies beyond 2027 • Continue periodic review of budget to actuals Mr. Zimmerman reported this first formal workshop begins the annual process of aligning city council priorities with financial resources, ensuring the city delivers high-quality services at a responsible tax level. While these early discussions rely on preliminary numbers and assumptions, they establish clear expectations for staff and create a more efficient path forward. Feedback from this session will directly shape the development of the city manager's 2027 budget recommendation, scheduled for presentation at the August 10 city council workshop. If further review is needed, additional time is available during the September 9 Workshop before the preliminary tax levy is formally certified at the September 21 city council meeting. Because this document is being prepared in late May, many assumptions continue to be made based on trends in prior years' financial performance. Several factors may impact the final budget, including legislative changes, state mandates, economic shifts, and union negotiations. Estimated assessed values for Page 34 of 385taxes payable in 2027 have not been provided by the county assessor, so at this time staff is unable to prepare an estimated tax capacity rate or impact scenario on the median valued single-family home. Additionally, metro-wide fiscal disparity information isn’t anticipated until sometime in late August, which staff also need to calculate an accurate estimate of tax rate/impact. In addition to the 2027 specific concepts shared by the council, staff continue to hold these fundamental fiscal principals throughout the year: • Evaluate and acknowledge both the short and long-term impacts of all budgetary decisions • Stabilize revenues and expenditures, and eliminate unanticipated variances • Fund operations at a level to provide quality services at a reasonable cost • Preserve structural balance and appropriate fund balance levels to mitigate future risks • Consider additional investments when they help achieve the city's goals and provide a significant return to the community • Seek to make a connection between resources and results Mr. Zimmerman commented also discussed at the February 18 workshop was the creation of a budget subcommittee which was supported by council and how Mayor Sanders had selected Councilmembers Fleming, Massoglia and Robertson to be part of the subcommittee. The purpose of the group is to provide guidance on council presentations and what information is most important for council to make decisions and introduce budget concepts that would be presented to the full council for discussion. This group met in late May to review the June 8 workshop materials and discuss various policy items which relate to future budget discussions about capital and debt. Staff provided further information on the 2027 preliminary budget and requested feedback from the council on how to proceed. Councilmember Larson expressed concern with how capital purchases were made in the past and how there was a lack of responsibility. Mayor Sanders reported for many years there was pressure for a no-levy increase throughout Anoka County and the council was now having to address these past decisions. He said he appreciated how the council was now planning for expenditures 10 to 15 years down the road. Mr. Thorvig described how the levy climate for the city will be more stable after 2030 because of the decisions the council is making now then discussed how staff had reviewed the travel/training expenditures for 2027 along with prefunding capital expenditures going forward. He commented further on the work that was being done by the budget subcommittee. Mayor Sanders explained the subcommittee would allow staff and several councilmembers to take a deeper dive into the budget, adding it was his hope the council would be able to approve future budgets on a unanimous vote. Mr. Thorvig reviewed the budget calendar for the remainder of the year, noting he hoped to receive feedback on the general fund budget. Page 35 of 385Mr. Zimmerman asked for service changes, additions or modifications that should be made to the budget. Mayor Sanders questioned what a one-point reduction in the levy would cost in budget reductions. Mr. Zimmerman reported there would have to be a reduction in the levy of $550,000 to reduce the levy by 1%. Councilmember Fleming inquired what policy or service modifications were. Mr. Thorvig stated the $85,000 mowing services item would be one way or creating more no-mow areas within the city's parks. Councilmember Newland indicated he would like the council to focus on the desired levy percentage at this time versus letting this matter be debated at the end of December. Mr. Thorvig commented staff was at a pivotal point in the budget process and if four councilmembers coalesced around 9.7%, this would be good direction for staff. However, if the council consensus was to approve a levy closer to 8%, this direction should be provided. Councilmember Ford commented it was difficult for him to decide on a percentage because the city was growing and services were expanding. He stated if the desire was to drop the levy by 1%, councilmembers should look to see where $550,000 can be cut from the budget. Councilmember Larson indicated she could not think of anything that could be cut at this time and appreciated the fact the travel expenditures were reduced. Councilmember Fleming questioned what happened to the discussions of pushing the pavement management program off two years until the city has cannabis revenues. Mr. Zimmerman stated the city would have revenues in 2027 that could be leveraged in 2028. Mr. Thorvig commented that the council could put a pause on projects for 2027, but 2028 projects could proceed. Councilmember Larson said she did not believe the city could delay street improvements for two years because residents were asking for improvements to both streets and trails. Councilmember Robertson asked if there was any support for a levy lower than 9.7% as she would not be able to support a levy this high. She stated if there was no support for a lower levy, the consensus of the council would move forward and she would continue to voice her objections. She indicated there was a reluctance to make cuts or consider reductions in the budget and while she understood this would come with difficult choices, she was willing to have these discussions. Councilmember Fleming explained she would be willing to discuss these things because she would like the budget to receive five or more votes then questioned what percentage Councilmember Robertson and Councilmember Massoglia would support. Councilmember Massoglia stated he would support a levy increase of 5%. Councilmember Robertson questioned if the city had to spend $1.6 million in capital expenditures in 2027. Mr. Thorvig explained these dollars would not all be spent but rather Page 36 of 385would assist the city with setting dollars aside for prefunding purchases in 2030. Mayor Sanders reported the two biggest increases in the levy were personnel and debt service. He stated he was willing to look at how to bring down the levy increase but wanted to understand if the city would be harmed in the future through the process. Mr. Zimmerman discussed the items that were non-negotiable due to how they would impact the city's financial metrics for future borrowing. Mr. Thorvig explained there would be future discussions on capital and debt this summer. Councilmember Ford stated that based on his experience, it would be easier to take large items out of the budget versus taking out a number of small items. Councilmember Fleming reported a 5% levy increase may not be realistic given how the three non-negotiable items had already created a levy increase of 7.5%. Councilmember Massoglia stated he was considering the past 10 years of 10% budget increases. He indicated the city's budget has gone from $25 million to $60 million and anticipated there were expenditures that could be cut. Mayor Sanders commented on how the city population had increased from 54,000 to over 80,000 in the past 10 years. Councilmember Massoglia said he understood that but indicated there were budget items that were increase increasing at an alarming rate and he wanted to see cuts. Councilmember Fleming indicated the council could not change the decisions that were made in the past. She stated the council could not reduce workers' compensation because this will impact the city's AAA bond rating. Councilmember Massoglia stated there were a lot of other considerations that could be made to the budget, such as covering the cost of park improvements with park dedication funds instead of levy dollars. Mr. Zimmerman reported the budget process was challenging and noted staff was working to be consistent with the council. He indicated there were nuances with park dedication funds because the funds were becoming stagnant. He reiterated that assumptions were made and some details were missing from the preliminary budget. Councilmebmer Robertson explained she wanted to see the city being good stewards of taxpayer dollars and noted she has not voted for past budgets because there were expenditures she did not support. Councilmember Ford suggested this item be closed for this meeting and that capital expenditures and debt be further discussed at the July workshop meeting. Mayor Sanders thanked staff for reducing the travel and training expenditures, adding he understood there was not much more room to make cuts and was of the opinion the budget did not have a lot of extras, including some who would believe the city was not doing enough when it came to parks and trails. Page 37 of 3854. Other Business Mayor Sanders invited the council to attend a Flag Day event at the Cub Foods at Northtown on Saturday, June 13 at 9:00AM then noted the ribbon cutting ceremony for Asia Village would be held at Northtown that same day. 5. Adjournment The workshop adjourned at 8:09PM. Page 38 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-129 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Approval of Consent Agenda: - Agenda Item # 7.3 Resolution Approving a Premise Permit for Lawful Gambling Activity for Blaine Youth Hockey at Pizza Pub Prime, 2190 105th Avenue NE Executive Summary Council is being asked to approve a premise permit for Blaine Youth Hockey at Pizza Pub Prime, 2190 105th Avenue NE to conduct charitable gambling. Background The Blaine Youth Hockey gambling manager has submitted an application to conduct charitable gambling at Pizza Pub Prime. If approved, they will conduct paper pull tabs with dispensing devices, electronic pull tabs and electronic bingo. A copy of the lease for lawful gambling and the premise permit application for the State Gambling Control Board are attached. Pursuant to the recent code amendment, no organization may maintain more than five lawful gambling locations in the City at one time. If approved, this will be Blaine Youth Hockey's fifth location in Blaine. A background investigation has been completed and nothing was found to disqualify the organization from obtaining this permit. The Gambling Control Board may not issue a lease for charitable gambling within a city unless a sponsoring organization obtains approval through a resolution to the Gambling Control Board or otherwise forfeit their gambling activities. Strategic Plan Relationship N/A Board/Commission Review Page 39 of 385 N/A Financial Impact N/A Public Outreach/Input N/A Staff Recommendation Adopt a resolution approving a new premise permit for Blaine Youth Hockey at Pizza Pub Prime, 2190 105th Avenue NE. Attachment List 1. LG214 Premise Permit Application 2. LG215 BYHA Pizza Pub Prime 3. 2026 Gambling Premise Permit License Holders - Public Page 40 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-129 Resolution Approving a Premise Permit for Lawful Gambling Activity for Blaine Youth Hockey at Pizza Pub Prime, 2190 105th Avenue NE WHEREAS, Blaine Youth Hockey has submitted an application for a premise permit to allow charitable gambling and raffles to be conducted at Pizza Pub Prime, 2190 105th Avenue NE, Blaine, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 349.213, Subd. 2, states that the Gambling Control Board may not issue a new premise permit for charitable gambling within a city unless the City Council approves the premise permit within ninety (90) days from the date of their application for the new premise permit. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Blaine as follows: The application for the premise permit for the purpose of conducting charitable gambling, including raffles, is hereby approved. A certified copy of this resolution shall be provided to the applicants as soon as possible for submittal to the Gambling Control Board. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 41 of 385Page 42 of 385Page 43 of 385Page 44 of 385Page 45 of 385 City of Blaine 2026 Gambling Premise Permit License Holders Organization Location(s) Premise Permit Issued Andover Football Association Acapulco Mexican Restaurant April 2025 9360 Baltimore St NE #160 Blaine Back Court Club (Blaine Youth Basketball) Buffalo Wild Wings December 2023 11540 109th Ave NE #300 The Wild Hare June 2025 10340 Baltimore St NE #100 Blaine Festival Blainbrook Entertainment May 2012 12000 Central Ave NE Blaine Youth Football The Ball Park Twin Cities May 2024 10650 Baltimore St NE Blaine Youth Hockey Ole Piper Inn December 2007 1416 – 93rd Lane NE Broadway Bar & Pizza December 2007 11822 Aberdeen St NE Wild Bill’s Sports Saloon January 2011 10950 Club West Pkwy #100 Clive’s Roadhouse 10400 Baltimore St NE #200 May 2018 Pizza Pub Prime June 2026 2190 105th Ave NE Pending Approval Centennial High School Football Boosters Applebee’s Grill and Bar April 2022 4345 Pheasant Ridge Dr# 202 El Norte Mexican Bar & Grill February 2025 3453 Lake Dr #100 The Rusty Bumblebee August 2025 10950 Club West Pkwy #160 Community Charities of Minnesota X-Golf June 2025 298 Northtown Drive Ham Lake Chamber of Commerce The Ball Park (bingo only) November 2024 10650 Baltimore St NE #100 Sgt. John Rice VFW Post 6316 Sgt. John Rice VFW 6316 June 2007 1374 109th Ave NE Spring Lake Park #16 Youth Hockey Association The Roadside October 2019 12540 Ulysses St NE Spring Lake Park Lions Club Fogerty/Moe’s Ice House December 2022 9250 Lincoln Street NE On the Green March 2024 12571 Central Ave NE Page 46 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: 2026-132 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Motion Approval of Consent Agenda: - Brian Podany, Safety Services Manager/Police Chief Agenda Item # 7.4 Motion to Approve Payment to Axon Enterprises, Inc. for Police Department Interview Rooms Executive Summary The Police Department requests Council approval to authorize payment of $314,807.70 to Axon Enterprise, Inc. for Axon Interview Room systems as outlined in the attached quote (Q-855116-46169TD). This project will modernize and fully replace the department’s outdated interview room technology and align the new equipment term dates with the existing multi-year Axon contract pursuant to Section 6.05 of the City Charter, Council approval is required for all purchases or contracts exceeding $50,000. Background The Blaine Police Department currently maintains an Axon contract covering squad cameras, body-worn cameras, taser devices, and cloud-based digital evidence storage. The department initially implemented squad cameras in 2011 and body-worn cameras in 2017. In 2020, with Council approval, the City transitioned to Axon as a unified platform to integrate both systems under a single, more efficient solution. The City Council approved a five-year Axon contract in 2019 (MO19-209), and in December 2023 (MO23-585), approved a new 10-year Officer Safety Plan agreement beginning in 2024. These contracts ensure consistent technological upgrades, streamlined evidence management, and fixed long-term pricing. The department’s current 5-year interview room contract is about to expire and the existing interview room technology will need to be replaced. The interview room contract will expire in October 2026. The attached Axon quote provides for an 89-month co-termed agreement for upgraded Interview Room 2-Camera Standard systems, associated software, installation services, server licensing, unlimited interview storage, and extended warranties. Total project cost is $314,807.70, with no taxes applied. Page 47 of 385 Strategic Plan Relationship The Axon contract ensures that the Blaine Police Department has the needed equipment and resources to continue to provide exceptional public service with the highest degree of professionalism, transparency, and accountability. Board/Commission Review None Financial Impact The interview room technologies are already part of the police department's budget but to increase savings we are transitioning these funds to be part of the co-termed 10-year Officer Safety Plan which expires in 2033. Public Outreach/Input Staff Recommendation Approve payment to Axon Enterprises, Inc. in the amount of $314,807.70 for the Axon Interview Room upgrade and co-termed contract, pursuant to Section 6.05 of the City Charter. Attachment List 1. Blaine IR Quote - coterm to main contract Page 48 of 385 Q-855116-46169TD Issued: 05/27/2026 Quote Expiration: 10/30/2026 Estimated Contract Start Date: 11/01/2026 Account Number: 113447 Payment Terms: N30 Mode of Delivery: AUTO-GND Credit/Debit Amount: $0.00 SHIP TO BILL TO SALES REPRESENTATIVE PRIMARY CONTACT Blaine Police Dept. - MN Blaine Police Dept. - MN 10801 Town Square Dr NE 10801 Town Square Dr NE Trevor Dorn Zach Johnson Minneapolis, Minneapolis Phone: Phone: MN MN Email: tdorn@axon.com Email: 55449-8100 55449-8100 Fax: Fax: USA USA Email: 41-6008302 Quote Summary Discount Summary $5,950.65 Program Length 89 Months Average Savings Per Year TOTAL COST $314,807.70 TOTAL SAVINGS $44,134.00 ESTIMATED TOTAL W/ TAX $314,807.70 Page 1 Q-855116-46169TD Page 49 of 385Payment Summary Date Subtotal Tax Total Oct 2026 $4,186.94 $0.00 $4,186.94 Feb 2027 $39,917.62 $0.00 $39,917.62 Feb 2028 $41,239.81 $0.00 $41,239.81 Feb 2029 $42,782.37 $0.00 $42,782.37 Feb 2030 $44,073.08 $0.00 $44,073.08 Feb 2031 $45,961.92 $0.00 $45,961.92 Feb 2032 $47,535.96 $0.00 $47,535.96 Feb 2033 $49,110.00 $0.00 $49,110.00 Total $314,807.70 $0.00 $314,807.70 Page 2 Q-855116-46169TD Page 50 of 385 Quote Unbundled Price: $358,955.40 Quote List Price: $314,807.70 Quote Subtotal: $314,807.70 Pricing All deliverables are detailed in Delivery Schedules section lower in proposal Item Description Qty Term Unbundled List Price Net Price Subtotal Tax Total Program TRUE UP - INTERVIEW ROOM BUNDLE - 2 CAMERA 1 50475 11 30 $184.85 $184.85 $61,000.50 $0.00 $61,000.50 ROOM TRUE UP IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 30 $692.45 $428.49 $428.49 $64,273.50 $0.00 $64,273.50 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 60 $487.05 $446.09 $446.09 $133,827.00 $0.00 $133,827.00 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 60 $470.14 $627.21 $627.21 $37,632.60 $0.00 $37,632.60 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 30 $658.80 $602.47 $602.47 $18,074.10 $0.00 $18,074.10 Total $314,807.70 $0.00 $314,807.70 Delivery Schedule Hardware Bundle Item Description QTY Shipping Location Estimated Delivery Date Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50114 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - COVERT SENSOR 5 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50114 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - COVERT SENSOR 1 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50118 AXON INTERVIEW - MIC - WIRED (STANDARD MIC) 5 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50118 AXON INTERVIEW - MIC - WIRED (STANDARD MIC) 1 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50118 AXON INTERVIEW - MIC - WIRED (STANDARD MIC) 5 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50118 AXON INTERVIEW - MIC - WIRED (STANDARD MIC) 1 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50218 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - COVERT MAIN UNIT 5 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50218 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - COVERT MAIN UNIT 1 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50221 AXON INTERVIEW - POE SWITCH - 24 PORT 1 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50298 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - OVERT DOME 1 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50298 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - OVERT DOME 5 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50322 AXON INTERVIEW - TOUCH PANEL PRO 1 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50322 AXON INTERVIEW - TOUCH PANEL PRO 5 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 74056 AXON INTERVIEW - TOUCH PANEL WALL MOUNT 1 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 74056 AXON INTERVIEW - TOUCH PANEL WALL MOUNT 5 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 74116 AXON INTERVIEW - COVERT ENCLOSURE 1 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 74116 AXON INTERVIEW - COVERT ENCLOSURE 5 1 10/01/2026 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50114 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - COVERT SENSOR 1 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50114 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - COVERT SENSOR 5 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50118 AXON INTERVIEW - MIC - WIRED (STANDARD MIC) 1 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50118 AXON INTERVIEW - MIC - WIRED (STANDARD MIC) 5 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50118 AXON INTERVIEW - MIC - WIRED (STANDARD MIC) 1 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50118 AXON INTERVIEW - MIC - WIRED (STANDARD MIC) 5 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50218 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - COVERT MAIN UNIT 5 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50218 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - COVERT MAIN UNIT 1 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50221 AXON INTERVIEW - POE SWITCH - 24 PORT 1 1 09/01/2031 Page 3 Q-855116-46169TD Page 51 of 385Hardware Bundle Item Description QTY Shipping Location Estimated Delivery Date Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50298 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - OVERT DOME 1 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50298 AXON INTERVIEW - CAMERA - OVERT DOME 5 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50322 AXON INTERVIEW - TOUCH PANEL PRO 1 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50322 AXON INTERVIEW - TOUCH PANEL PRO 5 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 74056 AXON INTERVIEW - TOUCH PANEL WALL MOUNT 5 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 74056 AXON INTERVIEW - TOUCH PANEL WALL MOUNT 1 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 74116 AXON INTERVIEW - COVERT ENCLOSURE 5 1 09/01/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 74116 AXON INTERVIEW - COVERT ENCLOSURE 1 1 09/01/2031 Software Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Start Date Estimated End Date AXON INTERVIEW - CLIENT SOFTWARE - PER TOUCH PANEL- Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50037 1 11/01/2026 03/31/2034 PC AXON INTERVIEW - CLIENT SOFTWARE - PER TOUCH PANEL- Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50037 5 11/01/2026 03/31/2034 PC AXON INTERVIEW - CLIENT SOFTWARE - PER TOUCH PANEL- Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50037 1 11/01/2026 03/31/2034 PC AXON INTERVIEW - CLIENT SOFTWARE - PER TOUCH PANEL- Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50037 5 11/01/2026 03/31/2034 PC AXON INTERVIEW - CLIENT SOFTWARE - MAINT. PER TOUCH Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50039 5 11/01/2026 10/31/2031 PANEL AXON INTERVIEW - CLIENT SOFTWARE - MAINT. PER TOUCH Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50039 1 11/01/2026 10/31/2031 PANEL AXON INTERVIEW - STREAMING SERVER LICENSE - PER Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50041 2 11/01/2026 03/31/2034 SERVER AXON INTERVIEW - STREAMING SERVER LICENSE - PER Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50041 2 11/01/2026 03/31/2034 SERVER AXON INTERVIEW - STREAMING SERVER MAINTENANCE - Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50043 2 11/01/2026 10/31/2031 PER SERVER Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50045 AXON EVIDENCE - STORAGE - INTERVIEW ROOM UNLIMITED 2 11/01/2026 10/31/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50045 AXON EVIDENCE - STORAGE - INTERVIEW ROOM UNLIMITED 10 11/01/2026 10/31/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 73840 AXON EVIDENCE - ECOM LICENSE - BASIC 1 11/01/2026 10/31/2031 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 73840 AXON EVIDENCE - ECOM LICENSE - BASIC 1 11/01/2026 10/31/2031 AXON INTERVIEW - CLIENT SOFTWARE - MAINT. PER TOUCH Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50039 1 10/01/2031 03/31/2034 PANEL AXON INTERVIEW - CLIENT SOFTWARE - MAINT. PER TOUCH Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50039 5 10/01/2031 03/31/2034 PANEL AXON INTERVIEW - STREAMING SERVER MAINTENANCE - Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50043 2 10/01/2031 03/31/2034 PER SERVER Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50045 AXON EVIDENCE - STORAGE - INTERVIEW ROOM UNLIMITED 2 10/01/2031 03/31/2034 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 50045 AXON EVIDENCE - STORAGE - INTERVIEW ROOM UNLIMITED 10 10/01/2031 03/31/2034 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 73840 AXON EVIDENCE - ECOM LICENSE - BASIC 1 10/01/2031 03/31/2034 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 73840 AXON EVIDENCE - ECOM LICENSE - BASIC 1 10/01/2031 03/31/2034 Services Bundle Item Description QTY Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 85170 AXON INTERVIEW - INSTALLATION - STANDARD (PER ROOM) 5 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 85170 AXON INTERVIEW - INSTALLATION - STANDARD (PER ROOM) 1 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 85170 AXON INTERVIEW - INSTALLATION - STANDARD (PER ROOM) 5 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 85170 AXON INTERVIEW - INSTALLATION - STANDARD (PER ROOM) 1 Page 4 Q-855116-46169TD Page 52 of 385Warranties Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Start Date Estimated End Date Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 101648 AXON INTERVIEW - EXT WARRANTY - 5 YEARS 5 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 101648 AXON INTERVIEW - EXT WARRANTY - 5 YEARS 1 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 101648 AXON INTERVIEW - EXT WARRANTY - 5 YEARS 5 Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 101648 AXON INTERVIEW - EXT WARRANTY - 5 YEARS 1 Page 5 Q-855116-46169TD Page 53 of 385Shipping Locations Location Number Street City State Zip Country 1 10801 Town Square Dr NE Minneapolis MN 55449-8100 USA Payment Details Oct 2026 Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total Year 1 50475 TRUE UP - INTERVIEW ROOM BUNDLE - 2 CAMERA 1 ROOM TRUE UP 11 $811.31 $0.00 $811.31 Year 1 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $854.84 $0.00 $854.84 Year 1 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $500.52 $0.00 $500.52 Year 1 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $1,779.88 $0.00 $1,779.88 Year 1 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $240.39 $0.00 $240.39 Total $4,186.94 $0.00 $4,186.94 Feb 2027 Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total Year 2 50475 TRUE UP - INTERVIEW ROOM BUNDLE - 2 CAMERA 1 ROOM TRUE UP 11 $7,734.86 $0.00 $7,734.86 Year 2 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $4,771.82 $0.00 $4,771.82 Year 2 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $2,291.80 $0.00 $2,291.80 Year 2 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $8,149.87 $0.00 $8,149.87 Year 2 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $16,969.27 $0.00 $16,969.27 Total $39,917.62 $0.00 $39,917.62 Feb 2028 Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total Year 3 50475 TRUE UP - INTERVIEW ROOM BUNDLE - 2 CAMERA 1 ROOM TRUE UP 11 $7,991.07 $0.00 $7,991.07 Year 3 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $8,419.84 $0.00 $8,419.84 Year 3 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $4,929.87 $0.00 $4,929.87 Year 3 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $17,531.32 $0.00 $17,531.32 Year 3 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $2,367.71 $0.00 $2,367.71 Total $41,239.81 $0.00 $41,239.81 Feb 2029 Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total Year 4 50475 TRUE UP - INTERVIEW ROOM BUNDLE - 2 CAMERA 1 ROOM TRUE UP 11 $8,289.97 $0.00 $8,289.97 Year 4 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $18,187.09 $0.00 $18,187.09 Year 4 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $8,734.76 $0.00 $8,734.76 Year 4 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $2,456.29 $0.00 $2,456.29 Year 4 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $5,114.26 $0.00 $5,114.26 Total $42,782.37 $0.00 $42,782.37 Feb 2030 Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total Year 5 50475 TRUE UP - INTERVIEW ROOM BUNDLE - 2 CAMERA 1 ROOM TRUE UP 11 $8,540.07 $0.00 $8,540.07 Year 5 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $18,735.80 $0.00 $18,735.80 Year 5 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $8,998.29 $0.00 $8,998.29 Page 6 Q-855116-46169TD Page 54 of 385Feb 2030 Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total Year 5 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $5,268.56 $0.00 $5,268.56 Year 5 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $2,530.36 $0.00 $2,530.36 Total $44,073.08 $0.00 $44,073.08 Feb 2031 Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total Year 6 50475 TRUE UP - INTERVIEW ROOM BUNDLE - 2 CAMERA 1 ROOM TRUE UP 11 $8,906.07 $0.00 $8,906.07 Year 6 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $19,538.71 $0.00 $19,538.71 Year 6 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $5,494.38 $0.00 $5,494.38 Year 6 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $9,383.94 $0.00 $9,383.94 Year 6 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $2,638.82 $0.00 $2,638.82 Total $45,961.92 $0.00 $45,961.92 Feb 2032 Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total Year 7 50475 TRUE UP - INTERVIEW ROOM BUNDLE - 2 CAMERA 1 ROOM TRUE UP 11 $9,211.08 $0.00 $9,211.08 Year 7 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $5,682.52 $0.00 $5,682.52 Year 7 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $9,705.27 $0.00 $9,705.27 Year 7 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $2,729.20 $0.00 $2,729.20 Year 7 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $20,207.89 $0.00 $20,207.89 Total $47,535.96 $0.00 $47,535.96 Feb 2033 Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total Year 8 50475 TRUE UP - INTERVIEW ROOM BUNDLE - 2 CAMERA 1 ROOM TRUE UP 11 $9,516.08 $0.00 $9,516.08 Year 8 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $10,026.69 $0.00 $10,026.69 Year 8 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $2,819.58 $0.00 $2,819.58 Year 8 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 5 $20,876.96 $0.00 $20,876.96 Year 8 IR2CA Interview Room 2 Camera Standard 1 $5,870.69 $0.00 $5,870.69 Total $49,110.00 $0.00 $49,110.00 Page 7 Q-855116-46169TD Page 55 of 385Tax is estimated based on rates applicable at date of quote and subject to change at time of invoicing. If a tax exemption certificate should be applied, please submit prior to invoicing. Standard Terms and Conditions Axon Enterprise Inc. Sales Terms and Conditions Axon Master Services and Purchasing Agreement: This Quote is limited to and conditional upon your acceptance of the provisions set forth herein and Axon’s Master Services and Purchasing Agreement (posted at https://www.axon.com/sales-terms-and-conditions), as well as the attached Statement of Work (SOW) for Axon Fleet and/or Axon Interview Room purchase, if applicable. In the event you and Axon have entered into a prior agreement to govern all future purchases, that agreement shall govern to the extent it includes the products and services being purchased and does not conflict with the Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program Appendix as described below. ACEIP: The Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program Appendix, which includes the sharing of de-identified segments of Agency Content with Axon to develop new products and improve your product experience (posted at www.axon.com/legal/sales-terms-and-conditions), is incorporated herein by reference. By signing below, you agree to the terms of the Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program. Acceptance of Terms: Any purchase order issued in response to this Quote is subject solely to the above referenced terms and conditions. By signing below, you represent that you are lawfully able to enter into contracts. If you are signing on behalf of an entity (including but not limited to the company, municipality, or government agency for whom you work), you represent to Axon that you have legal authority to bind that entity. If you do not have this authority, please do not sign this Quote. Page 8 Q-855116-46169TD Page 56 of 385 Exceptions to Standard Terms and Conditions Rewrite Estimates Estimated Amounts and Contract Terminations. Any amounts stated as due under existing or terminated contracts — including contract transfer balances carried forward to new or pending contracts — are estimates based on payments received as of the calculation date. These estimates may be adjusted if new contracts are not executed on the anticipated dates or if expected payments are not made. Refresh Shipment Timing Technology Assurance Plan (TAP) Refresh Prior to Renewal. For Customers with expiring agreements that include TAP refresh rights, Axon may, in its discretion, ship refresh hardware under the existing contract while renewal or replacement agreements are in progress. Any such shipments will be deemed made under the terms of the existing contract until the new contract is fully executed, after which any applicable updates, fees, or adjustments will apply. Shipment Timing Shipment Variance. Estimated shipment dates are provided for planning purposes only and are not guarantees. Axon may ship hardware before or after the estimated shipment date, and failure to meet an estimated shipment date will not, by itself, constitute a breach, provided Axon uses commercially reasonable efforts to meet estimated shipment dates. \s1\ \d1\ Signature Date Signed 5/27/2026 Page 9 Q-855116-46169TD Page 57 of 385 Page 10 Q-855116-46169TD Page 58 of 385 STATEMENT OF WORK FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AXON INTERVIEW ROOM FOR BLAINE POLICE DEPT. - MN ("SOW”) Submitted By: Axon Enterprise, Inc. (Axon) North 85th Street PAGE1 Page 59 of 3851. PROJECT OVERVIEW: 1.1 SOFTWARE The hardware and software detailed in this SOW includes, the listed functionality.  Axon Interview Room 1.2 DEFINITIONS TERM DEFINITION PARTIES Agency Blaine Police Dept. - MN who is identified within this SOW End-Users Specific Agency groups that will use the system Professional Services The services that Axon will provide within the scope of this SOW SYSTEMS Axon Systems Software solutions and Agency specific integrations developed by Axon CJIS The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Criminal Justice Information System NCIC National Crime Information Center Product The hardware and software solution being implemented as part of this SOW Production Environment The operational environment where the Product will be accessed PROJECT & MILESTONES Project Scope of this SOW as defined by the work to be completed described herein Project Change Order (PCO) Change order form outlined in Attachment B to be executed between Axon and Agency if a material change in scope is required to this SOW ACCEPTANCE Blocker Issue impacting 50% or more users Functional Acceptance Testing Testing the functionality of the system as configured for Agency PAGE2 Page 60 of 3851.3 OUT OF PROJECT SCOPE Axon is only responsible for performing the Professional Services described within this SOW. Any additional Professional Services that are not defined explicitly by this SOW shall be done so through a Project Change Order. The following are considered outside the scope of this Project:  Administration, management, or support of any internal City, County, State, Federal or Agency IT network or infrastructure  Third Party Products and Services costs related to the vendors or Agency’s cost of implementing the vendors or Agency’s side of the integration  Changes made by Agency or Agency’s vendors PAGE3 Page 61 of 3852. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: 2.1 GENERAL  Axon will provide a project manager throughout entire project. 2.2 HARDWARE 2.2.1  will supply Servers. o If agency grants access, Axon will unbox and rack servers. o Agency will ensure servers are powered on with Windows installed prior to Install date. o Agency may setup server per agencies standards for things such as, joining to the domain, antivirus, firewalls, etc, so long as they do not degrade operations of Interview Server(s) o Agency will provide onsite and remote access to Interview Server(s) as required by Axon installers. Axon will then configure the Interview Server(s). {{LOCATIONS_NAME  Agency will configure all network equipment.  Agency will prepare all rooms prior to installation. o Removing all evidence from room. o Removal of existing video solution. Axon will work on installation timing with Agency to ensure an adequate number of rooms are available when possible. PAGE4 Page 62 of 385PAGE5 Page 63 of 3852.3 INTERVIEW SOFTWARE  Agency will ensure an appropriate resource is available to configure/troubleshoot network communications between onsite Interview Hardware. Agency will also assist in configure/troubleshoot connection to Axon Evidence.  Agency may setup server per agencies standards for things such as, joining to the domain, antivirus, firewalls, etc, so long as they do not degrade operations of Interview Server(s)  Axon will install Axon Interview Server Application, Agency may be required to provide appropriate permissions/credentials.  Axon will install and configure Touch Panel Software. 2.4 READINESS  Axon will supply Agency with copy of current QA/Testing Checklist.  Axon will complete QA/Testing Checklist per room consisting of: o Hardware Wiring o Hardware Mounting o Hardware Functionality o Firmware Updates o Software Install and Configuration o Functional Test of all features 2.6 TRAINING  Axon will provide training materials that may be used by agency. Training materials will be customized for agencies environment where applicable.  Agency will provide facilities and equipment for conducting the Training.  Train the Trainer: Axon will provide session(s), materials and support allowing Agency’s in-house trainers to conduct their own Training. Agency is responsible for updating all Training materials after final acceptance. PAGE6 Page 64 of 3853. PROJECT MANAGEMENT: 3.1 MANAGEMENT RESOURCES  Both Parties will assign a Point of Contact, Project Manager, or Project Coordinator to ensure completion of deliverables.  Axon’s Project Coordinator will ensure all team members from Axon and Agency are continually updated on the status of the Project. 3.2 REQUIREMENTS PLANNING  All Proposed Project timelines will be documented during Project Management Kickoff call.  Once all requirements are agreed to, Axon’s Project Coordinator will work with Agency’s Project Manager to develop a Project plan for Axon’s implementation. 3.3 CHANGE CONTROL  If any changes in the Project cause a material increase or decrease in fees, as determined by Axon, an adjustment in the fees will be agreed upon and included in a signed PCO form.  Agency acknowledges a proposed change request might have an impact on both scheduling and cost for the Project that will be outlined in the PCO form. PAGE7 Page 65 of 3854. AGENCY COMMITMENTS:  Ensure the reasonable availability for meetings, phone or email of knowledgeable staff and personnel to provide timely and accurate documentation and information to Axon.  Identify holidays, non-workdays or major events that may impact the Project.  Ensure Agency desktop or mobile systems and devices can access the Product.  Make available relevant systems if needed for assessment by Axon (including making these systems available to Axon via remote access if possible).  Technical Systems Requirements PAGE8 Page 66 of 3855. SUPPORT:  Axon will provide on-site installer/trainer support as part of project.  The Product undergoes updates and enhancements which Agency will automatically receive.  Axon will provide Agency’s End Users access to the help.axon.com support portal to submit and review service tickets.  For Technical Support assistance, Agency may contact a Technical Support representative at 800-978-2737, or via email at Support@Axon.com. Online, email-based support and remote-location troubleshooting are included on an ongoing basis as part of Agency’s investment in the Axon ecosystem. Phone support is available 24/7. PAGE9 Page 67 of 3856. TERMS AND CONDITIONS: This SOW is governed by the Master Services and Purchasing Agreement executed by the Parties. AXON ENTERPRISE, INC. AGENCY Signature: _____________________ Signature: _________________________ Name: _________________________ Name: ____________________________ Title: _________________________ Title: _____________________________ Date: _________________________ Date: _____________________________ PAGE10 Page 68 of 385ATTACHMENT B - PROJECT CHANGE ORDER TEMPLATE Date: Axon Product or Service: Change Order Details AXON ENTERPRISE, INC. AGENCY Signature: _____________________ Signature: _________________________ Name: _________________________ Name: ____________________________ Title: _________________________ Title: _____________________________ Date: _________________________ Date: _____________________________ PAGE11 Page 69 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: 2026-133 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Motion Approval of Consent Agenda: - Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering Agenda Item # 7.5 Motion to Authorize Temporary Removal of Parking Restrictions on 91st Avenue, 92nd Avenue, 92nd Lane and Baltimore Street to Accommodate Lettermen Sports Tent Sales on July 27, 2026 through August 2, 2026. Executive Summary Staff recommends authorization for temporary parking on 91st Avenue, 92nd Avenue, 92nd Lane and the west side of Baltimore Street. Background The City of Blaine received a request on April 20, 2026, from Amy Schumacher, representing Lettermen Sports, requesting the temporary removal of parking restrictions on 91st Avenue, 92nd Avenue, 92nd Lane and the west side of Baltimore Street in order to allow parking on those streets July 27, 2026 through August 2, 2026. Lettermen Sports is hosting their annual Tent Sale during that timeframe and expect a need for additional parking to accommodate their customers. City Council authorization is required for the temporary lifting of parking restrictions. City Council has previously authorized similar temporary lifting of parking restrictions for Lettermen Sports 2012 - 2025 Tent Sales. Strategic Plan Relationship Not applicable. Board/Commission Review Not applicable. Page 70 of 385 Financial Impact Not applicable. Public Outreach/Input Not applicable. Staff Recommendation By motion, authorize the temporary removal of parking restrictions on both sides of 92nd Avenue cul- de-sac east of Baltimore Street, 91st Avenue and 92nd Lane between Baltimore and Davenport Streets, and the west side of Baltimore Street between 91st Avenue and 92nd Lane, from 10:00 AM to 9:00 PM, July 27, 2026 - August 2, 2026. Attachment List None Page 71 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-114 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Approval of Consent Agenda: - Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering Agenda Item # 7.6 Resolution to Receive Petition and Order Public Hearing for Vacation of a Portion of the 30-foot Scenic Easement created by Document No. 303325, which is contained within Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Ball Road Industrial Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota; Vacation No. V26-06 Executive Summary The City received a petition dated May 28, 2026, from Robert Carlson, representing Rendova Partnership, requesting the vacation of the portion of the 30-ft wide scenic easement as created and recorded as Document No. 303325, which is contained within Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Ball Road Industrial Park; according to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota; see Attached Exhibit A for description. Background The property is platted as Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Ball Road Industrial Park. The existing 30-foot scenic easement is no longer needed. Engineering staff has reviewed the request and agrees with the vacation. Schedule of Actions 06/15/2026 Receive Petition and Order Public Hearing 07/20/2026 Public Hearing and Adopt Vacation Resolution Strategic Plan Relationship This item is part of the city’s strategic plan for Growth Management. Board/Commission Review Page 72 of 385 This item was not presented to any boards or commissions. Public input will be received by council at the Public Hearing on July 20, 2026. Financial Impact No Financial Impact to the city for this request. Public Outreach/Input Notice will be officially published for the calling of the Public Hearing on July 20, 2026. Staff Recommendation By motion, adopt the Resolution. Attachment List 1. Petition to Vacate Easement or Right-of-Way Form - fully executed 2. EXHIBIT A Scenic Easement Ball Road Industrial Park Page 73 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-114 Resolution to Receive Petition and Order Public Hearing for Vacation of a Portion of the 30-foot Scenic Easement created by Document No. 303325, which is contained within Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Ball Road Industrial Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota; Vacation No. V26-06 WHEREAS, the City Council has received a petition dated the 28th day of May, 2026, requesting the vacation of a portion of a 30-foot scenic easement as created and recorded as Document No. 303325, which is contained within Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Ball Road Industrial Park; according to the recorded plat thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota; as shown in Exhibit A (attached); and WHEREAS, the Engineering Department has reviewed the petition and recommends that the City Council hold a Public Hearing on the requested vacation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Blaine as follows: 1. The Council will consider the petitioned vacation of easement for the property owners. 2. A Public Hearing shall be held on the proposed vacation at 7:00 PM on the 20th day of July, 2026 and the City Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and vacation as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 74 of 385Page 75 of 3855/28/2026 V26-06 6/15/2026 7/20/2026 Page 76 of 385Page 77 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-120 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Approval of Consent Agenda: - Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering Agenda Item # 7.7 Resolution Accepting a Bid from Insituform Technologies USA, LLC in the Amount of $48,233.98 for the 2026 Storm Sewer Lining Project, Improvement Project No. U2614 Executive Summary Accept bids and approve a contract with Insituform Technologies USA, LLC for the 2026 Storm Sewer Lining Project, Improvement Project No. U2614. This project was approved in the 2026 Budget. The project consists of the rehabilitation of existing storm sewer pipelines by the installation of a 'cured-in-place' (CIPP) lining for various pipes throughout the City as shown in the plans. Background Bids were received electronically at 10:00 AM, June 4, 2026, for Project No. U2614. The project was bid with two project areas as the Base Bid and one additional area as an Alternate Bid. A total of 6 bids were received, ranging from $34,896.62 to $80,535.00. The Engineer’s estimate and 3 lowest bidders are as follows: BASE BID ALTERNATE + BASE BID Engineer's Estimate $85,790.00 $116,715.00 Insituform $34,896.62 $48,233.98 Technologies USA, LLC Vortex Services $36,316.00 $58,838.00 Minnesota, LLC Veit & Company, Inc. $45,040.00 $62,450.00 Bids have been checked and tabulated, and it has been determined that Insituform Technologies USA, LLC of Chesterfield, Missouri is the lowest bidder. The Engineering Department has worked with Page 78 of 385 Insituform Technologies USA, LLC on previous contracts and recommends that the low Baset Bid plus Alternate Bid be accepted, and a contract entered into with Insituform Technologies USA, LLC. City Council is also asked to approve a 10% contingency to bring the total project budget to $53,057.38. The funding source for this project is the Storm Water Capital Fund and there are sufficient funds budgeted in 2026 to cover these costs. Strategic Plan Relationship The project aligns with the City’s strategic initiatives for providing a Well-maintained Infrastructure. Board/Commission Review N/A Financial Impact This project was previously authorized as part of the 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which was adopted via resolution 25-191 on December 15, 2025. The 2026 adopted project budget appropriated $100,000 for CIPP (cured-in-place pipe) storm sewer lining. To date, $0 has been encumbered. Staff anticipates improvements will be completed in 2026. 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Plan Project Name Funding Source Project 2026 Appropriation Number 2026 CIPP Lining - Annual Storm Stormwater Utility U2614 $100,000 Sewer Lining Contract Fund Public Outreach/Input N/A Staff Recommendation By motion, adopt the resolution. Attachment List 1. 26-07 Bid Tab 2. 2026 Storm Lining_PLAN (BID) Page 79 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-120 Resolution Accepting a Bid from Insituform Technologies USA, LLC in the Amount of $48,233.98 for the 2026 Storm Sewer Lining Project, Improvement Project No. U2614 WHEREAS, pursuant to advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. U2614, said bids were received on June 4, 2026, electronically opened and tabulated according to law, and the following 3 lowest bids were received complying with the advertisement: BASE BID ALTERNATE + BASE BID Engineer's Estimate $85,790.00 $116,715.00 Insituform Technologies $34,896.62 $48,233.98 USA, LLC Vortex Services $36,316.00 $58,838.00 Minnesota, LLC Veit & Company, Inc. $45,040.00 $62,450.00 AND WHEREAS, Insituform Technologies USA, LLC of Chesterfield, Missouri is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Blaine as follows: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Insituform Technologies USA, LLC for the designated improvements in the amount of $48,233.98. 2. A 10% contingency is hereby approved to bring the total project budget to $53,057.38 and the City Manager or their designee is hereby authorized to sign all change orders up to the authorized project budget amount. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June 2026. Page 80 of 3852026 Blaine Storm Sewer Lining Project (#10203039) Improvement Project No. U2614 Owner: City of Blaine Solicitor: Blaine MN, City of - Engineering Department 06/04/2026 10:00 AM CDT Insituform Technologies USA, LLC Vortex Services MN, LLC Veit & Company, Inc. Visu-Sewer Hydro-Klean Subsurface, Inc. Line Item Item Code Item Description UofM Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension 1 2503.603 12" CIPP LINING LF 158 $103.28 $16,318.24 $102.00 $16,116.00 $130.00 $20,540.00 $110.00 $17,380.00 $120.70 $19,070.60 $135.00 $21,330.00 2 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $833.32 $833.32 $500.00 $500.00 $250.00 $250.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $500.00 $500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 BASE BID-SCHEDULE A - QUINCY BLVD $17,151.56 $16,616.00 $20,790.00 $18,380.00 $19,570.60 $23,830.00 3 2503.603 12" CIPP LINING LF 240 $71.16 $17,078.40 $80.00 $19,200.00 $100.00 $24,000.00 $110.00 $26,400.00 $120.70 $28,968.00 $135.00 $32,400.00 4 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $666.66 $666.66 $500.00 $500.00 $250.00 $250.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 BASE BID-SCHEDULE B - 3RD STREET $17,745.06 $19,700.00 $24,250.00 $26,900.00 $29,468.00 $34,900.00 A-1 2503.603 12" CIPP LINING LF 143 $91.52 $13,087.36 $154.00 $22,022.00 $120.00 $17,160.00 $125.00 $17,875.00 $120.70 $17,260.10 $135.00 $19,305.00 A-2 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $250.00 $250.00 $500.00 $500.00 $250.00 $250.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 ALTERNATE BID - 120TH LANE $13,337.36 $22,522.00 $17,410.00 $18,375.00 $17,760.10 $21,805.00 BASE BID TOTAL: $34,896.62 $36,316.00 $45,040.00 $45,280.00 $49,038.60 $58,730.00 BASE + ALT BID TOTAL: $48,233.98 $58,838.00 $62,450.00 $63,655.00 $66,798.70 $80,535.00 Page 81 of 385 1. THEEXACTLOCATIONOFUNDERGROUNDUTILITIESSUCHASGAS,TELEPHONE, FIBEROPTIC, ELECTRIC,CABLETVANDPIPELINESAREUNKNOWN.THE MODIFIED BYTHESPECIFICATIONS FORTHISPROJECT. LAYOUTS" -CURRENTEDITION. MMUTCD, INCLUDING"FIELDMANUALFORTEMPORARY TRAFFICCONTROLZONE DEPICTION OFEXISTINGSUBSURFACEUTILITY DATA." D. THISQUALITYLEVELWASDETERMINEDACCORDING TOTHEGUIDELINESOF NOTES: STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FORCONSTRUCTIONSHALLGOVERNEXCEPT AS 3. ALLTRAFFICCONTROLDEVICESANDSIGNING SHALLCONFORMTOTHE CI/ASCE 38-02,ENTITLED"STANDARDGUIDELINES FORTHECOLLECTIONAND SYSTEM.......1-800-252-166 CONTRACTOR SHALLCONTACTGOPHERSTATEONECALLBEFORECOMMENCING 4. THE2025EDITIONOF THEMINNESOTADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION 2. THESUBSURFACEUTILITYINFORMATIONINTHIS PLANISUTILITYQUALITYLEVEL AND CONSTRUCTIONOREXCAVATION.GOPHERSTATEONECALL X 82nd AVE 86th AVE 90th AVE 94th AVE 98th AVE 102nd AVE 103rd AVE 106th AVE 107th AVE 110th AVE 111th AVE 114th AVE 115th AVE 118th AVE 119th AVE 122nd AVE 123rd AVE 126th AVE 127th AVE 130th AVE 131st AVE 120th AVE 124th AVE 128th AVE 132nd AVE 83rd AVE 87th AVE 91st AVE 92nd AVE 95th AVE 96th AVE 99th AVE 100th AVE 104th AVE 108th AVE 112th AVE 116th AVE 84th AVE 85th AVE 88th AVE 89th AVE 93th AVE 97th AVE 101st AVE 105th AVE 109th AVE 113th AVE 117th AVE 121st AVE 125th AVE 129th AVE 133rd AVE UNIVERSITY AVE 3rd ST 4th ST 5th ST 6th ST 7th ST TERRACE RD WASHINGTON ST JEFFERSON ST MADISON RD MONROE ST QUINCY ST JACKSON ST VAN BUREN ST ABLE ST TYLER ST POLK ST TAYLOR ST FILLMORE ST PIERCE ST BUCHANAN ST LINCOLN ST JOHNSON ST ULYSSES ST HWY 65 ABERDEEN ST BALTIMORE ST CHISHOLM ST DAVENPORT ST ELDORADO ST FERGUS ST GOODHUE ST HASTINGS ST ISANTI ST JENKINS ST KENYON ST LONDON ST MANKATO ST NASSAU ST OWATONNA ST PALISADE ST QUAMBA ST ROCHESTER ST STAPLES ST TACONITE ST URBANK ST VERMILLION ST WACONIA ST XYLITE ST YANCY ST ZUMBROTA ST ALAMO ST BATAAN ST CORAL SEA ST DUNKIRK ST EDISON ST FLANDERS ST GUADALCANAL ST HARPERS ST IWO JIMA ST JAMESTOWN ST KISKA ST LEYTE ST MIDWAY ST NAPLES ST OKINAWA ST PETERSBURG ST QUEMOY ST RENDOVA ST SHENANDOAH ST TIPPECANOE ST URAL ST VIEKERS ST WAKE ST XEBEC ST YALTA ST ZEST ST WAKE ST BRANT ST CORD ST LEXINGTON AVE ERSKIN ST FRAIZER ST GHIA ST HUPP ST ISETTA ST JEWELL ST KISSEL ST LEVER ST MARMON ST NATIONAL ST OPAL ST PACKARD ST QUITO ST ROCKNEY ST SUTZ ST SUNSET AVE Page 82 of 385 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 Phone (763) 785-6172 Page 83 of 385 11179 & 11185 QUINCY BLVD LITTLE LEAGUE PARK QUINCY BLVD NE QUINCY BLVD NE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 Phone (763) 785-6172 Page 84 of 385 12005 AND 12007 3RD STREET X X X X X X X X X X 3RD STREET NE X X 3RD ST NE X X ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 Phone (763) 785-6172 Page 85 of 385 120TH LANENE 3RD STREET NE 10801 TownSquare Drive,Blaine,Minnesota 55449 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Phone (763) 785-6172 42 &43120THLANE(ALTERNATEBID) X X X X X X X X X X X Page 86 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-121 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Approval of Consent Agenda: - Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering Agenda Item # 7.8 Resolution Accepting a bid from Fields Contracting LLC in the Amount of $138,370.00 for the 2026 Storm Outlet Project, Improvement Project U2616 Executive Summary Accept bids and approve a contract with Fields Contracting LLC for the 2025 Structure improvements (storm) and 2026 Storm Outlet Project, Improvement Project No. U2616. This project was approved in the 2025 and 2026 Budgets. The project consists of the removal and installation of various storm sewer pipe and outlet repairs, replacement of sidewalk and pavement, grading around the new pipe and aprons to provide cover over the pipe, grading downstream of the pipe to provide drainage, and turf restoration throughout the City as shown in the plans (4 locations). Background The project consists of the removal and installation of various storm sewer outlet aprons and pipe, some directional drilling, grading around the new pipe and aprons to provide cover over the pipe and match existing ground, and turf restoration throughout the City as shown in the plans. Bids were received electronically at 10:30 AM, June 4, 2026, for Improvement Project No. U2616. The project was bid with three project areas as the Base Bid and one additional area as an Alternate Bid. A total of 4 bids were received, ranging from $120,820.00 to $179,136.90. The Engineer’s estimate and 3 lowest bidders are as follows: Base Bid Alternate Bid Engineer's Estimate $122,054.80 $145,290.80 Fields Contracting LLC $120,820.00 $138,370.00 Page 87 of 385 New Look Contracting, $141,849.00 $168,449.00 Inc. McLafferty Contracting $147,709.00 $173,419.25 Group, LLC Bids have been checked and tabulated, and it has been determined that Fields Contracting LLC of Harris, Minnesota is the lowest bidder. The Engineering Department has worked with Fields Contracting LLC on previous contracts. Staff recommends that the low bid be accepted, and a contract entered into with Fields Contracting LLC. City Council is also asked to approve a 10% contingency to bring the total project budget to $152,207.00. The funding source for this project is the Storm Water Capital Fund and there are sufficient funds budgeted to cover these costs. The total appropriation for the structure improvements (storm) will encompass Schedule A - Leyte LN and 128th St storm pipe repair, Schedule B - 10651/10655 Quincy St outlet replacement, and Schedule C - 11179 & 11185 Quincy Blvd outlet replacement. These projects were identified by staff in 2021 as failing sections of pipe and outfalls that needed to be replaced. Strategic Plan Relationship The project aligns with the City’s strategic initiatives for providing a Well-maintained Infrastructure. Board/Commission Review N/A Financial Impact As part of the 2025-2029 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), adopted via resolution 24-230 on December 16, 2024, $250,000 was budgeted for Structure Improvements (Storm)- High Volume Roadways Manhole Lining (U2518) and as part of the 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), adopted via resolution 25-191 on December 15, 2025 there was $95,000 budgeted for Storm System Rehab (U2616). Bringing the total appropriated amount to $345,000 for storm water improvements. Bid costs exceed the adopted budget for Storm System Rehabilitations, thus staff recommend reallocating appropriations from U2518 to accommodate these necessary updates, and amending the project budgets as proposed in the table below. The proposed amended budget is sufficient to cover the project costs, including contingency. Should further adjustments to the budget be needed, an item will be brought forward to Council as necessary. At the completion of construction, the project will be closed, and any remaining allocations will be canceled. Project Budget Summary Page 88 of 385 2025 Adopted 2026 Adopted Amended Project Name Budget Budget Budget Storm System Rehab (U2616) $ - $95,000 $345,000 Structure Improvements (Storm) – High Volume Roadways $250,000 $ - $ - Manhole Lining (U2518) Public Outreach/Input N/A Staff Recommendation By motion, adopt the resolution. Attachment List 1. 26-08 Bid Tab 2. 2026 Storm Outfall_PLANS (BID) Page 89 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-121 Resolution Accepting a bid from Fields Contracting LLC in the Amount of $138,370.00 for the 2026 Storm Outlet Project, Improvement Project U2616 WHEREAS, pursuant to advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. U2616, said bids were received on June 4, 2026, electronically opened and tabulated according to law, and the three lowest bids were received complying with the advertisement: Fields Contracting LLC $138,370.00 New Look Contracting, Inc. $168,449.00 McLafferty Contracting Group, LLC $173,419.25 AND WHEREAS, Fields Contracting LLC, of Harris, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Blaine as follows: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Fields Contracting LLC for the designated improvements in the amount of $138,370.00. 2. A 10% contingency is hereby approved to bring the total project budget to $152,207.00 and the City Manager or their designee is hereby authorized to sign all change orders up to the authorized project budget amount. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Blaine hereby authorizes the following expenditure decrease(s) to the budget and the cancellation of project U2518. Fund / Account Project Project Description Amount Number Stormwater Capital Fund - Project Contract U2518 Structure Improvements (Storm) - $250,000 Cost High Volume Roadways Manhole Lining 613.50.530.539.5590-4590 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Blaine hereby authorizes the following expenditure increase(s) to the budget. Fund / Account Project Project Description Amount Number Stormwater Capital Fund - Project Contract U2616 Storm System Rehab $250,000 Cost 613.50.530.539.5590-4590 Page 90 of 385 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 91 of 3852026 Blaine Storm Outlet Project (#10203043) Improvement Project No. U2616 Owner: City of Blaine Solicitor: Blaine MN, City of - Engineering Department 06/04/2026 10:30 AM CDT Engineer Estimate Fields Contracting LLC New Look Contracting, Inc. McLafferty Contracting Group, LLC Urban Companies Line Item Item Code Item Description UofM Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension SCHEDULE A - Leyte Street and 128th Avenue Storm Pipe Replacement 1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $3,050.00 $3,050.00 $4,200.00 $4,200.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 2 2104.503 REMOVE HDPE STORM PIPE LF 29 $26.00 $754.00 $40.00 $1,160.00 $45.00 $1,305.00 $40.00 $1,160.00 $50.00 $1,450.00 3 2104.503 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB LF 50 $15.00 $750.00 $20.00 $1,000.00 $10.00 $500.00 $20.00 $1,000.00 $25.00 $1,250.00 4 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 17 $8.00 $136.00 $35.00 $595.00 $45.00 $765.00 $18.00 $306.00 $25.00 $425.00 5 2104.518 REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK SF 120 $10.00 $1,200.00 $5.00 $600.00 $3.50 $420.00 $5.00 $600.00 $3.00 $360.00 6 2231.604 BITUMINOUS PATCH SPECIAL SY 17 $75.00 $1,275.00 $295.00 $5,015.00 $200.00 $3,400.00 $245.00 $4,165.00 $235.00 $3,995.00 7 2503.503 15" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 LF 29 $125.00 $3,625.00 $125.00 $3,625.00 $145.00 $4,205.00 $131.00 $3,799.00 $200.00 $5,800.00 8 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 2 $1,705.00 $3,410.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,325.00 $2,650.00 $3,100.00 $6,200.00 $3,000.00 $6,000.00 9 2521.518 6" CONCRETE WALK & ADA PEDESTRIAN RAMP SF 120 $50.00 $6,000.00 $50.00 $6,000.00 $25.00 $3,000.00 $57.00 $6,840.00 $42.72 $5,126.40 10 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER DESIGN B618 LF 50 $30.00 $1,500.00 $60.00 $3,000.00 $75.00 $3,750.00 $98.00 $4,900.00 $108.45 $5,422.50 11 2575.501 TURF ESTABLISHMENT - SODDING TYPE LAWN LS 1 $1,250.00 $1,250.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $2,125.00 $2,125.00 $5,300.00 $5,300.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 BASE BID SCHEDULE A TOTAL: $22,950.00 $31,695.00 $29,620.00 $44,270.00 $43,828.90 SCHEDULE B - 10651 & 10655 Quincy Blvd Outlet Replacement 12 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $10,150.00 $10,150.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $15,250.00 $15,250.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $11,350.00 $11,350.00 13 2101.501 CLEAR AND GRUB LS 1 $5,675.00 $5,675.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $4,525.00 $4,525.00 $5,300.00 $5,300.00 $2,875.00 $2,875.00 14 2104.502 REMOVE CONCRETE STRUCTURE EACH 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $1,825.00 $1,825.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 15 2104.503 REMOVE CONCRETE STORM PIPE LF 138 $31.00 $4,278.00 $30.00 $4,140.00 $48.00 $6,624.00 $40.00 $5,520.00 $50.00 $6,900.00 16 2104.503 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL CHAIN LINK FENCE LF 168 $82.60 $13,876.80 $75.00 $12,600.00 $50.00 $8,400.00 $41.00 $6,888.00 $46.00 $7,728.00 17 2501.502 27" RC PIPE APRON EACH 1 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $2,400.00 $2,400.00 $4,025.00 $4,025.00 $2,209.00 $2,209.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 18 2503.503 27" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 LF 124 $225.00 $27,900.00 $235.00 $29,140.00 $220.00 $27,280.00 $163.00 $20,212.00 $225.00 $27,900.00 19 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 1 $1,705.00 $1,705.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,075.00 $2,075.00 $3,120.00 $3,120.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 20 2511.507 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III CY 17 $210.00 $3,570.00 $175.00 $2,975.00 $200.00 $3,400.00 $120.00 $2,040.00 $200.00 $3,400.00 21 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE STRAW LF 40 $10.00 $400.00 $10.00 $400.00 $15.00 $600.00 $3.00 $120.00 $15.00 $600.00 22 2575.501 TURF ESTABLISHMENT - SEEDING LS 1 $2,675.00 $2,675.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $5,275.00 $5,275.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 BASE BID SCHEDULE B TOTAL: $78,229.80 $66,855.00 $79,279.00 $71,909.00 $73,753.00 SCHEDULE C - 11179 & 11185 Quincy Blvd Outlet Replacement 23 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $2,150.00 $2,150.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $12,500.00 $12,500.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 24 2101.501 CLEAR AND GRUB LS 1 $5,675.00 $5,675.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,050.00 $3,050.00 $8,300.00 $8,300.00 $1,380.00 $1,380.00 25 2104.503 REMOVE CMP STORM PIPE LF 46 $35.00 $1,610.00 $20.00 $920.00 $50.00 $2,300.00 $40.00 $1,840.00 $50.00 $2,300.00 26 2501.502 12" RC PIPE APRON EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $2,025.00 $2,025.00 $1,800.00 $1,800.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 27 2503.503 12" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 LF 40 $85.00 $3,400.00 $135.00 $5,400.00 $155.00 $6,200.00 $98.00 $3,920.00 $200.00 $8,000.00 28 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 1 $1,705.00 $1,705.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,120.00 $3,120.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 29 2511.507 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III CY 6 $210.00 $1,260.00 $175.00 $1,050.00 $200.00 $1,200.00 $155.00 $930.00 $200.00 $1,200.00 30 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE STRAW LF 40 $10.00 $400.00 $10.00 $400.00 $15.00 $600.00 $3.00 $120.00 $15.00 $600.00 31 2575.501 TURF ESTABLISHMENT - SEEDING LS 1 $2,675.00 $2,675.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,075.00 $2,075.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 BASE BID SCHEDULE C TOTAL: $20,875.00 $22,270.00 $32,950.00 $31,530.00 $32,480.00 ALTERNATE BID - 10560 & 10600 Fillmore Street Outlet Replacement A-32 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $3,150.00 $3,150.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 A-33 2101.501 CLEAR AND GRUB LS 1 $5,675.00 $5,675.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,050.00 $3,050.00 $5,300.00 $5,300.00 $1,380.00 $1,380.00 A-34 2104.503 REMOVE CONCRETE STORM PIPE LF 16 $31.00 $496.00 $100.00 $1,600.00 $140.00 $2,240.00 $40.00 $640.00 $100.00 $1,600.00 A-35 2104.503 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF FENCE LF 15 $10.00 $150.00 $20.00 $300.00 $30.00 $450.00 $10.00 $150.00 $50.00 $750.00 A-36 2106.601 GRADING LS 1 $3,580.00 $3,580.00 $750.00 $750.00 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $6,800.00 $6,800.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 A-37 2501.502 15" RC PIPE APRON EACH 1 $2,250.00 $2,250.00 $1,750.00 $1,750.00 $3,050.00 $3,050.00 $2,209.00 $2,209.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 A-38 2503.503 15" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 LF 8 $125.00 $1,000.00 $100.00 $800.00 $300.00 $2,400.00 $131.00 $1,048.00 $200.00 $1,600.00 A-39 2511.507 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III CY 8 $210.00 $1,680.00 $150.00 $1,200.00 $200.00 $1,600.00 $125.00 $1,000.00 $200.00 $1,600.00 A-40 2575.501 TURF ESTABLISHMENT - SEEDING LS 1 $2,675.00 $2,675.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,750.00 $1,750.00 $2,800.00 $2,800.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 A-41 2575.504 ROLLED EROSION PREVENTION SY 215 $12.00 $2,580.00 $10.00 $2,150.00 $4.00 $860.00 $3.55 $763.25 $3.00 $645.00 ALTERNATE BID TOTAL: $23,236.00 $17,550.00 $26,600.00 $25,710.25 $29,075.00 BASE BID TOTALS (includes Schedules A, B, C): $122,054.80 $120,820.00 $141,849.00 $147,709.00 $150,061.90 BASE BID + ALT BID TOTALS (includes all schedules): $145,290.80 $138,370.00 $168,449.00 $173,419.25 $179,136.90 Page 92 of 385 1. THEEXACTLOCATIONOFUNDERGROUNDUTILITIESSUCHASGAS,TELEPHONE, FIBEROPTIC, ELECTRIC,CABLETVANDPIPELINESAREUNKNOWN.THE MODIFIED BYTHESPECIFICATIONS FORTHISPROJECT. LAYOUTS" -CURRENTEDITION. MMUTCD, INCLUDING"FIELDMANUALFORTEMPORARY TRAFFICCONTROLZONE DEPICTION OFEXISTINGSUBSURFACEUTILITY DATA." D. THISQUALITYLEVELWASDETERMINEDACCORDING TOTHEGUIDELINESOF NOTES: STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FORCONSTRUCTIONSHALLGOVERNEXCEPT AS 3. ALLTRAFFICCONTROLDEVICESANDSIGNING SHALLCONFORMTOTHE CI/ASCE 38-02,ENTITLED"STANDARDGUIDELINES FORTHECOLLECTIONAND SYSTEM.......1-800-252-166 CONTRACTOR SHALLCONTACTGOPHERSTATEONECALLBEFORECOMMENCING 4. THE2025EDITIONOF THEMINNESOTADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION 2. THESUBSURFACEUTILITYINFORMATIONINTHIS PLANISUTILITYQUALITYLEVEL AND CONSTRUCTIONOREXCAVATION.GOPHERSTATEONECALL X 82nd AVE 86th AVE 90th AVE 94th AVE 98th AVE 102nd AVE 103rd AVE 106th AVE 107th AVE 110th AVE 111th AVE 114th AVE 115th AVE 118th AVE 119th AVE 122nd AVE 123rd AVE 126th AVE 127th AVE 130th AVE 131st AVE 120th AVE 124th AVE 128th AVE 132nd AVE 83rd AVE 87th AVE 91st AVE 92nd AVE 95th AVE 96th AVE 99th AVE 100th AVE 104th AVE 108th AVE 112th AVE 116th AVE 84th AVE 85th AVE 88th AVE 89th AVE 93th AVE 97th AVE 101st AVE 105th AVE 109th AVE 113th AVE 117th AVE 121st AVE 125th AVE 129th AVE 133rd AVE UNIVERSITY AVE 3rd ST 4th ST 5th ST 6th ST 7th ST TERRACE RD WASHINGTON ST JEFFERSON ST MADISON RD MONROE ST QUINCY ST JACKSON ST VAN BUREN ST ABLE ST TYLER ST POLK ST TAYLOR ST FILLMORE ST PIERCE ST BUCHANAN ST LINCOLN ST JOHNSON ST ULYSSES ST HWY 65 ABERDEEN ST BALTIMORE ST CHISHOLM ST DAVENPORT ST ELDORADO ST FERGUS ST GOODHUE ST HASTINGS ST ISANTI ST JENKINS ST KENYON ST LONDON ST MANKATO ST NASSAU ST OWATONNA ST PALISADE ST QUAMBA ST ROCHESTER ST STAPLES ST TACONITE ST URBANK ST VERMILLION ST WACONIA ST XYLITE ST YANCY ST ZUMBROTA ST ALAMO ST BATAAN ST CORAL SEA ST DUNKIRK ST EDISON ST FLANDERS ST GUADALCANAL ST HARPERS ST IWO JIMA ST JAMESTOWN ST KISKA ST LEYTE ST MIDWAY ST NAPLES ST OKINAWA ST PETERSBURG ST QUEMOY ST RENDOVA ST SHENANDOAH ST TIPPECANOE ST URAL ST VIEKERS ST WAKE ST XEBEC ST YALTA ST ZEST ST WAKE ST BRANT ST CORD ST LEXINGTON AVE ERSKIN ST FRAIZER ST GHIA ST HUPP ST ISETTA ST JEWELL ST KISSEL ST LEVER ST MARMON ST NATIONAL ST OPAL ST PACKARD ST QUITO ST ROCKNEY ST SUTZ ST SUNSET AVE Page 93 of 385 8"-12" DIA LOG WITH NOTES: ENDS LAPPED 6". 4 TRENCH BEHIND CURB AT A DEPTH 1. 54" THRU 120" DIA. STRUCTURES ARE MANUFACTURED WITH BELL END FACING DOWN. EQUAL TO 1/4 THE LOG DIA. 1 EXISTING CURB 2. STRUCTURES ARE MANUFACTURED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C-478 AND MNDOT STANDARD PLATE 4005 WITH RUBBER GASKET JOINTS. 3. REFER TO BLAINE DETAIL MI-3 FOR CASTING, ADJUSTING RINGS, AND STEPS. STREET PAVEMENT 1"X2"X24" WOOD STAKE AT A 3' A 2' A MAX SPACING. PROVIDE A 8"-10" OF STAKE EMBEDMENT. END VIEW 4. PROVIDE MORTAR FILLETS TO FIT THE BOTTOM PORTION OF PIPE TO DIRECT FLOW TO OUTLET HALF-WAY UP PIPE MINIMUM. NOTES: 5. COVER SLAB DESIGN 1. RIP-RAP SHALL BE HAND PLACED. VARIES WITH CASTING. D 2. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR 6. REINFORCING STEEL SHALL B A B E MATERIALS. BE PER ASTM C-478 AND CURB INSTALLATION 3. FILTER LAYER AND FABRIC ARE MNDOT PLATE 4005. INCIDENTAL TO RIP-RAP. 4. ADD RIP-RAP OVER TOP OF PIPE 8"-12" DIA LOG WITH ENDS LAPPED 6". 5D EXCEPT IN RESIDENTIAL REAR FOR INSTALLATION ON BARE SOIL 1"X2"x24" WOOD STAKES 1' USE EQUIV. D YARDS. OVERSIZED HOLE AT 3' MAX SPACING. STAKES SHALL PLACE LOG IN A SMOOTH, ROUNDED FOR ARCH PIPE FOR PIPE OPENINGS TRENCH WITH A DEPTH EQUAL TO 1/4 5. PIPE SHALL BE RCP TO FIRST BE DRIVEN OVER LOG AT A 45° ANGLE TO BE FIELD WITH TOP OF STAKE POINTING UPSTREAM. THE LOG DIA. STRUCTURE. PROVIDE 8"-10" OF STAKE EMBEDMENT. GROUTED. GROUND WATER LEVEL FLOW VARIES 3' A B C D E 48" 5" 64" 6" 6" 54" 5.5" 72" 8" 8" FIELD INSTALLATION USING MULCH OR COMPOST MNDOT TYPE 4 FILTER FABRIC SECTION A-A 60" 6" 78" 8" 8" 66" 6.5" 85" 8" 8" RIP-RAP QUANTITIES (C.Y.) 72" 7" 92" 8" 8" 8"-12" DIA LOG WITH ENDS LAPPED 6". PIPE DIA. RIP-RAP PIPE DIA. RIP-RAP PIPE DIA. RIP-RAP FOR INSTALLATION ON BARE SOIL 78" 7.5" 100" 8" 8" D 1"X2"X24" WOOD STAKES PLACE LOG IN A SMOOTH, ROUNDED 12" 6 24" 14 42" 35 84" 8" 106" 8" 8" AT 3' MAX SPACING. STAKES SHALL 1 8 17 43 BE DRIVEN TROUGH BACK HALF OF LOG TRENCH WITH A DEPTH EQUAL TO 4 15" 27" 48" 90" 8.5" 114" 8" 8" C AT A 45° ANGLE WITH TOP OF STAKE THE LOG DIA. 18" 9 30" 21 54" 50 96" 9" 120" 8" 8" POINTING UPSTREAM. PROVIDE 8"-10" OF 21" 12 36" 28 60" 58 102" 9.5" 127" 12" 8" STAKE EMBEDMENT. FLOW 108" 10" 132" 12" 12" HEAVY DUTY TRASH GUARD REQUIRED ON: 120" 10" 146" 12" 12" - UPSTREAM APRONS -DOWNSTREAM APRONS 30" OR LARGER IN MAINTAINED RESIDENTIAL AREAS -NO TRASH GUARD ON DITCH CROSSINGS FIELD INSTALLATION USING STRAW OR WOOD FIBER UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED STANDARD STORM SEWER RIP-RAP FOR OUTLET TO CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG INSTALLATION Plate No. EC-8 WET DITCH OR BASIN Plate No. SD-3 & MANHOLE Plate No. SD-6 2026 STANDARD DETAIL PLATE 2026 STANDARD DETAIL PLATE 2026 STANDARD DETAIL PLATE City of Blaine - Engineering Department City of Blaine - Engineering Department City of Blaine - Engineering Department 10801 Town Square Drive NE, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 763-785-6172 Fax 763-785-6139 10801 Town Square Drive NE, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 763-785-6172 Fax 763-785-6139 10801 Town Square Drive NE, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 763-785-6172 Fax 763-785-6139 MANHOLE CASTING (SEE SPECS) CONCRETE ADJUSTING RINGS 30"MAX. WRAP RINGS AND CASTING 16" WITH MNDOT TYPE 4 FILTER FABRIC OR APPROVED EQUAL CATCHBASIN CASTING (SEE SPECS) CONCRETE ADJUSTING RINGS WRAP RINGS AND CASTING WITH MNDOT TYPE 4 FILTER FABRIC OR APPROVED EQUAL NOTES: 1. USE MINIMUM OF 2-0.2' ADJUSTING RINGS, MAXIMUM OF 5-0.2' ADJUSTING RINGS. GROUT RINGS 1/4" MIN. 2. MANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE PER MNDOT PLATE 4180, TYPE W. STEPS SHALL BE LOCATED ON UPSTREAM WALL FOR PIPE SIZES UP TO AND INCLUDING 15" AND ON SIDE WALL FOR GREATER THAN 15". 3. LIDS FOR SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE MARKED "SANITARY" AND LIDS FOR STORM SEWERS SHALL BE MARKED "STORM". 4. NO WOOD SHIMS WILL BE ALLOWED. ADJUSTING RINGS & STEPS Plate No. MI-3 2026 STANDARD DETAIL PLATE City of Blaine - Engineering Department 10801 Town Square Drive NE, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 763-785-6172 Fax 763-785-6139 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 Phone (763) 785-6172 Page 94 of 385 LEYTE STREET AND 128TH AVENUE 128TH AVENUE LEYTE STREET 10.00 60.00 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 Phone (763) 785-6172 Page 95 of 385 10651 & 10655 QUINCY BLVD X X ◦ X X X X X X ◦ X ◦ X X QUINCY BLVD NE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 Phone (763) 785-6172 Page 96 of 385 11179 & 11185 QUINCY BLVD ◦ ◦ LITTLE LEAGUE PARK QUINCY BLVD NE QUINCY BLVD NE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 Phone (763) 785-6172 Page 97 of 385 10560 & 10600 FILLMORE STREET (ALTERNATE BID) FILLMORE STREET NE 106TH AVENUE NE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 Phone (763) 785-6172 Page 98 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: 2026-134 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Motion Approval of Consent Agenda: - Nick Fleischhacker, Public Works Director Agenda Item # 7.9 Motion to Approve a Contract With Electric Pump for the purchase of Lift Station #12 pumps, Improvement Project No. U2608 Executive Summary Council is requested to approve a contract with Electric Pump for sanitary sewer Lift Station #12 pumps. Background Staff has been working to update older lift station pumps, piping, and controls that have reached the end of their service life. The current pumps were originally purchased in 2011 and have already undergone a rebuild since their initial installation. With the purchase of four new pumps for Lift Station #12, public works staff will have the ability to interchange pumps with Lift Station 13. This will improve system reliability, increase interchangeability, and reduce inventory needs moving forward. In addition, staff have been standardizing upgrades to Flygt N-style impeller submersible pumps. These pumps provide material cutting capability and improved clog resistance, which supports reliable operation of the sanitary sewer system. A request for quotes on the required pumps was publicly advertised beginning on April 24, 2026. Quotes were received electronically at 10:00 AM on May 7, 2026 and a total of one quote was received from Electric Pump in the amount of $395,315.00. Strategic Plan Relationship This project aligns with the City’s strategic plan goal of well-maintained infrastructure by providing high quality sanitary sewer services. This action relates directly to the City of Blaine Strategic Plan Item No. 6 - Well Maintained Infrastructure and Desired Outcome - Reliable Utility Systems. Board/Commission Review Page 99 of 385 Financial Impact This project was previously authorized as part of the 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which was adopted via resolution 24-191 on December 15, 2025. The 2026 adopted project budget appropriated $400,000 for Lift Stations #12 Pumps and Controls. To date, $154.00 has been encumbered on the project. 2026-2030 Capital Improvement Plan Project Name Funding Source Project 2026 Appropriation Number Lift Station #12 Pumps and Controls Sewer Utility Fund U2608 $400,000 Public Outreach/Input N/A Staff Recommendation By motion, authorize the Director of Public Works to execute the $395,315.00 purchase of the pumps as shown in the quote received on May 7, 2026 from Electric Pump. Attachment List 1. Electric Pump Quote Form - Lift Station 12 and 13 Pumps (5-7-26) Page 100 of 385 Quote Form City of Blaine 10801 Town Square Drive NE, Blaine MN 55449 Engineering Department phone: 763-785-6172 | BlaineMN.gov Lift Station 12 and 13 Pumps Quote Submittal Deadline: 10:00AM, May 7, 2026 Project: Lift Station 12 and 13 Pumps Quote Request Furnish four (4) Flygt NP3202.095-616LT Submersible Pumps and Accessories including: • 45hp, 460V, 3phase, 60Hz, explosion proof motor • Hard Iron N-Impeller and Insert Plate • 100ft Power cable • SS Cable Rack for level sensing cables • SS Heavy Duty J-Hooks for pump cable & lifting chain • SS lifting chain with bow shackle • Flygt Mini-Cas pump monitoring units QUOTE TOTAL: $_____________________________ Quote Submittal Conditions Payment will be based on the quoted price upon full delivery and acceptance of the pumps. The quoted cost must include all specified materials and delivery. Materials must be delivered to the City of Blaine Public Works Facility, 1801 101st Avenue NE, Blaine, MN 55449, between 8:00 AM and 2:45 PM, Monday through Friday. The City reserves the right to inspect all delivered materials for damage and reject all or part of the materials at no cost to the City. Contractor Information & Signature Company Name: Date: Company Address: City, State, Zip: Signature: Printed Name: Title: Phone: Email: Page 101 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-130 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Approval of Consent Agenda: - Nick Fleischhacker, Public Works Director Agenda Item # 7.10 Resolution Accepting a Bid from Davey Resource Group in the Amount of $149,580 for the 2025 ReLeaf Grant Tree Inventory Project and Authorizing Execution of an Agreement Executive Summary Accept a bid for the 2025 ReLeaf Tree Inventory Project and award a contract in the amount $149,580 to Davey Resource Group. Background The City was awarded $160,934.65 from the 2025 ReLeaf Grant from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The grant covers a tree inventory, management plan, and public communication. A request for bids for a tree inventory was issued on May 26, 2026. Bids were received electronically by 3:00PM, June 5, 2026, for the Tree Inventory Project. A total of 1 bid was received. Birch Tree and Rainbow Tree responded that they did not have the capacity to complete the inventory within the timeframe designated by the grant. Davey Resource $149,580 Group Birch Tree No Submission Rainbow Tree Care No Submission Page 102 of 385 Bids have been checked and tabulated, and it has been determined that Davey Resource Group is the lowest bidder. Staff recommends that the low bid be accepted, and a contract be entered into with Davey Resource Group. Strategic Plan Relationship This service aligns with the city's strategic plan goals of providing well-maintained infrastructure. Board/Commission Review N/A Financial Impact The bid is funded fully through the MN DNR ReLeaf Grant that was previously approved by City Council on 05/18/26. No budget impact is expected. Public Outreach/Input N/A Staff Recommendation By motion, accept the bid from Davey Resource Group and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for an amount not to exceed $149,580 for the tree inventory project. Attachment List 1. RFP Proposal 6_4_26 - Blaine, MN Standard Tree Inventory 2. DRG_City of Blaine Tree Inventory Quote Form Page 103 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-130 Resolution Accepting a Bid from Davey Resource Group in the Amount of $149,580 for the 2025 ReLeaf Grant Tree Inventory Project and Authorizing Execution of an Agreement WHEREAS, said bids were received electronically on June 5, 2026, and tabulated according to law, the following three lowest bids were received complying with the advertisement: Davey Resource Group - $149,580 Birch Tree - No Submission Rainbow Tree Care - No Submission WHEREAS, Davey Resource Group has met the necessary bid requirements and is the lowest responsible bidder; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Blaine the following: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Davey Resource Group in the amount of $149,580. Page 104 of 385 A PROPOSAL PREPARED FOR City of Blaine, MN Street and Park Tree Inventory June 4, 2026 Page 105 of 385 Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 Section One: Project Understanding 3 INTRODUCTION 3 PROJECT APPROACH - QTC 4 UNCOMPROMISING QUALITY 4 TEAMWORK AT ITS BEST 4 SEAMLESS COMMUNICATION 4 CUSTOMIZED APPROACH 4 Section Two: Scope of Work 5 TASK ONE: TREE INVENTORY 5 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 5 TREE INVENTORY DATA COLLECTION 6 Data Fields 6 QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE 7 DATA DELIVERY 7 Section Three: 9 Qualifications and Experience 9 DRG’S URBAN FORESTRY SERVICES 10 DRG’S UNIQUE QUALIFICATIONS 10 THE PROJECT TEAM 11 RELATED PROJECTS 12 Investment and Authorization to Proceed 14 Street and Park Tree Inventory 14 Invoicing Method 16 Insurance Requirements 16 Client Responsibilities 17 Terms and Conditions 17 Limited Warranty 18 Appendix A: Staff Resumes 19 Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 1 Page 106 of 385 City of Blaine, MN 10801 Town Square Dr. Blaine, MN 55449 RE: Response to Request for Proposals for a Street and Park Tree Inventory Dear Kristofer Paulseth, I am writing to submit our proposal for conducting a comprehensive tree inventory for City of Blaine, MN. Our team is excited about the opportunity to collaborate with you to map, assess, and manage your urban forest resources effectively. Trees are part of everyday life. The urban forest creates a sense of place and supplies real benefits to those who live in an area surrounded by trees. Trees along streets, in parks, around playgrounds, and in backyards provide shade and beauty and enhance the quality of life by bringing natural elements and wildlife habitats into urban settings. Trees also moderate temperatures, reduce air pollution and energy use, improve water quality, and promote human health and well-being. Davey Resource Group, Inc. (DRG) understands the benefits trees bring, and we also realize the challenges that come with managing public trees. Our parent company, The Davey Tree Expert Company, was founded in 1880 to train tree surgeons - predecessors to the modern-day arborists. Through the years, our company has developed numerous tree care and maintenance protocols, standards, and best practices - including developing software for organizing and managing tree inventories. Our world-leading research and development department, the Davey Institute, is staffed with scientists and technical advisors to guide our field service teams in diagnosing and prescribing the best approaches to tree maintenance and care. Fundamentally, our tree knowledge is rooted in direct science and research, differentiating us from our competitors and ensuring our clients receive the best advice to manage and maintain trees. The team we proposed to manage your project has the knowledge, experience, and availability to meet your goals and help you with the next steps for your project. They understand how to help you meet your specific program needs and project budget. We believe that our expertise in urban forestry management and our commitment to sustainability makes us an ideal partner for City of Blaine, MN in this important endeavor. Thank you for considering DRG, and we look forward to talking with you about the next steps. Sincerely, Jack Spadafore Associate Consultant Davey Resource Group, Inc. 651-253-2347 jack.spadafore@davey.com Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 2 Page 107 of 385 Section One: Project Understanding INTRODUCTION DRG provides a wide range of environmental consulting services to clients throughout the world. As the industry leader in urban forestry, we understand that trees have immense value to communities, and we know that trees sometimes fail and can cause damage. Our experience in collecting data on millions of trees and having done more inventories than any other company in the world provides you the reassurance that your investment will not go to waste and that we understand your goals. We aim to bring our experience to assist you with maximizing the value that trees provide and minimize the risks of damage, injury, or disruption trees may cause. Tools like a tree inventory and management plan help identify opportunities, focus attention, and secure resources to tackle community priorities. We understand that your goal is to improve the urban forest's health and structure by understanding this vital tree resource better. You canʼt manage if you donʼt know what you have. DRGʼs tree inventory will be a ground-based arborist evaluation of the public trees, specifically in defined areas, including the street ROWs, mowed and manicured areas of public parks, and properties. It will include information about species diversity, age distribution, ecosystem benefits, and the overall condition of each tree. This project will provide a much-needed insight into the tree population and allows for a proactive approach to prioritizing tree work. Applying our proprietary Quality, Teamwork, and Communication (QTC) methodology, we ensure the quality of our project by leveraging the latest GIS technology, the most recent arboriculture industry standards, and best practices to collect tree inventory data. We customize our field data collection application to your specifications, ensuring our qualified arborists collect all data attributes at each tree and effectively minimize data entry errors. To ensure accuracy, our arborists employ extensive quality control processes to identify errors and improve our approach, and before delivering data, our senior urban foresters run additional data checks and quality control processes. This project will be led by our local regional team, with support from our headquarters in Kent, Ohio, allowing us to draw from resources across the United States, meet tight deadlines, share expertise, and scale as needed. Our professional staff includes many former city foresters, tree nonprofit program leaders, and tree workers who know how to assess trees and understand the difficulties in managing trees on the ground and in forestry operations. During the inventory, DRG will communicate in real-time by providing access to the data from our web-based TreeKeeper® software. We will create custom reports for you that will provide important visualization and insights into the findings. This allows you to track progress and make immediate management decisions. Upon completion of the inventory, if desired, DRG can use the inventory data to develop a Tree Inventory Analysis and Maintenance Strategy with a projected 5-year budget. This plan will describe the status of the current urban forest and provide an approach to tree maintenance that focuses on risk reduction over time. The plan will enable you to project realistic budgets and work plans. Overall, this project will provide you with comprehensive data about the trees and illuminate a path forward to address the needs of the urban forest. DRG is excited about the opportunity to be part of your proactive tree management project. Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 3 Page 108 of 385 PROJECT APPROACH - QTC Our team is excited to present our proprietary approach, which integrates quality, teamwork, and communication (QTC) to ensure unparalleled service and results for your project. Our process is designed to meet our client's unique needs and standards. UNCOMPROMISING QUALITY Our commitment to quality is at the core of everything we do. We utilize state-of-the-art tools and methodologies to ensure the highest standards are met. Our quality assurance process involves rigorous testing and validation at every stage, ensuring that the final product not only meets but exceeds your expectations. TEAMWORK AT ITS BEST We believe that the key to successful project delivery is rooted in effective teamwork. Our team comprises industry experts who bring diverse skills and perspectives to the table. We foster a collaborative environment where every team memberʼs contribution is valued, leading to innovative solutions and creative problem-solving. SEAMLESS COMMUNICATION Clear and consistent communication is vital for the success of any project. We have established a structured communication protocol that keeps all stakeholders informed and engaged throughout the project lifecycle. Regular updates, transparent reporting, and open channels for feedback ensure that we are always aligned with your goals and expectations. CUSTOMIZED APPROACH Understanding that each project has unique challenges and requirements, we customize our approach to best fit your needs. Our flexible methodology allows us to adapt to changing circumstances and requirements, ensuring that we deliver optimal results every time. With DRG, you are choosing a partner committed to excellence. Our proprietary process, emphasizing quality, teamwork, and communication, is designed to deliver superior results that align with your mission and objectives. We are eager to bring our expertise to your project and look forward to a successful collaboration. Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 4 Page 109 of 385 Section Two: Scope of Work The following key task constitutes the proposed project: 1. Inventory: DRG will conduct a Geographic Information System (GIS)-based inventory of an estimated 28,000 trees in the street ROWs and maintained areas of parks. The project area will be defined using GIS data layers such as a parcel, street ROW, and parks boundary layers. At the conclusion of the project, you will receive all of your data in an ESRI® shapefiles. a. A summary report will be provided at the conclusion of the tree inventory detailing the total number of trees inventoried by location (parks or boulevard), and distribution of species. TASK ONE: TREE INVENTORY Utilizing our proprietary method of QTC, we have developed the following approach to provide consistent high-quality tree inventory data. As a client-focused company, we prioritize clear and effective communication with our clients. We intend to keep you informed every step of the way so that you are confident in your data and our services. Our communication process aims to address any issues that may arise before they become problems, and we discuss issues as they occur and work towards developing solutions that work for everyone involved. We maintain strict quality control measures throughout the project and monitor the site count, budget, and timeline while keeping you informed. Our proprietary approach to project implementation applies stringent quality control measures, engaged team members, and clear communication to deliver the final project with confidence in meeting the specifications. PROJECT MANAGEMENT Prior to starting fieldwork, it is imperative that we are clearly aligned on the complete project scope. The DRG team sets up meetings and updates schedules prior to starting fieldwork and continually evaluates communication throughout the project to ensure the scope of work is completed on time and within budget. These meetings and email updates include a Virtual Kick-Off Meeting, On-Site Kick-Off Meeting, project update emails, and On-Site Close-Out Meeting. DRG will request relevant GIS data and imagery or, if necessary, we can use imagery from other public sources. We will use this data to program the data collection software and will confirm the agreed-upon data specification. Once computers are programmed and fieldwork is scheduled, we will set up an on-site kick-off meeting. This meeting occurs on the first day of data collection and includes topics such as safety, data calibration, communication Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 5 Page 110 of 385 procedures, project expectations, and milestones. We can also provide you with a press release, which can be utilized to notify homeowners about the project, funding sources, and what to expect. TREE INVENTORY DATA COLLECTION DRG begins data collection after the on-site kick-off meeting. Our arborists and urban foresters locate trees, stumps, and planting sites (if desired) as per the agreed upon specification of work. They evaluate the trees and record the specified data for each site. ● Location Accuracy: DRG uses field computers and equipment that meet or exceed the project's location accuracy requirements. Our project teams use GIS software and ruggedized computers with GPS receivers capable of sub-meter location accuracy under favorable conditions. ● Individual Tree Inspection Process: Urban foresters inspect each tree from the ground during data collection. They identify the species, measure tree diameter, assess tree condition and risk, and suggest the needed recommended maintenance. Data collection is done systematically for consistency and is typically done Monday through Saturday during daylight hours. ● Safety: DRG provides Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), such as hard hats, high-visibility safety vests, safety glasses, and boots. Additionally, our vehicles are marked with company logos and equipped with first-aid kits, fire extinguishers, and safety cones. Data Fields As requested by the client, the following data fields will provide the necessary information to achieve the project goals. However, if you have specific requirements that are not covered by the mentioned data fields, we are happy to Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 6 Page 111 of 385 further customize the project's scope of work. Based on our industry-leading experience, the following data fields should be assessed: ● Address/Location: transfer values from parcel GIS layer including house address, on street, X & Y coordinates, and park name (if applicable). ● Species: using botanical and common names and cultivars when appropriate. ● Tree Size: measured by diameter at breast height (DBH) in 1-inch size classes. ● Condition: categorized as Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, or Dead based on signs of stress, poor structure, damage, soil and root problems, disease, and pests. ● Land Use: categorizing tree location based on land use using descriptors such as Boulevard and Park. ● Comments: additional comments that may be beneficial to the client regarding the site. QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE Not only do we provide you with real-time data viewable from our TreeKeeper® software, but we also have a detailed quality control and quality assurance processes to guarantee a high level of accuracy. While minor errors are always possible in human-collected data, we are confident that our approach to quality control surpasses that of any other firm. We understand the importance of the data for your decision-making and stand by the accuracy. To ensure the accuracy of the data, the team employs several quality control checks consisting of hot and cold data checks during fieldwork. Hot checks involve the urban foresters working together and collecting the same data to INVENTORY STATISTICS Site Count to Date Percent Complete Estimated Total Site Count 3,161 83% 3,800 Overall Critical Non-Critical Target Non-Critical Target Critical Score Percent Audited Error Score Error Score Score 100% 95% 98.7% 90% 1% ensure consistency. In cold checks, the urban foresters review a sample of each other's data to identify any inconsistencies. Any necessary corrections are made to ensure that you receive consistent and accurate data communicated to you. After the data collection is complete and before final delivery, a series of queries and checks are run to verify the data's correctness. Any identified errors are addressed before delivering the data to you and your representatives. Below is an example of a snapshot from our QC/QA methodology: DATA DELIVERY At the end of data collection and final QC checks, we provide the data in both shapefile and Microsoft Excel™ format. If desired, you can continue to maintain your web-based TreeKeeper® system, which has the ability to export data in these formats at any time. Additionally, we have experience delivering data or creating APIʼs into a wide variety of other software systems such as ESRI, Cartegraph, CityWorks, Salesforce, etc. Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 7 Page 112 of 385 We understand the importance of this Tree Inventory Milestone to the further development of your program. Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 8 Page 113 of 385 Section Three: Qualifications and Experience Davey Resource Group, Inc. is the leader in urban forestry consulting in the United States and has provided tree inventory assessment services and assisted with managing urban forests since its founding in 1992. We regularly assess over two million trees annually and develop a wide range of plans for communities. These plans include data-driven operationally-focused work plans and strategic master plans guided by community and stakeholder input. Our TreeKeeper® software is used by over 500 clients nationwide and has more than 10 million trees hosted. In addition to our on-the-ground arborist assessment and urban forest planning services, we provide GIS-based mapping and canopy assessments. Since 2010, DRG has completed over 225 urban tree canopy (UTC) assessments, providing accurate estimates of tree canopy cover and impervious surfaces. Our team consists of arborists, urban foresters, planners, landscape architects, ecologists, GIS, and Information Technology (IT) professionals. Together, we offer proven solutions for urban forest management and unique strategies for todayʼs challenges, such as the urban heat island effect and the lack of tree canopy in underserved neighborhoods. In addition to DRGʼs renowned urban forestry services, we also offer a diverse range of other environmental consulting services. This includes wetlands and stream studies, environmental design and ecosystem restoration, stormwater management and compliance, and invasive species management. DRG's staff is well versed in complex ecosystems, resource challenges, and regulatory concerns that can impact project success. With 24 local regional offices and a national presence, DRG is well equipped to handle urban forestry and environmental projects in your area. Internally, we believe in the QTC method - Quality, Teamwork, and Communication. How does this benefit you and your project? We continually look for ways to reinvent, innovate, and adapt our processes to achieve the highest quality results at the best value for our clients. This includes hiring and training team members who are accountable for good work, working safely, and providing accurate results. We encourage and engage in active communication with you and within our teams to provide quality service throughout the project and beyond. This philosophy has led to our history of satisfied repeat clients. As a trusted partner, Davey collaborates with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service, The Nature Conservancy, American Forests, and the Arbor Day Foundation on a variety of industry-leading initiatives. Our commitment extends to the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and its local chapters, with staff serving on boards and committees. We support the Urban and Community Forestry Society with regular presentations, sponsorships, and volunteering. Davey has actively contributed to developing and revising arboriculture standards and best management practices, including tree risk assessment, through the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and ISA. We also work directly with the USFS on the continued development and support of i-Tree to quantify the value ecosystem services trees provide. Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 9 Page 114 of 385 DRG’S URBAN FORESTRY SERVICES DRGʼs urban foresters support municipalities, campuses, parks, cemeteries, utilities, and the private sector across North America and internationally. We often provide tree risk reduction strategies through assessments and tools such as tree inventories, risk assessments, and urban tree canopy assessments. DRG tailors each project to meet our clientʼs specific program needs and project budget. We provide: ● Tree inventory data collection and updates of existing data. ● Smart tree inventory data collection (AI and machine learning). ● TreeKeeper® software. ● Urban forest planning services to help manage trees and achieve short- and long-term goals. ● GIS services and specialists in-house to assess urban tree canopy, map tree growth, analyze planting space, and predict the impact of threats to tree canopy, such as the urban heat island effect. ● Staff augmentation and contract forestry. ● i-Tree Tools and analyses to highlight the benefits of trees. We provide innovative solutions through experience and expertise. DRG’S UNIQUE QUALIFICATIONS The following assets and qualities of DRG distinguish us within the arboriculture and urban forestry fields and demonstrate our ability to provide high-quality services. ● Large professional arborist and GIS/IT staff. DRG has over 100 professional arborists dedicated to tree inventories and urban forestry consulting, 20 GIS/IT specialists, and access to additional trained employees as the needs arise. As a large national firm, DRG can expand a project team quickly to meet the needs of any project. Our size and internal resources allow it to complete large, long-term inventory projects. ● Large equipment inventory. DRG owns multiple handheld computers and pen tablets for tree data collection and precise GPS units. We have national purchase and rental agreements with computer hardware manufacturers and technical equipment to quickly obtain specialty, additional, or replacement equipment. ● Tree inventory and software project experience. DRG has over 30 years of experience conducting municipal tree inventories, creating long-term management plans, and creating customized software systems. We have successfully completed more tree inventories than any other company and regularly assess more than 2 million trees annually. Our inventory arborists are highly trained in tree identification, tree maintenance determinations, and tree risk assessments. Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 10 Page 115 of 385 ● Local offices and staff with national support. DRG maintains several offices throughout the region, and our staff can respond directly to any questions or inquiries you might have, ensuring quick and constant communication. Our parent company, The Davey Tree Expert Company, also has residential and commercial tree care and landscaping, horticultural technical support, and urban forestry consulting offices throughout the region. These local offices have our nationwide company's collective support and resources and can assist as necessary. A 145-year history of providing clients with quality work and proven results. The Davey Tree Expert Company has been in business for over 145 years. It is an employee-owned company that has stood the test of time. While other urban forestry companies and their inventory software programs have gone out of business, The Davey Tree Expert Companyʼs history speaks to longevity and security, such that it will remain successful and be able to serve the needs of your community well into the future. THE PROJECT TEAM DRG's staff members are the most qualified and credentialed in the industry and possess extensive industry knowledge and experience. This knowledge and experience includes industry standards, best management practices (BMPs), and the municipal work environment. All of our DRG team members are either ISA Certified Arborists or on a path to becoming certified. Many have additional credentials and maintain the ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) and/or are Board Certified Master Arborists (BCMA). Our team also includes IT and GIS analysts, plan writers, software technicians, data analysis, and administrative support. DRG has the largest staff of urban forestry consultants in the country, allowing us to scale and substitute staff as needed. The staff listed below have been identified as an ideal solution for your project, but due to timing or other assignments, we may elect to substitute staff or equal expertise if needed. See Appendix A: Staff Resumes Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 11 Page 116 of 385 RELATED PROJECTS We understand the importance of this project and how you only have one chance to get it right. With our vast experience providing urban forestry consulting, you can rest assured we will get it right the first time, and your investment will not be wasted. Below is a limited selection of projects demonstrating our expertise in delivering similar scopes of work on time and within budget. We are happy to provide additional project examples or references if desired. CITY OF BURNSVILLE, MN TREE INVENTORY UPDATE Location: Burnsville, MN Start/Completion: June 2024-October 2024 Contact: Brian Ulvin Phone/E-mail: 952.895.4508 | brian.ulvin@burnsvillemn.gov Davey Resource Group, Inc. (DRG) was contracted by the City of Burnsville, MN, to conduct a tree inventory for the Cityʼs comprehensive tree care program. A total of 21,375 trees were inventoried. The results of this project help Burnsville better understand the composition, structure, and maintenance needs of its urban forest. The information will allow the city to allocate resources effectively, develop risk management strategies, and promote the ecosystem benefits that the trees provide to the local community. This project received funding from the 2024 Releaf Community Forestry Grant from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. CITY OF ST. PAUL, MN TREE INVENTORY UPDATE Location: St. Paul, MN Start/Completion: January-August 2023 Contact: Rachel Jongeward, Urban Forestry Supervisor Phone/E-mail: 651.266.8989 | rachel.jongeward@ci.stpaul.mn.us The City of St. Paul has been a long-time TreeKeeper® user and has been updating their inventory for several years. Since the inventory had been updated in numerous phases, they decided to hire DRG to complete a new tree inventory so all the data would be up to date during the same time period. All trees on public right-of-way or streets were updated as part of this street tree inventory project. The inventory lasted seven months and included documentation of tree species, the diameter of the tree, and observations about the trees, including tree decline, root system issues, branch issues, and whether the tree was staked or not. Quality control and assurance were implemented during data collection. DRG’s project manager and urban foresters used hot and cold data checks during fieldwork. Hot checks consist of arborists reviewing a portion of trees together and double- checking each other’s work in real-time. Cold checks involve a project manager or senior arborist confirming a portion of the data collected by each urban forester to ensure accuracy and consistency. This is a higher level of quality control processes provided than standard in our industry. At the end of the project, DRG’s IT specialists ran computer diagnostics on the inventory data to ensure the data were clean. Good communication was maintained on both sides to maintain efficiency for the project and data management for the City. The total tree count was 107,410 trees. Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 12 Page 117 of 385 CITY OF SUPERIOR, MN INVENTORY UPDATE AND MANAGEMENT PLAN Location: Superior, MN Start/Completion: April 2022- December 2022 Contact: Linda Cadotte, Director Parks, Recreation, and Forestry Department Phone/E-mail: 715.395.7270 | cadottel@ci.superior.wi.us The City of Superior, Wisconsin, hired Davey Resource Group, Inc. (DRG) to perform an update of their tree inventory along with a management plan for the future growth of the program. The project involved a GIS-based update of the maintained trees situated along public rights-of-way (ROW), public parks, and properties in the City. The City of Superior already had an existing inventory and was also a TreeKeeper® user. Our TreeKeeper® team at DRG expanded their data fields as the City was already using TreeKeeper®. They successfully delivered a complete update of inventory data in TreeKeeper® format. The inventory update included 26,488 trees, and specific information about each site was recorded in the inventory database. The updated data points included information on tree species, address, condition, DBH, hardscape damage, overhead utilities, primary defects, maintenance suggestions, and risk assessments of each site. The weather conditions in early 2022, including snow, ice, and cold, posed a challenge for the inventory update project. Despite these conditions, DRG staff worked diligently to complete the project safely and within the planned timeline. Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 13 Page 118 of 385 Investment and Authorization to Proceed The prices, terms and conditions, and warranty are hereby accepted. I am authorized to bind and authorize Davey Resource Group, Inc. to perform the specified work. I am familiar with and agree to the terms and conditions appended to this proposal. I understand that once accepted, this proposal constitutes a binding contract. This proposal is based on an estimated number of trees/sites to be inventoried. Davey Resource Group, Inc. reserves the right to renegotiate the price based on the timing of the award, scheduling of fieldwork, the final methodology chosen by the client, and availability, completeness, and quality of maps and GIS information. Street and Park Tree Inventory DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE PRICE ACCEPTANCE TASK 1: TREE INVENTORY & DATA DELIVERY Computerized inventory data collection of up to 28,000 existing trees & delivery of shapefile. $149,280 Additional inventory data collection above 28,000 trees. $5.33/tree Summary Report $300 By signing this form, I do hereby acknowledge acceptance of the scope of work and associated fee, as well as the terms and conditions and limited warranty contained herein. Furthermore, my signature authorizes the work to be performed effective the date of my signature and denotes that I am an authorized representative of City of Blaine, MN with authority to authorize and bind my company. City of Blaine, MN Davey Resource Group, Inc. Client Representative: DRG Project Representative: Authorizing Signature: Title: Authorizing Name: Date: Title: Phone Number: Date: Email: Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 14 Page 119 of 385 Phone Number: Email: Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 15 Page 120 of 385 Invoicing Method How would you like to receive invoices for this project? Mail: Invoice(s) will be mailed to the address listed on page 1 of this proposal. Email: Invoice(s) will be e-mailed to: Other: Please provide instructions below: Insurance Requirements Certificate Holder Name and Address (if different than listed on page 1 of the proposal): List of Additional Insured Entities: Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 16 Page 121 of 385 Client Responsibilities ● Provide DRG with imagery, maps, and data files. Our request may include the following: digital orthophotographs, available GIS data layers, other electronic or paper copies of maps for roads, pavement widths, right-of-way widths, boundaries and utilities, and an electronic file or printed list of street names and endpoints. ● Provide daily contact information and directions during the inventory project. ● Provide a copy of any existing tree inventory databases. ● Coordinate and host an on-site kick-off meeting before the start of fieldwork. ● By accepting this proposal, you accept DRG’s Terms and Conditions and Limited Warranty and agree that, upon award, this proposal and its attachments will be made a part of the Agreement. Terms and Conditions ● All pricing is valid for 30 days from the date of this proposal, after which time we reserve the right to amend fees as needed. ● Time and materials (T&M) estimates will be billed using the labor rates in DRG’s current commercial price list. Fixed Fee Contract Prices will be billed in monthly increments for the percentage of work completed in the billing period. Firm-Fixed Unit Prices will be billed in monthly increments for the number of completed units in the billing period. ● Payment terms are net 30 days. ● If prevailing wage requirements are discovered after the date of this proposal, we reserve the right to negotiate our fees. ● The client is responsible for any permit fees, taxes, and other related expenses unless noted as being included in our proposal. ● The client shall provide 48 hours’ notice of any meetings where the consultant’s attendance is required. ● Unless otherwise stated, one round of revisions to deliverables is included in our base fee. Additional edits or revisions will be billed on a time and material (T&M) basis. ● All reports are provided only to the client unless otherwise directed. ● DRG represents that it and its agents, and consultants employed by it, are protected by Workers' Compensation insurance and that DRG has coverage under liability insurance policies which DRG deems reasonable and adequate. DRG shall furnish certificates of insurance upon request. DRG agrees to maintain general liability insurance in commercially reasonable amounts. Client is responsible for requesting specific inclusions or limits of coverage that are not present in DRG insurance, and the cost of such inclusion or coverage increases, if available, will be at Client’s sole cost and expense. Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 17 Page 122 of 385 Limited Warranty Davey Resource Group, Inc. (“DRG”) provides this limited warranty (“Limited Warranty”) in connection with the provision of services by DRG (collectively the “Services”) under the agreement between the parties, including any bids, orders, contracts, or understandings between the parties (collectively the “Agreement”). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Agreement, this Limited Warranty will apply to all Services rendered by DRG and supersedes all other warranties in the Agreement and all other terms and conditions in the Agreement that conflict with the provisions of this Limited Warranty. Any terms or conditions contained in any other agreement, instrument, or document between the parties, or any document or communication from you, that in any way modifies the provisions in this Limited Warranty, will not modify this Limited Warranty nor be binding on the parties unless such terms and conditions are approved in a writing signed by both parties that specifically references this Limited Warranty. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Limited Warranty, for a period of ninety (90) days from the date Services are performed (the “Warranty Period”), DRG warrants to Customer that the Services will be performed in a timely, professional and workmanlike manner by qualified personnel. To the extent the Services involve the evaluation or documentation (“Observational Data”) of trees, tree inventories, natural areas, wetlands and other water features, animal or plant species, or other subjects (collectively, “Subjects”), the Observational Data will pertain only to the specific point in time it is collected (the “Time of Collection”). DRG will not be responsible nor in any way liable for (a) any conditions not discoverable using the agreed upon means and methods used to perform the Services, (b) updating any Observational Data, (c) any changes in the Subjects after the Time of Collection (including, but not limited to, decay or damage by the elements, persons or implements; insect infestation; deterioration; or acts of God or nature [collectively, “Changes”]), (d) performing services that are in addition to or different from the originally agreed upon Services in response to Changes, or (e) any actions or inactions of you or any third party in connection with or in response to the Observational Data. If a visual inspection is utilized, visual inspection does not include aerial or subterranean inspection, testing, or analysis unless stated in the scope of work. When performing tree inventories or assessments, DRG will not be liable for the discovery or identification of non-visually observable, latent, dormant, or hidden conditions or hazards, and does not guarantee that Subjects will be healthy or safe under all circumstances or for a specified period of time, or that remedial treatments will remedy a defect or condition. To the extent you request DRG’s guidance on your permitting and license requirements, DRG’s guidance represents its recommendations based on its understanding of and experience in the industry and does not guarantee your compliance with any particular federal, state or local law, code or regulation. DRG may review information provided by or on behalf of you, including, without limitation, paper and digital GIS databases, maps, and other information publicly available or other third-party records or conducted interviews (collectively, “Source Information”). DRG assumes the genuineness of all Source Information. DRG disclaims any liability for errors, omissions, or inaccuracies resulting from or contained in any Source Information. If it is determined that DRG has breached this Limited Warranty, DRG will, in its reasonable discretion, either: (i) re-perform the defective part of the Services or (ii) credit or refund the fees paid for the defective part of the Services. This remedy will be your sole and exclusive remedy and DRG’s entire liability for any breach of this Limited Warranty. You will be deemed to have accepted all of the Services if written notice of an alleged breach of this Limited Warranty is not delivered to DRG prior to the expiration of the Warranty Period. To the greatest extent permitted by law, except for this Limited Warranty, DRG makes no warranty whatsoever, including, without limitation, any warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, whether express or implied, by law, course of dealing, course of performance, usage of trade or otherwise. Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 18 Page 123 of 385 Appendix A: Staff Resumes Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 19 Page 124 of 385 Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 20 Page 125 of 385 Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 21 Page 126 of 385 Davey Resource Group, Inc. Street and Park Tree Inventory Page 22 Page 127 of 385 QUOTE FORM TREE INVENTORY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 26-01 Included in the “Unit Price” and "Total Price" for the Work are the costs of all logistics, staff, materials, equipment, and incidentals required to complete the Work as outlined in the Specification. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT TOTAL PRICE NO. PRICE 1 Per tree inventory Per 28,000 $5.33 $149,280 (includes all data Tree collection described in specifications) 2 Summary Report Each 1 $300 $300 TOTAL $149,580 Project completion date as outlined in the Specification. If interested please return quote form(s) no later than: 3:00 PM on Friday, June 5th 2026. Prior to award, contractor shall submit proof of insurance meeting the attached minimum Insurance Requirements and Responsible Contractor Forms. Total number of Data Collection Crews (Crews consist of a Supervisor to collect the data and any support staff, if needed, to record the data) to complete the Work, as proposed, in the timeframe required, is__________1 Crew (2 Arborists)___________. SUBMITTED BY: Davey Resource Group, Inc. Company Name Date: 6/4/2026 Signature Associate Consultant Jack Spadafore Title Printed Name 1 of 1 Page 128 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-115 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Approval of Consent Agenda: - Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director Agenda Item # 7.11 Resolution Supporting a Grant Application for The Active Transportation Local Pedestrian Facility Grant for the Pedestrian Bridge Over 105th Avenue Executive Summary The resolution authorizes the submittal of a grant application to the Metropolitan Council Regional Solicitation for Transportation Funding, Local Pedestrian Facilities Grant for $3.5 million for the construction of a pedestrian bridge over 105th Avenue. Background A pedestrian bridge located near the new roundabout at the Nassau Street alignment on 105th Avenue, is included in the master plan for the 105th Redevelopment Area. Previous bonding packages approved by the city council identified a funding source of $3MM for the bridge. The design presented at the May workshop was within the existing $3MM budget. Council directed staff to explore additional options for the bridge, including stairs and aesthetic elements which would add to the cost. The maximum grant amount is $3.5 million and no scoring preference is awarded for cost-effectiveness or leveraged funds, so staff recommends applying for the full $3.5 million of additional funds. The budget for the bridge utilizing grant funds will include additional elements that may not be financially feasible without the grant, including stairs, elevated design and public art components. Staff researched a variety of funding sources to assist with the cost of construction for the bridge. The Active Transportation — Local Pedestrian Facilities Grant, which is a component of the Regional Solicitation, was identified as the only viable grant option. The grant is funded by a portion of the Regional Transportation Sales and Use Tax, which was approved by the legislature in 2023 and is applied to all purchases in the 7-county metro area. Strategic Plan Relationship Page 129 of 385 This is consistent with the goals to increase non tax revenues and successful redevelopment of the 105th area. Board/Commission Review Not applicable. Financial Impact The City will incur no costs, other than staff time, for submission of the grant application. Any additional project costs related to grant requirements will be covered by the requested grant. Public Outreach/Input A pedestrian bridge was included in the master plan for the 105th Redevelopment Area based on feedback from the public and City Council. If the grant is awarded, significant public engagement will occur related to public art components and way finding signage. Staff Recommendation By motion, adopt the resolution. Attachment List None Page 130 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-115 Resolution Supporting a Grant Application for The Active Transportation Local Pedestrian Facility Grant for the Pedestrian Bridge Over 105th Avenue WHEREAS, insufficient funds are available in the 105th Avenue Redevelopment financing package to fully fund a pedestrian bridge incorporating elevated design elements and design elements to promote usage; and WHEREAS, the proposed pedestrian bridge is eligible for the Active Transportation Local Pedestrian Facility Grant; and WHEREAS, the cost of the pedestrian bridge will exceed $3.5 million. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Blaine hereby authorizes a grant application for a pedestrian bridge over 105th Avenue near the Nassau Street alignment for a total grant request of $3.5 million which will incorporate unique design and way finding elements informed by community engagement. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 131 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-110 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Approval of Consent Agenda: - Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director Agenda Item # 7.12 Resolution Granting a 10-Foot Variance from the 50-Foot Front Yard Building Setback and the 30-Foot Front Yard Parking Lot Setback Adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4195 123rd Lane NE (Jerry's Foods); and a 10-Foot Variance from the 30-Foot Front Yard Parking Lot Setback Adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4194 123rd Lane NE.(Multi-Tenant Building). HJ Development (Case File No. 26-0023/SLK) Executive Summary The applicant is requesting variances to allow for reduced parking and building setbacks along Lexington Avenue due to an increased right of way for a trail along Lexington Avenue and adequate separation from existing overhead power lines. Background Planning Commission (Public Hearing) June 9, 2026 City Council (Variance) June 15, 2026 Action Deadline July 11, 2026 Staff report prepared by Shawn Kaye, Planner, and Teresa Barnes, Project Engineer. Planning Analysis Zoning The property is zoned Town Commercial (B-5) Surrounding Zoning and uses The adjacent uses are: • North: 125th Avenue • West: Vacant future commercial development (zoned B-5) • East: Lexington Avenue Page 132 of 385 • South: City's water tower site (zoned Planned Business District - PBD) Comprehensive Land Use The property is guided Planned Commercial (PC). The proposed commercial development is consistent with that designation. Existing Conditions Both sites are currently vacant. The multi-tenant building has applied for a building permit. Jerry's Foods plans to start construction in 2027. History The City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a coffee shop with a drive-thru and a zero lot line with shared access in August 2025. Code Requirement Sec. 113-224 (1) (a) of the zoning code requires a 50-foot minimum building setback from the front yard property line. Sec. 113-224 (2) (a) of the zoning code requires a 30-foot minimum parking setback from the front yard property line. Request The applicant is requesting variances to allow a 10-foot reduction to both the parking setback and building setback along Lexington Avenue. The request is necessary because of the expanded right-of- way needed for the proposed county trail along Lexington Avenue, as well as the need to maintain adequate separation from existing overhead power lines. The proposed parking setback would be reduced to 20 feet for both the multi-tenant building and Jerry Foods, while the proposed building setback for Jerry Foods would be reduced to 40 feet. The requested reductions are intended to accommodate the larger right-of-way dedication for a county trail and provide appropriate separation from the existing power lines. Landscaping The typical landscaping requirements will apply when the lots are developed. Engineering Analysis Grading/Storm Drainage The requested variance does not include any alterations to the proposed/approved grading or storm water drainage patterns for the overall development. Utilities The requested variance does not include any alterations to the proposed/approved utility systems for the overall development. No new connections are proposed. Wetlands/Watershed/FEMA The requested variance does not include any alterations to the proposed/approved overall Page 133 of 385 development plans for the existing wetland and FEMA areas. An updated review by Rice Creek Watershed District is not required. Access/Street Design/Sidewalks/Trails The requested variance does not include any alterations to the proposed/approved overall development plans for the access, street design, sidewalks or trails. No additional street design, sidewalks or trails will be required. Easements/Right-of-way/Permits The developer will need to obtain any and all required permits to construct the proposed project. A copy of all permits will need to be submitted to the City prior to any site work. Variances (Section101-6) (a) Criteria for granting variances. A variance to the provision of the zoning ordinance may be issued by the City Council to provide relief to the landowner in those cases where the ordinance imposes practical difficulty on the property owner in the use of his land. No use variances may be issued. (1) Variances shall only be permitted: Explain how these are met or not met after each item. a. When they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance The proposed reduced setback is in harmony with the intent of the ordinance to preserve the attractiveness of Blaine, since the reduced setback will still allow adequate room for landscaping. b. When the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed commercial development is consistent with the Planned Commercial land use designation. (2) Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variances establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning. Practical difficulties, as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that: a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning code; The functional use of the property will be the same as a stile plan that would meet setback requirements. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The plight of the landowner is due to the existing right of way for Lexington Avenue, which was platted to accommodate the county trail within the right-of-way and to provide adequate separation between the trail and the existing overhead power lines. c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality, since the proposed reduced setback would still allow adequate room for landscaping. d. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The requested setback variance will still allow the site to develop in a functional manner while preserving the setback area for its intended landscaping purposes. Page 134 of 385 e. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the unique circumstances. The requested variance is the minimum needed in order to maintain adequate separation from the right-of-way. Attachment List: Zoning and Location Map Site Plans (2) Narrative Unapproved PC Minutes Strategic Plan Relationship Not applicable. Board/Commission Review The Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the variance. No one spoke at the public hearing. The meeting minutes are attached for reference. Financial Impact Not applicable. Public Outreach/Input Notices of a public hearing were: 1. Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the property boundaries. 2. Published in Blaine/Spring Lake Park/Columbia Heights/Fridley Life. 3. Posted on the City website. Staff Recommendation By motion, adopt the resolution. Attachment List 1. Attachments 2. Unapproved PC Minutes Page 135 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-110 Resolution Granting a 10-Foot Variance from the 50-Foot Front Yard Building Setback and the 30- Foot Front Yard Parking Lot Setback Adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4195 123rd Lane NE (Jerry's Foods); and a 10-Foot Variance from the 30-Foot Front Yard Parking Lot Setback Adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4194 123rd Lane NE.(Multi-Tenant Building). HJ Development (Case File No. 26-0023/SLK) WHEREAS, an application has been filed by BLAINE LEX CROSSINGS 2025 LLC and JE BLAINE 2025 LLC as Case File No. 26-0023 for a variance from the 50-foot front yard building setback and the 30-foot front yard parking lot setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4195 123rd Lane NE (Jerry's Foods); and a 10- foot variance from the 30-foot front yard parking lot setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4194 123rd Lane NE.(Multi-Tenant Building); and WHEREAS, said case involves the land described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2, Block 3 and Outlots A and B, LEXINGTON CROSSING SECOND ADDITION. Subject to the dedication to the public for public use forever the drainage and utility easements as shown on this plat, LEXINGTON CROSSING SECOND ADDITION, recorded as Document No. 629646.003, on December 8, 2025. Also dedicating to the County of Anoka the right of access onto County State Aid Highway No. 17 as shown on this plat, LEXINGTON CROSSING SECOND ADDITION, recorded as Document No. 629646.003, on December 8, 2025. Also dedicating to the County of Anoka the right of access onto County State Aid Highway No. 14 as shown on this plat, LEXINGTON CROSSING, recorded as Document No. 626606.001, on July 29, 2025. Subject to subsisting ditch liens, if any. Subject to highway easement across the North 33 feet of said tract and to highway and utility easements of record, if any. AND Lot 1, Block 2, LEXINGTON CROSSING SECOND ADDITION Subject to the dedication to the public for public use forever the drainage and utility easements as shown on this plat, LEXINGTON CROSSING SECOND ADDITION, recorded as Document No. 629646.003, on December 8, 2025. Also dedicating to the County of Anoka the right of access onto County State Aid Highway No. 17 as shown on this plat, LEXINGTON CROSSING SECOND ADDITION, recorded as Document No. 629646.003, on December 8, 2025. Also dedicating to the County of Anoka the right of access onto County State Aid Highway No. 14 as shown on this plat, LEXINGTON CROSSING, recorded as Document No. 626606.001, on July 29, 2025. Subject to subsisting ditch liens, if any. Subject to highway easement across the North 33 feet of said tract and to highway and utility easements of record, if any. WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held by the Blaine Planning Commission on June 9, 2026 and the Planning Commission recommends approval; and WHEREAS, the Blaine City Council has reviewed said case on June 15, 2026. Page 136 of 385 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Blaine that a variance is hereby approved per Sections 101-6 and 113-224 (1)a and (2)a of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a 10-foot variance from the 30-foot front yard parking lot setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4195 123rd Lane NE (proposed Jerry Foods), a 10-foot variance from the 50-foot front yard building setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4195 123rd Lane NE (proposed Jerry Foods), and a 10-foot variance from the 30- foot front yard parking lot setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4194 123rd Lane NE (multi-tenant building) with the following findings: 1. The variance is due to the larger right of way required for the county trail and maintaining adequate separation from the existing overhead power lines. 2. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. 3. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 4. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning code. 5. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 137 of 385 Erskin Cir NE DF FR 127th Ave NE Xebec Xebec St NE DF FR FR E N t S E DF DF N n i t k S FR s r r Lexington Ave NE Lexington E e z 126th Ave NE i a r F DF DF B-1 B-1 125th Ave NE 1 DF 24 th Z Ln e NE st S t N E E N Project t FR B-5 C ta B-5 Location t Ise E N t C th 123rd Ln NE PBD 4 2 DF 1 B-5 PBD 123rd C ir N E PBD FR DF DF PBD B-5 Lexington Ave NE E N 122nd Ave NE St er DF ev B-2 L B-2 PBD B-2 FR FR PBD DF FR DF DF B-5 121st Ct NE WoodlandPkwy NE B-5 FR FR Zoning DF Blaine Parcels RF Blaine Lexington City Parks Wetland Athletic Sanctuary 121st Ave NE Complex Project Location DF DF Case File No. 26-0023 0 0.04 0.07 0.15 Miles Lexington Crossing 2nd Addition Scale: 1:6,456 Blaine Planning Department / 10801 Town Square Dr NE / Blaine, MN 55449 / (763) 785-6180 BlaineMN.gov This map is for general reference only. It is not for legal, engineering, or surveying use. . Page 138 of 385 SITE PLAN LEGEND F U T U R E C I T Y L O T F U T U R E F U T U R E C O M M E R C I A L C I T Y L O T F U T U R E C O M M E R C I A L F U T U R E C I T Y L O T F U T U R E C O M M E R C I A L Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Aaron D. Briski Drawn: GJS 1. 7/22/25 per City, ACHD, & RCWD Comments HJ DEVELOPMENT LEXINGTON CROSSING or report was prepared by me or under my PRELIMINARY SITE & 4 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: ADB 2655 Cheshire Lane N SECOND ADDITION of Licensed Professional Engineer under UTILITY PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 6/6/25 License #: 57811 Date: 6/6/25 Plymouth, MN, 55447 Blaine, Minnesota 10 Save Date: 07/23/25 f:\jobs\10721 - 10740\10733 - kempf parcel (lexington-main)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10733_site.dwg #10733 Page 139 of 385 F U T U R E C O M M E R C I A L F U T U R E C O M M E R C I A L F U T U R E C I T Y SITE PLAN LEGEND L O T F U T U R E C O M M E R C I A L Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Aaron D. Briski Drawn: GJS 1. 7/22/25 per City, ACHD, & RCWD Comments HJ DEVELOPMENT LEXINGTON CROSSING or report was prepared by me or under my PRELIMINARY SITE & 5 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: ADB 2655 Cheshire Lane N SECOND ADDITION of Licensed Professional Engineer under UTILITY PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 6/6/25 License #: 57811 Date: 6/6/25 Plymouth, MN, 55447 Blaine, Minnesota 10 Save Date: 07/23/25 f:\jobs\10721 - 10740\10733 - kempf parcel (lexington-main)\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10733_site.dwg #10733 Page 140 of 385 8hj devel'6-Bm%ent COMMERCIAL REAL EST ATE . MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT May 11, 2026 To members of the City of Blaine Planning Commission and City Council, We are requesting a variance to the 30-foot parking lot setback and the 50-foot building setback from Lexington Avenue for both the Jerry's Grocery Store (4195 123'd Ln NE) as well as a variance to the 30- foot parking lot setback for the Multitenant Building (4194 123'd Ln NE). As proposed, we are requesting a 20-foot setback for parking and a 40-foot setback for the buildings. This smaller setback is due to the oversized right of way required to encompass the county trail and maintain adequate separation from the exiting overhead power poles. * This request is in a reasonable manner to the existing code as the proposed parking will be 20' from R/W but still 50' or more from the roadway of Lexington Avenue and the buildings will be at least 40' from the R/W and still 70' from the roadway. The trail will already be in place so the setback will not be needed for a future tail addition. * This is a unique circumstance as the right of way for Lexington Avenue was platted in excess in order to encompass the county trail in the R/W and to provide adequate separation between the trail and overhead powerlines. * The essential character of the locality is maintained as the existing trail is located within the right of way so the reduced setback will maintain the character of the locality as the roadway will maintain a typical setback. The proposed parking will be 20' from R/W but still 50' or more from the roadway and the buildings will be at least 40" from the R/W and still 70' from the roadway. @ Economic considerations are not the practical difficulty, and the variance request is due to the existing overhead powerlines and county trail. * The 20" parking setback and 40" building setback is the minimum variance needed in order to still maintain adequate separation from the right of way. Thank you for your consideration. Jeff Carriveau As Manager for Blaine Lex 2025, LLC 2655 Cheshire Lane North, Plymouth, MN 55447 i 952-476-9400 i hjdevelopment.com Page 141 of 385 City of Blaine Planning Commission June 9, 2026 | 7:00 PM Blaine City Hall 10801 Town Square Drive NE Blaine, MN 55449 MINUTES 1. Call to Order The Blaine planning commission met in the City Hall Chambers on Tuesday, June 9, 2026. Chair Goracke called the meeting to order at 7:00PM. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commission Members Freeman, Geiselhart, Halpern, Swanson, and Chair Goracke. Members Absent: Commission Members Howard and Olson. Staff Present: Shawn Kaye, Planner Elizabeth Showalter, Community Development Specialist Alex Koberoski, Assistant Planner Teresa Barnes, Project Engineer 4. Public Hearing 4.2. 2026-278 Case File No. 26-0023 // HJ Development // 4194 and 4195 123rd Lane NE The applicant is requesting the following: 1. A 10-foot variance from the 30-foot front yard parking lot setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4195 123rd Lane NE (proposed Jerry Foods). 2. A 10-foot variance from the 50-foot front yard building setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4195 123rd Lane NE (proposed Jerry Foods). 3. A 10-foot variance from the 30-foot front yard parking lot setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4194 123rd Lane NE (multi-tenant building). Sponsors: Shawn Kaye, Planner Page 142 of 385The report to the planning commission was presented by Shawn Kaye, Planner. The public hearing for Case File 26-0023 was opened at 7:17PM. As no one wished to appear, the public hearing was closed at 7:17PM. Motion by Commissioner Halpern to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0023 a 10-foot variance from the 30-foot front yard parking lot setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4195 123rd Lane NE (proposed Jerry Foods), a 10-foot variance from the 50- foot front yard building setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4195 123rd Lane NE (proposed Jerry Foods), and a 10-foot variance from the 30-foot front yard parking lot setback adjacent to Lexington Avenue for 4194 123rd Lane NE (multi-tenant building) with the following findings: Case 26-0023: 1. The variance is due to the larger right of way required for the county trail and maintaining adequate separation from the existing overhead power lines. 2. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. 3. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 4. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning code. 5. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. Motion seconded by Commissioner Swanson. The motion passed 5-0. Chair Goracke noted this would be on the agenda of the June 15, 2026 city council meeting. Page 143 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-111 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Approval of Consent Agenda: - Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director Agenda Item # 7.13 Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Allow a 380 Square Foot Outdoor Dining Patio in a Town Commercial (B-5) Zoning District at 4194 123rd Lane NE. HJ Development (Case file No. 26-0024/ACK) Executive Summary The applicant is requesting an outdoor dining area on the north-east side of a proposed multi-tenant building. The outdoor dining area is proposed to serve a coffee shop. Background Planning Commission Public Hearing June 9, 2026 City Council (Conditional Use Permit) June 15, 2026 Action Deadline July 13, 2026 Staff report prepared by Alex Koberoski, Assistant Planner, and Teresa Barnes, Project Engineer. Evaluation of Request Planning Analysis Zoning The property is zoned Town Commercial (B-5). Land Use Designation The property has a land use designation of Planned Commercial (PC). Surrounding Zoning and Uses Properties to the north and west are zoned B-5. Lexington Ave is located to the east, and the City's water tower site is located directly south, zoned Planned Business District (PBD). Page 144 of 385 Existing Conditions The property is currently vacant. History In 2025, this parcel received Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval for a multi-tenant commercial building that includes a drive-thru coffee shop, a zero lot line, and shared access. Site Plan HJ Development is proposing an outdoor dining area on the northeast corner of the building. It consists of three tables and 12 seats as shown on the attached plans. The outdoor dining area will have a decorative and maintenance-free fence surrounding two sides of the seating area. The outdoor dining area will be subject to Sewer Access Charges (SAC). The applicant must work with the City’s Chief Building Official and Met Council to determine the amount required for this use. All other requirements listed in the attached conditions are the standard conditions that the City applies to other outdoor dining conditional use permits. Landscaping The typical landscape requirements will be reviewed with the building permit. Engineering Analysis Grading/Storm Drainage The proposed outdoor dining area does not include any alterations to the existing grading or storm water drainage patterns on the property. Utilities The proposed outdoor dining area will utilize the existing utilities into the building. No new connections are proposed. Wetlands/Watershed/FEMA The proposed outdoor dining area does not alter any wetlands or FEMA flood plain that might exist in the area. A Rice Creek Watershed District review is not required. Access/Street Design/Sidewalks/Trails The proposed outdoor dining area will utilize the existing access points to the existing parking area. No new access point will be granted. No additional street design, sidewalks or trails will be required. Easements/Right-of-way/Permits The proposed outdoor dining area will need to obtain any and all required permits to construct the proposed project. A copy of all permits will need to be submitted to the City prior to any site work. Conditional Use Permit A city exercises “quasi-judicial” authority when considering a CUP application. This means the city’s role is limited to applying the standards in the ordinance to the facts presented by the application. The city acts like a judge in evaluating the facts against the standards. Page 145 of 385 Section 101-4 Criteria for granting conditional use permits: The Blaine City Council shall consider the advice and recommendations of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed use on the comprehensive plan and upon the health, safety, and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands. Among other things, the Council shall consider the following findings where applicable. (Ord. No. 20-2447, 7-20-2020) 1. The use shall not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. o A 380 square foot outdoor dining area will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets, or other utilities. 2. The use will be located, designed, maintained, and operated to be compatible with adjoining properties and the existing or intended character of the zoning district. (Ord. No. 20-2447, 7-20- 2020) o The B-5 district is intended to allow limited commercial uses that are appropriate for highly visible properties serving local or regional trade areas with elevated architectural and site design. The proposed outdoor dining area meets this intent. 3. The use shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent properties. o The existing building and outdoor dining will meet all setbacks and landscape requirements. The use will not have an adverse effect on adjacent properties. 4. The use, in the opinion of the City Council, shall be reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. 5. The use shall be consistent with the purposes of the zoning code and purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. o The use meets the purpose of the B-5 district. 6. The use shall not be in conflict with the comprehensive plan of the City. o The comprehensive plan designation is PC (Planned Commercial), which is for accommodating commercial, retail and office uses in a planned, cohesive style of development, in areas with good visibility and access from major roadways. The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. 7. The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. o The proposed use will not generate any additional traffic hazard or congestion. 8. The use shall have adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and necessary facilities. o The existing structure is served with the required utility services, adequate roadway infrastructure and necessary drainage facilities to service the proposed uses. Attachment List: Zoning and Location Map Site Plan Landscape Plan Narrative Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes Strategic Plan Relationship Not applicable. Page 146 of 385 Board/Commission Review The Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the conditional use permit. No one spoke at the public hearing. The meeting minutes are attached for reference. Financial Impact Not applicable. Public Outreach/Input Notices of a public hearing were: 1. Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the property boundaries. 2. Published in Blaine/Spring Lake Park/Columbia Heights/Fridley Life. 3. Posted on the City website. Staff Recommendation By motion, adopt the resolution. Attachment List 1. Attachments 2. Unapproved PC Minutes Page 147 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-111 Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Allow a 380 Square Foot Outdoor Dining Patio in a Town Commercial (B-5) Zoning District at 4194 123rd Lane NE. HJ Development (Case file No. 26-0024/ACK) WHEREAS, an application has been filed by HJ Development as Conditional Use Permit Case File No. 26- 0024 for Lexington Crossing Second Addition; and WHEREAS, said case involves the property described as follows: Lot 1, Block 3, LEXINGTON CROSSING SECOND ADDITION. WHEREAS, the Blaine Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 9, 2026, and recommended approval regarding said Conditional Use Permit; and WHEREAS, the Blaine City Council has reviewed said case on June 15, 2026; and WHEREAS, the criteria identified in Section 101-4 for granting a conditional use permit has been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Blaine that a conditional use permit is hereby approved per Sections 101-4 and 113-221 of the zoning ordinance to allow a 380 square foot outdoor dining area in a Town Commercial (B-5) zoning district with the following conditions: 1. The outdoor dining area is subject to a SAC review and payment. The applicant must work with the City's chief building official and Met Council to determine the amount required for this use. 2. No outdoor advertising on the building or outdoor dining area without obtaining a temporary sign permit is allowed. 3. The outdoor dining area is limited to no more than 380 square feet as shown in the submitted plans. 4. The ability to operate outdoor dining is reliant upon the applicant's ability to adequately control litter and refuse as associated with the facility. 5. Per the Minnesota building code, exit doors in any railing or fence in the outdoor dining area shall be openable from the inside without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort. 6. No amplified outdoor music system is allowed. 7. Provide manufacturing specifications and requirements for propane heater use and clearance to combustibles if they are to be used on site. 8. The fence surrounding the outdoor dining area is required to be decorative and maintenance- free. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 148 of 385 Page 149 of 385 126th Ave NE E N t S DF n i FR k s DF r E FR DF DF B-1 B-1 125th Ave NE DF 124th Ln NE Z e st S t N E E N B-5 t FR S B-5 r e z i a Isetta Ct NE r F DF 123rd Ln NE PBD Project Location E PBD B-5 1 N 2 e 3 v r d PBD A C n DF i o r FR t DF g N n PBD B-5 i E x e L 122nd Ave NE B-2 B-2 DF DF PBD B-2 FR FR PBD FR DF B-5 FR B-5 Zoning FR Blaine Parcels Blaine LexingtonCity Parks Wetland RF Athletic Sanctuary ComplexProject Location Case File No. 26-0024 0 0.03 0.06 0.11 Miles Lexington Crossing 2nd Addition Scale: 1:4,878 Blaine Planning Department / 10801 Town Square Dr NE / Blaine, MN 55449 / (763) 785-6180 BlaineMN.gov This map is for general reference only. It is not for legal, engineering, or surveying use. . Page 150 of 385 LEGEND F U T U R E C O M M E R C I A L P R O P O S E D C O M M E R C I A L · · · · · · R · Know what's below. Callbefore you dig. · DONOT ENTER Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Aaron D. Briski, P.E. Drawn: GJS 1. LEXINGTON CROSSING SECOND ADDITION or report was prepared by me or under my HJ DEVELOPMENT 3 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: ADB 2655 Cheshire Lane N BLOCK 3, LOT 1 of Licensed Professional Engineer under SITE PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 02/06/26 License #: 57811 Date: 02/06/26 Plymouth, MN, 55447 Blaine, Minnesota 9 Save Date: 02/10/26 f:\jobs\10721 - 10740\10733 - kempf parcel (lexington-main)\cad c3d\engineering\2nd addition_block 3\lot 1\final\10733_site.dwg #10733 Page 151 of 385 KC AE 4 2 CA 2 RM OB 2 1 OB 1 HL SB2 3 3 JL 2 BH 3 BF 3 WO BL WP 2 3 2 R Know what's below. Callbefore you dig. I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA Drawn: RJR LEXINGTON CROSSING SECOND ADDITION or report was prepared by me or under my HJ DEVELOPMENT L1 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: RJR 2655 Cheshire Lane N BLOCK 3, LOT 1 of Licensed Landscape Architect under LANDSCAPE PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 02/06/26 License #: 56346 Date: 02/06/26 Plymouth, MN, 55447 Blaine, Minnesota 2 Save Date: 02/05/26 f:\jobs\10721 - 10740\10733 - kempf parcel (lexington-main)\cad c3d\landscape\2nd add - b3_l1\10733_landscape.dwg #10733 Page 152 of 385 Lexington Crossing CUP amendment CUP Amendment – Outdoor Seating Areas Multi-Tenant Retail Building This amendment pertains to an approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to incorporate outdoor seating areas at a new multi-tenant retail building. Dunkin' (End Cap): Initially, this tenant will utilize a limited number of outdoor tables and chairs within the designated patio area at the front of the building. West Tenant (Dental Office): This tenant may or may not make use of outdoor seating at the patio located at the northwest corner of the building. Page 153 of 385 City of Blaine Planning Commission June 9, 2026 | 7:00 PM Blaine City Hall 10801 Town Square Drive NE Blaine, MN 55449 MINUTES 1. Call to Order The Blaine planning commission met in the City Hall Chambers on Tuesday, June 9, 2026. Chair Goracke called the meeting to order at 7:00PM. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commission Members Freeman, Geiselhart, Halpern, Swanson, and Chair Goracke. Members Absent: Commission Members Howard and Olson. Staff Present: Shawn Kaye, Planner Elizabeth Showalter, Community Development Specialist Alex Koberoski, Assistant Planner Teresa Barnes, Project Engineer 4. Public Hearing 4.3. 2026-279 Case File No. 26-0024 // HJ Development // 4194 123rd Lane NE The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a 380 square foot outdoor dining patio in a Town Commercial (B-5) zoning district. Sponsors: Alex Koberoski, Assistant Planner The report to the planning commission was presented by Alex Koberoski, Assistant Planner. The public hearing for Case File 26-0024 was opened at 7:20PM. As no one wished to appear, the public hearing was closed at 7:20PM. Motion by Commissioner Swanson to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0024 based on the following conditions: Case 26-0024: Page 154 of 385 1. The outdoor dining area is subject to a SAC review and payment. The applicant must work with the City's chief building official and Met Council to determine the amount required for this use. 2. No outdoor advertising on the building or outdoor dining area without obtaining a temporary sign permit is allowed. 3. The outdoor dining area is limited to no more than 380 square feet as shown in the submitted plans. 4. The ability to operate outdoor dining is reliant upon the applicant's ability to adequately control litter and refuse as associated with the facility. 5. Per the Minnesota building code, exit doors in any railing or fence in the outdoor dining area shall be openable from the inside without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort. 6. No amplified outdoor music system is allowed. 7. Provide manufacturing specifications and requirements for propane heater use and clearance to combustibles if they are to be used on site. 8. The fence surrounding the outdoor dining area is required to be decorative and maintenance-free. Motion seconded by Commissioner Halpern. The motion passed 5-0. Chair Goracke noted this would be on the agenda of the June 15, 2026 city council meeting. Page 155 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: ORD 26-2607 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Ordinance 7:00 PM - Public Hearing and Items Published for a Certain Time - Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering Agenda Item # 8.1 Public Hearing and First Reading Ordinance Granting to Connexus Energy, a Minnesota Cooperative Association, Its Successors and Assigns, Permission to Construct, Operate, Repair and Maintain in the City of Blaine, Minnesota, an Electric Distribution System and Transmission Lines, Including Necessary Poles, Lines, Fixtures and Appurtenances, for the Furnishing of Electric Energy to the City, its Inhabitants, and Others, and to Use the Public Ways and Public Grounds of the City for Such Purposes, and Prescribing Certain Terms and Conditions Thereof Executive Summary A Franchise Ordinance Granting to Connexus Energy, a Minnesota Cooperative Association, Its Successors and Assigns, Permission to Construct, Operate, Repair and Maintain in the City of Blaine, Minnesota, an Electric Distribution System and Transmission Lines, Including Necessary Poles, Lines, Fixtures and Appurtenances, for the Furnishing of Electric Energy to the City, its Inhabitants, and Others, and to Use the Public Ways Background The City of Blaine and Anoka Electric Cooperative, D/B/A/ Connexus Energy last entered into a Franchise Agreement in 1998, Ordinance Number 98-1698. This agreement allowed them to operate their electric distribution system within the city's right-of-ways for a period of 20 years. This Franchise Agreement has now expired, and it is the desire of both the city and Connexus Energy to renew an agreement. To enact a Franchise Ordinance, the city has a process for adopting the ordinance. • June 1st, Council opened the public hearing to allow for comments and continued the public hearing to June 15. • Tonight, the council is asked to reconvene the public hearing and allow for additional comments, have the 1st reading of the proposed ordinance and continue the public hearing until July 6th. Page 156 of 385 • July 6, reconvene and then close the public hearing, have the 2nd reading and adopt the proposed ordinance. Strategic Plan Relationship Board/Commission Review Financial Impact Public Outreach/Input Staff Recommendation Reconvene the Public Hearing, conduct the First Reading of Ordinance, and continue the public hearing until July 6th. Attachment List None Page 157 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Ordinance: ORD 26-2607 Public Hearing and First Reading Ordinance Granting to Connexus Energy, a Minnesota Cooperative Association, Its Successors and Assigns, Permission to Construct, Operate, Repair and Maintain in the City of Blaine, Minnesota, an Electric Distribution System and Transmission Lines, Including Necessary Poles, Lines, Fixtures and Appurtenances, for the Furnishing of Electric Energy to the City, its Inhabitants, and Others, and to Use the Public Ways and Public Grounds of the City for Such Purposes, and Prescribing Certain Terms and Conditions Thereof THE CITY OF BLAINE DOES ORDAIN: Sec. 1. Definitions. For purposes of this ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1. City. The City of Blaine, County of Anoka, State of Minnesota. 1.2. City utility system. Facilities used for providing public utility service owned or operated by the City or agency thereof, including sewer and water service, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. 1.3. Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government that preempts all or part of the authority to regulate electric retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4. Company. Connexus Energy, a Minnesota cooperative association, its successors, and assignees. 1.5. Electric facilities. Electric transmission and distribution towers, poles, lines, guys, anchors, conduits, fixtures, and necessary appurtenances owned, operated or otherwise used by the Company for the purpose of providing electric energy for public use. 1.6. Non-betterment costs. Cost incurred by Company from relocation, removal, or rearrangement of electric facilities that do not result in an improvement to the electric facilities. 1.7. Notice. A writing served by any party or parties on any other party or parties. Notice to the Company shall be mailed to the President and CEO, Connexus Energy, 14601 Ramsey Blvd., Ramsey, MN 55303. Notice to City shall be mailed to the City Manager, City of Blaine, 10801 Town Square Drive NE, Blaine, MN 55449. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this ordinance by written notice to the other party. Page 158 of 385 1.8. Effective date. The date on which the ordinance becomes effective under section 2.2. 1.9. Public way. Any street, alley, walkway, or other public rights-of-way within the City. 1.10. Public ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for parks, trails, open space or similar purpose, which is held for use in common by the public or for the public benefit. Sec. 2. Franchise. 2.1. Grant of franchise. City grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the date of passage of this ordinance, the non-exclusive right to transmit and furnish electric energy for light, heat, power, and other purposes for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. For these purposes, the Company may construct, operate, repair, and maintain electric facilities in, on, over, under, and across the public ways and public grounds of City subject to the provisions of this ordinance. Company may do all things reasonably necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to its ordinances and the provisions of this franchise agreement, and consistent with state laws and rules. 2.2. Effective date; written acceptance. This franchise shall be effective from and after its passage and its acceptance by the Company, and its publication as required by law. An acceptance by the Company must be filed in writing with the City clerk within 60 days after publication of this ordinance. 2.3. Service rates and area. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for electric service in City currently are subject to the jurisdiction of the public utilities commission. The area within the City in which the Company may provide electric service currently is subject to the provisions of the M.S.A. § 216B.40. 2.4. Publication expense. The expense of publication of this ordinance shall be paid by the Company. 2.5. Dispute resolution. If the City or the Company asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party must notify the other party in writing of the default and the desired remedy. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within 30 days after service of the Notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate negotiation. The parties will share equally the fees and expenses of the mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in district court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. Sec. 3. Location, other regulations. 3.1. Location of facilities. Electric facilities shall be located, constructed, installed, and maintained so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over public ways or of public grounds and so as not disrupt normal operation of any City utility system previously installed therein. Electric facilities shall be located on public grounds only as determined by City. Company's construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, and location of electric facilities shall be subject to other ordinances and regulations of the City and consistent with the authority granted the City to manage its public ways and public grounds under state law. Under this Page 159 of 385 franchise agreement the City does not relinquish its police power regulatory authority and Company does not relinquish its eminent domain authority. Company may abandon underground electric facilities in place only if it has first received written approval from the City to do so and that at City's request Company removes abandoned electric facilities, including metal conduit or concrete enclosed conduit interfering with a City improvement project or other franchised utility or as otherwise required by Minnesota Rules Part 7819.3300. 3.2. Field locations. The Company shall provide field locations for its underground electric facilities within City consistent with the requirements of M.S.A. ch. 216D. Company shall provide accurate and current mapping information for any of its Electrical Facilities in accordance with Minnesota Rules Parts 7819.4000 and 7819.4100 and other applicable state and federal laws. 3.3. Street openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any public way or public ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, for which the City may impose a reasonable fee. Any conditions imposed on the Company must not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any public way or public ground without permission from the City where an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of electric facilities. In such event, Company shall notify City to the office designated by the City before commencement of the emergency repair, if possible, and as soon as practicable. On the next business day after commencement of the emergency repair, Company shall obtain any required permits and pay any required fees and costs pursuant to City ordinance. In the event that there is no franchise fee imposed pursuant to section 8.1, the City retains the right to charge a permit fee. 3.4. Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any public way or public ground, Company must restore the same, including paving and its foundation, in accordance with Minnesota Rules Part 7819.1100, to as good a condition as formerly existed and shall maintain any paved surface in good condition for two years thereafter. The work must be completed as promptly as weather reasonably permits. If the Company does not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and restore the public way or public ground in the said condition, the City shall have, after demand to the Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City, including its administrative expense and overhead, plus ten percent additional as liquidated damages. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedies available to the City for noncompliance with this section 3.4. 3.5. Shared use of poles. The Company must make space available on its poles and towers for City fire, water utility, police or other City facilities whenever such use will not interfere with the use of such poles or towers by Company, by another electric utility, by a telephone utility, or by any cable television company or other form of communication company. In addition, City shall pay for any added cost incurred by Company because of such City use. 3.6. Notice of improvements. The City must give Company reasonable notice of plans for improvements to public ways or public grounds where the City has reason to believe that electric facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: (i) the nature and character of the improvements; (ii) the public ways and public grounds upon which the improvements are to be made; (iii) the extent of the improvements; (iv) the time when the City will Page 160 of 385 start the work; and (v) if more than one public way or public ground is involved, the order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any necessary additions, alterations or repairs to its electric facilities. The City may require the Company to install electric service connections to properties prior to such paving or resurfacing if it is apparent that electrical service will be required during the five years following the paving or resurfacing. 3.7. Tree trimming. The Company may trim all trees and shrubs in the public ways and public grounds of the City interfering with the proper construction, operation, repair and maintenance of any electric facilities installed hereunder; provided that Company must save City harmless from any liability arising therefrom, and subject to permit or other reasonable regulations by City. Except in the case of an emergency, Company shall provide notice to residents not less than 72-hours before any trees or shrubs upon their property are trimmed. 3.8. Company protection of electric facilities. The Company must take reasonable measures to prevent the electric facilities from causing damage to persons or property. The Company must take reasonable measures to protect the electric facilities from damage that could be inflicted by persons, property, or the elements. The Company must take protective measures when the City performs work near the electric facilities, if given reasonable notice by the City of such work prior to its commencement. Nothing in this ordinance relieves any person from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging electric facilities while performing any activity. Sec. 4. Relocations. 4.1. Relocation of electric facilities in public ways. The Company shall comply with the requirements of this agreement, Minnesota Rules Part 7819.3100 and 7819.3200, and other applicable laws relating to relocation of Electronic Facilities. Except as provided in section 4.4, if the City determines to vacate a public way for a City improvement project, or at the City's cost to grade, regrade or change the alignment of any public way, or construct or reconstruct any City utility system in any public way, the City may order Company to relocate its electric facilities located therein. Company shall relocate its electric facilities at its own expense. The City must give the Company reasonable notice of plans to vacate for a City improvement project, or to grade, regrade, or change the alignment of any public way or to construct or reconstruct any City utility system. If a relocation is ordered within five years of a prior relocation of the same electric facilities, which was made at Company expense, the City shall reimburse Company for non-betterment costs on a time and material basis without markup. If any subsequent relocation is required because of the extension of a City utility system to a previously unserved area, Company may be required to make the subsequent relocation at its own expense. Nothing in this ordinance requires the Company to relocate, remove, replace or reconstruct at its own expense its electric facilities where such relocation, removal, replacement or reconstruction is solely for the convenience of the City and is not reasonably necessary for the construction or reconstruction of a public way or City utility system or other City improvement. 4.2. Relocation of electric facilities in public ground. Except as may be provided in section 4.4, the City may require the Company, at the Company's expense, to relocate or remove its electric facilities from public ground upon a finding by City that the electric facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment of the existing or proposed public use of the public ground. Page 161 of 385 4.3. No waiver. The provisions of section 4 apply only to electric facilities constructed in reliance on a franchise and the Company does not waive its rights under an easement or prescriptive right, or state or county permit. 4.4. Projects with federal funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any electric facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of M.S.A. § 161.46 as supplemented or amended. Sec. 5. Vacation of public ways. The City must give the Company at least two weeks' prior written notice of the proposed vacation of a public way. Except where required for a City improvement project or as otherwise provided in section 4, the vacation of any public way, after the installation of electric facilities, shall not operate to deprive Company of its rights to operate and maintain such electrical facilities until the reasonable cost of relocating the same and the expenses resulting from such relocation are first paid to Company. In no case, however, shall the City be liable to the Company for failure to specifically preserve a right-of- way, under M.S.A. § 160.29. Sec. 6. Indemnification. 6.1. Indemnity of the City. Company shall defend, indemnify, keep and hold the City free and harmless from any and all liability on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the electric facilities located in the City. The City shall not be indemnified by the Company for losses or claims in which the City is determined to negligent, except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City's negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company's plans or work. The City shall not be indemnified if the injury or damage results from the performance in a proper manner of acts reasonably deemed hazardous by Company, and such performance is nevertheless ordered or directed by the City after notice to the City of Company's determination. 6.2. Defense of the City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense will defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a reasonable period or if Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not as to third parties a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City; and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City is entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under M.S.A. ch. 466. Sec. 7. Change in form of government. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligation of the City provided in this ordinance. This ordinance and the rights and obligations conferred hereby, is binding on and inures to the benefit of the City and its successors and Page 162 of 385 on the Company and its successors and permitted assigns. This ordinance and the franchise it confers may not be assigned by the Company without the written consent of the City. Sec. 8. Franchise fee. 8.1. Separate ordinance. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in addition to other fees being imposed or that the City has the right by statute to impose on the Company. The franchise fee shall be imposed by a separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least 60 days after written notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon the Company by certified mail. The fee shall not become effective until at least 60 days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon Company by certified mail. Section 2.5. shall constitute the sole remedy for solving disputes between Company and the City in regard to the interpretation of, or enforcement of, the separate ordinance. The payment of a franchise fee as provided by this section 8.1. does not relieve Company from paying fees to City unrelated to the installation, ownership, or operation of electric facilities, such as building permit fees. 8.2. Calculation of fee. The City may impose the franchise fee: (i) as a percentage of gross revenues received by the Company for its operations within the City; or (ii) as a flat fee per customer account based on metered service to retail customers within the City or on some other reasonable basis; or (iii) as a fee based on units of electricity delivered to any class of retail customers within the corporate limits of the City. The formula for a franchise fee based on units of energy delivered may incorporate both commodity and demand units. The method of imposing the franchise fee, the percent of revenue rate, the flat rate, and the per unit rate may differ for each customer class to the extent that the total annual franchise fee amount estimated by Company to be collected from any non-residential customer class shall not, as a percentage of the total revenues estimated by Company, less any sales tax and franchise fee from said non-residential customer class, exceed the percentage estimated by Company to be collected from the residential customer class. The franchise fee or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use, including those related to heating, cooling, or lighting, as well as to the supply of energy needed to run machinery and appliances on premises located within or adjacent to the City. The design of said fees shall be consistently and equally applied by the City to all utility providers operating within the City provided that, as to such a utility provider, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax, in order to prohibit any unfair advantage for one company over another as a result of the imposition of said fees. 8.3. Terms defined. For the purpose of this section 8, the following definitions apply: 8.2.1. Customer classification shall refer to the classes listed on the fee ordinance and as defined or determined in Company's electric tariffs on file with the commission. 8.2.2. Final order refers to an order of the commission changing Company's electric service rates for one or more of the Company's customer classifications, if the order is not an interim order and the time for appeal on such order has expired or all proceedings relating to an appeal have been exhausted. 8.4. Collection of the fee. The franchise fee will be payable monthly, and based on any of the alternative formulas described in section 8.1 during and calculated on the basis of complete billing months of the period for which payment is to be made. The payment shall be due the last business Page 163 of 385 day of the month following the period for which the payment is made. The franchise fee may be changed by ordinance from time to time; however, each change shall meet the same notice requirements and not occur more often than annually. The fee may not exceed any amount that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City by imposing a surcharge in Company's applicable rate for electric service. Company may pay the City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles, refunds, and correction of erroneous billings. Company agrees to make its records available for inspection by the City at reasonable times provided that the City and its designated representative agree in writing not to disclose any information which would indicate the amount paid by any identifiable customer or customers or any other information regarding identified customers that is non-public law. 8.5. Conditions on the fee. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against Company unless it lawfully imposes and the City quarterly or more often collects a fee or tax of the same or greater equivalent amount on the receipts from sales of energy within the City by any other energy supplier; provided that, as to such a supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax. The franchise fee or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use, including those related to heating, cooling, or lighting, as well as to the supply of energy needed to run machinery and appliances on premises located within or adjacent to the City. 8.6. Continuation of franchise fee. If this franchise expires and City and the Company are unable to agree to terms of a new franchise, the franchise fee, if any, being imposed by the City at the time this franchise expires, will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon. Sec. 9. Limitation on applicability. This ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and the Company. No provision of this franchise inures to the benefit of any third person, including the public at large, so as to constitute any such person as a third-party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action for any person not a party hereto. Sec. 10. Severability. If any portion of this franchise is found to [be] invalid for any reason whatsoever, the validity of the remainder will not be affected. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of the ordinance, the provisions of this ordinance shall prevail. Sec. 11. Amendment. This ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon filing of the Company's written consent thereto with the City clerk within 60 days after the effective date of the amendatory ordinance. Sec. 12. Previous franchises superseded. This franchise supersedes any previous electric franchise granted to the Company or its predecessors. Page 164 of 385 INTRODUCED and read in full this15th day of June, 2026. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine the day of , 2026. Page 165 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: ORD 26-2608 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Ordinance 7:00 PM - Public Hearing and Items Published for a Certain Time - Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering Agenda Item # 8.2 Public Hearing and First Reading Ordinance Granting to Northern States Power Company, D/B/A/ Xcel Energy, a Minnesota Corporation, Its Successors and Assigns, a Nonexclusive Franchise to Construct, Operate, Repair and Maintain in the City Of Blaine, Minnesota, an Electric Distribution System and Transmission Lines, Including Necessary Poles, Lines, Fixtures and Appurtenances, for the Furnishing of Electric Energy to the City, Its Inhabitants, and Others, and to Use the Public Ways and Public Grounds of the City for Such Purposes, and Prescribing Certain Terms and Conditions Thereof Executive Summary A Franchise Ordinance Granting to Excel Energy, Its Successors and Assigns, Permission to Construct, Operate, Repair and Maintain in the City of Blaine, Minnesota, an Electric Distribution System and Transmission Lines, Including Necessary Poles, Lines, Fixtures and Appurtenances, for the Furnishing of Electric Energy to the City, its Inhabitants, and Others, and to Use the Public Ways Background The City of Blaine and Northern States Power, D/B/A/Excel Energy last entered into a Franchise Agreement in 1998, Ordinance Number 98-1699. This agreement allowed them to operate their electric distribution system within the city's right-of-ways for a period of 20 years. This Franchise Agreement has now expired, and it is the desire of both the city and Excel Energy to renew an agreement. To enact a Franchise Ordinance, the city has a process for adopting the ordinance. • June 1st, Council opened the public hearing to allow for comments and continued the public hearing to June 15. Page 166 of 385 • Tonight, the council is asked to reconvene the public hearing and allow for additional comments, have the 1st reading of the proposed ordinance and continue the public hearing until July 6th. • July 6, reconvene and then close the public hearing, have the 2nd reading and adopt the proposed ordinance. Strategic Plan Relationship Board/Commission Review Financial Impact Public Outreach/Input Staff Recommendation Reconvene the public hearing, conduct the 1st reading, and continue the public hearing until July 6th. Attachment List None Page 167 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Ordinance: ORD 26-2608 Public Hearing and First Reading Ordinance Granting to Northern States Power Company, D/B/A/ Xcel Energy, a Minnesota Corporation, Its Successors and Assigns, a Nonexclusive Franchise to Construct, Operate, Repair and Maintain in the City Of Blaine, Minnesota, an Electric Distribution System and Transmission Lines, Including Necessary Poles, Lines, Fixtures and Appurtenances, for the Furnishing of Electric Energy to the City, Its Inhabitants, and Others, and to Use the Public Ways and Public Grounds of the City for Such Purposes, and Prescribing Certain Terms and Conditions Thereof THE CITY OF BLAINE DOES ORDAIN: (Added portions are underscored and deleted portions are shown in overstrike.) Sec. 1. Definitions. For purposes of this ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1. City. The City of Blaine, County of Anoka, State of Minnesota. 1.2. City utility system. Facilities used for providing public utility service owned or operated by the City or agency thereof, including sewer and water service, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. 1.3. Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government that preempts all or part of the authority to regulate electric retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4. Company. Northern States Power Company, d/b/a Xcel Energy, a Minnesota corporation, its successors, and assignees. 1.5. Electric facilities. Electric transmission and distribution towers, poles, lines, guys, anchors, conduits, fixtures, and necessary appurtenances owned, operated or otherwise used by the Company for the purpose of providing electric energy for public use. 1.6. Non-betterment costs. Cost incurred by Company from relocation, removal, or rearrangement of electric facilities that do not result in an improvement to the electric facilities. 1.7. Notice. A writing served by any party or parties on any other party or parties. Notice to the Company shall be mailed to the General Counsel, Law Department, Northern States Power Company, Page 168 of 385 414 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 55401. Notice to City shall be mailed to the City Manager, City of Blaine, 10801 Town Square Drive NE, Blaine, MN 55449. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this ordinance by written notice to the other party. 1.8. Effective date. The date on which the ordinance becomes effective under section 2.2. 1.9. Public way. Any street, alley, walkway, or other public rights-of-way within the City. 1.10. Public ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for parks, trails, open space or similar purpose, which is held for use in common by the public or for the public benefit. Sec. 2. Franchise. 2.1. Grant of franchise. City grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the date of passage of this ordinance, the non-exclusive right to transmit and furnish electric energy for light, heat, power, and other purposes for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. For these purposes, the Company may construct, operate, repair, and maintain electric facilities in, on, over, under, and across the public ways and public grounds of City subject to the provisions of this ordinance. Company may do all things reasonably necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to its ordinances and the provisions of this franchise agreement, and consistent with state laws and rules. 2.2. Effective date; written acceptance. This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and its acceptance by the Company, and its publication as required by law. An acceptance by the Company must be filed in writing with the City clerk within 60 days after publication of this ordinance. 2.3. Service rates and area. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for electric service in City currently are subject to the jurisdiction of the public utilities commission. The area within the City in which the Company may provide electric service currently is subject to the provisions of the M.S.A. § 216B.40. 2.4. Publication expense. The expense of publication of this ordinance shall be paid by the Company. 2.5. Dispute resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party must notify the other party in writing of the default and the desired remedy. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within 30 days of the written notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will share equally the fees and expenses of the mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in district court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. Sec. 3. Location, other regulations. 3.1. Location of facilities. Electric facilities shall be located, constructed, installed, and maintained so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over public ways or of public grounds and so as not disrupt normal operation of any City utility system previously Page 169 of 385 installed therein. Electric facilities shall be located on public grounds only as determined by City. Company's construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, and location of electric facilities shall be subject to other reasonable regulations of the City and consistent with the authority granted the City to manage its public ways and public grounds under state law. Under this franchise agreement the City does not relinquish its police power regulatory authority and Company does not relinquish its eminent domain authority. Company may abandon underground electric facilities in place provided that is has first received written approval from the City to do so and that at City's request Company removes abandoned electric facilities, including metal conduit or concrete enclosed conduit interfering with a City improvement project or other franchised utility or other franchised utility or as otherwise required by Minnesota Rules Part 7819.3300. 3.2. Field locations. The Company shall provide field locations for its underground electric facilities within City consistent with the requirements of M.S.A. ch. 216D. Company shall provide accurate and current mapping information for any of its Electrical Facilities in accordance with Minnesota Rules Parts 7819.4000 and 7819.4100 and other applicable state and federal laws. 3.3. Street openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any public way or public ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, for which the City may impose a reasonable fee. Any conditions imposed on the Company must not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any public way or public ground without permission from the City where an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of electric facilities. In such event, Company shall notify City to the office designated by the City before commencement of the emergency repair, if possible, and as soon as practicable. On the next business day after commencement of the emergency repair, Company shall obtain any required permits and pay any required fees and costs pursuant to City ordinance. In the event that there is no franchise fee imposed pursuant to section 8.1, the City retains the right to charge a permit fee. 3.4. Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any public way or public ground, Company must restore the same, including paving and its foundation, in accordance with Minnesota Rules Part 7819.1100, to as good a condition as formerly existed and shall maintain any paved surface in good condition for two years thereafter. The work must be completed as promptly as weather reasonably permits. If the Company does not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the public way or public ground in the said condition, the City shall have, after demand to the Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City, including its administrative expense and overhead, plus ten percent additional as liquidated damages. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this section 3.4. 3.5. Shared use of poles. The Company must make space available on its poles and towers for City fire, water utility, police or other City facilities whenever such use will not interfere with the use of such poles or towers by Company, by another electric utility, by a telephone utility, or by any cable television company or other form of communication company. In addition, City shall pay for any added cost incurred by Company because of such City use. Page 170 of 385 3.6. Notice of improvements. The City must give Company reasonable notice of plans for improvements to public ways or public grounds where the City has reason to believe that electric facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: (i) the nature and character of the improvements; (ii) the public ways and public grounds upon which the improvements are to be made; (iii) the extent of the improvements; (iv) the time when the City will start the work; and (v) if more than one public way or public ground is involved, the order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any necessary additions, alterations or repairs to its electric facilities. The City may require the Company to install electric service connections to properties prior to such paving or resurfacing if it is apparent that electrical service will be required during the five years following the paving or resurfacing. 3.7. Tree trimming. The Company may trim all trees and shrubs in the public ways and public grounds of the City interfering with the proper construction, operation, repair and maintenance of any electric facilities installed hereunder; provided that Company must save City harmless from any liability arising therefrom, and subject to permit or other reasonable regulations by City. Except in the case of an emergency, Company shall provide notice to residents not less than 72-hours before any trees or shrubs upon their property are trimmed. 3.8. Company protection of electric facilities. The Company must take reasonable measures to prevent the electric facilities from causing damage to persons or property. The Company must take reasonable measures to protect the electric facilities from damage that could be inflicted by persons, property, or the elements. The Company must take protective measures when the City performs work near the electric facilities, if given reasonable notice by the City of such work prior to its commencement. Nothing in this ordinance relieves any person from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging electric facilities while performing any activity. Sec. 4. Relocations. 4.1. Relocation of electric facilities in public ways. The Company shall comply with the requirements of this agreement, Minnesota Rules Part 7819.3100 and 7819.3200, and other applicable laws relating to relocation of Electronic Facilities. Except as provided in section 4.4, if the City determines to vacate a public way for a City improvement project, or at the City's cost to grade, regrade or change the alignment of any public way, or construct or reconstruct any City utility system in any public way, the City may order Company to relocate its electric facilities located therein. Company shall relocate its electric facilities at its own expense. The City must give the Company reasonable notice of plans to vacate for a City improvement project, or to grade, regrade, or change the alignment of any public way or to construct or reconstruct any City utility system. If a relocation is ordered within five years of a prior relocation of the same electric facilities, which was made at Company expense, the City shall reimburse Company for non-betterment costs on a time and material basis without markup. If any subsequent relocation is required because of the extension of a City utility system to a previously unserved area, Company may be required to make the subsequent relocation at its own expense. Nothing in this ordinance requires the Company to relocate, remove, replace or reconstruct at its own expense its electric facilities where such relocation, removal, replacement or reconstruction is solely for the convenience of the City and is not reasonably necessary for the construction or reconstruction of a public way or City utility system or other City improvement. Page 171 of 385 4.2. Relocation of electric facilities in public ground. Except as may be provided in section 4.4, the City may require the Company, at the Company's expense, to relocate or remove its electric facilities from public ground upon a finding by City that the electric facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment of the existing or proposed public use of the public ground. 4.3. No waiver. The provisions of section 4 apply only to electric facilities constructed in reliance on a franchise and the Company does not waive its rights under an easement or prescriptive right, or state or county permit. 4.4. Projects with federal funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any electric facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of M.S.A. § 161.46 as supplemented or amended. Sec. 5. Vacation of public ways. The City must give the Company at least two weeks' prior written notice of the proposed vacation of a public way. Except where required for a City improvement project or as otherwise provided in section 4, the vacation of any public way, after the installation of electric facilities, shall not operate to deprive Company of its rights to operate and maintain such electrical facilities until the reasonable cost of relocating the same and the expenses resulting from such relocation are first paid to Company. In no case, however, shall the City be liable to the Company for failure to specifically preserve a right-of- way, under M.S.A. § 160.29. Sec. 6. Indemnification. 6.1. Indemnity of the City. Company shall defend, indemnify, keep and hold the City free and harmless from any and all liability on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the electric facilities located in the City. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims in which the City is determined to negligent, except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City's negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company's plans or work. The City shall not be indemnified if the injury or damage results from the performance in a proper manner of acts reasonably deemed hazardous by Company, and such performance is nevertheless ordered or directed by the City after notice to the City of Company's determination. 6.2. Defense of the City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense will defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a reasonable period or if Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not as to third parties a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City; and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City is entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under M.S.A. ch. 466. Sec. 7. Change in form of government. Page 172 of 385 Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligation of the City provided in this ordinance. This ordinance and the rights and obligations conferred hereby, is binding on and inures to the benefit of the City and its successors and on the Company and its successors and permitted assigns. This ordinance and the franchise it confers may not be assigned by the Company without the written consent of the City. Sec. 8. Franchise fee. 8.1. Separate ordinance. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in addition to other fees being imposed or that the City has the right by statute to impose a franchise fee on the Company. The franchise fee shall be imposed by a separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least 60 days after written notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon the Company by certified mail. The fee shall not become effective until at least 60 days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon Company by certified mail. Section 2.5. shall constitute the sole remedy for solving disputes between Company and the City in regard to the interpretation of, or enforcement of, the separate ordinance. The payment of a franchise fee as provided by this section 8.1. does not relieve Company from paying fees to City unrelated to the installation, ownership, or operation of electric facilities, such as building permit fees. 8.2. Calculation of fee. The City may impose the franchise fee: (i) as a percentage of gross revenues received by the Company for its operations within the City; or (ii) as a flat fee per customer account based on metered service to retail customers within the City or on some other reasonable basis; or (iii) as a fee based on units of electricity delivered to any class of retail customers within the corporate limits of the City. The formula for a franchise fee based on units of energy delivered may incorporate both commodity and demand units. The method of imposing the franchise fee, the percent of revenue rate, the flat rate, and the per unit rate may differ for each customer class to the extent that the total annual franchise fee amount estimated by Company to be collected from any non-residential customer class shall not, as a percentage of the total revenues estimated by Company, less any sales tax and franchise fee from said non-residential customer class, exceed the percentage estimated by Company to be collected from the residential customer class. The franchise fee or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use, including those related to heating, cooling, or lighting, as well as to the supply of energy needed to run machinery and appliances on premises located within or adjacent to the City. The design of said fees shall be consistently and equally applied by the City to all utility providers operating within the City provided that, as to such a utility provider, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax, in order to prohibit any unfair advantage for one company over another as a result of the imposition of said fees. 8.3. Terms defined. For the purpose of this section 8, the following definitions apply: 8.2.1. Customer classification shall refer to the classes listed on the fee ordinance and as defined or determined in Company's electric tariffs on file with the commission. 8.2.2. Final order refers to an order of the commission changing Company's electric service rates for one or more of the Company's customer classifications, if the order is not an interim order Page 173 of 385 and the time for appeal on such order has expired or all proceedings relating to an appeal have been exhausted. 8.4. Collection of the fee. The franchise fee shall be payable monthly, and based on any of the alternative formulas described in section 8.1 during and calculated on the basis of complete billing months of the period for which payment is to be made. The payment shall be due the last business day of the month following the period for which the payment is made. The franchise fee may be changed by ordinance from time to time; however, each change shall meet the same notice requirements and not occur more often than annually. The fee may not exceed any amount that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City by imposing a surcharge in Company's applicable rate for electric service. Company may pay the City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles, refunds, and correction of erroneous billings. Company agrees to make its records available for inspection by the City at reasonable times provided that the City and its designated representative agree in writing not to disclose any information which would indicate the amount paid by any identifiable customer or customers or any other information regarding identified customers that is non-public law. 8.5. Conditions on the fee. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against Company unless it lawfully imposes and the City quarterly or more often collects a fee or tax of the same or greater equivalent amount on the sales of energy within the City by any other energy supplier; provided that, as to such a supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax. The franchise fee or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use, including those related to heating, cooling, or lighting, as well as to the supply of energy needed to run machinery and appliances on premises located within or adjacent to the City. 8.6. Continuation of franchise fee. If this franchise expires and City and the Company are unable to agree to terms of a new franchise, the franchise fee, if any, being imposed by the City at the time this franchise expires, will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon. Sec. 9. Limitation on applicability. This ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and the Company. No provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person, including the public at large, so as to constitute any such person as a third-party beneficiary of the agreements or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action by any person not a party hereto. Sec. 10. Severability. Every section, provision, or part of this ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part; and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of the ordinance, the provisions of this ordinance shall prevail. Sec. 11. Amendment. This ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon filing of the Company's written consent thereto with the City clerk within 60 days after the effective date of the amendatory ordinance. Page 174 of 385 Sec. 12. Previous franchises superseded. This franchise supersedes any previous electric franchise granted to the Company or its predecessors. INTRODUCED and read in full this15th day of June, 2026. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine the day of , 2026. Page 175 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: ORD 26-2609 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Ordinance 7:00 PM - Public Hearing and Items Published for a Certain Time - Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering Agenda Item # 8.3 Public Hearing and First Reading Ordinance Granting to Northern States Power Company, D/B/A/ Xcel Energy, a Minnesota Corporation, Its Successors and Assigns, a Nonexclusive Franchise to Construct, Operate, Repair, and Maintain Facilities and Equipment for the Transportation, Distribution, Manufacture, and Sale of Gas Energy for Public and Private Use and to Use Public Ways and Public Grounds of the City for Such Purposes; and Prescribing Certain Terms and Conditions Thereof Executive Summary A Franchise Ordinance Granting to Northern Sates Power, D/B/A/ Excel Energy, a Minnesota Cooperative Association, Its Successors and Assigns, Permission to Construct, Operate, Repair and Maintain in the City of Blaine, Minnesota, a Gas Energy Distribution System and Transmission Lines, Including Necessary Lines, Fixtures and Appurtenances, for the Furnishing of Gas Energy to the City, its Inhabitants, and Others, and to Use the Public Ways Background The City of Blaine and Northern States Power, D/B/A/ Excel Energy last entered into a Franchise Agreement in 1998, Ordinance Number 98-1710. This agreement allowed them to operate their gas distribution system within the city's right-of-ways for a period of 20 years. This Franchise Agreement has now expired, and it is the desire of both the city and Excel Energy to renew an agreement. To enact a Franchise Ordinance, the city has a process for adopting the ordinance. • June 1st, Council opened the public hearing to allow for comments and continued the public hearing to June 15. Page 176 of 385 • Tonight, the council is asked to reconvene the public hearing and allow for additional comments, have the 1st reading of the proposed ordinance and continue the public hearing until July 6th. • July 6, reconvene and then close the public hearing, have the 2nd reading and adopt the proposed ordinance. Strategic Plan Relationship Board/Commission Review Financial Impact Public Outreach/Input Staff Recommendation Reconvene the public hearing, conduct the 1st reading of the ordinance, continuation of public hearing to July 6th. Attachment List None Page 177 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Ordinance: ORD 26-2609 Public Hearing and First Reading Ordinance Granting to Northern States Power Company, D/B/A/ Xcel Energy, a Minnesota Corporation, Its Successors and Assigns, a Nonexclusive Franchise to Construct, Operate, Repair, and Maintain Facilities and Equipment for the Transportation, Distribution, Manufacture, and Sale of Gas Energy for Public and Private Use and to Use Public Ways and Public Grounds of the City for Such Purposes; and Prescribing Certain Terms and Conditions Thereof THE CITY OF BLAINE DOES ORDAIN: Sec. 1. Definitions. For purposes of this ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1. City. The City of Blaine, County of Anoka, State of Minnesota. 1.2. City utility system. Facilities used for providing public utility service owned or operated by the City or agency thereof, including sewer and water service, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. 1.3. Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government that preempts all or part of the authority to regulate gas retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4. Company. Northern States Power Company, d/b/a Xcel Energy, a Minnesota corporation, its successors, and assignees. 1.5. Gas facilities. Gas transmission and distribution pipes, mains, regulators and necessary appurtenances owned, operated or otherwise used by the Company for the purpose of providing natural gas, manufactured gas or other form of gaseous energy for public, private, or wholesale use. 1.6. Non-betterment costs. Cost incurred by Company from relocation, removal, or rearrangement of gas facilities that do not result in an improvement to the gas facilities. 1.7. Notice. A writing served by any party or parties on any other party or parties. Notice to the Company shall be mailed to President, NSP Gas, 825 Rice Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55117. Notice to City shall be mailed to the City Manager, City of Blaine, 10801 Town Square Drive NE, Blaine, MN Page 178 of 385 55449. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this ordinance by written notice to the other party. 1.8. Effective date. The date on which the ordinance becomes effective under section 2.2. 1.9. Public way. Any street, alley, walkway, or other public right-of-way within the City. 1.10. Public ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for parks, trails, open space or similar purpose, which is held for use in common by the public or for the public benefit. Sec. 2. Franchise. 2.1. Grant of franchise. City grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the date of passage of this ordinance, the non-exclusive right to transmit and furnish gas energy for light, heat, power, and other purposes for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. For these purposes, the Company may construct, operate, repair, and maintain gas facilities in, on, over, under, and across the public ways and public grounds of City subject to the provisions of this ordinance. Company may do all things reasonably necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to ordinance and the provisions of this franchise agreement, and consistent with state and federal laws and rules. 2.2. Effective date; written acceptance. This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and its acceptance by the Company, and its publication as required by law. An acceptance by the Company must be filed in writing with the City clerk within 60 days after publication of this ordinance. 2.3. Service rates and area. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for gas service in City are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission. 2.4. Publication expense. The expense of publication of this ordinance shall be paid by the Company. 2.5. Dispute resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party must notify the other party in writing of the default and the desired remedy. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within 30 days of the written notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will share equally the fees and expenses of the mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in district court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. Sec. 3. Location, other regulations. 3.1. Location of facilities. Gas facilities shall be located, constructed, installed, and maintained so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over public ways or of public grounds and so as not disrupt normal operation of any City utility system previously installed therein. Gas facilities shall be located on public grounds only as determined by City . Company's construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, and location of gas facilities shall be subject to other reasonable regulations of the City and consistent with the authority granted the City Page 179 of 385 to manage its public ways and public grounds under state law. Under this franchise agreement the City does not relinquish its police power regulatory authority and Company does not relinquish its eminent domain authority. Company may abandon underground gas facilities in place provided that is has first received written approval from the City and that at City's request Company removes abandoned gas facilities and metal pipe, conduit, or concrete enclosed conduit if such are uncovered as part of the city improvement project or interfere with another franchised utility or as otherwise required by Minnesota Rules Part 7819.3300. 3.2. Field locations. The Company shall provide field locations for its underground gas facilities within City consistent with the requirements of M.S.A. ch. 216D. Company shall provide accurate and current mapping information for any of its Gas Facilities in accordance with Minnesota Rules Parts 7819.4000 and 7819.4100 and other applicable state and federal laws. 3.3. Street openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any public way or public ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, for which the City may impose a reasonable fee. Any conditions imposed on the Company must not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any public way or public ground without permission from the City where an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of gas facilities. In such event, Company shall notify City to the office designated by the City before commencement of the emergency repair, if possible, and as soon as practicable. On the next business day after commencement of the emergency repair, Company shall obtain any required permits and pay any required fees and costs pursuant to City ordinance. In the event that there is no franchise fee imposed pursuant to section 8.1, the City retains the right to charge a permit fee. 3.4. Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of a public way or public ground, Company shall restore the same, including paving and its foundation, in accordance with Minnesota Rules Part 7819.1100 and City requirements, to as good a condition as formerly existed and shall maintain any paved surface in good condition for two years thereafter. The work shall be completed as promptly as weather reasonably permits. If the Company does not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the public way or public ground in the said condition, the City shall have, after demand to the Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City, including its administrative expense and overhead, plus ten percent additional as liquidated damages. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedies available to the City for noncompliance with this section 3.4. 3.5. Protection of gas facilities. The Company must take reasonable measures to prevent the gas facilities from causing damage to persons or property. The Company must take reasonable measures to protect the gas facilities from damage that could be inflicted by persons, property, or the elements. The Company must take protective measures when the City performs work near the gas facilities, if given reasonable notice by the City of such work prior to its commencement. Nothing in this ordinance relieves any person from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging gas facilities while performing any activity. 3.6. Notice of improvements. The City must give Company reasonable notice of plans for improvements to public ways or public grounds where the City has reason to believe that gas Page 180 of 385 facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: (i) the nature and character of the improvements; (ii) the public ways and public grounds upon which the improvements are to be made; (iii) the extent of the improvements; (iv) the time when the City will start the work; and (v) if more than one public way or public ground is involved, the order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any necessary additions, alterations or repairs to its gas facilities. The City may require the Company to install gas service connections to properties prior to such paving or resurfacing if it is apparent that gas service will be required during the five years following the paving or resurfacing. 3.7. Major facilities. Before Company constructs any new structure or converts any existing structure for the manufacture or storage of gas, Company shall first obtain the approval of the structure and the location thereof with the City. Sec. 4. Relocation. 4.1. Relocation of gas facilities in public ways. The Company shall comply with the requirements of this franchise ordinance, Minnesota Rules Part 7819.3100 and 7819.3200, and other applicable laws and rules relating to relocation of Gas Facilities. Except as provided in section 4.4, if the City determines to vacate a public way for a City improvement project, or at the City's cost to grade, re-grade or change the alignment of any public way, or construct or reconstruct any City utility system in any public way, the City may order Company to relocate its gas facilities located therein. Company shall relocate its gas facilities at its own expense. The City must give the Company reasonable notice of plans to vacate for a City improvement project, or to grade, re-grade, or change the alignment of any public way or to construct or reconstruct any City utility system. If a relocation is ordered within five years of a prior relocation of the same gas facilities, which was made at Company expense, the City shall reimburse Company for non-betterment costs on a time and material basis without markup. If any subsequent relocation is required because of the extension of a City utility system to a previously unserved area, Company may be required to make the subsequent relocation at its own expense. Nothing in this ordinance requires the Company to relocate, remove, replace or reconstruct at its own expense its gas facilities where such relocation, removal, replacement or reconstruction is solely for the convenience of the City and is not reasonably necessary for the construction or reconstruction of a public way or City utility system or other City improvement. 4.2. Relocation of gas facilities in public ground. Except as may be provided in section 4.4, the City may require the Company, at the Company's expense, to relocate or remove its gas facilities from public ground upon a finding by City that the gas facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment of the existing or proposed public use of the public ground. 4.3. No waiver. The provisions of section 4 apply only to gas facilities constructed in reliance on a franchise and the Company does not waive its rights under an easement or prescriptive right, or state or county permit. 4.4. Projects with federal funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any gas facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of M.S.A. § 161.46 as supplemented or amended. Sec. 5. Vacation of public ways. Page 181 of 385 The City shall give the Company at least two weeks' prior written notice of the proposed vacation of a public way. Except where required for a City improvement project or as otherwise provided in section 4, the vacation of any public way, after the installation of gas facilities, shall not operate to deprive Company of its rights to operate and maintain such gas facilities until the reasonable cost of relocating the same and the expenses resulting from such relocation are first paid to Company. In no case, however, shall the City be liable to the Company for failure to specifically preserve a right-of- way, under M.S.A. § 160.29. Sec. 6. Indemnification. 6.1. Indemnity of the City. Company shall defend, indemnify, keep and hold the City free and harmless from any and all liability on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the gas facilities located in the City. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims in which the City is determined to negligent, except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City's negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company's plans or work. The City shall not be indemnified if the injury or damage results from the performance in a proper manner of acts reasonably deemed hazardous by Company, and such performance is nevertheless ordered or directed by the City after notice to the City of Company's determination. 6.2. Defense of the City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense will defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a reasonable period or if Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not as to third parties a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City; and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City is entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under M.S.A. ch. 466. Sec. 7. Change in form of government. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligation of the City provided in this ordinance. This ordinance and the rights and obligations conferred hereby, is binding on and inures to the benefit of the City and its successors and on the Company and its successors and permitted assigns. This ordinance and the franchise it confers may not be assigned by the Company without the written consent of the City. Sec. 8. Franchise fee. 8.1. Separate ordinance. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in addition to other fees being imposed or that the City has the right by statute to impose on the Company. The franchise fee shall be imposed by a separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least 60 days after written notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon the Company by certified mail. The fee shall not become effective until at least 60 days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon Page 182 of 385 Company by certified mail. Section 2.5. shall constitute the sole remedy for solving disputes between Company and the City in regard to the interpretation of, or enforcement of, the separate ordinance. The payment of a franchise fee as provided by this section 8.1. does not relieve Company from paying fees to City unrelated to the installation, ownership, or operation of gas facilities, such as building permit fees. 8.2. Calculation of fee. The City may impose the franchise fee: (i) as a percentage of gross revenues received by the Company for its operations within the City; or (ii) as a flat fee per customer account based on metered service to retail customers within the City or on some other reasonable basis; or (iii) as a fee based on units of gas delivered to any class of retail customers within the corporate limits of the City. The formula for a franchise fee based on units of gas delivered may incorporate both commodity and demand units. The method of imposing the franchise fee, the percent of revenue rate, the flat rate, and the per unit rate may differ for each customer class to the extent that the total annual franchise fee amount estimated by Company to be collected from any non- residential customer class shall not, as a percentage of the total revenues estimated by Company, less any sales tax and franchise fee from said non-residential customer class, exceed the percentage estimated by Company to be collected from the residential customer class. The franchise fee or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use, including those related to heating, cooling, or lighting, as well as to the supply of energy needed to run machinery and appliances on premises located within or adjacent to the City. The design of said fees shall be consistently and equally applied by the City to all utility providers operating within the City provided that, as to such a utility provider, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax, in order to prohibit any unfair advantage for one company over another as a result of the imposition of said fees. 8.3. Collection of the fee. The franchise fee shall be payable monthly, and based on any of the alternative formulas described in section 8.1 during and calculated on the basis of complete billing months of the period for which payment is to be made. The payment shall be due the last business day of the month following the period for which the payment is made. The franchise fee may be changed by ordinance from time to time; however, each change shall meet the same notice requirements and not occur more often than annually. The fee may not exceed any amount that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City by imposing a surcharge in Company's applicable rate for gas service. Company may pay the City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles, refunds, and correction of erroneous billings. Company agrees to make its records available for inspection by the City at reasonable times provided that the City and its designated representative agree in writing not to disclose any information which would indicate the amount paid by any identifiable customer or customers or any other information regarding identified customers that is non-public law. 8.4. Conditions on the fee. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against Company unless it lawfully imposes and the City quarterly or more often collects a fee or tax of the same or greater equivalent amount on the sales of energy within the City by any other energy supplier; provided that, as to such a supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax. The franchise fee or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use, including those related to heating, cooling, or lighting, as well as to the supply of energy needed to run machinery and appliances on premises located within or adjacent to the City. Page 183 of 385 8.5. Continuation of franchise fee. If this franchise expires and City and the Company are unable to agree to terms of a new franchise, the franchise fee, if any, being imposed by the City at the time this franchise expires, will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon. Sec. 9. Limitation on applicability. This ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and the Company. No provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person, including the public at large, so as to constitute any such person as a third-party beneficiary of the agreements or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action by any person not a party hereto. Sec. 10. Severability. Every section, provision, or part of this ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part; and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of the ordinance, the provisions of this ordinance shall prevail. Sec. 11. Amendment. This ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon filing of the Company's written consent thereto with the City clerk within 60 days after the effective date of the amendatory ordinance. Sec. 12. Previous franchises superseded. This franchise supersedes any previous gas franchise granted to the Company or its predecessors. INTRODUCED and read in full this15th day of June, 2026. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine the day of , 2026. Page 184 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: ORD 26-2606 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Ordinance Development Business - Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director Agenda Item # 9.1 Second Reading Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF) at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Montean Meadows (Mark Montean) (Case File No. 26-0017/SLK) Executive Summary The applicant is requesting a rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF) to construct 86 single family homes. Background Planning Commission (Public Hearing) May 12, 2026 City Council (1st Reading) June 1, 2026 City Council (2nd Reading) June 15, 2026 Action Deadline (60 Days) June 16, 2026 Action Deadline (City Extended — 60 Days) August 15, 2026 Staff report prepared by Shawn Kaye, Planner, and Teresa Barnes, Project Engineer. Rezoning Section 101-3 Criteria for granting zoning/comprehensive plan amendments: The City Council may adopt amendments to the zoning ordinance, zoning map, and comprehensive plan relative to land uses within a particular district or to the location of the district lines. Zoning amendments shall only be used as a means to reflect changes in the goals and policies of the City as reflected in the comprehensive plan or changes in conditions in the City. Although there are no explicit findings that must be made in conjunction with rezoning, appropriate considerations include: • Whether the proposed District is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • How the proposed district differs from the existing district. Page 185 of 385 • How the proposed district meets the goals and polices of the City The proposed development meets the following criteria for the Development Flex Zoning District: a. That the proposal shall provide for a wider range of housing types, price ranges and styles than could be accomplished under the existing zoning; o By utilizing the development flex zoning, this will provide the setbacks and lot areas needed to meet the required density requirements. The applicant proposes to construct 86 single-family homes. b. That the proposal shall provide amenities and facilities and open spaces greater than the minimum requirements under existing zoning; o This project does propose providing an approximately 13 acre open area. This will include storm water pounding, trees and wetlands. c. That the proposed development is compatible with the purposes and intents of this ordinance and with the comprehensive plan; o The development is compatible with the purpose and intent of the ordinance and aligns with the comprehensive plan as it is being developed into single-family homes with a density of 2.73 units per acre. d. That the proposal shall in no way be detrimental to the environment. Scenic aspects and natural features, such as streams, trees, topography, and geological features, shall be protected and preserved to the greatest extent possible; o The development has been designed in a way that will have little to no impact to the existing wetlands. The site as designed will also preserve the existing flood plain volume and provide the necessary storm water system for the project. Some trees will be removed, although a tree inventory has been completed and new tree plantings will be provided with this project. e. That the proposal shall not impose any undue burden upon the public services and facilities, such as fire and police protection, schools, streets, water systems, sanitary sewer systems, and storm sewer systems; o The project has been designed in a manner that will not impose any undue burden upon the public services and facilities,such as fire and police protection, schools, streets, water systems, sanitary sewer systems, and storm sewer systems. f. That the proposed development is designed in such a manner to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries, and also which will not be detrimental to future land uses in the surrounding areas; and o The project has been designed in a manner that has taken into account the surrounding environment. This includes the existing flood plains, wetland and MnDNR determined environmentally sensitive areas. g. That the proposal be consistent with all other applicable City and State regulations. o The project has been submitted to Coon Creek Watershed in conjunction with the City's application process, and has been designed to accommodate their requirements. Evaluation of Request Planning Analysis Surrounding Zoning and Uses The properties to the north are single family and located in Ham Lake. The properties to the west, east, Page 186 of 385 and south have single family homes and are zoned Farm Residential (FR). Current Zoning The site is currently zoned Farm Residential (FR). The FR district is intended for areas where urban services are not presently available. A minimum lot size of ten acres will retain these lands in their natural uses and agricultural uses pending proper timing of economic provision for parks, streets, utilities, and other public facilities, so that orderly development will occur. Proposed Zoning The proposed zoning is Development Flex (DF). The DF district is intended to provide for greater flexibility in land use planning, and maximize the choice of housing types and styles than is possible under the strict application of other sections of this ordinance. The DF district also attempts to create a reasonable balance between the interests of the property owner in freely developing their property with greater flexibility in land uses, and at the same time, protect the interest of surrounding properties in the following ways: a. By encouraging a more creative approach in housing developments, that will result in quality living environments through innovative design and aesthetic controls; b. By permitting a combination of housing types and style, including single, two-family, and multiple family dwellings, with the exception of mobile homes; c. By allowing flexibility in design by permitting cluster developments and a variety of architectural styles and treatments; d. By allowing for any type of ownership, private, condominium, or rental; e. By allowing flexibility in setback and height restrictions; f. By allowing non-residential uses, such as commercial or light industrial uses which will serve the inhabitants of such district, provided such non-residential uses will enhance the character, amenities, and convenience of those who live in the proposed development; g. By providing an efficient use of land resulting in more cost-efficient installation of utilities, streets, and other facilities. h. By encouraging the preservation of common open space, recreational facilities, natural features, such as woodland and wetland areas; i. By contributing to the tax base of the community without making undue demands on the community services; and j. By providing the means for greater creativity and flexibility in environmental design than is provided under the strict application of the Blaine Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance, while, at the same time, preserving the health, safety, order, convenience, prosperity, and general welfare of the City of Blaine and its inhabitants. A rezoning to DF is necessary as the R-1 district requires a minimum lot width of 80 feet, lot depth of 125 feet, and a 10,000 sf lot size. Land Use Designation The subject site is designated Low Density Residential (LDR) in the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The LDR designation is for single-family homes with a density of 2.5–6 units an acre. The proposal meets this designation with single-family, and a density of 2.73 units/acre. Existing Conditions The site is currently made up of two parcels with frontage on 131st Avenue. The southwest parcel has a Page 187 of 385 single family home and detached accessory building. The larger parcel is vacant. History There are no previous approvals on this property. The applicant requested feedback on rezoning to DF for 101 single-family homes at an August 2025 City Council Workshop meeting. The plan included 101 homes, including eight 80-foot wide lots and the remaining 93 lots split approximately evenly between 65-foot and 70-foot lots. At that meeting, council provided feedback that all lots should be 70 feet wide or wider. The applicant returned to a council workshop in February 2026 and requested feedback on rezoning to DF for: • 80 foot lots - 9 • 70 foot lots - 62 • 65 foot lots - 15 Council consensus was to require 70-foot-wide lots (at a minimum), and would consider cost-share proposals for street and sanitary sewer. Plat The preliminary plat creates 86 single family lots and 2 outlots for ponding and wetlands. The DF zoning district does not have minimum lot sizes. The lot width of most lots is 70 feet wide with corner lots being wider. As proposed, the lot sizes are as follows: • Single family lots range from 8,750 s.f to 13,045 s.f. • Outlot A - .30 acres • Outlot B - 12.91 acres Architecture The proposed single-family homes will have varying roof styles and exterior treatments. All homes constructed should be consistent in architecture, materials and style with the drawings/elevations submitted for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval. Use of premium materials such as brick, natural stone, stucco, cementitious or engineered wood siding or shake shingle siding are to be used on all front elevations. Vinyl/metal siding can be utilized on the side and rear elevations. Setbacks The DF zoning district does not have set standards for setbacks; these are determined as part of the CUP. The setbacks are as follows: • Front yard setback - 25 feet • Side yard setback - 7.5 feet (house and garage) • Corner side yard setback - 20 feet Page 188 of 385 • Rear yard setback - 30 feet Landscaping The landscape plan proposes one front yard tree and one rear yard tree in the rear yard, except for Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. Tree Preservation Approximately 12.2 acres of trees will be disturbed during construction and the City’s tree preservation requirement includes replacing eight trees per acre for all disturbed portions of the development. This would mean that 98 trees would be required for tree replacement purposes. The developer has proposed a total of 258 trees within this development. The tree preservation replacement requirement has been met. A total of 3.6 acres of trees are proposed to be saved on the site. Park Dedication Park dedication will be required for the 86 new single-family lots being constructed at the rate of $5,800 per unit (2026 rate) for a total park dedication fee of $498,800 if paid in 2026. This amount must be paid prior to releasing the plat mylars for recording at Anoka County. Engineering Analysis Grading/Storm Drainage The developer is proposing to grade the entire site as shown on the Coon Creek Watershed District (CCWD) and city approved grading, drainage, erosion protection and sediment control plans prepared by the developer's engineer. The plans shall include existing drainage patterns (contours) with flow arrows, soil boring locations, perimeter site protection, tree preservation, tree clearing limits, custom grading, proposed grading contours, proposed drainage patterns with flow arrows, storm water management, SWPPP information, temporary erosion protection Best Management Practices (BMPs), and temporary sediment control BMPs information for the site. The SWPPP may be included in the construction plan sheet(s) or prepared as a separate document and included in the development construction contract specifications. The developer will also need to submit construction contract documents that include a mass (rough) grading, erosion protection, sediment control, development, utilities, roadway, and storm drainage plan sheets. Supporting wetland delineation report, geotechnical investigation report, soil boring logs, and hydrology report shall be included in the submittal for city review and approval. The grading plan shall provide greater detail on protecting existing trees and provide additional information on adjacent property. For each lot a house is proposed to be constructed on, as-built surveys shall be required to verify structure elevations, custom grading requirements, and final lot grading elevations. Utilities The developer has requested the City to coordinate a reimbursement for the installation of the regional sanitary sewer system, including the required lift station within the 131st Avenue corridor for the benefiting parcels. If they develop in the next 12 years, at such time, the opportunity for Page 189 of 385 reimbursement will terminate. The installation will also include the public water main along the 131st Avenue corridor. The developer will be responsible for trunk sanitary sewer area charges. These charges become due with platting for upland acreage. The 2026 rate for Sanitary Sewer District 6-5 is $8,344.00 per upland acre and will be applied to the acreage platted. This phase is proposing to develop 31.5 acres of upland for a total sewer area charge of $262,836.00. Standard Water and Sanitary Sewer Access Charges (WAC & SAC) become due with each building permit at the rate established at the time the building permit is issued. Utilities will be extended to the edge of the plat for future connection to adjacent parcels. Hydrant locations must be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department. The developer shall explore water sources for landscape irrigation systems installed throughout the development, including the possible use of created ponds or storm water reuse. Wetlands/Watershed/FEMA The plat will need to provide for a protective buffer strip of natural vegetation at least 15-feet in width (25-feet is preferred) and shall surround all wetlands. This buffer strip shall be placed in an easement. The developer will need to submit the project to CCWD. Review, approval and permits are required prior to city plan approval and start of site work. The development shall indicate that all structures are protected from flooding by processing a Letter of Map Change with FEMA prior to issuance of building permits within the unnumbered A-Zone on the FEMA flood map. Developer shall provide all FEMA paperwork and structure as-built surveys to homeowners at the time of lot closing. The developer is responsible for following through with FEMA (as necessary) to receive final documents, to provide those documents to the homeowners, and to record these on the certificate of title for each parcel in the development. Access/Street Design/Sidewalks/Trails The development is proposing to gain/provide access from the construction of 131st Avenue NE beginning at the north end of Legacy Creek Parkway. 131st Avenue NE is a state aid roadway and will need to be constructed to state aid standards, including a trail and sidewalk. The developer has requested the City to coordinate a reimbursement for the installation of 131st Avenue to the benefiting parcels. If they develop in the next 12 years, at such time, the opportunity for reimbursement will terminate. All local roads shall be constructed to 29-feet back of curb to back of curb in width and will extend to the edge of the plat for future connection with adjacent parcels. Six-foot concrete sidewalks are required to be constructed on one side of all local streets. Location to be determined in the plan review process. Page 190 of 385 Trails shall be required to be constructed in accordance with current city standards. Location to be determined in the plan review process. As part of the street design, the development will be required to provide streetlights installed in the manner, location and type prescribed by the City Engineer. The developer shall pay the costs of all the street lighting installations. The City agrees to pay the cost of maintaining the portion of the lights that are installed that reflect the normal and typical lighting requirements by the City. Easements/Right-of-way/Permits Dedication of public right-of-way along the 131st Avenue corridor will be required. The developer will need to obtain all required permits to construct the proposed project. A copy of all permits will need to be submitted to the City prior to any site work. Standard drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated along all lot lines and over areas of delineated wetlands, wetland mitigation, infiltration trenches, drainage swales, and storm water management ponds. All local public streets require dedication of 60-feet of right-of-way. The developer is to provide access for inspection and maintenance of storm water management infrastructure. This maintenance access shall be a minimum of 10-feet wide and allow for vehicular access. Restrictions will be placed on lot lines as needed to limit fences and landscaping to ensure access. Attachment List: Zoning and Location Map Preliminary Plat (3) Grading Plan (3) Landscape Plan Tree Preservation Plan House Elevations Narrative Cost Share 131st Improvements Public Comments Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes Strategic Plan Relationship Not applicable. Board/Commission Review The Planning Commission voted 5-1 to approve the rezoning. The meeting minutes are attached for reference on the public hearing comments. Page 191 of 385 Financial Impact Not applicable. Public Outreach/Input Notices of a public hearing were: 1. Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the property boundaries. 2. Published in Blaine/Spring Lake Park/Columbia Heights/Fridley Life. 3. Posted on the City website. 4. Posted (sign) on the property with contact information for the Planning Department. Staff Recommendation By motion, approve the ordinance. Attachment List 1. Attachments 2. Public Comments 3. Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes Page 192 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Ordinance: ORD 26-2606 Second Reading Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF) at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Montean Meadows (Mark Montean) (Case File No. 26-0017/SLK) THE CITY OF BLAINE DOES ORDAIN: (Added portions are underscored and deleted portions are shown with overstrike.) Section 1. The Official Zoning Map of the Zoning Code of the Municipal Code of the City of Blaine is hereby amended to change the zoning classification of the following described property: The Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4), Section Two (2), Township Thirty- one (31), Range Twenty-three {23), Anoka County, Minnesota, Except that port herein described, as follows: Commencing at the Southwest comer of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence North along the West line thereof for 300 feet; proceeding thence East and parallel to the South line of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4), for a distance of 400 feet; proceeding thence South and parallel to said West line for a distance of 300 feet and to the South line of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence West along said South line to the point of commencement. Subject to existing road. AND, That port of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4) Section Two (2), Township Thirty-one (31), Range Twenty-three (23), that is described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence North along the West line thereof for 300 feet; proceeding thence East and parallel to the South line of sold Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4), for a distance of 400 feet; proceeding thence South and parallel to said West line for a distance of 300 feet and to the South line of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence West along said South line to the point of commencement. Subject to existing road. {abstract property) Section 2. The above described property is hereby rezoned from: Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF) Page 193 of 385 Section 3. The City Manager is hereby directed to make the appropriate changes in the Official Zoning Map of the City of Blaine to reflect and show the changes in zoning classification as set forth above. INTRODUCED and read in full this 1st day of June, 2026. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 194 of 385 FR DF DF DF Project 1 FR DF FR 32 n d A FR DF v Location e DF N E FR 1 3 1 s t A v e N E DF DF DF DF FR 131st Ave NE 130th Ln NE DF Leyte Cir NE FR DF Legacy Woods Open Space DF 129th Ln NE 129th Ct NE DF E N e v A n 129th Ave NE o FR t g DF n i DF x e L DF DF 128th Ln NE 128th Ct NE E N NE Cir Erskin DF y w k DF P FR k e e r C 128th L E n 128th y NE A c ve NE N a M t 128th Ave NE g i S E d e L N w g t r S a DF u te y y b e K DF Tippecanoe St NE L i S s DF s t r k N e a DF t 127th Ln NE E Savanna S e t Grove Park P DF N E 127th Ave NE Legacy Creek Park DF NE e Zoning DF v th A DF 127 127th Ave NE 126th Ln NE DF Xebec St NE Blaine Parcels DF DF Quemoy St Quemoy NE City Parks DF 126th 126th Cir NE Jamestown St NE Jamestown Ave NE 26th DF Project Location FR 1 DF 126th Ave NE FR DF DF DF FR Zest Zest St NE Case File No. 26-0017 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 Miles Montean Meadows Scale: 1:10,878 Blaine Planning Department / 10801 Town Square Dr NE / Blaine, MN 55449 / (763) 785-6180 BlaineMN.gov This map is for general reference only. It is not for legal, engineering, or surveying use. . Page 195 of 385 OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: SHENANDOAH ST. NE OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: STREET E SEE SHEET 5 SITE DATA STREET A OWNER: OWNER: STREET B STREET STREET D SEE SHEET 4 STREET A STREET C LEGEND 131ST AVENUE NE OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: I hereby certify that this survey, plan Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. DRAWN BY: npc Revisions: MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS 3 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: ISSUE DATE: 04/03/26 1230 Sycamore Lane N PRELIMINARY PLAT INDEX of Licensed Land Surveyor under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 40361 FILE NO: 2494 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\survey\pre plat\10143_preplat index.dwg Page 196 of 385 STREET A OWNER: OWNER: STREET B STREET STREET D STREET A STREET C 131ST AVENUE NE OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: I hereby certify that this survey, plan Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. DRAWN BY: npc Revisions: MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS 4 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: ISSUE DATE: 04/03/26 1230 Sycamore Lane N PRELIMINARY PLAT of Licensed Land Surveyor under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 40361 FILE NO: 2494 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\survey\pre plat\10143_preplat.dwg Page 197 of 385 OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: ST. NE OWNER: SHENANDOAH OWNER: STREET E STREET A OWNER: OWNER: STREET B STREET STREET D I hereby certify that this survey, plan Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. DRAWN BY: npc Revisions: MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS 5 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: ISSUE DATE: 04/03/26 1230 Sycamore Lane N PRELIMINARY PLAT of Licensed Land Surveyor under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 40361 FILE NO: 2494 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\survey\pre plat\10143_preplat.dwg Page 198 of 385 H I D D E N F O R E S T G H O S T P L A T 3 4 9 1 G H O S T3 5 3 1 3 4 4 1 3 4 6 5 P L A T 3 7 8 1 3 7 5 0 C I T Y P A R K 3 6 1 0 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 C O T TC AO G V EE W O O D R Know what's below. Callbefore you dig. Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY GRADING & 11 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota EROSION CONTROL INDEX the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_gr.dwg #10143 Page 199 of 385 G H O S T P L A T 3 7 8 1 3 7 5 0 3 6 1 0 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY GRADING & 13 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota EROSION CONTROL PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_gr.dwg #10143 Page 200 of 385 H I D D E N F O R E S T Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY GRADING & 14 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota EROSION CONTROL PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_gr.dwg #10143 Page 201 of 385 H I D D E N F O R E S T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T 3 4 4 1 3 4 6 5 3 4 9 1 3 5 3 1 3 7 8 1 3 6 1 0 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 7 5 0 C O T T A G E W O O D C O V E C I T Y P A R K P R E S E R V E A T R L E G A C Y C R E E K 2 N D A D D I T I O N Know what's below. Callbefore you dig. Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA Drawn: RJR MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY L1 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: RJR 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Landscape Architect under Blaine, Minnesota LANDSCAPE PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 56346 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 4 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\landscape\10143_landscape.dwg #10143 Page 202 of 385 H I D D E N H I D D E N F O R E S T F O R E S T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T 3 4 6 5 3 4 4 1 3 4 9 1 3 5 3 1 C I T Y P A R K 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 7 5 0 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 3 6 1 0 C O T T A G E W O O D C O V E Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS T1 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N TREE PRESERVATION PLAN of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 T116 Save Date: 03/27/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_tree preservation.dwg #10143 Page 203 of 385Lewis Approx. 2,692 sq ft 4 beds • 2.5 baths 3-car garage Folk - C3 Page 204 of 385To: Planning Commission Members, From: Mark Montean Project Background and Site History The subject property was purchased by my family in the spring of 1964. At the time of purchase, it was understood that the area would ultimately be serviced by municipal water and sanitary sewer. For several decades, the property functioned as a hobby farm, utilizing private well and septic systems and reflecting the area’s rural character at that time. In 2008, I began evaluating development potential for the approximately 39-acre site. These efforts were delayed due to the economic downturn and the property’s location outside an eligible sanitary sewer district. Following the passing of the applicant’s parents in 2014 and 2015, the existing residence was renovated and transitioned to a rental use, while the agricultural land continued to be leased to a local farmer. In April 2018, the property was reclassified from Sewer District 7 to Sewer District 6, significantly improving access to municipal water and sanitary sewer infrastructure. Following this change, the applicant engaged Carlson Engineering to prepare multiple concept plans to evaluate feasible development options. During 2024 and 2025, I met with adjacent property owners and participated in two City Council workshops to review development concepts and address site-specific engineering constraints. Based on feedback from City staff and the City Council workshops, the development plan was refined to incorporate environmental considerations, including the preservation of approximately 12 acres of non-developable open space. My family wants to leave a legacy in Blaine. The Michael’s Meadow (open area) will be named after my brother who passed away unexpectedly. These areas include land identified by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources as supporting rare plant species. The current proposal reflects this feedback and seeks to develop the site as an approximately 86-lot residential subdivision. The plan emphasizes larger lot configurations, integration of open space, preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, and neighborhood amenities, including views of onsite ponds. Page 205 of 385 131st Improvements: The developer would like to propose that the cost of the improvements for 131st Avenue NE be paid for up front by the Montean Development. The developer would be reimbursed by each parcel fronting on 131st Avenue as they develop or sell. This reimbursement amount would be based on each parcels proportional share (based on frontage), and would be collected by the city and reimbursed to the developer. COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHARE OF COST (%) COST* DEVELOPMENT 3621 - 131ST AVENUE 1318' 33.0% $511,500.00 PID 02-31-23-21-001 CITY PARK 330' 8.3% $128,650.00 PID 02-31-23-23-005 COTTAGEWOOD COVE N/A** PRESERVE AT LEGACY CREEK N/A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 3465 - 131ST AVENUE 3491 - 131ST AVENUE 3531 - 131ST AVENUE 3610 - 131ST AVENUE 2338' 58.7% $909,850.00 3650 - 131ST AVENUE 3690 - 131ST AVENUE 3698 - 131ST AVENUE 3710 - 131ST AVENUE TOTAL 3986' 100% $1,550,000.00 * Based on Engineers Estimate 2/18/25 (subject to change w/final bid numbers) ** Existing Escrow w/City of Blaine (Amount to be verified by City) Total cost of 131st Avenue Improvements = $1,550,000 (excluding lift station and forcemain) Lift Station The developer also proposes that the lift station & forcemain improvements be paid for up front by the Montean Development. Again the developer would be reimbursed by all the benefitting parcels as they develop/connect. The developer will look to the city for the best method to calculate reimbursment amounts for each benefitting parcel. The estimated cost for the lift station is $550,000 Page 206 of 385From: Patrick Vesperman To: Planning Subject: Montean Meadows Case: 26-0017 Date: Saturday, May 2, 2026 8:38:16 AM Hello, I would like to voice my opposition to Case 26-0017 Montean Meadows rezoning request and development plan. Blaine has shrinking open green space and the area north of 131st is a city gem and should be preserved. Best, -- Patrick Vesperman 651-788-5846 Page 207 of 385 From: David L Mathews To: Sheila Sellman Cc: Terra Fleming; Chris Massoglia; Pat Robinson; Alan Goracke Subject: Formal Objection: Montean Meadows Development - Case 26-0017 (3621 131st Ave NE) Date: Friday, May 8, 2026 12:41:17 PM Dear Ms. Sellman, I am formally submitting my objections regarding Case 26-0017, the proposed Montean Meadows development at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Having resided on the property adjacent to this site for 40 years, I am deeply concerned by the precedent this project sets for the City of Blaine. Specifically, the plan calls for property owners surrounding the project to pay the developer directly for the cost of the project's lift station. This is a highly irregular arrangement that forces neighbors to fund a private developer's essential utility infrastructure. I am requesting formal clarification from the city on whether Blaine has ever allowed a developer to mandate that unattached private property owners pay for the construction of a lift station. My objections are centered on the following critical issues: Zoning Precedent and Tax Impact: I oppose the rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF). This shift creates an expectation that the surrounding properties will be subject to involuntary rezoning in the future, fundamentally altering the character of our established neighborhood. Furthermore, I am deeply concerned that this rezoning will result in significantly higher property taxes for long-standing residents, essentially forcing neighbors to pay higher costs for a development they did not initiate and do not want. Inequitable Infrastructure Costs: The current funding model requires the eight adjacent properties to pay 67% of an estimated $2.5 million in infrastructure costs. In contrast, the developer can spread their 33% share across the entire 86 units in the project, significantly diluting their individual financial burden. Forcing unattached properties to bear the overwhelming financial weight of a private developer’s requirements, including the lift station, mandatory sewer hook-ups, septic removals, and well capping, is fundamentally unjust. I urge the city to require the developer to pay for all infrastructure costs associated with this project and to place no financial burden on non-participating landowners. Page 208 of 385 Traffic and Safety Hazards on 131st Ave NE: The addition of 86 new units will critically overload the currently unpaved gravel road. Under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 160, roads designated for "low-volume" use are generally appropriate only for volumes of fewer than 150 vehicles per day. This development will immediately surpass this threshold. Furthermore, under MN Rule 7470.1100, the city must ensure school bus stops are safe; a high-traffic gravel road creates visibility and braking hazards for students. Paving Requirement to Lexington Avenue: The current plan shows a complete disregard for residents to the east. I urge the council to require that the developer, at their sole expense, pave 131st Ave NE in its entirety from the development site to Lexington Avenue. The city should not allow a developer to shift their primary business expenses onto long-standing residents while failing to provide necessary safety and infrastructure improvements for the impacted community. Please include these comments in the official record for the public hearing on Tuesday, May 12, 2026. Sincerely, David L. Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE, Blaine, MN 612-240-3631 Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 209 of 385From: Rieschl, James B To: Planning Subject: FW: Case File NO. 26-0017 Monteam Medows Date: Thursday, May 7, 2026 7:49:10 PM Attachments: image002.png I will be unable to attend the Public Hearing because I work 2nd shift. My concern is a health issue. I have a rare fungal infection called Blastomycosis (see description below) Everything you are planning on doing is everything I can’t be around for health reasons, moving Rotting trees, Digging, and disruption to the soil and so on . Our property is in Ham Lake along Shenandoah Street. Lot 1 is in contact with our property but only part of it. Is there any way to protect our property from direct contact to this project. Maybe leave a small buffer of tress to reduce the dust or shift lot 1 to the right one property. I know you don’t have to do anything, but the chance of me contacting the Blastomycosis while I am still in treatment for it is very high. I can’t mow the lawn or rake / blow leaves. 4 out of 5 people die from Blastomycosis, so am a lucky one, it almost killed me twice during my 9-week hospital stay So you can understand my concern. If you want a Docters note to prove my sickness let me know. Thanks for your consideration. James Rieschl 3602 133rd Lane NE Page 210 of 385From: Jon Gorzycki To: Sheila Sellman; Shawn Kaye; Pat Robinson; Alan Goracke Subject: Public Comments on Case File 26-0017 Date: Sunday, May 10, 2026 11:05:36 AM Dear Ms. Sellman and Ms. Kaye, I am writing to formally submit my objections and concerns on Case File 26-0017, the proposed Montean Meadows development located at 3621 131st Avenue NE. The current plan indicates that neighboring property owners may be required to directly compensate the developer for construction of a lift station. This arrangement appears highly atypical and raises significant concerns regarding the appropriateness of assigning private development infrastructure costs to adjacent, non-participating property owners. I respectfully request formal clarification from the City regarding whether similar requirements have been authorized in prior developments, and under what statutory or municipal authority such a condition is being considered. My concerns are outlined in detail below: 1. Inequitable Allocation of Infrastructure Costs The proposed cost-sharing model assigns approximately 67% of an estimated $2.5 million in infrastructure costs to eight adjacent properties, while the developer’s 33% share may be distributed across 86 residential units. This results in a disproportionate and inequitable financial burden on existing property owners who are not participants in the development. These costs include, but are not limited to, lift station construction, sewer connections, septic system removal, and well capping. I respectfully request that the City require the developer to assume full responsibility for all infrastructure necessary to support the project and to avoid imposing financial obligations on neighboring properties that do not directly benefit from or request these improvements. 2. Traffic and Safety Concerns – 131st Avenue NE The addition of 86 residential units will substantially increase traffic volume on 131st Avenue NE, which currently exists as an unpaved gravel roadway. This increase will exacerbate existing safety concerns associated with unpaved roads, including reduced visibility, dust generation, and longer vehicle stopping distances. Additionally, the most direct and commonly recommended route from the proposed development to the nearest freeway access point (Lexington Avenue and I-35W) utilizes the unpaved portion of 131st Avenue NE. As a result, this segment is likely to experience the majority of increased traffic. In contrast, Legacy Creek Parkway NE, an alternate route, presents its own safety concerns due to the presence of parked vehicles and frequent pedestrian activity, including children. These conditions collectively indicate that the current roadway infrastructure is not adequate to safely support the anticipated increase in traffic. 3. Road Improvement Requirements The current proposal does not sufficiently address impacts to properties located east of the Page 211 of 385development site. I respectfully request that the Planning Commission consider adding a condition of approval requiring the developer to fully fund and complete paving of 131st Avenue NE from the development site through to Lexington Avenue, thereby ensuring safe and equitable access for all impacted residents. 4. Conformance with Section 101-4 CUP Criteria Based on the current proposal, I believe the project does not meet key requirements outlined in Section 101-4 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) criteria, including: Excessive Burden on Public Infrastructure: The proposal places undue strain on existing streets and utilities, particularly given that the primary access road remains unpaved and infrastructure costs are shifted to non-participating property owners. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties: The proposal does not adequately consider the impacts on properties to the east of the development, resulting in incompatibility with the surrounding area. Traffic Safety and Congestion: The anticipated increase in traffic on an unpaved roadway introduces safety hazards and congestion concerns that are not sufficiently mitigated in the current plan. Given these concerns, I respectfully request that the Planning Commission consider recommending amendments to the proposal to ensure compliance with Section 101-4 requirements. Alternatively, I request that the Commission consider returning this case to a workshop setting for further review and revision prior to approval. Thank you for your consideration. I respectfully request that this correspondence be entered into the official record for the public hearing scheduled for May 12, 2026. Sincerely, Jon Gorzycki Page 212 of 385From: Chris Berry To: Planning Cc: ssellman@blainmn.com; probinson@blainmn.com; agorache@blainmn.com Subject: Montean Meadows (26-0017) Date: Monday, May 11, 2026 10:21:12 AM Dear Planning Department, I am writing to formally express my concerns regarding the proposed Montean Meadows development and its potential impact on our community. My primary concern involves the significant increase in traffic and activity that 86 new housing units would generate. We previously experienced the dangers of increased traffic volume when 125th Avenue was closed and vehicles were rerouted to 131st Avenue NE. This period proved extremely hazardous for my children and highlighted that our quiet neighborhood—currently a haven for local wildlife like deer and turkey—is not equipped for such high-density activity. This development threatens to permanently disrupt the safety and character of our residential area. Furthermore, I have been informed that the developer, Mark Monteen, is requesting that current homeowners share in the cost of required infrastructure improvements. I find this proposal highly inappropriate. As the developer stands to gain the financial benefit from this project, they should be solely responsible for the associated investment costs. Existing homeowners should not be expected to subsidize the infrastructure necessary for a private development that we did not initiate. Thank you for your time and for considering these points during the planning process. Best regards, Chris Berry 3781 131st Ave NE, Blaine, MN 55449 Page 213 of 385From: Elizabeth Grazulis To: Planning Cc: Sheila Sellman; Alan Goracke; Pat Robinson Subject: Porposed Montean Meadows Case 26-0017 on 131st AVE Date: Monday, May 11, 2026 10:05:29 AM Planning Committee, we have the following questions and concerns regarding the proposed development - Specifically Development Flex (DF). Development Flex (DF) zoning district. Can you please explain how you came to this proposal? 1. Sounds like anything goes as far as any type of housing built, condos, townhouses, cluster (high density??) in an area where the rest of the road is farm residential?? Basically anything but a mobile home?? Really? This clearly isn’t a good fit for our neighborhood. 2. What is a cluster? Will there be commercial property?? We really need to know exactly what this means and what types of "homes" this DF would include! We originally were told that this would be single family homes? 3. Why should the adjacent properties pay a dime for the road/lift station if they are not the ones wanting this? 4. Why should the adjacent properties pay 2/3 of the cost for this lift station when the developer and Montean will pay only 1/3? 5. What impact does this have to the rest of us to the east of the proposed DF development? We were told many times that “you won’t have to pay for sewer or water unless you decide to hook up or sell your property”. This has huge financial implications for all of us!! 6. Did you consider the impact to the current residents on this road, both to the east and west of this property as well as those on Legacy Creek Parkway as far as traffic and safety to the residents? 7. It appears that the road will start at Legacy Creek Parkway and end Montean’s parcel. Can you please confirm this? rd 8. Will the north side of this proposed development have access to 133 in Ham Lake? 9. Can you please provide all of the access roads that this proposed development will use? 10. It appears that the ditch 59 will remain the same with the 100 ft easement? 11. Will these potential additional “homes” impact our wells and the water levels? Several years ago many pumps/wells were impacted. The pumps had to be lowered as many households had no water. 12. What type of development is the Legacy Creek Parkway in? Why wouldn’t this proposed development be the same to have similar houses? 13. Why are you proposing this DF zoning on a road that is the least feasible to handle this population as well as the traffic? 14. Will the potential kids in this area go to Sunrise Elementary as it’s within a mile? 15. Will there be speed bumps on 13st AVE as the traffic will increase significantly and certainly speeds as it’s a straight 1 mile road from Legacy Creek to Lexington AVE? We have serious concerns on many issues and several objections on what we have read!! We appreciate some clarification on all of our concerns. Thank you st Page 214 of 385Chris and Liz Grazulis 3790 131 ave NE Page 215 of 385From: Emily Gorzycki To: Sheila Sellman; Shawn Kaye; Pat Robinson Subject: Formal Objection to Montean Meadows, Date: Monday, May 11, 2026 5:13:50 PM To the Blaine Planning Commission, I am writing to formally submit my objection to Case File 26-0017, the proposed Montean Meadows development located at 3621 131st Avenue NE, and to request clarification on several material aspects of the proposal. My parents live directly across the street from the proposed development, and my young son spends a significant amount of time visiting. As such, the development’s logistical and safety concerns are a top priority for me and my family. I respectfully request that this correspondence be entered into the official record for the public hearing scheduled for May 12, 2026 with note of the following concerns: 1. Inequitable and Potentially Unlawful Allocation of Infrastructure Costs The current plan indicates that neighboring property owners may be required to directly compensate the developer for construction of a lift station. This arrangement is highly atypical and raises serious legal and ethical concerns. The proposed cost-sharing model assigns approximately 67% of an estimated $2.5 million in infrastructure costs to eight adjacent, non-participating properties, while the developer’s 33% share may be distributed across 86 residential units. This represents a disproportionate financial burden imposed on property owners who neither requested nor benefit directly from the development. Such an arrangement raises concerns regarding: Due process and fairness principles in municipal decision-making Potential violation of nexus and proportionality standards commonly applied to development exactions (i.e., required costs must be directly related and proportionate to impacts created by the development) Improper private cost-shifting from a developer to uninvolved parties I respectfully request formal clarification regarding: Whether similar arrangements have been previously authorized by the City The statutory or municipal authority under which such cost allocation is being considered Absent clear legal authority and justification, this cost structure appears inequitable and inconsistent with sound public policy. The developer should be required to assume full responsibility for infrastructure necessary to support the project. 2. Significant Traffic and Safety Hazards The proposal introduces 86 residential units on a site that is currently situated along a gravel/dirt roadway without significant neighborhood development, which fundamentally lacks the infrastructure to safely support increased traffic. The anticipated traffic increase will: Substantially degrade road conditions already impacted by dust, rutting, and erosion Page 216 of 385 Increase stopping distances and loss of vehicle control, particularly in adverse weather Reduce visibility due to dust generation Increase risk to pedestrians, cyclists, and residential traffic Critically: The most direct route to major transportation infrastructure (Lexington Avenue and I- 35W) relies on this unpaved segment, meaning it will absorb the majority of development-related traffic Alternate routes such as Legacy Creek Parkway NE introduce additional safety concerns due to parked vehicles, pedestrian activity, and presence of children Importantly, this site is not part of an existing developed corridor, but rather sits in the middle of a low-density area accessed by a minimally maintained dirt road. Introducing high- density residential use into this context creates an inherent and foreseeable safety hazard. 3. Incomplete and Ineffective Road Improvement Proposal The current proposal fails to adequately address roadway infrastructure in a comprehensive or equitable manner. Of particular concern is the apparent intention to improve only a portion of 131st Avenue NE, without extending those improvements to a major traffic connection such as Lexington Avenue. Partial roadway improvements: Create inconsistent and unsafe driving conditions between paved and unpaved segments. Significant road deterioration occurs already with the existing traffic burden and is most notable in the transition spaces between paved and unpaved areas. Concentrate traffic impacts on unimproved portions of the road. Shift safety and maintenance burdens onto neighboring residents To mitigate these risks, I request the Planning Commission require as a condition of approval that the developer: Fully fund and complete paving of 131st Avenue NE Extend improvements continuously from the development site to Lexington Avenue Ensure roadway design meets standards appropriate for projected traffic volume Anything less represents an incomplete solution that fails to address the full scope of impact created by the development. 4. Non-Conformance with Section 101-4 Conditional Use Permit Criteria Based on the current proposal, the development does not satisfy key requirements under Section 101-4 CUP criteria, including: Excessive Burden on Public Infrastructure The project relies on inadequate existing infrastructure, particularly an unpaved access road, while shifting infrastructure costs onto non-participating property owners. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties The proposal is inconsistent with the surrounding area, which lacks comparable Page 217 of 385 density and infrastructure. The introduction of an 86-unit development in an otherwise undeveloped setting represents a significant and incompatible change in land use intensity. Traffic Safety and Congestion The project introduces foreseeable and preventable safety hazards due to increased traffic on an unpaved and insufficient roadway system, without adequate mitigation. 5. Public Interest Considerations Beyond legal compliance, I respectfully urge the Commission to consider its broader responsibility to act in the public interest. While the City may have the technical authority to approve aspects of this proposal, doing so under these conditions would: Place undue financial burden on uninvolved property owners Introduce known and avoidable safety risks Prioritize development outcomes over resident well-being and equitable treatment Good governance requires not only legal sufficiency, but also fairness, transparency, and sound judgment. Approval of this project in its current form would fall short of those standards. Given the concerns outlined above, I respectfully request that the Planning Commission: Require the developer to assume full infrastructure costs Mandate comprehensive roadway improvements extending to a major arterial Reassess traffic safety impacts and share these anticipated impacts transparently with identified appropriate mitigation measures Ensure full compliance with Section 101-4 CUP criteria Alternatively, return this proposal to a workshop setting for further revision Thank you for your consideration and for your service to the community. Respectfully submitted, Dr. Emily Gorzycki Page 218 of 385 From: Molly Vesperman To: Planning; ssellman@blainemn.com; probinson@blainemn.com; agoracke@blainemn.com Subject: 131st Avenue Development Date: Thursday, May 14, 2026 6:39:51 PM Hello, I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed development off 131st Avenue NE in Blaine. We live on Legacy Creek Parkway NE, and live quite close to the dirt road (131 Ave NE). From my understanding, the dirt road will not be paved with this development. There is already a significant amount of dust that comes off of that road, and I don't think any residents around us or on the dirt road care for any additional traffic that a new development will bring. Our family loves to play outside and enjoy biking, walking and rollerblading safely around our neighborhood. The inevitable increase in traffic is a huge concern for all of us on Legacy Creek Parkway NE. Would the city please consider slowing down residential development and instead increase development of the infrastructure to support the growing population? We could use more stores, restaurants, schools and places to shop rather than more homes. Where are all of those kids going to be going to school? Sunrise Elementary is at max capacity already, and my daughter had to attend a different school for kindergarten than her siblings due to poor city planning with all of the homes and population increase that caused the schools to be overcrowded. With additional taxpayer revenue with all of the additional developments over the past 5 years, we would expect our taxes to remain the same, yet they continue to increase. Please consider the needs of your current residents. Thank you for considering my concerns. Sincerely, Molly Vesperman Page 219 of 385 From: David L Mathews <dlmathewsusa@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2026 8:32 AM To: CityCouncil <CityCouncil@blainemn.gov>; Tom Newland <tnewland@blainemn.gov>; Chris Ford <cford@blainemn.gov>; Leslie Larson <leslielarson@blainemn.gov>; Jess Robertson <jrobertson@blainemn.gov>; Chris Massoglia <cmassoglia@blainemn.gov>; Terra Fleming <tfleming@blainemn.gov> Subject: Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows) Formal Written Infrastructure Objection Date: May 19, 2026 To: CityCouncil@BlaineMN.gov (Alternatively, paste individual addresses: tsanders@blainemn.gov, tnewland@blainemn.gov, cford@blainemn.gov, leslielarson@blainemn.gov, jrobertson@blainemn.gov, cmassoglia@blainemn.gov, Page 220 of 385 tfleming@blainemn.gov) CC: csorensen@blainemn.gov Subject: Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows) Formal Written Infrastructure Objection Date: May 19, 2026 To: The Blaine City Council (via Planning@BlaineMN.gov) From: David Mathews– Affected Resident of the 131st Avenue NE Corridor Subject: URGENT RECORD SUBMISSION: Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows, 3621 131st Avenue NE) – Infrastructure, Pedestrian Safety, and Public Safety Risk Advisory Requested Action: Denial of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Preliminary Plat, OR the attachment of Mandatory Developer Performance Conditions requiring the full paving of 131st Avenue NE and the completion of contiguous sidewalk networks. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: THE COUNCIL'S IMMEDIATE RISK EXPOSURE The Montean Meadows proposal (Case 26‑0017) would add 86 homes and materially increase traffic on an existing 1/2‑mile unpaved segment of 131st Avenue NE. I request denial of the CUP and preliminary plat, or approval only if the developer fully funds and completes paving of the unpaved segment, constructs a contiguous ADA sidewalk to Lexington Avenue, and secures completion with an irrevocable performance bond. I ask the Council to forward this submission and the cited meeting evidence to the City Attorney and Public Works for legal and technical review prior to the June 1 vote ABOUT THE AUTHOR & METHOD OF REVIEW As a matter of full disclosure, I am a retired electrical engineer with a career dedicated to designing and manufacturing critical components for supercomputers, medical sensors, LED lighting, and both conventional and nuclear weapon systems that protect land, sea, and air platforms. While I am not formally trained in real estate development, municipal civil engineering, or real estate law, my professional work has been guided by strict zero-failure safety protocols, rigorous risk management, and systemic failure analysis. In my career, if my components failed, there could be catastrophic damage and loss of life. I am reviewing the Montean Meadows proposal through that exact same objective lens—as an engineer trained to identify dangerous structural gaps, material limitations, and loading failures that compromise public safety before catastrophic system failure. DISCLAIMER & MATERIAL LIMITATIONS OF REVIEW I have researched and compiled all the information contained within this formal Page 221 of 385submission using strictly public information available on the internet, official Blaine meeting minutes, and the recorded public planning meeting. Any errors or omissions are purely unintentional, and I sincerely apologize for any technical discrepancies. The City Council should note that the compressed timeline between the public Planning Commission meeting and the final voting session on June 1, 2026, has created extreme time constraints for surrounding property owners. This brief window severely limits the neighborhood’s ability to contract third-party civil engineering firms or traffic safety assessors independently. This review has been completed entirely within those constraints to ensure a timely submission into the public record before the final June 1st vote . 1. Statement of Intent and Core Objection This formal written submission registers my firm objection to the approval of Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows) under its current configuration. While the applicant seeks a Rezoning to Development Flex (DF) and a CUP to introduce a high-density, 86- lot subdivision, the surrounding public infrastructure is entirely inadequate to absorb this massive influx of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Specifically, the primary access point—the 1/2-mile unpaved gravel-and-dirt segment of 131st Avenue NE leading to Lexington Avenue—cannot sustain the compounded traffic load from the new subdivision alongside the existing heavy vehicle operations and regional cut-through commuter traffic along the corridor. Pushing a dense suburban development onto a rural dirt road without contiguous walkways directly exposes the City of Blaine to extreme financial and operational risk. 2. Regional Cut-Through Traffic and Engineering Infrastructure Failure The City faces clear public safety risks under the discretionary standards of a Development Flex (DF) zoning change or a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) due to several compounding transit failures: The Lexington Parkway Commuter Shortcut: Rapid development along the Lexington Parkway corridor to the west creates an immediate infrastructure crisis. Commuters looking to travel north on Lexington Avenue will intentionally use 131st Avenue NE as a direct shortcut to completely bypass the severe traffic congestion at the Lexington Avenue & Highway 242 (Main Street) intersection. Pushing an unpaved residential corridor to serve as a regional arterial bypass is an engineering failure in traffic sequencing. Compounded Structural Loading and Safety Risks: This unpaved 1/2-mile gap is already severely degraded by daily operations that far exceed its engineering capacity. The corridor is currently used by 25 existing residential families, multiple daily school buses, and heavy commercial construction equipment Page 222 of 385actively moving materials to construct the new 86 homes. Adding the massive commuter load from Montean Meadows onto a roadbed already experiencing continuous axial loading from heavy construction vehicles and school buses drives the total volume to over 1,110 daily trips. This structural overload creates an extreme safety liability. It creates a high risk of rapid deterioration and structural failure of this unpaved roadbed, leading to rapid washboarding, deep rutting, sub-base failure, and blinding dust screens that put schoolchildren at immediate risk. Dismantling the MUSA Boundary Pretext: I anticipate that City staff or the developer may argue that because the Montean Meadows site sits inside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary, the City lacks the authority or obligation to mandate paving on the unsewered eastern section of the 131st Avenue NE corridor. This seems like an engineering misdirection. The MUSA boundary dictates the extension of regional wastewater and sanitary sewer infrastructure; it does not limit a municipality’s police powers to regulate surface road safety, traffic loads, and right-of-way engineering. The 1/2-mile gap is a dedicated public municipal right-of-way under the City's explicit jurisdiction. Whether a street segment has sewer access or sits outside a utility boundary is separate from the physics of structural roadbed failure under the weight of 1,110+ daily vehicular trips, school buses, and heavy construction equipment. The City retains full authority to require off-site road paving as a condition of a discretionary Development Flex (DF) CUP to mitigate an actionable public safety hazard, regardless of where subsurface utilities terminate. Rebuffing the Pretext Against Paving Without Sewer: At the Planning Commission meeting, the City Engineer stated that Blaine will no longer pave streets that lack sanitary sewer infrastructure. While this may be a preferred internal city staff policy for capital improvement projects, it is not a binding statutory restriction, and it runs counter to established municipal precedent. Multiple existing public streets in the Northeast Blaine area are currently paved without sanitary sewer utilities. The City has a clear history of independently engineering surface transportation safety, separate from subsurface wastewater networks. More importantly, there is a fundamental functional distinction between the City choosing to spend public taxpayer funds to pave a road without utilities, and the City Council using its discretionary land-use authority to mandate that a private developer fund off-site paving as Page 223 of 385 a condition of an intense density expansion. The developer is seeking a Development Flex (DF) zoning upgrade. The City Council is under no obligation to compromise public safety to satisfy an internal staff preference regarding sewer sequencing. The physics of an unpaved roadbed failing under 1,110+ daily trips remains an immediate threat regardless of whether a sewer pipe runs beneath it. Comprehensive Plan Inconsistency: The current Blaine Comprehensive Plan guides this area as Low-Density Residential with the assumption of matching infrastructure. Granting a "Flex" density increase while leaving the main access corridor unpaved is highly inconsistent with the City's core land-use, safety, and infrastructure objectives outlined in its planning guidelines. Zoning Transformation vs. Historical Use: Because this application seeks to abandon Farm Residential (FR) status for Development Flex (DF) suburban densities, it is advisory to note that the developer cannot reasonably claim agricultural or "Right to Farm" exemptions for these road conditions. Commuter traffic completely changes the road's functional classification. Relying on future Municipal State Aid (MSA) funds to fix this road later shifts the financial burden to the public, when immediate developer funding mechanisms are available. Cross-Jurisdictional and Environmental Nuisance: Because the north side of 131st Avenue NE directly borders the City of Ham Lake, the extreme dust generation and mud tracking will create an immediate cross-jurisdictional nuisance. Furthermore, due to the high volume of traffic, runoff from mud and chemical dust binders will wash directly into the site's protected wetlands, causing severe environmental degradation. Given these significant issues, I respectfully request that the City actively evaluate whether an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) should be legally required under the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules before any final vote or plat approval. 3. On-the-Record Admission and Municipal Tort Risk Analysis During the public Planning Commission meeting on May 12, 2026—officially broadcast live over the Blaine City Portal and featuring 10 public speakers—the developer, Mark Montean, explicitly admitted on the record that he knows the unpaved segment of 131st Avenue NE is hazardous, but stated he cannot maintain project profitability if required to pave it. Under Minnesota land-use principles, a private developer’s profit margin is not a valid planning metric to override safety infrastructure requirements. More critically, this broadcast admission establishes clear, actual notice to the City of Blaine regarding an unmitigated infrastructure defect. Under established Minnesota Page 224 of 385municipal tort law, while a city generally enjoys statutory immunity for high-level discretionary policy decisions, it can lose this protection and face operational liability if it acts to exacerbate a known physical hazard after receiving actual notice (see, e.g., Holmquist v. State, 425 N.W.2d 454; Cairl v. State, 323 N.W.2d 20). Approving an optional density expansion via a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that funnels over 1,110 daily trips directly onto a self-admitted, unmitigated road hazard knowingly transitions a passive deficiency into an active, city-approved operational risk. I respectfully request that the City Attorney review this specific notice record and evaluate the City's resulting tort exposure prior to a final vote. 4. Severe Pedestrian Safety Hazards and Sidewalk Gaps A critical flaw in the current project design is the failure to provide safe, continuous pedestrian pathways. Currently, there is only a partial sidewalk on the development side of the road. This incomplete infrastructure creates a highly predictable, dangerous scenario: Forced Roadway Pedestrian Traffic: Because the sidewalk abruptly ends, families, children walking to school bus stops, and pedestrians will be forced off the curb and directly onto the unpaved shoulder or into the active path of heavy construction vehicles, school buses, and regional shortcut commuters on 131st Avenue NE. Severance from the Blaine Bikeway System: The City of Blaine actively promotes its trail networks. However, this unpaved 1/2-mile gap serves as a physical barrier between the end of the development and the Blaine Bikeway network on Lexington Avenue (a 0.5-mile, 10-minute walk along the unpaved shoulder). Forcing children, cyclists, and fitness enthusiasts to navigate a dusty, muddy ditch shoulder just to access the Lexington Avenue trail system directly conflicts with the City's unified comprehensive transit goals. 5. Protecting Taxpayers Against Future Builder Transfers It is widely anticipated that the current developer plans to transfer or sell the approved plat to a high-volume national builder, such as Lennar. In the state of Minnesota, Conditions of Approval run with the land, binding any subsequent buyer or corporate builder. If Mark Montean cannot afford to pave the road, then the financial sustainability of developing this high-density project under current infrastructure constraints is highly questionable. If the City Council approves this CUP without explicit infrastructure conditions, Montean will sell the land to a volume builder at a massive profit, leaving the subsequent builder with no performance obligation to address the unpaved gap. The financial burden to pave, grade, align 131st Avenue NE, and install missing public Page 225 of 385sidewalks will likely be unfairly shifted directly onto Blaine taxpayers via the municipal capital improvement budget. 6. Preemptive Rebuttal to Anticipated Applicant Defenses Because public oral testimony is explicitly barred at the June 1st voting session, I submit the following engineering and planning counters to the standard, predictable arguments the developer’s team may leverage behind closed doors: Counter to the "Prohibitive Cost / Unconstitutional Taking" Argument: The developer may claim that requiring off-site paving as a condition of approval represents an unconstitutional "taking" under federal or state land-use standards. However, from a municipal planning perspective, courts have generally held that land-use conditions tied to purely discretionary zoning changes—such as a request to move from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF)—are permissible when they are structurally related and proportional to the project's direct impacts (see, e.g., Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and its progeny regarding essential nexus). Because the introduction of this high-density plat is the direct catalyst pushing 131st Avenue NE past its engineering capacity, a paving requirement functions as a direct safety mitigation, not an unconstitutional burden. If the applicant’s profit model relies on utilizing substandard public gravel beds to handle heavy suburban traffic, the infrastructure gap indicates the project is technically unfeasible under its current density layout. I respectfully request that the City Attorney review and confirm the City’s broad discretionary authority to condition or deny this optional, non-entitled Conditional Use Permit (CUP) based on these infrastructure limitations. Counter to the "Proportionality / Shared Traffic" Argument: The applicant may argue that because 25 existing families and regional shortcuts use 131st Avenue NE, they should not bear 100% of the cost. However, the applicant's 86 homes represent a massive 80% surge in localized commuter volume. Their project is the direct cause of the structural failure. If the developer objects to stabilizing the infrastructure system they are disrupting, it is recommended that the City Council scale the plat back to the original Farm Residential (FR) low- density baseline, matching the road's current true capacity. Counter to the "Phased Mitigation and Dust Binding" Compromise: The developer will likely propose a compromise: periodic application of chemical dust-binding agents during construction, with paving deferred to later phases. From an engineering failure analysis perspective, this is not an adequate Page 226 of 385 temporary solution. Chemical binders wash out during rain cycles, accelerating chemical and sediment pollution into the site’s protected wetlands and causing immediate runoff friction with our cross-jurisdictional neighbors in Ham Lake. Deferring paving removes all municipal leverage once the plat is recorded, allowing corporate assignees to finish the homes while heavy equipment completely degrades the dirt base. 7. Proposed Recommendations and Formal Requests To ensure the long-term safety of our neighborhood and protect municipal resources, I respectfully request that the Blaine City Council consider taking one of the following two paths: 1. Decline Approval of the CUP and Preliminary Plat under its current configuration, on the basis that the surrounding public street and pedestrian networks are not yet structurally prepared to absorb this sudden, high-density traffic load. 2. Approve with Protective Infrastructure Conditions. If the Council decides to proceed with approval, I strongly urge the inclusion of standard infrastructure performance conditions in the final resolution. Specifically, it is requested that the developer enter into a standard Developer's Agreement with the City of Blaine to: 1. Fully fund, grade, drain, and pave the entirety of the unpaved 1/2-mile segment of 131st Avenue NE to standard city specifications up to its intersection with Lexington Avenue. Please ensure the infrastructure alignment is not phased or delayed based on subdivision construction stages. 2. Construct a fully contiguous, ADA-compliant concrete public sidewalk system extending along the entirety of the project corridor to eliminate all pedestrian gaps and ensure safe connectivity to the Blaine Bikeway system on Lexington Avenue. To safeguard local taxpayers from future infrastructure shortfalls, it is requested that no final plat be recorded and no building permits or certificates of occupancy be issued until these conditions are fully completed or financially secured by an irrevocable letter of credit or a performance bond. I appreciate the Council’s time, dedication, and careful consideration of these safety- focused infrastructure factors before taking a final vote on Case 26-0017. I formally request that the City Council place this letter into the official public record for the Case 26-0017 proceeding and forward it to the City Attorney and the Public Works Department for technical and legal review prior to the final June 1st vote Respectfully submitted, Page 227 of 385David L Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE 612-240-3631; dlmathewsusa@gmail.com Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 228 of 385 From: David L Mathews To: CityCouncil; Tim Sanders; Chris Ford; Jess Robertson; Terra Fleming; Tom Newland; Leslie Larson; Cathy Sorensen Cc: Planning Subject: Subject: Direct neighbor feedback: Urgent tree root safety and full ADA corridor compliance (June 1st Vote) Date: Friday, May 29, 2026 8:15:17 AM I am writing to provide additional feedback and clarify key design elements for the official record regarding the Montean Meadows development plan scheduled for your vote on June 1st. I am a property owner located directly across from the proposed development along 131st Avenue NE. Since the initial public planning meeting, I have reviewed the project materials in greater depth, including the site geography and local infrastructure requirements. Through this closer analysis, I identified several technical, drainage, and jurisdictional gaps in the corridor layout that directly threaten my property lines, personal safety, and mature tree canopy. Incomplete Corridor Design As currently drawn, the plan specifies ADA‑compliant roadway upgrades only for the western 1/4 mile of 131st Avenue NE. The remaining section of the road extending east to its intersection with Lexington Avenue (Anoka County Highway 17) is entirely omitted from the design. Because 131st Avenue NE is an unpaved gravel road with no existing paved pedestrian facilities, upgrading it to support a new subdivision requires a continuous, fully compliant paved pedestrian access route along the entire corridor, all the way to Lexington Avenue. Addressing only a single 1/4‑mile segment poses several severe practical, structural, and legal challenges to my property, particularly to the mature trees located within 15 feet of the roadway. Stormwater Drainage Failures The small internal retention pond proposed for Montean Meadows is insufficient to accommodate the significant increase in stormwater runoff resulting from converting a porous gravel corridor into a paved, impervious ADA roadway. Because the current submittal does not include a continuous underground storm sewer system extending to Lexington Avenue, roadway grading will naturally redirect thousands of gallons of sheeted runoff across the street onto my lawn and into the root zones of my trees. I object to any layout that fails to store and pipe its roadway runoff away from established neighboring properties. Tree Destruction and Root Zone Impacts Numerous mature trees are located within 15 feet of the existing gravel roadway. A fully paved ADA street with sidewalks, curbs, and boulevard buffers requires a substantially wider construction footprint. Grading and trenching along the full corridor will cut directly into critical root zones, threatening tree survival and creating an immediate wind‑topple hazard. The developer’s Tree Preservation Survey is inadequate because it ends at the 1/4‑mile marker and omits the remainder of the corridor. Right‑of‑Way and Easement Conflicts The current gravel road occupies a narrow functional right‑of‑way. Expanding it to a standard municipal profile with ADA sidewalks will require additional right‑of‑way or permanent slope easements from adjacent property owners, including myself. I have not been contacted, surveyed, or asked to grant any such easements, and I will not sign away land that would destroy my mature canopy. County Highway 17 Jurisdiction Because Lexington Avenue is an Anoka County highway (CSAH 17), any connection requires an official County Highway Access Permit and Page 229 of 385 engineering review. County standards may require turn lanes or expanded intersection geometry, pushing construction limits even farther into the gravel quadrant and affecting more trees and private boundaries than the developer’s partial plan shows. Roadway Continuity and ADA Compliance A public roadway upgrade cannot terminate a pedestrian facility at an unpaved gravel segment immediately before a major county highway. State and federal accessibility codes require a continuous paved ADA transition to the intersection. The current plan does not meet this requirement. Turnaround and Traffic Flow Deficiencies The plans do not show a turnaround or cul‑de‑sac at the point where the pavement ends. Without one, delivery trucks, school buses, and emergency vehicles will be forced to use my driveway or yard to turn around, creating an unacceptable safety and property hazard. Protection Against Premature Earth‑Moving Because securing easements, county permits, and MUSA staging updates takes time, there is a risk that construction could stall mid‑corridor. If earth‑moving begins before all approvals are finalized, large soil piles could sit across from my home for months, causing dust pollution and erosion. I request that the city condition approval so that no grading permits are issued until all agency approvals and private easements are fully secured. Public Record Request Because there is no public comment period during the June 1st voting assembly, I respectfully request that the City Clerk include this letter in the official agenda packet. I also request that Planning Staff read aloud the specific impacts on stormwater, tree destruction, and private property boundaries during the project summary so that attendees and online viewers are fully informed of the off‑site corridor deficiencies. Request to Table the Vote To ensure the final project is complete, functional, and integrated into the community without infringing on private property rights or destroying mature trees, I respectfully request that the City Council table the June 1st vote. A brief delay would allow the developer to submit a comprehensive road design and an updated tree survey covering the entire length of 131st Avenue NE to Lexington Avenue. Thank you for your time, accessibility, and continued dedication to the residents of Blaine. Please include this letter in the official public record for the June 1st meeting. David L Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE 612-240-3631 Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 230 of 385From: David L Mathews To: CityCouncil; Tim Sanders; Chris Ford; Jess Robertson; Terra Fleming; Tom Newland; Leslie Larson; Chris Massoglia Cc: Planning; Cathy Sorensen Subject: ADDENDUM: Pre-emptive technical clarification regarding expected developer rebuttals (June 1 Vote) Date: Friday, May 29, 2026 1:30:52 PM Dear Mayor Sanders and Blaine City Council Members, As a follow-up to my previous technical objection regarding the Montean Meadows plan (Case File No. 26-0017), I am writing to provide a matter-of-fact addendum to anticipate and disarm the standard corporate rebuttals the developer will likely present to you to push past neighborhood concerns: The "Deferred Engineering" Defense: The developer will likely argue that full- corridor ADA specifications, utility depths, and county intersection layouts are details meant for the final engineering phase, rather than this zoning/CUP phase. However, because a true, full-corridor ADA design requires widening the road footprint and changing slopes directly onto my property across the street, their current 86-lot configuration is built on an unverified and legally unbuildable boundary line. The "Internal Retention Sufficiency" Fallacy: The developer's team will claim that their small internal pond handles all necessary stormwater runoff. This completely ignores the unpaved reality of 131st Avenue NE. Converting a porous gravel road into an impervious paved surface accelerates water flow. Without a continuous underground storm sewer infrastructure network extending all the way east to Lexington Avenue (Hwy 17), the roadway grading will naturally use gravity to direct thousands of gallons of sheet stormwater runoff directly across the street, flooding my private lawn and drowning my trees' root systems. The "Right-of-Way Exemption" Tree Defense: The developer may claim that trees removed or damaged for public roadway improvements are exempt from standard city replacement math and mitigation fees. While that may apply inside an established public right-of-way, 131st Avenue NE is a narrow gravel road with an easement limited to the existing driving surface. Ripping, grading, or cutting the critical root zones on my private property across the street without a signed easement is civil timber trespass under Minnesota law, regardless of public project exemptions. Unpermitted Heavy Construction Staging Traffic: By only paving the western 1/4 mile, the developer intends to use the remaining eastern unpaved gravel road as an unmanaged staging and haul corridor for heavy dump trucks and concrete machinery. This creates an immediate safety hazard, generates severe dust pollution, and will structurally destabilize the shallow root networks of the mature trees within 15 feet of the road before full-corridor permitting is ever finalized. Page 231 of 385I request that the Council not allow the developer to gloss over these off-site corridor deficiencies with promises of "fixing it later." Please table this vote on June 1st until the developer proves they have the legal right-of-way, the Anoka County highway permits, and a continuous ADA/stormwater design all the way to Lexington Avenue. Sincerely, David L Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE 612-240-3631 Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 232 of 385From: David L Mathews To: Lucy Gray; Planning Subject: Subject: Inquiry Regarding Infrastructure Cost Sharing & Assessments - 3650 131st Ave NE Date: Friday, June 5, 2026 8:50:28 AM Dear Blaine Engineering and Planning Departments, I am writing to request clarification in writing regarding the infrastructure cost-sharing and special assessment structure for my property at 3650 131st Ave NE, specifically related to the Montean Meadows project. During a recent planning meeting, city staff indicated that I would not be required to pay for the water and sewer infrastructure until my property is actively connected to these city systems. However, street improvements were not explicitly discussed. To help me properly plan, could you please clarify the following questions: 1. Street Infrastructure Billing: Is the street portion of the infrastructure project billed separately? Will I be assessed and billed for the street improvements immediately, even though my water and sewer charges are delayed until connection? 2. Transferability of Deferrals: If the water and sewer charges are deferred until connection, does this deferral remain with the property if the property is sold? If I sell the property to a private individual before hooking up, will these deferred assessments be due at closing, or can the next owner inherit the same arrangement? Could you please provide a formal breakdown of any current, pending, or deferred assessments associated with my parcel? Thank you for your time and assistance. I look forward to your guidance. Sincerely, David L Mathews 612-240-3631 Property Owner, 3650 131st Ave NE Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 233 of 385From: Connie Larson To: Planning Subject: Montean Meadows - improvements reimbursement period Date: Friday, June 5, 2026 9:53:36 AM Hello - I live at 3465 131st Ave NE and will be impacted by the Montean project. I want to formally state that any reimbursement period for the improvements paid for by Montean Development longer than 8 years is not reasonable or fair. There have been many mentions of this period being between 5 and 10 years. I feel that at most 8 years is fair. I understand that a period of 12 years has been recommended by Montean, which is why I would like to submit my recommendation of 8 years max. I further understand that this will be on the agenda for the June 15 council meeting, and at this time I am not able to attend. If you have any questions please feel free to email or call me. Thank you for accepting and representing my recommendation. Regards, Connie Larson 612 802-8919 Page 234 of 385 City of Blaine Planning Commission May 12, 2026 | 7:00 PM Blaine City Hall 10801 Town Square Drive NE Blaine, MN 55449 MINUTES 1. Call to Order The Blaine planning commission met in the City Hall Chambers on Tuesday, May 12, 2026. Chair Goracke called the meeting to order at 7:00PM. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commission Members Freeman, Geiselhart, Howard, Olson, Swanson, and Chair Goracke. Members Absent: Commission Member Halpern. Staff Present: Shawn Kaye, Planner Alex Koberoski, Assistant Planner Teresa Barnes, Project Engineer 4. Public Hearing 4.3. 2026-206 Case File 26-0017 // Mark Montean // 3621 131st Avenue NE The applicant is requesting the following: 1. Rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF). 2. Preliminary plat to subdivide 39.68 acres into 86 single family lots and 2 outlots to be known as Montean Meadows. 3. Conditional use permit to allow the construction of 86 single-family homes in a Development Flex (DF) zoning district. Sponsors: Shawn Kaye, Planner The report to the planning commission was presented by Shawn Kaye, Planner. Page 235 of 385Chair Goracke asked if the gravel road would be paved by the city. Project Engineer Barnes explained the gravel road will be paved from Legacy Creek Parkway to the eastern property line of the Montean Meadows development. The public hearing for Case File 26-0017 was opened at 7:28PM. Dave Mathews, resident of Blaine, read a prepared statement to the commission. He stated he has lived adjacent to the subject property for the past 40 years and he objected to the proposed development. He reported this proposal was using a predatory funding model that required eight adjacent property owners to pay 67% of the projects $2.5 million infrastructure costs. Meanwhile, the developer only has to pay 33%. He requested the city require the developer to pay all of the infrastructure costs and place zero burden on the non-participating adjacent landowners. He was of the opinion the rezoning from farm residential to development flex would set a dangerous precedent. He indicated this would lead to higher property taxes that could tax him out of his home. He stated adding 86 homes to 131st Avenue NE would violate Minnesota State Chapter 160 regarding low volume road safety threshold. He recommended the developer be required to pave all of 131st Avenue NE in its entirety. He wanted to be assured that he would not have to hook up to city water and sewer. He reiterated that he did not believe the adjacent property owners should have to subsidize this project in order for this property owner to profit from the proposed development. He recommended this application be denied by the city. Blaine Krugerud, resident of Ham Lake, thanked the city for communicating with him on this project. He commented his concern was with how Shenandoah Road would be impacted. He asked that this new development not connect to Shenandoah Road. He suggested the homes along the northern property line of this development have a fence or landscaping buffer. Jon Gorzycki, 4442 123rd Circle NE, explained this development was being put in on an island as it would be completely surrounded by farm residential and would be serviced by a dirt road. He expressed concern with the fact this project did not meet key conditional use permit criteria when it comes to traffic safety and infrastructure. He indicated this project would add 86 homes, yet the primary access road remains unpaved, which was a safety risk. He suggested the planning commission consider amendments or direct this item back to a council workshop meeting for further review. Jeff Frey, resident of Ham Lake, explained he lived directly north of the proposed development. He indicated this lot was heavily wooded and he did not want his mature oak trees to be damaged during the development of this property. Dan Werra, 3811 131st Avenue, reported he lived on the dirt road. He understood the developer wanted the dirt road to be paved. He asked if a petition could be brought forward to ensure the entire roadway was paved for safety purposes. He explained he supported the developer incurring the costs for paving this roadway due to the hardship he was creating through his development. He discussed how the water tables in Blaine were dropping due to all the development that has occurred in the community. He requested the city take this into consideration because he did not want his well to be impacted by this development. Page 236 of 385Richard Fallstrom, 3810 131st Avenue, stated he appreciated the concerns that were being raised by his neighbors. He understood this project has been in the works since 2024 and questioned why the neighbors were only hearing about it now. He commented on how those living on 131st Avenue would be impacted by this development, if it were approved, noting there would be a great deal of dust rolling across the road into his home. He was of the opinion it did not make sense to pave three-fourths of the road and not all of the roadway. He stated the surrounding property owners will be forced to develop and then 131st Avenue would not be serving just these 86 houses and the existing property owners, but rather this roadway would be serving hundreds and hundreds of houses. He supported the developer paying for the paving of 131st Avenue because the pavement was needed to serve his development. He asked that he not be required to hook up to city water and sewer until he has problem with his septic tank. Chris Grazulis, 3790 131st Avenue, stated he was confused by the financing. He questioned how the homeowners would be impacted by the lift station and street. He was of the opinion that it was unfair to push infrastructure costs onto the adjacent homeowners when the cost should be borne fully by the developer. Mike Bayer, 3403 131st Avenue, explained he has lived on 131st Avenue since 1994. He indicated he has been waiting for the day these properties would develop. He stated he was surprised 131st Avenue has been a dirt road this long. He commented he would like the city to have an opinion on this roadway. He reported the developer has lived in Blaine his entire life and would get half of the road paved, which would benefit all of Blaine. He stated he supported the proposed development moving forward. Char Oestreich, 3698 131st Avenue, explained she has a small parcel that will be across from a new residential street. She indicated the new paved road would end at the edge of her property. She commented on how dusty her home and vehicles were. She reported she had a problem with the partial pavement idea, especially given the number of vehicles that would be added to this roadway. She stated she took issue with the funding that would be provided to the developer for infrastructure costs. She noted she had no desire to hook up to city water and sewer, nor was she interested in incurring expenses for the pavement or infrastructure costs. Liz Grazulis, 3790 131st Avenue, explained she has lived in Blaine since 1994. She encouraged the commissioners to drive down 131st Avenue in order to understand the safety concerns. She indicated she was concerned with the fact the developer was proposing to pave only half of the roadway. She discussed how Blaine was growing quickly and she feared the schools were not keeping up. The public hearing was closed at 7:57PM. Chair Goracke invited the applicant to come forward at this time in order to address the questions that were raised during the public hearing. Mark Montean, the applicant, reported the development costs were quite high and stated he could not afford to develop his 40 acres if he had to pay for all the infrastructure costs. He explained he could get more for the property working with a developer than selling the property to an individual party. He understood that traffic had increased since 131st Avenue Page 237 of 385was connected to Legacy Creek. He explained he no longer lived along 131st Avenue and his renter has requested the roadway be treated due to the high levels of dust. He stated the cost to develop a single lot was $75,000 plus the lift station and roadway. He commented further on the large amount of money that had to be spent to protect the endangered plants on his property. Chair Goracke requested further information regarding the 67%/33% split for the infrastructure costs and asked if this split had been used in the past. Project Engineer Barnes explained this process has been done in the past. She reported the 67% would be split between the eight benefiting properties. However, if these properties do not develop in the next five to ten years they would not be required to pay. However, if these properties were to subdivide, then the property owner would be responsible for their portion of the costs. Chair Goracke requested staff speak to how the existing wells would be impacted by this project. Project Engineer Barnes reported the 86 new lots would be required to connect to city water and sewer. She stated the water lines brought to this development will not impact the existing wells in the area. Chair Goracke inquired how traffic would impact 131st Avenue. Project Engineer Barnes reported paving 131st Avenue from Legacy Parkway to the eastern property line was being done to manage the amount of traffic that would incur from this development. Chair Goracke asked if the city had ever paved only half of a street for a development in Blaine. Project Engineer Barnes stated she could not recall this being done in the past. She indicated the portion of the roadway being developed was being paved as it was within Sanitary Sewer District No. 6. She explained the properties on the eastern portion of 131st Avenue were part of Sanitary Sewer District No. 7 and lines would have to come from Zest Street and 125th. She indicated it was not city policy to pave a roadway until the utilities are placed underneath it. Chair Goracke questioned how many farm residential properties have been rezoned to development flex in recent years. Planner Kaye reported in the last several years, five to ten properties in Blaine were rezoned to development flex. Chair Goracke asked if the developer would be installing a fence along the north property line. Planner Kaye indicated the city does not require developers to install a fence along the property lines where projects abut single family homes. She explained the homeowners in Page 238 of 385Ham Lake could install a fence along the property line. Commissioner Olson stated the existing homeowners would not be required to abandon their wells and septic. Chair Goracke reported this was correct. Commissioner Olson encouraged the developer to be cautious of the mature oaks along the property line so as not to damage the 100 year old oak trees on the neighboring properties. Planner Kaye stated Project Engineer Barnes would be working closely with the developer on this matter to ensure the trees were projected. Project Engineer Barnes indicated there was a drainage and utility easement for the rears of these properties to account for the stormwater, which meant nothing structural could be located in the rears of these lots. Commissioner Olson inquired if Legacy Creek Parkway was designed to handle the traffic from another 86 homes. Project Engineer Barnes reported Legacy Creek Parkway was designed to handle the residential capacities and anticipated development over the entire area. Commissioner Olson stated developing land was expensive, and she did not believe the burden of a development should be passed off to adjacent property owners. Planner Kaye clarified that these costs would only be passed onto the adjacent property owners if they chose to subdivide their properties in the next five to ten years. Chair Goracke questioned if a neighborhood meeting was held for this development. Mr. Montean reported he has been working with an engineering firm since 2018 on this project. He stated it has been very difficult to pull together this project, given that it was on an island and had to be serviced by city water and sewer. He indicated this led him to hire an engineer to assist with the project planning. Planner Kaye explained a neighborhood meeting was not required for single-family. Chair Goracke encouraged the developer and his team members to meet with the neighbors after this meeting outside the council chambers in order to address any additional questions the neighbors may have. Commissioner Olson requested further information on the eight properties that would have to bear 67% of the infrastructure costs. Project Engineer Barnes explained the proposed development is approximately 40 acres compared to the eight other benefiting properties that totaled 70 acres in combination and would only have to incur the costs if they chose to develop their property in the next five to ten years. Page 239 of 385 Chair Goracke encouraged the eight property owners in question to contact their city council representatives in order to receive clarification on if this will be five or ten years. Commissioner Geiselhart indicated the eight property owners would benefit from the infrastructure that was already in place and would only have to pay their portion of the costs if they chose to develop. Motion by Commissioner Howard to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0017A a rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF), with the following rationale: Case 26-0017A: 1. The DF zoning standards to be incorporated are consistent with and will complement homes and housing options that have been constructed within recent developments. The standards will create an attractive benchmark of quality homes with a desired range in appearance, style, density, and construction value and market appeal. 2. The DF zoning district allows the City the opportunity to have some flexibility when approving developments that warrant higher standards than what is allowed with the traditional zoning districts. It affords the City the opportunity to provide input on items that would benefit the surrounding neighborhoods and the City as a whole. Motion by Commissioner Howard to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0017B a preliminary plat to subdivide 39.68 acres into 86 single family lots and 2 outlots to be known as Montean Meadows with the following conditions: Case 26-0017B: 1. Park dedication will be required for the 86 new lots being constructed at the rate of $5,800 per unit (2026 rate), for a total park dedication fee of $498,800 if paid in 2026. This amount must be paid prior to releasing the plat mylars for recording at Anoka County. 2. The development is required to complete the construction of the 131st Avenue NE corridor, from the north end of Legacy Creek Parkway to the east property line of the proposed plat. The developer has requested the City to coordinate a reimbursement for the installation of 131st Avenue to the benefiting parcels as they develop. 3. The developer will be responsible for Trunk Sanitary Sewer area charges. These charges become due with platting for upland acreage. The 2026 rate for Sanitary Sewer District 6-5 is $8,344.00 per upland acre and will be applied to the acreage platted. This phase is proposing to develop 31.5 acres of upland for a total sewer area charge of $262,836.00. 4. The overall development shall be certified by a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Minnesota and indicate that all structures shall be protected from flooding. Page 240 of 385 5. Plans and specifications must be approved by the City prior to the start of construction. 6. Coon Creek Watershed District (CCWD) permit is required prior to city approval of construction plans and specifications. 7. Development requires a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). A prerequisite to the MPCA permit application includes preparation of a site Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the development site. 8. Construction contract documents shall include a mass (rough) grading, erosion protection, sediment control, development, utilities, roadway, and storm drainage plan sheets. Supporting wetland delineation report, geotechnical investigation report, soil boring logs, and hydrology report shall be included in the submittal for city review and approval. 9. The grading plan shall provide greater detail on protecting existing trees and provide additional information on adjacent property. 10. Standard utility and drainage easements must be dedicated along all lot lines and over areas of delineated wetlands, wetland mitigation, infiltration trenches, drainage swales, and storm water management ponds. 11. A protective buffer strip of natural vegetation, at least 15 feet in width (25-feet is preferred) shall surround all wetlands. This buffer strip shall be placed in easement. 12. The developer is to provide access for inspection and maintenance of storm water management infrastructure. Restrictions will be placed on lot lines as needed to limit fences and landscaping to ensure access. 13. All local public streets require dedication of 60 feet of right-of-way and shall be constructed to 29 feet back to back of width. 14. 131st Avenue NE will be required to be built to State Aid Standards. 15. All streets will follow the Anoka County street name grid system. 16. Street and utility extensions are required to the edge of the plat for each future connection to the adjacent parcels. 17. Sidewalks and or trails are required on all streets and location will be determined in the plan review process. 18. Streetlights shall be installed in the manner, location and type prescribed by the City Engineer. The developer shall pay the costs of all street lighting installations. The City agrees to pay the cost of maintaining the portion of lights that are installed that reflect the normal and typical lighting requirements of the City. Additional lights, and those within neighborhoods that are installed by the Developer, will be required to be maintained by the Homeowners Association. 19. Hydrant locations must be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department. 20. Water and sanitary sewer availability charges (WAC & SAC) become due with each building permit at the rate established at the time the building permit is issued. 21. As-built surveys shall be required to verify structure elevations, custom grading requirements, and final lot grading elevations. 22. The Developer shall process a Letter of Map Change with FEMA prior to issuance of building permits within the unnumbered A-Zone on the FEMA flood map. Developer shall provide all FEMA paperwork and structure as-built Page 241 of 385 surveys to homeowners at time of lot closing. Developer is responsible for following through with FEMA (as necessary) to receive final FEMA documents, to provide those documents to the homeowners, and to record the final documents on the certificate of title for each parcel in the development. 23. Developer to install grouped mailboxes with design and locations approved by the City and US Postal Service. 24. All development signage by separate review. 25. Each lot in the development will be required to have the standard two trees with a minimum of 2½-inch caliper per lot. One tree will be required in the front yard and one tree may be planted in the rear or front yard. Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 26. Seventy-eight trees are required to be planted adjacent to 131st Avenue in the rear yards of Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7. 27. The developer must meet the City’s tree preservation requirements by planting 98 replacement trees for the lots that are preliminary platted (12.2 disturbed acres). This requirement can be met with the required front and rear yard trees, and trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 28. All existing structure removals will require demolition permits. All wells and septic systems shall be properly abandoned per all local and state requirements. 29. All existing structures on site shall be removed prior to the final plat being released for recording. 30. The developer is responsible for recording the plat mylars with Anoka County. Proof of recording must be provided to the City prior to issuance of building permits. 31. Execution and recording of a development agreement, which sets forth in greater detail the plat conditions as well as other responsibilities for the development of this plat. Motion by Commissioner Howard to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0017C a conditional use permit to allow construction of 86 single-family homes in a Development Flex (DF) zoning district with the following conditions: Case 26-0017C: Single Family - Development Flex (DF) Development Standards Permitted Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwellings 2. Group family daycare Accessory Uses: 1. Private attached garages - one detached accessory structure, with area less than 120 square feet, will be permitted. Page 242 of 385 2. Private swimming pools meeting the requirements of Blaine Municipal Code Chapter 18 Article III. 3. Keeping of not more than two (2) boarders and/or roomers per dwelling unit. Conditional Uses: 1. Home occupations listed as conditional uses in Section 129-10 Standards: • Front yard setback - 25 feet • Side yard setback - 7.5 feet (house and garage) • Corner side yard setback - 20 feet • Rear yard setback - 30 feet 1. Maximum building height — 2 1/2 stories or 35 feet. 2. It shall be required for all single-family dwellings that there be an attached garage constructed of a minimum of four hundred (400) square feet, with no dimension less than 20 feet. Total garage space shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet. Detached garages or accessory storage buildings are not permitted. 3. The minimum finished floor area above grade for all homes shall be 1,500 square feet above ground for a single-level home and 2,500 square feet above ground for a two-story home. 4. All homes shall have a minimum depth and width of 24 feet. 5. All homes to incorporate multiple gables or varied rooflines and articulation of the front façade. Premium materials such as brick, natural stone, stucco, cementitious or engineered wood siding or shake shingle siding on all front elevations. Vinyl/metal siding can be utilized on the side and rear elevations. 6. All residential dwellings must be built in conformance with the current edition of the Minnesota State Building Code. 7. Driveways shall not be constructed closer than three feet to the property line. All driveways and approaches shall be hard surfaced using concrete, bituminous asphalt or other city-approved material that is consistent in durability and quality. 8. It shall be required that all yards of a new single-family dwelling be sodded over a minimum of 4-inches of topsoil (black dirt containing not more than 35 percent sand). Yards may be seeded over 4-inches of black dirt if underground irrigation is installed with the home. 9. Each lot in the development will be required to have two trees with a minimum of 2½-inch caliper per lot. One tree will be required in the front yard (not boulevard) and one tree may be planted in the rear or front yard. Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 10. The developer to require the Homeowners Association to maintain all common areas. 11. All development entrance signage by separate permit. Page 243 of 385 Motion seconded by Commissioner Swanson. The motion passed 5-1 (Commissioner Olson opposed). Chair Goracke noted this would be on the agenda of the June 1, 2026 city council meeting. Page 244 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-109 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Development Business - Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director Agenda Item # 9.2 Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval to Subdivide 39.68 Acres into 86 Single Family Lots and 2 Outlots to be Known as Montean Meadows at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Mark Montean (Case File No. 26- 0017/SLK) Executive Summary The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval to develop the site into 86 single family lots and 2 outlots for wetlands and ponding. Background Planning Commission Public Hearing May 12, 2026 City Council (Preliminary Plat) June 15, 2026 City Council (Final Plat) TBD Action Deadline (60 Days) June 16, 2026 Action Deadline (City Extended — 60 Days) August 15, 2026 Staff report prepared by Shawn Kaye, Planner, and Teresa Barnes, Project Engineer. Preliminary Plat Standards of Review The planning commission shall make a recommendation on the preliminary plat considering conformance with the city's comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, this chapter and all chapters of this code. Evaluation of Request Planning Analysis Surrounding Zoning and Uses The properties to the north are single family and located in Ham Lake. The properties to the west, east, and south have single family homes and are zoned Farm Residential (FR). Page 245 of 385 Current Zoning The site is currently zoned Farm Residential (FR). The FR district is intended for areas where urban services are not presently available. A minimum lot size of ten acres will retain these lands in their natural uses and agricultural uses pending proper timing of economic provision for parks, streets, utilities, and other public facilities, so that orderly development will occur. Proposed Zoning The proposed zoning is Development Flex (DF). The DF district is intended to provide for greater flexibility in land use planning, and maximize the choice of housing types and styles than is possible under the strict application of other sections of this ordinance. The DF district also attempts to create a reasonable balance between the interests of the property owner in freely developing their property with greater flexibility in land uses, and at the same time, protect the interest of surrounding properties in the following ways: a. By encouraging a more creative approach in housing developments, that will result in quality living environments through innovative design and aesthetic controls; b. By permitting a combination of housing types and style, including single, two-family, and multiple-family dwellings, with the exception of mobile homes; c. By allowing flexibility in design by permitting cluster developments and a variety of architectural styles and treatments; d. By allowing for any type of ownership, private, condominium, or rental; e. By allowing flexibility in setback and height restrictions; f. By allowing non-residential uses, such as commercial or light industrial uses which will serve the inhabitants of such district, provided such non-residential uses will enhance the character, amenities, and convenience of those who live in the proposed development; g. By providing an efficient use of land resulting in more cost-efficient installation of utilities, streets, and other facilities. h. By encouraging the preservation of common open space, recreational facilities, natural features, such as woodland and wetland areas; i. By contributing to the tax base of the community without making undue demands on the community services; and j. By providing the means for greater creativity and flexibility in environmental design than is provided under the strict application of the Blaine Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance, while, at the same time, preserving the health, safety, order, convenience, prosperity, and general welfare of the City of Blaine and its inhabitants. A rezoning to DF is necessary as the R-1 district requires a minimum lot width of 80 feet, lot depth of 125 feet, and a 10,000 sf lot size. Land Use Designation The subject site is designated Low Density Residential (LDR) in the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The LDR designation is for single-family homes with a density of 2.5–6 units an acre. The proposal meets this designation with single-family, and a density of 2.73 units/acre. Existing Conditions The site is currently made up of two parcels with frontage on 131st Avenue. The southwest parcel has a single family home and detached accessory building. The larger parcel is vacant. Page 246 of 385 History There are no previous approvals on this property. The applicant requested feedback on rezoning to DF for 101 single-family homes at an August 2025 City Council Workshop meeting. The plan included 101 homes, including eight 80-foot wide lots and the remaining 93 lots split approximately evenly between 65-foot and 70-foot lots. At that meeting, council provided feedback that all lots should be 70 feet wide or wider. The applicant returned to a council workshop in February 2026 and requested feedback on rezoning to DF for: • 80 foot lots - 9 • 70 foot lots - 62 • 65 foot lots - 15 Council consensus was to require 70-foot-wide lots (at a minimum), and would consider cost-share proposals for street and sanitary sewer. Plat The preliminary plat creates 86 single family lots and 2 outlots for ponding and wetlands. The DF zoning district does not have minimum lot sizes. The lot width of most lots is 70 feet wide with corner lots being wider. As proposed, the lot sizes are as follows: • Single family lots range from 8,750 s.f to 13,045 s.f. • Outlot A - .30 acres • Outlot B - 12.91 acres Architecture The proposed single-family homes will have varying roof styles and exterior treatments. All homes constructed should be consistent in architecture, materials and style with the drawings/elevations submitted for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval. Use of premium materials such as brick, natural stone, stucco, cementitious or engineered wood siding or shake shingle siding are to be used on all front elevations. Vinyl/metal siding can be utilized on the side and rear elevations. Setbacks The DF zoning district does not have set standards for setbacks; these are determined as part of the CUP. The setbacks are as follows: • Front yard setback - 25 feet • Side yard setback - 7.5 feet (house and garage) • Corner side yard setback - 20 feet • Rear yard setback - 30 feet Page 247 of 385 Landscaping The landscape plan proposes one front yard tree and one rear yard tree in the rear yard, except for Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. Tree Preservation Approximately 12.2 acres of trees will be disturbed during construction and the City’s tree preservation requirement includes replacing eight trees per acre for all disturbed portions of the development. This would mean that 98 trees would be required for tree replacement purposes. The developer has proposed a total of 258 trees within this development. The tree preservation replacement requirement has been met. A total of 3.6 acres of trees are proposed to be saved on the site. Park Dedication Park dedication will be required for the 86 new single-family lots being constructed at the rate of $5,800 per unit (2026 rate) for a total park dedication fee of $498,800 if paid in 2026. This amount must be paid prior to releasing the plat mylars for recording at Anoka County. Engineering Analysis Grading/Storm Drainage The developer is proposing to grade the entire site as shown on the Coon Creek Watershed District (CCWD) and city approved grading, drainage, erosion protection and sediment control plans prepared by the developer's engineer. The plans shall include existing drainage patterns (contours) with flow arrows, soil boring locations, perimeter site protection, tree preservation, tree clearing limits, custom grading, proposed grading contours, proposed drainage patterns with flow arrows, storm water management, SWPPP information, temporary erosion protection Best Management Practices (BMPs), and temporary sediment control BMPs information for the site. The SWPPP may be included in the construction plan sheet(s) or prepared as a separate document and included in the development construction contract specifications. The developer will also need to submit construction contract documents that include a mass (rough) grading, erosion protection, sediment control, development, utilities, roadway, and storm drainage plan sheets. Supporting wetland delineation report, geotechnical investigation report, soil boring logs, and hydrology report shall be included in the submittal for city review and approval. The grading plan shall provide greater detail on protecting existing trees and provide additional information on adjacent property. For each lot a house is proposed to be constructed on, as-built surveys shall be required to verify structure elevations, custom grading requirements, and final lot grading elevations. Utilities The developer has requested the City to coordinate reimbursement for the installation of the regional sanitary sewer system, including the required lift station within the 131st Avenue corridor for the benefiting parcels. If they develop in the next 12 years, at such time, the opportunity for reimbursement will terminate. The installation will also include the public water main along the 131st Avenue corridor. Page 248 of 385 The developer will be responsible for trunk sanitary sewer area charges. These charges become due with platting for upland acreage. The 2026 rate for Sanitary Sewer District 6-5 is $8,344.00 per upland acre and will be applied to the acreage platted. This phase is proposing to develop 31.5 acres of upland for a total sewer area charge of $262,836.00. Standard Water and Sanitary Sewer Access Charges (WAC & SAC) become due with each building permit at the rate established at the time the building permit is issued. Utilities will be extended to the edge of the plat for future connection to adjacent parcels. Hydrant locations must be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department. The developer shall explore water sources for landscape irrigation systems installed throughout the development, including the possible use of created ponds or storm water reuse. Wetlands/Watershed/FEMA The plat will need to provide for a protective buffer strip of natural vegetation at least 15-feet in width (25-feet is preferred) and shall surround all wetlands. This buffer strip shall be placed in an easement. The developer will need to submit the project to CCWD. Review, approval and permits are required prior to city plan approval and start of site work. The development shall indicate that all structures are protected from flooding by processing a Letter of Map Change with FEMA prior to issuance of building permits within the unnumbered A-Zone on the FEMA flood map. Developer shall provide all FEMA paperwork and structure as-built surveys to homeowners at the time of lot closing. The developer is responsible for following through with FEMA (as necessary) to receive final documents, to provide those documents to the homeowners, and to record these on the certificate of title for each parcel in the development. Access/Street Design/Sidewalks/Trails The development is proposing to gain/provide access from the construction of 131st Avenue NE beginning at the north end of Legacy Creek Parkway. 131st Avenue NE is a state aid roadway and will need to be constructed to state aid standards, including a trail and sidewalk. The developer has requested the City coordinate a reimbursement for the installation of 131st Avenue to the benefiting parcels. If they develop in the next 12 years, at such time, the opportunity for reimbursement will terminate. All local roads shall be constructed to 29-feet back of curb to back of curb in width and will extend to the edge of the plat for future connection with adjacent parcels. Six-foot concrete sidewalks are required to be constructed on one side of all local streets. Location to be determined in the plan review process. Trails shall be required to be constructed in accordance with current city standards. Location to be determined in the plan review process. Page 249 of 385 As part of the street design, the development will be required to provide streetlights installed in the manner, location and type prescribed by the City Engineer. The developer shall pay the costs of all the street lighting installations. The City agrees to pay the cost of maintaining the portion of the lights that are installed that reflect the normal and typical lighting requirements by the City. Easements/Right-of-way/Permits Dedication of public right-of-way along the 131st Avenue corridor will be required. The developer will need to obtain all required permits to construct the proposed project. A copy of all permits will need to be submitted to the City prior to any site work. Standard drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated along all lot lines and over areas of delineated wetlands, wetland mitigation, infiltration trenches, drainage swales, and storm water management ponds. All local public streets require dedication of 60-feet of right-of-way. The developer is to provide access for inspection and maintenance of storm water management infrastructure. This maintenance access shall be a minimum of 10-feet wide and allow for vehicular access. Restrictions will be placed on lot lines as needed to limit fences and landscaping to ensure access. Attachment List: Zoning and Location Map Preliminary Plat (3) Grading Plan (3) Landscape Plan Tree Preservation Plan House Elevations Narrative Cost Share 131st Improvements Public Comments Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes Strategic Plan Relationship Not applicable. Board/Commission Review The Planning Commission voted 5-1 to approve the preliminary plat. The meeting minutes are attached for reference on the public hearing comments. Financial Impact Not applicable. Page 250 of 385 Public Outreach/Input Notices of a public hearing were: 1. Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the property boundaries. 2. Published in Blaine/Spring Lake Park/Columbia Heights/Fridley Life. 3. Posted on the City website. 4. Posted (sign) on the property with contact information for the Planning Department. Staff Recommendation By motion, adopt the resolution. Attachment List 1. Attachments 2. Public Comments 3. Unapproved PC Minutes Page 251 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-109 Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval to Subdivide 39.68 Acres into 86 Single Family Lots and 2 Outlots to be Known as Montean Meadows at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Mark Montean (Case File No. 26-0017/SLK) WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Montean Properties, LLC, Case File No. 26-0017 for a preliminary plat known as Montean Meadows; and WHEREAS, said case involves the division of land described as follows: The Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4), Section Two (2), Township Thirty- one (31), Range Twenty-three {23), Anoka County, Minnesota, Except that port herein described, as follows: Commencing at the Southwest comer of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence North along the West line thereof for 300 feet; proceeding thence East and parallel to the South line of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4), for a distance of 400 feet; proceeding thence South and parallel to said West line for a distance of 300 feet and to the South line of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence West along said South line to the point of commencement. Subject to existing road. AND, That port of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4) Section Two (2), Township Thirty-one (31), Range Twenty-three (23), that is described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence North along the West line thereof for 300 feet; proceeding thence East and parallel to the South line of sold Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4), for a distance of 400 feet; proceeding thence South and parallel to said West line for a distance of 300 feet and to the South line of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence West along said South line to the point of commencement. Subject to existing road. {abstract property) WHEREAS, the Blaine Planning Commission has reviewed said case file on May 12, 2026; and WHEREAS, the preliminary plat meets the general requirements of section 74-46 of the Blaine Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, the Blaine Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 12, 2026 and recommend approval regarding said plat with conditions; and Page 252 of 385 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Blaine that preliminary plat approval per Section 74-46 of the subdivision regulations is hereby granted for Montean Meadows permitting preparation of a final plat for approval per Section 74-47 subject to the listed conditions. 1. Park dedication will be required for the 86 new lots being constructed at the rate of $5,800 per unit (2026 rate), for a total park dedication fee of $498,800 if paid in 2026. This amount must be paid prior to releasing the plat mylars for recording at Anoka County. 2. The development is required to complete the construction of the 131st Avenue NE corridor, from the north end of Legacy Creek Parkway to the east property line of the proposed plat. The developer has requested the City to coordinate a 12-year reimbursement for the installation of 131st Avenue to the benefiting parcels if they develop. 3. The development is required to install a lift station to provide service to the proposed development and the surrounding sewer disctrict. The developer has requested the City to coordinate a 12-year reimbursement for the installation of the lift station and trunk sanitary sewer to the benefiting parcels if they develop. 4. The developer will be responsible for Trunk Sanitary Sewer area charges. These charges become due with platting for upland acreage. The 2026 rate for Sanitary Sewer District 6-5 is $8,344.00 per upland acre and will be applied to the acreage platted. This phase is proposing to develop 31.5 acres of upland for a total sewer area charge of $262,836.00. 5. The overall development shall be certified by a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Minnesota and indicate that all structures shall be protected from flooding. 6. Plans and specifications must be approved by the City prior to the start of construction. 7. Coon Creek Watershed District (CCWD) permit is required prior to city approval of construction plans and specifications. 8. Development requires a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). A prerequisite to the MPCA permit application includes preparation of a site Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the development site. 9. Construction contract documents shall include a mass (rough) grading, erosion protection, sediment control, development, utilities, roadway, and storm drainage plan sheets. Supporting wetland delineation report, geotechnical investigation report, soil boring logs, and hydrology report shall be included in the submittal for city review and approval. 10. The grading plan shall provide greater detail on protecting existing trees and provide additional information on adjacent property. 11. Standard utility and drainage easements must be dedicated along all lot lines and over areas of delineated wetlands, wetland mitigation, infiltration trenches, drainage swales, and storm water management ponds. 12. A protective buffer strip of natural vegetation, at least 15 feet in width (25-feet is preferred) shall surround all wetlands. This buffer strip shall be placed in easement. 13. The developer is to provide access for inspection and maintenance of storm water management infrastructure. Restrictions will be placed on lot lines as needed to limit fences and landscaping to ensure access. 14. All local public streets require dedication of 60 feet of right-of-way and shall be constructed to 29 feet back to back of width. 15. 131st Avenue NE will be required to be built to State Aid Standards. 16. All streets will follow the Anoka County street name grid system. Page 253 of 385 17. Street and utility extensions are required to the edge of the plat for each future connection to the adjacent parcels. 18. Sidewalks and or trails are required on all streets and location will be determined in the plan review process. 19. Streetlights shall be installed in the manner, location and type prescribed by the City Engineer. The developer shall pay the costs of all street lighting installations. The City agrees to pay the cost of maintaining the portion of lights that are installed that reflect the normal and typical lighting requirements of the City. Additional lights, and those within neighborhoods that are installed by the developer, will be required to be maintained by the Homeowners Association. 20. Hydrant locations must be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department. 21. Water and sanitary sewer availability charges (WAC & SAC) become due with each building permit at the rate established at the time the building permit is issued. 22. As-built surveys shall be required to verify structure elevations, custom grading requirements, and final lot grading elevations. 23. The Developer shall process a Letter of Map Change with FEMA prior to issuance of building permits within the unnumbered A-Zone on the FEMA flood map. Developer shall provide all FEMA paperwork and structure as-built surveys to homeowners at time of lot closing. Developer is responsible for following through with FEMA (as necessary) to receive final FEMA documents, to provide those documents to the homeowners, and to record the final documents on the certificate of title for each parcel in the development. 24. Developer to install grouped mailboxes with design and locations approved by the City and US Postal Service. 25. All development signage by separate review. 26. Each lot in the development will be required to have the standard two trees with a minimum of 2½-inch caliper per lot. One tree will be required in the front yard and one tree may be planted in the rear or front yard. Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 27. Seventy-eight trees are required to be planted adjacent to 131st Avenue in the rear yards of Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7. 28. The developer must meet the City’s tree preservation requirements by planting 98 replacement trees for the lots that are preliminary platted (12.2 disturbed acres). This requirement can be met with the required front and rear yard trees, and trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 29. All existing structure removals will require demolition permits. All wells and septic systems shall be properly abandoned per all local and state requirements. 30. All existing structures on site shall be removed prior to the final plat being released for recording. 31. The developer is responsible for recording the plat mylars with Anoka County. Proof of recording must be provided to the City prior to issuance of building permits. 32. Execution and recording of a development agreement, which sets forth in greater detail the plat conditions as well as other responsibilities for the development of this plat. PASSED by City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 254 of 385 FR DF DF DF Project 1 FR DF FR 32 n d A FR DF v Location e DF N E FR 1 3 1 s t A v e N E DF DF DF DF FR 131st Ave NE 130th Ln NE DF Leyte Cir NE FR DF Legacy Woods Open Space DF 129th Ln NE 129th Ct NE DF E N e v A n 129th Ave NE o FR t g DF n i DF x e L DF DF 128th Ln NE 128th Ct NE E N NE Cir Erskin DF y w k DF P FR k e e r C 128th L E n 128th y NE A c ve NE N a M t 128th Ave NE g i S E d e L N w g t r S a DF u te y y b e K DF Tippecanoe St NE L i S s DF s t r k N e a DF t 127th Ln NE E Savanna S e t Grove Park P DF N E 127th Ave NE Legacy Creek Park DF NE e Zoning DF v th A DF 127 127th Ave NE 126th Ln NE DF Xebec St NE Blaine Parcels DF DF Quemoy St Quemoy NE City Parks DF 126th 126th Cir NE Jamestown St NE Jamestown Ave NE 26th DF Project Location FR 1 DF 126th Ave NE FR DF DF DF FR Zest Zest St NE Case File No. 26-0017 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 Miles Montean Meadows Scale: 1:10,878 Blaine Planning Department / 10801 Town Square Dr NE / Blaine, MN 55449 / (763) 785-6180 BlaineMN.gov This map is for general reference only. It is not for legal, engineering, or surveying use. . Page 255 of 385 OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: SHENANDOAH ST. NE OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: STREET E SEE SHEET 5 SITE DATA STREET A OWNER: OWNER: STREET B STREET STREET D SEE SHEET 4 STREET A STREET C LEGEND 131ST AVENUE NE OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: I hereby certify that this survey, plan Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. DRAWN BY: npc Revisions: MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS 3 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: ISSUE DATE: 04/03/26 1230 Sycamore Lane N PRELIMINARY PLAT INDEX of Licensed Land Surveyor under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 40361 FILE NO: 2494 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\survey\pre plat\10143_preplat index.dwg Page 256 of 385 STREET A OWNER: OWNER: STREET B STREET STREET D STREET A STREET C 131ST AVENUE NE OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: I hereby certify that this survey, plan Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. DRAWN BY: npc Revisions: MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS 4 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: ISSUE DATE: 04/03/26 1230 Sycamore Lane N PRELIMINARY PLAT of Licensed Land Surveyor under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 40361 FILE NO: 2494 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\survey\pre plat\10143_preplat.dwg Page 257 of 385 OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: ST. NE OWNER: SHENANDOAH OWNER: STREET E STREET A OWNER: OWNER: STREET B STREET STREET D I hereby certify that this survey, plan Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. DRAWN BY: npc Revisions: MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS 5 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: ISSUE DATE: 04/03/26 1230 Sycamore Lane N PRELIMINARY PLAT of Licensed Land Surveyor under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 40361 FILE NO: 2494 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\survey\pre plat\10143_preplat.dwg Page 258 of 385 H I D D E N F O R E S T G H O S T P L A T 3 4 9 1 G H O S T3 5 3 1 3 4 4 1 3 4 6 5 P L A T 3 7 8 1 3 7 5 0 C I T Y P A R K 3 6 1 0 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 C O T TC AO G V EE W O O D R Know what's below. Callbefore you dig. Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY GRADING & 11 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota EROSION CONTROL INDEX the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_gr.dwg #10143 Page 259 of 385 G H O S T P L A T 3 7 8 1 3 7 5 0 3 6 1 0 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY GRADING & 13 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota EROSION CONTROL PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_gr.dwg #10143 Page 260 of 385 H I D D E N F O R E S T Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY GRADING & 14 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota EROSION CONTROL PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_gr.dwg #10143 Page 261 of 385 H I D D E N F O R E S T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T 3 4 4 1 3 4 6 5 3 4 9 1 3 5 3 1 3 7 8 1 3 6 1 0 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 7 5 0 C O T T A G E W O O D C O V E C I T Y P A R K P R E S E R V E A T R L E G A C Y C R E E K 2 N D A D D I T I O N Know what's below. Callbefore you dig. Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA Drawn: RJR MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY L1 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: RJR 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Landscape Architect under Blaine, Minnesota LANDSCAPE PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 56346 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 4 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\landscape\10143_landscape.dwg #10143 Page 262 of 385 H I D D E N H I D D E N F O R E S T F O R E S T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T 3 4 6 5 3 4 4 1 3 4 9 1 3 5 3 1 C I T Y P A R K 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 7 5 0 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 3 6 1 0 C O T T A G E W O O D C O V E Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS T1 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N TREE PRESERVATION PLAN of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 T116 Save Date: 03/27/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_tree preservation.dwg #10143 Page 263 of 385Lewis Approx. 2,692 sq ft 4 beds • 2.5 baths 3-car garage Folk - C3 Page 264 of 385To: Planning Commission Members, From: Mark Montean Project Background and Site History The subject property was purchased by my family in the spring of 1964. At the time of purchase, it was understood that the area would ultimately be serviced by municipal water and sanitary sewer. For several decades, the property functioned as a hobby farm, utilizing private well and septic systems and reflecting the area’s rural character at that time. In 2008, I began evaluating development potential for the approximately 39-acre site. These efforts were delayed due to the economic downturn and the property’s location outside an eligible sanitary sewer district. Following the passing of the applicant’s parents in 2014 and 2015, the existing residence was renovated and transitioned to a rental use, while the agricultural land continued to be leased to a local farmer. In April 2018, the property was reclassified from Sewer District 7 to Sewer District 6, significantly improving access to municipal water and sanitary sewer infrastructure. Following this change, the applicant engaged Carlson Engineering to prepare multiple concept plans to evaluate feasible development options. During 2024 and 2025, I met with adjacent property owners and participated in two City Council workshops to review development concepts and address site-specific engineering constraints. Based on feedback from City staff and the City Council workshops, the development plan was refined to incorporate environmental considerations, including the preservation of approximately 12 acres of non-developable open space. My family wants to leave a legacy in Blaine. The Michael’s Meadow (open area) will be named after my brother who passed away unexpectedly. These areas include land identified by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources as supporting rare plant species. The current proposal reflects this feedback and seeks to develop the site as an approximately 86-lot residential subdivision. The plan emphasizes larger lot configurations, integration of open space, preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, and neighborhood amenities, including views of onsite ponds. Page 265 of 385 131st Improvements: The developer would like to propose that the cost of the improvements for 131st Avenue NE be paid for up front by the Montean Development. The developer would be reimbursed by each parcel fronting on 131st Avenue as they develop or sell. This reimbursement amount would be based on each parcels proportional share (based on frontage), and would be collected by the city and reimbursed to the developer. COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHARE OF COST (%) COST* DEVELOPMENT 3621 - 131ST AVENUE 1318' 33.0% $511,500.00 PID 02-31-23-21-001 CITY PARK 330' 8.3% $128,650.00 PID 02-31-23-23-005 COTTAGEWOOD COVE N/A** PRESERVE AT LEGACY CREEK N/A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 3465 - 131ST AVENUE 3491 - 131ST AVENUE 3531 - 131ST AVENUE 3610 - 131ST AVENUE 2338' 58.7% $909,850.00 3650 - 131ST AVENUE 3690 - 131ST AVENUE 3698 - 131ST AVENUE 3710 - 131ST AVENUE TOTAL 3986' 100% $1,550,000.00 * Based on Engineers Estimate 2/18/25 (subject to change w/final bid numbers) ** Existing Escrow w/City of Blaine (Amount to be verified by City) Total cost of 131st Avenue Improvements = $1,550,000 (excluding lift station and forcemain) Lift Station The developer also proposes that the lift station & forcemain improvements be paid for up front by the Montean Development. Again the developer would be reimbursed by all the benefitting parcels as they develop/connect. The developer will look to the city for the best method to calculate reimbursment amounts for each benefitting parcel. The estimated cost for the lift station is $550,000 Page 266 of 385From: Patrick Vesperman To: Planning Subject: Montean Meadows Case: 26-0017 Date: Saturday, May 2, 2026 8:38:16 AM Hello, I would like to voice my opposition to Case 26-0017 Montean Meadows rezoning request and development plan. Blaine has shrinking open green space and the area north of 131st is a city gem and should be preserved. Best, -- Patrick Vesperman 651-788-5846 Page 267 of 385 From: David L Mathews To: Sheila Sellman Cc: Terra Fleming; Chris Massoglia; Pat Robinson; Alan Goracke Subject: Formal Objection: Montean Meadows Development - Case 26-0017 (3621 131st Ave NE) Date: Friday, May 8, 2026 12:41:17 PM Dear Ms. Sellman, I am formally submitting my objections regarding Case 26-0017, the proposed Montean Meadows development at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Having resided on the property adjacent to this site for 40 years, I am deeply concerned by the precedent this project sets for the City of Blaine. Specifically, the plan calls for property owners surrounding the project to pay the developer directly for the cost of the project's lift station. This is a highly irregular arrangement that forces neighbors to fund a private developer's essential utility infrastructure. I am requesting formal clarification from the city on whether Blaine has ever allowed a developer to mandate that unattached private property owners pay for the construction of a lift station. My objections are centered on the following critical issues: Zoning Precedent and Tax Impact: I oppose the rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF). This shift creates an expectation that the surrounding properties will be subject to involuntary rezoning in the future, fundamentally altering the character of our established neighborhood. Furthermore, I am deeply concerned that this rezoning will result in significantly higher property taxes for long-standing residents, essentially forcing neighbors to pay higher costs for a development they did not initiate and do not want. Inequitable Infrastructure Costs: The current funding model requires the eight adjacent properties to pay 67% of an estimated $2.5 million in infrastructure costs. In contrast, the developer can spread their 33% share across the entire 86 units in the project, significantly diluting their individual financial burden. Forcing unattached properties to bear the overwhelming financial weight of a private developer’s requirements, including the lift station, mandatory sewer hook-ups, septic removals, and well capping, is fundamentally unjust. I urge the city to require the developer to pay for all infrastructure costs associated with this project and to place no financial burden on non-participating landowners. Page 268 of 385 Traffic and Safety Hazards on 131st Ave NE: The addition of 86 new units will critically overload the currently unpaved gravel road. Under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 160, roads designated for "low-volume" use are generally appropriate only for volumes of fewer than 150 vehicles per day. This development will immediately surpass this threshold. Furthermore, under MN Rule 7470.1100, the city must ensure school bus stops are safe; a high-traffic gravel road creates visibility and braking hazards for students. Paving Requirement to Lexington Avenue: The current plan shows a complete disregard for residents to the east. I urge the council to require that the developer, at their sole expense, pave 131st Ave NE in its entirety from the development site to Lexington Avenue. The city should not allow a developer to shift their primary business expenses onto long-standing residents while failing to provide necessary safety and infrastructure improvements for the impacted community. Please include these comments in the official record for the public hearing on Tuesday, May 12, 2026. Sincerely, David L. Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE, Blaine, MN 612-240-3631 Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 269 of 385From: Rieschl, James B To: Planning Subject: FW: Case File NO. 26-0017 Monteam Medows Date: Thursday, May 7, 2026 7:49:10 PM Attachments: image002.png I will be unable to attend the Public Hearing because I work 2nd shift. My concern is a health issue. I have a rare fungal infection called Blastomycosis (see description below) Everything you are planning on doing is everything I can’t be around for health reasons, moving Rotting trees, Digging, and disruption to the soil and so on . Our property is in Ham Lake along Shenandoah Street. Lot 1 is in contact with our property but only part of it. Is there any way to protect our property from direct contact to this project. Maybe leave a small buffer of tress to reduce the dust or shift lot 1 to the right one property. I know you don’t have to do anything, but the chance of me contacting the Blastomycosis while I am still in treatment for it is very high. I can’t mow the lawn or rake / blow leaves. 4 out of 5 people die from Blastomycosis, so am a lucky one, it almost killed me twice during my 9-week hospital stay So you can understand my concern. If you want a Docters note to prove my sickness let me know. Thanks for your consideration. James Rieschl 3602 133rd Lane NE Page 270 of 385From: Jon Gorzycki To: Sheila Sellman; Shawn Kaye; Pat Robinson; Alan Goracke Subject: Public Comments on Case File 26-0017 Date: Sunday, May 10, 2026 11:05:36 AM Dear Ms. Sellman and Ms. Kaye, I am writing to formally submit my objections and concerns on Case File 26-0017, the proposed Montean Meadows development located at 3621 131st Avenue NE. The current plan indicates that neighboring property owners may be required to directly compensate the developer for construction of a lift station. This arrangement appears highly atypical and raises significant concerns regarding the appropriateness of assigning private development infrastructure costs to adjacent, non-participating property owners. I respectfully request formal clarification from the City regarding whether similar requirements have been authorized in prior developments, and under what statutory or municipal authority such a condition is being considered. My concerns are outlined in detail below: 1. Inequitable Allocation of Infrastructure Costs The proposed cost-sharing model assigns approximately 67% of an estimated $2.5 million in infrastructure costs to eight adjacent properties, while the developer’s 33% share may be distributed across 86 residential units. This results in a disproportionate and inequitable financial burden on existing property owners who are not participants in the development. These costs include, but are not limited to, lift station construction, sewer connections, septic system removal, and well capping. I respectfully request that the City require the developer to assume full responsibility for all infrastructure necessary to support the project and to avoid imposing financial obligations on neighboring properties that do not directly benefit from or request these improvements. 2. Traffic and Safety Concerns – 131st Avenue NE The addition of 86 residential units will substantially increase traffic volume on 131st Avenue NE, which currently exists as an unpaved gravel roadway. This increase will exacerbate existing safety concerns associated with unpaved roads, including reduced visibility, dust generation, and longer vehicle stopping distances. Additionally, the most direct and commonly recommended route from the proposed development to the nearest freeway access point (Lexington Avenue and I-35W) utilizes the unpaved portion of 131st Avenue NE. As a result, this segment is likely to experience the majority of increased traffic. In contrast, Legacy Creek Parkway NE, an alternate route, presents its own safety concerns due to the presence of parked vehicles and frequent pedestrian activity, including children. These conditions collectively indicate that the current roadway infrastructure is not adequate to safely support the anticipated increase in traffic. 3. Road Improvement Requirements The current proposal does not sufficiently address impacts to properties located east of the Page 271 of 385development site. I respectfully request that the Planning Commission consider adding a condition of approval requiring the developer to fully fund and complete paving of 131st Avenue NE from the development site through to Lexington Avenue, thereby ensuring safe and equitable access for all impacted residents. 4. Conformance with Section 101-4 CUP Criteria Based on the current proposal, I believe the project does not meet key requirements outlined in Section 101-4 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) criteria, including: Excessive Burden on Public Infrastructure: The proposal places undue strain on existing streets and utilities, particularly given that the primary access road remains unpaved and infrastructure costs are shifted to non-participating property owners. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties: The proposal does not adequately consider the impacts on properties to the east of the development, resulting in incompatibility with the surrounding area. Traffic Safety and Congestion: The anticipated increase in traffic on an unpaved roadway introduces safety hazards and congestion concerns that are not sufficiently mitigated in the current plan. Given these concerns, I respectfully request that the Planning Commission consider recommending amendments to the proposal to ensure compliance with Section 101-4 requirements. Alternatively, I request that the Commission consider returning this case to a workshop setting for further review and revision prior to approval. Thank you for your consideration. I respectfully request that this correspondence be entered into the official record for the public hearing scheduled for May 12, 2026. Sincerely, Jon Gorzycki Page 272 of 385From: Chris Berry To: Planning Cc: ssellman@blainmn.com; probinson@blainmn.com; agorache@blainmn.com Subject: Montean Meadows (26-0017) Date: Monday, May 11, 2026 10:21:12 AM Dear Planning Department, I am writing to formally express my concerns regarding the proposed Montean Meadows development and its potential impact on our community. My primary concern involves the significant increase in traffic and activity that 86 new housing units would generate. We previously experienced the dangers of increased traffic volume when 125th Avenue was closed and vehicles were rerouted to 131st Avenue NE. This period proved extremely hazardous for my children and highlighted that our quiet neighborhood—currently a haven for local wildlife like deer and turkey—is not equipped for such high-density activity. This development threatens to permanently disrupt the safety and character of our residential area. Furthermore, I have been informed that the developer, Mark Monteen, is requesting that current homeowners share in the cost of required infrastructure improvements. I find this proposal highly inappropriate. As the developer stands to gain the financial benefit from this project, they should be solely responsible for the associated investment costs. Existing homeowners should not be expected to subsidize the infrastructure necessary for a private development that we did not initiate. Thank you for your time and for considering these points during the planning process. Best regards, Chris Berry 3781 131st Ave NE, Blaine, MN 55449 Page 273 of 385From: Elizabeth Grazulis To: Planning Cc: Sheila Sellman; Alan Goracke; Pat Robinson Subject: Porposed Montean Meadows Case 26-0017 on 131st AVE Date: Monday, May 11, 2026 10:05:29 AM Planning Committee, we have the following questions and concerns regarding the proposed development - Specifically Development Flex (DF). Development Flex (DF) zoning district. Can you please explain how you came to this proposal? 1. Sounds like anything goes as far as any type of housing built, condos, townhouses, cluster (high density??) in an area where the rest of the road is farm residential?? Basically anything but a mobile home?? Really? This clearly isn’t a good fit for our neighborhood. 2. What is a cluster? Will there be commercial property?? We really need to know exactly what this means and what types of "homes" this DF would include! We originally were told that this would be single family homes? 3. Why should the adjacent properties pay a dime for the road/lift station if they are not the ones wanting this? 4. Why should the adjacent properties pay 2/3 of the cost for this lift station when the developer and Montean will pay only 1/3? 5. What impact does this have to the rest of us to the east of the proposed DF development? We were told many times that “you won’t have to pay for sewer or water unless you decide to hook up or sell your property”. This has huge financial implications for all of us!! 6. Did you consider the impact to the current residents on this road, both to the east and west of this property as well as those on Legacy Creek Parkway as far as traffic and safety to the residents? 7. It appears that the road will start at Legacy Creek Parkway and end Montean’s parcel. Can you please confirm this? rd 8. Will the north side of this proposed development have access to 133 in Ham Lake? 9. Can you please provide all of the access roads that this proposed development will use? 10. It appears that the ditch 59 will remain the same with the 100 ft easement? 11. Will these potential additional “homes” impact our wells and the water levels? Several years ago many pumps/wells were impacted. The pumps had to be lowered as many households had no water. 12. What type of development is the Legacy Creek Parkway in? Why wouldn’t this proposed development be the same to have similar houses? 13. Why are you proposing this DF zoning on a road that is the least feasible to handle this population as well as the traffic? 14. Will the potential kids in this area go to Sunrise Elementary as it’s within a mile? 15. Will there be speed bumps on 13st AVE as the traffic will increase significantly and certainly speeds as it’s a straight 1 mile road from Legacy Creek to Lexington AVE? We have serious concerns on many issues and several objections on what we have read!! We appreciate some clarification on all of our concerns. Thank you st Page 274 of 385Chris and Liz Grazulis 3790 131 ave NE Page 275 of 385From: Emily Gorzycki To: Sheila Sellman; Shawn Kaye; Pat Robinson Subject: Formal Objection to Montean Meadows, Date: Monday, May 11, 2026 5:13:50 PM To the Blaine Planning Commission, I am writing to formally submit my objection to Case File 26-0017, the proposed Montean Meadows development located at 3621 131st Avenue NE, and to request clarification on several material aspects of the proposal. My parents live directly across the street from the proposed development, and my young son spends a significant amount of time visiting. As such, the development’s logistical and safety concerns are a top priority for me and my family. I respectfully request that this correspondence be entered into the official record for the public hearing scheduled for May 12, 2026 with note of the following concerns: 1. Inequitable and Potentially Unlawful Allocation of Infrastructure Costs The current plan indicates that neighboring property owners may be required to directly compensate the developer for construction of a lift station. This arrangement is highly atypical and raises serious legal and ethical concerns. The proposed cost-sharing model assigns approximately 67% of an estimated $2.5 million in infrastructure costs to eight adjacent, non-participating properties, while the developer’s 33% share may be distributed across 86 residential units. This represents a disproportionate financial burden imposed on property owners who neither requested nor benefit directly from the development. Such an arrangement raises concerns regarding: Due process and fairness principles in municipal decision-making Potential violation of nexus and proportionality standards commonly applied to development exactions (i.e., required costs must be directly related and proportionate to impacts created by the development) Improper private cost-shifting from a developer to uninvolved parties I respectfully request formal clarification regarding: Whether similar arrangements have been previously authorized by the City The statutory or municipal authority under which such cost allocation is being considered Absent clear legal authority and justification, this cost structure appears inequitable and inconsistent with sound public policy. The developer should be required to assume full responsibility for infrastructure necessary to support the project. 2. Significant Traffic and Safety Hazards The proposal introduces 86 residential units on a site that is currently situated along a gravel/dirt roadway without significant neighborhood development, which fundamentally lacks the infrastructure to safely support increased traffic. The anticipated traffic increase will: Substantially degrade road conditions already impacted by dust, rutting, and erosion Page 276 of 385 Increase stopping distances and loss of vehicle control, particularly in adverse weather Reduce visibility due to dust generation Increase risk to pedestrians, cyclists, and residential traffic Critically: The most direct route to major transportation infrastructure (Lexington Avenue and I- 35W) relies on this unpaved segment, meaning it will absorb the majority of development-related traffic Alternate routes such as Legacy Creek Parkway NE introduce additional safety concerns due to parked vehicles, pedestrian activity, and presence of children Importantly, this site is not part of an existing developed corridor, but rather sits in the middle of a low-density area accessed by a minimally maintained dirt road. Introducing high- density residential use into this context creates an inherent and foreseeable safety hazard. 3. Incomplete and Ineffective Road Improvement Proposal The current proposal fails to adequately address roadway infrastructure in a comprehensive or equitable manner. Of particular concern is the apparent intention to improve only a portion of 131st Avenue NE, without extending those improvements to a major traffic connection such as Lexington Avenue. Partial roadway improvements: Create inconsistent and unsafe driving conditions between paved and unpaved segments. Significant road deterioration occurs already with the existing traffic burden and is most notable in the transition spaces between paved and unpaved areas. Concentrate traffic impacts on unimproved portions of the road. Shift safety and maintenance burdens onto neighboring residents To mitigate these risks, I request the Planning Commission require as a condition of approval that the developer: Fully fund and complete paving of 131st Avenue NE Extend improvements continuously from the development site to Lexington Avenue Ensure roadway design meets standards appropriate for projected traffic volume Anything less represents an incomplete solution that fails to address the full scope of impact created by the development. 4. Non-Conformance with Section 101-4 Conditional Use Permit Criteria Based on the current proposal, the development does not satisfy key requirements under Section 101-4 CUP criteria, including: Excessive Burden on Public Infrastructure The project relies on inadequate existing infrastructure, particularly an unpaved access road, while shifting infrastructure costs onto non-participating property owners. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties The proposal is inconsistent with the surrounding area, which lacks comparable Page 277 of 385 density and infrastructure. The introduction of an 86-unit development in an otherwise undeveloped setting represents a significant and incompatible change in land use intensity. Traffic Safety and Congestion The project introduces foreseeable and preventable safety hazards due to increased traffic on an unpaved and insufficient roadway system, without adequate mitigation. 5. Public Interest Considerations Beyond legal compliance, I respectfully urge the Commission to consider its broader responsibility to act in the public interest. While the City may have the technical authority to approve aspects of this proposal, doing so under these conditions would: Place undue financial burden on uninvolved property owners Introduce known and avoidable safety risks Prioritize development outcomes over resident well-being and equitable treatment Good governance requires not only legal sufficiency, but also fairness, transparency, and sound judgment. Approval of this project in its current form would fall short of those standards. Given the concerns outlined above, I respectfully request that the Planning Commission: Require the developer to assume full infrastructure costs Mandate comprehensive roadway improvements extending to a major arterial Reassess traffic safety impacts and share these anticipated impacts transparently with identified appropriate mitigation measures Ensure full compliance with Section 101-4 CUP criteria Alternatively, return this proposal to a workshop setting for further revision Thank you for your consideration and for your service to the community. Respectfully submitted, Dr. Emily Gorzycki Page 278 of 385 From: Molly Vesperman To: Planning; ssellman@blainemn.com; probinson@blainemn.com; agoracke@blainemn.com Subject: 131st Avenue Development Date: Thursday, May 14, 2026 6:39:51 PM Hello, I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed development off 131st Avenue NE in Blaine. We live on Legacy Creek Parkway NE, and live quite close to the dirt road (131 Ave NE). From my understanding, the dirt road will not be paved with this development. There is already a significant amount of dust that comes off of that road, and I don't think any residents around us or on the dirt road care for any additional traffic that a new development will bring. Our family loves to play outside and enjoy biking, walking and rollerblading safely around our neighborhood. The inevitable increase in traffic is a huge concern for all of us on Legacy Creek Parkway NE. Would the city please consider slowing down residential development and instead increase development of the infrastructure to support the growing population? We could use more stores, restaurants, schools and places to shop rather than more homes. Where are all of those kids going to be going to school? Sunrise Elementary is at max capacity already, and my daughter had to attend a different school for kindergarten than her siblings due to poor city planning with all of the homes and population increase that caused the schools to be overcrowded. With additional taxpayer revenue with all of the additional developments over the past 5 years, we would expect our taxes to remain the same, yet they continue to increase. Please consider the needs of your current residents. Thank you for considering my concerns. Sincerely, Molly Vesperman Page 279 of 385 From: David L Mathews <dlmathewsusa@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2026 8:32 AM To: CityCouncil <CityCouncil@blainemn.gov>; Tom Newland <tnewland@blainemn.gov>; Chris Ford <cford@blainemn.gov>; Leslie Larson <leslielarson@blainemn.gov>; Jess Robertson <jrobertson@blainemn.gov>; Chris Massoglia <cmassoglia@blainemn.gov>; Terra Fleming <tfleming@blainemn.gov> Subject: Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows) Formal Written Infrastructure Objection Date: May 19, 2026 To: CityCouncil@BlaineMN.gov (Alternatively, paste individual addresses: tsanders@blainemn.gov, tnewland@blainemn.gov, cford@blainemn.gov, leslielarson@blainemn.gov, jrobertson@blainemn.gov, cmassoglia@blainemn.gov, Page 280 of 385 tfleming@blainemn.gov) CC: csorensen@blainemn.gov Subject: Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows) Formal Written Infrastructure Objection Date: May 19, 2026 To: The Blaine City Council (via Planning@BlaineMN.gov) From: David Mathews– Affected Resident of the 131st Avenue NE Corridor Subject: URGENT RECORD SUBMISSION: Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows, 3621 131st Avenue NE) – Infrastructure, Pedestrian Safety, and Public Safety Risk Advisory Requested Action: Denial of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Preliminary Plat, OR the attachment of Mandatory Developer Performance Conditions requiring the full paving of 131st Avenue NE and the completion of contiguous sidewalk networks. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: THE COUNCIL'S IMMEDIATE RISK EXPOSURE The Montean Meadows proposal (Case 26‑0017) would add 86 homes and materially increase traffic on an existing 1/2‑mile unpaved segment of 131st Avenue NE. I request denial of the CUP and preliminary plat, or approval only if the developer fully funds and completes paving of the unpaved segment, constructs a contiguous ADA sidewalk to Lexington Avenue, and secures completion with an irrevocable performance bond. I ask the Council to forward this submission and the cited meeting evidence to the City Attorney and Public Works for legal and technical review prior to the June 1 vote ABOUT THE AUTHOR & METHOD OF REVIEW As a matter of full disclosure, I am a retired electrical engineer with a career dedicated to designing and manufacturing critical components for supercomputers, medical sensors, LED lighting, and both conventional and nuclear weapon systems that protect land, sea, and air platforms. While I am not formally trained in real estate development, municipal civil engineering, or real estate law, my professional work has been guided by strict zero-failure safety protocols, rigorous risk management, and systemic failure analysis. In my career, if my components failed, there could be catastrophic damage and loss of life. I am reviewing the Montean Meadows proposal through that exact same objective lens—as an engineer trained to identify dangerous structural gaps, material limitations, and loading failures that compromise public safety before catastrophic system failure. DISCLAIMER & MATERIAL LIMITATIONS OF REVIEW I have researched and compiled all the information contained within this formal Page 281 of 385submission using strictly public information available on the internet, official Blaine meeting minutes, and the recorded public planning meeting. Any errors or omissions are purely unintentional, and I sincerely apologize for any technical discrepancies. The City Council should note that the compressed timeline between the public Planning Commission meeting and the final voting session on June 1, 2026, has created extreme time constraints for surrounding property owners. This brief window severely limits the neighborhood’s ability to contract third-party civil engineering firms or traffic safety assessors independently. This review has been completed entirely within those constraints to ensure a timely submission into the public record before the final June 1st vote . 1. Statement of Intent and Core Objection This formal written submission registers my firm objection to the approval of Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows) under its current configuration. While the applicant seeks a Rezoning to Development Flex (DF) and a CUP to introduce a high-density, 86- lot subdivision, the surrounding public infrastructure is entirely inadequate to absorb this massive influx of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Specifically, the primary access point—the 1/2-mile unpaved gravel-and-dirt segment of 131st Avenue NE leading to Lexington Avenue—cannot sustain the compounded traffic load from the new subdivision alongside the existing heavy vehicle operations and regional cut-through commuter traffic along the corridor. Pushing a dense suburban development onto a rural dirt road without contiguous walkways directly exposes the City of Blaine to extreme financial and operational risk. 2. Regional Cut-Through Traffic and Engineering Infrastructure Failure The City faces clear public safety risks under the discretionary standards of a Development Flex (DF) zoning change or a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) due to several compounding transit failures: The Lexington Parkway Commuter Shortcut: Rapid development along the Lexington Parkway corridor to the west creates an immediate infrastructure crisis. Commuters looking to travel north on Lexington Avenue will intentionally use 131st Avenue NE as a direct shortcut to completely bypass the severe traffic congestion at the Lexington Avenue & Highway 242 (Main Street) intersection. Pushing an unpaved residential corridor to serve as a regional arterial bypass is an engineering failure in traffic sequencing. Compounded Structural Loading and Safety Risks: This unpaved 1/2-mile gap is already severely degraded by daily operations that far exceed its engineering capacity. The corridor is currently used by 25 existing residential families, multiple daily school buses, and heavy commercial construction equipment Page 282 of 385actively moving materials to construct the new 86 homes. Adding the massive commuter load from Montean Meadows onto a roadbed already experiencing continuous axial loading from heavy construction vehicles and school buses drives the total volume to over 1,110 daily trips. This structural overload creates an extreme safety liability. It creates a high risk of rapid deterioration and structural failure of this unpaved roadbed, leading to rapid washboarding, deep rutting, sub-base failure, and blinding dust screens that put schoolchildren at immediate risk. Dismantling the MUSA Boundary Pretext: I anticipate that City staff or the developer may argue that because the Montean Meadows site sits inside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary, the City lacks the authority or obligation to mandate paving on the unsewered eastern section of the 131st Avenue NE corridor. This seems like an engineering misdirection. The MUSA boundary dictates the extension of regional wastewater and sanitary sewer infrastructure; it does not limit a municipality’s police powers to regulate surface road safety, traffic loads, and right-of-way engineering. The 1/2-mile gap is a dedicated public municipal right-of-way under the City's explicit jurisdiction. Whether a street segment has sewer access or sits outside a utility boundary is separate from the physics of structural roadbed failure under the weight of 1,110+ daily vehicular trips, school buses, and heavy construction equipment. The City retains full authority to require off-site road paving as a condition of a discretionary Development Flex (DF) CUP to mitigate an actionable public safety hazard, regardless of where subsurface utilities terminate. Rebuffing the Pretext Against Paving Without Sewer: At the Planning Commission meeting, the City Engineer stated that Blaine will no longer pave streets that lack sanitary sewer infrastructure. While this may be a preferred internal city staff policy for capital improvement projects, it is not a binding statutory restriction, and it runs counter to established municipal precedent. Multiple existing public streets in the Northeast Blaine area are currently paved without sanitary sewer utilities. The City has a clear history of independently engineering surface transportation safety, separate from subsurface wastewater networks. More importantly, there is a fundamental functional distinction between the City choosing to spend public taxpayer funds to pave a road without utilities, and the City Council using its discretionary land-use authority to mandate that a private developer fund off-site paving as Page 283 of 385 a condition of an intense density expansion. The developer is seeking a Development Flex (DF) zoning upgrade. The City Council is under no obligation to compromise public safety to satisfy an internal staff preference regarding sewer sequencing. The physics of an unpaved roadbed failing under 1,110+ daily trips remains an immediate threat regardless of whether a sewer pipe runs beneath it. Comprehensive Plan Inconsistency: The current Blaine Comprehensive Plan guides this area as Low-Density Residential with the assumption of matching infrastructure. Granting a "Flex" density increase while leaving the main access corridor unpaved is highly inconsistent with the City's core land-use, safety, and infrastructure objectives outlined in its planning guidelines. Zoning Transformation vs. Historical Use: Because this application seeks to abandon Farm Residential (FR) status for Development Flex (DF) suburban densities, it is advisory to note that the developer cannot reasonably claim agricultural or "Right to Farm" exemptions for these road conditions. Commuter traffic completely changes the road's functional classification. Relying on future Municipal State Aid (MSA) funds to fix this road later shifts the financial burden to the public, when immediate developer funding mechanisms are available. Cross-Jurisdictional and Environmental Nuisance: Because the north side of 131st Avenue NE directly borders the City of Ham Lake, the extreme dust generation and mud tracking will create an immediate cross-jurisdictional nuisance. Furthermore, due to the high volume of traffic, runoff from mud and chemical dust binders will wash directly into the site's protected wetlands, causing severe environmental degradation. Given these significant issues, I respectfully request that the City actively evaluate whether an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) should be legally required under the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules before any final vote or plat approval. 3. On-the-Record Admission and Municipal Tort Risk Analysis During the public Planning Commission meeting on May 12, 2026—officially broadcast live over the Blaine City Portal and featuring 10 public speakers—the developer, Mark Montean, explicitly admitted on the record that he knows the unpaved segment of 131st Avenue NE is hazardous, but stated he cannot maintain project profitability if required to pave it. Under Minnesota land-use principles, a private developer’s profit margin is not a valid planning metric to override safety infrastructure requirements. More critically, this broadcast admission establishes clear, actual notice to the City of Blaine regarding an unmitigated infrastructure defect. Under established Minnesota Page 284 of 385municipal tort law, while a city generally enjoys statutory immunity for high-level discretionary policy decisions, it can lose this protection and face operational liability if it acts to exacerbate a known physical hazard after receiving actual notice (see, e.g., Holmquist v. State, 425 N.W.2d 454; Cairl v. State, 323 N.W.2d 20). Approving an optional density expansion via a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that funnels over 1,110 daily trips directly onto a self-admitted, unmitigated road hazard knowingly transitions a passive deficiency into an active, city-approved operational risk. I respectfully request that the City Attorney review this specific notice record and evaluate the City's resulting tort exposure prior to a final vote. 4. Severe Pedestrian Safety Hazards and Sidewalk Gaps A critical flaw in the current project design is the failure to provide safe, continuous pedestrian pathways. Currently, there is only a partial sidewalk on the development side of the road. This incomplete infrastructure creates a highly predictable, dangerous scenario: Forced Roadway Pedestrian Traffic: Because the sidewalk abruptly ends, families, children walking to school bus stops, and pedestrians will be forced off the curb and directly onto the unpaved shoulder or into the active path of heavy construction vehicles, school buses, and regional shortcut commuters on 131st Avenue NE. Severance from the Blaine Bikeway System: The City of Blaine actively promotes its trail networks. However, this unpaved 1/2-mile gap serves as a physical barrier between the end of the development and the Blaine Bikeway network on Lexington Avenue (a 0.5-mile, 10-minute walk along the unpaved shoulder). Forcing children, cyclists, and fitness enthusiasts to navigate a dusty, muddy ditch shoulder just to access the Lexington Avenue trail system directly conflicts with the City's unified comprehensive transit goals. 5. Protecting Taxpayers Against Future Builder Transfers It is widely anticipated that the current developer plans to transfer or sell the approved plat to a high-volume national builder, such as Lennar. In the state of Minnesota, Conditions of Approval run with the land, binding any subsequent buyer or corporate builder. If Mark Montean cannot afford to pave the road, then the financial sustainability of developing this high-density project under current infrastructure constraints is highly questionable. If the City Council approves this CUP without explicit infrastructure conditions, Montean will sell the land to a volume builder at a massive profit, leaving the subsequent builder with no performance obligation to address the unpaved gap. The financial burden to pave, grade, align 131st Avenue NE, and install missing public Page 285 of 385sidewalks will likely be unfairly shifted directly onto Blaine taxpayers via the municipal capital improvement budget. 6. Preemptive Rebuttal to Anticipated Applicant Defenses Because public oral testimony is explicitly barred at the June 1st voting session, I submit the following engineering and planning counters to the standard, predictable arguments the developer’s team may leverage behind closed doors: Counter to the "Prohibitive Cost / Unconstitutional Taking" Argument: The developer may claim that requiring off-site paving as a condition of approval represents an unconstitutional "taking" under federal or state land-use standards. However, from a municipal planning perspective, courts have generally held that land-use conditions tied to purely discretionary zoning changes—such as a request to move from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF)—are permissible when they are structurally related and proportional to the project's direct impacts (see, e.g., Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and its progeny regarding essential nexus). Because the introduction of this high-density plat is the direct catalyst pushing 131st Avenue NE past its engineering capacity, a paving requirement functions as a direct safety mitigation, not an unconstitutional burden. If the applicant’s profit model relies on utilizing substandard public gravel beds to handle heavy suburban traffic, the infrastructure gap indicates the project is technically unfeasible under its current density layout. I respectfully request that the City Attorney review and confirm the City’s broad discretionary authority to condition or deny this optional, non-entitled Conditional Use Permit (CUP) based on these infrastructure limitations. Counter to the "Proportionality / Shared Traffic" Argument: The applicant may argue that because 25 existing families and regional shortcuts use 131st Avenue NE, they should not bear 100% of the cost. However, the applicant's 86 homes represent a massive 80% surge in localized commuter volume. Their project is the direct cause of the structural failure. If the developer objects to stabilizing the infrastructure system they are disrupting, it is recommended that the City Council scale the plat back to the original Farm Residential (FR) low- density baseline, matching the road's current true capacity. Counter to the "Phased Mitigation and Dust Binding" Compromise: The developer will likely propose a compromise: periodic application of chemical dust-binding agents during construction, with paving deferred to later phases. From an engineering failure analysis perspective, this is not an adequate Page 286 of 385 temporary solution. Chemical binders wash out during rain cycles, accelerating chemical and sediment pollution into the site’s protected wetlands and causing immediate runoff friction with our cross-jurisdictional neighbors in Ham Lake. Deferring paving removes all municipal leverage once the plat is recorded, allowing corporate assignees to finish the homes while heavy equipment completely degrades the dirt base. 7. Proposed Recommendations and Formal Requests To ensure the long-term safety of our neighborhood and protect municipal resources, I respectfully request that the Blaine City Council consider taking one of the following two paths: 1. Decline Approval of the CUP and Preliminary Plat under its current configuration, on the basis that the surrounding public street and pedestrian networks are not yet structurally prepared to absorb this sudden, high-density traffic load. 2. Approve with Protective Infrastructure Conditions. If the Council decides to proceed with approval, I strongly urge the inclusion of standard infrastructure performance conditions in the final resolution. Specifically, it is requested that the developer enter into a standard Developer's Agreement with the City of Blaine to: 1. Fully fund, grade, drain, and pave the entirety of the unpaved 1/2-mile segment of 131st Avenue NE to standard city specifications up to its intersection with Lexington Avenue. Please ensure the infrastructure alignment is not phased or delayed based on subdivision construction stages. 2. Construct a fully contiguous, ADA-compliant concrete public sidewalk system extending along the entirety of the project corridor to eliminate all pedestrian gaps and ensure safe connectivity to the Blaine Bikeway system on Lexington Avenue. To safeguard local taxpayers from future infrastructure shortfalls, it is requested that no final plat be recorded and no building permits or certificates of occupancy be issued until these conditions are fully completed or financially secured by an irrevocable letter of credit or a performance bond. I appreciate the Council’s time, dedication, and careful consideration of these safety- focused infrastructure factors before taking a final vote on Case 26-0017. I formally request that the City Council place this letter into the official public record for the Case 26-0017 proceeding and forward it to the City Attorney and the Public Works Department for technical and legal review prior to the final June 1st vote Respectfully submitted, Page 287 of 385David L Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE 612-240-3631; dlmathewsusa@gmail.com Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 288 of 385 From: David L Mathews To: CityCouncil; Tim Sanders; Chris Ford; Jess Robertson; Terra Fleming; Tom Newland; Leslie Larson; Cathy Sorensen Cc: Planning Subject: Subject: Direct neighbor feedback: Urgent tree root safety and full ADA corridor compliance (June 1st Vote) Date: Friday, May 29, 2026 8:15:17 AM I am writing to provide additional feedback and clarify key design elements for the official record regarding the Montean Meadows development plan scheduled for your vote on June 1st. I am a property owner located directly across from the proposed development along 131st Avenue NE. Since the initial public planning meeting, I have reviewed the project materials in greater depth, including the site geography and local infrastructure requirements. Through this closer analysis, I identified several technical, drainage, and jurisdictional gaps in the corridor layout that directly threaten my property lines, personal safety, and mature tree canopy. Incomplete Corridor Design As currently drawn, the plan specifies ADA‑compliant roadway upgrades only for the western 1/4 mile of 131st Avenue NE. The remaining section of the road extending east to its intersection with Lexington Avenue (Anoka County Highway 17) is entirely omitted from the design. Because 131st Avenue NE is an unpaved gravel road with no existing paved pedestrian facilities, upgrading it to support a new subdivision requires a continuous, fully compliant paved pedestrian access route along the entire corridor, all the way to Lexington Avenue. Addressing only a single 1/4‑mile segment poses several severe practical, structural, and legal challenges to my property, particularly to the mature trees located within 15 feet of the roadway. Stormwater Drainage Failures The small internal retention pond proposed for Montean Meadows is insufficient to accommodate the significant increase in stormwater runoff resulting from converting a porous gravel corridor into a paved, impervious ADA roadway. Because the current submittal does not include a continuous underground storm sewer system extending to Lexington Avenue, roadway grading will naturally redirect thousands of gallons of sheeted runoff across the street onto my lawn and into the root zones of my trees. I object to any layout that fails to store and pipe its roadway runoff away from established neighboring properties. Tree Destruction and Root Zone Impacts Numerous mature trees are located within 15 feet of the existing gravel roadway. A fully paved ADA street with sidewalks, curbs, and boulevard buffers requires a substantially wider construction footprint. Grading and trenching along the full corridor will cut directly into critical root zones, threatening tree survival and creating an immediate wind‑topple hazard. The developer’s Tree Preservation Survey is inadequate because it ends at the 1/4‑mile marker and omits the remainder of the corridor. Right‑of‑Way and Easement Conflicts The current gravel road occupies a narrow functional right‑of‑way. Expanding it to a standard municipal profile with ADA sidewalks will require additional right‑of‑way or permanent slope easements from adjacent property owners, including myself. I have not been contacted, surveyed, or asked to grant any such easements, and I will not sign away land that would destroy my mature canopy. County Highway 17 Jurisdiction Because Lexington Avenue is an Anoka County highway (CSAH 17), any connection requires an official County Highway Access Permit and Page 289 of 385 engineering review. County standards may require turn lanes or expanded intersection geometry, pushing construction limits even farther into the gravel quadrant and affecting more trees and private boundaries than the developer’s partial plan shows. Roadway Continuity and ADA Compliance A public roadway upgrade cannot terminate a pedestrian facility at an unpaved gravel segment immediately before a major county highway. State and federal accessibility codes require a continuous paved ADA transition to the intersection. The current plan does not meet this requirement. Turnaround and Traffic Flow Deficiencies The plans do not show a turnaround or cul‑de‑sac at the point where the pavement ends. Without one, delivery trucks, school buses, and emergency vehicles will be forced to use my driveway or yard to turn around, creating an unacceptable safety and property hazard. Protection Against Premature Earth‑Moving Because securing easements, county permits, and MUSA staging updates takes time, there is a risk that construction could stall mid‑corridor. If earth‑moving begins before all approvals are finalized, large soil piles could sit across from my home for months, causing dust pollution and erosion. I request that the city condition approval so that no grading permits are issued until all agency approvals and private easements are fully secured. Public Record Request Because there is no public comment period during the June 1st voting assembly, I respectfully request that the City Clerk include this letter in the official agenda packet. I also request that Planning Staff read aloud the specific impacts on stormwater, tree destruction, and private property boundaries during the project summary so that attendees and online viewers are fully informed of the off‑site corridor deficiencies. Request to Table the Vote To ensure the final project is complete, functional, and integrated into the community without infringing on private property rights or destroying mature trees, I respectfully request that the City Council table the June 1st vote. A brief delay would allow the developer to submit a comprehensive road design and an updated tree survey covering the entire length of 131st Avenue NE to Lexington Avenue. Thank you for your time, accessibility, and continued dedication to the residents of Blaine. Please include this letter in the official public record for the June 1st meeting. David L Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE 612-240-3631 Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 290 of 385From: David L Mathews To: CityCouncil; Tim Sanders; Chris Ford; Jess Robertson; Terra Fleming; Tom Newland; Leslie Larson; Chris Massoglia Cc: Planning; Cathy Sorensen Subject: ADDENDUM: Pre-emptive technical clarification regarding expected developer rebuttals (June 1 Vote) Date: Friday, May 29, 2026 1:30:52 PM Dear Mayor Sanders and Blaine City Council Members, As a follow-up to my previous technical objection regarding the Montean Meadows plan (Case File No. 26-0017), I am writing to provide a matter-of-fact addendum to anticipate and disarm the standard corporate rebuttals the developer will likely present to you to push past neighborhood concerns: The "Deferred Engineering" Defense: The developer will likely argue that full- corridor ADA specifications, utility depths, and county intersection layouts are details meant for the final engineering phase, rather than this zoning/CUP phase. However, because a true, full-corridor ADA design requires widening the road footprint and changing slopes directly onto my property across the street, their current 86-lot configuration is built on an unverified and legally unbuildable boundary line. The "Internal Retention Sufficiency" Fallacy: The developer's team will claim that their small internal pond handles all necessary stormwater runoff. This completely ignores the unpaved reality of 131st Avenue NE. Converting a porous gravel road into an impervious paved surface accelerates water flow. Without a continuous underground storm sewer infrastructure network extending all the way east to Lexington Avenue (Hwy 17), the roadway grading will naturally use gravity to direct thousands of gallons of sheet stormwater runoff directly across the street, flooding my private lawn and drowning my trees' root systems. The "Right-of-Way Exemption" Tree Defense: The developer may claim that trees removed or damaged for public roadway improvements are exempt from standard city replacement math and mitigation fees. While that may apply inside an established public right-of-way, 131st Avenue NE is a narrow gravel road with an easement limited to the existing driving surface. Ripping, grading, or cutting the critical root zones on my private property across the street without a signed easement is civil timber trespass under Minnesota law, regardless of public project exemptions. Unpermitted Heavy Construction Staging Traffic: By only paving the western 1/4 mile, the developer intends to use the remaining eastern unpaved gravel road as an unmanaged staging and haul corridor for heavy dump trucks and concrete machinery. This creates an immediate safety hazard, generates severe dust pollution, and will structurally destabilize the shallow root networks of the mature trees within 15 feet of the road before full-corridor permitting is ever finalized. Page 291 of 385I request that the Council not allow the developer to gloss over these off-site corridor deficiencies with promises of "fixing it later." Please table this vote on June 1st until the developer proves they have the legal right-of-way, the Anoka County highway permits, and a continuous ADA/stormwater design all the way to Lexington Avenue. Sincerely, David L Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE 612-240-3631 Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 292 of 385From: David L Mathews To: Lucy Gray; Planning Subject: Subject: Inquiry Regarding Infrastructure Cost Sharing & Assessments - 3650 131st Ave NE Date: Friday, June 5, 2026 8:50:28 AM Dear Blaine Engineering and Planning Departments, I am writing to request clarification in writing regarding the infrastructure cost-sharing and special assessment structure for my property at 3650 131st Ave NE, specifically related to the Montean Meadows project. During a recent planning meeting, city staff indicated that I would not be required to pay for the water and sewer infrastructure until my property is actively connected to these city systems. However, street improvements were not explicitly discussed. To help me properly plan, could you please clarify the following questions: 1. Street Infrastructure Billing: Is the street portion of the infrastructure project billed separately? Will I be assessed and billed for the street improvements immediately, even though my water and sewer charges are delayed until connection? 2. Transferability of Deferrals: If the water and sewer charges are deferred until connection, does this deferral remain with the property if the property is sold? If I sell the property to a private individual before hooking up, will these deferred assessments be due at closing, or can the next owner inherit the same arrangement? Could you please provide a formal breakdown of any current, pending, or deferred assessments associated with my parcel? Thank you for your time and assistance. I look forward to your guidance. Sincerely, David L Mathews 612-240-3631 Property Owner, 3650 131st Ave NE Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 293 of 385From: Connie Larson To: Planning Subject: Montean Meadows - improvements reimbursement period Date: Friday, June 5, 2026 9:53:36 AM Hello - I live at 3465 131st Ave NE and will be impacted by the Montean project. I want to formally state that any reimbursement period for the improvements paid for by Montean Development longer than 8 years is not reasonable or fair. There have been many mentions of this period being between 5 and 10 years. I feel that at most 8 years is fair. I understand that a period of 12 years has been recommended by Montean, which is why I would like to submit my recommendation of 8 years max. I further understand that this will be on the agenda for the June 15 council meeting, and at this time I am not able to attend. If you have any questions please feel free to email or call me. Thank you for accepting and representing my recommendation. Regards, Connie Larson 612 802-8919 Page 294 of 385 City of Blaine Planning Commission May 12, 2026 | 7:00 PM Blaine City Hall 10801 Town Square Drive NE Blaine, MN 55449 MINUTES 1. Call to Order The Blaine planning commission met in the City Hall Chambers on Tuesday, May 12, 2026. Chair Goracke called the meeting to order at 7:00PM. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commission Members Freeman, Geiselhart, Howard, Olson, Swanson, and Chair Goracke. Members Absent: Commission Member Halpern. Staff Present: Shawn Kaye, Planner Alex Koberoski, Assistant Planner Teresa Barnes, Project Engineer 4. Public Hearing 4.3. 2026-206 Case File 26-0017 // Mark Montean // 3621 131st Avenue NE The applicant is requesting the following: 1. Rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF). 2. Preliminary plat to subdivide 39.68 acres into 86 single family lots and 2 outlots to be known as Montean Meadows. 3. Conditional use permit to allow the construction of 86 single-family homes in a Development Flex (DF) zoning district. Sponsors: Shawn Kaye, Planner The report to the planning commission was presented by Shawn Kaye, Planner. Page 295 of 385Chair Goracke asked if the gravel road would be paved by the city. Project Engineer Barnes explained the gravel road will be paved from Legacy Creek Parkway to the eastern property line of the Montean Meadows development. The public hearing for Case File 26-0017 was opened at 7:28PM. Dave Mathews, resident of Blaine, read a prepared statement to the commission. He stated he has lived adjacent to the subject property for the past 40 years and he objected to the proposed development. He reported this proposal was using a predatory funding model that required eight adjacent property owners to pay 67% of the projects $2.5 million infrastructure costs. Meanwhile, the developer only has to pay 33%. He requested the city require the developer to pay all of the infrastructure costs and place zero burden on the non-participating adjacent landowners. He was of the opinion the rezoning from farm residential to development flex would set a dangerous precedent. He indicated this would lead to higher property taxes that could tax him out of his home. He stated adding 86 homes to 131st Avenue NE would violate Minnesota State Chapter 160 regarding low volume road safety threshold. He recommended the developer be required to pave all of 131st Avenue NE in its entirety. He wanted to be assured that he would not have to hook up to city water and sewer. He reiterated that he did not believe the adjacent property owners should have to subsidize this project in order for this property owner to profit from the proposed development. He recommended this application be denied by the city. Blaine Krugerud, resident of Ham Lake, thanked the city for communicating with him on this project. He commented his concern was with how Shenandoah Road would be impacted. He asked that this new development not connect to Shenandoah Road. He suggested the homes along the northern property line of this development have a fence or landscaping buffer. Jon Gorzycki, 4442 123rd Circle NE, explained this development was being put in on an island as it would be completely surrounded by farm residential and would be serviced by a dirt road. He expressed concern with the fact this project did not meet key conditional use permit criteria when it comes to traffic safety and infrastructure. He indicated this project would add 86 homes, yet the primary access road remains unpaved, which was a safety risk. He suggested the planning commission consider amendments or direct this item back to a council workshop meeting for further review. Jeff Frey, resident of Ham Lake, explained he lived directly north of the proposed development. He indicated this lot was heavily wooded and he did not want his mature oak trees to be damaged during the development of this property. Dan Werra, 3811 131st Avenue, reported he lived on the dirt road. He understood the developer wanted the dirt road to be paved. He asked if a petition could be brought forward to ensure the entire roadway was paved for safety purposes. He explained he supported the developer incurring the costs for paving this roadway due to the hardship he was creating through his development. He discussed how the water tables in Blaine were dropping due to all the development that has occurred in the community. He requested the city take this into consideration because he did not want his well to be impacted by this development. Page 296 of 385Richard Fallstrom, 3810 131st Avenue, stated he appreciated the concerns that were being raised by his neighbors. He understood this project has been in the works since 2024 and questioned why the neighbors were only hearing about it now. He commented on how those living on 131st Avenue would be impacted by this development, if it were approved, noting there would be a great deal of dust rolling across the road into his home. He was of the opinion it did not make sense to pave three-fourths of the road and not all of the roadway. He stated the surrounding property owners will be forced to develop and then 131st Avenue would not be serving just these 86 houses and the existing property owners, but rather this roadway would be serving hundreds and hundreds of houses. He supported the developer paying for the paving of 131st Avenue because the pavement was needed to serve his development. He asked that he not be required to hook up to city water and sewer until he has problem with his septic tank. Chris Grazulis, 3790 131st Avenue, stated he was confused by the financing. He questioned how the homeowners would be impacted by the lift station and street. He was of the opinion that it was unfair to push infrastructure costs onto the adjacent homeowners when the cost should be borne fully by the developer. Mike Bayer, 3403 131st Avenue, explained he has lived on 131st Avenue since 1994. He indicated he has been waiting for the day these properties would develop. He stated he was surprised 131st Avenue has been a dirt road this long. He commented he would like the city to have an opinion on this roadway. He reported the developer has lived in Blaine his entire life and would get half of the road paved, which would benefit all of Blaine. He stated he supported the proposed development moving forward. Char Oestreich, 3698 131st Avenue, explained she has a small parcel that will be across from a new residential street. She indicated the new paved road would end at the edge of her property. She commented on how dusty her home and vehicles were. She reported she had a problem with the partial pavement idea, especially given the number of vehicles that would be added to this roadway. She stated she took issue with the funding that would be provided to the developer for infrastructure costs. She noted she had no desire to hook up to city water and sewer, nor was she interested in incurring expenses for the pavement or infrastructure costs. Liz Grazulis, 3790 131st Avenue, explained she has lived in Blaine since 1994. She encouraged the commissioners to drive down 131st Avenue in order to understand the safety concerns. She indicated she was concerned with the fact the developer was proposing to pave only half of the roadway. She discussed how Blaine was growing quickly and she feared the schools were not keeping up. The public hearing was closed at 7:57PM. Chair Goracke invited the applicant to come forward at this time in order to address the questions that were raised during the public hearing. Mark Montean, the applicant, reported the development costs were quite high and stated he could not afford to develop his 40 acres if he had to pay for all the infrastructure costs. He explained he could get more for the property working with a developer than selling the property to an individual party. He understood that traffic had increased since 131st Avenue Page 297 of 385was connected to Legacy Creek. He explained he no longer lived along 131st Avenue and his renter has requested the roadway be treated due to the high levels of dust. He stated the cost to develop a single lot was $75,000 plus the lift station and roadway. He commented further on the large amount of money that had to be spent to protect the endangered plants on his property. Chair Goracke requested further information regarding the 67%/33% split for the infrastructure costs and asked if this split had been used in the past. Project Engineer Barnes explained this process has been done in the past. She reported the 67% would be split between the eight benefiting properties. However, if these properties do not develop in the next five to ten years they would not be required to pay. However, if these properties were to subdivide, then the property owner would be responsible for their portion of the costs. Chair Goracke requested staff speak to how the existing wells would be impacted by this project. Project Engineer Barnes reported the 86 new lots would be required to connect to city water and sewer. She stated the water lines brought to this development will not impact the existing wells in the area. Chair Goracke inquired how traffic would impact 131st Avenue. Project Engineer Barnes reported paving 131st Avenue from Legacy Parkway to the eastern property line was being done to manage the amount of traffic that would incur from this development. Chair Goracke asked if the city had ever paved only half of a street for a development in Blaine. Project Engineer Barnes stated she could not recall this being done in the past. She indicated the portion of the roadway being developed was being paved as it was within Sanitary Sewer District No. 6. She explained the properties on the eastern portion of 131st Avenue were part of Sanitary Sewer District No. 7 and lines would have to come from Zest Street and 125th. She indicated it was not city policy to pave a roadway until the utilities are placed underneath it. Chair Goracke questioned how many farm residential properties have been rezoned to development flex in recent years. Planner Kaye reported in the last several years, five to ten properties in Blaine were rezoned to development flex. Chair Goracke asked if the developer would be installing a fence along the north property line. Planner Kaye indicated the city does not require developers to install a fence along the property lines where projects abut single family homes. She explained the homeowners in Page 298 of 385Ham Lake could install a fence along the property line. Commissioner Olson stated the existing homeowners would not be required to abandon their wells and septic. Chair Goracke reported this was correct. Commissioner Olson encouraged the developer to be cautious of the mature oaks along the property line so as not to damage the 100 year old oak trees on the neighboring properties. Planner Kaye stated Project Engineer Barnes would be working closely with the developer on this matter to ensure the trees were projected. Project Engineer Barnes indicated there was a drainage and utility easement for the rears of these properties to account for the stormwater, which meant nothing structural could be located in the rears of these lots. Commissioner Olson inquired if Legacy Creek Parkway was designed to handle the traffic from another 86 homes. Project Engineer Barnes reported Legacy Creek Parkway was designed to handle the residential capacities and anticipated development over the entire area. Commissioner Olson stated developing land was expensive, and she did not believe the burden of a development should be passed off to adjacent property owners. Planner Kaye clarified that these costs would only be passed onto the adjacent property owners if they chose to subdivide their properties in the next five to ten years. Chair Goracke questioned if a neighborhood meeting was held for this development. Mr. Montean reported he has been working with an engineering firm since 2018 on this project. He stated it has been very difficult to pull together this project, given that it was on an island and had to be serviced by city water and sewer. He indicated this led him to hire an engineer to assist with the project planning. Planner Kaye explained a neighborhood meeting was not required for single-family. Chair Goracke encouraged the developer and his team members to meet with the neighbors after this meeting outside the council chambers in order to address any additional questions the neighbors may have. Commissioner Olson requested further information on the eight properties that would have to bear 67% of the infrastructure costs. Project Engineer Barnes explained the proposed development is approximately 40 acres compared to the eight other benefiting properties that totaled 70 acres in combination and would only have to incur the costs if they chose to develop their property in the next five to ten years. Page 299 of 385 Chair Goracke encouraged the eight property owners in question to contact their city council representatives in order to receive clarification on if this will be five or ten years. Commissioner Geiselhart indicated the eight property owners would benefit from the infrastructure that was already in place and would only have to pay their portion of the costs if they chose to develop. Motion by Commissioner Howard to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0017A a rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF), with the following rationale: Case 26-0017A: 1. The DF zoning standards to be incorporated are consistent with and will complement homes and housing options that have been constructed within recent developments. The standards will create an attractive benchmark of quality homes with a desired range in appearance, style, density, and construction value and market appeal. 2. The DF zoning district allows the City the opportunity to have some flexibility when approving developments that warrant higher standards than what is allowed with the traditional zoning districts. It affords the City the opportunity to provide input on items that would benefit the surrounding neighborhoods and the City as a whole. Motion by Commissioner Howard to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0017B a preliminary plat to subdivide 39.68 acres into 86 single family lots and 2 outlots to be known as Montean Meadows with the following conditions: Case 26-0017B: 1. Park dedication will be required for the 86 new lots being constructed at the rate of $5,800 per unit (2026 rate), for a total park dedication fee of $498,800 if paid in 2026. This amount must be paid prior to releasing the plat mylars for recording at Anoka County. 2. The development is required to complete the construction of the 131st Avenue NE corridor, from the north end of Legacy Creek Parkway to the east property line of the proposed plat. The developer has requested the City to coordinate a reimbursement for the installation of 131st Avenue to the benefiting parcels as they develop. 3. The developer will be responsible for Trunk Sanitary Sewer area charges. These charges become due with platting for upland acreage. The 2026 rate for Sanitary Sewer District 6-5 is $8,344.00 per upland acre and will be applied to the acreage platted. This phase is proposing to develop 31.5 acres of upland for a total sewer area charge of $262,836.00. 4. The overall development shall be certified by a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Minnesota and indicate that all structures shall be protected from flooding. Page 300 of 385 5. Plans and specifications must be approved by the City prior to the start of construction. 6. Coon Creek Watershed District (CCWD) permit is required prior to city approval of construction plans and specifications. 7. Development requires a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). A prerequisite to the MPCA permit application includes preparation of a site Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the development site. 8. Construction contract documents shall include a mass (rough) grading, erosion protection, sediment control, development, utilities, roadway, and storm drainage plan sheets. Supporting wetland delineation report, geotechnical investigation report, soil boring logs, and hydrology report shall be included in the submittal for city review and approval. 9. The grading plan shall provide greater detail on protecting existing trees and provide additional information on adjacent property. 10. Standard utility and drainage easements must be dedicated along all lot lines and over areas of delineated wetlands, wetland mitigation, infiltration trenches, drainage swales, and storm water management ponds. 11. A protective buffer strip of natural vegetation, at least 15 feet in width (25-feet is preferred) shall surround all wetlands. This buffer strip shall be placed in easement. 12. The developer is to provide access for inspection and maintenance of storm water management infrastructure. Restrictions will be placed on lot lines as needed to limit fences and landscaping to ensure access. 13. All local public streets require dedication of 60 feet of right-of-way and shall be constructed to 29 feet back to back of width. 14. 131st Avenue NE will be required to be built to State Aid Standards. 15. All streets will follow the Anoka County street name grid system. 16. Street and utility extensions are required to the edge of the plat for each future connection to the adjacent parcels. 17. Sidewalks and or trails are required on all streets and location will be determined in the plan review process. 18. Streetlights shall be installed in the manner, location and type prescribed by the City Engineer. The developer shall pay the costs of all street lighting installations. The City agrees to pay the cost of maintaining the portion of lights that are installed that reflect the normal and typical lighting requirements of the City. Additional lights, and those within neighborhoods that are installed by the Developer, will be required to be maintained by the Homeowners Association. 19. Hydrant locations must be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department. 20. Water and sanitary sewer availability charges (WAC & SAC) become due with each building permit at the rate established at the time the building permit is issued. 21. As-built surveys shall be required to verify structure elevations, custom grading requirements, and final lot grading elevations. 22. The Developer shall process a Letter of Map Change with FEMA prior to issuance of building permits within the unnumbered A-Zone on the FEMA flood map. Developer shall provide all FEMA paperwork and structure as-built Page 301 of 385 surveys to homeowners at time of lot closing. Developer is responsible for following through with FEMA (as necessary) to receive final FEMA documents, to provide those documents to the homeowners, and to record the final documents on the certificate of title for each parcel in the development. 23. Developer to install grouped mailboxes with design and locations approved by the City and US Postal Service. 24. All development signage by separate review. 25. Each lot in the development will be required to have the standard two trees with a minimum of 2½-inch caliper per lot. One tree will be required in the front yard and one tree may be planted in the rear or front yard. Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 26. Seventy-eight trees are required to be planted adjacent to 131st Avenue in the rear yards of Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7. 27. The developer must meet the City’s tree preservation requirements by planting 98 replacement trees for the lots that are preliminary platted (12.2 disturbed acres). This requirement can be met with the required front and rear yard trees, and trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 28. All existing structure removals will require demolition permits. All wells and septic systems shall be properly abandoned per all local and state requirements. 29. All existing structures on site shall be removed prior to the final plat being released for recording. 30. The developer is responsible for recording the plat mylars with Anoka County. Proof of recording must be provided to the City prior to issuance of building permits. 31. Execution and recording of a development agreement, which sets forth in greater detail the plat conditions as well as other responsibilities for the development of this plat. Motion by Commissioner Howard to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0017C a conditional use permit to allow construction of 86 single-family homes in a Development Flex (DF) zoning district with the following conditions: Case 26-0017C: Single Family - Development Flex (DF) Development Standards Permitted Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwellings 2. Group family daycare Accessory Uses: 1. Private attached garages - one detached accessory structure, with area less than 120 square feet, will be permitted. Page 302 of 385 2. Private swimming pools meeting the requirements of Blaine Municipal Code Chapter 18 Article III. 3. Keeping of not more than two (2) boarders and/or roomers per dwelling unit. Conditional Uses: 1. Home occupations listed as conditional uses in Section 129-10 Standards: • Front yard setback - 25 feet • Side yard setback - 7.5 feet (house and garage) • Corner side yard setback - 20 feet • Rear yard setback - 30 feet 1. Maximum building height — 2 1/2 stories or 35 feet. 2. It shall be required for all single-family dwellings that there be an attached garage constructed of a minimum of four hundred (400) square feet, with no dimension less than 20 feet. Total garage space shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet. Detached garages or accessory storage buildings are not permitted. 3. The minimum finished floor area above grade for all homes shall be 1,500 square feet above ground for a single-level home and 2,500 square feet above ground for a two-story home. 4. All homes shall have a minimum depth and width of 24 feet. 5. All homes to incorporate multiple gables or varied rooflines and articulation of the front façade. Premium materials such as brick, natural stone, stucco, cementitious or engineered wood siding or shake shingle siding on all front elevations. Vinyl/metal siding can be utilized on the side and rear elevations. 6. All residential dwellings must be built in conformance with the current edition of the Minnesota State Building Code. 7. Driveways shall not be constructed closer than three feet to the property line. All driveways and approaches shall be hard surfaced using concrete, bituminous asphalt or other city-approved material that is consistent in durability and quality. 8. It shall be required that all yards of a new single-family dwelling be sodded over a minimum of 4-inches of topsoil (black dirt containing not more than 35 percent sand). Yards may be seeded over 4-inches of black dirt if underground irrigation is installed with the home. 9. Each lot in the development will be required to have two trees with a minimum of 2½-inch caliper per lot. One tree will be required in the front yard (not boulevard) and one tree may be planted in the rear or front yard. Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 10. The developer to require the Homeowners Association to maintain all common areas. 11. All development entrance signage by separate permit. Page 303 of 385 Motion seconded by Commissioner Swanson. The motion passed 5-1 (Commissioner Olson opposed). Chair Goracke noted this would be on the agenda of the June 1, 2026 city council meeting. Page 304 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-98 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Development Business - Sheila Sellman, Community Development Director Agenda Item # 9.3 Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit to Allow the Construction of 86 Single-Family Homes in a Development Flex (DF) Zoning District at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Montean Meadows (Mark Montean) (Case File No. 26-0017/SLK) Executive Summary The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow the development of 86 single-family homes. Background Planning Commission (Public Hearing) May 12, 2026 City Council (1st Reading) June 1, 2026 City Council (2nd Reading) June 15, 2026 Action Deadline (60 Days) June 16, 2026 Action Deadline (City Extended — 60 Days) August 15, 2026 Staff report prepared by Shawn Kaye, Planner, and Teresa Barnes, Project Engineer. Evaluation of Request Planning Analysis Surrounding Zoning and Uses The properties to the north are single family and located in Ham Lake. The properties to the west, east, and south have single family homes and are zoned Farm Residential (FR). Current Zoning The site is currently zoned Farm Residential (FR). The FR district is intended for areas where urban services are not presently available. A minimum lot size of ten acres will retain these lands in their natural uses and agricultural uses pending proper timing of economic provision for parks, streets, Page 305 of 385 utilities, and other public facilities, so that orderly development will occur. Proposed Zoning The proposed zoning is Development Flex (DF). The DF district is intended to provide for greater flexibility in land use planning, and maximize the choice of housing types and styles than is possible under the strict application of other sections of this ordinance. The DF district also attempts to create a reasonable balance between the interests of the property owner in freely developing their property with greater flexibility in land uses, and at the same time, protect the interest of surrounding properties in the following ways: a. By encouraging a more creative approach in housing developments, that will result in quality living environments through innovative design and aesthetic controls; b. By permitting a combination of housing types and style, including single, two-family, and multiple family dwellings, with the exception of mobile homes; c. By allowing flexibility in design by permitting cluster developments and a variety of architectural styles and treatments; d. By allowing for any type of ownership, private, condominium, or rental; e. By allowing flexibility in setback and height restrictions; f. By allowing non-residential uses, such as commercial or light industrial uses which will serve the inhabitants of such district, provided such non-residential uses will enhance the character, amenities, and convenience of those who live in the proposed development; g. By providing an efficient use of land resulting in more cost-efficient installation of utilities, streets, and other facilities. h. By encouraging the preservation of common open space, recreational facilities, natural features, such as woodland and wetland areas; i. By contributing to the tax base of the community without making undue demands on the community services; and j. By providing the means for greater creativity and flexibility in environmental design than is provided under the strict application of the Blaine Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance, while, at the same time, preserving the health, safety, order, convenience, prosperity, and general welfare of the City of Blaine and its inhabitants. A rezoning to DF is necessary as the R-1 district requires a minimum lot width of 80 feet, lot depth of 125 feet, and a 10,000 sf lot size. Land Use Designation The subject site is designated Low Density Residential (LDR) in the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The LDR designation is for single-family homes with a density of 2.5–6 units an acre. The proposal meets this designation with single-family, and a density of 2.73 units/acre. Existing Conditions The site is currently made up of two parcels with frontage on 131st Avenue. The southwest parcel has a single family home and detached accessory building. The larger parcel is vacant. History There are no previous approvals on this property. The applicant requested feedback on rezoning to DF for 101 single-family homes at an August 2025 City Page 306 of 385 Council Workshop meeting. The plan included 101 homes, including eight 80-foot wide lots and the remaining 93 lots split approximately evenly between 65-foot and 70-foot lots. At that meeting, council provided feedback that all lots should be 70 feet wide or wider. The applicant returned to a council workshop in February 2026 and requested feedback on rezoning to DF for: • 80 foot lots - 9 • 70 foot lots - 62 • 65 foot lots - 15 Council consensus was to require 70-foot-wide lots (at a minimum), and would consider cost-share proposals for street and sanitary sewer. Plat The preliminary plat creates 86 single family lots and 2 outlots for ponding and wetlands. The DF zoning district does not have minimum lot sizes. The lot width of most lots is 70 feet wide with corner lots being wider. As proposed, the lot sizes are as follows: • Single family lots range from 8,750 s.f to 13,045 s.f. • Outlot A - .30 acres • Outlot B - 12.91 acres Architecture The proposed single-family homes will have varying roof styles and exterior treatments. All homes constructed should be consistent in architecture, materials and style with the drawings/elevations submitted for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval. Use of premium materials such as brick, natural stone, stucco, cementitious or engineered wood siding or shake shingle siding are to be used on all front elevations. Vinyl/metal siding can be utilized on the side and rear elevations. Setbacks The DF zoning district does not have set standards for setbacks; these are determined as part of the CUP. The setbacks are as follows: • Front yard setback - 25 feet • Side yard setback - 7.5 feet (house and garage) • Corner side yard setback - 20 feet • Rear yard setback - 30 feet Landscaping The landscape plan proposes one front yard tree and one rear yard tree in the rear yard, except for Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees Page 307 of 385 planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. Tree Preservation Approximately 12.2 acres of trees will be disturbed during construction and the City’s tree preservation requirement includes replacing eight trees per acre for all disturbed portions of the development. This would mean that 98 trees would be required for tree replacement purposes. The developer has proposed a total of 258 trees within this development. The tree preservation replacement requirement has been met. A total of 3.6 acres of trees are proposed to be saved on the site. Park Dedication Park dedication will be required for the 86 new single-family lots being constructed at the rate of $5,800 per unit (2026 rate) for a total park dedication fee of $498,800 if paid in 2026. This amount must be paid prior to releasing the plat mylars for recording at Anoka County. Engineering Analysis Grading/Storm Drainage The developer is proposing to grade the entire site as shown on the Coon Creek Watershed District (CCWD) and city approved grading, drainage, erosion protection and sediment control plans prepared by the developer's engineer. The plans shall include existing drainage patterns (contours) with flow arrows, soil boring locations, perimeter site protection, tree preservation, tree clearing limits, custom grading, proposed grading contours, proposed drainage patterns with flow arrows, storm water management, SWPPP information, temporary erosion protection Best Management Practices (BMPs), and temporary sediment control BMPs information for the site. The SWPPP may be included in the construction plan sheet(s) or prepared as a separate document and included in the development construction contract specifications. The developer will also need to submit construction contract documents that include a mass (rough) grading, erosion protection, sediment control, development, utilities, roadway, and storm drainage plan sheets. Supporting wetland delineation report, geotechnical investigation report, soil boring logs, and hydrology report shall be included in the submittal for city review and approval. The grading plan shall provide greater detail on protecting existing trees and provide additional information on adjacent property. For each lot a house is proposed to be constructed on, as-built surveys shall be required to verify structure elevations, custom grading requirements, and final lot grading elevations. Utilities The developer has requested the City to coordinate a reimbursement for the installation of the regional sanitary sewer system, including the required lift station within the 131st Avenue corridor for the benefiting parcels. If they develop in the next 12 years, at such time, the opportunity for reimbursement will terminate. The installation will also include the public water main along the 131st Avenue corridor to serve the proposed development. The developer will be responsible for trunk sanitary sewer area charges. These charges become due with platting for upland acreage. The 2026 rate for Sanitary Sewer District 6-5 is $8,344.00 per upland acre and will be applied to the acreage platted. This phase is proposing to develop 31.5 acres of upland Page 308 of 385 for a total sewer area charge of $262,836.00. Standard Water and Sanitary Sewer Access Charges (WAC & SAC) become due with each building permit at the rate established at the time the building permit is issued. Utilities will be extended to the edge of the plat for future connection to adjacent parcels. Hydrant locations must be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department. The developer shall explore water sources for landscape irrigation systems installed throughout the development, including the possible use of created ponds or storm water reuse. Wetlands/Watershed/FEMA The plat will need to provide for a protective buffer strip of natural vegetation at least 15-feet in width (25-feet is preferred) and shall surround all wetlands. This buffer strip shall be placed in an easement. The developer will need to submit the project to CCWD. Review, approval and permits are required prior to city plan approval and start of site work. The development shall indicate that all structures are protected from flooding by processing a Letter of Map Change with FEMA prior to issuance of building permits within the unnumbered A-Zone on the FEMA flood map. Developer shall provide all FEMA paperwork and structure as-built surveys to homeowners at the time of lot closing. The developer is responsible for following through with FEMA (as necessary) to receive final documents, to provide those documents to the homeowners, and to record these on the certificate of title for each parcel in the development. Access/Street Design/Sidewalks/Trails The development is proposing to gain/provide access from the construction of 131st Avenue NE beginning at the north end of Legacy Creek Parkway. The city has designated 131st Avenue NE as a state aid roadway and will need to be constructed to state aid standards, including a trail and sidewalk. The developer has requested the City to coordinate a reimbursement for the installation of 131st Avenue to the benefiting parcels. If they develop in the next 12 years at such time, the opportunity for reimbursement will terminate. All local roads shall be constructed to 29-feet back of curb to back of curb in width and will extend to the edge of the plat for future connection with adjacent parcels. Six-foot concrete sidewalks are required to be constructed on one side of all local streets. Location to be determined in the plan review process. Trails shall be required to be constructed in accordance with current city standards. Location to be determined in the plan review process. As part of the street design, the development will be required to provide streetlights installed in the manner, location and type prescribed by the City Engineer. The developer shall pay the costs of all the street lighting installations. The City agrees to pay the cost of maintaining the portion of the lights that Page 309 of 385 are installed that reflect the normal and typical lighting requirements by the City. Easements/Right-of-way/Permits Dedication of public right-of-way along the 131st Avenue corridor will be required. The developer will need to obtain all required permits to construct the proposed project. A copy of all permits will need to be submitted to the City prior to any site work. Standard drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated along all lot lines and over areas of delineated wetlands, wetland mitigation, infiltration trenches, drainage swales, and storm water management ponds. All local public streets require dedication of 60-feet of right-of-way. The developer is to provide access for inspection and maintenance of storm water management infrastructure. This maintenance access shall be a minimum of 10-feet wide and allow for vehicular access. Restrictions will be placed on lot lines as needed to limit fences and landscaping to ensure access. Conditional Use Permit A city exercises “quasi-judicial” authority when considering a CUP application. This means the city’s role is limited to applying the standards in the ordinance to the facts presented by the application. The city acts like a judge in evaluating the facts against the standards. Section 101-4 Criteria for granting conditional use permits: The Blaine City Council shall consider the advice and recommendations of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed use on the comprehensive plan and upon the health, safety, and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands. Among other things, the Council shall consider the following findings where applicable. (Ord. No. 20-2447, 7-20-2020) 1. The use shall not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. o The proposed single-family subdivision is guided LDR which allows up to 6 units per acre, and will not create excessive burden on public facilities or utilities. 2. The use will be located, designed, maintained, and operated to be compatible with adjoining properties and the existing or intended character of the zoning district. o The architectural standards listed in the proposed conditions will ensure the use is compatible with developments to the west and the intent of the DF zoning district. The development meets the intended character of the zoning district. 3. The use shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent properties. o The architectural standards listed in the proposed conditions will ensure the use is compatible with the developed properties to the west and the intent of the DF zoning district. 4. The use, in the opinion of the city council, shall be reasonably related to the overall needs of the city and to the existing land use. 5. The use shall be consistent with the purposes of the zoning code and purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. Page 310 of 385 o The use is consistent with the purpose of the district to allow for flexible residential development. The DF zoning district is intended to provide for greater flexibility in land use planning and maximize the choice of housing types and styles than is possible under the strict application of other sections of this ordinance. The DF district also attempts to create a reasonable balance between the interests of the property owner in freely developing his property with greater flexibility in land uses. 6. The use shall not be in conflict with the comprehensive plan of the city. o The use is consistent with the LDR land use. 7. The use will not cause traffic hazard or congestion. o The proposed use will not generate any additional traffic hazard or congestion. 8. The use shall have adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and necessary facilities. o The existing structure is served with the required utility services, adequate roadway infrastructure and necessary drainage facilities to service the proposed uses. Attachment List: Zoning and Location Map Preliminary Plat (3) Grading Plan (3) Landscape Plan Tree Preservation Plan House Elevations Narrative Cost Share 131st Improvements Public Comments Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes Strategic Plan Relationship Not applicable. Board/Commission Review The Planning Commission voted 5-1 to approve the conditional use permit. The meeting minutes are attached for reference on the public hearing comments. Financial Impact Not applicable. Public Outreach/Input Notices of a public hearing were: 1. Mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the property boundaries. 2. Published in Blaine/Spring Lake Park/Columbia Heights/Fridley Life. 3. Posted on the City website. Page 311 of 385 4. Posted (sign) on the property with contact information for the Planning Department. Staff Recommendation By motion, adopt the resolution. Attachment List 1. Attachments 2. Public Comments 3. Unapproved PC Minutes Page 312 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-98 Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit to Allow the Construction of 86 Single-Family Homes in a Development Flex (DF) Zoning District at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Montean Meadows (Mark Montean) (Case File No. 26-0017/SLK) WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Montean Properties LLC as Conditional Use Permit Case File No. 26-0017 for Montean Meadows; and WHEREAS, said case involves the property described as follows: The Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4), Section Two (2), Township Thirty- one (31), Range Twenty-three {23), Anoka County, Minnesota, Except that port herein described, as follows: Commencing at the Southwest comer of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence North along the West line thereof for 300 feet; proceeding thence East and parallel to the South line of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4), for a distance of 400 feet; proceeding thence South and parallel to said West line for a distance of 300 feet and to the South line of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence West along said South line to the point of commencement. Subject to existing road. AND, That port of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4) Section Two (2), Township Thirty-one (31), Range Twenty-three (23), that is described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence North along the West line thereof for 300 feet; proceeding thence East and parallel to the South line of sold Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4), for a distance of 400 feet; proceeding thence South and parallel to said West line for a distance of 300 feet and to the South line of said Northeast Quarter of Northwest Quarter (NE 1/4 of NW 1/4); proceeding thence West along said South line to the point of commencement. Subject to existing road. {abstract property) WHEREAS, the Blaine Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 12, 2026, and recommended approval regarding said Conditional Use Permit; and WHEREAS, the Blaine City Council has reviewed said case on June 15, 2026; and WHEREAS, the criteria identified in Section 101-4 for granting a conditional use permit has been met. Page 313 of 385 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Blaine that a conditional use permit is hereby approved per Sections 101-4 and Chapter 109 ARTICLE XIII of the zoning ordinance to allow construction of 86 single-family homes in a Development Flex (DF) zoning district with the following conditions: Single Family - Development Flex (DF) Development Standards Permitted Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwellings 2. Group family daycare Accessory Uses: 1. Private attached garages - one detached accessory structure, with area less than 120 square feet, will be permitted. 2. Private swimming pools meeting the requirements of Blaine Municipal Code Chapter 18 Article III. 3. Keeping of not more than two (2) boarders and/or roomers per dwelling unit. Conditional Uses: 1. Home occupations listed as conditional uses in Section 129-10 Standards: • Front yard setback - 25 feet • Side yard setback - 7.5 feet (house and garage) • Corner side yard setback - 20 feet • Rear yard setback - 30 feet 1. Maximum building height — 2 1/2 stories or 35 feet. 2. It shall be required for all single-family dwellings that there be an attached garage constructed of a minimum of four hundred (400) square feet, with no dimension less than 20 feet. Total garage space shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet. Detached garages or accessory storage buildings are not permitted. 3. The minimum finished floor area above grade for all homes shall be 1,500 square feet above ground for a single-level home and 2,500 square feet above ground for a two-story home. 4. All homes shall have a minimum depth and width of 24 feet. 5. All homes to incorporate multiple gables or varied rooflines and articulation of the front façade. Premium materials such as brick, natural stone, stucco, cementitious or engineered wood siding or shake shingle siding on all front elevations. Vinyl/metal siding can be utilized on the side and rear elevations. 6. All residential dwellings must be built in conformance with the current edition of the Minnesota State Building Code. Page 314 of 385 7. Driveways shall not be constructed closer than three feet to the property line. All driveways and approaches shall be hard surfaced using concrete, bituminous asphalt or other city-approved material that is consistent in durability and quality. 8. It shall be required that all yards of a new single-family dwelling be sodded over a minimum of 4- inches of topsoil (black dirt containing not more than 35 percent sand). Yards may be seeded over 4-inches of black dirt if underground irrigation is installed with the home. 9. Each lot in the development will be required to have two trees with a minimum of 2½-inch caliper per lot. One tree will be required in the front yard (not boulevard) and one tree may be planted in the rear or front yard. Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 10. The developer to require the Homeowners Association to maintain all common areas. 11. All development entrance signage by separate permit. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 315 of 385 FR DF DF DF Project 1 FR DF FR 32 n d A FR DF v Location e DF N E FR 1 3 1 s t A v e N E DF DF DF DF FR 131st Ave NE 130th Ln NE DF Leyte Cir NE FR DF Legacy Woods Open Space DF 129th Ln NE 129th Ct NE DF E N e v A n 129th Ave NE o FR t g DF n i DF x e L DF DF 128th Ln NE 128th Ct NE E N NE Cir Erskin DF y w k DF P FR k e e r C 128th L E n 128th y NE A c ve NE N a M t 128th Ave NE g i S E d e L N w g t r S a DF u te y y b e K DF Tippecanoe St NE L i S s DF s t r k N e a DF t 127th Ln NE E Savanna S e t Grove Park P DF N E 127th Ave NE Legacy Creek Park DF NE e Zoning DF v th A DF 127 127th Ave NE 126th Ln NE DF Xebec St NE Blaine Parcels DF DF Quemoy St Quemoy NE City Parks DF 126th 126th Cir NE Jamestown St NE Jamestown Ave NE 26th DF Project Location FR 1 DF 126th Ave NE FR DF DF DF FR Zest Zest St NE Case File No. 26-0017 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 Miles Montean Meadows Scale: 1:10,878 Blaine Planning Department / 10801 Town Square Dr NE / Blaine, MN 55449 / (763) 785-6180 BlaineMN.gov This map is for general reference only. It is not for legal, engineering, or surveying use. . Page 316 of 385 OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: SHENANDOAH ST. NE OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: STREET E SEE SHEET 5 SITE DATA STREET A OWNER: OWNER: STREET B STREET STREET D SEE SHEET 4 STREET A STREET C LEGEND 131ST AVENUE NE OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: I hereby certify that this survey, plan Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. DRAWN BY: npc Revisions: MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS 3 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: ISSUE DATE: 04/03/26 1230 Sycamore Lane N PRELIMINARY PLAT INDEX of Licensed Land Surveyor under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 40361 FILE NO: 2494 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\survey\pre plat\10143_preplat index.dwg Page 317 of 385 STREET A OWNER: OWNER: STREET B STREET STREET D STREET A STREET C 131ST AVENUE NE OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: I hereby certify that this survey, plan Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. DRAWN BY: npc Revisions: MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS 4 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: ISSUE DATE: 04/03/26 1230 Sycamore Lane N PRELIMINARY PLAT of Licensed Land Surveyor under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 40361 FILE NO: 2494 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\survey\pre plat\10143_preplat.dwg Page 318 of 385 OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: OWNER: ST. NE OWNER: SHENANDOAH OWNER: STREET E STREET A OWNER: OWNER: STREET B STREET STREET D I hereby certify that this survey, plan Print Name: Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. DRAWN BY: npc Revisions: MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS 5 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: ISSUE DATE: 04/03/26 1230 Sycamore Lane N PRELIMINARY PLAT of Licensed Land Surveyor under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 40361 FILE NO: 2494 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\survey\pre plat\10143_preplat.dwg Page 319 of 385 H I D D E N F O R E S T G H O S T P L A T 3 4 9 1 G H O S T3 5 3 1 3 4 4 1 3 4 6 5 P L A T 3 7 8 1 3 7 5 0 C I T Y P A R K 3 6 1 0 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 C O T TC AO G V EE W O O D R Know what's below. Callbefore you dig. Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY GRADING & 11 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota EROSION CONTROL INDEX the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_gr.dwg #10143 Page 320 of 385 G H O S T P L A T 3 7 8 1 3 7 5 0 3 6 1 0 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY GRADING & 13 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota EROSION CONTROL PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_gr.dwg #10143 Page 321 of 385 H I D D E N F O R E S T Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY GRADING & 14 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota EROSION CONTROL PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 16 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_gr.dwg #10143 Page 322 of 385 H I D D E N F O R E S T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T 3 4 4 1 3 4 6 5 3 4 9 1 3 5 3 1 3 7 8 1 3 6 1 0 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 7 5 0 C O T T A G E W O O D C O V E C I T Y P A R K P R E S E R V E A T R L E G A C Y C R E E K 2 N D A D D I T I O N Know what's below. Callbefore you dig. Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA Drawn: RJR MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY L1 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: RJR 1230 Sycamore Lane N of Licensed Landscape Architect under Blaine, Minnesota LANDSCAPE PLAN the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 56346 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 4 Save Date: 04/08/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\landscape\10143_landscape.dwg #10143 Page 323 of 385 H I D D E N H I D D E N F O R E S T F O R E S T G H O S T P L A T G H O S T P L A T 3 4 6 5 3 4 4 1 3 4 9 1 3 5 3 1 C I T Y P A R K 3 7 1 0 3 6 9 8 3 7 5 0 3 6 5 0 3 6 9 0 3 6 1 0 C O T T A G E W O O D C O V E Revisions: I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: LOC MONTEAN PROPERTIES, LLC or report was prepared by me or under my MONTEAN MEADOWS T1 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK 1230 Sycamore Lane N TREE PRESERVATION PLAN of Licensed Professional Engineer under Blaine, Minnesota the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 04/03/26 License #: 25063 Date: 04/03/26 Plymouth, MN 55441 T116 Save Date: 03/27/26 f:\jobs\10141 - 10160\10143 - 131st avenue ne, blaine - montean\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\10143_tree preservation.dwg #10143 Page 324 of 385Lewis Approx. 2,692 sq ft 4 beds • 2.5 baths 3-car garage Folk - C3 Page 325 of 385To: Planning Commission Members, From: Mark Montean Project Background and Site History The subject property was purchased by my family in the spring of 1964. At the time of purchase, it was understood that the area would ultimately be serviced by municipal water and sanitary sewer. For several decades, the property functioned as a hobby farm, utilizing private well and septic systems and reflecting the area’s rural character at that time. In 2008, I began evaluating development potential for the approximately 39-acre site. These efforts were delayed due to the economic downturn and the property’s location outside an eligible sanitary sewer district. Following the passing of the applicant’s parents in 2014 and 2015, the existing residence was renovated and transitioned to a rental use, while the agricultural land continued to be leased to a local farmer. In April 2018, the property was reclassified from Sewer District 7 to Sewer District 6, significantly improving access to municipal water and sanitary sewer infrastructure. Following this change, the applicant engaged Carlson Engineering to prepare multiple concept plans to evaluate feasible development options. During 2024 and 2025, I met with adjacent property owners and participated in two City Council workshops to review development concepts and address site-specific engineering constraints. Based on feedback from City staff and the City Council workshops, the development plan was refined to incorporate environmental considerations, including the preservation of approximately 12 acres of non-developable open space. My family wants to leave a legacy in Blaine. The Michael’s Meadow (open area) will be named after my brother who passed away unexpectedly. These areas include land identified by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources as supporting rare plant species. The current proposal reflects this feedback and seeks to develop the site as an approximately 86-lot residential subdivision. The plan emphasizes larger lot configurations, integration of open space, preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, and neighborhood amenities, including views of onsite ponds. Page 326 of 385 131st Improvements: The developer would like to propose that the cost of the improvements for 131st Avenue NE be paid for up front by the Montean Development. The developer would be reimbursed by each parcel fronting on 131st Avenue as they develop or sell. This reimbursement amount would be based on each parcels proportional share (based on frontage), and would be collected by the city and reimbursed to the developer. COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHARE OF COST (%) COST* DEVELOPMENT 3621 - 131ST AVENUE 1318' 33.0% $511,500.00 PID 02-31-23-21-001 CITY PARK 330' 8.3% $128,650.00 PID 02-31-23-23-005 COTTAGEWOOD COVE N/A** PRESERVE AT LEGACY CREEK N/A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 3465 - 131ST AVENUE 3491 - 131ST AVENUE 3531 - 131ST AVENUE 3610 - 131ST AVENUE 2338' 58.7% $909,850.00 3650 - 131ST AVENUE 3690 - 131ST AVENUE 3698 - 131ST AVENUE 3710 - 131ST AVENUE TOTAL 3986' 100% $1,550,000.00 * Based on Engineers Estimate 2/18/25 (subject to change w/final bid numbers) ** Existing Escrow w/City of Blaine (Amount to be verified by City) Total cost of 131st Avenue Improvements = $1,550,000 (excluding lift station and forcemain) Lift Station The developer also proposes that the lift station & forcemain improvements be paid for up front by the Montean Development. Again the developer would be reimbursed by all the benefitting parcels as they develop/connect. The developer will look to the city for the best method to calculate reimbursment amounts for each benefitting parcel. The estimated cost for the lift station is $550,000 Page 327 of 385From: Patrick Vesperman To: Planning Subject: Montean Meadows Case: 26-0017 Date: Saturday, May 2, 2026 8:38:16 AM Hello, I would like to voice my opposition to Case 26-0017 Montean Meadows rezoning request and development plan. Blaine has shrinking open green space and the area north of 131st is a city gem and should be preserved. Best, -- Patrick Vesperman 651-788-5846 Page 328 of 385 From: David L Mathews To: Sheila Sellman Cc: Terra Fleming; Chris Massoglia; Pat Robinson; Alan Goracke Subject: Formal Objection: Montean Meadows Development - Case 26-0017 (3621 131st Ave NE) Date: Friday, May 8, 2026 12:41:17 PM Dear Ms. Sellman, I am formally submitting my objections regarding Case 26-0017, the proposed Montean Meadows development at 3621 131st Avenue NE. Having resided on the property adjacent to this site for 40 years, I am deeply concerned by the precedent this project sets for the City of Blaine. Specifically, the plan calls for property owners surrounding the project to pay the developer directly for the cost of the project's lift station. This is a highly irregular arrangement that forces neighbors to fund a private developer's essential utility infrastructure. I am requesting formal clarification from the city on whether Blaine has ever allowed a developer to mandate that unattached private property owners pay for the construction of a lift station. My objections are centered on the following critical issues: Zoning Precedent and Tax Impact: I oppose the rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF). This shift creates an expectation that the surrounding properties will be subject to involuntary rezoning in the future, fundamentally altering the character of our established neighborhood. Furthermore, I am deeply concerned that this rezoning will result in significantly higher property taxes for long-standing residents, essentially forcing neighbors to pay higher costs for a development they did not initiate and do not want. Inequitable Infrastructure Costs: The current funding model requires the eight adjacent properties to pay 67% of an estimated $2.5 million in infrastructure costs. In contrast, the developer can spread their 33% share across the entire 86 units in the project, significantly diluting their individual financial burden. Forcing unattached properties to bear the overwhelming financial weight of a private developer’s requirements, including the lift station, mandatory sewer hook-ups, septic removals, and well capping, is fundamentally unjust. I urge the city to require the developer to pay for all infrastructure costs associated with this project and to place no financial burden on non-participating landowners. Page 329 of 385 Traffic and Safety Hazards on 131st Ave NE: The addition of 86 new units will critically overload the currently unpaved gravel road. Under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 160, roads designated for "low-volume" use are generally appropriate only for volumes of fewer than 150 vehicles per day. This development will immediately surpass this threshold. Furthermore, under MN Rule 7470.1100, the city must ensure school bus stops are safe; a high-traffic gravel road creates visibility and braking hazards for students. Paving Requirement to Lexington Avenue: The current plan shows a complete disregard for residents to the east. I urge the council to require that the developer, at their sole expense, pave 131st Ave NE in its entirety from the development site to Lexington Avenue. The city should not allow a developer to shift their primary business expenses onto long-standing residents while failing to provide necessary safety and infrastructure improvements for the impacted community. Please include these comments in the official record for the public hearing on Tuesday, May 12, 2026. Sincerely, David L. Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE, Blaine, MN 612-240-3631 Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 330 of 385From: Rieschl, James B To: Planning Subject: FW: Case File NO. 26-0017 Monteam Medows Date: Thursday, May 7, 2026 7:49:10 PM Attachments: image002.png I will be unable to attend the Public Hearing because I work 2nd shift. My concern is a health issue. I have a rare fungal infection called Blastomycosis (see description below) Everything you are planning on doing is everything I can’t be around for health reasons, moving Rotting trees, Digging, and disruption to the soil and so on . Our property is in Ham Lake along Shenandoah Street. Lot 1 is in contact with our property but only part of it. Is there any way to protect our property from direct contact to this project. Maybe leave a small buffer of tress to reduce the dust or shift lot 1 to the right one property. I know you don’t have to do anything, but the chance of me contacting the Blastomycosis while I am still in treatment for it is very high. I can’t mow the lawn or rake / blow leaves. 4 out of 5 people die from Blastomycosis, so am a lucky one, it almost killed me twice during my 9-week hospital stay So you can understand my concern. If you want a Docters note to prove my sickness let me know. Thanks for your consideration. James Rieschl 3602 133rd Lane NE Page 331 of 385From: Jon Gorzycki To: Sheila Sellman; Shawn Kaye; Pat Robinson; Alan Goracke Subject: Public Comments on Case File 26-0017 Date: Sunday, May 10, 2026 11:05:36 AM Dear Ms. Sellman and Ms. Kaye, I am writing to formally submit my objections and concerns on Case File 26-0017, the proposed Montean Meadows development located at 3621 131st Avenue NE. The current plan indicates that neighboring property owners may be required to directly compensate the developer for construction of a lift station. This arrangement appears highly atypical and raises significant concerns regarding the appropriateness of assigning private development infrastructure costs to adjacent, non-participating property owners. I respectfully request formal clarification from the City regarding whether similar requirements have been authorized in prior developments, and under what statutory or municipal authority such a condition is being considered. My concerns are outlined in detail below: 1. Inequitable Allocation of Infrastructure Costs The proposed cost-sharing model assigns approximately 67% of an estimated $2.5 million in infrastructure costs to eight adjacent properties, while the developer’s 33% share may be distributed across 86 residential units. This results in a disproportionate and inequitable financial burden on existing property owners who are not participants in the development. These costs include, but are not limited to, lift station construction, sewer connections, septic system removal, and well capping. I respectfully request that the City require the developer to assume full responsibility for all infrastructure necessary to support the project and to avoid imposing financial obligations on neighboring properties that do not directly benefit from or request these improvements. 2. Traffic and Safety Concerns – 131st Avenue NE The addition of 86 residential units will substantially increase traffic volume on 131st Avenue NE, which currently exists as an unpaved gravel roadway. This increase will exacerbate existing safety concerns associated with unpaved roads, including reduced visibility, dust generation, and longer vehicle stopping distances. Additionally, the most direct and commonly recommended route from the proposed development to the nearest freeway access point (Lexington Avenue and I-35W) utilizes the unpaved portion of 131st Avenue NE. As a result, this segment is likely to experience the majority of increased traffic. In contrast, Legacy Creek Parkway NE, an alternate route, presents its own safety concerns due to the presence of parked vehicles and frequent pedestrian activity, including children. These conditions collectively indicate that the current roadway infrastructure is not adequate to safely support the anticipated increase in traffic. 3. Road Improvement Requirements The current proposal does not sufficiently address impacts to properties located east of the Page 332 of 385development site. I respectfully request that the Planning Commission consider adding a condition of approval requiring the developer to fully fund and complete paving of 131st Avenue NE from the development site through to Lexington Avenue, thereby ensuring safe and equitable access for all impacted residents. 4. Conformance with Section 101-4 CUP Criteria Based on the current proposal, I believe the project does not meet key requirements outlined in Section 101-4 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) criteria, including: Excessive Burden on Public Infrastructure: The proposal places undue strain on existing streets and utilities, particularly given that the primary access road remains unpaved and infrastructure costs are shifted to non-participating property owners. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties: The proposal does not adequately consider the impacts on properties to the east of the development, resulting in incompatibility with the surrounding area. Traffic Safety and Congestion: The anticipated increase in traffic on an unpaved roadway introduces safety hazards and congestion concerns that are not sufficiently mitigated in the current plan. Given these concerns, I respectfully request that the Planning Commission consider recommending amendments to the proposal to ensure compliance with Section 101-4 requirements. Alternatively, I request that the Commission consider returning this case to a workshop setting for further review and revision prior to approval. Thank you for your consideration. I respectfully request that this correspondence be entered into the official record for the public hearing scheduled for May 12, 2026. Sincerely, Jon Gorzycki Page 333 of 385From: Chris Berry To: Planning Cc: ssellman@blainmn.com; probinson@blainmn.com; agorache@blainmn.com Subject: Montean Meadows (26-0017) Date: Monday, May 11, 2026 10:21:12 AM Dear Planning Department, I am writing to formally express my concerns regarding the proposed Montean Meadows development and its potential impact on our community. My primary concern involves the significant increase in traffic and activity that 86 new housing units would generate. We previously experienced the dangers of increased traffic volume when 125th Avenue was closed and vehicles were rerouted to 131st Avenue NE. This period proved extremely hazardous for my children and highlighted that our quiet neighborhood—currently a haven for local wildlife like deer and turkey—is not equipped for such high-density activity. This development threatens to permanently disrupt the safety and character of our residential area. Furthermore, I have been informed that the developer, Mark Monteen, is requesting that current homeowners share in the cost of required infrastructure improvements. I find this proposal highly inappropriate. As the developer stands to gain the financial benefit from this project, they should be solely responsible for the associated investment costs. Existing homeowners should not be expected to subsidize the infrastructure necessary for a private development that we did not initiate. Thank you for your time and for considering these points during the planning process. Best regards, Chris Berry 3781 131st Ave NE, Blaine, MN 55449 Page 334 of 385From: Elizabeth Grazulis To: Planning Cc: Sheila Sellman; Alan Goracke; Pat Robinson Subject: Porposed Montean Meadows Case 26-0017 on 131st AVE Date: Monday, May 11, 2026 10:05:29 AM Planning Committee, we have the following questions and concerns regarding the proposed development - Specifically Development Flex (DF). Development Flex (DF) zoning district. Can you please explain how you came to this proposal? 1. Sounds like anything goes as far as any type of housing built, condos, townhouses, cluster (high density??) in an area where the rest of the road is farm residential?? Basically anything but a mobile home?? Really? This clearly isn’t a good fit for our neighborhood. 2. What is a cluster? Will there be commercial property?? We really need to know exactly what this means and what types of "homes" this DF would include! We originally were told that this would be single family homes? 3. Why should the adjacent properties pay a dime for the road/lift station if they are not the ones wanting this? 4. Why should the adjacent properties pay 2/3 of the cost for this lift station when the developer and Montean will pay only 1/3? 5. What impact does this have to the rest of us to the east of the proposed DF development? We were told many times that “you won’t have to pay for sewer or water unless you decide to hook up or sell your property”. This has huge financial implications for all of us!! 6. Did you consider the impact to the current residents on this road, both to the east and west of this property as well as those on Legacy Creek Parkway as far as traffic and safety to the residents? 7. It appears that the road will start at Legacy Creek Parkway and end Montean’s parcel. Can you please confirm this? rd 8. Will the north side of this proposed development have access to 133 in Ham Lake? 9. Can you please provide all of the access roads that this proposed development will use? 10. It appears that the ditch 59 will remain the same with the 100 ft easement? 11. Will these potential additional “homes” impact our wells and the water levels? Several years ago many pumps/wells were impacted. The pumps had to be lowered as many households had no water. 12. What type of development is the Legacy Creek Parkway in? Why wouldn’t this proposed development be the same to have similar houses? 13. Why are you proposing this DF zoning on a road that is the least feasible to handle this population as well as the traffic? 14. Will the potential kids in this area go to Sunrise Elementary as it’s within a mile? 15. Will there be speed bumps on 13st AVE as the traffic will increase significantly and certainly speeds as it’s a straight 1 mile road from Legacy Creek to Lexington AVE? We have serious concerns on many issues and several objections on what we have read!! We appreciate some clarification on all of our concerns. Thank you st Page 335 of 385Chris and Liz Grazulis 3790 131 ave NE Page 336 of 385From: Emily Gorzycki To: Sheila Sellman; Shawn Kaye; Pat Robinson Subject: Formal Objection to Montean Meadows, Date: Monday, May 11, 2026 5:13:50 PM To the Blaine Planning Commission, I am writing to formally submit my objection to Case File 26-0017, the proposed Montean Meadows development located at 3621 131st Avenue NE, and to request clarification on several material aspects of the proposal. My parents live directly across the street from the proposed development, and my young son spends a significant amount of time visiting. As such, the development’s logistical and safety concerns are a top priority for me and my family. I respectfully request that this correspondence be entered into the official record for the public hearing scheduled for May 12, 2026 with note of the following concerns: 1. Inequitable and Potentially Unlawful Allocation of Infrastructure Costs The current plan indicates that neighboring property owners may be required to directly compensate the developer for construction of a lift station. This arrangement is highly atypical and raises serious legal and ethical concerns. The proposed cost-sharing model assigns approximately 67% of an estimated $2.5 million in infrastructure costs to eight adjacent, non-participating properties, while the developer’s 33% share may be distributed across 86 residential units. This represents a disproportionate financial burden imposed on property owners who neither requested nor benefit directly from the development. Such an arrangement raises concerns regarding: Due process and fairness principles in municipal decision-making Potential violation of nexus and proportionality standards commonly applied to development exactions (i.e., required costs must be directly related and proportionate to impacts created by the development) Improper private cost-shifting from a developer to uninvolved parties I respectfully request formal clarification regarding: Whether similar arrangements have been previously authorized by the City The statutory or municipal authority under which such cost allocation is being considered Absent clear legal authority and justification, this cost structure appears inequitable and inconsistent with sound public policy. The developer should be required to assume full responsibility for infrastructure necessary to support the project. 2. Significant Traffic and Safety Hazards The proposal introduces 86 residential units on a site that is currently situated along a gravel/dirt roadway without significant neighborhood development, which fundamentally lacks the infrastructure to safely support increased traffic. The anticipated traffic increase will: Substantially degrade road conditions already impacted by dust, rutting, and erosion Page 337 of 385 Increase stopping distances and loss of vehicle control, particularly in adverse weather Reduce visibility due to dust generation Increase risk to pedestrians, cyclists, and residential traffic Critically: The most direct route to major transportation infrastructure (Lexington Avenue and I- 35W) relies on this unpaved segment, meaning it will absorb the majority of development-related traffic Alternate routes such as Legacy Creek Parkway NE introduce additional safety concerns due to parked vehicles, pedestrian activity, and presence of children Importantly, this site is not part of an existing developed corridor, but rather sits in the middle of a low-density area accessed by a minimally maintained dirt road. Introducing high- density residential use into this context creates an inherent and foreseeable safety hazard. 3. Incomplete and Ineffective Road Improvement Proposal The current proposal fails to adequately address roadway infrastructure in a comprehensive or equitable manner. Of particular concern is the apparent intention to improve only a portion of 131st Avenue NE, without extending those improvements to a major traffic connection such as Lexington Avenue. Partial roadway improvements: Create inconsistent and unsafe driving conditions between paved and unpaved segments. Significant road deterioration occurs already with the existing traffic burden and is most notable in the transition spaces between paved and unpaved areas. Concentrate traffic impacts on unimproved portions of the road. Shift safety and maintenance burdens onto neighboring residents To mitigate these risks, I request the Planning Commission require as a condition of approval that the developer: Fully fund and complete paving of 131st Avenue NE Extend improvements continuously from the development site to Lexington Avenue Ensure roadway design meets standards appropriate for projected traffic volume Anything less represents an incomplete solution that fails to address the full scope of impact created by the development. 4. Non-Conformance with Section 101-4 Conditional Use Permit Criteria Based on the current proposal, the development does not satisfy key requirements under Section 101-4 CUP criteria, including: Excessive Burden on Public Infrastructure The project relies on inadequate existing infrastructure, particularly an unpaved access road, while shifting infrastructure costs onto non-participating property owners. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties The proposal is inconsistent with the surrounding area, which lacks comparable Page 338 of 385 density and infrastructure. The introduction of an 86-unit development in an otherwise undeveloped setting represents a significant and incompatible change in land use intensity. Traffic Safety and Congestion The project introduces foreseeable and preventable safety hazards due to increased traffic on an unpaved and insufficient roadway system, without adequate mitigation. 5. Public Interest Considerations Beyond legal compliance, I respectfully urge the Commission to consider its broader responsibility to act in the public interest. While the City may have the technical authority to approve aspects of this proposal, doing so under these conditions would: Place undue financial burden on uninvolved property owners Introduce known and avoidable safety risks Prioritize development outcomes over resident well-being and equitable treatment Good governance requires not only legal sufficiency, but also fairness, transparency, and sound judgment. Approval of this project in its current form would fall short of those standards. Given the concerns outlined above, I respectfully request that the Planning Commission: Require the developer to assume full infrastructure costs Mandate comprehensive roadway improvements extending to a major arterial Reassess traffic safety impacts and share these anticipated impacts transparently with identified appropriate mitigation measures Ensure full compliance with Section 101-4 CUP criteria Alternatively, return this proposal to a workshop setting for further revision Thank you for your consideration and for your service to the community. Respectfully submitted, Dr. Emily Gorzycki Page 339 of 385 From: Molly Vesperman To: Planning; ssellman@blainemn.com; probinson@blainemn.com; agoracke@blainemn.com Subject: 131st Avenue Development Date: Thursday, May 14, 2026 6:39:51 PM Hello, I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed development off 131st Avenue NE in Blaine. We live on Legacy Creek Parkway NE, and live quite close to the dirt road (131 Ave NE). From my understanding, the dirt road will not be paved with this development. There is already a significant amount of dust that comes off of that road, and I don't think any residents around us or on the dirt road care for any additional traffic that a new development will bring. Our family loves to play outside and enjoy biking, walking and rollerblading safely around our neighborhood. The inevitable increase in traffic is a huge concern for all of us on Legacy Creek Parkway NE. Would the city please consider slowing down residential development and instead increase development of the infrastructure to support the growing population? We could use more stores, restaurants, schools and places to shop rather than more homes. Where are all of those kids going to be going to school? Sunrise Elementary is at max capacity already, and my daughter had to attend a different school for kindergarten than her siblings due to poor city planning with all of the homes and population increase that caused the schools to be overcrowded. With additional taxpayer revenue with all of the additional developments over the past 5 years, we would expect our taxes to remain the same, yet they continue to increase. Please consider the needs of your current residents. Thank you for considering my concerns. Sincerely, Molly Vesperman Page 340 of 385 From: David L Mathews <dlmathewsusa@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2026 8:32 AM To: CityCouncil <CityCouncil@blainemn.gov>; Tom Newland <tnewland@blainemn.gov>; Chris Ford <cford@blainemn.gov>; Leslie Larson <leslielarson@blainemn.gov>; Jess Robertson <jrobertson@blainemn.gov>; Chris Massoglia <cmassoglia@blainemn.gov>; Terra Fleming <tfleming@blainemn.gov> Subject: Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows) Formal Written Infrastructure Objection Date: May 19, 2026 To: CityCouncil@BlaineMN.gov (Alternatively, paste individual addresses: tsanders@blainemn.gov, tnewland@blainemn.gov, cford@blainemn.gov, leslielarson@blainemn.gov, jrobertson@blainemn.gov, cmassoglia@blainemn.gov, Page 341 of 385 tfleming@blainemn.gov) CC: csorensen@blainemn.gov Subject: Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows) Formal Written Infrastructure Objection Date: May 19, 2026 To: The Blaine City Council (via Planning@BlaineMN.gov) From: David Mathews– Affected Resident of the 131st Avenue NE Corridor Subject: URGENT RECORD SUBMISSION: Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows, 3621 131st Avenue NE) – Infrastructure, Pedestrian Safety, and Public Safety Risk Advisory Requested Action: Denial of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Preliminary Plat, OR the attachment of Mandatory Developer Performance Conditions requiring the full paving of 131st Avenue NE and the completion of contiguous sidewalk networks. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: THE COUNCIL'S IMMEDIATE RISK EXPOSURE The Montean Meadows proposal (Case 26‑0017) would add 86 homes and materially increase traffic on an existing 1/2‑mile unpaved segment of 131st Avenue NE. I request denial of the CUP and preliminary plat, or approval only if the developer fully funds and completes paving of the unpaved segment, constructs a contiguous ADA sidewalk to Lexington Avenue, and secures completion with an irrevocable performance bond. I ask the Council to forward this submission and the cited meeting evidence to the City Attorney and Public Works for legal and technical review prior to the June 1 vote ABOUT THE AUTHOR & METHOD OF REVIEW As a matter of full disclosure, I am a retired electrical engineer with a career dedicated to designing and manufacturing critical components for supercomputers, medical sensors, LED lighting, and both conventional and nuclear weapon systems that protect land, sea, and air platforms. While I am not formally trained in real estate development, municipal civil engineering, or real estate law, my professional work has been guided by strict zero-failure safety protocols, rigorous risk management, and systemic failure analysis. In my career, if my components failed, there could be catastrophic damage and loss of life. I am reviewing the Montean Meadows proposal through that exact same objective lens—as an engineer trained to identify dangerous structural gaps, material limitations, and loading failures that compromise public safety before catastrophic system failure. DISCLAIMER & MATERIAL LIMITATIONS OF REVIEW I have researched and compiled all the information contained within this formal Page 342 of 385submission using strictly public information available on the internet, official Blaine meeting minutes, and the recorded public planning meeting. Any errors or omissions are purely unintentional, and I sincerely apologize for any technical discrepancies. The City Council should note that the compressed timeline between the public Planning Commission meeting and the final voting session on June 1, 2026, has created extreme time constraints for surrounding property owners. This brief window severely limits the neighborhood’s ability to contract third-party civil engineering firms or traffic safety assessors independently. This review has been completed entirely within those constraints to ensure a timely submission into the public record before the final June 1st vote . 1. Statement of Intent and Core Objection This formal written submission registers my firm objection to the approval of Case 26-0017 (Montean Meadows) under its current configuration. While the applicant seeks a Rezoning to Development Flex (DF) and a CUP to introduce a high-density, 86- lot subdivision, the surrounding public infrastructure is entirely inadequate to absorb this massive influx of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Specifically, the primary access point—the 1/2-mile unpaved gravel-and-dirt segment of 131st Avenue NE leading to Lexington Avenue—cannot sustain the compounded traffic load from the new subdivision alongside the existing heavy vehicle operations and regional cut-through commuter traffic along the corridor. Pushing a dense suburban development onto a rural dirt road without contiguous walkways directly exposes the City of Blaine to extreme financial and operational risk. 2. Regional Cut-Through Traffic and Engineering Infrastructure Failure The City faces clear public safety risks under the discretionary standards of a Development Flex (DF) zoning change or a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) due to several compounding transit failures: The Lexington Parkway Commuter Shortcut: Rapid development along the Lexington Parkway corridor to the west creates an immediate infrastructure crisis. Commuters looking to travel north on Lexington Avenue will intentionally use 131st Avenue NE as a direct shortcut to completely bypass the severe traffic congestion at the Lexington Avenue & Highway 242 (Main Street) intersection. Pushing an unpaved residential corridor to serve as a regional arterial bypass is an engineering failure in traffic sequencing. Compounded Structural Loading and Safety Risks: This unpaved 1/2-mile gap is already severely degraded by daily operations that far exceed its engineering capacity. The corridor is currently used by 25 existing residential families, multiple daily school buses, and heavy commercial construction equipment Page 343 of 385actively moving materials to construct the new 86 homes. Adding the massive commuter load from Montean Meadows onto a roadbed already experiencing continuous axial loading from heavy construction vehicles and school buses drives the total volume to over 1,110 daily trips. This structural overload creates an extreme safety liability. It creates a high risk of rapid deterioration and structural failure of this unpaved roadbed, leading to rapid washboarding, deep rutting, sub-base failure, and blinding dust screens that put schoolchildren at immediate risk. Dismantling the MUSA Boundary Pretext: I anticipate that City staff or the developer may argue that because the Montean Meadows site sits inside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary, the City lacks the authority or obligation to mandate paving on the unsewered eastern section of the 131st Avenue NE corridor. This seems like an engineering misdirection. The MUSA boundary dictates the extension of regional wastewater and sanitary sewer infrastructure; it does not limit a municipality’s police powers to regulate surface road safety, traffic loads, and right-of-way engineering. The 1/2-mile gap is a dedicated public municipal right-of-way under the City's explicit jurisdiction. Whether a street segment has sewer access or sits outside a utility boundary is separate from the physics of structural roadbed failure under the weight of 1,110+ daily vehicular trips, school buses, and heavy construction equipment. The City retains full authority to require off-site road paving as a condition of a discretionary Development Flex (DF) CUP to mitigate an actionable public safety hazard, regardless of where subsurface utilities terminate. Rebuffing the Pretext Against Paving Without Sewer: At the Planning Commission meeting, the City Engineer stated that Blaine will no longer pave streets that lack sanitary sewer infrastructure. While this may be a preferred internal city staff policy for capital improvement projects, it is not a binding statutory restriction, and it runs counter to established municipal precedent. Multiple existing public streets in the Northeast Blaine area are currently paved without sanitary sewer utilities. The City has a clear history of independently engineering surface transportation safety, separate from subsurface wastewater networks. More importantly, there is a fundamental functional distinction between the City choosing to spend public taxpayer funds to pave a road without utilities, and the City Council using its discretionary land-use authority to mandate that a private developer fund off-site paving as Page 344 of 385 a condition of an intense density expansion. The developer is seeking a Development Flex (DF) zoning upgrade. The City Council is under no obligation to compromise public safety to satisfy an internal staff preference regarding sewer sequencing. The physics of an unpaved roadbed failing under 1,110+ daily trips remains an immediate threat regardless of whether a sewer pipe runs beneath it. Comprehensive Plan Inconsistency: The current Blaine Comprehensive Plan guides this area as Low-Density Residential with the assumption of matching infrastructure. Granting a "Flex" density increase while leaving the main access corridor unpaved is highly inconsistent with the City's core land-use, safety, and infrastructure objectives outlined in its planning guidelines. Zoning Transformation vs. Historical Use: Because this application seeks to abandon Farm Residential (FR) status for Development Flex (DF) suburban densities, it is advisory to note that the developer cannot reasonably claim agricultural or "Right to Farm" exemptions for these road conditions. Commuter traffic completely changes the road's functional classification. Relying on future Municipal State Aid (MSA) funds to fix this road later shifts the financial burden to the public, when immediate developer funding mechanisms are available. Cross-Jurisdictional and Environmental Nuisance: Because the north side of 131st Avenue NE directly borders the City of Ham Lake, the extreme dust generation and mud tracking will create an immediate cross-jurisdictional nuisance. Furthermore, due to the high volume of traffic, runoff from mud and chemical dust binders will wash directly into the site's protected wetlands, causing severe environmental degradation. Given these significant issues, I respectfully request that the City actively evaluate whether an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) should be legally required under the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules before any final vote or plat approval. 3. On-the-Record Admission and Municipal Tort Risk Analysis During the public Planning Commission meeting on May 12, 2026—officially broadcast live over the Blaine City Portal and featuring 10 public speakers—the developer, Mark Montean, explicitly admitted on the record that he knows the unpaved segment of 131st Avenue NE is hazardous, but stated he cannot maintain project profitability if required to pave it. Under Minnesota land-use principles, a private developer’s profit margin is not a valid planning metric to override safety infrastructure requirements. More critically, this broadcast admission establishes clear, actual notice to the City of Blaine regarding an unmitigated infrastructure defect. Under established Minnesota Page 345 of 385municipal tort law, while a city generally enjoys statutory immunity for high-level discretionary policy decisions, it can lose this protection and face operational liability if it acts to exacerbate a known physical hazard after receiving actual notice (see, e.g., Holmquist v. State, 425 N.W.2d 454; Cairl v. State, 323 N.W.2d 20). Approving an optional density expansion via a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that funnels over 1,110 daily trips directly onto a self-admitted, unmitigated road hazard knowingly transitions a passive deficiency into an active, city-approved operational risk. I respectfully request that the City Attorney review this specific notice record and evaluate the City's resulting tort exposure prior to a final vote. 4. Severe Pedestrian Safety Hazards and Sidewalk Gaps A critical flaw in the current project design is the failure to provide safe, continuous pedestrian pathways. Currently, there is only a partial sidewalk on the development side of the road. This incomplete infrastructure creates a highly predictable, dangerous scenario: Forced Roadway Pedestrian Traffic: Because the sidewalk abruptly ends, families, children walking to school bus stops, and pedestrians will be forced off the curb and directly onto the unpaved shoulder or into the active path of heavy construction vehicles, school buses, and regional shortcut commuters on 131st Avenue NE. Severance from the Blaine Bikeway System: The City of Blaine actively promotes its trail networks. However, this unpaved 1/2-mile gap serves as a physical barrier between the end of the development and the Blaine Bikeway network on Lexington Avenue (a 0.5-mile, 10-minute walk along the unpaved shoulder). Forcing children, cyclists, and fitness enthusiasts to navigate a dusty, muddy ditch shoulder just to access the Lexington Avenue trail system directly conflicts with the City's unified comprehensive transit goals. 5. Protecting Taxpayers Against Future Builder Transfers It is widely anticipated that the current developer plans to transfer or sell the approved plat to a high-volume national builder, such as Lennar. In the state of Minnesota, Conditions of Approval run with the land, binding any subsequent buyer or corporate builder. If Mark Montean cannot afford to pave the road, then the financial sustainability of developing this high-density project under current infrastructure constraints is highly questionable. If the City Council approves this CUP without explicit infrastructure conditions, Montean will sell the land to a volume builder at a massive profit, leaving the subsequent builder with no performance obligation to address the unpaved gap. The financial burden to pave, grade, align 131st Avenue NE, and install missing public Page 346 of 385sidewalks will likely be unfairly shifted directly onto Blaine taxpayers via the municipal capital improvement budget. 6. Preemptive Rebuttal to Anticipated Applicant Defenses Because public oral testimony is explicitly barred at the June 1st voting session, I submit the following engineering and planning counters to the standard, predictable arguments the developer’s team may leverage behind closed doors: Counter to the "Prohibitive Cost / Unconstitutional Taking" Argument: The developer may claim that requiring off-site paving as a condition of approval represents an unconstitutional "taking" under federal or state land-use standards. However, from a municipal planning perspective, courts have generally held that land-use conditions tied to purely discretionary zoning changes—such as a request to move from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF)—are permissible when they are structurally related and proportional to the project's direct impacts (see, e.g., Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and its progeny regarding essential nexus). Because the introduction of this high-density plat is the direct catalyst pushing 131st Avenue NE past its engineering capacity, a paving requirement functions as a direct safety mitigation, not an unconstitutional burden. If the applicant’s profit model relies on utilizing substandard public gravel beds to handle heavy suburban traffic, the infrastructure gap indicates the project is technically unfeasible under its current density layout. I respectfully request that the City Attorney review and confirm the City’s broad discretionary authority to condition or deny this optional, non-entitled Conditional Use Permit (CUP) based on these infrastructure limitations. Counter to the "Proportionality / Shared Traffic" Argument: The applicant may argue that because 25 existing families and regional shortcuts use 131st Avenue NE, they should not bear 100% of the cost. However, the applicant's 86 homes represent a massive 80% surge in localized commuter volume. Their project is the direct cause of the structural failure. If the developer objects to stabilizing the infrastructure system they are disrupting, it is recommended that the City Council scale the plat back to the original Farm Residential (FR) low- density baseline, matching the road's current true capacity. Counter to the "Phased Mitigation and Dust Binding" Compromise: The developer will likely propose a compromise: periodic application of chemical dust-binding agents during construction, with paving deferred to later phases. From an engineering failure analysis perspective, this is not an adequate Page 347 of 385 temporary solution. Chemical binders wash out during rain cycles, accelerating chemical and sediment pollution into the site’s protected wetlands and causing immediate runoff friction with our cross-jurisdictional neighbors in Ham Lake. Deferring paving removes all municipal leverage once the plat is recorded, allowing corporate assignees to finish the homes while heavy equipment completely degrades the dirt base. 7. Proposed Recommendations and Formal Requests To ensure the long-term safety of our neighborhood and protect municipal resources, I respectfully request that the Blaine City Council consider taking one of the following two paths: 1. Decline Approval of the CUP and Preliminary Plat under its current configuration, on the basis that the surrounding public street and pedestrian networks are not yet structurally prepared to absorb this sudden, high-density traffic load. 2. Approve with Protective Infrastructure Conditions. If the Council decides to proceed with approval, I strongly urge the inclusion of standard infrastructure performance conditions in the final resolution. Specifically, it is requested that the developer enter into a standard Developer's Agreement with the City of Blaine to: 1. Fully fund, grade, drain, and pave the entirety of the unpaved 1/2-mile segment of 131st Avenue NE to standard city specifications up to its intersection with Lexington Avenue. Please ensure the infrastructure alignment is not phased or delayed based on subdivision construction stages. 2. Construct a fully contiguous, ADA-compliant concrete public sidewalk system extending along the entirety of the project corridor to eliminate all pedestrian gaps and ensure safe connectivity to the Blaine Bikeway system on Lexington Avenue. To safeguard local taxpayers from future infrastructure shortfalls, it is requested that no final plat be recorded and no building permits or certificates of occupancy be issued until these conditions are fully completed or financially secured by an irrevocable letter of credit or a performance bond. I appreciate the Council’s time, dedication, and careful consideration of these safety- focused infrastructure factors before taking a final vote on Case 26-0017. I formally request that the City Council place this letter into the official public record for the Case 26-0017 proceeding and forward it to the City Attorney and the Public Works Department for technical and legal review prior to the final June 1st vote Respectfully submitted, Page 348 of 385David L Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE 612-240-3631; dlmathewsusa@gmail.com Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 349 of 385 From: David L Mathews To: CityCouncil; Tim Sanders; Chris Ford; Jess Robertson; Terra Fleming; Tom Newland; Leslie Larson; Cathy Sorensen Cc: Planning Subject: Subject: Direct neighbor feedback: Urgent tree root safety and full ADA corridor compliance (June 1st Vote) Date: Friday, May 29, 2026 8:15:17 AM I am writing to provide additional feedback and clarify key design elements for the official record regarding the Montean Meadows development plan scheduled for your vote on June 1st. I am a property owner located directly across from the proposed development along 131st Avenue NE. Since the initial public planning meeting, I have reviewed the project materials in greater depth, including the site geography and local infrastructure requirements. Through this closer analysis, I identified several technical, drainage, and jurisdictional gaps in the corridor layout that directly threaten my property lines, personal safety, and mature tree canopy. Incomplete Corridor Design As currently drawn, the plan specifies ADA‑compliant roadway upgrades only for the western 1/4 mile of 131st Avenue NE. The remaining section of the road extending east to its intersection with Lexington Avenue (Anoka County Highway 17) is entirely omitted from the design. Because 131st Avenue NE is an unpaved gravel road with no existing paved pedestrian facilities, upgrading it to support a new subdivision requires a continuous, fully compliant paved pedestrian access route along the entire corridor, all the way to Lexington Avenue. Addressing only a single 1/4‑mile segment poses several severe practical, structural, and legal challenges to my property, particularly to the mature trees located within 15 feet of the roadway. Stormwater Drainage Failures The small internal retention pond proposed for Montean Meadows is insufficient to accommodate the significant increase in stormwater runoff resulting from converting a porous gravel corridor into a paved, impervious ADA roadway. Because the current submittal does not include a continuous underground storm sewer system extending to Lexington Avenue, roadway grading will naturally redirect thousands of gallons of sheeted runoff across the street onto my lawn and into the root zones of my trees. I object to any layout that fails to store and pipe its roadway runoff away from established neighboring properties. Tree Destruction and Root Zone Impacts Numerous mature trees are located within 15 feet of the existing gravel roadway. A fully paved ADA street with sidewalks, curbs, and boulevard buffers requires a substantially wider construction footprint. Grading and trenching along the full corridor will cut directly into critical root zones, threatening tree survival and creating an immediate wind‑topple hazard. The developer’s Tree Preservation Survey is inadequate because it ends at the 1/4‑mile marker and omits the remainder of the corridor. Right‑of‑Way and Easement Conflicts The current gravel road occupies a narrow functional right‑of‑way. Expanding it to a standard municipal profile with ADA sidewalks will require additional right‑of‑way or permanent slope easements from adjacent property owners, including myself. I have not been contacted, surveyed, or asked to grant any such easements, and I will not sign away land that would destroy my mature canopy. County Highway 17 Jurisdiction Because Lexington Avenue is an Anoka County highway (CSAH 17), any connection requires an official County Highway Access Permit and Page 350 of 385 engineering review. County standards may require turn lanes or expanded intersection geometry, pushing construction limits even farther into the gravel quadrant and affecting more trees and private boundaries than the developer’s partial plan shows. Roadway Continuity and ADA Compliance A public roadway upgrade cannot terminate a pedestrian facility at an unpaved gravel segment immediately before a major county highway. State and federal accessibility codes require a continuous paved ADA transition to the intersection. The current plan does not meet this requirement. Turnaround and Traffic Flow Deficiencies The plans do not show a turnaround or cul‑de‑sac at the point where the pavement ends. Without one, delivery trucks, school buses, and emergency vehicles will be forced to use my driveway or yard to turn around, creating an unacceptable safety and property hazard. Protection Against Premature Earth‑Moving Because securing easements, county permits, and MUSA staging updates takes time, there is a risk that construction could stall mid‑corridor. If earth‑moving begins before all approvals are finalized, large soil piles could sit across from my home for months, causing dust pollution and erosion. I request that the city condition approval so that no grading permits are issued until all agency approvals and private easements are fully secured. Public Record Request Because there is no public comment period during the June 1st voting assembly, I respectfully request that the City Clerk include this letter in the official agenda packet. I also request that Planning Staff read aloud the specific impacts on stormwater, tree destruction, and private property boundaries during the project summary so that attendees and online viewers are fully informed of the off‑site corridor deficiencies. Request to Table the Vote To ensure the final project is complete, functional, and integrated into the community without infringing on private property rights or destroying mature trees, I respectfully request that the City Council table the June 1st vote. A brief delay would allow the developer to submit a comprehensive road design and an updated tree survey covering the entire length of 131st Avenue NE to Lexington Avenue. Thank you for your time, accessibility, and continued dedication to the residents of Blaine. Please include this letter in the official public record for the June 1st meeting. David L Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE 612-240-3631 Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 351 of 385From: David L Mathews To: CityCouncil; Tim Sanders; Chris Ford; Jess Robertson; Terra Fleming; Tom Newland; Leslie Larson; Chris Massoglia Cc: Planning; Cathy Sorensen Subject: ADDENDUM: Pre-emptive technical clarification regarding expected developer rebuttals (June 1 Vote) Date: Friday, May 29, 2026 1:30:52 PM Dear Mayor Sanders and Blaine City Council Members, As a follow-up to my previous technical objection regarding the Montean Meadows plan (Case File No. 26-0017), I am writing to provide a matter-of-fact addendum to anticipate and disarm the standard corporate rebuttals the developer will likely present to you to push past neighborhood concerns: The "Deferred Engineering" Defense: The developer will likely argue that full- corridor ADA specifications, utility depths, and county intersection layouts are details meant for the final engineering phase, rather than this zoning/CUP phase. However, because a true, full-corridor ADA design requires widening the road footprint and changing slopes directly onto my property across the street, their current 86-lot configuration is built on an unverified and legally unbuildable boundary line. The "Internal Retention Sufficiency" Fallacy: The developer's team will claim that their small internal pond handles all necessary stormwater runoff. This completely ignores the unpaved reality of 131st Avenue NE. Converting a porous gravel road into an impervious paved surface accelerates water flow. Without a continuous underground storm sewer infrastructure network extending all the way east to Lexington Avenue (Hwy 17), the roadway grading will naturally use gravity to direct thousands of gallons of sheet stormwater runoff directly across the street, flooding my private lawn and drowning my trees' root systems. The "Right-of-Way Exemption" Tree Defense: The developer may claim that trees removed or damaged for public roadway improvements are exempt from standard city replacement math and mitigation fees. While that may apply inside an established public right-of-way, 131st Avenue NE is a narrow gravel road with an easement limited to the existing driving surface. Ripping, grading, or cutting the critical root zones on my private property across the street without a signed easement is civil timber trespass under Minnesota law, regardless of public project exemptions. Unpermitted Heavy Construction Staging Traffic: By only paving the western 1/4 mile, the developer intends to use the remaining eastern unpaved gravel road as an unmanaged staging and haul corridor for heavy dump trucks and concrete machinery. This creates an immediate safety hazard, generates severe dust pollution, and will structurally destabilize the shallow root networks of the mature trees within 15 feet of the road before full-corridor permitting is ever finalized. Page 352 of 385I request that the Council not allow the developer to gloss over these off-site corridor deficiencies with promises of "fixing it later." Please table this vote on June 1st until the developer proves they have the legal right-of-way, the Anoka County highway permits, and a continuous ADA/stormwater design all the way to Lexington Avenue. Sincerely, David L Mathews 3650 131st Ave NE 612-240-3631 Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 353 of 385From: David L Mathews To: Lucy Gray; Planning Subject: Subject: Inquiry Regarding Infrastructure Cost Sharing & Assessments - 3650 131st Ave NE Date: Friday, June 5, 2026 8:50:28 AM Dear Blaine Engineering and Planning Departments, I am writing to request clarification in writing regarding the infrastructure cost-sharing and special assessment structure for my property at 3650 131st Ave NE, specifically related to the Montean Meadows project. During a recent planning meeting, city staff indicated that I would not be required to pay for the water and sewer infrastructure until my property is actively connected to these city systems. However, street improvements were not explicitly discussed. To help me properly plan, could you please clarify the following questions: 1. Street Infrastructure Billing: Is the street portion of the infrastructure project billed separately? Will I be assessed and billed for the street improvements immediately, even though my water and sewer charges are delayed until connection? 2. Transferability of Deferrals: If the water and sewer charges are deferred until connection, does this deferral remain with the property if the property is sold? If I sell the property to a private individual before hooking up, will these deferred assessments be due at closing, or can the next owner inherit the same arrangement? Could you please provide a formal breakdown of any current, pending, or deferred assessments associated with my parcel? Thank you for your time and assistance. I look forward to your guidance. Sincerely, David L Mathews 612-240-3631 Property Owner, 3650 131st Ave NE Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 354 of 385From: Connie Larson To: Planning Subject: Montean Meadows - improvements reimbursement period Date: Friday, June 5, 2026 9:53:36 AM Hello - I live at 3465 131st Ave NE and will be impacted by the Montean project. I want to formally state that any reimbursement period for the improvements paid for by Montean Development longer than 8 years is not reasonable or fair. There have been many mentions of this period being between 5 and 10 years. I feel that at most 8 years is fair. I understand that a period of 12 years has been recommended by Montean, which is why I would like to submit my recommendation of 8 years max. I further understand that this will be on the agenda for the June 15 council meeting, and at this time I am not able to attend. If you have any questions please feel free to email or call me. Thank you for accepting and representing my recommendation. Regards, Connie Larson 612 802-8919 Page 355 of 385 City of Blaine Planning Commission May 12, 2026 | 7:00 PM Blaine City Hall 10801 Town Square Drive NE Blaine, MN 55449 MINUTES 1. Call to Order The Blaine planning commission met in the City Hall Chambers on Tuesday, May 12, 2026. Chair Goracke called the meeting to order at 7:00PM. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commission Members Freeman, Geiselhart, Howard, Olson, Swanson, and Chair Goracke. Members Absent: Commission Member Halpern. Staff Present: Shawn Kaye, Planner Alex Koberoski, Assistant Planner Teresa Barnes, Project Engineer 4. Public Hearing 4.3. 2026-206 Case File 26-0017 // Mark Montean // 3621 131st Avenue NE The applicant is requesting the following: 1. Rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF). 2. Preliminary plat to subdivide 39.68 acres into 86 single family lots and 2 outlots to be known as Montean Meadows. 3. Conditional use permit to allow the construction of 86 single-family homes in a Development Flex (DF) zoning district. Sponsors: Shawn Kaye, Planner The report to the planning commission was presented by Shawn Kaye, Planner. Page 356 of 385Chair Goracke asked if the gravel road would be paved by the city. Project Engineer Barnes explained the gravel road will be paved from Legacy Creek Parkway to the eastern property line of the Montean Meadows development. The public hearing for Case File 26-0017 was opened at 7:28PM. Dave Mathews, resident of Blaine, read a prepared statement to the commission. He stated he has lived adjacent to the subject property for the past 40 years and he objected to the proposed development. He reported this proposal was using a predatory funding model that required eight adjacent property owners to pay 67% of the projects $2.5 million infrastructure costs. Meanwhile, the developer only has to pay 33%. He requested the city require the developer to pay all of the infrastructure costs and place zero burden on the non-participating adjacent landowners. He was of the opinion the rezoning from farm residential to development flex would set a dangerous precedent. He indicated this would lead to higher property taxes that could tax him out of his home. He stated adding 86 homes to 131st Avenue NE would violate Minnesota State Chapter 160 regarding low volume road safety threshold. He recommended the developer be required to pave all of 131st Avenue NE in its entirety. He wanted to be assured that he would not have to hook up to city water and sewer. He reiterated that he did not believe the adjacent property owners should have to subsidize this project in order for this property owner to profit from the proposed development. He recommended this application be denied by the city. Blaine Krugerud, resident of Ham Lake, thanked the city for communicating with him on this project. He commented his concern was with how Shenandoah Road would be impacted. He asked that this new development not connect to Shenandoah Road. He suggested the homes along the northern property line of this development have a fence or landscaping buffer. Jon Gorzycki, 4442 123rd Circle NE, explained this development was being put in on an island as it would be completely surrounded by farm residential and would be serviced by a dirt road. He expressed concern with the fact this project did not meet key conditional use permit criteria when it comes to traffic safety and infrastructure. He indicated this project would add 86 homes, yet the primary access road remains unpaved, which was a safety risk. He suggested the planning commission consider amendments or direct this item back to a council workshop meeting for further review. Jeff Frey, resident of Ham Lake, explained he lived directly north of the proposed development. He indicated this lot was heavily wooded and he did not want his mature oak trees to be damaged during the development of this property. Dan Werra, 3811 131st Avenue, reported he lived on the dirt road. He understood the developer wanted the dirt road to be paved. He asked if a petition could be brought forward to ensure the entire roadway was paved for safety purposes. He explained he supported the developer incurring the costs for paving this roadway due to the hardship he was creating through his development. He discussed how the water tables in Blaine were dropping due to all the development that has occurred in the community. He requested the city take this into consideration because he did not want his well to be impacted by this development. Page 357 of 385Richard Fallstrom, 3810 131st Avenue, stated he appreciated the concerns that were being raised by his neighbors. He understood this project has been in the works since 2024 and questioned why the neighbors were only hearing about it now. He commented on how those living on 131st Avenue would be impacted by this development, if it were approved, noting there would be a great deal of dust rolling across the road into his home. He was of the opinion it did not make sense to pave three-fourths of the road and not all of the roadway. He stated the surrounding property owners will be forced to develop and then 131st Avenue would not be serving just these 86 houses and the existing property owners, but rather this roadway would be serving hundreds and hundreds of houses. He supported the developer paying for the paving of 131st Avenue because the pavement was needed to serve his development. He asked that he not be required to hook up to city water and sewer until he has problem with his septic tank. Chris Grazulis, 3790 131st Avenue, stated he was confused by the financing. He questioned how the homeowners would be impacted by the lift station and street. He was of the opinion that it was unfair to push infrastructure costs onto the adjacent homeowners when the cost should be borne fully by the developer. Mike Bayer, 3403 131st Avenue, explained he has lived on 131st Avenue since 1994. He indicated he has been waiting for the day these properties would develop. He stated he was surprised 131st Avenue has been a dirt road this long. He commented he would like the city to have an opinion on this roadway. He reported the developer has lived in Blaine his entire life and would get half of the road paved, which would benefit all of Blaine. He stated he supported the proposed development moving forward. Char Oestreich, 3698 131st Avenue, explained she has a small parcel that will be across from a new residential street. She indicated the new paved road would end at the edge of her property. She commented on how dusty her home and vehicles were. She reported she had a problem with the partial pavement idea, especially given the number of vehicles that would be added to this roadway. She stated she took issue with the funding that would be provided to the developer for infrastructure costs. She noted she had no desire to hook up to city water and sewer, nor was she interested in incurring expenses for the pavement or infrastructure costs. Liz Grazulis, 3790 131st Avenue, explained she has lived in Blaine since 1994. She encouraged the commissioners to drive down 131st Avenue in order to understand the safety concerns. She indicated she was concerned with the fact the developer was proposing to pave only half of the roadway. She discussed how Blaine was growing quickly and she feared the schools were not keeping up. The public hearing was closed at 7:57PM. Chair Goracke invited the applicant to come forward at this time in order to address the questions that were raised during the public hearing. Mark Montean, the applicant, reported the development costs were quite high and stated he could not afford to develop his 40 acres if he had to pay for all the infrastructure costs. He explained he could get more for the property working with a developer than selling the property to an individual party. He understood that traffic had increased since 131st Avenue Page 358 of 385was connected to Legacy Creek. He explained he no longer lived along 131st Avenue and his renter has requested the roadway be treated due to the high levels of dust. He stated the cost to develop a single lot was $75,000 plus the lift station and roadway. He commented further on the large amount of money that had to be spent to protect the endangered plants on his property. Chair Goracke requested further information regarding the 67%/33% split for the infrastructure costs and asked if this split had been used in the past. Project Engineer Barnes explained this process has been done in the past. She reported the 67% would be split between the eight benefiting properties. However, if these properties do not develop in the next five to ten years they would not be required to pay. However, if these properties were to subdivide, then the property owner would be responsible for their portion of the costs. Chair Goracke requested staff speak to how the existing wells would be impacted by this project. Project Engineer Barnes reported the 86 new lots would be required to connect to city water and sewer. She stated the water lines brought to this development will not impact the existing wells in the area. Chair Goracke inquired how traffic would impact 131st Avenue. Project Engineer Barnes reported paving 131st Avenue from Legacy Parkway to the eastern property line was being done to manage the amount of traffic that would incur from this development. Chair Goracke asked if the city had ever paved only half of a street for a development in Blaine. Project Engineer Barnes stated she could not recall this being done in the past. She indicated the portion of the roadway being developed was being paved as it was within Sanitary Sewer District No. 6. She explained the properties on the eastern portion of 131st Avenue were part of Sanitary Sewer District No. 7 and lines would have to come from Zest Street and 125th. She indicated it was not city policy to pave a roadway until the utilities are placed underneath it. Chair Goracke questioned how many farm residential properties have been rezoned to development flex in recent years. Planner Kaye reported in the last several years, five to ten properties in Blaine were rezoned to development flex. Chair Goracke asked if the developer would be installing a fence along the north property line. Planner Kaye indicated the city does not require developers to install a fence along the property lines where projects abut single family homes. She explained the homeowners in Page 359 of 385Ham Lake could install a fence along the property line. Commissioner Olson stated the existing homeowners would not be required to abandon their wells and septic. Chair Goracke reported this was correct. Commissioner Olson encouraged the developer to be cautious of the mature oaks along the property line so as not to damage the 100 year old oak trees on the neighboring properties. Planner Kaye stated Project Engineer Barnes would be working closely with the developer on this matter to ensure the trees were projected. Project Engineer Barnes indicated there was a drainage and utility easement for the rears of these properties to account for the stormwater, which meant nothing structural could be located in the rears of these lots. Commissioner Olson inquired if Legacy Creek Parkway was designed to handle the traffic from another 86 homes. Project Engineer Barnes reported Legacy Creek Parkway was designed to handle the residential capacities and anticipated development over the entire area. Commissioner Olson stated developing land was expensive, and she did not believe the burden of a development should be passed off to adjacent property owners. Planner Kaye clarified that these costs would only be passed onto the adjacent property owners if they chose to subdivide their properties in the next five to ten years. Chair Goracke questioned if a neighborhood meeting was held for this development. Mr. Montean reported he has been working with an engineering firm since 2018 on this project. He stated it has been very difficult to pull together this project, given that it was on an island and had to be serviced by city water and sewer. He indicated this led him to hire an engineer to assist with the project planning. Planner Kaye explained a neighborhood meeting was not required for single-family. Chair Goracke encouraged the developer and his team members to meet with the neighbors after this meeting outside the council chambers in order to address any additional questions the neighbors may have. Commissioner Olson requested further information on the eight properties that would have to bear 67% of the infrastructure costs. Project Engineer Barnes explained the proposed development is approximately 40 acres compared to the eight other benefiting properties that totaled 70 acres in combination and would only have to incur the costs if they chose to develop their property in the next five to ten years. Page 360 of 385 Chair Goracke encouraged the eight property owners in question to contact their city council representatives in order to receive clarification on if this will be five or ten years. Commissioner Geiselhart indicated the eight property owners would benefit from the infrastructure that was already in place and would only have to pay their portion of the costs if they chose to develop. Motion by Commissioner Howard to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0017A a rezoning from Farm Residential (FR) to Development Flex (DF), with the following rationale: Case 26-0017A: 1. The DF zoning standards to be incorporated are consistent with and will complement homes and housing options that have been constructed within recent developments. The standards will create an attractive benchmark of quality homes with a desired range in appearance, style, density, and construction value and market appeal. 2. The DF zoning district allows the City the opportunity to have some flexibility when approving developments that warrant higher standards than what is allowed with the traditional zoning districts. It affords the City the opportunity to provide input on items that would benefit the surrounding neighborhoods and the City as a whole. Motion by Commissioner Howard to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0017B a preliminary plat to subdivide 39.68 acres into 86 single family lots and 2 outlots to be known as Montean Meadows with the following conditions: Case 26-0017B: 1. Park dedication will be required for the 86 new lots being constructed at the rate of $5,800 per unit (2026 rate), for a total park dedication fee of $498,800 if paid in 2026. This amount must be paid prior to releasing the plat mylars for recording at Anoka County. 2. The development is required to complete the construction of the 131st Avenue NE corridor, from the north end of Legacy Creek Parkway to the east property line of the proposed plat. The developer has requested the City to coordinate a reimbursement for the installation of 131st Avenue to the benefiting parcels as they develop. 3. The developer will be responsible for Trunk Sanitary Sewer area charges. These charges become due with platting for upland acreage. The 2026 rate for Sanitary Sewer District 6-5 is $8,344.00 per upland acre and will be applied to the acreage platted. This phase is proposing to develop 31.5 acres of upland for a total sewer area charge of $262,836.00. 4. The overall development shall be certified by a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Minnesota and indicate that all structures shall be protected from flooding. Page 361 of 385 5. Plans and specifications must be approved by the City prior to the start of construction. 6. Coon Creek Watershed District (CCWD) permit is required prior to city approval of construction plans and specifications. 7. Development requires a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). A prerequisite to the MPCA permit application includes preparation of a site Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the development site. 8. Construction contract documents shall include a mass (rough) grading, erosion protection, sediment control, development, utilities, roadway, and storm drainage plan sheets. Supporting wetland delineation report, geotechnical investigation report, soil boring logs, and hydrology report shall be included in the submittal for city review and approval. 9. The grading plan shall provide greater detail on protecting existing trees and provide additional information on adjacent property. 10. Standard utility and drainage easements must be dedicated along all lot lines and over areas of delineated wetlands, wetland mitigation, infiltration trenches, drainage swales, and storm water management ponds. 11. A protective buffer strip of natural vegetation, at least 15 feet in width (25-feet is preferred) shall surround all wetlands. This buffer strip shall be placed in easement. 12. The developer is to provide access for inspection and maintenance of storm water management infrastructure. Restrictions will be placed on lot lines as needed to limit fences and landscaping to ensure access. 13. All local public streets require dedication of 60 feet of right-of-way and shall be constructed to 29 feet back to back of width. 14. 131st Avenue NE will be required to be built to State Aid Standards. 15. All streets will follow the Anoka County street name grid system. 16. Street and utility extensions are required to the edge of the plat for each future connection to the adjacent parcels. 17. Sidewalks and or trails are required on all streets and location will be determined in the plan review process. 18. Streetlights shall be installed in the manner, location and type prescribed by the City Engineer. The developer shall pay the costs of all street lighting installations. The City agrees to pay the cost of maintaining the portion of lights that are installed that reflect the normal and typical lighting requirements of the City. Additional lights, and those within neighborhoods that are installed by the Developer, will be required to be maintained by the Homeowners Association. 19. Hydrant locations must be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department. 20. Water and sanitary sewer availability charges (WAC & SAC) become due with each building permit at the rate established at the time the building permit is issued. 21. As-built surveys shall be required to verify structure elevations, custom grading requirements, and final lot grading elevations. 22. The Developer shall process a Letter of Map Change with FEMA prior to issuance of building permits within the unnumbered A-Zone on the FEMA flood map. Developer shall provide all FEMA paperwork and structure as-built Page 362 of 385 surveys to homeowners at time of lot closing. Developer is responsible for following through with FEMA (as necessary) to receive final FEMA documents, to provide those documents to the homeowners, and to record the final documents on the certificate of title for each parcel in the development. 23. Developer to install grouped mailboxes with design and locations approved by the City and US Postal Service. 24. All development signage by separate review. 25. Each lot in the development will be required to have the standard two trees with a minimum of 2½-inch caliper per lot. One tree will be required in the front yard and one tree may be planted in the rear or front yard. Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 26. Seventy-eight trees are required to be planted adjacent to 131st Avenue in the rear yards of Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7. 27. The developer must meet the City’s tree preservation requirements by planting 98 replacement trees for the lots that are preliminary platted (12.2 disturbed acres). This requirement can be met with the required front and rear yard trees, and trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 28. All existing structure removals will require demolition permits. All wells and septic systems shall be properly abandoned per all local and state requirements. 29. All existing structures on site shall be removed prior to the final plat being released for recording. 30. The developer is responsible for recording the plat mylars with Anoka County. Proof of recording must be provided to the City prior to issuance of building permits. 31. Execution and recording of a development agreement, which sets forth in greater detail the plat conditions as well as other responsibilities for the development of this plat. Motion by Commissioner Howard to recommend approval of Planning Case 26-0017C a conditional use permit to allow construction of 86 single-family homes in a Development Flex (DF) zoning district with the following conditions: Case 26-0017C: Single Family - Development Flex (DF) Development Standards Permitted Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwellings 2. Group family daycare Accessory Uses: 1. Private attached garages - one detached accessory structure, with area less than 120 square feet, will be permitted. Page 363 of 385 2. Private swimming pools meeting the requirements of Blaine Municipal Code Chapter 18 Article III. 3. Keeping of not more than two (2) boarders and/or roomers per dwelling unit. Conditional Uses: 1. Home occupations listed as conditional uses in Section 129-10 Standards: • Front yard setback - 25 feet • Side yard setback - 7.5 feet (house and garage) • Corner side yard setback - 20 feet • Rear yard setback - 30 feet 1. Maximum building height — 2 1/2 stories or 35 feet. 2. It shall be required for all single-family dwellings that there be an attached garage constructed of a minimum of four hundred (400) square feet, with no dimension less than 20 feet. Total garage space shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet. Detached garages or accessory storage buildings are not permitted. 3. The minimum finished floor area above grade for all homes shall be 1,500 square feet above ground for a single-level home and 2,500 square feet above ground for a two-story home. 4. All homes shall have a minimum depth and width of 24 feet. 5. All homes to incorporate multiple gables or varied rooflines and articulation of the front façade. Premium materials such as brick, natural stone, stucco, cementitious or engineered wood siding or shake shingle siding on all front elevations. Vinyl/metal siding can be utilized on the side and rear elevations. 6. All residential dwellings must be built in conformance with the current edition of the Minnesota State Building Code. 7. Driveways shall not be constructed closer than three feet to the property line. All driveways and approaches shall be hard surfaced using concrete, bituminous asphalt or other city-approved material that is consistent in durability and quality. 8. It shall be required that all yards of a new single-family dwelling be sodded over a minimum of 4-inches of topsoil (black dirt containing not more than 35 percent sand). Yards may be seeded over 4-inches of black dirt if underground irrigation is installed with the home. 9. Each lot in the development will be required to have two trees with a minimum of 2½-inch caliper per lot. One tree will be required in the front yard (not boulevard) and one tree may be planted in the rear or front yard. Lot 1 Block 1, Lots 1-13 Block 8, and Lots 13-14 Block 7 will have one front yard tree with additional trees planted adjacent to 131st Avenue. 10. The developer to require the Homeowners Association to maintain all common areas. 11. All development entrance signage by separate permit. Page 364 of 385 Motion seconded by Commissioner Swanson. The motion passed 5-1 (Commissioner Olson opposed). Chair Goracke noted this would be on the agenda of the June 1, 2026 city council meeting. Page 365 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-113 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Administration - Daniel Schluender, Director of Engineering Agenda Item # 10.1 Resolution Accepting a Bid from Park Construction Company in the amount of $577,651.95 for the 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project, Improvement Project No. T2605. Executive Summary The City Council approved plans and specifications and ordered advertisement for bids for the 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project on April 20, 2026 with Resolution 26-63. The project will rehabilitate the following streets: • South Lake Boulevard from Lakes Parkway to Lakes Parkway The proposed project will involve a bituminous mill and overlay with underseal and appurtenant construction, explained in more detail in the feasibility report. Background Bids were received electronically at 10:00AM, June 2, 2026, for Project No. T2605. A total of 5 bids were received, ranging from $577,651.95 to $624,886.32. The three (3) lowest bids and engineer’s estimates are as follows: Engineer's Estimate $638,701.04 Park Construction Company $577,651.95 Bituminous Roadways, Inc. $595,251.25 North Valley, Inc. $596,619.53 Page 366 of 385 Bids have been checked and tabulated, and it has been determined that Park Construction Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota is the lowest bidder. The Engineering department has worked with Park Construction Company on previous contracts. Staff recommends that the low bid be accepted, and a contract entered into with Park Construction Company. The funding sources for the street rehabilitation project are Municipal State Aid funds, bond proceeds placed in the City Pavement Management Program Fund and Public Utility Funds. There are sufficient funds budgeted to cover these costs. City Council is also asked to approve a 10% contingency to bring the total contract budget to $635,417. Strategic Plan Relationship This project aligns with the City’s strategic plan goal of infrastructure management by providing high- quality street surfaces. Board/Commission Review N/A Financial Impact The project will be funded by a combination of Municipal State Aid funds, bond proceeds placed in the City Pavement Management Program Fund and Public Utility Funds. The 2025 project budget in the 2025-2029 Capital Improvement Plan allocated $555,000 and the 2026 budget is $1,125,000, bringing the total project budget to $1,680,000, which includes consulting, construction, and contingency. To date, $51,549.45 has been encumbered. The project budget has been adjusted to $975,000, reflecting the bids received and the proposed contract award. Staff anticipates improvements to be completed in 2026. Based on the progress of the project, bonding no longer appears to be necessary as outlined in the amended budget below. Should unanticipated costs occur during construction and additional funds be required, Council will be required to approve further amendments to the project budget. Funding Source 2025 Adopted 2026 Adopted Total Adopted Amended Budget Budget Budget Budget (6/15/2026) PMP Fund $555,000 $75,000 $630,000 $150,000 Municipal State Aid - $900,000 $900,000 $725,000 Special Assessments - $50,000 $50,000 $0 Page 367 of 385 Water Utility Funds - $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 Sewer Utility Funds - $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 TOTAL $555,000 $1,125,000 $1,680,000 $975,000 Public Outreach/Input The project is being conducted pursuant to MN Statutes, Chapter 429 and is compliant with all public notification requirements thereof. Staff Recommendation By motion, adopt the resolution. Attachment List 1. 26-05 Location Map 2. 26-05 Bid Tab (6-2-26) Page 368 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-113 Resolution Accepting a Bid from Park Construction Company in the amount of $577,651.95 for the 2026 Street Rehabilitation Project, Improvement Project No. T2605. WHEREAS, pursuant to advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. T2605, said bids were received on June 2, 2026, electronically opened and tabulated according to law, and the following three (3) lowest bids were received complying with the advertisement: Park Construction Company $577,651.95 Bituminous Roadways, Inc. $595,251.25 North Vally, Inc. $596,619.53 AND WHEREAS, Park Construction Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Blaine as follows: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Park Construction Company for the designated improvements in the amount of $577,651.95. 2. A 10% contingency is hereby approved to bring the total project budget to $635,417 and the Director of Engineering is hereby authorized to sign all change orders up to the authorized project budget amount. 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the bid bonds submitted with their bids, except the two lowest bidders. When a contract is duly executed, the bid bond of the remaining unsuccessful bidder will be returned. The bid bond of the successful bidder will be retained until the performance and payment bonds have been executed and approved, after which the bid bond will be returned. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 369 of 385 2026 STREET REHABILITATION CITY OF BLAINE PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SOUTH LAKE BOULEVARD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine, Minnesota 55449 Phone (763) 785-6172 Page 370 of 3852026 Street Rehabilitation Project (#10183173) Improvement Project No. T2605 (26-05) Owner: City of Blaine Solicitor: WSB 06/02/2026 10:00 AM CDT Park Construction Company Bituminous Roadways Inc. North Valley, Inc. GMH Asphalt Corporation Asphalt Surface Technologies Corp. Line Item Item Code Item Description UofM Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension 1 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $52,200.00 $52,200.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $31,361.40 $31,361.40 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 2 2 REMOVE VALVE BOX EA 9 $174.00 $1,566.00 $225.00 $2,025.00 $108.60 $977.40 $106.00 $954.00 $269.50 $2,425.50 3 3 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LF 720 $2.00 $1,440.00 $2.00 $1,440.00 $2.66 $1,915.20 $3.00 $2,160.00 $3.30 $2,376.00 4 4 REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER LF 324 $12.90 $4,179.60 $10.00 $3,240.00 $21.23 $6,878.52 $21.00 $6,804.00 $12.10 $3,920.40 5 5 REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT SY 75 $13.40 $1,005.00 $25.00 $1,875.00 $31.85 $2,388.75 $20.00 $1,500.00 $22.00 $1,650.00 6 6 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 160 $13.10 $2,096.00 $15.00 $2,400.00 $20.90 $3,344.00 $12.00 $1,920.00 $22.00 $3,520.00 7 7 AGGREGATE BASE PREPARATION SY 308 $3.25 $1,001.00 $7.50 $2,310.00 $31.02 $9,554.16 $13.00 $4,004.00 $8.69 $2,676.52 8 8 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HR 20 $204.00 $4,080.00 $190.00 $3,800.00 $200.92 $4,018.40 $210.00 $4,200.00 $231.00 $4,620.00 9 9 BITUMINOUS PATCHING MIXTURE (SPECIAL 1) SY 107 $209.00 $22,363.00 $30.00 $3,210.00 $37.61 $4,024.27 $30.00 $3,210.00 $26.51 $2,836.57 10 10 BITUMINOUS PATCHING MIXTURE (SPECIAL 2) SY 54 $87.50 $4,725.00 $70.00 $3,780.00 $81.47 $4,399.38 $48.00 $2,592.00 $75.68 $4,086.72 11 11 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (2.0") SY 26965 $1.45 $39,099.25 $2.75 $74,153.75 $1.92 $51,772.80 $2.00 $53,930.00 $1.50 $40,447.50 12 12 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR SEAL COAT GAL 9478 $2.30 $21,799.40 $2.25 $21,325.50 $2.66 $25,211.48 $2.40 $22,747.20 $0.91 $8,624.98 13 13 BITUMINOUS UNDERSEAL AGGREGATE SY 27067 $1.55 $41,953.85 $1.50 $40,600.50 $1.77 $47,908.59 $1.60 $43,307.20 $3.55 $96,087.85 14 14 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (3,C) TON 3216 $92.10 $296,193.60 $95.00 $305,520.00 $96.72 $311,051.52 $98.50 $316,776.00 $96.03 $308,832.48 15 15 IRRIGATION SYSTEM REPAIR EA 5 $765.00 $3,825.00 $450.00 $2,250.00 $255.22 $1,276.10 $1,500.00 $7,500.00 $1,800.00 $9,000.00 16 16 VALVE BOX EA 9 $410.00 $3,690.00 $300.00 $2,700.00 $287.80 $2,590.20 $970.00 $8,730.00 $600.00 $5,400.00 17 17 ADJUST GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 5 $585.00 $2,925.00 $325.00 $1,625.00 $108.60 $543.00 $573.00 $2,865.00 $495.00 $2,475.00 18 18 ADJUST FRAME AND RING CASTING EA 5 $1,140.00 $5,700.00 $1,500.00 $7,500.00 $1,015.44 $5,077.20 $1,378.00 $6,890.00 $1,078.00 $5,390.00 19 19 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER DESIGN B612 LF 105 $43.80 $4,599.00 $31.00 $3,255.00 $33.18 $3,483.90 $39.70 $4,168.50 $38.50 $4,042.50 20 20 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER DESIGN B618 LF 241 $39.50 $9,519.50 $38.00 $9,158.00 $40.29 $9,709.89 $39.70 $9,567.70 $38.50 $9,278.50 21 21 8" CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER SY 79 $129.00 $10,191.00 $165.00 $13,035.00 $173.49 $13,705.71 $132.00 $10,428.00 $137.50 $10,862.50 22 22 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $18,766.67 $18,766.67 $14,000.00 $14,000.00 $11,880.00 $11,880.00 23 23 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EA 39 $207.00 $8,073.00 $200.00 $7,800.00 $38.01 $1,482.39 $216.00 $8,424.00 $187.00 $7,293.00 24 24 SANDY CLAY LOAM TOPSOIL BORROW (CV) CY 29 $109.00 $3,161.00 $75.00 $2,175.00 $221.46 $6,422.34 $85.25 $2,472.25 $50.00 $1,450.00 25 25 FERTILIZER TYPE 3 LB 10 $10.20 $102.00 $2.25 $22.50 $24.21 $242.10 $14.40 $144.00 $2.00 $20.00 26 26 HYDRAULIC BONDED FIBER MATRIX LB 164 $10.20 $1,672.80 $10.50 $1,722.00 $24.21 $3,970.44 $14.40 $2,361.60 $4.40 $721.60 27 27 SEED SOUTHERN BOULEVARD LB 7 $102.00 $714.00 $36.00 $252.00 $242.13 $1,694.91 $144.00 $1,008.00 $12.00 $84.00 28 28 4" SOLID LINE MULTI-COMPONENT LF 13340 $0.52 $6,936.80 $0.50 $6,670.00 $0.63 $8,404.20 $0.53 $7,070.20 $0.55 $7,337.00 29 29 24" SOLID LINE MULTI-COMPONENT LF 16 $7.75 $124.00 $7.50 $120.00 $9.50 $152.00 $7.95 $127.20 $8.25 $132.00 30 30 4" DOUBLE SOLID LINE MULTI-COMPONENT LF 227 $1.05 $238.35 $1.00 $227.00 $1.27 $288.29 $1.06 $240.62 $1.10 $249.70 31 31 PAVEMENT MESSAGE MULTI-COMPONENT SF 856 $8.30 $7,104.80 $8.00 $6,848.00 $10.13 $8,671.28 $8.45 $7,233.20 $8.80 $7,532.80 32 32 CROSSWALK MULTI-COMPONENT SF 648 $6.75 $4,374.00 $6.50 $4,212.00 $8.23 $5,333.04 $6.90 $4,471.20 $7.15 $4,633.20 BASE BID TOTALS: $577,651.95 $595,251.25 $596,619.53 $616,805.87 $624,886.32 Page 371 of 385 City of Blaine Staff Report File Number: RES 26-107 Agenda Date Status June 15, 2026 In Control File Type City Council Resolution Administration - Jerome Krieger, Park and Recreation Director Agenda Item # 10.2 Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract to ODESA II in the Amount of $395,661.17 for the Jim Peterson Park Improvements Project, Improvement Project No. P2606 and Associated Budget Amendments Executive Summary The City Council previously approved a budget for the Parks Capital Improvement Program for the Jim Peterson Park Improvements in 2023, 2024, and 2026. City Council awarded WSB a contract to prepare final design of plans and specifications with File Motion No. 2025-132 on June 2, 2025. Improvements will include construction of a paved ice rink, parking lot expansion, water and sanitary sewer extensions to a warming house/concession building (future), storm sewer improvements and construction of a stormwater basin. Background This item was presented to the city council at the June 1, 2026 council meeting and also at the June 8, 2026 council workshop. The project was dialoged with questions and concerns being answered. • Bids were received electronically at 2:00PM, May 14, 2026, for Project No. P2606. A total of 12 bids were received, ranging from $395,661.17 to $735,110.45. The following three (3) lowest bids were received (full bid tabulation attached) and engineer’s estimates are as follows: ODESA II LLC $ 395,661.17 Dunaway Construction $ 463,330.55 Bituminous Roadways Inc. $ 519,799.25 Engineers Estimate $ 465,690.35 Page 372 of 385 Bids have been checked and tabulated, and it has been determined that ODESA II LLC of Sauk Rapids, Minnesota is the lowest bidder. The Parks department has worked with this contractor on previous contracts. Staff recommends that the low bid be accepted, and a contract entered into with ODESA II LLC. City Council is also asked to approve a 10% contingency to bring the total project budget to $435,227.29. The funding sources for this project are the Parks Capital Improvement Program budget funds and there are sufficient funds budgeted to cover these costs. Strategic Plan Relationship This project aligns with the City’s strategic plan goal of well-maintained infrastructure by providing high- quality park infrastructure. Board/Commission Review N/A Financial Impact The project has been included in requests through the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) in 2023, 2024, and 2026 within the Parks Development Fund (404), which receives its operating revenues solely through park dedication fees. No property tax dollars are allocated to this fund. This project was previously identified in the CIP as projects PRK230500 - Jim Peterson Field and Hockey Lighting, PRK230600 - Jim Peterson Hockey Rink, and P2606 - Jim Peterson Parking Lot Expansion, with appropriations of $335,000 in 2023, $625,000 in 2024, and $174,950 in 2026, bringing the total project budget to $1,134,950. To date, $327,174 has been encumbered among the projects. Budget and encumbrances are detailed in the table below: Project 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total Encumbered Budget to Date Remaining (5/19/26) Jim Peterson $335,000 $475,000 $0 $0 $810,000 $257,874 $552,126 Field and Hockey Lighting (PRK230500) Jim Peterson $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $150,000 $69,300 $80,700 Hockey Rink (PRK230600) Jim Peterson $0 $0 $0 $174,950 $174,950 $0 $174,950 Parking Lot Expansion (P2606) Page 373 of 385 Totals $335,000 $625,000 $0 $174,950 $1,134,950 $327,174 $807,776 To streamline project management, staff recommends consolidating these initiatives into P2606. This involves transferring the remaining balances of $552,126 (from PRK230500) and $80,700 (from KRP230600). The resulting combined budget of $807,776 is sufficient to cover the requirements of this contract. Public Outreach/Input N/A Staff Recommendation By motion, adopt the resolution. Attachment List 1. 029064-000 Jim Peterson Bid Tabulation 051426 2. RINK_PARKING W_WSB 90%Layout Page 374 of 385 City of Blaine Signature Copy Resolution: RES 26-107 Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract to ODESA II in the Amount of $395,661.17 for the Jim Peterson Park Improvements Project, Improvement Project No. P2606 and Associated Budget Amendments WHEREAS, pursuant to the advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. P2606, said bids were received on May 14, 2026, electronically opened and tabulated according to law, and the following three (3) lowest bids were received complying with the advertisement: ODESA II LLC $395,661.17 Dunaway Construction $463,300.55 Dituminous Roadways Inc. $519,799.25 AND WHEREAS, ODESA II LLC of Sauk Rapids, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Blaine as follows: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with ODESA II LLC for the designated improvements in the amount of $395,661.17. 2. A 10% contingency is hereby approved to bring the total project budget to $435,227.29 and the Senior Manager of Parks is hereby authorized to sign all change orders up to the authorized project budget amount. 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the bid bonds submitted with their bids, except the two lowest bidders. When a contract is duly executed, the bid bond of the remaining unsuccessful bidder will be returned. The bid bond of the successful bidder will be retained until the performance and payment bonds have been executed and approved, after which the bid bond will be returned. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Blaine hereby authorizes the following expenditure decrease(s) to the budget and the cancellation of projects PRK230500 and PRK230600. Page 375 of 385 Fund / Account Project Project Description Amount Number Parks Development Fund - Project Contract PRK230500 Jim Peterson Field and $552,126 Cost Hockey Lighting 404.60.600.602.6031-4590 Parks Development Fund - Project Contract PRK230600 Jim Peterson Hockey $80,700 Cost Rink 404.60.600.602.6031-4590 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Blaine hereby authorizes the following expenditure increase(s) to the budget. Fund / Account Project Project Description Amount Number Parks Development Fund - Project Contract P2606 Jim Peterson Parking Lot $632,826 Cost Extension 404.60.600.602.6031-4590 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Blaine this 15th day of June, 2026. Page 376 of 385BID TABULATION Jim Peterson Park Improvements (#10164179) City Project No. 23-45 City of Blaine WSB Project No. 029064-000 Bids Received: 05/14/2026 02:00 PM CDT DENOTES CORRECTED FIGURE Engineer Estimate ODESA II Dunaway Construction Bituminous Roadways Inc. Line # Item # Item Description Units Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension BASE BID 1 2011.601 CONSTRUCTION STAKING L S 1 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 $6,900.00 $6,900.00 $9,175.00 $9,175.00 $14,000.00 $14,000.00 2 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $21,803.35 $21,803.35 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $24,000.00 $24,000.00 3 2105.503 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER L F 240 $5.00 $1,200.00 $1.50 $360.00 $10.00 $2,400.00 $2.65 $636.00 4 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y 275 $9.00 $2,475.00 $4.00 $1,100.00 $5.00 $1,375.00 $4.25 $1,168.75 5 2105.601 REMOVE EXISTING OUTLET PIPE LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 6 2106.601 SITE GRADING LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $49,550.00 $49,550.00 $73,730.00 $73,730.00 7 2106.607 POND LINER S Y 1430 $20.00 $28,600.00 $12.33 $17,631.90 $13.00 $18,590.00 $13.00 $18,590.00 8 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR 8 $150.00 $1,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $120.00 $960.00 $260.00 $2,080.00 9 2360.504 BITUMINOUS DRIVES (WITH AGGREGATE BASE) 4.5" THICK (P) SY 1635 $35.00 $57,225.00 $42.95 $70,223.25 $37.33 $61,034.55 $36.00 $58,860.00 10 2360.504 BITUMINOUS RINK (WITH AGGREGATE BASE) 3.0" THICK (P) S Y 1800 $35.00 $63,000.00 $29.50 $53,100.00 $29.33 $52,794.00 $28.00 $50,400.00 11 2451.507 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE (CV) C Y 36 $55.00 $1,980.00 $69.67 $2,508.12 $84.00 $3,024.00 $120.00 $4,320.00 12 2451.607 FILTER MEDIA SPECIAL (P) C Y 460 $90.00 $41,400.00 $48.67 $22,388.20 $65.00 $29,900.00 $60.00 $27,600.00 13 2501.502 12" RC PIPE APRON EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,237.00 $1,237.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,985.00 $1,985.00 14 2501.602 10" YARD DRAIN (NYLOPLAST) EACH 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,250.00 $1,250.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $2,665.00 $2,665.00 15 2501.602 12" YARD DRAIN (NYLOPLAST) EACH 2 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $2,150.00 $4,300.00 $3,040.00 $6,080.00 16 2502.503 4" PERF PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 460 $10.00 $4,600.00 $30.00 $13,800.00 $12.00 $5,520.00 $27.50 $12,650.00 17 2502.503 6" PERF PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 26 $12.00 $312.00 $52.00 $1,352.00 $25.00 $650.00 $78.50 $2,041.00 18 2502.503 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 250 $12.00 $3,000.00 $40.00 $10,000.00 $13.00 $3,250.00 $36.50 $9,125.00 19 2502.602 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN CLEANOUT EACH 6 $750.00 $4,500.00 $250.00 $1,500.00 $250.00 $1,500.00 $730.00 $4,380.00 20 2503.503 12" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V L F 18 $80.00 $1,440.00 $89.45 $1,610.10 $100.00 $1,800.00 $126.00 $2,268.00 21 2504.503 1.5" PVC PIPE SEWER FORCEMAIN L F 325 $20.00 $6,500.00 $50.00 $16,250.00 $56.00 $18,200.00 $42.00 $13,650.00 22 2504.503 6" PVC PIPE WATER SERVICE L F 290 $60.00 $17,400.00 $100.00 $29,000.00 $74.00 $21,460.00 $92.00 $26,680.00 23 2504.502 6" PVC GATE VALVE EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,486.00 $2,486.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $3,660.00 $3,660.00 24 2504.502 6" HYDRANT EACH 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $25,335.00 $25,335.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $27,000.00 $27,000.00 25 2504.502 6" PVC TEE EACH 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $800.00 $800.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $1,575.00 $1,575.00 26 2504.601 IRRIGATION REPAIRS LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,178.00 $2,178.00 $13,980.00 $13,980.00 $37,650.00 $37,650.00 27 2506.602 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 1 EACH 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,073.00 $8,073.00 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $11,515.00 $11,515.00 28 2506.602 CONNECT INTO EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $550.00 $550.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,690.00 $1,690.00 29 2506.602 RAIN GUARDIAN - TURRET TYPE EACH 2 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,100.00 $4,200.00 $9,000.00 $18,000.00 $4,100.00 $8,200.00 30 2511.507 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III C Y 3 $170.00 $510.00 $200.00 $600.00 $200.00 $600.00 $315.00 $945.00 31 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L F 525 $35.00 $18,375.00 $27.50 $14,437.50 $28.00 $14,700.00 $32.00 $16,800.00 32 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN S512 L F 530 $35.00 $18,550.00 $28.00 $14,840.00 $28.00 $14,840.00 $32.00 $16,960.00 33 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $800.00 $800.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $3,200.00 $3,200.00 34 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 7 $200.00 $1,400.00 $85.00 $595.00 $175.00 $1,225.00 $220.00 $1,540.00 35 2573.503 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS L F 230 $3.00 $690.00 $5.00 $1,150.00 $3.00 $690.00 $3.45 $793.50 36 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F 1360 $3.00 $4,080.00 $3.00 $4,080.00 $4.00 $5,440.00 $3.20 $4,352.00 37 2575.504 ROLLED EROSION PREVENTION CATEGORY 20 S Y 1700 $2.50 $4,250.00 $2.48 $4,216.00 $1.65 $2,805.00 $2.15 $3,655.00 38 2575.505 SEEDING - TYPE I TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.3 $15,000.00 $4,500.00 $10,267.00 $3,080.10 $38,370.00 $11,511.00 $12,550.00 $3,765.00 39 2575.505 SEEDING - TYPE II TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.4 $12,000.00 $4,800.00 $7,225.00 $2,890.00 $33,230.00 $13,292.00 $13,900.00 $5,560.00 40 2576.505 SEEDING - TYPE III TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.2 $12,000.00 $2,400.00 $7,200.00 $1,440.00 $29,650.00 $5,930.00 $13,900.00 $2,780.00 Page 1 of 8 Page 377 of 385BID TABULATION Jim Peterson Park Improvements (#10164179) City Project No. 23-45 City of Blaine WSB Project No. 029064-000 Bids Received: 05/14/2026 02:00 PM CDT DENOTES CORRECTED FIGURE Engineer Estimate ODESA II Dunaway Construction Bituminous Roadways Inc. Line # Item # Item Description Units Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension 41 2575.571 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 MGAL 10 $100.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $764.50 $7,645.00 $830.00 $8,300.00 42 2582.601 PAVEMENT MARKINGS LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $1,700.00 $1,700.00 $1,190.00 $1,190.00 $450.00 $450.00 TOTAL BASE BID $465,690.35 $395,661.17 $463,330.55 $519,799.25 Page 2 of 8 Page 378 of 385BID TABULATION Jim Peterson Park Improvements (#10164179) City Project No. 23-45 City of Blaine WSB Project No. 029064-000 Bids Received: 05/14/2026 02:00 PM CDT DENOTES CORRECTED FIGURE Engineer Estimate Urban Companies Blackstone Contractors LLC Swan Companies Line # Item # Item Description Units Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension BASE BID 1 2011.601 CONSTRUCTION STAKING L S 1 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $3,675.00 $3,675.00 $8,238.00 $8,238.00 2 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $21,803.35 $21,803.35 $40,348.00 $40,348.00 $27,100.00 $27,100.00 $52,879.50 $52,879.50 3 2105.503 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER L F 240 $5.00 $1,200.00 $12.00 $2,880.00 $10.65 $2,556.00 $4.17 $1,000.80 4 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y 275 $9.00 $2,475.00 $12.00 $3,300.00 $10.33 $2,840.75 $10.53 $2,895.75 5 2105.601 REMOVE EXISTING OUTLET PIPE LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $710.00 $710.00 $1,750.00 $1,750.00 6 2106.601 SITE GRADING LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $110,000.00 $110,000.00 $152,234.00 $152,234.00 $92,010.70 $92,010.70 7 2106.607 POND LINER S Y 1430 $20.00 $28,600.00 $21.00 $30,030.00 $12.42 $17,760.60 $20.65 $29,529.50 8 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR 8 $150.00 $1,200.00 $200.00 $1,600.00 $142.00 $1,136.00 $280.00 $2,240.00 9 2360.504 BITUMINOUS DRIVES (WITH AGGREGATE BASE) 4.5" THICK (P) SY 1635 $35.00 $57,225.00 $37.69 $61,623.15 $37.70 $61,639.50 $42.04 $68,735.40 10 2360.504 BITUMINOUS RINK (WITH AGGREGATE BASE) 3.0" THICK (P) S Y 1800 $35.00 $63,000.00 $28.60 $51,480.00 $27.59 $49,662.00 $32.97 $59,346.00 11 2451.507 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE (CV) C Y 36 $55.00 $1,980.00 $80.00 $2,880.00 $100.72 $3,625.92 $101.39 $3,650.04 12 2451.607 FILTER MEDIA SPECIAL (P) C Y 460 $90.00 $41,400.00 $55.00 $25,300.00 $59.67 $27,448.20 $74.36 $34,205.60 13 2501.502 12" RC PIPE APRON EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,184.00 $1,184.00 $1,472.20 $1,472.20 14 2501.602 10" YARD DRAIN (NYLOPLAST) EACH 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,214.00 $1,214.00 $1,200.50 $1,200.50 15 2501.602 12" YARD DRAIN (NYLOPLAST) EACH 2 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 $2,118.00 $4,236.00 $3,037.00 $6,074.00 16 2502.503 4" PERF PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 460 $10.00 $4,600.00 $22.00 $10,120.00 $19.57 $9,002.20 $13.34 $6,136.40 17 2502.503 6" PERF PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 26 $12.00 $312.00 $25.00 $650.00 $31.77 $826.02 $94.60 $2,459.60 18 2502.503 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 250 $12.00 $3,000.00 $15.00 $3,750.00 $30.44 $7,610.00 $16.77 $4,192.50 19 2502.602 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN CLEANOUT EACH 6 $750.00 $4,500.00 $750.00 $4,500.00 $347.67 $2,086.02 $596.81 $3,580.86 20 2503.503 12" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V L F 18 $80.00 $1,440.00 $200.00 $3,600.00 $115.00 $2,070.00 $125.34 $2,256.12 21 2504.503 1.5" PVC PIPE SEWER FORCEMAIN L F 325 $20.00 $6,500.00 $20.00 $6,500.00 $85.73 $27,862.25 $57.38 $18,648.50 22 2504.503 6" PVC PIPE WATER SERVICE L F 290 $60.00 $17,400.00 $50.00 $14,500.00 $122.80 $35,612.00 $98.88 $28,675.20 23 2504.502 6" PVC GATE VALVE EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $3,310.00 $3,310.00 $3,218.90 $3,218.90 24 2504.502 6" HYDRANT EACH 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $17,500.00 $17,500.00 $10,736.00 $10,736.00 $11,351.40 $11,351.40 25 2504.502 6" PVC TEE EACH 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $3,926.00 $3,926.00 $1,390.70 $1,390.70 26 2504.601 IRRIGATION REPAIRS LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $34,308.75 $34,308.75 $35,942.50 $35,942.50 27 2506.602 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 1 EACH 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $5,920.00 $5,920.00 $8,202.80 $8,202.80 28 2506.602 CONNECT INTO EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,420.00 $1,420.00 $750.00 $750.00 29 2506.602 RAIN GUARDIAN - TURRET TYPE EACH 2 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $4,500.00 $9,000.00 $3,051.00 $6,102.00 $3,567.50 $7,135.00 30 2511.507 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III C Y 3 $170.00 $510.00 $200.00 $600.00 $214.00 $642.00 $606.67 $1,820.01 31 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L F 525 $35.00 $18,375.00 $39.09 $20,522.25 $35.45 $18,611.25 $35.80 $18,795.00 32 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN S512 L F 530 $35.00 $18,550.00 $41.73 $22,116.90 $37.76 $20,012.80 $35.80 $18,974.00 33 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,210.00 $1,210.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 34 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 7 $200.00 $1,400.00 $300.00 $2,100.00 $256.29 $1,794.03 $350.00 $2,450.00 35 2573.503 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS L F 230 $3.00 $690.00 $5.00 $1,150.00 $5.26 $1,209.80 $2.48 $570.40 36 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F 1360 $3.00 $4,080.00 $6.00 $8,160.00 $2.49 $3,386.40 $4.68 $6,364.80 37 2575.504 ROLLED EROSION PREVENTION CATEGORY 20 S Y 1700 $2.50 $4,250.00 $3.00 $5,100.00 $2.42 $4,114.00 $1.87 $3,179.00 38 2575.505 SEEDING - TYPE I TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.3 $15,000.00 $4,500.00 $20,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,400.00 $1,920.00 $10,648.00 $3,194.40 39 2575.505 SEEDING - TYPE II TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.4 $12,000.00 $4,800.00 $20,000.00 $8,000.00 $5,050.00 $2,020.00 $10,395.00 $4,158.00 40 2576.505 SEEDING - TYPE III TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.2 $12,000.00 $2,400.00 $20,000.00 $4,000.00 $8,600.00 $1,720.00 $4,950.00 $990.00 Page 3 of 8 Page 379 of 385BID TABULATION Jim Peterson Park Improvements (#10164179) City Project No. 23-45 City of Blaine WSB Project No. 029064-000 Bids Received: 05/14/2026 02:00 PM CDT DENOTES CORRECTED FIGURE Engineer Estimate Urban Companies Blackstone Contractors LLC Swan Companies Line # Item # Item Description Units Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension 41 2575.571 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 MGAL 10 $100.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $10,000.00 $242.00 $2,420.00 $660.00 $6,600.00 42 2582.601 PAVEMENT MARKINGS LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $1,216.50 $1,216.50 $1,309.00 $1,309.00 TOTAL BASE BID $465,690.35 $547,310.30 $568,089.99 $571,073.08 Page 4 of 8 Page 380 of 385BID TABULATION Jim Peterson Park Improvements (#10164179) City Project No. 23-45 City of Blaine WSB Project No. 029064-000 Bids Received: 05/14/2026 02:00 PM CDT DENOTES CORRECTED FIGURE Engineer Estimate McLafferty Contracting Group, LLC Sunram Construction, Inc. Peterson Companies Line # Item # Item Description Units Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension BASE BID 1 2011.601 CONSTRUCTION STAKING L S 1 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $18,260.00 $18,260.00 2 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $21,803.35 $21,803.35 $63,560.00 $63,560.00 $28,785.50 $28,785.50 $61,550.00 $61,550.00 3 2105.503 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER L F 240 $5.00 $1,200.00 $12.00 $2,880.00 $12.00 $2,880.00 $3.05 $732.00 4 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y 275 $9.00 $2,475.00 $9.00 $2,475.00 $3.25 $893.75 $7.45 $2,048.75 5 2105.601 REMOVE EXISTING OUTLET PIPE LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,296.00 $1,296.00 6 2106.601 SITE GRADING LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $43,870.00 $43,870.00 $116,300.00 $116,300.00 $106,680.00 $106,680.00 7 2106.607 POND LINER S Y 1430 $20.00 $28,600.00 $33.00 $47,190.00 $21.00 $30,030.00 $23.30 $33,319.00 8 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR 8 $150.00 $1,200.00 $83.00 $664.00 $135.00 $1,080.00 $982.50 $7,860.00 9 2360.504 BITUMINOUS DRIVES (WITH AGGREGATE BASE) 4.5" THICK (P) SY 1635 $35.00 $57,225.00 $50.75 $82,976.25 $45.00 $73,575.00 $47.60 $77,826.00 10 2360.504 BITUMINOUS RINK (WITH AGGREGATE BASE) 3.0" THICK (P) S Y 1800 $35.00 $63,000.00 $45.00 $81,000.00 $37.25 $67,050.00 $34.50 $62,100.00 11 2451.507 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE (CV) C Y 36 $55.00 $1,980.00 $68.00 $2,448.00 $185.00 $6,660.00 $136.00 $4,896.00 12 2451.607 FILTER MEDIA SPECIAL (P) C Y 460 $90.00 $41,400.00 $84.00 $38,640.00 $109.00 $50,140.00 $62.80 $28,888.00 13 2501.502 12" RC PIPE APRON EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,120.00 $1,120.00 $3,100.00 $3,100.00 $1,814.00 $1,814.00 14 2501.602 10" YARD DRAIN (NYLOPLAST) EACH 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,120.00 $1,120.00 $2,235.00 $2,235.00 $1,187.00 $1,187.00 15 2501.602 12" YARD DRAIN (NYLOPLAST) EACH 2 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $1,530.00 $3,060.00 $2,800.00 $5,600.00 $1,543.00 $3,086.00 16 2502.503 4" PERF PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 460 $10.00 $4,600.00 $10.00 $4,600.00 $38.00 $17,480.00 $15.80 $7,268.00 17 2502.503 6" PERF PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 26 $12.00 $312.00 $48.00 $1,248.00 $75.00 $1,950.00 $64.80 $1,684.80 18 2502.503 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 250 $12.00 $3,000.00 $24.00 $6,000.00 $25.50 $6,375.00 $12.10 $3,025.00 19 2502.602 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN CLEANOUT EACH 6 $750.00 $4,500.00 $670.00 $4,020.00 $750.00 $4,500.00 $868.50 $5,211.00 20 2503.503 12" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V L F 18 $80.00 $1,440.00 $151.00 $2,718.00 $120.00 $2,160.00 $110.00 $1,980.00 21 2504.503 1.5" PVC PIPE SEWER FORCEMAIN L F 325 $20.00 $6,500.00 $61.34 $19,935.50 $41.00 $13,325.00 $33.50 $10,887.50 22 2504.503 6" PVC PIPE WATER SERVICE L F 290 $60.00 $17,400.00 $78.00 $22,620.00 $63.25 $18,342.50 $74.60 $21,634.00 23 2504.502 6" PVC GATE VALVE EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $8,760.00 $8,760.00 $4,850.00 $4,850.00 $3,943.00 $3,943.00 24 2504.502 6" HYDRANT EACH 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $15,890.00 $15,890.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $15,040.00 $15,040.00 25 2504.502 6" PVC TEE EACH 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,520.00 $1,520.00 $3,200.00 $3,200.00 $1,252.00 $1,252.00 26 2504.601 IRRIGATION REPAIRS LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $34,560.00 $34,560.00 $34,300.00 $34,300.00 $10,420.00 $10,420.00 27 2506.602 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 1 EACH 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $13,540.00 $13,540.00 $8,650.00 $8,650.00 $13,460.00 $13,460.00 28 2506.602 CONNECT INTO EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $1,750.00 $1,750.00 $2,649.00 $2,649.00 29 2506.602 RAIN GUARDIAN - TURRET TYPE EACH 2 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,890.00 $11,780.00 $4,200.00 $8,400.00 $3,868.00 $7,736.00 30 2511.507 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III C Y 3 $170.00 $510.00 $133.00 $399.00 $315.00 $945.00 $163.50 $490.50 31 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L F 525 $35.00 $18,375.00 $34.00 $17,850.00 $36.75 $19,293.75 $41.30 $21,682.50 32 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN S512 L F 530 $35.00 $18,550.00 $43.00 $22,790.00 $38.75 $20,537.50 $44.00 $23,320.00 33 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $1,530.00 $1,530.00 $850.00 $850.00 $3,404.00 $3,404.00 34 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 7 $200.00 $1,400.00 $200.00 $1,400.00 $150.00 $1,050.00 $170.00 $1,190.00 35 2573.503 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS L F 230 $3.00 $690.00 $3.15 $724.50 $2.50 $575.00 $5.65 $1,299.50 36 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F 1360 $3.00 $4,080.00 $3.00 $4,080.00 $4.50 $6,120.00 $3.95 $5,372.00 37 2575.504 ROLLED EROSION PREVENTION CATEGORY 20 S Y 1700 $2.50 $4,250.00 $3.08 $5,236.00 $1.75 $2,975.00 $1.65 $2,805.00 38 2575.505 SEEDING - TYPE I TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.3 $15,000.00 $4,500.00 $3,800.00 $1,140.00 $10,250.00 $3,075.00 $38,710.00 $11,613.00 39 2575.505 SEEDING - TYPE II TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.4 $12,000.00 $4,800.00 $4,500.00 $1,800.00 $10,000.00 $4,000.00 $33,520.00 $13,408.00 40 2576.505 SEEDING - TYPE III TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.2 $12,000.00 $2,400.00 $5,400.00 $1,080.00 $4,725.00 $945.00 $29,900.00 $5,980.00 Page 5 of 8 Page 381 of 385BID TABULATION Jim Peterson Park Improvements (#10164179) City Project No. 23-45 City of Blaine WSB Project No. 029064-000 Bids Received: 05/14/2026 02:00 PM CDT DENOTES CORRECTED FIGURE Engineer Estimate McLafferty Contracting Group, LLC Sunram Construction, Inc. Peterson Companies Line # Item # Item Description Units Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension 41 2575.571 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 MGAL 10 $100.00 $1,000.00 $135.00 $1,350.00 $630.00 $6,300.00 $771.00 $7,710.00 42 2582.601 PAVEMENT MARKINGS LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $1,930.00 $1,930.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $1,350.00 $1,350.00 TOTAL BASE BID $465,690.35 $589,504.25 $604,478.00 $617,357.55 Page 6 of 8 Page 382 of 385BID TABULATION Jim Peterson Park Improvements (#10164179) City Project No. 23-45 City of Blaine WSB Project No. 029064-000 Bids Received: 05/14/2026 02:00 PM CDT DENOTES CORRECTED FIGURE Engineer Estimate D&D Contracting LLC Precision Utilities Midwest Landscapes & Excavation Line # Item # Item Description Units Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension BASE BID 1 2011.601 CONSTRUCTION STAKING L S 1 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 $8,500.00 $8,500.00 $7,620.00 $7,620.00 $6,757.00 $6,757.00 2 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $21,803.35 $21,803.35 $68,040.00 $68,040.00 $85,000.00 $85,000.00 $42,000.00 $42,000.00 3 2105.503 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER L F 240 $5.00 $1,200.00 $4.38 $1,051.20 $5.66 $1,358.40 $5.20 $1,248.00 4 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y 275 $9.00 $2,475.00 $9.55 $2,626.25 $11.50 $3,162.50 $6.25 $1,718.75 5 2105.601 REMOVE EXISTING OUTLET PIPE LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $525.00 $525.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,023.10 $1,023.10 6 2106.601 SITE GRADING LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $289,430.00 $289,430.00 $173,415.00 $173,415.00 $184,754.18 $184,754.18 7 2106.607 POND LINER S Y 1430 $20.00 $28,600.00 $14.10 $20,163.00 $2.06 $2,945.80 $21.50 $30,745.00 8 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR 8 $150.00 $1,200.00 $210.00 $1,680.00 $165.00 $1,320.00 $468.22 $3,745.76 9 2360.504 BITUMINOUS DRIVES (WITH AGGREGATE BASE) 4.5" THICK (P) SY 1635 $35.00 $57,225.00 $26.25 $42,918.75 $43.20 $70,632.00 $60.71 $99,260.85 10 2360.504 BITUMINOUS RINK (WITH AGGREGATE BASE) 3.0" THICK (P) S Y 1800 $35.00 $63,000.00 $19.95 $35,910.00 $62.95 $113,310.00 $53.81 $96,858.00 11 2451.507 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE (CV) C Y 36 $55.00 $1,980.00 $115.03 $4,141.08 $87.30 $3,142.80 $112.07 $4,034.52 12 2451.607 FILTER MEDIA SPECIAL (P) C Y 460 $90.00 $41,400.00 $68.11 $31,330.60 $40.58 $18,666.80 $102.24 $47,030.40 13 2501.502 12" RC PIPE APRON EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,200.78 $1,200.78 $2,143.00 $2,143.00 $2,150.81 $2,150.81 14 2501.602 10" YARD DRAIN (NYLOPLAST) EACH 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,449.00 $1,449.00 $1,470.54 $1,470.54 $2,867.48 $2,867.48 15 2501.602 12" YARD DRAIN (NYLOPLAST) EACH 2 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $2,038.49 $4,076.98 $1,596.00 $3,192.00 $2,941.03 $5,882.06 16 2502.503 4" PERF PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 460 $10.00 $4,600.00 $18.92 $8,703.20 $20.59 $9,471.40 $11.53 $5,303.80 17 2502.503 6" PERF PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 26 $12.00 $312.00 $16.04 $417.04 $49.61 $1,289.86 $59.75 $1,553.50 18 2502.503 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN L F 250 $12.00 $3,000.00 $23.53 $5,882.50 $14.17 $3,542.50 $16.80 $4,200.00 19 2502.602 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN CLEANOUT EACH 6 $750.00 $4,500.00 $212.82 $1,276.92 $360.69 $2,164.14 $350.14 $2,100.84 20 2503.503 12" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V L F 18 $80.00 $1,440.00 $84.21 $1,515.78 $110.00 $1,980.00 $154.74 $2,785.32 21 2504.503 1.5" PVC PIPE SEWER FORCEMAIN L F 325 $20.00 $6,500.00 $17.03 $5,534.75 $31.39 $10,201.75 $11.00 $3,575.00 22 2504.503 6" PVC PIPE WATER SERVICE L F 290 $60.00 $17,400.00 $44.73 $12,971.70 $69.59 $20,181.10 $31.31 $9,079.90 23 2504.502 6" PVC GATE VALVE EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $6,702.66 $6,702.66 $6,075.00 $6,075.00 $9,609.05 $9,609.05 24 2504.502 6" HYDRANT EACH 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $11,429.16 $11,429.16 $9,599.00 $9,599.00 $13,631.09 $13,631.09 25 2504.502 6" PVC TEE EACH 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $3,884.84 $3,884.84 $1,785.00 $1,785.00 $6,585.88 $6,585.88 26 2504.601 IRRIGATION REPAIRS LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $14,679.00 $14,679.00 $15,540.00 $15,540.00 $37,450.00 $37,450.00 27 2506.602 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 1 EACH 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $7,789.17 $7,789.17 $9,420.00 $9,420.00 $12,382.11 $12,382.11 28 2506.602 CONNECT INTO EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $892.50 $892.50 $944.00 $944.00 $7,192.88 $7,192.88 29 2506.602 RAIN GUARDIAN - TURRET TYPE EACH 2 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,714.25 $5,428.50 $4,139.00 $8,278.00 $3,870.24 $7,740.48 30 2511.507 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III C Y 3 $170.00 $510.00 $175.00 $525.00 $565.32 $1,695.96 $480.73 $1,442.19 31 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L F 525 $35.00 $18,375.00 $31.40 $16,485.00 $72.15 $37,878.75 $36.54 $19,183.50 32 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN S512 L F 530 $35.00 $18,550.00 $31.38 $16,631.40 $72.15 $38,239.50 $39.19 $20,770.70 33 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,100.00 $2,100.00 $2,359.00 $2,359.00 $5,260.84 $5,260.84 34 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 7 $200.00 $1,400.00 $315.00 $2,205.00 $233.10 $1,631.70 $212.68 $1,488.76 35 2573.503 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS L F 230 $3.00 $690.00 $4.57 $1,051.10 $3.57 $821.10 $8.93 $2,053.90 36 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F 1360 $3.00 $4,080.00 $3.47 $4,719.20 $3.27 $4,447.20 $3.69 $5,018.40 37 2575.504 ROLLED EROSION PREVENTION CATEGORY 20 S Y 1700 $2.50 $4,250.00 $1.73 $2,941.00 $2.25 $3,825.00 $2.30 $3,910.00 38 2575.505 SEEDING - TYPE I TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.3 $15,000.00 $4,500.00 $40,288.50 $12,086.55 $12,980.00 $3,894.00 $14,157.96 $4,247.39 39 2575.505 SEEDING - TYPE II TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.4 $12,000.00 $4,800.00 $34,891.50 $13,956.60 $14,421.00 $5,768.40 $11,109.15 $4,443.66 40 2576.505 SEEDING - TYPE III TURF SEED MIX ACRE 0.2 $12,000.00 $2,400.00 $31,132.50 $6,226.50 $14,421.00 $2,884.20 $13,334.10 $2,666.82 Page 7 of 8 Page 383 of 385BID TABULATION Jim Peterson Park Improvements (#10164179) City Project No. 23-45 City of Blaine WSB Project No. 029064-000 Bids Received: 05/14/2026 02:00 PM CDT DENOTES CORRECTED FIGURE Engineer Estimate D&D Contracting LLC Precision Utilities Midwest Landscapes & Excavation Line # Item # Item Description Units Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension 41 2575.571 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 MGAL 10 $100.00 $1,000.00 $802.73 $8,027.30 $865.00 $8,650.00 $671.44 $6,714.40 42 2582.601 PAVEMENT MARKINGS LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $1,249.50 $1,249.50 $550.00 $550.00 $4,644.13 $4,644.13 TOTAL BASE BID $465,690.35 $688,354.51 $701,995.40 $735,110.45 I hereby certify that this is an exact reproduction of bids received Certified By: License No. 44337 Date: May 14, 2026 Page 8 of 8 Page 384 of 385 X X X X X X X X X X X 326 X X X X 25.00 DT 326 DT DT DT DT DT 327 DT DT 25.00 DT DT Page 385 of 385