Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2025-04-10 City Council Agenda Packet
1.Call to Order / Roll Call 2.Pledge of Allegiance 3.Agenda Approval 4.Presentations a.Pat Meister Longevity Award - 35 Years of Service b.Three Rivers Park District Update - Marge Beard c.4M/PMA Investment Strategy - Corey Boyer d.Elm Creek Watershed 5.Open Forum - Public Comment Opportunity 6.Consent Agenda a.Meeting Minutes Approval b.Financial Claims to April 10, 2025 c.Teamsters Compensation Classification Study Memorandum of Agreement d.Resolution Recognizing Truck Safety Seminar and Donations e.Exempt Employee Policy f.Chisholm Trail Street Improvements - Accept Feasibility Study & Order Improvement Hearing g.Temporary On-Sale Liquor License Application - Hennepin County Fair h.City Park Remaster - Design Update i.Grant Proposals j.Street Maintenance - Maltene Based Restorative Seal Quote k.Water Treatment Plant- Pay Request #23 l.Corcoran Water Tower- Pay Request #23 m.Water Treatment Plant- Change Order #10 n.Administrative Correction - Resolution 2025-32 Awarding the Sale of General Obligation Bonds - Series 2025A o.Charitable Gambling Application - Heroes Helping Heroes. 7.Planning 8.Unfinished Business a.Draft Ordinance No. 2025-545 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants 9.New Business 10.Closed Session 11.Staff Reports 12.Council Reports Corcoran City Council - Regular Session Agenda April 10, 2025 7:00 PM 1 13.City Council Schedule a.2025 City Council Schedule 14.Adjournment Hybrid Meeting Option Available The public is invited to attend the regular Council meetings at City Hall. Meeting Via Telephone/Other Electronic Means Call-in Instructions: +1 312 626 6799 US Enter Meeting ID: 864 5093 6362 Video Link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86450936362 or visit http://www.zoom.us and enter Meeting ID: 864 5093 6362 *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the Council Chambers Agenda Packet book located by the entrance. The complete Council Agenda Packet is available electronically on the City website at www.corcoranmn.gov. 2 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 4.a Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Deb Johnson Topic: Pat Meister Longevity Award - 35 Years of Service Action Required: Acknowledge Pat Meister for 35 Year of Service Summary Public Works Operation Superintendent, Pat Meister is being recognized for his 35 years with the City of Corcoran. Council Action Acknowledge Pat Meister for 35 Years of Service. Attachments 1. Pat 35 Years Slide.pdf 3 Pat Meister Public Works Operations Superintendent Celebrated his 35 year anniversary with the City of Corcoran! Pat’s dedication to the City of Corcoran and her citizens is marked by the exceptional care that Pat brings to each project. His success as Operations Superintendent can be measured by the quality of our roads, parks, and infrastructure. As a supervisor he leads by example, never asking the team to complete any task that he would not do himself. He supports his team and works to create opportunities for individual growth and foster areas of interest. 4 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 4.b Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Deb Johnson Topic: Three Rivers Park District Update - Marge Beard Action Required: No Action Required Council Action Attachments 1. 2025 Three Rivers Park District Presentation_Corcoran.pptx 5 Marge Beard Commissioner, District 1 6 Our mission: Promote environmental stewardship through recreation and education in a natural resources-based park system. 7 Who we are •Park District was established in 1957 by state Legislature •Board of Commissioners – 5 elected; 2 appointed •Three Rivers Park District includes suburban Hennepin County •Partnership with Scott County •We partner with other agencies to manage some facilities 8 •25 parks and park reserves •27,000 acres of land •175 miles of regional trails •300 miles of trails within our parks •15 million visits per year 9 Natural Resources 10 Recreation 11 Mississippi Gateway Redevelopment 12 Bloomington Partnership 13 Current and planned facilities in Corcoran Operational •Lake Independence Regional Trail Approved long-range plan •Diamond Lake Regional Trail 14 We’re always interested in talking about potential partnerships and how we can do an even better job serving residents of our communities. Moving forward 15 Thank you! Comments/questions? 16 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 4.c Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Deb Johnson Topic: 4M/PMA Investment Strategy - Corey Boyer Action Required: No Action Required Council Action Attachments 1. PMA-4M Council Presentation - 4-10-25.pptx 17 League of Minnesota Cities 4M Fund (Minnesota Municipal Money Market) Corey Boyer Vice President, Investment Services PMA Financial Network, LLC April 10, 2025 18 2 4M Fund Overview League of MN Cities (LMC) started Cash/Investment Management program in 1987 under MN Statute, “Joint Powers Act” –LMC Board governs the Fund LMC hired PMA as 4M Fund Administrator and Investment Advisor to perform: •Daily activity processing for Participants •Fund reporting – confirmations/statements •Portfolio Investment Management Services 4M Fund Money Markets - AAAm-rated by S&P Global Ratings Over 450 municipal entities participate in the 4M Fund MN Statute 118A Compliant 19 3 Investment Solutions for Operating Reserves: 20 4 4M Fund Fixed Rate Programs Fixed Rate Investment Program (PMA Financial Network, PMA Securities) Investment options: US Agencies, Treasuries Municipal Securities Variety of CD products – 1,000+ bank relationships DTC-eligible CDs Non-negotiable Collateralized - Secured by Pledged Securities or Letters of Credit (LOC) CDARS – Secured by FDIC Insurance Savings Deposit Accounts (Same-day liquidity) MMA & ICS - Secured through a Letter of Credit (LOC) Issued by FHLB and/or Collateralized by Pledged Securities or FDIC Insurance (ICS) 21 4M Cash Flow Service 5 Cash flow projection is developed from review of various documents such as : Budget Capital Improvement Plan Debt service schedules Bank statements 22 City of Corcoran – 4M Fund Accounts 23 Rate Cuts and Higher for Longer 724 U.S. Treasury Yields 8 Source: Bloomberg 25 Liquidity Analysis Determine amount needed to comfortably meet short-term liquidity needs for the City As markets ‘normalize’, don’t pay for liquidity you don’t need Diversification Utilize various investment options to extend investment duration to maximize returns over time Goal of enhancing income while maintaining sufficient liquidity Investment Strategy Considerations 26 10 Disclaimer 27 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 4.d Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Deb Johnson Topic: Elm Creek Watershed Action Required: No Action Required Council Action Attachments 1. Cover Memo for CAC Meetings.docx 2. Elm Creek Watershed Overview.docx 3. CAC Presentation_Corcoran.pdf 28 CHAMPLIN • CORCORAN • DAYTON • MAPLE GROVE • MEDINA •PLYMOUTH • ROGERS elm creek Watershed Management Commission ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE PH: 763.553.1144 | email: judie@jass.biz 3235 Fernbrook Lane ● Plymouth, MN 55447 elmcreekwatershed.org Elm Creek WMO Member Cities Citizen Advisory Committees Dear Stakeholder: Your City is a member of the Joint Powers Organization, the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission. Watershed Management Organizations (WMOs) within the Metro Area, such as Elm Creek, provide management and oversight of lakes, streams, and rivers within their respective drainage areas. State law requires each WMO to have a plan in place that establishes goals, policies, and actions to protect and improve those waters, and that plan must be updated every ten years. The Elm Creek Commission has been working for the past year to update what will be its fourth management plan and would appreciate review and comments from residents and property owners in the watershed. Rather than establisha specialseparate Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), the Commission has asked each of its member cities to designate one of its existing citizen commissions (i.e., parks and rec, environmental, planning, etc.) to serve. The role of the CAC is to provide input and review, starting with a presentation on the general goals and actions in the Fourth Gen Plan at one of your regular meetings and an opportunity to review and provide comment on the overall draft plan either at a subsequent meeting or on your own. Attached to this letteris a brief overview of the Commission, what we do, and what is planned for the next ten years. At your upcoming meetings, Commission and City staff will expand on that information and how it relates to your city. In the next few years all cities in the Metro area will be updating their Comprehensive Plans, including their own Local Stormwater Management Plans. The goals and actions proposed in the Watershed’s Plan will need to be addressed in your Local Plan and the Comp Plan, so this is the start of a multi-year planning process. Prior to our upcoming meeting, we hope you will be able to learn more about the Commission and what we do at www.elmcreekwatershed.org. On the home page is a link to a page dedicated to the Fourth Generation Plan. There you will find the latest draft of the Plan and supporting material, more information about the process and timeline, and an opportunity to submit comments online. You can also submit comments to City staff. There will be more opportunities to review and submit comments during several upcoming public comment periods and a public hearing later this year. We appreciate your time and input and look forward to meeting with you. We hope you find this information and process illuminating and helpful as you provide input and advice to your City Council on matters related to water resources in your community. Sincerely, Doug Baines Chair, City of Dayton 29 CHAMPLIN • CORCORAN • DAYTON • MAPLE GROVE • MEDINA •PLYMOUTH • ROGERS Figure 1. Elm Creek drainage system. 30 Elm Creek Watershed Fourth Generation Management Plan What is the role of the Watershed Commission? We partner with cities, property owners, and others to protect and improve lakes,streams, and wetlands in the 130 square mile Elm Creek watershed. This includes all or parts of seven cities that drain into Rush Creek, Diamond Creek, and Elm Creek and then to the Mississippi River. It also includes areas in those cities that drain directly into the Crow River or the Mississippi River . We are a joint powers organization governed by a citizen board and advised by a technical committee of key city staff. The Commission sets policies and establishes goals for the water resources in the watershed and implements programs to achieve those goals. These policies help guide city actions as we work toward common goals. What is the history of the Commission? The Commission was established on February 1, 1973, when several cities and the Hennepin Conservation District formed a Joint Powers Organization. The Town of Hassan and City of Rogers later joined, and the City of Greenfield withdrew. The parties saw an opportunity in jointly managing the watershed through common standards, water quality monitoring, and evaluations of flooding potential. In 1982 the Minnesota Surface Water Management Act required the Metro area to be divided into drainage areas under the planning and oversight of watershed management organizations (WMOs)based on drainage boundaries rather than county or municipal boundaries.The Elm Creek Commission fulfils this statutory role. What does the Commission do? As required by statute, every 10 years the Commission prepares a new Watershed Management Plan of goals and actions.This will be our fourth, or “Fourth Generation”Plan. Sets policy and standards to protect and improve lakes, streams, and wetlands. Maintains Rules and Standards for development and redevelopment and reviews proposals to be sure impacts to downstream waters are minimized. Monitors water quality in lakes and streams. Provides education and outreach programming . Completes special studies for potential projects. Leverages grant funding and partnerships to move projects forward. Read more about our accomplishments! 31 Elm Creek Watershed Fourth Generation Plan What is our focus for 2025-2034? The Commission has established four priorities of focus for the Fourth Generation Plan: 1. Protect, maintain, and improve the water quality and ecological integrity of the water and natural resources within the watersheds and the downstream receiving waters. 2. Reduce stormwater runoff rates and volumes to limit flood risk, protect conveyance systems, protect surficial groundwater, and reduce or mitigate impacts that have already occurred. 3. Educate and engage all stakeholders in the watershed on surface water issues and opportunities. 4. Anticipate and proactively work to withstand adverse impacts from changing land use/cover and environmental and climate conditions. Celebrate! The Commission and partners Three Rivers Park District, City of Maple Grove, the lake association, and others worked together on projects that improved Fish Lake water quality so much that it was removed from the state’s list of Impaired Waters. We partner with other WMOs to expand our reach and resources. The West Metro Water Alliance (WMWA) is a partnership between the Elm Creek, Shingle Creek/West Mississippi and Bassett Creek WMOs. WMWA pools resources to offer education and outreach throughout the four watersheds. A notable program is Watershed PREP that provides classroom instruction to fourth graders. Over 22,000 students have participated. This education partnership was recently expanded to include Hennepin County and the Richfield-Bloomington WMO, who help fund a shared education coordinator dedicated to developing and delivering common messaging and coordination. What are some of our projects? Over the last 10 years, the Commission was awarded over $1.2 million in grants for water quality improvement projects and provided $3.6 million in cost-share funds to help cities undertake 22 projects. Notable projects are: restoration of 9,100 feet of Elm Creek in Champlin, 8,700 feet of Elm Creek in Plymouth, 7,000 feet of Rush Creek in Maple Grove, and 5,100 feet of South Fork Rush Creek in Maple Grove. The Commission shared in the cost of an alum treatment and carp removals on Fish Lake and fishery and other improvements on the Mill Pond. The Commission also partners with Hennepin County Board Conservationists to identify and implement improvements on lands used for agriculture and animal husbandry. What’s coming up? Some exciting city/watershed actions planned or underway are: Continued invasive carp management in Fish and Rice Lakes. Additional stream restoration projects on Rush Creek and South Fork Rush Creek in Maple Grove. Nutrient management in Diamond Lake, including potential alum treatments to reduce phosphorus release from sediments. Continued engagement with the agricultural community. Increased emphasis on reducing chloride and bacteria pollution in our waters. An ongoing assessment of climate vulnerabilities and resiliency actions. More information can be found on the Commission’s website www.elmcreekwatershed.org 32 Introduction to the Fourth Generation Watershed Management Plan CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 10, 2025 33 Introduction Joint powers collaboration funded by cities vs. district with taxing authority Water and runoff don’t stop at city boundaries Watershed sets agreed-upon standards and policies Cities implement projects, watershed manages programming Cities regulate based on watershed policy Citizen Board of Commissioners, City staff Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 34 The Fourth Generation Management Plan WMOs must update their management plans every ten years This will be Elm Creek’s fourth plan Separate from but related to the Comprehensive Plan process 35 What does the Commission do? Reviews plans for new development and redevelopment No increase in pollutants or the rate of stormwater runoff Limit the new volume of runoff from impervious surface Completed 439 project reviews in last 10 years Monitors 4 “sentinel lakes” every year and others every 3-4 years Monitors flow and water quality at 3 stream sites Partners with 3 other WMOs on education and outreach, including classroom lessons for over 22,000 4th graders Partners with Hennepin County on outreach and BMPs on agricultural properties Provided cities with $4.8 million in grants and cost share for 22 projects 36 What is in a Watershed Management Plan? An overview of the current physical conditions in the watershed, called a Land and Water Resources Inventory General information about how water and natural resources are managed and who does what An assessment of existing and potential water resource problems Goals and policies for managing the water resources and addressing the identified problems An implementation plan of programs and projects to work toward the 10-year goals 37 Identified Problems in the Elm Creek Watershed: Water Quality 1.Several lakes and streams have degraded water quality and are “Impaired Waters” 2.New impairments include chloride on Elm Creek and S Fork Rush Creek 3.Streams in the watershed have erosion and sedimentation issues 4.Agricultural properties also contribute pollutants Impaired lakes: Diamond Cowley Rice Henry Sylvan Goose Impaired streams: Elm Creek Rush Creek S Fork Rush Cr Diamond Cr Crow River Miss River 38 Identified Problems in the Elm Creek Watershed 5.Need to increase voluntary adoption of BMPs, both urban and rural 6.Need to expand education and outreach to create behavioral change 7.Land is transitioning more densely developed land uses at higher imperviousness. 8.Climate data in Minnesota shows an increase in intensity and depth of precipitation events. 39 Fourth Generation Plan 2025-2034 Goals 1.Protect, maintain, and improve the water quality and ecological integrity of the water and natural resources within the watersheds and the downstream receiving waters. 2.Reduce stormwater runoff rates and volumes to limit flood risk, protect conveyance systems, protect surficial groundwater, and reduce or mitigate impacts that have already occurred. 3.Educate and engage all stakeholders in the watersheds on surface water issues and opportunities. 4.Anticipate and proactively work to withstand adverse impacts from changing land use/cover and environmental and climate conditions. 40 Implementation Strategies Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Stream restorations on Rush Creek and South Fork Rush Creek Carp and other fish management on Fish and Rice Lakes Diamond Lake Alum Treatment Cost share in upgraded street sweepers “Generic projects” City and Partnership Cost Share Programs Promotes voluntary BMPs Up to 100% funding for improvements on private property Up to 50% funding for small City-led projects 41 Education and Outreach Continue and expand partnerships With Hennepin County to assist producers and animal operators with voluntary BMPs With West Metro Water Alliance (WMWA) for education and outreach to students, parents, and the public and expand outreach coordinator position to full time Add more outreach to lake associations, HOAs, and other groups Joint Chloride Management Plan – Elm, Shingle Creek and West Mississippi WMOs Better understand chloride sources Strategically target management actions Develop partnerships Deliver common messages 42 Climate Resiliency and Sustainability 1.Resiliency Planning Framework (2025-2028) Gathering information and guidance Preparing for Phase 2 2.Climate Vulnerability and Assessment (2028-2030) Model scenarios using 2050 development and future precipitation ranges Estimate extent of future flooding Identify risks and vulnerabilities 43 Climate Resiliency and Sustainability 3.Adaptation Strategy and Identification (2030-2032) Evaluate options to prevent future flooding Understand impacts of land use practices Consider revising development rules and standards 4.Adaptation Strategy Implementation (2032-2035) Construct resiliency projects such as additional water storage, enhanced infiltration, flood proofing Communicate strategies 44 www.elmcreekwatershed.org/ watershed-management- plan.html 45 Corcoran Projects - Subwatershed Assessments and Ag BMPS •5 landowners, 13 BMPs •Corcoran conservation cover Cost share: •$275,000 EC •$80,000 County •$65,000 owners Removal results: •135 lbs TP •55 tons sediment South Fork Rush Creek Rush Creek Headwaters 46 Upcoming Projects New street sweeper $100,000 Commission contribution 60 pounds TP/year 13 pounds chloride/year Continuation of partnership with Hennepin County Potential to add stormwater storage and infiltration (100% Commission funding) Stream restoration/repair if needed (may be 25-100% Commission funding) 47 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.a Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Karen Heiden Deb Johnson Topic: Meeting Minutes Approval Action Required: Approval Recommendation Approve March 27, 2025 City Council Minutes Council Action Approve March 27, 2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Attachments 1. 2025-03-27 DRAFT Council Minutes.pdf 48 City of Corcoran City Council Minutes March 27, 2025, 7pm 1 The Corcoran City Council met on March 27, 2025, in Corcoran, Minnesota. The City Council meeting was held in person and the public was present in person and remotely through electronic means using the audio and video conferencing platform Zoom. Mayor McKee, Councilors Friedrich, Nichols and Vehrenkamp were present. Also present: City Administrator Tobin, Assistant City Administrator Williams, City Clerk Johnson, City Planner Lindahl, Community Development Director Davis McKeown, Planner Klingbeil, and Public Safety Director Gottschalk. 1. Call to Order / Roll Call Mayor McKee called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. 2. Pledge of Allegiance Mayor McKee invited all in attendance to rise and join in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Agenda Approval City Administrator Tobin stated that Item 6d and 6e on the consent agenda were revised. He also stated that item 12 – City Council schedule was revised. Mayor McKee moved Item 11 Council Update ahead of Item 7 Planning on agenda. MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Friedrich to approve the agenda with revisions. Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, Friedrich, and Vehrenkamp. (Motion carries: 4:0) 4. Presentations - None 5. Open Forum – Public Comment Opportunity Mayor McKee invited residents to come forward to address the Council during Open Forum for any items not included on the agenda. City Administrator Tobin explained the instructions to participate in the public comment opportunity. • Christina Jensen, 7800 Maple Hill Road, addressed the Council with issues that residents are having with the new property management company and concerns raised regarding unjust treatment of residents at Maple Hill Estates and asked the Council for assistance. • Francine Whitford, Maple Hill Estates, addressed the Council stating several violations of multiple Minnesota statutes by the new property management company. • Diane Lindgren, Maple Hill Estates, addressed the Council with her concerns with the new property management at Maple Hill Estates. • Sandy Jensen, 7800 Maple Hill Road, addressed the Council with concerns with new property management at Maple Hill Estates. Staff will follow up and help find housing related resources available to help the residents at Maple Hill Estates. 6. Consent Agenda a. City Council Meeting Minutes Approval Action – Approved March 13, 2025 City Council Minutes. b. Financial Claims Action – Approved Financial Claims for March 13, 2025. c. Public Works Hiring Process; Equipment Purchase Authorization Action – Approve Staff to Complete the Hiring Process for Utility Lead Worker and Utility Maintenance Worker Positions Including the Associated Equipment Purchase. d. REVISED Resolution 2025-32 Awarding 2025A Bond Sale Action – Adopted Resolution 2025-32. Approving Resolution 2025-32 Awarding the Sale of General Obligation Bonds – Series 2025A. 49 City of Corcoran City Council Minutes March 27, 2025, 7pm 2 e. REVISED Classification and Compensation Study Action – Approved the Personnel Committee Recommendation to Adopt Job Descriptions and Implement Compensation Classification Study on April 26, 2025. f. Postage Meter and Folding/Inserter Machines Proposals Action – Approved Proposal with American Mailing and Directed Staff to Execute the Contract Pending City Attorney Review. g. NE Corcoran Trunk Infrastructure Pay Request 6 Action – Approved Pay Application #6 for the NE Corcoran Trunk Infrastructure Project to S.R. Weidema in the amount of $137,048.54. h. City Center and 79th Place Pay Request #8 Action- Approved Pay Application #8 for the Street and Utility Construction for City Center Drive and 79th Place to S.M. Hentges & Sons in the amount of $74,136.64. i. Stieg Road Improvements Change Order #3 Action – Approved Change Order #3 for the Stieg Road Improvements Project increasing the Contact Amount by $24,122.50. j. Resolution 2025-30 Jackets Action – Adopted Resolution 2025-30. Approving the Authorizing Purchase of City Logo Jackets for all Staff and Elected or Appointed Officials. k. HUD Agreement – City Park CPF Grant Improvements Action – Approved HUD Community Project Funding Grant Agreeement and Authorized City Staff to Execute the Agreement and Submit Additional Forms and Information Necessary for Grant Approval . MOTION: made by Vehrenkamp, seconded by Nichols to approve consent agenda items 6a-6d, and 6f-6j. Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Nichols, and Vehrenkamp. (Motion carries: 4:0) MOTION: made by Friedrich, seconded by Vehrenkamp to approve consent item 6e. Voting aye: McKee, Friedrich, Nichols, and Vehrenkamp. (Motion carries 4:0) MOTION: made by Vehrenkamp, seconded by Nichols to approve consent item 6k. Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Nichols, and Vehrenkamp. (Motion carries: 4:0) 7. Council Update (was moved up in the agenda discussion) • Mayor McKee pointed out several bills being proposed by the State Legislature. In an effort to keep the City of Corcoran informed, staff has added a page to the website listing the proposed bills, a listing of the bills authors and committee member as well as the City of Corcoran’s response. This site will be updated with changes as they are drafted. The Mayor also encouraged residents to reach out to the bills authors and committee members. • Councilor Friedrich reported that she was in contact with the Rockford High School art teacher and was interested in the design process for artwork on the vinyl wrap at the Dominos cooler. • Mayor McKee and Councilor Lanterman will be reviewing the planning commission applicants and meeting with in the near future. 8. Planning a. Brockton Business Park Kendra Lindahl presented the preliminary plat and site plan for Brockton Lane Business Park. Brandon Champeau, Executive Vice President, Hempel Real Estate, addressed the council and answered questions. 50 City of Corcoran City Council Minutes March 27, 2025, 7pm 3 MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Vehrenkamp to adopt Resolution 2025-27 and 2025-28 Approving Preliminary Plat and Site Plan for Brockton Lane Business Park. Voting aye: McKee, Friedrich, Nichols, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 4:0) b. Lother Comprehensive Plan Amendment Planner Klingbeil presented Lother Comprehensive Plan Amendment. • Brian Lother, 10110 County Rd 116, applicant, addressed the mayor and councilmembers. • Josh McKinny, Measure Group, representing Brian and Jackie Lother, addressed the mayor and councilmembers regarding subsidizing the property. • Jason Bartels,19795 Hunters Ridge, addressed the mayor and councilmembers in opposition to the application with concerns as a homeowner living close to the proposed plan. • David Thompson, 19780 Hunters Ridge, addressed the mayor and councilmembers in opposition to the application with concerns as a homeowner living close to the proposed plan and the high density area it would create. • Kathleen Dickinson, 19725 Hunters Ridge, addressed the mayor and councilmembers in opposition to the application with concerns as a homeowner living close to the proposed plan. • Diane Patterness, 19795 Hunters Ridge, addressed the mayor and councilmembers in opposition to the application with concerns as a homeowner living close to the proposed plan. MOTION: made by Friedrich, seconded by McKee to adopt Resolution 2025-31 Lother Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Voting aye: McKee, Friedrich, Nichols, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carries 4:0) 9. Unfinished Business a. Strategic Planning Update City Administrator Tobin talked about strategic planning updates and reaching for higher goals as well as Corcoran values. 10. New Business - None 11. Staff Update - None 12. REVISED 2025 City Council Schedule Work Session April 10, 2025 Fire Arm Field Safety April 26, 2025 Clean-Up Day May 3, 2025 Work Session May 8, 2025 Ribbon Cutting and Tour of Watershed Treatment Facility June 23, 2025. 13. Adjournment MOTION: made by Vehrenkamp, seconded by Friedrich to adjourn. Voting Aye: McKee, Friedrich, Nichols, and Vehrenkamp. (Motion carries 4:0) Mayor McKee adjourned the meeting at 9:53 p.m. March 27, 2025 51 City of Corcoran City Council Minutes March 27, 2025, 7pm 4 Respectfully submitted, _____________________________________ Karen Heiden – Deputy Clerk 52 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.b Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Reed Kottke Topic: Financial Claims to April 10, 2025 Action Required: Consider approving claims as presented. Summary Claims require Council review and approval, those permitted per policy have been completed, while others are pending for Council approval. Financial/Budget Claims are within budget or are identified on a case-by-case basis to confirm funding source and seek Council approvals as necessary. Options 1. Approve claims as presented. 2. Amend and approve claims. Recommendation Approve claims as presented. Council Action Approve claims as presented. Attachments 1. 20250410 council.pdf 53 CLAIMS APPROVED AND PROCESSED PER POLICY Check Range: 36846-36865 Financial Claims 03/27/2025 24,067.68$ -$ 24,067.68$ Check Register (See register for financial claims) Automatic Deduction (EFT) Total Expenditures For Approval Agenda Item: 6b 1 Council Meeting: 04/10/2025 Prepared By: Reed Kottke, Accountant 54 CLAIMS APPROVED AND PROCESSED PER POLICY Check Range: 36866-36916 Financial Claims 04/03/2025 161,226.44$ -$ 161,226.44$ Check Register (See register for financial claims) Automatic Deduction (EFT) Total Expenditures For Approval Agenda Item: 6b 2 Council Meeting: 04/10/2025 Prepared By: Reed Kottke, Accountant 55 CLAIMS PENDING COUNCIL APPROVAL Check Range: 36917-36936 Financial Claims 04/10/2025 947,832.66$ 292,670.03$ 1,240,502.69$ Date Vendor Amount Description 3/21/2025 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 204.16$ FEBRUARY FUEL TAX RETURN 3/24/2025 POSTALIA POSTAGE 100.00$ MAIL METER 3/24/2025 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION OF MN 32,268.90$ PP6 PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS 3/24/2025 OPTUM FINANCIAL 6,250.27$ PP6 HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNT CONTRIBUTIONS 3/24/2025 OPTUM CLAIM 678.81$ DEPENDENT CARE FSA FUNDING REQUEST 3/25/2025 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM 2,735.27$ PP6 DEFERRED COMPENSATION / ROTH CONTRIBUTIONS 3/25/2025 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM 3,978.63$ PP6 HEALTH CARE SAVINGS PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS 3/26/2025 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHNOLOGIES 5,200.00$ FEBRUARY & MARCH RETAINER 3/27/2025 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHNOLOGIES 5,904.08$ JANUARY MONTHLY MANAGED SERVICES 3/27/2025 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 2,122.31$ PUBLIC WORKS NATURAL GAS EFT PAYMENT 3/27/2025 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 1,173.28$ CITY HALL & CITY PARK NATURAL GAS EFT PAYMENT 3/27/2025 XCEL ENERGY 380.48$ BELLWETHER STREET LIGHTS MARCH STATEMENT 3/27/2025 XCEL ENERGY 1,483.65$ PUBLIC WORKS FEBRUARY STATEMENT 3/28/2025 ADP PAYROLL FEES 574.41$ PP6 PAYROLL PROCESSING FEE 3/31/2025 OPTUM CLAIM 125.00$ DEPENDENT CARE FSA FUNDING REQUEST 4/1/2025 REPUBLIC SERVICES 1,764.72$ REFUSE & RECYCLING SERVICES EFT PAYMENT 4/1/2025 HEALTHPARTNERS 57,688.80$ APRIL HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS 4/1/2025 METLIFE 1,828.02$ APRIL DENTAL INSURANCE PREMIUMS 4/2/2025 COMCAST 259.60$ PUBLIC WORKS PHONE SERVICE EFT PAYMENT 4/2/2025 COMCAST 1,086.70$ CITY HALL & POLICE INTERNET EFT PAYMENT 4/2/2025 US BANK 15,186.20$ MARCH MANAGING ACCOUNT STATEMENT RECONCILIATION 4/3/2025 ADP WAGE PAY 112,130.39$ PP7 NET PAY 4/3/2025 ADP TAX 39,546.35$ PP7 TAX WITHHOLDING Total 292,670.03$ Automatic Deduction / Electronic Fund Transfer / Other Disbursement Check Register (See register for detail) Automatic Deduction / Electronic Funds Transfer Total Expenditures For Approval Agenda Item: 6b 3 Council Meeting: 04/03/2025 Prepared By: Reed Kottke, Accountant 56 BANK CODE: GEN CHECK DATE: 03/27/2025 INVOICE PAY DATE FROM 03/27/2025 TO 03/27/2025 03/27/2025 03:23 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran Page: 1/1CHECK PROOF FOR CITY OF CORCORAN # InvoicesTotal AmountCredit TotalInvoice TotalVendor NameVendor CodeCheck #BankCheck Date 6211.16 0.00 211.16 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES227036846GEN03/27/2025 4380.10 0.00 380.10 CINTAS - 4705636847GEN03/27/2025 2209.06 0.00 209.06 CITY OF CORCORAN281336848GEN03/27/2025 3##366.17 134.56 500.73 ECM PUBLISHERS INC201136849GEN03/27/2025 125.30 0.00 25.30 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLCMISC36850GEN03/27/2025 24,440.40 0.00 4,440.40 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #2518190436851GEN03/27/2025 1128.85 0.00 128.85 FP MAILING SOLUTIONS163336852GEN03/27/2025 1275.00 0.00 275.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES19136853GEN03/27/2025 1140.00 0.00 140.00 MARIE RIDGEWAY LICSW, LLC256136854GEN03/27/2025 4193.53 0.00 193.53 MENARDS MAPLE GROVE16736855GEN03/27/2025 1150.00 0.00 150.00 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRO226736856GEN03/27/2025 13,982.77 0.00 3,982.77 MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH117536857GEN03/27/2025 42,027.20 0.00 2,027.20 NORTH AMERICAN SAFETY INC320136858GEN03/27/2025 11,171.17 0.00 1,171.17 REPUBLIC SERVICES13836859GEN03/27/2025 194.03 0.00 94.03 TERMINAL SUPPLY CO174236860GEN03/27/2025 1250.00 0.00 250.00 TWIN CITIES PROMO320236861GEN03/27/2025 1940.00 0.00 940.00 ULTIMATE CLEANERS LLC266336862GEN03/27/2025 154.00 0.00 54.00 WATER LABORATORIES, INC. 305136863GEN03/27/2025 11,000.00 0.00 1,000.00 WRIGHT COUNTYMISC36864GEN03/27/2025 18,028.94 0.00 8,028.94 WRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT184436865GEN03/27/2025 ## Denotes that check has vendor credit applied. Num Stubs: 0Num Checks: 20 Num Invoices: 38 Total Amount: 24,067.68 57 BANK CODE: GEN CHECK DATE: 04/03/2025 INVOICE PAY DATE FROM 04/03/2025 TO 04/03/2025 04/03/2025 11:10 AM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran Page: 1/2CHECK PROOF FOR CITY OF CORCORAN # InvoicesTotal AmountCredit TotalInvoice TotalVendor NameVendor CodeCheck #BankCheck Date Type: CheckStub 2##0.00 1,202.96 1,202.96 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #2518190420(S)GEN04/03/2025 Type: Paper Check 1219.00 0.00 219.00 ACME TOOLS156036866GEN04/03/2025 3415.00 0.00 415.00 ALTA207136867GEN04/03/2025 81,582.12 0.00 1,582.12 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES227036868GEN04/03/2025 22,079.67 0.00 2,079.67 ASPEN MILLS229736869GEN04/03/2025 11,260.48 0.00 1,260.48 BEAUDRY OIL COMPANY62236870GEN04/03/2025 11,500.00 0.00 1,500.00 RYAN BURNS159636871GEN04/03/2025 3616.25 0.00 616.25 CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER5336872GEN04/03/2025 14,489.10 0.00 4,489.10 CARSON, CLELLAND, & SCHREDER5336873GEN04/03/2025 132.50 0.00 32.50 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36874GEN04/03/2025 1351.25 0.00 351.25 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36875GEN04/03/2025 11,146.25 0.00 1,146.25 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36876GEN04/03/2025 148.75 0.00 48.75 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36877GEN04/03/2025 1212.50 0.00 212.50 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36878GEN04/03/2025 1212.50 0.00 212.50 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36879GEN04/03/2025 1828.75 0.00 828.75 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36880GEN04/03/2025 163.75 0.00 63.75 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36881GEN04/03/2025 185.00 0.00 85.00 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36882GEN04/03/2025 1106.25 0.00 106.25 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36883GEN04/03/2025 142.50 0.00 42.50 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36884GEN04/03/2025 1148.75 0.00 148.75 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36885GEN04/03/2025 1170.00 0.00 170.00 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36886GEN04/03/2025 121.25 0.00 21.25 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36887GEN04/03/2025 121.25 0.00 21.25 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36888GEN04/03/2025 121.25 0.00 21.25 City of CocoranREFUNDBD36889GEN04/03/2025 1122.74 0.00 122.74 CITY OF CORCORAN281336890GEN04/03/2025 186.32 0.00 86.32 PETTY CASH FOR CITY OF CORCORAN320436891GEN04/03/2025 1730,929.82 0.00 30,929.82 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH242736892GEN04/03/2025 123.00 0.00 23.00 BRANDON HEINZ22836893GEN04/03/2025 11,670.19 0.00 1,670.19 HENN CO SHERIFF68836894GEN04/03/2025 172.49 0.00 72.49 INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS LLC320336895GEN04/03/2025 11,500.00 0.00 1,500.00 JOSHUA LAWSONMISC36896GEN04/03/2025 130.80 0.00 30.80 KAREN HEIDENMISC36897GEN04/03/2025 1100.00 0.00 100.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES19136898GEN04/03/2025 1100.00 0.00 100.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES19136899GEN04/03/2025 198.37 0.00 98.37 M-R SIGN CO., INC.49236900GEN04/03/2025 179.98 0.00 79.98 MENARDS MAPLE GROVE16736901GEN04/03/2025 11,050.00 0.00 1,050.00 MHSRC/RANGE160136902GEN04/03/2025 11,558.00 0.00 1,558.00 MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOC196036903GEN04/03/2025 14,300.00 0.00 4,300.00 MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INC133436904GEN04/03/2025 1300.00 0.00 300.00 NORTH MEMORIAL115736905GEN04/03/2025 3##40.97 39.99 80.96 ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC13036906GEN04/03/2025 58 BANK CODE: GEN CHECK DATE: 04/03/2025 INVOICE PAY DATE FROM 04/03/2025 TO 04/03/2025 04/03/2025 11:10 AM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran Page: 2/2CHECK PROOF FOR CITY OF CORCORAN # InvoicesTotal AmountCredit TotalInvoice TotalVendor NameVendor CodeCheck #BankCheck Date 123.00 0.00 23.00 PAT MEISTER13136907GEN04/03/2025 127.12 0.00 27.12 RYAN GANNERMISC36908GEN04/03/2025 190.00 0.00 90.00 SHERBURNE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE 304836909GEN04/03/2025 4496,484.16 0.00 96,484.16 STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES170836910GEN04/03/2025 19##3,475.13 2,870.00 6,345.13 STREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT14836911GEN04/03/2025 11,492.81 0.00 1,492.81 SUPERIOR FORD25836912GEN04/03/2025 1344.50 0.00 344.50 SYMBOLARTS LLC232936913GEN04/03/2025 1457.92 0.00 457.92 TEAMSTER LOCAL 320158836914GEN04/03/2025 175.00 0.00 75.00 TRANSUNION RISK & ALTERNATIVE222036915GEN04/03/2025 11,020.00 0.00 1,020.00 ULTIMATE CLEANERS LLC266336916GEN04/03/2025 ## Denotes that check has vendor credit applied. Num Stubs: 1Num Checks: 51 Num Invoices: 144 Total Amount: 161,226.44 59 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 1/10Page: 04/03/2025 03:47 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/27/2025 - 04/10/2025 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 36846 3684636.85 03/27/251LYG-H17H-TXW9GEL PENSAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES12/05/24100-41900-50200 368468.80 03/27/251PWN-CHMY-NVPFMODTEK CUBICLE WALL HOOKAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES12/07/24100-41910-50210 3684636.96 03/27/251N1H-MYHX-1V43LOCKBOX & KEY RING TABSAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES12/16/24100-43100-50223 3684625.99 03/27/2514Y7-3QVP-1PY1IPAD CASEAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES12/23/24100-45100-50210 3684663.02 03/27/251WXX-DP3P-376VLED LIGHTS FOR HOLIDAY TOY AND FOOD DRIVEAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES12/23/24100-45100-50210 3684639.54 03/27/251GKY-P91Q-WP1WIPHONE PROTECTOR, SHARPIES, HIGHLIGHTERSAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES12/08/24601-49400-50210 211.16 Total For Check 36846 Check 36847 3684721.14 03/27/254223904868BLACK MATSCINTAS - 47003/12/25100-41900-50400 3684725.91 03/27/254223904950SHOP SUPPLIESCINTAS - 47003/12/25100-43100-50400 3684761.23 03/27/254223904995UNIFORMS / SHOP SUPPLIESCINTAS - 47003/12/25100-43100-50400 36847105.06 03/27/254223904995UNIFORMS / SHOP SUPPLIESCINTAS - 47003/12/25100-43100-50417 36847166.76 03/27/254223905028UNIFORMSCINTAS - 47003/12/25100-43100-50417 380.10 Total For Check 36847 Check 36849 36849258.28 03/27/251038746ADD 1454704 NOTICE OF INTENTECM PUBLISHERS INC03/06/25100-41900-50350 36849242.45 03/27/251031911AD# 1445413 CROW RIVER NEWSECM PUBLISHERS INC01/16/25100-41900-50350 500.73 Total For Check 36849 Check 36850 3685025.30 03/27/252025032419138 81ST PL N ASSESSMENT OVERPAYMENTEDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC03/24/25408-00000-36100 25.30 Total For Check 36850 Check 36851 368512,176.00 03/27/250541651METER ACCOUNT MACH10FERGUSON WATERWORKS #251812/31/24601-49400-50227 368512,264.40 03/27/250541758METER ACCOUNT R900IFERGUSON WATERWORKS #251801/31/25601-49400-50227 4,440.40 Total For Check 36851 Check 36852 36852128.85 03/27/25RI106570310ACCT 600014038, MAR-JUN 2025FP MAILING SOLUTIONS03/04/25100-41900-50322 128.85 Total For Check 36852 Check 36853 36853275.00 03/27/2542568225 LMC CONFERENCE-MCKEOWNLEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES03/11/25100-41910-50207 275.00 Total For Check 36853 Check 36854 36854140.00 03/27/253086MANDATORY CHECK IN QTY 1MARIE RIDGEWAY LICSW, LLC01/31/25100-41900-50300 140.00 Total For Check 36854 Check 36855 3685555.89 03/27/2545676SUPPLIESMENARDS MAPLE GROVE03/04/25100-42100-50220 368554.49 03/27/2545944SUPPLIESMENARDS MAPLE GROVE03/10/25100-42100-50223 3685511.99 03/27/2545705SUPPLIESMENARDS MAPLE GROVE03/05/25100-42100-50223 3685539.99 03/27/2545941SUPPLIESMENARDS MAPLE GROVE03/10/25100-45100-50210 3685581.17 03/27/2545941SUPPLIESMENARDS MAPLE GROVE03/10/25415-45200-50210 193.53 Total For Check 36855 Check 36856 36856150.00 03/27/250001185023WASTE COST RECOVERYMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRO03/14/25602-49450-50312 150.00 Total For Check 36856 Check 36857 60 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 2/10Page: 04/03/2025 03:47 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/27/2025 - 04/10/2025 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 36857 368573,982.77 03/27/252025Q1COMMUNITY WATER SUPPLY SERVICE CONNECTION FEE Q1 2025MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH03/31/25601-49400-50300 3,982.77 Total For Check 36857 Check 36858 368581,312.50 03/27/25INV96021BEST VEST QTY 250NORTH AMERICAN SAFETY INC02/25/25100-43100-50417 36858174.65 03/27/25INV95596GLOBAL GLOVE QTY 7NORTH AMERICAN SAFETY INC02/06/25100-43100-50417 36858115.20 03/27/25INV95555ERGODYNE BLACK QTY 8NORTH AMERICAN SAFETY INC02/05/25100-43100-50417 36858424.85 03/27/25INV95198GLOBAL GLOVE QTY 15NORTH AMERICAN SAFETY INC01/24/25100-43100-50417 2,027.20 Total For Check 36858 Check 36859 368591,171.17 03/27/250894-007052910CONTRACT RECYCLING SERVICE FEBRUARY 2025REPUBLIC SERVICES02/28/25100-43201-50300 1,171.17 Total For Check 36859 Check 36860 3686094.03 03/27/2513619-00BLIND RIVENTSTERMINAL SUPPLY CO03/11/25100-45200-50210 94.03 Total For Check 36860 Check 36861 36861250.00 03/27/2567588BUSINESS CARDS HARTNECK & PELUFTWIN CITIES PROMO01/13/25100-42100-50200 250.00 Total For Check 36861 Check 36862 36862940.00 03/27/2525022700GENERAL CLEANING FEBRUARY 2025ULTIMATE CLEANERS LLC02/27/25100-41900-50401 940.00 Total For Check 36862 Check 36863 3686354.00 03/27/2596044COLIFORM TEST 3/5/25WATER LABORATORIES, INC. 03/05/25601-49400-50300 54.00 Total For Check 36863 Check 36864 368641,000.00 03/27/25202503192025 HIGHWAY 55 ANNUAL DUESWRIGHT COUNTY03/19/25100-41110-50207 1,000.00 Total For Check 36864 Check 36865 368658,028.94 03/27/2535032005206ELECTRIC FEBRUARY 2025WRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT02/28/25100-41900-50381 8,028.94 Total For Check 36865 Check 36866 36866219.00 04/03/2512536786-2ROTARY HAMMERACME TOOLS03/18/24100-43100-50210 219.00 Total For Check 36866 Check 36867 36867194.00 04/03/252196125 YEAR SVC AWARDALTA03/19/25100-41900-50210 3686725.00 04/03/252197725 YEAR SVC AWARDALTA03/19/25100-41900-50210 36867196.00 04/03/2521965FIREARM TRAINING AWARDSALTA03/19/25204-42100-50210 415.00 Total For Check 36867 Check 36868 36868135.78 04/03/251VJF-X946-JVW1ACCT AKKM4RRGY10LC8, HP 78A BLACK TONER CARTRIDGEAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES01/13/25100-41500-50207 36868410.76 04/03/251CC6-DNYV-7YYWACCOUNT AKKM4RGY10LC8, SUPPLIESAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES01/27/25100-41900-50210 36868202.03 04/03/251TNX-HP64-GN6LACCOUNT AKKM4RGY10LC8, SUPPLIESAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES01/28/25100-41900-50210 36868328.37 04/03/2516DN-RJL1-73PTACCT AKKM4RGY10LC8, 1/31/25 ORDERAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES02/03/25100-41900-50210 3686826.98 04/03/251XC9-FJL9-T3M3ACCOUNT AKKM4RGY10LC8, PADLOCKS WITH SAME KEYAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES01/06/25100-42100-50210 3686832.88 04/03/251FP4-QJ1T-D7PGACCT AKKM4RGY10LC8, 1/28/25 ORDERAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES01/31/25100-42100-50210 61 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 3/10Page: 04/03/2025 03:47 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/27/2025 - 04/10/2025 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 36868 3686889.22 04/03/251W4W-TYY6-3VDXACCT AKKM4RGY10LC8, 2/04/25 ORDERAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES02/10/25100-42100-50210 3686828.99 04/03/251PXJ-4W7T-X3TDACCOUNT AKKM4RGY10LC8, SUPPLIESAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES01/27/25100-42100-50321 36868290.87 04/03/251PXJ-4W7T-X3TDACCOUNT AKKM4RGY10LC8, SUPPLIESAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES01/27/25101-42100-50210 3686816.25 04/03/251FP4-QJ1T-D7PGACCT AKKM4RGY10LC8, 1/28/25 ORDERAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES01/31/25101-42100-50210 3686819.99 04/03/251W4W-TYY6-3VDXACCT AKKM4RGY10LC8, 2/04/25 ORDERAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES02/10/25101-42100-50210 1,582.12 Total For Check 36868 Check 36869 368691,035.41 04/03/25351070SO 58797ASPEN MILLS03/24/25100-42100-50417 368691,044.26 04/03/25349427S/N 2501069218 BODY ARMOR & SUPPLIESASPEN MILLS02/25/25100-42100-50417 2,079.67 Total For Check 36869 Check 36870 3687037.81 04/03/252904756UNLEADED 87 - 10% ETHANOLBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/06/25100-41900-50212 368701,159.65 04/03/252904756UNLEADED 87 - 10% ETHANOLBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/06/25100-42100-50212 3687063.02 04/03/252904756UNLEADED 87 - 10% ETHANOLBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/06/25100-43100-50212 1,260.48 Total For Check 36870 Check 36871 368711,500.00 04/03/2520250401WELLNESS TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENTRYAN BURNS04/01/25100-42100-50307 1,500.00 Total For Check 36871 Check 36872 36872108.75 04/03/257405-2CK REQ CDD CHASTEK 20250331CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER04/01/25100-00000-22205 36872362.50 04/03/257405-3CK REQ CDD HEATHER MEADOWS 3RD 20250331CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER04/01/25100-00000-22205 36872145.00 04/03/257405-4CK REQ CDD KWIK TRIP 20250331CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER04/01/25100-00000-22205 616.25 Total For Check 36872 Check 36873 36873145.00 04/03/257405CITY ATTORNEY MARCH 2025CARSON, CLELLAND, & SCHREDER03/31/25100-00000-22205-007 3687358.00 04/03/257405CITY ATTORNEY MARCH 2025CARSON, CLELLAND, & SCHREDER03/31/25100-00000-22205-098 368732,453.10 04/03/257405CITY ATTORNEY MARCH 2025CARSON, CLELLAND, & SCHREDER03/31/25100-41600-50300 368731,833.00 04/03/257405CITY ATTORNEY MARCH 2025CARSON, CLELLAND, & SCHREDER03/31/25100-42100-50304 4,489.10 Total For Check 36873 Check 36874 3687432.50 04/03/25BP24-0053JANCK REQ CDD OLD FARM RIDGE 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 32.50 Total For Check 36874 Check 36875 36875351.25 04/03/25BP24-0070JANCK REQ CDD SPAETH 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 351.25 Total For Check 36875 Check 36876 368761,146.25 04/03/25BP25-0004JANCK REQ CDD LOTHER 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 1,146.25 Total For Check 36876 Check 36877 3687748.75 04/03/25BP25-0001JANCK REQ CDD HIDDEN VALLEY 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 48.75 Total For Check 36877 Check 36878 36878212.50 04/03/25BP24-0037JANCK REQ CDD HOPE MEADOWS 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 212.50 Total For Check 36878 62 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 4/10Page: 04/03/2025 03:47 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/27/2025 - 04/10/2025 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 36879 36879212.50 04/03/25BP24-0033JANCK REW CDD WOODLAND HILLS 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 212.50 Total For Check 36879 Check 36880 36880828.75 04/03/25BP24-0067JANCK REQ CDD AA TREE 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 828.75 Total For Check 36880 Check 36881 3688163.75 04/03/25BP24-0011JANCK REQ CDD FWY SHORES 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 63.75 Total For Check 36881 Check 36882 3688285.00 04/03/25BP24-0069JANCK REW CDD ST THOMAS 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 85.00 Total For Check 36882 Check 36883 36883106.25 04/03/25BP24-0071JANCK REQ CDD BROCKTON 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 106.25 Total For Check 36883 Check 36884 3688442.50 04/03/25BP24-0058JANCK REQ CDD ARENS NORLING 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 42.50 Total For Check 36884 Check 36885 36885148.75 04/03/25BP24-0057JANCK REQ CDD CHASTEK 2 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 148.75 Total For Check 36885 Check 36886 36886170.00 04/03/25BP24-0032JANCK REQ CDD CAMP SOLBERG 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 170.00 Total For Check 36886 Check 36887 3688721.25 04/03/25BP22-0037JANCK REQ CDD KEEFE 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 21.25 Total For Check 36887 Check 36888 3688821.25 04/03/25BP24-0051JANCK REQ CDD HEATHER MEADOWS 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 21.25 Total For Check 36888 Check 36889 3688921.25 04/03/25BP23-0042JANCK REQ CDD 3019 CPA RZ 20250131City of Cocoran04/01/25100-00000-22205 21.25 Total For Check 36889 Check 36890 36890122.74 04/03/252025040310120 CO RD 116 UTILITY BILLING JAN & FEB 2025CITY OF CORCORAN03/19/25601-49400-50380 122.74 Total For Check 36890 Check 36891 3689186.32 04/03/2520250401PETTY CASH RECONCILIATIONPETTY CASH FOR CITY OF CORCORAN04/01/25100-41900-50430 86.32 Total For Check 36891 Check 36892 368927,164.31 04/03/25396742CIT ORDER 14011 LENOVO THINKPADS & DOCKING STATIONSCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/17/25100-41920-50210 368922,380.00 04/03/25396348CIT PROACTIVE PREMIUM MANAGED SERVICES MARCH 2025COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/14/25100-41920-50300 368925,904.40 04/03/25397396CIT FEBRUARY 2025 MONTHLY MANAGED SERVICESCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/28/25100-41920-50300 63 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 5/10Page: 04/03/2025 03:47 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/27/2025 - 04/10/2025 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 36892 36892308.13 04/03/25397038CIT FEBRUARY 2025 MONTHLY MANAGED SERVICESCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH01/31/25100-41920-50300 368922,396.00 04/03/25398643CIT PROACTIVE PREMIUM MANAGED SERVICES APRIL 2025COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/14/25100-41920-50300 36892148.30 04/03/25394811CIT ORDER 13746 TECHSMITH SNAGIT MAINT RENEWAL 2025COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH01/24/25100-41920-50308 36892300.00 04/03/25396508CIT ORDER 13838 ANNUAL WINSVRCAL SA & WINSVRSTD CORECOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/12/25100-41920-50308 36892650.65 04/03/25395152CIT SIEM 365 DAY RETENTION QTY 77 MARCH 2025COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/14/25100-41920-50308 368922,713.60 04/03/25395813CIT M365 DOMESTIC CALLING / TEAMS FEBRUARY 2025COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/14/25100-41920-50308 368921,295.00 04/03/25396172CIT SIRIS 5 BACKUP AGREEMENT MARCH 2025COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/14/25100-41920-50308 3689256.96 04/03/25396744CIT ORDER 14015 ADOBE ACROBAT STD FOR TEAMS X 2COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/17/25100-41920-50308 368921,295.00 04/03/25398462CIT SIRIS 5 BACKUP AGREEMENT APRIL 2025COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/14/25100-41920-50308 3689265.38 04/03/25398379CIT HPE FOUNDATION CARE WARRANTYCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/12/25100-41920-50308 368924,937.20 04/03/25398065CIT M365 DOMESTIC CALLING / TEAMS MARCH 2025COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/14/25100-41920-50308 36892650.65 04/03/25397629CIT SIEM 365 DAY RETENTION QTY 77 APRIL 2025COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/14/25100-41920-50308 3689214.24 04/03/25397148CIT ADOBE ACROBAT STD FOR TEAMS X 1COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/24/25100-41920-50308 36892650.00 04/03/25398918CIT FORTINET FORTICARE BUNDEL 1YR LICENSE 2025COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/14/25100-41920-50308 30,929.82 Total For Check 36892 Check 36893 3689323.00 04/03/2520250401MDH WATER LICENSEBRANDON HEINZ04/01/25601-49400-50210 23.00 Total For Check 36893 Check 36894 368941,670.19 04/03/251000242864MC 683 - RADIO FLEET FEESHENN CO SHERIFF03/04/25100-42100-50323 1,670.19 Total For Check 36894 Check 36895 3689572.49 04/03/25IN4747149OFFICE SUPPLIESINNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS LLC03/31/25100-41900-50200 72.49 Total For Check 36895 Check 36896 368961,500.00 04/03/2520250401WELLNESS TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENTJOSHUA LAWSON04/01/25100-42100-50307 1,500.00 Total For Check 36896 Check 36897 3689730.80 04/03/2520250401MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT ALTA HONORSKAREN HEIDEN04/01/25100-41400-50331 30.80 Total For Check 36897 Check 36898 36898100.00 04/03/25427513RYAN GANNER ANNUAL CONFERENCELEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES03/31/25100-41400-50207 100.00 Total For Check 36898 Check 36899 36899100.00 04/03/25427512NALISHA WILLIAMS ANNUAL CONFERENCELEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES03/31/25100-41400-50207 100.00 Total For Check 36899 Check 36900 3690098.37 04/03/25227180STREET SIGNS QTY 2M-R SIGN CO., INC.03/31/25100-43100-50226 98.37 Total For Check 36900 Check 36901 3690179.98 04/03/2546348CARPET PROTECTORMENARDS MAPLE GROVE03/19/25204-42100-50210 79.98 Total For Check 36901 Check 36902 369021,050.00 04/03/25337900-11588CLASS FEE X 2. EDSTROM, OLSONMHSRC/RANGE03/17/25100-42100-50207 64 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 6/10Page: 04/03/2025 03:47 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/27/2025 - 04/10/2025 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 36902 1,050.00 Total For Check 36902 Check 36903 36903779.00 04/03/25202504012025 MEMBERSHIPMINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOC03/20/25601-49400-50433 36903779.00 04/03/25202504012025 MEMBERSHIPMINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOC03/20/25602-49450-50433 1,558.00 Total For Check 36903 Check 36904 369041,720.00 04/03/258282091966BODY CAMERA & SUPPLIESMOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INC03/08/25100-42100-50210 369042,580.00 04/03/258282091966BODY CAMERA & SUPPLIESMOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INC03/08/25100-42100-50417 4,300.00 Total For Check 36904 Check 36905 36905300.00 04/03/2537008MEDICAL RESPONDER CLASS X 3NORTH MEMORIAL02/28/25100-42100-50207 300.00 Total For Check 36905 Check 36906 36906(39.99)04/03/25410703510001RETURNED OFFICE SUPPLIESODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC02/20/25100-41900-50200 3690611.49 04/03/25412623495001ACCT 84031524 ORDERED 3/14/25ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC03/12/25100-41900-50200 3690669.47 04/03/25412626413001ACCT 84031524 ORDERED 3/10/25ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC03/12/25100-41900-50200 40.97 Total For Check 36906 Check 36907 3690723.00 04/03/2520250401MHD WATER LICENSEPAT MEISTER04/01/25601-49400-50210 23.00 Total For Check 36907 Check 36908 3690827.12 04/03/2520250401MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT CHILI CONTESTRYAN GANNER04/01/25100-41900-50210 27.12 Total For Check 36908 Check 36909 3690990.00 04/03/25202501-CPDRANGE USE 1/3/25SHERBURNE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE 03/31/25100-42100-50207 90.00 Total For Check 36909 Check 36910 369101,152.33 04/03/252358297-2CK REQ HOPE COMMUNITY 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 369101,509.85 04/03/252358304CK REQ KWIK TRIP 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 369103,082.15 04/03/252358304-2CK REQ KWIK TRIP 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 36910792.00 04/03/252358313CK REQ OLD FARM RIDGE 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 36910446.47 04/03/252358298CK REQ RED BARN 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 36910465.53 04/03/252358299CK REQ ST THERESE 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 369101,255.54 04/03/252358306CK REQ WOODLAND HILLS 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 369106,784.20 04/03/252358307CK REQ NE INDSTRL PID 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 3691059.05 04/03/252358312CK REQ DOMINOS 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 369101,547.05 04/03/252358312-2CK REQ DOMINOS 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 36910796.00 04/03/252358309CK REQ ST THOMAS 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 36910294.00 04/03/252358309-2CK REQ ST THOMAS 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 36910225.00 04/03/252358311CK REQ KEEFE 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 36910755.24 04/03/252358295CK REQ WALCOTT GLENNSTANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22205 369103,036.55 04/03/252358291BELLWETHER 6190 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205 36910353.52 04/03/252358305CORCORAN STORAGE II 6190 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205 369108,575.80 04/03/252358317CORCORAN STORAGE II TURN LANE 7310 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205 36910689.50 04/03/252358310BASS LAKE CROSSING 6199 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-008 36910694.48 04/03/252358302BECHTOLD FARM 6190 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-013 36910651.73 04/03/252358292COOK LAKE HIGHLANDS 6190 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-017 65 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 7/10Page: 04/03/2025 03:47 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/27/2025 - 04/10/2025 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 36910 36910255.12 04/03/252358301KARINIEMI MEADOWS 6190 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-044 369106,038.76 04/03/252358293TAVERA 6190 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-056 369106,968.03 04/03/252358290RAVINIA 6190 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-058 36910201.25 04/03/252358325B002294-20-504 NELSON 101 TURN LN 1855 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-076 3691010,801.41 04/03/252358331STIEG ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 4864 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-087 369101,145.17 04/03/252358296AMBERLY 1 2 BELLWETHER 6 7 9 6190 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-087 369102,655.24 04/03/252358294RUSH CREEK RESERVE 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-098 36910517.50 04/03/252358326RUSH CREEK TURN LANES 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-098 36910315.71 04/03/252358303SCHERBER CR 30 6190 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-110 36910316.38 04/03/252358300GARAGES TOO 6190 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-111 369102,143.30 04/03/252358318HUNTERS RIDGE TURN LANE 7336 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-131 36910566.85 04/03/252358336COOK LAKE TURN LANE 5990 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25100-00000-22205-133 369102,521.50 04/03/252358297CK REQ HOPE COMMUNITY 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES04/01/25100-00000-22206 36910684.25 04/03/252358320B002294-17-031 66TH ST 1079 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25408-48005-50300 36910650.90 04/03/252360697CORCORAN TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS 4153 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25408-48007-50303 369101,330.65 04/03/252359908BRIDGE REPLACEMENT DESIGN 4119 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25408-48009-50303 36910690.00 04/03/252358330CITY CENTER DR AND 79TH PL 4747 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25408-48010-50303 369103,703.75 04/03/252358333CITY CTR DR AND 79 PL ST UTILITIES 5033 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25408-48010-50303 369102,051.00 04/03/252358332HORSESHOE BEND DRIVE 4908 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25434-48012-50300 369108,046.75 04/03/252358334NE CORCORAN WATER TOWERSTANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25601-49400-50300 3691010,162.45 04/03/252358335NE CORCORAN TRUNK 5275 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25601-49400-50300 36910565.80 04/03/252358321B002294-18-040 SE TRUNK 1174 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25601-49400-50303 36910331.20 04/03/252358323B002294-19-048 WATER UTILITY 1204 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25601-49400-50303 36910655.20 04/03/252358322B002294-19-047 SEWER UTILITY 1203 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25602-49450-50303 96,484.16 Total For Check 36910 Check 36911 36911514.55 04/03/25I17083419MM PISTOL X 1STREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT07/10/24100-42100-50417 3691194.98 04/03/25I1712498HAT, STRAPSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT08/02/24100-42100-50417 3691144.00 04/03/25I1716900EMBROIDERY ON JACKETS, ADD PATCHES TO SHIRTSSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT09/03/24100-42100-50417 369116.99 04/03/25I1723043EMBROIDERY SVCSSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT10/08/24100-42100-50417 36911329.99 04/03/25I1726711CARRIER, OVERT, NASPO & NAME TAGSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT10/30/24100-42100-50417 36911329.99 04/03/25I1726712CARRIER, OVERT, NASPO & NAME TAGSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT10/30/24100-42100-50417 36911113.97 04/03/25I1727979IRRITANT HOLDER, CUFF HOLDER, FLASHLIGHT CASESTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT11/06/24100-42100-50417 36911659.90 04/03/25I1735800EQUIPMENT BAG, SHIRT ALTER, EMBROIDERYSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT12/20/24100-42100-50417 36911139.98 04/03/25I1740884UNDERVEST SHIRT, CARGO PANTSSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT01/17/25100-42100-50417 36911300.00 04/03/25I1741416TACTICAL ASSAULT CARRIERSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT01/22/25100-42100-50417 369111,848.90 04/03/25I1749689BALL.PANEL SET, CARRIERS, TRAUMA PLATESTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT01/22/25100-42100-50417 3691144.00 04/03/25I1749802SHIRT ALTERATIONSSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT03/06/25100-42100-50417 3691123.98 04/03/25I1750606NAME TAGSSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT03/11/25100-42100-50417 369111,893.90 04/03/25I1752293CARRIERS, BALL.PANEL SET, TRAUMA TAG, NAME TAGSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT03/20/25100-42100-50417 36911(675.00)04/03/25CM299047USED 9MM X 3STREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT03/20/24100-42100-50417 36911(780.00)04/03/25CM300045USED 9MM X 3STREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT07/10/24100-42100-50417 36911(800.00)04/03/25CM302115USED 9MM X 1STREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT03/06/25100-42100-50417 36911(300.00)04/03/25CM302190REF I1749689 CARRIER, OVERT, NASPO, V1 MOLLESTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT03/14/25100-42100-50417 36911(315.00)04/03/25CM301200REF I1726712 CARIIER, OVERT, NASPO, FRONT OPEN, TMWSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT11/26/24100-42100-50417 3,475.13 Total For Check 36911 Check 36912 369121,492.81 04/03/25682150REPAIRS & MAINTENACE - 2020 FORD EXPLORER TAG T9986SUPERIOR FORD03/07/25100-42100-50403 1,492.81 Total For Check 36912 Check 36913 36913344.50 04/03/250522516BADGES-8 OFFICER, 2 ROOKYSYMBOLARTS LLC03/06/25100-42100-50417 66 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 8/10Page: 04/03/2025 03:47 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/27/2025 - 04/10/2025 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 36913 344.50 Total For Check 36913 Check 36914 36914457.92 04/03/2520250401UNION/TEAM LEGAL DUES APRIL 2025TEAMSTER LOCAL 32004/01/25100-00000-21707 457.92 Total For Check 36914 Check 36915 3691575.00 04/03/253609221-202502-1SVCS FOR 2/1/25 - 2/28/25TRANSUNION RISK & ALTERNATIVE03/01/25100-42100-50300 75.00 Total For Check 36915 Check 36916 369161,020.00 04/03/2525033100GENERAL CLEANING MARCH 2025ULTIMATE CLEANERS LLC03/31/25100-41900-50401 1,020.00 Total For Check 36916 Check 36917 369171,998.95 04/10/2513447-01FIREARM SAFETY CLASS HATSARCON SOLUTIONS03/13/25204-42100-50210 36917269.93 04/10/2513448-01FIREARM SAFETY CLASS SHIRTSARCON SOLUTIONS03/17/25204-42100-50210 2,268.88 Total For Check 36917 Check 36918 3691825.99 04/10/252914325UNLEADED 87 - 10% ETHANOLBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/17/25100-41900-50212 36918797.17 04/10/252914325UNLEADED 87 - 10% ETHANOLBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/17/25100-42100-50212 3691843.32 04/10/252914325UNLEADED 87 - 10% ETHANOLBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/17/25100-43100-50212 866.48 Total For Check 36918 Check 36919 36919836.89 04/10/25399331CIT MARCH 2025 MONTHLY MANAGED SERVICESCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/21/25100-41920-50300 369192,903.44 04/10/25399332CIT MARCH 2025 MONTHLY MANAGED SERVICESCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/21/25100-41920-50300 3691914,789.00 04/10/25399382SECURITY SYSTEM COMPONENTSCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH03/24/25601-00000-16500 18,529.33 Total For Check 36919 Check 36920 36920(36.00)04/10/253058645CREDIT MEMO FOR RETURN OF 6 BOTTLESCULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER03/19/25100-41900-50210 3692086.00 04/10/25100X08461704POLICE EQUIP RENTAL FOR APRIL 2025CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER03/31/25100-42100-50210 50.00 Total For Check 36920 Check 36921 3692186.00 04/10/25100X08437001ADMIN EQUIP RENTAL FOR APRIL 2025CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER03/31/25100-41900-50210 86.00 Total For Check 36921 Check 36922 36922291.45 04/10/259007375745WINDOW ENVELOPESDELUXE03/21/25601-49400-50322 36922291.45 04/10/259007375745WINDOW ENVELOPESDELUXE03/21/25602-49450-50322 582.90 Total For Check 36922 Check 36923 3692320,552.28 04/10/25301825UNIT 579 - 25 FORD FULL BUILD CONFIG1GUARDIAN FLEET SAFETY02/20/25416-42100-50210 20,552.28 Total For Check 36923 Check 36924 3692420,491.14 04/10/2520250401FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES 2025 Q2CITY OF HANOVER04/01/25100-42200-50300 20,491.14 Total For Check 36924 Check 36925 36925570.00 04/10/251000243695MC683 - CCN 21006520, CASE 27CR2214664HENN CO SHERIFF03/17/25100-42100-50305 67 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 9/10Page: 04/03/2025 03:47 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/27/2025 - 04/10/2025 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 36925 570.00 Total For Check 36925 Check 36926 36926763.34 04/10/25INV2743701CONTRACT 63313-STATE-01 LEASE CHGMETRO SALES INC03/19/25100-41920-50210 763.34 Total For Check 36926 Check 36927 3692740,530.74 04/10/254466PERMITS FINALED JANUARY 2025METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVICES01/31/25100-42400-50300 36927154,009.77 04/10/254506PERMITS FINALED FEBRUARY 2025METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVICES02/28/25100-42400-50300 194,540.51 Total For Check 36927 Check 36928 36928700.00 04/10/250314202541ST TECH CONFERENCE (MAURER, REINKING)MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOC03/14/25601-49400-50207 700.00 Total For Check 36928 Check 36929 369298.19 04/10/25414509934001ACCT 84031524 ORDERED 3/14/25ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC03/17/25100-41500-50207 3692911.60 04/10/25414388201001ACCT 84031524 ORDERED 3/14/25ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC03/15/25100-41500-50207 3692934.94 04/10/25414509937001ACCT 84031524 ORDERED 3/14/25ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC03/17/25100-41900-50200 3692914.99 04/10/25414509952001ACCT 84031524 ORDERED 3/14/25ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC03/18/25100-41910-50210 69.72 Total For Check 36929 Check 36930 3693020,267.50 04/10/2524-26.4CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK INVOICE 4OERTEL ARCHITECTS03/11/25415-45200-50300 20,267.50 Total For Check 36930 Check 36931 3693127,660.00 04/10/25227705274 PAY 23CORCORAN WATER TOWER STORAGE TANK PAY 23PHOENIX FABRICATORS & ERECTORS, LLC03/31/25601-00000-16500 36931(1,383.00)04/10/25227705274 PAY 23CORCORAN WATER TOWER STORAGE TANK PAY 23PHOENIX FABRICATORS & ERECTORS, LLC03/31/25601-00000-20610 26,277.00 Total For Check 36931 Check 36932 369321,171.17 04/10/250894-007089955CONTRACT RECYCLING SERVICE MARCH 2025REPUBLIC SERVICES03/31/25100-43201-50300 1,171.17 Total For Check 36932 Check 36933 36933403,700.00 04/10/25227704426 PAY 23NE WATER SUPPLY - WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT PAY 23RICE LAKE CONSTRUCTION GROUP03/31/25601-00000-16500 36933(20,185.00)04/10/25227704426 PAY 23NE WATER SUPPLY - WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT PAY 23RICE LAKE CONSTRUCTION GROUP03/31/25601-00000-20610 383,515.00 Total For Check 36933 Check 36934 3693490,714.70 04/10/2520250401FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES 2025 Q2CITY OF ROGERS04/01/25100-42200-50300 90,714.70 Total For Check 36934 Check 36935 3693542,558.20 04/10/252358316CITY DOWNTOWN PARK 7229 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25415-45200-50300 3693539,602.25 04/10/252358328WATER TREATMENT PLANT DESIGN 4426 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25601-00000-16500 3693525,041.25 04/10/252358329WATER TREATMENT PLANT DESIGN 4426 20241231STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES03/31/25601-00000-16500 107,201.70 Total For Check 36935 Check 36936 3693658,615.01 04/10/252-2408FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES 2025 Q2WEST SUBURBAN FIRE DISTRICT04/01/25100-42200-50300 58,615.01 Total For Check 36936 68 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 10/10Page: 04/03/2025 03:47 PM User: RCKOTTKE DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/27/2025 - 04/10/2025 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check #AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number 516,923.06 Fund 100 GENERAL FUND 327.11 Fund 101 LONG-TERM PLANNING FUND 2,544.86 Fund 204 FIREARMS SAFETY 7,084.85 Fund 408 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT 62,906.87 Fund 415 PARK CAPITAL FUND 20,552.28 Fund 416 CAPITAL-EQUIPMENT CERTS 2,051.00 Fund 434 CITY CENTER DRIVE AND HORSESHOE BEND 518,786.60 Fund 601 WATER 1,875.65 Fund 602 SEWER Fund Totals: 1,133,052.28 Total For All Funds: 69 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.c Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Nalisha Williams Topic: Teamsters Compensation Classification Study Memorandum of Agreement Action Required: Approve the Memorandum of Agreement and direct the Mayor and City Administrator to enter the agreement. Summary The compensation and classification study will be implemented on April 26, 2025. The study resulted in employees receiving a new grade and pay rate. As part of the process the City has reached out to the bargaining unit to provide the same benefit to employees in the collective bargaining unit. The attached Memorandum of Agreement with Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees’ Union Local No. 320 proposes a new pay scale for employees in the collective bargaining unit. Appendix A that is attached to the Memorandum of Agreement outlines the following: Police Officers have been evaluated at Grade 8 by Abdo In order to maintain alignment with the existing labor agreement structure; The City will hire new Police Officers at step 2 or higher and not use step 1 for bargaining unit members (7 steps total) Steps 2 and 3 are 6-month steps for police officers The City will reserve the step 1 rate of pay for other non-bargaining unit positions Financial/Budget Wage increases will be paid for from the Central Services business unit as a “Transfer” expense. Options Approve the Memorandum of Agreement and direct the Mayor and City Administrator to enter the agreement. Council Action Approval and Direction Attachments 1. Executed Memorandum of Agreement - City of Corcoran.pdf 2. March 27, 2025 Classification and Compensation Study Staff Report.pdf 70 71 72 Appendix A Wage Schedule for Police Officers Grade Steps and Hourly Rate Per Step 1 (Non-Union Positions) 2 (New Officers Start Step – 6 Months) 3 (6 Months) 4 (12 Months) 5 (12 Months) 6 (12 Months) 7 (12 Months) 8 (12 Months) 8 - Police Patrol Officer (K9/Detective) 38.83 40.38 42 43.68 45.42 47.24 49.13 51.59 73 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6e. Council Meeting March 27, 2025 Prepared By Nalisha Williams, Assistant City Administrator Jay Tobin, City Administrator Topic Classification and Compensation Study Action Required Approval Summary The City Council adopted the Classification and Compensation Study on January 23, 2025. On January 29, 2025, administration leaders held a “lunch and learn” with all staff, to discuss the implementation and next steps of the Classification and Compensation Study process. In the discussion, a few staff members raised concerns regarding their job descriptions and requested a pause in the implementation. City Administrator Tobin approved a 30-day pause, to allow staff members more time to review their job descriptions and discuss any concerns or proposed changes with their Department Heads. The 30-day pause ended on February 28, 2025, then all Department Heads met with City Administrator Tobin and Assistant City Administrator Williams to clarify any job description changes they felt were necessary for their department operations. The Abdo Consultant reviewed job description and ensured scoring reflected the changes. City Council’s Personnel Committee met on Tuesday, March 11, 2025, to review and discuss updated job descriptions, concurring with the consultant’s recommendations as outlined below. The following positions were submitted for second review (or initial review), and the outcome of each re-analysis is as follows: • Accountant: Recommended change from Grade 7 to Grade 8 • Construction Services Coordinator: Recommended change from Grade 4 to Grade 5 • Parks and Recreation Manager: Recommended change from Grade 7 to Grade 9 • Public Safety Administrative/Evidence Specialist: Recommended change from Grade 3 to Grade 4 • Utility Crew Leader (New position): Grade 7 • Utility Superintendent, Operations Superintendent, and Operations Manager: No grade change recommended 74 Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA) Under the Fair Labor Standard Act, all positions of the City have been tested through salary and duties assessments, which tests if job duties align with specific exemptions. The following positions were determined to change from non-exempt to exempt per the results of testing and legal review of the City’s labor attorney. • Operations Superintendent • Construction Services Manager • Parks and Recreation Manager • Planner Part-Time Employees Part-time employees will enter the wage scale at the same step as the full-time position equivalent as listed on the wage schedule. Part-time employees are eligible for a step increase upon completion of every 2,080 hours at current step (equivalent to the number of hours work for full-time employees). For example, a part-time Administrative Assistant starts at Grade 3 Step 1 and moves to Step 2 once they have worked a total of 2,080 hours as confirmed by our Payroll/Human Resources Department. Seasonal Employees Seasonal Employee job descriptions and wage schedules will be brought to a future City Council meeting for discussion. Implementation The new implementation date for the Compensation Classification Study will be April 26th, 2025, for pay period April 26, 2025 – May 9, 2025 with pay date May 16, 2025. Financial/Budget Approximately $44,500 to be paid for from “Central Services” business unit as a “Transfer” expense. Recommendation Staff recommends Council adoption of the Personnel Committee’s recommendation for the positions listed above and approve the attached job descriptions for implementation beginning April 26, 2025. Council Action 1. Request Council approve the Personnel Committee recommendation to adopt job descriptions and implement Compensation Classification Study on April 26th, 2025. 2. Council provide staff with other guidance. Attachments 1. Abdo Position Updated Step/Grade Table 2. Job Descriptions 75 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.d Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Paula Steelman Topic: Resolution Recognizing Truck Safety Seminar and Donations Action Required: Adopt Resolution 2025-33 Summary The City of Corcoran Public Works facility hosted the 17th Annual Truck Safety Seminar on February 27, 2025. The City would like to recognize the committee and many donors who supported the program. Recommendation Consider a motion to adopt Resolution 2025-33 Recognizing the Truck Safety Event and Accept Donations. Council Action Adopt Resolution 2025-33 Recognizing the Truck Safety Event and Accept Donations. Attachments 1. Resolution 2025-33 Recognizing Truck Safety Seminar.docx 76 City of Corcoran April 1, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-33 Motion By: Vehrenkamp Seconded By: Nichols A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING TRUCK SAFETY SEMINAR AND APPROVAL OF DONATED FUNDS WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota, does hereby find as follows: WHEREAS,the City of Corcoran supports the efforts of the Annual Truck Safety Seminar; and WHEREAS,Corcoran Public Works facility was the host site for the 17th Annual Truck Safety Seminar held on February 27, 2025; and WHEREAS,Annual Truck Safety Seminar planning committee consisted of Director Matt Gottschalk, Deputy Director Ryan Burns, Administrative Manager Paula Steelman, Administrative Assistant Amelia Fadden, Officer Josh Lawson and other members of the Corcoran Police Department; Public Works Superintendent Pat Meister and Public Works Staff; Construction Services Supervisor Mike Pritchard, Permit Technician Shawn Zuther; Recreation Supervisor Jessica Christensen Buck; the Minnesota State Patrol; and WHEREAS,the following donors have made financial contributions to the City of Corcoran to be utilized in support of the Truck Safety Seminar program; Duane’s Septic Service, LLC $50.00 Donated Cash $70.00 Ende Septic Service, LLC $100.00 Three Rivers Park District $150.00 Trueman Welters $150.00 Kothrade Sewer, Water & Excavating, Inc. $175.00 Beaudry Oil & Propane $200.00 Designing Nature Landscaping Services $200.00 Sunram Construction, Inc.$200.00 Farmers State Bank of Hamel $250.00 Miller Brothers Excavating, Inc.$250.00 Hassan Sand & Gravel, Inc.$300.00 Corcoran Lions $500.00 Northwest Area Jaycees $500.00 D&D Service $500.00 DMJ Asphalt, Inc.$500.00 Doboszenski & Sons, Inc.$500.00 Ess Brothers and Sons, Inc.$500.00 KD & Company Recycling, Inc.$500.00 NAPA of Corcoran $500.00 WHEREAS,the following donors have made non-financial contributions to the Truck Safety Seminar program; Swifty Sweep-volunteer labor; Farmers State Bank of Hamel-cups and napkins; St. Thomas Church-coffee makers and servers; Corcoran Crossroads-ice. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Corcoran, that: 1.Acknowledges the outstanding efforts by the Truck Safety Planning Committee. 2. Acknowledges Corcoran Public Works as its host site. 3. Acknowledges the generosity of all donors and graciously accepts the financial donations as listed above totaling $6,095.00. 77 City of Corcoran April 1, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2025-33 Page 2 of 2 VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Friedrich, Michelle Friedrich, Michelle Lanterman, Mark Lanterman, Mark Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 10 th day of April, 2025. ________________________________ Tom McKee – Mayor City Seal ATTEST: ____________________________________ Deb Johnson – City Clerk 78 X X X X X STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.e Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Nalisha Williams Topic: Exempt Employee Policy Action Required: Approval Summary As an outcome of the compensation and classification study and FLSA testing, an increased number of employees will become exempt. Staff has put together an exempt employee policy to communicate expectations. This policy will supersede the current employee handbook until updates to the handbook have been completed. Council Action Approve the Exempt Employee Policy Attachments 1. Exempt Employee Policy.pdf 79 Exempt Employee Policy Exempt employees are expected to work an average of 40 hours per week (minimum of 80 hours per pay period) to meet the performance expectations outlined by their supervisors. Exempt employees do not receive extra pay for the hours worked over 40 in one workweek (or 80 hours in a pay period). Exempt employees are paid on a salary basis. This means they receive a predetermined amount of pay each pay period and are not paid by the hour. The City will only reduce the gross weekly salary of an exempt employee, that doesn’t work a full workweek, in the following situations: • The employee is in a position that earns paid time off and is absent for one or more full days due to personal reasons, illness, or injury, but: o Paid time off has not been requested or has been denied. o Paid time off is exhausted. • The employee is receiving a short-term or long-term disability benefit or workers’ compensation wage loss benefits. • The very first workweek or the very last workweek of employment with the city in which the employee does not work a full week. In this case, the city will prorate the employee’s salary based on the time actually worked. • The employee has exhausted the 15 days of paid military leave for that calendar year (MN Statute 192.26). • The employee is suspended without pay for a full day or more for disciplinary reasons for violations of any written policy that is applied to all employees. • The employee is on FMLA leave, and all paid time off has been exhausted. • The City may, for budgetary reasons, implement a voluntary or involuntary unpaid leave program and, under this program, make deductions from the weekly salary of an exempt employee. In this case, the employee will be treated as non-exempt for any workweek in which the budget-related deductions are made. 80 If the city inadvertently makes an improper deduction to the weekly salary of an exempt employee, the city will reimburse the employee and make appropriate changes to comply in the future. If an employee thinks that a wage deduction was made in error, please contact Payroll promptly. Time Off for Exempt Employees Exempt employees may use paid time off when on personal business, or flex their schedule, to meet the minimum 80 hours per pay period. All employees must manage their paid time off hours to ensure they don’t exceed the paid time off maximum balance as outlined in the handbook. Exempt employees must communicate their absences with their direct supervisor. 81 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.f Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Lauren Letsche Topic: Chisholm Trail Street Improvements - Accept Feasibility Study & Order Improvement Hearing Action Required: Decision Summary On December 12th, 2024, the City Council authorized staff to complete a feasibility study related to proposed street improvements in the Chisholm Trail Neighborhood. An in person/virtual neighborhood meeting was held on January 23rd, 2025. At that meeting, City staff shared a presentation on the project and process with the residents of the neighborhood and answered any questions that they had at that time. Staff provided contact information at that meeting and have fielded additional comments and questions since the open house. Attached is the feasibility report outlining the recommended street and drainage improvements, preliminary assessment rolls, estimated project costs, schedule, and overall feasibility. The feasibility report is consistent with the city's adopted Special Assessment Policy. Special assessments are a right provided by state statute that allow the City to fund a portion of the project costs through assessments to the benefited properties. As part of this process, there are certain procedural steps that are required. If the council elects to proceed with this project, the next step is to hold an improvement hearing in which interested parties can come and speak to the project prior to the City Council authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications of the project. Staff would prepare notices that are both mailed to the properties to be assessed but also posted twice in the newspaper. It is recommended that City Council discuss the feasibility study presented, review and discuss the preliminary assessment roll provided, accept the report, then order the Improvement Hearing by Resolution. Financial/Budget The improvements could be funded through a combination of special assessments and local participation. A preliminary breakdown of each funding source is estimated below. 2025 General Budget Asphalt Maintenance line item - $250,000 Special Assessments - $81,000 Pavement Management Fund - $90,725.60 Options 1. Accept the Chisholm Trail Street Improvements Feasibility Study and Order Improvement Hearing 2. Decline Recommendation Staff recommends approving the Chisholm Trail Street Improvements Feasibility Study and Order Improvement Hearing. Council Action Consider a motion to accept the Chisholm Trail Street Improvements Feasibility Study and Order Improvement Hearing. 82 Attachments 1. Feasibilty Report Chisholm Trail 04012025.pdf 2. Resolution 2025-34 Receving Feasbility Report and Calling Improvement Hearing for Chisholm Trail Improvement.pdf 83 i City of Corcoran Chisholm Trail Improvement Project Feasibility Report April 1, 2025 Prepared for: City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Prepared by: Stantec One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 100 Plymouth, MN 55447 84 ii Stantec Consulting Services Inc. One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 100, Plymouth, MN 55447 Date Line File: 193807366 Attention: Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works Director/City Engineer City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Dear Mr. Mattson, Reference: Feasibility Report for Chisholm Trail Improvements Project Please see the enclosed Feasibility Report for the Chisholm Trail Improvements Project. We would be pleased to discuss this report in further detail and answer any questions that may come forth. Regards, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Steven Hegland P.E. Project Engineer 85 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT iii Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION/BACKGROUND ......................................................................... 1 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................... 1 2.1 ROADWAY ..................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 STORMWATER ............................................................................................................. 2 2.3 SEWER AND WATER .................................................................................................... 2 2.4 PRIVATE UTILITIES ...................................................................................................... 2 3.0 PROPOSED DESIGN ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................ 2 3.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ....................................................................................... 3 3.2 DRIVEWAY IMPROVEMENTS....................................................................................... 4 3.3 RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENTS .............................................................................. 4 3.4 STORMWATER AND DRAINAGE .................................................................................. 4 3.5 UTILITIES ...................................................................................................................... 4 4.0 ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS .................................................................................... 5 5.0 ASSESSMENTS ............................................................................................................ 5 6.0 PROJECT FINANCIALS ................................................................................................ 6 7.0 SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 7 7.1 PROJECT FEASIBILITY................................................................................................. 7 7.2 RECOMMENDATION ..................................................................................................... 7 FIGURES Figure 1 Project Location APPENDICES Appendix A Geotechnical Report Appendix B Cost Estimates Appendix C Appraisal Report Appendix D Preliminary Assessment Roll 86 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION The City of Corcoran has authorized Stantec to prepare this report to provide an analysis of the feasibility, cost effectiveness, and necessity of proposed improvements for the local roadway identified as Chisholm Trail. This report investigates the existing review of roadway conditions and potential improvement alternatives, review of area drainage considerations, review of geotechnical data, preliminary assessment roll in accordance with assessment policy (including potential overlay credits), and overall feasibility of the project. 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION/BACKGROUND This project is located along the north side of County Road 30 (CR30) just west of Trail Haven Road. Chisholm Trail is an isolated cul-de-sac with direct access to CR 30 which services the 18 residential properties which have access to this roadway. One of the properties has their residential access from CR 30 with their accessory building access from Chisholm Trail. Figure 1 is attached to this report showing the improvement area. The neighborhood is bounded by a large wetland complex to the north and west and a drainage ditch to the east. The homes in this neighborhood were platted with the Trail Haven 1st and 2nd Addition plats with one property platted with the Corcoran Hills development to the west. The properties are all large rural residential lots ranging in size from 1.5 acres up to approximately 10 acres. The development was originally constructed as a gravel roadway when the neighborhood was established in the 1970’s. In the early 2000’s the existing gravel roadway was shaped and paved with a bituminous asphalt surface. 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 ROADWAY Chisholm Trail is approximately 22 to 24 feet wide and generally centered within a 60-foot right of way. The roadway is a rural roadway design which means that the roadway sheds the stormwater runoff to a ditch system which conveys the runoff through the ditch and culverts. There are four culvert crossings under the roadway with individual driveway culverts as required at driveway locations. The bituminous pavement shows a significant amount of wear, and cracking of the roadway is prevalent throughout. Before the roadway was paved, a draintile was installed by the City down the center of the roadway. Soil borings throughout the project area were conducted in February of 2025 by Independent Testing Technologies, Inc. (ITT). Appendix A includes a copy of the geotechnical report completed by ITT. The borings indicate the existing bituminous section is 3 to 3.5 inches thick with 10 to 12 inches of aggregate 87 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 2 base supporting the pavement. The borings indicate a layer of sandy lean clay below the base course that extends to the bottom of the borehole at all five borings. Frozen conditions were encountered at the top of the borings due to the timing of the investigation, but the material blow counts below the frozen soils showed suitable soils for a roadway base. No buried topsoil or organic materials were encountered in any of the borings. The soil borings had indicated mottling in the soils in all the borings. Mottling is staining of the soils which indicates that they have experienced seasonally high groundwater conditions in the past. 2.2 STORMWATER The existing road is a rural section in which the roadway drains to the adjacent ditches where the runoff is directed to the low areas. Generally, a majority of the runoff from the development drains to the northwest to a large wetland complex with some of the runoff routed east to a drainage ditch which then conveys the runoff north to the wetland complex. Portions of the roadside ditches hold slight amounts of water, but in general they successfully convey water. We are not aware of any historical roadway overtopping or drainage issues which impact the roadway. During the open house meeting with residents, two potential areas of drainage concern not adjacent to the roadway were identified by the property owners. In the drainage ditch to the east of Chisholm Trail approximately 600-feet north of the development entrance residents had expressed concerns with the area being saturated for prolonged periods and potentially holding water. Additionally, concerns were expressed with the drainage ditch to the east of the neighborhood. Residents had shared that the ditch periodically flooded portions of their yards when the flow through the area was elevated. 2.3 SEWER AND WATER The residents within the project area are all on private septic and well systems. Public sewer and water systems are not anticipated to be available for the foreseeable future. 2.4 PRIVATE UTILITIES Private utilities run underground adjacent to the roadway within the Right of Way. These include electric, gas, and communication. 3.0 PROPOSED DESIGN ALTERNATIVES Several alternatives were reviewed in determining a cost-effective improvement to Chisholm Trail as described below. 88 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 3 3.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS The existing asphalt surface throughout the project is generally 3-3.5 inches thick, in poor condition, and is underlain by 10 -12 inches of underlying aggregate and a subgrade base of sandy clayey soils. Based on the geotechnical borings and condition of the roadway, three pavement improvement techniques were considered: a bituminous overlay, full depth reclamation, and a roadway reconstruction. Bituminous Overlay A bituminous overlay is a maintenance improvement project in which a 2-inch lift of bituminous pavement is placed over the existing roadway. This improvement is generally used to strengthen the roadway and create a new watertight surface. The current roadway is experiencing a significant amount of block cracking throughout the roadway. These block cracks will typically reflect up through the newly installed pavement which would greatly reduce the longevity of the overlay. If the block cracking were in isolated areas, it could be removed and the remainder of the roadway overlaid. In Chisholm Trail, the cracking is prevalent throughout. Roadway Reconstruction Reconstruction of the entire roadway would include completely removing the existing pavement and subgrade and installing a completely new road section in accordance with the City of Corcoran Standards. The road section would be excavated and hauled from the site with the new sand drainage layer, aggregate base, and bituminous section installed. This approach would provide for the longest lifespan of the roadway but will be the most expensive approach as none of the existing roadway materials would be reused. Full Depth Reclamation Full depth reclamation (FDR) is the third roadway improvement method which was reviewed. In this method, the existing bituminous pavement is ground up with the aggregate base to create a new aggregate base for the roadway. The resulting material is then graded, excess material is removed, and new bituminous pavement is placed on top of the prepared base. This method is more cost effective then reconstructing the entire roadway and is appropriate for this roadway given the suitable pavement subgrade and adequate ditch drainage throughout. We would recommend that draintile be installed along both shoulders of the roadway at the low points of the roadway to ensure that if seasonally high groundwater is encountered, it is properly drained from the road subgrade which helps extend the life of the roadway. This draintile would be in addition to the existing draintile within the roadway. It is possible that previously, or through the construction project, the existing drain tile became compromised and supplementing the subgrade drainage with new draintile is recommended. The feasibility study assumes that 500-feet of draintile will be installed in either direction from the low points in the roadway, which is greater than what is typically installed but is appropriate based on the geotechnical investigation. 89 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 4 A FDR is the recommended improvement method for Chisholm Trail. It is anticipated that the pavement section and approximately 8-10 inches of the existing aggregate base will be reclaimed and reused as an aggregate base for the roadway. 3 ½ inches of bituminous pavement will then be paved on the newly compacted aggregate base. 3.2 DRIVEWAY IMPROVEMENTS Due to the nature of the improvements, limited driveway removal is recommended. This will allow existing driveway culverts to remain in place, reduce inconvenience to residents, and minimize project costs. 3.3 RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENTS No additional Right of Way or easements (temporary or permanent) are anticipated to complete the proposed roadway improvements along Chisholm Trail. 3.4 STORMWATER AND DRAINAGE The culverts along the project area were reviewed and were found to be in an acceptable condition. Within the project area there are two locations in which ditching improvements are anticipated to be necessary to ensure drainage within the ditches is properly maintained. Both areas are highlighted on the site plan. The two drainage concerns which were identified during he open house were reviewed and it is recommended that the City consider and address those areas outside of this project. The primary purpose of this project is a roadway improvement project, and both areas of concern are outside the limits of the roadway and are not anticipated to affect the roadway. Additionally, the scope of work for stream/ditch grading and stabilization is different than a roadway improvement which may be done more efficiently with a contractor who doesn’t specialize in roadway paving. Both drainage features are anticipated to have wetlands present, which would need to be verified with a delineation. Any changes to the drainage in these areas is anticipated to require permitting through the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) as well as potential US Army Corps of Engineering and DNR permitting which could limit or prevent what can be done in these areas. We would recommend the City review the drainage ditch to the east of the neighborhood once the area is vegetated and remove any fallen trees or vegetation which could be inhibiting flow. If a project is necessary in the future, we would recommend identifying the costs and potential funding sources or grants prior to initiation, as the City doesn’t currently have a dedicated funding source for projects such as this. 3.5 UTILITIES No changes to the utilities are included in this project. 90 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 5 4.0 ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS Costs for the proposed project were estimated based on the improvements as described in this report. A copy of the cost estimates for this project is provided in Appendix B. For this project, the total estimated project cost for the recommended roadway improvement of a full depth reclamation is estimated to be $421,725.60. 5.0 ASSESSMENTS Under the State Local Improvement Code, known as chapter 429, the City of Corcoran has the authority to levy special assessments to parcels based upon the special benefit a parcel receives from an improvement project. The City of Corcoran has a policy in place to ensure that the costs for improvements levied through special assessments are distributed in a fair and equitable manner. An appraisal report (Letter of Benefit) was created for the properties affected by the improvements along Chisholm Trail to determine the anticipated benefit for the properties abutting the improvements. Appendix C contains the Letter of Benefit dated January 4th, 2025 by Nagell Appraisal Incorporated. In accordance with the Nagell Appraisal, the Single Family Residential Properties are reasonably anticipated to receive an average benefit of $10,000 - $15,000 per buildable lot Corcoran’s assessment policy states that for reconstruction and rehabilitation street improvements, the assessable cost to the benefiting properties is to be assessed at 90% of the low end of the range of the benefit. For this project, that means that the maximum assessment for a property along Chisholm Trail is $9,000 (0.9 x $10,000) for the benefited properties. Due to the condition of the roadway, we are recommending a FDR improvement before an overlay is completed on the roadway, which historically has been completed the first time on some roadways without assessment. Because of this, in the appraisal report the City also requested the anticipated benefit value of an overlay to determine a credit which could be provided back. The overlay benefit for a Single Family Residential Property are anticipated to receive an average benefit of $5,000 - $8,000 per buildable lot. This was done similarly with the Corcoran Trails project. We would recommend the credit provided for the overlay be 90% of the low end of the range to be consistent with the assessment calculations for the property. For this project, the overlay credit would be calculated as $4,500 (0.9 x $5,000) The preliminary Assessment Roll calculates the total project cost and distributes it amongst the benefiting properties up to the maximum assessment amount as provided in the City of Corcoran Assessment Policy. A copy of the Preliminary Assessment Roll is included in Appendix D. 91 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 6 6.0 PROJECT FINANCIALS Table 5.1 shows the project revenues and expenses for the recommended improvements. Table 6.1 ESTIMATED COSTS AND ASSESSMENTS Project Local Funds Special Assessments Total Chisholm Trail Improvements Assessment Roll $340,725.60 $81,000 $421,725.60 Cost estimates for the project are provided in Appendix B. 92 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 7 7.0 SUMMARY 7.1 PROJECT FEASIBILITY The outlined project discussed previously is feasible as it relates to the general engineering principles, standards, and construction procedures and is in accordance with the City’s assessment policy. The project is necessary to make the required street improvements and to maintain the quality and function of the current street system. The project is cost effective based on the existing conditions, public bidding, and acceptable construction standards for street improvements. The project is financially feasible. However, due to the significant City participation, the Council may want to consider whether the proposed improvements are warranted based on other needs in the City. 7.2 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council discuss the feasibility report presented, review and discuss the preliminary assessment roll provided, & then consider the recommended Improvements. 93 Figure 1 Project Location 94 Wright County Anoka County Hennepin County Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ 456730 97th Ave N C h i s holm T rHig h B l u f f L a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Ditching Improvements Project Area Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ V: \ 2 2 7 7 \ r e s o u r c e \ g i s \ C o r c o r a n \ P r o \ G e n e r a l F i g u r e s \ C h i s h o l m T r a i l \ C h i s h o l m T r a i l . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 3 - 2 8 B y : t w a v r i n Legend Project Area County Parcels Ñ Map ID on Assesment Roll Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 15N 2. Data Sources: MNDOT, Hennepin County Imagery 3. Background: Hennepin County Aerial, 2024 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:6,000 0 250 500 Feet Prepared by TAW on 2025-03-28 Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN City of Corcoran Project Location 1 00 95 Appendix A Geotechnical Report 96 MARCH 19, 2025 ITT PROJECT 25-018 REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION For CHISHOLM TRAIL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS CORCORAN, MINNESOTA Prepared For: CITY OF CORCORAN 97 March 19, 2025 Mr. Kevin Mattson, Public Works Director City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 RE: 25-018 Report of Geotechnical Exploration Chisholm Trail Road Improvements Corcoran, Minnesota Dear Mr. Mattson: Independent Testing Technologies, Inc. is pleased to submit the results of our subsurface investigation program for this project in Corcoran, Minnesota. This report represents our work on this project as authorized by you. It includes our recommendations regarding earthwork, fill and compaction, subgrade preparation, and pavement design. An electronic copy is enclosed. The soils encountered were mostly fine grained clayey sands (SC) and sandy lean clays (CL). Groundwater was not observed in any of the borings during our investigation However, the water levels were observed over a very short period and may not have had time to stabilize in the bore holes. Grey soils were encountered at a shallow depth, which indicates there may be shallow groundwater present. The soils are fair to good for the proposed street reconstruction. Mr. Mattson, it has been our pleasure to work with you on this project. Independent Testing appreciated the opportunity to perform this geotechnical evaluation and look forward to continuing our participation during the construction phase of this project. Please contact Patrick Johnson if you have any questions regarding this report. Please contact Tyler Burkes if you would like a proposal for the materials testing services that will be needed. Sincerely, Patrick A. Johnson, P.E. Kevin T. Reller Minnesota License #22037 President 98 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. _______________________________ Patrick A. Johnson Date: March 19, 2025 License No.: 22037 99 TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Introduction .......................................................................... 1 Purpose ................................................................................. 1 Scope of Services ................................................................. 1 General Site Conditions ....................................................... 2 Available Subsurface Information ....................................... 2 B. Exploration Program ............................................................. 2 Exploration Results .............................................................. 3 Penetration Test Results....................................................... 3 Water Level Observations ................................................... 3 Laboratory Testing ............................................................... 4 C. Engineering Review.............................................................. 4 Discussion ............................................................................ 4 D. Recommendations ................................................................ 4 Utility Installation ................................................................ 4 Trench Backfill .................................................................... 5 Reclaiming ........................................................................... 6 E. Pavement Recommendations ................................................ 7 F. Closing .................................................................................. 8 Boring Location Plan ................................................ Appendix 1 Soil Boring Logs ....................................................... Appendix 2 Laboratory Testing ................................................... Appendix 3 100 Page 1 GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION CHISHOLM TRAIL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS CORCORAN, MINNESOTA PROJECT 25-018 A. Introduction This report is being prepared for use by our client on this specific project. We intend to present this report and our findings in the same logical manner that led us to arrive at our recommendations. This report is based on some general assumptions regarding the anticipated construction based on experience with similar projects. These assumptions and the entire report should be reviewed immediately upon receipt. Purpose: The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the existing soil and water conditions on this site for the purpose of reconstructing the existing road within the City of Corcoran. The project will consist of reconstruction of Chisholm Trail from 97th Avenue, aka County Road 30, to the dead end. The project is approximately 2500 feet long. Some storm sewer and culvert work may also be performed. In accordance with your written authorization, we have conducted a subsurface exploration program for the proposed project. Scope of Services: Our authorized scope of services included the following: 1. To investigate the subsurface soil and water conditions encountered at five (5) split-spoon soil boring locations. The borings were planned to depths of fourteen (14) feet at each location. 2. To provide a report of our findings including a summary of our findings with pavement thickness at each boring location as well as recommendations regarding earthwork, fill and compaction, subgrade preparation, and pavement design with an estimated design R-value. 101 March 19, 2025 ITT Project 25-018 Chisholm Trail Road Improvements Corcoran, Minnesota Page 2 General Site Conditions: The project is on Chisholm Trail from 97th Avenue (County Road 30) to the north and east approximately 2,500 feet to the cul-de-sac. Chisholm Trail is a local residential street that serves a single-family residential neighborhood. The roadway is gently rolling, with slopes of 2-12 percent. Available Subsurface Information: According to the Geologic Map of Minnesota, Quaternary Geology, prepared by Howard C. Hobbs and Joseph E. Goebel (1982, Minnesota Geological Survey), the site lies within a ground moraine of the Pine City moraine association. It is associated with the Des Moines glaciation of Pleistocene, Late Wisconsinan age. The drift is derived from parent material in North Dakota and Manitoba. According to the Soil Survey of Hennepin County prepared by the Soil Conservation Service, the site lies within the Hayden- Cordova- Peaty muck Soil Association. These consist of nearly level to rolling, medium textured and moderately fine textured soils that developed in glacial till and level organic soils. The individual soils mapped on the site are loams and clay loams. The soils are rated fair to poor for construction of roadways with limitations due to frost, low strength, and slight shrink swell. B. Exploration Program Five (5) split-spoon soil borings were conducted on this project. The borings were planned to depths of 14 feet using a 3 ¼ inch I.D. hollow stem auger. Samples were obtained every 2 ½ feet for the first ten feet and every five feet, thereafter, using a 2-inch O.D. split-spoon sampler in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM D1586). Standard penetration values (N-values) were obtained at each sample interval by driving the sampler into the soil using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. After an initial set of 6 inches, the number of blows required to drive the sampler 12 inches is known as the standard penetration resistance or N-value. Where the sampler cannot be driven at least 6 inches by 50 blows of the hammer, the total number of blows as well as the distance driven is reported on the boring logs. Groundwater levels were noted during drilling and immediately after completion. The holes were backfilled with the auger cuttings and patched with bituminous cold patch. Some settlement of the bore holes may be expected. All the borings were conducted with a truck mounted CME-45 drill rig. 102 March 19, 2025 ITT Project 25-018 Chisholm Trail Road Improvements Corcoran, Minnesota Page 3 Exploration Results: All of the borings were conducted in the existing paved roadways and encountered 3.0 to 3.5 inches of bituminous over 10.0 to 12.0 inches of aggregate base. The depth of bituminous and aggregate encountered at each location are shown in the following table: Below the pavement and aggregate, boring SB-1 encountered native, fine grained clayey sand (SC) to 4.0 feet, followed by sandy lean clay (CL) to termination at 14.0 feet. Below the pavement and aggregate, the remainder of the borings all encountered native, sandy lean clay (CL) to termination at 14.0 feet. Penetration Test Results: The standard penetration blow counts in the clayey sand (SC) and sandy clay (CL) soils ranged from 7 to 26, which are moderate to high, indicating they are in a firm to very stiff condition. Refusal of the spoon or auger did not occur in any of the borings. Drilling was relatively easy. Water Level Observations: Observations of the subsurface water conditions were made during drilling operations. Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings during drilling. The water levels were observed over a brief period of time. We feel they are not an accurate representation of the true groundwater conditions on this site due to the low permeability of the native clay soils. The water did not have enough time to infiltrate into the boreholes. It should be noted that fluctuations in the level of the groundwater can occur due to variations in rainfall, temperature, spring thaw and other factors not evident at the time of our investigation. Boring Bituminous Aggregate SB-1 3.0” 12.0” SB-2 3.0” 12.0” SB-3 3.5” 12.0” SB-4 3.5” 12.0” SB-5 3.5” 10.0” 103 March 19, 2025 ITT Project 25-018 Chisholm Trail Road Improvements Corcoran, Minnesota Page 4 Mottled soils were observed at a shallow depth. Mottled native soils are a historical indication of a temporarily or seasonally saturated soil condition. Grey soils were also observed. Grey native soils are an indication of a permanently saturated soil condition. Laboratory Testing Moisture Content Tests- Moisture content tests were performed on every split spoon sample in accordance with ASTM method D2216; Standard Test Method for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass. Individual test results are shown on the boring logs adjacent to the sample that was tested. C. Engineering Review Discussion: The soils encountered are all fine grained clayey sands (SC) and sandy lean clays (CL). The surface soils are fair to poor material for use as roadway subgrade material and for bituminous pavement support due to weakness and frost susceptibility. Based on our observation, the roadway embankment was stable throughout all of the project area. Unless it is known that there is some issue in the embankment in the project area, it is our opinion that the existing roadway embankment can remain in place. D. Recommendations The following recommendations are based on our understanding of the proposed project. If our understanding of the project is not accurate or if changes are made to the project scope, please inform us so that our recommendations can be amended, if necessary. We have included recommendations regarding earthwork and construction that may help with cost estimates and aid in design. We should be allowed to review the proposed construction plans to provide further detailed recommendations, if necessary. Without the opportunity to review the final construction plans, the recommendations made in this report may no longer be valid. Utility Installation: We recommend that all utility pipes lay in non-organic mineral soils capable of supporting the pipes. Excessive over-excavation beneath the pipes should be avoided. We recommend that 2 to 104 March 19, 2025 ITT Project 25-018 Chisholm Trail Road Improvements Corcoran, Minnesota Page 5 6 inches of granular bedding material be placed and compacted around the pipe to aid in aligning the pipe for line and grade. Compaction should be done very carefully by hand to prevent the pipe from shifting. We recommend that the backfill be compacted with a vibratory sheep’s foot roller after the backfill is 2 feet above the top of the pipe. Vibratory compaction should only be used on clean sands or silty sands at or below optimum moisture. We recommend that excavations slope at a 1.5:1 (horizontal: vertical) ratio from the bottom of the excavation to the surface. Stockpiled material should be kept at least 2 feet from the edge of the excavation. This is the minimum required by OSHA. We recommend all construction vehicles be kept at least 5 feet from the edge of the excavation. An escape ladder should always be provided while workers are in the excavation. All excavations must meet OSHA standards (29 CFR1926). Trench Backfill: The on-site soils consisting of fine grained, clayey sands (SC) and sandy lean clays (CL) encountered are considered fair to poor material for use as structural fill. These soils may be wet and may require drying and reworking to become suitable. In addition, the fine-grained nature of these soils makes them susceptible to moisture and frost. They will be susceptible to degradation under construction traffic and will begin to pump and become unstable under heavy moving or vibrating loads. No organic soils, roots, stumps, logs, brush, etc. should be used as structural fill below any foundation or pavement section. We recommend that all fill material be free of soft, wet, or frozen soils, highly expansive soils, rubble, debris, and rocks in excess of 6 inches in diameter. The fill should be as uniform as possible both in composition and moisture content. We recommend all fill be compacted to the minimum relative density levels shown in the table below: 105 March 19, 2025 ITT Project 25-018 Chisholm Trail Road Improvements Corcoran, Minnesota Page 6 Location Recommended Compaction Level (Percent of Std. Proctor ASTM D698) Below Pavements, deeper than 3 feet from finished subgrade 95% Below Pavements within 3 feet of finished subgrade 100% Landscape Areas 90% We recommend all fill placed in the roadway areas be compacted in 8-inch loose lifts. All fill should be compacted at a moisture content within plus 2% or minus 3% of the optimum moisture as determined by a standard proctor. We recommend compaction tests be taken on any utility trench backfill at a rate of one test per 200 feet in the bottom, middle and top thirds of the trench backfill. We recommend compaction tests be taken at a rate of one test for two feet depth of embankment fill per 200 linear feet of roadway fill. We recommend compaction tests be taken at a rate of one test per 200 linear feet on the finished roadway subgrade and aggregate base layer. Reclaiming: We understand that reclaiming and resurfacing may be an option to rehabilitate the streets. The bituminous thickness ranged from 3.0 to 3.5 inches with 10.0 to 12.0 inches of aggregate base. The total thickness ranged from 13.5 to 15.5 inches. Reclaiming to depths of 8 to 10 inches is feasible on this roadway. Where there is sufficient bituminous and aggregate base to allow for a full depth reclaim, we recommend pulverizing and blending the in-place bituminous pavement and a portion of the underlying aggregate material to produce a uniform graded aggregate base. This would include spreading, watering, compacting, shaping, and maintaining the blended reclaim material to the specified profile and cross-section or as directed by the Engineer. We recommend the reclaiming be performed to a minimum depth of 8 inches. After compacting the reclaimed aggregate base, a new bituminous surface would then be constructed on the reclaimed areas. We recommend the road reclaimer be a self-propelled machine designed to pulverize the in-place bituminous pavement structure to the specified maximum particle size. It should be capable of uniformly blending the pulverized material with the underlying aggregate base material to the 106 March 19, 2025 ITT Project 25-018 Chisholm Trail Road Improvements Corcoran, Minnesota Page 7 required depths. The machine shall have a control system to automatically control the elevation of the cutting head to the specified depth. The machine shall be approved by the Engineer prior to the start of the pulverizing operation. We recommend any bituminous pieces larger than 3 inches, which are visible on the grade during the reclamation process, be removed from the grade. Any additional aggregate material required to reach the proposed grade should be uniformly spread across the roadway surface prior to being incorporated into the reclaim mixture. Since the proposed grade will closely match the existing grade, we would assume that no additional material would be needed beyond sufficient aggregate to blend to plan depth. Water may be needed during the blending and spreading operations so that at the time of compaction the moisture content is not less than 3 percent nor more than 7 percent based on the dry weight. It is critical that the reclaimed material be graded to tolerance at the end of the day, or as soon as practical, especially if the roadway will be open to traffic. The traffic will tend to compact the reclaim material very densely in a very short period, making it very difficult to tolerance later. After reclaiming the existing bituminous pavement, we recommend placing a new bituminous surface, consisting of 3.5 inches of MnDOT 2360 SP Wear. E. Pavement Recommendations The expected subgrade soils on the site will likely consist of fine grained, clayey sands (SC) and sandy lean clay (CL). The clayey soils on this site are classified as A-6 soils in accordance with the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) classification system. A-6 soils are rated as poor material for use as roadway subgrade material. Without benefit of a laboratory R-value determination and based on Mn/Dot guidelines, we recommend an R-value of 20 be assumed for the onsite soils consisting of predominantly fine grained clayey sands (SC) and sandy lean clay (CL) soils. 107 March 19, 2025 ITT Project 25-018 Chisholm Trail Road Improvements Corcoran, Minnesota Page 8 Based on an R-value of 20, we recommend the following bituminous pavement section for low- volume, 9-ton streets: Thickness Course/Description G.E. 1.5” Mn Dot 2360 SPWEB240 Bituminous 3.4” 2.0” Mn Dot 2360 SPNWB230 Bituminous 4.5” 12.0” Mn Dot 3138 Class 5 or 6 Aggregate Base 12.0” 15.5” TOTAL 19.9” In using the above R-value for bituminous pavement design, it is essential that the subgrade be constructed of uniform soils at a moisture content and density in accordance with Mn Dot specification 2105 and capable of passing a test roll in accordance with Mn Dot specification 2111. The native, undisturbed soils may need preparation (drying and compacting) to pass a proof roll. If the subgrade is not compacted, uniform and capable of passing a test roll, then we recommend the subgrade be scarified and recompacted or subcut and geotextile fabric placed along with select granular material meeting Mn Dot specification 3149. The top of subgrade should be compacted to a minimum of 100% of standard proctor maximum density. The subgrade should be sloped towards the edges to provide drainage. F. Closing Our work was performed for geotechnical purposes only and not to document the presence or extent of any contamination on the site. We can note that our crew did not detect any obvious contamination by sight or smell during drilling operations. However, human senses are limited in terms of contamination detection and, therefore, the lack of detection through human sensing does not preclude the possibility of the presence of contamination of the site. This report represents the result of our subsurface investigation and is based on information gathered at specific locations. Subsurface conditions can change a great deal over short horizontal distances. Also, the actual interface between strata will likely be a gradual transition rather than an abrupt change as represented on the boring logs. 108 March 19, 2025 ITT Project 25-018 Chisholm Trail Road Improvements Corcoran, Minnesota Page 9 Geotechnical engineering is based extensively on opinion. Therefore, the data contained in this report should be used as a guide, and we recommend that construction monitoring be performed by a qualified geotechnical engineer or technician. We recommend ITT be retained to perform construction observation and materials testing on this project due to our familiarity with the soils. Any changes in the subsurface conditions from those found during this geotechnical exploration should be brought to the attention of a soils engineer. 109 APPENDIX 1 BORING LOCATION PLAN 110 Anoka County Hennepin County Wright County 456730 97th Ave N C h i s h o l m Tr Hig h B l u f f L a Project Area Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ V: \ 2 2 7 7 \ r e s o u r c e \ g i s \ C o r c o r a n \ P r o \ G e n e r a l F i g u r e s \ C h i s h o l m T r a i l \ C h i s h o l m T r a i l . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 4 - 1 2 - 0 4 B y : t w a v r i n Legend Project Area County Parcels Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 15N 2. Data Sources: MNDOT, Hennepin County Imagery 3. Background: Hennepin County Aerial, 2024 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:6,000 0 250 500 Feet Prepared by TAW on 2024-12-04 Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN City of Corcoran Project Location 1 SB-#1 SB-#2 SB-#3 SB-#4 SB-#5 111 APPENDIX 2 SOIL BORING LOGS 112 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. LOG OF SOIL BORING PROJECT:25-018 CITY OF COCORAN DATE:3/4/25 BORING #:SB-1 CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS START TIME:8:30 END TIME:9:00 CORCORAN, MINNESOTA METHOD:3 ¼" I.D. Hollow Stem Auger CREW:CD/RS LOCATION:See Boring Location Plan N45.1313398° W93.5911443° ELEVATION:N/G Page 1 of 1 Depth ASTM Soil Sample N (Feet)Symbol Description #Value W n Notes 3.0 inches Bituminous. 12.0 inches Aggregate 15"SC CLAYEY SAND, very fine grained, dark brown, grey, mottled.*FROZEN 1 12 21.0 4.0 CL SANDY LEAN CLAY, w/ fine grained SAND, grey, mottled. 5.0 2 12 22.9 3 9 22.0 10.0 brown, mottled.4 7 18.6 greyish brown, mottled.5 19 17.6 14.0 Boring complete to 14.0 feet. No water encountered during drilling. No water measured to cave-in at 12' 0" after completion. 113 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. LOG OF SOIL BORING PROJECT:25-018 CITY OF COCORAN DATE:3/4/25 BORING #:SB-2 CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS START TIME:9:00 END TIME:9:30 CORCORAN, MINNESOTA METHOD:3 ¼" I.D. Hollow Stem Auger CREW:CD/RS LOCATION:See Boring Location Plan N45.1326251° W93.5911205° ELEVATION:N/G Page 1 of 1 Depth ASTM Soil Sample N (Feet)Symbol Description #Value W n Notes 3.0 inches Bituminous. 12.0 inches Aggregate 15"CL SANDY LEAN CLAY, w/ fine grained SAND, dark brown, mottled. 1 15 18.0 5.0 2 15 19.6 brown, mottled.3 17 17.4 10.0 grey, brown, mottled.4 18 17.0 grey.5 26 15.7 14.0 Boring complete to 14.0 feet. No water encountered during drilling. No water measured to cave-in at 11' 6" after completion. 114 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. LOG OF SOIL BORING PROJECT:25-018 CITY OF COCORAN DATE:3/4/25 BORING #:SB-3 CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS START TIME:9:30 END TIME:10:00 CORCORAN, MINNESOTA METHOD:3 ¼" I.D. Hollow Stem Auger CREW:CD/RS LOCATION:See Boring Location Plan N45.1340748° W93.5905716° ELEVATION:N/G Page 1 of 1 Depth ASTM Soil Sample N (Feet)Symbol Description #Value W n Notes 3.5 inches Bituminous. 12.0 inches Aggregate 15.5"CL SANDY LEAN CLAY, w/ fine grained SAND, brown, mottled.*FROZEN 1 17 18.7 5.0 2 9 18.5 light grey, brown, mottled.3 8 18.1 10.0 4 11 18.7 brown, mottled.5 11 19.6 14.0 Boring complete to 14.0 feet. No water encountered during drilling. No water measured to cave-in at 12' 6" after completion. 115 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. LOG OF SOIL BORING PROJECT:25-018 CITY OF COCORAN DATE:3/4/25 BORING #:SB-4 CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS START TIME:10:00 END TIME:10:30 CORCORAN, MINNESOTA METHOD:3 ¼" I.D. Hollow Stem Auger CREW:CD/RS LOCATION:See Boring Location Plan N45.1351188° W93.5891611° ELEVATION:N/G Page 1 of 1 Depth ASTM Soil Sample N (Feet)Symbol Description #Value W n Notes 3.5 inches Bituminous. 12.0 inches Aggregate 15.5"CL SANDY LEAN CLAY, w/ fine grained SAND, brown, mottled.*FROZEN 1 17 18.1 5.0 2 9 18.6 3 13 16.2 10.0 light grey, mottled.4 13 21.4 dark grey.5 24 20.4 14.0 Boring complete to 14.0 feet. No water encountered during drilling. No water measured to cave-in at 12' 0" after completion. 116 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. LOG OF SOIL BORING PROJECT:25-018 CITY OF COCORAN DATE:3/4/25 BORING #:SB-5 CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS START TIME:10:30 END TIME:11:00 CORCORAN, MINNESOTA METHOD:3 ¼" I.D. Hollow Stem Auger CREW:CD/RS LOCATION:See Boring Location Plan N45.1336394° W93.5879052° ELEVATION:N/G Page 1 of 1 Depth ASTM Soil Sample N (Feet)Symbol Description #Value W n Notes 3.5 inches Bituminous. 10.0 inches Aggregate 13.5"CL SANDY LEAN CLAY, w/ fine grained SAND, brown, mottled. *FROZEN 1 16 15.6 5.0 w/ layers of SAND 2 16 14.5 3 14 16.7 10.0 light grey, brown, mottled.4 13 17.8 brown, mottled.5 16 16.6 14.0 Boring complete to 14.0 feet. No water encountered during drilling. No water measured to cave-in at 12' 0" after completion. 117 Unified Soil Classification (USC) System (from ASTM D 2487) Major Divisions Group Symbol Typical Names Course-Grained Soils More than 50% retained on the 0.075 mm (No. 200) sieve Gravels 50% or more of course fraction retained on the 4.75 mm (No. 4) sieve Clean Gravels GW Well-graded gravels and gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines GP Poorly graded gravels and gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines Gravels with Fines GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures Sands 50% or more of course fraction passes the 4.75 (No. 4) sieve Clean Sands SW Well-graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no fines SP Poorly graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no fines Sands with Fines SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures Fine-Grained Soils More than 50% passes the 0.075 mm (No. 200) sieve Silts and Clays Liquid Limit 50% or less ML Inorganic silts, very fine sands, rock four, silty or clayey fine sands CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly/sandy/silty/lean clays OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity Silts and Clays Liquid Limit greater than 50% MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sands or silts, elastic silts CH Inorganic clays or high plasticity, fat clays OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, muck, and other highly organic soils Prefix: G = Gravel, S = Sand, M = Silt, C = Clay, O = Organic Suffix: W = Well Graded, P = Poorly Graded, M = Silty, L = Clay, LL < 50%, H = Clay, LL > 50% 118 APPENDIX 3 LABORATORY TESTING 119 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 337 31st Avenue South, Waite Park, MN 56387 Phone: (320) 253-4338 FAX: (320) 253-4547 www.independenttestingtech.com Report Date: Client:City of Cocoran I.T.T. Project #:25-018 Kevin Mattson, Public Works Director/City Admin.Chisolm Trail Improvements 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, Minnesota Cocoran, MN 55340 Email:lletsche@cocoranmn.gov Sample Information Sample #:G-1 Sampled By:Drill Crew Testing Technician:CW-ITT Date Sampled:3/7/2025 Date Received:3/7/2025 Date Tested:3/10/2025 Classification:SM -Silty Sand Location/Pit:SB-1 Laboratory Data Sieve Size % Passing Specifications 3/4"100 *** 5/8"99 *** 1/2"98 *** 3/8"90 *** #4 75 *** #10 57 *** #20 42 *** #40 30 *** #80 18 *** #200 14.5 *** Remarks *** Respectfully Submitted: Chad T. Wolney, Soils Lab Manager GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS March 19, 2025 120 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 337 31st Avenue South, Waite Park, MN 56387 Phone: (320) 253-4338 FAX: (320) 253-4547 www.independenttestingtech.com Report Date: Client:City of Cocoran I.T.T. Project #:25-018 Kevin Mattson, Public Works Director/City Admin.Chisolm Trail Improvements 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, Minnesota Cocoran, MN 55340 Email:lletsche@cocoranmn.gov Sample Information Sample #:G-2 Sampled By:Drill Crew Testing Technician:CW-ITT Date Sampled:3/7/2025 Date Received:3/7/2025 Date Tested:3/10/2025 Classification:SM -Silty Sand Location/Pit:SB-2 Laboratory Data Sieve Size % Passing Specifications 1"100 *** 3/4"100 *** 5/8"99 *** 1/2"97 *** 3/8"91 *** #4 77 *** #10 63 *** #20 50 *** #40 36 *** #80 22 *** #200 17.0 *** Remarks *** Respectfully Submitted: Chad T. Wolney, Soils Lab Manager GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS March 19, 2025 121 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 337 31st Avenue South, Waite Park, MN 56387 Phone: (320) 253-4338 FAX: (320) 253-4547 www.independenttestingtech.com Report Date: Client:City of Cocoran I.T.T. Project #:25-018 Kevin Mattson, Public Works Director/City Admin.Chisolm Trail Improvements 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, Minnesota Cocoran, MN 55340 Email:lletsche@cocoranmn.gov Sample Information Sample #:G-3 Sampled By:Drill Crew Testing Technician:CW-ITT Date Sampled:3/7/2025 Date Received:3/7/2025 Date Tested:3/11/2025 Classification:SM -Silty Sand Location/Pit:SB-3 Laboratory Data Sieve Size % Passing Specifications 1"100 *** 3/4"100 *** 5/8"98 *** 1/2"97 *** 3/8"91 *** #4 79 *** #10 64 *** #20 49 *** #40 34 *** #80 20 *** #200 13.8 *** Remarks *** Respectfully Submitted: Chad T. Wolney, Soils Lab Manager GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS March 19, 2025 122 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 337 31st Avenue South, Waite Park, MN 56387 Phone: (320) 253-4338 FAX: (320) 253-4547 www.independenttestingtech.com Report Date: Client:City of Cocoran I.T.T. Project #:25-018 Kevin Mattson, Public Works Director/City Admin.Chisolm Trail Improvements 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, Minnesota Cocoran, MN 55340 Email:lletsche@cocoranmn.gov Sample Information Sample #:G-4 Sampled By:Drill Crew Testing Technician:CW-ITT Date Sampled:3/7/2025 Date Received:3/7/2025 Date Tested:3/11/2025 Classification:SM -Silty Sand Location/Pit:SB-4 Laboratory Data Sieve Size % Passing Specifications 1"100 *** 3/4"99 *** 5/8"98 *** 1/2"97 *** 3/8"89 *** #4 77 *** #10 63 *** #20 50 *** #40 36 *** #80 21 *** #200 15.6 *** Remarks *** Respectfully Submitted: Chad T. Wolney, Soils Lab Manager GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS March 19, 2025 123 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 337 31st Avenue South, Waite Park, MN 56387 Phone: (320) 253-4338 FAX: (320) 253-4547 www.independenttestingtech.com Report Date: Client:City of Cocoran I.T.T. Project #:25-018 Kevin Mattson, Public Works Director/City Admin.Chisolm Trail Improvements 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, Minnesota Cocoran, MN 55340 Email:lletsche@cocoranmn.gov Sample Information Sample #:G-5 Sampled By:Drill Crew Testing Technician:CW-ITT Date Sampled:3/7/2025 Date Received:3/7/2025 Date Tested:3/12/2025 Classification:SM -Silty Sand Location/Pit:SB-5 Laboratory Data Sieve Size % Passing Specifications 1"100 *** 3/4"97 *** 5/8"95 *** 1/2"91 *** 3/8"83 *** #4 72 *** #10 57 *** #20 44 *** #40 30 *** #80 18 *** #200 13.9 *** Remarks *** Respectfully Submitted: Chad T. Wolney, Soils Lab Manager GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS March 19, 2025 124 Appendix B Cost Estimate 125 OPINION OF PROBABLE COST CITY OF CORCORAN CHISHOLM TRAIL FEASIBILITY 2.0" OVERLAY NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 6,000.00$ 6,000.00$ 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 2,000.00$ 2,000.00$ 3 2" MILL BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 80 5.00$ 400.00$ 8,400.00$ 4 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 400 5.00$ 2,000.00$ 5 BITUMINOUS WEARING PAVEMENT (2.0") TON 950 110.00$ 104,500.00$ 104,500.00$ 112,900.00$ 22,580.00$ 135,480.00$ 27,096.00$ 162,576.00$ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 20% LEGAL, ENGINEERING, ADMIN, FINANCE TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST SCHEDULE A - REMOVALS, EARTHWORK, AND RESTORATION SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE A SCHEDULE B - STREETS SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE B 19387366 March 30, 2025 SUBTOTAL BASE BID SCHEDULE [20%] CONTINGENCY Chisholm Trail Feasibility City of Corcoran 193807366 PAGE 1 OF 1 126 OPINION OF PROBABLE COST CITY OF CORCORAN CHISHOLM TRAIL FEASIBILITY FULL RECONSTRUCTION NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 25,000.00$ 25,000.00$ 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 3,500.00$ 3,500.00$ 3 SALVAGE & REINSTALL MAILBOX EA 18 250.00$ 4,500.00$ 4 SAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LF 305 3.00$ 915.00$ 5 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER LF 150 25.00$ 3,750.00$ 6 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 325 10.00$ 3,250.00$ 7 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY 675 10.00$ 6,750.00$ 8 TOPSOIL CY 270 35.00$ 9,450.00$ 9 RESTORATION LS 1 3,790.00$ 3,790.00$ 26,990.00$ 10 REMOVE PIPE CULVERT LF 200 10.00$ 2,000.00$ 11 15" CPP DUAL WALL STORM PIPE LF 200 80.00$ 16,000.00$ 12 COMMON EXCAVATION OFFSITE CY 70 40.00$ 2,800.00$ 13 DITCH GRADING LF 200 50.00$ 10,000.00$ 14 TOPSOIL CY 40 35.00$ 1,400.00$ 32,200.00$ 15 4" PVC DRAINTILE - SCH. 40 LF 3810 19.00$ 72,390.00$ 16 4" PRECAST CONCRETE HEADWALL EA 10 350.00$ 3,500.00$ 17 4" PVC DRAINTILE CLEANOUT - SCH 40 EA 14 675.00$ 9,450.00$ 18 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE (3/4" CLEAR WASHED ROCK) TON 270 53.50$ 14,445.00$ 19 COMMON EXCAVATION OFFSITE (P) CY 5590 30.00$ 167,700.00$ 20 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, TYPE 5 NON-WOVEN SY 8828 2.50$ 22,070.69$ 21 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW MOD 5% TON 5365 20.00$ 107,296.52$ 22 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 - 80% CRUSHED TON 3730 25.00$ 93,250.00$ 23 BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE TON 950 105.00$ 99,750.00$ 24 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE TON 710 110.00$ 78,100.00$ 25 BITUMINOUS TACK COAT GAL 400 5.00$ 2,000.00$ 26 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY TON 60 250.00$ 15,000.00$ 27 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY 75 90.00$ 6,750.00$ 691,702.21$ 750,892.21$ 150,178.44$ 901,070.66$ 180,214.13$ 1,081,284.79$ 19387366 March 30, 2025 [20%] CONTINGENCY TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST 20% LEGAL, ENGINEERING, ADMIN, FINANCE TOTAL PROJECT COSTS SUBTOTAL BASE BID SCHEDULE SCHEDULE A - REMOVALS, EARTHWORK, AND RESTORATION SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE A SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE C SCHEDULE B - DRAINAGE SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE B SCHEDULE C - STREETS Chisholm Trail Feasibility City of Corcoran 193807366 PAGE 1 OF 1 127 OPINION OF PROBABLE COST CITY OF CORCORAN CHISHOLM TRAIL FEASIBILITY FULL DEPTH RECLAIMATION NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 15,000.00$ 15,000.00$ 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 3,500.00$ 3,500.00$ 3 SALVAGE & REINSTALL MAILBOX EA 18 250.00$ 4,500.00$ 4 SAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LF 305 3.00$ 915.00$ 5 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER LF 150 25.00$ 3,750.00$ 6 RECLAIM BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 7880 5.00$ 39,400.00$ 7 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 325 10.00$ 3,250.00$ 8 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY 675 10.00$ 6,750.00$ 9 EXCAVATE, LOAD & HAUL RECLAIM AGGREGATE CY 240.00 20.00$ 4,800.00$ 10 TOPSOIL CY 270.00 35.00$ 9,450.00$ 11 RESTORATION LS 1 3,790.00$ 3,790.00$ 77,065.00$ 12 COMMON EXCAVATION OFFSITE CY 70 40.00$ 2,800.00$ 13 DITCH GRADING LF 200 50.00$ 10,000.00$ 14 TOPSOIL CY 40 35.00$ 1,400.00$ 14,200.00$ 15 4" SCH. 40 PERFORATED DRAINTILE LF 3810 19.00$ 72,390.00$ 16 4" SCH. 40 DRAINTILE CLEANOUT EA 10 350.00$ 3,500.00$ 17 4" PRECAST CONCRETE DRAINTILE HEADWALL EA 14 675.00$ 9,450.00$ 18 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE (3/4" CLEAR WASHED ROCK) TON 270 53.50$ 14,445.00$ 19 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 - 80% CRUSHED TON 30 25.00$ 750.00$ 20 BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE TON 950 105.00$ 99,750.00$ 21 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE TON 710 110.00$ 78,100.00$ 22 BITUMINOUS TACK COAT GAL 400 5.00$ 2,000.00$ 23 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY TON 60 250.00$ 15,000.00$ 24 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY 75 90.00$ 6,750.00$ 201,600.00$ 292,865.00$ 58,573.00$ 351,438.00$ 70,287.60$ 421,725.60$ 19387366 March 30, 2025 [20%] CONTINGENCY TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST 20% LEGAL, ENGINEERING, ADMIN, FINANCE TOTAL PROJECT COSTS SUBTOTAL BASE BID SCHEDULE SCHEDULE A - REMOVALS, EARTHWORK, AND RESTORATION SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE A SCHEDULE C - STREETS SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE C SCHEDULE B - DRAINAGE SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE B Chisholm Trail Feasibility City of Corcoran 193807366 PAGE 1 OF 1 128 Appendix C Appraisal Report 129 Report Type Real Estate Consulting Letter Report (Restricted Appraisal) Effective Date January 4, 2025 Prepared By: Ethan Waytas, MAI, Appraiser William R. Waytas, SRA, Appraiser Nagell Appraisal Incorporated 12805 Highway 55, Suite 300 Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 Tel: 952.544.8966 | Fax: 952.544.8969 Client Subject Property City of Corcoran Street Improvement Project Attn: Lauren Letsche, Engineering Development Superintendent Chisholm Trail 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Corcoran, MN 55340 File # V2501001 – Chisholm Trail 130 131 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Page 1 NAGELL APPRAISAL INCORPORATED 12805 Highway 55 #300 Phone 952-544-8966 Plymouth, MN 55441 Fax 952-544-8969 Established in 1968 __________________________________________________________________________ City of Corcoran Report Date: March 6, 2025 Attn: Lauren Letsche, Engineering Development Superintendent 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 To Lauren Letsche: Per your request, this is a letter report to assist the city for guidance regarding a street improvement project within Corcoran (see attached map for the location of the streets in the project). The following information outlines the scope and intent of this document: Client: City of Corcoran Intended User: City of Corcoran Note: Only the client and name intended user can rely upon this report. Effective Date: January 4, 2025 Report Type: Restricted Appraisal (as a restricted appraisal, this report may not contain supporting rationale for all of the opinions and conclusions as stated. This information is retained in the workfile) Intended Use: The intended use of this report is for decision-making purposes regarding a road project and potential special assessments. Value Provided: Market Value, see rear of report for definition Interest Provided: Fee Simple Subject Property: This document is not an appraisal of a specific property, rather, it provides a benefit range for similar properties types within the project area. These ranges are applicable to the properties within the project area. The project boundaries are clearly identified in this report. Information regarding individual properties can be provided upon request. Scope of Work: Ethan Waytas, MAI drove the streets in the project area on January 4, 2025. The appraiser reviewed sales, rents, listings, and costs in the market. A drive-by viewing of properties in the project area and streets was completed. The market was analyzed to indicate a benefit range that would be applicable to the project. In addition, the appraiser has completed a cursory review of the zoning and future land use plan. Other research includes prior discussions with market participants and discussion with the city regarding the project. 132 Page 2 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Letter of Transmittal – Continued Sales Comparison Approach: Sales data was analyzed to indicate a market benefit range. Income Approach: This approach was not applied at this time, as it is considered less reliable given the project and scope of assignment. Cost Approach: This approach was considered regarding new road costs and physical depreciation. Uses in Project Area: Uses in the project area are single-family residential. Report Assistance: Ethan Waytas, MAI wrote the report and analyzed the market data. William R. Waytas read the report and agreed with the conclusions. Ethan Waytas, MAI viewed the project area and took photos. Note: This report is not an appraisal (value) of a specific property, but rather provides a preliminary opinion of a general range of market benefit, if any, for similar properties. Relevant information and analysis is retained in the workfile. If an appraisal of a specific property was performed, the findings of that report are considered likely to be consistent with the findings in this document (but could vary). The letter can function as a test of reasonableness for the proposed assessments. PROJECT The City of Corcoran is proposing to complete a full depth reclamation, which is described by the city as: “this would include milling the old road surface down to the underlying base material, then mixing the millings with the underlying base material (if sufficient) to create the new base for the roadway, lastly adding 3.5”– 4” of new asphalt to create the new road surface.” Per request, you desire to know the benefit (if any) as it impacts properties in the project area. Motivation for the road improvement project appears to stem from deteriorating road surface. 133 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Page 3 AREA DESCRIPTION The City of Corcoran is an outlying western suburban community located approximately 35 minutes northwest of Downtown Minneapolis. Access is considered average, as many county roads run through the area. The commercial portion of Corcoran is located at the intersection of County Road s 10 & 116. The remainder of the city is mostly made up of agricultural and rural residential uses. There are pockets of single-family residential developments with acreage lots and private well/septic. Nearby/competing communities include the western Hennepin County Area; Medina, Hanover, Greenfield, Hassan, Independence, Dayton, etc. The City of Corcoran borders the City of Maple Grove to the east. Corcoran has a reputation as a stable community, with nearby shopping and access to many major roadways. Access to Downtown Minneapolis and surrounding communities is convenient. Major shopping and commerce are located near the City of Corcoran. The very southwestern -most corner of the city fronts on State Highway 55. The population for Corcoran in 2010 was 5,379, down from 5,630 in 2000—a 4.5% decrease. The 2020 estimated population is 6,185, a 15.0% increase. The 2023 population estimate is 7,719, an increase of 24.80% from 2020. Single family homes generally range in value between $200,000 and $1,800,000+ in the City Limits with an average of about $688,000 (MLS statistics). The city is primarily residential and agricultural, with some industrial and commercial. Most homes are average to good quality. SUBJECT PROPERTIES The project area consists of single-family residential homes. EXISTING STREETS & UTILITIES Physical Condition of the Existing Road: The existing road improvements are asphalt with no curb or shoulder. The road condition, based on the visual inspection of the streets, is rated to be fair. There are signs of transverse, longitudinal, and alligator cracking. There are also areas of raveling and heaving. Physical Condition of Existing Utilities: The utilities in the area are private well and septic, public electricity, and natural gas. There are no proposed utility updates for this project. Functional Design of the Road: The existing road is dated, in fair overall condition, and does have substantial large cracks, heaving, raveling, etc. The road condition is rated to be fair. Road and utility infrastructure in poor to fair condition do not meet the expectations of typical market participants in this suburban market for re-development, resale price, and/or updating the current uses. Overall, the existing street improvements are in fair condition, are beginning to look dated (or function) and reflect likewise on the adjoining and side street properties. 134 Page 4 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The City of Corcoran is proposing to complete a full depth reclamation, which is described by the city as: “this would include milling the old road surface down to the underlying base material, then mixing the millings with the underlying base material (if sufficient) to create the new base for the roadway, lastly adding 3.5”– 4” of new asphalt to create the new road surface” Given the existing condition of the road, the proposed project is logical. If any of the above descriptions change, the benefit due to the project could differ. HIGHEST AND BEST USE The subject project area is located in the north portion of the city in an area of rural residential and agricultural land uses. Owners in the subject area appear to update their property as needed when site and building components wear out or become dated. Owners in the overall area commonly pave their driveways or maintain parking lots as needed, recognizing it adds value when done. Therefore, it is logical to update the road and/or utility infrastructure to the subject properties as needed, as these are essential property characteristics that are expected in this market. An informed buyer would consider the condition of the road, traffic flow/management, and utilities. A well-constructed and good condition road provides aesthetic appeal to a property and efficient/safe traffic flow. Given a choice, a potential informed buyer would likely prefer a newer road with good traffic flow over a deteriorating road with fair traffic flow. Additionally, a potential informed buyer would likely prefer newer utility infrastructure as compared to older, dated and inferior utility infrastructure. If replacement of components of real estate near the end of their economic life in a home or building is postponed, it can be costlier in the long run; delays in replacing components can result in incurring higher interim maintenance costs and potential difficulty in marketing the property. Also, it is typical for the cost of the replacement of an improvement to increase over time. That said it is logical and prudent for market participants to update/replace dated components when needed. Therefore, the highest and best use of the surrounding properties in the project area is for the continued various uses with the proposed infrastructure improvements. 135 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Page 5 DISCUSSION OF MARKET BENEFIT Listed below are the factors that will be taken into consideration concerning the potential benefit to the properties. Description Existing Improvements Change 1) Road Surface Fair New, asphalt 2) Base Condition Likely fair to average Regraded, portions new, compacted 3) Curb Surface Surface 4) Drainage Average Average 5) Storm Sewer None None 6) City water None None 7) City sewer None None 8) Sidewalk None None 9) Street Lights None None 10) Functional Design of Road Dated Good, new 11) Traffic Management Average Average 12) Pedestrian Use (biking, walking, etc.) Fair Good 13) Median n/a n/a 14) Road Proximity to Properties n/a n/a 15) Dust n/a n/a 16) Visual Impact on Properties Fair Good Based on the preceding grid, the subject properties will improve in 5 of the 16 categories. Market participants generally recognize that roads and utilities need replacing when nearing the end of a long economic life. A typical buyer in the subject market commonly prefers a good condition paved road surface versus an inferior condition paved road surface. Similarly for utilities, market participants prefer new or newer utilities versus older utilities. In addition to visual benefit, new street improvements provide better and safer use for pedestrians (biking, walking, stroller, rollerblading, etc.) and drivers. The new streets and utilities will enhance potential for re-development and/or updating the current properties. Properties that indirectly/directly abut or have driveways/access that exit on the new street will benefit. Based on past appraisals, experience, and general market information, it is not uncommon for properties similar to those in the subject market to realize an increase in price for new street improvements. 136 Page 6 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Discussion of Market Benefit – Continued Given the scope of the project, the age/quality/condition of houses, properties in the area with newer street improvements could see an average price benefit of: • Single-Family Residential – Reclamation $10,000 to $15,000 per homesite (i.e. per PID) Note: The above benefit considers only the scope of the project. Higher value buildings /homes or larger lots are on the upper end of the range. Properties on corners, with one street being improved and the other not, might receive less than the above ranges (for example 50% of the benefit). Additional Scenario: The client requested an additional scenario where the project is a mill and overlay instead of a reclamation. For a mill and overlay project, the benefit range would be: • Single-Family Residential – Reclamation $5,000 to $8,000 per homesite (i.e. per PID) Note: The above benefit considers only the scope of the project. Higher value buildings /homes or larger lots are on the upper end of the range. Properties on corners, with one street being improved and the other not, might receive less than the above ranges (for example 50% of the benefit). 137 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Page 7 CONCLUSION The benefit amounts noted above should not be construed or relied on as being an appraisal of a specific property, but are general observations based on the overall market. If an appraisal were made on the individual properties, the actual benefit amount could vary from market observations above. If you have additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, Ethan Waytas, MAI William R. Waytas, SRA Certified General MN 40368613 Certified General MN 4000813 Enclosures: Location Map, Aerial Map View of Project, Subject Photos, Qualifications __________________________________________________________________________ www.nagellmn.com 138 Page 8 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 LOCATION MAP 139 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Page 9 PROJECT MAP 140 Page 10 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 AERIAL VIEW OF PROJECT MAP *Red line reflects the indicated project area 141 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Page 11 SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Street view Street view Street view Street view 142 Page 12 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Subject Photographs – continued Street view Street view Street view Street view 143 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Page 13 Subject Photographs – continued Street view Street view 144 Page 14 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 DEFINITIONS MARKET VALUE - The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: (A) buyer and seller are typically motivated; (B) both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their own best interests; (C) a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; (D) payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and (E) the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. Source: Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Seventh Edition, Appraisal Institute EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS & HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS As stated by USPAP; Extraordinary Assumption: An assumption, directly related to a specific assignment, which, if found to be false, could alter the appraiser’s opinions of conclusions. None Hypothetical Condition: That which is contrary to what exists but is supposed for the purpose of analysis. The provided conclusions assume the project is completed on the same day as the effective date. The above noted assumptions might have affected the assignment results. 145 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Page 15 CERTIFICATION I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: 1) The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. 2) The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions. 3) I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. 4) I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. 5) My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. 6) My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. 7) My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. 8) The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared in conformity with the requirements of the Appraisal Institute’s Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, which includes the Uniform Standards of Appraisal Practice. 9) Ethan Waytas, MAI has made a personal inspection of the streets that are in the project area, as well as viewing surrounding properties. William R. Waytas, SRA did not personally inspect the project area. Ethan Waytas wrote, analyzed, and selected all the data in the report. William R. Waytas read the report, concurred with the findings, and then co-signed the report. 10) No one provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this report. 11) In accordance with the competency provision USPAP, I have verified that my knowledge, experience and education are sufficient to allow me to competently complete this appraisal. See attached qualifications. 12) As of the date of this report, William R. Waytas and Ethan Waytas have completed the requirements of the continuing education program of the appraisal institute. 13) The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representative. 14) We have not provided services as an appraiser, regarding properties in the project area within the 3-year period immediately preceding acceptance to this assignment. Ethan Waytas, MAI William R. Waytas, SRA Certified General MN 40368613 Certified General MN 4000813 Date: see report Date: see report 146 Page 16 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 QUALIFICATIONS Appraisal Experience Presently and since 2006, Ethan Waytas, MAI has been employed as an employee of Nagell Appraisal Incorporated, an independent appraisal firm (11 employees) who annually prepare 1,500 +/- appraisal reports of all types. He is currently a full time licensed certified general real estate appraiser, partner, and director of the company’s IT department. Properties appraised: • Commercial - low and high-density multi-family, retail, office, industrial, restaurant, church, strip- mall, fast-food, convenience stores, auto-service and repair, cinema, numerous special use properties, golf courses, and subdivision analysis. • Residential – single-family residences, hobby farms, lakeshore, condominiums, townhouses, REO and land. • Eminent Domain – extensive partial and total acquisition appraisal services provided to numerous governmental agencies and private owners. • Special Assessment – numerous street improvement and utilities projects for both governmental and private owners. • Clients - served include banks, savings and loan associations, trust companies, corporations, governmental bodies, relocation companies, attorneys, REO companies, accountants and private individuals. • Area of Service - most appraisal experience is in the greater Twin Cities Metro Area (typically an hour from downtown metro). Numerous assignments throughout Minnesota. Testimony -- Court, commission, mediation testimony, etc. has been given Professional Membership, Associations & Affiliations License: Certified General Real Property Appraiser, MN License #40368613 Holds the MAI designation from the Appraisal Institute Education -- Graduate of the University of Minnesota: College of Science and Engineering, Twin Cities Campus Bachelor of Science in Computer Science, with distinction, 3.86 GPA. -- General & Professional Practice Courses & Seminars -- Basic Appraisal Procedures -- Basic Appraisal Principles -- 2012-2013 15-Hour National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice -- General Appraiser Sales Comparison Approach -- General Appraiser Income Approach – Part 1 -- General Appraiser Income Approach – Part 2 -- Advanced Income Capitalization -- General Appraiser Report Writing and Case Studies -- Real Estate Finance, Statistics and Valuation Modeling -- 2014-2015 7-hour National USPAP Update Course -- General Appraiser Site Valuation & Cost Approach -- Advanced Market Analysis and Highest & Best Use -- Advanced Concepts & Case Studies -- Quantitative Analysis 147 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Page 17 Curriculum Vitae -- continued Appraisal Experience Presently and since 1985, William R. Waytas has been employed as a full time real estate appraiser. Currently a partner and President of the Nagell Appraisal & Consulting, an independent appraisal firm (11 employees) who annually prepare 1,500 +/- appraisal reports of all types. Mr. Waytas was employed with Iver C. Johnson & Company, Ltd., Phoenix, AZ from 1985 to 1987. Properties appraised: • Commercial - low and high-density multi-family, retail, office, industrial, restaurant, church, strip- mall, fast-food, convenience stores, auto-service and repair, hotel, hotel water park, bed & breakfast, cinema, marina, numerous special use properties, and subdivision analysis. • Residential – single-family residences, hobby farms, lakeshore, condominiums, townhouses, REO and land. • Eminent Domain – extensive partial and total acquisition appraisal services provided to numerous governmental agencies and private owners. • Special Assessment – numerous street improvement and utilities projects for both governmental and private owners. • Review – residential, commercial and land development. • Clients - served include banks, savings and loan associations, trust companies, corporations, governmental bodies, relocation companies, attorneys, REO companies, accountants and private individuals. • Area of Service - most appraisal experience is in the greater Twin Cities Metro Area (typically an hour from downtown metro). Numerous assignments throughout Minnesota. Professional Membership, Associations & Affiliations License: Certified General Real Property Appraiser, MN License #4000813. Appraisal Institute: SRA, Senior Residential Appraiser Designation, General Associate Member Employee Relocation Council: CRP Certified Relocation Professional Designation. International Right-Of-Way Association: Member HUD/FHA: On Lender Selection Roster and Review Appraiser DNR: Approved appraiser for Department of Natural Resources Testimony -- Court, deposition, commission, arbitration & administrative testimony given. Mediator -- Court appointed in Wright County. Committees -- President of Metro/Minnesota Chapter, 2002, Appraisal Institute. -- Chairman of Residential Admissions, Metro/MN Chapter, AI. -- Chairman Residential Candidate Guidance, Metro/Minnesota Chapter, AI. -- Elm Creek Watershed Commission, Medina representative 3 years. -- Medina Park Commission, 3 years. 148 Page 18 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Curriculum Vitae -- continued Education -- Graduate of Bemidji State University, Minnesota. B.S. degree in Bus. Ad. -- During college, summer employment in building trades (residential and commercial). -- Graduate of Cecil Lawter Real Estate School. Past Arizona Real Estate License. -- General & Professional Practice Courses & Seminars -- Course 101-Introduction to Appraising Real Property. -- Numerous Standards of Professional Practice Seminar. -- Fair Lending Seminar. -- Eminent Domain & Condemnation Appraising. -- Eminent Domain (An In-Depth Analysis) -- Property Tax Appeal -- Eminent Domain -- Business Practices and Ethics -- Scope of Work -- Construction Disturbances and Temporary Loss of Going Concern -- Uniform Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions (Yellow Book Seminar) -- Partial Interest Valuation Divided (conservation easements, historic preservation easements, life estates, subsurface rights, access easements, air rights, water rights, transferable development rights) Commercial/Industrial/Subdivision Courses & Seminars -- Capitalization Theory & Techniques -- Highest & Best Use Seminar -- General & Residential State Certification Review Seminar -- Subdivision Analysis Seminar. -- Narrative Report Writing Seminar (general) -- Advanced Income Capitalization Seminar -- Advanced Industrial Valuation -- Appraisal of Local Retail Properties -- Appraising Convenience Stores -- Analyzing Distressed Real Estate -- Evaluating Commercial Construction -- Fundamentals of Separating Real Property, Personal Property and Intangible Business Assets Residential Courses & Seminars -- Course 102-Applied Residential Appraising -- Narrative Report Writing Seminar (residential) -- HUD Training session local office for FHA appraisals -- Familiar with HUD Handbook 4150.1 REV-1 & other material from local FHA office. -- Appraiser/Underwriter FHA Training -- Residential Property Construction and Inspection -- Numerous other continuing education seminars for state licensing & AI Speaking Engagements -- Bankers -- Auditors -- Assessors -- Relocation (Panel Discussion) Publications -- Real Estate Appraisal Practice (book): Acknowledgement -- Articles for Finance & Commerce and Minnesota Real Estate Journal 149 Nagell Appraisal Incorporated | 952.544.8966 Page 19 Sales in Project Area: The property at 9915 Chisholm Trail sold on August 11, 2022 for $535,000 less $4,000 in seller contributions. The property was listed on MLS for 35 days. The sale price appears to be market appropriate. The property at 9723 Chisholm Trail sold on March 30, 2023 for $710,000 less $16,000 in seller contributions. The property was listed on MLS for 22 days. The sale price appears to be market appropriate. The property at 9801 Chisholm Trail sold on October 30, 2023 for $460,000. The property was listed on the open market. The assessor indicated the sale is market appropriate. 150 Appendix D Preliminary Assessment Roll 151 Map ID PID PROPERTY ADDRESS TAX PAYER ADDRESS TAXPAYER NAME Roadway Assessment Amount Overlay Credit Total Assessment Amount 1 0911923130005 9723 Chisholm Trail 9723 Chisholm Trail Michael Jamieson/Natalie Jamieson 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 2 0911923130006 9735 Chisholm Trail 9735 Chisholm Trail Chad & Amber Kockelman 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 3 0911923130007 9801 Chisholm Trail 9801 Chisholm Trail Fritz E Peterson/Jennifer R Peterson 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 4 0911923130013 9807 Chisholm Trail 9807 Chisholm Trail Philip & Margaret Kariniemi 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 5 0911923130008 9829 Chisholm Trail 9829 Chisholm Trail Lee J Pflug & Rebecca Pflug 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 6 0911923120002 9837 Chisholm Trail 1613 Punta Rassa Lane, The Villages, FL, 32163 Edward C & Patricia A Saxton 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 7 0911923110011 9901 Chisholm Trail 9901 Chisholm Trail Christopher Rust/Kelly Rust 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 8 0911923110012 9915 Chisholm Trail 9915 Chisholm Trail Cassandra Kociemba Gruber/Michael Sean Gruber 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 9 0911923140006 9919 Chisholm Trail 9919 Chisholm Trail Donn Schepers 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 10 0911923140007 9935 Chisholm Trail 9935 Chisholm Trail Micah L Lother/Katherine L Lother 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 11 0911923140008 9947 Chisholm Trail 9947 Chisholm Trail Randall H & Carla C Eckhoff 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 12 0911923140009 9940 Chisholm Trail 9940 Chisholm Trail Steven G Eitreim/Heidi J Eitreim 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 13 0911923140010 9920 Chisholm Trail 9920 Chisholm Trail Douglas D/Barbara J Nystrom 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 14 0911923110013 9900 Chisholm Trail 9900 Chisholm Trail David C Vandusen 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 15 0911923140005 9832 Chisholm Trail 9832 Chisholm Trail Warren L & Mamie C Jacobson 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 16 0911923130010 9820 Chisholm Trail 9820 Chisholm Trail Hal K & Kristine M Saulsbury 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 17 0911923130011 9810 Chisholm Trail 9810 Chisholm Trail Ernest Underwood 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ 18 0911923140015 21650 Co Rd No 30 21650 Co Rd No 30 Roger L & Janet Hanson 9,000.00$ (4,500.00)$ 4,500.00$ Total Assessment Amount 81,000.00$ Chisholm Trail - Street Improvements Preliminary Assessment Roll 152 City of Corcoran April 10th, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-34 Motion By: Friedrich Seconded By: Vehrenkamp A RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING A HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT FOR THE CHISHOLM TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Corcoran authorized the preparation of a report by Stantec Associates, Inc. with reference to the proposed Chisholm Trail Improvements Project (the “Project”), the improvement by reconstruction and paving of the existing roadway as described below: •Chisholm Trail to the respective connections with County Road 30; and WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible; whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement; the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended; and a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for affected parcels; and WHEREAS, it is proposed to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA: 1.The recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated as if fully stated herein. 2.The City Council will consider the improvement of such streets in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $421,725.60. 3.A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement (improvement hearing) on the 8th day of May 2025, in the council chambers of the City Hall at 7 p.m., attendance at said hearing shall occur in person, and City Staff shall provide mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement, as required by law 153 City of Corcoran April 10th, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2025-34 Page 2 of 2 VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Friedrich, Michelle Friedrich, Michelle Lanterman, Mark Lanterman, Mark Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 10th day of April 2025. ________________________________ Tom McKee – Mayor ATTEST: __________________________________________ City Seal Debra Johnson – City Clerk 154 XX X XX STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.g Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Deb Johnson Topic: Temporary On-Sale Liquor License Application - Hennepin County Fair Action Required: Adopt Resolution 2025-25 Approving On-Sale Liquor License Summary The Hennepin County Agricultural Society has submitted an Temporary On-Sale Liquor License to be effective June 12-14, 2025 during the Hennepin County Fair held at Corcoran Lion's Park. The licensee has contracted Iron Exchange Brewery, Maple Plan, as the liquor supplier. Both the licensee and liquor supplier have provided appropriate insurance documents and meet the requirements for approval. Recommendation Adopt Resolution 2025-25 Approving a Temporary On-Sale Liquor License to Hennepin County Agricultural Society for the Hennepin County Fair on June 12-14, 2025 Council Action Adopt Resolution 2025-25 Approving On-Sale Liquor License Attachments 1. Resolution 2025-25 Approving Temporary On-Sale Liquor License Hennepin County Fair.pdf 155 City of Corcoran April 10, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-35 Motion By: Friedrich Seconded By: Vehrenkamp A RESOLUTION APPROVING TEMPORARY ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE IN THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Corcoran that the following Liquor License is granted effective for the dates as indicated, to the following Licensee, provided appropriate application and insurance documents are submitted and satisfactory background check completed. LICENSEE LICENSE LICENSE EFFECTIVE DATE Hennepin County Agricultural Society 7403 Hickory Lane Corcoran, MN 55340 On-sale June 12 – 14, 2025 Hennepin County Fair Corcoran Lions Park VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Friedrich, Michelle Friedrich, Michelle Lanterman, Mark Lanterman, Mark Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 10th day of April, 2025. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Debra Johnson – City Clerk 156 X X X X X STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.h Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Jessica Christensen Buck Topic: City Park Remaster - Design Update Action Required: None Summary Project History and Recent Updates: December 19, 2024: The Parks and Trails Commission received a memo summarizing public feedback: Strong preference for the inclusion of a splashpad and playground. Emphasis on connectivity and safety, particularly regarding paths and safe crossings. Of the 197 survey responses, the majority were from families with children aged 25-44, with 90% residing in Corcoran. December 19, 2024 & January 16, 2025: The Parks and Trails Commission reviewed 60% designs and recommended vendors for the playground (Playworld) and splashpad (Aquatix). February 23, 2025: The City Council approved 60% designs and provided direction for 90% project designs. This direction was to proceed with a combination of scenarios 1B and 2A from the report, to include the full park building, playground, and minimally paved parking. March 20, 2025: The Parks and Trails Commission reviewed 90% designs and provided feedback on the design and playground equipment options. Anticipated Next Steps: Task Date CC meeting requesting authorization to bid Thursday, April 24, 2025 Post project to bid Friday, May 2, 2025 Planning commission meeting Thursday, May 1, 2025 Bid opening Tuesday, May 27, 2025 CC meeting to award bid Thursday, June 12, 2025 Removal Items Trees, Fencing, Lights, Tennis Courts, Playground Included in the plan are removals of trees, fencing, lights, tennis courts, and playground. These items are part of the removals to allow for utilities, Diamond Lake Regional Trail, updated playground, and the driveway into the park to be constructed. The plan prioritizes tree retention with only the trees necessary for construction and ash trees being removed. There is consideration in the plan to replace and plant additional trees and landscaping, which focuses on low-maintenance solutions throughout the park. The trees and landscaping plan show a variety of proposed deciduous and coniferous trees that are included to help offset the removal of necessary trees. 157 Stormwater Management Two stormwater management options are shown on the southern portion of the plan, to include a wet basin and another area that would be wet during rain events. These areas help to provide places for the water to navigate towards and be held, while also increasing the natural aesthetic of the park, specifically near the regional trail route. Paving and Trails The 8-foot asphalt trail surrounds the western, northern, and eastern portions of the parking lot as an alternate. Concrete paths link the parking lot to the building plaza and extend through playground area. The future Diamond Lake Regional Trail would be constructed as a 10-foot-wide bituminous path with a 2-foot shoulder, incorporating a boardwalk along the northwest portion. Boardwalk construction and rough grading for the trail are included in Phase 1, with potential paving as funding allows. The existing bridge crossing near County Road 10 would be reused as part of the trail, and a connection the Rush Creek Reserve development added. Lighting A minimized lighting plan is shown, including three lighting options: pedestrian-scale lights, bollard walkway lights, and parking lot lights. Lighting around the playground and down through the pinwheel are proposed as alternates. The building will feature exterior lighting to enhance visibility and safety. Building The proposed building will include a gathering space with a total capacity of 75-90 people or two separate rooms accommodating 30 and 60 people. The divider that would separate the room into two spaces will be included as an alternate on the bid. Inside, there would be three bathrooms: two single-occupancy, gender-neutral restrooms (SOGN) and the family restroom with an adult changing table, as required by code. Exterior-access restrooms include the family restroom and an additional SOGN restroom. The doors to access the interior restrooms for the dual access family restroom is anticipated to be on a digital locking system. Three storage areas are shown on the plans: building mechanicals, table and chair storage, and another within the catering kitchen. The building is anticipated to support City-run programs and events, with the kitchen storage location utilized to store frequently used items. A catering kitchen is shown including a three-compartment sink, refrigerator/freezer, handwashing sink, and preparation countertops. It will have direct access to the larger gathering space, an outdoor door, and a serving window for coordinated use with the future patio and shelter. The building’s exterior features vertical wood siding in black ash, a metal roof, and windows at the front and back of the main gathering space. Shown previously in the building plans was to have garage doors on the north and south sides of the building. The glass window garage doors were removed from the park building plans due to concerns about excessive bugs, security concerns for those reserving the space, and the high cost outweighing their limited usability. In response to the removal of the garage doors, discussions took place during the Parks and Trails Commission meeting to put plantings in front of the wall of windows. 158 Playground The playground is shown with an agricultural theme to reflect Corcoran’s history, as heard within the survey. It is intended to include play areas for children aged 2–5 and 5–12, as well as a zipline area proposed as an alternate. A small embankment slide is integrated into the hillside. The 5–12-year-old area includes two bridges and a large embankment slide. Poured-in-place rubber surfacing would be used on the hillside to accommodate the features, while engineered wood fiber would cover the remaining playground containers. Multiple swing options, including a bucket swing and ADA-compliant swing, are shown. A third playground area featuring a zipline is proposed as an alternate, with positive feedback from the community supporting its inclusion. However, the Parks and Trails Commission noted concerns during the March 20, 2025, meeting that many ziplines they had seen in communities were broken. Previous feedback from the Commission and Council included adding to the tractor within the 2–5-year- old area, a higher slide in the 5–12-year-old area, a roller embankment slide, and bridge connections with movement. Staff and consultants met with Playworld to discuss these items and found the following: Hillside embedded roller slide: Spaces between the rollers on these slides are small. Maple Grove’s Central Park was referenced in this discussion, where the playground features majority poured-in-place surfacing, with some sand areas. A textured slide is shown as an alternative to the request to the roller slide. While the hillside is proposed to include poured-in-place surfacing, majority of the playground surfacing will consist of engineered wood fiber (EWF). History of children bringing the EWF onto the roller slides was discussed, leading to jams and necessary replacements. The cost to add the additional “Mighty Decent Slide” on the embankment is $13,000. 2–5-year-old area: Frequently, this area is filled with 1–2-year-old children, with many of the others looking to explore the 5–12-year-old area. Included in the 2–5-year-old area is the tractor, netted swing, spring cow, spring horse, embankment slides, and haybale cube climbers. Higher tower slide: During a previous Parks and Trails Commission meeting, there was discussion about raising the silo tower slide. Comparisons to French Park were made during this discussion; the tallest slide at French Park is listed as 12’ 5”, with the slide shown in the City Park plans as 13.8’. Increasing the height of the slide would require a higher tower, with additional engineering and larger foundational footings. The cost for the slide, without the additional engineering and footings, was estimated $20,000. Majority of the Parks and Trails Commission felt the 13.8’ tall slide on the current plans was sufficient. Bridges: The bridges that are shown as part of the plan are wheelchair accessible, flat, and 9-10’ in the air with high railings. These bridges have high fall zones that do not allow for movement at this height. Alternative options discussed included an arched bridge, but it was determined this would be challenging to incorporate, if it was even possible. As an alternative to the moving bridge, pole toppers shaped like corn and wheat were added to the poles supporting the bridges, enhancing the agricultural farm theme of the playground. These decorative elements will also help distinguish the bridges from one another. Barn reduction cost savings: Connecting the barn and silo structures in the 5–12-year-old area of the playground would help reduce costs but would also require scaling the barn down to a single level to match the rest of the equipment. While removing the barn entirely was considered, the Parks and Trails Commission valued its presence in the design. They supported the compromise of connecting the structures and limiting the barn to one level as a way to balance cost savings with maintaining the farm theme. Alternate Items 159 Alternates shown include paved trails through the cloverleaf, pedestrian lighting through the playground area, and fully paving the parking lot. Bid Packages Site work Building Playground (direct purchase) More information regarding bid packages is intended to be included as part of the April 24, 2025, City Council meeting. Financial/Budget The City Council previously approved funding for the design development and construction documentation phases of the City Park remaster. As a result, no additional financial impact is anticipated currently. Council Action Informational Attachments 1. City Park Plans 160 6 PREVIOUS SITE PLAN C R - 1 0 CR-50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 17 16 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 1315 12 14 10 2 2 C R - 1 0 Create level field space for multi-purpose recreation including soccer and cricket Stormwater management Pave parking lot (+/-260 spaces) Youth ballfield Destination playground Splash pad Patio and shelter Park building Overflow parking/future paved parking (+/- 45 spaces) Pickleball courts Gravel parking Trailhead with paved parking Pedestrian Crossing Amphitheater Regional trail Tennis Courts Park equipment storage buildings LEGEND Alternates Future Phase Future Pickleball 161 7 CURRENT SITE PLAN C R - 1 0 CR-50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 11 12 13 13 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 12 10 2 2 C R - 1 0 Create level field space for multi-purpose recreation including soccer and cricket Stormwater management Paved parking lot (~60 spaces) Gravel parking lot (~150 spaces) Destination playground Youth ballfield Park building Overflow parking/future paved parking (+/- 45 spaces) Regional Trail Pedestrian Crossing Pave trails between ballfields Pave entire parking lot Pedestrian-scale lighting LEGEND Alternates 162 8 REMOVALS PLAN llllllll l l l l l l lll l l REMOVE OR SALVAGE GRAVEL REMOVE LIGHT POLE SALVAGE ANDREINSTALL SIGNS CLEAR AND GRUBTREE (TYP.) PROTECT ALL TREES NOTMARKED FOR REMOVAL ABANDON UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC REMOVE SIGNS SALVAGE CHAIN LINK FENCE SALVAGE FLARED END SECTION CLEAR AND GRUBTREE (TYP.) REMOVE LIGHT POLE REMOVE HYDRANT CLEAR AND GRUBTREE (TYP.) CLEAR AND GRUB AREAMARKED BY ENGINEER REMOVE SANITARY SEWER REMOVE CULVERT REMOVECULVERT REMOVE PLAYGROUND CLEAR AND GRUB AREAMARKED BY ENGINEER STRIP AND RESPREAD GRAVEL STRIP ANDRESPREAD GRAVEL WETLAND EDGE (TYP.) WETLAND EDGE WETLAND EDGE (TYP.) ROW ROW ROW ROW REMOVE CHAIN LINK FENCE TO NEAREST POST CLEAR AND GRUB AREA MARKED BY ENGINEER CLEAR AND GRUB AREAMARKED BY ENGINEER 955 960960 953 953 954954 956 956 957 957 958 958 959959961961962962963963964964 955 955960 954 954956 956957 957 958 958 959 959 961 950 95 5 94 7 9 4 8 94 9 951 952 9 5 3 9 5 4 9 5 6 95 7 9 5 8 95 0 950 955 955 95 5 955 95 5 96 0 960 9 6 0 951 951 952 952 9 5 3 953 95 3 95 3 953 954 95 4 954 954 9 5 4 956 9 5 6 95 6 957 95 7 95 7 958 9 5 8 9 5 8 9 5 9 959 9 5 9 961 96 1 9 6 2 96 2 950 94 7 948 94 9 951 95 2 950 946 947 948949 951952 95 3 954 9 5 5 95 1 95 1952 95 2 953 95 3 954 95 4 95 6 9 5 7 9 5 8 9 5 9 955 960 952 953 954 956957958959 961962 950 95 5 9 5 5 955 960 949 951 952 953 95 4 956 95 6 956 957 95 7 95 7 958 959 961962 95 5 96 0 95 4 95 6 95 7 95 8 95 9 96 1 95 5 96 0 96 5 95 695 795 895 9 96 196 296 396 4 96 6 950 94894995 19529 5 3 950 950 955 951 951 952 952 953 953 954 9 5 6 95 7 95 8 9 5 5 9 5 2 9 5 3 9 5 4 95 6 9 5 7 955 956 957 950 955 960 949 951 952 953 954 956 957958959 961 962 963 950 955 949 951 95 2 95 3 954 95 6 957 9 6 0 956 9 5 6 9 5 7 95 8 9 5 9 9 6 1 9 6 2 9 5 5 9 6 0 9549 5 4 95 6 95 7 9 5 8 9 5 9 96 1 9 6 2 9 4 6 9 4 7 9 4 8 9 4 9 953 953 954 954 960 957 958 959960 957 95 8 959 96 2 963964 950 955948949951952953954 956 957 950 949951952953 961 962 963 964 9 6 0 9 5 6 95 7 95 8 9 5 9 9 6 1 961 PROTECT SANITARYSERVICE REMOVE BALL FIELDFENCE ROW PROTECT BALLFIELD FENCE ANDDUGOUT REMOVE BALL FIELDFENCE REMOVE TENNISCOURT AND FENCING REMOVE BITUMINOUSPAVEMENT SALVAGE AND REINSTALL BLEACHERS CLEAR AND GRUBTREE (TYP.) SHEET NUMBER SURVEY APPROVED DESIGNED DRAWN PROJ. NO. CHECKED 193807229 SDB JJE JJE MJS SKH C-001 1. SEE SHEET G-002 AND G-003 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES AND LEGEND NOTES OV E R A L L E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S A N D RE M O V A L S C-004 C-002C-003 C-005 Remove fencing, trees, lights, for utilities Remove fencing for road crossing Remove tennis courts and playground Clear trees for regional trail Clear trees for regional trail Remove outfield fencing Clear trees for utilities and driveway 163 Future Pickleball 9 PAVING AND TRAILS 10’ TRPD Regional Trail w/ 2’ Shoulder Existing Crushed Path, to remain Boardwalk 8’ Asphalt Trail Rough Grade Regional Trail Aggregate Path Reuse Existing Bridge Crossing Connect to Rush Creek Reserve Development LEGEND Proposed Asphalt Proposed Concrete Proposed Regional Trail Boardwalk ADA Route C R - 1 0 CR-50 164 TREES AND LANDSCAPE Proposed Deciduous Trees River Birch Betula nigra White Spruce Picea glauca Type A: Low-maintenance Planting Beds Type B: Grass Heavy Prairie Type C: Natural Pollinator Prairie Swamp White Oak Quercus bicolor Eastern Redcedar Juniperus virginiana Red Maple Acer rubrum Black Hills Spruce Picea glauca var. densata Hackberry Celtis occidentalis Scotch Pine Pinus sylvestris American Elm Ulmus americana Norway Spruce Picea abies Proposed Coniferous Trees Landscape Area 10 CR-50 LEGEND Existing Trees, to remain Existing Trees, to remove Proposed Deciduous Trees Proposed Coniferous Trees Landscape Area 165 Future Pickleball 11 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT C R - 1 0 CR-50 Wet basin Wet during rain events 166 12 LIGHTING C R - 1 0 CR-50 LEGEND Pedestrian Scale Path/Area Lights Bollard Walkway Lights Parking Lot Lights 167 LIGHTING CR-50 Bollard/Walkway Lighting Parking lot lights will be standard cobra lights Pedestrian Scale Path/ Area Lights Model: OutlineManufacturer: Landscape FormsApproximate Cost (w/o ship. + tax): $1,875 Post: BOL 14’ Wood Pole Luminaire: Lumenpulse Allegra Fixture and Arm Manufacturer: Structura (post); Lumenpulse (luminaire) Approximate Cost (w/o ship. + tax): $4,400 (post) + $2,500 (luminaire) Notes: Agrarian Style; LED; Dark Sky compliant; Good for edge conditions, open air spaces, along trails, and in parks • Goal • Provide security lighting for parking lot • Alternate: ped lighting at playground areas • Lighting design • Preliminary examples below 13 LEGEND Pedestrian Scale Path/Area Lights Bollard Walkway Lights Parking Lot Lights 168 3/ 1 1 / 2 0 2 5 9 0 % P r o g r e s s S e t BUILDING PROGRAM / FLOOR PLAN Common area Restroom Kitchen Storage Egress 14 169 3/ 1 1 / 2 0 2 5 9 0 % P r o g r e s s S e t BUILDING ELEVATIONS 15 170 CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK Option D Render Package 02/26/2025 BUILDING EXTERIOR: BLACK ASH 16 171 CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK Option D Render Package 02/26/2025 17 172 CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK Option D Render Package 02/26/2025 18 173 2 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) Slide & Solve Panel 2-5yr & 5-12yr accessible ground level and ADA elevated play components. Rainbow Panel Magical Music Panel (4)Custom Graphics Panels Balcony w/Telescope Twisted Climber Inclined Cliff Hanger Hypnotize Panel (2) Anywhere Seats Tower Climber Post Mount Bells STANDARD SWINGS PART#ZZXX0825,0827 W/BELT SEATS PART#ZZXX0260 W/ADA SEAT PART#ZZXX0892 W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMIC DESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATEDROOFADA STAIR TOWERCLIMBER TUBE SLIDEW/WINDOWS SKY PANEL W/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOMGRAPHICS PANELW/FIBERGLASSINSERTS (deck)OVAL INSERTPANEL W/GEARSINSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANELW/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBINGSQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT(ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE(deck) ADA ANIMALTUNES PANEL(ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOMGRAPHICS PANELW/FIBERGLASSINSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSICINSERT SKY PANELW/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/RAINBOWINSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKETBETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPSZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATIONW/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECKWHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTEDCLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96" 76" TRANSFER STATION W/STEP 360° SPIRAL NUVO SLIDE TRI-VERSECLIMBER 6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOM MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE FOR HILLSIDE ZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1" 77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10' 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS RIBBON CLIMBER SILO CLIMBER 11'-2" 14'-8" 14'-3" 8'-10" 11'-1" 22'-4" 22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN (2) Steering Wheel Panels 174 3 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) (2) Playwood Bridge 2-5yr & 5-12yr accessible ground level and ADA elevated play components. Tri-verse Climber Ball Maze Panel (3) Dynamic Descent Slides Glide Slide Animal Tunes Panel 360 Degree Nuvo Slide Babble-On Talk Tube Ribbon Climber ADA Bucket Seat Prism Pass STANDARD SWINGS PART#ZZXX0825,0827 W/BELT SEATS PART#ZZXX0260 W/ADA SEAT PART#ZZXX0892 W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMIC DESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATEDROOFADA STAIR TOWERCLIMBER TUBE SLIDEW/WINDOWS SKY PANEL W/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOMGRAPHICS PANELW/FIBERGLASSINSERTS (deck)OVAL INSERTPANEL W/GEARSINSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANELW/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBINGSQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT(ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE(deck) ADA ANIMALTUNES PANEL(ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOMGRAPHICS PANELW/FIBERGLASSINSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSICINSERT SKY PANELW/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/RAINBOWINSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKETBETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPSZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATIONW/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECKWHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTEDCLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96" 76" TRANSFER STATION W/STEP 360° SPIRAL NUVO SLIDE TRI-VERSECLIMBER 6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOM MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE FOR HILLSIDE ZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1" 77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10' 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS RIBBON CLIMBER SILO CLIMBER 11'-2" 14'-8" 14'-3" 8'-10" 11'-1" 22'-4" 22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Bell Puzzle Panel 175 4 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN 176 5 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN 177 6 UNITY SWING W/BASKET SWING PART#ZZXX0198,0204 48" TWIST N' SHOUT SLIDE TRANSFER STATION W/STEP SILO CLIMBER NUVO SWIRL ROOF PM FARM TRACTOR STRUCTURE ZZYYC268 PLASTIC PLAYCUBES FRACTAL NET FRACTAL NET TRANSFER STEP 6'-4" 7'-2" 6'-6" 9'-10" 13'-10" 12'-8" 20'-3" 8' 0 5'10' 62'-8" 65'-2" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 9 5 9 4 3 4 3 4 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 28'10" X 29'3" X 10' 62'8" X 65'2" 2,530 Sq. Ft. 199 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft. 205 2-5 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 UNITY SWING W/BASKET SWING PART#ZZXX0198,0204 48"TWIST N'SHOUTSLIDETRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP SILOCLIMBERNUVOSWIRLROOF PM FARMTRACTOR STRUCTUREZZYYC268PLASTICPLAYCUBESFRACTALNETFRACTAL NETTRANSFERSTEP 6'-4"7'-2"6'-6"9'-10" 13'-10" 12'-8"20'-3"8' 0 5'10' 62'-8"65'-2" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 9 5 9 4 3 4 3 4 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 28'10" X 29'3" X 10'62'8" X 65'2" 2,530 Sq. Ft. 199 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft.205 2-5 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +4!+1!+1! CUSTOM TRACTOR STRUCTURE (2-5YR) Climbing Squares Silo Climber Horse Spring Rider Tractor Tunnel Unity Steppers Playcubes Structure (2) Steering Wheel Panels Unity Swing (2) Tractor Wheel Cozy Hangout Tube Slide Cow Spring Rider Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN 2-5yr & 5-12yr accessible ground level and ADA elevated play components. 178 7 STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN CUSTOM TRACTOR STRUCTURE (2-5YR) 179 9 ZOOMTRAXPART#ZZXX1136ADA ZOOMTRAXPART#ZZXX1139 77'-9" 0 5'10' 68'-1"57'-6"6'-6"7'-2"6'-8"6'-7" 6'-9" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 N/A68'1" X 57'6" 2,452 Sq. Ft. 203 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +2!+1! ADA ACCESSIBLE EMBANKEMENT SLIDES Twist N’ Shout Embankement Slide Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Embankement slides will be located along an ADA accessible park trail and will exit into an ADA accessible Engineered Wood Fiber certified surfacing. Mighty Descent & Dynamic Descent Embankement Slides 180 HIGHER TOWER SLIDE: $20,000 (SLIDE ONLY) 18’ Tower Slide - existing is 13.75’ tall - will require additional engineering. Will also require much larger foundational footings ($$$). Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN 13.8’ Entrance 8.5’ Entrance 18’ Entrance 24 181 29 REGIONAL TRAIL • Plan to install boardwalk and rough grading in Phase 1; potential paving • Phase 2 may include paving the trail in 2026 10’ TRPD Regional Trail w/ 2’ Shoulder Boardwalk Reuse Existing Bridge Crossing Connect to Rush Creek Reserve Development Rough Grade Regional Trail 182 30 ALTERNATE ITEMS C R - 1 0 CR-50 C R - 1 0 Paved trails through cloverleaf Pave full parking lot Lighting 183 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.i Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Jessica Christensen Buck Topic: Grant Proposals Action Required: None Summary Staff completed and submitted two grant applications on Monday, March 31, for the City Park remaster project. These grant applications were submitted to secure additional funding for the playground component of the project. The first grant application was for the Outdoor Recreation Grant Program. The purpose of this grant is to increase and enhance outdoor recreation facilities in local and community parks throughout the state. Staff requested $350,000 specifically for the playground. Due to the timing of the grant awards, the playground installation may be delayed depending on the requirements of the grant. Additionally, some of the requirements for the Housing and Urban Development - Community Project Funding from the federal government may align with this grant, which could aid in meeting its conditions. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) will review and rank applications in the spring of 2025, with preliminary grant awards announced in the summer of 2025. The earliest anticipated project start date is the fall of 2025. However, this could be delayed further due to requirements related to environmental resources, historical and archaeological reviews, and federal approvals if applicable. All work under this grant must be completed by June 30, 2027. The second grant application was submitted to the Hometown Grant Program through T-Mobile. This program provides funding for projects that build, rebuild, or refresh community spaces. Eligible projects include improvements to outdoor parks or trails, among other initiatives. Staff requested the maximum grant amount of $50,000 for the playground. Grant recipients will be contacted directly by a T-Mobile representative within 60 days after the entry period has closed for the quarter. No status updates will be available prior to that communication. Financial/Budget At this time, there is no financial impact. Should the City be awarded either grant, there are matching fund requirements. However, the City would well exceed the required matching funds for both grant programs. No financial commitment will be required until a grant is awarded. Council Action Attachments 1. City of Corcoran - ORGP DNR Grant Application - 2025 - SUBMISSION.pdf 2. T-Mobile Hometown Grant Application - FULL.pdf 184 Page | 4 November 2024 OUTDOOR RECREATION GRANT PRORAM APPLICATION CHECK-LIST Please use this checklist to make sure your application is complete before submitting. Application Deadline: March 31, 2025 Applicants should focus on projects that will be completed during the 2025/2026 construction seasons. Please note that if your project advances to final selection review, financial documentation will need to be provided including recent financial statements and audit as well as a statement of financial position. Required for all applicants Grant Application ☒ Item 1: Application Summary ☒ Item 2: Project Narrative ☒ Item 3: Project Relation to SCORP ☒ Item 4: Cost Breakdown ☒ Item 5: Project Site Evaluation ☒ Part 1: IPAC Report ☒ Part 2: Conservation Planning Report *NEW Requirement ☒ Part 3: SHPO Data Search **NEW Process ☒ Part 4: Description of Environmental Impact of Proposed Project ☒ Part 5: Environmental Screening Form (ESF) ☐ Part 6: Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) *NEW Requirement – WEBSITE DOWN ☒ Item 6: Public Participation and Benefit ☒ Item 7: Availability for Public Use ☒ Item 8: Statement of Accessibility Attachments ☒ Attachment A – Applicant’s Resolution ☒ Attachment B – Maps ☒ Location Map ☒ Boundary Map ☒ Recreational Site Plan 185 Page | 5 November 2024 ☒ Attachment C – Project Timeline, beginning with Day 0 ☒ Attachment D - Photos of all existing areas of the park (not project area(s) only) ☒ Attachment E – Plans, required for all new and renovated facilities ☐ Buildings, shelters and restrooms plans ☐ Trail, walkway and access route plans ☒ Playground and splash pad plans ☐ Fishing pier plans ☐ Campground plans ☐ Attachment F - Federal Appraisal, required for all land acquisition projects ☒ Attachment G – Environmental Assessment ☒ Attachment H – Historic Architectural Survey ☒ Attachment I – Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey 186 Page | 6 November 2024 ITEM 1 - APPLICATION SUMMARY – 2025 APPLICATION Use the 2025 Grant Application template, as requirements have changed. Using prior templates places applicants at risk of excluding required information. Please keep the application intact. DO NOT delete questions that are irrelevant to your project or change numbering. Applicant Information Name of applicant: City of Corcoran Name and title of contact: Jessica Christensen Buck, Recreation Supervisor Address: 8200 County Road 116 City: Corcoran State: MN Zip Code: 55340 Phone: 763-400-7034 Email: jchristensenbuck@corcoranmn.gov Park Information Park Name: City Park Park Address: 20200 County Road 50 City: Corcoran Nine Digit Zip Code: 55340-9423 County: Hennepin Township, Section, Range: 119N, 23, 23W Existing Park Acres: 79.25 acres Project Information Project Type (Check all that apply to this project): ☐ Acquisition: Acres to be purchased: Click to enter amount. ☒ New Development/Construction ☒ Redevelopment/ Rehabilitation ☒ Replacement/ Demolition Description: Provide a short description (less than 30 words) of your project proposal. Include only items that will be accomplished with this project. Do not include work to be accomplished in future phases. Complete Phase 1b of larger city park project. Phase 1b work includes the addition of an accessible playground. Financial Information The Applicant must provide a non-state match of, at least, 50% of the total cost. This match may consist of cash or the value of materials, labor and equipment usage by the applicant, donations or any combination of these. Applicants that provide, at least, 20% of the match from their own resources will receive additional consideration in the review criteria. The total project cost shown below must equal the total cost shown in Item 4 – Cost Breakdown. 187 Page | 7 November 2024 Total Project Cost: $850,000 Grant Request: $350,000 Match Amount: $500,000 Match: List all sources and amounts of the match and identify if it is committed or pending. This program requires a one-to-one match. The match can consist of cash, the value of materials, labor and equipment usage by the local sponsor, donations or any combination thereof. Other state and federal grants are not eligible for match under this program. Applicants who provide at least 20% of the match from their own resources and/or have their match committed at the time of the application will receive additional consideration in the review. Matching Share Contributors (Name and funding source): Match Amount/Value Type (cash, donated land, etc.) Is Match Secured or firmly committed. If committed, list date expected to be secured. Corcoran Athletic Association Donation $5,622 Cash Match Secured Hanover Athletic Association Donation $45,000 Cash Match Secured Northwest Area Jaycees Donation $100,000 Cash Match Secured Park Dedication, City of Corcoran, MN $349,378 Cash Match Secured Grand Total $500,000 188 Page | 8 November 2024 ITEM 2 - PROJECT NARRATIVE Please limit each response to 1-2 paragraphs, no more than 250 words per paragraph. 1. Provide a general overview of what the project involves and what will be accomplished by the completion of the proposed project. Discuss why this project is needed at this time. Identify new facilities that will be constructed, existing facilities that will be renovated or replaced (specify which), or the general site improvements that will be completed with the requested funding. The City of Corcoran’s City Park Remaster is a multi-phase project aimed at enhancing recreational opportunities, accessibility, and community infrastructure. This project is designed to meet the evolving needs of the growing population while preserving and celebrating the city’s agrarian heritage. This is a multi-phased project with phase 1a anticipated to include a park building, walkways to and around the playground container, tree removal/planting, parking lot improvements, and work on the future Diamond Lake Regional Trial as part of the Three Rivers Park District system. These enhancements will prepare for the playground installation expected as phase 1b, which is the scope of the “project” for the Outdoor Recreation Grant Program. The funding requested would specifically support the construction of a new playground and the surfacing within the playground area. The current playground, is approximately 25 years old, outdated, and situated within the proposed route of the future Regional Trail. To address these concerns, the playground will be removed and replaced with a modern, inclusive play area in a location southeast of the existing playground. The new playground incorporates main features, such as a silo, barn, and tractor, providing a thematic and engaging space for children while paying homage to Corcoran’s rural roots. The tractor is located within the 2–5-year-old area, along with the barn and silo in the 5– 12-year-old container. This project is critically needed at this time to support the community’s expanding recreational demands, replace aging infrastructure, and improve accessibility. 2. What design elements are included that contribute to preserving environmental resources as part of ensuring a quality outdoor recreation experience for present and future generations? The City Park Remaster project integrates design elements that preserve and enhance the park’s natural environment, ensuring a lasting outdoor recreation experience for present and future generations. To prepare for the playground project, removal of some trees and the strategic replanting of diverse tree species are included in phase 1a. Specifically, the ash trees in the area will be removed and new tree species will be planted in an effort to strengthen the park’s ecosystem by improving biodiversity, providing shade, and creating wildlife habitat while increasing long-term resilience against future tree diseases. While the addition of the playground area is important, maintaining the natural characteristics of the area was a key part of the design process and the City’s vision to honor the rural character of this area. 189 Page | 9 November 2024 The playground is also carefully designed to integrate with the park’s natural hillside, maintaining the existing landscape while minimizing land disturbance. This approach preserves the character of the park while enhancing accessibility and sustainability. 3. Who is accessing your park the most? Who has the least access? How does the proposed project address the needs of the users with the least access? Currently, the park is primarily used by youth visitors that utilize the existing playground, ice rinks, and ballfields. Some adult athletic groups utilize the space as well for baseball, soccer, softball, and cricket. While these activities bring many residents to the park, those not participating in organized sports have fewer opportunities to engage with the park area. Individuals with mobility challenges or those seeking recreational options beyond athletics face limited access, as the existing and aging playground infrastructure can create barriers to use. The proposed project directly addresses these gaps by creating a more inclusive and welcoming environment. The accessible playground will feature bridge connections, and transfer stations, ensuring children of all abilities can play safely. These improvements ensure that everyone, regardless of ability or recreational interest, can fully enjoy and benefit from Corcoran’s City Park. 190 Page | 10 November 2024 ITEM 3 - PROJECT RELATION TO SCORP Discuss how the following Strategic Directions from the 2020-2024 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) apply to your project. The SCORP is available at this link. How Does the Project Connect People to the Outdoors? 1. How does the proposed project design and redevelop outdoor recreation facilities so they accommodate varying forms of transportation to your park? Describe the types of transportation used to access your park from your community (e.g., trail, car, public transportation). The proposed playground is shown to be surrounded by accessible walkways around the perimeter of the container, however, the walkways are not included in the scope of this application due to timing and cost saving potential with including it in the prior phase. The playground location and access needs serve as a catalyst to including the walkways. While outside the direct scope of this funding request, the project enhances outdoor recreation facilities with integrated accessible walkways around the playground area, ensuring safe and inclusive access for visitors of all mobility levels. These walkways will connect key park amenities, providing seamless navigation for pedestrians, families with strollers, and individuals using mobility devices. The City Park Remaster project further improves multi-modal access by introducing a new trail loop that connects to the nearby Rush Creek Reserve neighborhood and serves as a future regional link to the Three Rivers Park District’s Diamond Lake Regional Trail. These connections promote non- motorized transportation options, encouraging walking and biking to the park from surrounding areas. Internal connections from the accessible walkways will allow the project to connect to comprehensive local and regional parks and trails systems in the future. Additionally, improvements to the park’s entryway and parking lot to be completed in phase 1a will enhance vehicle access and ensure safe, efficient entry for those arriving by car. A traffic study confirmed that a turn lane is not required for phase 1a or 1b. Collectively, these enhancements strengthen connectivity and accessibility, making the park and playground more inclusive for all visitors, regardless of their mode of transportation. The City’s focus on including accessible walkways within City Park directly aligns with the grant’s objective to improve equitable access to recreation spaces. 2. How does the park and/or proposed project provide outdoor recreation facilities to promote a welcoming environment for people of all abilities and diverse backgrounds? Does your park provide accessible seating, bathrooms, drinking water, shade opportunities, informational signs and/or safety features? Please describe. Note: The 2020-2024 SCORP will be used to evaluate 2025 applications. 191 Page | 11 November 2024 The proposed project is designed to create an inclusive, welcoming environment that accommodates visitors of all abilities and diverse backgrounds. A key component of the project is the new playground, which will feature bridge connections, transfer stations, and adaptive swings, allowing children of varying abilities to engage in play safely and comfortably. These elements promote inclusive recreation, ensuring that children with mobility challenges or other disabilities can interact and play alongside their peers. The bridge feature also serves as a means for caregivers and guardians to navigate easier into the playground when it is time for families to leave. The playground features a variety of textures, colors, and interactive elements to engage individuals with sensory needs, ensuring a stimulating yet accessible play experience. Ground surfaces are composed of engineered wood fiber and poured-in-place surfacing to allow mobility. Playground equipment is designed for inclusive play, including adaptive swings, ramps, and tactile panels. While included in phase 1a, the park will also feature a community building with accessible restrooms, one of which will include an adult changing table and will be accessible from both inside and outside the building. This addition ensures that individuals with higher accessibility needs, including caregivers, have necessary amenities to comfortably enjoy the park. Additionally, the park update incorporates multiple seating areas, drinking fountains, and ample shade through both manmade structures and tree canopies. These features provide spaces for rest, hydration, and sun protection, making the park more accommodating for individuals of all ages and abilities. 3. How does the proposed project provide high-quality experiences to visitors through thoughtful design, programming, and interpretation? Does your project include development or expansion of facilities to provide high quality experiences? Are interpretive signs provided to enhance the user experience? The City Park Remaster project is designed to provide high-quality experiences through thoughtful design and diverse programming. The project has undergone multiple rounds of public engagement and refinement through both the Parks and Trails Commission and City Council, ensuring community needs are met. The proposed project provides high-quality experiences to visitors through a thoughtfully designed farm-themed playground that fosters imaginative play and educational opportunities. Central to the playground design are a barn and a silo, which offer children a unique setting to climb, explore, and pretend to be farmers. This engaging environment encourages interactive play while sparking curiosity about farming and agriculture. Beyond physical play, the playground design promotes learning through family conversations about farm life, food production, and the importance of agriculture in daily life. These discussions can enhance children’s understanding of where their food comes from, creating a deeper connection to nature and local food systems. Does the Project Acquire Land and/or Create Opportunities? Acquisition If you are not acquiring land, 192 Page | 12 November 2024 • Respond “Not applicable” to questions 1-5 and proceed to Development- Redevelopment questions 6-9. • Any responses provided to questions 1-5 will not be reviewed or scored. 1. Is the proposed project located in a densely settled area and/or area of rapid population growth? Not applicable 2. Does the proposed project accelerate the acquisition of private in-holdings and add lands to existing parks to enhance resource protection and recreational opportunities? Please describe. Not applicable 3. Does the proposed project acquire exceptional one-time opportunities of unique, high- quality natural resources that meet critical needs outside of regional centers? Please describe. Not applicable 4. Does the proposed project acquire land to connect protected and high-quality natural resource corridors? Please describe. Not applicable 5. Does the proposed project acquire land that protects important water resources including lakes, rivers, wetlands, shoreline, and critical watersheds? Please describe. Not applicable Development/Redevelopment 6. How does the proposed project develop and/or redevelop facilities that meet the differing outdoor recreation needs for people of all abilities? Does your project incorporate universal design, family friendly facilities, separation of uses (active/passive use, RV/tent sites), appropriate quality natural setting for proposed activities? Please describe. The proposed playground redevelopment is designed to accommodate the diverse outdoor recreation needs of people of all abilities by incorporating a family-friendly, inclusive environment. The playground consists of two distinct areas: one for children ages 2-5 and another for children ages 5-12, ensuring age-appropriate play experiences that foster development, social interaction, and physical activity. 193 Page | 13 November 2024 The playground is thoughtfully integrated into the hillside, providing a natural setting that contrasts with the park’s more structured athletic spaces. This design offers an alternative recreational experience for those who may not engage in competitive sports, emphasizing imaginative and active play in a scenic environment. Additionally, the natural berm between the ballfield and playground serves as both a safety buffer and a vantage point, allowing caregivers to supervise children while maintaining a visual connection to the broader park activities. Universal design features are prioritized to ensure accessibility for all users, including those with mobility challenges. The play structures incorporate elements such as inclusive swings, ground-level sensory play panels, and transfer stations to accommodate children with disabilities. Ample seating areas provide comfortable spaces for families, caregivers, and visitors of all ages. By thoughtfully balancing active and passive recreation areas, the project enhances the overall park experience while promoting inclusivity, safety, and engagement for all visitors. 7. How does the proposed project create an accessible environment that is open and flexible to accommodate new and emerging nature-based recreation uses? Does the project support numerous activities, maintain large open play areas, incorporate emerging nature-based activities such as camping, fishing, water access, birding, hiking, wildlife viewing, etc.? Please describe. The proposed project creates an accessible and flexible environment by integrating the playground into the hillside, which preserves green space and incorporates the park’s natural features. This mindful approach ensures that a large portion of the western side of the park remains open for recreation. By maintaining large open play areas and constructing trails and walkways as part of phase 1a, the park will support numerous activities while also providing space for emerging nature-based recreation such as hiking, wildlife viewing, and birding. Additionally, shown in previous renditions of the plans was an additional container that would host a zipline feature. This area could be developed in the future, as it was included in plans and anticipated as an alternate of the project. By planning for this feature, the City can accommodate future expansion to the playground, as funds are available, and the expansion is desired. 8. How does the proposed project develop new infrastructure and amenities that meet the needs and interests of future generations and diverse communities (e.g., develop group- based opportunities such as group campsites, group picnic areas, and gathering spaces used by diverse communities. Offers amenities that meet the lifestyles of our target markets such as wireless internet, playgrounds, family bathrooms, areas for specialized interest, etc.)? Please describe. The proposed project enhances park infrastructure by introducing a thoughtfully designed hillside playground that balances natural topography with accessibility. By integrating bridges from the hillside and strategically placed transfer stations, the playground ensures inclusive access for individuals of all abilities, allowing children to engage in play without barriers well into the future. 194 Page | 14 November 2024 This design not only maximizes the use of natural landscape features but also fosters an inclusive, family-friendly environment. Parents and guardians will benefit from the elevated vantage points, enabling them to easily supervise multiple children engaging in different recreational activities across the park. Additionally, the playground’s location provides clear sightlines to nearby fields and gathering spaces, promoting multi- generational participation and a sense of community. 9. Will the proposed project be designed and constructed with sustainable and resilient infrastructure, including effective storm water management (e.g., rely on up-to-date green infrastructure and best practice designs, is energy efficient, easy to maintain and uses recycled/recyclable materials, conserve the use of water at facilities and/or design facilities to effectively manage storm water onsite.)? Please describe. As part of phase 1a, enhanced stormwater management infrastructure will be implemented, including the construction of stormwater ponds southwest of the parking lot. These ponds will capture and manage runoff, reducing erosion and improving water quality while mitigating the impact of heavy rainfall events. The City is collaborating with Oertel, HKGi, and Stantec to ensure the project reflects best practices in sustainability. Efforts to reduce heat retention will include shaded areas through tree plantings and reflective or permeable surfaces. The playground and surrounding facilities will be designed for durability, accessibility, and adaptability, ensuring long-term community benefits. By prioritizing sustainable and resilient infrastructure, this project will create an environmentally responsible and climate-adaptive space for recreation while minimizing ecological impact. This holistic approach ensures that the site remains functional and sustainable for years to come, providing a high-quality recreational experience while enhancing environmental stewardship. Does the Project Take Care of What We Have? 1. Does the proposed project result in redevelopment, renovation, or rehabilitation of existing infrastructure to ensure high-quality and safe experiences for the public (e.g., roof replacement, structural replacement, trail resurfacing, refurbishing trail head amenities, campgrounds rehabbed and updated, bring facilities up to modern codes and standards, and/or make it easy for everyone to access and enjoy parks and trails)? Please describe. The proposed project is part of a larger park renovation project and will redevelop an existing playground on the site that has approached the end of its life cycle. The new playground location embraces and enhances the park’s natural topography by working with the existing terrain and integrating the playground into the hillside. By building the playground into the hillside, the design maintains the character of the land while providing an engaging, safe, and dynamic play environment. Bridges from the hillside and strategically placed transfer stations ensure that accessibility is seamlessly incorporated into the design, allowing children of all abilities to enjoy the playground while maintaining natural elevation changes. Additionally, the hillside setting offers a unique advantage for parents and guardians, providing clear sightlines to both the playground and other park amenities, fostering a safe and inclusive environment for 195 Page | 15 November 2024 families. By leveraging the existing topography rather than removing it, this project revitalizes park infrastructure in a way that is both functional and environmentally conscious. The improvements enhance accessibility, safety, and recreation while preserving the park’s natural beauty for future generations to enjoy. 2. Does the project sponsor maintain a Capital Asset Management plan, that includes a schedule of replacing park equipment/facilities, to ensure protection and full utilization of the proposed facilities (yes or no, describe)? Yes, the project sponsor maintains a Capital Asset Management Plan that includes a schedule for replacing park equipment and facilities. The proposed playground equipment would be incorporated into the City of Corcoran’s Capital Improvement Plan. This ensures long-term protection and maintenance. 3. Does the proposed project preserve existing high-quality natural areas and water resources? Please describe. The proposed project is designed to preserve and enhance the park’s high-quality natural areas and water resources while integrating new recreational opportunities. While the project necessitates the removal of some trees, many of which are ash trees, it actively contributes to long-term ecological health by planting a diverse selection of tree species. This effort not only helps restore the canopy but also improves resilience against pests and disease, ensuring a sustainable and thriving tree population for future generations. The playground’s hillside location provides scenic views of the surrounding trees and the meandering creek, fostering a connection between visitors and the park’s natural beauty. The preservation of these elements ensures that the park remains a space where recreation and nature coexist. By integrating thoughtful design with natural preservation efforts, this project enhances public access to outdoor recreation while safeguarding the park’s ecological integrity. 4. Does the proposed project restore and reconstruct natural communities that have been degraded or lost due to agriculture or development? The larger Park Remaster project restores and reconstructs natural communities by addressing tree loss resulting from project necessity and the removal of ash trees at risk from emerald ash borer. By mitigating canopy loss and creating the opportunity for diverse species replanting, the project will be enhanced with ecological resilience and support long-term biodiversity. This proactive approach helps restore the environmental benefits provided by a healthy tree canopy, counteracting past degradation due to development and risk for tree disease. 196 Page | 16 November 2024 ITEM 4 - COST BREAKDOWN Development (see Program Manual for eligible costs). Contingency and indirect costs are not eligible grant expenditures. Design/Engineering costs more than 10% of the total project construction cost are not eligible. Be aware we require all existing and proposed facilities to have accessible routes so please account for that in your cost breakdown. If your project is selected for federal funding, the Build America, Buy America Act will apply (BABAA). We recommend including pricing from BABAA compliant companies to the extent possible on applicable budget lines. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 177.41 to 177.44, and corresponding Minnesota Rules 5200.1000 to 5200.1120, this program is subject to prevailing wages as established by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry. If awarded, all contractors and subcontractors must pay all laborers and mechanics the established prevailing wages for work performed under the contract. Failure to comply with the aforementioned may result in civil or criminal penalties. Accordingly, ensure pricing includes costs for prevailing wages. Please provide cost breakdown by facility, not by materials. See examples. Delete the listed examples from your budget prior to submission. Facility (e.g., picnic area, campground, walkway, shelter, restroom) Description (linear feet, dimensions, material used, number of components, etc.) Cost Per Unit Total Cost Playground Equipment Materials and labor for construction of 2-5 and 5- 12 playground equipment $740,000.00 $740,000.00 Engineered Wood Fiber 560 cubic yards of engineered wood fiber $25.00 $14,000.00 Poured-in-Place Rubber Surfacing 2,340 sq ft of poured in place surfacing $22.50 $52,560.00 Concrete subbase (for PIP) 2,333 sq ft of concrete subbase for embankment $19.50 $45,630.00 1. How were the cost estimates derived? The cost estimates were derived working with the playground vendor. As some pieces are moved, added, or removed, there have been slight adjustments to the quote, but the estimate above reflects 90% design. 2. What assurances are there that the costs listed are reasonable? 197 Page | 17 November 2024 The City is utilizing competitive purchasing methods to ensure cost efficiency. Playground equipment will be procured through a cooperative purchasing contract, such as Sourcewell, allowing access to pre-negotiated state contract pricing. Additionally, working with experienced consultants and referencing past project costs further ensures that estimates align with industry standards and current market conditions. 3. Describe any project elements or costs that will improve site resiliency and facility longevity, if any. With poured-in-place surfacing being installed along the hillside, this improves the resiliency of the site and longevity of the playground. The poured-in-place material will help the hillside maintain its form comparatively to grass while embedding of slides and playground features into it. Additionally, with a lifespan of 20 years and plans to inspect/maintain, the playground can be enjoyed by visitors for years to come. 4. What is the anticipated life span of the facilities that will be funded as part of this project? What are the estimated annual maintenance costs? The playground is expected to last 20 years with regular inspections and maintenance. Annual maintenance costs are projected to be consistent with industry standards, covering routine inspections, surface upkeep, and minor repairs to ensure safety and longevity, but varying yearly based on need. Replacement and replenishment of engineered wood fiber and playground parts are the more frequently anticipated costs. Estimates were provided by the Midwest Playscapes at $2,663.44 approximately for annual upkeep of the playground surfacing materials. 5. What is your recent experience completing similar projects with state or federal grant funding? The City has recent experience managing projects with federal grant funding, including a $500,000 Community Project Funding grant through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for City Park. We are actively working through compliance requirements with items such as SHPO and IPaC. Attached are submissions for each of those items. The federal grant funding is planned to assist with the funding for phase 1a of the City Park Remaster project, including the parking lot, general site work, utilities, stormwater, etc. Land Acquisition (if application includes acquisition) – Federal (Yellow-Book) Appraisal(s) must be attached. If you are not acquiring land, any answers provided here will not be reviewed or scored. Parcel Identification Number or location Description of property Acres Appraised Value 198 Page | 18 November 2024 Parcel Identification Number or location Description of property Acres Appraised Value Grand Total 1. Why is this acquisition needed? Not applicable 2. Describe the existing resources and features of the site that make it desirable for public outdoor recreation. Not applicable 3. Explain how you envision this acquisition contributing to outdoor recreation in the long term. Not applicable 4. From whom is this property being purchased? Not applicable 5. Are any buildings or structures being purchased along with the property? a. ☒ No b. ☐ Yes – Describe what is planned for those structures and whether the grant funded project includes the value of those structures. Not applicable 6. How and when will the site be made open and accessible for public outdoor recreation use? For acquisition only grants, parking and a funding acknowledgement sign must be posted prior to close of the grant and the park open for public access. Recreation facilities must be developed within three years from the date of acquisition. Not applicable 7. Is this property being acquired under threat of condemnation? Not applicable 8. Was the property listed for public sale? 199 Page | 19 November 2024 a. ☐ No b. ☐ Yes – Explain how the property owner was made aware of the grant sponsor’s interest in the property. Not applicable 9. Does this project involve donated property? a. ☐ No b. ☐ Yes – Include evidence that the seller was offered the fair market value of the property as just compensation and willingly chose to donate the property instead. Not applicable 200 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 Phone: (952) 858-0793 In Reply Refer To: Project code: 2024-0141639 Project Name: City of Corcoran City Park Remaster Subject:Consistency letter for 'City of Corcoran City Park Remaster' for specified threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location consistent with the Minnesota-Wisconsin Endangered Species Determination Key (Minnesota- Wisconsin DKey). Dear Jason (Jay) Tobin: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) received on October 30, 2024 your effect determination(s) for the 'City of Corcoran City Park Remaster' (Action) using the Minnesota- Wisconsin DKey within the Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system. You have submitted this key to satisfy requirements under Section 7(a)(2). The Service developed this system in accordance of with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C 1531 et seq.). Based on your answers and the assistance of the Service’s Minnesota-Wisconsin DKey, you made the following effect determination(s) for the proposed Action: Species Listing Status Determination Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus)Candidate No effect Salamander Mussel (Simpsonaias ambigua)Proposed Endangered May affect Whooping Crane (Grus americana)Experimental Population, Non- Essential No effect Determination Information Thank you for informing the Service of your “No Effect” determination(s). Your agency has met consultation requirements and no further consultation is required for the species you determined will not be affected by the Action. Additional Information 201 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 2 of 7 ▪ Sufficient project details: Please provide sufficient project details on your project homepage in IPaC (Define Project, Project Description) to support your conclusions. Failure to disclose important aspects of your project that would influence the outcome of your effects determinations may negate your determinations and invalidate this letter. If you have site-specific information that leads you to believe a different determination is more appropriate for your project than what the Dkey concludes, you can and should proceed based on the best available information. Future project changes: The Service recommends that you contact the Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office or re-evaluate the project in IPaC if: 1) the scope or location of the proposed Action is changed; 2) new information reveals that the action may affect listed species or designated critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered; 3) the Action is modified in a manner that causes effects to listed species or designated critical habitat; or 4) a new species is listed or critical habitat designated. If any of the above conditions occurs, additional consultation with the Service should take place before project changes are final or resources committed. Species-specific information Bald and Golden Eagles: Bald eagles, golden eagles, and their nests are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (54 Stat. 250, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 668a-d) (Eagle Act). The Eagle Act prohibits, except when authorized by an Eagle Act permit, the “taking” of bald and golden eagles and defines “take” as “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb.” The Eagle Act’s implementing regulations define disturb as “… to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.” The following species and/or critical habitats may also occur in your project area and are not covered by this conclusion: Western Regal Fritillary Argynnis idalia occidentalis Proposed Threatened Coordination with the Service is not complete if additional coordination is advised above for any species. 202 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 3 of 7 Action Description You provided to IPaC the following name and description for the subject Action. 1. Name City of Corcoran City Park Remaster 2. Description The following description was provided for the project 'City of Corcoran City Park Remaster': The Project entails construction of several improvements to the Corcoran Community Park. These improvements include five new soccer fields, six new pickle ball courts, replacement of two tennis courts, playground replacements, and the addition of a splash pad. A new multi-purpose, approximately 7,500-square- foot building is also proposed, along with a new, larger paved parking lot, the removal of a paved path between existing ball fields, the addition of a regional trail, removal of a storage area south of the three existing ball fields, and the addition of turn lanes at the south park entrance along County Road 50. A connection from City amenities onsite will be made to the City’s sewer and water. Besides funding from HUD, other funding sources for this Project include donations from the Northwest Area Jaycees, the Hanover Athletic Association, and Three Rivers organizations. Construction is anticipated to begin in Spring 2025. The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@45.0984218,-93.55594633922905,14z 203 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 4 of 7 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. QUALIFICATION INTERVIEW This determination key is intended to assist the user in evaluating the effects of their actions on Federally listed species in Minnesota and Wisconsin. It does not cover other prohibited activities under the Endangered Species Act (e.g., for wildlife: import/export, Interstate or foreign commerce, possession of illegally taken wildlife, etc.; for plants: import/export, reduce to possession, malicious destruction on Federal lands, commercial sale, etc.) or other statutes. Additionally, this key DOES NOT cover wind development, purposeful take (e.g., for research or surveys), communication towers that have guy wires or are over 450 feet in height, aerial or other large-scale application of any chemical (such as insecticide or herbicide), and approval of long-term permits or plans (e.g., FERC licenses, HCP's). Click YES to acknowledge that you must consider other prohibitions of the ESA or other statutes outside of this determination key. Yes Is the action being funded, authorized, or carried out by a Federal agency? Yes Are you the Federal agency or designated non-federal representative? Yes Does the action involve the installation or operation of wind turbines? No Does the action involve purposeful take of a listed animal? No Does the action involve a new communications tower? No Does the activity involve aerial or other large-scale application of ANY chemical, including pesticides (insecticide, herbicide, fungicide, rodenticide, etc)? No Will your action permanently affect local hydrology? Yes 204 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 5 of 7 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Does your project have the potential to impact the riparian zone or indirectly impact a stream/river (e.g., cut and fill; horizontal directional drilling; construction; vegetation removal; pesticide or fertilizer application; discharge; runoff of sediment or pollutants; increase in erosion, etc.)? Note: Consider all potential effects of the action, including those that may happen later in time and outside and downstream of the immediate area involved in the action. Endangered Species Act regulation defines "effects of the action" to include all consequences to listed species or critical habitat that are caused by the proposed action, including the consequences of other activities that are caused by the proposed action. A consequence is caused by the proposed action if it would not occur but for the proposed action and it is reasonably certain to occur. Effects of the action may occur later in time and may include consequences occurring outside the immediate area involved in the action. (50 CFR 402.02). Yes Will your action disturb the ground or existing vegetation? Note: This includes any off-road vehicle access, soil compaction (enough to collapse a rodent burrow), digging, seismic survey, directional drilling, heavy equipment, grading, trenching, placement of fill, pesticide application (herbicide, fungicide), vegetation management (including removal or maintenance using equipment or prescribed fire), cultivation, development, etc. Yes Will your action include spraying insecticides? No Does your action area occur entirely within an already developed area? Note: Already developed areas are already paved, covered by existing structures, manicured lawns, industrial sites, or cultivated cropland, AND do not contain trees that could be roosting habitat. Be aware that listed species may occur in areas with natural, or semi-natural, vegetation immediately adjacent to existing utilities (e.g. roadways, railways) or within utility rights-of-way such as overhead transmission line corridors, and can utilize suitable trees, bridges, or culverts for roosting even in urban dominated landscapes (so these are not considered "already developed areas" for the purposes of this question). If unsure, select NO.. No [Semantic] Does the project intersect the Salamander mussel AOI? Automatically answered Yes Have you determined that the action will have no effect on individuals within the whooping crane nonessential experimental population (NEP)? Yes [Hidden Semantic] Does the action area intersect the monarch butterfly species list area? Automatically answered Yes 205 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 6 of 7 16. 17. Under the ESA, monarchs remain warranted but precluded by listing actions of higher priority. The monarch is a candidate for listing at this time. The Endangered Species Act does not establish protections or consultation requirements for candidate species. Some Federal and State agencies may have policy requirements to consider candidate species in planning. We encourage implementing measures that will remove or reduce threats to these species and possibly make listing unnecessary. If your project will have no effect on monarch butterflies (for example, if your project won't affect their habitat or individuals), then you can make a "no effect" determination for this project. Are you making a "no effect" determination for monarch? No Is this project funded, authorized, or carried out by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No 206 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 7 of 7 IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION Agency:Corcoran city Name:Jason (Jay) Tobin Address:8200 County Road 116 City:Corcoran State:MN Zip:55340 Email jtobin@corcoranmn.gov Phone:7634007030 LEAD AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION Lead Agency:Department of Housing and Urban Development 207 Conservation Planning Report: City of Corcoran City Park This document is intended for planning purposes only for the area of interest defined by the user. The report identifies ecologically significant areas documented within the defined area of interest plus any additional search distance indicated below. These ecologically significant areas can be viewed in the Explore Tab of the Minnesota Conservation Explorer. Please visit MN Geospatial Commons for downloadable GIS data. This document does not meet the criteria for a Natural Heritage Review. If a Natural Heritage Review is needed, please define an Area of Interest in the Explore Tab and click on the Natural Heritage Review option. This document does not include known occurrences of state-listed or federally listed species. MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance Search distance = 330 feet Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) Sites of Biodiversity Significance are areas with varying levels of native biodiversity that may contain high quality native plant communities, rare plants, rare animals, and/or animal aggregations. A Biodiversity Significance Rank is assigned on the basis of the number of rare species, the quality of the native plant communities, size of the site, and context within the landscape. MBS Sites are ranked Outstanding, High, or Moderate. Areas ranked as Below were found to be disturbed and are retained in the layer as negative data. These areas do not meet the minimum biodiversity threshold for statewide significance but may have conservation value at the local level as habitat for native plants and animals, corridors for animal movements, buffers surrounding higher quality natural areas, or as areas with high potential for restoration of native habitat. The DNR recommends avoidance of MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance ranked High or Outstanding. Wetlands within MBS Sites of Outstanding or High Biodiversity Significance may be considered Rare Natural Communities under the Wetland Conservation Act. For technical guidance on Rare Natural Communities, please visit WCA Program Guidance and Information. For more information please visit MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance. SEARCH RESULTS: No features were found within the search area. Page 1 of 4 2/26/2025 12:19:31 PM 208 DNR Native Plant Communities Search distance = 330 feet A native plant community is a group of native plants that interact with each other and with their environment in ways not greatly altered by modern human activity or by introduced organisms. These groups of native plant species form recognizable units, such as oak savannas, pine forests, or marshes, that tend to repeat over space and time. Native plant communities are classified and described by considering vegetation, hydrology, landforms, soils, and natural disturbance regimes. DNR Native Plant Community types and subtypes are given a Conservation Status Rank that reflects the relative rarity and endangerment of the community type in Minnesota. Conservation Status Ranks range from S1 (critically imperiled) to S5 (secure, common, widespread, and abundant). Native plant communities with a Conservation Status Rank of S1 through S3 are considered rare in the state. The DNR recommends avoidance of rare native plant communities. Wetland native plant communities with a conservation status rank of S1 through S3 may also be considered Rare Natural Communities under the Wetland Conservation Act. For technical guidance on Rare Natural Communities, please visit WCA Program Guidance and Information. DNR Native Plant Communities may be given a Condition Rank that reflects the degree of ecological integrity of a specific occurrence of a native plant community. The Condition Rank is based on species composition, vegetation structure, ecological processes and functions, level of human disturbance, presence of exotic species, and other factors. Condition Ranks range from A-rank (excellent ecological integrity) to D-rank (poor ecological integrity. A Condition Rank of NR means Not Ranked and a Condition Rank of MULTI mean multiple ranks are present because the record is a native plant community complex. For more information please visit Minnesota’s Native Plant Communities. SEARCH RESULTS: No features were found within the search area. Calcareous Fens Search distance = 5 miles A calcareous fen is a rare and distinctive peat-accumulating wetland that is legally protected in Minnesota under the Wetland Conservation Act (Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.223). Many of the unique characteristics of calcareous fens result from the upwelling of groundwater through calcareous substrates. Because of this dependence on groundwater hydrology, calcareous fens can be affected by nearby activities or even those several miles away. For more information regarding calcareous fens, please see the Calcareous Fen Fact Sheet or review the List of Known Calcareous Fens. SEARCH RESULTS: No features were found within the search area. DNR Old Growth Stands Search distance = 330 feet Old-growth forests are natural forests that have developed over a long period of time, generally at least 120 years, without experiencing severe, stand-replacing disturbances such as fires, windstorms, or logging. Old-growth forests are a unique, nearly vanished piece of Minnesota’s history and ecology; less than 4% of Minnesota’s old-growth forests remain. The DNR recommends avoidance of all DNR Old Growth Stands. The following DNR Old Growth Stands have been documented within the search area. SEARCH RESULTS: No features were found within the search area. MN Prairie Conservation Plan Search distance = 330 feet The Minnesota Prairie Conservation Plan, a twenty-five year strategy for accelerating prairie conservation in the state, identifies Core Areas, Corridors, and Corridor Complexes as areas to focus conservation efforts. The Plan’s strategies include protection, enhancement, and restoration of grassland and wetland habitat. To meet the Plan’s goals, approaches within Core Areas will need to include restoration and approaches within Corridors will need to include conservation of grassland habitat which can provide stepping stones between larger Core Areas. SEARCH RESULTS: No features were found within the search area. Page 2 of 4 2/26/2025 12:19:31 PM 209 Important Bird Areas Search distance = 1 mile Important Bird Areas, identified by Audubon Minnesota in partnership with the DNR, are part of an international conservation effort aimed at conserving globally important bird habitats. They are voluntary and non-regulatory, but the designation demonstrates the significant ecological value of the area. SEARCH RESULTS: No features were found within the search area. Lakes of Biological Significance Search distance = 330 feet Lakes of Biological Significance are high quality lakes as determined by the aquatic plant, fish, bird, or amphibian communities present within the lake. To be included in this layer, a lake only needs to meet the criteria for one of these four community types. The lake is assigned a biological significance of Outstanding, High, or Moderate based on the community with the highest quality. SEARCH RESULTS: No features were found within the search area. USFWS Habitat Conservation Plans A Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) is a mechanism for compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act for a given set of activities and protected species. An HCP is required by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as part of an application for an incidental take permit (ITP). The ITP allows the permit holder to proceed with activities covered in the HCP that could result in the unintentional take of federally listed species. Lakes States Forest Management Bat Habitat Conservation Plan (Bat HCP): (search distance = 0; within area of interest only) This HCP was created to provide flexibility to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to manage forests while addressing federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) regulations related to federally threatened and endangered bat species. The Bat HCP covers three bat species within Minnesota: northern long-eared bat, little brown bat, and tricolored bat. This report is intended to help non-federal, non-DNR landowners evaluate their potential eligibility for the Landowner Enrollment Program of the Bat HCP (For DNR-administered land, DNR staff should refer to the Bat HCP Implementation Policy). Landowner Enrollment Program – DNR’s incidental take permit may be extended through the Landowner Enrollment Program (LEP) to eligible non-federal landowners who conduct forest management activities. Landowners may be eligible to enroll in the LEP if they are a county land administrator, own more than 10,000 acres, or own land that overlaps a Bat HCP feature. The results below indicate if the defined area of interest overlaps a Bat HCP feature. For more information on how to enroll in the LEP, please visit the Landowner Enrollment Program (LEP). SEARCH RESULTS: No Bat HCP features were found within the area of interest. Landowners are only eligible to apply for the Landowner Enrollment Program if they are a county land administrator or they own more than 10,000 acres. USFWS Regulatory Layers To ensure compliance with federal law, conduct a federal regulatory review using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) online Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) tool. This report is not a substitution for a Section 7 review. For informational purposes only, this tool currently checks the following USFWS Regulatory Layers: Rusty Patched Bumblebee High Potential Zones: (search distance = 0; within area of interest only) The rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis), federally listed as endangered, is likely to be present in suitable habitat within the high potential zones. From April through October this species uses underground nests in upland grasslands, shrublands, and forest edges, and forages where nectar and pollen are available. From October through April the species overwinters under tree litter in upland forests and woodlands. The rusty patched bumble bee may be impacted by a variety of land management activities including, but not limited to, prescribed fire, tree-removal, haying, grazing, herbicide use, pesticide use, land-clearing, soil disturbance or compaction, or use of non-native bees. The USFWS RPBB guidance provides guidance on avoiding impacts to rusty patched bumble bee and a key for determining if actions are likely to affect the species; the determination key can be found in the appendix. Please visit the USFWS Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Map for the most current locations of High Potential Zones. SEARCH RESULTS: No features were found within the search area. Page 3 of 4 2/26/2025 12:19:31 PM 210 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Page 4 of 4 2/26/2025 12:19:31 PM 211 MnSHIP City of Corcoran City Park Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA, Esri Community Maps Contributors, Metropolitan Council, MetroGIS, Three Rivers Park District, © MnSHIP Points Inventoried County Boundaries 2/26/2025 0 0.1 0.20.05 mi 0 0.15 0.30.07 km 1:8,990 212 OSA Map City of Corcoran City Park Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA, Esri Community Maps Contributors, Metropolitan Council, MetroGIS, Three Rivers Park District, © 2/26/2025 0 0.1 0.20.05 mi 0 0.15 0.30.07 km 1:8,990 213 Please mail the completed form and required material to: ENReviewSHPO@state.mn.us This is a new submittal This is additional information relating to SHPO Project #: ____________ DATE:_________________ Please refer to Instructions for Completing the Request for Project Review form on our website. Submit one Request for Project Review form for each project. For questions regarding the SHPO review process, please visit our website or contact Kelly Gragg-Johnson (651-201-3285) or Leslie Coburn (651-201-3286) or by email at ENReviewSHPO@state.mn.us. Project Title: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Project Address (or Location): _________________________________________________________________________ City / Township (circle one): ________________________ Zip: __________ County: ________________ Legal Description: Township ______ Range ______E/W (circle one) Section ______ Quarter-section ______ Project Contact Name: ____________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Company/Agency: ___________________________________________________________________________________ Street Address: ___________________________________ Phone Number: ______________________________ City: _________________________ State: ______ Zip: ______________ Email: _________________________ Federal Agency (if applicable): _______________________________________________________________________ (Agency providing funds, licenses, or permits) Permit or Project Reference #: _____________________________ State Agency (if applicable): _________________________________________________________________________ (Agency providing funds, licenses, or permits) Permit or Project Reference #: _____________________________ Local Agency (if applicable): _________________________________________________________________________ (Continued on Reverse Side) 214 A)REQUIRED FOR ALL PROJECTS Write a detailed description of the proposed project. (See attached.) _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Attach a map of project location, with project area(s) clearly marked. Road names must be included and legible. B)Architecture Are there any buildings or structures within the project area? Yes No If No, continue to the Archaeology section below. If Yes, submit all of the following information: List all buildings and structures within the project area and the year they were built. (See attached.) _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Photographs of each building and structure located within the project area, along with a photo key. Include streetscape images, if applicable. All photographs must be clear, crisp, focused, and taken at ground level. Aerial photos are insufficient. List known historic buildings or structures located within the project area (i.e., individual properties or districts which are listed in the National Register or which meet the criteria for listing in the National Register). (See attached.) _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ C)Archaeology Does the proposed undertaking involve ground-disturbing activity? Yes No If No, this form is complete. If Yes, submit all of the following information: Attach the relevant portion of a 1:24000-scale USGS topographic map (photocopied or computer generated) with the project boundary marked. Description of current and previous land use and disturbances: (See attached.) _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Any available information concerning known or suspected archaeological resources within the project area. (See attached.) _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ October 2022 215 www.corcoranmn.gov Administrative Offices 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Phone: 763-420-2288 Police Department Offices 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Phone: 763-420-8966 Public Works Offices 9100 County Road 19 Corcoran, MN 55357 Phone: 763-420-2652 February 28, 2025 Project/File: 193807229 Leslie Coburn Environmental Review Specialist State Historic Preservation Office Administration Building Suite 203 50 Sherburn Ave St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Leslie Coburn, Reference: An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey and Historic Architectural Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Hennepin County, Minnesota: Request for Additional Project Review 2025-0233 The City of Corcoran proposes improvements to existing park areas at the Corcoran Community Park. The Corcoran Park Remaster Project (Project) is located in Hennepin County, Minnesota in Section 23 of Township 119 North, Range 23 West. The entire Project is on land owned by the City of Corcoran. The Project may entail the proposed construction of several improvements to the Corcoran Community Park, including five new soccer fields, six new pickleball courts, two new tennis courts, one new playground, one splash pad, an approximately 4,000 square feet multipurpose building not to exceed 26 feet in height, and a parking lot. Two existing tennis courts, the existing playground, a storage area south of the existing ball fields, and a paved path between the existing ball fields will be removed. A regional trail connection to the Diamond Lake Regional Trail will also be developed. Connection to City sewer and water would occur for new facilities requiring connection (e.g., splash pad, multi-purpose building). The listed improvements may be implemented in phases as funding is available. In addition to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding, additional funding sources for the Project include donations from the Northwest Area Jaycees, the Hanover Athletic Association, and Three Rivers Park District organizations. Construction of the project is anticipated to begin in Spring 2025. The proposed Project received a Community Development Grant from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and therefore is subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. § 306108). In anticipation of compliance with Section 106, the City of Corcoran contracted with Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) to conduct a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey and a reconnaissance level historic architectural survey for the Project. For the Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey, Stantec surveyed a 22.6-acre APE for direct impacts. An additional 24.9 acres were included in the Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey to support future planning within the park, hereafter referred to as the Survey Area. For the reconnaissance level historic architectural survey, Stantec surveyed a 45-acre APE for indirect impacts, defined as parcels adjacent to the direct APE within viewshed of the Project Area. The archaeological and architectural surveys followed federal and state guidelines for conducting cultural resources investigations, including the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation [48 Federal Register 44716-44740] (National Park Service 1983), Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota (Anfinson 2005), the State Archaeologist’s Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota (Anfinson 2011), and Historic and Architectural Survey Manual (SHPO 2017). The City of Corcoran is requesting your review of the attached reports An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Community Park Project, Hennepin County, Minnesota (Witt, Bakken, and Jensen 2025) and Historic Architectural Survey for the City of Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase I, Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota (Davidson, Adams, and Higgins 2025). 216 www.corcoranmn.gov Administrative Offices 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Phone: 763-420-2288 Police Department Offices 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Phone: 763-420-8966 Public Works Offices 9100 County Road 19 Corcoran, MN 55357 Phone: 763-420-2652 Stantec conducted a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the Survey Area on September 23, 26, and 27, 2024, under Minnesota Archaeological Survey License 24-377. No new archaeological sites were identified during the archaeological investigation. Stantec recommends a finding of No Historic Properties Affected for the Project. No further archaeological work is recommended should the Project proceed as planned. Stantec conducted a reconnaissance level historic architectural survey of the APE in September and October 2024 and February 2025. Ten properties were identified within the indirect APE. Stantec recommends that HE-COC-00086 to HE-COC- 00094 are Not Eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Due to lack of access to the property, resource HE-COC-00085 is recommended as Undetermined, but treated as Eligible for the NRHP as the property may be an important farmstead associated with the Corcoran family, who founded the town of Corcoran. Regardless of HE-COC-00085’s NRHP status, the property should experience No Adverse Effects from the Project as planned. Your attention to this request is appreciated. If you have questions, feel free to contact me at (763) 400-7030, or by email at jtobin@corcoranmn.gov, or contact Angela Julin, Stantec’s environmental consultant for this Project, at (763) 252-6816, or email at angela.julin@stantec.com. Sincerely, Jason (Jay) Tobin City Administrator, City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 (763) 400-7030 jtobin@corcoranmn.gov 217 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project St a n t e c C o n s u l t i n g S e r v i c e s I n c . Prepared for: City of Corcoran Prepared by: Claire Witt Rikka Bakken Joshua Jensen M.Sc, RPA February 28, 2025 Project/File: 193807229 Hennepin County, Minnesota 218 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Project: 193807229 The conclusions in the Report titled An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project are Stantec’s professional opinion, as of the time of the Report, and concerning the scope described in the Report. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the scope of work was conducted and do not take into account any subsequent changes. The Report relates solely to the specific project for which Stantec was retained and the stated purpose for which the Report was prepared. The Report is not to be used or relied on for any variation or extension of the project, or for any other project or purpose, and any unauthorized use or reliance is at the recipient’s own risk. Stantec has assumed all information received from City of Corcoran (the “Client”) and third parties in the preparation of the Report to be correct. While Stantec has exercised a customary level of judgment or due diligence in the use of such information, Stantec assumes no responsibility for the consequences of any error or omission contained therein. This Report is intended solely for use by the Client in accordance with Stantec’s contract with the Client. While the Report may be provided by the Client to applicable authorities having jurisdiction and to other third parties in connection with the project, Stantec disclaims any legal duty based upon warranty, reliance or any other theory to any third party, and will not be liable to such third party for any damages or losses of any kind that may result. Prepared by Signature Joshua Jensen, M.Sc, RPA Printed Name Reviewed by Signature Angela Julin, MA, RPA Printed Name Approved by Signature Printed Name Liam Mitchell 219 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Executive Summary Project: 193807229 iii Executive Summary The City of Corcoran proposes improvements to existing park areas at the Corcoran Community Park. The Corcoran Park Remaster Project (Project) is located in Hennepin County, Minnesota in Section 23 of Township 119 North, Range 23 West. The Project is within the Central Lakes Deciduous archaeological region. The proposed Project received a Community Development Grant from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and therefore is subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. § 306108). In anticipation of compliance with Section 106, the City of Corcoran contracted with Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) to conduct a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the 22.6-acre Area of Potential Effect (APE) for ground disturbing activities. An additional 24.9 acres were included in the survey to support future planning within the park, which in combination with the APE is referred to the Survey Area hereafter. The APE is owned by the City of Corcoran. A literature review conducted prior to fieldwork identified no previously recorded archaeological sites, burial sites/cemeteries, previously conducted archaeological surveys, or previously inventoried above-ground resources within the APE. A separate architectural history survey was conducted and submitted to Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for review (Stantec 2024). Stantec conducted a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the Project on September 23, 26, and 27, 2024, under Minnesota Archaeological Survey License 24-377. No new archaeological sites were identified during the investigation. Stantec recommends a finding of No Historic Properties Affected for the Project. No further archaeological work is recommended should the Project proceed as planned. 220 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Table of Contents Project: 193807229 i Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... iii Acronyms / Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................... iii 1 Project Description ...................................................................................................................... 1 2 Environmental Context ............................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Topography ................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Hydrology ...................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Geology ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2.4 Soils and Geomorphology ............................................................................................................. 2 2.5 Vegetation and Land Use .............................................................................................................. 3 3 Culture History ............................................................................................................................. 3 3.1 Precontact Period (10,900 BCE-1650 CE) .................................................................................... 3 3.2 Contact Period (1650-1837 CE) .................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Hennepin County ........................................................................................................................... 7 4 Research Design ......................................................................................................................... 8 4.1 Objectives ...................................................................................................................................... 8 4.2 Methods ......................................................................................................................................... 8 5 Literature Search ......................................................................................................................... 9 5.1 Previously Conducted Archaeological Surveys ............................................................................. 9 5.2 Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites.................................................................................... 9 5.3 Previously Identified Burial Sites and Cemeteries ........................................................................ 9 5.4 Previously Identified Above-Ground Historic Resources ............................................................ 10 5.5 Historic Maps, Atlases, and Aerial Photographs ......................................................................... 10 6 Work Summary .......................................................................................................................... 11 6.1 Agricultural Fields ........................................................................................................................ 11 6.2 Park ............................................................................................................................................. 12 7 Results and Recommendations ............................................................................................... 18 8 References Cited ....................................................................................................................... 19 List of Tables Table 1. Soil Map Units within the APE ........................................................................................................ 3 Table 2. Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites in the Study Area ........................................................ 9 Table 3. Previously Identified Above-Ground Historic Resources in the Study Area ................................. 10 Table 4. Shovel Test Profiles - North Edge ................................................................................................. 13 Table 5. Shovel Test Profiles - South of Baseball Fields ............................................................................ 16 Table 6. Auger Test Soil Profiles ................................................................................................................ 17 List of Photos Photo 1. Agricultural Field Overview, Facing West. .................................................................................... 11 Photo 2. Representative Overview of Park Facilities, Facing North. .......................................................... 12 Photo 3. Representative Overview of Park Landscaping, Facing Northwest. ............................................ 12 Photo 4. Representative Overview of Park Facilities and Landscaping, Facing Northeast. ....................... 12 Photo 5. Representative Overview of Channelized Creek, Facing South-southwest. ................................ 12 Photo 6. ST 10, Overview. .......................................................................................................................... 13 221 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Table of Contents Project: 193807229 ii Photo 7. ST A 03, Overview. ....................................................................................................................... 15 Photo 8. ST 01, Overview. .......................................................................................................................... 15 Photo 9. ST 19, Overview. .......................................................................................................................... 16 List of Appendices Appendix A Figures A.1 Figure 1 - Project Location A.2 Figure 2 - Project Overview A.3 Figure 3 - Literature Review Results A.4 Figure 4 - GLO Survey Map A.5 Figure 5 – Survey Results 222 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Acronyms / Abbreviations Project: 193807229 iii Acronyms / Abbreviations APE Area of Potential Effects BCE Before Common Era CE Common Era cmbgs centimeters below ground surface GLO General Land Office HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development MDNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources MnSHIP Minnesota Statewide Historic Inventory Portal NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places OSA Office of the State Archaeologist Project Corcoran Park Remaster Project SHPO Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office ST Shovel Test Stantec Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. UMN University of Minnesota USGS United States Geological Survey 223 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 1 Project Description Project: 193807229 1 1 Project Description The City of Corcoran proposes improvements to existing park areas at the Corcoran City Park. The Corcoran Park Remaster Project (Project) is located in Hennepin County, Minnesota in Section 23 of Township 119 North, Range 23 West (see Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix A). The Area of Potential Effect for direct effects (APE) comprises 22.6 acres. The APE is owned by the City of Corcoran. The Project may entail the proposed construction of several improvements to the Corcoran Community Park, including five new soccer fields, six new pickleball courts, two new tennis courts, one new playground, one splash pad, an approximately 4,000 square feet multipurpose building, and a parking lot. Two existing tennis courts, the existing playground, a storage area south of the existing ball fields, and a paved path between the existing ball fields will be removed. A regional trail connection to the Diamond Lake Regional Trail will also be developed. Connection to City sewer and water would occur for new facilities requiring connection (e.g., splash pad, multi-purpose building). The listed improvements may be implemented in phases as funding is available. In addition to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding, additional funding sources for the Project include donations from the Northwest Area Jaycees, the Hanover Athletic Association, and Three Rivers Park District organizations. Construction of the project is anticipated to begin in Spring 2025. As the proposed Project received a Community Development Grant from HUD, the Project therefore is subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. § 306108). In anticipation of compliance with Section 106, the City of Corcoran contracted with Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) to conduct a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the 22.6-acre APE. An additional 24.9 acres were included in the survey to support future planning within the park, which in combination with the APE is referred to the Survey Area hereafter. Stantec conducted a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the Project on September 23, 26, and 27, 2024, under Minnesota Archaeological Survey License 24-377. Survey methods included pedestrian survey and shovel testing. The Phase I archaeological survey followed federal and state guidelines for conducting cultural resources investigations, including the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation [48 Federal Register 44716-44740] (National Park Service 1983), Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota (Anfinson 2005), the State Archaeologist’s Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota (Anfinson 2011), and Historic and Architectural Survey Manual (SHPO 2017). Angela Julin served as the Principal Investigator for the Project. Ms. Julin exceeds the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology, as defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Section 61. Angela Julin, MA, RPA, served as the Principal Investigator. Ms. Julin exceeds the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology, as defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Section 61. 2 Environmental Context The APE is located within the Big Woods subsection of the Minnesota and NE Iowa Morainal section of the Eastern Broadleaf Forest Province (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources [MDNR] 2024a). The Big 224 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 2 Environmental Context Project: 193807229 2 Woods subsection is characterized by a large area of deciduous forest present at the time of Euro-American settlement bounded by tallgrass prairie to the west, savanna and tallgrass prairie to the east, and the Mississippi River and an outwash/lake plain to the north. Much of the Big Woods subsection consists of a loamy mantled end moraine associated with the Des Moines Lobe of the Late Wisconsin Glaciation (MDNR 2024a). Current landcover within the APE consists of agricultural fields, woodlots, and a park. 2.1 Topography Topography within the Big Woods subsection ranges from circular, level topped hills bounded by smooth side slopes and level areas between the hills that are interspersed with closed depressions containing lakes and peat bogs (MDNR 2024a). The APE is located on level plain, with elevation ranging between 950 and 960 ft above sea level. 2.2 Hydrology The Big Woods subsection is home to over 100 lakes greater than 160 acres, many of which are groundwater controlled with no inlets or outlets. Major rivers within the Big Woods subsection include the Minnesota River, Crow River, and the Mississippi River (MDNR 2024a) The APE is located within the Mississippi River Watershed of the Upper Mississippi River Basin (MDNR 2024b). Precontact hydrology throughout the APE consisted of wetlands, some of which remain today (Office of the State Archaeologist [OSA] 2024a). An unnamed tributary of Rush Creek runs along the northern boundary and through the eastern half of the APE. 2.3 Geology The APE is comprised of Upper Cambrian, Paleozoic-aged bedrock. The Upper Cambrian unit consists of sandstone, siltstone, shale, and dolostone, and includes the Jordan Sandstone and St. Lawrence Formation, and the Mazomanie, Lone Rock, and Davis Formations of the Tunnel City Group. (Horton et al. 2017; Jirsa et al. 2011). 2.4 Soils and Geomorphology The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) was used to determine soil types within the APE (see Table 1). Soil types within the APE consist predominantly of loam and range from very poorly drained to well drained. Cordova loam comprises the highest percent of the APE, which is a hydric soil that typically yields a very dark gray clay loam Ap horizon extending 25 centimeters below ground surface (cmbgs) over a very dark gray clay loam A horizon extending to 46 cmbgs over an olive gray clay loam Btg1 horizon with dark yellowish brown iron concentrations extending to 76 cmbgs (NRCS 2024). 225 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 3 Culture History Project: 193807229 3 Table 1. Soil Map Units within the APE Map Unit Name Drainage Class Landform Percent of APE Cordova loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Poorly drained Drainage ways on moraines 58 Angus loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes Well drained Ground moraines, hillslopes 19 Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded Well drained Hillslopes, ground moraines 16 Glencoe clay loam, 0 to 1 percent Very poorly drained Depressions 5 Le Sueur loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes Somewhat poorly drained Ground moraines, hillslopes 2 2.5 Vegetation and Land Use Prior to Euro-American settlement, vegetation in the Big Woods subsection consisted predominantly of oak woodland and maple-basswood forest (MDNR 2024a). Historically, wildfires are less common in the Big Woods subsection than the prairie to the west due to the presence of lakes and the irregular topography (MDNR 2024a). At the time of Euro-American settlement the APE was covered by seasonal wetlands, with deciduous forest upon upland areas (OSA 2024a; Trygg 1964). At present, land use within the Big Woods subsection is predominantly cropland or pasture, and about 10 to 15 percent of the subsection remains as upland forest or wetland (MNDR 2024a). Current land use within the APE includes developed park, woodland, and agricultural fields. 3 Culture History Culturally, the APE is within the Minnesota Archaeological region 4 (Central Lakes Deciduous). This region includes most of central and east central Minnesota, containing all of Anoka, Benton, Cass, Chisago, Crow Wing, Hennepin, Isanti, Mille Lacs, Morrison, Ramsey, Sherburne, Stearns, Todd, Wadena, Washington, and Wright counties and portions of Becker, Dakota, Douglas, Kandiyohi, Kanabec, Meeker, Otter Tail, Pine, Pope, and Swift counties. The region could be extended into west central Wisconsin. (Gibbon et al. 2002). The following culture history is presented as a context. 3.1 Precontact Period (10,900 BCE-1650 CE) The first inhabitants of Minnesota are known as Paleoindians (10,900 to 7,500 years Before the Common Era [BCE]). These people were highly nomadic hunter-gatherers moving in small bands in search of food and other subsistence resources; however, in the Late Glacial and Early Holocene forests of Minnesota, Paleoindians likely relied more on gathering and the hunting of a variety of smaller animals. Paleoindian sites are small and relatively ephemeral and are commonly identified with the recovery of distinctive spear tips that occur across much of North America. Paleoindian components within the Central Lakes Deciduous 226 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 3 Culture History Project: 193807229 4 are poorly understood, but sites near lakes and major rivers seem to have been a focus of activity. Paleo point types found in the region include fluted points, western stemmed forms, eastern narrow leaf forms, broad concave base forms, and Plano the last of which are the most common throughout the region (Gibbon et al. 2002). The Paleoindian peoples were followed by Archaic Tradition hunter-gatherers. At the end of the Ice Age around 10,000 years BCE the climate became warmer and drier, which led to major changes in plant and animal communities. Spruce forests followed the retreating glacial ice northward and were replaced by a new landscape comprised of extensive lakes and rivers. Many large-game species became extinct. Archaic Tradition hunters-gatherers (6,500 to ca. 500 BCE) adapted to this new environment, shifting their focus to smaller game such as deer and elk, the abundant fish and shellfish in the numerous lakes and rivers, and wild plants such as nuts and berries (Gibbon et al. 2002). The Archaic peoples appear to have been less nomadic and lived in smaller household groups. Archaic sites are identified by large notched and stemmed projectile points. Immense sedimentation during the early part of the Archaic, corresponding with the Early and Middle Holocene periods, resulted in many Archaic Tradition sites being deeply buried under river valley deposits; therefore, these sites are not usually evident in surficial contexts. Little is known about Archaic sites in the Central Lakes Deciduous region as few sites have been excavated with intact, clearly defined Archaic horizons. Some sites have been found near lakes and major rivers, such as Petaga Point (21ML0011) near Lake Mille Lacs and the Rum River, as wells as the Pine City sites near the Snake River in Pine County. Potential Archaic burial sites are located in the western part of the region. (OSA 2024b; Gibbon et al. 2002). The Woodland Tradition followed the Archaic Tradition. In Minnesota, the Woodland Tradition is separated into two periods: the earlier Initial Woodland period (ca. 500 BCE to 500 years into the Common Era [CE]), and the later Terminal Woodland period (500 to 1650 CE). During the Initial Woodland period habitation sites in the Central Lakes Deciduous region became larger and population size may have increased and become less nomadic. Larger village sites became more concentrated on major lakes, and smaller campsites and specialized activity sites were located along major rivers and larger lakes (Gibbon et al. 2002). The frequent surficial expression of Woodland site locations, coupled with burial mounds that frequently mark their place, has resulted in more frequent documentation and excavation of Woodland sites. Due to this higher frequency of identification, many Woodland sites have also been grouped into specific regional archaeological cultures (Gibbon et al. 2002; Gibbon 2012). The Initial Woodland period is primarily marked by the emergence of precontact ceramic traditions and burial mounds. Regional archaeological cultures of the Initial Woodland period include Malmo, Howard Lake, Brainerd, St. Croix, Onamia, Blackduck, Kathio, and Clam River, with Brainerd and Blackduck concentrated in the northwestern portion and the rest in the eastern. (Gibbon et al. 2002; Gibbon 2012). The Terminal Woodland period has been defined throughout eastern and central Minnesota, the Red River Valley, and portions of the Dakotas (Gibbon 2012). During this period, populations began to increase, which in turn led to an increase in the size and number of precontact sites. In the Central Lakes Deciduous, large parts of the region likely began to be used more for resource gathering as the population became more 227 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 3 Culture History Project: 193807229 5 concentrated. Burial mounds became more prevalent and the cultural material artifacts began shifting to smaller, unnotched triangular projectile points and thinner ceramic vessels that were more globular in shape. The earliest and most common ceramic tradition is Brainerd. Though horticulture was practiced in the region, there is no evidence that agriculture was adopted during this period. Forageable resources were widespread and diverse, which reduced the need for the adoption of agriculture. Wild rice, in particular, was abundant and became an important food source (OSA 2024b). Base camps from the Woodland period are located near resource concentrations, particularly where wild rice, fishing, and agriculture were plentiful (Gibbon et al. 2002; Gibbon 2012). In the northern portion of the state ceramic types and burial practices indicate specific regional archaeological cultures, including Kathio, Blackduck, and Psinomani. In the southern portion of the state, primarily comprised of deciduous forests and prairie, some cultures adopted the cultivation of maize and the construction of effigy burial mounds. Within the Central Lakes Deciduous, early ceramics are associated with the Blackduck and shifted to Sandy Lake complex over time (Gibbon et al. 2002; Gibbon 2012). Around approximately 1000 CE, Mississippian populations from Cahokia, near St. Louis, Missouri, began to extend their influence northward into the Upper Mississippi River Valley and evidence suggests that there were attempts at colonization. Archaeologists tend to regard some southern Minnesota Terminal Woodland cultures as the northern expression of a “Mississippian” lifeway, distinguished by distinctive ceramic styles, larger and more diverse artifact assemblages, and evidence of maize production. In southern Minnesota, three Mississippian complexes have been identified: Silvernale, Oneota, and Plains Village (Gibbon et al. 2002). It was the Mississippian peoples in the south and the Terminal Woodland peoples in the north who had contact with the first Europeans to explore Minnesota in the mid-seventeenth century (Gibbon et al. 2002; Gibbon 2012). The Mississippian cultural shift does not appear to have occurred in northern Minnesota, within the Project vicinity. The region remains in the Terminal Woodland culture until Europeans and Euro-Americans make contact (Gibbon et al. 2002; OSA 2024b). 3.2 Contact Period (1650-1837 CE) The contact period includes American Indian and Euro-American contexts. The OSA subdivides the Native American context into “Indeterminate” or “Eastern Dakota,” and the Euro-American context into “Indeterminate,” “French,” “British,” and “Initial US” (OSA 2024b). This section focuses on developing a context for the broader region. The remaining information provides a temporal framework as a context. Euro-American fur traders and settlers encountered the Dakota (also known as Sioux) and Ojibwe (also known as Chippewa) Native American peoples when they moved into traditional lands in what is now Minnesota. Several other Native American tribes, including the Assiniboine, moved west in the early 1600s soon after the explorers and traders entered the region (Holmquist 1981). While the Ojibwe controlled the northern portion of the Central Lakes Deciduous by 1800, during the contact period, the Santee Dakota and Yanktonai occupied the region at contact (Gibbon et al. 2002). The Dakota lived in village-centered societies in the southern portion of Minnesota while the Ojibwe were organized into independent migratory bands in the northern portion of Minnesota (Gibbon 2012:205). 228 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 3 Culture History Project: 193807229 6 The first written European accounts about the Ojibwe appeared in Jesuit diaries, published in collected form as the Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents 1610-1791 (Thwaites 1898). The documents are so detailed in their descriptions of Native Americans and their cultures, they are considered ethnographic accounts. Following the Jesuits, French explorers and trappers traveled portions of Minnesota in the seventeenth century and established a fur trading economy with local native populations, including the Dakota and Ojibwe. Early trading posts were established along the lower Mississippi River and the first French fort was established in 1700 near present day Mankato. The fur trade resulted in the Ojibwe becoming reliant on traded goods rather than the clothing, utensils, and weapons they had traditionally constructed. In the early eighteenth century, the French began to move their fur trade north into Canada. Over the next 100 years, the Ojibwe and French established strong relationships and the French embraced Ojibwe culture, learned the language, and married into Ojibwe families. Territorial disputes, competition, and shifts in political alliances eventually led to the French and Indian War (1754 to 1763). The Ojibwe sided with the French against the British in the final Colonial War, fought between 1689 and 1763, which culminated with the French and Indian War. At the end of the French and Indian War, the 1763 Treaty of Paris resulted in the French ceding all land east of the Mississippi River in the New World to the British (Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa 2018). The French had already ceded the land west of the Mississippi River to Spain with the 1762 Treaty of Fontainebleau, but the transfer was not publicly announced until 1764. The region was retroceded to France under the terms of the 1800 Third Treaty of San Ildefonso and the 1801 Treaty of Aranjuez, then was transferred to the United States in 1803 by the Louisiana Purchase (World History Project 2018). Although the United States purchased the land, the Dakota, Ojibwe, and several other Native American groups retained sovereignty, resulting in numerous subsequent treaties with the United States. After the Treaty of Paris in 1763, the British quickly set up fur trading posts throughout Minnesota. The British fur trading economy was centered at Grand Portage, where traders would bring their furs and leave with other valuable trade goods. Jonathon Carver explored the upper Mississippi River in the 1760s. After the Revolutionary War of 1776, competition between the United States and British companies intensified throughout Minnesota. In 1803, the Louisiana land purchase established United States lands extending from the Atlantic to the Rocky Mountains. The War of 1812 saw a demise in the British fur traders due to the United States denying business licenses to British traders. Trading posts were constructed by both the French and English on larger water bodies within the region (Gibbon et al. 2002). Early British and United States citizens conducted the first fully documented land survey of Minnesota in the mid-eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. By 1806, Zebulon Pike had explored portions of the Mississippi River. Missionaries began to arrive in the early nineteenth century, primarily along the Minnesota River. The American Fur Company was founded by John Jacob Astor in 1811, after which numerous fur trading posts were quickly established throughout the state. At the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi River, Fort Snelling was constructed in 1819 to protect the new United States’ investments in the area. Large-scale fur trade resulted in a major decline in the native beaver populations and, by 1842, the fur trade in Minnesota came to an end when the American Fur Company came to its demise (Dobbs 1989). After the passing of the fur trading industry, land was opened to Euro-American settlers. 229 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 3 Culture History Project: 193807229 7 3.3 Hennepin County Hennepin County, located in the southeast quadrant of the State of Minnesota, is comprised of 607 square miles and is home to Minneapolis and its suburbs, the largest city in the state. The county is bordered by the Mississippi River to the north and east, the Minnesota River to the south, and numerous lakes extending to prairies in the west. The area has been home to native settlement for at least 6,000 years and by the time of French explorers and fur traders venturing to the region, it was primarily home to the Dakota and neighboring Ojibwe tribes in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The county’s namesake, Father Louis Hennepin, visited the region in 1680 with other French explorers and fur traders (Parsons 1916). Following the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, the United States government purchased land along the west bank of the Mississippi River from the Dakota Tribe for purpose of building a trading post and fort along the river. The first European settlement was at Fort Snelling, at the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers, established in 1820. Settlers began building houses and mills at St. Anthony Falls on the west bank of the Mississippi and on the numerous large lakes to the west in the 1830s (Hennepin County 2024). Minnesota Territory was created in 1849 and three years later Hennepin County was formally established. Minneapolis, a settlement of a few hundred people, was made the county seat. The first European/Euro- American settlers were from New England and New York but beginning in the 1850s and continuing to the early twentieth century, immigrants from Norway, Sweden, Germany, and Ireland also settled. By the 1860s more than a dozen mills lined the falls on the Mississippi River, generating power for grist and sawmills to fulfill the demand for lumber and agricultural goods in the growing region. The introduction of the railroad transport and industrial-scale manufacturing in the 1880s led Hennepin County, and particularly the City of Minneapolis, to become the flour milling capital of the world and one of the nation’s largest lumber producers. The population of the county exceeded 200,000 by the turn of the century; however, much of the county remained distinctly rural, with 284,000 acres of land devoted to farmland (Hennepin County 2024). In the early twentieth century, Minneapolis had become a major regional city and dominated the economy and politics of the broader Hennepin County. The largest county by population in the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County continued to grow rapidly through the 1940s. In the post-war years, the intense agricultural nature of Hennepin County outside of Minneapolis began to decline as suburban development grew (Hennepin County 2024). This suburban growth became the driving force behind the county’s history in the contemporary era as the population of Minneapolis reached its peak of 521,718 people in 1950 and has since steadily declined. The lack of available lots within the city limits exacerbated by the development of Village and City governments in the county outside of Minneapolis, combined with the increasing dependence on the automobile, was among the factors that led to the growth of the suburbs. Highways were constructed throughout, and the economy became more diversified, turning away from milling industries. By 1970, the number of people in Hennepin County living outside of Minneapolis outnumbered those living within the city limits for the first time in more than a century. In response, the county government centralized in Minneapolis and took on a more active role regionally. The population of the county reached 1,260,121 people in the 2020 census (New History 2020). 230 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 4 Research Design Project: 193807229 8 Corcoran was organized in 1858 and named for the town founder Patrick Corcoran, who along with his wife Anne, was one of the first Euro-American settlers in the area in 1855. Patrick Corcoran built the first schoolhouse, a 12-foot by 16-foot log cabin, in 1857. Patrick Corcoran also owned a general store, was the first teacher in the schoolhouse he built, and was the first postmaster for Corcoran (City of Corcoran 2024). 4 Research Design 4.1 Objectives The objective of the literature search of the APE was to better understand what has been previously documented about the APE and Project vicinity. The literature search, supported by a review of the environmental context, aided in the evaluation of the APE to determine the necessity for a Phase I investigation. The purpose of the review of previously recorded archaeological site data, survey reports, and archival information, was to provide insight into the potential for significant intact archaeological resources within the APE, and to understand previous disturbances in the APE, to guide survey planning. Moreover, the historical context obtained from the literature search assisted in assessing the significance of potential sites and where they may be located based on known environmental variables. The objective of this Phase I investigation was to ascertain whether archaeological sites are present within the APE, and to preliminarily delineate both the vertical and horizontal extent of the identified site limits, without impacting the integrity of identified sites. The results of the investigation will inform the final design of the proposed Project. Stantec assumes that the Phase I investigation will satisfy compliance with Section 106 by avoiding impacts to identified historic properties. 4.2 Methods The literature search focused on previously recorded cultural resources (archaeological sites and architectural properties) within the literature search Study Area, defined as a 1-mile buffer around the APE. In addition, Stantec reviewed archival resources including General Land Office (GLO) maps, county atlases, the University of Minnesota (UMN) Borchert Map Library, Trygg maps, and historical aerial imagery to identify potential unrecorded cultural features in the APE. Areas of ground surface visibility affording less than 25 percent soil exposure were shovel tested where feasible and practical, with soil screened through ¼ inch mesh. Shovel tests (ST) measured 30 to 40 cm in diameter, terminating at least 10 cm into subsoil when possible. Shovel testing was conducted at 15-meter intervals. Shovel testing was proposed only in areas with moderate to high probability for intact archaeological resources. These areas were designated as such based on their proximity to precontact and historic waterbodies, where muck, poorly drained soils, steep soils, and rock outcrops did not prohibit shovel testing. Shovel testing was confined to two landforms, along the northern boundary of the APE and south of the western baseball fields, mapped as non-hydric soils. Judgmental auger tests were excavated on remaining landforms to confirm mapped hydric soils and disturbance due to extensive landscaping during the original construction of the park. Areas with ground surface visibility affording 25 percent soil exposure 231 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 5 Literature Search Project: 193807229 9 or greater were pedestrian surveyed in lieu of shovel testing. Pedestrian survey was conducted at 15-meter intervals. The survey was geographically oriented using Geographic Information System data in conjunction with an EOS Arrow 100 series GNSS receiver. Field observations, including vegetation, ground surface visibility, slope, general topography, and areas of soil disturbance or inundation, were described in field forms. No cultural materials were identified or collected as a result of this survey; therefore, the methods will not include a discussion of collection, analysis, or curation methods. 5 Literature Search Stantec reviewed the OSA Online Portal and the Minnesota’s Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MnSHIP) in August 2024. Stantec performed an in-person records search at the SHPO on September 3, 2024. According to the MnModel, available on the OSA Online Portal, the APE is within areas that are either well surveyed with low site potential or poorly surveyed with unknown site potential. 5.1 Previously Conducted Archaeological Surveys No previously conducted archaeological surveys are recorded in the APE or Study Area. 5.2 Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites No previously recorded archaeological sites are located within the APE. Two archaeological sites are recorded in the Study Area, 21HE0379 and 21HE0380 (see Table 2; see Figure 3 in Appendix A). Both archaeological sites are unevaluated for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Table 2. Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites in the Study Area Site Number Site Name Site Type Cultural Affiliation NRHP Status 21HE0379 Mengelkoch Lithic Scatter Unknown Precontact Unevaluated 21HE0380 Gorham/Sipe Farmstead Historic Artifact Scatter/Standing Structure Post-contact Unevaluated 5.3 Previously Identified Burial Sites and Cemeteries There are no previously identified burial sites/cemeteries within the APE. One historic cemetery, the St. Thomas Cemetery, is recorded in the Study Area (see Figure 3 in Appendix A). 232 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 5 Literature Search Project: 193807229 10 5.4 Previously Identified Above-Ground Historic Resources No previously identified above-ground historic resources are recorded in the APE. Four previously identified above-ground historic resources are recorded within the Study Area (see Figure 3 in Appendix A). Of the four resources, three resources have not been evaluated for listing in the NRHP and one resource, HE- COC-00079, is considered not eligible for listing in the NRHP (see Table 3). Table 3. Previously Identified Above-Ground Historic Resources in the Study Area Resource No. Name Resource Type Address/Location NRHP Eligibility Status HE-COC-00017 Farmhouse Building 19835 Larkin Rd. Unevaluated HE-COC-00025 Store (demolished) Building NW intersection of Co Rd. 10 and Co Rd. 50 Unevaluated HE-COC-00026 St. Thomas Catholic Church Building 20000 County Rd 10 Unevaluated HE-COC-00079 Bridge 90586 Structure CSAH 50 over South Fork Rush Creek Not Eligible 5.5 Historic Maps, Atlases, and Aerial Photographs Stantec reviewed the original GLO surveys, atlas maps, topographic maps, and historic aerial imagery of the APE. The original 1855 GLO survey and 1964 Trygg interpretation of the original survey notes do not indicate any structures or features within the APE (GLO 1855; Trygg 1964; see Figure 4 in Appendix A). Recorded vegetation at the time of the original survey consisted of marsh in the western half of the APE and upland forest throughout the remainder of the APE (GLO 1855; Trygg 1964). The 1873 plat map indicates one structure in the southeast corner of the APE, on land owned by P.B. Corcoran at the time (Wright 1973). The City of Corcoran and Corcoran township are both named for P.B. Corcoran, mentioned above in Section 3.3. Plat maps from 1898, 1913, and 1916 all show a stream running north-south through the east half of the APE, with no structures mapped within the APE (Dahl 1898; State of Minnesota 1916; Westby 1913). Stantec reviewed United State Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps of the APE for features or structures within the APE. On the 1909 and 1958 Rockford MN 7.5’ quadrangle, one structure is indicated in the southeast corner of the APE, along what is now County Road 10. An intermittent stream is also shown running north-south through the east half of the APE (USGS 1909, 1958). The structure is not mapped on the 1981 Hamel MN 7.5’ quadrangle and Corcoran Community Park is shown in the APE (USGS 1981). In aerial imagery from 1937, the APE is covered by row-crop agriculture and has been largely deforested. One farmstead appears in the southeast corner of the APE along what is now County Road 10 (UMN 2015). Little change appears in aerial imagery from 1945, 1957, 1960, and 1971 (UMN 2015). The farmstead was demolished between 1977 and 1975, when the eastern half of the park appears in aerial imagery; the unnamed branch of Rush Creek appears channelized through the park beginning in 1975 aerial imagery 233 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 11 (Nationwide Environmental Tile Research, LLC 2024). The western half of the park first appears in 1991 aerial imagery (Nationwide Environmental Tile Research, LLC 2024). 6 Work Summary The Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey was conducted on September 23, 26, and 27, 2024 under Minnesota Archaeological Survey License 24-377. Angela Julin, MA, RPA, served as Principal Investigator. Joshua Jensen served as Field Director. The APE consisted of two agricultural fields along the western edge and a manicured lawn and park facilities throughout the rest of the APE (see Figure 5 in Appendix A). 6.1 Agricultural Fields The agricultural fields consisted of harvested corn, yielding 80 to 90 percent ground surface visibility; therefore, pedestrian survey was conducted in lieu of shovel testing (see Photo 1; Figure 5 in Appendix A). No cultural materials were identified in the agricultural fields. Photo 1. Agricultural Field Overview, Facing West. 234 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 12 6.2 Park The park portion of the APE consisted of one gravel parking lot, a portion of a baseball field, tennis courts, and a playground (see Photo 2; Figure 5 in Appendix A). An additional five baseball fields, two gravel parking lots, a pavilion, and other facilities were concentrated outside of the APE within the Survey Area. A majority of the area was covered in manicured grass, completely obscuring the ground surface. The park was heavily landscaped, and the parking lots and baseball fields appeared mechanically leveled (see Photos 3 and 4). The creek flowing through the eastern half of the Survey Area is channeled, consisting of unnatural straight sections and angled corners (see Photo 5). Due to the obvious disturbances associated with the initial construction of the park and mapped hydric soils within the APE, shovel testing was limited to two landforms with non-hydric soils. Auger tests were excavated on landforms within hydric soils; the landforms included mapped hydric areas along the northwestern boundary of the APE, the southwestern portion of the APE, and baseball fields. Photo 2. Representative Overview of Park Facilities, Facing North. Photo 3. Representative Overview of Park Landscaping, Facing Northwest. Photo 4. Representative Overview of Park Facilities and Landscaping, Facing Northeast. Photo 5. Representative Overview of Channelized Creek, Facing South-southwest. 235 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 13 A total of 19 STs were excavated within the APE, with an additional eight STs excavated within the larger Survey Area (see Figure 5 in Appendix A; see Table 4). The typical shovel test soil profile along the northern edge of the Survey Area consisted of a 10YR 3/2 very dark grayish brown sandy loam Ap horizon extending on average between 20 and 30 cmbgs over a 10YR 4/4 dark yellowish brown sandy loam Bt1 horizon excavated to an average depth between 30 and 40 cmbgs (see Photo 6). Pebbles and gravels typically constituted 5 to 20 percent of both the Ap and Bt1 horizons. The Ap horizon is within the range of mapped Angus loam when accounting for the dry conditions (NRCS 2024). The observed soils were sandier and contained more gravel than the typical profile for Angus loam but was within the published range of characteristics (NRCS 2024). Photo 6. ST 10, Overview. Table 4. Shovel Test Profiles - North Edge Shovel Test Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? 2 Ap Bt1 0 – 26 26 – 40 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/4 Sandy loam Sandy clay loam No 3 Ap Bt1 0 – 16 16 – 27 10YR 5/1 10YR 6/4 Sandy loam with 1% pebbles Sandy loam with 1% pebbles No 4 Ap Bt1 0 – 18 18 – 34 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 1% pebbles Sandy loam No 5 Ap/A 0 – 56 10YR 3/2 Sandy loam Terminated at compact soil No 6 Ap Bt1 0 – 26 26 – 36 10YR 4/2 10YR 5/4 Sandy loam with 1% pebbles Sandy clay loam No 236 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 14 Shovel Test Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? 7 Ap Bt1 0 – 36 36 – 42 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles No 8 Ap Bt1 0 – 24 24 – 36 10YR 4/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy clay loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No 9 Ap Bt1 0 – 20 20 - 34 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles No 10 Ap Bt1 0 – 28 28 – 42 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No 11 Ap A AB 0 – 30 30 – 90 90 – 100 10YR 3/2 10YR 2/1 10YR 2/1 + 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Loam Clay loam No 12 Ap Bt1 0 – 40 40 – 52 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy clay loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No 13 Ap Bt1 0 – 20 20 - 36 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No 14 Ap 0 – 65 10YR 3/2 Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel Terminated at root impasse No 15 Ap Bt1 0 – 50 50 - 62 10YR 2/2 10YR 4/2 Loam Sandy loam No 16 Ap Bt1 0 – 35 35 - 45 10YR 3/2 10YR 5/2 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No 17 Ap Bt1 0 – 31 31 - 51 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Loam Sandy loam No Ten STs were excavated south of the western baseball fields in the APE, and one additional ST excavated within the western baseball fields in the larger Survey Area (see Table 5; Figure 5 in Appendix A). The typical ST soil profile south of the western baseball fields consisted of a 10YR 3/2 very dark grayish brown 237 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 15 silty clay mottled with 30 percent 10YR 7/3 very pale brown silty clay Fill 1 horizon extending 10 cmbgs over a 10YR 5/6 yellowish brown silty clay mottled with 30 percent 10YR 5/3 brown silty clay Fill 2 horizon extending to 105 cmbgs (see Photo 7). Oxidized iron concentrations and/or streaks were noted in both fill horizons. Poorly sorted pebbles constituted one to five percent of the Fill 1 horizon and poorly sorted gravels constituted 20 to 50 percent of the Fill 2 horizon. The gravely clay fill is entirely different from the mapped Lester loam and is the result of landscaping observed throughout the park (NRCS 2024). STs 1 and 20 were excavated on top of a berm and consisted of a 10YR 2/2 very dark brown sandy loam Ap horizon extending between 44 and 48 cmbgs over a 10YR 5/2 grayish brown sandy loam E horizon extending between 54 and 60 cmbgs (see Photo 8). The Ap and E horizons included 1 to 5 percent pebbles and gravels. The soil profiles from STs 1 and 20 are within the listed range of characteristics of the mapped Lester loam; however, the berm is primarily mapped within hydric soils and does not appear to be a natural landform (NRCS 2024). STs 18 and 19 had profiles consisting of a 10YR 2/1 black sandy clay loam A1 horizon extending between 53 and 102 cmbgs over a 10YR 3/2 very dark gray clay A2 horizon extending between 65 and 112 cmbgs (see Photo 9). The profile is deeper and contains more clay than the mapped Cordova loam (NRCS 2024). No cultural materials were identified during shovel testing. Photo 7. ST A 03, Overview. Photo 8. ST 01, Overview. 238 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 16 Photo 9. ST 19, Overview. Table 5. Shovel Test Profiles - South of Baseball Fields Shovel Test Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? A 1 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 26 26 - 34 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/2 + 10YR 5/6 Loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel Sandy clay loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel No A 2 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 20 20 - 38 10YR 2/1 10YR 5/1 Clay loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel Clay loam with 5-20% gravel No A 3 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 10 10 – 105 10YR 3/2 10YR 5/6 + 10YR 5/2 Silty clay with 1-5% pebbles Silty clay with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Oxidized Fe streaks in Fill 2 No A 4 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 22 22 - 35 10YR 2/1 10YR 5/4 + 10YR 4/2 Sandy clay Loamy sand with 1% pebbles Oxidized Fe inclusions in Fill 2 No A 5 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 20 20 – 30 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/3 Loam with 1% pebbles Sandy clay loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No B 1 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 26 26 - 37 10YR 2/1 10YR 5/2 + 10YR 4/4 Sandy clay with 1-5% pebbles Loamy sand with 1-5% pebbles Oxidized Fe inclusions in Fill 2 No C 1 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 20 20 – 34 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/2 Clay loam with 1-5% gravel Clay loam with 1-5% gravel Oxidized Fe inclusions in Fill 2 No 239 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 17 Shovel Test Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? 1 A E 0 – 44 44 – 60 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/2 Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel No 18 A1 A2 0 – 53 53 – 65 10YR 2/1 10YR 4/2 Sandy clay loam Clay No 19 A1 A2 0 – 102 102-112 10YR 2/1 10YR 3/2 Sandy clay loam Clay No 20 A E 0 – 48 48 - 54 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/2 Sandy loam with 1-5% gravel Sandy loam with 1-5% gravel No Five auger tests were excavated on landforms mapped as hydric soils throughout the APE, with four additional auger tests excavated within the larger Survey Area (see Figure 5 in Appendix A). The auger tests did not have a consistent soil profile (see Table 6). The auger tests within the baseball fields (Augers 2, 3, 8, and 9) consisted of mottled sandy loams and clays with slight to moderate inclusions of pebbles and gravels. The soil profiles are inconsistent with mapped soils and the inconsistency is likely the result of filling and landscaping to produce dry, flat baseball fields (NRCS 2024). The remaining augur tests consisted of very dark brown or grayish brown to black sand clay with slight pebble and gravel inclusions. The aforementioned soil profiles are inconsistent with the mapped Cordova loam but are closer to the nearby recorded Glencoe clay loam (NRCS 2024). No cultural materials were identified during auger testing. Table 6. Auger Test Soil Profiles Auger Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? 1 Fill 1 Fill 2 Fill 3 0 – 22 22 – 32 32 - 77 10YR 3/2 + 10YR 4/4 10YR 4/4 10YR 5/3 + 7.5YR 5/8+ 10YR 6/2 Silt loam Silt loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Clay loam with 1-5% pebbles Terminated due to gravely soil No 2 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 15 15 – 80 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/4 Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel Clay loam 5-20% pebbles/gravels Terminated due to gravely soil No 3 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 20 20 - 90 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/4 + 10YR 4/4 + 10YR 6/2 Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles Clay loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Terminated due to gravely soil No 4 A1 0 – 65 10YR 2/1 Sandy clay No 240 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 7 Results and Recommendations Project: 193807229 18 Auger Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? AB Bg1 65 – 73 73 – 90 10YR 4/2 10YR 5/3 + 10YR 6/3 Sandy clay Sandy Clay with 1% pebbles 5 Ap A AB 0 – 13 13 – 58 58 - 105 10YR 3/2 10YR 2/1 10YR 2/1 + 10YR 5/3 Loamy sand with 1-5% pebbles Sandy clay with 1-5% pebbles Clay iron redox in A 3 No 6 Ap A 0 – 35 35 – 52 10YR 2/1 10YR 3/2 Clay loam with 1-5% pebbles Clay with 1% pebbles Iron redox in A 2 No 7 Ap A 0 – 37 37 - 57 10YR 2/2 10YR 3/2 Sandy clay with 1% gravel Sandy clay with 1% gravel No 8 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 26 26 – 42 10YR 2/1 + 10YR 5/6 10YR 6/4 + 10YR7/2 Loamy sand with 1-5% pebbles Clay loam with 5-20% pebble/gravel Terminated due to gravely soil No 9 Fill 1 Fill 2 Fill 3 0 – 21 21 – 53 53 – 77 10YR 2/2 + 10YR 5/4 10YR 5/6 10YR 3/2 + 10YR 5/6 Sandy loam with 1-5% gravel Sandy loam with 1-5% gravel Sandy loam with 1-5% gravels Terminated due to gravely soil, iron redox in Fill 3 No 7 Results and Recommendations The Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey was conducted on September 23, 26, and 27, 2024. No cultural materials were identified during the archaeological survey. The unnatural landforms, numerous facilities, and disturbed soils and fill suggest that the majority of the APE was previously disturbed during the construction of the extant park facilities and has low potential to yield intact archaeological sites. Stantec recommends a finding of No Historic Properties Affected for the Project. No further archaeological work is recommended should the Project proceed as planned. 241 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 8 References Cited Project: 193807229 19 8 References Cited Anfinson, Scott 2005. SHPO Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota. State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul, Minnesota. https://mn.gov/admin/assets/archsurvey_tcm36-327672.pdf. 2011. State Archaeologist’s Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota. Office of the State Archaeologist, St. Paul, Minnesota. https://mn.gov/admin/assets/OSAmanual_tcm36-186982.pdf. City of Corcoran. 2024. History, Electronic document. https://www.corcoranmn.gov/our_community/history, accessed September 2024. Dahl, Peter M. 1898. Plat Book of Hennepin County, Medina Township. Northwester Map Publishing Company; E. P. Noll & Company. https://cdm16022.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/mhs/id/1254, accessed September 2024. Dobbs, C. A. 1989. Historic Context Outlines: The Contact Period Contexts (ca 1630 A.D. – 1820 A.D.) Draft Reports of Investigations No. 39. Institute for Minnesota Archaeology, Minneapolis. Submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office, Minnesota Historical Society, Saint Paul. Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. 2018. Onigamiinsing Dibaajimowinan Duluth’s Stories, Electronic document. http://www.duluthstories.net/index.html, accessed September 2024. General Land Office (GLO). 1855. Original Survey, MN, 5th PM, T119N – R23W. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/survey/default.aspx?dm_id=232242&sid=esv0ej4t.mer#surveyD etailsTabIndex=1, accessed September 2024. Gibbon, Guy. 2012. Archaeology of Minnesota: The Prehistory of the Upper Mississippi River Region. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Gibbon, Guy E., Craig M. Johnson, and Elizabeth Hobbs. 2002. Minnesota’s Environment and Native American Culture History. https://www.dot.state.mn.us/mnmodel/P3FinalReport/chapter3.html#ch344, accessed September 2024 Hennepin County. 2024. History of Hennepin County, Electronic document, https://www.hennepin.us/en/your-government/overview/overview-of-hennepin-county, accessed September 2024. Holmquist, June D. 1981. They Chose Minnesota: A Survey of the State’s Ethnic Groups. Chicago: Minnesota, Historical Society Press, Saint Paul. Horton, D. John, Carma A. San Juan, and Dougls B. Stoeser. 2017. The State Geological Map Compilation (SGMC) geodatabase of the conterminous United States. United States Geological Survey. Electronic document, https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/ds1052, accessed September 2024. 242 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 8 References Cited Project: 193807229 20 Jirsa, Mark A. Terrence J. Boerboom, V.W. Chandler, John H. Mossler, Anthony C. Runkel, and Dale R. Setterholm 2011. S-21 Geologic Map of Minnesota—Bedrock Geology. Minnesota Geological Survey, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Electronic document, https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/101466, accessed September 2024. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) 2024a. Ecological Classification System - Big Woods Subsection. https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecs/222Mb/index.html, accessed September 2024. 2024b. Minnesota’s watershed basins. https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/watersheds/map.html, accessed September 2024. Minnesota Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA). 2024a. Office of the State Archaeologist Portal, https://osaportal.gisdata.mn.gov/, accessed September 2024. 2024b. Prehistoric Period. Electronic document, https://mn.gov/admin/archaeologist/the- public/mn-archaeology/prehistoric-period/, accessed September 2024. Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) 2017. Historic and Architectural Survey Manual. State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul, Minnesota. https://mn.gov/admin/assets/surveymanual082017_tcm36-327675.pdf. National Park Service (NPS) 1983. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. Federal Register 48(190):44716-44740. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2024. Web Soil Survey. Electronic document, https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, accessed September 2024. Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC. 2024. Historic Aerials by NETROnline. Electronic document, https://historicaerials.com/viewer, accessed September 2024. New History. 2020. New History Historic Context and History-Architecture Survey. Minneapolis in the Modern Era: 1930-1975. Parsons, E. Dudley. 1916. The Story of Minnesota, American Book Company, New York. State of Minnesota. 1916. Minnesota Plat Book. https://geo.lib.umn.edu/collections/digitizedplatbooks/stateofmn1916.html, accessed September 2024. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (Stantec). 2024. Historic Architectural Survey, Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase I, Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Thwaites, Reuben G. (ed). 1898. The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents 1610 to 1791. The Burrows Brothers, Cleveland, http://moses.creighton.edu/kripke/jesuitrelations/, accessed September 2024 Trygg, J. William, Sr. 1964. Composite Map of United States Land Surveyors’’ Original Plats and Field Notes – Sheet 7. Trygg Land Office, Ely, Minnesota. 243 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 8 References Cited Project: 193807229 21 Westby, P. O. 1913. Atlas of Hennepin County Minnesota. Hennepin Atlas and Publishing Company. Minneapolis, Minnesota. https://geo.lib.umn.edu/collections/digitizedplatbooks/hennepin1913index.htm, accessed September 2024. World History Project. 2018. Nov 30, 1803: Louisiana is Transferred from Spanish Control to French Control, https://worldhistoryproject.org/1803/11/30/louisiana-is-transferred-from-spanish-control- to-french-control, accessed May 2024. Wright George B. 1873. Hennepin County Atlas. St. Paul Lithographic and Engraving Company, St. Paul Minnesota. https://collection.mndigital.org/catalog/mhs:865#?c=&m=&s=&cv=&xywh=-345%2C- 144%2C3779%2C2866, accessed September 2024. United States Geological Survey (USGS). 1909. Rockford 1909 https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht- bin/tv_browse.pl?id=f5b4890178eb72c9b12cdcf44592e3af, accessed August 2024 1958. Rockford 1958 https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht- bin/tv_browse.pl?id=268f3a22beeef905275f4d3590b2670c, accessed August 2024. 1981. Hamel 1981 https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht- bin/tv_browse.pl?id=b393d8f032aaf55f455b661aecf436b4, accessed August 2024 University of Minnesota (UMN). 2015. Minnesota Historic Aerial Photographs Online. University of Minnesota Libraries. Electronic document, https://apps.lib.umn.edu/mhapo/ accessed August 2024. 244 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Project: 193807229 Appendix A 245 Anoka Co. Carver Co. Hennepin Co. Ra m s e y C o . Wright Co. Minneapolis St. Paul §¨¦694 §¨¦35E §¨¦94 §¨¦35W §¨¦394 §¨¦35 §¨¦494 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ U: \ 1 9 3 8 \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ A r c P r o \ C u l t u r a l \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 _C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ A r c h a e o l o g y . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 2 5 B y : j s e i b e l Legend Survey Area APE Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, Esri, USCB, USGS 3. Background: USGS 7.5' Topographic Quadrangles (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:24,000 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Prepared by JDS on 2025-01-30 TR by MP on 2024-08-28 IR by XXX on 2024-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S23 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229Client/ProjectCity of Corcoran Corcoran Park Remaster Project Cultural Review Project Location with Topography 1 246 Hennepin Co. Corcoran Maple Grove T119N, R23W, S23 T119N, R23W, S26Co Rd 50 C o R d 10 Rebecca Park Trl B a s s L a k e R d Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ U: \ 1 9 3 8 \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ A r c P r o \ C u l t u r a l \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 _C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ A r c h a e o l o g y . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 2 5 B y : j s e i b e l Legend Survey Area APE Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, Esri, USCB, USGS 3. Background: NAIP 2021 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:4,800 0 200 400 Feet Prepared by JDS on 2024-08-28 TR by MP on 2024-08-28 IR by XXX on 2024-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S23 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229Client/ProjectCity of Corcoran Corcoran Park Remaster Project Cultural Review Project Location with Aerial 2 247 Hennepin Co.Wr i g h t C o . ")101 ST55 £¤12 §¨¦694 §¨¦494 §¨¦94 HE-COC-00025 HE-COC-00079 HE-COC-00017 HE-COC-00026 21HE0380 21HE0379 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ U: \ 1 9 3 8 \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ A r c P r o \ C u l t u r a l \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 _C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ A r c h a e o l o g y . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 2 5 B y : j s e i b e l Legend Survey Area APE 1 Mile Survey Area Buffer Archaeological Site MnSHIP Inventoried Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, Esri, USCB, USGS, MnSHIP, OSA 3. Background: Esri World Topographic Map (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:24,000 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Prepared by JDS on 2025-01-30 TR by MP on 2024-08-28 IR by XXX on 2024-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S23 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229Client/ProjectCity of Corcoran Corcoran Park Remaster Project Cultural Review Literature Review 3 CONFIDENTIAL 248 Anoka Co. Carver Co. Hennepin Co. Ra m s e y C o . Wright Co. Minneapolis St. Paul §¨¦694 §¨¦35E §¨¦94 §¨¦35W §¨¦394 §¨¦35 §¨¦494 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ U: \ 1 9 3 8 \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ A r c P r o \ C u l t u r a l \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 _C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ A r c h a e o l o g y . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 2 5 B y : j s e i b e l Legend Survey Area APE Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, Esri, USCB, USGS 3. Background: Plat Map 1856 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:24,000 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Prepared by JDS on 2025-01-30 TR by MP on 2024-08-28 IR by XXX on 2024-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S23 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229Client/ProjectCity of Corcoran Corcoran Park Remaster Project Cultural Review General Land Office Records Survey Map 4 249 Hennepin Co. Corcoran Maple Grove #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* ST-17 ST-16 ST-15 ST-14 ST-13 ST-12 ST-11 ST-08 ST-07 ST-06 ST-05 ST-04 ST-03 ST-02 ST-09 ST-10 ST-A 01ST-A 02 ST-A 03 ST-A 04 ST-A 05 ST-B 01 ST-C 01 ST-20 ST-01 ST-18 ST-19 Auger 01 Auger 03 Auger 08 Auger 02 Auger 05 Auger 04 Auger 07 Auger 09 Auger 06 T119N, R23W, S23 T119N, R23W, S26Co Rd 50 C o R d 10 Rebecca Park Trl B a s s L a k e R d Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ U: \ 1 9 3 8 \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ A r c P r o \ C u l t u r a l \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 _C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ A r c h a e o l o g y . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 2 5 B y : j s e i b e l Legend Survey Area APE #*Auger Test Negative Shovel Test Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, Esri, USCB, USGS 3. Background: NAIP 2021 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:4,800 0 200 400 Feet Prepared by JDS on 2025-01-30 TR by MP on 2024-10-11 IR by XXX on 2024-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S23 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229Client/ProjectCity of Corcoran Corcoran Park Remaster Project Cultural Review Survey Results 5 250 Wi t h e v e r y c o m m u n i t y , w e r e d e f i n e w h a t ’ s p o s s i b l e . Stantec is a global leader in sustainable architecture, engineering, and environmental consulting. The diverse perspectives of our partners and interested parties drive us to think beyond what’s previously been done on critical issues like climate change, digital transformation, and future-proofing our cities and infrastructure. We innovate at the intersection of community, creativity, and client relationships to advance communities everywhere, so that together we can redefine what’s possible. 251 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota 193807229 252 Document Information Project Name Historic Architectural Survey for the City of Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase 1, Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota Lead Federal Agency U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Project Number 193807229 Project Manager Courtnay Bot, Senior Project Manager Date February 2025 Prepared and Submitted by Rowan Davidson, Ph.D., T’Keyah Adams, and Holly Higgins, MSHP Principal Investigator Rachel M. Kennedy, MHP rachel.kennedy@stantec.com Prepared for: Jessica Christensen Buck, Recreation Supervisor City of Corcoran 9100 County Road 19 Corcoran, MN 55340 (763) 400-7034 Prepared by: Stantec 1 Carlson Parkway N Plymouth, MN 55417 502-579-1814 253 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Project is a federal undertaking which will utilize a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Economic Development Initiative Community Project Funding Grant and, thus, HUD is the lead federal agency. The historic architectural survey was requested to meet federal compliance requirements in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), as amended (54 USC § 306108) and its implementing regulations (36 CFR § 800). 254 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec ii ABSTRACT/MANAGEMENT SUMMARY Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (Stantec) was contracted by the City of Corcoran, Minnesota to complete a reconnaissance level historic architectural survey for the proposed Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase 1, located at 20200 County Rd 50 in Corcoran (the Project). The proposed Project involves the proposed construction of improvements including the addition of a new splash pad, playground, pickleball courts, and park pavilion; the reconfiguration of soccer fields and tennis courts for an improved experience; and enhancing the natural features in the park. In September/October 2024 and February 2025, Stantec’s architectural history staff, managed by Rachel M Kennedy, MHP, surveyed ten properties within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the Project. Stantec recommends that HE-COC-00086 to HE-COC-00094 (Field Sites 2 to 12) are Not Eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). HE-COC-00085 (Field Site 1) is recommended as undetermined but treated as eligible for the NRHP, due to a lack of access and a potential for historic importance. The following report describes these findings. 255 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec iii CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS I certify that this investigation was conducted and documented according to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines and that the report is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. February 28, 2025 ___________________________________ ______________________ Signature of Principal Investigator Date 256 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec iv Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................................. i ABSTRACT/MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... ii CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS ................................................................................................................... iii INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Description .................................................................................................................................... 1 Compliance Requirements ........................................................................................................................ 6 Area of Potential Effects ............................................................................................................................ 6 METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 8 Previous Investigations .............................................................................................................................. 8 Map and Literature Review ..................................................................................................................... 10 Survey Methodology ................................................................................................................................ 11 Summary of Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 12 HISTORIC CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................. 15 Hennepin County, Minnesota .............................................................................................................................. 15 City of Corcoran ................................................................................................................................................... 16 SITE DESCRIPTIONS AND RESULTS ...................................................................................................... 17 FIELD SURVEY SITES .................................................................................................................................... 17 HE-COC-00085 ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 HE-COC-00086 ..................................................................................................................................................... 25 HE-COC-00087 ..................................................................................................................................................... 28 HE-COC-00088 ..................................................................................................................................................... 30 HE-COC-00089 ..................................................................................................................................................... 32 HE-COC-00090 ..................................................................................................................................................... 34 HE-COC-00092 ..................................................................................................................................................... 36 HE-COC-00093 ..................................................................................................................................................... 38 HE-COC-00094 ..................................................................................................................................................... 40 HE-COC-00091 ..................................................................................................................................................... 42 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 49 SELECT REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 50 257 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec v FIGURES FIGURE 1. CORCORAN CITY PARK IMPROVEMENTS, PROPOSED SITE PLAN. NOTE THE EXTENSION OF THE PARK TRAIL TO THE EAST EXTENDING TO COUNTY ROAD 10. ................................................................................................................................................ 4 FIGURE 2. PROJECT LOCATION, CORCORAN, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ............................................................................... 5 FIGURE 3. AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS (APE). ....................................................................................................................... 7 FIGURE 4. PREVIOUSLY RECORDED PROPERTIES ........................................................................................................................ 9 FIGURE 5. FIELD SURVEY MAP. ........................................................................................................................................... 18 FIGURE 6. CORCORAN CITY PARK IMPROVEMENTS, PROPOSED SITE PLAN ................................................................................... 22 FIGURE 7. EFFECTS MAP, HE-COC-00085. NOTE THAT THE PROJECT ACTIVITIES, MOST OF WHICH ARE OF A LOW HORIZONTAL NATURE, BECOMING OF A PARK, AND ARE OCCURRING NORTH OF COUNTY ROAD 50. ........................................................................ 24 TABLES TABLE 1. PREVIOUSLY RECORDED PROPERTIES, CORCORAN, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA. ......................................................... 8 TABLE 2. MAPS OF PROJECT AREA ....................................................................................................................................... 10 TABLE 3. INVENTORIED RESOURCES ..................................................................................................................................... 12 TABLE 4. NON-INVENTORIED PROPERTIES ............................................................................................................................. 13 PLATES PLATE 1. OVERVIEW TOWARD PROJECT FOOTPRINT FROM COUNTY ROAD 50, LOOKING EAST FORM NEAR CORCORAN PARK TRAIL. .......... 2 PLATE 2. OVERVIEW OF PROJECT FOOTPRINT FROM COUNTY ROAD 10, LOOKING NORTHWEST. ......................................................... 2 PLATE 3. VIEW FROM COUNTY ROAD 50 AT THE ENTRANCE TO CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK TOWARD HE-COC-00085, LOOKING SOUTHEAST. .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 PLATE 4. JOHN CORCORAN FARMSTEAD, LOOKING NORTH. ...................................................................................................... 19 PLATE 5. JOHN CORCORAN FARMSTEAD, LOOKING NORTH. ...................................................................................................... 20 PLATE 6. JOHN CORCORAN FARMSTEAD, GARAGE AND SHED, LOOKING NORTH. ............................................................................ 21 PLATE 7. VIEW FROM COUNTY ROAD 50 FROM THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROAD, DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE PROPOSED PARK ACTIVITIES, TOWARD HE-COC-00085. ....................................................................................................................................... 23 PLATE 8. 10-50 CLUB, LOOKING SOUTHWEST. ....................................................................................................................... 25 PLATE 9. 10-50 CLUB, REAR ATTACHED HOUSE, LOOKING NORTHEAST. ...................................................................................... 26 PLATE 10. RETAIL BUILDING, LOOKING SOUTHWEST. ............................................................................................................... 28 PLATE 11. RETAIL BUILDING, REAR, LOOKING NORTHEAST. ....................................................................................................... 29 PLATE 12. FRONT GABLE HOUSE, LOOKING SOUTHEAST. .......................................................................................................... 30 PLATE 13. MINIMAL TRADITIONAL HOUSE, LOOKING SOUTH. ................................................................................................... 32 PLATE 14. MINIMAL TRADITIONAL HOUSE, DETACHED GARAGE, LOOKING SOUTH. ........................................................................ 33 PLATE 15. JOHN FEHAN GARAGE, LOOKING SOUTH. ................................................................................................................ 34 PLATE 16. JOHN FEHAN OUTHOUSE, LOOKING SOUTHEAST. ...................................................................................................... 35 PLATE 17. RANCH HOUSE, LOOKING SOUTH. ......................................................................................................................... 36 PLATE 18. RANCH HOUSE, DETACHED GARAGE, LOOKING SOUTH. .............................................................................................. 37 PLATE 19. RANCH HOUSE, LOOKING NORTH. ......................................................................................................................... 38 PLATE 20. RANCH HOUSE, DETACHED GARAGE, LOOKING NORTH. .............................................................................................. 39 PLATE 21. RANCH HOUSE, LOOKING SOUTHWEST. .................................................................................................................. 40 PLATE 22. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, OVERVIEW, LOOKING SOUTH. .................................................................................... 42 PLATE 23. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, PICNIC SHELTER AND PLAYGROUND, LOOKING NORTH. .................................................... 44 PLATE 24. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, PLAYGROUND, LOOKING NORTHEAST. ......................................................................... 44 258 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec vi PLATE 25. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, TENNIS COURTS, LOOKING NORTHWEST. ...................................................................... 45 PLATE 26. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, SNYDER FIELD, LOOKING EAST. .................................................................................. 45 PLATE 27. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, MEISTER FIELD, LOOKING SOUTHEAST. ....................................................................... 46 PLATE 28. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, HOCKEY AND KIDS’ RINKS, LOOKING NORTHWEST. ......................................................... 46 PLATE 29. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, WARMING HOUSE, LOOKING NORTHWEST. ................................................................... 47 PLATE 30. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, LIONS FIELD, LOOKING SOUTHEAST. ........................................................................... 47 PLATE 31. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, OVERVIEW OF BALL FIELDS WITHIN WESTERN HALF OF THE PARK, LOOKING NORTHEAST. ........ 48 259 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 1 1 INTRODUCTION PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project entails construction of several improvements to the Corcoran Community Park (Figure 1 and Figure 2; Plate 1 - Plate 3). These improvements may include five new soccer fields; six new pickleball courts; two new tennis courts; a new playground; splash pad; and an approximately 4,000 square feet multipurpose building with bathrooms, kitchen, gathering area and pavilion, located along County Road 50; and a larger combination paved/gravel parking lot. Two existing tennis courts, the existing playground, a storage area south of the existing ball fields, and a paved path between the existing ball fields will be removed. A regional trail connection to the Diamond Lake Regional Trail will also be completed. The regional trail will be paved with asphalt except for a wooden boardwalk that will be installed through the wetlands in the west portion of the project area to avoid potential wetland impacts. Connection to City sewer and water would occur for new facilities requiring connection (e.g., splash pad, multi-purpose building). The listed improvements may be implemented in phases as funding is available. In addition to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding, additional funding sources for this project include donations from the Northwest Area Jaycees, the Hanover Athletic Association, and Three Rivers Park District organizations. Construction of the project is anticipated to begin in Spring 2025. 260 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 2 Plate 1. Overview toward project footprint from County Road 50, looking east form near Corcoran Park Trail. Plate 2. Overview of project footprint from County Road 10, looking northwest. 261 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 3 Plate 3. View from County Road 50 at the entrance to Corcoran Community Park toward HE-COC-00085, looking southeast. 262 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 4 Figure 1. Corcoran City Park Improvements, Proposed Site Plan. Note the extension of the park trail to the east extending to County Road 10. 263 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 5 Figure 2. Project Location, Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota 264 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 6 COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS The Project is a federal undertaking that will utilize a HUD Economic Development Initiative Community Project Funding Grant and thus, HUD will be the lead federal agency. The historic architectural survey was requested to meet federal compliance requirements in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), as amended (54 USC § 306108) and its implementing regulations (36 CFR § 800). Section 106 requires that federal agencies identify cultural resources 50 years of age or older within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) of their federal undertakings. Additionally, Section 106 requires federal agencies to assess and resolve through consultation any direct and/or indirect adverse effects of their undertakings on historic properties listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) prior to the issuance of a federal permit or license or the expenditure of any federal funds for construction. AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS Per 36 CFR § 800.4, the APE is defined as the limits of disturbance for the Project (Project Area) and adjacent parcels within the viewshed of the Project Area. The APE is approximately 45 acres and is bounded by agricultural land to the north; County Road 10 to the east; County Road 50 to the south; and a residential subdivision to the west. See Figure 2 for a graphic representation of the APE. The APE consists of the Corcoran Community Park Project Phase I project area, and adjacent parcels within its viewshed. The park and adjacent parcels are level and comprise a mix of playing fields and park amenities with areas of grassland and woods. Along both County Road 10 and County Road 50 are an assortment of houses, farmland, and commercial properties set back from the street in a suburban and rural setting. Most of the area was formerly farmland that was developed from the mid-to-late twentieth century to the present. 265 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 7 Figure 3. Area of Potential Effects (APE). 266 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 8 2 METHODOLOGY The investigation was completed using guidelines set forth in the Secretary of the Interior Standards and the Minnesota Historic Preservation Office’s (MN-SHPO) Historic and Architectural Survey Manual. The Principal Investigator (PI), Rachel M. Kennedy, exceeds the requirements for professional architectural historian as detailed in the Secretary of the Interior (SOI) Standards. This investigation includes a records check, review of maps and literature, and survey. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS Stantec completed a records search of the APE plus a one-mile buffer in September/October 2024 using the Minnesota Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MnSHIP) to identify previously recorded properties. This search identified four previously recorded properties; all of which are outside the APE. One of the previously recorded properties has been demolished (HE-COC-00025). There is one resource determined not eligible, HE-COC-0079, a concrete box culvert. None of these properties were included as a field site in this report because they are located within the APE. See Table 1 and Figure 3 for a list and geographic representation of the previously recorded properties within or adjacent to the APE. Table 1. Previously Recorded Properties, Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Inventory No. Name/Resource Address Construction Date NRHP Status HE-COC-00026 St. Thomas Catholic Church 20000 Co. Rd. 10 1896 Unevaluated HE-COC-00025 Store NW corner Co. Rd. 10 & Co. Rd. 50 ca. 1900 N/A (Demolished) HE-COC-0017 Farmstead 19835 Larkin Rd ca. 1875 Unevaluated HE-COC-0079 Concrete Box Culvert CSAH 50 over South Fork Rush Creek ca. 1934 Not Eligible Stantec did not identify any historic architectural survey reports that address the community of Corcoran in this area nor the resources within the APE. Additionally, no NRHP listed properties or National Historic Landmarks (NHLs) are located within the project area or APE. 267 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 9 Figure 4. Previously Recorded Properties 268 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 10 MAP AND LITERATURE REVIEW Stantec reviewed primary and secondary materials online at the websites of various institutions, including the University of Minnesota 1 and The Minnesota Historical Society.2 Stantec also conducted research online using the websites of the US Geological Service’s (USGS) Map Store and Historic Map Works.3 Maps reviewed are listed in Table 2. Table 2. Maps of Project Area Date Title Author 1873 Map of Hennepin County, Minnesota George B. Wright & G.J. Wright Publishers 1898 Plat Book of Hennepin County Northwestern Map Publishing Co. 1909 Topographic Map for Rockford, MN USGS 1914 Atlas and Farmers Directory of Anoka and Hennepin County Webb Publishing Co. 1925 Minnesota State Atlas W.W. Hixson & Co. 1953 Topographic Map for Stillwater, MN USGS 1954 Atlas of the State of Minnesota Thomas O. Nelson Co. 1958 Topographic Map for Rockford, MN USGS 1965 Topographic Map for Stillwater, MN USGS 1981 Topographic Map for Hamel, MN USGS 1991 Topographic Map for Anoka, MN USGS 2013 Topographic Map for Hamel, MN USGS 2022 Topographic Map for Hamel, MN USGS 1 Accessed online September 2024 at: https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/56238 and https://apps.lib.umn.edu/mhapo/ 2 Accessed online September 2024 at: https://libguides.mnhs.org/maps/atlas. 3 Accessed online September 2024 at: https://historicmapworks.com. 269 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 11 SURVEY METHODOLOGY In September/October 2024 and February 2025, Stantec’s architectural history team, managed by Rachel M. Kennedy, MHP, conducted a historic architectural survey using methods consistent with both the NPS guidelines and the MN-SHPO and Heritage Preservation Department (HPD) Historic and Architectural Survey Manual. Stantec surveyed the APE for properties that met the fifty-year age consideration for the NRHP with the addition of a five-year buffer to account for potential project delays (i.e., built before circa 1979). Each potential historic property was photographed and a preliminary assessment of integrity and NRHP eligibility was conducted. Most of the field survey was conducted from the public rights-of-way (ROW). General landscape photographs were also taken. The project area was also surveyed for potential historic districts. There were no access limitations in the project area. Standing resources are considered eligible for the NRHP if they possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and meet Criteria A, B, or C on the local, state, or national level. Criterion A: associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; Criterion B: associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; Criterion C: embodies distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. MN-SHPO inventory forms, photographs, and mapping were prepared using guidance found in MN- SHPO’s Historic and Architectural Survey Manual (8/2017).4 As well, this study followed applicable National Park Service Guidelines for survey and NRP eligibility, including NRHP Bulletin 24, “Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis For Preservation Planning,” NRHP Bulletin 15, “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation,” and NRHP Bulletin 16A, “How to Complete the National Register Registration Form.” 4 Historic and Architectural Survey Manual, Minnesota Historical Society – Heritage Preservation Department, St. Paul, Minnesota, 2017. 270 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 12 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Stantec performed a field survey on ten field sites 45 years of age or older for NRHP consideration (Table 3). Descriptions and images of these resources can be found below in the SITE DESCRIPTIONS AND RESULTS section of this report. Stantec also examined two field sites that were not of sufficient age for NRHP consideration and/or under the Guidance for Criterion Consideration G (Table 4). Table 3. Inventoried Resources Inventory No. Field Site No. Historic/Commo n Name Address Approx. Date of Constru ction NRHP Recommendation Effects Assessment HE-COC- 00085 1 John Corcoran Farmstead 20130 Larkin Road c. 1922 Undetermined/ Treated as Eligible No Adverse Effects HE-COC- 00086 2 10-50 Club 20115 Co. Rd. No. 10 c.1925/ 1960 Not Eligible N/A HE-COC- 00087 3 Retail Building 20121 Co. Rd. No. 10 c.1930 Not Eligible N/A HE-COC- 00088 4 Front Gable House 20137 Co. Rd. No. 50 c.1950 Not Eligible N/A HE-COC- 00089 5 Minimal Traditional House 20201 Co. Rd. No. 50 c.1950 Not Eligible N/A HE-COC- 00090 6 John Fehan Garage 20209 Co. Rd. No. 50 c.1940 Not Eligible N/A HE-COC- 00092 8 Ranch House 20239 Co. Rd. No. 50 c.1953 Not Eligible N/A HE-COC- 00093 10 Ranch House 20420 Co. Rd. No. 50 c.1966 Not Eligible N/A HE-COC- 00094 11 Ranch House 20301 Co. Rd. No. 10 c.1972 Not Eligible N/A HE-COC- 00091 12 Corcoran Community Park 20175 Co. Rd. No. 50 1975 / 1990 Not Eligible N/A 271 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 13 Table 4. Non-Inventoried Properties Inventory No. Historic/Common Name Address Date of Construction Not Inventoried Explanation N/A House 20225 Co. Rd. No. 50 1983 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A House 20405 Co. Rd. No. 50 1983 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Multi-family housing 20133-20139 78th Place 2022 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Multi-family housing 20141-20147 78th Place 2021 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Multi-family housing 20149-20155 78th Place 2021 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Multi-family housing 20157-20163 78th Place 2023 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Multi-family housing 20165-20171 78th Place 2022 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Duplex 7891-7901 Xyloid Lane 2022 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Duplex 7905-7909 Xyloid Lane 2022 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Duplex 7913-7917 Xyloid Lane 2021 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Duplex 7923-7925 Xyloid Lane 2023 This resource is not 45 years of age or older 272 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 14 Inventory No. Historic/Common Name Address Date of Construction Not Inventoried Explanation N/A Duplex 7929-7933 Xyloid Lane 2023 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Duplex 7937-7941 Xyloid Lane 2023 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Duplex 7945-7949 Xyloid Lane 2023 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Duplex 7953-7957 Xyloid Lane 2024 This resource is not 45 years of age or older N/A Duplex 7961-7965 Xyloid Lane 2024 This resource is not 45 years of age or older 273 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 15 3 HISTORIC CONTEXT Hennepin County, Minnesota Hennepin County, located in the southeast portion of Minnesota. The county is comprised of 607 square miles and is home to Minneapolis and its suburbs, the largest city in the state. The county is bordered by the Mississippi River to the north and east, the Minnesota River to the south, and numerous lakes leading up to prairie in the west. The area has been home to native settlement for at least 6,000 years and by the time French explorers and fur traders ventured into the region in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it was primarily home to the Dakota and neighboring Ojibwe tribes. The county’s namesake, Father Louis Hennepin, visited the region in 1680 along with other French explorers and fur traders.5 Following the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, the United States government purchased land along the west bank of the Mississippi River from the Dakota Tribe for the purpose of building a trading post and fort along the river. The first European settlement was at Fort Snelling, at the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers, established in 1820. Settlers began building houses and mills at St. Anthony Falls on the west bank of the Mississippi and on the numerous large lakes to the west in the 1830s.6 Minnesota Territory was created in 1849 and three years later Hennepin County was formally established. Minneapolis, a settlement of a few hundred people, was made the county seat. The first European settlers in the area were from New England and New York. Beginning in the 1850s and continuing into the early twentieth century, waves of immigrants from Norway, Sweden, Germany, and Ireland also settled in the area. By the 1860s, more than a dozen mills lined the falls on the Mississippi River generating power for grist and sawmills to fulfill the demand for lumber and agricultural goods in the growing region. The introduction of the railroad and industrial-scale manufacturing in the 1880s led Hennepin County, and particularly the City of Minneapolis, to become the flour milling capital of the world and one of the nation’s largest lumber producers. The population of the county exceeded 200,000 by the turn of the century; however, much of the county remained distinctly rural with approximately 72 percent of the county’s land devoted to farmland.7 In the early twentieth century, Minneapolis had become a major regional city and dominated the economy and politics of broader Hennepin County. The largest county by population in the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County continued to grow rapidly through the 1940s. In the post-war years, the intense agricultural nature of Hennepin County outside of Minneapolis began to decline as suburban development increased.8 This suburban growth became the driving force behind the county’s history in the mid- twentieth century, as the population of Minneapolis reached its peak of 521,718 people in 1950 and has 5 Parsons, E. Dudley. The Story of Minnesota (New York: American Book Company, 1916). 6 “Overview of Hennepin County,” Hennepin County website, Accessed September 2024 online at: www.hennepin.us/your- government/overview/overview-of-hennepin-county. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 274 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 16 since steadily declined. The lack of available lots within the city limits exacerbated by the development of Village and City governments in the county outside of Minneapolis, combined with the increasing dependence on the automobile, was among the factors that led to the growth of the suburbs. Highways were constructed throughout the county, and the economy became more diversified, turning away from milling industries. By 1970, the number of people in Hennepin County living outside of Minneapolis outnumbered those living within the city limits for the first time in more than a century. In response, the county government centralized in Minneapolis and took on a more active role regionally. The population of the county reached 1,260,121 people in the 2020 census.9 City of Corcoran The City of Corcoran is in the northwest corner of Hennepin County, Minnesota, and covers approximately 36 square miles. The region was occupied by the Lakota people in the early nineteenth century and for several centuries before that. In 1851, the Lakota/Dakota signed treaties ceding most southern and western Minnesota to the United States, formally opening western Hennepin County to settlement by European farmers. The first European settlers made claims in the area in 1855, and the township of Corcoran was organized in 1858, taking its name from the first postmaster of the town, the Irish immigrant Patrick Butterfield Corcoran. Most of the initial settlers were from the Northeast United States and also included French and Irish immigrants. The community remained small in the nineteenth century, primarily occupied by large and successful farms typical of Hennepin County during the period. The population reached 1,338 by the turn of the twentieth century.10 Corcoran was incorporated as a city in 1948. The city began to grow rapidly in the post-World War II period. During this time, an influx of residents entered rural Hennepin County as the City of Minneapolis grew only twenty miles away. Corcoran had 1,135 people in 1950, which rose to 4,252 by 1980. The city is transected by six county roads that have been improved and increasingly utilized over the last four decades, altering the community from a rural to suburban setting near the twin cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. The city remains mostly suburban with a considerable number of single-family homes and industrial and commercial properties along major roads. Corcoran had 6,185 inhabitants in the 2020 census.11 9 New History. Historic Context and History-Architecture Survey. Minneapolis in the Modern Era: 1930-1975 (June 2020). 10 “The History and Founding of Corcoran,” City of Corcoran website accessed September 2024 online at: https://www.ci.corcoran.mn.us/our_community/history; Neill, Rev. Edward D. History of Hennepin County, and the City of Minneapolis. Minneapolis: North Star Publishing, 1881. 11 “The History and Founding of Corcoran,” City of Corcoran website accessed September 2024 online at: https://www.ci.corcoran.mn.us/our_community/history. 275 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 17 4 SITE DESCRIPTIONS AND RESULTS FIELD SURVEY SITES Field sites range in period of construction from the early to mid-twentieth century, as far as can be determined from exterior survey. All properties that appeared to have been built prior to 1979 were examined for this survey (see Figure 4). Ten field survey sites are described in this section of the report. 276 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 18 Figure 5. Field Survey Map. 277 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 19 HE-COC-00085 Field Site 1 John Corcoran Farmstead Circa 1922 20130 Larkin Road Corcoran, MN 55340 45.091082, -93.550142 Plate 4. John Corcoran Farmstead, looking north. Description: The 68.7-acre property is a level, cultivated field lined with trees and vegetation with a creek running along its eastern boundary. In the center of the property is a grouping of agricultural buildings including a barn, two silos, a garage, a pole barn, two sheds, and a farmhouse with a long gravel driveway. The buildings are oriented northeast-southwest at an angle. The farmhouse is completely obscured from view by vegetation and could not be assessed from the right-of-way. From aerial images it appears to be a front-gable, two-story house with a central chimney and several one-story additions including a porch. The barn has an arched roof with metal sheathing. It also has corrugated metal panel siding and a concrete block foundation. There are two concrete stave silos adjacent to the barn, one larger than the other, and a small wood shingle shed with an asphalt shingle gambrel roof to the north. Behind the barn to the northwest is a long, one-story metal pole barn and adjacent to it is a two-car garage with a metal, front- gable roof and vinyl siding. Most of the extant resources that remain on the farmstead, including the house, which was completed circa 1922, were constructed in the 1920s or more recently. 278 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 20 The Corcoran family followed Patrick Butterfield Corcoran, the namesake of the town, to settle in Corcoran Township in 1857. Patrick’s brother William, and wife Catherine, established a farm along the creek south of his brother’s plot. A rural schoolhouse (no longer extant) was established the same year and operated until the mid-twentieth century. William and Catherine’s son, John Corcoran inherited their farm. John Corcoran was born in 1860, never married, or had children, and died in 1935. He farmed 116 acres and operated a general store near the intersection of County Road 10 and County Road 50. The store is possibly the non-extant MnSHIP record HE-COC-00025 mentioned in the Methodology section of this report. Plate 5. John Corcoran Farmstead, looking north. 279 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 21 Plate 6. John Corcoran Farmstead, garage and shed, looking north. NRHP Eligibility: Undetermined/Treated as Eligible Stantec recommends this property remain Undetermined for the NRHP but treated as eligible for the purposes of this report. Access to the property was limited for inspection or field photography due to vegetation and setback from the right-of-way. Given the potential historic importance for its association with the Corcoran Family, the founders of the town, under Criterion A or B, and a lack of access to the farmstead, Stantec recommends this property retain an Undetermined status. Future historic architectural work should attempt to determine if there are extant properties associated with the family and provide recommendations for their significance and potential preservation. The entire 68.7-acre parcel, outlined in white in Figure 6 below, is treated as eligible. Effects Assessment: No Adverse Effects This property will experience No Adverse Effects from the proposed Project. Project activities are occurring in the Corcoran City Park at approximately 700 ft (diagonally northwest to southeast) to the parcel boundary for HE-COC-00085/the Corcoran Farmstead, along County Road 50, as can be seen in Figure 5 - Figure 6; Plate 7 below and in Plate 3 in Section 1 above. As also depicted, the park is located on the north side of County Road 50/Larkin Road. Project activities are mostly horizontal in profile and include a gravel/paved parking area, pickleball courts, soccer fields, splash pad, and the multi-purpose building – all in keeping with park activities. The multi-purpose building is a 4,000 sq. ft. facility; the location of which is noted in Figure 5 below. This building, which will serve as a combination bathroom, kitchen, gathering area, and pavilion facility, will be approximately 26 ft. tall, as proposed. As can be seen in the figures below, the building is approximately 500 ft. north of County Road 50. The Proposed 280 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 22 project activities, including the multipurpose building, which is the only new construction that may remotely be seen from the small portion of this parcel that extends onto County Road 50, should not detrimentally affect the integrity of setting, location, feeling, association, design, materials, or workmanship of the Cocoran Farmstead property (HE-COC-00085). Therefore, this Project should result in No Adverse Effects on this property. Figure 6. Corcoran City Park Improvements, Proposed Site Plan Multi- Purpose Park Building 281 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 23 Plate 7. View from County Road 50 from the north side of the road, directly in front of the proposed park activities, toward HE-COC-00085. 282 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 24 Figure 7. Effects Map, HE-COC-00085. Note that the Project activities, most of which are of a low horizontal nature, becoming of a park, and are occurring north of County Road 50. 283 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 25 HE-COC-00086 Field Site 2 10-50 Club Circa 1925/1960 20115 Co. Rd. No. 10 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.095152, -93.548641 Plate 8. 10-50 Club, looking southwest. Description: The .27-acre site sits at the intersection of County Road 10 and County Road 50 at an acute angle. There are two distinct portions of the building including a rear house and a front tavern. The two-story house has a pyramidal roof with asphalt shingles and a central internal brick chimney with shallow eaves. The exterior is stuccoed with minimal decorative features and the foundation is not visible. The rear elevation of the house, constructed before the attached tavern and facing southwest, appears to have originally been the rear of the building. There is a sliding vinyl door at the first floor with a wood deck and stairs on the southeast side. Paired wood sash 1/1 windows with wood trim are located on the northwest side. The second floor of this elevation has two windows directly beneath the eaves and equally spaced and aligned with the fenestration below. These windows are both small, wood sash 1/1 windows with wood trim. The southeast elevation has a one-story addition that may have been an enclosed porch with a hip roof. The façade is presently covered by the tavern addition on the northeast elevation that envelops the house on the east and south elevations completely. The front tavern addition is one story with an l- 284 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 26 shaped plan and a gabled asphalt shingle roof. The exterior is stucco with a concrete foundation. The main elevation faces the road to the northeast and has a front-gable section with the main entry at the southern end. The main entry has a wood front-gable vestibule with an octagonal fixed window and a pair of electric signs overhead. The north side of the main elevation has a brick veneer low wall below the windowsills. Above the low wall are two sliding horizontal metal windows with fixed shutters and a secondary metal door. The building is situated on land previously owned by Patrick H. Corcoran, the son of Patrick Butterfield Corcoran; the latter of whom is the founder and namesake of Corcoran Township. Patrick H. Corcoran owned a 160-acre farm here in the early twentieth century. He sold lots along the major roads for commercial development creating a settlement called “Corcoran” with a Catholic church, general store, and other businesses while his farmhouse was located on the east side of the road per historic plat maps. Patrick was born in 1866, never married, or had children, and died in 1941. The house was constructed in the late 1920s; its original owner is not known at this time and is unlikely to have been Patrick H. Corcoran’s home as he lived across the street. In 1960, Mike “Irving” Thomas, a resident of Corcoran, constructed a tavern attached to the house named the 10-50 Club after the intersection of County Roads 10 and 50 where the building sits. The bar was in operation until it closed in 2006. Plate 9. 10-50 Club, rear attached house, looking northeast. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century house or tavern in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important 285 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 27 common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person, as far as can be determined; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, as far as can be determined, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 286 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 28 HE-COC-00087 Field Site 3 Commercial Building Circa 1930 20121 Co. Rd. No. 10 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.095285, -93.548837 Plate 10. Retail Building, looking southwest. Description: The .25-acre site sits adjacent to the 10-50 Club and is immediately adjacent to the road. The one-story building has a gable metal panel roof, an interior brick chimney, and a concrete block exterior. The main elevation, facing northeast, has stepped parapet wall on its the south end and a simple parapet wall at the north end with minimal decoration. There is a recessed main entry at the south end of the elevation with a metal casement door and two fixed metal, plate glass windows. Above these is a now-empty location for former signage and a metal pole extending from the wall. To the north is an enclosed doorway and another fixed metal window. The rear is utilitarian with metal siding in the gable end and concrete block below with a sliding metal door and a pair of enclosed windows. Like the adjacent 10-50 Club (Field Site 2), this retail building was constructed on land previously owned and developed by Patrick H. Corcoran. There were several similar commercial buildings at the intersection of County Road 10 and County Road 50 during the mid-twentieth century when this building was likely constructed. Although its original use is unknown at this time, the building was occupied by the local 287 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 29 Corcoran Lion’s Club from the 1960s to the 1990s. Most recently, it was occupied by the Corcoran Locker Meats business until 2022. Plate 11. Retail Building, rear, looking northeast. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century commercial building in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 288 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 30 HE-COC-00088 Field Site 4 Front Gable House Circa 1950 20137 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.094671, -93.549020 Plate 12. Front Gable House, looking southeast. Description: The .9-acre site sits south of the road and has a one-and-one-half story house and a detached two-car garage. The house has a gabled roof with asphalt shingles, vinyl siding, and a concrete block foundation. The main elevation faces west perpendicular to the road and has a central main entry with an overhead gabled patio and wood stairs. The door is a contemporary metal door with nine lights. On either side of the door is a window, a vinyl 1/1 sash to the north and a vinyl sliding window to the south. Above the entry is another window in the gable end that is a vinyl 1/1 sash. The detached two car garage is southwest of the house and has a gable asphalt shingle roof and vinyl siding. The two overhead doors in the gable end are contemporary and the foundation was not visible. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century residence in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important 289 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 31 common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 290 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 32 HE-COC-00089 Field Site 5 Minimal Traditional House HE-COC-00089 Circa 1950 20201 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.094639, -93.550607 Plate 13. Minimal Traditional House, looking south. Description: The .8-acre site sits south of the road and has a one-story house with a side addition and a large rear four- car garage. The side gable house has an asphalt shingle roof and shallow eaves. The house is clad in aluminum siding with a stone veneer low wall. The foundation is concrete block. The main entry is centered on the north elevation facing the road; there is a fixed wood picture window east of the entry and a vinyl casement window west of the entry. A large addition with a flat roof, vinyl siding, and a concrete block foundation extends from the west elevation of the house. The north elevation of the addition has a central door with a single large light. An overhead garage door is east of the central entry and a fixed picture window is west of the central entry. On the west elevation of the addition is another door and a large rear garage with two oversized garage doors. A portion of the west elevation of the addition is concrete block. North and west of the house is an extensive paved area. A detached garage is located southwest of the house. This garage has a front gable metal roof and vertical metal panel siding. There are four identical overhead doors on the north elevation and the foundation is not visible. 291 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 33 Plate 14. Minimal Traditional House, detached garage, looking south. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century residence in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 292 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 34 HE-COC-00090 Field Site 6 John Fehan Garage Circa 1940 20209 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.094721, -93.551018 Plate 15. John Fehan Garage, looking south. Description: The .42-acre site sits south of the road and has a detached two-car garage and an outhouse. The garage has a jerkinhead roof clad in asphalt shingles. The garage is clad in wood clapboard siding and its foundation is not visible. The main (north) elevation has a contemporary overhead door and a single window in the gable end. This wood window is a 3/1 sash with wood trim. There are a pair of identical windows on both the east and west elevations. Southwest of the garage is a small outhouse with a hipped roof clad in asphalt shingles. The outhouse is clad in vertical wood board siding. The garage and outhouse are all that remain of the former John Fehan Farmstead, constructed in the early to mid-twentieth century along County Road 50. The house, barn, and other agricultural buildings are non-extant. 12 12 Atlas and Farmers Directory of Anoka and Hennepin County, Minnesota. St. Paul, MN: Webb Publishing Co., 1914; and Minnesota Historical Aerial Photographs Online. University of Minnesota. Accessed September 2024 online at: https://apps.lib.umn.edu/mhapo/; and Netronline. Historic Aerials. Tempe: Nationwide Environments Title Research, LLC. Accessed September 2024 online at: https://historicaerials.com/viewer. 293 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 35 Plate 16. John Fehan Outhouse, looking southeast. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of an early twentieth century agricultural complex in Hennepin County. The outbuildings do not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor are they examples of important common types; therefore, the property is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 294 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 36 HE-COC-00092 Field Site 8 Ranch House Circa 1953 20239 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.094674, -93.553092 Plate 17. Ranch House, looking south. Description: The 2.39-acre site sits south of the road and has a one-story ranch house with a walkout basement, a detached three-car garage, and separate shed. The house sits at the top of hill with a walkout lower level on the east and south elevations. The building has a hipped roof clad in asphalt shingles and an interior brick chimney. The house has a brick veneer exterior, cream color on the upper level and red for the lower level. The main elevation faces the road to the north and has a single main entry with wood stairs and a divided light doorway. East of the door is a tripartite wood picture window with a fixed light in the middle flanked by 1/1 wood sashes on either side. West of the door are two 8/8 wood sash windows spaced equally along the elevation. The east elevation has a side entry door at the lower level, also with divided lights, and a 1/1 wood sash window to the south. The upper level has a pair of 2/2 wood sash windows at the south end of the building. There appears to be a rear contemporary walk-out porch on the south elevation. The foundation is concrete. West of the house is a shed with a gable roof. The roof is clad in asphalt shingles. The small building has vertical wood board siding, no windows, and a pair of barn doors on the east elevation. There is a detached 295 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 37 garage southeast of the house with a hipped asphalt shingle roof, aluminum siding, and a concrete foundation. The north elevation has three overhead doors, two paired together at the west end flanked by exterior light fixtures and another separate garage door at the east end. Plate 18. Ranch House, detached garage, looking south. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century residence in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 296 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 38 HE-COC-00093 Field Site 10 Ranch House Circa 1966 20420 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.095499, -93.557815 Plate 19. Ranch House, looking north. Description: The 4.8-acre site sits north of the road and has a two-story house and a detached two-car garage. The house is a walk-out ranch style variant similar to Field Site 8 with a hipped asphalt shingle roof and an interior brick chimney. The exterior is stucco with a low brick wall at the base and a concrete foundation. The main elevation facing the road to the south is two stories with a two-car overhead door at the west end flanked by exterior lighting. There are two pairs of vinyl casement windows east of the garage bay. An entry on the south elevation is not evident from the ROW. The upper level of the south elevation has a sliding glass door, above the first level garage, which accesses a wood and metal porch. A large vinyl tripartite picture window is located on the east end of the south elevation. The other elevations are not visible from the ROW. Southwest of the house is a detached garage with a gable metal roof, vertical metal siding, and a low brick veneer wall at the base. The south elevation of the garage has two overhead doors, one larger than the other, and a single fixed horizontal window at the eastern end. 297 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 39 Plate 20. Ranch House, detached garage, looking north. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century residence in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 298 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 40 HE-COC-00094 Field Site 11 Ranch House Circa 1972 20301 Co. Rd. No. 10 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.098207, -93.552597 Plate 21. Ranch House, looking southwest. Description: The 1.91-acre site sits west of the road and has a one-story house. The house has side gable roof clad in asphalt shingles; the roof has shallow eaves. The house is clad in vertical wood board siding on the facade (northeast elevation), and horizontal vinyl siding on the other elevations. The foundation is concrete block. The facade has an attached, two-car garage flanked by exterior lighting at the north end and a main entry adjacent to it. The entry has a concrete stoop, wood trim, a screen door, and an original door with a single centered light. There is a tripartite wood picture window on the elevation with painted wood trim that extends down to the base of the exterior. At the south end of the elevation are two windows, one a single 1/1 wood sash and the other a pair of wood casement windows, both with painted wood trim similar to that on the tripartite window. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century residence in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of 299 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 41 building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 300 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 42 HE-COC-00091 Field Site 12 Corcoran Community Park Circa 1975 20175 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.095766, -93.550877 Plate 22. Corcoran Community Park, overview, looking south. Description: Corcoran Community Park is located on 16 acres of land northwest of the intersection of Highway 10 and Highway 50. The park is flat with open fields and has a small stream and pond running through the middle of it from the north to the south. There are trees lining the edges of the property and brush and reeds around the waterways. The east side of the park includes two parking areas and three ball fields, Snyder Field, Lions Field, and Meister Field. There is also an outdoor ice rink, kid’s rink, and warming house at the southern end of the park, and a pair of tennis courts, a volleyball court, playground, and picnic shelter at the north end. The playground and kid’s rink are more recent additions. The western expansion of the park includes a parking area, a multi-use field, and three additional ball fields. The picnic shelter, constructed in 1975, is a star-shaped structure situated on a concrete slab foundation. The log posts support the asphalt shingle roof. The playground, constructed circa 2000, is located just west of the picnic shelter. It is comprised of a large metal play structure with plastic slides, a smaller play structure with plastic slides, a merry-go-round, and 301 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 43 three metal swing sets. Wood chips surround the playground structures and are encased by railroad ties mark the playground boundary. The two tennis courts, constructed circa 1984, are located just northwest of the playground and are surrounded by a chain link fence. Synder Field and Meister Field, both constructed in 1975, are located southeast of the picnic shelter, playground and tennis courts, along County Road 10. The dugout and baseline areas of each are surrounded by a chain link fence. Snyder Field, the larger of the two, has a shed roof press box located behind the dugout. Both have metal bleachers located along the baselines. The hockey rink, constructed in 1975, is a large, rectangular structure with a wood backboard and a chain link fence surrounding the northern and southern ends of the rink. Wood light posts are located at the corners. It is located northwest of the warming house and adjacent to the outfield of Lions Field. The kids’ rink, constructed circa 1990, is a rectangular structure surrounded by a wood backboard and wood light posts at the corners. It is located just south of the hockey rink. The warming house, constructed in 1975, is a rectangular, concrete block building with a flat roof. A wood garage door is located at the western corner of the south elevation. Two metal pedestrian doors are located just west of the garage door. It is located just east of both ice rinks. Lions Field, constructed in 1975, is located just west of the ice rinks. The baselines and the outfield are surrounded by a chain link fence. Metal bleachers are located along the third base line. Three nearly identical ballfields, constructed in 1990, are located within the western portion of the park. They each have chain link fences along the dugout and baselines, with metal bleachers behind each dugout. Three front-gable, prefabricated sheds are located southwest of the ballfields. Ten acres of farmland was purchased by City of Corcoran northwest of the intersection of Highway 10 and Highway 50 for the purpose of developing a public park for the community in 1973. In 1975, the city constructed Snyder Field, Lions Field, Meister Field, the picnic shelter, warming house, hockey rink, and a playground. The fencing of the ball fields and the playground have subsequently been replaced, though the ice rink, pond, warming house, and picnic shelter remain. By 1984, the tennis courts had been added. In 1990, the park was expanded to the west with additional six acres of playing fields. The kids’ rink was also constructed at this time. Two existing tennis courts; the existing playground; a storage area south of the existing ball fields; and a paved path between the existing ball fields will be removed as part of this project. None of the built resources 45 years of age or older will be demolished and/or replaced as part of the Project. 302 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 44 Plate 23. Corcoran Community Park, picnic shelter and playground, looking north. Plate 24. Corcoran Community Park, playground, looking northeast. 303 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 45 Plate 25. Corcoran Community Park, tennis courts, looking northwest. Plate 26. Corcoran Community Park, Snyder Field, looking east. 304 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 46 Plate 27. Corcoran Community Park, Meister Field, looking southeast. Plate 28. Corcoran Community Park, hockey and kids’ rinks, looking northwest. 305 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 47 Plate 29. Corcoran Community Park, warming house, looking northwest. Plate 30. Corcoran Community Park, Lions Field, looking southeast. 306 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 48 Plate 31. Corcoran Community Park, overview of ball fields within western half of the park, looking northeast. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a late twentieth century public park in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of park design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 307 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 49 5 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the historic context developed and the field survey results, Stantec recommends that HE-COC- 00086 to HE-COC-00094 (Field Sites 2 to 12) are Not Eligible for the NRHP. HE-COC-00085 (Field Site 1) is recommended as Undetermined, but treated as eligible for the NRHP, due to a lack of access and a potential for historic importance. The property may be an important farmstead associated with the Corcoran family, founders of the community. Future historic architectural work should attempt to determine if there are extant properties with integrity associated with the Corcoran family and provide recommendations for their significance and potential preservation. This study would ideally include HE- COC-00085. Regardless of this property’s NRHP status, the farmstead should experience No Adverse Effects from the Project, as planned. A more detailed analysis, including effects for HE-COC-00085, for each property is included in Section 4 of this report. 308 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 50 6 SELECT REFERENCES Selected Primary and Secondary Sources Carley, Rachel. The Visual Dictionary of American Domestic Architecture. New York: Henty Holt and Company, 1994, updated 1997. Historic and Architectural Survey Manual, Minnesota Historical Society – Heritage Preservation Department. St. Paul, Minnesota, 2017. McAlester, Virginia Savage. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2015. National Park Service. “Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning.” Washington D.C.: National Register Bulletin 24. U.S. Department of the Interior, 1977, revised 1985. _________________ . “How to Complete the National Register Registration Form.” National Register Bulletin 16A. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1997. _________________ . “How to Complete the National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form,” National Register Bulletin 16B. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1991, revised 1999. _________________ . “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Register Bulletin 15. U.S. Department of the Interior, 1997. Neill, Rev. Edward D. History of Hennepin County, and the City of Minneapolis. Minneapolis: North Star Publishing, 1881. New History. Historic Context and History-Architecture Survey. Minneapolis in the Modern Era: 1930-1975. June 2020. Parsons, E. Dudley. The Story of Minnesota. New York: American Book Company, 1916. Sanders, Thomas, ed. Specifications for Conducting Fieldwork and Preparing Cultural Resource Assessment Reports. Prepared by the Kentucky Heritage Council/State Historic. Wyatt, Barbara. The Components of a Historic Context: A National Register White Paper. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 2009. Accessed online March 2024 at: www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/publications.htm. Historic Maps Atlas and Farmers Directory of Anoka and Hennepin County, Minnesota. St. Paul, MN: Webb Publishing Co., 1914. Atlas of the State of Minnesota. Fergus Falls, MN: Thomas O. Nelson Co., 1954. Map of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN: George B. Wright & G.J. Wright Publishers, 1873. Minnesota State Atlas. Rockford Il: W.W. Hixson & Co., 1925. Plat Book of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN: Northwestern Map Publishing Co., 1898. United States Geological Survey. USGS Topographic Map for Rockford, MN Quadrangle. 1909. __________________________. USGS Topographic Map for Stillwater, MN Quadrangle. 1953. 309 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota February 2025 Stantec 51 __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Rockford, MN Quadrangle. 1958. __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Stillwater, MN Quadrangle. 1965. __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Hamel, MN Quadrangle. 1981. __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Anoka, MN Quadrangle. 1991. __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Hamel, MN Quadrangle. 2013. __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Hamel, MN Quadrangle. 2022. Online Resources Google Earth. Historical Aerial Maps. Accessed September 2024 online at: Google Earth app. “The History and Founding of Corcoran.” City of Corcoran website. Accessed September 2024 online at: https://www.ci.corcoran.mn.us/our_community/history. Minnesota Historical Aerial Photographs Online. University of Minnesota. Accessed September 2024 online at: https://apps.lib.umn.edu/mhapo/. Netronline. Historic Aerials. Tempe: Nationwide Environments Title Research, LLC. Accessed September 2024 online at: https://historicaerials.com/viewer. “Overview of Hennepin County.” Hennepin County. Accessed September 2024 online at: www.hennepin.us/your- government/overview/overview-of-hennepin-county. 310 Page | 20 November 2024 ITEM 5 - PROJECT SITE EVALUATION All applicants must prepare and submit the Project Site Evaluation on the next pages. The project site evaluation will provide information necessary to determine the impacts of the project, if any, on the environmental and cultural resources of the project area. It is very important, therefore, that the project site evaluation identify all possible impacts of the proposed project. This will help determine whether any changes in project scope or design may be required or whether mitigation measures must be undertaken. Use the resources below to help you fill out the evaluation: Endangered Species and Critical Habitat Resources US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) Report provides a list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the USFWS’ jurisdiction that are known or expected to be in or near the project area. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information. Minnesota’s List of Endangered and Threatened Animal Species Additional information on animals and plants that are endangered, threatened or merit special consideration or management is available from the Minnesota Natural Heritage Program/Nongame Wildlife Program, Section of Wildlife, Department of Natural Resources (DNR). A booklet entitled Minnesota’s List of Endangered and Threatened Animal Species, that includes a list of all species of Minnesota's animals and plants listed under the provisions of the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, Public Law 93-205, and/or Minnesota Statute 84.0895, is available from the DNR by calling (651) 296-6157 or (888) 646-6367 or at the DNR website Minnesota's Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species. Additional information may be obtained by calling the Division of Ecological Resources information number at (651) 259-5100. The DNR is also developing biological surveys on a county-by-county basis on sensitive natural habitats and rare plant and animal species. Several publications are available which provide detailed information on these subjects. Additional information about county biological surveys is available at Minnesota Biological Survey. Wetlands Resources Minnesota has adopted a "no-net-loss" wetlands policy. Each state agency must ensure that its activities, including state sponsored, financed, or assisted projects, do not contribute to the loss or diminishment of the many important values of wetlands. Unavoidable impacts must be minimized, and compensatory mitigation must be provided for all values that have been lost or diminished. The basic reference for wetland determination will be the National Wetlands Inventory produced by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and available at the DNR. Questions regarding implementation of the "no-net-loss" policy and identification of wetlands may be directed to the Ecological Resources Division, DNR at (651) 259-5100. 311 Page | 21 November 2024 Project Site Evaluation Using the following format and subject categories below, address all of the points covered under each category and be specific. It is important that the project site evaluation be a complete and accurate assessment of the natural and/or scenic characteristics of the area and the likely impacts of the project, either positive or negative, on those characteristics. Part 1 – USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) Report Review of your project by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) Report is required to provide a list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the USFWS’ jurisdiction that are known or expected to be in or near the project area, as well as a determination of the project’s impact on the list of species and other resources (consistency letter). The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information. From the website, click on “Get Started” then enter a location, define the area, and confirm the area where the project activities will occur. Then click on “Continue,” print the resource list and attach to your application. Next, follow the IPaC Determination Key guidance to receive a determination for each listed species and resource and attach the consistency letter to your application. Use this information to help guide your responses below. *NEW REQUIRMENT IN 2025* Part 2 – Minnesota Conservation Explorer Conservation Planning Report A Conservation Planning report (free of charge) is required to provide information on ecologically significant areas. Go to: Minnesota Conservation Explorer (MCE) (found at https://mce.dnr.state.mn.us/) Click on EXPLORE Tab o Define Area of Interest (draw, select layers, or upload shapefile) o Ensure the defined area covers both the entire project area plus any potentially impacted areas. Click on “CONSERVATION PLANNING REPORT” o The report may take a few minutes to generate. Save and attach to your grant application. Use this information to guide your responses below. If your application is funded, the DNR will require you to request and submit a Natural Heritage Review letter. There is a fee to conduct this step. Please do not conduct a Natural Heritage Review unless you have been selected for funding. The cost of this review is not an eligible grant expense. 312 Page | 22 November 2024 Part 3 – Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) – Initial Data Search *NEW PROCESS IN 2025 SHPO research request procedures have changed with the launch of the Minnesota Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MnSHIP). Please visit MnSHIP (https://mnship.gisdata.mn.gov/) and the Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA) OSA Portal (https://osaportal.gisdata.mn.gov/) to perform research yourself. You can also visit https://npgallery.nps.gov/nrhp to obtain National Register of Historic Places nominations and information. Although this process allows for quick turnaround of results, please allow sufficient time in case follow-up with Minnesota Indian Affairs Council (MIAC) and/or OSA as needed. At MnSHIP, search for the project area by 1) address; 2) township, section, and range; or 3) Shapefile. Once you have located your project area, draw a box to further specify the project area, select the print option on the right-hand side of the map, enter a title and export. This will provide a map with a legend and scale. Attach the map to your application. At the OSA Portal, search for your project area. Once located, draw an area to further specify your project area and save a screenshot. Attach the screenshot to your application. If the MIAC layer shows up in your project area, you will need to reach out to MIAC and OSA to see if there is potential impact to a cemetery. Reach out to the Grant Coordinators for guidance if this is required. Email communication to MIAC and OSA must be attached to the application. Use the information from MnSHIP and OSA Portal and your community history to help guide your responses below. The Request for Project Review by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) is attached to the application for review as this was part of the HUD funding requirements. On the following pages are a couple of maps from the attached report. 313 Page | 23 November 2024 314 Page | 24 November 2024 315 Page | 25 November 2024 Part 4 - Description of Environment and Environmental Impact of Proposed Project A. Present Land Use: Describe the existing site conditions, facilities, and park acres. The project impact area for phase 1a and 1b of the City Park remaster consists of one gravel parking lot, a portion of a baseball field, tennis courts, and a playground. An additional five baseball fields, two gravel parking lots, a pavilion, and other facilities were concentrated outside of the project area. Additionally, there is approximately 28 acres of undeveloped upland on the northwest portion of the overall site. Much of the park area is covered in manicured grass. The City Park Remaster project area is approximately 22.6 acres. The total site is approximately 80 acres. 1. Explain why the site is suitable for the type of outdoor recreation proposal being submitted. The current park land is well-suited for the proposed project. The northern portion of the park already hosts a 25-year-old playground, establishing this area as a dedicated recreational space for children and families. Upgrading to a new playground in the proposed new location aligns with the park’s history of recreational use while ensuring minimal disruption and enhancing the overall experience for visitors. The park also supports a variety of athletic activities, positioning it as a central hub for community recreation. This high level of activity indicates that the park is already an important gathering place for community members, making it an ideal location for the new playground. By integrating the proposed agricultural features into this active environment, the project will enhance the park’s role as a multifaceted recreational space that creates a sense of community identity. Additionally, the planned perimeter trail loop, which forms part of the Diamond Lake Regional Trail, will pass through this area as part of phase 1a of the City Park Remaster project. This connectivity enhances the site’s suitability by linking the playground and accessible walkways to a broader network of trails, promoting mobility and inclusivity for park visitors, including those with disabilities. The integration of the proposed project with the regional trail system helps create a more seamless and accessible recreational experience, ensuring that the park serves a diverse range of users. The site offers ample space to accommodate the new playground and walkways, allowing for safe play areas and clear circulation paths. This spatial arrangement ensures that the proposed project will integrate effectively with the existing athletic fields and hillside without overwhelming the area or reducing its functionality. In sum, the existing playground must be replaced and relocated. The proposed location for the new playground is ideal as it will be better situated in proximity to the athletic fields and park building to create a community hub at the park, will optimize the natural topography of the surrounding area, and will be connected to the future regional trail system. 2. Does the site include any elements that visually detract from the outdoor recreation experience or that represent a potential public safety hazard? a. X No b. ☐ Yes – Explain and describe whether this project will help to address those concerns. 316 Page | 26 November 2024 B. Environmental Intrusions: Describe all rights-of-way, easements, reversionary interests, etc. within the proposed boundary area. All existing and future overhead power lines serving the park must be placed underground. The cost of placing the power lines underground can be included in this application. As shown on the plans, the Diamond Lake Regional Trail is shown routing through City Park. Work has been done in coordination with Three Rivers Park District through a cooperative agreement that provides reimbursement for the work done on the trail. Once regionally significant, among the other thresholds that must be met, the trail will eventually become part of the Three Rivers Park District, and they will maintain the easement area. Additionally, while outside of the project area, the park is located at the intersection of County Road 10 and County Road 50. As such, it is possible that the County would require or request new right-of-way easements in the future to accommodate road improvement projects, but nothing is known at this time. C. Fish and Wildlife: Indicate whether the proposed project site is on or adjacent to a national, state, or local wildlife management area, park, or natural area. Describe the known fish and wildlife species common to the project site and any known species that are listed as endangered, threatened or of special concern. Describe the likely impacts of the proposed project on habitat, population levels, and any other factors related to the fish and wildlife resources. The project site is not adjacent to any of the areas listed. As included in the letter from the United States Department of the Interior’s consistency letter, the following species were deemed as “No Effect” determinations: Monarch Butterfly, Salamander Mussel, and Whooping Crane. D. Vegetation: Describe the major plant species and communities common to the project site and any known species that are listed as endangered, threatened or of special concern. Describe the distribution of major plant communities or types on the site. Indicate the extent of cutting, clearing, removal or other disturbance that will result from the proposed project, as well as any restoration and/or protection activities planned as part of the project. Per the conservation planning report completed and attached, there are no known species that are listed as endangered, threatened, or of special concern found within the search area. Currently, a majority of the space is manicured grass with a variety of tree species. As part of the project, the removal of the ash trees in the project area is planned with the intention of keeping as many trees as possible. The replanting of diverse tree species will strengthen the park’s ecosystem, offering shade, wildlife habitat, and resilience against future tree diseases. E. Wetland Resources: Describe any existing wetland areas on or adjacent to the proposed project site. Indicate any likely physical disturbances of these wetlands, including (but not limited to) draining and filling that would result from the proposed project. Describe any other potential impacts to wetlands, such as water level fluctuations or water pollution that may result from the proposed project. Discuss possible alternatives that would avoid or minimize negative wetland impacts. Also describe any other water resources on or adjacent to the site, proposed uses of surface or groundwater, and any 317 Page | 27 November 2024 possible impacts on these resources, including depletion or pollution, resulting from the proposed project. Explain how the proposed project would help to protect water quality on or adjacent to the site. Located at City Park along the western edge of the park are wetlands. The scope of phase 1b for this project does not have any impact on these wetlands. An additional water resources located within City Park is the creek that runs through the eastern parcel of the park, with a small pond located by the t-ball fields. This scope of the project has no impact on this area. A map of the park has been provided on the following page with the approximate location of the playground shown as an orange rectangle and the categorized national wetlands inventory shown in yellow, greens, and blue. As part of phase 1a, enhanced stormwater management infrastructure will be implemented, including the construction of stormwater ponds southwest of the parking lot. These ponds will capture and manage runoff, reducing erosion and improving water quality while mitigating the impact of heavy rainfall events. F. Geologic and Physiographic Features: Describe any interesting, unique, or fragile geologic and/or physiographic features on the proposed project site and any likely impacts on these features that would result from the proposed project. Also describe any proposed protection activities or measures to provide public education, interpretation, and enjoyment of these resources. One interesting area that the City is looking to highlight and build into is the hillside perpendicular to County Road 50 located in-line with the northeast boarder of the current parking lot. The playground is being built into the hillside with bridges connecting from the higher topography and slides embedded along the hillside. The hillside allows for a 360-degree view of the park. By working with the hillside, rather than removing it, the City is able to highlight that feature for enjoyment by the public. Additionally, this vantage point allows parents to watch their child(ren) play on the playground while simultaneously watching their other child(ren) participate in athletics. 318 Page | 28 November 2024 G. Flood plains: Describe any flood plains in the project area. Include flood plain levels, what development in the flood plain areas will look like and all mitigation efforts. As shown on the graphic below, Hennepin County GIS Natural Resource (https://gis.hennepin.us/NaturalResources/) does not show any flood plains in the project area. H. Air Quality/Noise: Describe any temporary or permanent air or noise pollution that will result from the development and use of the site and the impact(s) on adjacent land uses or landowners. With the installation of the playground, temporary noise pollution would occur during limited construction hours as required by City Code (7AM - 7PM Monday through Friday, and 8AM - 4PM on weekends and holidays). The new playground location is centrally located within the larger park site, so no additional air/noise quality impacts are anticipated to result for adjacent land uses/owners. I. Archeology/ Ground Disturbances: Provide a description of current and historic land use and ground disturbances. Include available information concerning known or suspected archaeological resources within or adjacent to the park. Indicate if any of these identified resources will be impacted by the proposed project. As part of the HUD-CPF requirement, a report was completed that addresses this question. The report is attached for reference, and the following is information from that report. Current and historic land use consists of recreational purposes, with the development of 3 softball fields, 1 t-ball field, a pavilion, 2 tennis courts, and a playground being installed by 1989. By 2000, the pinwheel of ballfields and main western parking lot was developed but was previously owned by the Rockford School District. Additionally, the ice rinks (1 youth hockey, 1 adult hockey, and 1 skating rink were erected. By 2002, trails become more prominent throughout the park, connecting the amenities. Between 2002 and 2012, 3 additional t-ball fields were developed, sheds and bleachers were added to the park, and a batting cage was installed. Stantec 319 Page | 29 November 2024 conducted a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the Survey Area on September 23, 26, and 27, 2024, under Minnesota Archaeological Survey License 24- 377. No new archaeological sites were identified during the archaeological investigation. Stantec recommends a finding of No Historic Properties Affected for the Project. No further archaeological work is recommended should the Project proceed as planned. Stantec conducted a reconnaissance level historic architectural survey of the area of potential effect (APE) in September and October 2024 and February 2025. The submission request for project review by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) is attached. J. Historic Structures: List known historic buildings or structures located within or adjacent to the project area (i.e., individual properties or districts which are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, or which meet the criteria for listing in the National Register). If applicable, identify any expected or potential impacts to these properties with the proposed project. As part of the HUD-CPF requirement, a report was completed that addresses this question. The report is attached for reference, and the following is information from that report. Stantec conducted a reconnaissance level historic architectural survey of the area of potential effect (APE) in September and October 2024 and February 2025. Ten properties were identified within the indirect APE. Stantec recommends that HE- COC-00086 to HE-COC-00094 are Not Eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Due to lack of access to the property, resource HE-COC-00085 is recommended as Undetermined, but treated as Eligible for the NRHP as the property may be an important farmstead associated with the Corcoran family, who founded the town of Corcoran. Regardless of HE-COC-00085’s NRHP status, the property should experience No Adverse Effects from the Project as planned. The submission request for project review by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) is attached. K. Surveys: Have there been any previous cultural and/or historic resource surveys completed that included this project site within the area of potential effect that was assessed? ☐ No – Describe any construction planned as a result of this project that will extend beyond the pre-existing disturbance area (including surface area and depth). Click here to enter text. ☒ Yes – Attach survey and summarize findings and include page number references below. Attached, included in the request for project review by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) is an Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the project (page 5) and Historic Architectural Survey (page 39). Through these surveys, Stantec noted no new archaeological sites were identified and recommends a finding of No Historic Properties Affected for the Project. Additionally, Stantec recommended properties be “Not 320 Page | 30 November 2024 Eligible” or “Undetermined, but treated as Eligible for the NRHP”. Stantec determined the property should experience No Adverse Effects from the Project as planned. 321 Page | 31 November 2024 Part 5 - Environmental Screening Form (ESF) The table below serves as a record of the environmental resources present at the site, whether the proposed action is likely to have a significantly negative impact on those resources, and whether further information is needed to determine the potential impact. Review the listed resources and identify any resources that may be significantly impacted by the action. The Environmental Screening Form (ESF) should be completed with professional input from resource experts and in consultation with relevant local, state, tribal, and federal governments, as appropriate. For each resource, indicate if positive or negative impacts are anticipated to result from the action or if further information is needed to determine the potential impact. Site Name: How will the project affect the following resources? + - ? n/a 1 Air quality ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 2 Circulation and transportation ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 3 Climate ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 4 Contamination or hazardous materials even if remediated ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 5 Endangered species: (listed or proposed threatened or endangered) including associated habitat ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 6 Environmental justice: minority and low-income populations ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 7 Geological resources: soils, bedrock, slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 8 Historic or cultural resources ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 9 Invasive species ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 10 Land use plans or policies from other agencies including tribes ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 11 Lightscapes, especially night sky ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 12 Migratory birds ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 13 Recreation resources ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐ 14 Socioeconomics: changes to tax base or competition with private sector ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 15 Sound (noise impacts) ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 16 Unique ecosystems, such as biosphere reserves, World Heritage sites, old growth forests, etc. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 17 Water quality and/or quantity ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 18 Water: coastal barrier resources or coastal zones ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 19 Water: marine and/or estuarine ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 20 Water: stream flow characteristics ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 21 Water: wetlands and floodplains ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 22 Other important resources Explain: The playground will enhance non-tangible cultural resources with the design meant to honor agrarian history of the area. ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐ + indicates positive impacts are anticipated to result from the action - indicates negative impacts are anticipated to result from the action ? indicates further information is needed to determine the potential impact n/a indicates resource does not exist on site or there is no impact 322 Page | 32 November 2024 1. Have there been any previous environmental documents that are relevant to this project or this specific site? a. ☐ No b. ☒ Yes – Attach and summarize findings and include page number references below An Environmental Assessment (EA) was completed consistent HUD requirements. This document is attached with a summary table addressing the topics in the table above and a final factors summary is provided within the document as well. Through the Environmental Assessment (Attachment G – Page XX), it was determined that the project does not require formal compliance steps or mitigation. The environmental assessment can be found as part of 2. Explain any negative or unknown impacts identified in the table of the ESF. N/A 3. How was the information identified in the table derived and what sources of data were used to justify the impact selection? The information identified in the table was derived from the completed Environmental Assessment performed by Stantec as part of the HUD funding requirements. The full assessment can be found as Attachment G. 4. Who contributed to filling out the ESF (include name, title, agency) and what qualifications do they have that provide the necessary resource expertise to determine impact significance? The Stantec Consulting environmental professionals team completed the work supporting the completion of the ESF (i.e., the EA). This team is comprised of environmental planners; ecologists; geologists; air, climate and greenhouse gas experts; traffic engineers; transportation planners; water resource scientists; and GIS specialists. These professionals are recognized in their fields/areas of practice as practicing their work per industry standards, with the appropriate standard of care and based on a number of years of experience in their relevant fields. 5. List all required federal, state, and local permits/approvals needed for the proposal and explain their purpose and status. Site Plan Approval with the City of Corcoran, Building Permit with the City of Corcoran Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) No Loss Permit, Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Permit, Hennepin County Right of Way/Utility Permits, MN Department of Health Watermain Extension Permit, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)/Met Council Environmental Services (MCES) Sewer Extension Permit, MN Department of Labor and Industry Permits (Plumbing, Building, Electrical), MPCA NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit, MN Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Water Appropriation General Permit for Temporary Projects, if needed, and Finding of No Significant Impact 323 Page | 33 November 2024 (FONSI) conclusion from HUD. All of these are anticipated to be completed in Spring/Summer 2025. Many of the listed requirements are being done as part of phase 1a of the project and wouldn’t apply to phase 1b, with the exception of the site plan approval. 324 Page | 34 November 2024 *NEW REQUIRMENT in 2025 Part 6 – CEQ’s Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) All applicants, regardless of disadvantaged status, must provide the results of a CEJST query for the project location. Visit CJEST (https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/) Zoom to the Census tract of your project location, click on the census tract Use the Tract Information to the right of the map to provide the following information: **We were unable to complete this as the website above is not in service. Tract Information Number: Click here to enter text. County: Click here to enter text. Population: Click here to enter text. Tract Demographics (percentages) Race / Ethnicity White: Click here to enter text. Black or African American: Click here to enter text. American Indian and Alaska Native: Click here to enter text. Asian: Click here to enter text. Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: Click here to enter text. Other: Click here to enter text. Two or more races: Click here to enter text. Hispanic: Click here to enter text. Age Children under 10: Click here to enter text. Ages 10 -64: Click here to enter text. Elderly over 65: Click here to enter text. Identified as Disadvantaged? ☐ YES (Continue to question 1 and 2) ☐NO (Continue to question 2) 1. If yes to above, please indicate the burden and socioeconomic thresholds. Relevant categories will be blue. For each relevant category, select the “+” icon and enter information for all sub-categories that are indicated in bold for exceeding the percentile threshold: ☐ Climate Change: Click here to enter text. ☐ Energy: Click here to enter text. ☐ Health: Click here to enter text. ☐ Housing: Click here to enter text. 325 Page | 35 November 2024 ☐ Legacy Pollution: Click here to enter text. ☐ Transportation: Click here to enter text. ☐ Wastewater Discharge: Click here to enter text. ☐ Workforce Development: Click here to enter text. ☐ Low Income: Click here to enter text. 2. (Optional) Regardless of status derived from CEJST, please provide additional information regarding the project location or community served. Does your target population fall outside the census tract of the project location? Are there population trends happening in your community, city, county, etc. that influence the need for or impact of your project? Highlighting the rural, agricultural history of Corcoran in this area is important. Rush Creek Reserve, a development across County Road 10 from the park, will have access with a crosswalk proposed in phase 1a as part of the connection/continuation of the future Diamond Lake Regional Trail. This area where the residential development stands now, was previously rural, open field. This project helps connect the agrarian history of Corcoran, while connecting new and previous residents of Corcoran. Development continues to move west through the City and by planning early, we can pay homage to our agricultural past, while providing recreational enjoyment for existing and incoming residents for years to come. 326 Page | 36 November 2024 ITEM 6 – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND BENEFIT Address the following questions regarding public participation, planning process and how this project will provide new and/or expanded recreational opportunities. 1. Describe both short- and long-term outdoor recreation benefits that will be achieved as a result of this project. The project will deliver significant short- and long-term benefits for outdoor recreation in Corcoran. In the short term, the construction of the playground will provide an immediate, engaging space for children and families to enjoy. This is of the utmost importance as the existing playground must be removed due to safety considerations as well as a conflict with the location of the planned Diamond Lake Regional Trail. In the long term, the integration of the playground into the park’s natural hillside will preserve the landscape’s character while maintaining a high-quality recreational experience for future generations. The replanting of diverse tree species surrounding the playground will strengthen the park’s ecosystem, offering shade, wildlife habitat, and resilience against future tree diseases. Through these investments, the City of Corcoran is ensuring that its park system remains a dynamic, accessible, and environmentally sustainable space for recreation, benefiting residents and visitors for years to come. 2. Explain how this project fits as part of other projects planned for this same site in the next three years. This project aligns with the broader vision for City Park and complements other planned improvements over the next three years. The City of Corcoran is preparing to embark on its 2050 Comprehensive Plan, to help guide development in this growing community. Additionally, discussions are underway regarding a Strategic Park System Plan, which would help shape the long-term vision for parks and recreational spaces. While the City has acquired significant parkland through dedication from development, securing funding for development remains a key focus. As planning efforts advance, more details will emerge on the future timeline for City Park improvements. This project supports and compliments the larger concept plan, which envisions new or renovated recreational amenities, such as a splashpad, pickleball and tennis courts, a warming house/maintenance building, ice rinks, and a pavilion. Due to funding constraints, these improvements are being phased in over time. By implementing this project now, the City can make progress toward its long-term goals while laying the foundation for future enhancements as additional resources become available. Phase 1a of the City Park Remaster includes a park building, parking lot, general grading/utility/site work, and the Diamond Lake Regional Trail. While not included in the scope of the project as it pertains to this application, the phases of the project align with the overall concept and schematic plans for City Park. 327 Page | 37 November 2024 3. Describe the process that led to the development of this proposal and how the public was involved. • Who was involved (include any state, local, and federal agency professionals, subject matter experts, Native American tribes, and members of the public)? • What information was made available and what opportunity to be involved in planning and developing your proposal was provided? • How were they able to review the completed proposal? • Describe any public meetings held and/or formal public comment periods, including dates and length of time. Were formal comments received and did you provide written responses? The development of this proposal involved collaboration between various stakeholders, including federal, state, and local agencies, as well as members of the public and Native American tribes. Funding for the project was coordinated through Representative Dean Phillips at the federal level, while local conversations with Hennepin County Commissioner Kevin Anderson occurred. Tribal involvement was part of the process in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). As part of the Environmental Assessment (EA), letters were sent to Native American tribes to address any cultural or environmental concerns related to the proposed project. These consultations ensured that the perspectives of Native American communities were considered in the planning and development of the proposal. There were many opportunities for the public to provide feedback, including online surveys, in-person open houses, and public events where community members could share their preferences regarding park amenities and features. A specific survey question was included to indicate residency, which highlighted high response from residents (as self- reported). Recognizing the diverse needs of the community, in-person feedback opportunities were included to engage individuals who may not have access to technology or who are less technologically savvy. Contact information for the Recreation Supervisor was also provided for those seeking further clarification, comments, or questions. The feedback collected was shared with the project consultants and incorporated into the planning process. Individuals who contributed feedback were informed that their input had been included in the discussions. Public participation extended to the Parks and Trails Commission meetings, where several individuals voiced their opinions, as well as to a City Council meeting. These contributions were formally recorded in the meeting minutes and considered during the final stages of planning. In addition, formal public comment periods were held to provide the community with an opportunity comment. Responses to formal comments were provided in writing as possible, ensuring that the public’s input was fully addressed and integrated into the plans. Public meetings/formal public comment periods • City Council – Meeting (10/24 – 7:00 pm) • Online Survey – Open from November 1 – November 22 • Parks and Trails Commission – Work Session (11/21 – 5:30 – 6:30 pm) • Parks and Trails Commission – Meeting (12/19 – 7:00 pm) • City Council – Meeting (2/13 – 7:00 pm) 328 Page | 38 November 2024 4. If relevant, please describe in further detail any tribal engagement that has occurred on this project. Required by NEPA EA, associated with the funding from the Department of HUD, the City of Corcoran sent letters to the appropriate parties for tribal consultation related to historic properties, such as archeological sites, burial grounds, sacred landscapes or features, ceremonial areas, etc. Included in the letter was a map of the project area, overview of the project, and request for any interested consulting parties. We did not receive word from anyone regarding interest in consulting on the project. Additional information including the tribes contacted, letters sent, etc. may be provided, as necessary. ITEM 7 – AVAILABILITY FOR PUBLIC USE All facilities within the park must be designed and available for general public use and open during typical park hours. This includes restrooms, picnic shelters, campgrounds, playgrounds and other structures. For parks that include marina or campground facilities, a minimum of 50% of the berths/campground spaces must be available for short-term rental and an equitable method of allocating long-term rentals shall be used. All personal property must be removed at the end of each use season. State the specific hours of operation, including seasonal hours, and any current or anticipated programmed use for the facilities proposed to be funded with this application. Saying the park will be open during normal park hours is not specific. Also describe any arrangements with schools, local organizations, clubs, or city programs for the use of the facilities and any reservation systems. Explain how this may impact facility availability to the general public. Describe what fees, if any, will be charged for use of the park facilities and/or access to the park. The park is open to the public from 6:00 AM to 11:00 PM, Monday through Sunday, year-round. The playground will be available during these hours without any cost or fee for public use. The park building, housing accessible restrooms with automatically locking doors, will feature one restroom with an adult changing table to be accessible both from inside and outside the building, ensuring convenience for all visitors. While the building is not part of the scope for this grant, the indirect effect is noteworthy and increases accessibility. Several local organizations and city programs actively use the park facilities. Partnerships with youth organizations like the Hanover Athletic Association and Rockford Athletic Association support the City’s baseball program while local softball and cricket teams regularly utilize the fields. These arrangements promote community sports and recreation but do not restrict public access to the playground. The park building is anticipated to be reserved for events, like the existing pavilion, but this will not impact the accessibility of the playground. Programs such as community programming, informational sessions, election polling, open houses, and a Firearm Safety Program are anticipated, enhancing community engagement without limiting public availability. Agencies 329 Page | 39 November 2024 such as the Northwest Area Jaycees, Lions Club, and the Parks and Trails Commission have fee- free use of park facilities, aligning with the City’s goal of fostering accessible public spaces. The growing number of local childcare facilities may also benefit from the inclusive playground design, supporting supervised group visits without exclusivity. Overall, the playground will remain freely available to the public during all park hours, with no fees or barriers to entry, ensuring an inclusive and welcoming environment for all visitors. Additionally, through the community organizations, City programming, and various athletics, the park receives additional visitors to spaces such as the playground. 330 Page | 40 November 2024 ITEM 8 - STATEMENT OF ACCESSIBILITY All facilities improved with this grant project must meet current Americans with Disabilities (ADA) standards and the final guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas. In addition, all critical existing components of the park listed below must be accessible to persons with disabilities. Critical components include: • Accessible parking spaces serving each area of the park. • Restrooms, if provided, must be accessible. • Drinking water, if provided, must be accessible. • Access routes to all recreation facilities must be provided. For this program, an access route must be a minimum of five feet wide, slip resistant, firm and stable. If the restrooms and/or drinking water are not accessible to persons with disabilities or access routes are not provided to all facilities, you will need to include these costs in your Cost Breakdown. Common park elements: For common elements that your park might offer (existing or new), ADA considerations must be included: at least one accessible picnic table, accessible entrance into play areas or sport courts, a walkway leading to the first disc golf tee, etc. View standards below for all other facilities. The following guidelines will help you design your facilities. Copies can be ordered from the U.S. Access Board at (800) 872-2253 or downloaded from their website at United States Access Board. • ADA Accessibility Standards for Buildings and Facilities (For buildings and certain recreation facilities including playgrounds, recreational boating facilities, and fishing piers) • Final Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas September 26, 2013 (For outdoor developed areas such as campgrounds, picnic areas, trails, and beaches. These guidelines, developed for federal facilities subject to the Architectural Barriers Act, are to be used for facilities improved by this Outdoor Recreation Grant Program.) 1. How does the proposed project address access requirements under the ADA Standards, Final Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas and all critical components identified above? Be specific for each proposed facility and existing critical components, providing details to the extent possible. Detailed information is included as an attachment regarding the ADA and accessibility of the playground. The plans have a total of 29 total elevated play activities and 15 total ground-level play activities. Of the required 15 accessible elevated activities, 26 are provided in the plans. Of the 8 required ground-level activities, 15 are provide. Examples of some of the ADA accessible features include the 4 embankment slides, an ADA bucket seat, transfer stations, and 2 bridges 331 Page | 41 November 2024 connecting the hillside to the structure. With clear widths, handrails, and 2 total bridges, this allows those using mobility devices easier travel from the hillside to the structure. Additionally, transfer stations allow access from the ground level. Surfacing consists of a combination of engineered wood fiber and poured-in-place for accessibility to and from features along the ground level. Concrete, ADA accessible pathways are intended to be installed with phase 1a of the City Park Remaster, allowing for access outside of the play container, but these features are not included as part of this grant request. 332 Page | 42 November 2024 ATTACHMENT A - APPLICANT’S RESOLUTION A copy of this approved resolution, with no wording changes, must be included with the application. BE IT RESOLVED that <APPLICANT> act as legal sponsor for the project contained in the Outdoor Recreation Grant application to be submitted on <DAY / MONTH / YEAR> and that <APPLICANT’s REPRESENTATIVE> is hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Natural Resources for funding of this project on behalf of <APPLICANT>. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant maintains an adequate Conflict of Interest Policy and, throughout the term of the contract, will monitor and report any actual or potential conflicts of interest to the State, upon discovery. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that <APPLICANT> has the legal authority to apply for financial assistance, and it has the financial capability to meet the match requirement (if any) and ensure adequate construction, operation, maintenance and replacement of the proposed project for its design life. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that <APPLICANT> has not incurred any development costs and has not entered into a written purchase agreement to acquire the property described in the Cost Breakdown section on this application. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that <APPLICANT> has or will acquire fee title or permanent easement over all the land described in the boundary map or recreational site plan included in the application. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, upon approval of its application by the State, <APPLICANT> may enter into an agreement with the State for the above-referenced project, and that <APPLICANT> certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement including dedicating the park property for uses consistent with the funding grant program into perpetuity. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that <TITLE OF AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL> is hereby authorized to execute such agreements as necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. I CERTIFY THAT the above resolution was adopted by the < City Council, County Board, etc.> of <APPLICANT> on <DAY / MONTH / YEAR>. SIGNED: WITNESSED: ________________________________ _____________________________________ (Signature) (Signature) _______________________________ _____________________________________ (Title) (Date) (Title) (Date) 333 Page | 43 November 2024 ATTACHMENT B – MAPS 1. Location Map: The location map shows the location of the park within your community. The map should identify the main roads to access the park. 2. Boundary Map: The map must clearly indicate the area to be acquired and/or developed as well as the proposed boundary of the larger park/recreation area that would be subject to the perpetual protection provisions, all known outstanding rights and interests in the area held by others, total acres within the boundary, and a north arrow. The Boundary Map will become part of the grant contract, so it is important to have an accurate map. Include the following information on your boundary map: • Park/site name and address, including county name. • Latitude/longitude of park entrance or parking area • Map legend • Draw and label the complete park boundary in a dashed red line. This boundary must include all contiguous lands currently owned by the applicant and managed for public recreation and any additional land to be acquired with this grant. • Indicate any rights-of-ways, easements, reversionary interests, etc. to the park area, including overhead utility lines. • Geographic reference point such as a section corner or designated road intersection. • Acreage of the park and/or each parcel to be acquired. If acquiring additional land for an existing park, differentiate existing acreage v. new acreage. • North arrow and graphic bar scale using the example below: • Signed and dated by the applicant. 3. Recreational Site Plan. The Recreational Site Plan must be drawn to scale, all existing buildings and facilities in the park and all acquisition and/or development listed in the Cost Breakdown. See color coding instructions. All facilities must be identified with legible labels. The Rec Site Plan must align with the project budget. Include the following information on your site plan: • Title "Recreation Site Plan" and the project name. • Entrance to the park and location of existing and/or proposed public parking facilities. • Location of all existing and planned recreation and support buildings and facilities such as restrooms, shelters, and potable water. See color coding instructions below. • All lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, floodplains, and adjacent land uses. • Access routes (existing and/or proposed) to all existing and proposed facilities. • North arrow and graphic bar scale using the example below: 334 Page | 44 November 2024 A text scale such as 1” = 500’ is not acceptable. Color Coding for map/plan • Red Park boundary (dashed line) • Green Existing facilities that will remain. • Yellow Acquisition and/or development of facilities accomplished with this grant. ATTACHMENT C – PROJECT TIMELINE Please include a project timeline for the activity. The timeline should start at day “0” and reference duration in days, weeks, and months. Do not provide specific dates/months in the timeline. ATTACHMENT D – PHOTOS Please include photos of each existing recreational facilities/structures and all buildings. Below each photo, indicate the year the facility/building was constructed and if it will remain as is, be renovated or be removed. ATTACHMENT E – PLANS Please submit all applicable plan(s) according to the directions provided below. Buildings, Shelters and Restrooms Plans For all proposed buildings, shelters, and restrooms that will be constructed or renovated with grant funds submit the following. 1. Front and side views 2. A floor plan with all dimensions If you are renovating a building, shelter, and restrooms, a current and renovated floor plan must be submitted. Trail, Walkway and Access Route Plans For all proposed trails, walkways, and access routes that will be constructed or renovated with grant funds, submit the following: 1. A typical cross section of the trail 2. The trail width, surfacing and base materials For the purposes of this grant program, a multi-purpose trail should be designed to a minimum 8 feet width. In some cases, this minimum width may not be adequate and a width of 10 feet or more may be appropriate. All walkways and access routes connecting park facilities from trail and/or parking lots must be a minimum of 5 feet wide. 335 Page | 45 November 2024 All trails and access routes must be firm, stable, and slip resistant. Playground and Splash Pad Plans Priority will be given to playground and splash pad designs that provide a high degree of safety and accessibility. The facility should be designed to provide an integrated play setting for both children and parents/care providers of all abilities. Playground facilities must be, at a minimum, designed using the ADA Accessibility Standards, Chapter 10, 1008 Play Areas. Applications that do not include enough information to determine the degree of accessibility and safety typically do not score high enough for funding. The playground plan must legible and include the following: 1. Show all the proposed playground components and all existing components that will remain. Label each component with its name and the height of its useable surfaces. 2. Identify all type(s), depth(s) and location(s) of the fall-protection surfacing. The splash pad plan must be legible and include the following: 1. Show all the proposed water components. Label each component with its name and the heigh of its useable surfaces. Fishing Pier Plans Fishing pier plans must show the dimensions of the pier, height(s) of the railings and edge protection all in accordance with ADA Standards Chapter 10, 1005 Fishing Piers and Platforms. Campground Plans All new and existing campgrounds must adhere to the Local Grants Program Campground and the state laws and rules set by the Minnesota Department of Health. A summary of these requirements is available at Summary of General Requirements for Recreational Camping Areas. Grantees must submit plans and receive approval for the development of a recreational camping area to the MN Department of Health or your local health authority before construction begins. Upon completion of the campground, a license application, license fee and inspection by the area health inspector is required. A copy of the license must be submitted with your final payment request. For all proposed campgrounds constructed or renovated with grant funds must submit the following: 1. Show all campground sites to scale. 2. Highlight ADA sites unless all sites provide universal access with accessible surfacing, tables, grills and fire ring. At a minimum, ADA sites should include one or more of each camping type provided (e.g., drive through, electric or primitive). 336 33 7 33 8 Attachment B – Location Map 339 Boundary Map Applicant signature Date Corcoran City Park, 20200 County Rd 50, Corcoran, MN 55340 | Hennepin County 0 250’500’ N 59.95 acres 19.3 acres 45.094959513894565, -93.55354367573686 Legend Park Boundary CR 50 Park Entrance Overhead utility lines CR 10 3/31/2025 340 Recreation Site Plan: Corcoran City Park Playground 500’ N 0 250’ Existing Ballfields Existing Ballfield Existing Parking Existing Parking Existing Parking Existing BallfieldExisting Warming House Existing Ballfield Existing T-ball Fields Existing Hockey and Ice Skating Rinks Proposed Destination Playground Existing Picnic Shelter Parking Lot (constructed in 2025) Wetland Residential Residential Industrial Residential Commercial Wetland CR 50 CR 10 Wetland Existing Park Entrance Park Building (constructed in 2025) Access route Access route Ac c e s s r o u t e 341 Attachment C – Project Timeline Corcoran City Park Playground Task Day 0/W k 1 W k 3 W k 4 W k 5 W k 6 W k 7 W k 8 W k 9 W k 1 0 W k 1 1 W k 1 2 W k 1 3 W k 1 4 W k 1 5 W k 1 6 W k 1 7 W k 1 8 W k 1 9 W k 2 0 W k 2 1 W k 22 W k 24 Complet e Final Design Council approval to bid Post project for bids Bid opening Council approval of bid Award project Pre-con meeting Construc tion window Project opening 342 LOCATION OF PROJECT (NEW PLAYGROUND) ATTACHMENT D - PHOTOS - CORCORAN PARK PLAYGROUND 343 OLD PLAYGROUND - 2000 - TO BE REMOVED 344 OTHER AMENITIES - ALL APPROX. 1989 1. LIONS FIELD - REMAIN AS IS 3. PAVILION - REMAIN AS IS 2. TENNIS COURTS - REMOVAL FOR TRAIL ROUTE W/ PRIOR PHASE 3. PAVILION - REMAIN AS IS 1. 3.2. 345 CREEK WITHIN THE PARK - REMAIN AS IS 346 STANDARD SWINGS PART#ZZXX0825,0827 W/BELT SEATS PART#ZZXX0260 W/ADA SEAT PART#ZZXX0892 W/TOT SEAT PART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMIC DESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANEL W/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96" 76" TRANSFER STATION W/STEP 360° SPIRAL NUVO SLIDE TRI-VERSE CLIMBER 6' PLAYWOOD BRIDGE CUSTOM MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE FOR HILLSIDE ZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1" 77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10' 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" GLIDE SLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS RIBBON CLIMBER SILO CLIMBER 11'-2" 14'-8" 14'-3" 8'-10" 11'-1" 22'-4" 22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 347 UNITY SWING W/BASKET SWING PART#ZZXX0198,0204 48" TWIST N' SHOUT SLIDE TRANSFER STATION W/STEP SILO CLIMBER NUVO SWIRL ROOF PM FARM TRACTOR STRUCTURE ZZYYC268 PLASTIC PLAYCUBES FRACTAL NET FRACTAL NET TRANSFER STEP 6'-4" 7'-2" 6'-6" 9'-10" 13'-10" 12'-8" 20'-3" 8' 0 5'10' 62'-8" 65'-2" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 9 5 9 4 3 4 3 4 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 28'10" X 29'3" X 10' 62'8" X 65'2" 2,530 Sq. Ft. 199 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft. 205 2-5 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 348 ZOOMTRAX PART#ZZXX1136 ADA ZOOMTRAX PART#ZZXX1139 77'-9" 0 5'10' 68'-1" 57'-6" 6'-6" 7'-2" 6'-8" 6'-7" 6'-9" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 N/A 68'1" X 57'6" 2,452 Sq. Ft. 203 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 349 Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK PLAYGROUND PLANNING 350 2 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) Slide & Solve Panel 2-5yr & 5-12yr accessible ground level and ADA elevated play components. Rainbow Panel Magical Music Panel (4)Custom Graphics Panels Balcony w/Telescope Twisted Climber Inclined Cliff Hanger Hypnotize Panel (2) Anywhere Seats Tower Climber Post Mount Bells STANDARD SWINGS PART#ZZXX0825,0827 W/BELT SEATS PART#ZZXX0260 W/ADA SEAT PART#ZZXX0892 W/TOT SEAT PART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMIC DESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANEL W/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96" 76" TRANSFER STATION W/STEP 360° SPIRAL NUVO SLIDE TRI-VERSE CLIMBER 6' PLAYWOOD BRIDGE CUSTOM MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE FOR HILLSIDE ZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1" 77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10' 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" GLIDE SLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS RIBBON CLIMBER SILO CLIMBER 11'-2" 14'-8" 14'-3" 8'-10" 11'-1" 22'-4" 22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN (2) Steering Wheel Panels 351 3 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) (2) Playwood Bridge 2-5yr & 5-12yr accessible ground level and ADA elevated play components. Tri-verse Climber Ball Maze Panel (3) Dynamic Descent Slides Glide Slide Animal Tunes Panel 360 Degree Nuvo Slide Babble-On Talk Tube Ribbon Climber ADA Bucket Seat Prism Pass STANDARD SWINGS PART#ZZXX0825,0827 W/BELT SEATS PART#ZZXX0260 W/ADA SEAT PART#ZZXX0892 W/TOT SEAT PART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMIC DESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANEL W/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96" 76" TRANSFER STATION W/STEP 360° SPIRAL NUVO SLIDE TRI-VERSE CLIMBER 6' PLAYWOOD BRIDGE CUSTOM MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE FOR HILLSIDE ZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1" 77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10' 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" GLIDE SLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS RIBBON CLIMBER SILO CLIMBER 11'-2" 14'-8" 14'-3" 8'-10" 11'-1" 22'-4" 22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Bell Puzzle Panel 352 4 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN 353 5 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN 354 6 UNITY SWING W/BASKET SWING PART#ZZXX0198,0204 48" TWIST N' SHOUT SLIDE TRANSFER STATION W/STEP SILO CLIMBER NUVO SWIRL ROOF PM FARM TRACTOR STRUCTURE ZZYYC268 PLASTIC PLAYCUBES FRACTAL NET FRACTAL NET TRANSFER STEP 6'-4" 7'-2" 6'-6" 9'-10" 13'-10" 12'-8" 20'-3" 8' 0 5'10' 62'-8" 65'-2" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 9 5 9 4 3 4 3 4 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 28'10" X 29'3" X 10' 62'8" X 65'2" 2,530 Sq. Ft. 199 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft. 205 2-5 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 UNITY SWING W/BASKET SWING PART#ZZXX0198,0204 48"TWIST N'SHOUTSLIDETRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP SILOCLIMBERNUVOSWIRLROOF PM FARMTRACTOR STRUCTUREZZYYC268PLASTICPLAYCUBESFRACTALNETFRACTAL NETTRANSFERSTEP 6'-4"7'-2"6'-6"9'-10" 13'-10" 12'-8"20'-3"8' 0 5'10' 62'-8"65'-2" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 9 5 9 4 3 4 3 4 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 28'10" X 29'3" X 10'62'8" X 65'2" 2,530 Sq. Ft. 199 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft.205 2-5 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +4!+1!+1! CUSTOM TRACTOR STRUCTURE (2-5YR) Climbing Squares Silo Climber Horse Spring Rider Tractor Tunnel Unity Steppers Playcubes Structure (2) Steering Wheel Panels Unity Swing (2) Tractor Wheel Cozy Hangout Tube Slide Cow Spring Rider Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN 2-5yr & 5-12yr accessible ground level and ADA elevated play components. 355 7 STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN CUSTOM TRACTOR STRUCTURE (2-5YR) 356 8 ZOOMTRAX PART#ZZXX1136 ADA ZOOMTRAX PART#ZZXX1139 77'-9" 0 5'10' 68'-1" 57'-6" 6'-6" 7'-2" 6'-8" 6'-7" 6'-9" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 N/A 68'1" X 57'6" 2,452 Sq. Ft. 203 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 ZOOMTRAXPART#ZZXX1136ADA ZOOMTRAXPART#ZZXX1139 77'-9" 0 5'10' 68'-1"57'-6"6'-6"7'-2"6'-8"6'-7" 6'-9" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 N/A68'1" X 57'6" 2,452 Sq. Ft. 203 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +2!+1! ZIP-LINE STRUCTURE Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN ADA Accessible Zoomtrax w/Bucket Seat 357 9 ZOOMTRAXPART#ZZXX1136ADA ZOOMTRAXPART#ZZXX1139 77'-9" 0 5'10' 68'-1"57'-6"6'-6"7'-2"6'-8"6'-7" 6'-9" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 N/A68'1" X 57'6" 2,452 Sq. Ft. 203 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +2!+1! ADA ACCESSIBLE EMBANKEMENT SLIDES Twist N’ Shout Embankement Slide Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Embankement slides will be located along an ADA accessible park trail and will exit into an ADA accessible Engineered Wood Fiber certified surfacing. Mighty Descent & Dynamic Descent Embankement Slides 358 Corcoran, MN ADA Requirement Breakdown Park Name: Community Park Drawing Number: 25-16202A 2-5 Total Elevated Play Components: 9 1. Climbing Squares 2. Tractor Tunnel 3. (2) Steering Wheel Panels 4. (2) Anywhere Seats (on deck) 5. Tube Slide 6. Silo Climber 7. Unity Stepper 2-5 Total ADA Elevated Play Components: (need minimum of 5): 9 1. Climbing Squares 2. Tractor Tunnel 3. (2) Steering Wheel Panels 4. (2) Anywhere Seats (on deck) 5. Tube Slide 6. Silo Climber 7. Unity Stepper 359 2-5 Total Ground Level Components: 7 Required: 3 Ground-Level of 3 Types of Play Provided: 7 Ground-Level of 5 Types of Play 1. Unity Swing 2. Cow Spring Rider 3. Horse Spring Rider 4. Playcubes Structure 5. Tractor Tunnel 6. (2) Tractor Wheel Cozy Hangout 5-12 Total Elevated Play Components: 31 1. Sky Panel w/Slide & Solve 2. Mighty Descent Slide 3. (4) Custom Graphics Panel w/Fiberglass Games 4. Oval Insert Panel w/Rainbow Insert 5. Balcony w/Telescope 6. Inclined CliƯ Hanger 7. Tower Climber 8. Sky Panel w/Magical Music Insert 9. Twisted Climber 10. Sky Panel w/Hypnotize Insert 11. Post Mount Bell 12. (2) Playwood Bridge 13. (3) Dynamic Descent Slide 14. (2) Upper Silo Climber 15. Climbing Squares Climber 16. Sky Panel w/Bell Puzzle Insert 17. (2) Tube Slides w/Windows 360 18. Ribbon Climber 19. Tri-Verse Climber 20. Silo Climber 21. Glide Slide 22. Ladder 23. 360 Degree Nuvo Slide 5-12 Total ADA Elevated Play Components: (need minimum of 16): 27 1. Sky Panel w/Slide & Solve 2. Mighty Descent Slide 3. (4) Custom Graphics Panel w/Fiberglass Games 4. Oval Insert Panel w/Rainbow Insert 5. Balcony w/Telescope 6. Inclined CliƯ Hanger 7. Tower Climber 8. Sky Panel w/Magical Music Insert 9. Twisted Climber 10. Sky Panel w/Hypnotize Insert 11. Post Mount Bell 12. (2) Playwood Bridge 13. (3) Dynamic Descent Slide 14. Climbing Squares Climber 15. Sky Panel w/Bell Puzzle Insert 16. Ribbon Climber 17. Tri-Verse Climber 18. Silo Climber 19. Glide Slide 20. Ladder 21. 360 Degree Nuvo Slide 361 5-12 Total Ground Level Components: 15 Required: 10 Ground-Level of 5 Types of Play Provided: 14 Ground-Level of 5 Types of Play 1. (6) Belt Swings 2. Tot Swing 3. ADA Swing 4. Oval Insert Panel w/Ball Maze Insert 5. ADA Animal Tunes Panel 6. Oval Insert Panel w/Gears Insert 7. Playseat 8. Babble-on 9. Prism Pass (Below Mighty Descent) Zoomtrax Area Ground Level Components: 2 Required: 0 Ground-Level of 0 Types of Play Provided: 2 Ground-Level of 2 Types of Play 1. Zoomtrax (Standard) 2. ADA Zoomtrax 362 Corcoran Park Remaster Environmental Assessment HEROS Submittal City of Corcoran, MN Prepared for: City of Corcoran Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. February 2025 363 Initial Screen *Indicates that field is required. *Project Name: Corcoran-Park-Grant *HUD Funding Source: Include only funding sources for which this review will fulfill HUD’s environmental review requirements. Do not include funding sources that will require a separate environmental review (e.g. if this project receives funding from both Part 50 and Part 58 programs). Grant/Project Identification Number HUD Program Program Name Funding Amount B-24-CP-MN-1236 Community Planning and Development (CPD) Community Project Funding (CPF) Grants $500,000 *Estimated Total HUD Funded, Assisted, or Insured Amount($): $500,000 *Estimated Total Project Cost: $ 5,300,000 This may be the same as the total HUD-funded, assisted, or insured amount. *Does this project anticipate the use of funds or assistance from another Federal agency in addition to HUD? No Yes Responsible Entity (RE) Information: Organization Name: City of Corcoran Address: Corcoran, Minnesota *RE Preparer Information: Name: Jason Tobin Certifying Officer Information (not required for exempt or CENST projects): Name: Grant Recipient Information (if different from Responsible Entity): Complete this section only if the grant recipient is not acting as the Responsible Entity. Search Other None Consultant Information: Complete this section only if you represent a consultant firm or other contractor assisting with the environmental review. Search Other None 364 Name of Firm: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Name of Preparer: Liam Mitchell 40 CFR 1506.5(b)(4): The lead agency or, where appropriate, a cooperating agency shall prepare a disclosure statement for the contractor's execution specifying that the contractor has no financial or other interest in the outcome of the action. Such statement need not include privileged or confidential trade secrets or other confidential business information. By checking this box, I attest that as a preparer, I have no financial or other interest in the outcome of the undertaking assessed in this environmental review. Sensitive Information While it is important that HUD assistance undergo the requisite environmental review and transparency requirements, it is equally important that information that may endanger certain types of projects, such as domestic violence shelters, is not publicly disclosed. To reduce the risk of violence or other harm at sensitive sites undergoing environmental review compliance for the use of HUD assistance, HUD has implemented certain preventative measures. If the nature of this project should be kept confidential, indicate that fact here. This project type is not sensitive and need not be kept confidential. This project type is sensitive and must be kept confidential. Project Summary * Description of the Proposed Project [24 CFR 50.12; 24 CFR 58.32; 40 CFR 1508.25]: Provide a project description that captures the maximum anticipated scope of the proposal. It should include all contemplated actions which logically are, either geographically or functionally, a composite part of the project, regardless of the source of funding. Describe all physical aspects of the project, such as plans for multiple phases of development, size and number of buildings, and activities to be undertaken. Include details of the physical impacts of the project, including whether there will be ground disturbance. If applicable, indicate whether the project site will require acquisition or if the sponsor already has ownership. If there is not enough space below, or if there are additional documents required to supplement this review, upload them below. The Project entails construction of several improvements to the Corcoran Community Park. These improvements may include five new soccer fields, six new pickleball courts, two new tennis courts, a new playground, splash pad, and an approximately 4,000 square feet multipurpose building with bathrooms, kitchen, gathering area, and pavilion, and a larger paved (or paved/gravel combination) parking lot. Two existing tennis courts, the existing playground, a storage area south of the existing ball fields, and a paved path between the existing ball fields will be removed. A regional trail connection to the Diamond Lake Regional Trail will also be completed. The regional trial will be paved with asphalt, with the exception of a wooden boardwalk through the wetlands in the west portion of the project area to avoid wetland impacts. Connection to City sewer and water would occur for new facilities requiring connection (e.g., splash pad, multi-purpose building). The listed improvements may be implemented in phases as funding is available. In addition to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 365 (HUD) funding, additional funding sources for this project include donations from the Northwest Area Jaycees, the Hanover Athletic Association, and Three Rivers Park District organizations. Construction of the project is anticipated to begin in Spring 2025. * Project Location: Provide a street address for your project and validate the address using the button below. If the project location is sensitive, you may provide an alternative address, such as the address of your city hall or nonprofit in lieu of the exact location of the project. If you cannot validate the address now, be sure to do so before completing the review. If the project affects a large area, such as an infrastructure or community services project, select a representative address and describe the project location in a narrative in the provided textbox. Street: 20200 County Road 50 * City: Corcoran * State: Minnesota Zip: 55340 Location Information: Field Inspection If a site visit was conducted, complete the following section. Inspector Information: Name: Date of Inspection (mm/dd/yy): Title: Upload any photographs or other documentation here * What activities are involved in the project? (Check all that apply.) Acquisition (including refinance) of real property Leasing Tooltip Maintenance Tooltip Repair/Improvement/Rehabilitation New construction/Reconstruction Demolition Disposition Removal of architectural barriers Soft Costs or other non-physical activities (e.g. planning, services, administration, predevelopment costs) * Will the project require or lead to a change in land use of the affected property (e.g. from non-residential to residential, commercial to industrial, or from one industrial use to another)? Yes No * What is the planned use of the affected property (after completion of the project)? 366 Vacant land Public facility Nonresidential building(s) Residential building(s) 367 What level of review is required by the scope of the project? For more information on determining the appropriate level of review, go to https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/orientation-to-environmental-reviews/#level-of-review Only the Responsible Entity (RE) may determine the level of review. Your selection on this screen is only advisory. The RE may want to confirm the level of review before you proceed with the environmental review. Consult with the RE for questions about processing this review. Exempt Select appropriate citation(s) from 24 CFR 58.34(a): (Check all that apply) Environmental and other studies, resource identification and the development of plans and strategies. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(1) Information and financial services. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(2) Administrative and management activities. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(3) Public services that will not have a physical impact or result in any physical changes, including but not limited to services concerned with employment, crime prevention, child care, health, drug abuse, education, counseling, energy conservation and welfare or recreational needs. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(4) Inspections and testing of properties for hazards or defects. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(5) Purchase of insurance. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(6) Purchase of tools. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(7) Engineering or design costs. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(8) Technical assistance and training. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(9) Assistance for temporary or permanent improvements that do not alter environmental conditions and are limited to protection, repair, or restoration activities necessary only to control or arrest the effects from disasters or imminent threats to public safety including those resulting from physical deterioration. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(10) Payment of principal and interest on loans made or obligations guaranteed by HUD. 24 CFR 58.34(a)(11) Categorical exclusion not subject to the Federal laws and authorities cited in §58.5 (CENST) Select appropriate citation(s) from 24 CFR 58.35(b): (Check all that apply) Tenant-based rental assistance. 24 CFR 58.35(b)(1) 368 Supportive services including, but not limited to, health care, housing services, permanent housing placement, day care, nutritional services, short-term payments for rent/mortgage/utility costs, and assistance in gaining access to local, State, and Federal government benefits and services. 24 CFR 58.35(b)(2) Operating costs including maintenance, security, operation, utilities, furnishings, equipment, supplies, staff training and recruitment and other incidental costs. 24 CFR 58.35(b)(3) Economic development activities, including but not limited to, equipment purchase, inventory financing, interest subsidy, operating expenses and similar costs not associated with construction or expansion of existing operations. 24 CFR 58.35(b)(4) Activities to assist homebuyers to purchase existing dwelling units or dwelling units under construction, including closing costs and down payment assistance, interest buydowns, and similar activities that result in the transfer of title. 24 CFR 58.35(b)(5) Affordable housing pre-development costs including legal, consulting, developer and other costs related to obtaining site options, project financing, administrative costs and fees for loan commitments, zoning approvals, and other related activities which do not have a physical impact. 24 CFR 58.35(b)(6) Approval of supplemental assistance 24 CFR 58.35(b)(7) This activity is CENST Supplemental Assistance if the approval is made by the same responsible entity that conducted the environmental review on the original project and reevaluation of the environmental findings is not required under Sec. 58.47. Categorical exclusion subject to the Federal laws and authorities cited in §58.5 (CEST) Select appropriate citation(s) from 24 CFR 58.35(a): (Check all that apply) Acquisition or leasing Acquisition of public facilities 24 CFR 58.35(a)(1) Acquisition of vacant land provided that the acquired land will be retained for the same use. 24 CFR 58.35(a)(5) Acquisition (including leasing) of an existing structure provided that the acquired structure will be retained for the same use. 24 CFR 58.35(a)(5) ADA Compliance Special projects directed to the removal of material and architectural barriers that restrict the mobility of and accessibility to elderly and handicapped persons. 24 CFR 58.35(a)(2) Repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation 369 Rehabilitation of public facilities and improvements other than buildings 24 CFR 58.35(a)(1) This activity is CEST if the facilities and improvements are in place and retained in the same use without change in size or capacity of more than 20 percent. Acceptable activities include replacement of water or sewer lines, reconstruction of curbs and sidewalks, and repaving of streets. Rehabilitation of residential buildings with one to four units 24 CFR 58.35(a)(3)(i) This activity is CEST if the density is not increased beyond four units, the land use is not changed, and the footprint of the building is not increased in a floodplain or wetland. Rehabilitation of multifamily (5 or more units) residential buildings 24 CFR 58.35(a)(3)(ii) This activity is CEST if unit density is not changed more than 20 percent; the project does not involve changes in land use from residential to non-residential; and the estimated cost of rehabilitation is less than 75 percent of the total estimated cost of replacement after rehabilitation. Rehabilitation of non-residential structures including commercial, industrial, and public buildings 24 CFR 58.35(a)(3)(iii) This activity is CEST if the facilities and improvements are in place and will not be changed in size or capacity by more than 20 percent; and the activity does not involve a change in land use, such as from non-residential to residential, commercial to industrial, or from one industrial use to another. Individual Actions An individual action on up to four dwelling units. 24 CFR 58.35(a)(4)(i) This activity is CEST where there is a maximum of four units on any one site. The units can be four one- unit buildings or one four-unit building or any combination in between. An individual action on a project of five or more housing units. 24 CFR 58.35(a)(4)(ii) This activity is CEST when the housing units are developed on scattered sites, the site are more than 2,000 feet apart, and there are not more than four housing units on any one site. Disposition Disposition of an existing structure provided that the disposed of structure will be retained for the same use. 24 CFR 58.35(a)(5) Equity Loans Equity loans on an existing structure provided that the financed structure will be retained for the same use. 24 CFR 58.35(a)(5) Environmental Assessment (EA) This activity requires an EA if no categorical exclusions or exemptions apply. An EA may also be required if extraordinary circumstances apply. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Not Sure 370 If the level of review is not known select this option to go to the Level of Review Determination Assistant. Level of Review Confirmation: EA (58) Based on your responses in the Level of Review Determination Section, this project requires an Environmental Assessment (EA). * Check your responses and confirm that this project should require an EA. Yes, this project falls into the category indicated above Check here if this project has been elevated to an EA based on extraordinary circumstances No Project Justification (50/58) * Statement of Purpose and Need for the Proposal: The underlying purpose and need to which the agency is responding in proposing the action and its alternatives. Describe how the proposed action is intended to address housing and/or community development needs. Between the City's significant growth and the park's aging infrastructure, the project is needed to provide recreational opportunities for the area. The City's current facilities need upgrades as they have reached the end of their useful life. The project addresses community development needs by providing a space for recreation for the public to enjoy. With no schools physically located in the City of Corcoran and no athletic associations, the park is a key location for outdoor recreational activities for the residents of Corcoran. The addition of additional amenities to the park beyond what is currently at the park will allow for inclusion of a broader and more diverse demographic to utilize the park than previously before. * Existing Conditions and Trends: [24 CFR 58.40(a)] Determine existing conditions and describe the character, features and resources of the project area and its surroundings; identify the trends that are likely to continue in the absence of the project. The current park has six ball fields, two tennis fields, four T-Ball fields, a smaller unpaved parking lot, and an existing shelter. The infrastructure in the current park is at the end of its useful life. Without the improvements from this project, the public will not have a readily accessible place to go to for sports and playground recreation. In addition, the lack of a building to host classes and other activities for the public will limit opportunities for the public. 2005 – Related Federal Laws and Authorities Summary (50/58) Directions: Click on the Compliance Factor links in the first column in the chart below. The links will take you to a separate screen to answer questions and provide documentation on the specific Compliance Factor. After completing each Compliance Factor screen you will automatically return to this screen to continue. 371 Compliance Factors Are formal compliance steps or mitigations required? Compliance Determination STATUTES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, AND REGULATIONS LISTED AT 24 CFR §50.4 & 58.6 Airport Hazards [Clear Zones and Accident Potential Zones; 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart D] No The project site is not within 15,000 feet of a military airport or 2,500 feet of a civilian airport. The closest airport to the project area, Kral's Personal Use Landing Field Airport, is permanently closed as noted in the attached images. The project is in compliance with Airport Hazards requirements. Coastal Barrier Resources [Coastal Barrier Resources Act, as amended by the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of 1990 [16 USC 3501]] No This project is not located in a CBRS Unit. Therefore, this project has no potential to impact a CBRS Unit and is in compliance with the Coastal Barrier Resources Act. Flood Insurance [Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 and National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 [42 USC 4001-4128 and 42 USC 5154a]] No Based on the project description the project includes no activities that would require further evaluation under this section. The project does not require flood insurance or is excepted from flood insurance. While flood insurance may not be mandatory in this instance, HUD recommends that all insurable structures maintain flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The project is in compliance with Flood Insurance requirements. STATUTES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, AND REGULATIONS LISTED AT 24 CFR §50.4 & 58.5 Air Quality [Clean Air Act, as amended, particularly section 176(c) & (d); 40 CFR Parts 6, 51, 93] No Based on the project description, this project includes no activities that would require further evaluation under the Clean Air Act. There are no sensitive air receptors in the project area. The project is in compliance with the Clean Air Act. 372 Coastal Zone Management [Coastal Zone Management Act, sections 307(c) & (d)] No This project is not located in or does not affect a Coastal Zone as defined in the state Coastal Management Plan. The project is in compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act. Contamination and Toxic Substances - Multifamily and Nonresidential Properties [24 CFR 50.3(i) & 58.5(i)(2)] (HUD Standard) Yes Site contamination was evaluated as follows: None of the above. On-site or nearby toxic, hazardous, or radioactive substances that could affect the health and safety of project occupants or conflict with the intended use of the property were not found. Radon analysis indicated elevated levels of radon or consideration of radon will occur following construction. Adverse radon impacts can be mitigated. With mitigation, identified in the mitigation section of this review, the project will be in compliance with contamination and toxic substances requirements. Endangered Species [Endangered Species Act of 1973, particularly section 7; 50 CFR Part 402] No This project has been determined to have No Effect on listed species. This project is in compliance with the Endangered Species Act without mitigation. Explosive and Flammable Hazards (Above-Ground Tanks)[24 CFR Part 51 Subpart C] No Based on the project description the project includes no activities that would require further evaluation under this section. The project is in compliance with explosive and flammable hazard requirements. Farmlands Protection [Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981, particularly sections 1504(b) & 1541; 7 CFR Part 658] No An inquiry into potential agricultural land usage (Prime and Unique Farmland soil map) at the Project area was conducted. It was found that there are some areas of the park that are designated as farmland of statewide importance. However, none of the land under the Project area now is 373 used for agricultural purposes. According to the City of Corcoran's 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the current Project area is designated as a ''Park, Recreational or Preserve'' use. In addition, the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates the Project area as ''Parks/Open Space'' for the 2040 Future Land Use map. Therefore, the Project area is not currently designated for agricultural use, nor will it be designated as such in the future. In addition, form AD-1006 was filled out to determine if further action was required. It was found that the impact rating was 36, which is below the threshold of 160 for action. This project does not include any activities that could potentially convert agricultural land to a non- agricultural use. The project is in compliance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act. Floodplain Management [Executive Order 11988, particularly section 2(a); 24 CFR Part 55] No This project does not occur in the FFRMS floodplain. The project is in compliance with Executive Orders 11988 and 13690. Historic Preservation [National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, particularly sections 106 & 110; 36 CFR Part 800] No The 14 local tribes near the Project area were consulted for historic preservation under HUD regulation 24 CFR 58.4. Out of the 14 tribes, only one tribe (Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community) responded to the outreach. Their Tribal Historic Preservation Officer concluded that there is no significant impact as concurred by the archaeological report attached. Please see attached reports for more information regarding the Architectural and Archaeological reports. 374 Noise Abatement and Control [Noise Control Act of 1972, as amended by the Quiet Communities Act of 1978; 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart B] No Based on the project description, this project includes no activities that would require further evaluation under HUD's noise regulation. The project is in compliance with HUD's Noise regulation. Sole Source Aquifers [Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended, particularly section 1424(e); 40 CFR Part 149] No The project is not located on a sole source aquifer area. The project is in compliance with Sole Source Aquifer requirements. Wetlands Protection [Executive Order 11990, particularly sections 2 & 5] No The project will not impact on- or off-site wetlands. The project is in compliance with Executive Order 11990. Wild and Scenic Rivers [Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, particularly section 7(b) & (c)] No This project is not within proximity of a NWSRS river. The project is also not in proximity of any rivers. The project is in compliance with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Environmental Justice [Executive Order 12898] No Adverse environmental impacts are not disproportionately high for low-income and/or minority communities as there are no disproportionally high communities in the project area or 0.25 mile buffer. The project is in compliance with Executive Order 12898. 375 Airport Hazards Directions General Requirements Legislation Regulation It is HUD’s policy to apply standards to prevent incompatible development around civil airports and military airfields. (none) 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart D Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/airport-hazards 1. To ensure compatible land use development, you must determine your site’s proximity to civil and military airports. Is your project within 15,000 feet of a military airport or 2,500 feet of a civilian airport? No Upload a map showing that the site is not within the applicable distances to a military or civilian airport in the Screen Summary at the conclusion of this screen. Yes Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region The project site is not within 15,000 feet of a military airport or 2,500 feet of a civilian airport. The closest airport to the project area, Kral's Personal Use Landing Field Airport, is permanently closed as noted in the attached images. The project is in compliance with Airport Hazards requirements. Supporting documentation See Appendix A for attached files Airports.pdf Aerial Location Map.pdf AirNavQuery.png AirportClosed.png ClosestAirport.png 376 Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 377 Coastal Barrier Resources Act General Requirements Legislation Regulation HUD financial assistance may not be used for most activities in units of the Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS). See 16 USC 3504 for limitations on Federal expenditures affecting the CBRS. Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982, as amended by the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of 1990 (16 USC 3501) (none) Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/coastal-barrier-resources 1. Is the project located in a CBRS (Coastal Barrier Resources System) Unit? No Upload map and documentation in the Screen Summary at the conclusion of this screen. Yes Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region This project is not located in a CBRS Unit. Therefore, this project has no potential to impact a CBRS Unit and is in compliance with the Coastal Barrier Resources Act. Supporting documentation See Appendix A for files. ProjectLocationInState.png Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 378 379 Flood Insurance General Requirements Legislation Regulation Certain types of federal financial assistance may not be used in floodplains unless the community participates in National Flood Insurance Program and flood insurance is both obtained and maintained. Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 as amended (42 USC 4001- 4128) 24 CFR 50.4(b)(1) and 24 CFR 58.6(a) and (b); 24 CFR 55.1(b). Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/flood-insurance 1. Does this project involve mortgage insurance, refinance, acquisition, repairs, rehabilitation, or construction of a structure, mobile home, or insurable personal property? No. This project does not require flood insurance or is excepted from flood insurance. Yes 4. While flood insurance is not mandatory for this project, HUD strongly recommends that all insurable structures maintain flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Will flood insurance be required as a mitigation measure or condition? No Yes Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region Based on the project description the project includes no activities that would require further evaluation under this section. The project does not require flood insurance or is excepted from flood insurance. While flood insurance may not be mandatory in this instance, HUD recommends that all insurable structures maintain flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The project is in compliance with Flood Insurance requirements. Supporting documentation 380 N/A Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 381 Air Quality General Requirements Legislation Regulation The Clean Air Act is administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which sets national standards on ambient pollutants. In addition, the Clean Air Act is administered by States, which must develop State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to regulate their state air quality. Projects funded by HUD must demonstrate that they conform to the appropriate SIP. Clean Air Act (42 USC 7401 et seq.) as amended particularly Section 176(c) and (d) (42 USC 7506(c) and (d)) 40 CFR Parts 6, 51 and 93 Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/air-quality Scope of Work 1. Does your project include new construction or conversion of land use facilitating the development of public, commercial, or industrial facilities OR five or more dwelling units? Yes No Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region Based on the project description, this project includes no activities that would require further evaluation under the Clean Air Act. There are no sensitive air receptors in the project area. The project is in compliance with the Clean Air Act. Supporting Documentation N/A 382 Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 383 Coastal Zone Management General Requirements Legislation Regulation Federal assistance to applicant agencies for activities affecting any coastal use or resource is granted only when such activities are consistent with federally approved State Coastal Zone Management Act Plans. Coastal Zone Management Act (16 USC 1451-1464), particularly section 307(c) and (d) (16 USC 1456(c) and (d)) 15 CFR Part 930 Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/coastal-zone-management 1. Is the project located in, or does it affect, a Coastal Zone as defined in your state Coastal Management Plan? Yes No Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region This project is not located in or does not affect a Coastal Zone as defined in the state Coastal Management Plan. The project is in compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act. Supporting Documentation N/A Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 384 385 Contamination and Toxic Substances (Multifamily and Non-Residential Properties) General Requirements Legislation Regulation It is HUD policy that all properties that are being proposed for use in HUD programs be free of hazardous materials, contamination, toxic chemicals and gases, and radioactive substances, where a hazard could affect the health and safety of the occupants or conflict with the intended utilization of the property. (none) 24 CFR 58.5(i)(2) 24 CFR 50.3(i) Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/site-contamination 1. How was site contamination evaluated? Select all that apply. Upload documentation and reports and explain evaluation of site contamination in the Screen Summary at the conclusion of this screen. ASTM Phase I ESA ASTM Phase II ESA Remediation or clean-up plan ASTM Vapor Encroachment Screening None of the above 2. Were any on-site or nearby toxic, hazardous, or radioactive substances (excluding radon) found that could affect the health and safety of project occupants or conflict with the intended use of the property? (Were any recognized environmental conditions or RECs identified in a Phase I ESA and confirmed in a Phase II ESA?) Provide a map or other documentation of absence or presence of contamination and explain evaluation of site contamination in the Screen Summary at the bottom of this screen. No * Explain: According to the MPCA's What's In My Neighborhood tool, there are no history of toxic or hazardous waste on the project area. Based on the response, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Radon Exempt Question. Yes 3. Evaluate the building(s) for radon. Do all buildings meet any of the exemptions from having to consider radon in the contamination analysis listed in CPD Notice CPD-23-103? Yes No 4. Is the proposed project new construction or substantial rehabilitation where testing will be conducted but 386 cannot yet occur because building construction has not been completed? Yes Compliance with this section is conditioned on post-construction testing being conducted, followed by mitigation, if needed. Radon test results, along with any needed mitigation plan, must be uploaded to the mitigation section within this screen. No 8. Mitigation Document the mitigation needed according to the requirements of the appropriate federal, state, tribal, or local oversight agency. If the adverse environmental impacts cannot be mitigated, then HUD assistance may not be used for the project at this site. For instances where radon mitigation is required (i.e. where test results demonstrated radon levels at 4.0 pCi/L and above), then you must include a radon mitigation plan. Tooltip Can all adverse environmental impacts be mitigated? No, all adverse environmental impacts cannot feasibly be mitigated. Project cannot proceed at this location. Yes, all adverse environmental impacts can be eliminated through mitigation, and/or consideration of radon and radon mitigation, if needed, will occur following construction. Provide all mitigation requirements and documents in the Screen Summary at the bottom of this screen. 9. Describe how compliance was achieved. Include any of the following that apply: State Voluntary Clean-up Program, a No Further Action letter, use of engineering controls, or use of institutional controls. * Explain: Radon testing If a remediation plan or clean-up program was necessary, which standard does it follow? Complete removal Risk-based corrective action (RBCA) Other Continue to the Screen Summary at the bottom of this screen. Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers 387 • Any additional requirements specific to your region Site contamination was evaluated as follows: None of the above. On-site or nearby toxic, hazardous, or radioactive substances that could affect the health and safety of project occupants or conflict with the intended use of the property were not found. Radon analysis indicated elevated levels of radon or consideration of radon will occur following construction. Adverse radon impacts can be mitigated. With mitigation, identified in the mitigation section of this review, the project will be in compliance with contamination and toxic substances requirements. Supporting documentation See Appendix A for files. MPCA WIMN.pdf Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 388 Endangered Species General Requirements Legislation Regulation Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) mandates that federal agencies ensure that actions that they authorize, fund, or carry out shall not jeopardize the continued existence of federally listed plants and animals or result in the adverse modification or destruction of designated critical habitat. Where their actions may affect resources protected by the ESA, agencies must consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service (“FWS” and “NMFS” or “the Services”). The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); particularly section 7 (16 USC 1536). 50 CFR Part 402 Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/endangered-species 1. Does the project involve any activities that have the potential to affect species or habitats? No, the project will have No Effect due to the nature of the activities involved in the project. This selection is only appropriate if none of the activities involved in the project have potential to affect species or habitats. Examples of actions without potential to affect listed species may include: purchasing existing buildings, completing interior renovations to existing buildings, and replacing exterior paint or siding on existing buildings. No, the project will have No Effect based on a letter of understanding, memorandum of agreement, programmatic agreement, or checklist provided by local HUD office Yes, the activities involved in the project have the potential to affect species and/or habitats. 2. Are federally listed species or designated critical habitats present in the action area ? Listed species are those that are either endangered (in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range) or threatened (likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range). Refer to HUD Exchange for information on consideration of candidate species (those that the Services have considered for listing but have not yet issued a final ruling) and proposed species (those that have been proposed for listing). No, the project will have No Effect due to the absence of federally listed species and designated critical habitat. Upload all documents used to make your determination in the Screen Summary at the conclusion of this screen. Documentation may include letters from the Services, species lists from the Services’ websites, surveys or other documents and analysis showing that there are no species in the action area. 389 Yes, there are federally listed species or designated critical habitats present in the action area. 3. What effects, if any, will your project have on federally listed species or designated critical habitat? No Effect: Based on the specifics of both the project and any federally listed species in the action area, you have determined that the project will have absolutely no effect on listed species or critical habitat. Upload all documents used to make your determination in the Screen Summary at the conclusion of this screen. Documentation should include a species list and explanation of your conclusion, and may require maps, photographs, and surveys as appropriate. May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect: Any effects that the project may have on federally listed species or critical habitats would be beneficial, discountable, or insignificant. Likely to Adversely Affect: The project may have negative effects on one or more listed species or critical habitat. Note: the application skips from question 3 to 6. There is no 4 or 5. 6. For the project to be brought into compliance with this section, all adverse impacts must be mitigated. Explain in detail the exact measures that must be implemented to mitigate for the impact or effect, including the timeline for implementation. This information will be automatically included in the Mitigation summary for the environmental review. If negative effects cannot be mitigated, cancel the project using the button at the bottom of this screen. Mitigation as follows will be implemented: No Mitigation Necessary *Explain why mitigation will not be made here: Why mitigation will not be made: The Project was reviewed through the USFWS Minnesota-Wisconsin determination key (dkey) which determined that that the Project would have No Effect on the monarch butterfly and whooping crane. Based on the habitat requirements for the salamander mussel and western regal fritillary, no potential suitable habitat for these species is present within the Project area. Compliance determination: Four federally-listed species were identified in the Official Species List generated through the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) including the salamander mussel (Simpsonaias ambigua; proposed endangered), the western regal fritillary (Argynnis idalia occidentalis; proposed threatened), the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus; candidate), and the whooping crane (Grus americana; non-essential experimental population). The salamander mussel is restricted to the lower St. Croix River in Minnesota but was once also found in the Mississippi River. The Project area does not overlap and is not within the vicinity of the St Croix River or the Mississippi River. As such, impacts on the salamander mussel as a result of the Project are not anticipated. 390 The western regal fritillary is associated throughout its range in upland and wetland native prairies. The Project area does not contain any native prairie habitat. As such, impacts on the western regal fritillary are not anticipated as a result of the Project. The whooping crane is a migratory bird species that once nested in northern prairies, but now breeds in remote northern forests in Canada as well as in an experimental population in Wisconsin, preferably within coniferous habitat containing swamps and nearby lakes or ponds. The Project area does not contain prairie or coniferous forest habitat preferred by the whooping crane. Additionally, the Project area is located within the Mississippi Flyway while the wild population of whooping crane utilizes the Central Flyway located further west. Any unlikely occurrence of a whooping crane within the Project area would, therefore, likely be from the experimental population in Wisconsin that is not federally regulated. As such, impacts to this species as a result of the Project are not anticipated. Monarch butterflies are a widespread species found in fields, prairies, savannahs, and most places where their host plant milkweed (Asclepias spp.) occurs throughout the United States and southern Canada. This species generally occurs in areas with high densities of native nectar sources. The existing Project area primarily consists of mowed lawn, athletic fields, and landscape trees with limited native nectar sources present. The monarch butterfly is a candidate for federal listing and is not currently regulated by the USFWS. The potential use of native seed mixes in revegetation plans may create a net positive in pollinator habitat compared to existing conditions. Based on a review of the Project has been determined to have No Effect on federally-listed species. The Project is in compliance with the Endangered Species Act and does not require mitigation measures. Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region This project has been determined to have No Effect on listed species. This project is in compliance with the Endangered Species Act without mitigation. Supporting Documentation See Appendix A for attached files. IPaC CorcoranParkProject HUD SpeciesList 20241030.pdf 20241030 NE Consistency MN WI StatesWide.pdf 391 Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 392 Explosive and Flammable Hazards General Requirements Legislation Regulation HUD-assisted projects must meet Acceptable Separation Distance (ASD) requirements to protect them from explosive and flammable hazards. N/A 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart C Reference: https://www.hudexchange.info/environmental-review/explosive-and-flammable-facilities/ 1. Is the proposed HUD-assisted project itself the development of a hazardous facility (a facility that mainly stores, handles or processes flammable or combustible chemicals such as bulk fuel storage facilities and refineries)? No Yes 2. Does this project include any of the following activities: development, construction, rehabilitation that will increase residential densities, or conversion? No Yes Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region Based on the project description the project includes no activities that would require further evaluation under this section. The project is in compliance with explosive and flammable hazard requirements. Supporting Documentation N/A Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. 393 Yes No Farmlands Protection General Requirements Legislation Regulation The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) discourages federal activities that would convert farmland to nonagricultural purposes. Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 (7 U.S.C. 4201 et seq.) 7 CFR Part 658 Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/farmlands-protection 1. Does your project include any activities, including new construction, acquisition of undeveloped land or conversion, that could convert agricultural land to a non-agricultural use? Yes No Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region An inquiry into potential agricultural land usage (Prime and Unique Farmland soil map) at the Project area was conducted. It was found that there are some areas of the park that are designated as farmland of statewide importance. However, none of the land under the Project area now is used for agricultural purposes. According to the City of Corcoran's 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the current Project area is designated as a ''Park, Recreational or Preserve'' use. In addition, the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates the Project area as ''Parks/Open Space'' for the 2040 Future Land Use map. Therefore, the Project area is not currently designated for agricultural use, nor will it be designated as such in the future. In addition, form AD-1006 was filled out to determine if further action was required. It was found that the impact rating was 123.2, which is below the threshold of 160 for action. This project does not include any activities that could potentially convert agricultural land to a non-agricultural use. The project is in compliance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act. Supporting Documentation 394 See Appendix A for files. AD1006.pdf Corcoran City Park - Farmland Classification.pdf Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 395 Floodplain Management General Requirements Legislation Regulation Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, requires Federal activities to avoid impacts to floodplains and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development to the extent practicable. Executive Order 11988 *Executive Order 13690 *42 USC 4001-4128 *42 USC 5154a *=only applies to screen 2047 and not 2046 24 CFR 55 Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/floodplain-management 1. Does this project meet an exemption at 24 CFR 55.12 from compliance with HUD’s floodplain management regulations in Part 55? Yes No Continue to Critical Action Question. 2. Does the project include a Critical Action? Examples of Critical Actions include projects involving hospitals, fire and police stations, nursing homes, hazardous chemical storage, storage of valuable records, and utility plants. Yes No Continue to (non-Critical Action) FFRMS Floodplain Extent Question. 3. Determine the extent of the FFRMS floodplain and provide mapping documentation in support of that determination. The extent of the FFRMS floodplain can be determined using a Climate Informed Science Approach (CISA), 0.2 percent flood approach (0.2 PFA), or freeboard value approach (FVA). For projects in areas without available CISA data or without FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), Flood Insurance Studies (FISs) or Advisory Base Flood Elevations (ABFEs), use the best available information Tooltip to determine flood elevation. Include documentation and an explanation of why this is the best available information Tooltip for the site. Note that newly constructed and substantially improved structures Tooltip must be elevated to the FFRMS floodplain regardless of the approach chosen to determine the floodplain. Select one of the following three options: CISA for non-critical actions. If using a local tool, data, or resources, ensure that the FFRMS elevation is higher than would have been determined using the 0.2 PFA or the FVA. 396 0.2-PFA. Where FEMA has defined the 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplain, the FFRMS floodplain is the area that FEMA has designated as within the 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplain. FVA. If neither CISA nor 0.2-PFA is available, for non-critical actions, the FFRMS floodplain is the area that results from adding two feet to the base flood elevation as established by the effective FIRM or FIS or — if available — a FEMA-provided preliminary or pending FIRM or FIS or advisory base flood elevations, whether regulatory or informational in nature. However, an interim or preliminary FEMA map cannot be used if it is lower than the current FIRM or FIS. Continue to FFRMS Floodplain Question. 5. Does your project occur in the FFRMS floodplain? Yes No Review for floodplain management is complete. Continue to Screen Summary at the bottom of this screen. Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region This project does not occur in the FFRMS floodplain. The project is in compliance with Executive Orders 11988 and 13690. Supporting Documentation See Appendix A for files. FEMAMap.png Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 397 Historic Preservation General Requirements Legislation Regulation Regulations under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) require a consultative process to identify historic properties, assess project impacts on them, and avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f) 36 CFR 800 “Protection of Historic Properties” https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR- 2012-title36-vol3/pdf/CFR-2012-title36- vol3-part800.pdf Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/historic-preservation Is Section 106 review required for your project? No, because the project consists solely of activities listed as exempt in a Programmatic Agreement (PA Tooltip). (See the PA Database to find applicable PAs.) No, because the project consists solely of activities included in a No Potential to Cause Effects memo or other determination [36 CFR 800.3(a)(1)]. Yes, because the project includes activities with potential to cause effects (direct or indirect). Threshold(b). Upload the memo in the Screen Summary at the conclusion of this screen, provide a link to the memo, or explain and justify the other determination here: Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region The 14 local tribes near the Project area were consulted for historic preservation under HUD regulation 24 CFR 58.4. Out of the 14 tribes, only one tribe (Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community) responded to the outreach. Their Tribal Historic Preservation Officer concluded that there is no significant impact as concurred by the archaeological report attached. Please see attached reports for more information regarding the Architectural and Archaeological reports. Supporting Documentation 398 See Appendix A for files. CorcoranPark Draft Architectural Report.pdf Phase I Archaeology Report Corcoran Park Remaster.pdf Tribal Response.pdf Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 399 Noise Abatement and Control General Requirements Legislation Regulation HUD’s noise regulations protect residential properties from excessive noise exposure. HUD encourages mitigation as appropriate. Noise Control Act of 1972 General Services Administration Federal Management Circular 75-2: “Compatible Land Uses at Federal Airfields” Title 24 CFR 51 Subpart B Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/noise-abatement-and-control 1. What activities does your project involve? Check all that apply: New construction for residential use Rehabilitation of an existing residential property A research demonstration project which does not result in new construction or reconstruction An interstate land sales registration Any timely emergency assistance under disaster assistance provisions or appropriations which are provided to save lives, protect property, protect public health and safety, remove debris and wreckage, or assistance that has the effect of restoring facilities substantially as they existed prior to the disaster None of the above Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region Based on the project description, this project includes no activities that would require further evaluation under HUD's noise regulation. The project is in compliance with HUD's Noise regulation. Supporting Documentation N/A 400 Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 401 Sole Source Aquifers General Requirements Legislation Regulation The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 protects drinking water systems which are the sole or principal drinking water source for an area and which, if contaminated, would create a significant hazard to public health. Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 201, 300f et seq., and 21 U.S.C. 349) 40 CFR Part 149 Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/sole-source-aquifers 1. Does the project consist solely of acquisition, refinance, insurance, leasing, repairs or rehabilitation of an existing building or building(s)? Yes No 2. Is the project located on a sole source aquifer (SSA) ? No Yes Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region The project is not located on a sole source aquifer area. The project is in compliance with Sole Source Aquifer requirements. Supporting Documentation See Appendix A for files. Sole Source Aquifer.pdf Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this 402 question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 403 Wetlands Protection General Requirements Legislation Regulation Executive Order 11990 discourages direct or indirect support of new construction impacting wetlands wherever there is a practicable alternative. The Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wetlands Inventory can be used as a primary screening tool, but observed or known wetlands not indicated on NWI maps must also be processed. Off-site impacts that result in draining, impounding, or destroying wetlands must also be processed. Executive Order 11990 24 CFR 55.20 can be used for general guidance regarding the 8 Step Process. ‘ Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/wetlands-protection 1. Does this project involve new construction as defined in Executive Order 11990, expansion of a building’s footprint, or ground disturbance? The term "new construction" shall include draining, dredging, channelizing, filling, diking, impounding, and related activities and any structures or facilities begun or authorized after the effective date of the Order. No Yes 2. Will the new construction or other ground disturbance impact an on- or off-site wetland? The term "wetlands" means those areas that are inundated by surface or ground water with a frequency sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances does or would support, a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas such as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows, mud flats, and natural ponds. Wetlands under E.O. 11990 include isolated and non-jurisdictional wetlands. No, a wetland will not be impacted in terms of E.O. 11990’s definition of new construction. Yes, there is a wetland that will or may be impacted in terms of E.O. 11990’s definition of new construction. Screen Summary Compliance Determination 404 Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region The project will not impact on- or off-site wetlands. The project is in compliance with Executive Order 11990. Supporting Documentation See Appendix A for files. Wetland Delineation Map.pdf Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 405 Wild and Scenic Rivers General Requirements Legislation Regulation The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act provides federal protection for certain free-flowing, wild, scenic and recreational rivers designated as components or potential components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System (NWSRS) from the effects of construction or development. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1271-1287), particularly section 7(b) and (c) (16 U.S.C. 1278(b) and (c)) 36 CFR Part 297 Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/wild-and-scenic-rivers 1. Is your project within proximity of a NWSRS river as defined below? Wild & Scenic Rivers: These rivers or river segments have been designated by Congress or by states (with the concurrence of the Secretary of the Interior) as wild, scenic, or recreational. Study Rivers: These rivers or river segments are being studied as a potential component of the Wild & Scenic River system. Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI): The National Park Service has compiled and maintains the NRI, a register of river segments that potentially qualify as national wild, scenic, or recreational river areas. No Upload documentation used to make your determination, such as a map identifying the project site and its surrounding area or a list of rivers in your region in the Screen Summary at the conclusion of this screen. Yes, the project is in proximity of a Designated Wild and Scenic River or Study Wild and Scenic River. Yes, the project is in proximity of a Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI) River. Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region This project is not within proximity of a NWSRS river. The project is also not in proximity of any rivers. The 406 project is in compliance with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Supporting Documentation See Appendix A for files. Aerial Location Map.pdf Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 407 Environmental Justice General Requirements Legislation Regulation Determine if the project creates adverse environmental impacts upon a low-income or minority community. If it does, engage the community in meaningful participation about mitigating the impacts or move the project. Executive Order 12898 (none) Reference: https://www.onecpd.info/environmental-review/environmental-justice HUD strongly encourages starting the Environmental Justice analysis only after all other laws and authorities, including Environmental Assessment factors if necessary, have been completed. 1. Were any adverse environmental impacts identified in any other compliance review portion of this project’s total environmental review? Yes No Screen Summary Compliance Determination Describe the basis that led to your determination here, identifying all key elements from your support documentation that substantiate your determination. The following minimum language is based on your responses in this section. You are strongly encouraged to edit this language to provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your region Adverse environmental impacts are not disproportionately high for low-income and/or minority communities as there are no disproportionally high communities in the project area or 0.25 mile buffer. The project is in compliance with Executive Order 12898. Supporting Documentation See Appendix A for files. Hennepin County EJ Screen.pdf Corcoran City EJ screen.pdf Corcoran Park EJ screen.pdf Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? 408 Only Responsible Entity (for Part 58) or HUD (for Part 50) Users may respond to this question. Ensure that this question is complete before finalizing the review. Yes No 409 4010 – EA Factors – Summary Impact Codes: An impact code from the following list has been used to make the determination of impact for each factor. (1) Minor beneficial impact (2) No impact anticipated (3) Minor Adverse Impact – May require mitigation (4) Significant or potentially significant impact requiring avoidance or modification which may require an Environmental Impact Statement. Environmental Assessment Factor Impact Code Impact Evaluation Mitigation LAND DEVELOPMENT Conformance with Plans / Compatible Land Use and Zoning / Scale and Urban Design 1 The City of Corcoran's 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates the Project area as Park, Recreation, or Preserve. It also identifies the great interest of the public for trails, which the project extends. The Project follows the 2040 Comprehensive Plan's designation. Soil Suitability / Slope / Erosion / Drainage / Storm Water Runoff 2 Soil suitability - the Project area has and will continue to serve park/recreation needs. Slope - no expected changes to the slope stability of the Project area. Erosion - there are no known erosion issues and no new ones will be caused by the project and the project would be completed consistent with state and local erosion avoidance/control measures. Stormwater/drainage - the Project area is planned consistent with City storm water management, and this would continue with the project. Hazards and Nuisances including Site Safety and Site- Generated Noise 2 N/A SOCIOECONOMIC Employment and Income Patterns 1 This Project includes possible new income in the form of teaching classes at the new multi- purpose building proposed in the Project. Demographic Character Changes / Displacement 2 N/A 410 Environmental Assessment Factor Impact Code Impact Evaluation Mitigation Environmental Justice EA Factor 1 This Project benefits disproportionally disadvantaged communities such as low income by providing opportunities for free recreational resource for them and avoiding the need to travel for these services. COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES Educational and Cultural Facilities (Access and Capacity) 1 This Project adds value to educational and cultural facilities in Corcoran by adding a multi- purpose building that can accommodate teaching community ed classes, which the City does not currently have. Commercial Facilities (Access and Proximity) 2 N/A Health Care / Social Services (Access and Capacity) 2 N/A Solid Waste Disposal and Recycling (Feasibility and Capacity) 2 N/A Waste Water and Sanitary Sewers (Feasibility and Capacity) 3 The Project will slightly increase demand on the City’s wastewater and sanitary sewers. The City's sewer and wastewater system should be able to accommodate the small increase in demand; no mitigation is required. Water Supply (Feasibility and Capacity) 3 The Project will slightly increase demand on the City’s water supply. The City's sewer and water supply system should be able to accommodate the small increase in demand; no mitigation is required. Public Safety - Police, Fire and Emergency Medical 2 N/A Parks, Open Space and Recreation (Access and Capacity) 1 The Project is an improvement to the City of Corcoran’s public park. It will increase access capacity with a new, paved parking lot and extension of existing trails. Capacity will also increase with more build structures in the Project area for public use (ball parks, splash pad, multi-purpose building, etc.) 411 Environmental Assessment Factor Impact Code Impact Evaluation Mitigation Transportation and Accessibility (Access and Capacity) 1 The extension of existing City trails as well as access to County trails in the Project area will provide accessibility and connectivity within the City of Corcoran. NATURAL FEATURES Unique Natural Features / Water Resources 2 N/A Vegetation / Wildlife (Introduction, Modification, Removal, Disruption, etc.) 3 There will be some clearing of natural vegetation in the Project area, resulting in some loss of vegetation and wildlife habitat. The contractor shall not destroy nests of protected migratory birds. Other Factors 1 Other Factors 2 CLIMATE AND ENERGY Climate Change 3 Increase of impervious surfaces (multi-purpose building and paved parking lots) increases local urbanization heat effect. This can be mitigated by selective landscaping in the Project area near impervious surfaces. Energy Efficiency 2 N/A Environmental Assessment Analysis * Cumulative Impact Analysis[24 CFR 58.32; 40 CFR 1508.7]: Identify below the cumulative impact on the environment, that will result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over time. There are no past projects on the site or foreseeable future projects to the site. Alternatives [24 CFR 58.40(e); 40 CFR 1508.9]: Identify below other reasonable courses of action that were considered and not selected, such as other sites, design modifications, or other uses of the subject site. Include the benefits and adverse impacts to the environment of each alternative, and the reasons (e.g., economic, engineering, or others) for rejecting it. N/A * No Action Alternative [24 CFR 58.40(e); 40 CFR 1502.14]: 412 Identify below the "no action" alternative, describing the most likely conditions expected to exist in the future in the absence of the implementation of any action. The park may have to close down due to the lack of safe infrastructure (from age) from not updating the park in this project. Additional Studies Performed: N/A * List of Sources, Agencies and Persons Consulted [40 CFR 1508.9(b)]: • *AirNav.com • *Google Maps • *Google Earth • *What’s In My Neighborhood through MPCA • *IPac through US fish and wildlife • *Farmlands: Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO) from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). • Advisement from Brandon DeFoe at the NRCS office in Baxter, MN • *Floodplain FEMA map • *Minnesota SHPO • *EPA EJ screen tool * Indicates an online tool that was accessed. List of Permits: Provide a list of permits, reviews, and approvals that are required for project construction. • WCA No Loss Permit • Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Permit • Hennepin County ROW/Utility Permits • MN Department of Health Watermain Extension Permit • MPCA/MCES Sewer Extension Permit • MN Department of Labor and Industry Permits (Plumbing, Building, Electrical) • MPCA NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit • MN DNR Water Appropriation General Permit for Temporary Projects, if needed * Public Outreach[24 CFR 50.23 and 58.43 ]: Provide your FONSI/FOSI notice dissemination list. Also, describe any additional public meetings and hearings that were held as part of or were relevant to the environmental review. The project was shared with the City Council. * Summary of Findings and Conclusions: Identify below the main points of analysis in the Environmental Assessment. The summary should include any potential impacts of the proposed project, both beneficial and potentially adverse. The summary must also discuss any changes to the proposal necessary to avoid significant impacts. 413 The Project has several benefits to it. It conforms with current City planning, has the potential to create income for the community, creates a new location for educational classes that the City doesn't currently have, improves a local park, and adds connection to existing transportation structures. The Project does have the drawback of increased sewer, wastewater, and water supply usage, as well as a decrease in natural wildlife and vegetation and an increase in local urbanized heat effect. 414 Mitigation Measures and Conditions Law, Authority, or Factor Mitigation Measure or Condition Mitigation Plan Contamination and Toxic Substances Radon testing Radon testing required when the multi-purpose building's construction is completed. Waste Water and Sanitary Sewers (Feasibility and Capacity) The City's sewer and wastewater system should be able to handle the small increase in demand; no mitigation is required. N/A Water Supply (Feasibility and Capacity) The City's sewer and water supply system should be able to handle the small increase in demand; no mitigation is required. N/A Vegetation / Wildlife (Introduction, Modification, Removal, Disruption, etc.) The contractor shall not destroy nests of protected migratory birds. N/A Climate Change This can be mitigated by selective landscaping in the Project area near impervious surfaces. N/A Project Mitigation Plan Explain how the mitigation plans for the above measures and conditions will be carried out and monitored. Clearly identify both the persons responsible for implementing and monitoring mitigation measures and the timeframe in which they will be completed. These measures and conditions must be incorporated into project contracts, development agreements and other relevant documents. (40 CFR 1505.2(c)) Radon testing will occur after the construction of the building to comply with mitigation requirements. 415 Appendix A Attachments 416 Carver County Hennepin County Anoka County Wright County Not In Project Area 456710 456750 C S A H 1 0 CSAH 50 Project Area Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ V: \ 2 2 7 7 \ a c t i v e \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ p r o \ C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ E R _ I n q u i r i e s \ M y P r o j e c t 1 0 . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 2 0 B y : t w a v r i n Legend Project Area Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 15N 2. Data Sources: Hennepin County 3. Background: Hennepin County Aerial, 2024 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:3,600 0 150 300 Feet Prepared by LAH on 2025-02-20 T11N, R12W, S05 Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229City of Corcoran Corcoran City Downtown Park HUD EA Aerial Location Map 1 417 -R1-R N-Rv.com [����nJlC:ml(IPl>o,..AW::::Jmm.._ Airport Search Results 2 airports found near Corcoran, i\'.IN ID CITY AIRPORT XA:\IE \HIER.I: ffi 42.\fN CORCOM\'. JIN K.R.4L 'S PERSO,V.�L L"5E UNDING FIELD .llRPORT l .S km SW ffi J{N66 LORETTO, MN /XGLESJDE AIRPORT 9.0 km SW c..,,,...eAL'<a,·.LLCAD,_,..., .... ________________ _ AirNavQuery.png 418 AirportClosed.png 419 Carver County Hennepin County Anoka County Wright County 456750 456710 ECorcoranTr CSAH 50 CSAH10 Walnut Ln 79th Pl 79th Ave X y l o i d L n Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ V: \ 2 2 7 7 \ a c t i v e \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ p r o \ C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ E R _ I n q u i r i e s \ M y P r o j e c t 1 0 . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 1 4 B y : l h e r s h l e y Legend Project Area 2,500 Foot Radius 15,000 Foot Radius Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 15N 2. Data Sources: USGS 3. Background: USGS Topo (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:60,000 0 2,500 5,000 Feet Prepared by LAH on 2025-02-14 T11N, R12W, S05 Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229City of Corcoran Corcoran City Downtown Park HUD EA Nearest Airports 3 *No airports within 15,000 feet of the Project area Airports.pdf 420 421 Carver County Hennepin County Anoka County Wright County !. !. !. " " " " " " " " " " ! ! ! ! # Pro-Tech Auto Repair Tonka Auto Center Phils Quality Automotive Treptau Implement Company Rush Creek Reserve Countryside Service A1 Outdoor Power Gazelle Marketing Pro Drywall and Painting Inc County Rd 10 and Walnut Lane Turn Improvements 456750 456710 W Co r c o r a n Tr ECor c o r a n Tr CSAH 50 C S A H 1 0 Project Area Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ V: \ 2 2 7 7 \ a c t i v e \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ p r o \ C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ E R _ I n q u i r i e s \ M y P r o j e c t 1 0 . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 2 0 B y : t w a v r i n Legend Project Area 0.25 Mile Radius MPCA Potentially Contaminated Sites !.Multiple Programs "Hazardous Waste !Stormwater Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 15N 2. Data Sources: Hennepin County 3. Background: Hennepin County Aerial, 2024 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:8,400 0 350 700 Feet Prepared by LAH on 2025-02-20 T11N, R12W, S05 Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229City of Corcoran Corcoran City Downtown Park HUD EA MPCA Potentially Contaminated Sites 4 422 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 Phone: (952) 858-0793 In Reply Refer To: Project code: 2024-0141639 Project Name: City of Corcoran City Park Remaster Subject:Consistency letter for 'City of Corcoran City Park Remaster' for specified threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location consistent with the Minnesota-Wisconsin Endangered Species Determination Key (Minnesota- Wisconsin DKey). Dear Jason (Jay) Tobin: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) received on October 30, 2024 your effect determination(s) for the 'City of Corcoran City Park Remaster' (Action) using the Minnesota- Wisconsin DKey within the Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system. You have submitted this key to satisfy requirements under Section 7(a)(2). The Service developed this system in accordance of with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C 1531 et seq.). Based on your answers and the assistance of the Service’s Minnesota-Wisconsin DKey, you made the following effect determination(s) for the proposed Action: Species Listing Status Determination Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus)Candidate No effect Salamander Mussel (Simpsonaias ambigua)Proposed Endangered May affect Whooping Crane (Grus americana)Experimental Population, Non- Essential No effect Determination Information Thank you for informing the Service of your “No Effect” determination(s). Your agency has met consultation requirements and no further consultation is required for the species you determined will not be affected by the Action. Additional Information 423 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 2 of 7 ▪ Sufficient project details: Please provide sufficient project details on your project homepage in IPaC (Define Project, Project Description) to support your conclusions. Failure to disclose important aspects of your project that would influence the outcome of your effects determinations may negate your determinations and invalidate this letter. If you have site-specific information that leads you to believe a different determination is more appropriate for your project than what the Dkey concludes, you can and should proceed based on the best available information. Future project changes: The Service recommends that you contact the Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office or re-evaluate the project in IPaC if: 1) the scope or location of the proposed Action is changed; 2) new information reveals that the action may affect listed species or designated critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered; 3) the Action is modified in a manner that causes effects to listed species or designated critical habitat; or 4) a new species is listed or critical habitat designated. If any of the above conditions occurs, additional consultation with the Service should take place before project changes are final or resources committed. Species-specific information Bald and Golden Eagles: Bald eagles, golden eagles, and their nests are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (54 Stat. 250, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 668a-d) (Eagle Act). The Eagle Act prohibits, except when authorized by an Eagle Act permit, the “taking” of bald and golden eagles and defines “take” as “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb.” The Eagle Act’s implementing regulations define disturb as “… to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.” The following species and/or critical habitats may also occur in your project area and are not covered by this conclusion: Western Regal Fritillary Argynnis idalia occidentalis Proposed Threatened Coordination with the Service is not complete if additional coordination is advised above for any species. 424 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 3 of 7 Action Description You provided to IPaC the following name and description for the subject Action. 1. Name City of Corcoran City Park Remaster 2. Description The following description was provided for the project 'City of Corcoran City Park Remaster': The Project entails construction of several improvements to the Corcoran Community Park. These improvements include five new soccer fields, six new pickle ball courts, replacement of two tennis courts, playground replacements, and the addition of a splash pad. A new multi-purpose, approximately 7,500-square- foot building is also proposed, along with a new, larger paved parking lot, the removal of a paved path between existing ball fields, the addition of a regional trail, removal of a storage area south of the three existing ball fields, and the addition of turn lanes at the south park entrance along County Road 50. A connection from City amenities onsite will be made to the City’s sewer and water. Besides funding from HUD, other funding sources for this Project include donations from the Northwest Area Jaycees, the Hanover Athletic Association, and Three Rivers organizations. Construction is anticipated to begin in Spring 2025. The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@45.0984218,-93.55594633922905,14z 425 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 4 of 7 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. QUALIFICATION INTERVIEW This determination key is intended to assist the user in evaluating the effects of their actions on Federally listed species in Minnesota and Wisconsin. It does not cover other prohibited activities under the Endangered Species Act (e.g., for wildlife: import/export, Interstate or foreign commerce, possession of illegally taken wildlife, etc.; for plants: import/export, reduce to possession, malicious destruction on Federal lands, commercial sale, etc.) or other statutes. Additionally, this key DOES NOT cover wind development, purposeful take (e.g., for research or surveys), communication towers that have guy wires or are over 450 feet in height, aerial or other large-scale application of any chemical (such as insecticide or herbicide), and approval of long-term permits or plans (e.g., FERC licenses, HCP's). Click YES to acknowledge that you must consider other prohibitions of the ESA or other statutes outside of this determination key. Yes Is the action being funded, authorized, or carried out by a Federal agency? Yes Are you the Federal agency or designated non-federal representative? Yes Does the action involve the installation or operation of wind turbines? No Does the action involve purposeful take of a listed animal? No Does the action involve a new communications tower? No Does the activity involve aerial or other large-scale application of ANY chemical, including pesticides (insecticide, herbicide, fungicide, rodenticide, etc)? No Will your action permanently affect local hydrology? Yes 426 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 5 of 7 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Does your project have the potential to impact the riparian zone or indirectly impact a stream/river (e.g., cut and fill; horizontal directional drilling; construction; vegetation removal; pesticide or fertilizer application; discharge; runoff of sediment or pollutants; increase in erosion, etc.)? Note: Consider all potential effects of the action, including those that may happen later in time and outside and downstream of the immediate area involved in the action. Endangered Species Act regulation defines "effects of the action" to include all consequences to listed species or critical habitat that are caused by the proposed action, including the consequences of other activities that are caused by the proposed action. A consequence is caused by the proposed action if it would not occur but for the proposed action and it is reasonably certain to occur. Effects of the action may occur later in time and may include consequences occurring outside the immediate area involved in the action. (50 CFR 402.02). Yes Will your action disturb the ground or existing vegetation? Note: This includes any off-road vehicle access, soil compaction (enough to collapse a rodent burrow), digging, seismic survey, directional drilling, heavy equipment, grading, trenching, placement of fill, pesticide application (herbicide, fungicide), vegetation management (including removal or maintenance using equipment or prescribed fire), cultivation, development, etc. Yes Will your action include spraying insecticides? No Does your action area occur entirely within an already developed area? Note: Already developed areas are already paved, covered by existing structures, manicured lawns, industrial sites, or cultivated cropland, AND do not contain trees that could be roosting habitat. Be aware that listed species may occur in areas with natural, or semi-natural, vegetation immediately adjacent to existing utilities (e.g. roadways, railways) or within utility rights-of-way such as overhead transmission line corridors, and can utilize suitable trees, bridges, or culverts for roosting even in urban dominated landscapes (so these are not considered "already developed areas" for the purposes of this question). If unsure, select NO.. No [Semantic] Does the project intersect the Salamander mussel AOI? Automatically answered Yes Have you determined that the action will have no effect on individuals within the whooping crane nonessential experimental population (NEP)? Yes [Hidden Semantic] Does the action area intersect the monarch butterfly species list area? Automatically answered Yes 427 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 6 of 7 16. 17. Under the ESA, monarchs remain warranted but precluded by listing actions of higher priority. The monarch is a candidate for listing at this time. The Endangered Species Act does not establish protections or consultation requirements for candidate species. Some Federal and State agencies may have policy requirements to consider candidate species in planning. We encourage implementing measures that will remove or reduce threats to these species and possibly make listing unnecessary. If your project will have no effect on monarch butterflies (for example, if your project won't affect their habitat or individuals), then you can make a "no effect" determination for this project. Are you making a "no effect" determination for monarch? No Is this project funded, authorized, or carried out by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No 428 Project code: 2024-0141639 IPaC Record Locator: 925-149224515 10/30/2024 16:39:24 UTC DKey Version Publish Date: 08/28/2024 7 of 7 IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION Agency:Corcoran city Name:Jason (Jay) Tobin Address:8200 County Road 116 City:Corcoran State:MN Zip:55340 Email jtobin@corcoranmn.gov Phone:7634007030 LEAD AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION Lead Agency:Department of Housing and Urban Development 429 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 Phone: (952) 858-0793 In Reply Refer To: Project Code: 2024-0141639 Project Name: City of Corcoran City Park Remaster Subject:List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project To Whom It May Concern: This response has been generated by the Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPaC) system to provide information on natural resources that could be affected by your project. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) provides this response under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543), the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d), the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712), and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.). Threatened and Endangered Species The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirement for obtaining a Technical Assistance Letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. Consultation Technical Assistance Please refer to refer to our Section 7 website for guidance and technical assistance, including step-by-step instructions for making effects determinations for each species that might be present and for specific guidance on the following types of projects: projects in developed areas, HUD, CDBG, EDA, USDA Rural Development projects, pipelines, buried utilities, telecommunications, and requests for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) from FEMA. 430 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 2 of 14 1. 2. We recommend running the project (if it qualifies) through our Minnesota-Wisconsin Federal Endangered Species Determination Key (Minnesota-Wisconsin ("D-key")). A demonstration video showing how-to access and use the determination key is available. Please note that the Minnesota-Wisconsin D-key is the third option of 3 available d-keys. D-keys are tools to help Federal agencies and other project proponents determine if their proposed action has the potential to adversely affect federally listed species and designated critical habitat. The Minnesota-Wisconsin D-key includes a structured set of questions that assists a project proponent in determining whether a proposed project qualifies for a certain predetermined consultation outcome for all federally listed species found in Minnesota and Wisconsin (except for the northern long-eared bat- see below), which includes determinations of “no effect” or “may affect, not likely to adversely affect." In each case, the Service has compiled and analyzed the best available information on the species’ biology and the impacts of certain activities to support these determinations. If your completed d-key output letter shows a "No Effect" (NE) determination for all listed species, print your IPaC output letter for your files to document your compliance with the Endangered Species Act. For Federal projects with a “Not Likely to Adversely Affect” (NLAA) determination, our concurrence becomes valid if you do not hear otherwise from us after a 30-day review period, as indicated in your letter. If your d-key output letter indicates additional coordination with the Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office is necessary (i.e., you get a “May Affect” determination), you will be provided additional guidance on contacting the Service to continue ESA coordination outside of the key; ESA compliance cannot be concluded using the key for “May Affect” determinations unless otherwise indicated in your output letter. Note: Once you obtain your official species list, you are not required to continue in IPaC with d-keys, although in most cases these tools should expedite your review. If you choose to make an effects determination on your own, you may do so. If the project is a Federal Action, you may want to review our section 7 step-by-step instructions before making your determinations. Using the IPaC Official Species List to Make No Effect and May Affect Determinations for Listed Species If IPaC returns a result of “There are no listed species found within the vicinity of the project,” then project proponents can conclude the proposed activities will have no effect on any federally listed species under Service jurisdiction. Concurrence from the Service is not required for no effect determinations. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC species list report for your records. If IPaC returns one or more federally listed, proposed, or candidate species as potentially present in the action area of the proposed project – other than bats (see below) – then project proponents must determine if proposed activities will have no effect on or may affect those species. For assistance in determining if suitable habitat for listed, candidate, or proposed species occurs within your project area or if species may be affected by project activities, you can obtain Life History Information for Listed and Candidate Species on our office website. If no impacts will occur to a species on the IPaC species list (e.g., there is no habitat present in the project area), the appropriate determination is no effect. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC species list report for your records. 431 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 3 of 14 3. ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ Should you determine that project activities may affect any federally listed, please contact our office for further coordination. Letters with requests for consultation or correspondence about your project should include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header. Electronic submission is preferred. Northern Long-Eared Bats Northern long-eared bats occur throughout Minnesota and Wisconsin and the information below may help in determining if your project may affect these species. Suitable summer habitat for northern long-eared bats consists of a wide variety of forested/wooded habitats where they roost, forage, and travel and may also include some adjacent and interspersed non-forested habitats such as emergent wetlands and adjacent edges of agricultural fields, old fields and pastures. This includes forests and woodlots containing potential roosts (i.e., live trees and/or snags ≥3 inches dbh for northern long- eared bat that have exfoliating bark, cracks, crevices, and/or hollows), as well as linear features such as fencerows, riparian forests, and other wooded corridors. These wooded areas may be dense or loose aggregates of trees with variable amounts of canopy closure. Individual trees may be considered suitable habitat when they exhibit the characteristics of a potential roost tree and are located within 1,000 feet (305 meters) of forested/wooded habitat. Northern long-eared bats have also been observed roosting in human-made structures, such as buildings, barns, bridges, and bat houses; therefore, these structures should also be considered potential summer habitat and evaluated for use by bats. If your project will impact caves or mines or will involve clearing forest or woodland habitat containing suitable roosting habitat, northern long-eared bats could be affected. For bat activity dates, please review Appendix L in the Range-wide Indiana Bat and Northern Long- Eared Bat Survey Guidelines. Examples of unsuitable habitat include: Individual trees that are greater than 1,000 feet from forested or wooded areas, Trees found in highly developed urban areas (e.g., street trees, downtown areas), A pure stand of less than 3-inch dbh trees that are not mixed with larger trees, and A monoculture stand of shrubby vegetation with no potential roost trees. If IPaC returns a result that northern long-eared bats are potentially present in the action area of the proposed project, project proponents can conclude the proposed activities may affect this species IF one or more of the following activities are proposed: Clearing or disturbing suitable roosting habitat, as defined above, at any time of year, Any activity in or near the entrance to a cave or mine, Mining, deep excavation, or underground work within 0.25 miles of a cave or mine, Construction of one or more wind turbines, or Demolition or reconstruction of human-made structures that are known to be used by bats based on observations of roosting bats, bats emerging at dusk, or guano deposits or stains. If none of the above activities are proposed, project proponents can conclude the proposed activities will have no effect on the northern long-eared bat. Concurrence from the Service is not required for No Effect determinations. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC 432 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 4 of 14 species list report for your records. If any of the above activities are proposed, and the northern long-eared bat appears on the user’s species list, the federal project user will be directed to either the range-wide northern long-eared bat D-key or the Federal Highways Administration, Federal Railways Administration, and Federal Transit Administration Indiana bat/ Northern long-eared bat D-key, depending on the type of project and federal agency involvement. Similar to the Minnesota-Wisconsin D-key, these d-keys helps to determine if prohibited take might occur and, if not, will generate an automated verification letter. Additional information about available tools can be found on the Service’s northern long-eared bat website. Whooping Crane Whooping crane is designated as a non-essential experimental population in Wisconsin and consultation under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act is only required if project activities will occur within a National Wildlife Refuge or National Park. If project activities are proposed on lands outside of a National Wildlife Refuge or National Park, then you are not required to consult. For additional information on this designation and consultation requirements, please review “Establishment of a Nonessential Experimental Population of Whooping Cranes in the Eastern United States.” Other Trust Resources and Activities Bald and Golden Eagles - Although the bald eagle has been removed from the endangered species list, this species and the golden eagle are protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to survey the area for any migratory bird nests. If there is an eagle nest on-site while work is on-going, eagles may be disturbed. We recommend avoiding and minimizing disturbance to eagles whenever practicable. If you cannot avoid eagle disturbance, you may seek a permit. A nest take permit is always required for removal, relocation, or obstruction of an eagle nest. For communication and wind energy projects, please refer to additional guidelines below. Migratory Birds - The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests, except when specifically authorized by the Service. The Service has the responsibility under the MBTA to proactively prevent the mortality of migratory birds whenever possible and we encourage implementation of recommendations that minimize potential impacts to migratory birds. Such measures include clearing forested habitat outside the nesting season (generally March 1 to August 31) or conducting nest surveys prior to clearing to avoid injury to eggs or nestlings. Communication Towers - Construction of new communications towers (including radio, television, cellular, and microwave) creates a potentially significant impact on migratory birds, especially some 350 species of night-migrating birds. However, the Service has developed voluntary guidelines for minimizing impacts. Transmission Lines - Migratory birds, especially large species with long wingspans, heavy bodies, and poor maneuverability can also collide with power lines. In addition, mortality can occur when birds, particularly hawks, eagles, kites, falcons, and owls, attempt to perch on uninsulated or unguarded power poles. To minimize these risks, please refer to guidelines developed by the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee and the Service. Implementation of these measures is especially important along sections of lines adjacent to wetlands or other areas that support large numbers of raptors and migratory birds. 433 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 5 of 14 ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ Wind Energy - To minimize impacts to migratory birds and bats, wind energy projects should follow the Service’s Wind Energy Guidelines. In addition, please refer to the Service's Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance, which provides guidance for conserving bald and golden eagles in the course of siting, constructing, and operating wind energy facilities. State Department of Natural Resources Coordination While it is not required for your Federal section 7 consultation, please note that additional state endangered or threatened species may also have the potential to be impacted. Please contact the Minnesota or Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for information on state listed species that may be present in your proposed project area. Minnesota Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Endangered Resources Review Homepage Email: Review.NHIS@state.mn.us Wisconsin Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources - Endangered Resources Review Homepage Email: DNRERReview@wi.gov We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. Please feel free to contact our office with questions or for additional information. Attachment(s): Official Species List USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries Bald & Golden Eagles Migratory Birds Wetlands OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action". This species list is provided by: Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 (952) 858-0793 434 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 6 of 14 PROJECT SUMMARY Project Code:2024-0141639 Project Name:City of Corcoran City Park Remaster Project Type:Mixed-Use Construction Project Description:The Project entails construction of several improvements to the Corcoran Community Park. These improvements include five new soccer fields, six new pickle ball courts, replacement of two tennis courts, playground replacements, and the addition of a splash pad. A new multi-purpose, approximately 7,500-square-foot building is also proposed, along with a new, larger paved parking lot, the removal of a paved path between existing ball fields, the addition of a regional trail, removal of a storage area south of the three existing ball fields, and the addition of turn lanes at the south park entrance along County Road 50. A connection from City amenities onsite will be made to the City’s sewer and water. Besides funding from HUD, other funding sources for this Project include donations from the Northwest Area Jaycees, the Hanover Athletic Association, and Three Rivers organizations. Construction is anticipated to begin in Spring 2025. Project Location: The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@45.09847285,-93.55594771618797,14z Counties:Hennepin County, Minnesota 435 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 7 of 14 1. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES There is a total of 4 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce. See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. 1 436 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 8 of 14 BIRDS NAME STATUS Whooping Crane Grus americana Population: U.S.A. (AL, AR, CO, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NC, NM, OH, SC, TN, UT, VA, WI, WV, western half of WY) No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/758 Experimental Population, Non- Essential CLAMS NAME STATUS Salamander Mussel Simpsonaias ambigua There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6208 Proposed Endangered INSECTS NAME STATUS Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743 Candidate Western Regal Fritillary Argynnis idalia occidentalis No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/12017 Proposed Threatened CRITICAL HABITATS THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION. YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL ABOVE LISTED SPECIES. USFWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LANDS AND FISH HATCHERIES Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns. THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA. 437 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 9 of 14 1. 2. 3. BALD & GOLDEN EAGLES Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act . Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or golden eagles, or their habitats , should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles". The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a) There are likely bald eagles present in your project area. For additional information on bald eagles, refer to Bald Eagle Nesting and Sensitivity to Human Activity For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area. NAME BREEDING SEASON Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626 Breeds Dec 1 to Aug 31 PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report. Probability of Presence () Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during that week of the year. Breeding Season () Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. 1 2 3 438 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 10 of 14 ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ 1. 2. 3. no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence Survey Effort () Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. No Data () A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week. SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bald Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable Additional information can be found using the following links: Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/ collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/ media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur- project-action MIGRATORY BIRDS Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act . Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles". The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a) 1 2 3 439 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 11 of 14 For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area. NAME BREEDING SEASON Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626 Breeds Dec 1 to Aug 31 Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9454 Breeds May 20 to Jul 31 Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9406 Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 25 Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679 Breeds elsewhere Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9561 Breeds elsewhere Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9478 Breeds elsewhere Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9603 Breeds elsewhere PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report. 440 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 12 of 14 ▪ ▪ no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence Probability of Presence () Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during that week of the year. Breeding Season () Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. Survey Effort () Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. No Data () A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week. SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bald Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable Bobolink BCC Rangewide (CON) Chimney Swift BCC Rangewide (CON) Lesser Yellowlegs BCC Rangewide (CON) Pectoral Sandpiper BCC Rangewide (CON) Rusty Blackbird BCC - BCR Semipalmated Sandpiper BCC - BCR Additional information can be found using the following links: Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/ collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds 441 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 13 of 14 ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/ media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur- project-action WETLANDS Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes. For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District. Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site. FRESHWATER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND PFO1Ad FRESHWATER EMERGENT WETLAND PEM1Cd PEM1Ad RIVERINE R5UBFx R4SBC R5UBH FRESHWATER POND PABHx 442 Project code: 2024-0141639 10/30/2024 14:00:40 UTC 14 of 14 IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION Agency:Corcoran city Name:Erin Sejkora Address:One Carlson Parkway, Suite 100 City:Plymouth State:MN Zip:55447 Email erin.sejkora@stantec.com Phone:7632526802 LEAD AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION Lead Agency:Department of Housing and Urban Development 443 U.S. Department of Agriculture FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency) Date Of Land Evaluation Request Name of Project Federal Agency Involved Proposed Land Use County and State PART II (To be completed by NRCS) Date Request Received By NRCS Person Completing Form: Does the site contain Prime, Unique, Statewide or Local Important Farmland? (If no, the FPPA does not apply - do not complete additional parts of this form) YES NO Acres Irrigated Average Farm Size Major Crop(s) Farmable Land In Govt. Jurisdiction Acres: % Amount of Farmland As Defined in FPPA Acres: % Name of Land Evaluation System Used Name of State or Local Site Assessment System Date Land Evaluation Returned by NRCS Alternative Site Rating PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) Site A Site B Site C Site D A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly C. Total Acres In Site PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland B. Total Acres Statewide Important or Local Important Farmland C. Percentage Of Farmland in County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted D. Percentage Of Farmland in Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Criterion Relative Value of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of 0 to 100 Points) PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency) Site Assessment Criteria (Criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5 b. For Corridor project use form NRCS-CPA-106) Maximum Points Site A Site B Site C Site D 1. Area In Non-urban Use (15) 2. Perimeter In Non-urban Use (10) 3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed (20) 4. Protection Provided By State and Local Government (20) 5. Distance From Urban Built-up Area (15) 6. Distance To Urban Support Services (15) 7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average (10) 8. Creation Of Non-farmable Farmland (10) 9. Availability Of Farm Support Services (5) 10. On-Farm Investments (20) 11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services (10) 12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use (10) TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160 PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency) Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V) 100 Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or local site assessment) 160 TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines) 260 Site Selected: Date Of Selection Was A Local Site Assessment Used? YES NO Reason For Selection: Name of Federal agency representative completing this form: Date: (See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 (03-02) 444 Anoka County Hennepin County Wright County Subject Property Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ \\ c d 1 0 0 1 - c 2 0 0 \ C T X - C I F S $ \ V D I \ R e d i r e c t \ l h e r s h l e y \ D o c u m e n t s \ A r c G I S \ P r o j e c t s \ M y P r o j e c t 1 0 \ M y P r o j e c t 1 0 . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 4 - 0 8 - 2 8 B y : l h e r s h l e y Legend Subject Property Farmland Class All areas are prime farmland Farmland of statewide importance Prime farmland if drained Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 15N 2. Data Sources: USGS 3. Background: USGS 7.5 Minute Quadrangle (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:4,800 0 200 400 Feet Prepared by XXX on 2024-08-28 TR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX IR by XXX on 2020-XX-XX T11N, R12W, S05 Minneapolis, Hennepin Co., MN 22770xxxxClient Project Report Site Location Map 1 445 STEPS IN THE PROCESSING THE FARMLAND AND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FORM Step 1 - Federal agencies (or Federally funded projects) involved in proposed projects that may convert farmland, as defined in the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) to nonagricultural uses, will initially complete Parts I and III of the form. For Corridor type projects, the Federal agency shall use form NRCS-CPA-106 in place of form AD-1006. The Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) process may also be accessed by visiting the FPPA website, http://fppa.nrcs.usda.gov/lesa/. Step 2 - Originator (Federal Agency) will send one original copy of the form together with appropriate scaled maps indicating location(s)of project site(s), to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) local Field Office or USDA Service Center and retain a copy for their files. (NRCS has offices in most counties in the U.S. The USDA Office Information Locator may be found at http://offices.usda.gov/scripts/ndISAPI.dll/oip_public/USA_map, or the offices can usually be found in the Phone Book under U.S. Government, Department of Agriculture. A list of field offices is available from the NRCS State Conservationist and State Office in each State.) Step 3 - NRCS will, within 10 working days after receipt of the completed form, make a determination as to whether the site(s) of the proposed project contains prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland. (When a site visit or land evaluation system design is needed, NRCS will respond within 30 working days. Step 4 - For sites where farmland covered by the FPPA will be converted by the proposed project, NRCS will complete Parts II, IV and V of the form. Step 5 - NRCS will return the original copy of the form to the Federal agency involved in the project, and retain a file copy for NRCS records. Step 6 - The Federal agency involved in the proposed project will complete Parts VI and VII of the form and return the form with the final selected site to the servicing NRCS office. Step 7 - The Federal agency providing financial or technical assistance to the proposed project will make a determination as to whether the proposed conversion is consistent with the FPPA. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FORM (For Federal Agency) Part I: When completing the "County and State" questions, list all the local governments that are responsible for local land use controls where site(s) are to be evaluated. Part III: When completing item B (Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly), include the following: 1. Acres not being directly converted but that would no longer be capable of being farmed after the conversion, because the conversion would restrict access to them or other major change in the ability to use the land for agriculture. 2. Acres planned to receive services from an infrastructure project as indicated in the project justification (e.g. highways, utilities planned build out capacity) that will cause a direct conversion. Part VI: Do not complete Part VI using the standard format if a State or Local site assessment is used. With local and NRCS assistance, use the local Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA). 1. Assign the maximum points for each site assessment criterion as shown in § 658.5(b) of CFR. In cases of corridor-type project such as transportation, power line and flood control, criteria #5 and #6 will not apply and will, be weighted zero, however, criterion #8 will be weighed a maximum of 25 points and criterion #11 a maximum of 25 points. 2. Federal agencies may assign relative weights among the 12 site assessment criteria other than those shown on the FPPA rule after submitting individual agency FPPA policy for review and comment to NRCS. In all cases where other weights are assigned, relative adjustments must be made to maintain the maximum total points at 160. For project sites where the total points equal or exceed 160, consider alternative actions, as appropriate, that could reduce adverse impacts (e.g. Alternative Sites, Modifications or Mitigation). Part VII: In computing the "Total Site Assessment Points" where a State or local site assessment is used and the total maximum number of points is other than 160, convert the site assessment points to a base of 160. Example: if the Site Assessment maximum is 200 points, and the alternative Site "A" is rated 180 points: For assistance in completing this form or FPPA process, contact the local NRCS Field Office or USDA Service Center. NRCS employees, consult the FPPA Manual and/or policy for additional instructions to complete the AD-1006 form. Total points assigned Site A 180 Maximum points possible 200 =X 160 = 144 points for Site A 446 447 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota 193807229 448 Document Information Project Name Historic Architectural Survey for the City of Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase 1, Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota Lead Federal Agency U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Project Number 193807229 Project Manager Courtnay Bot, Senior Project Manager Date October 2024 Prepared and Submitted by Rowan Davidson, Ph.D., T’Keyah Adams, and Holly Higgins, MSHP Principal Investigator Rachel M. Kennedy, MHP rachel.kennedy@stantec.com Prepared for: Jessica Christensen Buck, Recreation Supervisor City of Corcoran 9100 County Road 19 Corcoran, MN 55340 (763) 400-7034 Prepared by: Stantec 1 Carlson Parkway N Plymouth, MN 55417 502-579-1814 449 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Project is a federal undertaking which will utilize a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Economic Development Initiative Community Project Funding Grant and, thus, HUD is the lead federal agency. The historic architectural survey was requested to meet federal compliance requirements in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), as amended (54 USC § 306108) and its implementing regulations (36 CFR § 800). 450 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec ii ABSTRACT/MANAGEMENT SUMMARY Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (Stantec) was contracted by the City of Corcoran, Minnesota to complete a reconnaissance level historic architectural survey for the proposed Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase 1, located at 20200 County Rd 50 in Corcoran (the Project). The proposed Project involves the proposed construction of improvements including formal parking, the addition of a new splash pad, playground, pickleball courts, and park pavilion for city use, the reconfiguration of soccer fields and tennis courts for an improved experience and enhancing the natural features in the park. In September and October 2024, Stantec’s architectural history staff, managed by Rachel M Kennedy, MHP, surveyed ten properties within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the Project. Stantec recommends that Field Sites 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 12 are Not Eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Field Site 1 is recommended as Undetermined for the NRHP, due to a lack of access and a potential for historic importance. The following report describes these findings. 451 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec iii CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS I certify that this investigation was conducted and documented according to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines and that the report is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. October 28, 2024 ___________________________________ ______________________ Signature of Principal Investigator Date 452 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec iv Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................................. i ABSTRACT/MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... ii CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS ................................................................................................................... iii INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Description .................................................................................................................................... 1 Compliance Requirements ........................................................................................................................ 5 Area of Potential Effects ............................................................................................................................ 5 METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Previous Investigations .............................................................................................................................. 7 Map and Literature Review........................................................................................................................ 9 Survey Methodology ................................................................................................................................ 10 Summary of Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 11 HISTORIC CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................. 13 Hennepin County, Minnesota....................................................................................................................... 13 City of Corcoran ........................................................................................................................................... 14 SITE DESCRIPTIONS AND RESULTS ...................................................................................................... 15 FIELD SURVEY SITES ................................................................................................................................... 15 Field Site 1 .................................................................................................................................................... 17 Field Site 2 .................................................................................................................................................... 20 Field Site 3 .................................................................................................................................................... 23 Field Site 4 .................................................................................................................................................... 25 Field Site 5 .................................................................................................................................................... 27 Field Site 6 .................................................................................................................................................... 29 Field Site 8 .................................................................................................................................................... 31 Field Site 10 .................................................................................................................................................. 33 Field Site 11 .................................................................................................................................................. 35 Field Site 12 .................................................................................................................................................. 37 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 40 SELECT REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 41 453 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project, Phase1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec v FIGURES FIGURE 1. PROJECT LOCATION, CORCORAN, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ............................................................................... 4 FIGURE 2. AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS (APE). ....................................................................................................................... 6 FIGURE 3. PREVIOUSLY RECORDED PROPERTIES ........................................................................................................................ 8 FIGURE 4. FIELD SURVEY MAP. .......................................................................................................................................... 16 FIGURE 5. EFFECTS MAP, FIELD SITE 1 ................................................................................................................................. 19 TABLES TABLE 1. PREVIOUSLY RECORDED PROPERTIES, CORCORAN, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA. ......................................................... 7 TABLE 2. MAPS OF PROJECT AREA ......................................................................................................................................... 9 TABLE 3. INVENTORIED RESOURCES ..................................................................................................................................... 11 TABLE 4. NON-INVENTORIED PROPERTIES ............................................................................................................................. 12 PLATES PLATE 1. OVERVIEW OF PROJECT FOOTPRINT FROM LARKIN ROAD., LOOKING NORTH....................................................................... 1 PLATE 2. OVERVIEW OF PROJECT FOOTPRINT FROM LARKIN ROAD, LOOKING NORTHWEST. ............................................................... 2 PLATE 3. OVERVIEW OF PROJECT FOOTPRINT FROM COUNTY ROAD 50, LOOKING EAST. ................................................................... 2 PLATE 4. OVERVIEW OF PROJECT FOOTPRINT FROM COUNTY ROAD 10, LOOKING NORTHWEST. ......................................................... 3 PLATE 5. JOHN CORCORAN FARMSTEAD, LOOKING NORTH. ...................................................................................................... 17 PLATE 6. JOHN CORCORAN FARMSTEAD, GARAGE AND SHED, LOOKING NORTH. ............................................................................ 18 PLATE 7. 10-50 CLUB, LOOKING SOUTHWEST. ....................................................................................................................... 20 PLATE 8. 10-50 CLUB, REAR ATTACHED HOUSE, LOOKING NORTHEAST. ...................................................................................... 21 PLATE 9. RETAIL BUILDING, LOOKING SOUTHWEST. ................................................................................................................. 23 PLATE 10. RETAIL BUILDING, REAR, LOOKING NORTHEAST. ....................................................................................................... 24 PLATE 11. FRONT GABLE HOUSE, LOOKING SOUTHEAST. .......................................................................................................... 25 PLATE 12. MINIMAL TRADITIONAL HOUSE, LOOKING SOUTH. ................................................................................................... 27 PLATE 13. MINIMAL TRADITIONAL HOUSE, DETACHED GARAGE, LOOKING SOUTH. ........................................................................ 28 PLATE 14. JOHN FEHAN GARAGE, LOOKING SOUTH. ................................................................................................................ 29 PLATE 15. JOHN FEHAN OUTHOUSE, LOOKING SOUTHEAST....................................................................................................... 30 PLATE 16. RANCH HOUSE, LOOKING SOUTH. ......................................................................................................................... 31 PLATE 17. RANCH HOUSE, DETACHED GARAGE, LOOKING SOUTH. .............................................................................................. 32 PLATE 18. RANCH HOUSE, LOOKING NORTH. ......................................................................................................................... 33 PLATE 19. RANCH HOUSE, DETACHED GARAGE, LOOKING NORTH. .............................................................................................. 34 PLATE 20. RANCH HOUSE, LOOKING SOUTHWEST. .................................................................................................................. 35 PLATE 21. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, OVERVIEW, LOOKING SOUTH. .................................................................................... 37 PLATE 22. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, PICNIC SHELTER AND PLAYGROUND, LOOKING NORTH. .................................................... 38 PLATE 23. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, HOCKEY RINKS, LOOKING NORTHWEST. ....................................................................... 38 PLATE 24. CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK, WARMING HOUSE, LOOKING NORTHWEST.................................................................... 39 454 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 1 1 INTRODUCTION PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project entails construction of several improvements to the Corcoran Community Park (Figure 1; Plate 1- Plate 4). These improvements may include five new soccer fields, six new pickleball courts, two new tennis courts, a new playground, splash pad, and 7,500 square feet multipurpose building with bathrooms, kitchen, gathering area, and pavilion, and a larger paved parking lot. Two existing tennis courts, the existing playground, a storage area south of the existing ball fields, and a paved path between the existing ball fields will be removed. A regional trail connection to the Diamond Lake Regional Trail and the addition of turn lanes at the south park entrance along County Road 50 will also be completed. Connection to City sewer and water would occur for new facilities requiring connection (e.g., splash pad, multi-purpose building). The listed improvements may be implemented in phases as funding is available. In addition to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding, additional funding sources for this project include donations from the Northwest Area Jaycees, the Hanover Athletic Association, and Three Rivers Park District organizations. Construction of the project is anticipated to begin in Spring 2025. Plate 1. Overview of project footprint from Larkin Road., looking north. 455 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 2 Plate 2. Overview of project footprint from Larkin Road, looking northwest. Plate 3. Overview of project footprint from County Road 50, looking east. 456 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 3 Plate 4. Overview of project footprint from County Road 10, looking northwest. 457 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 4 Figure 1. Project Location, Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota 458 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 5 COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS The Project is a federal undertaking that will utilize a HUD Economic Development Initiative Community Project Funding Grant and thus, HUD will be the lead federal agency. The historic architectural survey was requested to meet federal compliance requirements in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), as amended (54 USC § 306108) and its implementing regulations (36 CFR § 800). Section 106 requires that federal agencies identify cultural resources 50 years of age or older within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) of their federal undertakings. Additionally, Section 106 requires federal agencies to assess and resolve through consultation any direct and/or indirect adverse effects of their undertakings on historic properties listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) prior to the issuance of a federal permit or license or the expenditure of any federal funds for construction. AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS Per 36 CFR § 800.4, the APE is defined as the limits of disturbance for the Project (Project Area) and adjacent parcels within the viewshed of the Project Area. The APE is approximately 45 acres and is bounded by agricultural land to the north; County Road 10 to the east; County Road 50 to the south; and a residential subdivision to the west. See Figure 2 for a graphic representation of the APE. The APE consists of the Corcoran Community Park Project Phase I project area, and adjacent parcels within its viewshed. The park and adjacent parcels are level and comprise a mix of playing fields and park amenities with areas of grassland and woods. Along both County Road 10 and County Road 50 are an assortment of houses, farmland, and commercial properties set back from the street in a suburban and rural setting. Most of the area was formerly farmland that was developed from the mid-twentieth century to the present. 459 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 6 Figure 2. Area of Potential Effects (APE). 460 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 7 2 METHODOLOGY The investigation was completed using guidelines set forth in the Secretary of the Interior Standards and the Minnesota Historic Preservation Office’s (MN-SHPO) Historic and Architectural Survey Manual. The Principal Investigator (PI), Rachel M. Kennedy, exceeds the requirements for professional architectural historian as detailed in the Secretary of the Interior (SOI) Standards. This investigation includes a records check, review of maps and literature, and survey. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS Stantec completed a records search of the APE plus a one-mile buffer in September 2024 using the Minnesota Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MnSHIP) to identify previously recorded properties. This search identified two previously recorded properties, both outside the APE to the east along County Road 10. One of the previously recorded properties has been demolished (HE-COC-00025). The other is St. Thomas Catholic Church (HE-COC-00026). Neither property was included as a field site in this report because neither are located within the APE. See Table 1 and Figure 3 for a list and geographic representation of the previously recorded properties within or adjacent to the APE. Table 1. Previously Recorded Properties, Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Inventory No. Name/Resource Address Construction Date NRHP Status HE-COC-00026 St. Thomas Catholic Church 20000 Co. Rd. 10 1896 Unevaluated HE-COC-00025 Store NW corner Co. Rd. 10 & Co. Rd. 50 ca. 1900 N/A (Demolished) Stantec did not identify any historic architectural survey reports that address the community of Corcoran in this area nor the resources within the APE. Additionally, no NRHP listed properties or National Historic Landmarks (NHLs) are located within the project area or APE. 461 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 8 Figure 3. Previously Recorded Properties 462 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 9 MAP AND LITERATURE REVIEW Stantec reviewed primary and secondary materials online at the websites of various institutions, including the University of Minnesota 1 and The Minnesota Historical Society.2 Stantec also conducted research online using the websites of the US Geological Service’s (USGS) Map Store and Historic Map Works.3 Maps reviewed are listed in Table 2. Table 2. Maps of Project Area Date Title Author 1873 Map of Hennepin County, Minnesota George B. Wright & G.J. Wright Publishers 1898 Plat Book of Hennepin County Northwestern Map Publishing Co. 1909 Topographic Map for Rockford, MN USGS 1914 Atlas and Farmers Directory of Anoka and Hennepin County Webb Publishing Co. 1925 Minnesota State Atlas W.W. Hixson & Co. 1953 Topographic Map for Stillwater, MN USGS 1954 Atlas of the State of Minnesota Thomas O. Nelson Co. 1958 Topographic Map for Rockford, MN USGS 1965 Topographic Map for Stillwater, MN USGS 1981 Topographic Map for Hamel, MN USGS 1991 Topographic Map for Anoka, MN USGS 2013 Topographic Map for Hamel, MN USGS 2022 Topographic Map for Hamel, MN USGS 1 Accessed online September 2024 at: https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/56238 and https://apps.lib.umn.edu/mhapo/ 2 Accessed online September 2024 at: https://libguides.mnhs.org/maps/atlas. 3 Accessed online September 2024 at: https://historicmapworks.com. 463 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 10 SURVEY METHODOLOGY In September and October 2024, Stantec’s architectural history team, managed by Rachel M. Kennedy, MHP, conducted a historic architectural survey using methods consistent with both the NPS guidelines and the MN-SHPO and Heritage Preservation Department (HPD) Historic and Architectural Survey Manual. Stantec surveyed the APE for properties that met the fifty-year age consideration for the NRHP with the addition of a five-year buffer to account for potential project delays (i.e., built before circa 1979). Each potential historic property was photographed and a preliminary assessment of integrity and NRHP eligibility was conducted. Most of the field survey was conducted from the public rights-of-way (ROW). General landscape photographs were also taken. The project area was also surveyed for potential historic districts. There were no access limitations in the project area. Standing resources are considered eligible for the NRHP if they possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and meet Criteria A, B, or C on the local, state, or national level. Criterion A: associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; Criterion B: associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; Criterion C: embodies distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. MN-SHPO inventory forms, photographs, and mapping were prepared using guidance found in MN- SHPO’s Historic and Architectural Survey Manual (8/2017).4 As well, this study followed applicable National Park Service Guidelines for survey and NRP eligibility, including NRHP Bulletin 24, “Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis For Preservation Planning,” NRHP Bulletin 15, “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation,” and NRHP Bulletin 16A, “How to Complete the National Register Registration Form.” 4 Historic and Architectural Survey Manual, Minnesota Historical Society – Heritage Preservation Department, St. Paul, Minnesota, 2017. 464 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 11 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Stantec performed a field survey on ten field sites 45 years of age or older for NRHP consideration (Table 3). Descriptions and images of these resources can be found below in the SITE DESCRIPTIONS AND RESULTS section of this report. Stantec also examined two field sites that were not of sufficient age for NRHP consideration and/or under the Guidance for Criterion Consideration G (Table 4). Table 3. Inventoried Resources Field Site No. Inventory No. Historic/Common Name Address Approx. Date of Construction NRHP Recommendation Effects Assessment 1 HE-COC- 00085 John Corcoran Farmstead 20130 Larkin Road c. 1922 Undetermined N/A 2 HE-COC- 00086 10-50 Club 20115 Co. Rd. No. 10 c.1925/1960 Not Eligible N/A 3 HE-COC- 00087 Retail Building 20121 Co. Rd. No. 10 c.1930 Not Eligible N/A 4 HE-COC- 00088 Front Gable House 20137 Co. Rd. No. 50 c.1950 Not Eligible N/A 5 HE-COC- 00089 Minimal Traditional House 20201 Co. Rd. No. 50 c.1950 Not Eligible N/A 6 HE-COC- 00090 John Fehan Garage 20209 Co. Rd. No. 50 c.1940 Not Eligible N/A 8 HE-COC- 00092 Ranch House 20239 Co. Rd. No. 50 c.1953 Not Eligible N/A 10 HE-COC- 00093 Ranch House 20420 Co. Rd. No. 50 c.1966 Not Eligible N/A 11 HE-COC- 00094 Ranch House 20301 Co. Rd. No. 10 c.1972 Not Eligible N/A 12 HE-COC- 00091 Corcoran Community Park 20175 Co. Rd. No. 50 1975 / 1990 Not Eligible N/A 465 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 12 Table 4. Non-Inventoried Properties Field Site No. Inventory No. Historic/Common Name Address Date of Constru ction Not Inventoried Explanation Resource Image 7 N/A House 20225 Co. Rd. No. 50 1983 This resource is not 45 years of age or older 9 N/A House 20405 Co. Rd. No. 50 1983 This resource is not 45 years of age or older 466 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 13 3 HISTORIC CONTEXT Hennepin County, Minnesota Hennepin County, located in the southeast portion of Minnesota. The county is comprised of 607 square miles and is home to Minneapolis and its suburbs, the largest city in the state. The county is bordered by the Mississippi River to the north and east, the Minnesota River to the south, and numerous lakes leading up to prairie in the west. The area has been home to native settlement for at least 6,000 years and by the time French explorers and fur traders ventured into the region in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it was primarily home to the Dakota and neighboring Ojibwe tribes. The county’s namesake, Father Louis Hennepin, visited the region in 1680 along with other French explorers and fur traders.5 Following the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, the United States government purchased land along the west bank of the Mississippi River from the Dakota Tribe for the purpose of building a trading post and fort along the river. The first European settlement was at Fort Snelling, at the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers, established in 1820. Settlers began building houses and mills at St. Anthony Falls on the west bank of the Mississippi and on the numerous large lakes to the west in the 1830s.6 Minnesota Territory was created in 1849 and three years later Hennepin County was formally established. Minneapolis, a settlement of a few hundred people, was made the county seat. The first European settlers in the area were from New England and New York. Beginning in the 1850s and continuing into the early twentieth century, waves of immigrants from Norway, Sweden, Germany, and Ireland also settled in the area. By the 1860s, more than a dozen mills lined the falls on the Mississippi River generating power for grist and sawmills to fulfill the demand for lumber and agricultural goods in the growing region. The introduction of the railroad and industrial-scale manufacturing in the 1880s led Hennepin County, and particularly the City of Minneapolis, to become the flour milling capital of the world and one of the nation’s largest lumber producers. The population of the county exceeded 200,000 by the turn of the century; however, much of the county remained distinctly rural with approximately 72 percent of the county’s land devoted to farmland.7 In the early twentieth century, Minneapolis had become a major regional city and dominated the economy and politics of broader Hennepin County. The largest county by population in the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County continued to grow rapidly through the 1940s. In the post-war years, the intense agricultural nature of Hennepin County outside of Minneapolis began to decline as suburban development increased.8 This suburban growth became the driving force behind the county’s history in the mid- twentieth century, as the population of Minneapolis reached its peak of 521,718 people in 1950 and has 5 Parsons, E. Dudley. The Story of Minnesota (New York: American Book Company, 1916). 6 “Overview of Hennepin County,” Hennepin County website, Accessed September 2024 online at: www.hennepin.us/your- government/overview/overview-of-hennepin-county. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 467 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 14 since steadily declined. The lack of available lots within the city limits exacerbated by the development of Village and City governments in the county outside of Minneapolis, combined with the increasing dependence on the automobile, was among the factors that led to the growth of the suburbs. Highways were constructed throughout the county, and the economy became more diversified, turning away from milling industries. By 1970, the number of people in Hennepin County living outside of Minneapolis outnumbered those living within the city limits for the first time in more than a century. In response, the county government centralized in Minneapolis and took on a more active role regionally. The population of the county reached 1,260,121 people in the 2020 census.9 City of Corcoran The City of Corcoran is in the northwest corner of Hennepin County, Minnesota, and covers approximately 36 square miles. The region was occupied by the Lakota people in the early nineteenth century and for several centuries before that. In 1851, the Lakota/Dakota signed treaties ceding most southern and western Minnesota to the United States, formally opening western Hennepin County to settlement by European farmers. The first European settlers made claims in the area in 1855, and the township of Corcoran was organized in 1858, taking its name from the first postmaster of the town, the Irish immigrant Patrick Butterfield Corcoran. Most of the initial settlers were from the Northeast United States and also included French and Irish immigrants. The community remained small in the nineteenth century, primarily occupied by large and successful farms typical of Hennepin County during the period. The population reached 1,338 by the turn of the twentieth century.10 Corcoran was incorporated as a city in 1948. The city began to grow rapidly in the post-World War II period. During this time, an influx of residents entered rural Hennepin County as the City of Minneapolis grew only twenty miles away. Corcoran had 1,135 people in 1950, which rose to 4,252 by 1980. The city is transected by six county roads that have been improved and increasingly utilized over the last four decades, altering the community from a rural to suburban setting near the twin cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. The city remains mostly suburban with a considerable number of single-family homes and industrial and commercial properties along major roads. Corcoran had 6,185 inhabitants in the 2020 census.11 9 New History. Historic Context and History-Architecture Survey. Minneapolis in the Modern Era: 1930-1975 (June 2020). 10 “The History and Founding of Corcoran,” City of Corcoran website accessed September 2024 online at: https://www.ci.corcoran.mn.us/our_community/history; Neill, Rev. Edward D. History of Hennepin County, and the City of Minneapolis. Minneapolis: North Star Publishing, 1881. 11 “The History and Founding of Corcoran,” City of Corcoran website accessed September 2024 online at: https://www.ci.corcoran.mn.us/our_community/history. 468 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 15 4 SITE DESCRIPTIONS AND RESULTS FIELD SURVEY SITES Field sites range in period of construction from the early to mid-twentieth century, as far as can be determined from exterior survey. All properties that appeared to have been built prior to 1979 were examined for this survey (see Figure 4). Ten field survey sites are described in this section of the report. 469 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 16 Figure 4. Field Survey Map. 470 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 17 Field Site 1 John Corcoran Farmstead HE-COC-00085 Circa 1922 20130 Larkin Road Corcoran, MN 55340 45.091082, -93.550142 Plate 5. John Corcoran Farmstead, looking north. Description: The 68.7-acre property is a level, cultivated field lined with trees and vegetation with a creek running along its eastern boundary. In the center of the property is a grouping of agricultural buildings including a barn, two silos, a garage, a pole barn, two sheds, and a farmhouse with a long gravel driveway. The buildings are oriented northeast-southwest at an angle. The farmhouse is completely obscured from view by vegetation and could not be assessed from the right-of-way. From aerial images it appears to be a front-gable, two-story house with a central chimney and several one-story additions including a porch. The barn has an arched roof with metal sheathing. It also has corrugated metal panel siding and a concrete block foundation. There are two concrete stave silos adjacent to the barn, one larger than the other, and a small wood shingle shed with an asphalt shingle gambrel roof to the north. Behind the barn to the northwest is a long, one-story metal pole barn and adjacent to it is a two-car garage with a metal, front- gable roof and vinyl siding. Most of the extant resources that remain on the farmstead, including the house, which was completed circa 1922, were constructed in the 1920s or more recently. 471 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 18 The Corcoran family followed Patrick Butterfield Corcoran, the namesake of the town, to settle in Corcoran Township in 1857. Patrick’s brother William, and wife Catherine, established a farm along the creek south of his brother’s plot. A rural schoolhouse (no longer extant) was established the same year and operated until the mid-twentieth century. William and Catherine’s son, John Corcoran inherited their farm. John Corcoran was born in 1860, never married, or had children, and died in 1935. He farmed 116 acres and operated a general store near the intersection of County Road 10 and County Road 50. The store is possibly the non-extant MnSHIP record HE-COC-00025 mentioned in the Methodology section of this report. Plate 6. John Corcoran Farmstead, garage and shed, looking north. NRHP Eligibility: Undetermined/Treated as Eligible Stantec recommends this property remain Undetermined for the NRHP. Access to the property was limited for inspection or field photography due to vegetation and setback from the right-of-way. Given the potential historic importance for its association with the Corcoran Family, the founders of the town, and a lack of access to the farmstead, Stantec recommends this property retain an Undetermined status. Future historic architectural work should attempt to determine if there are extant properties associated with the family and provide recommendations for their significance and potential preservation. Effects Assessment: No Effects This property will experience No Effects from the proposed Project. It is located approximately .33 miles from the southeast corner of the park’s Phase 1 boundaries and is obscured from view of the Project by extant buildings and dense vegetation. 472 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 19 Figure 5. Effects Map, Field Site 1 473 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 20 Field Site 2 10-50 Club HE-COC-00086 Circa 1925/1960 20115 Co. Rd. No. 10 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.095152, -93.548641 Plate 7. 10-50 Club, looking southwest. Description: The .27-acre site sits at the intersection of County Road 10 and County Road 50 at an acute angle. There are two distinct portions of the building including a rear house and a front tavern. The two-story house has a pyramidal roof with asphalt shingles and a central internal brick chimney with shallow eaves. The exterior is stuccoed with minimal decorative features and the foundation is not visible. The rear elevation of the house, constructed before the attached tavern and facing southwest, appears to have originally been the rear of the building. There is a sliding vinyl door at the first floor with a wood deck and stairs on the southeast side. Paired wood sash 1/1 windows with wood trim are located on the northwest side. The second floor of this elevation has two windows directly beneath the eaves and equally spaced and aligned with the fenestration below. These windows are both small, wood sash 1/1 windows with wood trim. The southeast elevation has a one-story addition that may have been an enclosed porch with a hip roof. The façade is presently covered by the tavern addition on the northeast elevation that envelops the house on the east and south elevations completely. The front tavern addition is one story with an l- 474 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 21 shaped plan and a gabled asphalt shingle roof. The exterior is stucco with a concrete foundation. The main elevation faces the road to the northeast and has a front-gable section with the main entry at the southern end. The main entry has a wood front-gable vestibule with an octagonal fixed window and a pair of electric signs overhead. The north side of the main elevation has a brick veneer low wall below the windowsills. Above the low wall are two sliding horizontal metal windows with fixed shutters and a secondary metal door. The building is situated on land previously owned by Patrick H. Corcoran, the son of Patrick Butterfield Corcoran; the latter of whom is the founder and namesake of Corcoran Township. Patrick H. Corcoran owned a 160-acre farm here in the early twentieth century. He sold lots along the major roads for commercial development creating a settlement called “Corcoran” with a Catholic church, general store, and other businesses while his farmhouse was located on the east side of the road per historic plat maps. Patrick was born in 1866, never married, or had children, and died in 1941. The house was constructed in the late 1920s; its original owner is not known at this time and is unlikely to have been Patrick H. Corcoran’s home as he lived across the street. In 1960, Mike “Irving” Thomas, a resident of Corcoran, constructed a tavern attached to the house named the 10-50 Club after the intersection of County Roads 10 and 50 where the building sits. The bar was in operation until it closed in 2006. Plate 8. 10-50 Club, rear attached house, looking northeast. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century house or tavern in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important 475 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 22 common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person, as far as can be determined; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, as far as can be determined, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 476 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 23 Field Site 3 Commercial Building HE-COC-00087 Circa 1930 20121 Co. Rd. No. 10 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.095285, -93.548837 Plate 9. Retail Building, looking southwest. Description: The .25-acre site sits adjacent to the 10-50 Club and is immediately adjacent to the road. The one-story building has a gable metal panel roof, an interior brick chimney, and a concrete block exterior. The main elevation, facing northeast, has stepped parapet wall on its the south end and a simple parapet wall at the north end with minimal decoration. There is a recessed main entry at the south end of the elevation with a metal casement door and two fixed metal, plate glass windows. Above these is a now-empty location for former signage and a metal pole extending from the wall. To the north is an enclosed doorway and another fixed metal window. The rear is utilitarian with metal siding in the gable end and concrete block below with a sliding metal door and a pair of enclosed windows. Like the adjacent 10-50 Club (Field Site 2), this retail building was constructed on land previously owned and developed by Patrick H. Corcoran. There were several similar commercial buildings at the intersection of County Road 10 and County Road 50 during the mid-twentieth century when this building was likely constructed. Although its original use is unknown at this time, the building was occupied by the local 477 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 24 Corcoran Lion’s Club from the 1960s to the 1990s. Most recently, it was occupied by the Corcoran Locker Meats business until 2022. Plate 10. Retail Building, rear, looking northeast. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century commercial building in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 478 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 25 Field Site 4 Front Gable House HE-COC-00088 Circa 1950 20137 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.094671, -93.549020 Plate 11. Front Gable House, looking southeast. Description: The .9-acre site sits south of the road and has a one-and-one-half story house and a detached two-car garage. The house has a gabled roof with asphalt shingles, vinyl siding, and a concrete block foundation. The main elevation faces west perpendicular to the road and has a central main entry with an overhead gabled patio and wood stairs. The door is a contemporary metal door with nine lights. On either side of the door is a window, a vinyl 1/1 sash to the north and a vinyl sliding window to the south. Above the entry is another window in the gable end that is a vinyl 1/1 sash. The detached two car garage is southwest of the house and has a gable asphalt shingle roof and vinyl siding. The two overhead doors in the gable end are contemporary and the foundation was not visible. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century residence in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important 479 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 26 common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 480 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 27 Field Site 5 Minimal Traditional House HE-COC-00089 Circa 1950 20201 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.094639, -93.550607 Plate 12. Minimal Traditional House, looking south. Description: The .8-acre site sits south of the road and has a one-story house with a side addition and a large rear four- car garage. The side gable house has an asphalt shingle roof and shallow eaves. The house is clad in aluminum siding with a stone veneer low wall. The foundation is concrete block. The main entry is centered on the north elevation facing the road; there is a fixed wood picture window east of the entry and a vinyl casement window west of the entry. A large addition with a flat roof, vinyl siding, and a concrete block foundation extends from the west elevation of the house. The north elevation of the addition has a central door with a single large light. An overhead garage door is east of the central entry and a fixed picture window is west of the central entry. On the west elevation of the addition is another door and a large rear garage with two oversized garage doors. A portion of the west elevation of the addition is concrete block. North and west of the house is an extensive paved area. A detached garage is located southwest of the house. This garage has a front gable metal roof and vertical metal panel siding. There are four identical overhead doors on the north elevation and the foundation is not visible. 481 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 28 Plate 13. Minimal Traditional House, detached garage, looking south. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century residence in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 482 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 29 Field Site 6 John Fehan Garage HE-COC-00090 Circa 1940 20209 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.094721, -93.551018 Plate 14. John Fehan Garage, looking south. Description: The .42-acre site sits south of the road and has a detached two-car garage and an outhouse. The garage has a jerkinhead roof clad in asphalt shingles. The garage is clad in wood clapboard siding and its foundation is not visible. The main (north) elevation has a contemporary overhead door and a single window in the gable end. This wood window is a 3/1 sash with wood trim. There are a pair of identical windows on both the east and west elevations. Southwest of the garage is a small outhouse with a hipped roof clad in asphalt shingles. The outhouse is clad in vertical wood board siding. The garage and outhouse are all that remain of the former John Fehan Farmstead, constructed in the early to mid-twentieth century along County Road 50. The house, barn, and other agricultural buildings are non-extant. 12 12 Atlas and Farmers Directory of Anoka and Hennepin County, Minnesota. St. Paul, MN: Webb Publishing Co., 1914; and Minnesota Historical Aerial Photographs Online. University of Minnesota. Accessed September 2024 online at: https://apps.lib.umn.edu/mhapo/; and Netronline. Historic Aerials. Tempe: Nationwide Environments Title Research, LLC. Accessed September 2024 online at: https://historicaerials.com/viewer. 483 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 30 Plate 15. John Fehan Outhouse, looking southeast. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of an early twentieth century agricultural complex in Hennepin County. The outbuildings do not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor are they examples of important common types; therefore, the property is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 484 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 31 Field Site 8 Ranch House HE-COC-00092 Circa 1953 20239 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.094674, -93.553092 Plate 16. Ranch House, looking south. Description: The 2.39-acre site sits south of the road and has a one-story ranch house with a walkout basement, a detached three-car garage, and separate shed. The house sits at the top of hill with a walkout lower level on the east and south elevations. The building has a hipped roof clad in asphalt shingles and an interior brick chimney. The house has a brick veneer exterior, cream color on the upper level and red for the lower level. The main elevation faces the road to the north and has a single main entry with wood stairs and a divided light doorway. East of the door is a tripartite wood picture window with a fixed light in the middle flanked by 1/1 wood sashes on either side. West of the door are two 8/8 wood sash windows spaced equally along the elevation. The east elevation has a side entry door at the lower level, also with divided lights, and a 1/1 wood sash window to the south. The upper level has a pair of 2/2 wood sash windows at the south end of the building. There appears to be a rear contemporary walk-out porch on the south elevation. The foundation is concrete. West of the house is a shed with a gable roof. The roof is clad in asphalt shingles. The small building has vertical wood board siding, no windows, and a pair of barn doors on the east elevation. There is a detached 485 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 32 garage southeast of the house with a hipped asphalt shingle roof, aluminum siding, and a concrete foundation. The north elevation has three overhead doors, two paired together at the west end flanked by exterior light fixtures and another separate garage door at the east end. Plate 17. Ranch House, detached garage, looking south. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century residence in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 486 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 33 Field Site 10 Ranch House HE-COC-00093 Circa 1966 20420 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.095499, -93.557815 Plate 18. Ranch House, looking north. Description: The 4.8-acre site sits north of the road and has a two-story house and a detached two-car garage. The house is a walk-out ranch style variant similar to Field Site 8 with a hipped asphalt shingle roof and an interior brick chimney. The exterior is stucco with a low brick wall at the base and a concrete foundation. The main elevation facing the road to the south is two stories with a two-car overhead door at the west end flanked by exterior lighting. There are two pairs of vinyl casement windows east of the garage bay. An entry on the south elevation is not evident from the ROW. The upper level of the south elevation has a sliding glass door, above the first level garage, which accesses a wood and metal porch. A large vinyl tripartite picture window is located on the east end of the south elevation. The other elevations are not visible from the ROW. Southwest of the house is a detached garage with a gable metal roof, vertical metal siding, and a low brick veneer wall at the base. The south elevation of the garage has two overhead doors, one larger than the other, and a single fixed horizontal window at the eastern end. 487 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 34 Plate 19. Ranch House, detached garage, looking north. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century residence in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 488 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 35 Field Site 11 Ranch House HE-COC-00094 Circa 1972 20301 Co. Rd. No. 10 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.098207, -93.552597 Plate 20. Ranch House, looking southwest. Description: The 1.91-acre site sits west of the road and has a one-story house. The house has side gable roof clad in asphalt shingles; the roof has shallow eaves. The house is clad in vertical wood board siding on the facade (northeast elevation), and horizontal vinyl siding on the other elevations. The foundation is concrete block. The facade has an attached, two-car garage flanked by exterior lighting at the north end and a main entry adjacent to it. The entry has a concrete stoop, wood trim, a screen door, and an original door with a single centered light. There is a tripartite wood picture window on the elevation with painted wood trim that extends down to the base of the exterior. At the south end of the elevation are two windows, one a single 1/1 wood sash and the other a pair of wood casement windows, both with painted wood trim similar to that on the tripartite window. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a mid-twentieth century residence in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of 489 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 36 building design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 490 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 37 Field Site 12 Corcoran Community Park HE-COC-00091 Circa 1975 20175 Co. Rd. No. 50 Corcoran, MN 55340 45.095766, -93.550877 Plate 21. Corcoran Community Park, overview, looking south. Description: Corcoran Community Park is located on 16 acres of land northwest of the intersection of Highway 10 and Highway 50. The park is flat with open fields and has a small stream and pond running through the middle of it from the north to the south. There are trees lining the edges of the property and brush and reeds around the waterways. The east side of the park includes two parking areas and three ball fields, Snyder Field, Lions Field, and Meister Field. There is also an outdoor ice rink, kid’s rink, and warming house at the southern end of the park, and a pair of tennis courts, a volleyball court, playground, and picnic shelter at the north end. The playground and kid’s rink are more recent additions. The western expansion of the park includes a parking area, a multi-use field, and three additional ball fields. 10 acres of farmland was purchased by City of Corcoran northwest of the intersection of Highway 10 and Highway 50 for the purpose of developing a public park for the community in 1973. In 1975, the city constructed several playing fields, a playground, picnic shelters, tennis courts, an ice rink, and warming house. The fencing of the ball fields and playground and subsequently been replaced, though the ice rink, 491 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 38 pond, warming house, and picnic shelter remain. In 1990, the park was expanded to the west with additional six acres of playing fields. Plate 22. Corcoran Community Park, picnic shelter and playground, looking north. Plate 23. Corcoran Community Park, hockey rinks, looking northwest. 492 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 39 Plate 24. Corcoran Community Park, warming house, looking northwest. NRHP Eligibility: Not Eligible This property is recommended Not Eligible for the NRHP. It is not a notable example of a late twentieth century public park in Hennepin County. It does not display the distinctive characteristics of a type of park design that is rare or innovative in the region or state, nor is it an example of an important common type; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. This property does not have an association with a significant person; therefore, it is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion B. Finally, the property does not have an association significant to the history of Hennepin County, and is therefore not eligible under Criterion A. Effects Assessment: Not Applicable 493 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 40 5 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the historic context developed and the field survey results, Stantec recommends that Field Sites 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 12 are Not Eligible for listing in the NRHP. Field Site 1 is recommended as Undetermined for the NRHP, due to a lack of access and a potential for historic importance. The property may be an important farmstead associated with the Corcoran family, founders of the community. Future historic architectural work should attempt to determine if there are extant properties with integrity associated with the Corcoran family and provide recommendations for their significance and potential preservation. This study would ideally include Field Site 1. Regardless of this property’s NRHP status, it is at a far distance from the Project area and should experience No Effects from the Projects, as planned. A more detailed analysis for each property is included in Section 4 of this report. 494 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 41 6 SELECT REFERENCES Selected Primary and Secondary Sources Carley, Rachel. The Visual Dictionary of American Domestic Architecture. New York: Henty Holt and Company, 1994, updated 1997. Historic and Architectural Survey Manual, Minnesota Historical Society – Heritage Preservation Department. St. Paul, Minnesota, 2017. McAlester, Virginia Savage. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2015. National Park Service. “Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning.” Washington D.C.: National Register Bulletin 24. U.S. Department of the Interior, 1977, revised 1985. _________________ . “How to Complete the National Register Registration Form.” National Register Bulletin 16A. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1997. _________________ . “How to Complete the National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form,” National Register Bulletin 16B. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1991, revised 1999. _________________ . “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Register Bulletin 15. U.S. Department of the Interior, 1997. Neill, Rev. Edward D. History of Hennepin County, and the City of Minneapolis. Minneapolis: North Star Publishing, 1881. New History. Historic Context and History-Architecture Survey. Minneapolis in the Modern Era: 1930-1975. June 2020. Parsons, E. Dudley. The Story of Minnesota. New York: American Book Company, 1916. Sanders, Thomas, ed. Specifications for Conducting Fieldwork and Preparing Cultural Resource Assessment Reports. Prepared by the Kentucky Heritage Council/State Historic. Wyatt, Barbara. The Components of a Historic Context: A National Register White Paper. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 2009. Accessed online March 2024 at: www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/publications.htm. Historic Maps Atlas and Farmers Directory of Anoka and Hennepin County, Minnesota. St. Paul, MN: Webb Publishing Co., 1914. Atlas of the State of Minnesota. Fergus Falls, MN: Thomas O. Nelson Co., 1954. Map of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN: George B. Wright & G.J. Wright Publishers, 1873. Minnesota State Atlas. Rockford Il: W.W. Hixson & Co., 1925. Plat Book of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN: Northwestern Map Publishing Co., 1898. United States Geological Survey. USGS Topographic Map for Rockford, MN Quadrangle. 1909. __________________________. USGS Topographic Map for Stillwater, MN Quadrangle. 1953. 495 Historic Architectural Survey Corcoran Park Remaster Project Phase 1 Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota October 2024 Stantec 42 __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Rockford, MN Quadrangle. 1958. __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Stillwater, MN Quadrangle. 1965. __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Hamel, MN Quadrangle. 1981. __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Anoka, MN Quadrangle. 1991. __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Hamel, MN Quadrangle. 2013. __________________________.USGS Topographic Map for Hamel, MN Quadrangle. 2022. Online Resources Google Earth. Historical Aerial Maps. Accessed September 2024 online at: Google Earth app. “The History and Founding of Corcoran.” City of Corcoran website. Accessed September 2024 online at: https://www.ci.corcoran.mn.us/our_community/history. Minnesota Historical Aerial Photographs Online. University of Minnesota. Accessed September 2024 online at: https://apps.lib.umn.edu/mhapo/. Netronline. Historic Aerials. Tempe: Nationwide Environments Title Research, LLC. Accessed September 2024 online at: https://historicaerials.com/viewer. “Overview of Hennepin County.” Hennepin County. Accessed September 2024 online at: www.hennepin.us/your- government/overview/overview-of-hennepin-county. 496 Please mail the completed form and required material to: ENReviewSHPO@state.mn.us This is a new submittal This is additional information relating to SHPO Project #: ____________ DATE:_________________ Please refer to Instructions for Completing the Request for Project Review form on our website. Submit one Request for Project Review form for each project. For questions regarding the SHPO review process, please visit our website or contact Kelly Gragg-Johnson (651-201-3285) or Leslie Coburn (651-201-3286) or by email at ENReviewSHPO@state.mn.us. Project Title: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Project Address (or Location): _________________________________________________________________________ City / Township (circle one): ________________________ Zip: __________ County: ________________ Legal Description: Township ______ Range ______E/W (circle one) Section ______ Quarter-section ______ Project Contact Name: ____________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Company/Agency: ___________________________________________________________________________________ Street Address: ___________________________________ Phone Number: ______________________________ City: _________________________ State: ______ Zip: ______________ Email: _________________________ Federal Agency (if applicable): _______________________________________________________________________ (Agency providing funds, licenses, or permits) Permit or Project Reference #: _____________________________ State Agency (if applicable): _________________________________________________________________________ (Agency providing funds, licenses, or permits) Permit or Project Reference #: _____________________________ Local Agency (if applicable): _________________________________________________________________________ (Continued on Reverse Side) 497 A)REQUIRED FOR ALL PROJECTS Write a detailed description of the proposed project. (See attached.) _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Attach a map of project location, with project area(s) clearly marked. Road names must be included and legible. B)Architecture Are there any buildings or structures within the project area? Yes No If No, continue to the Archaeology section below. If Yes, submit all of the following information: List all buildings and structures within the project area and the year they were built. (See attached.) _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Photographs of each building and structure located within the project area, along with a photo key. Include streetscape images, if applicable. All photographs must be clear, crisp, focused, and taken at ground level. Aerial photos are insufficient. List known historic buildings or structures located within the project area (i.e., individual properties or districts which are listed in the National Register or which meet the criteria for listing in the National Register). (See attached.) _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ C)Archaeology Does the proposed undertaking involve ground-disturbing activity? Yes No If No, this form is complete. If Yes, submit all of the following information: Attach the relevant portion of a 1:24000-scale USGS topographic map (photocopied or computer generated) with the project boundary marked. Description of current and previous land use and disturbances: (See attached.) _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Any available information concerning known or suspected archaeological resources within the project area. (See attached.) _______________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ October 2022 498 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project St a n t e c C o n s u l t i n g S e r v i c e s I n c . Prepared for: City of Corcoran Prepared by: Claire Witt Rikka Bakken Joshua Jensen M.Sc, RPA October 16, 2024 Project/File: 193807229 Hennepin County, Minnesota 499 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran City Park Project Project: 193807229 The conclusions in the Report titled An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project are Stantec’s professional opinion, as of the time of the Report, and concerning the scope described in the Report. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the scope of work was conducted and do not take into account any subsequent changes. The Report relates solely to the specific project for which Stantec was retained and the stated purpose for which the Report was prepared. The Report is not to be used or relied on for any variation or extension of the project, or for any other project or purpose, and any unauthorized use or reliance is at the recipient’s own risk. Stantec has assumed all information received from City of Corcoran (the “Client”) and third parties in the preparation of the Report to be correct. While Stantec has exercised a customary level of judgment or due diligence in the use of such information, Stantec assumes no responsibility for the consequences of any error or omission contained therein. This Report is intended solely for use by the Client in accordance with Stantec’s contract with the Client. While the Report may be provided by the Client to applicable authorities having jurisdiction and to other third parties in connection with the project, Stantec disclaims any legal duty based upon warranty, reliance or any other theory to any third party, and will not be liable to such third party for any damages or losses of any kind that may result. Prepared by Signature Joshua Jensen, M.Sc, RPA Printed Name Reviewed by Signature Angela Julin, MA, RPA Printed Name Approved by Signature Printed Name 500 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran City Park Project Executive Summary Project: 193807229 iii Executive Summary The City of Corcoran proposes improvements to existing park areas at the Corcoran City Park. The Corcoran Park Remaster Project (Project) is located in Hennepin County, Minnesota in Section 23 of Township 119 North, Range 23 West. The Project is within the Central Lakes Deciduous archaeological region. The proposed Project received a Community Development Grant from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, and therefore is subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. § 306108). In anticipation of compliance with Section 106, the City of Corcoran contracted with Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) to conduct a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the 46.1-acre Area of Potential Effect (APE). The entire Project is on land owned by the City of Corcoran. A literature review conducted prior to fieldwork identified no previously recorded archaeological sites, burial sites/cemeteries, previously conducted archaeological surveys, or previously inventoried above-ground resources within the APE. Stantec conducted a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the Project on September 23, 26, and 27, 2024, under Minnesota Archaeological Survey License 24-377. No new archaeological sites were identified during the investigation. Stantec recommends a finding of No Historic Properties Affected for the Project. No further archaeological work is recommended should the Project proceed as planned. 501 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Table of Contents Project: 193807229 i Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... iii Acronyms / Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................... iii 1 Project Description ...................................................................................................................... 1 2 Environmental Context ............................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Topography ................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Hydrology ...................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Geology ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2.4 Soils and Geomorphology ............................................................................................................. 2 2.5 Vegetation and Land Use .............................................................................................................. 3 3 Culture History ............................................................................................................................. 3 3.1 Precontact Period (10,900 BCE-1650 CE) .................................................................................... 3 3.2 Contact Period (1650-1837 CE) .................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Hennepin County ........................................................................................................................... 7 4 Research Design ......................................................................................................................... 8 4.1 Objectives ...................................................................................................................................... 8 4.2 Methods ......................................................................................................................................... 8 5 Literature Search ......................................................................................................................... 9 5.1 Previously Conducted Archaeological Surveys ............................................................................. 9 5.2 Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites.................................................................................... 9 5.3 Previously Identified Burial Sites and Cemeteries ........................................................................ 9 5.4 Previously Identified Above Ground Historic Resources ............................................................. 10 5.5 Historic Maps, Atlases, and Aerial Photographs ......................................................................... 10 6 Work Summary .......................................................................................................................... 11 6.1 Agricultural Fields ........................................................................................................................ 11 6.2 Park ............................................................................................................................................. 12 7 Results and Recommendations ............................................................................................... 18 8 References Cited ....................................................................................................................... 19 List of Tables Table 1. Soil Map Units within the APE ........................................................................................................ 2 Table 2. Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites in the Study Area ........................................................ 9 Table 3. Previously Identified Above-Ground Historic Resources in the Study Area ................................. 10 Table 4. Shovel Test Profiles - North Edge ................................................................................................. 13 Table 5. Shovel Test Profiles - South of Baseball Fields ............................................................................ 16 Table 6. Auger Test Soil Profiles ................................................................................................................ 17 List of Photos Photo 1. Agricultural Field Overview, Facing West. .............................................................................. 11 Photo 2. Representative Overview of Park Facilities, Facing North. ................................................... 12 Photo 3. Representative Overview of Park Landscaping, Facing Northwest. .................................... 12 Photo 4. Representative Overview of Park Facilities and Landscaping, Facing Northeast. ............. 12 Photo 5. Representative Overview of Channelized Creek, Facing South-southwest. ....................... 12 Photo 6. ST 10, Overview. ........................................................................................................................ 13 502 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Table of Contents Project: 193807229 ii Photo 7. ST A 03, Overview. ..................................................................................................................... 15 Photo 8. ST 01, Overview. ........................................................................................................................ 15 Photo 9. ST 19, Overview. ........................................................................................................................ 16 List of Appendices Appendix A Figures A.1 Figure 1 - Project Location A.2 Figure 2 - Project Overview A.3 Figure 3 - Literature Review Results A.4 Figure 4 - GLO Survey Map A.5 Figure 5 – Survey Results 503 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran City Park Project Acronyms / Abbreviations Project: 193807229 iii Acronyms / Abbreviations APE Area of Potential Effects BCE Before Common Era CE Common Era cmbgs centimeters below ground surface GLO General Land Office MDNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources MnSHIP Minnesota Statewide Historic Inventory Portal NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places OSA Office of the State Archaeologist Project Corcoran Park Remaster Project SHPO Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office ST Shovel Test Stantec Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. UMN University of Minnesota USGS United States Geological Survey 504 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 1 Project Description Project: 193807229 1 1 Project Description The City of Corcoran proposes improvements to existing park areas at the Corcoran City Park. The Corcoran Park Remaster Project (Project) is located in Hennepin County, Minnesota in Section 23 of Township 119 North, Range 23 West (see Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix A). The Area of Potential Effect (APE) comprises 46.1 acres. The entire APE is on land owned by the City of Corcoran. The proposed improvements to the current park facilities include the formalization of parking; installation of a new splash pad, playground, pickleball courts, and park pavilion for city use; reconfiguration and improvement of soccer and tennis courts; enhancement of the natural features in the park; and setting the stage for future improvements. The proposed Project received a Community Development Grant from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, and therefore is subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. § 306108). In anticipation of compliance with Section 106, the City of Corcoran contracted with Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) to conduct a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the 46.1-acre Area of Potential Effect (APE). Stantec conducted a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the Project on September 23, 26, and 27, 2024, under Minnesota Archaeological Survey License 24-377. Survey methods included pedestrian survey and shovel testing. The Phase I archaeological survey followed federal and state guidelines for conducting cultural resources investigations, including the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation [48 Federal Register 44716-44740] (National Park Service 1983), Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota (Anfinson 2005), the State Archaeologist’s Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota (Anfinson 2011), and Historic and Architectural Survey Manual (SHPO 2017). Angela Julin served as the Principal Investigator for the Project. Ms. Julin exceeds the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology, as defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Section 61. Angela Julin, MA, RPA, served as the Principal Investigator. Ms. Julin exceeds the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology, as defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Section 61. 2 Environmental Context The APE is located within the Big Woods subsection of the Minnesota and NE Iowa Morainal section of the Eastern Broadleaf Forest Province (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources [MDNR] 2024a). The Big Woods subsection is characterized by a large area of deciduous forest present at the time of Euro-American settlement bounded by tallgrass prairie to the west, savanna and tallgrass prairie to the east, and the Mississippi River and an outwash/lake plain to the north. Much of the Big Woods subsection consists of a loamy mantled end moraine associated with the Des Moines Lobe of the Late Wisconsin Glaciation (MDNR 2024a). Current landcover within the APE consists of agricultural fields, woodlots, and a park. 505 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 2 Environmental Context Project: 193807229 2 2.1 Topography Topography within the Big Woods subsection ranges from circular, level topped hills bounded by smooth side slopes and level areas between the hills that are interspersed with closed depressions containing lakes and peat bogs (MDNR 2024a). The APE is located on level plain, with elevation ranging between 950 and 960 ft above sea level. 2.2 Hydrology The Big Woods subsection is home to over 100 lakes greater than 160 acres, many of which are groundwater controlled with no inlets or outlets. Major rivers within the Big Woods subsection include the Minnesota River, Crow River, and the Mississippi River (MDNR 2024a) The APE is located within the Mississippi River Watershed of the Upper Mississippi River Basin (MDNR 2024b). Precontact hydrology throughout the APE consisted of wetlands, some of which remain today (Office of the State Archaeologist [OSA] 2024a). An unnamed tributary of Rush Creek runs along the northern boundary and through the eastern half of the APE. 2.3 Geology The APE is comprised of Upper Cambrian, Paleozoic-aged bedrock. The Upper Cambrian unit consists of sandstone, siltstone, shale, and dolostone, and includes the Jordan Sandstone and St. Lawrence Formation, and the Mazomanie, Lone Rock, and Davis Formations of the Tunnel City Group. (Horton et al. 2017; Jirsa et al. 2011). 2.4 Soils and Geomorphology The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) was used to determine soil types within the APE (see Table 1). Soil types within the APE consist predominantly of loam and range from very poorly drained to well drained. Cordova loam comprises the highest percent of the APE, which is a hydric soil that typically yields a very dark gray clay loam Ap horizon extending 25 centimeters below ground surface (cmbgs) over a very dark gray clay loam A horizon extending to 46 cmbgs over an olive gray clay loam Btg1 horizon with dark yellowish brown iron concentrations extending to 76 cmbgs (NRCS 2024). Table 1. Soil Map Units within the APE Map Unit Name Drainage Class Landform Percent of APE Cordova loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Poorly drained Drainage ways on moraines 53.4 Glencoe clay loam, 0 to 1 percent Very poorly drained Depressions 19.1 506 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 3 Culture History Project: 193807229 3 Map Unit Name Drainage Class Landform Percent of APE Angus loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes Well drained Ground moraines, hillslopes 17.1 Lester loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded Well drained Hillslopes, ground moraines 9.3 Le Sueur loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes Somewhat poorly drained Ground moraines, hillslopes 1.1 2.5 Vegetation and Land Use Prior to Euro-American settlement, vegetation in the Big Woods subsection consisted predominantly of oak woodland and maple-basswood forest (MDNR 2024a). Historically, wildfires are less common in the Big Woods subsection than the prairie to the west due to the presence of lakes and the irregular topography (MDNR 2024a). At the time of Euro-American settlement the APE was covered by seasonal wetlands, with deciduous forest upon upland areas (OSA 2024a; Trygg 1964). At present, land use within the Big Woods subsection is predominantly cropland or pasture, and about 10 to 15 percent of the subsection remains as upland forest or wetland (MNDR 2024a). Current land use within the APE includes developed park (79.8 percent), woodland (13.9 percent), and agricultural fields (6.3 percent). 3 Culture History Culturally, the APE is within the Minnesota Archaeological region 4 (Central Lakes Deciduous). This region includes most of central and east central Minnesota, containing all of Anoka, Benton, Cass, Chisago, Crow Wing, Hennepin, Isanti, Mille Lacs, Morrison, Ramsey, Sherburne, Stearns, Todd, Wadena, Washington, and Wright counties and portions of Becker, Dakota, Douglas, Kandiyohi, Kanabec, Meeker, Otter Tail, Pine, Pope, and Swift counties. The region could be extended into west central Wisconsin. (Gibbon et al. 2002). The following culture history is presented as a context. 3.1 Precontact Period (10,900 BCE-1650 CE) The first inhabitants of Minnesota are known as Paleoindians (10,900 to 7,500 years Before the Common Era [BCE]). These people were highly nomadic hunter-gatherers moving in small bands in search of food and other subsistence resources; however, in the Late Glacial and Early Holocene forests of Minnesota, Paleoindians likely relied more on gathering and the hunting of a variety of smaller animals. Paleoindian sites are small and relatively ephemeral and are commonly identified with the recovery of distinctive spear tips that occur across much of North America. Paleoindian components within the Central Lakes Deciduous are poorly understood, but sites near lakes and major rivers seem to have been a focus of activity. Paleo point types found in the region include fluted points, western stemmed forms, eastern narrow leaf forms, 507 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 3 Culture History Project: 193807229 4 broad concave base forms, and Plano the last of which are the most common throughout the region (Gibbon et al. 2002). The Paleoindian peoples were followed by Archaic Tradition hunter-gatherers. At the end of the Ice Age around 10,000 years BCE the climate became warmer and drier, which led to major changes in plant and animal communities. Spruce forests followed the retreating glacial ice northward and were replaced by a new landscape comprised of extensive lakes and rivers. Many large-game species became extinct. Archaic Tradition hunters-gatherers (6,500 to ca. 500 BCE) adapted to this new environment, shifting their focus to smaller game such as deer and elk, the abundant fish and shellfish in the numerous lakes and rivers, and wild plants such as nuts and berries (Gibbon et al. 2002). The Archaic peoples appear to have been less nomadic and lived in smaller household groups. Archaic sites are identified by large notched and stemmed projectile points. Immense sedimentation during the early part of the Archaic, corresponding with the Early and Middle Holocene periods, resulted in many Archaic Tradition sites being deeply buried under river valley deposits; therefore, these sites are not usually evident in surficial contexts. Little is known about Archaic sites in the Central Lakes Deciduous region as few sites have been excavated with intact, clearly defined Archaic horizons. Some sites have been found near lakes and major rivers, such as Petaga Point (21ML0011) near Lake Mille Lacs and the Rum River, as wells as the Pine City sites near the Snake River in Pine County. Potential Archaic burial sites are located in the western part of the region. (OSA 2024b; Gibbon et al. 2002). The Woodland Tradition followed the Archaic Tradition. In Minnesota, the Woodland Tradition is separated into two periods: the earlier Initial Woodland period (ca. 500 BCE to 500 years into the Common Era [CE]), and the later Terminal Woodland period (500 to 1650 CE). During the Initial Woodland period habitation sites in the Central Lakes Deciduous region became larger and population size may have increased and become less nomadic. Larger village sites became more concentrated on major lakes, and smaller campsites and specialized activity sites were located along major rivers and larger lakes (Gibbon et al. 2002). The frequent surficial expression of Woodland site locations, coupled with burial mounds that frequently mark their place, has resulted in more frequent documentation and excavation of Woodland sites. Due to this higher frequency of identification, many Woodland sites have also been grouped into specific regional archaeological cultures (Gibbon et al. 2002; Gibbon 2012). The Initial Woodland period is primarily marked by the emergence of precontact ceramic traditions and burial mounds. Regional archaeological cultures of the Initial Woodland period include Malmo, Howard Lake, Brainerd, St. Croix, Onamia, Blackduck, Kathio, and Clam River, with Brainerd and Blackduck concentrated in the northwestern portion and the rest in the eastern. (Gibbon et al. 2002; Gibbon 2012). The Terminal Woodland period has been defined throughout eastern and central Minnesota, the Red River Valley, and portions of the Dakotas (Gibbon 2012). During this period, populations began to increase, which in turn led to an increase in the size and number of precontact sites. In the Central Lakes Deciduous, large parts of the region likely began to be used more for resource gathering as the population became more concentrated. Burial mounds became more prevalent and the cultural material artifacts began shifting to smaller, unnotched triangular projectile points and thinner ceramic vessels that were more globular in 508 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 3 Culture History Project: 193807229 5 shape. The earliest and most common ceramic tradition is Brainerd. Though horticulture was practiced in the region, there is no evidence that agriculture was adopted during this period. Forageable resources were widespread and diverse, which reduced the need for the adoption of agriculture. Wild rice, in particular, was abundant and became an important food source (OSA 2024b). Base camps from the Woodland period are located near resource concentrations, particularly where wild rice, fishing, and agriculture were plentiful (Gibbon et al. 2002; Gibbon 2012). In the northern portion of the state ceramic types and burial practices indicate specific regional archaeological cultures, including Kathio, Blackduck, and Psinomani. In the southern portion of the state, primarily comprised of deciduous forests and prairie, some cultures adopted the cultivation of maize and the construction of effigy burial mounds. Within the Central Lakes Deciduous, early ceramics are associated with the Blackduck and shifted to Sandy Lake complex over time (Gibbon et al. 2002; Gibbon 2012). Around approximately 1000 CE, Mississippian populations from Cahokia, near St. Louis, Missouri, began to extend their influence northward into the Upper Mississippi River Valley and evidence suggests that there were attempts at colonization. Archaeologists tend to regard some southern Minnesota Terminal Woodland cultures as the northern expression of a “Mississippian” lifeway, distinguished by distinctive ceramic styles, larger and more diverse artifact assemblages, and evidence of maize production. In southern Minnesota, three Mississippian complexes have been identified: Silvernale, Oneota, and Plains Village (Gibbon et al. 2002). It was the Mississippian peoples in the south and the Terminal Woodland peoples in the north who had contact with the first Europeans to explore Minnesota in the mid-seventeenth century (Gibbon et al. 2002; Gibbon 2012). The Mississippian cultural shift does not appear to have occurred in northern Minnesota, within the Project vicinity. The region remains in the Terminal Woodland culture until Europeans and Euro-Americans make contact (Gibbon et al. 2002; OSA 2024b). 3.2 Contact Period (1650-1837 CE) The contact period includes American Indian and Euro-American contexts. The OSA subdivides the Native American context into “Indeterminate” or “Eastern Dakota,” and the Euro-American context into “Indeterminate,” “French,” “British,” and “Initial US” (OSA 2024b). This section focuses on developing a context for the broader region. The remaining information provides a temporal framework as a context. Euro-American fur traders and settlers encountered the Dakota (also known as Sioux) and Ojibwe (also known as Chippewa) Native American peoples when they moved into traditional lands in what is now Minnesota. Several other Native American tribes, including the Assiniboine, moved west in the early 1600s soon after the explorers and traders entered the region (Holmquist 1981). While the Ojibwe controlled the northern portion of the Central Lakes Deciduous by 1800, during the contact period, the Santee Dakota and Yanktonai occupied the region at contact (Gibbon et al. 2002). The Dakota lived in village-centered societies in the southern portion of Minnesota while the Ojibwe were organized into independent migratory bands in the northern portion of Minnesota (Gibbon 2012:205). The first written European accounts about the Ojibwe appeared in Jesuit diaries, published in collected form as the Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents 1610-1791 (Thwaites 1898). The documents are so detailed 509 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 3 Culture History Project: 193807229 6 in their descriptions of Native Americans and their cultures, they are considered ethnographic accounts. Following the Jesuits, French explorers and trappers traveled portions of Minnesota in the seventeenth century and established a fur trading economy with local native populations, including the Dakota and Ojibwe. Early trading posts were established along the lower Mississippi River and the first French fort was established in 1700 near present day Mankato. The fur trade resulted in the Ojibwe becoming reliant on traded goods rather than the clothing, utensils, and weapons they had traditionally constructed. In the early eighteenth century, the French began to move their fur trade north into Canada. Over the next 100 years, the Ojibwe and French established strong relationships and the French embraced Ojibwe culture, learned the language, and married into Ojibwe families. Territorial disputes, competition, and shifts in political alliances eventually led to the French and Indian War (1754 to 1763). The Ojibwe sided with the French against the British in the final Colonial War, fought between 1689 and 1763, which culminated with the French and Indian War. At the end of the French and Indian War, the 1763 Treaty of Paris resulted in the French ceding all land east of the Mississippi River in the New World to the British (Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa 2018). The French had already ceded the land west of the Mississippi River to Spain with the 1762 Treaty of Fontainebleau, but the transfer was not publicly announced until 1764. The region was retroceded to France under the terms of the 1800 Third Treaty of San Ildefonso and the 1801 Treaty of Aranjuez, then was transferred to the United States in 1803 by the Louisiana Purchase (World History Project 2018). Although the United States purchased the land, the Dakota, Ojibwe, and several other Native American groups retained sovereignty, resulting in numerous subsequent treaties with the United States. After the Treaty of Paris in 1763, the British quickly set up fur trading posts throughout Minnesota. The British fur trading economy was centered at Grand Portage, where traders would bring their furs and leave with other valuable trade goods. Jonathon Carver explored the upper Mississippi River in the 1760s. After the Revolutionary War of 1776, competition between the United States and British companies intensified throughout Minnesota. In 1803, the Louisiana land purchase established United States lands extending from the Atlantic to the Rocky Mountains. The War of 1812 saw a demise in the British fur traders due to the United States denying business licenses to British traders. Trading posts were constructed by both the French and English on larger water bodies within the region (Gibbon et al. 2002). Early British and United States citizens conducted the first fully documented land survey of Minnesota in the mid-eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. By 1806, Zebulon Pike had explored portions of the Mississippi River. Missionaries began to arrive in the early nineteenth century, primarily along the Minnesota River. The American Fur Company was founded by John Jacob Astor in 1811, after which numerous fur trading posts were quickly established throughout the state. At the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi River, Fort Snelling was constructed in 1819 to protect the new United States’ investments in the area. Large-scale fur trade resulted in a major decline in the native beaver populations and, by 1842, the fur trade in Minnesota came to an end when the American Fur Company came to its demise (Dobbs 1989). After the passing of the fur trading industry, land was opened to Euro-American settlers. 510 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 3 Culture History Project: 193807229 7 3.3 Hennepin County Hennepin County, located in the southeast quadrant of the State of Minnesota, is comprised of 607 square miles and is home to Minneapolis and its suburbs, the largest city in the state. The county is bordered by the Mississippi River to the north and east, the Minnesota River to the south, and numerous lakes extending to prairies in the west. The area has been home to native settlement for at least 6,000 years and by the time of French explorers and fur traders venturing to the region, it was primarily home to the Dakota and neighboring Ojibwe tribes in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The county’s namesake, Father Louis Hennepin, visited the region in 1680 with other French explorers and fur traders (Parsons 1916). Following the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, the United States government purchased land along the west bank of the Mississippi River from the Dakota Tribe for purpose of building a trading post and fort along the river. The first European settlement was at Fort Snelling, at the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers, established in 1820. Settlers began building houses and mills at St. Anthony Falls on the west bank of the Mississippi and on the numerous large lakes to the west in the 1830s (Hennepin County 2024). Minnesota Territory was created in 1849 and three years later Hennepin County was formally established. Minneapolis, a settlement of a few hundred people, was made the county seat. The first European/Euro- American settlers were from New England and New York but beginning in the 1850s and continuing to the early twentieth century, immigrants from Norway, Sweden, Germany, and Ireland also settled. By the 1860s more than a dozen mills lined the falls on the Mississippi River, generating power for grist and sawmills to fulfill the demand for lumber and agricultural goods in the growing region. The introduction of the railroad transport and industrial-scale manufacturing in the 1880s led Hennepin County, and particularly the City of Minneapolis, to become the flour milling capital of the world and one of the nation’s largest lumber producers. The population of the county exceeded 200,000 by the turn of the century; however, much of the county remained distinctly rural, with 284,000 acres of land devoted to farmland (Hennepin County 2024). In the early twentieth century, Minneapolis had become a major regional city and dominated the economy and politics of the broader Hennepin County. The largest county by population in the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County continued to grow rapidly through the 1940s. In the post-war years, the intense agricultural nature of Hennepin County outside of Minneapolis began to decline as suburban development grew (Hennepin County 2024). This suburban growth became the driving force behind the county’s history in the contemporary era as the population of Minneapolis reached its peak of 521,718 people in 1950 and has since steadily declined. The lack of available lots within the city limits exacerbated by the development of Village and City governments in the county outside of Minneapolis, combined with the increasing dependence on the automobile, was among the factors that led to the growth of the suburbs. Highways were constructed throughout, and the economy became more diversified, turning away from milling industries. By 1970, the number of people in Hennepin County living outside of Minneapolis outnumbered those living within the city limits for the first time in more than a century. In response, the county government centralized in Minneapolis and took on a more active role regionally. The population of the county reached 1,260,121 people in the 2020 census (New History 2020). 511 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 4 Research Design Project: 193807229 8 Corcoran was organized in 1858 and named for the town founder Patrick Corcoran, who along with his wife Anne, was one of the first Euro-American settlers in the area in 1855. Patrick Corcoran built the first schoolhouse, a 12-foot by 16-foot log cabin, in 1857. Patrick Corcoran also owned a general store, was the first teacher in the schoolhouse he built, and was the first postmaster for Corcoran (City of Corcoran 2024). 4 Research Design 4.1 Objectives The objective of the literature search of the APE was to better understand what has been previously documented about the APE and Project vicinity. The literature search, supported by a review of the environmental context, aided in the evaluation of the APE to determine the necessity for a Phase I investigation. The purpose of the review of previously recorded archaeological site data, survey reports, and archival information, was to provide insight into the potential for significant intact archaeological resources within the APE, and to understand previous disturbances in the APE, to guide survey planning. Moreover, the historical context obtained from the literature search assisted in assessing the significance of potential sites and where they may be located based on known environmental variables. The objective of this Phase I investigation was to ascertain whether archaeological sites are present within the APE, and to preliminarily delineate both the vertical and horizontal extent of the identified site limits, without impacting the integrity of identified sites. The results of the investigation will inform the final design of the proposed Project. Stantec assumes that the Phase I investigation will satisfy compliance with Section 106 by avoiding impacts to identified historic properties. 4.2 Methods The literature search focused on previously recorded cultural resources (archaeological sites and architectural properties) within the literature search Study Area, defined as a 1-mile buffer around the APE. In addition, Stantec reviewed archival resources including General Land Office (GLO) maps, county atlases, the University of Minnesota (UMN) Borchert Map Library, Trygg maps, and historical aerial imagery to identify potential unrecorded cultural features in the APE. Areas of ground surface visibility affording less than 25 percent soil exposure were shovel tested where feasible and practical, with soil screened through ¼ inch mesh. Shovel tests (ST) measured 30 to 40 cm in diameter, terminating at least 10 cm into subsoil when possible. Shovel testing was conducted at 15-meter intervals. Shovel testing was proposed only in areas with moderate to high probability for intact archaeological resources. These areas were designated as such based on their proximity to precontact and historic waterbodies, where muck, poorly drained soils, steep soils, and rock outcrops did not prohibit shovel testing. Shovel testing was confined to two landforms, along the northern boundary of the APE and south of the western baseball fields, mapped as non-hydric soils. Judgmental auger tests were excavated on remaining landforms to confirm mapped hydric soils and disturbance due to extensive landscaping during the original construction of the park. Areas with ground surface visibility affording 25 percent soil exposure 512 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 5 Literature Search Project: 193807229 9 or greater were pedestrian surveyed in lieu of shovel testing. Pedestrian survey was conducted at 15-meter intervals. The survey was geographically oriented using Geographic Information System data in conjunction with an EOS Arrow 100 series GNSS receiver. Field observations, including vegetation, ground surface visibility, slope, general topography, and areas of soil disturbance or inundation, were described in field forms. No cultural materials were identified or collected as a result of this survey; therefore, the methods will not include a discussion of collection, analysis, or curation methods. 5 Literature Search Stantec reviewed the OSA Online Portal and the Minnesota’s Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MnSHIP) in August 2024. Stantec performed an in-person records search at the SHPO on September 3, 2024. According to the MnModel, available on the OSA Online Portal, the APE is within areas that are either well surveyed with low site potential or poorly surveyed with unknown site potential. 5.1 Previously Conducted Archaeological Surveys No previously conducted archaeological surveys are recorded in the APE or Study Area. 5.2 Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites No previously recorded archaeological sites are located within the APE. Two archaeological sites are recorded in the Study Area, 21HE0379 and 21HE0380 (see Table 2; see Figure 3 in Appendix A). Both archaeological sites are unevaluated for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Table 2. Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites in the Study Area Site Number Site Name Site Type Cultural Affiliation NRHP Status 21HE0379 Mengelkoch Lithic Scatter Unknown Precontact Unevaluated 21HE0380 Gorham/Sipe Farmstead Historic Artifact Scatter/Standing Structure Post-contact Unevaluated 5.3 Previously Identified Burial Sites and Cemeteries There are no previously identified burial sites/cemeteries within the APE. One historic cemetery, the St. Thomas Cemetery, is recorded in the Study Area (see Figure 3 in Appendix A). 513 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 5 Literature Search Project: 193807229 10 5.4 Previously Identified Above-Ground Historic Resources No previously identified above-ground historic resources are recorded in the APE. Four previously identified above-ground historic resources are recorded within the Study Area (see Figure 3 in Appendix A). Of the four resources, three resources have not been evaluated for listing in the NRHP and one resource, HE- COC-00079, is considered Not Eligible for listing in the NRHP (see Table 3). Table 3. Previously Identified Above-Ground Historic Resources in the Study Area Resource No. Name Resource Type Address/Location NRHP Eligibility Status HE-COC-00017 Farmhouse Building 19835 Larkin Rd. Unevaluated HE-COC-00025 Store Building NW intersection of Co Rd. 10 and Co Rd. 50 Unevaluated HE-COC-00026 St. Thomas Catholic Church Building 20000 County Rd 10 Unevaluated HE-COC-00079 Bridge 90586 Structure CSAH 50 over South Fork Rush Creek Not Eligible 5.5 Historic Maps, Atlases, and Aerial Photographs Stantec reviewed the original GLO surveys, atlas maps, topographic maps, and historic aerial imagery of the APE. The original 1855 GLO survey and 1964 Trygg interpretation of the original survey notes do not indicate any structures or features within the APE (GLO 1855; Trygg 1964; see Figure 4 in Appendix A). Recorded vegetation at the time of the original survey consisted of marsh in the western half of the APE and upland forest throughout the remainder of the APE (GLO 1855; Trygg 1964). The 1873 plat map indicates one structure in the southeast corner of the APE, on land owned by P.B. Corcoran at the time (Wright 1973). The City of Corcoran and Corcoran township are both named for P.B. Corcoran, mentioned above in Section 3.3. Plat maps from 1898, 1913, and 1916 all show a stream running north-south through the east half of the APE, with no structures mapped within the APE (Dahl 1898; State of Minnesota 1916; Westby 1913). Stantec reviewed United State Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps of the APE for features or structures within the APE. On the 1909 and 1958 Rockford MN 7.5’ quadrangle, one structure is indicated in the southeast corner of the APE, along what is now County Road 10. An intermittent stream is also shown running north-south through the east half of the APE (USGS 1909, 1958). The structure is not mapped on the 1981 Hamel MN 7.5’ quadrangle and Corcoran Community Park is shown in the APE (USGS 1981). In aerial imagery from 1937, the APE is covered by row-crop agriculture and has been largely deforested. One farmstead appears in the southeast corner of the APE along what is now County Road 10 (UMN 2015). Little change appears in aerial imagery from 1945, 1957, 1960, and 1971 (UMN 2015). The farmstead was demolished between 1977 and 1975, when the eastern half of the park appears in aerial imagery; the unnamed branch of Rush Creek appears channelized through the park beginning in 1975 aerial imagery 514 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 11 (Nationwide Environmental Tile Research, LLC 2024). The western half of the park first appears in 1991 aerial imagery (Nationwide Environmental Tile Research, LLC 2024). 6 Work Summary The Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey was conducted on September 23, 26, and 27, 2024 under Minnesota Archaeological Survey License 24-377. Angela Julin, MA, RPA, served as Principal Investigator. Joshua Jensen served as Field Director. The APE consisted of two agricultural fields along the western edge and a manicured lawn and park facilities throughout the rest of the APE (see Figure 5 in Appendix A). 6.1 Agricultural Fields The agricultural fields consisted of harvested corn, yielding 80 to 90 percent ground surface visibility; therefore, pedestrian survey was conducted in lieu of shovel testing (see Photo 1; Figure 5 in Appendix A). No cultural materials were identified in the agricultural fields. Photo 1. Agricultural Field Overview, Facing West. 515 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 12 6.2 Park The park portion of the APE consisted of six baseball fields, three gravel parking lots, a playground, pavilion, tennis courts, and other facilities (see Photo 2; Figure 5 in Appendix A). A majority of the area was covered in manicured grass, completely obscuring the ground surface. The park was heavily landscaped, and the parking lots and baseball fields appeared mechanically leveled (see Photos 3 and 4). The creek flowing through the eastern half of the park is channeled, consisting of unnatural straight sections and angled corners (see Photo 5). Due to the obvious disturbances associated with the initial construction of the park and mapped hydric soils within the APE, shovel testing was limited to two landforms with non-hydric soils. Auger tests were excavated on landforms within hydric soils; the landforms included mapped hydric areas along the northwestern boundary of the APE, the southwestern portion of the APE, and baseball fields. Photo 2. Representative Overview of Park Facilities, Facing North. Photo 3. Representative Overview of Park Landscaping, Facing Northwest. Photo 4. Representative Overview of Park Facilities and Landscaping, Facing Northeast. Photo 5. Representative Overview of Channelized Creek, Facing South-southwest. 516 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 13 A total of 27 shovel tests were excavated within the APE (see Figure 5 in Appendix A). Sixteen shovel tests were excavated along the northern edge of the APE (see Table 4). The typical shovel test soil profile along the northern edge of the APE consisted of a 10YR 3/2 very dark grayish brown sandy loam Ap horizon extending on average between 20 and 30 cmbgs over a 10YR 4/4 dark yellowish brown sandy loam Bt1 horizon excavated to an average depth between 30 and 40 cmbgs (see Photo 6). Pebbles and gravels typically constituted 5 to 20 percent of both the Ap and Bt1 horizons. The Ap horizon is within the range of mapped Angus loam when accounting for the dry conditions (NRCS 2024). The observed soils were sandier and contained more gravel than the typical profile for Angus loam but was within the published range of characteristics (NRCS 2024). Photo 6. ST 10, Overview. Table 4. Shovel Test Profiles - North Edge Shovel Test Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? 2 Ap Bt1 0 – 26 26 – 40 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/4 Sandy loam Sandy clay loam No 3 Ap Bt1 0 – 16 16 – 27 10YR 5/1 10YR 6/4 Sandy loam with 1% pebbles Sandy loam with 1% pebbles No 4 Ap Bt1 0 – 18 18 – 34 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 1% pebbles Sandy loam No 5 Ap/A 0 – 56 10YR 3/2 Sandy loam Terminated at compact soil No 6 Ap Bt1 0 – 26 26 – 36 10YR 4/2 10YR 5/4 Sandy loam with 1% pebbles Sandy clay loam No 517 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 14 Shovel Test Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? 7 Ap Bt1 0 – 36 36 – 42 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles No 8 Ap Bt1 0 – 24 24 – 36 10YR 4/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy clay loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No 9 Ap Bt1 0 – 20 20 - 34 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles No 10 Ap Bt1 0 – 28 28 – 42 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No 11 Ap A AB 0 – 30 30 – 90 90 – 100 10YR 3/2 10YR 2/1 10YR 2/1 + 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Loam Clay loam No 12 Ap Bt1 0 – 40 40 – 52 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy clay loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No 13 Ap Bt1 0 – 20 20 - 36 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No 14 Ap 0 – 65 10YR 3/2 Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel Terminated at root impasse No 15 Ap Bt1 0 – 50 50 - 62 10YR 2/2 10YR 4/2 Loam Sandy loam No 16 Ap Bt1 0 – 35 35 - 45 10YR 3/2 10YR 5/2 Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Sandy loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No 17 Ap Bt1 0 – 31 31 - 51 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/4 Loam Sandy loam No Eleven shovel tests were excavated south of the western baseball fields (see Table 5; Figure 5 in Appendix A). The typical shovel test soil profile south of the western baseball fields consisted of a 10YR 3/2 very dark grayish brown silty clay mottled with 30 percent 10YR 7/3 very pale brown silty clay Fill 1 horizon extending 518 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 15 10 cm cmbgs over a 10YR 5/6 yellowish brown silty clay mottled with 30 percent 10YR 5/3 brown silty clay Fill 2 horizon extending to 105 cmbgs (see Photo 7). Oxidized iron concentrations and/or streaks were noted in both fill horizons. Poorly sorted pebbles constituted one to five percent of the Fill 1 horizon and poorly sorted gravels constituted 20 to 50 percent of the Fill 2 horizon. The gravely clay fill is entirely different from the mapped Lester loam and is the result of landscaping observed throughout the park (NRCS 2024). STs 1 and 20 were excavated on top of a berm and consisted of a 10YR 2/2 very dark brown sandy loam Ap horizon extending between 44 and 48 cmbgs over a 10YR 5/2 grayish brown sandy loam E horizon extending between 54 and 60 cmbgs (see Photo 8). The Ap and E horizons included 1 to 5 percent pebbles and gravels. The soil profiles from STs 1 and 20 are within the listed range of characteristics of the mapped Lester loam; however, the berm is primarily mapped within hydric soils and does not appear to be a natural landform (NRCS 2024). STs 18 and 19 had profiles consisting of a 10YR 2/1 black sandy clay loam A1 horizon extending between 53 and 102 cmbgs over a 10YR 3/2 very dark gray clay A2 horizon extending between 65 and 112 cmbgs (see Photo 9). The profile is deeper and contains more clay than the mapped Cordova loam (NRCS 2024). No cultural materials were identified during shovel testing. Photo 7. ST A 03, Overview. Photo 8. ST 01, Overview. 519 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 16 Photo 9. ST 19, Overview. Table 5. Shovel Test Profiles - South of Baseball Fields Shovel Test Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? A 1 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 26 26 - 34 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/2 + 10YR 5/6 Loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel Sandy clay loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel No A 2 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 20 20 - 38 10YR 2/1 10YR 5/1 Clay loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel Clay loam with 5-20% gravel No A 3 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 10 10 – 105 10YR 3/2 10YR 5/6 + 10YR 5/2 Silty clay with 1-5% pebbles Silty clay with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Oxidized Fe streaks in Fill 2 No A 4 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 22 22 - 35 10YR 2/1 10YR 5/4 + 10YR 4/2 Sandy clay Loamy sand with 1% pebbles Oxidized Fe inclusions in Fill 2 No A 5 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 20 20 – 30 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/3 Loam with 1% pebbles Sandy clay loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel No B 1 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 26 26 - 37 10YR 2/1 10YR 5/2 + 10YR 4/4 Sandy clay with 1-5% pebbles Loamy sand with 1-5% pebbles Oxidized Fe inclusions in Fill 2 No C 1 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 20 20 – 34 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/2 Clay loam with 1-5% gravel Clay loam with 1-5% gravel Oxidized Fe inclusions in Fill 2 No 520 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 6 Work Summary Project: 193807229 17 Shovel Test Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? 1 A E 0 – 44 44 – 60 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/2 Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel No 18 A1 A2 0 – 53 53 – 65 10YR 2/1 10YR 4/2 Sandy clay loam Clay No 19 A1 A2 0 – 102 102-112 10YR 2/1 10YR 3/2 Sandy clay loam Clay No 20 A E 0 – 48 48 - 54 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/2 Sandy loam with 1-5% gravel Sandy loam with 1-5% gravel No Nine auger tests were excavated on landforms mapped as hydric soils throughout the APE (see Figure 5 in Appendix A). The auger tests did not have a consistent soil profile (see Table 6). The auger tests within the baseball fields (Augers 2, 3, 8, and 9) consisted of mottled sandy loams and clays with slight to moderate inclusions of pebbles and gravels. The soil profiles are inconsistent with mapped soils and the inconsistency is likely the result of filling and landscaping to produce dry, flat baseball fields (NRCS 2024). The remaining augur tests consisted of very dark brown or grayish brown to black sand clay with slight pebble and gravel inclusions. The aforementioned soil profiles are inconsistent with the mapped Cordova loam but are closer to the nearby recorded Glencoe clay loam (NRCS 2024). No cultural materials were identified during auger testing. Table 6. Auger Test Soil Profiles Auger Horizon Depth (cmbgs) Munsell Soil Texture Notes Cultural Materials? 1 Fill 1 Fill 2 Fill 3 0 – 22 22 – 32 32 - 77 10YR 3/2 + 10YR 4/4 10YR 4/4 10YR 5/3 + 7.5YR 5/8+ 10YR 6/2 Silt loam Silt loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Clay loam with 1-5% pebbles Terminated due to gravely soil No 2 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 15 15 – 80 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/4 Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles/gravel Clay loam 5-20% pebbles/gravels Terminated due to gravely soil No 3 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 20 20 - 90 10YR 2/2 10YR 5/4 + 10YR 4/4 + 10YR 6/2 Sandy loam with 1-5% pebbles Clay loam with 5-20% pebbles/gravel Terminated due to gravely soil No 4 A1 AB 0 – 65 65 – 73 10YR 2/1 10YR 4/2 Sandy clay Sandy clay No 521 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 7 Results and Recommendations Project: 193807229 18 Bg1 73 – 90 10YR 5/3 + 10YR 6/3 Sandy Clay with 1% pebbles 5 Ap A AB 0 – 13 13 – 58 58 - 105 10YR 3/2 10YR 2/1 10YR 2/1 + 10YR 5/3 Loamy sand with 1-5% pebbles Sandy clay with 1-5% pebbles Clay iron redox in A 3 No 6 Ap A 0 – 35 35 – 52 10YR 2/1 10YR 3/2 Clay loam with 1-5% pebbles Clay with 1% pebbles ironredox in A 2 No 7 Ap A 0 – 37 37 - 57 10YR 2/2 10YR 3/2 Sandy clay with 1% gravel Sandy clay with 1% gravel No 8 Fill 1 Fill 2 0 – 26 26 – 42 10YR 2/1 + 10YR 5/6 10YR 6/4 + 10YR7/2 Loamy sand with 1-5% pebbles Clay loam with 5-20% pebble/gravel Terminated due to gravely soil No 9 Fill 1 Fill 2 Fill 3 0 – 21 21 – 53 53 – 77 10YR 2/2 + 10YR 5/4 10YR 5/6 10YR 3/2 + 10YR 5/6 Sandy loam with 1-5% gravel Sandy loam with 1-5% gravel Sandy loam with 1-5% gravels Terminated due to gravely soil, iron redox in Fill 3 No 7 Results and Recommendations The Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey was conducted on September 23, 26, and 27, 2024. No cultural materials were identified during the archaeological survey. The unnatural landforms, numerous facilities, and disturbed soils and fill suggest that the majority of the APE was previously disturbed during the construction of the extant park facilities and has low potential to yield intact archaeological sites. Stantec recommends a finding of No Historic Properties Affected for the Project. No further archaeological work is recommended should the Project proceed as planned. 522 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 8 References Cited Project: 193807229 19 8 References Cited Anfinson, Scott 2005. SHPO Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota. State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul, Minnesota. https://mn.gov/admin/assets/archsurvey_tcm36-327672.pdf. 2011. State Archaeologist’s Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota. Office of the State Archaeologist, St. Paul, Minnesota. https://mn.gov/admin/assets/OSAmanual_tcm36-186982.pdf. City of Corcoran. 2024. History, Electronic document. https://www.corcoranmn.gov/our_community/history, accessed September 2024. Dahl, Peter M. 1898. Plat Book of Hennepin County, Medina Township. Northwester Map Publishing Company; E. P. Noll & Company. https://cdm16022.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/mhs/id/1254, accessed September 2024. Dobbs, C. A. 1989. Historic Context Outlines: The Contact Period Contexts (ca 1630 A.D. – 1820 A.D.) Draft Reports of Investigations No. 39. Institute for Minnesota Archaeology, Minneapolis. Submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office, Minnesota Historical Society, Saint Paul. Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. 2018. Onigamiinsing Dibaajimowinan Duluth’s Stories, Electronic Document. http://www.duluthstories.net/index.html, accessed September 2024. General Land Office (GLO). 1855. Original Survey, MN, 5th PM, T119N – R23W. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/survey/default.aspx?dm_id=232242&sid=esv0ej4t.mer#surveyD etailsTabIndex=1, accessed September 2024. Gibbon, Guy. 2012. Archaeology of Minnesota: The Prehistory of the Upper Mississippi River Region. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Gibbon, Guy E., Craig M. Johnson, and Elizabeth Hobbs. 2002. Minnesota’s Environment and Native American Culture History, https://www.dot.state.mn.us/mnmodel/P3FinalReport/chapter3.html#ch344, accessed September 2024 Hennepin County. 2024. History of Hennepin County, Electronic document, https://www.hennepin.us/en/your-government/overview/overview-of-hennepin-county, accessed September 2024. Holmquist, June D. 1981. They Chose Minnesota: A Survey of the State’s Ethnic Groups. Chicago: Minnesota, Historical Society Press, Saint Paul. Horton, D. John, Carma A. San Juan, and Douglas B. Stoeser. 2017. The State Geological Map Compilation (SGMC) geodatabase of the conterminous United States. United States Geological Survey. Electronic document: https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/ds1052, accessed September 2024. 523 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 8 References Cited Project: 193807229 20 Jirsa, Mark A. Terrence J. Boerboom, V.W. Chandler, John H. Mossler, Anthony C. Runkel, and Dale R. Setterholm 2011. S-21 Geologic Map of Minnesota—Bedrock Geology. Minnesota Geological Survey, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Electronic document: https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/101466, accessed September 2024. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) 2024a. Ecological Classification System - Big Woods Subsection. https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecs/222Mb/index.html, accessed September 2024. 2024b. Minnesota’s watershed basins. https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/watersheds/map.html, accessed September 2024. Minnesota Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA). 2024a. Office of the State Archaeologist Portal, https://osaportal.gisdata.mn.gov/, accessed September 2024. 2024b. Prehistoric Period. Electronic document, https://mn.gov/admin/archaeologist/the- public/mn-archaeology/prehistoric-period/, accessed September 2024. Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) 2017. Historic and Architectural Survey Manual. State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul, Minnesota. https://mn.gov/admin/assets/surveymanual082017_tcm36-327675.pdf National Park Service (NPS) 1983. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. Federal Register 48(190):44716-44740. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2024. Web Soil Survey. Electronic document, https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, accessed September 2024. Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC. 2024. Historic Aerials by NETROnline. Electronic document, https://historicaerials.com/viewer, accessed September 2024. New History. 2020. New History Historic Context and History-Architecture Survey. Minneapolis in the Modern Era: 1930-1975. Parsons, E. Dudley. 1916. The Story of Minnesota, American Book Company, New York. State of Minnesota. 1916. Minnesota Plat Book. https://geo.lib.umn.edu/collections/digitizedplatbooks/stateofmn1916.html, accessed September 2024. Thwaites, Reuben G. (ed). 1898. The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents 1610 to 1791. The Burrows Brothers, Cleveland, http://moses.creighton.edu/kripke/jesuitrelations/, accessed September 2024 Trygg, J. William, Sr. 1964. Composite Map of United States Land Surveyors’’ Original Plats and Field Notes – Sheet 7. Trygg Land Office, Ely, Minnesota. Westby, P. O. 1913. Atlas of Hennepin County Minnesota. Hennepin Atlas and Publishing Company. Minneapolis, Minnesota. https://geo.lib.umn.edu/collections/digitizedplatbooks/hennepin1913index.htm, accessed September 2024. 524 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran Park Remaster Project 8 References Cited Project: 193807229 21 World History Project. 2018. Nov 30, 1803: Louisiana is Transferred from Spanish Control to French Control, https://worldhistoryproject.org/1803/11/30/louisiana-is-transferred-from-spanish-control- to-french-control, accessed May 2024. Wright George B. 1873. Hennepin County Atlas. St. Paul Lithographic and Engraving Company, St. Paul Minnesota. https://collection.mndigital.org/catalog/mhs:865#?c=&m=&s=&cv=&xywh=-345%2C- 144%2C3779%2C2866, accessed September 2024. United States Geological Survey (USGS). 1909. Rockford 1909 https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht- bin/tv_browse.pl?id=f5b4890178eb72c9b12cdcf44592e3af, accessed August 2024 1958. Rockford 1958 https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht- bin/tv_browse.pl?id=268f3a22beeef905275f4d3590b2670c, accessed August 2024. 1981. Hamel 1981 https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht- bin/tv_browse.pl?id=b393d8f032aaf55f455b661aecf436b4, accessed August 2024 University of Minnesota (UMN). 2015. Minnesota Historic Aerial Photographs Online. University of Minnesota Libraries. Electronic document, https://apps.lib.umn.edu/mhapo/ accessed August 2024. 525 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Corcoran City Park Project Project: 193807229 Appendix A 526 Anoka Co. Carver Co. Hennepin Co. Ra m s e y C o . Wright Co. Minneapolis St. Paul §¨¦694 §¨¦35E §¨¦94 §¨¦35W §¨¦394 §¨¦35 §¨¦494 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Figure No. Project Location "($$¯ U: \ 1 9 3 8 \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ A r c P r o \ C u l t u r a l \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 _C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ A r c h a e o l o g y . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 - 1 1 B y : j s e i b e l Legend Project Boundary Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, Esri, USCB, USGS 3. Background: USGS 7.5' Topographic Quadrangles (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:24,000 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Prepared by JDS on 2024-08-28 TR by MP on 2024-08-28 IR by XXX on 2024-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S23 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229Client/Project City of Corcoran Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Title Project Location 1 527 Hennepin Co. Corcoran Maple Grove T119N, R23W, S23 T119N, R23W, S26 Co Rd 50 C o R d 10 Rebecca Park Trl B a s s L a k e Rd Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Figure No. Project Location "($$¯ U: \ 1 9 3 8 \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ A r c P r o \ C u l t u r a l \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 _C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ A r c h a e o l o g y . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 - 1 1 B y : j s e i b e l Legend Project Boundary Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, Esri, USCB, USGS 3. Background: NAIP 2021 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:4,800 0 200 400 Feet Prepared by JDS on 2024-08-28 TR by MP on 2024-08-28 IR by XXX on 2024-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S23 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229Client/ProjectCity of Corcoran Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Title Project Location 2 528 Hennepin Co.Wr i g h t C o . ")101 ST55 £¤12 §¨¦694 §¨¦494 §¨¦94 HE-COC-00025 HE-COC-00032 HE-COC-00019 HE-COC-00079 HE-COC-00017 HE-COC-00026 21HE0380 21HE0379 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ U: \ 1 9 3 8 \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ A r c P r o \ C u l t u r a l \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 _C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ A r c h a e o l o g y . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 - 1 1 B y : j s e i b e l Legend Project Boundary 1 Mile Buffer Archaeological Site MnSHIP NR Listed or Eligible* Inventoried NR Listed or Eligible* Inventoried* NR Listed or Eligible* Inventoried* Restricted* Page 1 of 1*No Features Within Data Frame Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, Esri, USCB, USGS, MnSHIP, OSA 3. Background: Esri World Topographic Map (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:24,000 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Prepared by JDS on 2024-08-28 TR by MP on 2024-08-28 IR by XXX on 2024-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S23 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229Client/ProjectCity of Corcoran Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Literature Review 3 CONFIDENTIAL 529 Anoka Co. Carver Co. Hennepin Co. Ra m s e y C o . Wright Co. Minneapolis St. Paul §¨¦694 §¨¦35E §¨¦94 §¨¦35W §¨¦394 §¨¦35 §¨¦494 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ U: \ 1 9 3 8 \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ A r c P r o \ C u l t u r a l \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 _C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ A r c h a e o l o g y . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 - 1 1 B y : j s e i b e l Legend Project Boundary Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, Esri, USCB, USGS 3. Background: Plat Map 1856 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:24,000 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Prepared by JDS on 2024-08-28 TR by MP on 2024-08-28 IR by XXX on 2024-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S23 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229Client/ProjectCity of Corcoran Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Corcoran Park Remaster Project General Land Office Records Survey Map 4 530 Hennepin Co. Corcoran Maple Grove #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* ST-17 ST-16 ST-15 ST-14 ST-13 ST-12 ST-11 ST-08 ST-07 ST-06 ST-05 ST-04 ST-03 ST-02ST-09 ST-10 ST-A 01ST-A 02 ST-A 03 ST-A 04 ST-A 05 ST-B 01 ST-C 01 ST-20 ST-01 ST-18 ST-19 Auger 01 Auger 03 Auger 08 Auger 02 Auger 05 Auger 04 Auger 07 Auger 09 Auger 06 T119N, R23W, S23 T119N, R23W, S26 Co Rd 50 C o R d 10 Rebecca Park Trl B a s s L a k e Rd Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ U: \ 1 9 3 8 \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ A r c P r o \ C u l t u r a l \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 _C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ A r c h a e o l o g y . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 4 - 1 0 - 1 1 B y : j s e i b e l Legend Project Boundary #*Auger Test Positive Shovel Test* Negative Shovel Test Page 1 of 1*No Features Within Data Frame Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, Esri, USCB, USGS 3. Background: NAIP 2021 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:4,800 0 200 400 Feet Prepared by JDS on 2024-10-11 TR by MP on 2024-10-11 IR by XXX on 2024-XX-XX T119N, R23W, S23 C. of Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229Client/ProjectCity of Corcoran Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Corcoran Park Remaster Project Survey Results 5 531 Wi t h e v e r y c o m m u n i t y , w e r e d e f i n e w h a t ’ s p o s s i b l e . Stantec is a global leader in sustainable architecture, engineering, and environmental consulting. The diverse perspectives of our partners and interested parties drive us to think beyond what’s previously been done on critical issues like climate change, digital transformation, and future-proofing our cities and infrastructure. We innovate at the intersection of community, creativity, and client relationships to advance communities everywhere, so that together we can redefine what’s possible. 532 From:Jessica Christensen Buck To:Bot, Courtnay Cc:Mitchell, Liam Subject:FW: Corcoran City Park Project (20200 County Road 50, Corcoran, MN) HUD Program Date:Wednesday, November 13, 2024 12:27:01 PM Attachments:image003.png image004.png image005.png Hi Courtnay – See below for the email from this morning regarding Leonard’s response. Thanks! From: Leonard Wabasha (TO) <leonard.wabasha@shakopeedakota.org> Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2024 6:42 AM To: Jessica Christensen Buck <jchristensenbuck@corcoranmn.gov> Cc: Jay Tobin <jtobin@corcoranmn.gov>; jrbathel7@yahoo.com Subject: RE: Corcoran City Park Project (20200 County Road 50, Corcoran, MN) HUD Program Dear Jessica Christensen Buck After having viewed the archaeological report by Stantec the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community is in concurrence with the finding of no significant impact. Thank you and Have a Great Day! LEONARD WABASHA Tribal Historic Preservation Officer • Cultural Resources Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community d: 952.496.6120 shakopeedakota.org Leonard.Wabasha@shakopeedakota.org The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community is a federally recognized, sovereign Indian tribe located southwest of Minneapolis/St. Paul. With a focus on being a good neighbor, good steward of the earth, and good employer, the SMSC is committed to charitable donations, community partnerships, a healthy environment, and a strong economy. From: Jessica Christensen Buck <jchristensenbuck@corcoranmn.gov> Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2024 4:26 PM To: Leonard Wabasha (TO) <leonard.wabasha@shakopeedakota.org> Cc: Jay Tobin <jtobin@corcoranmn.gov>; jrbathel7@yahoo.com 533 This message was sent from outside of the organization. Please do not click links or open attachments unless yourecognize the source of this email and know the content is safe. You don't often get email from jchristensenbuck@corcoranmn.gov. Learn why this is important Subject: RE: Corcoran City Park Project (20200 County Road 50, Corcoran, MN) HUD Program This message came from outside the organization. Do Not click on links, open attachments or respondunless you know the content is safe. Hi Leonard – I apologize for the delay – please see the attached draft phase 1 archeology report for the project. Thank you! From: Leonard Wabasha (TO) <leonard.wabasha@shakopeedakota.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2024 3:42 PM To: Jessica Christensen Buck <jchristensenbuck@corcoranmn.gov> Cc: Jay Tobin <jtobin@corcoranmn.gov>; jrbathel7@yahoo.com Subject: RE: Corcoran City Park Project (20200 County Road 50, Corcoran, MN) HUD Program Thank you for the opportunity to consult, is the Archaeological Study available for me to view? I would need to see the actual report. Thank you and Have a Great Day! LEONARD WABASHA Tribal Historic Preservation Officer • Cultural Resources Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community d: 952.496.6120 shakopeedakota.org Leonard.Wabasha@shakopeedakota.org The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community is a federally recognized, sovereign Indian tribe located southwest of Minneapolis/St. Paul. With a focus on being a good neighbor, good steward of the earth, and good employer, the SMSC is committed to charitable donations, community partnerships, a healthy environment, and a strong economy. From: Jessica Christensen Buck <jchristensenbuck@corcoranmn.gov> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2024 1:42 PM To: Leonard Wabasha (TO) <leonard.wabasha@shakopeedakota.org> 534 You don't often get email from jchristensenbuck@corcoranmn.gov. Learn why this is important Cc: Jay Tobin <jtobin@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Corcoran City Park Project (20200 County Road 50, Corcoran, MN) HUD Program This message came from outside the organization. Do Not click on links, open attachments or respondunless you know the content is safe. Good afternoon – A letter detailing the City of Corcoran's planned park project and its associated federal funding from HUD has been mailed to you, and this email serves as an additional contact point. As outlined, the City is conducting an environmental review per HUD and National Historic Preservation Act regulations, including a tribal consultation to identify and assess any potential impacts on historic properties of religious or cultural significance. If you are interested in participating as a consulting party in this review, we encourage you to respond. Additionally, any initial concerns about potential impacts on culturally significant properties can be included in your reply. Should you choose to consult, please include the name and contact information of your tribe's principal representative. Your feedback is valued, and we look forward to collaborating to ensure that any historic properties of significance to your tribe are carefully considered. Thank you for your time, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The information contained in this message is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, dissemination or copying of this information is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete the message from your system. Thank you! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The information contained in this message is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, dissemination or copying of this information is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete the message from your system. Thank you! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Caution: This email originated from outside of Stantec. Please take extra precaution. 535 Attention: Ce courriel provient de l'extérieur de Stantec. Veuillez prendre des précautions supplémentaires. Atención: Este correo electrónico proviene de fuera de Stantec. Por favor, tome precauciones adicionales. 536 CarverCounty HennepinCounty AnokaCountyWrightCounty Iowa Michigan Minnesota Nebraska North Dakota South Dakota Wisconsin Project Area Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ V: \ 2 2 7 7 \ a c t i v e \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ p r o \ C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ E R _ I n q u i r i e s \ M y P r o j e c t 1 0 . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 1 4 B y : l h e r s h l e y Legend Project Area Sole Source Aquifers Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 15N 2. Data Sources: USGS 3. Background: USGS Topo (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:720,000 0 30,000 60,000 Feet Prepared by LAH on 2025-02-14 T11N, R12W, S05 Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229City of Corcoran Corcoran City Downtown Park HUD EA Sole Source Aquifer 5 *Project Area is not on a sole source aquifer 537 Carver County Hennepin County Anoka County Wright County Not In Project Area Raised boardwalk over delineated wetland for it not to be disturbed. 456710 456750 C S A H 1 0 CSAH 50 Project Area Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ V: \ 2 2 7 7 \ a c t i v e \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ p r o \ C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ E R _ I n q u i r i e s \ M y P r o j e c t 1 0 . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 2 0 B y : t w a v r i n Legend Project Area Delineated Wetland Boundary Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Hennepin Feet 2. Data Sources: Hennepin County 3. Background: Hennepin County Aerial, 2024 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:3,600 0 150 300 Feet Prepared by LAH on 2025-02-20 T11N, R12W, S05 Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229City of Corcoran Corcoran City Downtown Park HUD EA Wetland Delineation Map 2 538 Carver County Hennepin County Anoka County Wright County Not In Project Area 456710 456750 C S A H 1 0 CSAH 50 Project Area Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Client/Project Figure No. Project Location Title "($$¯ V: \ 2 2 7 7 \ a c t i v e \ 1 9 3 8 0 7 2 2 9 \ 0 3 _ d a t a \ g i s _ c a d \ g i s \ p r o \ C o r c o r a n C i t y P a r k _ E R _ I n q u i r i e s \ M y P r o j e c t 1 0 . a p r x R e v i s e d : 2 0 2 5 - 0 2 - 2 0 B y : t w a v r i n Legend Project Area Page 1 of 1 Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 15N 2. Data Sources: Hennepin County 3. Background: Hennepin County Aerial, 2024 (At original document size of 8.5x11) 1:3,600 0 150 300 Feet Prepared by LAH on 2025-02-20 T11N, R12W, S05 Corcoran, Hennepin Co., MN 193807229City of Corcoran Corcoran City Downtown Park HUD EA Aerial Location Map 1 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 T-Mobile Hometown Grant Application Q1 2025 (Application Open January 1 - March 31, 2025) Ends on Mon, Mar 31, 2025 11:59 PM T-Mobile Hometown Grants is a $25 million, five-year initiative to support the people and organizations who help small towns across America thrive and grow. Hometown Grants are given every quarter to up to 25 small towns. Apply for funding to support a community project of your choice, like revitalizing or repurposing a historic structure, creating a downtown asset or destination, or improving a space where friends and neighbors gather. Projects that add to a sense of place or could lead to further investment are of particular interest. We look forward to learning more about your town and your project. Projects must be completed and usable by the public by May 31, 2026. Make sure to consider these parameters when choosing the kind of project you are proposing for this grant. Thank you for your interest in the T-Mobile Hometown Grants Program. Your application will be reviewed by an internal T-Mobile review committee and non-profit partner based upon the following criteria. Please note that the letters of support for your project are an important part of this application. • Community need - Proposed project should fill a demonstrated need in the community. This grant funding is intended for shovel-ready projects that would not otherwise be possible to implement through municipal funding. Proposal & letters of support should demonstrate strong community support for the project. • Community impact - Project should connect the community in meaningful, innovative, and creative ways. • Partners and engagement - Strong applications actively involve local organizations by incorporating them into the planning and execution processes and engaging the community in activating the project site. Letters of support should come from a variety of stakeholders within the community. • Feasibility - You should have a shovel-ready plan ready to go and be able to complete your project within your detailed budget and within 12 months of receiving funding, if selected. Note: When developing your proposed project budget, keep in mind that funds may not be used for engineering and architectural plans or fees, salaries or annual operating expenses, or reimbursement for projects that are already completed. Projects must be completed and usable by the public by May 31, 2026. Make sure to consider these parameters when choosing the kind of project you are proposing for this grant. • Alignment with T-Mobile's small town strategy - T-Mobile strives to be a force for good. To read more about T-Mobile’s many corporate initiatives and key segments, visit https://www.t-mobile.com/responsibility. Tip: To help avoid losing any work as you complete your application, we encourage you to type your responses into a separate document, saving your work frequently, and then copy and paste your responses into this form. Award determinations will be made in mid-May 2025 and funds will be disbursed by approximately June 1, 2025, if selected. You will receive a notification about award determinations via your Submittable account that you use to submit your application. Please note that you cannot make any changes to your application once it has been submitted. We look forward to receiving your project proposal. Questions? Email TMobileGrant@mainstreet.org 552 First name: Jessica Last name: Christensen Buck Title/Position: Recreation Supervisor What is your connection in the community?: City Employee Email Address: jchristensenbuck@corcoranmn.gov Phone number (xxx-xxx-xxxx): 763 400 7034 Are you willing to serve as your community’s key contact/sponsor for the grant?: Yes Organization Details Name of Organization Requesting Funds: City of Corcoran Organization's Street Address Line 1: 8200 County Road 116 Organization's City: Corcoran Organization's State/Territory: MN Organization's Zip Code: 55340 Organization's County: Hennepin Which best describes your organization: Local government entity How many staff (full-time and part-time) does your organization have?: 41 Full Time 11 Part Time, and 3 Seasonal How many years has the project lead been in their current position?: 3.5 years Has your organization led a local placemaking initiative before? Yes If the project lead were to leave their current position, what steps would be taken to ensure that this project would continue uninterrupted and be completed by the May 31, 2026 deadline? Community Development Director and staff would continue working on the project. 553 Project Details What is the name of your project?: City of Corcoran City Park Remaster Please select the project category that most closely describes your proposal: Playground (park and community center/senior center were alternative options) Physical Address of Project Site Physical Address of Project Site: Street Address 1: 20400 County Road 50 Physical Address of Project Site: City: Corcoran Physical Address of Project Site: State/Territory: MN Physical Address of Project Site: Zip Code: 55340 Physical Address of Project Site: County: Hennepin Population size: 8,019 (Metropolitan Council 2023 Final Population and Household Estimates) Brief Project Summary: Please describe your project in one to two sentences: Please communicate the following in your brief one to two-sentence summary: • What your project is • Intended impact of project for community The City of Corcoran City Park Remaster intends to provide a distinctive, high-quality experience to community members through a thoughtfully designed agrarian-themed playground to replace the aging 25-year-old playground scheduled to be removed as part of the larger park remaster project. Central elements to the playground design include a barn, silo, and tractor, which offer children a unique setting to climb, explore, and pretend to be farmers while celebrating the historical roots of the City of Corcoran. Detailed Project Proposal: Tell us about your project idea. Be sure to describe how your idea represents innovative, experimental, creative and/or entrepreneurial approaches to local placemaking. We encourage you to include visual project renderings, maps, images, etc. in this document to help communicate your shovel-ready project proposal to the review committee. Further in the application, you will be asked to upload a separate detailed budget, provide a timeline, and discuss your intended outcomes. Please include: • A description of your placemaking initiative • A description of how you will use the grant funds • Which partners, if any, you will be working with in the design and implementation process Included as part of a broader park revitalization effort, the City of Corcoran requests grant funds to be put towards a farm-themed playground to replace the aging 25-year-old playground at City Park. Updating 554 this frequently used amenity ensures that families and children have access to modern, engaging, and inclusive recreation activities. The playground design will feature iconic agricultural elements such as a barn, silo, and tractor, creating an imaginative environment where children can climb, explore, and pretend to be farmers. These elements will offer hands-on, interactive, educational experiences that highlight the City’s rich agricultural history while fostering creativity and play. A critical component of the playground is the accessibility of the design. The playground includes bridge connections, transfer stations, and adaptive swings as part of the plans, ensuring that children of all abilities can safely engage in play together. The bridge features will also facilitate easier navigation for caregivers, enhancing the overall accessibility. Additionally, the playground incorporates sensory-friendly elements, including varied textures, colors and interactive panels, catering to children with diverse needs. The use of engineered wood fiber and poured-in-place rubber surfacing will provide a stable and safe foundation for mobility aids, ensuring inclusivity. The playground is strategically shown to be built into the existing hillside, providing an elevated vantage point that allows visitors to take in multiple features of City Park. This location enables parents to simultaneously watch their children at the playground, while also observing athletics on the nearby fields. The integration of the playground into the natural landscape promotes sustainability by maintaining the area’s natural characteristics, minimizing disruption to the environment, and preserving green space. By blending seamlessly with the parks existing topography, the playground not only enhances the aesthetic appeal of the area but also ensures a balance between recreational development and environmental stewardship. The funds requested from this grant, would be used to support the purchase of materials, construction, and installation of the new playground structure and its supporting infrastructure. More specifically, funding would be anticipated to cover procurement and installation of the playground structures and ground-surfacing materials. Throughout the planning stages, the City has been working with the several key parties: • HKGi and Stantec: Both have been working closely with City staff as consultants for the project to develop park design. • Midwest Playscapes: HKGi and City staff have been working with the playground vendor to develop renditions of the playground design. • Community Stakeholders: Input from local residents, the Parks and Trails Commission, City Council, and others have helped to refine the design for the playground through engagement efforts. At which stage are your plans for this project as of now?: Ready for construction/implementation – Go with this one Please upload 2-3 photos of the project site as it currently exists. PDF labeled “Photos” 555 Does your organization own the site?: Yes Have these plans been approved and permitted, if applicable? (Pick “Other” and include description of current council status?) - Depending on what the other choices are, that sounds like the most applicable. The following schedule is what has been proposed: City Council meeting requesting authorization to bid: Thursday, April 24, 2025 Site Plan Public Hearing with Planning Commission: Thursday, May 1, 2025 Post project to bid (upon authorization): Friday, May 2, 2025 Site Plan Approval at City Council: Thursday, May 22, 2025 Bid opening: Tuesday, May 27, 2025 City Council meeting to award bid: Thursday, June 12, 2025 The first phase of this project (1a) will establish the grading and container space as part of the earthwork for other amenities. Construction of the playground project will be completed as phase 1b following the completion of phase 1a. The playground does not have to be bid as part of the process, as it would be obtained through cooperative procurement through state pricing. Additionally, both the Parks and Trails Commission and City Council have approved multiple phases of the project, most recently being recommendation of approval of 90% designs during the March 20, 2025, Parks and Trails Commission meeting. Please briefly describe the community in which your project would be implemented, including community demographics, any primary industries, and any particular challenge(s) that the community is facing. How will this grant help your community address this challenge? Corcoran is a growing community located on the northwestern edge of Hennepin County, approximately 20 miles from downtown Minneapolis. Spanning nearly 36 square miles, Corcoran has maintained a primarily rural character while experiencing steady population growth. The City is home to approximately 8,019 residents and features several key amenities, including Corcoran City Park, Wildflower Park, and the Memorial Garden. Corcoran City Park serves as the primary recreational hub, offering a park shelter, ball fields, playground, ice rinks, and a warming house, making it a key destination for residents and visitors alike. With the city's more recent rapid growth, the demand for recreational opportunities and park improvements has increased. Additionally, there is a strong desire of the community to balance the incoming growth with the rural character of the City. Expanding and enhancing park amenities is crucial to meeting the evolving needs of the community and ensuring that residents have access to quality 556 outdoor spaces. The planned design of the playground will provide a centralized feature of City Park that pays tribute to the agricultural history of the City. This grant will directly support Corcoran’s efforts to address these challenges by funding the procurement and installation of new playground structures and ground-surfacing materials at Corcoran City Park. These improvements will provide children with a safe, engaging, and inclusive play environment, enhancing the overall recreational experience for families. As the City continues to grow, the upgraded playground will serve as a vital community asset, ensuring that young residents have a well- equipped and accessible space for continued outdoor play and social interaction. Please describe how your project design (including community engagement) and project execution plan actively fosters inclusion, taking into consideration the lived experiences, abilities, and needs of all community members. A key component of the updates to City Park is the new playground (phase 1b), which will feature bridge connections, transfer stations, and adaptive swings, allowing children of varying abilities to engage in play safely and comfortably. These elements promote inclusive recreation, ensuring that children with mobility challenges or other disabilities can interact and play alongside their peers. The bridge feature also serves as a means caregivers and guardians to navigate easier into the playground when the time comes for families to depart. The proposed project is designed to create an inclusive, welcoming environment that accommodates visitors of all abilities and diverse backgrounds. The playground features a variety of textures, colors, and interactive elements to engage individuals with sensory needs, ensuring a stimulating yet accessible play experience. Ground surfaces are composed of engineered wood fiber and poured-in-place rubber surfacing to allow mobility. Playground equipment is designed for inclusive play, including adaptive swings, ramps, and tactile panels. While included in a phase (1a) of the larger City Park Remaster, the location of the playground is anticipated to be nearby a new park building with accessible restrooms, one of which would include an adult changing table accessible from both inside and outside the building. This addition ensures that individuals with higher accessibility needs, including caregivers, have necessary amenities to comfortably enjoy the park. Additionally, phase 1a incorporates multiple seating areas, drinking fountains, and ample shade through both manmade structures and tree canopies that will enhance the experience of the park and playground. While not directly tied to this application, the previous phase features provide spaces for rest, hydration, and sun protection, making the playground more accommodating for individuals of all ages and abilities. The development of this project involved collaboration between various stakeholders, including federal, state, and local agencies, as well as members of the public and Native American tribes. Tribal involvement was part of the process in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for funds received as part of items in phase 1a. As part of the Environmental Assessment (EA), letters were sent to Native American tribes to address any cultural or environmental concerns related to the proposed project. These consultations ensured that the perspectives of Native American communities were considered in the planning and development of the proposal to ensure respect to their history, should the site be significant. There were many opportunities for the public to provide feedback, including online surveys, in-person open houses, and public events where community members could share their preferences regarding park amenities and features. A specific survey question was included to indicate 557 residency, which highlighted high response from residents (as self-reported). Recognizing the diverse needs of the community, in-person feedback opportunities were included to engage individuals who may not have access to technology or who are less technologically savvy. Contact information for the Recreation Supervisor was also provided for those seeking further clarification, comments, or questions. The feedback collected was shared with the project consultants and incorporated into the planning process. Individuals who contributed feedback were informed that their input had been included in the discussions. Public participation extended to the Parks and Trails Commission meetings, where several individuals voiced their opinions, as well as to a City Council meeting. These contributions were formally recorded in the meeting minutes and considered during the final stages of planning. In addition, formal public comment periods were held to provide the community with an opportunity comment. Responses to formal comments were provided in writing as possible, ensuring that the public’s input was fully addressed and integrated into the plans. The agricultural-themed playground will be completely free to access, ensuring that financial constraints do not prevent children and families from enjoying the space. Unlike pay-to-play facilities, this playground removes economic barriers, allowing all community members—regardless of income level— to gather, play, and connect. By providing a high-quality recreational space at no cost, we create an inclusive environment where every child has the opportunity to explore, imagine, and engage in active play without financial limitations. Please provide three (3) specific ways in which you intend for this project to benefit your community. Additionally, how could this project be modeled and/or scaled for other non-profits or local municipal governments to adopt and implement? Please consider: • How might this project help your organization build relationships with new partners and community members? • How will the project continue to contribute to and impact your community after its initial implementation/launch? • How might this project be leveraged for additional funding support for your area's community and economic development efforts? • How could this project be modeled and/or scaled for other non-profits or local governments to adopt and implement? The agricultural-themed playground will provide significant benefits to the City of Corcoran by: 1. Honoring local history: As the City continues to develop, the playground highlights the rich agricultural history, fostering community pride and educating visitors on the City’s roots. Featuring a tractor, silo, and barn alongside the interactive play panels and activities will reinforce the connection between past and present while engaging community members and other visitors in educational play. 2. Increasing awareness of the park and its amenities: By incorporating a destination playground with unique, standout features, the project can help to tell the story and bring awareness of the surrounding park amenities. This includes the new park building (anticipated to be developed as part of Phase 1a), which will host events, programs, and meetings, as well as existing amenities such as the ballfields, 558 pavilion, trails, and ice rinks. The playground serves as a catalyst for greater community engagement, awareness, and ultimately usage of the entire park space. 3. Replacement and update of well-loved playground: The current playground, known to many with the unique dinosaur themed items, has served the community for 25 years. The new structure will be located in a new location, within the same familiar park, and will be able to accommodate the City’s growing population for years to come. With the inclusion of items such as embedded slides, accessible swings, and transfer stations, the playground exceeds the standard accessibility guidelines. By prioritizing universal design, this project ensures that children of all abilities can engage in meaningful play together. This project provides a model for other communities in demonstrating how playground themes can help reflect and tell the story of a City’s unique history and identity. For example, a riverfront city could develop a waterway-inspired playground, featuring steamboat-themed structures and bridges to connect to the area’s geography. Similarly, a town with a mining heritage could create a miner’s adventure playground, incorporating tunnels, rock-climbing features, and play elements that mimic historical tools. Please provide a timeline for your project. Note when the different stages/elements of your project will be executed, if selected. IMPORTANT: Grant announcements for the 2025 Q1 cycle will be made mid-May 2025. If selected, grant funds will be disbursed by approximately June 1, 2025. Projects must be completed and usable by the public by May 31, 2026. Make sure to consider these parameters when choosing the kind of project you are proposing for this grant. Task Day 0/ Wk 1 W k 3 W k 4 W k 5 W k 6 W k 7 W k 8 W k 9 W k 1 0 W k 1 1 W k 1 2 W k 1 3 W k 1 4 W k 1 5 W k 1 6 W k 1 7 W k 1 8 W k 1 9 W k 2 0 W k 2 1 W k 2 2 W k 2 4 Compl ete Final Design Counci l approv al to bid Post project for bids 559 Bid openin g Counci l approv al of bid Award project Pre- con meetin g Constr uction window Project openin g The following schedule is what has been proposed: City Council meeting requesting authorization to bid: Thursday, April 24, 2025 Site Plan Public Hearing with Planning Commission: Thursday, May 1, 2025 Post project to bid (upon authorization): Friday, May 2, 2025 Site Plan Approval at City Council: Thursday, May 22, 2025 Bid opening: Tuesday, May 27, 2025 City Council meeting to award bid: Thursday, June 12, 2025 The playground construction will follow the completion of phase 1a of the larger City Park Remaster project which will establish the grading and container space. The playground does not have to be bid as part of the process, as it will be obtained through cooperative procurement through state pricing. Additionally, both the Parks and Trails Commission and City Council have approved multiple phases of the project, most recently being recommendation of approval of 90% designs during the March 20, 2025, Parks and Trails Commission meeting. 560 Select the amount of time you expect will be needed to complete your T-Mobile Hometown Grant Project, if selected, starting from the time at which grant funds would be disbursed (March 1, 2025) 9-12 months Other options include: 1-3 months, 3-6 months, 6 to 9 months, more than 12 months. T-Mobile Hometown Grants award up to $50,000 for qualifying projects. How much funding are you requesting for your project? $50,000 Does your project need more than $50,000 to be completed? Yes ($850k total) If you need more than $50,000 to complete your project, please describe how you will cover the remainder of the budget. Please specify exactly which part(s) of your project the T-Mobile grant funds would cover, versus the components that other funding sources would cover. Please also indicate the certainty of any additional funding sources. The City is actively pursuing additional funding opportunities to support this project. However, any remaining budget beyond the $50,000 provided by the T-Mobile grant will be covered using park dedication funds. These funds have been acquired through ongoing development and will continue to be available as new developments occur. The T-Mobile grant funds will specifically be utilized as part of the procurement of playground equipment, ensuring that this key component of the project can move forward. Any remaining project costs, such as further equipment procurement, site preparation, and installation, will be covered using the secured park dedication funds. The availability of park dedication funds is highly certain, as these funds have already been collected and will continue to be generated through development, ensuring that the project can be completed regardless of additional grant funding. Please provide an itemized budget (.pdf, .xlx, .jpg, or .doc) showing how the grant funds would be used. Make sure to include labor costs in your budget. If your project requires more than $50,000, make sure to indicate which parts of the project would be covered by the T-Mobile Hometown Grant, if selected, and where the funding for the other parts of the project would come from. Located in the folder. 561 Facility (e.g., picnic area, campground, walkway, shelter, restroom) Description (linear feet, dimensions, material used, number of components, etc.) Cost Per Unit Total Cost Playground Equipment Materials and labor for construction of 2-5 and 5- 12 playground equipment $740,000.00 $740,000.00 Engineered Wood Fiber 560 cubic yards of engineered wood fiber $25.00 $14,000.00 Poured-in-Place Rubber Surfacing 2,340 sq ft of poured in place surfacing $22.50 $52,560.00 Concrete subbase (for PIP) 2,333 sq ft of concrete subbase for embankment $19.50 $45,630.00 $852,190.00 562 IMPORTANT : Grant funds may not be used for engineering and architectural plans or fees, salaries, annual operating expenses, regular programming expenses, or reimbursement for projects that are already completed. Please upload up to five letters of support for your project. We encourage applicants to include letters of support from a variety of key partners throughout the community. For example, you might choose to include letters from community organizations, local government agencies, schools, hospitals, local business partners, community members, etc. that demonstrate community alignment, engagement, and consensus for your proposed project. Letters of support may be combined into one document or uploaded as individual documents. Located in the folder Optional: Are there any additional items that you would like the review committee to consider as a part of your application? (Examples: additional project renderings, maps, news articles, artist biographies, etc.) City Park Playground Overview ADA Requirement Breakdown If you are awarded a grant, you will be required to submit a progress report 6 months into the implementation period and a final grant report at the end of the 12-month project implementation period. Both reports will be completed as fillable forms, emailed to you by the program staff. Will you be able to submit the progress report and final report, if awarded a grant? Yes Which best describes your organization’s affiliation to the Main Street network? Please note: This grant program is open both to organizations that are part of the Main Street network, as well as organizations that are not. Our organization is not, at this time, affiliated with any Main Street program./I am not aware of any local Main Street program that exists in our community. Other options include: Our organization is an Accredited or Affiliate Main Street America Community Member at the national level. Our organization is a member of the national non-profit, Main Street America, but not yet an Accredited/Affiliate community. Our organization is involved in our state/county-level Main Street Coordinating Program but is not currently a member of Main Street America at the national level. Our organization, itself, is not affiliated with any state/county/national-level Main Street organizations, but there is a separate, active local Main Street program in our community. 563 How did you hear about the T-Mobile Hometown Grants Program? Online Grants Search Other options include: Main Street America, State/County Main Street Coordinating Program, Local Main Street Program, T-Mobile Employee Referral, Radio/Television, Other. 564 City of Corcoran T-Mobile Hometown Grant Application City Park Remaster Detailed Project Proposal: Tell us about your project idea. Be sure to describe how your idea represents innovative, experimental, creative and/or entrepreneurial approaches to local placemaking. We encourage you to include visual project renderings, maps, images, etc. in this document to help communicate your shovel-ready project proposal to the review committee. Further in the application, you will be asked to upload a separate detailed budget, provide a timeline, and discuss your intended outcomes. Included as part of a broader park revitalization effort, the City of Corcoran requests grant funds to be put towards a farm-themed playground to replace the aging 25-year-old playground at City Park. Updating this frequently used amenity ensures that families and children have access to modern, engaging, and inclusive recreation activities. The playground design will feature iconic agricultural elements such as a barn, silo, and tractor, creating an imaginative environment where children can climb, explore, and pretend to be farmers. These elements will offer hands-on, interactive, educational experiences that highlight the City’s rich agricultural history while fostering creativity and play. A critical component of the playground is the accessibility of the design. The playground includes bridge connections, transfer stations, and adaptive swings as part of the plans, ensuring that children of all abilities can safely engage in play together. The bridge features will also facilitate easier navigation for caregivers, enhancing the overall accessibility. Additionally, the playground incorporates sensory-friendly elements, including varied textures, colors and interactive panels, catering to children with diverse needs. The use of engineered wood fiber and poured-in-place rubber surfacing will provide a stable and safe foundation for mobility aids, ensuring inclusivity. The playground is strategically shown to be built into the existing hillside, providing an elevated vantage point that allows visitors to take in multiple features of City Park. This location enables parents to simultaneously watch their children at the playground, while also observing athletics on the nearby fields. The integration of the playground into the natural landscape promotes sustainability by maintaining the area’s natural characteristics, minimizing disruption to the environment, and preserving green space. By blending seamlessly with the parks existing topography, the playground not only enhances the aesthetic appeal of the area but also ensures a balance between recreational development and environmental stewardship. The funds requested from this grant, would be used to support the purchase of materials, construction, and installation of the new playground structure and its supporting infrastructure. More specifically, funding would be anticipated to cover procurement and installation of the playground structures and ground-surfacing materials. Throughout the planning stages, the City has been working with the several key parties: • HKGi and Stantec: Both have been working closely with City staff as consultants for the project to develop park design. • Midwest Playscapes: HKGi and City staff have been working with the playground vendor to develop renditions of the playground design. • Community Stakeholders: Input from local residents, the Parks and Trails Commission, City Council, and others have helped to refine the design for the playground through engagement efforts. 565 Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN CORCORAN COMMUNITY PARK PLAYGROUND PLANNING 566 Recreation Site Plan: Corcoran City Park Playground 500’ N 0 250’ Existing Ballfields Existing Ballfield Existing Parking Existing Parking Existing Parking Existing BallfieldExisting Warming House Existing Ballfield Existing T-ball Fields Existing Hockey and Ice Skating Rinks Proposed Destination Playground Existing Picnic Shelter Parking Lot (constructed in 2025) Wetland Residential Residential Industrial Residential Commercial Wetland CR 50 CR 10 Wetland Existing Park Entrance Park Building (constructed in 2025) Access route Access route Ac c e s s r o u t e 567 STANDARD SWINGS PART#ZZXX0825,0827 W/BELT SEATS PART#ZZXX0260 W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892 W/TOT SEAT PART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMIC DESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANEL W/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANELW/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck)OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARSINSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANELW/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOWINSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96" 76" TRANSFER STATION W/STEP 360° SPIRAL NUVO SLIDE TRI-VERSE CLIMBER 6' PLAYWOOD BRIDGE CUSTOM MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE FOR HILLSIDE ZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1" 77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10' 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" GLIDE SLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS RIBBON CLIMBER SILO CLIMBER 11'-2" 14'-8" 14'-3" 8'-10" 11'-1" 22'-4" 22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 568 UNITY SWING W/BASKET SWING PART#ZZXX0198,0204 48" TWIST N' SHOUT SLIDE TRANSFER STATION W/STEP SILO CLIMBER NUVO SWIRL ROOF PM FARM TRACTOR STRUCTURE ZZYYC268 PLASTIC PLAYCUBES FRACTAL NET FRACTAL NET TRANSFER STEP 6'-4" 7'-2" 6'-6" 9'-10" 13'-10" 12'-8" 20'-3" 8' 0 5'10' 62'-8" 65'-2" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 9 5 9 4 3 4 3 4 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 28'10" X 29'3" X 10' 62'8" X 65'2" 2,530 Sq. Ft. 199 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft. 205 2-5 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 569 ZOOMTRAX PART#ZZXX1136 ADA ZOOMTRAX PART#ZZXX1139 77'-9" 0 5'10' 68'-1" 57'-6" 6'-6" 7'-2" 6'-8" 6'-7" 6'-9" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 N/A 68'1" X 57'6" 2,452 Sq. Ft. 203 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 570 2 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) Slide & Solve Panel 2-5yr & 5-12yr accessible ground level and ADA elevated play components. Rainbow Panel Magical Music Panel (4)Custom Graphics Panels Balcony w/Telescope Twisted Climber Inclined Cliff Hanger Hypnotize Panel (2) Anywhere Seats Tower Climber Post Mount Bells STANDARD SWINGS PART#ZZXX0825,0827 W/BELT SEATS PART#ZZXX0260 W/ADA SEAT PART#ZZXX0892 W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMIC DESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATEDROOFADA STAIR TOWERCLIMBER TUBE SLIDEW/WINDOWS SKY PANEL W/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOMGRAPHICS PANELW/FIBERGLASSINSERTS (deck)OVAL INSERTPANEL W/GEARSINSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANELW/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBINGSQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT(ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE(deck) ADA ANIMALTUNES PANEL(ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOMGRAPHICS PANELW/FIBERGLASSINSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSICINSERT SKY PANELW/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/RAINBOWINSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKETBETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPSZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATIONW/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECKWHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTEDCLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96" 76" TRANSFER STATION W/STEP 360° SPIRAL NUVO SLIDE TRI-VERSECLIMBER 6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOM MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE FOR HILLSIDE ZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1" 77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10' 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS RIBBON CLIMBER SILO CLIMBER 11'-2" 14'-8" 14'-3" 8'-10" 11'-1" 22'-4" 22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN (2) Steering Wheel Panels 571 3 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) (2) Playwood Bridge 2-5yr & 5-12yr accessible ground level and ADA elevated play components. Tri-verse Climber Ball Maze Panel (3) Dynamic Descent Slides Glide Slide Animal Tunes Panel 360 Degree Nuvo Slide Babble-On Talk Tube Ribbon Climber ADA Bucket Seat Prism Pass STANDARD SWINGS PART#ZZXX0825,0827 W/BELT SEATS PART#ZZXX0260 W/ADA SEAT PART#ZZXX0892 W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMIC DESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATEDROOFADA STAIR TOWERCLIMBER TUBE SLIDEW/WINDOWS SKY PANEL W/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOMGRAPHICS PANELW/FIBERGLASSINSERTS (deck)OVAL INSERTPANEL W/GEARSINSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANELW/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBINGSQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT(ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE(deck) ADA ANIMALTUNES PANEL(ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOMGRAPHICS PANELW/FIBERGLASSINSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSICINSERT SKY PANELW/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/RAINBOWINSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKETBETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPSZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATIONW/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECKWHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTEDCLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96" 76" TRANSFER STATION W/STEP 360° SPIRAL NUVO SLIDE TRI-VERSECLIMBER 6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOM MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE FOR HILLSIDE ZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1" 77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10' 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" 72" GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHIC PANEL W/SIGNS RIBBON CLIMBER SILO CLIMBER 11'-2" 14'-8" 14'-3" 8'-10" 11'-1" 22'-4" 22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Bell Puzzle Panel 572 4 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN 573 5 CUSTOM SILO + BARN STRUCTURE (5-12YR) STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN 574 6 UNITY SWING W/BASKET SWING PART#ZZXX0198,0204 48" TWIST N' SHOUT SLIDE TRANSFER STATION W/STEP SILO CLIMBER NUVO SWIRL ROOF PM FARM TRACTOR STRUCTURE ZZYYC268 PLASTIC PLAYCUBES FRACTAL NET FRACTAL NET TRANSFER STEP 6'-4" 7'-2" 6'-6" 9'-10" 13'-10" 12'-8" 20'-3" 8' 0 5'10' 62'-8" 65'-2" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 9 5 9 4 3 4 3 4 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 28'10" X 29'3" X 10' 62'8" X 65'2" 2,530 Sq. Ft. 199 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft. 205 2-5 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 UNITY SWING W/BASKET SWING PART#ZZXX0198,0204 48"TWIST N'SHOUTSLIDETRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP SILOCLIMBERNUVOSWIRLROOF PM FARMTRACTOR STRUCTUREZZYYC268PLASTICPLAYCUBESFRACTALNETFRACTAL NETTRANSFERSTEP 6'-4"7'-2"6'-6"9'-10" 13'-10" 12'-8"20'-3"8' 0 5'10' 62'-8"65'-2" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 9 5 9 4 3 4 3 4 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 28'10" X 29'3" X 10'62'8" X 65'2" 2,530 Sq. Ft. 199 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft.205 2-5 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +4!+1!+1! CUSTOM TRACTOR STRUCTURE (2-5YR) Climbing Squares Silo Climber Horse Spring Rider Tractor Tunnel Unity Steppers Playcubes Structure (2) Steering Wheel Panels Unity Swing (2) Tractor Wheel Cozy Hangout Tube Slide Cow Spring Rider Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN 2-5yr & 5-12yr accessible ground level and ADA elevated play components. 575 7 STANDARD SWINGSPART#ZZXX0825,0827W/BELT SEATSPART#ZZXX0260W/ADA SEATPART#ZZXX0892W/TOT SEATPART#ZZXX0265 DYNAMICDESCENT 3'/8'/13' 102" DYNAMICDESCENTW/SLIDE-A-SIDE CORRUGATED ROOFADA STAIR TOWER CLIMBER TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS SKY PANELW/BELL PUZZLE INSERT (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/BALL MAZE INSERT (ground) 10' PLAYWOOD ARCH BRIDGE TUBE SLIDE W/WINDOWS 72" MIGHTY DESCENT SLIDE W/PRISM PASS 96" 96" CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS (deck) OVAL INSERT PANEL W/GEARS INSERT (ground) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS INCLINED CLIFF HANGER SKY PANEL W/SLIDE & SOLVE INSERT CLIMBING SQUARES CLIMBER PLAYSEAT (ground) BABBLE-ON BABBLE-ON POST MOUNT ACCESS GATE 96" 96" 96" BALCONY W/TELESCOPE (deck) ADA ANIMAL TUNES PANEL (ground) POST MOUNT BELL (DECK) CUSTOM GRAPHICS PANEL W/FIBERGLASS INSERTS 96" 96" SKY PANEL W/MAGICAL MUSIC INSERT SKY PANEL W/HYPNOTIZE PANEL 96" OVAL INSERT PANEL W/ RAINBOW INSERT PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 PM CONNECTOR BRACKET BETWEEN FLAT WHEELCHAIR RAMPS ZZYY6374 TRANSFER STATION W/STEP PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 PM 12' FLAT GROUND TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZYY1166 PM 12' FLAT DECK TO DECK WHEELCHAIR RAMP ZZPM7546 TWISTED CLIMBER DYNAMIC DESCENT W/SLIDE-A-SIDE 0/96" 6'-4" 96"76"TRANSFERSTATIONW/STEP 360° SPIRALNUVO SLIDETRI-VERSECLIMBER6' PLAYWOODBRIDGE CUSTOMMIGHTY DESCENTSLIDE FOR HILLSIDEZZYYB884 8'-8" 8'-3"7'-8" 12'-11" 153'-1"77'-9" 0 5'10' 62'-8" 0 5'10'72"72"72"72"72"72"GLIDESLIDE LADDER CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNS CUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSCUSTOM GRAPHICPANEL W/SIGNSRIBBONCLIMBERSILOCLIMBER11'-2"14'-8"14'-3"8'-10"11'-1"22'-4"22'-8" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 29 15 26 15 8 15 5 5 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/16"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 54'6" X 76' X 26'2" 77'9" X 153'1" 7,493 Sq. Ft. 400 Ft. 6 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +11!+7! Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN CUSTOM TRACTOR STRUCTURE (2-5YR) 576 8 ZOOMTRAX PART#ZZXX1136 ADA ZOOMTRAX PART#ZZXX1139 77'-9" 0 5'10' 68'-1" 57'-6" 6'-6" 7'-2" 6'-8" 6'-7" 6'-9" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP: AREA:PERIMETER: EQUIPMENT SIZE: USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 CO M M U N I T Y P A R K CO R C O R A N , M N 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 N/A 68'1" X 57'6" 2,452 Sq. Ft. 203 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft. 205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC. 8632 Eagle Creek Circle Savage, MN 55378 ZOOMTRAXPART#ZZXX1136ADA ZOOMTRAXPART#ZZXX1139 77'-9" 0 5'10' 68'-1"57'-6"6'-6"7'-2"6'-8"6'-7" 6'-9" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 N/A68'1" X 57'6" 2,452 Sq. Ft. 203 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +2!+1! ZIP-LINE STRUCTURE Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN ADA Accessible Zoomtrax w/Bucket Seat 577 9 ZOOMTRAXPART#ZZXX1136ADA ZOOMTRAXPART#ZZXX1139 77'-9" 0 5'10' 68'-1"57'-6"6'-6"7'-2"6'-8"6'-7" 6'-9" Total Elevated Play Activities: Total Ground-Level Play Activities: Accessible Elevated Activities Accessible Ground-Level Activities Accessible Ground-Level Play Types Required Provided AD A S C H E D U L E 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 BPaper Size USER CAPACITY:AGE GROUP:AREA:PERIMETER:EQUIPMENT SIZE:USE ZONE: DATE: SCALE:PROJECT NO: FALL HEIGHT: *PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION REQUIRED DRAWN BY: ASTM F1487- CPSC #325 COMMUN I T Y P A R K CORCORAN, MN 25-16133A 1/8"=1'0" MICHAEL BORDNER 04-MAR-2025 N/A68'1" X 57'6" 2,452 Sq. Ft. 203 Ft. 4 In. 8 Ft.205 5-12 21 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES, INC.8632 Eagle Creek CircleSavage, MN 55378 +2!+1! ADA ACCESSIBLE EMBANKEMENT SLIDES Twist N’ Shout Embankement Slide Equipment ManufacturerSales RepresentativeCommunity Park Corcoran, MN Embankement slides will be located along an ADA accessible park trail and will exit into an ADA accessible Engineered Wood Fiber certified surfacing. Mighty Descent & Dynamic Descent Embankement Slides 578 Corcoran, MN ADA Requirement Breakdown Park Name: Community Park Drawing Number: 25-16202A 2-5 Total Elevated Play Components: 9 1. Climbing Squares 2. Tractor Tunnel 3. (2) Steering Wheel Panels 4. (2) Anywhere Seats (on deck) 5. Tube Slide 6. Silo Climber 7. Unity Stepper 2-5 Total ADA Elevated Play Components: (need minimum of 5): 9 1. Climbing Squares 2. Tractor Tunnel 3. (2) Steering Wheel Panels 4. (2) Anywhere Seats (on deck) 5. Tube Slide 6. Silo Climber 7. Unity Stepper 579 2-5 Total Ground Level Components: 7 Required: 3 Ground-Level of 3 Types of Play Provided: 7 Ground-Level of 5 Types of Play 1. Unity Swing 2. Cow Spring Rider 3. Horse Spring Rider 4. Playcubes Structure 5. Tractor Tunnel 6. (2) Tractor Wheel Cozy Hangout 5-12 Total Elevated Play Components: 31 1. Sky Panel w/Slide & Solve 2. Mighty Descent Slide 3. (4) Custom Graphics Panel w/Fiberglass Games 4. Oval Insert Panel w/Rainbow Insert 5. Balcony w/Telescope 6. Inclined CliƯ Hanger 7. Tower Climber 8. Sky Panel w/Magical Music Insert 9. Twisted Climber 10. Sky Panel w/Hypnotize Insert 11. Post Mount Bell 12. (2) Playwood Bridge 13. (3) Dynamic Descent Slide 14. (2) Upper Silo Climber 15. Climbing Squares Climber 16. Sky Panel w/Bell Puzzle Insert 17. (2) Tube Slides w/Windows 580 18. Ribbon Climber 19. Tri-Verse Climber 20. Silo Climber 21. Glide Slide 22. Ladder 23. 360 Degree Nuvo Slide 5-12 Total ADA Elevated Play Components: (need minimum of 16): 27 1. Sky Panel w/Slide & Solve 2. Mighty Descent Slide 3. (4) Custom Graphics Panel w/Fiberglass Games 4. Oval Insert Panel w/Rainbow Insert 5. Balcony w/Telescope 6. Inclined CliƯ Hanger 7. Tower Climber 8. Sky Panel w/Magical Music Insert 9. Twisted Climber 10. Sky Panel w/Hypnotize Insert 11. Post Mount Bell 12. (2) Playwood Bridge 13. (3) Dynamic Descent Slide 14. Climbing Squares Climber 15. Sky Panel w/Bell Puzzle Insert 16. Ribbon Climber 17. Tri-Verse Climber 18. Silo Climber 19. Glide Slide 20. Ladder 21. 360 Degree Nuvo Slide 581 5-12 Total Ground Level Components: 15 Required: 10 Ground-Level of 5 Types of Play Provided: 14 Ground-Level of 5 Types of Play 1. (6) Belt Swings 2. Tot Swing 3. ADA Swing 4. Oval Insert Panel w/Ball Maze Insert 5. ADA Animal Tunes Panel 6. Oval Insert Panel w/Gears Insert 7. Playseat 8. Babble-on 9. Prism Pass (Below Mighty Descent) Zoomtrax Area Ground Level Components: 2 Required: 0 Ground-Level of 0 Types of Play Provided: 2 Ground-Level of 2 Types of Play 1. Zoomtrax (Standard) 2. ADA Zoomtrax 582 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288 www.corcoranmn.gov MEMO Meeting Date: December 19, 2024 To: Parks and Trails Commission From: Jessica Christensen Buck, Recreation Supervisor Re: City Park Survey Results ______________________________________________________________________ Community feedback was requested on proposed amenities, features, and themes for park development. The survey received 197 responses, but it should be noted that not all questions were required to be answered by the respondent to submit their feedback. This information reflects the priorities and preferences expressed by survey participants and provides guidance for planning and design efforts. The primary amenities that received the most votes were the playground and splashpad. Preferences for the playground included slides and climbing aspects to be incorporated. Most respondents preferred individual swings, tall embankment slides, and hillside climbing loops as part of the playground. Additionally, including shade trees for shade integration was preferred. The splashpad responses reflected a strong desire for a nature theme, with additional preference towards a combination of above and below-ground level sprayers. Alternate amenity preference was towards the detached shelter and bituminous trails. Similarly, there was strong preference towards paved pathways with accessible slopes. Additional information is included below, reflecting more specifics with statistics from the survey. Amenity Prioritization Primary Amenities (Determined by combining the top three preferences for each amenity): 1. Playground (175 top three rankings) 2. Splashpad (151 top three rankings) 3. Park Building (116 top three rankings) 7b. 583 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288 www.corcoranmn.gov 4. Pickleball (94 top three rankings) 5. Parking Lot (61 top three rankings) Alternate Amenities (Determined by combining the top three preferences for each amenity): 1. Detached Shelter (162 top three rankings) 2. Bituminous Trails (138 top three rankings) 3. 3rd Playground Container (124 top three rankings) 4. Pickleball Plaza (114 top three rankings) 5. Planting Beds (51 top three rankings) Feedback on Vegetation and Shade • Preferred Vegetation Types: o Shade trees (141 votes) o Colorful shrubs and perennials (121 votes) o Ornamental flowering trees (111 votes) o Native plantings and mowed turf (107 votes) o Prairie restoration (82 votes) Splashpad Design • Theme Preferences: o Most liked: Nature (126 strongly like) o Additional Suggestions: Dinosaur, Minnesota heritage, floral themes, and Corcoran’s farming roots. • Sprayer Preferences: o Strong preference for both above and ground-level sprayers (154 votes). Playground Features • Top Prioritized Equipment (Determined by combining the top three preferences for each amenity): 1. Slides (165 top three rankings) 2. Climbers (132 top three rankings) 3. Zipline (119 top three rankings) 4. Bridges (117 top three rankings) 5. Spinning Amenities (55 top three rankings) • Accessible/Inclusive Features: o Strong preference for paved pathways with accessible slopes, accessible ramps/bridges, and accessible swings. • Swing Options: o Most preferred: Individual swings. o All other options listed were within 14 votes of each other. • Hillside Features: o Most liked: Tall embankment slides and hillside climbing loops. • Shade Integration Preferences: o Shade trees near seating areas (145 votes) 584 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288 www.corcoranmn.gov o Fabric shade sails (118 votes) o Small shelters or pavilions (104 votes) Additional Desired Amenities Key requests include: • Dog Park/Off-leash Area • Pickleball Facilities • Trail Connections (e.g., Rush Creek and perimeter walking trails) • Restrooms and Drinking Fountains • Seating and Picnic Areas Demographics Residency: • Corcoran: 179 • Hennepin County: 48 • Bordering City: 12 90% of the respondents reported living in Corcoran. Size of the household: • Adult(s) only: 68 • Adult(s), 1 child: 36 • Adult(s), 2-4 children: 76 • Adult(s), 4+ children: 10 • Prefer not to answer: 7 Age: • >18: 3 • 18-24: 4 • 25-34: 40 • 35-44: 82 • 45-54: 22 • 55-64: 17 • 65+ years old: 21 • Prefer not to answer: 8 Attachments None 585 58 6 587 58 8 58 9 59 0 LOCATION OF PROJECT (NEW PLAYGROUND) ATTACHMENT D - PHOTOS - CORCORAN PARK PLAYGROUND 591 OLD PLAYGROUND - 2000 - TO BE REMOVED 592 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.j Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Lauren Letsche Topic: Street Maintenance - Maltene Based Restorative Seal Quote Action Required: Decision Summary Annually, the City contracts for street maintenance. For 2025 quotes were sent to select firms. Corrective Asphalt Materials, LLC was the sole source bidder on the project. A quote was received on April 8th, 2025. A summary of the quote is provided below. Item Units Quantity Unity Rate Total Cost Mobilization Lump Sum 1 $3,385.00 $3,385.00 Maltene Based Application Sq. Yard 72,219 $1.08 $77,996.52 Post Application Sweeping Lump Sum 1 $7,850.00 $7,850.00 Base Quote Total $89,231.52 Alternate 1 Sq. Yard 3,026 $1.18 $3,570.68 Alternate 2 Sq. Yard 3,345 $1.18 $3,947.10 Alternate 3 Sq. Yard 3,220 $1.18 $3,799.60 Alternate Quote Total $11,317.38 Base + Alternate Quote Total $100,548.90 Financial/Budget Costs for these improvements are included in the 2025 budget ($100,000.00) Options 1. Authorized quote for the Bases Bid plus Alternates 1, 2, and 3 to Corrective Asphalt Materials, LLC. in the amount of $100,548.90 2. Authorize any combination of Base Bid plus Alternates 3. Decline. Recommendation Authorized quote for the Base Bid plus Alternates 1, 2, and 3 to Corrective Asphalt Materials, LLC. in the amount of $100, 548.90 Council Action Authorized quote for the Base Bid plus Alternates 1, 2, and 3 to Corrective Asphalt Materials, LLC. in the amount of $100,548.90 Attachments 1. Corcoran - 2025 Maltene Based Restorative Seal - Quote Form - CAM LLC.pdf 2. 2025 Reclamite Map.pdf 593 594 595 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.k Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Kevin Mattson Topic: Water Treatment Plant- Pay Request #23 Action Required: Approval Summary Staff is requesting payment to Rice Lake Construction Group for work completed through 3/28/2025 in the amount of $385,515.00. Financial/Budget No budgetary impacts. This project was funded through General Obligation Bonds, Series 2023A. Pay App #23 $385,515.00 Options Approve Pay App #23 in the amount of $385,515 to Rice Lake Construction Group. Recommendation Approve Pay App #23 in the amount of $385,515 to Rice Lake Construction Group. Council Action Approval Attachments 1. Corcoran WTP Pay App #23.pdf 596 Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE, PW Director From: Ash Hammerbeck, PE Steve Hegland, PE Project/File: 227704426 Date: March 27, 2025 Subject: Corcoran WTP - Pay Application #23 Council Action Requested Staff is recommending Council approve Pay Application #23 for the Corcoran Water Treatment Plant Project to Rice Lake Construction Group in the amount of $383,515.00. Summary Rice Lake continued work on the project including the HVAC Systems startup and owner training, sanding and patching walls, conduit and pipe painting, chemical feed piping, doors and windows, fittings, valves, and accessories, plumbing fixtures and fittings, plant controls, interior fixtures and lamps, distribution equipment, and obtaining the necessary utilities and materials. The pay application includes work done to install filter media, filter underdrain, testing filter components, install the plant controls, electrical wiring, connections and hardware along with process pipe fittings and proper sealer and insulation . This pay request is for the work performed through 03/28/2025. The signed payment request form and pay application is attached for review. Total Contract Value to Date $ 17,135,788.72 Work Completed to Date $ 16,575,492.29 5% Retainage $ 828,774.61 Amount Paid to Date $15,363,202.68 Total Pay App #23 $ 383,515.00 Engineer’s Recommendation We have reviewed the request and recommend approving Pay Application #23 to Rice Lake Construction Group in the amount of $383,515.00 for the work completed and materials stored to date. 597 3/27/2025 59 8 59 9 60 0 60 1 60 2 60 3 60 4 60 5 60 6 60 7 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.l Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Kevin Mattson Topic: Corcoran Water Tower- Pay Request #23 Action Required: Approval Summary Staff is requesting payment to Phoenix Fabricators and Erectors for work completed through 3/31/2025 in the amount of $26,277.00. Financial/Budget No budgetary impacts. This project was funded through General Obligation Bonds, Series 2023A. Pay App #23 $26,277 Options Approve Pay App #23 in the amount of $26,277.00 to Phoenix Fabricators and Erectors. Recommendation Approve Pay App #23 in the amount of $26,277.00 to Phoenix Fabricators and Erectors. Council Action Approval Attachments 1. Corcoran Water Tower Pay App #23.pdf 608 Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE, PW Director From: Daryl Kirschenman, PE Steve Hegland, PE Project/File: 227705274 Date: April 1, 2025 Subject: Pay Application #23 to Phoenix Fabricators and Erectors Council Action Requested We recommend the City Council review and approve Pay Application #23 for the Corcoran Water Tower Project to Phoenix Fabricators and Erectors in the amount of $26,277.00. This pay request covers work completed from March 1st through March 31st. Summary This pay request includes the tank mixing system and tank logo allowance. The tower has been online since March 26th, 2025. The signed payment request form and pay application are attached for your review, Total Contract Value to Date $4,674,756.08 Work Completed to Date $4,418,751.00 5% Retainage $220,937.55 Amount Paid to Date $4,171,536.45 Total Pay App #23 $26,277.00 Engineer’s Recommendation We recommend approving Pay Application #23 to Phoenix Fabricators and Erector’s in the amount of $26,277.00. 609 610 227705274 3927 TWENTYTWO From 03/01/25 To 03/31/25 03/31/25 A C D E F G H I J K L Item Quantity Units Unit Price ($) Value of Bid Item (C X E) ($) Estimated Quantity Incorporated in the Work Value of Work Completed to Date (E X G) ($) 1 1 LS 185,000.00 185,000.00 0.75 138,750.00 138,750.00 75% 46,250.00 2 1 LS 4,000.00 4,000.00 - - - 0% 4,000.00 3 1 LS 6,500.00 6,500.00 0.62 4,000.00 4,000.00 62% 2,500.00 4 1 LS 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.75 3,000.00 3,000.00 75% 1,000.00 5 50 CY 40.00 2,000.00 - - - 0% 2,000.00 6 1 EA 5,700.00 5,700.00 - - - 0% 5,700.00 7 355 LF 265.00 94,075.00 355.00 94,075.00 94,075.00 100% - 8 1 EA 31,000.00 31,000.00 1.00 31,000.00 31,000.00 100% - 9 18 LF 397.00 7,146.00 - - 0% 7,146.00 10 55 LF 117.00 6,435.00 55.00 6,435.00 6,435.00 100% - 11 2 EA 4,000.00 8,000.00 2.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 100% - 12 2 EA 8,512.00 17,024.00 2.00 17,024.00 17,024.00 100% - 13 4,000 LB 15.00 60,000.00 4,000.00 60,000.00 60,000.00 100% - 14 1 EA 1,800.00 1,800.00 1.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 100% - 15 20 SY 75.00 1,500.00 20.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 100% - 16 2 EA 1,000.00 2,000.00 2.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 100% - 17 1 LS 8,000.00 8,000.00 - - - 0% 8,000.00 18 1,750 SY 2.60 4,550.00 1,750.00 4,550.00 4,550.00 100% - 19 1,625 TN 49.00 79,625.00 1,625.00 79,625.00 79,625.00 100% - 20 175 TN 190.00 33,250.00 - - - 0% 33,250.00 21 225 TN 195.00 43,875.00 - - - 0% 43,875.00 22 510 LF 31.00 15,810.00 - - - 0% 15,810.00 23 410 LF 47.00 19,270.00 - - - 0% 19,270.00 24 1,250 LF 4.50 5,625.00 1,250.00 5,625.00 5,625.00 100% - 25 1 LS 8,500.00 8,500.00 - - - 0% 8,500.00 26 1.4 AC 8,220.00 11,508.00 - - - 0% 11,508.00 27 11 EA 820.00 9,020.00 - - - 0% 9,020.00 28 10 EA 670.00 6,700.00 - - - 0% 6,700.00 29 56 EA 100.00 5,600.00 - - - 0% 5,600.00 30 118 EA 28.00 3,304.00 - - - 0% 3,304.00 1 1 LS 115,000.00 115,000.00 1.00 115,000.00 115,000.00 100% - 1.10 1 LS 153,000.00 153,000.00 0.75 114,750.00 114,750.00 75% 38,250.00 1.11 1 LS 172,000.00 172,000.00 1.00 172,000.00 172,000.00 100% - 1.12 1 LS 194,000.00 194,000.00 1.00 194,000.00 194,000.00 100% - 1.13 1 LS 886,000.00 886,000.00 1.00 886,000.00 886,000.00 100% - 1.14 1 LS 1,216,994.00 1,216,994.00 1.00 1,216,994.00 1,216,994.00 100% - 1.15 1 LS 70,000.00 70,000.00 1.00 70,000.00 70,000.00 100% - 1.16 1 LS 380,000.00 380,000.00 1.00 380,000.00 380,000.00 100% - 1.17 1 LS 450,000.00 450,000.00 1.00 450,000.00 450,000.00 100% - 1.18 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.09 1,800.00 17,188.00 18,988.00 95% 1,012.00 1.19 1 LS 8,500.00 8,500.00 1.00 8,500.00 8,500.00 100% - MNDOT SEED MIXTURE 25-131 SHRUB 5 GAL. CONTAINER PERENNIAL 1 GAL. CONTAINER 2.5" B&B DECIDUOUS TREE 6' HT CONIFEROUS TREE BONDS / INSURANCE MOBILIZATION TANK DELIVERY TANK ERECTION TANK PAINTING TANK MIXING SYSTEM EROSION CONTROL ENGINEERING ALTERNATE A - 1,000,000 GALLON COMPOSITE TANK 20" GATE VALVE PART 1 SITE WORK MOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL SALVAGE, STOCKPILE & RESPREAD TOPSOIL 20" DIP WATERMAIN, CL 52, INCLUDE POLY WRAP B618 CURB SILT FENCE, MS INFILTRATION BASIN, FILTER FABRIC, 6' DRAIN TILE & 6' FLARED END SECTION B BITUMINOUS RIBBON CURB Original Contract % of Value of Item (J / F) (%) Balance to Finish (F - J) ($) BITUMINOUS WEAR SPWEA340B BITUMINOUS BASE SPNWB330B Description Work Completed Materials Currently Stored (not in G) ($) Work Completed and Materials Stored to Date (H + I) ($) Contract Information Bid Item No. TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PLACEMENT & REMOVAL COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN 20" PVC WATER MAIN 20" PVC WATERMAIN, C900 Contractor's Application for PaymentProgress Estimate - Unit Price Work Owner's Project No.: Engineer's Project No.: Contractor's Project No.: City of Corcoran Stantec Consulting Services Phoenix Fabricators & Erectors, LLC 1.0 MG Elevated Water Storage Tank Corcoran Water Tower Owner: Application Period:Application No.: Engineer: Contractor: Project: Contract: 6" DIP WATERMAIN, CL 52, INCLUDE POLY WRAP 6" GATE VALVE & BOX 6" HYDRANT DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS FOUNDATION TANK SHAFT TANK MATERIAL / SHOP FABRICATION AGGREGATE BASE 4' X 6' OVERFLOW SPLASHPAD CONCRETE SIDEWALK 8" BOLLARD CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V NON WEAR Application Date: Unit Price EJCDC C-620 Contractor's Application for Payment (c) 2018 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.1 of 3611 227705274 3927 TWENTYTWO From 03/01/25 To 03/31/25 03/31/25 A C D E F G H I J K L Item Quantity Units Unit Price ($) Value of Bid Item (C X E) ($) Estimated Quantity Incorporated in the Work Value of Work Completed to Date (E X G) ($) B % of Value of Item (J / F) (%) Balance to Finish (F - J) ($)Description Work Completed Materials Currently Stored (not in G) ($) Work Completed and Materials Stored to Date (H + I) ($) Contract Information Bid Item No. Contractor's Application for PaymentProgress Estimate - Unit Price Work Owner's Project No.: Engineer's Project No.: Contractor's Project No.: City of Corcoran Stantec Consulting Services Phoenix Fabricators & Erectors, LLC 1.0 MG Elevated Water Storage Tank Corcoran Water Tower Owner: Application Period:Application No.: Engineer: Contractor: Project: Contract: Application Date: 1.20 1 LS 160,000.00 160,000.00 0.92 147,200.00 147,200.00 92% 12,800.00 2 1 LS 25,000.00 25,000.00 1.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 100% - 3 825 CY 51.00 42,075.00 825.00 42,075.00 42,075.00 100% - 4 1 LS 120,000.00 120,000.00 1.00 120,000.00 120,000.00 100% - 4,703,386.00$ 4,400,703.00$ 17,188.00$ 4,417,891.00$ 94%285,495.00$ Original Contract Totals COMMON EXCAVATION & SITE GRADING ELECTRICAL / CONTROLS LOGO ALLOWANCE STRUCTURAL FILL BELOW FOUNDATION Unit Price EJCDC C-620 Contractor's Application for Payment (c) 2018 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.2 of 3612 227705274 3927 TWENTYTWO From 03/01/25 To 03/31/25 03/31/25 A C D E F G H I J K L Item Quantity Units Unit Price ($) Value of Bid Item (C X E) ($) Estimated Quantity Incorporated in the Work Value of Work Completed to Date (E X G) ($) B % of Value of Item (J / F) (%) Balance to Finish (F - J) ($)Description Work Completed Materials Currently Stored (not in G) ($) Work Completed and Materials Stored to Date (H + I) ($) Contract Information Bid Item No. Contractor's Application for PaymentProgress Estimate - Unit Price Work Owner's Project No.: Engineer's Project No.: Contractor's Project No.: City of Corcoran Stantec Consulting Services Phoenix Fabricators & Erectors, LLC 1.0 MG Elevated Water Storage Tank Corcoran Water Tower Owner: Application Period:Application No.: Engineer: Contractor: Project: Contract: Application Date: CO1 1.00 LS (19,576.92) (19,576.92) - - - 0% (19,576.92) CO1 1.00 LS 860.00 860.00 1.00 860.00 860.00 100% - CO3 1.00 LS (9,913.00) (9,913.00) - - - 0% (9,913.00) (28,629.92)$ 860.00$ -$ 860.00$ -3%(29,489.92)$ 4,674,756.08$ 4,401,563.00$ 17,188.00$ 4,418,751.00$ 95%256,005.08$ Project Totals Change Order Totals Original Contract and Change Orders Change Orders DEDUCT CITY SUPPLIED 20" BV VALVE ON RISER INCREASE LOGO ALLOWANCE DEDUCT WINTER FROST CHARGES FOR ELECTRICAL SERVICE Unit Price EJCDC C-620 Contractor's Application for Payment (c) 2018 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.3 of 3613 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.m Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Kevin Mattson Topic: Water Treatment Plant- Change Order #10 Action Required: Decision Summary Staff is requesting review and approval of Change Order #10 in the amount of $24,985.53 for the modifications associated with Change Order Proposals #36-#40. Financial/Budget Change Order #10 represents an increase to the Water Treatment Plant Project in the amount of $24,985.53. This project was funded through General Obligation Bonds, Series 2023A. Options Approve Change Order #10 in entirety Approve one or more Change Order Proposals #36-#40 Decline Change Order #10 in entirety Decline one or more Change Order Proposals #36-#40 Recommendation Approve Change Order #10 in entirety Council Action Approval Attachments 1. Corcoran WTP Change Order #10.pdf 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.n Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Jay Tobin Topic: Administrative Correction - Resolution 2025-32 Awarding the Sale of General Obligation Bonds - Series 2025 A Action Required: Approve Administrative Correction Summary Administrative changes were made to Exhibit C. Several items were previously omitted from the list are now included. Council Action Approval Attachments 1. Resolution 2025-32 Corcoran GO Bonds 2025A AWARD 4.7.25.docx 643 4907-9305-7063.3 Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the City Council of the City of Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota, was duly held in the City Hall in said City on Thursday, March 27, 2025, commencing at 7:00 P.M. The following members of the Council were present:McKee, Freidrich, Nichols, Vehrenkamp and the following were absent: Lanterman * * * * * * * * * The Mayor announced that the next order of business was consideration of the proposals which had been received for the purchase of the City’s General Obligation Bonds, Series 2025A, to be issued in the original aggregate principal amount of $3,695,000. The City Administratorpresented a tabulation of the proposals that had been received in the manner specified in the Notice of Sale for the Bonds. The proposals are as set forth in EXHIBIT A attached. After due consideration of the proposals, Member _Vehrenkamp then introduced the following written resolution, the reading of which was dispensed with by unanimous consent, and moved its adoption: 644 4907-9305-7063.3 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-32 A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2025A, IN THE ORIGINAL AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $3,695,000; FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “City”), as follows: Section 1.Sale of Bonds. 1.01.Authorization for Sale of Bonds. (a)Pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on February 13, 2025 (the “Authorizing Resolution”), the City authorized the sale of its General Obligation Bonds, Series 2025A (the “Bonds”), for the following purposes: (i)to finance certain capital improvements described in the capital improvement plan for years 2025 through 2029 (the “Capital Improvement Plan”) including but not costs associated with a new city hall and municipal facility in the City and the improvements to the City’s public works building including floor sealing and the acquisition and construction of a lean-to enclosure (the “CIP Project”), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, as amended, specifically Section 475.521, as amended (the “CIP Act”) in accordance with the Capital Improvement Plan adopted by the City Council on February 13, 2025by at least a 3/5 vote following a duly noticed public hearing; and (ii)to finance the acquisitionof equipment as set forth in EXHIBIT C attached hereto (the “Equipment”), pursuant to Chapter 475 and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 410.32 and 412.301, as amended (collectively, the “Equipment Act”). (b)As required by the Equipment Act, (i) the expected useful life of each item of Equipment is or will be at least as long as the term of the Certificates; and (ii) the principal amount of the Certificates will not exceed 0.25% of the estimated market value of taxable property in the City for the year 2025, which is the market value as last finally equalized. (c)The City issued its General Obligation Equipment Certificates of Indebtedness, Series 2022A in the original aggregate principal amount of $1,800,000 (the “2022 Bonds”) on June 2, 2022. The City has unexpended proceeds of the 2022 Bonds in the amount of $215,000. In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.65, the City Council hereby authorizes the use of such unexpended proceeds to pay additional costs of the acquisition and installation of the Equipment. 1.02.Issuance of General Obligation Bonds. (a)The City Council finds it necessary and expedient to the sound financial management of the affairs of the City to issue its General Obligation Bonds, Series 2025A (the “Bonds”), in the original aggregate principal amount of $3,695,000, pursuant to the CIP Act and 645 4907-9305-7063.3 3 the Equipment Act (collectively, the “Act”), to provide financing for the CIP Project and the acquisition of the Equipment. (b)The City is authorized by Section 475.60, subdivision 2(9) of the Act to negotiate the sale of the Bonds, it being determined that the City has retained an independent municipal advisor in connection with such sale. The City has retained Northland Securities, Inc. as its municipal advisor (the “Municipal Advisor”). The actions of the City staff and the City’s Municipal Advisor in negotiating the sale of the Bonds are ratified and confirmed in all aspects. 1.03.Award to the Purchaser and Interest Rates. The proposal of Robert W. Baird & Co., Incorporated, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, as syndicate manager (the “Purchaser”) to purchase the Bonds is hereby found and determined to be a reasonable offer and is hereby accepted, the proposal being to purchase the Bonds at a price of $3,925,794.85 (par amount of $3,695,000.00, plus a net original issue premium of $276,657.40, less an underwriter’s discount of $ $45,862.55), plus accrued interest, if any, for Bonds bearing interest as follows: Year of Maturity Interest Rate Year of Maturity Interest Rate 2027 5.00%2033 5.00% 2028 5.00 2034 5.00 2029 5.00 2035 5.00 2030 5.00 2036 5.00 2031 5.00 2038*4.00 2032 5.00 2041*4.00 *Term Bond True interest cost: 3.7038301% 1.04.Purchase Contract. The amount proposed by the Purchaser in excess of the minimum bid shall be credited to the accounts in the Debt Service Fund hereinafter created or deposited in the accounts of the Construction Fund hereinafter created, as determined by the City Administrator in consultation with the City’s municipal advisor. The City Administrator is directed to retain the good faith deposit of the Purchaser, pending completion of the sale of the Bonds. The Mayor and the City Administrator are directed to execute a contract with the Purchaser on behalf of the City. 1.05.Terms and Principal Amount of the Bonds. The City will forthwith issue and sell the Bonds pursuant to the Act, in the original aggregate principal amount of $3,695,000, originally dated the date of issuance, in fully registered form, in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, numbered No. R-1, upward, bearing interest as above set forth, and maturing serially on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: Year of Maturity Amount Year of Maturity Amount 2027 $350,000 2033 $255,000 2028 370,000 2034 265,000 2029 395,000 2035 280,000 2030 410,000 2036 295,000 2031 425,000 2038*150,000 2032 240,000 2041*260,000 *Term Bond 646 4907-9305-7063.3 4 (a)$3,160,000 the “Equipment Certificates”), maturing on February 1 in the years and in the amounts set forth below, will be used to finance the acquisition of the Equipment $3,160,000 of the principal amount of the Bonds (the “CIP Bonds”), maturing on February 1 in the years and in the amounts set forth below, will be used to finance the construction of the CIP Project: Year of Maturity Amount Year of Maturity Amount 2027 $325,000 2033 $220,000 2028 345,000 2034 230,000 2029 365,000 2035 245,000 2030 380,000 2036 255,000 2031 395,000 2038*70,000 2032 210,000 2041*120,000 *Term Bond (b)The remainder of the principal amount of the Bonds in the amount $535,000 of the principal amount of the Bonds (the “CIP Bonds”), maturing on February 1 in the years and in the amounts set forth below, will be used to finance the construction of the CIP Project: Year of Maturity Amount Year of Maturity Amount 2027 $25,000 2033 $35,000 2028 25,000 2034 35,000 2029 30,000 2035 35,000 2030 30,000 2036 40,000 2031 30,000 2038*80,000 2032 30,000 2041*140,000 *Term Bond 1.06.Optional Redemption. The City may elect on February 1, 2033, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2034. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC (as defined in Section 7 hereof) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant’s interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. 1.07.Mandatory Redemption; Term Bonds. The Bonds maturing on February 1, 2038and February 1, 2041 shall hereinafter be referred to collectively as the “Term Bonds.” The principal amount of the Term Bonds subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption on any date may be reduced through earlier optional redemptions, with any partial redemptions of the Term Bonds credited against future mandatory sinking fund redemptions of such Term Bond in such order as the City shall determine. The Term Bonds are subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption and shall be redeemed in part at par plus accrued interest on February 1 of the following years and in the principal amounts as follows: 647 4907-9305-7063.3 5 Sinking Fund Installment Date February 1, 2038 Term Bond Principal Amount 2037 $75,000 2038*75,000 ___________________ * Maturity Sinking Fund Installment Date February 1, 2041 Term Bond Principal Amount 2039 $85,000 2040 85,000 2041*90,000 ____________________ * Maturity Section 2.Registration and Payment. 2.01.Registered Form. The Bonds will be issued only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, is payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 2.02.Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond will be dated as of the last interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest payment date, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of original issue. The interest on the Bonds is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing February 1, 2026, to the registered owners of record as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not that day is a business day. 2.03.Registration. The City will appoint, and will maintain, a bond registrar, transfer agent, authenticating agent and paying agent (the “Registrar”). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto are as follows: (a)Register. The Registrar will keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond register in which the Registrar provides for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b)Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until that interest payment date. (c)Exchange of Bonds. Whenever anyBonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate 648 4907-9305-7063.3 6 principal amount and maturity as requested by the registered owner or the owner’s attorney in writing. (d)Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange will be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e)Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When a Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond until the Registrar is satisfied that the endorsement on the Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f)Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name a Bond is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes and payments so made to aregistered owner or upon the owner’s order will be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon the Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g)Taxes, Fees and Charges. The Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof for a transfer or exchange of Bonds, sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer or exchange. (h)Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. If a Bond becomes mutilated or is destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it and as provided by law, in which both the City and the Registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar will be cancelled by the Registrar and evidence of such cancellation must be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it is not necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. (i)Redemption. In the event any of the Bonds are called for redemption, notice thereof identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first class mail (postage prepaid) to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar and by publishing the notice if required by law. Failure to give notice by publication or by mail to any registered owner, or any defect therein, will not affect the validity of the proceedings for the redemption of Bonds. Bonds so called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided that the funds for the redemption are on deposit with the place of payment at that time. 2.04.Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City appoints Northland Bond Services, Northland Bond Services, a division of First National Bank of Omaha, Minneapolis, Minnesota as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Administratorare authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, the resulting corporation is authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges 649 4907-9305-7063.3 7 of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar upon 30 days’ notice and upon the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar must deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. On or before each principal or interest due date, without further order of this Council, the City Administrator must transmit to the Registrar money sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest then due. 2.05.Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds will be prepared under the direction of the City Administrator and executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Administrator, provided that those signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. If an officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, that signature or facsimile will nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if the officer had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, a Bond will not be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on a Bond is conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this Resolution. When the Bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated, the City Administrator will deliver the same to the Purchaser thereof upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the Purchaser is not obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. Section 3.Form of Bond. 3.01.Execution of the Bonds. The Bonds will be printed or typewritten in substantially the form as set forth in EXHIBIT B attached hereto. 3.02.Approving Legal Opinion. The City Administrator is authorized and directed to obtain a copy of the proposed approving legal opinion of Kutak Rock LLP, Minneapolis, Minnesota, which will be complete except as to dating thereof and to cause the opinion to be printed on or accompany each Bond. Section 4.Payment; Security; Pledges and Covenants. 4.01.Debt Service Fund. For the convenience and proper administration of the moneys to be borrowed and repaid on the Bonds, there is hereby created a special fund to be designated the Bonds will be payable from the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2025ADebt Service Fund (the “Debt Service Fund”) hereby created. The Debt Service Fund shall be administered and maintained by the City Administrator as a bookkeeping account separate and apart from all other funds maintained in the official financial records of the City. The Debt Service Fund will be maintained in the manner herein specified until all of the Bonds and the interest thereon have been fully paid. The City will maintain the following accounts in the Debt Service Fund: the “CIP Account” and the “Equipment Account.” Amounts in the CIP Account are irrevocably pledged to the CIP Bonds and amounts in the Equipment Account are irrevocably pledged to the Equipment Certificates. (a)CIP Account. The City Administrator shall timely deposit in the CIP Account of the Debt Service Fund the ad valorem taxes levied herein for the CIP Project, which ad valorem taxes are pledged to the CIP Account. There is also appropriated to the CIP Account a pro rata portion of (i) capitalized interest financed from the proceeds of the CIP Bonds, if any; (ii) a pro rata portion amounts over the minimum purchase price paid by the Purchaser, to the extent designated 650 4907-9305-7063.3 8 for deposit in the Debt Service Fund in accordance with Section 1.04 hereof; and (iii) any other funds appropriated for the payment of principal or interest on the CIP Bonds. (b)Equipment Account. The City Administrator shall timely deposit in the Equipment Account of the Debt Service Fund the ad valorem taxes levied herein for the acquisition and installation of the Equipment, which ad valorem taxes are pledged to the Equipment Account. There is also appropriated to the Equipment Account a pro rata portion of (i) capitalized interest financed from the proceeds of the Equipment Bonds, if any; (ii) a pro rata portion amounts over the minimum purchase price paid by the Purchaser, to the extent designated for deposit in the Debt Service Fund in accordance with Section 1.04 hereof; and (iii) any other funds appropriated for the payment of principal or interest on the Equipment Certificates. 4.02.Construction Fund. The City hereby creates the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2025A Construction Fund (the “Construction Fund”) to be administered and maintained by the Administrator as a bookkeeping account separate and apart from all other funds maintained in the official financial records of the City. The City will maintain the following accounts in the Construction Fund: the “CIP Account” and the “Equipment Account.” Amounts in the CIP Account are irrevocably pledged to the CIP Bonds and amounts in the Equipment Account are irrevocably pledged to the Equipment Certificates. (a)CIP Account. Proceeds of the CIP Bonds, less the appropriations made in Section 4.01(a) hereof, together with any other funds appropriated for the CIP Project, will be deposited in the CIP Account of the Construction Fund to be used solely to defray expenses of the the CIP Project. When the CIP Project has been acquired and the cost thereof paid, the CIP Account of the Fund is to be closed and any funds remaining may be deposited in the CIP Account of the Debt Service Fund or otherwise used in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.65. (b)Equipment Account. Proceeds of the Equipment Certificates, less the appropriations made in Section 4.01(b) hereof, will be deposited in the Equipment Accountof the Construction Fund to be used solely to defray expenses of the acquisition and installation of the Equipment. When the Equipment has been acquired and the cost thereof paid, the Equipment Account of the Construction Fund is to be closed and any funds remaining may be deposited in the Equipment Account of the Debt Service Fund or otherwise used in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.65. 4.03.General Obligation Pledge. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due, the full faith, credit and taxing powers of the City will be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. If the balance in the Debt Service Fund is ever insufficient to pay all principal and interest then due on the Bonds, the deficiency will be promptly paid out of monies in the general fund of the Citywhich are available for such purpose, and such general fund may be reimbursed with or without interest from the Debt Service Fund when a sufficient balance is available therein. 4.04.Pledge of Tax Levy. (a)CIP Bonds. For the purpose of paying all or a portion of the interest on the CIP Bonds, there is levied a direct annual irrepealable ad valorem tax (the “Taxes”) upon all of the taxable property in the City, which will be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of other general taxes of the City. The Taxes will be credited to the CIP Account of the Debt Service Fund above provided and will be in the years and amounts as attached hereto as EXHIBIT D. The tax levy herein provided will be irrepealable until all of the CIP Bonds are paid, provided that the City Administrator may annually, at the time the City makes its tax levies, certify to County Auditor/Treasurer of Hennepin County (the “County Auditor”) the amount available in the CIP Account of the Debt Service Fund to pay principal and interest due during the ensuing year on the 651 4907-9305-7063.3 9 CIP Bonds, and the County Auditor of the County will thereupon reduce the levy collectible during such year by the amount so certified. (b)Equipment Certificates. For the purpose of paying all or a portion of the interest on the Equipment Certificates, there is levied Taxes upon all of the taxable property in the City, which will be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of other general taxes of the City. The Taxes will be credited to the Equipment Account of the Debt Service Fund above provided and will be in the years and amounts as attached hereto as EXHIBIT E. The tax levy herein provided will be irrepealable until all of the Equipment Certificates are paid, provided that the City Administrator may annually, at the time the City makes its tax levies, certify to the County Auditor of the County the amount available in the Equipment Account of the Debt Service Fund to pay principal and interest due during the ensuing year on the Equipment Certificates, and the County Auditor of the County will thereupon reduce the levy collectible during such year by the amount so certified. 4.05.Certification County Auditor as to Debt Service Fund Amount. It is hereby determined that the estimated collection of the foregoing Taxes levied will produce at least 5% in excess of the amount needed to pay when due, the principal and interest payments on the CIP Bonds and the Equipment Certificates. 4.06.Filing of Resolution. The City Administratoris authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with County Auditor and to obtain the certificate required by Section 475.63 of the Act. Section 5.Authentication of Transcript. 5.01.City Proceedings and Records. The officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies of proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial condition and affairs of the City, and such other certificates, affidavits and transcripts as may be required to show the facts within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and under their control, relating to the validity and marketability of the Bonds, and such instruments, including any heretofore furnished, may be deemed representations of the City as to the facts stated therein. 5.02.Certification as to Official Statement. The Mayor, the Finance Manager and the City Administrator, or any of them, are hereby authorized and directed to certify that they have examined the Official Statement prepared and circulated in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that to the best of their knowledge and belief the Official Statement is a complete and accurate representation of the facts and representations made therein as of the date of the Official Statement. 5.03.Other Certificates. Mayor, the Finance Manager and the City Administrator, or any of them, are hereby authorized and directed to furnish to the Purchaser at the closing such certificates as are required as a condition of sale. Unless litigation shall have been commenced and be pending questioning the Certificates or the organization of the City or incumbency of its officers, at the closing the Mayor, the Finance Manager,and the City Administrator, or any of them, shall also execute and deliver to the Purchaser a suitable certificate as to absence of material litigation, and the City Administrator or Finance Manager shall also execute and deliver a certificate as to payment for and delivery of the Certificates. 5.04.Electronic Signatures. The electronic signature of the Mayor and/or the City Administrator, or any of them, to this resolution and to any certificate authorized to be executed hereunder shall be as valid as an original signature of such party and shall be effective to bind the City thereto. For purposes hereof, (i) “electronic signature” means (a) a manually signed original signature that is then 652 4907-9305-7063.3 10 transmitted by electronic means or (b) a signature obtained through DocuSign or Adobe or a similarly digitally auditable signature gathering process; and (ii) “transmitted by electronic means” means sent in the form of a facsimile or sent via the internet as a portable document format (“pdf”) or other replicating image attached to an electronic mail or internet message. Section 6.Tax Covenants. 6.01.Tax-Exempt Bonds. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions, and that it will take or cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative action within its power that may be necessary to ensure that such interest will not become subject to taxation under the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations, as presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds. To that end, the City will comply with all requirements necessary under the Code to establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds under Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods for investments, and limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Bonds. 6.02.Rebate. The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Certificates under Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods for investments, limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Certificates, and the rebate of excess investment earnings to the United States unless the Certificates qualify for an exception to the rebate requirement under the Code and related Treasury Regulations. 6.03.Not Private Activity Bonds. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of the Bonds or the CIP Project or Equipment financed by the Bonds or to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the Bonds to be “private activity bonds” within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the Code. 6.04.Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. In order to qualify the Bonds as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, the City makes the following factual statements and representations: (a)the Bonds are not “private activity bonds” as defined in Section 141 of the Code; (b)the City designates the Bonds as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code; (c)the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds that are not qualified 501(c)(3) bonds) which will be issued by the City (and all subordinate entities of the City) during calendar year 2025 will not exceed $10,000,000; and (d)not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City during calendar year 2025 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code. 6.05.Procedural Requirements. The City will use its best efforts to comply with any federal procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by this section. Section 7.Book-Entry System; Limited Obligation of City. 653 4907-9305-7063.3 11 7.01.DTC. The Bonds will be initially issued in the form of a separate single typewritten or printed fully registered Bond for each of the maturities set forth in Section 1.05 hereof. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of each Bond will be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York, and its successors and assigns (“DTC”). Except as provided in this section, all of the outstanding Bonds will be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. 7.02.Participants. With respect to Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the City, the Registrar and the Paying Agent will have no responsibility or obligation to any broker dealers, banks and other financial institutions from time to time for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository (the “Participants”) or to any other person on behalf of which a Participant holds an interest in the Bonds, including but not limited to any responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy of the records of DTC, Cede & Co. or any Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any Participant or any other person (other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown by the registration books kept by the Registrar) of any notice with respect to the Bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the payment to any Participant or any other person, other than a registered owner of Bonds, of any amount with respect to principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. The City, the Registrar and the Paying Agent may treat and consider the person in whose name each Bond is registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar as the holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of principal, premium and interest with respect to such Bond, for the purpose of registering transfers with respect to such Bonds, and for all other purposes. The Paying Agent will pay all principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds only to or on the order of the respective registered owners, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, and all such payments will be valid and effectual to fully satisfy and discharge the City’s obligations with respect to payment of principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, will receive a certificated Bond evidencing the obligation of this resolution. Upon delivery by DTC to the City Administrator of a written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the words “Cede & Co.” will refer to such new nominee of DTC; and upon receipt of such a notice, the City Administrator will promptly deliver a copy of the same to the Registrar and Paying Agent. 7.03.Representation Letter. The City has heretofore executed and delivered to DTC a Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations (the “Representation Letter”) which will govern payment of principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds and notices with respect to the Bonds. Any Paying Agent or Registrar subsequently appointed by the City with respect to the Bonds will agree to take all action necessary for all representations of the City in the Representation Letter with respect to the Registrar and Paying Agent, respectively, to be complied with at all times. 7.04.Transfers Outside Book-Entry System. In the event the City, by resolution of the City Council, determines that it is in the best interests of the persons having beneficial interests in the Bonds that they be able to obtain Bond certificates, the City will notify DTC, whereupon DTC will notify the Participants, of the availability through DTC of Bond certificates. In such event the City will issue, transfer and exchange Bond certificates as requested by DTC and any other registered owners in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event, if no successor securities depository is appointed, the City will issue and the Registrar will authenticate Bond certificates in accordance with this resolution and the provisions hereof will apply to the transfer, exchange and method of payment thereof. 654 4907-9305-7063.3 12 7.05.Payments to Cede & Co. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution to the contrary, so long as a Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, payments with respect to principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bond and notices with respect to the Bond will be made and given, respectively in the manner provided in DTC’s Operational Arrangements, as set forth in the Representation Letter. Section 8.Continuing Disclosure. 8.01.Execution of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. “Continuing Disclosure Certificate” means that certain Continuing Disclosure Certificate executed by the Mayor and the City Administrator and dated the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds, as originally executed and as it may be amended from time to time in accordance with the terms thereof. 8.02.City Compliance with Provisions of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. The City hereby covenants and agrees that it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the Continuing Disclosure Certificate. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution, failure of the City to comply with the Continuing Disclosure Certificate is not to be considered an event of default with respect to the Bonds; however, any Bondholder may take such actions as may be necessary and appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific performance by court order, to cause the City to comply with its obligations under this section. Section 9.Defeasance. When all Bonds (or all of either the CIP Bonds or Equipment Certificates portion thereof) and all accrued interest thereon have been discharged as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution (with respect to the CIP Bonds or Equipment Certificatesportion of the Bonds, as the case may be) to holders of the Bonds will cease, except that the pledge of the full faith and credit of the City for the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds will remain in full force and effect. The City may discharge all Bonds (or all of either the CIP Bondsor Equipment Certificatesportion thereof) which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full or by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a suitable institution qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States of America, or any other security authorized under Minnesota law for such purpose, bearing interest payable at such times and at such rates and maturing on such dates and in such amounts as shall be required and sufficient, subject to sale and/or reinvestment in like securities, to pay said obligation(s), which may include any interest payment on such Bond and/or principal amount due thereon at a stated maturity (or if irrevocable provision shall have been made for permitted prior redemption of such principal amount, at such earlier redemption date). If any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such deposit. (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Approved by the City Council of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota this 27th day of March, 2025. Mayor ATTEST: City Administrator 655 4907-9305-7063.3 13 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member _Nichols__ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 656 4907-9305-7063.3 A-1 EXHIBIT A PROPOSALS TABULATION OF BIDS CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA $3,960,000† GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2025A AWARD:ROBERT W. BAIRD & CO., INC. DATE OF SALE:THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2025 MOODY’S UNDERLYING RATING Aa2 BIDDER PURCHASE PRICE NET INTEREST COST TRUE INTEREST COST (TIC) ROBERT W. BAIRD & CO., INC $4,206,873.15 $1,013,403.52 3.6963153% Milwaukee, WI STONEX FINANCIAL INC.$4,182,600.25 $1,044,356.97 3.8222687% Winter Park, FL STIFEL, NICOLAUS & CO., INC.$4,096,108.85 $1,038,606.71 3.8694659% Birmingham, AL †Par amount decreased from $3,960,000 to $3,695,000. The adjusted purchase price is $3,925,794.85, plus accrued interest from the date of issue to the date of delivery, and the adjusted TIC is 3.7038301%. 657 B-1 4907-9305-7063.3 EXHIBIT B FORM OF BOND No. R-_____$________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF CORCORAN GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND SERIES 2025A Rate Maturity Date of Original Issue CUSIP %February 1, 20__April 29, 2025 Registered Owner: Cede & Co. The City of Corcoran, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal corporation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “City”), acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the Registered Owner specified above or registered assigns, the principal sum set forth above on the Maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual Rate specified above (calculated on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30 day months), payable February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1, 2026, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft or wire by Northland Bond Services, a division of First National Bank of Omaha, Minneapolis, Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Paying Agent, Transfer Agent and Authenticating Agent, or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. The City may elect on February 1, 2033, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2034. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant’s interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. The Bonds maturing on February 1, 2038 and February 1, 2041 shall hereinafter be referred to collectively as the “Term Bonds.” The principal amount of the Term Bonds subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption on any date may be reduced through earlier optional redemptions, with any partial redemptions of the Term Bonds credited against future mandatory sinking fund redemptions of such Term Bond in such order as the City shall determine. The Term Bonds are subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption and shall be redeemed in part at par plus accrued interest on February 1 of the following years and in the principal amounts as follows: 658 B-2 4907-9305-7063.3 Sinking Fund Installment Date February 1, 2038 Term Bond Principal Amount 2037 $75,000 2038*75,000 ____________________ * Maturity Sinking Fund Installment Date February 1, 2041 Term Bond Principal Amount 2039 $85,000 2040 85,000 2041*90,000 ____________________ * Maturity This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $3,695,000 all of like original issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date, interest rate, and redemption privilege, all issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on March 27, 2025 (the “Resolution”), for the purpose of providing money to defray the expenses incurred and to be incurred in the undertaking of the certain capital improvements to City facilities and the acquisition and installation of certain equipment, pursuant to and in full conformity with the home rule charter of the City and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, as amended, specifically Section 475.521, and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 410.32 and 412.301, as amended, and the principal hereof and interest hereon are payable from ad valorem taxes, as set forth in the Resolution to which reference is made for a full statement of rights and powers thereby conferred. The full faith and credit of the City are irrevocably pledged for payment of this Bond and the City Council has obligated itself to levy additional ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City in the event of any deficiency in ad valorem taxes, which taxes may be levied without limitation as to rate or amount. The Bonds of this series are issued only as fully registered Bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof of single maturities. The City Council has designated the issue of Bonds of which this Bond forms a part as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) relating to disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions and within the $10 million limit allowed by the Code for the calendar year of issue. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the home rule charter of the City and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Certificate in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required, and that the issuance of this Certificate does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional, statutory or charter limitation of indebtedness. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner’s attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner’s attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at 659 B-3 4907-9305-7063.3 the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar will be affected by any notice to the contrary. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the home rule charter of the City and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required, and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional, statutory, or charter limitation of indebtedness. This Bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon has been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile or manual signatures of the Mayor and the City Administrator and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. Dated: April 29, 2025 CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA (Facsimile)(Facsimile) Mayor City Administrator _________________________________ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. NORTHLAND BOND SERVICES By Authorized Representative _________________________________ ABBREVIATIONS 660 B-4 4907-9305-7063.3 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, will be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM -- as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT _________ Custodian _________ (Cust)(Minor) TEN ENT -- as tenants by entireties under Uniform Gifts or Transfers to Minors Act, State of _______________ JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. ________________________________________ ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto ________________________________________ the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint _________________________ attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Notice:The assignor’s signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change whatever. Signature Guaranteed: NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a financial institution that is a member of the Securities Transfer Agent Medallion Program (“STAMP”), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program (“SEMP”), the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. Medallion Signatures Program (“MSP”) or other such “signature guarantee program” as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to, or in substitution for, STAMP, SEMP or MSP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information concerning the assignee requested below is provided. Name and Address: (Include information for all joint owners if this Bond is held by joint account.) 661 B-5 4907-9305-7063.3 Please insert social security or other identifying number of assignee PROVISIONS AS TO REGISTRATION The ownership of the principal of and interest on the within Bond has been registered on the books of the Registrar in the name of the person last noted below. Date of Registration Registered Owner Signature of Registrar April 29, 2025 Cede & Co. Federal ID #13-2555119 662 C-1 4907-9305-7063.3 EXHIBIT C Equipment Annual PD Radio Fleet Purchase Records Management System Software Ford SUV Explorer (583) Ford SUV Explorer (581) Ford SUV Explorer (582) Ford SUV Explorer (580) Ford SUV Explorer (584) Sign Trailer Speed Trailer PD Lockers Side by Side Utility Support and Protection Equipment Ez Go Golf Cart Pickup Dump Truck - Single Axle Dump Truck - Tandem Street Sweeper Mower Pickup with Plow BoMag Mini Sheeps Foot Compactor Felling Trailer Landa Pressure Washer BS&A Cloud IT Networking Annual PD Radio Fleet Purchase Chev Truck (CSO 571) Ford SUV Explorer Chev Tahoe (572) SIU/Narcotics Vehicle MDCs - Replace Squad Computers Support and Protection Equipment Fire SUV Enclosed Gator for Recreation Crack Filler Dump Truck - Tandem Woodchipper Road Widener Shoulder Machine Pickup 96" Mower 663 C-2 4907-9305-7063.3 144" Mower Pull Behind Mower I/R Doosan 185 Air Compressor 664 D-1 4907-9305-7063.3 EXHIBIT D TAX LEVY SCHEDULE Tax Levy for CIP Bonds Date Total P+I CIF 105% Levy Levy Year Collection Year 02/01/2026 18,548.89 (18,548.89)- 02/01/2027 49,550.00 -52,027.50 2025 2026 02/01/2028 48,300.00 -50,715.00 2026 2027 02/01/2029 52,050.00 -54,652.50 2027 2028 02/01/2030 50,550.00 -53,077.50 2028 2029 02/01/2031 49,050.00 -51,502.50 2029 2030 02/01/2032 47,550.00 -49,927.50 2030 2031 02/01/2033 51,050.00 -53,602.50 2031 2032 02/01/2034 49,300.00 -51,765.00 2032 2033 02/01/2035 47,550.00 -49,927.50 2033 2034 02/01/2036 50,800.00 -53,340.00 2034 2035 02/01/2037 48,800.00 -51,240.00 2035 2036 02/01/2038 47,200.00 -49,560.00 2036 2037 02/01/2039 50,600.00 -53,130.00 2037 2038 02/01/2040 48,800.00 -51,240.00 2038 2039 02/01/2041 52,000.00 -54,600.00 2039 2040 Total $761,698.89 (18,548.89)$780,307.50 665 E-1 4907-9305-7063.3 EXHIBIT E TAX LEVY SCHEDULE Tax Levy for Equipment Certificates Date Principal Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 105% Levy 04/29/2025 ---- 02/01/2026 -117,942.22 117,942.22 117,942.22 08/01/2026 -78,050.00 78,050.00 - 02/01/2027 325,000.00 78,050.00 403,050.00 481,100.00 505,155.00 08/01/2027 -69,925.00 69,925.00 - 02/01/2028 345,000.00 69,925.00 414,925.00 484,850.00 509,092.50 08/01/2028 -61,300.00 61,300.00 - 02/01/2029 365,000.00 61,300.00 426,300.00 487,600.00 511,980.00 08/01/2029 -52,175.00 52,175.00 - 02/01/2030 380,000.00 52,175.00 432,175.00 484,350.00 508,567.50 08/01/2030 -42,675.00 42,675.00 - 02/01/2031 395,000.00 42,675.00 437,675.00 480,350.00 504,367.50 08/01/2031 -32,800.00 32,800.00 - 02/01/2032 210,000.00 32,800.00 242,800.00 275,600.00 289,380.00 08/01/2032 -27,550.00 27,550.00 - 02/01/2033 220,000.00 27,550.00 247,550.00 275,100.00 288,855.00 08/01/2033 -22,050.00 22,050.00 - 02/01/2034 230,000.00 22,050.00 252,050.00 274,100.00 287,805.00 08/01/2034 -16,300.00 16,300.00 - 02/01/2035 245,000.00 16,300.00 261,300.00 277,600.00 291,480.00 08/01/2035 -10,175.00 10,175.00 - 02/01/2036 255,000.00 10,175.00 265,175.00 275,350.00 289,117.50 08/01/2036 -3,800.00 3,800.00 - 02/01/2037 35,000.00 3,800.00 38,800.00 42,600.00 44,730.00 08/01/2037 -3,100.00 3,100.00 - 02/01/2038 35,000.00 3,100.00 38,100.00 41,200.00 43,260.00 08/01/2038 -2,400.00 2,400.00 - 02/01/2039 40,000.00 2,400.00 42,400.00 44,800.00 47,040.00 08/01/2039 -1,600.00 1,600.00 - 02/01/2040 40,000.00 1,600.00 41,600.00 43,200.00 45,360.00 08/01/2040 -800.00 800.00 - 02/01/2041 40,000.00 800.00 40,800.00 41,600.00 43,680.00 Total $3,160,000.00 $967,342.22 $4,127,342.22 -4,209,870.00 666 4907-9305-7063.3 STATE OF MINNESOTA CERTIFICATE OF TAXPAYER SERVICES DIVISION MANAGER AS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN TO TAX LEVY AND REGISTRATION I, the undersigned Auditor/Treasurerof Hennepin County, Minnesota, hereby certify that a certified copy of a resolution adopted by the governing body of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota (the “City”), on March 27, 2025, levying taxes for the payment of the City’s General Obligation Bonds, Series 2025A, issued in the original aggregate principal amount of $3,695,000 dated as of April 29, 2025, has been filed in my office and said bonds have been entered on the register of obligations in my office and that such tax has been levied as required by law. WITNESS My hand and official seal this _____ day of __________, 2025. Auditor/Treasurer Hennepin County, Minnesota (SEAL) 667 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 6.o Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Deb Johnson Topic: Charitable Gambling Application - Heroes Helping Heroes. Action Required: Approval Summary Non-profit organization Heroes Helping Heroes has applied for a charitable gambling license in coordination with an event being held at the Stanchion on July 12, 2025 during the Hamel Rodeo. This event has been hosted at the Stanchion in past years by other organizations such as Ducks Unlimited and Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. The application meets the criteria and the organization has provided proof of non-profit status by submitting a Certificate of Good Standing from the MN Secretary of State. Recommendation Adopt Resolution 2025-36 Approving Charitable Gambling License to Heroes Helping Heroes for event on July 12, 2025 at the Stanchion. Council Action Adopt Resolution 2025-36 Approving Charitable Gambling License to Heroes Helping Heroes for event on July 12, 2025. Attachments 1. Approving Charitable Gambling Permit - Stanchion 07.12.2025.pdf 2. LG2200 Application for Exempt Permit - Heroes Helping Heroes (redacted)_Redacted.pdf 668 City of Corcoran April 10, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2025-36 Motion By: Friedrich Seconded By: Vehrenkamp A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHARITABLE GAMBLING IN THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Corcoran that the following Charitable Gambling License is granted effective for the dates as indicated, to the following Licensee, which provided appropriate application. LICENSEE LICENSE LICENSE EFFECTIVE DATE Heroes Helping Heroes 4828 Bennett St. SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 Charitable Gambling July 12, 2025 (Bingo) Event located at The Stanchion 20037 County Road 10 Corcoran, MN 55340 VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Friedrich, Michelle Friedrich, Michelle Lanterman, Mark Lanterman, Mark Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 10th day of April, 2025. Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: City Seal Debra Johnson – City Clerk Page 1 of 1 669 X X X X X 670 671 672 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 8.a Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Nalisha Williams Deb Johnson Topic: Draft Ordinance No. 2025-545 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Action Required: Direction Summary The City of Corcoran has discussed the regulation of Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants at the City Council meetings on June 9, 2011, November 12, 2015, November 9, 2017, April 14, 2022, and August 8, 2024. Staff have also received complaints from the community regarding door-to-door sales. At the April 14, 2022, City Council meeting the Council directed staff to move forward with creation of a draft ordinance regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants. The direction included starting with the League of MN Cities model ordinance and working with the City Attorney to expand some of the restrictions and limitations, as appropriate, along with simplifying the exclusion placard requirements. Staff indicated that they would begin working on the draft. Due to staffing changes, the draft ordinance was delayed. At the August 8, 2024, City Council meeting the Council directed staff to develop an ordinance based on the Council’s discussion. Since that time, the guiding information from the League of Minnesota Cities and the model ordinance have been updated. In addition, there is one new council member and several staff changes. Staff has included a draft ordinance (awaiting City Attorney’s review) for the Council to provide feedback – the draft ordinance incorporates language from the cities of Medina and Green River (suggested at the August 8, 2024 City Council meeting). Financial/Budget This will incur cost to the City in staff time and legal fees. The extent of that cost will depend on how much development and legal review is required. The City Council will also have to set a fee for licensing. Recommendation Provide staff with feedback on the draft ordinance. Council Action 1. Provide staff with feedback on the draft ordinance. 2. Provide staff with other guidance. Attachments 1. DRAFT Ordinance 2025-545 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, Transient Merchants updated 4.9.25 clean.pdf 673 2. LMC Memo Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient-Merchants.pdf 3. Sample No Solicitation Sign.pdf 4. Sample Badge.pdf 674 City of Corcoran December 19, 2011 City of Corcoran Month XX, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2025-545 Motion By: Seconded By: AN ORDINANCE REGULATING PEDDLERS, SOLICITORS, TRANSIENT MERCHANTS AND DOOR-TO-DOOR ADVOCATES THE CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Chapter 120: Peddlers, Solicitors, Transient Merchants and Door-to-Door Advocates 120.01. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to promote the public health, safety, and welfare by protecting the privacy of residents and their properties by discouraging fraudulent sale of or solicitation of goods or services or fraudulent solicitation on behalf of organizations or causes and by protecting against persons of criminal intent who travel from place to place in the city under a guise of legitimacy. 120.02. Definitions. For the purposes of this ordinance, the following terms shall have the meanings given to them: Subd. 1. “Peddler” means any person who goes from house to house, place to place or street to street conveying or transporting goods, wares or merchandise or offering or exposing the same for sale, or making sales and delivering immediately upon sale, goods, wares, merchandise or articles to purchasers. Subd. 2. “Solicitor” means any person who goes from house to house, place to place or street to street soliciting or taking orders for the sale of goods, wares or merchandise of any nature for future delivery, or for services to be performed in the future, regardless of whether such individual has, carries or exposes for sale a sample of the subject of such order or whether advance payment on such orders is collected. Solicitation shall include any effort to obtain orders even though such may not initially purport to be the case. Subd. 3.“Door-to-Door Advocate” means any person who goes door-to-door for the primary purpose of disseminating religious, political, social or other ideological materials or advocating such beliefs. For purposes of this ordinance, door-to-door advocacy includes door-to-door canvassing and pamphleting for non-commercial purposes. Subd. 4. “Transient Merchant” means any person who engages in, does or transacts any temporary business in the city, out of a vehicle, building, structure, trailer, boxcar, tent, vacant lot or other portable shelter either in one locality or in traveling from place to place in the city selling or exhibiting for sale goods, wares or merchandise, and who, for the purpose of carrying on such business, does not remain in any one location for more than fourteen (14) consecutive days. Subd. 5. “Person” means any individual, partnership, corporation, organization, society or association acting as a peddler, solicitor, transient merchant or door-to-door advocate. 675 City of Corcoran December 19, 2011 City of Corcoran Month XX, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2025-545 120.03. License Required. Except as listed in sections 120.08, no person shall engage in or follow the business of a peddler or transient merchant without first having obtained a license from the city. 120.04. Application Application for a peddler or transient merchant license shall be made to the city clerk on the forms provided by the city. The application shall contain at least the following information and shall be signed by the applicant. A photograph will be taken of the applicant and an identification badge will be distributed upon approval of the license application. (a) Name and any other names under which the applicant has or does conduct business; (b) A valid photo Identification (driver’s license, passport, citizenship or green card); (c) Complete permanent home, local address and telephone numbers of the applicant and the cellular phone number at which the applicant may be reached while working; (d) The name and address of the employer and principal business, parent organization or supplier of the applicant; (e) A Minnesota Tax Identification Number or Federal Tax Identification Number for the employer and principal business, organization or supplier; (f) A brief description of the nature of the business and goods to be sold; (g) The source of supply of goods or property proposed to be sold, or orders taken for the sale thereof, the location of such goods or products at the time of the application, and the proposed method of delivery; (h) If applicant is offering building or home improvement services, a current contractor’s license number as issued by the State of Minnesota; (i) The dates and hours of the day during which the business will be carried on; (j) A statement as to whether the applicant has been convicted of any misdemeanor, gross misdemeanor or felony within the past ten (10) years for violation of any statute, law, or ordinance, other than traffic violations, the date and nature of the offense and punishment of penalty assessed therefore; (k) The names of other municipalities, not to exceed five in number, where the applicant carried on similar business immediately preceding the date of application and the address from which such business was conducted in those municipalities. (l) If a transient merchant, written permission of the owner of the property from which sales will be conducted. (m) If a transient merchant, a copy of the license issued by Hennepin County; (n) If a vehicle is to be used, a description of the vehicle, together with state of registration and license number; (o) The required fee; and 676 City of Corcoran December 19, 2011 City of Corcoran Month XX, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2025-545 (p) Any other information reasonably required by the city in order to conduct an investigation of the applicant. 120.05. Application Fee. The application fee for a peddler or transient merchant license shall be set by the ordinance in the city fee schedule. The fee shall be non-refundable regardless of whether the license is issued or denied and shall not be prorated even if the license is issued for less than the six-month period. 120.06. Issuance of License Subd. 1. Upon receipt of the completed application for a peddler or transient merchant license, including the required fee, the city clerk shall transmit a copy of the application to the police department who has the authority to conduct a criminal history and driver’s license check on the applicant through the State of Minnesota, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. Subd. 2. Within five days of receipt of a report from the police and other public officials recommending approval of the license application the city clerk shall contact the applicant to complete the license process in person. The applicant’s photo will be taken at that time and then be issued an identification badge which will serve as the permit. The Identification badge must be always displayed while soliciting and shall be exhibited by the applicant upon request by a police officer or any person in the city who may encounter the applicant in connection with the licensed activity. Licenses shall be valid for a period of time stated thereon but shall expire six months from the date of issuance. The city clerk shall maintain a record of all licenses issued hereunder. Subd. 3. Within five days of receipt of a report from the police and other public officials recommending denial of a license application, the city clerk shall deny the application and notify the applicant in writing of the denial. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the city clerk to deny a license may appeal such denial to the city council by submitting a written request to the city clerk within 15 business days of receipt and notification of denial. The city council shall hear the applicant’s appeal at its next regular meeting occurring not sooner than 10 days after receipt of the appeal by the city. 120.07 Grounds for Denial of License. The following shall be grounds for denial of an application for a peddler or transient merchant license: (a) Omission or misrepresentation of any material fact or information on the application; (b) Revocation or suspension within the previous five years of any peddler or transient merchant license in any jurisdiction; (c) Failure or refusal to consent to a background check; (d) Previous, repeated violations of the this ordinance or non-payment of the license fee or administrative fines; (e) Conviction within the previous ten years of any crime involving fraud, deceit or misrepresentation in any trade or business or of any crime which reflects adversely 677 City of Corcoran December 19, 2011 City of Corcoran Month XX, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2025-545 on the applicant’s suitability to conduct business or of any crime involving any form of actual or threatened physical harm to another; (f) Intent to sell or take orders for the sale of any goods, wares, merchandise or services which are illegal or injurious to the public health, safety or welfare; or (g) Revocation or suspension by any jurisdiction of any other license or permit required to conduct business. 120.08 Exemptions. This ordinance shall not apply to the following: (a) Sale of personal property at wholesale to dealer is such articles; (b) Sale or delivery of newspapers or making contact for the purpose of establishing a delivery route for newspapers; (c) Delivery by merchants for goods purchased in the regular course of business; (d) Sale or delivery of items of food or drink to households on a regular route; (e) Sale to dealers by commercial travelers or selling agents in the usual course of business; (f) Sale of the products of the farm or garden occupied or cultivated by the seller; (g) A sale required by statute or by order of any court, or a bona fide auction sale pursuant to law; (h) A garage, rummage or similar sale involving household or other items owned and used by the seller; (i) Solicitation by an organization that is religious, political, non-profit, or educational in nature solely of its own members; (j) Non-commercial door-to-door advocates not engaged in the sale of any goods or services; or (k) Distribution of materials door to door free of charge. Exemption from the requirements of this ordinance does not include exemption from any other applicable provision of the code of ordinances unless an exemption under such other provision also applies. 120.09 Door-to-Door Advocate Exemption. No license shall be required under this ordinance for any person going door-to-door for the purpose of advocating any religious, political, social or other position or belief protected by federal and state constitution. This exemption does not apply, and such person is required to obtain a license if the exercise of a person’s constitutional rights are merely incidental to a commercial activity. 678 City of Corcoran December 19, 2011 City of Corcoran Month XX, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2025-545 120.10. Prohibited Activities No peddler, solicitor, transient merchant or door-to-door advocate shall conduct business or activities in any of the following manners: (a) Calling attention to any goods or services by means of blowing a horn or whistle, ringing a bell, crying out, using amplified sound or any other noise in an unreasonably audible manner; (b) Obstruction of vehicular or pedestrian traffic on any street, sidewalk, alleyway or right-of way; (c) Alleging false or misleading statements about the goods or services being sold including untrue statements of endorsement by the city solely based on the city having issued a license to that person; (d) Conducting business or activities other than permitted hours; (e) Failing to produce a license and identification when applicable and requested by a police officer or any other person in the city when requested; (f) Using the license of another person or a false license; (g) Remaining on the property of another after being requested to leave; (h) Failing to heed any no solicitation or similar notice posted on the property; (i) Selling or taking orders for the sale of any goods or services which are illegal or injurious to the public health, safety or welfare; or (j) Conducting business or activities in any manner which a reasonable person would find threatening, intimidating or abusive. 120.11. Licenses Not Transferable. No license or certificate issued pursuant to this ordinance shall be transferable. Each individual shall be separately licensed or certified when more than one individual is involved in a sales or advocacy activity. 120.12. Use of Property. No person licensed or certified under this ordinance has an exclusive right to any specific location on public property, nor shall a stationary location thereon be permitted. No Person licensed or certified under this ordinance shall operate in a congested area so that such operation creates a public safety hazard or nuisance or where he or she may impede or interfere with traffic. Nothing in this ordinance shall be deemed to permit persons licensed or certified hereunder to use private property without the consent of the property owner. 120.13. Exclusion by Placard. Any person who wishes to exclude peddlers and solicitors from premises he or she occupies may place upon or near the usual entrance to such premises a conspicuous printed placard or sign bearing a notice that peddlers and solicitors are prohibited. No peddler or solicitor shall enter in or upon any premises or attempt to enter in or upon any premises where such a placard or sign is placed and maintained notwithstanding the fact that he or she may have obtained a license under the provisions of this ordinance. No person other than the occupant shall remove, damage or deface such placard or sign. 679 City of Corcoran December 19, 2011 City of Corcoran Month XX, 2025 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2025-545 120.14. Suspension or Revocation. Any license may be suspended or revoked by the City Clerk upon reasonable evidence the person is or has become ineligible for a license under section 120.07 or for any violation of section 120.10. The City Clerk shall notify the person of the suspension or revocation in writing at the person’s permanent address or place of business at the addresses provided on their application. Any person aggrieved by the suspension or revocation of a license under this section may appeal the suspension or revocation to the city council in the manner specified in section 6 of this ordinance. 120.15. Hours of Solicitations. Peddlers, solicitors and door-to-door advocates may engage in sales or activities daily between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. or until sundown, whichever occurs first. 120.16. Violations. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 120.17. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its publication and passage. ADOPTED by the City Council on the _____th day of ______, 2025. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Friedrich, Michelle Friedrich, Michelle Lanterman, Mark Lanterman, Mark Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Debra Johnson – City Clerk 680 This material is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice. Consult your attorney for advice concerning specific situations. 145 University Ave. West www.lmc.org 11/9/2023 Saint Paul, MN 55103-2044 (651) 281-1200 or (800) 925-1122 © 2023 All Rights Reserved INFORMATION M EMO Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Describes possible ways cities can regulate peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants. Learn how to differentiate between the persons and practices to avoid legal challenges. Understand the meaning of reasonable regulations that do not violate any rights protected by the state or federal constitutions. Contains easy-to-use charts on local authority and whether to license or merely register. RELEVANT LINKS: I. Why regulate peddlers, solicitors, or transient merchants Peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants can provide benefits and challenges to cities and their residents. They provide an opportunity to bring interested parties (such as buyers and sellers, or donors and charitable, religious, or nonprofit organizations) together. However, they can also cause problems not typically associated with permanently established local businesses. Bad experiences can lead disgruntled home and business owners to contact their local officials demanding relief, including: • Protection from fraud, scam artists, and other unwanted intrusions. • Prevention of crimes and unlawful activities. • A direct city response to their uneasiness and need for safety in the community. Minnesota cities have the authority, both specifically within state statutes and under their general police powers, to regulate the activities of peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants. However, this authority is not absolute. Regulations must be “reasonable” and not violate any rights protected by the state or federal constitutions. II. Classifications State and local governments have used different terms to describe individuals who travel city-to-city or door-to-door offering products and services for sale or expressing ideological and religious beliefs. The most common names for those participating in these general practices include: 681 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 2 Section II-A, Peddlers. Section II-B, Solicitors and canvassers. Section II-C, Transient merchants. • Peddlers • Solicitors • Transient merchants • Hawkers • Canvassers • Advocates • Itinerant vendors • Hucksters • Proselytizers • Door-to-door salespersons • Drummers • Missionaries Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants, LMC Model Ordinance. Such terms (and others) are generally defined by state statute or city ordinance. Language is often used interchangeably but may be applied differently depending on the relevant jurisdiction involved. Despite the use of these various terms for generally similar practices, there are fundamental differences in actual operations that affect a local government’s ability to regulate a particular type of activity. A. Peddlers City of St. Paul v. Briggs, 85 Minn. 290, 88 N.W. 984 (1902). A peddler is generally described as someone who: • Travels about from place to place with no fixed place of business. • Carries the actual merchandise offered for sale, not merely samples of such products. • Sells the merchandise at the time it is offered for sale. • Delivers the merchandise at the time the sale is consummated. • Sells to the ultimate consumer and not to a retail establishment for an expected resale of the merchandise. Also commonly known as hawkers, peddlers carry the actual products offered for sale from place to place. Section V,-Local regulations. Cities generally have the authority to either license or register peddlers who wish to operate within the city’s jurisdiction. Section IV-C, Commerce Clause. Section II-B, Solicitors and canvassers. The licensing or regulation of peddlers usually does not raise constitutional concerns under the Commerce Clause because both product delivery and payment occur during the initial interaction. With peddling, goods are not typically shipped into the local jurisdiction for delivery at a later date and time. 682 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 3 B. Solicitors and canvassers Excelsior Baking Co. v. City of Northfield, 247 Minn. 387, 77 N.W.2d 188 (1956). Edwards v. City of Reno, 103 Nev. 347, 742 P.2d 486 (1987). A solicitor also engages in door-to-door activities. However, unlike a peddler, a merchant solicitor goes from place to place and only obtains orders for goods or services that will be delivered or performed at a later date. Solicitors do not carry the merchandise they are offering for sale with them. Most often, a solicitor will use samples, or carry catalogues illustrating the goods or services available. All Parks Alliance for Change v. Uniprop Manufactured Housing Cmtys. Income Fund, 732 N.W.2d 189 (Minn. 2007). Although this memo often uses the terms “solicitors” and “solicitation” interchangeably with “canvassers” and “canvassing,” canvassing refers to the practice of going from location to location with the primary purpose of furthering religious, social, or political advocacy. Unlike solicitors, financial profit is not the canvassers’ primary motivation. A canvasser (sometimes known as an advocate) may: • Ask for signatures on a petition. • Request support for a political candidate or position. • Espouse religious beliefs or causes. • Seek donations, organization memberships, or other financial support for their religious, social, or political organizations. • Take orders for goods, to be delivered at a later time, in order to raise money for a non-profit or other charitable organization’s operations. Section IV. Constitutional implications. The regulation of these types of door-to-door advocates involves many basic constitutional rights, including a canvasser’s freedom of speech and possibly freedom of religion, a solicitor’s Commerce Clause protections, and a homeowner’s privacy and property rights. Minn. Stat. § 412.221, subd. 19. Although statutory cities are specifically provided the power to “restrain or license and regulate” solicitors and canvassers (most home rule charter cities have similar language within their charters), most legal authorities suggest their authority is actually more limited. Section IV-C, Commerce Clause. A.G. Op. 59a-32 (Jan. 13, 1961). Section V-G, Registration. The major restriction on local licensing of solicitors is the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Minnesota attorney general has advised that because states are prohibited from interfering with interstate commerce, local governments cannot collect license fees from solicitors who take orders in one state for goods to be delivered in the future from another state. In contrast, a municipal ordinance requiring all solicitors, including interstate merchants, to simply register with local authorities before engaging in their business activities may be a reasonable local regulation of interstate commerce. 683 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 4 Section IV-A, Freedom of speech. And while most canvassing activities do not raise concerns under the commerce clause, these activities likely raise protections under the First Amendment. If the activity is pure advocacy (the expression of one’s views or religious principles), a local unit of government cannot impose a prior restraint, such as obtaining a license or registration before engaging in the activity. Unfortunately, it is less clear what regulations, if any, may be enacted when the canvassing involves the sale of goods and services that will be provided at a later date. So, while the city can license peddlers and transient merchants, it probably should not license most solicitors or canvassers. C. Transient merchants A transient merchant is someone who demonstrates the traits of both a peddler and the typical permanent business. Transient merchants are regulated under state law. Minn. Stat. § 329.099. A transient merchant is: • Any person, individual, partnership, limited liability company, or corporation. • That sells goods, wares, or merchandise. • From a vehicle, portable shelter, vacant building, structure, lot, or railroad car. • With the intent to remain in business at any one location for a limited period, usually no more than a few weeks. Minn. Stat. § 329.099. Pursuant to state statute, a “transient merchant” does not include the seller or exhibitor in a firearms collection show involving two or more sellers or exhibitors. Minn. Stat. § 329.10. Minn. Stat. § 329.11. Transient merchants are not allowed to begin their business operations without first applying for and obtaining a county-issued license. (In practice, however, a county may not be issuing such licenses.) The license application will include: • The applicant’s name. • The proposed place of business. • The type or manner of business to be conducted. • How long the business will operate at that location. Minn. Stat. § 329.11. A transient merchant pays a county license fee of $150 and provides a bond in an amount not less than $1,000, but no more than $3,000. 684 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 5 The bond is conditioned on the merchant conforming to all laws relating to transient merchants, complying with all material oral or written statements and representations made regarding merchandise offered for sale, as well as on the faithful performance of any warranties made with the merchandise. Minn. Stat. § 329.13. Minn. Stat. § 329.17. When goods are brought into the state by a nonresident and it is claimed that such stock is to be sold at reduced prices, it is considered prima facie (“on its face”) evidence that the person (partnership or corporation) selling those goods is a transient merchant. Anyone acting in violation of these requirements is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. Minn. Stat. § 329.15. Minn. Stat. § 412.221, subd. 19. Minn. Stat. § 437.02. In addition, statutory and home rule charter cities have the specific authority to adopt ordinances to regulate, control, and license transient merchants, as well as provide criminal penalties for violating city regulations. State ex rel. Greenwood v. Nolan, 108 Minn. 170, 122 N.W. 255 (1909). State v. Schmidt, 280 Minn. 281, 159 N.W.2d 113 (1968). Licensing or other city ordinances regulating transient merchants must apply uniformly to all transient dealers regardless of residence, locale, or otherwise. 94 A.L.R. 1076. A volume of legal authority recognizes classifications based on the temporary nature of transient merchants as valid, and finds that it is proper to distinguish between temporary enterprises and permanently established businesses. D. Commercial vs. non-commercial In addition to categorizing conduct as peddling, soliciting, or transient merchant sales, these activities also need to be evaluated as to whether they are commercial or non-commercial in nature. LMC information memo, Public Nuisances. Often, the action or conduct is a nuisance and possibly a violation of city ordinance. In reality, it is not that easy to define community concerns and tolerances. To illustrate the practical differences involved, consider: • The resident, unbothered when non-profits ring the doorbell selling candy bars, but infuriated when a vacuum salesperson comes calling. • The resident, who doesn’t mind the vacuum salesperson who maintains an office on Main Street but doesn’t want to be disturbed by similar salespersons who live and work in another city, county, or state. • The resident who pretends to be out whenever a member of a particular religious group knocks on the door, just wanting to talk about their beliefs, but opens her door when the parish priest or pastor stops by seeking donations for the church’s latest initiative. 685 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 6 These scenarios describe what seem to be very similar activities, which would seem to require the same manner of regulation. The community may, however, be tempted to regulate certain groups and organizations in a more stringent manner simply because they consider those groups distasteful. SectionIV, Constitutional implications. The particular entity involved (business, church, political candidate or party, or local charity), the activity (the sale of goods or services, political campaigning, or preaching), and purpose behind that activity (for-profit or merely incidental to non-profit’s purpose), are all relevant when determining whether local regulations apply. Cities need to be careful that their regulations are applied evenly with the appropriate category or grouping. III. Local authority Handbook, City Licensing. Handbook, City Regulatory Functions. Appendix A: Local Authority-Regulations or Prohibitions. Cities, counties, and other units of local government have substantial regulatory powers. Although a local government’s licensing and regulatory authority is necessary to promote and protect the general welfare, they can often provoke conflicts between public and private interests. Section IV,Constitutional implications. Local regulations may also impact an individual’s constitutional rights. Since resolving these clashes is often a difficult task, the proper application of the city’s licensing and regulatory authority is critical. A. Scope of authority Minn. Stat. § 329.15. Minn. Stat. § 412.221, subd. 19. Minn. Stat. § 437.02. Despite specific statutory authority authorizing the regulation (or prohibition) of peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants, and years of judicial interpretation, there is some uncertainty about the actual scope of a city’s authority to license or regulate. While it is fairly clear cities cannot ban certain classes of transient activities, it is far from clear how far their regulations may go. B. Regulations—in general Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc’y of New York, Inc. v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150, 122 S. Ct. 2080 (2002). Section III-C, Time, place, and manner. The government’s interest in regulating door-to-door and transient merchant activities is generally two-fold: 1) To ensure residents’ privacy rights in their homes; and 2) To protect residents from fraud and other crimes. Regulations take different forms, from elaborate licensing schemes, to more simple requirements such as registering with the police department and agreeing to abide by time, place, and manner restrictions. State ex rel. Cook v. Bates, 101 Minn. 301, 112 N.W. 67 (1907). New Jersey Good Humor, Inc., v. Bd. Of Comm’rs, 11 A.2d 113 (N.J. 1940). With few exceptions, city regulations should seek to control only the nuisance aspects of a particular type of business, not outlaw the activity completely. However, if certain businesses involve a fraudulent scheme designed to trap the unsuspecting citizen, a city may go as far as a prohibition, though that may be difficult to prove. 686 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 7 Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 109 S. Ct. 2746 (1989). Cities need to be mindful that their regulations should be: • Content neutral. (A city generally cannot target or treat individuals differently because of who they are or for their particular message). • Narrowly tailored to serve the government’s interest. • Open for alternative methods for the same or similar communications to occur. C. Time, place, and manner Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 109 S. Ct. 2746 (1989). State ex rel. Cook v. Bates, 101 Minn. 301, 112 N.W. 67 (1907). Cities have some discretion in regulating the time, place, and manner in which peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants operate. If a restriction is not content-based, a city may impose reasonable restrictions. The city’s discretion is not, however, absolute. Bd. of Trs. Of State Univ. of N.Y. v. Fox, 492 U.S. 469, 109 S. Ct. 3028 (1989). Working America v. City of Bloomington, 142 F. Supp. 3d 823 (D. Minn. 2015). Cities need to consider a restriction’s general effect and be able to demonstrate a “reasonable fit” between the government’s end (i.e., to preserve privacy in one’s home; prevent fraud, theft, or other crimes) and the means that they have decided to use to accomplish those goals (i.e., background checks, registration, or bonding). Ohio Citizen Action v. City of Mentor-on-the-Lake, 272 F. Supp. 2d 671 (N.D. Ohio 2003). ACORN v. City of Frontenac, 714 F.2d 813 (8th Cir. 1983). Local restrictions are generally reviewed by the courts using a test that has been defined as intermediate scrutiny (Is an important governmental interest furthered substantially by the regulation used?). However, if the restriction is not content neutral (i.e., only applies to a particular group or specific activity), it will be subject to a more stringent test known as strict scrutiny (Is there a compelling governmental interest? Is the regulation narrowly tailored to achieve that interest? Is that regulation the least restrictive way possible to accomplish that goal?). In providing time, place, or manner restrictions, the local authority recognizes that sometimes it is the method, and not the activity itself, that will affect the health, safety, and welfare of the residents. By providing guidelines on acceptable methods, the needs of residents and merchants (or canvassers) can often be accommodated. 1. Time Ohio Citizen Action v. City of Mentor-on-the-Lake, 272 F. Supp. 2d 671 (N.D. Ohio 2003). City of Watseka v. Illinois Pub. Action Council, 796 F.2d 1547 (7th Cir. 1986). City regulations often include restrictions that limit the time during which door-to-door activities may occur. For instance, regulations often prohibit uninvited calls that are too early in the morning or too late at night. As with all regulations, time restrictions must be reasonable, affording peddlers and solicitors a reasonable period of time for their activities. 687 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 8 ACORN v. City of Frontenac, 714 F.2d 813 (8th Cir. 1983). Time restrictions should be content neutral (applying to all door-to-door calls and narrowly tailored to fit the city’s interests). Working America v. City of Bloomington, 142 F. Supp. 3d 823 (D. Minn. 2015). A city must be careful not to be so restrictive when establishing permissible hours that the average working person would never be home or available. 2. Place Schneider v. State, 308 U.S. 147, 60 S. Ct. 146 (1939). Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 536, 85 S. Ct. 453 (1965). Cities can establish provisions that prohibit peddlers and transient merchants from conducting their operations at locations that would be harmful to the community. A common example of a place regulation would be reasonable location restrictions that prevent traffic hazards or interference with movement on streets and sidewalks. 3. Manner Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 109 S. Ct. 2746 (1989). Cities can also provide reasonable prohibitions on the manner or techniques used by peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants. Common examples of manner regulations would be to prohibit or restrict the use of: • Whistles • Air horns • Megaphones • Amplifiers • Other loud noise devices • Flashing or strobe lights • Other devices that may be used to attract attention to the merchant, yet would have a demonstrable negative impact on the health, safety, and welfare of the community 4. Alternative methods – door hangers U.S. v. Kokinda, 497 U.S. 720, 110 S. Ct. 3115 (1990). Not all transient merchant activities include face-to-face interactions. An example of “alternative” activities is leaving donation request forms, restaurant menus, or other order forms on a residence’s doorknob or on the windshield of a vehicle. If there is no actual contact with the homeowner, common concerns with solicitors and peddlers (invasion of privacy, fraud, or criminal activity) and the justifications for city regulations diminish. Schneider v. State, 308 U.S. 147, 60 S. Ct. 146 (1939). Section III-F, Modified Green River ordinances. However, the use of door hangers or other leaflets may trigger a city’s authority in regulating the amount of garbage accumulating on city streets and sidewalks. One remedy allows citizens to themselves indicate whether they are willing to entertain these merchants at their residences by posting a sign indicating if they do not want to be disturbed. 688 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 9 D. Licensing—authority Handbook, City Licensing. Section V-C, Applications – background checks. Appendix B: Local Authority-Licensing or Registration. A license is a regulatory device used to ensure compliance with regulations governing a specific occupation, profession, commercial trade, or other activity. The authority to regulate includes the power to establish standards and minimum requirements for meeting those standards. Licensing is typically a formal process with an application, fee, and council or city administration determining whether the applicant meets all licensing requirements. Background checks are common. Licensing is an exercise of police power (protecting and promoting the public welfare). Cities have adequate authority for licensing as long as it is: • Constitutional • Reasonable • Not specifically pre-empted by state or federal regulations Minn. Stat. § 329.10. Minn. Stat. § 329.17. It is unlawful for transient merchants to operate without first obtaining a county-issued license. Failure to obtain a county license, or violation of any licensing requirement, is a gross misdemeanor offense. Minn. Stat. § 412.221, subd. 19. Minn. Stat. § 329.11. Minn. Stat. § 329.15. Minn. Stat. § 437.02. Minnesota cities have authority from statutes and court decisions to regulate peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants. Statutory cities and counties have the express statutory authority to license and regulate transient merchants, including peddlers and solicitors. Home rule charter cities also have the express authority to regulate these activities (charters themselves often provide specific authority as well). When a county license is required, cities may regulate above and beyond the requirements for county licensure. E. Licensing—exceptions There are several trades or activities that are exempt from local licensing based upon the U.S. Constitution, the Minnesota Constitution, state statute, or judicial decisions. 1. Farm products Minn. Const. art. XIII, § 7. The Minnesota Constitution prohibits the licensing of farmers selling the products cultivated from their own farms. This constitutional exemption would apply to individuals who go door-to-door in a manner typically associated with the normal operations of a peddler. This farm-product exemption also applies to transient merchant operations and prohibits local licensing requirements for those farmers who are operating roadside fruit or vegetable stands. 689 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 10 State v. Hartmann¸ 700 N.W.2d 449 (Minn. 2005). The farm-product exception is limited to products “cultivated” at a farm or garden. In one case, sales of meat were found to be exempt from licensing because the meat was a product of the farm, but not necessary exempt from meat inspection requirements. State ex rel. Mudeking v. Parr, 109 Minn. 147, 123 N.W. 408 (1909). This exception cannot be expanded to exempt all persons who make or produce what they are selling from the city’s licensing requirements. It would not be appropriate, for example, to require peddlers and transient merchants who sell industrially manufactured handbags to obtain a city license but exempt anyone who goes door-to-door selling bags they produced themselves. 2. Other exemptions Minn. Stat. § 329.14. There are additional exemptions to local licensing requirements, including: Excelsior Baking Co. v. City of Northfield, 247 Minn. 387, 77 N.W.2d 188 (1956). • Initial contacts to establish delivery routes for perishables. • Businesses making deliveries on regular routes. • Delivery of newspapers. • Wholesalers making direct sales to retail establishments. • Sales made pursuant to invitation issued by an owner or legal occupant. • A seller or exhibitor in a firearms collection show involving two or more sellers or exhibitors. The general nature of these operations (occurring on a fixed schedule, possibly daily; generally upon occupant’s invitation), significantly reduces the chances that they will become nuisances, injuring the general public. F. Green River ordinances As an alternative to licensing, many municipalities across the country have adopted what is commonly referred to as a “Green River” ordinance, prohibiting the door-to-door activities of most transient salespersons. Town of Green River v. Fuller Brush Co., 65 F.2d 112 (10th Cir. 1933). Town of Green River v. Bunger, 50 Wyo. 52, 58 P.2d 456 (1936). Day v. Klein, 225 Miss. 191, 82 So.2d 831 (1955). The Green River approach (named after the city in which it was first used and upheld by the courts) makes it a nuisance to go onto private property and peddle or solicit orders for goods or merchandise, unless the owner or legal occupant extended an actual or implied invitation to the seller. This approach does not apply to soliciting the sale of personal services or to solicitations at places of business. Violations are misdemeanor offenses and punishable by a fine and possible imprisonment. 77 A.L.R.2d 1216. 35 A.L.R.2d 355. Other usual methods for seeking business remain. The sale of goods is not specifically prohibited, only a particular method or practice. For example, solicitors may still gain access to homes by appointments made by mail, telephone, or email inquiry. 690 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 11 35 A.L.R.2d 355. However, some courts in other jurisdictions have invalidated Green River ordinances when they considered: • The prohibited conduct involves lawful businesses. • Many useful articles cannot be sold except through home solicitations. 77 A.L.R.2d 1216. These ordinances denounce and prohibit the habitual acts of these merchants; a single uninvited act of solicitation or peddling at a private residence may not be found to violate the intent of these ordinances. However, attempting to evade the ordinance by approaching a private residence, only asking for an invitation to come back later to sell or solicit an order for goods, has been found to be a prohibited practice. Vill. of Schaumburg v. Citizens for a Better Env’tt, 444 U.S. 620, 100 S. Ct. 826 (1980). It is doubtful that a Green River ordinance can prohibit constitutionally protected door-to-door advocacy. A common example of such a practice would be an individual engaged in religious-related sales, such as religious literature. G. Licensing vs. Green River State v. Northwest Airlines, 213 Minn. 395, 7 N.W.2d 691 (1942). Breard v. Alexandria, 341 U.S. 622, 71 S. Ct. 920 (1951). Project 80’s, Inc. v. City of Pocatello, 942 F.2d 635 (9th Cir. 1991). While licensing ordinances are a tested and legally sound method of regulation, Minnesota courts have never directly addressed the validity of a Green River ordinance (but there have been indirect indications that these ordinances are valid under the Minnesota Constitution). Although upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court and never expressly overruled, subsequent federal courts had found Green River ordinances to be an unconstitutional restriction on protected speech (including commercial speech) and other state courts have struck down such ordinances for violating rights under state constitutions. H. Modified Green River ordinances There is an additional, alternative method of city action that both regulates the nuisance aspects prohibited by a Green River ordinance and recognizes the benefits of certain door-to-door activities. Martin v. Struthers, 319 U.S. 141, 63 S. Ct. 862 (1943). A modified version of the Green River ordinance authorizes homeowners to prohibit peddlers and solicitors by posting a sign indicating they do not want to be disturbed. It is a misdemeanor offense to violate that declaration. People v. Bohnke, 287 N.Y. 154, 38 N.E. 2d 478 (1941). This type of ordinance applies to solicitors engaged in interstate commerce, as well as to peddlers or solicitors engaging in the sale or distribution of religious materials, because the critical actor (the one creating the prohibition) is the individual property owner or tenant, not the city. 691 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 12 Courts have consistently held the Constitution does not guarantee anyone the right to go freely onto private property for the purpose of any kind of sales or solicitations, irrespective of the owner or occupant’s wishes. Vill. of Schaumburg v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 444 U.S. 620, 100 S. Ct. 826 (1980). The modified Green River approach, particularly when combined with some manner of city licensing, is probably the most effective means of controlling the problems associated with peddlers and solicitors. Despite concerns over the validity of the standard Green River ordinance, specifically when constitutional rights are involved, it appears more conclusive that an ordinance may prohibit peddling or soliciting when individuals post signs indicating they do not want to be disturbed by sales or solicitations. IV. Constitutional implications Many municipal regulations have been struck down for violating constitutional protections. Most often, challenges to city peddler, solicitor, or transient merchant regulations are based on alleged violations of: • Freedom of speech • Equal protection • Commerce Clause • Freedom of religion Because concerns over these and other constitutional rights are often raised by local regulation of peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants, courts must balance the rights of these individuals against the government’s interests to protect the citizens’ rights to privacy, prevention of crimes, and avoidance of frauds. A court’s decision often hinges on whether the contested speech benefits commercial or noncommercial purposes. Attempts to regulate individuals going place-to-place, their primary purpose to exercise their constitutional rights, may be a losing battle. A. Freedom of speech U.S. Const. amend. I. Vill. of Schaumburg v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 444 U.S. 620, 100 S. Ct. 826 (1980). Schneider v. State, 308 U.S. 147, 60 S. Ct. 146 (1939). The First Amendment provides that communications are generally protected from censorship by the government. Social, political, and religious door-to- door canvassing that does not involve the solicitation of money or the sale of goods (a commercial purpose) is among the most protected activities under the First Amendment. State Bd. of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748, 96 S. Ct. 1817 (1976). State v. Century Camera, 309 N.W.2d 735 (Minn. 1981). Commercial speech is also provided with limited protections; protections “commensurate with its subordinate position in the scale of First Amendment values.” This allows for some governmental regulations that would not be permitted if noncommercial speech was involved. 692 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 13 1. Prior restraint A prior restraint is a government attempt, either through a total ban or as a consequence of local licensing, to suppress communications before they can reach the general public. Concerns with prior restraint are demonstrated by the situation where a government official is provided absolute discretion in granting or denying a permit and, ultimately, whether the speech is allowed to occur. Forsyth County v. The Nationalist Movement¸ 505 U.S. 123, 112 S. Ct. 2395 (1992). To avoid claims of unbridled restraint and violations of the individual’s (or organization’s) freedom of speech, the local ordinance must: • Contain narrow, objective, and definite standards used to guide the licensing authority. • Provide limits on the time within which the licensing authority has to make its determination. FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of Dallas, 493 U.S. 215, 110 S. Ct. 596 (1990). The U.S. Supreme Court has considered the lack of such basic requirements “evils that will not be tolerated.” 2. Commercial speech State Bd. of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748, 96 S. Ct. 1817 (1976). Commercial speech typically does no more than propose a business transaction. As distinguished from religious, political, or social speech, where the dialogue may include the sharing of a viewpoint on an issue, commercial forms of expression generally relate to economic interests. Limited First Amendment protections have been extended to speech that “does no more than propose a commercial transaction.” Cent. Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Pub. Serv. Comm., 447 U.S. 557, 100 S. Ct. 2343 (1980). Regulations on commercial speech are subject to a four-part test: • Is the proposed activity protected by the First Amendment to the extent that it concerns lawful activity and is not misleading? The First Amendment does not protect false or misleading commercial speech. • Are the asserted governmental interests substantial? A local government’s interests in privacy, crime prevention, and fraud are usually considered sufficient “substantial interests.” • Does the regulation directly advance the asserted governmental interests? If the purpose of the regulation is to prohibit fraud, there must be a link between that regulation and the prevention of fraud, not mere happenstance. 693 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 14 • Is the regulation not more extensive than necessary to serve those interests? While court decisions indicate use of the least restrictive means to achieve the government’s interest, the absolutely least severe restriction possible is not required. If the ordinance fails this four-part test, it is more likely a violation of the merchant’s freedom of speech. 3. Non-commercial speech Non-commercial speech occurs in many forms. Often, it is the exercise of First Amendment rights by sharing religious or political information during doorstep conversations or distributing door hangers, flyers, and other written materials. Cities generally cannot require all religious, social, or political solicitors to obtain a license or register when the primary purpose behind their activities is to share a viewpoint. Despite the ideological or constitutional differences between commercial and non-commercial conduct, many homeowners don’t value or draw such distinctions. A person who does not want to be disturbed by salespeople may also find charitable canvassing a nuisance. Additionally, some “non- commercial” speech is fraudulent or criminal in purpose. Cities have difficulties when non-commercial solicitors are, to some degree, also engaging in commercial activity (selling candy bars, raffle tickets, or religious publications). In the past, local regulations and the courts have examined specific conduct to determine if: • The activity is primarily commercial in nature and subject to local regulations on peddlers, solicitors, or transient merchants. • The sale is secondary to the expression of a belief or position and falls within constitutional protections and outside certain local regulations. 77 A.L.R.2d 1216. Vill. of Schaumburg v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 444 U.S. 620, 100 S. Ct. 826 (1980). Local regulations have been upheld when they apply only to transactions of a commercial nature and distinguish, for example, the evangelist selling or taking orders for materials that support or further his beliefs. From a practical and conservative perspective, non-commercial advocacy is often peppered with some level of commercial activity. Often, despite the incidental commercial activities involved, the entire “speech” is generally protected. Riley v. Nat’l Fed’n of the Blind, 487 U.S. 781, 108 S. Ct. 2667 (1988). Regulations that apply to non-commercial door-to-door solicitations must be narrowly drafted to meet the legitimate interests of the city and not significantly prohibit otherwise protected activities. 694 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 15 B. Equal protection U.S. Const. amend. XIV. Minn. Const. art. I, § 2. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of its laws. This protection is additionally reinforced under the Minnesota Constitution. A local government cannot generally favor one group over another. Equal protection concerns arise when: • Local regulations treat in-state (“locals”) different than out-of-state merchants. • City-based merchants are treated differently than other in-state businesspeople. • Within general definitions for peddlers, solicitors, or transient merchants, groups of merchants are distinguished from one another. • Local regulations specifically allow the door-to-door or transient sale of one type of product or service but prohibit the similar sale of another. 112 A.L.R. 63. Kalra v. State of Minnesota, 580 F. Supp. 971 (D. Minn. 1983). State statutes or city ordinances that discriminate against non-residents by refusing to grant them a license (or grant licenses on different terms) are generally unconstitutional. The courts have indicated non-citizens also fall within the coverage of the equal protection clause. State ex rel. Greenwood v. Nolan, 108 Minn. 170, 122 N.W. 255 (1909). Minnesota courts invalidated a city ordinance that discriminated between resident and nonresident peddlers since such restrictions denied nonresidents the privileges enjoyed by resident citizens. 94 A.L.R. 1076. State v. Schmidt, 280 Minn. 281, 159 N.W.2d 113 (1968). Regulations that apply only to nonresidents are likely void. For example, an ordinance requiring a transient merchant from outside the county to post a bond was invalidated because it violated the non-resident’s equal protection rights. That court would not follow the assumption that salespersons living within the county were solvent and financially responsible, but individuals residing elsewhere would not satisfy a possible civil judgment. Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 60 S. Ct. 900 (1940). Cities should be able to provide for their community’s general welfare without invading an individual’s rights. Unless there is a clear, definable grounds for making a distinction (an almost certain adverse impact to the public), such divisions are not permissible. C. Commerce Clause U.S. Const. art. 1, § 8, cl. 3. City of Waseca v. Braun, 206 Minn. 154, 288 N.W. 229 (1939). The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution provides Congress with the exclusive authority to regulate trade between the states. 695 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 16 This provision both: (1) grants the federal government a tremendous amount of authority over what would otherwise be local issues; and (2) limits what cities may do when their regulations might affect the movement of goods between states. The Commerce Clause substantially impacts the regulation of itinerant salespersons by local governments. C & A Carbone, Inc. v. Town of Clarkstown, 511 U.S. 383, 114 S. Ct. 1677 (1994). Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 U.S. 263, 104 S. Ct. 3049 (1984). The Commerce Clause prohibits state and local laws that promote local economic protection. An ordinance may establish local protectionism because of either a discriminatory purpose or discriminatory effect. The U.S. Supreme Court has invalided regulations that: Ward v. Maryland, 79 U.S. 418 (1870). • Required only nonresident merchants to obtain licenses. • Charged higher fees to nonresidents. • Prohibited merchants from using nonresidents as salespersons. These decisions are based in part upon the belief that the government may not prevent someone from traveling state-to-state to earn a living. Oregon Waste Sys. Inc. v. Dept. of Envtl. Quality of the State of Or., 511 U.S. 93, 114 S. Ct. 1345 (1994). State v. Schmidt, 280 Minn. 281, 159 N.W.2d 113 (1968). A local regulation is discriminatory if it provides different treatment to in- state and out-of-state economic interests, benefiting the former and burdening the later. Restrictions that discriminate on interstate commerce are virtually per se invalid. For example, just as with equal protection challenges, a city ordinance that only required nonresident transient merchants to post a bond was an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce and unconstitutional. State v. Schmidt, 280 Minn. 281, 159 N.W.2d 113 (1968). Courts have held that formal licensing procedures and fees for solicitors, involved in interstate commerce (orders delivered from a different state at a later time) amount to an undue burden on commerce and violate the U.S. Constitution. Since residents and non-residents must be treated equally under the law, a prohibition on regulating out-of-state merchants creates a situation where in-state merchants may not be licensed as well. Wagner v. Covington, 251 U.S. 95, 40 S. Ct. 93 (1919). Peddlers and transient merchants have their goods within the state before the commercial transaction begins. Because of this, cities that license these classifications are not affecting interstate commerce. D. Freedom of religion U.S. Const. amend. I. Minn. Const. art. I, § 16. Freedom of religion is a constitutionally-protected right under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Minnesota Constitution. Int’l Soc’y for Krishna Consciousness v. City of Houston, 689 F.2d 541 (5th Cir. 1982). Various forms of conduct can fall within an individual’s freedom of religion, from pure speech, the sale of religious materials, or the request for donations. Cities must use caution when attempting to regulate religious solicitors because of their First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion. 696 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 17 Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc’y of New York, Inc. v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150, 122 S. Ct. 2080 (2002). Cities are prohibited from even registering individuals going from place to place to exercise their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion. In one case, the city required all solicitors to register and obtain a permit from the mayor’s office before entering private property to promote any cause. The Court held that a licensing requirement for social, political, and religious door-to-door canvassing would inhibit the free exercise of a person’s right to express ideas or solicit support anonymously or spontaneously. City regulations must be narrowly tailored to meet their purpose of protecting city residents from crimes and fraud but cannot overreach and significantly burden noncommercial solicitors and their advocacy. It is unclear how far cities may go when constitutional rights and commercial activity intermingle. Of particular concern is the situation where professional fundraisers are used on behalf of a nonprofit, religious, or similar organization. Buckley v. Am. Constitutional Law Found., Inc., 525 U.S. 182, 119 S. Ct. 636 (1999). ACORN v. Golden, Colorado, 744 F. 2d 739 (10th Cir. 1984). While cities have taken different approaches in policing the activities of non-commercial advocates, a conservative approach is practicable. These types of solicitors should not be required to obtain a license; cities should probably not be requiring non-commercial advocates to register. Mandatory background checks are likely impermissible for non-commercial door-to- door activities; identification requirements for noncommercial activists have also been invalided. City regulations—requiring licensing, permitting, or registration for the dissemination of ideas—will be considered inherently suspect. V. Local regulations Apart from the Green River approach, a licensing ordinance is by far the most common method used to attempt to control the activities of peddlers, solicitors, and transient sellers. A. City ordinances Handbook, Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances. Hanson v. City of Granite Falls, 529 N.W.2d 485 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995). The decision to regulate people or property, and to provide penalties for any violations, should be adopted by city ordinance. As a result, the council must pass, in ordinance form, all police regulations for public health, morals, economic well-being, welfare, and safety. Ordinance regulations apply generally within the city and are permanent and continuing in nature. Holt v. City of Sauk Rapids, 559 N.W.2d 444 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). Ordinances, particularly when regulating peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants, must be consistent with the constitutions and statutes of the United States and Minnesota. An ordinance must not limit or deny any common law or constitutional rights, or unreasonably restrain trade. 697 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 18 Press v. City of Minneapolis, 553 N.W.2d 80 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). An ordinance must not be unconstitutionally vague. Ordinances must be reasonably certain in their terms and set forth objective standards, providing adequate notice of what is required and/or prohibited. Ordinances establish the process for granting and issuing licenses. Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants, LMC Model Ordinance. Although form varies from city to city, most peddler, solicitor, and transient merchant ordinances provide: • Definitions • Exceptions • Licensing requirements and exemptions • License ineligibility • Suspension/revocation procedures • Transferability • Registration • Prohibited activities • Exclusion by placard (modified Green River) City of St. Paul v. Briggs, 85 Minn. 290, 88 N.W. 984 (1902). Excelsior Baking Co. v. City of Northfield, 247 Minn. 387, 77 N.W.2d 188 (1956). State ex rel. Mudeking v. Parr, 109 Minn. 147, 123 N.W. 408 (1909). The ordinance must specifically mention and define each term used for the purpose of the local regulation. The courts have been strict in their definitions of what type of activity constitutes a particular type of business practice. This is particularly important since there are legal distinctions between the terms “peddler,” “solicitor,” “canvasser,” and “transient merchant.” Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants, LMC Model Ordinance. A licensing ordinance should be complete and detailed. The ordinance provides the authority and procedures for: • Applying for the license. • The term of the license. • Required qualifications of the license applicant. • Bond and insurance requirements (if applicable). • The possible reasons for denial, revocation, or suspension of the license. • Transferability of the license. • Any other limitations or applicable city regulations. The ordinance should place specific time limits within which the decision- maker must issue the license or permit, and establish specific criteria used to determine whether to grant a license or permit. An ordinance should list some specific reasons for which an applicant could be denied a city license. 698 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 19 B. Licenses in general Handbook, City Licensing. The city council’s authority to grant or refuse a license varies with the nature of the business or activity. On one hand, there are licenses (more appropriately considered a permit) available to anyone who applies, pays the required fee, and meets any basic conditions specified by city ordinance. When the applicant has complied with the requirements, the city must issue the license. Except for determining whether an applicant satisfies the basic, pre-existing written requirements, council or staff discretion is largely removed from the process. 54 A.L.R 1104. 92 A.L.R. 400. On the other hand is a city licensing system where, based on the potential abuses and in lieu of prohibiting the activity altogether, more extensive qualifications on license eligibility or on the business operations are weighed before a license is granted. A licensing ordinance is a tested and legally- sound method of regulation. Although more leeway is provided under this method, a city council cannot be given uncontrolled discretion in granting a license based on the character of the applicant, the nature of the organization, or the general welfare of the community. Section V-D, Fees. 9 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations § 26.11. When a license is required, it must be obtained before sales begin and should be issued in the names of those persons who actually will be engaged in the peddling. Ordinances need to be specific and should prohibit the transfer of licenses from person to person. Fees need to be reasonable. Preference cannot be given to resident vendors over non-residents. Once issued, individuals have an interest in the license and the ability to conduct their door-to-door activities. When a license comes up for renewal, the licensee is in the same position as any other applicant unless a statute, charter, or local ordinance provides otherwise. Minn. Stat. § 329.15. Gifford v. Wiggins, 50 Minn. 401, 52 N.W. 904 (1892). Despite specific statutory authority that would seem to indicate otherwise, cities cannot prohibit the sale of some items but permit the sale of others, unless the prohibited items have some adverse effect on the public health, morals, safety or general welfare and even then, it may be difficult for the city to prove such detriment. C. Applications—background checks Minn. Stat. ch. 13. LMC information memo, Data Practices: Analyze Classify & Respond. It is important for cities to consider the form of their peddler or transient merchant license applications. The information provided and the background checks that are authorized will be the means by which a city obtains all the information on which they will make their licensing determinations. Cities need to ensure they comply with the requirements of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act in the collection and maintenance of such information. 699 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 20 Handbook, City Licensing. The ordinance gives authority and guidance on the procedural matters involved. An ordinance should provide: • Who investigates the applicants. • Who decides whether an applicant is qualified. • What procedural rights exist in the case of denial, suspension, or revocation. When background checks are a required part of the process, there must be a demonstrable link between the inquiry and the ultimate goal of crime and fraud prevention and other general safety concerns. It is a good idea to make findings (statements of fact) when adopting the ordinance, establishing the crime and fraud problems requiring this action, and ensuring that the background check’s results are considered when making licensing decisions. Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants, LMC Model Ordinance. With city licensing, time is always of the essence. Licenses should be issued as soon as reasonably possible, considering that applicant review takes time. To balance city and applicant needs, an ordinance should provide: • The actual amount of time city staff has to determine if the submitted application was completed in full (two days). • Licenses will be issued or denied within a specific period of time (within 10 regular business days). • Rights to appeal the decision, either through city or district court, within so many days of receipt of written denial (20 days of receipt). The timeframes provided should be clearly established within the ordinance and followed by city staff and elected officials. Handbook, City Licensing. The background check determines whether an applicant can satisfy the personal requirements for obtaining a peddler or transient merchant’s license. Disqualifying factors could include: Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants, LMC Model Ordinance. • Failure to obtain a county license (when applicable). • Application was not completed truthfully. • Applicant has a record of criminal convictions related to the sale of goods, such as larceny, theft, or fraud. • Revocation of license elsewhere. • Bad business reputation. The prerequisites used must be valid, applied consistently, and able to withstand challenge. 700 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 21 D. Fees Watters v. People of State of Michigan, 248 U.S. 65, 39 S. Ct. 29 (1918). Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless v. City of Cleveland, 105 F.3d 1107 (6th Cir. 1997). Whenever a city requires a license, it may also require a license fee. A license fee imposed on all peddlers (regardless of the source and nature of the products they peddle) can be a content neutral, constitutionally permissible time, place, and manner regulation as long as the purpose of charging the fee is limited to defraying the expenses incurred for regulating the activity. Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc’y of New York, Inc. v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150, 122 S. Ct. 2080 (2002). While permit or license fees probably cannot be charged for commercial and non-commercial door-to-door solicitors, cities may charge a fee to most peddlers and transient merchants. Cities often utilize a fee schedule to establish the fees for all city-issued licenses. By removing specific dollar amounts from specific ordinances and referencing a fee schedule, the city can pass one ordinance adopting the new fee schedule each time it changes a fee. Orr v. City of Rochester, 193 Minn. 371, 258 N.W. 569 (1935). State v. Redmon, 43 Minn. 250, 45 N.W. 232 (1890). Licensing should not be viewed as a significant source of revenue. A license fee should approximate the direct and indirect costs associated with issuing the license and policing the licensed activities. License fees that significantly exceed city costs are generally considered to be taxes the city does not have the authority to enact. A license fee may not be so high as to produce any substantial revenue beyond what it actually costs to issue the license and to supervise, inspect, and regulate the licensed business. Establishing licensing fees by simply comparing fees imposed by other cities can be problematic. The reasonable character of a particular fee depends on the kind of business, the amount of inspection and regulation, the current value of the dollar, and other inherently local factors—all of which can vary greatly by location. If the city fee is large enough to cover more than the cost of issuing the license and all city licenses expire on the same day, it may want to consider providing a pro rata fee system for those who get or give up licenses during the year. E. Bonds A bond is similar to an insurance policy. If a merchant fails to comply with city regulations or uphold his or her guarantees, an injured party may be entitled to recover funds secured by the bond. The benefit of requiring the posting of a bond before door-to-door or transient operations are allowed may appear obvious in theory but is more problematic in practice. 701 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 22 Larson v. City of Shelton, 37 Wash.2d 481, 224 P.2d 1067 (1950). Bonding requirements for commercial activities may be used to ensure compliance with city standards, and to protect the public from fraud and other crimes. The protection of the public is an obvious reason for states and cities to require peddlers to post a bond to obtain a license or permit. These merchants are often here today and gone tomorrow. Unless a bond or deposit is required, local residents will have no remedy if fraud occurs. A.G. Op. 59a-32 (Jan. 13, 1961). A city considering including a bonding requirement must proceed with caution. Bonding requirements for non-commercial activities will likely be deemed unconstitutional if challenged. A bond may violate the Equal Protection Clause or the Commerce Clause if not imposed evenhandedly and a city cannot properly require a solicitor to post a bond. Finally, the required bond amounts should not be excessive in regard to the activity being regulated. F. Denying license State ex rel. Cook v. Bates, 101 Minn. 301, 112 N.W. 67 (1907). Where a Minnesota city has the power to regulate, it exercises the authority and considerable discretion to decide what restraints will be imposed. For operations that are nothing more than a fraudulent attempt to trap the unsuspecting or the unwary, a consequence of city regulations may be to prohibit those activities altogether. Grounds for denying a license may include: • A material misrepresentation in the application. • An applicant with “poor” moral character. • Circumstances where granting the license would harm the safety, health, morals, and general welfare of the community. Handbook, City Licensing. A licensing ordinance doesn’t generally need to specifically define terms such as “good moral character” or “professional misconduct”. However, a city cannot generally disqualify someone from a licensed occupation, including peddling or transient sales, based solely upon a prior criminal conviction. A prior conviction must directly relate to the occupation for which the person is seeking the license. A city should also consider the time elapsed since the conviction when determining whether it justifies a denial. G. Registration As a less intrusive option, cities can, as an alternative to a full licensing process, require all peddlers and transient merchants to register with the city prior to beginning their operations. 702 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 23 Registration is a process that involves recording a person’s name and all other information necessary to ensure the good faith and conduct of the registrant. With registration, there are no approvals or denials, and no fees or background checks. The process should only take a few minutes, rather than the days involved with licensing. It is likely that a city may also require commercial solicitors to register prior to their door-to-door activities; registration alone should not have any impact on interstate commerce. This authority probably cannot extend to non- commercial operations (circumstances where an individual’s primary or sole purpose for going door-to-door is to further social, political, or religious beliefs) or where commercial profit, if present, is a secondary concern. VI. Suggestions The regulation of these profit and nonprofit activities is subject to ever- evolving legal interpretations. What may be a relatively safe and settled regulation today can change with a single decision from the U.S. or Minnesota Supreme Courts. Unfortunately, these new decisions don’t always clearly uphold or reverse prior decisions, leaving this area of law sometimes even more unsettled. Accordingly, Minnesota cities considering adopting or amending a city ordinance that regulates the activities of peddlers, solicitors and other transient merchants should work with their city attorney to ensure their regulations comply with all current legal requirements. From an intentionally conservative approach, a city should keep these basic ideas in mind when considering regulating peddlers, solicitors (both commercial and non-commercial), or other transient merchant and their activities: • Do nothing. • Adopt a Green River ordinance and prohibit most commercial door-to- door and transient activities. • Adopt a modified Green River ordinance, either alone or as part of a larger city licensing or regulatory ordinance, allowing residents to decide if they want to create a blanket prohibition for door-to-door advocacy on their property. • License peddlers and transient merchants. • Register peddlers, transient merchants, and commercial solicitors. • When activities concern non-commercial social, political, or religious advocates, the city may not be able to license or register. 703 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 24 Because this can become a highly litigated (and potentially costly) concern, and because there is the potential risk for violating constitutional protections, cities need to involve their city attorney before adopting or revising any municipal regulation that affects peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants. 704 League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 25 Appendix A: Local Authority – Regulations or Prohibitions This chart provides a basic summary of the general authority cities have in regulating or prohibiting door-to-door or transient activities. As this area of law is subject to change, a city should consult its city attorney when establishing (or reviewing) local regulations. Classification Can City Regulate? Can City Prohibit? Can Resident Prohibit? Peddlers, Solicitors, & Transient Merchants (For-Profit Activities) ? Cities have significant authority to regulate the activities of peddlers, solicitors, and transient merchants—from licensing or registration requirements for most peddler or transient operations, to establishing time, place, and manner restrictions on all operations. While our courts have never determined the validity of a Green River ordinance (prohibiting all transient activities) as applied specifically to the Minnesota Constitution (likely to be upheld), a total prohibition could conflict with particular provisions of the U.S. Constitution, such as freedom of speech or the regulation of interstate commerce. Additionally, a city can adopt a modified Green River ordinance, where residents, through their posting of notice, individually determine if peddlers or solicitors are welcome. Canvassers (Non-Commercial Door-to-Door Activities) No* While non-commercial door-to-door activities fall under various constitutional protections, cities have the ability to establish reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on their operations; regulations that do not, in purpose or practice, prohibit those activities from occurring. These protections will still apply to sales that are “secondary” to the primary, constitutionally-protected rights of free speech, freedom of religion, etc. If a Green River ordinance is adopted, its general prohibition on transient or door-to-door activities probably cannot be applied to individuals going door-to-door exercising their constitutional rights. While a city would have the general authority to prohibit purely fraudulent canvassing activities, that would, in practice, occur more on a case-by-case basis and not through specific ordinance prohibitions. However, a modified Green River, with the resident, and not the government, regulating speech would most likely apply to commercial and non-commercial activities. 705 League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2023 Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors, and Transient Merchants Page 26 Appendix B: Local Authority - Licensing or Registration This chart provides a summary of the general authority cities have in regulating door-to-door or transient activities. As it is often difficult to classify actual conduct into only one of these classifications, a city should consult its city attorney when such specific assistance is needed. Classification Can City Require License? Can City Require Registration? Peddlers *While most peddlers are subject to a city’s licensing or registration requirements, there are trades or activities that are exempt from local licensing. See Part III – E - Licensing – exemptions. Solicitors (For-Profit Operations) No *Licensing of for-profit solicitors brings up equal protection and interstate commerce concerns. See Part II – B – Solicitors and canvassers. Transient Merchants *Most transient merchants are subject to city licensing or registrations. However, there are activities (i.e. produce stands) that may be exempt from local licensing. See Part III – E - Licensing – exemptions. Canvassers (Not-for-Profit Solicitations) No No *The licensing and/or registering of religious, political, or other non-profit canvassers impacts constitutional rights (freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc.). See Part IV - Constitutional implications. 706 Door to door sales activity is regulated by CORCORAN CITY ORDINANCE. 707 PEDDLER/ SOLICITOR PERMIT VALID (DATE) TO (DATE) Peddler/Solicitor Name Company Name Insert photo PEDDLER/ SOLICITOR PERMIT VALID (DATE) TO (DATE) Peddler/Solicitor Name Company Name Insert photo PEDDLER/ SOLICITOR PERMIT VALID (DATE) TO (DATE) Peddler/Solicitor Name Company Name Insert photo PEDDLER/ SOLICITOR PERMIT VALID (DATE) TO (DATE) Peddler/Solicitor Name Company Name Insert photo PEDDLER/ SOLICITOR PERMIT VALID (DATE) TO (DATE) Peddler/Solicitor Name Company Name Insert photo PEDDLER/ SOLICITOR PERMIT VALID (DATE) TO (DATE) Peddler/Solicitor Name Company Name Insert photo PEDDLER/ SOLICITOR PERMIT VALID (DATE) TO (DATE) Peddler/Solicitor Name Company Name Insert photo PEDDLER/ SOLICITOR PERMIT VALID (DATE) TO (DATE) Peddler/Solicitor Name Company Name Insert photo PEDDLER/ SOLICITOR PERMIT VALID (DATE) TO (DATE) Peddler/Solicitor Name Company Name Insert photo 708 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 13.a Council Meeting: April 10, 2025 Prepared By: Deb Johnson Topic: 2025 City Council Schedule Action Required: Council Action Attachments 1. 2025 City Council Meeting Calendar as of 4.3.25.pdf 709 1 2025 CITY OF CORCORAN Meetings Mayor Contracted Services Council Tom McKee tmckee@corcoranmn.gov Planning 612-638-0225 Council Quarterly Work Sess. Council Members Engineer 763-479-4209 Planning Commission Michelle R. Friedrich michelle.friedrich@corcoranmn.gov Building Inspector 763-479-1720 Parks & Trails Commissions Mark Lanterman mlanterman@corcoranmn.gov City Assessor 612-348-2943 City Holiday Jeremy Nichols jnichols@corcoranmn.gov Septic / Henn Co. 612-543-5200 Alternative Meeting Dates Dean Vehrenkamp dvehrenkamp@corcoranmn.gov Republic Services 763-972-3335 JANUARY S M T W T F S 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 FEBRUARY S M T W T F S 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 MARCH S M T W T F S 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 APRIL S M T W T F S 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MAY S M T W T F S 27 28 29 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 JUNE S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 JULY S M T W T F S 29 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 AUGUST S M T W T F S 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 SEPTEMBER S M T W T F S 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 OCTOBER S M T W T F S 28 29 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NOVEMBER S M T W T F S 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 DECEMBER S M T W T F S 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 710 2 City of Corcoran 2025 City Council Schedule (as of April 3, 2025) Below is a tentative schedule for City Council meetings and events - subject to change. April 10, 2025: •Presentation: Pat Meister – Longevity Award for 35 years •Presentation: Three Rivers Park District Update – Marge Beard •Presentation: 4M/PMA Investment Strategy – Corey Boyer •Presentation: Elm Creek Watershed •City Park Remaster – Design Update •Reclamite Bid •Chisolm Trail Street Improvement Feasibility Study •Truck Safety Update •Grant Proposals (DNR $350k/T-Mobile $50k) •On-Call Policy – Public Works •Exempt Employee Policy •Solicitation Ordinance April 24, 2025 •Presentation: Northwest Trails Snowmobile Club – (Grant) •City Park Remaster – 100% Design and Bid Authorization •RFP – Space Needs Analysis •Camp Solberg Minor Subdivision •Kwik Trip •Commercial Kennel Zoning Amendment •Continental Concept Plan •Industrial/Commercial Update •Hunters Ridge Tunrlane Bid Award •79th (City Center) Turnlane Bid Award April 26 2025 Firearms Safety Field Day and Awards May 3, 2025 City-wide Clean-up Day May 8, 2025 Work Session – 5:00-6:30pm •Fire Services May 8, 2025 May 20, 2025 I-94 Chamber First Responders Luncheon May 22, 2025 •Chastek •St Thomas Site Plan and Variance •City Park Remaster Site Plan Amendment and Variance •City Park Remaster Bid Award June 12, 2025 •RFP Recycling June 23, 2025 Work Session - Ribbon Cutting and Elected Tour: 5:00-6:30pm •Water Treatment Plant Grand Opening 711 3 June 23, 2025* (*NOTE: Monday Regular Council Meeting*) June 25-27, 2025 League of Minnesota Cities Annual Conference (Duluth) July 10, 2025 July 24, 2025 August 5, 2025 (*NOTE: Tuesday*) NITE TO UNITE August 14, 2025 August 15-16 Corcoran Country Daze August 28, 2025 September 11, 2025 • Firearms Ordinance September 25, 2025 October 9, 2025 October 16, 2025 November 13, 2025 November 24, 2025* (NOTE: Monday) December 11, 2025 712