Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
Agenda and Packet
Agenda and PacketAGENDA
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, AUGUST 27, 2018
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD
A.5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION
Note: Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the work
session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular
agenda.
1.2019 Detailed Budget Presentation
2.MidYear Key Financial Strategy Update
3.Key Financial Strategy: Chanhassen Railroad Depot Improvements
B.7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER
C.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
1.Teen Volunteer Recognition
D.CONSENT AGENDA
All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and
will be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If
discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered
separately. City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to the
council packet for each staff report.
1.Approve of City Council Minutes dated August 13, 2018
2.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated August 7, 2018
3.Receive Park & Recreation Summary Minutes dated July 24, 2018
4.Approve Flood Reduction Grant Agreement for Acquisition of Property at 770 Pioneer
Trail
5.Resolution 201841: Authorize the City of Chanhassen to participate in the GreenStep
Cities program
6.Resolution No. 201842: Accept Ads for Bid; Award Contract for the Lake Susan Trail
Rehabilitation Project
7.Award of Bid: Audit Services Contract for Fiscal Years 20182020
E.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
AGENDACHANHASSEN CITY COUNCILMONDAY, AUGUST 27, 2018CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARDA.5:30 P.M. WORK SESSIONNote: Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the worksession items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regularagenda.1.2019 Detailed Budget Presentation2.MidYear Key Financial Strategy Update3.Key Financial Strategy: Chanhassen Railroad Depot ImprovementsB.7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDERC.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS1.Teen Volunteer RecognitionD.CONSENT AGENDAAll items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council andwill be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. Ifdiscussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and consideredseparately. City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to thecouncil packet for each staff report.1.Approve of City Council Minutes dated August 13, 20182.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated August 7, 20183.Receive Park & Recreation Summary Minutes dated July 24, 20184.Approve Flood Reduction Grant Agreement for Acquisition of Property at 770 PioneerTrail5.Resolution 201841: Authorize the City of Chanhassen to participate in the GreenStepCities program6.Resolution No. 201842: Accept Ads for Bid; Award Contract for the Lake Susan TrailRehabilitation Project7.Award of Bid: Audit Services Contract for Fiscal Years 20182020
E.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
1.The Garden by the Woods: Proposal for Pollinator Garden on City Property
F.FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE
1.Fire Department Update
2.Law Enforcement Update
G.OLD BUSINESS
H.PUBLIC HEARINGS
I.NEW BUSINESS
J.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
K.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
L.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
1.Review of Claims Paid 08272018
M.ADJOURNMENT
N.GUIDELINES
GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen City
Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided
at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations.
Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor. When
called upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the City
Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City
Council.
If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokesperson
that can summarize the issue.
Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor. If
you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council.
During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in discussion.
Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough understanding
of your concern, suggestion or request.
Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual
either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be directed to the City
Manager.
Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Houlihan's, 530 Pond Promenade in Chanhassen immediately
after the meeting for a purely social event. All members of the public are welcome.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject 2019 Detailed Budget Presentation
Section 5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Item No: A.1.
Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: A039W 2019 Budget
ATTACHMENTS:
Detailed Budget PPT
Yard Waste Report
Staff Report 813
Gen Fund Budget
Bond Tax Levies
Dept Head Wage Survey
City of Chanhassen
2019 Budget
2019 Budget
LEGISLATIVE 1110
The City Council is responsible for formulating City policy,
enacting legislation and overseeing City Administration.
Services Provided
Legislative, 1110
•Salaries, special meeting reimbursements, travel, and
training for the City Council
•Chanhassen Connection
•Memberships: League of Minnesota Cities, Metro Cities,
Minnesota Association of Mayors, Municipal Legislative
Commission and SouthWest Transportation Coalition
•Publication of ordinances and agendas
Legislative -1110
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $46,700 $0 $81,600 $128,300
2018 $44,900 $0 $81,600 $126,500
Percent Change +4.0%0.0%14.0%+1.4%
Significant Changes:
•Increase in city council wages based on ordinance 601.
2019 Budget
ADMINISTRATION 1120
Provides for the administration of the entire City organization
including human resources, economic development, contract and
records management, coordination of the budget and CIP, and
general departmental support.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Administration, 1120
•Staff: City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Office
Manager, Communications Specialist, Administrative
Support Specialist, Senior Administrative Support
Specialist
•Human Resources
•Prepare City Council packets
•Licensing
•Economic Development
•Customer and Support Services
•City communications –Connection, electronic
message center, website, etc.
•Postage
Administration -1120
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $501,400 $0 $59,500 $560,900
2018 $478,500 $0 $56,600 $535,100
Percent Change +4.8%0.0%+5.1%+4.8%
Significant Changes:
•Small increase to match actual postage costs.
2019 Budget
FINANCE 1130
The finance department is responsible for the management of
the City’s financial resources and assets, and performs all
accounting functions to measure and preserve those resources.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Finance, 1130
•Staff: Finance Director, Assistant Finance Director, and two
accounting clerks.
•The department produces the CAFR (audit), Budget, CIP, and all
other long-term financial planning documents
•The department manages payroll, utility billing, investments,
accounts payable/receivable, and all other accounting and
financial reporting functions.
Finance -1130
Personal Service Materials
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Capital
Outlay
Total Budget
2019 $332,800 $200 $46,300 $0 $379,300
2018 $308,900 $200 $49,600 $0 $358,700
Percent
Change
+7.7%0.0%-6.7%0.0%+5.7%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
LEGAL 1140
Provides for attorney services that advise the City on all questions
of law, reviews all ordinances, contracts, and other legal
documents of the City, and represents the City in court actions.
Services Provided
Legal, 1140
•Contract with Campbell Knutson for City Attorney, prosecutorial
services, etc.
Legal -1140
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $200,000 $200,000
2018 $190,500 $190,500
Percent Change +5.0%+5.0%
Significant Changes:
•Increase for additional services provided related to expanded development
and other legal reviews.
•Offsetting revenue in 2017 of $110,000 (includes all traffic violations and
prosecution fees collected)
•Prosecution services accounts for approximately $70,000 of the total budget.
2019 Budget
PROPERTY ASSESSMENT 1150
Provides for the valuation of residential, commercial and
industrial real estate parcels and personal property.
Services Provided
Property Assessment, 1150
•Contract with Carver and Hennepin Counties
Property Assessment, 1150
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $156,000 $156,000
2018 $150,000 $150,000
Percent Change +4.0%+4.0%
Significant Changes:
•Small adjustment for increased properties assessed and inflationary contract
adjustment.
2019 Budget
MIS 1160
Ensures that all City users are provided with the appropriate
technology to efficiently perform their job functions.
Services Provided/Outcomes
MIS, 1160
•Staff: MIS Coordinator/PC Specialist
•Acquisition, Service & Support for Network Servers, Printers, and
Infrastructure
•Acquisition, Service & Support of End User Computers and Devices
•Support PC Software Applications, Manage Vendor Software
•Acquisition, Service & Support Telecommunications Hardware and
Software
MIS -1160
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $168,800 $44,700 $46,000 $259,500
2018 $157,900 $30,000 $46,900 $234,800
Percent Change +6.9%+49.0%-1.9%+10.5%
Significant Changes:
•The increase is primarily due to support cost for hardware that is coming off
warranty. These items are the primary storage systems, ($6,300), two production
network servers, ($3,400) and a backup appliance ($2,800).
2019 Budget
CITY HALL 1170
Provides for the operation of City Hall, including maintenance,
office supplies, and liability and property insurance.
Services Provided/Outcomes
City Hall, 1170
•Staff: Building Maintenance
•Cleaning and Waste Removal
•Insurance: Auto, Property, General Liability
•Office Supplies
City Hall -1170
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $95,100 $40,300 $262,000 $397,400
2018 $91,200 $41,600 $281,000 $413,800
Percent Change +4.3%-3.1%-6.8%-4.0%
Significant Changes:
•Adjustment of some line items to reflect actual costs.
2019 Budget
ELECTIONS 1180
Provides for the administration of elections and official records.
Services Provided / Outcomes
Elections, 1180
•Staff: Election Judges (PT, temporary positions)
•The City budgets one-half of election costs each year
to avoid budget fluctuations
Elections -1180
Significant Changes:
•Small increases for expanded absentee voting and wages paid to account for
minimum wage increases.
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $26,000 $4,000 $18,000 $48,000
2018 $24,600 $4,000 $14,000 $42,600
Percent Change +5.7%+0.0%+28.6%+12.7%
2019 Budget
LIBRARY 1190
Provides for the maintenance and operations
of the Chanhassen Library.
Services Provided / Outcomes
Library, 1190
•Staff: none (provided by Carver County)
•City is responsible for:
•Cleaning
•Waste removal
•Utilities
•Phones
•Building maintenance
Library -1190
Materials & Supplies Contractual Services Total
Budget
2019 $2,500 $109,100 $111,600
2018 $2,500 $109,100 $111,600
Percent Change 0%0%0%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
POLICE ADMINISTRATION 1210
Provides for law enforcement services through the contract with
the Carver County Sheriff’s Office.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Police Administration, 1210
•Contract with Carver County Sheriff’s Office to
provide Liaison Lieutenant, 3 Sergeants, 1 School
Resource Officer, 1 Investigator, and 9 Deputies
•Participate in Southwest Metro Drug Task Force
Police Administration -1210
Significant Changes:
•The crime prevention specialist position is being eliminated from the budget.
•No increase in the police contract due to staffing changes in the sheriffs
department.
Personal
Service
Contractual Services Total
Budget
2019 $0 $1,885,800 $1,885,800
2018 $73,900 $1,887,500 $1,961,400
Percent Change -100.0%0%-3.9%
2019 Budget
FIRE DEPARTMENT 1220
The mission of the Chanhassen Fire Department is to minimize
loss of life and property from fires, natural disasters, and
life-threatening situations.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Fire Department, 1220
•Full Time Staff: Fire Chief, Fire Marshal, and .50 Admin Support
•48 Paid on Call Staff: Command Staff, Officers, and Firefighters
•Services Provided:
•Professional Emergency Response to Chanhassen and
other Mutual Aid Partners
•Fire Prevention and Education within the community
•new and existing commercial business inspections
•State mandated inspections of schools
•new construction plan reviews
•emergency management
•non-emergency community events and activities
Fire Department -1220
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $788,000 $45,100 $170,400 $1,003,500
2018 $699,100 $45,100 $175,400 $919,600
Percent Change +12.7%0.0%-2.9%+9.1%
Significant Changes:
•The fire department has seen an increase in call activity. There is also a cost
of living increase for on call pay and a small market adjustment in full time
wages.
2019 Budget
CODE ENFORCEMENT 1250
Provide for the health, safety and welfare of the city through the
administration of building and fire codes.
Services Provided
Code Enforcement, 1250
•Staff:
•Building Official
•2 Building Inspectors
•2 Mechanical Inspectors
•3 Support Staff (1 new in 2017)
•Responsibilities include plan review; permit issuance; inspections of building,
plumbing and mechanical systems; fire sprinklers; alarm systems; and
individual sewage treatment systems.
•Also responsible for inspections of existing buildings for fire code violations,
property maintenance.
•Staff support to the city law enforcement and community service staff.
•Admin Staff will now also assist with some Crime Prevention duties.
Code Enforcement 1250
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $722,600 $6,400 $13,200 $742,200
2018 $698,500 $6,600 $13,000 $718,100
Percent Change +3.5%-3.0%+1.5%+3.4%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
COMMUNITY SERVICE 1260
Provides animal control, code enforcement,
and supports law enforcement.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Community Service, 1260
•Staff: 2 PT Community Service Officers (30 hrs per
week)
•Respond to domestic and wild animal calls
•Vehicle Lockouts
•Assist with traffic direction, stalls, and medical calls
•Community Education
•Code Enforcement (i.e. Weeds & Grass)
Community Service -1260
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $53,700 $1,700 $5,800 $61,200
2018 $58,700 $1,700 $6,000 $66,400
Percent Change -8.5%0.0%-3.3%-7.8%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
ENGINEERING 1310
Our mission is to provide efficient, centralized, and cost effective
municipal engineering services to the citizens, as well as other
departments of the City. Furthermore, we intend to be good stewards of
public resources in order to enhance the quality of life in the City.
Services Provided
Engineering , 1310
•Staff: 7 Employees
•Significant contracts: Annual bridge inspection and certification, Suburban Rate
Authority annual dues, street condition survey and data collection, traffic studies,
contract survey work as needed.
•The Engineering Department is responsible for:
•Design and project management services for roadways, sanitary and storm sewers, storm
water management, water distribution mains and other civil engineering projects funded in
the City's Capital Improvement Program
•Mapping –GIS services used for all departments
•Plan review for proposed developments
•Pavement management
•Traffic complaints
•Surface Water Management -protect and improve the water quality of area streams, rivers,
lakes and wetlands through proper planning, project implementation, and public education
and outreach.
•Permits –Approximately 1,200 permits reviewed annually
•Variance, Encroachment Agreement & Vacation Requests
•Work with other agencies such as MnDOT and Carver County on joint projects
Engineering -1310
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $655,400 $800 $26,900 $683,100
2018 $652,500 $1,300 $27,500 $681,300
Percent Change +0.4%-38.5%-2.2%+0.3%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
STREET MAINTENANCE 1320
The mission of the Street Department is to provide the highest quality public works
services to the public and other City departments, balanced through efforts to
maintain a cost effective operation and to provide these services in a responsible and
efficient manner. This mission is accomplished through the prudent use of resources,
technology, innovations, teamwork, and coordination with other service providers.
Services Provided
Street Maintenance Department 1320
•Staff: 7 Employees
•Significant Contracts –Salt joint purchase agreement with MnDOT
•Responsibilities of Street Department:
•Snow and Ice Control
•Pothole Patching and Crack Sealing
•Tree Trimming and Mowing Activities
•Traffic Sign Installation and Maintenance
•Traffic Signal & Street Light Maintenance
•Pavement Marking
•Pedestrian Trail Sidewalk Repairs
•Street Sweeping
•Storm Sewer Maintenance
•Pond Cleaning
Street Department -1320
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $882,800 $113,300 $35,400 $1,031,500
2018 $853,400 $112,600 $30,900 $996,900
Percent Change
+3.4%+0.6%+14.6%+3.5%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
STREET LIGHTING & SIGNALS 1350
To provide for the operation and maintenance of the street lights
and signal systems in the community.
Services Provided
Street Lighting and Signals, 1350
•Staff: Maintenance work completed by Street
Department and Electric Utilities.
•Significant contracts:
•Xcel Energy
•Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative
Street Lighting & Signals -1350
Materials & Supplies Contractual Services Total
Budget
2019 $3,000 $354,500 $357,500
2018 $2,000 $354,500 $356,500
Percent Change +50.0%0.0%+0.3%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
FLEET DEPARTMENT 1370
Keeps City vehicles and equipment in a good and safe working
condition with minimal down time and to work on cost effective
replacement of vehicles and equipment.
Services Provided
Fleet, 1370
•Staff:4 Employees
•3 Mechanics
•1 Office assistant responsible for entire Public Works, Utility and Park
Departments.
•Significant contract -Joint fuel contract with MnDOT
Fleet Department -1370
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Capital
Outlay
Total Budget
2019 $323,100 $172,000 $61,800 $5,500 $562,400
2018 $311,400 $177,400 $57,800 $5,500 $552,100
Percent
Change +3.8%-3.0%+6.9%0.0%+1.9%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
PLANNING COMMISSION 1410
The commission conducts public hearings and makes
recommendations to the City Council on proposed changes
affecting zoning and land uses within the City, considers site plan
reviews, conditional use permits, variances, special use permits,
and other planning related items.
Services Provided
Planning Commission, 1410
•7 Member Commission –no salary
•Subscription to Planning Commission
Journal & Training (Government Training
Service)
•75% of budget for public hearing notices
Planning Commission 1410
Materials & Supplies Contractual Services Total Budget
2019 $200 $1,500 $1,700
2018 $200 $1,500 $1,700
Percent Change 0.0%0.0%0.0%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
PLANNING ADMINISTRATION 1420
Identify community needs and goals to guide amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan. The planning staff prepares and maintains the
Comprehensive Plan for the City and advises the City Council on matters
regarding implementation of the plan. Review development/redevelopment
plans for compliance with city ordinance.
Services Provided
Planning Administration, 1420
•Staff:
•Community Development Director,
o Senior Planner (2),
o Planner II (1)
o Senior Administrative Support Specialist
•Staff Support to the Planning Commission & City Council
•Maintain, Update and Enforce the City Code
•Coordinate city statistical data: demographics, permit
activity, available land inventory, etc.
•Economic Development
•Special Studies
Planning Administration -1420
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $548,700 $400 $11,300 $560,400
2018 $482,700 $400 $11,300 $494,400
Percent Change +13.7%0.0%0.0%+13.3%
Significant Changes:
•Wages includes transition of Assistant Planner position to Planner II.
2019 Budget
SENIOR COMMISSION 1430
The Senior Commission examines the needs of senior citizens in
the community. They review issues such as housing, information
and referral services, and transportation.
Services Provided
Senior Commission, 1430
•Staff:
•25% of Senior Planner Salary
•7 Member Commission –no salary
•Fees for Services provides contract with CAP
(Community Action Program) to manage
congregate dining program
Senior Commission 1430
Personal
Service
Contractual Services Total
Budget
2019 $29,500 $11,000 $40,500
2018 $28,600 $9,700 $38,300
Percent Change +3.1%+13.4%+5.7%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION 1510
The Park & Recreation Commission provides recommendations and advice to the City Council regarding parks, recreation and leisure services. The Commission is comprised of nine members appointed by the City Council for staggered terms.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Park & Recreation Commission, 1510
•9 Member Commission, no salary
•Staff: None (Supported by Park and Recreation Director)
•Prepares park and recreation section of comprehensive plan
•Subdivision review (Parks/Open Space/Trails)
•Advisory capacity to Council in all matters relating to parks and
recreation in the City.
Park & Recreation Commission -1510
Materials & Supplies Contractual Services Total
Budget
2019 $200 $1,000 $1,200
2018 $200 $1,000 $1,200
Percent Change 0.0%0.0%0.0%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
PARK & RECREATION
ADMINISTRATION 1520
The Park & Recreation administration budget manages leisure time
activities in the community. This function physically plans and develops
parks, open space, trails and indoor recreation facilities. Staff also
coordinates programs with school districts, local athletic associations,
and other groups.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Park & Recreation Administration, 1520
•Staff: Park and Recreation Director & Administrative
Support/Communications Specialist
•Developing a park and open space plan
•Encouraging citizen participation
•Developing a comprehensive interconnected trail/sidewalk
system
•Facilitating cooperative efforts between local school systems
and the city in acquisition, development and usage of
recreational lands and facilities
Park & Recreation Administration -1520
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $253,600 $200 $6,000 $259,800
2018 $239,500 $200 $5,900 $245,600
Percent Change +5.9%0.0%+1.7%+5.8%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
RECREATION CENTER 1530
The Recreation Center provides fitness activities, recreational
opportunities and meeting spaces for the community. Year-round
indoor and outdoor recreational programs are offered. The facility
was constructed under a joint powers agreement with ISD 112
and is operated through a lease agreement with the District.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Recreation Center, 1530
•Staff: 1 Recreation Center Manager, 10 Facility Supervisors,
1 Dance Coordinator, and 1 Dance Instructor
•Fitness and recreational programs for community members of
all ages
•Community events
•Facility rental space
•Activity space for local school, city, county, and state
governments provided at no charge. In 2016, we provided
4,400 hours of free space, valued at $83,000, for these agencies
Recreation Center -1530
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $234,100 $17,700 $95,900 $347,700
2018 $229,400 $23,000 $93,800 $346,200
Percent Change +2.0%-23.0%+2.2%+0.4%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
LAKE ANN OPERATIONS 1540
This department provides for the operations at Lake Ann Park.
Revenues, which offsets 40% of expenses, include facility rental,
watercraft and equipment rental, and concession fees.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Lake Ann Park Operations, 1540
•Staff: 4 Seasonal concession stand employees
•Beach season runs from June-August
•Accounts for concession food sales and watercraft rentals
•Lifeguards monitor 25,000 swimmers during lifeguard hours
•Lake Ann Park is the most visited and widely recognized park in
the city
Lake Ann Park Operations -1540
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $12,000 $9,200 $47,600 $68,800
2018 $12,200 $9,200 $49,100 $70,500
Percent Change -1.6%0.0%-3.1%-2.4%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
PARK MAINTENANCE 1550
Maintains and cares for City park and open space sites, play
equipment, athletic facilities, and trails. Also responsible for
landscaping maintenance of the downtown business district
including City Center Park, Old Village Hall, Train Depot,
boulevards, lighting, banners, and related items.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Park Maintenance, 1550
•Staff:7 full time & 16 seasonal park maintenance employees
•Maintenance of 30 parks, 14 preserves, 104 miles of trails,
48 athletic fields, 15 tennis courts, 10 pickle ball courts, skate
park and the downtown greenscapes
•Landscaping maintenance for 2 fire stations, City Hall, Library,
Old Village Hall and Train Depot
Park Maintenance -1550
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $860,000 $80,800 $101,800 $1,041,600
2018 $848,400 $80,800 $101,100 $1,030,300
Percent Change +1.4%0.0%-0.3%+1.1%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
2019 Budget
SENIOR CENTER 1560
The Senior Center budget plans and implements a variety of year-round
programs, special events, monthly one-day tours, and health and
wellness activities for older adults. The Center provides a welcoming
setting which improves the quality of life and use of leisure time for all
seniors. Programs and activities are funded through a combination of
fees, property tax levy, and community partnerships.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Senior Citizens Center, 1560
•Staff: Senior Center Coordinator in addition to
100+ volunteer hours per month
•Maintains a strong and respected reputation for providing
quality senior services
•Relevant and affordable programs are offered
•Friendly and welcoming environment
•Networked with other local service providers
•Valued partnerships are formed with local business community
Senior Citizens Center -1560
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $86,200 $4,300 $32,700 $123,200
2018 $80,100 $4,300 $29,700 $114,100
Percent Change +7.6%0.0%+10.1%+8.0%
Significant Changes:
•Increase in contractual services for increased demand in programming
2019 Budget
RECREATION PROGRAMS 1600
To provide a year-round recreational program that reflects a variety of
interests in the community and develops a social, physical, cultural,
and aesthetic quality for our citizens. These programs are funded by
a combination of fees, property tax levy, and a community
sponsorship program.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Recreation Programs, 1600
•Staff: Recreation Superintendent, Recreation Supervisor,
27 Seasonal Positions
•Adaptive recreation services
•Plan and host special events and recreation programs
•Summer playground program, summer concert series, warming
houses, and skate park attendant
Recreation Programs -1600
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $236,860 $22,100 $120,500 $376,960
2018 $214,900 $21,100 $116,100 $352,100
Percent Change +9.0%+5.2%+3.8%+7.1%
Significant Changes:
•Wage allocation between Self Supporting programs and Recreation Programs
adjusted to reflect actual time spent on the programs in each department. Net
impact to the General Fund is zero.
2019 Budget
SELF-SUPPORTING PROGRAMS 1700
This department funds adult programs, crafts and instructional
classes that cover all costs from fee revenue. New programs may be
started from this budget and not recover all costs in their first years.
Activities are expected to become self-sufficient in following years
and are evaluated annually.
Services Provided/Outcomes
Self Supporting Programs, 1700
•Staff: Program instructors and softball umpires
•Adult sporting leagues
•Assist other departments with programs; i.e., Safety Camp,
Pinky Swear 5K & Fun Run, Homecoming Parade
•Children’s enrichment programs
•Variety of sporting lessons and camps
Self Supporting Programs 1700
Personal Service Materials &
Supplies
Contractual
Services
Total
Budget
2019 $19,900 $4,500 $12,500 $36,900
2018 $36,300 $4,500 $15,000 $55,800
Percent Change -45.2%0.0%-16.7%-33.9%
Significant Changes:
•Wage allocation between Self Supporting programs and Recreation Programs
adjusted to reflect actual time spent on the programs in each department.
Net impact to the General Fund is zero.
2019 Budget
RECREATION SPORTS 1800
Recreation Sports provides preschool and school-age children
safe, educational, and healthy experience in sports where
recreation and fun are emphasized.
Services Provided / Outcomes
Rec Center Sports, 1800
•Staff: 1 PT Coordinator and 5 Youth Sports Leaders
•A variety of preschool sports and after-school sports for elementary-age
children
•Increased customer service and program quality over previously offered
contracted services
Recreation Sports -1800
Personal
Service
Materials & Supplies Total
Budget
2019 $30,400 $8,200 $38,600
2018 $29,300 $8,200 $37,500
Percent Change +3.8%0.0%+2.9%
Significant Changes:
•No significant changes.
Potential Service Level/Levy Reduction Ideas
•Most Likely a reduction in Healthcare Costs based on upcoming bids.
Result –No impact on services.$40,000
•Reduction in Audit Services Contract.
Result –No impact on services.$4,000
•Reduction in Sealcoat Levy, total levy is $93,000.
Result –The reduction in this levy would need to
be replaced by using other funds such as MSA funding
or Franchise Fee dollars.
$36,000
TOTAL :$76,000
2019 Budget
THANK YOU!
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM: Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resources Specialist
DATE: August 2018
SUBJ: Staff Report – Chanhassen Yard Waste Collection Options
BACKGROUND
The City of Chanhassen has long had a history of managing yard waste for residents. In the
1980’s the city would do curbside pick up throughout the city in the spring and fall. In 1991, the
city opened a yard waste site in what is now Bandimere Park. Every Saturday, Chanhassen
residents could bring yard waste to the site which was open on Saturdays, 9a – 3p, from April
until November. Around 2000, the Bandimere compost site closed for park expansion. The city
then offered spring and fall brush collection days. These collection days took place in the front
parking lot of Lake Ann Park on one Saturday in the spring and fall. In 2002, the last year of
collection, the cost to the city was $10,000 for the two days.
In 2003, the Carver County Environmental Center opened. This became the new yard waste
collection site and has continued to be such for 15 years. Over time, the Center justly became a
popular drop off site for yard waste from Chanhassen residents. In 2015, the county began to
search for an alternative site for yard waste drop off due to an increase in traffic at the Center. In
2018, the county proposed to the Board of Commissioners a partnership with the UMN
Landscape Arboretum for a yard waste drop off site located on Arboretum property. Neighbors
to the site strongly opposed the location and in the spring of 2018, the Carver County Board of
Commissioners voted to not pursue an alternate location and not accept yard waste at the
Environmental Center beginning in January 2019.
The City of Chanhassen had assisted the county in their search for suitable yard waste sites.
Throughout the two-year search, the city had found no suitable parcels within Chanhassen for the
relocation. Possible sites were too small, in residential neighborhoods, and/or lacked good
access and traffic stacking capabilities. The city simply does not have public property that is
appropriate for a community yard waste site. However, starting in 2019 the city will be forced to
confront the yard waste issue.
City Council
Chanhassen Yard Waste Collection Options
August 2018
Page 2 of 6
Other cities in Carver County offer yard waste collection in addition to their residents being able
to access the Environmental Center until 2019. See Attachment A for the city list and details.
City staff have been in discussions internally concerning various options for yard waste disposal
within the city. This report will present all options available.
ISSUE
Starting January 2019, Chanhassen residents will no longer be able to drop off yard waste and
brush at the Carver County Environmental Center.
SUMMARY
The city has assisted residents in managing yard waste from their properties since the 1980s.
With the elimination of yard waste collection at the Carver County Environmental Center,
Chanhassen residents will be looking for alternatives. The Carver County Board of
Commissioners noted in their April 3 vote to end yard waste collection at the Center and that
residents preferred a private sector option. From the county board meeting minutes, this
preference was not voiced by any Chanhassen residents. The city now has to decide what
options will be available to Chanhassen residents for yard waste in 2019.
The options available include:
• Residents contract with their private haulers for yard waste collection and/or haul it to
drop-off sites in Minnetrista, Watertown or Shakopee. See Attachment B
• The city contracts with a single hauler to do curbside collection of yard waste.
• The city offers yard waste collection days at a specific location on specific days.
• The city operates a yard waste collection site open multiple days throughout the season.
ANALYSIS
Option 1: Private haulers and compost sites
Chanhassen residents are required to properly dispose of all waste, including yard waste.
Homeowners can compost yard waste on their property, contract with their private hauler for
yard waste disposal, or take the waste to a composting facility. The nearest facilities are in
Shakopee, Minnetrista or Watertown. The cost for drop off varies by site. Homeowners can use
this option as needed and with any amount and size of brush. The disadvantages include cost
and time of driving to site, labor of loading and unloading, limited hours and days of operation at
the sites.
Contracting for yard waste collection through a private hauler is available from every hauler
servicing Chanhassen. Collection is weekly and is limited to one container and/or a certain
number of bags and bundles. The average cost per season for yard waste collection is around
$100 per household and the season runs from the beginning of April through Thanksgiving
City Council
Chanhassen Yard Waste Collection Options
August 2018
Page 3 of 6
week. Extra bags or bundles are charged back to the homeowner per item. This option is very
convenient, involving no extra loading time or transportation, the waste is taken away weekly,
and for a price, homeowners can set out as much waste as they would like. Disadvantages
include the cost of service, limited sizes of brush, and space needed for another waste container
on the property.
Option 2: City contracts with private hauler for city-wide yard waste collection
The city could send out an RFP to contract directly with a hauler to collect yard waste
throughout the city during the growing season. Residents would have a weekly collection that
would run April through October, or whatever months designated by the city. While a number
of cities contract with haulers for recycling and organics collection, staff couldn’t find any city in
the metro that contracts specifically for yard waste. This doesn’t mean it can’t be done. This
option would provide the most convenience for residents, avoid all site improvement costs at the
Public Works facility, and not require any daily ongoing staffing costs and issues. Disadvantages
include contract negotiations and oversight of the contractor. The RFP could also include
recycling collection which would help consolidate services, reduce truck traffic in neighborhoods
and allow residents to continue to choose solid waste contractors on their own.
Option 3: Spring and Fall Yard Waste Collection
In the early 2000’s the city offered Yard Waste Collection Days in the spring and fall for
residents. On one Saturday in April and October, residents could drop off unlimited amounts of
yard waste at no charge. The city contracted with a hauler to supply roll offs which would be
filled during the event. Three city employees, two paid overtime and one salaried, worked the
event, directing traffic and managing the waste. The cost for hauling the yard waste to a disposal
site was $10,000 in 2002.
The city could offer this option again choosing 1 or more days in the spring and fall during
which residents could drop off waste for collection. This option would limit the cost of site
improvements since only a parking lot would be needed as a temporary site for 2 or more days a
year. Hauling costs and employee costs would still accrue, but only for the few days. A
minimum of two employees would be required to direct traffic, check residency, manage waste,
etc.
Costs for spring and fall yard waste collection:
Item Cost ESTIMATE Per Daily Event
Employee – fulltime, benefitted, overtime $366.16 - $594.88 (Average $480.48)
Employee – seasonal, non-benefitted $214.24
Hauling - $9.50/cu yd – 400 cu yd $3800
ESTIMATED Total per event $4,494.72
The quantity dropped off at such an event may be significantly underestimated.
City Council
Chanhassen Yard Waste Collection Options
August 2018
Page 4 of 6
For comparison, the City of Chaska has spent approximately $15,000 - $17,000 per event when
hosting.
Option 4: City operated permanent yard waste site at the Public Works facility
This option would provide residents with a convenient disposal option for yard waste by
potentially offering more hours of operation than spring and fall collection days, a closer location
than the County Environmental Center and little or no fees for drop-offs. The site is centrally
located within Chanhassen at the Public Works facility. There would be no impact on any
residential neighborhoods since the site is in an industrial area. Traffic issues from stacking
would not affect any major roadways.
Disadvantages of this option include the cost of site improvements, increase in costs for
employee staffing, elimination of snow storage area at public works, wear and tear on site
pavement, and elimination of storage areas for dumpsters, mulch, soil, backfill and spoils.
Reconfiguration of the site would make operations more difficult for city staff by reducing the
usable area for daily work and storage.
To modify the city Public Works (PW) site to accommodate a permanent yard waste collection
operation the following items would need to be addressed:
• The best and only location on the PW site for yard waste collection is near the front of the
site as shown in Attachment B. This area is currently being used to store soil, backfill,
spoils and other incidentals that don’t have dedicated storage elsewhere on site. This
location would provide better safety for city employees if drop-off hours are concurrent
with work hours, reduce the number of non-city vehicles in the PW site and provide
better security for the site.
• A minimum of two employees would be required to direct traffic, check residency,
manage waste, etc.
• Site improvements that would need to be made to accommodate a permanent yard waste
site include:
o Removing stored piles from area
o Reconfiguring storage bunkers in rear to accommodate more materials
o Improving the surface of the proposed yard waste area
o Removing sections of berm to create flow-through traffic access to yard waste site
o Building walls around the yard waste area to keep materials on site, assist with
mechanical collection of yard waste, and buffer views.
o Installing a security gate to eliminate afterhours access by the public into the site
o Installing a security camera
o Additionally, a gate house of some sort may be needed to accommodate staff
checking residency of customers and collecting any fees.
City Council
Chanhassen Yard Waste Collection Options
August 2018
Page 5 of 6
The costs of site improvements are as follows:
Item Cost
Storage bunkers – remove, replace, build walls to relocate
storage
$50,795.00
Yard waste area site improvements – class 5 gravel, block
walls
$14,559.75
Security gate $20,620.00
Power to gate $3,230.00
Security cameras and card reader $16,045.00
Power to cameras and card reader ESTIMATE $2,000.00
TOTAL $107,249.75
The quotes for site improvement costs are Attachment C.
The yard waste site would potentially be open every Saturday from April to November. Possible
hours would be 8a – 4p to accommodate residents and allow for a pacing of customers.
Additional hours on a weekday evening could be added to provide residents added convenience.
Potentially, these hours would be Noon-7p to accommodate those going to evening work or
activities as well as those returning home from work.
Employee needs for the site would range from 1-2 staff per event. The busiest spring and fall
days would require 2 employees to ensure traffic safety and site management. At every event,
one employee with the ability to operate a bobcat would be required. Since the event would
happen on Saturdays and evenings, overtime rates would be required for staff. Employee costs
for a public works staff to work the site would include the overtime hourly rate, PERA,
SS/Medicare, HCSP Contribution and Workers Comp. A seasonal employee cost would include
an hourly rate, SS/Medicare and Workers Comp.
Operational costs for yard waste site:
Item Cost ESTIMATE
Employee – fulltime, benefitted, overtime – high end of pay scale $74.36 per hour
Employee – fulltime, benefitted, overtime – low end of pay scale $45.77 per hour
Employee – fulltime, benefitted, overtime AVERAGE $60.06 per hour
Employee – seasonal, non-benefitted $26.78 per hour
Yard waste hauling - $9.50/cu yd – minimum 80 cu yds $760.00 minimum haul
cost
City Council
Chanhassen Yard Waste Collection Options
August 2018
Page 6 of 6
ESTIMATED TOTAL PER WEEK –– MINIMUM COSTS
Item Cost Per Event
Sat (8a-4p) only – 8 hrs
Cost Per Year
(35 weeks/280 hrs)
Employee – high rate
($594.88) + 160cy hauling
$2,114.88 per event $74,020.80 annually
Employee – low rate ($366.16)
+ 160 cy hauling
$1,886.16 per event $66,015.60 annually
Employee – average ($480.48)
+ 160 cy hauling
$2,000.48 per event $70,016.80 annually
Seasonal ($214.24) + hauling $1,734.24 per event $60,698.40 annually
Employee - average + Seasonal
+hauling
$2,214.72 per event $77,515.20 annually
ESTIMATED TOTAL PER WEEK –– MINIMUM COSTS
Item Cost Per Week
Sat & Wkday (12-7p) – 15
hrs
Cost Per Year
(35 weeks/525 hours)
Employee – high rate
($1,115.40) + 160cy hauling
$2,635.40 per event $92,239.00 annually
Employee – low rate
($686.55) + hauling
$2,206.55 per event $77,229.25 annually
Employee – average
($900.90) + 160 cy hauling
$2,420.90 per event $84,731.50 annually
Seasonal ($401.70) + hauling $1,921.70 per event $67,259.50 annually
Employee average + Seasonal
+hauling
$2,822,60 per event $98,791.00 annually
RECOMMENDATION
Staff looks to the City Council for direction on the preferred option for the city.
ATTACHMENTS
A) Yard Waste Collection in neighboring communities
B) Nearby Private Compost Sites
C) Public Works Site Improvement Quotes
D) Diagrams of Site Improvement at Public Works
G:/Plan/JS/Recycling/County Compost Site/Yard Waste Site
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Greg Sticha, Finance Director
DATE: August 13, 2018
SUBJ: 2019 Budget Discussion
BACKGROUND
During this evening’s 2019 budget discussion, staff will present three different scenarios for
setting the preliminary levy. Items that will be reviewed include the assumptions made while
preparing the budget document, the impact of each scenario on the average home, and staff’s
recommendation for setting the preliminary levy.
Attached is the budget document that will be used to present tonight’s discussion and the detailed
PowerPoint presentations. The preliminary levy will be set on September 24, 2018.
BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS
Staff has prepared the preliminary budget based on the following assumptions:
1. A wage increase for employees in 2019 of 3%, which will include a merit-based portion.
2. Market Adjustments for department heads, additional 2%-5%
3. Building permit revenue $100,000 larger than previous years.
4. An increase in healthcare costs of 18%.
5. No increase in the Law enforcement contract.
6. New growth of 0.97% ($106,000)
7. Elimination of the Crime Prevention Specialist position from the budget ($73,000)
For 2019, staff is including a health insurance cost increase of 18% ($106,000). This is the
second year of a two-year contract for healthcare insurance with Blue Cross Blue Shield. The
current contract includes a rate cap increase at 18%. It is possible for the city to get a rate
increase below 18% due to our experience rating or competitive outside bids, which we are
currently soliciting. Final healthcare numbers are not expected to be available until mid-
September.
Mayor & City Council
August 14, 2017
Page 2
Additionally, the city experienced a 0.97% increase in new construction. This results in
approximately $106,000 in new property tax dollars payable in 2019.
Staff did include an increase of $100,000 in building permit revenue. Staff believes the new base
building permit revenue year to be closer to $1M rather than the $900,000 that the city has used
for the past several years.
The law enforcement contract for 2019 does not have an increase over the 2018 contract. The
lack of increase is due to the fact that some of the officers assigned to Chanhassen in 2019 are
newer to Carver County, and therefore lower in their pay ranges than the previous, more tenured
staff. All staffing levels and equipment maintenance schedules will remain the same, so there is
no anticipated decrease in the current service levels.
Staff did include wage increases of 3% for all employee’s and also included market adjustments
for department head positions. A department head salary survey was completed of all of our
KFS cities and regional competitor cities. Based on that data from the survey we found our
department heads are paid 1.95% more than average of our KFS cities and are paid nearly 13%
lower than our competitor cities. Within the current budget we have included a 5% market rate
adjustment in additional to the cost of living adjustment (3%) to get those positions at or near the
top of our KFS cities and around only 8% lower than the average of our competitor cities.
The Crime Prevention Specialist position has been vacant for over a year and staff has proposed
eliminating the position from the budget for 2019. The duties of the position have been
accomplished in most part by the CSO positions and with administration picking up some of the
other small duties. Staff believes that at least for the immediate future, the duties can be
managed in a similar manner but should be monitored on an ongoing basis.
The result of all these calculations, along with a detailed review of all line items and anticipated
changes in the General Fund Budget, results in a levy of $76,000 above new growth.
SCENARIOS
Consistent with prior year’s preliminary budget adoptions, staff is presenting three scenarios for
city council to consider when setting the preliminary levy. When discussing the following
scenarios it is important to note that the average home in Chanhassen increased in value by
7.52% for budget year 2019. As always, the value of individual homes compared to the average
home will dictate the final outcome of individual property tax bills.
Scenario #1: This scenario includes an increase in the total levy from the previous year of
$182,000 or 1.67%. Included in that amount is $106,000 in new property tax dollars thus
resulting in a .69% or $6-$7 increase in the city portion of the property tax bill for the average
home in the city ($76,000 above new growth).
Mayor & City Council
August 14, 2017
Page 3
This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for
department head positions, elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in
total building permit revenue budget of $100,000, a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to
the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various line items (both decreases and
increases).
Scenario #2: This scenario includes an increase in the total levy of $106,000 or 0.97%, the
result of this scenario is a zero percent increase in the city portion of the property tax bill on the
average home in the city (new growth).
This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for
department head positions, elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in
total building permit revenue budget of $100,000, a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to
the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various line items (both decreases and
increases).
In order to achieve this levy, either a combination of the healthcare contract increase would need
to come in lower than 18%, reduction in other expenses, or increased budgeted revenues would
need to amount to $76,000 as compared to scenario #1.
Scenario #3: The third scenario includes an increase in the total levy of $56,000 or 0.51%
higher from the previous year. Included in that amount is $106,000 in new property tax dollars
thus resulting in a 0.51% or $5-$7 decrease in the city portion of the property tax bill on the
average home in the city ($50,000 below new growth).
This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for
department head positions, elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in
total building permit revenue budget of $100,000, a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to
the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various line items (both decreases and
increases).
In order to achieve this levy, either a combination of the Healthcare contract increase would need
to come in lower than 18%, reduction in other expenses or increased budgeted revenues would
need to amount to $126,000 as compared to scenario #1.
YARD WASTE COLLECTION SITE
As city council may be aware, Carver County has made the decision to close their yard waste
collection site for residents within the county. If the City Council would like to offer this service
to Chanhassen residents staff has begun researching one-time costs as well as ongoing operating
costs for a potential site at the Public Works Facility. You will find attached a memo prepared
by the city’s Environmental Resource Specialist that goes into more detail of total costs and
options to either provide or not provide this service going forward.
Mayor & City Council
August 14, 2017
Page 4
If the city council would like to pursue this service, staff is recommending a special revenue fund
be set up to account for all the activity both revenue and expenditure line items to allow for the
most transparency. The revenues could include grants, a small fee for service and a small
property tax levy depending on the availability of grants and how much of a service fee would be
charged for those dropping off yard waste. Based on the options presented in the memo drafted
by the Environmental Resources Specialist, the annual operating expenditures would include fees
for disposal, wages to man the drop off site and some potential small ongoing security and other
costs. Staff is estimating the total operating cost based on manned operating hours of 280/year
(Saturday only drop off) to 525/year (Saturday & 1 weekday7 hours), to be between
$60,000/year to as much as $150,000/year, depending on the option/service level selected.
Currently the county funds the city with a solid waste grant of $17,000/year. It is possible the
county could decide to the allocation of additional resources because of the elimination of their
yard waste collection site, but because of this unknown, there is a potential of a unfunded portion
of this service to be between $43,000-$135,000 per year. It is important to note that if the
current solid waste grant funds were to be utilized for this service it would mean no availability
of funds for recycling coupons and other public recycling and composting services being offered
to residents currently. Therefore, a service disposal fee or property tax levy would need to be
instituted to account for as much as $150,000 per year, depending on the option/service level for
yard waste, recycling and public composting services the city council desires to provide. This
item is currently not included in any of the budget assumptions previously discussed and staff is
looking for direction from the city council on how to proceed with this item.
Staff will also be bringing with it to this evenings meeting information on potential private
collection costs for individual residential yard waste collection by local refuse companies.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on all the information presented above, staff believes setting a preliminary levy as
described in Scenario #1 would give the most flexibility before setting a final levy in December.
Staff has researched all estimated costs and revenues to the fullest extent possible at this point in
the year; however, a number of factors could either adversely or positively impact the budget
between now and December. The unknown of the change in the healthcare insurance contract
has the most significant impact on the budget. Since the final levy can only go down from the
preliminary levy, staff believes setting a levy lower than Scenario #1 would not give the city as
much flexibility to recover from any potential adverse factors that could impact the budget.
NEXT STEP
No action is required on this item. The next budget discussion will occur when department
heads present their proposed 2019 budgets by department. Their presentations will be based on
Scenario #1 and will highlight any significant changes in their departments.
ATTACHMENTS
Mayor & City Council
August 14, 2017
Page 5
1. Levy Impact Scenarios.
2. Detailed General Fund Expenditure & Revenue Budget.
3. Carver County Assessor’s Office – Chanhassen Assessment Summary.
4. Debt Levies.
5. KFS & Regional Department Head Salary Survey
6. Environmental Resource Specialist Memo
f:\gregs\budget\2018 budget\8-14 prelim bud discussion.docx
2018 2019 % Change
Operational & Capital Levies
General Fund 8,704,333$
Capital Replacement 800,000
Revolving Imp Street Reconstruction 384,838
MSA (Sealcoating) 93,000
Total Operational & Capital Levies 9,982,171$ -$ -100.00%
Debt Levies
Public Works Facility 470,400
Library Referendum 461,297
Total Debt Levies 931,697$ -$ -100.00%
Total All Levies 10,913,868$ -$ -100.00%
2019 Tax Levy
Personal Materials Contractual Capital 2019 2018 %2017
Services & Supplies Services Outlay Total Total Change Actual
General Government
1110 Legislative 46,700 - 81,600 - 128,300 126,500 1.42%122,613
1120 Administration 501,400 - 59,500 - 560,900 535,100 4.82%522,872
1130 Finance 332,800 200 42,300 - 375,300 358,700 4.63%339,100
1140 Legal - - 200,000 - 200,000 190,500 4.99%198,417
1150 Property Assessment - - 156,000 - 156,000 150,000 4.00%146,422
1160 MIS 168,800 44,700 46,000 - 259,500 234,800 10.52%223,613
1170 City Hall 95,100 40,300 262,000 - 397,400 413,800 -3.96%390,266
1180 Elections 26,000 4,000 18,000 - 48,000 42,600 12.68%-
1190 Library Building - 2,500 109,100 - 111,600 111,600 0.00%109,165
*Total 1,170,800 91,700 974,500 - 2,237,000 2,163,600 3.39%2,052,467
Law Enforcement
1210 Police Administration - 1,000 1,884,800 - 1,885,800 1,961,400 -3.85%1,804,236
1220 Fire Prevention & Admin 788,000 45,100 170,400 - 1,003,500 919,600 9.12%895,087
1250 Code Enforcement 722,600 6,400 13,200 - 742,200 718,100 3.36%736,784
1260 Community Service 53,700 1,700 5,800 - 61,200 66,400 -7.83%48,665
*Total 1,564,300 54,200 2,074,200 - 3,692,700 3,665,500 0.74%3,484,772
Public Works
1310 Engineering 655,400 800 26,900 - 683,100 681,300 0.26%658,709
1320 Street Maintenance 882,800 113,300 35,400 - 1,031,500 996,900 3.47%931,096
1350 Street Lighting & Signals - 3,000 354,500 - 357,500 356,500 0.28%359,197
1370 Fleet Department 323,100 172,000 61,800 5,500 562,400 552,100 1.87%518,808
*Total 1,861,300 289,100 478,600 5,500 2,634,500 2,586,800 1.84%2,467,810
Community Development
1410 Planning Commission - 200 1,500 - 1,700 1,700 0.00%1,338
1420 Planning Administration 548,700 400 11,300 - 560,400 494,400 13.35%496,230
1430 Senior Commission 29,500 - 11,000 - 40,500 38,300 5.74%43,254
*Total 578,200 600 23,800 - 602,600 534,400 12.76%540,823
Park & Recreation
1510 Park & Rec Commission - 200 1,000 - 1,200 1,200 0.00%175
1520 Park & Rec Administration 253,600 200 6,000 - 259,800 245,600 5.78%233,149
1530 Recreation Center 234,100 17,700 95,900 - 347,700 346,200 0.43%312,419
1540 Lake Ann Park Operations 12,000 9,200 47,600 - 68,800 70,500 -2.41%67,573
1550 Park Maintenance 860,000 80,800 100,800 - 1,041,600 1,030,300 1.10%1,041,692
1560 Senior Citizens Center 86,200 4,300 32,700 - 123,200 114,100 7.98%117,940
1600 Recreation Programs 234,260 22,200 120,500 - 376,960 352,100 7.06%353,384
1700 Self-Supporting Programs 19,900 4,500 12,500 - 36,900 55,800 -33.87%50,614
1800 Recreation Sports 30,400 7,900 300 - 38,600 37,500 2.93%35,258
*Total 1,730,460 147,000 417,300 - 2,294,760 2,253,300 1.84%2,212,203
Total Operational Expenditures 6,905,060 582,600 3,968,400 5,500 11,461,560 11,203,600 2.30%10,758,075
Transfer for Roads - - - -
**Total General Fund 11,461,560 11,203,600 2.30%10,758,075
Dollar Change from Previous Year 257,960
2019 General Fund Budget
Expenditures
2016 2017 2018 2019 Inc Over 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget PY Budget Estimate
General Property Tax
3010 Current Property Tax 8,000,093 8,475,905 8,704,333 8,810,333 1.2%
3002 Allowance for Delinquent Taxes (39,158) (75,108) (40,000) (55,000)
3011 Delinquent Property Tax 34,408 7,050 45,000 25,000
3090 Excess TIF Taxes 33,069 86,633 - -
*Total General Property Tax 8,028,411 8,494,480 8,709,333 8,780,333 0.8%-
Licenses
3203 Dog Kennel 500 250 500 500 500
3206 Massage License 600 150 800 500 500
3213 Solicitor - - - - -
3226 Liquor On and Off Sale 92,221 92,018 93,000 93,000 93,000
3284 Rubbish 2,400 3,000 3,500 3,500 3,500
*Total Licenses 95,721 95,418 97,800 97,500 -0.3%97,500
Permits
3301 Building 524,996 518,620 500,000 500,000 500,000
3302 Plan Check 252,621 253,777 235,000 235,000 235,000
3305 Heating & A/C 114,854 172,701 82,800 82,800 82,800
3306 Plumbing 92,927 97,615 65,000 65,000 65,000
3307 Trenching 40,641 55,066 30,000 30,000 30,000
3308 Hunting/Shooting 940 840 1,400 1,400 1,400
3309 Sprinkler 8,335 11,074 11,000 11,000 11,000
3311 Sign 8,590 4,015 6,500 6,500 6,500
3316 Septic Tank 1,560 - - - -
3320 Stable 200 200 300 300 300
3331 Firework's Application Fee 200 200 - - -
3390 Misc. Permits 3,410 5,525 3,000 3,000 3,000
*Total Permits 1,049,275 1,119,633 935,000 935,000 0.0%935,000
Fines & Penalties
3401 Traffic & Ordinance Violation 113,232 126,636 115,000 120,000 120,000
3402 Vehicle Lockouts 692 950 1,000 1,000 1,000
3404 Dog/Cat Impound 427 808 - 500 500
3405 Other Fines and Penalties 16 - - - -
*Total Fines & Penalties 114,368 128,394 116,000 121,500 4.7%121,500
Intergovernmental Revenue
3503 Reimbursement from School Dist.47,056 49,407 47,000 50,000 50,000
3509 Other Shared Taxes 196,298 196,021 200,000 200,000 200,000
3510 Grants-State 162,175 163,912 162,000 162,000 162,000
3530 Grants-Federal - - - - -
3533 Grants-Other 692 6,291 - - -
*Total Intergovernmental Revenue 406,222 415,632 409,000 412,000 0.7%412,000
2019 General Fund Budget
Revenue
2016 2017 2018 2019 Inc Over 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget PY Budget Estimate
Charges for Current Services
3601 Sale of Documents 863 950 500 800 800
3602 Use & Variance Permits 13,309 21,533 20,000 20,000 20,000
3603 Rezoning Fees 2,700 1,750 2,000 2,000 2,000
3604 Assessment Searches 15 - 300 - -
3605 Plat Recording Fees 1,650 2,290 4,000 4,000 4,000
3607 Election Filing Fees - - - - -
3613 Misc.-General Government 2,892 5,616 5,000 5,000 5,000
3614 Admin. Charge-2% Constr.56,079 52,225 55,000 55,000 55,000
3617 Engineering General 125 - - - -
3619 Investment Management Fee 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000
3629 Misc.-Public Safety 9,465 9,971 10,000 10,000 10,000
3630 Recreation Program Fees 52,417 59,520 52,000 58,000 56,000
3631 Recreation Center 218,732 217,077 218,000 217,000 218,000
3633 Park Equipment Rental 57 93 300 100 100
3634 Park Facility Usage Fee 19,395 19,022 19,000 19,000 19,000
3635 Watercraft Rental 16,169 18,020 16,000 18,000 18,000
3636 Self-Supporting Programs 42,001 45,276 42,000 42,000 42,000
3637 Senior Programs 45,854 47,025 45,000 47,000 47,000
3638 Food Concessions 11,470 10,862 12,000 11,000 11,000
3639 Misc.-Park & Rec.905 1,347 1,200 1,200 1,200
3642 Recreation Sports 44,556 44,384 46,000 45,000 45,000
3649 Misc.-Public Works 4,646 3,651 2,000 3,500 3,500
3651 Merchandise Sales 3,702 2,950 2,400 2,800 2,800
*Total Charges for Current Services 622,000 638,562 627,700 636,400 1.4%635,400
Other Revenue
3801 Interest Earnings 27,080 36,120 30,000 45,000 45,000
3802 Equipment Rental & Sale 182,378 186,978 178,000 265,000 265,000
3803 Building Rental 6,692 5,798 6,500 6,000 6,000
3804 Land Sale 35,324 8,100 - - -
3807 Donations 24,275 28,609 25,267 25,327 25,000
3808 Insurance Reimbursements - 18,709 - - -
3816 SAC Retainer 3,404 4,386 4,000 4,000 4,000
3818 Sur-Tax Retainer 662 740 1,000 1,000 1,000
3820 Misc. Other Revenue 418 766 300 500 500
3903 Refunds/Reimbursements 60,805 55,635 63,700 60,000 60,000
3980 Cash Short/Over 0 1 - - -
*Total Other Revenue 341,039 345,843 308,767 406,827 31.8%406,500
**Total General Fund Revenue 10,657,035 11,237,962 11,203,600 11,389,560 1.7%2,607,900
Total General Fund Expenditures 11,461,560
Net Levy Remaining (Use of Gen Fund Reserves)(72,000)
2019 General Fund Budget
Revenue
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 28,800 42,000 42,000 43,600 3.8%43,600
4030 Contributions-Retirement 1,915 2,804 2,800 3,000 7.1%3,000
4050 Workers Compensation 106 90 100 100 0.0%100
*Total Personal Services 30,821 44,894 44,900 46,700 4.0%46,700
4300 Fees, Services 2,096 - 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
4340 Printing & Publishing 28,251 29,911 32,000 32,000 0.0%32,000
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 41,682 41,560 42,000 42,000 0.0%42,000
4370 Travel & Training 6,500 5,650 6,000 6,000 0.0%6,000
4375 Promotional Expenses 1,679 599 600 600 0.0%600
*Total Contractual Services 80,208 77,719 81,600 81,600 0.0%81,600
**Total Legislative 111,030 122,613 126,500 128,300 1.4%128,300
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Legislative (1110)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 374,858 360,011 362,000 377,300 4.2%388,600
4011 Overtime-Reg 2,503 - - - 0.0%-
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 231 209 300 300 0.0%300
4030 Contributions-Retirement 48,549 51,126 54,700 55,500 1.5%58,000
4040 Contributions-Insurance 58,697 59,127 58,000 64,600 11.4%72,400
4050 Workers Compensation 2,995 3,045 3,500 3,700 5.7%3,900
*Total Personal Services 487,832 473,517 478,500 501,400 4.8%523,200
4300 Fees, Services 21,755 4,634 15,000 15,000 0.0%15,000
4310 Telephone 4,934 5,677 5,000 5,800 16.0%5,800
4320 Utilities 89 - 200 200 0.0%200
4330 Postage 21,641 22,968 21,000 23,000 9.5%23,000
4340 Printing & Publishing 220 - 300 300 0.0%300
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 4,221 4,633 4,500 4,600 2.2%4,600
4370 Travel & Training 6,834 9,503 8,600 8,600 0.0%8,600
4380 Mileage 837 1,079 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
4410 Rental-Equipment 755 860 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
4807 Property Tax Expense 4 - - - 0.0%-
*Total Contractual Services 61,291 49,355 56,600 59,500 5.1%59,500
**Total Administration 549,123 522,872 535,100 560,900 4.8%582,700
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Adminstration (1120)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 218,028 226,932 224,600 239,500 6.6%246,700
4011 Overtime-Reg 156 - - - 0.0%-
4030 Contributions-Retirement 32,253 33,129 34,100 36,300 6.5%37,400
4040 Contributions-Insurance 29,734 38,281 48,000 54,700 14.0%61,300
4050 Workers Compensation 1,643 1,937 2,200 2,300 4.5%2,500
*Total Personal Services 281,814 300,279 308,900 332,800 7.7%347,900
4120 Supplies-Equipment - - 100 100 0.0%100
4210 Books & Periodicals - - 100 100 0.0%100
*Total Materials & Supplies - - 200 200 0.0%200
4300 Fees, Services 13,955 14,087 17,000 16,000 (5.9%)16,000
4301 Fees, Financial/Audit 21,599 19,147 26,000 20,000 (23.1%)21,000
4310 Telephone and Communications 972 997 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
4340 Printing & Publishing 241 200 600 300 (50.0%)300
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 465 465 500 500 0.0%500
4370 Travel & Training 4,037 3,926 4,500 4,500 0.0%4,500
*Total Contractual Services 41,269 38,821 49,600 42,300 (14.7%)43,300
**Total Finance 323,083 339,100 358,700 375,300 4.6%391,400
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Finance (1130)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4302 Fees, Legal 187,471 198,417 190,500 200,000 5.0%210,000
*Total Contractual Services 187,471 198,417 190,500 200,000 5.0%210,000
**Total Legal 187,471 198,417 190,500 200,000 5.0%210,000
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Legal (1140)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4300 Fees, Services 146,371 146,422 150,000 156,000 4.0%161,000
*Total Contractual Services 146,371 146,422 150,000 156,000 4.0%161,000
**Total Property Assessment 146,371 146,422 150,000 156,000 4.0%161,000
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Property Assessment (1150)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 125,068 112,230 116,300 123,800 6.4%127,500
4030 Contributions-Retirement 18,102 16,505 17,700 18,800 6.2%19,300
4040 Contributions-Insurance 17,384 19,697 22,800 25,000 9.6%28,200
4050 Workers Compensation 921 957 1,100 1,200 9.1%1,400
*Total Personal Services 161,475 149,389 157,900 168,800 6.9%176,400
4150 Maintenance Materials 1,264 1,062 1,300 1,300 0.0%1,300
4210 Books & Periodicals 40 55 300 100 (66.7%)100
4220 Software Licensing & Support 20,277 27,670 28,100 43,000 53.0%45,000
4260 Small Tools & Equipment 262 274 300 300 0.0%300
*Total Materials & Supplies 21,843 29,061 30,000 44,700 49.0%46,700
4300 Fees, Services 32,485 21,368 21,300 22,000 3.3%23,000
4310 Telephone and Communications 1,899 1,980 3,300 2,000 (39.4%)2,200
4320 Utilities 11,545 11,070 11,300 11,000 (2.7%)11,000
4370 Travel & Training 5,420 5,755 6,000 6,000 0.0%6,000
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 3,428 4,990 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000
*Total Contractual Services 54,777 45,163 46,900 46,000 (1.9%)47,200
**Total MIS 238,095 223,613 234,800 259,500 10.5%270,300
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Management Information Systems (MIS) (1160)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 57,088 58,399 59,000 60,000 1.7%61,800
4011 Overtime-Reg 1,702 - 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
4030 Contributions-Retirement 8,779 8,301 9,000 9,000 0.0%9,400
4040 Contributions-Insurance 8,977 14,691 18,300 20,900 14.2%23,500
4050 Workers Compensation 3,249 3,479 3,900 4,200 7.7%5,000
*Total Personal Services 79,795 84,870 91,200 95,100 4.3%100,700
4110 Supplies-Office 33,017 32,629 36,000 34,000 (5.6%)34,000
4120 Supplies-Equipment 629 176 900 900 0.0%900
4140 Supplies-Vehicles 699 411 300 500 66.7%500
4150 Maintenance Materials 5,554 4,250 4,000 4,500 12.5%4,500
4260 Small Tools & Equipment 7 144 400 400 0.0%400
*Total Materials & Supplies 39,907 37,611 41,600 40,300 (3.1%)40,300
4300 Fees, Services 11,495 11,166 6,500 11,000 69.2%11,000
4310 Telephone 10,413 10,357 11,000 11,000 0.0%11,000
4320 Utilities 41,055 37,768 42,000 39,000 (7.1%)39,000
4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 29,847 29,201 30,000 30,000 0.0%30,000
4370 Travel & Training - - 200 200 0.0%200
4410 Rental-Equipment 12,236 14,442 14,500 14,500 0.0%14,500
4440 License & Registration 16 - 100 100 0.0%100
4483 Insurance-General Liability 141,936 141,675 163,000 150,000 (8.0%)150,000
4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 3,548 12,932 9,500 1,000 (89.5%)1,000
4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 132 - 200 200 0.0%200
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 4,951 10,245 4,000 5,000 25.0%5,000
*Total Contractual Services 255,630 267,785 281,000 262,000 (6.8%)262,000
**Total City Hall 375,331 390,266 413,800 397,400 (4.0%)403,000
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
City Hall (1170)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 29,581 - 24,000 26,000 8.3%26,000
4030 Contributions-Retirement - - 500 - (100.0%)-
4050 Workers Compensation - - 100 - (100.0%)-
*Total Personal Services 29,581 - 24,600 26,000 5.7%26,000
4110 Supplies-Office 691 - 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500
4120 Supplies-Equipment 40 - 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500
*Total Materials & Supplies 732 - 4,000 4,000 0.0%4,000
4300 Fees, Services 8,052 - 8,000 12,000 50.0%12,000
4340 Printing & Publishing 208 - 2,500 1,000 (60.0%)1,000
4370 Travel & Training 6,299 - 3,500 5,000 42.9%5,000
*Total Contractual Services 14,560 - 14,000 18,000 28.6%18,000
**Total Elections 44,873 - 42,600 48,000 12.7%48,000
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Elections (1180)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4150 Maintenance Materials 2,105 2,333 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500
*Total Materials & Supplies 2,105 2,333 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500
4300 Fees, Services 7,216 3,258 2,000 3,000 50.0%3,000
4310 Telephone 1,526 1,526 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,600
4320 Utilities 61,902 56,908 63,000 63,000 0.0%63,000
4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 28,723 29,304 34,000 30,500 (10.3%)30,500
4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 7,050 10,274 5,000 6,500 30.0%6,500
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 3,432 5,562 3,500 4,500 28.6%4,500
*Total Contractual Services 109,850 106,832 109,100 109,100 0.0%109,100
**Total Library Building 111,954 109,165 111,600 111,600 0.0%111,600
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Library Building (1190)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 23,910 5,209 47,400 - (100.0%)-
4030 Contributions-Retirement 2,710 766 7,200 - (100.0%)-
4040 Contributions-Insurance 3,806 1,442 18,900 - (100.0%)-
4050 Workers Compensation 171 45 400 - (100.0%)-
*Total Personal Services 30,597 7,463 73,900 - (100.0%)-
4130 Program Supplies 475 313 2,500 1,000 (60.0%)1,000
*Total Materials & Supplies 475 313 2,500 1,000 (60.0%)1,000
4300 Fees, Services 1,683,764 1,795,040 1,882,700 1,882,700 0.0%1,967,500
4370 Travel & Training 173 15 300 100 (66.7%)100
4375 Promotional Expense 1,838 1,405 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000
*Total Contractual Services 1,685,775 1,796,460 1,885,000 1,884,800 (0.0%)1,969,600
**Total Police Administration 1,716,848 1,804,236 1,961,400 1,885,800 (3.9%)1,970,600
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Police Administration (1210)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 191,863 217,749 195,400 217,000 11.1%223,600
4011 Overtime-Reg - 292 1,000 3,000 200.0%3,000
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 124,317 153,469 167,500 200,000 19.4%210,000
4022 Training Wages 41,344 - - - 0.0%-
4030 Contributions-Retirement 187,866 222,858 220,000 230,000 4.5%240,000
4040 Contributions-Insurance 24,098 25,335 22,200 27,000 21.6%29,000
4050 Workers Compensation 51,330 71,572 58,000 75,000 29.3%78,000
4060 Unemployment 162 439 - - 0.0%-
4070 Contracted Wages 31,696 34,048 35,000 36,000 2.9%37,000
*Total Personal Services 652,675 725,763 699,100 788,000 12.7%820,600
4120 Supplies-Equipment 5,859 6,994 7,000 7,000 0.0%7,000
4130 Supplies-Program 477 3,073 2,000 2,200 10.0%2,200
4140 Supplies-Vehicles 9,485 6,943 9,000 9,000 0.0%9,000
4150 Maintenance Materials 403 1 500 400 (20.0%)400
4210 Books & Periodicals - - 600 500 (16.7%)500
4240 Uniforms & Clothing 11,992 9,044 11,000 11,000 0.0%11,000
4260 Small Tools & Equipment 1,770 4,924 8,000 8,000 0.0%8,000
4290 Misc. Materials & Supplies 4,541 3,642 7,000 7,000 0.0%7,000
*Total Materials & Supplies 34,526 34,620 45,100 45,100 0.0%45,100
4300 Fees, Services 24,444 29,088 32,000 32,000 0.0%32,000
4310 Telephone 8,426 8,541 7,200 8,000 11.1%8,000
4320 Utilities 16,542 15,464 22,000 16,000 (27.3%)16,000
4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 4,914 4,469 5,000 5,100 2.0%5,100
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 1,648 1,327 2,500 2,000 (20.0%)2,000
4370 Travel & Training 21,084 40,072 41,500 41,500 0.0%41,500
4375 Promotional Expense 6,506 6,922 10,000 10,000 0.0%10,000
4483 Insurance-General Liability 685 734 1,200 800 (33.3%)1,000
4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 7,874 5,775 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500
4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 1,100 1,909 7,000 7,000 0.0%7,000
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 19,968 20,338 19,500 20,500 5.1%20,500
4531 Repair & Maintenance-Radios 297 63 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000
Contribution for Performance 34,521 - 20,000 20,000 0.0%30,000
*Total Contractual Services 148,009 134,704 175,400 170,400 (2.9%)180,600
**Total Fire Prevention and Admin 835,210 895,087 919,600 1,003,500 9.1%1,046,300
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Fire Prevention and Administration (1220)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 508,082 537,534 504,000 518,200 2.8%533,800
4011 Overtime-Reg 289 82 - - 0.0%-
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 16,307 14,490 20,000 18,000 (10.0%)18,000
4030 Contributions-Retirement 74,422 75,207 78,000 78,500 0.6%84,200
4040 Contributions-Insurance 84,469 96,731 92,000 103,700 12.7%116,000
4050 Workers Compensation 4,059 3,575 4,500 4,200 (6.7%)4,800
*Total Personal Services 687,628 727,619 698,500 722,600 3.5%756,800
4120 Supplies-Equipment 186 - 100 100 0.0%100
4130 Supplies-Program 409 877 900 900 0.0%900
4140 Supplies-Vehicles 2,722 279 2,700 2,000 (25.9%)2,000
4210 Books & Periodicals 1,129 77 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500
4240 Uniforms & Clothing 1,197 956 1,000 1,500 50.0%1,500
4260 Small Tools & Equipment 99 344 400 400 0.0%400
*Total Materials & Supplies 5,742 2,534 6,600 6,400 (3.0%)6,400
4310 Telephone 2,827 2,535 4,500 4,500 0.0%4,500
4340 Printing & Publishing - - 1,500 1,000 (33.3%)1,000
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 724 761 800 1,000 25.0%1,000
4370 Travel & Training 4,541 3,336 4,500 5,000 11.1%5,000
4440 License & Registration 530 - 500 500 0.0%500
4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 207 - 300 300 0.0%300
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 92 - 900 900 0.0%900
*Total Contractual Services 8,922 6,632 13,000 13,200 1.5%13,200
**Total Code Enforcement 702,293 736,784 718,100 742,200 3.4%776,400
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Code Enforcement (1250)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 43,007 35,473 49,500 45,500 (8.1%)48,000
4021 Overtime-Temp 203 289 200 300 50.0%300
4030 Contributions-Retirement 6,623 4,576 7,000 6,000 (14.3%)6,500
4040 Contributions-Insurance 541 321 700 600 (14.3%)600
4050 Workers Compensation 1,121 1,115 1,300 1,300 0.0%1,500
4060 Unemployment - 527 - - 0.0%-
*Total Personal Services 51,495 42,302 58,700 53,700 (8.5%)56,900
4120 Supplies-Equipment 193 175 300 300 0.0%300
4140 Supplies-Vehicles 1,604 17 700 700 0.0%700
4240 Uniforms & Clothing - 801 700 700 0.0%700
*Total Materials & Supplies 1,797 993 1,700 1,700 0.0%1,700
4300 Fees, Services 2,677 4,126 2,800 3,200 14.3%3,400
4310 Telephone 1,615 1,229 1,700 1,600 (5.9%)1,600
4340 Printing & Publishing 697 16 600 100 (83.3%)100
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - - 200 200 0.0%200
4370 Travel & Training - - 200 200 0.0%200
4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 73 - 200 200 0.0%200
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip - - 100 100 0.0%100
4531 Repair & Maintenance-Radios - - 200 200 0.0%200
*Total Contractual Services 5,062 5,370 6,000 5,800 (3.3%)6,000
**Total Community Service 58,355 48,665 66,400 61,200 (7.8%)64,600
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Community Service (1260)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 479,255 464,860 462,300 467,000 1.0%481,000
4011 Overtime-Reg 5,229 6,157 5,500 6,000 9.1%6,000
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 5,790 13,897 13,000 14,000 7.7%16,000
4021 Overtime-Temp 126 - - - 0.0%-
4030 Contributions-Retirement 72,025 68,941 70,000 70,700 1.0%74,700
4040 Contributions-Insurance 62,895 80,702 96,900 93,700 (3.3%)105,000
4050 Workers Compensation 3,942 3,588 4,800 4,000 (16.7%)4,500
*Total Personal Services 629,261 638,144 652,500 655,400 0.4%687,200
4120 Supplies-Equipment 262 21 1,000 500 (50.0%)500
4140 Supplies-Vehicles 212 10 300 300 0.0%300
4210 Books & Periodicals 369 - - - 0.0%-
*Total Materials & Supplies 843 32 1,300 800 (38.5%)800
4300 Fees, Services 14,593 10,822 16,000 16,000 0.0%16,000
4310 Telephone 3,614 3,915 3,400 4,000 17.6%4,000
4340 Printing & Publishing 140 292 500 300 (40.0%)300
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 1,503 1,383 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500
4370 Travel & Training 4,444 3,971 4,500 4,500 0.0%4,500
4380 Mileage 95 149 100 100 0.0%100
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip - - 1,500 500 (66.7%)500
*Total Contractual Services 24,389 20,533 27,500 26,900 (2.2%)26,900
**Total Engineering 654,493 658,709 681,300 683,100 0.3%714,900
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Engineering (1310)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 465,380 489,181 531,400 543,100 2.2%559,400
4011 Overtime-Reg 31,835 27,554 26,000 27,000 3.8%30,000
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 18,525 24,366 28,000 28,000 0.0%28,000
4021 Overtime-Temp 327 428 - - 0.0%-
4030 Contributions-Retirement 74,870 77,435 80,500 82,300 2.2%84,800
4040 Contributions-Insurance 88,894 100,282 123,500 136,400 10.4%153,100
4050 Workers Compensation 45,866 59,215 64,000 66,000 3.1%70,000
4060 Unemployment 4,911 3,328 - - 0.0%-
*Total Personal Services 730,608 781,789 853,400 882,800 3.4%925,300
4120 Supplies-Equipment 32,557 43,237 45,000 45,000 0.0%45,000
4140 Supplies-Vehicles 8,264 18,263 10,000 12,000 20.0%12,000
4150 Maintenance Materials 46,265 33,014 50,000 48,000 (4.0%)48,000
4210 Books & Periodicals - - 100 100 0.0%100
4240 Uniforms & Clothing 5,438 5,439 5,000 5,500 10.0%5,500
4260 Small Tools & Equipment 2,733 2,758 2,500 2,700 8.0%2,700
*Total Materials & Supplies 95,257 102,710 112,600 113,300 0.6%113,300
4300 Fees, Services 3,256 9,353 2,500 3,500 40.0%3,500
4310 Telephone 4,120 5,128 5,200 5,200 0.0%5,200
4340 Printing & Publishing - 63 300 300 0.0%300
4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 969 2,051 1,000 2,000 100.0%2,000
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - - 200 200 0.0%200
4370 Travel & Training 1,377 1,589 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,600
4410 Rental-Equipment 844 8,383 1,000 3,000 200.0%3,000
4440 License & Registration 513 5 500 500 0.0%500
4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building - 450 100 100 0.0%100
4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 756 200 1,000 800 (20.0%)800
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 500 650 1,500 700 (53.3%)700
4540 Repair & Maintenance-Streets 6,757 6,875 5,000 6,500 30.0%6,500
4560 Repair & Maintenance-Signs 8,621 11,850 11,000 11,000 0.0%12,000
*Total Contractual Services 27,712 46,597 30,900 35,400 14.6%36,400
**Total Street Maintenance 853,577 931,096 996,900 1,031,500 3.5%1,075,000
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Street Maintenance (1320)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4120 Supplies-Equipment 2,785 4,679 2,000 3,000 50.0%3,500
*Total Materials & Supplies 2,785 4,679 2,000 3,000 50.0%3,500
4300 Fees, Services - 2,166 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
4310 Telephone 360 360 500 500 0.0%500
4320 Utilities 326,178 320,328 329,000 323,000 (1.8%)323,000
4565 Repair & Maintenance-Light/Signal 30,239 31,664 24,000 30,000 25.0%33,000
*Total Contractual Services 356,778 354,518 354,500 354,500 0.0%357,500
**Total Street Lighting and Signals 359,562 359,197 356,500 357,500 0.3%361,000
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Street Lighting and Signals (1350)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 198,243 206,685 210,800 217,100 3.0%223,700
4011 Overtime-Reg 5,514 4,771 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 1,129 4,182 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000
4030 Contributions-Retirement 29,259 30,569 32,000 33,000 3.1%34,000
4040 Contributions-Insurance 36,597 40,026 47,200 52,000 10.2%58,400
4050 Workers Compensation 8,927 9,266 11,400 11,000 (3.5%)13,000
*Total Personal Services 279,669 295,498 311,400 323,100 3.8%339,100
4120 Supplies-Equipment 1,638 1,610 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000
4140 Supplies-Vehicles 82 48 600 200 (66.7%)200
4150 Maintenance Materials 1,147 113 600 600 0.0%600
4170 Motor Fuels & Lubricants 110,112 144,222 170,000 165,000 (2.9%)165,000
4240 Uniforms & Clothing 1,003 1,055 1,200 1,200 0.0%1,200
4260 Small Tools & Equipment 2,848 2,605 3,000 3,000 0.0%3,000
*Total Materials & Supplies 116,829 149,654 177,400 172,000 (3.0%)172,000
4300 Fees, Services 5,664 4,798 2,500 5,000 100.0%5,000
4310 Telephone 2,456 2,432 3,000 2,500 (16.7%)2,500
4320 Utilities 31,170 32,540 32,000 32,000 0.0%32,000
4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 4,825 5,145 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 37 40 200 200 0.0%200
4370 Travel & Training 118 691 800 800 0.0%800
4440 License & Registration 93 - 300 300 0.0%300
4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 9,007 12,451 10,000 12,000 20.0%12,000
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 2,447 8,798 3,500 3,500 0.0%3,500
4933 Sales Tax 141 - - - 0.0%-
*Total Contractual Services 55,958 66,895 57,800 61,800 6.9%61,800
4703 Office Equipment - - 500 500 0.0%500
4705 Other Equipment 4,743 6,761 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000
*Total Capital Outlay 4,743 6,761 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500
**Total Fleet Department 457,199 518,808 552,100 562,400 1.9%578,400
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Fleet Department (1370)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4210 Books & Periodicals - - 200 200 0.0%200
*Total Materials & Supplies - - 200 200 0.0%200
4340 Printing & Publishing 1,149 1,090 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - - 200 200 0.0%200
4370 Travel & Training 11 249 300 300 0.0%300
*Total Contractual Services 1,160 1,338 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500
**Total Planning Commission 1,160 1,338 1,700 1,700 0.0%1,700
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Planning Commission (1410)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 320,925 339,898 353,000 403,400 14.3%415,500
4011 Overtime-Reg 1,348 - - - 0.0%-
4030 Contributions-Retirement 45,870 48,624 53,500 61,000 14.0%63,000
4040 Contributions-Insurance 56,502 62,321 73,000 80,500 10.3%90,000
4050 Workers Compensation 2,390 2,860 3,200 3,800 18.8%4,200
*Total Personal Services 427,035 453,704 482,700 548,700 13.7%572,700
4120 Supplies-Equipment 97 62 300 300 0.0%300
4140 Supplies-Vehicles 22 441 100 100 0.0%100
*Total Materials & Supplies 118 503 400 400 0.0%400
4300 Fees, Services 2,270 37,392 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 408 909 800 800 0.0%800
4370 Travel & Training 5,083 3,722 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500
*Total Contractual Services 7,762 42,024 11,300 11,300 0.0%11,300
**Total Planning Administration 434,915 496,230 494,400 560,400 13.3%584,400
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Planning Administration (1420)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 20,907 21,852 22,100 22,600 2.3%23,300
4030 Contributions-Retirement 3,074 3,220 3,400 3,500 2.9%3,500
4040 Contributions-Insurance 2,267 2,481 2,900 3,200 10.3%3,500
4050 Workers Compensation 155 182 200 200 0.0%200
*Total Personal Services 26,403 27,735 28,600 29,500 3.1%30,500
4300 Fees, Services 9,010 14,240 9,000 10,000 11.1%14,000
4370 Travel & Training - 295 200 200 0.0%200
4375 Promotional Expense 320 984 500 800 60.0%800
*Total Contractual Services 9,329 15,519 9,700 11,000 13.4%15,000
**Total Senior Commission 35,733 43,254 38,300 40,500 5.7%45,500
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Senior Commission (1430)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4130 Supplies-Program - - 100 100 0.0%100
4210 Books & Periodicals - - 100 100 0.0%100
*Total Materials & Supplies - - 200 200 0.0%200
4340 Printing & Publishing - - 100 100 0.0%100
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - - 500 500 0.0%500
4370 Travel & Training 325 175 400 400 0.0%400
*Total Contractual Services 325 175 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
**Total Park and Rec Commission 325 175 1,200 1,200 0.0%1,200
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Park and Recreation Commission (1510)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 161,579 172,863 174,500 182,300 4.5%187,700
4030 Contributions-Retirement 23,446 25,112 26,400 27,600 4.5%28,400
4040 Contributions-Insurance 23,414 26,993 37,000 41,900 13.2%47,000
4050 Workers Compensation 1,195 1,452 1,600 1,800 12.5%2,000
*Total Personal Services 209,635 226,420 239,500 253,600 5.9%265,100
4120 Supplies-Equipment - 16 100 100 0.0%100
4130 Supplies-Program - - 100 100 0.0%100
*Total Materials & Supplies - 16 200 200 0.0%200
4300 Fees, Services - 828 200 300 50.0%300
4310 Telephone 721 617 900 700 (22.2%)700
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 2,903 3,448 2,900 3,100 6.9%3,100
4370 Travel & Training 1,225 1,821 1,800 1,800 0.0%1,800
4380 Mileage - - 100 100 0.0%100
*Total Contractual Services 4,849 6,713 5,900 6,000 1.7%6,000
**Total Park and Rec Admin.214,483 233,149 245,600 259,800 5.8%271,300
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Park and Recreation Administration (1520)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 61,765 64,313 66,400 68,100 2.6%70,200
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 101,768 97,000 115,000 113,000 (1.7%)115,000
4030 Contributions-Retirement 24,105 24,008 28,500 30,000 5.3%32,000
4040 Contributions-Insurance 8,995 9,848 11,300 12,500 10.6%14,000
4050 Workers Compensation 6,869 9,909 8,200 10,500 28.0%11,000
*Total Personal Services 203,502 205,079 229,400 234,100 2.0%242,200
4120 Supplies-Equipment 726 1,358 2,000 1,600 (20.0%)1,800
4130 Supplies-Program 14,846 13,066 20,000 15,000 (25.0%)16,000
4150 Maintenance Materials 237 450 500 500 0.0%500
4240 Uniforms & Clothing 438 631 500 600 20.0%600
*Total Materials & Supplies 16,248 15,505 23,000 17,700 (23.0%)18,900
4300 Fees, Services 59,162 50,812 50,000 52,000 4.0%54,000
4310 Telephone 617 917 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
4320 Utilities 33,875 35,409 37,000 37,000 0.0%37,000
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 348 351 300 400 33.3%400
4370 Travel & Training 275 15 400 400 0.0%400
4375 Promotional Expense 654 700 800 800 0.0%800
4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 3,659 1,978 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 1,532 1,653 1,800 1,800 0.0%1,800
*Total Contractual Services 100,123 91,834 93,800 95,900 2.2%97,900
**Total Recreation Center 319,873 312,419 346,200 347,700 0.4%359,000
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Recreation Center (1530)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 9,110 8,164 10,700 10,700 0.0%11,500
4030 Contributions-Retirement 697 625 900 700 (22.2%)700
4050 Workers Compensation 289 500 600 600 0.0%700
*Total Personal Services 10,096 9,288 12,200 12,000 (1.6%)12,900
4130 Supplies-Program 8,433 10,477 9,000 9,000 0.0%9,000
4240 Uniforms & Clothing 200 200 200 200 0.0%200
*Total Materials & Supplies 8,633 10,677 9,200 9,200 0.0%9,200
4300 Fees, Services 32,349 35,341 34,500 35,000 1.4%36,000
4310 Telephone 1,145 1,288 1,200 1,200 0.0%1,200
4320 Utilities 12,947 10,765 13,000 11,000 (15.4%)11,000
4340 Printing & Publishing 428 214 400 400 0.0%400
*Total Contractual Services 46,868 47,607 49,100 47,600 (3.1%)48,600
**Total Lake Ann Park Operations 65,597 67,573 70,500 68,800 (2.4%)70,700
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Lake Ann Park Operations (1540)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 479,890 489,295 490,400 482,000 (1.7%)497,000
4011 Overtime-Reg 32,631 32,956 25,000 30,000 20.0%32,000
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 114,904 112,282 121,000 118,000 (2.5%)120,000
4021 Overtime-Temp 5,211 3,829 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000
4030 Contributions-Retirement 85,025 83,513 88,000 88,000 0.0%90,000
4040 Contributions-Insurance 76,977 78,394 87,000 98,000 12.6%110,000
4050 Workers Compensation 26,127 36,995 32,000 39,000 21.9%42,000
4060 Unemployment 864 - - - 0.0%-
*Total Personal Services 821,630 837,263 848,400 860,000 1.4%896,000
4120 Supplies-Equipment 38,744 45,221 40,000 40,000 0.0%40,000
4140 Supplies-Vehicles 2,852 11,122 3,000 5,000 66.7%5,000
4150 Maintenance Materials 26,479 21,561 30,000 27,000 (10.0%)27,000
4151 Irrigation Materials 3,200 3,967 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000
4240 Uniforms & Clothing 1,295 2,453 2,200 2,600 18.2%2,600
4260 Small Tools & Equipment 2,822 2,032 600 1,200 100.0%1,200
*Total Materials & Supplies 75,393 86,356 80,800 80,800 0.0%80,800
4300 Fees, Services 28,322 52,825 43,000 43,000 0.0%43,000
4310 Telephone 4,512 5,813 5,100 5,900 15.7%5,900
4320 Utilities 4,584 4,796 5,000 4,800 (4.0%)4,800
4340 Printing & Publishing - 105 200 200 0.0%200
4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 3,474 3,591 4,000 3,700 (7.5%)3,700
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 10 - 400 400 0.0%400
4370 Travel & Training 501 2,537 600 1,000 66.7%1,000
4400 Rental-Land & Buildings 29,347 29,984 34,000 36,000 5.9%36,000
4410 Rental-Equipment 250 1,274 700 700 0.0%700
4440 License & Registration 429 44 300 300 0.0%300
4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 759 5,073 1,700 1,700 0.0%1,700
4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles - 2,387 100 100 0.0%100
4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 640 8,889 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
4560 Repair & Maintenance-Signs 2,093 754 5,000 2,000 (60.0%)2,000
*Total Contractual Services 74,921 118,073 101,100 100,800 (0.3%)100,800
4705 Other Equipment 977 - - - 0.0%-
*Total Capital Outlay 977 - - - 0.0%-
**Total Park Maintenance 972,921 1,041,692 1,030,300 1,041,600 1.1%1,077,600
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019 Rental-Land & Buildings Increase in portable restroom contract
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Park Maintenance (1550)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 44,535 64,425 66,000 56,200 (14.8%)57,900
4030 Contributions-Retirement 6,720 9,772 10,000 8,600 (14.0%)8,800
4040 Contributions-Insurance 295 3,536 3,500 20,800 494.3%23,400
4050 Workers Compensation 339 535 600 600 0.0%600
*Total Personal Services 51,889 78,268 80,100 86,200 7.6%90,700
4120 Supplies-Equipment 56 41 300 300 0.0%300
4130 Supplies-Program 2,483 4,431 4,000 4,000 0.0%4,000
*Total Materials & Supplies 2,540 4,472 4,300 4,300 0.0%4,300
4300 Fees, Services 30,856 34,713 29,000 32,000 10.3%33,000
4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 95 95 100 100 0.0%100
4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 107 110 100 100 0.0%100
4370 Travel & Training 99 222 300 300 0.0%300
4375 Promotional Expense - 60 100 100 0.0%100
4380 Mileage - - 100 100 0.0%100
*Total Contractual Services 31,157 35,200 29,700 32,700 10.1%33,700
**Total Senior Citizens Center 85,585 117,940 114,100 123,200 8.0%128,700
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Senior Citizens Center (1560)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 98,490 103,215 105,300 121,860 15.7%125,500
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 56,230 64,368 71,000 68,000 (4.2%)71,000
4021 Overtime-Temp 1,272 402 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000
4030 Contributions-Retirement 19,207 20,434 22,000 24,000 9.1%26,000
4040 Contributions-Insurance 10,026 10,720 12,000 14,400 20.0%15,800
4050 Workers Compensation 3,045 4,802 3,600 5,000 38.9%5,400
*Total Personal Services 188,269 203,942 214,900 234,260 9.0%244,700
4120 Supplies-Equipment 2,321 2,019 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500
4130 Supplies-Program 15,524 22,063 17,000 18,000 5.9%18,000
4240 Uniforms & Clothing 1,575 2,035 1,600 1,700 6.3%1,700
*Total Materials & Supplies 19,420 26,117 21,100 22,200 5.2%22,200
4300 Fees, Services 61,653 65,606 64,000 66,600 4.1%66,600
4310 Telephone 2,140 2,155 2,700 2,200 (18.5%)2,200
4320 Utilities 3,718 4,660 4,000 4,600 15.0%4,600
4340 Printing & Publishing 9,409 9,683 6,600 7,500 13.6%8,000
4370 Travel & Training 414 507 500 500 0.0%500
4380 Mileage - - 100 100 0.0%100
4400 Rental-Land & Buildings 5,999 8,303 6,200 7,000 12.9%7,000
4410 Rental-Equipment 25,108 32,412 32,000 32,000 0.0%32,000
*Total Contractual Services 108,439 123,325 116,100 120,500 3.8%121,000
**Total Recreation Programs 316,128 353,384 352,100 376,960 7.1%387,900
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Recreation Programs (1600)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 24,624 25,806 26,300 13,600 (48.3%)14,000
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 1,950 1,950 2,400 2,200 (8.3%)2,200
4030 Contributions-Retirement 3,851 4,020 4,200 2,100 (50.0%)2,200
4040 Contributions-Insurance 2,472 2,645 3,000 1,600 (46.7%)1,700
4050 Workers Compensation 267 337 400 400 0.0%400
*Total Personal Services 33,164 34,757 36,300 19,900 (45.2%)20,500
4130 Supplies-Program 4,142 4,283 4,500 4,500 0.0%4,500
*Total Materials & Supplies 4,142 4,283 4,500 4,500 0.0%4,500
4300 Fees, Services 11,766 11,573 15,000 12,500 (16.7%)13,000
*Total Contractual Services 11,766 11,573 15,000 12,500 (16.7%)13,000
**Total Self-Supporting Programs 49,071 50,614 55,800 36,900 (33.9%)38,000
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Self-Supporting Programs (1700)
2018 to
2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020
Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate
4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 21,370 23,393 25,500 26,000 2.0%26,500
4030 Contributions-Retirement 2,302 2,438 2,700 2,800 3.7%2,800
4050 Workers Compensation 899 1,481 1,100 1,600 45.5%1,700
*Total Personal Services 24,571 27,311 29,300 30,400 3.8%31,000
4120 Supplies-Equipment - 82 - - 0.0%-
4130 Supplies-Program 3,309 2,438 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500
4240 Uniforms & Clothing 4,852 5,427 5,400 5,400 0.0%5,400
*Total Materials & Supplies 8,161 7,947 7,900 7,900 0.0%7,900
4375 Promotional Expenses - - 300 300 0.0%-
*Total Contractual Services - - 300 300 0.0%-
**Total Recreation Sports 32,732 35,258 37,500 38,600 2.9%38,900
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
2019
2020
2019 General Fund Budget
Recreation Sports (1800)
City of Chanhassen, MinnesotaBond Tax Levies2006-20252005 C Ref1998A Park 2002A Subtotal of 2001C 2003A 2004A Subtotal of 1999 2001B ^^ Subtotal of 2000 Subtotal of Total Year of GO Park GO Library Market GO Equip GO Equip GO GO GO Impr GO Impr Spec Assmt GO Pub Other GeneralCollection Bonds Bonds Value Levies Certs Certs Bonds Levies Bonds Bonds Levies Proj Levies Bonded Debt2006 634,800 486,700 1,121,500 138,814 345,800 484,614 100,000 100,000 122,048 122,048 1,828,162 2007 696,500 489,100 1,185,600 141,380 346,900 488,280 100,000 100,000 122,548 122,548 1,896,428 2008 695,900 490,700 1,186,600 138,173 346,700 484,873 100,000 100,000 122,703 122,703 1,894,176 2009 972,700 491,300 1,464,000 297,900 297,900 - 122,603 122,603 1,884,503 2010 496,400 496,400 122,195 122,195 618,595 2011 495,400 495,400 126,420 126,420 621,820 2012 498,800 498,800 498,800 2013 501,200 501,200 501,200 2014 502,400 502,400 502,400 2015 502,500 502,500 502,500 2016 507,000 507,000 507,000 2017 505,100 505,100 505,100 2018 512,800 512,800 512,800 2019 513,900 513,900 513,900 2020 513,700 513,700 513,700 2021 517,500 517,500 517,500 Totals 2,999,900 8,024,500 11,024,400 - 418,367 1,337,300 1,755,667 300,000 - 300,000 738,515 738,515 13,818,582 2005 2006 2007 2008 2005 2008 2010 Total LevyExcess to ** Potential Actual Spec AssmtSpec AssmtSpec AssmtSpec Assmt 212 Bonds PW Facility Fire Station Year w/ CIP EstPay debt Excess Levy Levy200680,000 2006 1,908,162 285,000 - 1,938,790200780,000 2007 1,976,428 63,000 - 1,913,4282008285,000 2008 2,179,176 269,986 - 1,909,1902009285,000 250,000 2009 2,419,503 510,313 - 1,909,1902010285,000 250,000 2010 1,153,595 1,128,299 785,195 1,938,7902011285,000 250,000 370,000 2011 1,526,820 411,970 1,938,7902012285,000 250,000 370,000 2012 1,403,800 534,990 1,938,7902013285,000 250,000 370,000 2013 1,406,200 532,590 1,938,7902014285,000 250,000 370,000 2014 1,407,400 531,390 1,938,7902015285,000 250,000 370,000 2015 1,407,500 531,290 1,938,7902016285,000 250,000 370,000 2016 1,412,000 526,790 1,938,7902017250,000 370,000 2017 1,125,100 813,690 1,938,7902018250,000 370,000 2018 1,132,800 805,990 1,938,7902019250,000 370,000 2019 1,133,900 804,890 1,938,7902020250,000 370,000 2020 1,133,700 805,090 1,938,7902021250,000 370,000 2021 1,137,500 801,290 1,938,7902022250,000 370,000 2022 620,000 1,318,790 1,938,7902023250,000 370,000 2023 620,000 1,318,790 1,938,7902024250,000 370,000 2024 620,000 1,318,790 1,938,7902025250,000 370,000 2025 620,000 1,318,790 1,938,790Totals - - - - - - - 2,725,000 4,250,000 5,550,000 - 40,310 26,343,582 ** - These funds to be used to pay down the debt levy each of the next four years.The PW facility is for $3.9 million of which $3.0 will be bonded for and the Fire Station and Equipment is for $4.5 million in principal.^^ - The 2001B debt service fund has sufficient fund balance due to prepaid specials, we are able to cancel the levy needed to pay the debt in 2008 & 2009. It is our plan to use that excess levy for General Fund Operations rather than lower the use of Cash Reserves to keep the debt levy flat from the previous year.
City of Chanhassen, MinnesotaBond Tax Levies2006-20292005 C Ref1998A Park2002A2010ASubtotal of2001C2003A2004ASubtotal of19992001B ^^Subtotal of2000Subtotal ofTotal Year of GO ParkGO LibraryGO RefundMarket GO EquipGO EquipGOGOGO ImprGO ImprSpec AssmtGO PubOtherGeneralCollectionBondsBonds2002A LibValue LeviesCertsCertsBondsLeviesBondsBondsLeviesProjLeviesBonded Debt2006634,800 486,700 1,121,500 138,814 345,800 484,614 100,000 100,000 122,048 122,048 1,828,162 2007696,500 489,100 1,185,600 141,380 346,900 488,280 100,000 100,000 122,548 122,548 1,896,428 2008695,900 490,700 1,186,600 138,173 346,700 484,873 100,000 100,000 122,703 122,703 1,894,176 2009972,700 491,300 1,464,000 297,900 297,900 - 122,603 122,603 1,884,503 2010496,400 496,400 122,195 122,195 618,595 2011495,400 495,400 126,420 126,420 621,820 2012351,648 351,648 351,648 2013445,310 445,310 445,310 2014448,880 448,880 448,880 2015446,098 446,098 446,098 2016452,792 452,792 452,792 2017451,952 451,952 451,952 2018461,297 461,297 461,297 2019459,512 459,512 459,512 2020457,412 457,412 457,412 2021465,497 465,497 465,497 Totals2,999,900 2,949,600 4,440,398 10,389,898 - 418,367 1,337,300 1,755,667 300,000 - 300,000 738,515 738,515 13,184,080 2009A@@20052016 A2008 ##2010 2010Total LevyExcess to ** Potential Actual Excess Lib212 BondsPW RefundPW FacilityFire StationAudubonYearw/ CIP EstPay debt Excess Levy Levy Levy200680,000 20061,908,162 285,000 - 1,938,790200780,000 20071,976,428 67,238 - 1,909,1902008285,000 20082,179,176 269,986 - 1,909,1902009285,000 20092,169,503 460,313 - 1,809,1902010337,500 599,300 253,795 20101,809,190 - - 1,809,1902011336,800 594,000 256,570 20111,809,190 - 1,809,1902012335,900 593,800 437,842 20121,719,190 - 1,719,1902013550,000 593,200 130,680 20131,719,190 - 1,719,1902014233,800 592,100 444,410 20141,719,190 - 1,719,1902015232,300 590,600 55,000 20151,323,998 395,192 1,719,1902016240,700 594,000 20161,287,492 431,698 1,719,1902017596,700 20171,048,652 384,838 1,433,4902018470,400 2018931,697 384,838 1,316,5352019475,800 2019935,312 381,223 1,316,5352020480,600 2020938,012 378,523 1,316,5352021479,800 2021945,297 371,238 1,316,5352022483,900 2022483,900 832,635 1,316,5352023482,300 2023482,300 834,235 1,316,5352024485,600 2024485,600 830,935 1,316,5352025487,500 2025487,500 829,035 1,316,5352026489,100 2026489,100 827,435 1,316,5352027490,600 2027490,600 825,935 1,316,5352028497,100 2028497,100 819,435 1,316,5352029498,100 2029498,100 818,435 1,316,535Totals- - - - - 2,267,000 730,000 5,820,800 4,753,700 - 1,578,297 48,420 28,333,877 1,082,536 ** - These funds to be used to pay down the debt levy each of the next four years.## - The PW facility is for 8 Million and bonding for $7 Million of the 8 Million.@@ - The 2009A Refunded the 2005A Mndot loand and 2006A MUSA area improvements.Debt Levies
Excess Levy Available Excess Levy Available
Original Bond Scenario New Facil Bond Scenario Difference
2010 785,195$ #REF! #REF!
2011 411,970 #REF! #REF!
2012 534,990 #REF! #REF!
2013 532,590 #REF! #REF!
2014 531,390 #REF! #REF!
2015 531,290 #REF! #REF!
2016 526,790 #REF! #REF!
2017 813,690 #REF! #REF!
2018 805,990 #REF! #REF!
2019 804,890 #REF! #REF!
2020 805,090 #REF! #REF!
2021 801,290 #REF! #REF!
2022 1,318,790 #REF! #REF!
2023 1,318,790 #REF! #REF!
2024 1,318,790 #REF! #REF!
2025 1,318,790 #REF! #REF!
13,160,325$ #REF! #REF!
KFS CitiesAsst City ManagerOffice ManagerFire ChiefFinance DirectorPW Dir/City EngComm Dvlp DirMIS CoordinatorPark & Rec DirChaska90,185$ 67,343$ 106,038$ N/A102,663$ 119,208$ 104,532$ 97,864$ Cottage Grove98,936 N/A117,009 136,746 126,693 126,693 98,936 117,009 Elk River N/A 84,431 113,508 114,035 120,200 120,200 96,131 110,953 Inver Grove Heights N/A 90,336 131,856 131,856 131,856 131,856 108,036 131,856 Lino Lakes95,866 78,739 127,763 119,983 118,627 115,631 N/AN/APrior Lake112,512 N/A109,008 134,949 134,949 105,576 N/AN/ARosemount110,912 N/AN/A119,966 124,240 120,726 81,189 113,488 Savage64,228 N/A115,877 111,966 111,966 106,621 83,034 108,139 Shakopee125,116 81,254 127,644 139,020 139,020 129,751 117,601 127,644 StillwaterN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AAverage99,679$ 80,421$ 118,588$ 126,065$ 123,357$ 119,585$ 98,494$ 115,279$ Competitor CitiesAsst City ManagerOffice ManagerFire ChiefFinance DirectorPW Dir/City EngComm Dvlp DirMIS CoordinatorPark & Rec DirEdina149,781$ 75,804$ 149,781$ 141,972$ 141,972$ 134,572$ 127,556$ 141,972$ St. Louis Park N/A N/A 146,393 133,408 148,147 129,780 146,393 155,517 Minnetonka134,244 91,680 135,996 133,380 145,392 135,084 N/A 124,572 Eden Prairie N/A 60,808 136,556 128,588 148,700 140,895 110,448 143,177 Bloomington147,000 80,225 161,980 127,393 176,475 140,000 140,045 133,800 Plymouth137,664 101,976 129,084 N/A 152,136 151,248 121,380 151,248 Maple Grove N/A N/A 133,746 128,918 146,640 133,746 118,612 128,274 Lakeville122,979 N/A129,515 147,125 134,000 127,515 121,603 127,515 Average138,334$ 82,099$ 140,381$ 134,398$ 149,183$ 136,605$ 126,577$ 138,259$ Chanhassen 2018 Budget87,610$ 75,712$ 129,189$ 123,885$ 131,622$ 128,315$ 101,712$ 125,778$ % Different from KFS Avg-12.11%-5.86%8.94%-1.73%6.70%7.30%3.27%9.11%1.95%% Different from Comp Avg-36.67%-7.78%-7.97%-7.82%-11.77%-6.07%-19.64%-9.03%-13.34%Department Head Comparable Salaries
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject MidYear Key Financial Strategy Update
Section 5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Item No: A.2.
Prepared By Todd Gerhardt, City Manager File No:
SUMMARY
Attached are the 2018 Key Financial Strategies that staff has accomplished to date. Listed below are the remaining
items and the dates they will come before the City Council:
Franchise Fee Discussion on Proposed Options: September 10, 2018.
Implement Park Replacement Schedule: to be placed on a future agenda after public meeting is held on the use
of franchise fees to fund roads.
Sanitary Sewer Inflow/Infiltration (I/I) Reduction Plan: October, 2018
Economic Development: Draft Business Subsidy Policy by the end of 2018
Downtown Focus Update: Review by the end of 2018
ATTACHMENTS:
2018 Key Financial Strategies/Work Plan
Ordinance 632 Craft Alcohol Production
Ordinance 633 Permeable Pavers
ESTABLISH ANNUAL GOALS & KEY
FINANCIAL STRATEGIES
ackground: In July 2002, staff met with Jim Prosser from Ehlers & Associates to begin
development of the city’s key financial strategies. At that time, comparisons were
completed of similar cities based on tax base mix, growth, allocation, population, five-year
budget comparison, debt ratios, tax capacity, and bond ratings. Council and staff identified
Financial Foundation Descriptions and prioritized capital improvements. City Council
adopted the Key Financial Strategies (KFS) on June 9, 2003. Implementation began with
the 2004 budget process, i.e. pavement management system including trails, roads, parking
lots; debt service; fixed assets for remodeling/replacement; water treatment and future
infrastructure; etc. These strategies will also be used as a part of our 2018 strategic planning
process.
B
2
Competitiveness
Create an environment for innovation and change —
building on our strengths, creativity, and skills.
MID-YEAR REVIEW OF KEY FINANCIAL STRATEGIES: PREPARE A MID-
YEAR REVIEW OF ALL KEY FINANCIAL STRATEGIES FOR PRESENTATION
AT THE FIRST MEETING IN JULY
On August 27, 2018, staff updated the City Council on each of the items in the City’s 2018
Annual Goals and Key Financial Strategies.
BREW PUB/DISTILLERIES ORDINANCE: RESEARCH AND PROPOSE AN
ORDINANCE THAT WOULD COVER BREW PUBS AND DISTILLERIES IN A
VARIETY OF LAND USE AREAS
At the April 23, 2018 work session, staff proposed a Craft Alcohol Production ordinance.
Staff gave a brief summary of the proposed ordinance. The city’s current ordinance limits
these facilities to industrial areas and does not permit brew pubs, taprooms, or cocktail
rooms. In order to permit these types of uses, the city would need to create zoning
standards, establish what zoning districts they are permitted in, and create the appropriate
liquor licenses.
City Council authorized staff to hold a public hearing at the Planning Commission. City
Council asked about food trucks and staff discussed that we do allow them but not in
commercial areas; only at special events in residential areas. The Planning Commission
approved the Craft Alcohol Production ordinance, but expressed concern about not
requiring a food component either on site or by partnering with delivery restaurants. Staff
said the ordinance allows for partnering with existing restaurants to have food delivered to
patrons. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the
ordinance. The City Council approved the Craft Alcohol Production Ordinance at their
June 11, 2018 regular City Council meeting. Attached is a copy of the approved
Ordinance.
3
PERMEABLE PAVERS: CONTINUE TO EVALUATE STAFF’S RESEARCH AND
PROPOSED POLICIES AND CONSIDER IMPLEMENTING AN ORDINANCE
THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR PERMEABLE PAVERS TO BE CREDITED
TOWARD THE EQUATION FOR HARD COVER ALLOWANCE (CONTINUED
FROM 2017)
Permeable Pavers was continued from the 2017 Key Financial Strategies. Again, we had
numerous discussions regarding this topic, including a work session on April 23, 2018, and a
Planning Commission public hearing on May 15, 2018. This item is to provide relief to lot
coverage restrictions. The intent is to allow residents to utilize permeable pavers to exceed
existing lot coverage caps and provide residents with an option other than requesting a lot
coverage variance.
It is important to balance the benefits of allowing increased lot coverages with its potential
consequences. Staff saw the need to provide alternatives that will allow homes located in
Residential Single Family Districts and are outside of the Shoreland Management District
five percent additional coverage in the form of pervious pavement which will provide
flexibility for homeowners looking to improve their properties. At their June 11, 2018
work session, the City Council indicated they would like to give this a try, but also
understands that we can switch it back if it does not work. However, they feel strongly that
if the system is designed and constructed property it should successfully accomplish the goal
and provide relief for those wanting a little bigger patio or driveway! The City Council
approved the attached Ordinance 633 at the June 25, 2018 regular City Council meeting.
4
Strengthen the City’s Financial Position
Provide financial stability and resources necessary to achieve the city’s vision by
exercising financial stewardship, implementing best practices, and utilizing
long-term financial planning tools.
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM: CONTINUE TO EDUCATE THE
COMMUNITY AND COLLECT FEEDBACK ON A POTENTIAL FRANCHISE FEE
IN ORDER TO FUND FUTURE ROAD PROJECTS (CONTINUED FROM 2017)
Educational material is being mailed out in utility bills and is posted on the city’s website.
Open houses are also in the process of being held in order to educate residents on potential
implications of a franchise fee.
August 20, 2018 Public Meeting Update: To date, staff held seven meetings in 2017
with the City Council to discuss extensively the different options for funding the Pavement
Management Program. An additional four to five meetings have been held in 2018. The
discussion included changing the percentage of the assessments, raising the levy, or
establishing a Franchise Fee to summarize, the feedback received at the August 20, 2018
Special City Council meeting. There were many different funding options provided but by
the end if the discussion the consensus was as follows:
1. Keep the assessment practice in place as it has been in the past (40/60 split).
2. Keep the levy the same as it has been in the past ($384,000).
3. Implement a Franchise Fee to make up the difference to achieve the funding needed
for the $3.3 million to fund the Pavement Management Program for the next 12
years.
The next step is for the City Council to discuss the proposed options as well as other options
at their September 10, 2018 meeting and give staff direction regarding next steps into the
future.
5
CONSIDER ESTABLISHING A GREENSTEP CITIES PROGRAM: BY
IMPLEMENTING ADDITIONAL TASKS WITHIN THE GREENSTEP CITIES
PROGRAM, THE CITY WILL HAVE COST SAVINGS, WHICH IMPROVES THE
CITY’S FINANCIAL POSITION. THE PROMOTION OF THE CITY’S
ATTAINMENT OF LEVELS 1 AND 2 AND THE PLAN TO ATTAIN LEVEL 3,
PROVES TO RESIDENTS THAT THE CITY IS CONSCIOUS OF
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND SUPPORTS THE CITY’S OBJECTIVE TO BE A
“COMMUNITY FOR LIFE”, THEREBY MAKING THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN A
STRONG COMPETITOR WHEN RESIDENTS ARE CHOOSING A COMMUNITY
IN THE WEST SUBURBS
The Mayor and City Council met with the Environmental Commission on June 25, 2018 to
discuss the GreenStep Cities Program. The Environmental Commission requested
authorization for the city to participate in the Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program. This is
a voluntary, non-regulatory program that dovetails into current city practices.
The City Council is under no obligation to complete any of the steps and can withdraw from
the program at any time. The next step is for the City Council to consider passing a
resolution to participate and direct the Environmental Commission to document current
practices that the city is already involved with.
6
Planning for the City’s Infrastructure
Create solutions for managing existing infrastructure and
future growth in our community while preserving
a sustainable quality of life and protecting the environment.
IMPLEMENT PARK REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE: INITIATE FUNDING OF AN
ANNUAL PARK EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE TO EFFICIENTLY
ADDRESS AGED AND DETERIORATED PARK EQUIPMENT AND
INFRASTRUCTURE
Background information on how this item became a key financial strategy was provided at
the June 25, 2018 City Council work session. The proposed park replacement schedule of
projects for 2019 through 2023 was presented. Potential funding options that can used to
fund these projects were reviewed. Council members agreed that they are not in favor of
doing anything until after the public meeting is held on the use of franchise fees to fund
roads. It was discussed that the item would move forward with the budget process.
DEVELOP LAKE ANN PARK AND TRAIL EXPANSION MASTER PLAN/PRN
PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT: INITIATE MASTER PLANNING AND
FEASIBILITY STUDY TO GUIDE FUTURE ACQUISITION OF LANDS
EXPANDING LAKE ANN PARK AND ASSOCIATED TRAILS. REVIEW THE
PARK AND TRAIL PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY SURROUNDING LAKE ANN,
AND THE PLANNING TOOLS AVAILABLE (DENSITY TRANSFER) TO
ACQUIRE OPEN SPACE
On June 11, 2018 the City Council discussed the proposed development by Lennar of the
18- acre Galpin Boulevard property. The discussion included conversation about different
architecture being proposed for a development, what discretion is given to home buyers for
exterior finishes, potential plat layout, concern over lot sizes not fitting in with surrounding
neighborhoods and a desire to preserve the property around Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. How
the item will move forward through staff, Planning Commission and City Council was also
discussed.
On August 13, 2018 the City Council completed a conceptual review of a Planned Unit
Development PUD for the property which included a staff report, comments from the
applicant and extensive feedback from council members and citizens. Staff has not yet
7
received a response from Lennar following the August 13 review regarding next steps. Staff
is proposing that the 2019 Park and Trail acquisition and development Capital Improvement
Program CIP include $35,000 for a Lake Ann Park and Trail Expansion Feasibility Study.
REVIEW SANITARY SEWER INFLOW/INFILTRATION (I/I) REDUCTION PLAN:
STAFF WILL UPDATE COUNCIL ON THE CURRENT I/I REDUCTION PLAN
AND SEE IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO MAKE ANY CHANGES.
Since 2007 the city has completed Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) projects to limit the amount of
groundwater and surface water coming into the sanitary sewer system. The Metropolitan
Council Environmental Services (MCES) placed a surcharge fee on the city for excessive I/I.
Excessive I/I takes away from the sewer capacity of the Metropolitan Trunk Sewers and can
lead to backups if enough I/I enters the system. In exchange for a fee surcharge the City
elected to make improvements to the city-owned sewers to reduce I/I in the city-
maintained sanitary sewer system. These projects consist of replacing leaking sewer pipe,
grouting joints, rehabilitating manholes and lining sewer pipes. A study was completed in
2006 that identified likely high I/I problem areas. Most of the identified project areas have
been investigated and improvements made. In addition, street rehabilitation and street
reconstruction projects have had I/I improvements made. The city still has a surcharge
placed on it by MCES. MCES has also televised and made I/I improvements to their trunk
sewer mains over the past years. They are also planning to complete additional I/I
improvements in the upcoming years. Staff will be bringing this item to a City Council
work session in October. Staff feels an update to the 2006 I/I study is needed to identify
other likely sources of I/I in the community.
UPGRADE OF GALPIN BLVD: COMPLETE THE SCOPING AND TRAFFIC
STUDY WITH CARVER COUNTY, AND IDENTIFY FUNDING SOURCES FOR
THE UPGRADE OF GALPIN BLVD NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5
Carver County currently operates and maintains Galpin Boulevard; however, the county has
identified this section of Galpin Boulevard as a potential turnback since it functions more as a
local collector roadway than a county roadway. A scoping study was completing in June
2018 to help determine if a turnback is in the best interest of the city. The City Council
passed a resolution of support for the study finding on June 25, 2018. The reconstruction of
Galpin Boulevard is tentatively programed for 2022.
8
IMPROVEMENTS TO CHANHASSEN RAILROAD DEPOT: MAKE
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RAILROAD DEPOT IN ORDER TO BETTER UTILIZE
A KEY PIECE OF CHANHASSEN’S HISTORY
This key financial strategy will be reviewed at the August 27, 2018 City Council work
session.
9
Enhance Local Tax Base
Evaluate the Comprehensive Plan
with current goals and policies; assess the impact.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: ENHANCE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
OPPORTUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY, I.E. INCENTIVES,
MARKETING, DIRECT MARKETING
On May 29, 2018, the current economic development practices and a summary of
recent projects were presented to City Council at a work session. City staff discussed
tax abatement and tax increment financing examples and programs as options for future
economic development programs, as well as a draft of an updated business subsidy
criteria policy. City Council directed staff to research policies from neighboring and
KFS cities and to present them at a later date.
On July 9, 2018 city staff presented economic development or subsidy policy examples
from Chaska, Shakopee, Minnetonka, and Elk River, as well as Chanhassen’s previously
updated draft policy. City Council discussed whether to update the policy as presented,
take requests on a case-by-case basis rather than have a formal policy, or whether to
adopt a policy with more specific criteria as to what types of projects would qualify and
an outline of what programs could be available to businesses. City Council directed staff
to see draft a policy with additional evaluation criteria.
Staff has been evaluating criteria from other policies and will bring a draft to City
Council for consideration before the end of the year.
DOWNTOWN FOCUS UPDATE: CONTINUE TO COLLECT INPUT FROM
RESIDENTS, BUSINESS OWNERS, AND CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS ON THEIR
VISION FOR DOWNTOWN CHANHASSEN. RESEARCH WHAT OTHER KEY
FINANCIAL CITIES ARE DOING WITH DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENTS
At the June 9, 2018 City Council work session, Bryan Harjes with Hoisington Koegler
Group, Inc. reviewed highlights of the Downtown Chanhassen Vision Plan update. The
key takeaways from the stakeholders’ meeting was the need for connectivity for
automobiles, pedestrians and bicycles, enhancements for intersection crossings, future
land use, and providing for flexibility for sub-districts. The City Council would like to
10
include more depth to the study, list the guiding principles of the study, and define the
next steps. Staff and Bryan were also asked to review the Survey Monkey ranking as the
highest and not the lowest, and bring it back for review at a future work session.
11
Other Projects and Goals Accomplished
Department Accomplishments in 2018 That Were Not Included in the
Key Financial Strategies.
g:\admin\tg\work plan\2018\2018 work plan.docx
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 632
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1, GENERAL PROVISIONS; CHAPTER 4,
LICENSE, PERMIT AND ADMINISTRAIVE FEES; CHAPTER 10, LICENSES,
PERMITS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS REGULATIONS; AND CHAPTER 20,
ZONING OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 1-2 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows:
Brew Pub is a brewer who also holds one or more retail on -sale licenses and who manufactures
fewer than 3,500 barrels of malt liquor in a year, at any one licensed premises, the entire
production of which is solely for consumption on tap on any licensed premises owned by the
brewer, or for off -sale from those licensed premises as permitted in Minn. Stat. 340A.24.
subdivision 2.
Brewer is a person who manufactures malt liquor for sale.
Brewery is a location where malt liquor is manufactured for sale.
Cocktail room is a location in or adjacent to a microdistillery where the owner of the distillery
sells distilled spirits produced by the distiller for consumption on the premises or for off-site
consumption as provided for in Minn. Stat. 340A.22.
Distiller is a person who manufactures distilled spirts for sale.
Distilled spirits is ethyl alcohol, hydrated oxide of ethyl, spirits of wine, whiskey, rum, brandy,
gin, and other distilled spirits, including all dilutions and mixtures thereof, for non -industrial use.
Malt Liquor is any beer, ale or other beverage made from malt by fermentation and containing
not less than one-half of one percent alcohol by volume.
Microdistillery is a distillery operated within the state producing premium distilled spirits in a
total quantity not to exceed 40,000 proof gallons in a calendar year.
Pickup signs. See Sign, Pickup
Sign, Pickup means a sign not attached to a building that designates a specific area of a parking
lot for the pickup and loading of goods purchased in advance.
Small Brewer is a brewery that produces less than 20,000 barrels of malt liquor in a year.
Tap Room is a location in or adjacent to a brewery where the owner of the brewery sells malt
liquor produced by the brewery for consumption on the premises or for off-site consumption as
provided for in Minn. Stat. 340A.28 and 340A.285.
Section 2. Section 4-15(a)(2) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as
follows:
2. Various other license fees shall be set as follows:
Microdistillery Off -sale ...................$200.00
On -sale Brewer Taproom.................$400.00
On -sale Cocktail Room....................$400.00
Off -sale intoxicating ........................$200.00*
Off -sale non -intoxicating .................$ 58.00
On -sale non -intoxicating ..................$410.00
Small Brewer Off -sale .....................$200.00
Sunday sales.....................................$200.00*
Wine/beer license.............................$410.00
Fees that are established by state statute.
Section 3. Section 10-19(h) to of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as
follows:
h) Temporary on -sale intoxicating liquor licenses.
1) The city council may issue to a club or charitable religious or nonprofit organization in
existence for at least three years or to a political committee registered under M.S. §
10A.14 a temporary license for the on -sale of intoxicating liquor in connection with a
social event within the city sponsored by the licensee. The license may authorize the on -
sale of intoxicating liquor for not more than four consecutive days, and may authorize on -
sales on premises other than premises the licensee owns or permanently occupies. The
license may provide that the licensee may contract for intoxicating liquor catering
services with the holder of a full -year on -sale liquor license issued by the city. The
licenses are subject to the terms, including license fee, imposed by the city. The licenses
issued under this section are subject to all laws and ordinances governing the sale of
intoxicating liquor except M.S. § 340A.409 and § 340A.504, subd. 3, paragraph (d), and
the laws and ordinances which by their nature are not applicable.
2) The city council may issue to a brewer who manufactures fewer than 3,500 barrels of
malt liquor in a year or a microdistillery a temporary license for the on -sale of
intoxicating liquor in connection with a social event within the municipality sponsored by
the brewer or microdistillery. The terms and conditions specified for temporary licenses
under paragraph (1) shall apply to a license issued under this paragraph, except that the
requirements of section M.S. § 340A.409 subd. 1 to 3a, shall apply to the license.
3) Limitations on temporary on -sale intoxication liquor licenses:
i) Temporary licenses must first be approved by the Commissioner of Public Safety
before they become valid.
ii) No more than three four-day, four three-day, or six two-day temporary licenses, in
any combination not to exceed 12 days per year, may be issued for the sale of
alcoholic beverages to any one organization or registered political committee, or for
any one location, within a 12 -month period.
iii)Not more than one temporary license may be issued to any one organization or
registered political committee, or for any one location, within any 30 -day period.
Section 4. The Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 10-19(k) to Section
10-19(n) to read as follows:
k) On -Sale Brewer Taproom License. May be issued to a brewery licensed under Minn. Stat.
Section 340A.301, subdivision 6, clause (c), (i), or 0) for the on -sale of malt liquor produced
by the brewer for the consumption on the premises of or adjacent to one brewery location
owned by the brewer as provided in Minn. Stat. Section 340A.26.
1) On -Sale Brewer Taproom License Holders are allowed Sunday on -sales as provided in
Minn. Stat 340A.26, subdivision 5 and do not require a separate On -Sale Sunday Liquor
License. No Sunday on -sales are allowed before 10:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m.
1) Small Brewer Off -Sale License. May be issued to a brew pub or brewery licensed under
Minn. Stat. Section 340A.301, subdivision 6, clause (c), (i), or 0) for the off -sale of malt
liquor at its licensed premises that has been produced and packaged by the brewer as
provided in Minn. Stat. 340A.24, 340A.28, and 340A.285.
1) Small Brewer Off -Sale License holders are allowed Sunday off -sale as provided in
Minn. Stat. 340A.24 and 340A.28, and 340A.285. No Sunday off -sales are allowed
before 10:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m.
m) On -Sales Cocktail Room. License may be issued to a microdistillery for the on -sale of
distilled spirits produced by the distiller for the consumption on the premises of or adjacent
to one distillery location owned by the distiller as provided in Minn. Stat 340A.22,
subdivision 2.
2) On -Sales Cocktail Room License Holders are allowed Sunday on -sales as provided in
Minn. Stat 340A.22, subdivision 2 and do not require a separate On -Sale Sunday Liquor
License. No Sunday on -sales are allowed before 10:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m.
n) Microdistillery Off -Sale License. May be issued to a microdistillery for the off -sale of
distilled spirits as provided in Minn. Stat. 340A.22, subdivision 4.
1) Microdistillery Off -Sale License Holders are allowed Sunday off -sales as provided in
Minn. Stat 340A.22, subdivision 4 and do not require a separate On -Sale Sunday Liquor
License. No Sunday off -sales are allowed before 10:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m.
Section 5. Section 10-53 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 10-53. - Samples.
On- or off -sale licensees may provide or permit a licensed manufacturer or wholesaler or its
agents to provide on the premise of the retail licensee samples of malt liquor, wine, liqueurs,
cordials, and distilled spirits which the licensee currently has in stock and is offering for sale to
the general public without obtaining an additional license, provided the malt liquor, wine,
liqueur, cordial, and distilled spirits samples are dispensed at no charge and consumed on the
licensed premises during the permitted hours of sale in a quantity less than 100 milliliters of malt
liquor per variety per customer, 50 milliliters of wine per variety per customer, 25 milliliters of
liqueur or cordial, and 15 milliliters of distilled spirits per variety per customer.
Section 6. The Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 20-314 to read as
follows:
Sec. 20-314. - Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom, producing more than 3,500
barrels of malt liquor per year.
The following applies to all breweries operated in conjunction with a taproom:
1) The brewery shall not produce more than 5,000 barrels of malt liquor per year, unless
they are located in an area zoned Industrial Office Park (IOP), in which case the brewery
shall not produce more than 20,000 barrels of malt liquor per year.
2) An outdoor seating area is permitted provided it has an enclosure and the enclosure is not
interrupted; access to the seating area must be through the principle building; its hours of
operation shall be no later than 10:00 p.m. Sunday -Thursday and 12:00 a.m. Friday -
Saturday; and the outdoor seating area must be located and designed so as not to interfere
with pedestrian and vehicular circulation.
3) Shipping and receiving areas shall be located behind the facility or otherwise screened
from view.
4) Compliance plan must be submitted to the city including:
a. An inventory of potential or identified odor emission point sources associated with
the industry or source.
b. An engineering quality plan detailing best available control technologies and
appurtenances designed to eliminate or achieve the maximum reduction of odor
pollution from an emission point source inclusive of, but not necessarily limited to
certain processes, procedures, or operating methods intended to mitigate or control
odor pollution.
c. A detailed explanation of the specifications and operating parameters of the best
available control technologies, monitoring instrumentation and equipment, and
processes and procedures intended for the mitigation or control of odor pollution.
d. A specification of the documentation that will be made available for the city's review
which will verify the data produced by the monitoring equipment, and which will
verify that processes and procedures are conducted consistent with the specifications
in the facility's odor control study and plan.
e. An approved schedule which states, in a time certain manner, the implementation and
installation of the best available control technology, processes, procedures, operating
methods, and monitoring instrumentation designed to mitigate or control odors at the
facility inclusive of an approved completion date.
0
An acknowledgment of the authority of the city and its agents to enter into the facility
or its property in order to investigate complaints and to verify the facility's adherence
to the compliance plan.
Section 7. Section 20-712 to of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Sec. 20-712. - Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in a "BH" district:
1) Adult day care, subject to the requirements of section 20-966
2) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
3) Brew pub, subject to the requirements of section 20-968.
4) Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom producing less than 3,500 barrels
per year, subject to the requirements of section 20-969.
5) Car wash.
6) Community center.
7) Convenience stores without gas pumps.
8) Day care center.
9) Fast-food restaurant.
10) Financial institutions with/or without drive-through services.
11) Funeral homes.
12) Health services.
13) Liquor stores.
14) Microdistillery operated in conjunction with cocktail room, subject to the
requirements of section 20-967.
15) Miniature golf.
16) Motels and hotels.
17) Offices.
18) Personal services.
19) Private clubs and lodges.
20) Shopping center.
21) Specialty retail shops.
22) Standard restaurants.
23) Utility services.
Section 8. Section 20-714 to of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Sec. 20-714. - Conditional uses.
The following are conditional uses in a "BH" district:
1) Automobile rental facilities.
2) Automotive repair shops.
3) Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom, producing over 3,500 barrels
per year.
4) Convenience stores with gas pumps.
5) Drive-through facilities.
6) Emission control testing stations.
7) Garden centers.
8) Motor fuel stations.
9) Outdoor storage.
10) Small vehicle sales.
11) Supermarkets.
12) Towers as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
Section 9. Section 20-732 to of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 20-732. - Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in a "CBD" district:
1) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
2) Ballroom.
3) Barber and beauty salons and spas including hair, nail, skin and scalp services.
4) Bars and taverns.
5) Bowling center.
6) Brew pub, subject to the requirements of section 20-968.
7) Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom producing less than 3,500
barrels per year, subject to the requirements of section 20-969.
8) Clothing rental.
9) Clubs and lodges.
10) Coin-operated service machines.
11) Community center.
12) Convenience stores without gas pumps.
13) Convention and conference facilities.
14) Costume rental.
15) Cultural facilities.
16) Day care center as part of shopping center.
17) Fast-food restaurants as part of shopping center.
18) Financial institutions.
19) Health and recreation clubs, instructions and services.
20) Health services, outpatient only.
21) Hotels.
22) Laundry and garment services including self-service.
23) Locker rental.
24) Microdistillery operated in conjunction with a cocktail room, subject to the
requirements of section 20-967.
25) Multiple -family dwellings, including senior citizen housing.
26) Newspaper offices.
27) Offices.
28) Parking ramp.
29) Photographic studios.
30) Print shops.
31) Quilting and scrap booking.
32) Retail sales.
33) Schools.
34) Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors.
35) Shopping center.
36) Sporting goods rental.
37) Standard restaurants.
38) Tattoo and body art and piercing services (MS ch. 146B).
39) Theatrical producers and services.
40) Utility service.
41) Wedding chapel.
Section 10. Section 20-734 to of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Sec. 20-734. - Conditional uses.
The following are conditional uses in a "CBD" district:
1) Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom, producing over 3,500 barrels
per year.
2) Drive-through facilities.
3) Convenience store with gas pumps.
4) Freestanding fast-food restaurants.
Section 11. Section 20-752 to of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Sec. 20-752. - Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in a "BG" district:
1) Adult day care, subject to the requirement of section 20-966
2) Animal hospital.
3) Antenna.
4) Bars and taverns.
5) Bowling center.
6) Brew pub, subject to the requirements of section 20-968.
7) Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom producing less than 3,500
barrels per year, subject to the requirements of section 20-969.
8) Community center.
9) Convenience stores without gas pumps.
10) Day care center.
11) Entertainment.
12) Fast-food restaurants.
13) Financial institutions.
14) Funeral homes.
15) Garden centers.
7
16) Hardware goods.
17) Health and recreation clubs.
18) Health services.
19) Home improvement trades building supply centers.
20) Microdistillery operated in conjunction with a cocktail room, subject to the
requirements of section 20-967.
21) Miniature golf.
22) Motels.
23) Newspaper and print shop.
24) Offices.
25) Personal services.
26) Private clubs and lodges.
27) Senior citizen housing.
28) Small appliance and similar repair shops.
29) Specialty retail.
30) Standard restaurants.
31) Supermarkets.
32) Utility services.
33) Veterinary clinic.
Section 12. Section 20-754 to of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Sec. 20-754. - Conditional uses.
The following are conditional uses in a "BG" district
1) Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom, producing over 3,500 barrels
per year.
2) Convenience stores with gas pumps.
3) Drive-through facilities
4) Equipment rental.
5) Major auto repair and body shops.
6) Motor fuel stations.
7) Screened outdoor storage.
8) Truck, automobile, farm implement, recreational vehicles and boat sales and
service.
Section 13. Section 20-793 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 20-793. - Permitted accessory uses.
The following are permitted accessory uses in the "OI" district:
1) Adult Day Care as part of a church (subject to the requirements of Sec. 20-966).
2) Parking lots.
3) Signs.
4) Temporary outdoor sales and events (subject to the requirements of section 20-
964).
Section 14. Section 20-812 to of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Sec. 20-812. - Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in an "IOP" district:
1) Adult day care, subject to the requirements of section 20-966
2) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
3) Automotive repair shops.
4) Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom producing less than 3,500 barrels
per year, subject to the requirements of section 20-969.
5) Conference/convention centers.
6) Health services.
7) Indoor health and recreation clubs.
8) Light industrial.
9) Microdistillery operated in conjunction with a cocktail room, subject to the
requirements of section 20-967.
10) Offices.
11) Off -premises parking lots.
12) Print shops.
13) Recording studios.
14) Utility services.
15) Vocational school.
16) Warehouses.
Section 15. Section 20-814 to of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as
follows:
Sec. 20-814. - Conditional uses.
The following are conditional uses in an "IOP" district:
1) Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom, producing over 3,500 barrels
per year.
2) Contracting yards.
3) Day care centers as part of a multi -tenant building.
4) Day care centers as a separate facility.
5) Food processing.
6) Gun range, indoor.
7) Home improvement trades.
8) Hotels and motels.
9) Lumber yards.
10) Motor freight terminals.
11) Outdoor health and recreation clubs.
12) Screened outdoor storage.
13) Research laboratories.
14) Commercial towers as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
15) Electrical distribution and underground electric distribution substations.
Section 16. The Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 20-967 to Section
20-969 to read as follows:
Sec. 20-967. - Microdistillery operated in conjunction with a cocktail room.
The following applies to all Microdistilleries operated in conjunction with a cocktail
room:
1) The Microdistillery shall not produce more than 40,000 proof gallons of distilled
spirits per year.
2) An outdoor seating area is permitted provided it has an enclosure and the
enclosure is not interrupted; access to the seating area must be through the
principle building; its hours of operation shall be no later than 10:00 p.m. Sunday -
Thursday and 12:00 a.m. Friday -Saturday; and the outdoor seating area must be
located and designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian and vehicular
circulation.
3) Shipping and receiving areas shall be located behind the facility or otherwise
screened from view.
Sec. 20-968. - Brew Pub.
The following applies to all brew pubs:
1) The brew pub shall not produce more than 3,500 barrels per year.
2) An outdoor seating area is permitted provided it has an enclosure and the
enclosure is not interrupted; access to the seating area must be through the
principle building; its hours of operation shall be no later than 10:00 p.m. Sunday -
Thursday and 12:00 a.m. Friday -Saturday; and the outdoor seating area must be
located and designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian and vehicular
circulation.
3) Shipping and receiving areas shall be located behind the facility or otherwise
screened from view.
Sec. 20-969. - Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom, producing less than 3,500
barrels of malt liquor per year.
The following applies to all breweries operated in conjunction with a taproom:
1) The brewery shall not produce more than 3,500 barrels of malt liquor per year.
2) An outdoor seating area is permitted provided it has an enclosure and the
enclosure is not interrupted; access to the seating area must be through the
principle building; its hours of operation shall be no later than 10:00 p.m. Sunday -
Thursday and 12:00 a.m. Friday -Saturday; and the outdoor seating area must be
located and designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian and vehicular
circulation.
10
3) Shipping and receiving areas shall be located behind the facility or otherwise
screened from view.
Section 17. The Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 20-1124(2)(z) to
read as follows:
z. Brew pub, Brewery operated in conjunction with a taproom, or Microdistillery
operated in conjunction with a cocktail room -One space for each 50 square feet of
gross taproom, cocktail room, or restaurant floor area, and one space for each 1,000
square feet of gross production area.
Section 18. The Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 20-1255(14) to
read as follows:
14) Pickup Signs; big box retailers and grocery stores are allowed one sign to
designate an area of the parking lot for pickup/driveup loading of goods
purchased in advance subject to the following conditions:
a. The pickup sign must be located within the parking lot and the placement of
pickup sign shall be so located such that the sign does not adversely affect
adjacent properties or navigability of the parking lot (including sight lines,
confusion of adjoining ingress or egress) or the general appearance of the site
from public rights of way.
b. No more than one pickup sign shall be allowed per business
c. The pickup sign may not exceed thirteen feet in height.
d. The pickup sign's base shall be not more than two -feet wide on a side, and no
portion of the sign may project beyond the base.
e. The pickup sign is limited to four square feet of display area per sign face, and
no more than 30 percent of the display area shall be used for the business logo
or identification.
f. Businesses with a drive-through facility may not also have a pickup sign.
Section 19. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and
publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this l la' day of June, 2018 by the City Council of the City of
Chanhassen,, Minnesot
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
cc
Denny Lau nburger, Mayor
Summary Ordinance 632 published in the Chanhassen Villager on June 21, 2018)
11
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 633
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 7, BUILDING AND BUILDING
REGULATIONS, AND CHAPTER 20, ZONING OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 7-19(21) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows:
21) Calculation of the amount and percentage of the lot coverage for the lot or
parcel broken out by impervious surfaces and pervious pavement, if present.
Section 2. Section 20-109(4)(h)(4) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as
follows:
4. Percent of lot coverage on site broken out by impervious surface and pervious pavement.
Section 3. Section 20-615(5) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows:
5) The maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is 30 percent, of which
no more than 25 percent can be impervious surfaces. For flag/neck lots neither the area
within the neck, nor the lot coverage of the driveway within the neck shall be included
within the calculation of the lot area or lot coverage of the lot.
Section 4. The Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 20-921 to read as
follows:
Sec. 20-921 —Pervious Pavement
Properly designed, installed, and maintained pervious pavements have the capacity to allow for
stormwater detention and/or infiltration. When not properly designed, installed, and maintained
pervious pavements fail to facilitate the detention and/or infiltration of stormwater. Additionally,
pervious pavements contribute to the creation of heat islands and do not provide the same surface
water management benefits as native vegetative cover. For these reasons, it is necessary to
regulate the lot coverage, design, installation, and maintenance of these systems.
1) Lot Coverage: Pervious pavements are considered to constitute lot coverage; however,
when built to the standards espoused in this section they do not constitute impervious
surfaces. Systems not built to the standards espoused in this section are considered to
constitute impervious surfaces.
2) Location Restrictions:
a. Pervious pavements may not be installed in areas where trash or garbage
receptacles will be stored.
3) Design and Installation:
a. A building permit is required for the instillation of pervious pavement systems.
b. Pervious pavement systems must be designed to provide for rate and volume
control for the first half inch (0.5") of treatment area and follow the current
version of The City of Chanhassen Standard Specification and Detail Plates.
Treatment area includes the total square footage of the pervious pavement system
plus the total square footage of impervious surface draining directly to the
pervious pavement system.
c. To meet the city's definition of pervious pavement the system must: 1) be
designed in compliance with standards established by the Interlocking Concrete
Pavement Institute (ICPI); 2) be installed by an ICPI certified installer; and, 3) be
designed to meet or exceed the standards listed in paragraph (b).
d. The City Engineer may permit pervious pavement technologies other than
permeable interlocking concrete pavers, so long as the City Engineer determines:
1) they are functionally equivalent or better; 2) the system is designed in
compliance with accepted guidelines and is installed by an appropriately certified
installer; and, 3) the system will meet or exceed the standards listed in paragraph
b)•
4) Maintenance:
a. The owner of a pervious paver system must enter into a maintenance agreement
with the city to ensure the system performs as designed in perpetuity. This
agreement must conform to the manufactures guidelines, and stipulate the
frequency and type of maintenance to be performed.
District restrictions:
a. Planned Unit Developments Residential Districts (PDDR) are limited to the lot
coverage specified by their ordinance and/or compliance table. For PUDRs
created before June 11, 2018 the terms hardcover, hard surface, impervious
surface, and similar phrases shall be understood to mean lot cover inclusive of
both pervious pavements and impervious surfaces, and in no circumstance shall
the failure of the ordinance or compliance table to mention pervious pavements be
understood to mean that pervious pavements are not subject to the lot cover,
hardcover, hardscape, or similarly identified limits that govern the PUDR.
b. Shoreland Management District restricts properties zoned Single Family
Residential District (RSF) to 25 percent lot coverage.
5)
Section 5. This ordinance shall be effective as of the 1" day of August, 2018.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25a' day of June, 2018 by the City Council of the City of
Chanhassen, Minnesota/ !
eo , --" V
odd Gerhardt, City Manager
w
Denny Lau nburger, Mayor
Published in the Chanhassen Villager on July 5, 2018)
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Key Financial Strategy: Chanhassen Railroad Depot Improvements
Section 5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Item No: A.3.
Prepared By Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation
Department
File No:
SUMMARY
The City of Chanhassen 2018 Annual Goals and Key Financial Strategies includes the following item under the
heading "Planning for the City's Infrastructure:" Improvements to Chanhassen Railroad DepotMake improvements to
the Railroad Depot in order to better utilize a key piece of Chanhassen's history.
BACKGROUND
The Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad built a small depot in Chanhassen in 1882. Back then, the
newspaper described it as "one of the handsomest and most convenient of any on the line." The railroad provided a
connection to Minneapolis and soon businesses sprung up around it. During World War II, the depot was no longer
needed and the building was sold to Joseph and Mary Kerber for $75. They moved it to their farm just west of Lake
Ann Park and used it as a workshop.
In celebration of the city's centennial in 1996, the depot was purchased by the Chanhassen Housing & Redevelopment
Authority and moved to its the current site, which is near its original location.
DISCUSSION
Upon return to downtown Chanhassen the exterior of the depot was extensively refurbished to persevere its condition
and renew its appearance. The 2018 estimate to completely renovate the interior and exterior of the structure, add
parking and a driveway entrance, gas, water, electrical and fiber optic utilities is $774,215.
It is staff's position that the highest and best use of the depot is that of a historic landmark. In 2012 the depot was
repainted by 75 AmeriCorps Volunteers in a single day with paint, materials and equipment donated by Kent and
Debbie Ludford from Merlins Ace Hardware.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council receive the report and take no action towards continued renovation of the
Chanhassen Historic Train Depot.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 27, 2018SubjectKey Financial Strategy: Chanhassen Railroad Depot ImprovementsSection5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Item No: A.3.Prepared By Todd Hoffman, Park & RecreationDepartment File No: SUMMARYThe City of Chanhassen 2018 Annual Goals and Key Financial Strategies includes the following item under theheading "Planning for the City's Infrastructure:" Improvements to Chanhassen Railroad DepotMake improvements tothe Railroad Depot in order to better utilize a key piece of Chanhassen's history. BACKGROUNDThe Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad built a small depot in Chanhassen in 1882. Back then, thenewspaper described it as "one of the handsomest and most convenient of any on the line." The railroad provided aconnection to Minneapolis and soon businesses sprung up around it. During World War II, the depot was no longerneeded and the building was sold to Joseph and Mary Kerber for $75. They moved it to their farm just west of LakeAnn Park and used it as a workshop. In celebration of the city's centennial in 1996, the depot was purchased by the Chanhassen Housing & RedevelopmentAuthority and moved to its the current site, which is near its original location.DISCUSSIONUpon return to downtown Chanhassen the exterior of the depot was extensively refurbished to persevere its conditionand renew its appearance. The 2018 estimate to completely renovate the interior and exterior of the structure, addparking and a driveway entrance, gas, water, electrical and fiber optic utilities is $774,215.It is staff's position that the highest and best use of the depot is that of a historic landmark. In 2012 the depot wasrepainted by 75 AmeriCorps Volunteers in a single day with paint, materials and equipment donated by Kent andDebbie Ludford from Merlins Ace Hardware.RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council receive the report and take no action towards continued renovation of the
Chanhassen Historic Train Depot.
ATTACHMENTS:
Project Narrative and Cost Estimate
Depot after relocation to current site
Depot in the process of being repainted in 2012
Depot after completion of repainting by AmeriCorps Volunteers in 2012
Depot in its current state
CHANHASSEN HISTORIC TRAIN DEPOT
PROJECT NARRATIVE:
In celebration of the city’s centennial in
1996, the depot was purchased by Chanhassen
Housing & Redevelopment Authority and moved
to this site, which is near its original location.
To help fund the move and exterior restoration,
brick and pavers were sold that were inscribed
with the names of many local families.
the 2019 initiative is to bring the train depot
up to code and utilize the building and site for
historical society meetings and purposes.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES:
• provide parking with ada stall
• provide ada access to entry
• refurbish exterior and roof
• refurbish interior with ada access
• provide interior restrooms
• provide updated utilities
• provide updated electrical and hvac
• provide site resoration and landscaping
CHANHASSEN, MN DAMON FARBER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS - 5-24-18
NEW LANDSCAPE
AND TURF RESTORATION
NEW ADA ENTRY
RAMP WITH
HANDRAIL
NEW STEPS
WITH HANDRAIL
NEW BITUMINOUS
PARKING WITH
CURBING
NEW SITE
RETAINING
WALLS CONCEPT SITE PLAN
CHANHASSEN HISTORIC TRAIN DEPOT
CHANHASSEN, MN DAMON FARBER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS - 5-24-18
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Teen Volunteer Recognition
Section PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS Item No: C.1.
Prepared By Katie Mathews, Recreation Supervisor File No:
BACKGROUND
On behalf of the City Council and the Park & Recreation Commission, I would like to recognize the 2018 Teen
Volunteers. These 1316 yearolds were selected to serve as volunteers for citysponsored recreation programs from
June through August. The programs consisted of the KleinBank Summer Concert Series, Lake Ann Adventure Camp,
youth sports at the Rec Center, and Discovery Playground Program.
The city would like to thank this year’s teen volunteers for their service. Together they compiled over 490 hours of
service to the City of Chanhassen!
Please come forward when your name is called to receive your certificate:
1. Alena Nugent
2. Ben Schubbe
3. Brian Gilbertson
4. Bridget McNaney
5. Caleb Blong
6. Derek Puzak
7. Fin O’Brien
8. Holley Marini
9. Hope Durenberger
10. Jack Dietz
11 . Jack Liwienski
12. Josh Boevers
13. Lolly Walsh
14. Melanie StewartHester
15. Madi Hamilton
16. McKenna Aker
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Approve of City Council Minutes dated August 13, 2018
Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.1.
Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No:
PROPOSED MOTION
“The City Council approves the minutes dated August 13, 2018.”
Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.
ATTACHMENTS:
City Council Work Session Minutes dated August 13, 2018
City Council Summary Minutes dated August 13, 2018
City Council Verbatim Minutes dated August 13, 2018
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
AUGUST 13, 2018
Mayor Laufenburger called the work session to order at 5:28 p.m.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Laufenburger, Councilwoman Tjornhom,
Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman Ryan, and Councilman Campion
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Kate Aanenson, Bob Generous, Paul Oehme, Todd
Hoffman, Jill Sinclair, and Greg Sticha
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Tim Erhart Chanhassen
Mike McGonagill 2451 Hunter Drive
Brian & Donna Strauss 6840 Lucy Ridge Lane
Bob & Cheryl Ayotte 6213 Cascade Pass
Greg Andrews 6895 Ruby Lane
2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE.
Kate Aanenson reviewed meetings held with the Planning Commission to discuss the 2040
Comprehensive Plan. Bob Generous reviewed highlights of changes made in the 10 chapters.
Councilman Campion asked for clarification on the addition of 40 acres in the community.
Mayor Laufenburger asked about the sewer, water and surface water management plans.
Councilwoman Ryan suggested wording changes regarding infill development specifically in the
downtown core area, and expressed concerns with wording for policies regarding density. Mayor
Laufenburger discussed wording under transportation, Highway 101 trail, and operations
regarding a tobacco use policy. Tim Erhart discussed issues related to a request for land use
changes to protect and create a greenway along the Bluff Creek corridor as it relates to his vision
for development of a high end office project on his property. Councilwoman Ryan asked for
clarification on how the boundary line for the Bluff Creek corridor was determined. Tim Erhart
continued with discussion of development potential for his property and his request to get clarity
of the Bluff Creek overlay district to add land to the Fox Woods Preserve. Councilwoman Ryan
asked for clarification on the progression of shifting the Bluff Creek overlay district boundary
line. Mayor Laufenburger recommended that council members get an opportunity to walk Tim
Erhart’s property.
City Council Work Session – August 13, 2018
2
REVIEW OF SECOND QUARTER REVENUE ACTIVITY TO DATE AND
INVESTMENTS.
Greg Sticha explained that revenue numbers for the second quarter are greater than budgeted
numbers before introducing Reed Christenson, the investment consultant with Wells Fargo who
reviewed results of the investment portfolio. Mayor Laufenburger asked for clarification on how
the investment portfolio compares to debt. Councilman Campion asked if the numbers being
presented can be compared to key financial strategy cities.
PRELIMINARY BUDGET AND LEVY DISCUSSION.
Greg Sticha discussed assumptions used in setting up the preliminary budget as related to new
growth, wage adjustments, health care, elimination of the crime prevention specialist position,
and police contract numbers which results in a levy that is $76,000 above the new growth
number. He explained that reduction of the $76,000 is represented in scenario 2. Mayor
Laufenburger discussed the three scenarios and asked how the budget and levy schedule will
proceed. Councilman Campion stated there seemed to be barely no difference between the 3
scenarios being presented and asked staff to look at presenting more differences in the 3
scenarios. Todd Gerhardt explained how service cuts have been addressed in the past. Mayor
Laufenburger asked that Jill Sinclair come back at a future work session to discuss yard waste
collection options.
Mayor Laufenburger adjourned the work session meeting at 6:57 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
AUGUST 13, 2018
Mayor Laufenburger called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Laufenburger, Councilwoman Tjornhom,
Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman Ryan, and Councilman Campion
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, Todd Hoffman, Jill Sinclair,
and Andrea McDowell Poehler
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Conrad Fiskness 2385 Bridle Creek Circle
Mike and Andi McGonagill 2451 Hunter Drive
Suzanne Hunt 1521 Lake Susan Hills Drive
Baro Egh Thiede 2091 Hennepin Avenue, Glencoe
Dale Hayne 7510 Cahill Road, Edina
Dennis Scheppmann 6740 Lakeway Drive
Shelley Berken 6820 Diamond Court
David & Jeff Allen 6870 Lake Harrison Circle
Jessica Hansgen 7555 Walnut Curve
Meghan Davy Chan Villager
Cristin Maschka 2086 Majestic Way
Ladd Conrad 6625 Horseshoe Curve
Donna & Brian Strauss 6840 Lucy Ridge Lane
Sue Bogan 7757 Butter? Court
Janet Taylor 2051 Blue? Lane
Paul Engebretson 7050 Tecumseh Lane
Erika LaBarge 7050 Tecumseh Lane
Mack Titess 2747 Century Trail
Mauricio Goes 6930 Ruby Lane
Mark Phillips 1760 Lucy Ridge Court
Brian & Donna Strauss 6840 Lucy Ridge Lane
Michelle & Matthew Myers 7421 Windmill Dive
Greg Andrews 6895 Ruby Lane
Steve Barnes 7100 Utica Lane
Peter Polingo 1981 Topaz Drive
Jay & Ann Marie Gerczak 1941 Topaz Drive
Tom K. Lannom 6920 Ruby Lane
City Council Summary – August 13, 2018
2
Bark Klick 7116 Utica Lane
Dale & Gloria Carlson 6900 Utica Lane
Steve Wallace 6900 Lucy Ridge Lane
Kris Lenk 6895 Lucy Ridge Lane
Joanne & Bill Lambrecht 6990 Utica Lane
Michael Bierden 2300 Lukewood Drive
Linda Zabrosky 2940 Highwood Drive
Eric Hamborg 18612 Topaz Drive
Mark Gilk 6890 Ruby Lane
Matt & Deb Chambers 2169 Red Fox Circle
Lora & Tony Hicks 6910 Ruby Lane
M.J. & Allan Olson 7461 Windmill Drive
Cheree Theisen 2072 Majestic Way
Serena O’Brien 6879 Ruby Lane
Deirdre & Dake Chatfield 2200 Majestic Way
Adam & Steph Tollefson 4000 Stratford Ridge
Jeff Ische 25365 Smithtown Road, Shorewood
Wittas 24625 Yellowstone Trail, Shorewood
Jim Fredrickson & Michelle Treptar 6935 Ruby Lane
Jeff & Stacey Morken 6945 Ruby Lane
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded to approve the agenda as
modified to table item G-2, Control Concepts. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Ryan moved, Councilman McDonald seconded to
approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s
recommendations:
1. Approval of City Council Minutes dated July 9, 2018
2. Receive Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated June 26, 2018
3. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated July 17, 2018
4. Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License Request: St. Hubert’s Catholic
Community; Harvest Festival on September 15, 2018
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. Don Amorosi, 2368 Grays Landing Road, Wayzata, speaking
as the father of Archer Amorosi who was killed by Carver County Deputies, requested that the
City form and fund if necessary an independent committee that reports to the city council and is
City Council Summary – August 13, 2018
3
comprised of a representative from social services, the area crisis center, law enforcement, and a
council member as well as a mental health professional, a parent, a student, an educator and a
member of the press. He asked that the committee’s charge should be to evaluate the
circumstances around this tragedy, identify breakdown’s and opportunities for improvement and
make recommendations to better systems, procedures, protocol and training which may reduce if
not eliminate something like this from happening ever again.
PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVE VACATION OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON
LOT 1, BLOCK 1, MINGER ADDITION (2300 LUKEWOOD DRIVE).
Jill Sinclair presented the staff report on this item. Councilwoman Ryan asked if other lots in
this neighborhood are impacted by the conservation easement. Mayor Laufenburger opened the
public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed.
Resolution #2018-40: Councilwoman Ryan moved, Councilman McDonald seconded that
the City Council adopts the resolution approving the vacation of a portion of conservation
easement legally described as the northerly 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Minger Addition
according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County, Minnesota. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
GALPIN PROPERTY: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPM,ENT CONCEPT PLAN
REVIEW.
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report and Planning Commission update on this item. Todd
Hoffman discussed the City’s Park System Master Plan and the Comprehensive Plan and how it
affects this development. City Engineer Paul Oehme, filling in for the Water Resources
Coordinator, discussed how development affects the water quality of Lake Lucy and Lake Ann.
Councilman McDonald asked for clarification of the street connection with the neighborhood to
the north of this development. Councilwoman Tjornhom asked about blending the new
development with the surrounding neighborhoods. Councilman Campion asked about signage
regarding the stub street going through in the future. Mayor Laufenburger asked about the traffic
study, and how the property being preserved around Lake Ann and Lake Lucy will be conveyed
to the City of Chanhassen. Representing the applicant, Joe Jablonski with Lennar Corporation
addressed issues related to how Lennar was chosen by the estate of Prince Rogers Nelson to
develop the property, and outlined the work that’s been performed on the property to date.
Councilmember Ryan voiced her disappointment in not being presented a Plan C from Lennar.
Councilman Campion asked about the purchase of 10 acres on the north side of the property
abutting Lake Lucy. Mayor Laufenburger asked the developer if he was prepared to work with
city staff to address the 13 pages of issues and where examples of the empty nester villa homes
are located before opening up the meeting for public comments. Matthew Myers, 7421
Windmill Drive asked if the City could buy 41 acres of the property for the park and not do the
density transfer. Brian Strauss, 6840 Lucy Ridge Lane, who had submitted a letter to the
council, raised additional points regarding current zoning as rural residential, road connections to
City Council Summary – August 13, 2018
4
the northern neighborhood, buffers, and that road connections be made to Galpin Boulevard.
Greg Andrews, 6895 Ruby Lane questioned the accuracy of the water quality study done on
Lake Lucy and expressed concerns with Lake Ann, wildlife, and that he was not aware and not in
favor of the stub street connection. He described where he lived in California where space is
provided between developments for emergency access. Jessica Hansgen, 7555 Walnut Curve
expressed concern with the increase in traffic, and discussed how her family uses their property.
Cheree Theisen, 2072 Majestic Way, having built her home in 1995 discussed wildlife in the
area, traffic and water issues. Barb Klick, 7116 Utica Lane, having been a nurse for 40 years
urged everyone to have a health care directive, before discussing her use of Lake Ann and
suggested the use of guide posts to help preserve green space. Cheree Theisen addressed
preservation of the tree line on Prince’s property. Jay Gerczak, 1941 Topaz Drive stated the
council has heard enough about the environmental and safety concerns, but his main issue is with
the process and the fact that he did not receive a notice for the Planning Commission meeting.
Peter Polingo, 1981 Topaz Drive asked that the council listen to their concerns regarding not
connecting the subdivisions, building a quality community, making sure safety is fundamental,
and traffic congestion. Jon Hebeisen asked two rhetorical questions. One, where is it written
that Lennar or whoever buys this property has to build 200 houses? And two, what does the City
get in return for saving the 94 acres of parkland? The public comment period was closed.
Council members provided direction for the developer and city staff on how to proceed.
CONTROL CONCEPTS: APPROVE SITE PLAN WITH A VARIANCE FOR LOT 2,
BLOCK 1, ARBORETUM BUSINESS PARK 7TH ADDITION.
This item was tabled.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. Councilman McDonald provided an update on the
Chanhassen Red Birds going into the State Tournament. Mayor Laufenburger discussed that
Wednesday, August 15th is Chanhassen Day at the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum and that
Monday, August 20th there will be a special City Council meeting to discuss funding options for
the pavement management program.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. None.
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The City
Council meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 13, 2018
Mayor Laufenburger called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Laufenburger, Councilwoman Tjornhom,
Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman Ryan, and Councilman Campion
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, Todd Hoffman, Jill Sinclair,
and Andrea McDowell Poehler
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Conrad Fiskness 2385 Bridle Creek Circle
Mike and Andi McGonagill 2451 Hunter Drive
Suzanne Hunt 1521 Lake Susan Hills Drive
Baro Egh Thiede 2091 Hennepin Avenue, Glencoe
Dale Hayne 7510 Cahill Road, Edina
Dennis Scheppmann 6740 Lakeway Drive
Shelley Berken 6820 Diamond Court
David & Jeff Allen 6870 Lake Harrison Circle
Jessica Hansgen 7555 Walnut Curve
Meghan Davy Chan Villager
Cristin Maschka 2086 Majestic Way
Ladd Conrad 6625 Horseshoe Curve
Donna & Brian Strauss 6840 Lucy Ridge Lane
Sue Bogan 7757 Butter? Court
Janet Taylor 2051 Blue? Lane
Paul Engebretson 7050 Tecumseh Lane
Erika LaBarge 7050 Tecumseh Lane
Mack Titess 2747 Century Trail
Mauricio Goes 6930 Ruby Lane
Mark Phillips 1760 Lucy Ridge Court
Brian & Donna Strauss 6840 Lucy Ridge Lane
Michelle & Matthew Myers 7421 Windmill Dive
Greg Andrews 6895 Ruby Lane
Steve Barnes 7100 Utica Lane
Peter Polingo 1981 Topaz Drive
Jay & Ann Marie Gerczak 1941 Topaz Drive
Tom K. Lannom 6920 Ruby Lane
Bark Klick 7116 Utica Lane
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
2
Dale & Gloria Carlson 6900 Utica Lane
Steve Wallace 6900 Lucy Ridge Lane
Kris Lenk 6895 Lucy Ridge Lane
Joanne & Bill Lambrecht 6990 Utica Lane
Michael Bierden 2300 Lukewood Drive
Linda Zabrosky 2940 Highwood Drive
Eric Hamborg 18612 Topaz Drive
Mark Gilk 6890 Ruby Lane
Matt & Deb Chambers 2169 Red Fox Circle
Lora & Tony Hicks 6910 Ruby Lane
M.J. & Allan Olson 7461 Windmill Drive
Cheree Theisen 2072 Majestic Way
Serena O’Brien 6879 Ruby Lane
Deirdre & Dake Chatfield 2200 Majestic Way
Adam & Steph Tollefson 4000 Stratford Ridge
Jeff Ische 25365 Smithtown Road, Shorewood
Wittas 24625 Yellowstone Trail, Shorewood
Jim Fredrickson & Michelle Treptar 6935 Ruby Lane
Jeff & Stacey Morken 6945 Ruby Lane
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you and I want to welcome all of you to this meeting this evening.
For those of you that are present in the chamber as well as those of you that are watching via
Mediacom cable channel at home or anywhere on the world wide web through our Chanhassen
website. And just for a note, for those of you that are not present I think we probably have, I’m
going to guess about 100 people here in council chambers and there’s probably some more that
are over next door in the senior center. We’re pleased to have so many people with us tonight.
Also for the record please note that all council members are present this evening along with City
Manager Todd Gerhardt and our legal counsel Andrea. Not Knutson. Andrea, nice to have you
with us tonight. First action for tonight is our agenda. Council members are there any
modifications to the agenda this evening? Mr. Gerhardt we have one modification do we not, is
that correct?
Todd Gerhardt: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: The item listed as item G-2, the Control Concepts, that has been removed
from the agenda is that correct?
Todd Gerhardt: That item has been tabled to our next meeting Mayor.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Any other changes to the agenda? May I have a motion to approve
the modified agenda.
Councilman McDonald: So moved,
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
3
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. McDonald. Is there a second?
Councilman Campion: Second.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Campion.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded to approve the agenda as
modified to table item G-2, Control Concepts. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Ryan moved, Councilman McDonald seconded to
approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s
recommendations:
1. Approval of City Council Minutes dated July 9, 2018
2. Receive Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated June 26, 2018
3. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated July 17, 2018
4. Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License Request: St. Hubert’s Catholic
Community; Harvest Festival on September 15, 2018
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS.
Mayor Laufenburger: At this time anyone wishing to address the council on a matter that is not
on the agenda this evening you may address the council by stepping to the podium. Stating your
name and your address for the record.
Don Amorosi: My name is Don Amorosi.
Mayor Laufenburger: Say your name again?
Don Amorosi: Donald E. Amorosi.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, and your address.
Don Amorosi: My address is 2368 Grays Landing Road in Wayzata. I also am here on behalf
on my ex-wife who’s address is 6451 Oriole Avenue, Chanhassen, Minnesota.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
4
Mayor Laufenburger: And what’s your presentation Mr. Amorosi?
Don Amorosi: It’s regarding a request of this committee to develop or set up a committee
associated with investigating beyond the scope of the BCA’s investigation in my son’s shooting
by two Carver County sheriff’s.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, is there anything you want to say about that?
Don Amorosi: Is this where I do it now or is that some other?
Mayor Laufenburger: This is visitor presentation Mr. Amorosi and we welcome any comments
to the council.
Don Amorosi: Okay Mr. Mayor, I know you’ve seen my email and my concerns, as have all of
you councilmen and councilwomen. I did not hear back from any of you so I think that this will
be pertinent to share again and to some of the people that are here with me. First I do want to
thank you for giving me and anyone who wants to have time to speak on behalf of what
happened in our community about something that is of great interest and concern to all of us I
believe, at least many, many, many in our community on both the north and south side of
Highway 7. I don’t know how this process works in this forum however I have a lot to say and I
need to be heard. I’ll be as brief as I can and hope for feedback when I’m finished. One month
ago today my son Archer Amorosi was shot and killed mercilessly by two Carver County
sheriff’s in the front yard of his mother’s home before both me and his mother. It was a horrific
and unnecessary tragedy by my account. Before I go further I would remiss not to stress the
importance to all of us that our city officials, you among then, recognize this as a tragedy. That
it happened in our community and express some measure of condolence to my family and to the
broader community. I have yet to see anything of the sort. In addition I think we would all
benefit to hear what actions have been taken so far by the City regarding this matter and what we
can anticipate from the City in the near future. We’re aware that this tragedy is part of an open
investigation by the State’s Bureau of Criminal Activity and that a decision about prosecuting the
case will be made by the Carver County Attorney in the future. What I would like to talk about
and propose tonight has nothing to do with that investigation. I want to be clear it has nothing to
do with that investigation. Instead I seek a resolution, a motion, a sponsorship of some kind to
adopt my, our request or simply to set aside time at a future meeting to present and discuss this
further. The request is as follows. To form and fund if necessary an independent committee that
reports to this council and is comprised of a representative from social services, the area crisis
center, law enforcement, and a council member and potentially others who this council may
recommend. In addition this council should be comprised of a mental health professional, a
parent, a student, an educator and even a member of the press. None of whom being employees
of the city or have any affiliation with the City or the County. To me the committee’s charge
should be to evaluate the circumstances around this tragedy. Identify breakdown’s and
opportunities for improvement and make recommendations to better systems, procedures,
protocol and training which may reduce if not eliminate something like this from happening ever
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
5
again. You see I was there before, during and after this ugly mess and I am now living with the
horrific aftermath. So are many in our community. And as I am learning I see that neither the
judiciary nor the BCA’s scope are broad enough to drive change, nor are either of those entities
advocates for your constituency, us. You are. I believe that you have an obligation, excuse me.
I do not want this to happen to one our precious youth again and I assume you don’t either. It is
also my strong and firm belief that law enforcement cannot self govern or go unchecked by the
public. As our elected public servants I believe you have an obligation to fill this void. I ask if
not you, who? If not now, when? What is it going to take? I’ll close with my bottom line. Our
kids cannot be killed by those who are here to protect and serve. We cannot second guess as
parents or anyone whether it is safe to call upon law enforcement under any circumstance.
Thank you and I look forward to your comments.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Amorosi. Appreciate your presentation. Is there any
other, anybody else who would like to make a presentation at this time? Mr. Gerhardt is there
anything that you would, you or our legal counsel would advise on the council’s behalf at this
time?
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council, I did send a letter to Mr. Amorosi talking about the difficulty of
the situation that occurred and that as sad as it may be there is an ongoing investigation. With
the Mayor and council not attending the event or seeing the event there’s really a missing piece
of the puzzle and that is getting that full investigative report back from the BCA before any
further action is taken so that was what I said in my letter to Mr. Amorosi.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright thank you Mr. Gerhardt. I would also make this comment Mr.
Amorosi. Did you want to say anything else?
Don Amorosi: Yeah I will add that I am aware of the investigation. I stated that in my remarks
and I am asking that something much more broad be put in place from our community. To me
it’s a cop out to say there’s an ongoing investigation. We have a community here not knowing
anything that happened in the investigation there’s an opportunity and by your reaction asking
council whether you can offer condolences or whether you can even tell us that you’ve done
anything in the past or have any intention to do anything in the future to represent this
community in this matter is, forgive me but pathetic. Those are my comments.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright thank you Mr. Amorosi. I would just like to make this comment.
Please don’t misinterpret our silence as not caring. Mr. Amorosi I was at your son’s funeral and
I shared the tragic nature of his departure. I saw a church service filled with probably 600 kids
all of whom cared deeply for him. It really is a tragedy and you’re right, nobody on this council
wants to see any other member of our community, young or old die in that manner. Is there
anybody else who would like to speak at this time on visitor presentations? Just a reminder that
visitor presentations are a part of every regularly scheduled council meeting and we invite any
member of the community to come forward and speak on any topic that is not on the agenda and
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
6
this is a perfect opportunity for you to address the council. There being no other presentations at
this time I will close visitor presentations.
PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVE VACATION OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON
LOT 1, BLOCK 1, MINGER ADDITION (2300 LUKEWOOD DRIVE).
Mayor Laufenburger: Is this your’s Mr. Oehme? Or this is Jill’s, okay. Alright. Ms. Sinclair,
nice to have you here.
Jill Sinclair: Thank you Mayor and council members. This item is a request to vacate a portion
of a conservation easement at 2300 Lukewood Drive. Sorry, technical difficulties. Thank you
Vanna. Okay. The property is in the Minger Addition located east of Galpin Boulevard. The
northerly 50 feet of the property is within a conservation easement that was established with the
development. Prior to this development the area along the north property line contained a
driveway to the existing home. The easement was established to protect the large oaks along the
driveway.
Mayor Laufenburger: Just a moment Jill. Could I have somebody close that door please?
Thank you. Just a reminder we do have extra seating in the adjacent senior center so sorry Jill.
Jill Sinclair: That’s alright. Thank you. So the easement was put in place to protect the large
oaks that were existing along the driveway along the north property line to the home, as well as
to establish and encourage tree planting in the open area that was left after their driveway was
removed. Next. When the building permit survey was submitted for 2300 Lukewood the builder
asked to locate the home in the middle of the property to maximize tree preservation on the lot.
As you can see very few existing trees were removed for the home and the driveway. The City
supported and approved the location of the home and drive in the easement. At the time the staff
was under the assumption that modifications to the easement could be done administratively and
giving approval for construction within the easement was acceptable in order to save the trees on
the lot. Next. The current property owners are requesting an amendment to the conservation
easement removing a portion of the property from the easement. Existing trees and vegetation
would still be covered by the easement while the open yard of the area, or the open area of the
yard, the driveway and a portion of the home would be released from the easement restrictions.
The area in pink is to be vacated and the area in green is what would be remaining in the
easement. Staff supports the vacation of a portion of the easement. There were no trees in this
area of the easement when the home was built and the area has not been reforested. All of the
existing vegetation in the easement would still remain under protection in the conservation
easement. These are pictures of the existing conditions on site. Next. Staff recommends
adopting the resolution in support of the vacation of a portion of the conservation easement. I’d
be happy to answer any questions.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you Ms. Sinclair. Any questions of staff from council?
Councilmember Ryan yes.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
7
Councilwoman Ryan: Ms. Sinclair do you, does the easement go along other properties? Are
other properties impacted and does it make sense to you know adopt the resolution for the whole
neighborhood or just this single property?
Jill Sinclair: This one is different from, there’s no other property that has a home and a driveway
constructed in the easement.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay.
Jill Sinclair: So this is different from any of the other ones. The easement does run 50 feet or
along the entire northern property line. Two other homes in the area have had amendments to
the easement to construct pools.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay.
Jill Sinclair: Which is a different circumstance than this. This is, when the house was built this
should have been taken care of when the house was built.
Councilwoman Ryan: And I know we talked about that. I called you earlier and asked you
about specifically to this property and that’s my question is, you know we’re doing it for this
property and if there’s amendments to other properties does it make sense to re-evaluate this
easement as a whole?
Jill Sinclair: And so the other two properties, I think it’s just this northerly one because the,
many lots in this development have a conservation easement in their back yard and their back
yards are totally wooded. The properties to the north had that driveway running through it so
when the driveway was removed, there were scattered trees but there was also large open areas
in a conservation easement.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay.
Jill Sinclair: So other neighbors had taken advantage of that to construct a pool where there were
no trees or you know in this case a house.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay. So continue to take it on a case by case situation.
Jill Sinclair: Yeah, that would be best.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay, thank you.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor?
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
8
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt go ahead.
Todd Gerhardt: We, the council has within their authority to grant across the board vacation of
an easement in the back yard but I think your last comment is to take it on a case by case basis
because each individual will have maybe a different situation or a different desire of how they
may want to develop the rear yard of their property. It might not need the entire easement
vacated so as Jill stated and as Councilmember Ryan stated I think we should really honestly
take a look from a case to case basis.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, any other questions from council for staff? Then I’d welcome
further discussion or a motion.
Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilmember Ryan.
Councilwoman Ryan: I’d like to propose the motion that the City Council adopts the resolution
approving the vacation of a portion of conservation easement legally described as the northerly
50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Minger Addition according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver
County, Minnesota.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Councilmember Ryan. We have a valid motion. Is there a
second?
Councilman McDonald: I’ll second it.
Kate Aanenson: Mayor if I may. This was noticed as a public hearing so I don’t know if we
want to take some public comment.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you very much.
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: So I’m going to hold that motion. I’m going to take your second but at
this time I would like to open the public hearing. Anybody that would like to speak on the
matter of the vacation of this, a portion of this conservation easement please step forward to the
podium at this time. There being no one coming forward to speak to that I would close the
public hearing. We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion on this motion?
Resolution #2018-40: Councilwoman Ryan moved, Councilman McDonald seconded that
the City Council adopts the resolution approving the vacation of a portion of conservation
easement legally described as the northerly 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Minger Addition
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
9
according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County, Minnesota. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Ms. Sinclair. We have removed item number G-1. Excuse me
G-2 from the agenda so we’ll move to item G-1.
GALPIN PROPERTY: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPM,ENT CONCEPT PLAN
REVIEW.
Mayor Laufenburger: And before we take on this item let me just take a few minutes to describe
to all of you the sequence of steps that we’re going to follow over the next few minutes. I’d like
to clarify the steps that we’re about to take related to this item. The review of the Galpin
Property development. The council is not scheduled to take a formal vote tonight on this subject.
There likely will be no specific decision on what will happen with the Galpin Property tonight.
Here’s the sequence that we will follow. First of all the council will hear a presentation from
staff on the options that are available regarding the possible development of the parcels of land
known as the Galpin Property. This will include the discussion of a conceptual planned unit
development and also what could be developed without the planned unit development. Second
council will hear from the proposed developer who as I understand it has an option to buy the
land from the estate. The Prince’s estate as authorized by the presiding Judge Kevin Eide. Now
of course during these the councilmembers may make a comment or ask questions as they
choose but please remember this. That the members of the council have all had the opportunity
to hear from many of you, the public via emails. Via phone conversations. By personal visits.
By walking the land. Visiting surrounding neighborhoods. The council has also had the
opportunity to view the entire packet which was delivered to us on this particular item, including
the verbatim Minutes and the video of the Planning Commission meeting on July 17th at which
about 22 citizens from the surrounding neighborhoods provided comments, views and concerns.
Next. Though the Planning Commission is used for public comment I understand the angst
associated with many of you not receiving notice of the Planning Commission meeting. Though
we did provide notice I think we erred by not including some of the neighbors that would be
affected by this development and on behalf of the city staff and the council I’m sorry about that.
I believe city staff did send out notices to a much broader geography for tonight’s meeting and
could I just get a nodding of heads if you received a notice about tonight’s meeting. Okay thank
you. Now because of that error and without objection from the council I will allow time for
public comment to the council. I will ask however that those of you that were present, or those
of you present right now that made your concerns known at the Planning Commission please
allow others who have not yet spoken in public to be given the opportunity to speak. Now I’ll
talk more about that when we arrive at that point of the review of this item. I fully expect that
many of you are here tonight to see what the final action will be but as I said earlier that is not
likely to happen tonight. In fact there are things procedural wise that our counsel would suggest
that we can’t do because we didn’t give public notice on some other things but as I said earlier
tonight the members of the council will have the opportunity, just like all of you have, to provide
comments to city staff and to the proposed developer on their individual thoughts and review of
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
10
the potential development of the Galpin Property. Following these comments by the council
members the developer will determine if and how they will proceed in their planning process.
Now ultimately this item will likely return to the council at some date in the future for final
action such as approving a PUD ordinance or approving a preliminary and a final plat of that
parcel. But before we begin with the staff report let me ask all of you to respectfully listen to
everything that is said and is asked this evening. This may seem like a cumbersome and an
arduous process and the truth is it is and this is how we do things here to ensure that all available
information and comments are shared and eventually acted on by this council. And lastly let me
add this comment. We are not your adversaries. We as a council think about the same things
that you do regarding this development and any development in the city. Now we may not
always agree with the public 100 percent of the time and we certainly don’t always agree as a
council but your comments and our comments are to be considered and listened to so I ask that
you be respectful of the council and I also ask that the council be respectful of all of you this
evening. Throughout the evening so with that thank you and Ms. Aanenson is this your’s?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright Ms. Aanenson. This is the item, planned unit development
concept review.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. Again U.S. Home
Corporation doing business as Lennar has made an application for concept PUD. I put in the
staff report the process for a PUD concept. It’s certainly advised but it’s not required to do a
concept review. It’s optional. Under the concept review we believe that it’s a good way, as
we’ve noted at the Planning Commission and here again at the City Council for the City Council
and the residents to provide feedback to the developer on the direction of the development of this
property so again while this isn’t legally binding. It’s an opportunity for the developer to hear
from the City Council as well as the residents and the staff as incorporating some of their
concerns or comments also in your staff report. So again your motion is just to give, it won’t be
a motion. Your goal then at the end is to give direction as well as what’s received in the public
comments. So again the property, five different properties for 188 acres is included and the
property under proposed development again a Lennar pursuing under the purchase agreement to
propose a development. This property is currently zoned rural residential and it’s been that way
for 25-30 years since we put in the Lake Ann interceptor. There’s a sewer line that runs through
the property that the Met Council put in so sewer has been available for a number of years. It’s
just been ownership that hasn’t desired to, up until this point to take advantage of that. So what
does that mean when it’s rural residential? Well there’s a land use guiding. It’s guided low
density which means 1.2 to 4 units an acre can be developed on this site. So within the zoning
there’s different zoning applications that can be applied. Residential single family is one of the
city’s more predominant zoning districts. Is a 15,000 square foot lot minimum. R-4 allows for
15,000 square foot minimum and 10,000 for twin homes so you could do a project applying for
R-4 and do a combination of the two. The RLM district allows for 9,000 square foot for single
family dwelling. Two family dwelling could be 7,260 and then townhouses of multiple units
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
11
could be 5,404. The difference with the RLM from the R-4 and the RSF, in order to get the
RLM it’s anticipated that you’re going to dedicate some property in preserve so we’ve used that
predominantly along the Bluff Creek corridor where we’re identified a corridor that we’d like to
preserve. So the PUD cluster development, there is no minimum lot size. However it cannot
exceed the density guidelines so the density guidelines in here would be 4 would be the
maximum. So the developer in reviewing this put together a plan showing a traditional single
family, what they could come in with under just straight zoning RSF would be 1.56 units and
acre and we’ll show that in a little bit more detail in a minutes. The PUD also comes under the 4
units an acre at 2.26. The zoning has to be consistent with the land use so the two have to align.
That’s required so those are the different zoning options. This developer has chosen the PUD
and we also recommended, as did they, want to go through the concept to get feedback as they
move forward. Again the concept is if we were to bring in a straight subdivision or a PUD the
risk they would run if there was a lot of changes. There’s a lot of investment made already so
this is to get a read from all groups and the like. I also want to note that we did send it out for
jurisdictional comments so we did get feedback from other agencies that would have feedback on
this and that also helps the developer to move forward in making some of their decisions for the
property.
Mayor Laufenburger: Ms. Aanenson can you just identify some of those agencies that you
included in the jurisdictional review?
Kate Aanenson: Sure it’d be all the utilities. The watershed district. The DNR. The County
because they have jurisdiction on Galpin Boulevard would be the main ones. School District.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay thank you.
Kate Aanenson: I’ll let the Park Director take a minute just to talk about the park master plan
and how it forms the project.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Hoffman.
Todd Hoffman: Thanks Kate, Honorable Mayor and members of the City Council. It’s my
pleasure this evening to talk about a couple different things regarding the Park Master Plan. The
Park System Master Plan which was just approved and then also the Comprehensive Plan which
the City has held for oh close to 40 years or at least over 30 years on this particular property. So
Lake Ann Park is located to the south and east of the property that is being developed or
proposed for development and then Lake Ann is inbetween those two properties. Lake Ann Park
is about 100 acres in size. The proposal at least as designed by the Comprehensive Plan is to
expand that size by nearly double and so the land that you see in this diagram by the dashed line
is about another 94 acres. It includes about 40 some acres of wetland and then about 50 of
upland in the middle of the two lakes. Subdivisions are an opportunity for the City and an
applicant or a developer to negotiate some kind of a land use arrangement which may or may not
include park so many developments in our community have not included park space. Some do.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
12
In this particular case it’s a unique situation that it includes such a large parcel that was dedicated
or at least identified as potential future park space. For this to occur a subdivision, it’s not a
designation. It doesn’t mean that the City’s going to get that property. It just designates to
anybody who is interested in the property, Prince himself probably knew that this was designated
as future park space and so did Lennar and so, but how do you get there? So park dedication is,
can be included or a cash equivalent of any particular subdivision and so park dedication is about
10 percent or in this case it’s about 9 acres and so it’s based off of 1 acre for every 75 people that
are going to be brought to an area and so in this particular case that’s 9 acres. So when you have
50 acres of upland that you’re talking about potentially preserving, 9 acres only gets you part of
the way so how are you going to gain access to that other 41 acres? You simply can’t take it
from a landowner or an applicant and so that’s where the density transfer scenario would come
into play and so you would say okay, you have 40 some acres left to acquire as park space. How
many houses could be developed in that 40 acres? Instead of putting them there let’s move them
over to another area of the plat and so that’s what a density transfer would do and that’s, in this
particular scenario at least the concept about how that would be developed. Back on June 26th
the Park and Recreation Commission reviewed that. They reviewed both the concept plans. The
one including the full lot layout of the 199 lots and the density transfer and that motion that night
from the Park and Recreation Commission was that they recommended that the City Council
acknowledge Lennar Concept Plan 7 dated June 1, 2018 depicting 199 lots clustered to the west
central and north central quadrants of the property and thus preserving 50 plus acres, plus or
minus acres of public park area utilizing a density transfer and park dedication in the eastern
quadrant of the property as a preferred starting point for the design of the preliminary plat for the
proposed development and so that’s what the Park and Recreation Commission recommended.
This is a diagram from the Park System Master Plan which just identified, as we went through
that if you’ll recall we had overwhelming citizen input in the Park System Master Plan and this
was the top commented item and so a priority expansion area preserving additional land between
Lake Lucy and Lake Ann in the area of this property so the notes there are develop a Park
System Master Plan. Define the limits of the park expansion to the north and west. Preserve
natural areas. Complete a trail loop around Lake Ann. Now any activity in this particular plat
wouldn’t complete the loop. There’s still one more property. The Gorra property at the
southwest corner but it would complete a good portion of the trail. And then potentially identify
any new facilities or user amenities that would go in that area.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay let me just pause for a second.
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: Council feel comfortable, if there’s a pause in the discussion you’re
welcomed to ask any questions pertinent to what we just heard so feel comfortable in raising
your hand in that okay. Kate?
Kate Aanenson: Yes thank you. So again I’m just talking about the issues that kind of framed
up the proposal as we’re moving forward so in looking at this, the applicant, actually the
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
13
representative or Comerica Bank the trustee looked at doing the wetland delineation. It’s always
good to know kind of what’s out there.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay just a second. Let’s just clarify. The developer that’s talking to us
is U.S. Home doing business as Lennar.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: You just talked about Comerica. Who’s Comerica?
Kate Aanenson: Comerica is the trustee for the estate.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: So they were the seller.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: So in looking at this it’s always good to know what’s, you know what are the,
again the framework issues out there so they did a wetland delineation and have submitted that to
the City to review. We made some comments on that. The City’s Water Resources Coordinator
has walked the site as well as the City Forester to identify, making sure that it was complete, as
did the person doing the delineation. So that’s one piece of information as we move forward on
this document. Framing up.
Councilwoman Ryan: Can I ask you a question?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah absolutely.
Councilwoman Ryan: So here we see the wetland locations but when the developer laid out the
concept plan it doesn’t, it doesn’t allow for whether or not the wetlands are going to be mitigated
or how they’re going to be handled.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. That’s a good question yep.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: So that’s part of the process moving forward that they would have to work
through so whether it gives legitimacy to all that but I don’t want to jump too far ahead but that’s
one thing the watershed district they felt strongly about preserving the ones that are closer to the
lake and working through those but yes they do have to go through a process. That’s one of the
conditions.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
14
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay, thank you.
Kate Aanenson: Yep. In addition Jill who was just here put together the, this is a little harder to
read, the inventory of the significant trees in the area. There are some significant trees scattered
on the western side of the property that certainly as we’re working with the developer, as they do
have to do a tree inventory. It’s a requirement of any subdivision. Some of those unique trees
that we can try to save but what we are doing is we’re saving the majority of the trees along this
side. Again that’s preferred. So they wouldn’t have to do the tree count here. Only on the
property that they’re developing but again that would be part of the information as we move to
the next step so these are all again the framework issues as we move forward. So taking that
information, what the park commission or the park Comprehensive Plan stated, looking at some
of the other data the Lennar team put together our standard residential subdivision. Again this is
illustrative. Nobody’s put an exact review of this. Of each individual lot but in working with
Lennar they have shown what they could get on with a traditional subdivision. Just over 200 lots
so that’s kind of the point of beginning as we talked about moving the density transfer. So to say
we wanted to try to meet preserving everything on the lake, on the Lake Ann side. Transferring
those lots out. That’s how we ended up with the other proposal so again this is an aerial view of
that same piece of property showing how it would connect. Again this is a traditional RSF which
is permitted in that zoning district which they could pursue.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Campion go ahead.
Councilman Campion: Ms. Aanenson so based on discussions with the watershed so far is there
any indication whether this is generally possible or?
Kate Aanenson: To do this one?
Councilman Campion: Yes.
Kate Aanenson: Yes it’s possible but it’s not as desirable because I think in doing this you’re,
greater impacts to the wetlands and the like so it would be preferred, it does meet ordinance
requirements. They could go through and demonstrate all that. So but their preference would be
to do the density transfer and that’s stated in a letter that we received from the DNR and those
were included in your packet. There was another one that just came back too so. Let me go back
to this slide.
Mayor Laufenburger: But just for follow up to Mr. Campion. They could follow the ordinances
of the city and the zoning and the guidance and they could build this.
Kate Aanenson: Correct and that’s why we asked them to show that because you don’t want to
just say we can put 200 units over there if you couldn’t get them. Now to be clear everything in
this district right here, this is the shoreland district so everything in this has to be 15,000.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
15
Mayor Laufenburger: Now east of that solid line.
Kate Aanenson: Correct, that all has to be 15,000 square feet and that’s what they’re
representing. So we asked them in good faith to show what they could put on the property and
so yes, there’s still the same hurdles to go through for the wetland permitting, the same hurdles
you would do with any other subdivision but yes that’s, so all those lots are 15,000 which is
required in the shoreland district. And all of these lots would also be 15,000 so they’re
representing again in good faith, they’re showing what they could do with the parcel if it was a
straight subdivision.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, Mr. Campion is your question answered?
Councilman Campion: I believe so but what I was trying to get at is just based on experience
with the watershed if there is any chance that this plan would actually be approved or if likely, if
they went this route if it would be you know probably 20 percent less homes that would actually
get approved.
Kate Aanenson: Well if, they’d have to go through the permitting process. Just like any other
project. Just like Avienda you knew so.
Councilman Campion: Right.
Mayor Laufenburger: But Ms. Aanenson to Mr. Campion’s question the watershed really
doesn’t determine the density, is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. As long as they meet all the rules for managing stormwater.
Mayor Laufenburger: Right.
Kate Aanenson: And going through the wetland.
Mayor Laufenburger: Wetland mitigation and things like that.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. That’s correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: That Councilwoman Ryan spoke of.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. So this, what you’re showing here is, if this land was a
little simpler and didn’t have all of the complications of wetland and trees and stuff they could
build this. If this was for example Bluff Creek Golf Course. 200 acres. They could build. They
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
16
could design. Put the land together and they could put in RSF 15,000 square foot lots and they
could build houses to their hearts content.
Kate Aanenson: Sure. I want to be clear that I don’t know if every lot’s going to work just like
on the other plan where we know every lot’s going to work.
Mayor Laufenburger: It’d have to be buildable.
Kate Aanenson: It would have to be buildable correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright.
Kate Aanenson: But it has potential correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Campion?
Councilman Campion: It’s an answer yeah.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah.
Councilwoman Ryan: May I add to that?
Mayor Laufenburger: Go ahead sure.
Councilwoman Ryan: Because I think this is where I’m a little challenged with the proposal A
and B and when we talk about conceptually that we are, we’re saying or the developer is saying
yes, we could come back and put 40 lots on this parcel and since we would prefer because of the
comp plan and the park and rec commission and the feeling at large is that we want to do a
density transfer and save that land and then move it over and so then you take those 40 lots and
now you have smaller lots on this other parcel. The confusion is that we don’t know that, as you
stated that they’re going to be able to get all of those because as you saw in the previous slide
there’s a lot of wetlands so we have the wetland buffer rules and setbacks from the lake and
wetland on the other side and so I think that the challenge that I see when we’re presented with
Option A or B is that we’re being told that these 40 lots could go there if you know, if we don’t
approve the Plan B and not to speak for Mr. Campion but that’s the concern of, this is just
merely concept if you were taking a piece of paper and drawing boxes on a piece of paper and
saying here’s the acreage. Here’s a 15,000 square foot lot. This is what can go in this but there’s
no guarantee that any of that could happen.
Kate Aanenson: Correct but I’ll go back to what Mr. Hoffman and the Park and Rec Director
said and that is, there’s value to that land.
Councilwoman Ryan: Absolutely.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
17
Kate Aanenson: Yep so it’s trying to find out could they go through that process to try to figure
that out.
Councilwoman Ryan: Right I’m not arguing the value.
Kate Aanenson: Yep.
Councilwoman Ryan: More concerned of that we’re being told that it’s either A or B.
Kate Aanenson: Well somewhere, yeah. I mean that’s, that’s every project just like with
Avienda we approved the wetland waiting to see what the watershed district was going to say so.
And that was accomplished using some dedication so that’s the one, so that’s our starting point.
So we give them all the wetland information. We look at the tree preservation that we talked
about. You have to count the trees on the site and obviously that comes into how they develop
the subdivision. So meeting our goals, the City’s goals of the park showed the other plan. Again
all these lots within the shoreland district have to meet the 90 foot of frontage, 15,000 square
foot minimum and the rest of the lots then pick up that so it’s less lots. Again the same question
that you asked before would apply here. Do all the lots work? They’re not all the street grades
aren’t engineered. We haven’t seen that. They may have more information than we have as far
as what they believe they can do and that’s why they’re gathering all this information but all
those lots would have to be demonstrated that they work and the wetland replacement and the
like would have to be accomplished. Those are all part of the next steps. So with that again here
it is illustratively in an aerial where you can see the 90. So these would be at the 15,000 and then
the 65 foot lots and then the 58 foot lots. The smaller lots on the southern part. Certainly we
recognize, if you go back to the tree one there’s significant trees on the southern end. We’ve
talked to them about that. There’s significant trees on the northern end and we always try to
preserve those buffers and those transitions so that’s some of the details that we’d be looking at
no matter what project was to go forward that we would work and try to preserve those and make
those transitions work so again next steps. So if you look at the preservation as a whole, again
Mr. Hoffman talked about the acreage and the breakdown but this would be the building area.
The preservation area whether it’s the wetland or the wooded area would be in here. So some of
the questions that came up, I just highlighted a few that people thought just to your point
Councilwoman Ryan is the mix right. Too many houses get put in too small of a space.
Transition between the existing neighborhoods and small lots maybe adjacent to traditional lots
on the south and how we to blend that. Street connections to the existing neighborhoods. That’s
predominantly to the north. There’s no other connections except potentially to the north. Traffic
we included in the staff report that went to the Planning Commission. That Galpin Boulevard is
a potential for an upgrade in the future if this project was to go forward we’d want the upgrade of
Galpin to occur after that. Tree loss. Again the significant portion on the eastern side and we
work, they have to do a tree survey and look at selecting some significant trees that we’d like to
save. A question was asked about school capacity. As part of the Comprehensive Plan we did
meet with both superintendents of the school district and I did speak to someone at the school
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
18
district to verify after a question was raised and there is adequate capacity in the school district.
Another question that came up was regarding water quality at Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. Again
there’s a letter to support both the DNR and the watershed support the cluster development.
They think that’s a better way of saving those significant trees for the extraction of the shoreland
and the City Engineer has some additional comments regarding the reports on Lake Lucy.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Oehme.
Paul Oehme: Thank you Mayor, thank you Ms. Aanenson. So the Water Resources Coordinator
couldn’t be here tonight so I’m just kind of filling in for her with some comments regarding the
water quality at Lake Lucy and Lake Ann so, the City does partner with Riley-Purgatory-Bluff
Creek Watershed District on water quality initiatives and studies and those type of things so
annually the watershed district does take water samples. Clarity readings for each of those lakes
and I just wanted to highlight the report and I think it was 2017. I think this report’s on their
website on the watershed district website that the water quality of Lake Lucy has increased
between 2016 and 2017 that meets two of the clear water standards set by Metropolitan Pollution
Control Agencies so at a city level I mean we value that Lake Lucy and Lake Ann, those are
some of our best water quality lakes and we definitely want to preserve those assets for our
community and like Kate said clustering does support and does go a long ways to help lake
quality and preserve these lakes. This is a map from again from the watershed district just
showing Lake Ann up here in the upper left hand corner does meet all the standards again for
chlorophyll phosphorus and water clarity and does Lake Lucy does have a little bit of an issue
with the algae and chlorophyll but looking over the, I think the watershed district and others have
taken studies all the way back from 1972 to the date and basically there really hasn’t been an
increase in any of these standards or decrease in the water quality over those years. They have
been pretty much average or standard over those years so just wanted to point that out.
Councilman Campion: Either Kate or Paul, so you said those are updated each year.
Paul Oehme: Right.
Councilman Campion: Looking online I saw on our city website we have the UAAU for Lake
Lucy and it looked like that was, I think that was last updated in 2013. That’s a more
comprehensive report.
Paul Oehme: Okay.
Councilman Campion: Is that updated, do either of you know if it’s updated on a certain
frequency or?
Paul Oehme: I don’t think that one’s updated. There’s the testing and the report that watershed
district completes. I don’t think that’s on our website. That’s done outside of our, it is basically
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
19
just done by the watershed district and updated annually just so we have a record of what the
water quality are, is in these lakes. And just basically as a baseline moving forward.
Kate Aanenson: So the data he presented was from 2017, 2016.
Paul Oehme: Right this is from 2017.
Councilman Campion: And that’s, but that’s not from a UAAU. That’s a different…
Paul Oehme: There might be a different study or different document. I’m just referencing what
the watershed district data has shown.
Councilman Campion: Okay.
Councilwoman Ryan: And Paul do you know if this data for the 2017 report was done, I know
you said it was 16-17. Was it done after the development on Lake Lucy and Yosemite?
Paul Oehme: I’m not aware of when that data was taken. Typically it’s done during the summer
months. June through August but I’m not exactly sure what the timing of that was.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay. Alright well I’ll follow up with them. That would be a concern of
mine because of the development that was done there and the grading and the impact to Lake
Lucy and Lake Ann from there.
Paul Oehme: Sure, okay.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay thanks.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt.
Todd Gerhardt: Vanessa Strong, our Water Resources Coordinator did give her analysis of the
development to the north of Lake Lucy.
Mayor Laufenburger: Anthem?
Todd Gerhardt: Anthem. And there was significant amount of silt that did come from the
Anthem development and, but it was retained into the wetlands on the south side of Lake Lucy.
Mayor Laufenburger: No. North side.
Todd Gerhardt: South side.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
20
Mayor Laufenburger: Well just please.
Todd Gerhardt: Anthem development’s on the north side but it drains.
Mayor Laufenburger: Oh on the south side of Lake Lucy Road.
Todd Gerhardt: Right.
Mayor Laufenburger: Oh excuse me, okay. My apologies. So you said there’s stormwater
ponds there?
Todd Gerhardt: There is wetlands and the silt went into a series of, is it 2 or 3 wetlands that go
through there before it ultimately goes into Lake Lucy.
Paul Oehme: Right, correct. So Mayor from the Anthem development there’s a infiltration
basin on the north side that was required with that development. Any overflow goes through a
culvert underneath Lake Lucy and then discharges.
Mayor Laufenburger: Road.
Paul Oehme: And there’s a 3 wetland cells that eventually work it’s way down to Lake Lucy.
Mayor Laufenburger: So they follow the grade.
Paul Oehme: They follow the grade yep.
Mayor Laufenburger: And eventually when each of those wetlands fill or overflow or fill and
overflow, then eventually they would get down to.
Paul Oehme: Yeah it potentially could get down to Lake Lucy. I’m just, the amount of volume
that would have to actually go through those wetlands to make it to Lake Lucy is, would be
significant. Very significant. If you look on the topography on GIS on Carver County’s website
the contours there, those wetlands would have to bounce about 4 to 5 feet to make it all the way
down to Lake Lucy so what happens in that area is the water congregates in those wetlands and
infiltrates or evaporates.
Mayor Laufenburger: And the sediment…
Paul Oehme: And the sediment yep, discharges and the particulates would settle in those
wetlands as well.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
21
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilmember Ryan, do you want to make your comments now
or?
Councilwoman Ryan: And just to follow up on that. Correct me if I’m wrong in terms of the
property but I, didn’t the property owner, one of the property owners south of Lake Lucy once
the development happened some of the grading how he did clear the culvert and she was having
some flooding because of the excess runoff?
Paul Oehme: During the construction there was some overflow and some sediment did release
from that development site. However my understanding and I was out there shortly after that,
there was no sediment really left her property. It more or less settled in, on her property and we
couldn’t find any evidence of it migrating farther to the south to Lake Lucy.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay.
Mayor Laufenburger: Is one of these three wetlands on her property?
Paul Oehme: It is correct.
Councilwoman Ryan: Okay. I just remember that there was some issues around that so I didn’t
know if it then continued down to Lake Ann or Lake Lucy.
Paul Oehme: Staff has been out there several times on her property reviewing that and trying to
figure out you know, because over the last say 2 years there’s been significant rainfall events that
has contributed to the expansion I think of that wetland area that’s concerning her and some of
her tree loss that she’s seeing.
Councilwoman Ryan: Right.
Mayor Laufenburger: Anything else?
Councilwoman Ryan: No go ahead.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. You use the term algae bloom. I think I heard you say that. On
Lake Lucy. What causes an algae bloom?
Paul Oehme: I’m not expert on that unfortunately but it, you know it could be a variety of
reasons. You know I know carp can stir up the bottom of lakes and stir up some of the sediment
and phosphorus and cause some of that. You know developments, additional runoff from new
developments in the area could potentially impact water quality but in this case we really haven’t
seen any major development on Lake Lucy since I think 2002 maybe with the Ashling Meadows
development so.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
22
Mayor Laufenburger: Right. And just related to the water quality, I recall sometime within the
last 2 years we’ve closed Lake Ann beach. Mr. Hoffman this might be for you. We closed Lake
Ann swimming beach. What’s your recollection or maybe you know exactly why we closed that
beach. There was something. What was that?
Todd Hoffman: Just would have been an indicator of potential …pollen form but not likely
because of geese. Goose droppings.
Mayor Laufenburger: Build a dome over that lake. Alright.
Todd Gerhardt: Or get a couple of Gordon Setters.
Mayor Laufenburger: A couple of Gordon Setters. Allow hunting. No, no, no. We’re not going
to do that okay.
Todd Gerhardt: No they just chase them.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. Let’s get back on track here Ms. Aanenson.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor. So just want to outline what the project steps would be if
this project was to advance or if a different project would come in. So once you give some
feedback or the developer hears feedback on the PUD cluster zoning they would proceed through
a preliminary plat. So that would require the watershed and additional jurisdictional approvals
so that could take a few months to get all that. Again the typical process for that would be, they
would submit 30 days ahead of time and that would give us time to notice. And give the
neighbors an opportunity to provide their input so that would be a public hearing at the Planning
Commission and then back up to the City Council for their review. After that it comes in for
final plat and construction plans. But again as I indicated the preliminary plat requires a lot of
civil work so that would be designing all the roads. All the lots. Showing that they meet all the
standards. Again the watershed approvals and the like so it’s a lot of engineering work on that
part of it. And again another public hearing is required and we would hope that between the
submittal of that application that the developer would work with the property owners to the north
and south and work through some of their specific concerns so again that’s the process. Again
it’ll be a few months at a minimum before this would come back. So again you’re not giving a
formal recommendation. You’re just providing feedback on the concept for the planned unit
development request so with that I’d be happy to answer any other questions you may have.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay before we go to presentation from the developer, any questions to
staff? Mr. McDonald go ahead.
Councilman McDonald: Ms. Aanenson I heard you say that basically what this is, is a concept
development that they take a piece of paper. We’ve delineated where the wetlands are at and
then at that point you just draw out what you think are the lot lines. I know you can’t say with
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
23
any kind of certainty that all of those lots would translate into houses but the probability is the
vast majority would, is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: Potentially. Again what it doesn’t take into consideration is the individual
quality of each wetland. How the watershed districts or we’re going to review that but that
should be the intent that most of them do meet.
Councilman McDonald: Okay and then the next step, once they’ve got these lots identified is the
detailed engineering has to go into each lot which would again look at what you’re talking about
as far as it’s buildability because the next step is to determine okay we’ve got lots but what’s
buildable.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman McDonald: So that would be the next step in the process and at a concept review
the only purpose of that really is to show a probability of what could happen. The other thing
you haven’t talked much about, I don’t know if I should wait for the developer or not but it’s the
connection between the development to the north and also to Prince. Can you talk a little bit
about that because I understand there’s some challenges there.
Kate Aanenson: Right so there’s existing stub streets and some significant grading to make
those work and maybe I’ll let the City Engineer talk a little bit about that.
Paul Oehme: Sure.
Mayor Laufenburger: Can you speak to that Mr. Oehme?
Paul Oehme: Yep so there is again significant grade from the north to the south. I can’t recall
off the top of my head how much elevation change is, is currently out there but to build that road
will take some significant effort to make that connection and it’s, we haven’t, we don’t have any
engineering drawings to really review their proposal at this point so we really can’t comment on
if it really meets our standards right now or you know if it’s even feasible to build it.
Councilman McDonald: Right at this point it’s just a road on a flat surface which could go
anywhere. When you say significant would you envision anything like retaining walls needing
to be put out there?
Paul Oehme: Absolutely. I think there would have to be a retaining wall on the north side of
those lots on the road and then potentially on the south end. South side on back of the lots as
well just to kind of bridge or, bridge that area.
Councilman McDonald: Well and that point wouldn’t that take away from the lots that they have
there in order to put retaining walls in.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
24
Paul Oehme: Yeah again I can’t really comment until I really see some engineering.
Councilman McDonald: Well I’m not asking. I’m not going to hold your feet to the fire or
anything but I mean just in general with your background and you know knowledge of any
engineering what does it take to put up a retaining wall? How much space and those kind of
things?
Paul Oehme: Yeah it’s not, you can’t just build a wall. You have to go back at least a 1 to 1
slope to build the wall plus all the potential, if it’s high enough you’re going to have to put in
some geogrid as well to reinforce the wall so there is significant impacts that would take place to
build that wall you know with the layout they have here I don’t, it’s going to be challenging I
think at the very least to build those walls and with the current alignment that they’re showing
right now.
Councilman McDonald: So is it safe to say that those would be a structurally engineered wall?
Paul Oehme: Absolutely. I mean knowing the topography that’s out there, the grade challenges
that they’re going to run into it’s definitely have to be engineered with either big block retaining
walls and geogrid or some other mechanism or some other material that make sure those walls
stay in place.
Kate Aanenson: If I may Commissioner McDonald, it’d probably be similar to Lennar did a
project out in Camden Ridge so if you go back behind where we’ve got the Bluff Creek overlay
down behind the, Mr. Degler’s property and then you’ve got a pretty tall structure wall there.
They also have a wall on the back side as you overlook the property down towards 212. There’s
also another wall there so. They have done it before.
Mayor Laufenburger: So you’re referring to the wall at Camden Ridge or the Jeurissen property.
You’re referring to the retaining wall that was built on the north side of that.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Separating Camden Ridge from what will eventually be…
Kate Aanenson: More on the south side there’s another wall too on that southern end too.
Mayor Laufenburger: There’s also a sound barrier right on 212.
Kate Aanenson: Correct on 212. Correct.
Councilman McDonald: And then just to follow up on the south part of the property are you
aware of any engineering challenges that would be down there?
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
25
Paul Oehme: Wetland mitigation, I know that’s going to be a challenge with the stubbing in the
street at Galpin in it’s current location that’s shown there. I know there’s, based upon some of
the comments we’ve received from the property owners I know there’s some high water, ground
water table issues there that we’ll have to take a look at and try to address under this
development as well so those two things and wetland setbacks. Buffer areas along some of the
properties on the south, I think it’s going to be challenging as well to meet those, our ordinance.
Councilman McDonald: Okay so as this thing moves forward and we get more detailed
engineering information it could turn out that a lot of these lots are just not buildable.
Paul Oehme: Again I mean if, until we see some drawings we can’t really comment too much on
that.
Councilman McDonald: Okay, thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilmember Tjornhom, yep.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Thank you Mr. Mayor. I just want to say welcome to everybody
tonight. I am, I appreciate the staff reports and I will appreciate listening to the Lennar, Mr.
Lennar or the Lennar company and what they have proposed but what I really am looking
forward to is hearing what you are proposing. I think that this is a time for all of us to walk
through this development together. I’ve enjoyed talking to several residents and just hearing
your thoughts and your concerns and suggestions about how to make this development
something that’s going to be impactful in a positive way for everybody. You know we talk about
what the impact’s going to be on the environment and we talk about what the impact’s going to
be on traffic. We talk about the impact of all sorts of different things that are happening with this
but I think that you know tonight’s the time that we talk about what’s the livable and lifestyle
impacts of all of you and your neighborhoods and so I really am looking forward to hearing your
suggestions. I know that in the PUD when it talks about it and it explains what it is Kate, one of
the statements that kind of jumps out at me all the time is the fact that the City has the
expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly high quality and sensitive
proposal and that really means a lot I think to all of us because that’s what we’re all looking for
and what we’re trying to create so what, can you give me some boundaries Kate as to what that
means.
Kate Aanenson: I would say in this circumstance the fact that you’re getting the almost 95 acres
to the west. A significant opportunity to make Lake Ann wooded all the way around is a big
factor in that.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: High quality, yes.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
26
Kate Aanenson: High quality yep. I mean it’s a unique piece of property where people can
walk. I think if you look at what we did with the RLM zoning district up on Fox Woods, those
people have that nice trail to walk through and that was also compressed some of those smaller
lots and provided an opportunity to preserve some woods and create a nice trail to go into the
City’s property. The woods that we have up there so again I think it’s the same opportunity here
when you connect the trails. We have an opportunity for all people on the other side of Galpin
also to come through and enjoy the property. Walk around the lake. Walk downtown. We think
that’s a very unique opportunity.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And I know there’s some questions also with blending of
neighborhoods when it comes to lot size. When it comes to square footage of the homes. The
neighbors concerned about how that’s going to look. What kind of, what can we do to kind of
help that process also or make them blend? Do we have any way we can help them blend?
Kate Aanenson: Yep so that’s a great question. Again one of the things that we talked about
with Lennar early on was the transition of the buffers. Trying to create those buffers. There’s
some significant trees on the south and on the north. Retaining wall aside that we’d want to
preserve those to make those work. We have places all over the city where we have different lot
sizes. Sometimes those homes are on smaller lots but they’re higher value so there’s a lot of
different ways to look at that. How that blends together. Again don’t know if all those lots are
going to fit. We haven’t seen that detail yet but understand the issue. Certainly again we’ve
asked the developer if this project was to move forward or if that’s what they chose to do that
they would work with those neighbors. I’d also like to add that when those subdivisions went in,
both Ashling Meadows and Royal Oaks, the wetland standards were a lot different. I know we
heard anecdotally that people have sump pumps. They’re next to the wetland there and the way
we treat wetlands today is drastically different of how much they have to manage the stormwater
is such a higher capacity than when those subdivisions went in so that will certainly be addressed
too.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Because I think that I, you know one of my goals when I see this, it’s
our opportunity to create just a really, you know we talk about Lake Ann, the park being a real
gem and taking this development and turning it into a gem and so it’s something that the
community’s proud of and it’s desirable for people to live in and to you know give us something
once again to brag about so I’m hoping that we can work with the developer to kind of make sure
he sees that vision. That it is something unique and something that is worthy of having the
address of Chanhassen.
Mayor Laufenburger: Any other questions or comments at this time? Councilmember Ryan I
think you had your hand up.
Councilwoman Ryan: I did but I’ll wait to hear from the developer and then follow up with
questions then.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
27
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay you’re certainly welcome to do that. Mr. Campion did you have a
question?
Councilman Campion: Yeah one more question. Kate I think this is for you. I’d seen some
commentary where, and it kind of goes off of Councilman McDonald was talking about with the
street connections up on the north side. They complained about a lack of signage there you
know where those streets were stubs exist. Is that something that, that should have been there
and wasn’t or?
Kate Aanenson: I think we started doing that a number of years after those subdivisions went in.
If it’s a stub street I would assume that it would go through in the future, yeah.
Mayor Laufenburger: What signage? Are you referring to a sign that says this street will go
through in the future? Is that what you’re saying?
Councilman Campion: Essentially yeah, or there’s, yes. It’s potential, a potential connection in
the future.
Mayor Laufenburger: Yep. Any other questions at this time?
Councilman Campion: Not at the time no.
Mayor Laufenburger: Kate just I want to clarify a couple things before we ask the developer to
come forward. You said that, or Mr. Oehme said that the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed
District has weighed in on this concept PUD. Is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: And what they, what have they said about?
Kate Aanenson: They liked the preservation area. The density transfer was.
Mayor Laufenburger: So they’re speaking in general about…
Kate Aanenson: Correct. They’re not weighing in on…
Mayor Laufenburger: Preserve the area around Lake Ann and Lake Lucy.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. How about the DNR? Have they done that as well?
Kate Aanenson: Yes, the DNR also weighed in on that.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
28
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. But the DNR, they also, they weighed in and said we favor this but
they would be part of the jurisdictional review once we get a more detailed preliminary plat is
that correct?
Kate Aanenson: Correct. I did talk to the regional person from the DNR over this area and just
reviewed our PUD ordinance and how it works and they thought this was a very good, favorable
approach to preserve all the woods.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Mr. Oehme you haven’t spoken about this but certainly one of the
things that I’ve heard from neighbors is relative to a concern about the volume of traffic that this
development would generate. Have you done a traffic analysis including potentially upwards of
200 residences in this area? Have you done this traffic analysis on Galpin? And if so how, make
us feel comfortable that you and your work has been done properly.
Paul Oehme: So thank you Mayor, City Council members. So in conjunction with the Galpin
Boulevard study that was recently completed this year.
Mayor Laufenburger: By the way what was the purpose of that study for people that may not be
familiar with it?
Paul Oehme: Sure. The City and Carver County jointly completed a Galpin Boulevard study
which looked at potentially transferring the jurisdiction of Galpin Boulevard from Carver County
over to the City of Chanhassen in the future. We wanted to look at the feasibility of that. The
costs. What needed to be done, completed with Galpin Boulevard to bring it up to our standards
because right now it’s a rural section road. Poor shoulders. Intersections that really need to be
improved so we looked at all those. All that information. We also looked at potential
development that could take place along Galpin in the area as well that would impact traffic or
add to traffic along Galpin so that was part of that Galpin Boulevard study and it took I think the
City about 6 months to complete that. We just recently finished that up.
Mayor Laufenburger: Do you recall what’s the average daily traffic on Galpin today? Do you
recall?
Paul Oehme: I do have that here. So it varies. So as you would think there’s a lot more traffic
to the south of Galpin Boulevard. Right today south of 78th Street. That little section between
78th Street and Highway 5. It’s about 10,000 trips per day but as you go north from there it drops
off significantly. Say up by Wynsong there’s about, actually that was in 2040 so yeah, so south
of 78th Street it’s 8,700 today. Up by Wynsong it’s about 2,700.
Mayor Laufenburger: Today?
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
29
Paul Oehme: Today, yeah. Trips per day so which for a two lane rural section of road, that’s not
too significant. As we’ve moved forward though we looked at 2040 data. Again assuming that
everything in the area would be developed and looking at potentially infill developments as well
too. We assumed for this particular development or piece the 188 acres we assumed 250 trips, or
250 units which is well above what the developer.
Mayor Laufenburger: But that takes into consideration the word infill. If there’s other infill
farther north on Galpin.
Paul Oehme: Correct, yeah I mean potentially some of those large lots were to subdivide or
divide you know there’d be.
Mayor Laufenburger: So what do you estimate the daily, average daily traffic to be after that?
Paul Oehme: So right again our traffic data that Kimley-Horn completed again right at Wynsong
the traffic goes up by a little. About 1,000 trips per day so, and we’re assuming that in 2040 or
you know when most of this development would potentially be completed that the Galpin
Boulevard project would come in shortly thereafter because we do have some concerns with
some topography that’s out there. Some of the intersections. We want to make some
intersection improvements. We wouldn’t expand the road to you know anything more than two
lanes but we want to add to maybe some left turn lanes at some of these intersections and other
intersection improvements such as roundabouts as well.
Mayor Laufenburger: But your analysis with Kimley-Horn for the purpose of anticipating the
turnback of the road from the County to the City incorporates things like curb and gutter for
stormwater management. Change of stop signs to potentially roundabouts. Mini roundabouts as
well as full roundabouts.
Paul Oehme: Yep.
Mayor Laufenburger: And also the addition of access points into the Galpin property to the east
is that correct?
Paul Oehme: That’s correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright.
Paul Oehme: It also looked at stormwater as well. We looked at if we’re urbanizing a roadway
how are we going to treat that water so we wanted to look at where that water would also be
treated.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay just to clarify Mr. Hoffman, you said the Park and Rec Commission
did weigh in on this and recommended something like the concept PUD where that land would
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
30
be, the density would be transferred to the west to preserve that 50 acres of tree stand and the
acreage around Lake Ann and Lake Lucy right.
Todd Hoffman: That’s correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: So where’s the 94 acres come if it’s only going to be preserving 50? Is
there 40 acres in that wetland?
Todd Hoffman: There is. It’s a very large wetland.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So Ms. Aanenson just to clarify that, if the developer chooses to go
forward with the concept PUD he buys, he or she. He. It’s the corporate he okay.
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: He buys this land from the estate and then do they just deed it to us? Do
they just give it to us for a dollar or is it free?
Kate Aanenson: No. That’s part of the process. So under the park dedication, as Mr. Hoffman
stated that they could probably get 9 acres. I think his preference would probably be to take the
shoreline.
Mayor Laufenburger: But 9 acres under the subdivision.
Kate Aanenson: Correct or under.
Mayor Laufenburger: Under the PUD as well?
Kate Aanenson: Well under the PUD, that’s where you would negotiate to say we’d like to, in
order for you to negotiate what you want to preserve.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So let’s say we take the position of we want 50 acres of the
shoreline and the woodlands and you’re not going to build on the wetlands so you might as well
give that to us too so we end up with 94 acres.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Of City property.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: And how much does that cost us? Dollars.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
31
Kate Aanenson: Well at this point it’s.
Mayor Laufenburger: That’s subject to negotiation.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah subject to negotiation. The intent is to recoup that on the other side.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright.
Kate Aanenson: The value.
Mayor Laufenburger: So we get that land by giving some potential concessions on the other
side.
Kate Aanenson: That’s right. Okay. Alright. Any other questions for staff? At this time I’d
like to hear from the developer. Would you identify yourself please.
Joe Jablonski: Good evening Mr. Mayor, members of the council. My name is Joe Jablonski
representing Lennar Corporation this evening.
Mayor Laufenburger: In what capacity do you represent them Mr. Jablonski?
Joe Jablonski: As the Director of Land Development and Entitlement.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Joe Jablonski: I want to start by thanking staff. I think the thoroughness of their presentations
will help limit my presentation to a relatively short conversation but there are a few things I just
wanted to highlight or point out to kind of supplement what has already been discussed. One of
the things kind of going back to the beginning of how this starts, the property, the current
property owners went through the decision to list the property for sale. Lennar Corporation was
lucky to be selected as the purchaser of that property which is why it kind of comes to this point
of where we are today. What we’re doing now for our standpoint is going through our proper
due diligence to figure out what we can, what the expectations for the property are. Some of the
other things that we have been doing in addition to the wetland delineation. We have been doing
some soil investigation work on the property. Part of that is how we start to formulate or figure
out what some of the requirements for stormwater are and how we go about meeting those. It’s
kind of this building process of working our way up to a preliminary plat and making business
decisions to get there to figure out you know what the feasibility of moving the project forward
for us is. And a big part of that, that I’m hoping that we can discuss and get some direction from
you folks on, recognizing that it’s not a vote but what we’re really interested in is getting good
feedback from you folks on which type of plan or which scenario you’re the most comfortable
with. I think staff did a great job of pointing out the differences between the two plans. I think
one of the things in our PUD application recognizes the fact that it is a special property and I
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
32
think that we’ve recognized that with the opportunity to preserve or look at the preservation of as
much open space as we have. The exchange for that is a little bit higher density in some of the
upland and doing that with some smaller lots or some cluster style lots. The, one of the
advantages or one of the things that comes with that is also the opportunity to meet some of your
housing goals for diversity. The City does have the opportunity here to, each one of the different
lot sizes would bring a different product type including on the south end more of an empty nester
type of single level villa which is a very under served type of product in the market today. Not
just in Chanhassen but also in the Twin Cities in general. So as we’ve continued to think about
this and continue to talk about this, you know I think some of the comments on the north end are
very valid. It’s certainly challenging but again at this point we’re at a pretty high level of
conceptual thinking and we’re really trying to dial in, is the City willing to support the density
transfer approach or is it really the desire, the direction of the City to go more in the direction of
traditional lot sizes throughout knowing that based on some of the various comment letters and
things that it appears from an environmental standpoint that the density transfer option certainly
has a lot less environmental impact. But you know I certainly will be here and certainly will be
available to answer any questions and would be happy to do so but you know I think it’s
important to recognize that while we are looking for an option for smaller lots, the maximum
density on this property could be significantly higher following the RSF guidelines of up to 4
units an acre. Even averaging just on the property we’re using we’re at about 2.26 I think is
what I remember calculating that out so, and that I think that was across about 89 acres which is
shown on the plan in front of you right now. So I think we’ve done a lot of things to try to meet
different goals of the City and try to really start the conversations of how does the City want to
go about developing this in a way or helping give us direction on what you want to see and what
we want to do knowing that the next step for us will be a big one in making the decision of
taking your feedback from tonight and starting to prepare hopefully to start getting us to the next
level where we start getting into the preliminary plat type of drawings and that level of detail. So
with that I guess I would be happy to answer any questions. I didn’t talk much specifically about
housing types and that.
Mayor Laufenburger: We have pretty good pictures of that in the.
Joe Jablonski: Yes there’s pictures in the packet.
Mayor Laufenburger: And the pictures that you, that are in the packet with the description of the
floorplans, the sizes, things like that, does that represent the full spectrum of homes that Lennar
builds?
Joe Jablonski: It does not.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Joe Jablonski: It represents I would say a supplemental package of what we would envision at
least initially starting with here.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
33
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Joe Jablonski: And certainly I can point you in directions of you know if you want to go see any
of them we have them built in several locations locally as well but.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Before we open this to public comments are you prepared to
answer some questions from council at this time?
Joe Jablonski: Absolutely.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilmember Ryan I think you said you had some questions of
him is that correct?
Councilwoman Ryan: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: Yeah please go ahead.
Councilwoman Ryan: Thank you Mayor. Thank you for being here again. I’m a little
disappointed. I was looking forward to having a Plan C. You presented at the Planning
Commission. Heard from you know as the Mayor said about 22 people. I know staff has given
you or likely given you feedback along, over the past couple weeks and when we got our packet
I was anticipating as Chairman Aller from the Planning Commission said, it might not be Plan A
or B but maybe a Plan C and so I know that’s not expected of you because it is just a concept
review. However it would have been nice to see that some of the considerations that the
residents shared with you were taken seriously to present any kind of option C. Specifically you
know just going through the property, you know I can share those comments for later. But to
come back tonight and just have option A or B presented to us again was, and you talk about
doing your due diligence with soil correction. Was there a thought of coming back with a Plan C
or not?
Joe Jablonski: Well Councilmember Ryan what I would say is we are, or we are working on a
revision or potentially a little bit more refined plan but at the same time we really need to get the
direction on which way we’re going before we spend too much time on that because while we
can get more information on the north and it might change how the road connection and layouts
are affected, it really doesn’t affect the concept of whether we’re going to do density transfer or
not. And so I.
Councilwoman Ryan: And so when you talk about looking for direction you’re specifically
meaning whether or not you’re going to come back with just the straight forward residential plan
or it’s going to be the density transfer. That’s really what the, when you talk about direction
that’s what you’re looking for.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
34
Joe Jablonski: That is item number one that we would like some feedback on for sure. You
know if we want to get into other things like where the road connections are. How the street stub
and all that stuff, that’s a little bit more level of detail than actually we’re looking for at this
point. We really want to dial in you know what is staff, or what is the City comfortable with or
what direction are we really looking at here and.
Mayor Laufenburger: Councilmember Ryan, I think that if I may just for a second. Clearly I
heard you say Mr. Jablonski that you have a decision to make about whether or not you move
forward. Is that correct?
Joe Jablonski: Or how we move forward.
Mayor Laufenburger: Or how you move forward.
Joe Jablonski: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: And that decision is based on, you talk about feedback from the City
Council. To me I interpret that not only now but in the dialogue that I’ve had with even with you
is, you want to hear what these members of the council. These 5 members of the council who
are likely in a position to vote approval or disapproval of some preliminary in the future, you
want to hear what we have to say about what you’ve shown us. Is that correct?
Joe Jablonski: Correct. Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: So you’ve shown us 2 pieces of artwork and you’re saying which of these
pieces of artwork do you like best. Not to say that this road is going to be exactly this place or
this lot is going to be that size but you’re looking for general views from these council members
as to what do you like about the plan. Either plan or what do you not like about either plan.
Joe Jablonski: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Joe Jablonski: This is an information gathering process for us. As Ms. Aanenson pointed out the
concept plan isn’t required but it’s an opportunity for us to get, start gathering as much
information as we can to start making the business decisions on how to move forward.
Mayor Laufenburger: So you’ve heard from the public. You’ve heard from the public at the
Planning Commission. I don’t know if you’ve seen any of the comments in the packet so you
know some of the general sentiment that’s coming from the public. Now you want to hear from
this 5 member group who ultimately probably is most significant in your decision making
process. Would you say that’s true?
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
35
Joe Jablonski: That’s correct, yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so I just wanted to clarify that Councilmember Ryan. It’s certainly
your perspective that you wanted a Plan C but I think a Plan C is out there and that Plan C will
be governed by, to some extent by what we have to say tonight. That’s my view so
Councilmember Ryan your turn.
Councilwoman Ryan: And I, I believe that what you initially said that you want either Plan A or
Plan B is the truth and because with your continued commentary you also said that you’re being,
you know generous or flexible in terms of the lot sizes and that hasn’t been the feedback from
the residents that, I don’t know how my fellow councilmembers will say but that isn’t my
feedback. That I think that this plan option B is a viable option based on the questions that Mr.
McDonald, Councilman McDonald asked our city engineer about the viability of the 90 foot lots
up there. How can we say yes, I think that Plan B is a viable option when we don’t know with
based on the slope and the retaining walls if those, you know those lots are going to be
something, you know something that’s going to be buildable. I’m concerned about the lots. You
know the road extension because of traffic safety so you, you know Mr. Mayor when you, I
know that there’s an Option C out there but my concern is that tonight we’re being presented
with making a decision on whether it’s Option A or Option B and I don’t think, I don’t think
that’s really the choice that we should be asked to make because I don’t think either one of them
are concepts that I could comfortably move forward with.
Mayor Laufenburger: Please. Please. Let this dialogue occur. Councilmember Ryan, there is
no decision. Unless a motion is made, and I don’t think it will be made, there’s no decision of A
or B tonight. The only thing that the council members are asked to do tonight is to make
comments to the developer and city staff. What do you like? What do you don’t like? What
would you like to see? What would you not like to see? That’s our responsibility. Our
responsibility is not to choose A or B tonight. I’m not choosing A or B tonight because I don’t
think it’s A or B is the option. I think there’s something else out there that U.S. Home
Corporation, after listening to all of us they’ll come back with something else. That’s my belief.
Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Yeah I guess I want to just weigh in on this a little bit. I’ve been
involved in this a lot longer than Councilmember Ryan has. This whole idea goes back to
Walmart and one of the things that the City learned out of that was that we needed an idea better
from the developer as to what they were looking for and what their questions were. That’s why
we came up with this concept review. It was never meant to be a final plat or a final plan. It was
only meant to give you a generalized concept and the reason for that is, is as I went through
earlier there are a lot of detailed engineering information that has got to be gathered and that
costs money and it doesn’t do the developer any good to try to get information based upon the
RSF plan when that information is probably not going to totally transfer over to doing something
with the PUD so that’s why we put it together was to let them pose the questions. Give us a
concept. I do not expect a detailed drawing of what this development looks like. I just need a
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
36
general idea to decide whether or not I want to say well I’m not in favor of a density transfer but
you can do the RSF. Go ahead and develop all the land to the fullest extent you can and good
luck. That’s not the purpose of being here tonight. It’s to try to understand what our options
would be so I think it’s a little disingenuous to berate the developer because there is no Plan C.
The City by it’s own standards does not require a Plan C. That is council’s responsibility to give
the go ahead to move forward and say okay, we’ve got a general idea. Go out and spend some
money now and let’s get some details so that we can make some decisions as to whether these
lots are buildable or whether or not we want the road to go through. What’s it going to take to
get the road through because if it gets too onerous and too expensive as far as the city, because
again at some point we’re going to have to maintain these roads. We have to maintain any kind
of a retaining wall or those kind of things. We need to make a decision if that’s something we
want to take on or if that really is just not something that is feasible that the City should be doing
and we need to look at other alternatives. As the Mayor has said, this whole thing as to whether
a road goes through on the north, that’s a long way from being decided and there’s a lot more
information we need. It’s nice to see this concept and it’s a great thing but as I pointed out it’s
lines on a flat piece of paper and as Mr. Oehme, our engineer said the reality is when you get out
there and you start looking at the topography and you try to put a road into something as
challenging as this, it just may not be feasible so I think that’s where we’re at. It’s not to come
here and berate the developer for saying where’s your plan C. Where’s the detail? That’s not
what we invited the developer here for and that was never the purpose of doing this. Again after
Walmart what we learned was, City Council needed a lot more information before we could
decide whether or not it’s even a good idea to go forward or not. That’s what we’re here for
tonight is to make that decision as to how do we go forward. What’s our marching orders to City
staff based upon the information that we’ve received.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, Councilmember Ryan do you have other questions or
clarifications you want to make? Go ahead.
Councilwoman Ryan: Just there’s a couple. One I know I was not on council but I didn’t have
my head in the sand either so I’m aware of what’s going on. Second of all me sharing my
disappointment in not having a Plan C is not to berate or embarrass or discredit the work that
you’ve done or Lennar as a developer. It is simply my request as a council member representing
the people in this room. The people at home that the Chairman Aller who said that he would
like, based on the feedback from the commission a Plan C so all I’m doing is expressing that I
would have liked to see a Plan C. That’s it.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Do you have other questions or comments at this time for the
developer?
Councilwoman Ryan: Not at this time, thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Anybody else questions for the developer? Mr. Campion.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
37
Councilman Campion: I have one more question for Mr. Jablonski. So from speaking to some
of the residents they were asking or expressed interest in possibly purchasing a 10 acre lot on the
north side and the question is, I know you can’t answer that. You know whether that would be
done or not but if, and so it would be a 10 acre lot that is on the north side that is relatively
abutting the Lake Lucy shore there. If neighbors had interest with that and you happened to go
forward with the PUD concept is that something that Lennar would entertain? The potential of
selling off 10 acres to neighbors for their own preservation.
Joe Jablonski: It’s something that we would look at. I was contacted by one of the homeowners.
We haven’t had a chance to connect. I understand he’s out of town but we plan to do so when he
returns so.
Councilman Campion: Okay.
Joe Jablonski: Need more details on that and, but it’s something that we would consider sure.
Councilman Campion: Alright.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Campion anything else?
Councilman Campion: Not at this time.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Laufenburger: Sure Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Let me ask my question now. We’ve talked a little bit about some of
these challenges. Are you up for working with city staff if you know part of our direction is we
would like to see things change a little bit? I mean is that part of the negotiations going forward
in your own mind?
Joe Jablonski: Yeah I think so. Again I think you described it pretty well that this is a, at this
point a fairly unrefined two dimensional drawing that we will continue working on. Getting,
continuing to build on direction and continuing to build on feedback on what the, not only on
what some of the desires of the neighborhood and feedback from council and staff is but you
know as we continue to gather more information and field studies and things like that on what
we can and can’t do out there as well.
Councilman McDonald: Okay thank you.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
38
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Jablonski part of the packet that the council members received was I
think about a 13 page document that represents comments from city departments like the
planning department. Engineering comments. Water resources comments. Landscaping. All of
those things. Are you familiar with that document?
Joe Jablonski: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Is there anything, are you prepared to work with city staff to
resolve these?
Joe Jablonski: Absolutely. We’ve done so on many other projects.
Mayor Laufenburger: Where have you done what you called empty nester homes? That would
be like the villa homes. Have you done any of those near Chanhassen?
Joe Jablonski: We have. We currently have an active community in Minnetonka.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Joe Jablonski: That’s fairly close by. It’s on the site of the old Minnetonka Golf Club so right
off of.
Mayor Laufenburger: Is that Smithtown Bay Road?
Joe Jablonski: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: In what’s Yellowstone is on the south side of that I think, yeah.
Joe Jablonski: Yes and we’ve also done them in, we have an active community in Cottage Grove
right now with that type of product. We have an active community in Rogers on the north side
of town. One in Otsego. It’s a very well received type of product with the growing empty nester
demographic for sure.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Regarding your purchase option from the estate or from
Comerica’s representatives, are you at liberty to talk at all about the contents of that?
Joe Jablonski: I guess it depends on what the question is. You know I don’t want to get in.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay well let me ask, let me ask my question and then you can decide
whether or not you want to share.
Joe Jablonski: Okay.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
39
Mayor Laufenburger: Is there anything in that contract that talks about desires that the estate or
the heirs have about this property?
Joe Jablonski: Well I guess I would say first and foremost the estate desires to sell it.
Mayor Laufenburger: Hence their invitation to all of the bidders.
Joe Jablonski: Correct.
Mayor Laufenburger: Right okay.
Joe Jablonski: And there is some acknowledgement that the heirs would like the opportunity to
work with staff and/or the City to come up with any opportunity for theming throughout the
neighborhood but that is not the direction that we will be taking as Lennar.
Mayor Laufenburger: When you say theming what do you mean?
Joe Jablonski: Any kind of opportunity to recognize the prior property owner.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. So they have asked for that but you have not made.
Joe Jablonski: That is not.
Mayor Laufenburger: That’s not a direction you’re.
Joe Jablonski: That’s not our requirement.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Joe Jablonski: That is something that they will perhaps approach the City on.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Alright. Okay. Well with that Mr. Jablonski get ready to listen
okay.
Joe Jablonski: Sure.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alrighty, thanks. Alright. Oh sure, just a moment Mr. Jablonski.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: No, no, you can.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay go ahead. Councilmember Tjornhom yeah.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
40
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Before we start public comment, because we are here tonight to give
our opinion whether think this property should be an RSF or a PUD, if it would be okay with you
Mr. Mayor if when people do come to the podium and speak, I’d like to hear their opinion on
what they think it should be. Should it be an RSF or a PUD?
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. Let me also say this. I mentioned this briefly. I would
simply ask that you be concise. Remember that you’re speaking to the council. You’re not
speaking to the audience or to anybody who may be watching at home. You’re speaking to the
council. Address your comments here. Be respectful but also understand that the council has
seen emails and have had phone conversations. Talked personally with many of you so we have
a little bit of the flavor already. However I think it’s important that those of you that have not
had an opportunity to address either the Planning Commission or the City Council be given an
opportunity to do so, so with that and I don’t know how long we’ll go on this but I’m going to do
my very best to manage this in a respectful and an efficient way so is there somebody would like
to break the seal. Alright, I just would ask, state your name and address and if you don’t mind
stating somewhere in your comments a preference for the concept PUD or the RSF as
Councilmember Tjornhom so your name and address please.
Matthew Myers: Matthew Myers, 7421 Windmill Drive on the south side of the property. I’ll
give you a Plan C. The 41 acres that the park board wants, could the City buy that from the
estate. Not transfer the 40 homes and then let Lennar buy the rest of the property and build what
would be 150. So not do the transfer of the density. Let them do regular density and 150 homes
generates a lot of property tax and over the years we just, as a City buy the 41 acres for the park
and not do the transfer.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright.
Matthew Myers: So there’s a Plan C.
Mayor Laufenburger: So do you have any preference.
Matthew Myers: Yes less density. Well I don’t know which one is the less density.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright.
Matthew Myers: Which is a PUD the less density? RSF? Yeah, bottom line less density is what
we’d like.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Myers. Anybody else would like to speak?
Brian Strauss: Hello my name is Brian Strauss and I reside at 6840 Lucy Ridge Lane. I would
just like to add to my comments. My wife and I had written a letter to the council. A fairly long
letter and I’d just like to raise a few additional points. I’m appreciative of the recognition that
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
41
the notice may not have been precise. I think it’s important that we have proper governance and
transparency. I will note that my current notice got here on Wednesday so still within 10 days
but I appreciate that. It’s unclear to me Mr. Mayor, I know you’ve been asking about whether
the land can be developed as is and it’s currently zoned rural residential is it not? So not a single
variance is needed to do that option. Is that right?
Kate Aanenson: That’s inconsistent with the guiding of the Comprehensive Plan. You have to
go back and look at, how the property was being appraised. The property’s being appraised by
the County Assessor based on the ultimate capacity of the land so right now if you look up the
appraisal value I believe it’s about $20 million dollars approximately. And that’s based on the
fact that they can subdivide that property. So if you were to say now you can only develop at
one acre lots, you’ve done a taking. And I’ll ask the city attorney on that question but I would
assume that the property owner would probably object to that.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Strauss I appreciate your comments.
Brian Strauss: Yeah.
Mayor Laufenburger: I just would ask that you make them in the form of your preference or
your presentation to us okay.
Brian Strauss: Okay. My preference is neither A or B.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Brian Strauss: From my research the land is currently zoned rural residential and there’s a
statement in there, at least based on my research, that the minimum lot sizes for that are 2.5 acres
per home. I’m not a land developer but that’s based on my research. I’m not in favor of either A
or B. I’d point to some of the issues that I wrote about in my letter. The connections to the
northern neighborhood as well as the size of the buffers in the north and the south. I’d
recommend an Option C be developed where there’s lower density. More environmentally
friendly and connections only out to Galpin so okay.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you for being concise, thank you Brian. And thank you for your
letter. All 35 pages by the way.
Brian Strauss: I would encourage everyone to read it.
Mayor Laufenburger: Anybody else wishing to address the council that hasn’t had an
opportunity to speak to the Planning Commission. We’re not going to bite you so just state your
name and address please.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
42
Greg Andrews: Hi I’m Greg Andrews. I live at 6895 Ruby Lane. Lived there a little over 5
years.
Mayor Laufenburger: Nice to meet you face to face Greg.
Greg Andrews: Good to talk to you on the phone Denny. So first point is all about protecting
Lake Ann. So I just question the water study on north Lake Lucy that it may, you may want to
wait and do it in 2018 because I know my neighbors in Lake Lucy Ridge they built a dock last
year and now it’s sunk in green muck and weeds and they can’t even use it for boats and it got
that way after that development got put in up to the north so. I guess I’m concerned about the
same thing happening to Lake Ann because this much development, and I know a lot of
protections are, everyone’s going to try to make but things happen, is I’d hate to see that happen
over there on a lake that my son and his cub scout pack 409 use and a lot of people use. It truly
is the gem of Chanhassen so I know people will try to protect it but there’s a lot of things that
happen in a wetland and overflows, et cetera. Excessive rains. Excessive snows. I watch the
footage of the people living to the south that, when there’s a lot of snow and a lot of runoff
they’re running their sump pumps and they can’t even keep up so that stuff can also go into Lake
Ann too. A lot of phosphorus. A lot of problems that can happen. So we live kind of on a
natural ridge that kind of connects up areas below us to Lake Lucy Ridge and then to Lake Ann.
Where deer kind of go through in a natural trail. If you follow that back. I’m jealous of the one
guy who said he trespassed on Prince’s property. I’ve never done that and to follow that trail is,
you know it just makes me think what’s going to happen to all the wildlife because the plan, and
even in the PUD plan is, it’s just going to put up houses and a wall right there and all those deer
that we’ve enjoyed for all those years and I don’t know about all the other animals that are back
there too. I don’t know, nobody really talks about that in the plan but I know those deer are
going to have to go find someplace else to live when this happens because their natural trail is
going to be gone. Alright. So my second point, and last point is about the stub streets. Is,
wasn’t aware that they were intended to connect through. When I first moved here, corporate
relo, lived on a busy street. I went out to the store and bought a big yellow cone that said
Caution, Children at Play. Every afternoon I’d come home from work. I’d throw that in the
middle of the street. I haven’t had to do that in Ashling Meadows so I feel really safe for my
kids there. If they obey the rules but I’d be very, very concerned that another 90 homes would
connect up with our neighborhood there so you know there’s different proposals for different
types of houses and not connecting. I grew up in California where hey, there’s millions and
millions of people in some neighborhoods. Instead of connecting the roads that I don’t know the
reason for connecting roads. I don’t know if it’s safety or not or just the design.
Mayor Laufenburger: In California or here?
Greg Andrews: No here.
Mayor Laufenburger: Oh okay.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
43
Greg Andrews: Yeah, I don’t know what the desire for connecting them is but I know that where
I lived is, there were certain neighborhoods that were built after ones. They weren’t roads
through but there was a space that emergency vehicles could get through. It was kind of like a,
just almost like a park that you could drive through in an emergency but the neighborhoods
weren’t connected at all. You could drive through them but only emergency vehicles could so
just an option where you’re not really connecting up the neighborhoods but if it’s around safety
there’s another option. Okay but, sorry. Just want to make sure I’m making all my points here.
So I guess I know that Lennar is trying to monetize the property there but to try to shove a bunch
of, you know 90 more homes and connect up with our neighborhoods, I’m just concerned that
it’s going to be a major thoroughfare. Our neighborhood as well as Lake Lucy Ridge so that’s
my major concern. For people like me who have young kids who want to ride their bikes, run
out in the street, et cetera.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you Mr. Andrews.
Greg Andrews: Thank you. Anyone else?
Jessica Hansgen: I wasn’t going to stand up but I have to. So my name’s Jessica Hansgen and I
live at 7555 Walnut Curve. On that horseshoe down to the south of the proposed development.
Mayor Laufenburger: You said Jessica what?
Jessica Hansgen: Hansgen.
Mayor Laufenburger: Hansgen?
Jessica Hansgen: I don’t know should I tell you how to spell my name?
Mayor Laufenburger: No I’ll do it phonetically.
Jessica Hansgen: Hansgen. Yep.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Jessica Hansgen: So I know Councilwoman Tjornhom you had asked earlier how we spend time
in the community and you wanted to hear from us. I also have 2 young children who live in that
horseshoe area and we already have a hard enough time crossing Galpin to use the parks that we
have. Thanks to the boy scouts who put the flags at every 4 way stop. We still have to dodge
cars and I’ve seen the road proposals for the roundabouts on Galpin in preparation, I’m assuming
in preparation for this development and it, it breaks my heart that we live that close to a park and
we can’t use it. We also spend a lot of time going down the hill up towards Longacres counting
deer in the field that you just talked about. Our favorite thing to do right now is when there’s
sirens on Highway 5 count how many coyotes we think are howling back in, I think we’re up to
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
44
about, we think maybe 10 right now. Different howls based on what we hear back in the berm
and my property doesn’t back up to the proposed development but my neighbors in front do and
we use that area so I just wanted to speak on how we use the area and use the, sorry I’m nervous.
I don’t know why. Use the community and the space that we have. And I also spend a lot of
money at Chaska Community Center so it’d be great to be able to have some sort of area within
Chanhassen that we could also put our own money towards to be a community center similar to
that.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Ms. Hansgen.
Cheree Theisen: Hello, my name is Cheree Theisen. I live at 2072 Majestic Way. I’m in the
Royal Oaks development. I was one of the very first people to go into that development and
build my custom home. Prior to building it I had checked out the school district which was a
priority and then the small time community that we had because I lived there when I graduated
from school.
Mayor Laufenburger: How long did you say, how long have you been at Majestic Way?
Cheree Theisen: I’ve been there since 1995.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay so 23 years. Okay.
Cheree Theisen: And I bought it for that very same reason. I went down there. It used to be a
turkey farm and I was able to pick out the lot that I wanted. I had a beautiful and still have a
beautiful back yard of nothing but woods. We treasure the turkeys coming into our
neighborhood. The coyotes, like she mentioned, howling and carrying on just on the other side
of the fence from where I live. And the deer. All of the animals. And plus we have a very quiet
neighborhood. We have small children that get to play in the street and have fun but we are just
small. You know I go out to Galpin to turn, you can’t get off Majestic Way. You’ve got people
coming from Longacres. You’ve got, if there’s cars stopped at the 4 way stop further south on
Galpin, by the time one comes you can’t get out because the other one’s on it’s way and you sit
there for quite a long time. I can’t imagine what’s going to happen to us when we bring in 190
some houses. I mean you guys are trying to put 10 pounds in a 5 pound bag. I have a big yard.
I’ve got a beautiful yard. I looked up every single one of your houses online. You have
beautiful back yards with wonderful trees. Wonderful trees. Mine.
Mayor Laufenburger: Did you put a camera back there?
Cheree Theisen: I have pictures of them all with me. But I will say I get to look at my next 10
years or whatever, maybe just one now, looking at a fricking clear cut. I mean go figure. I put a
lot of money. I was a single mom. I still am. I put everything into my business and my home
for my children and I love, and I am so disappointed and for all the same reasons. The traffic.
The, my house actually the basement caved in on me because of the amount of water that would
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
45
come off from the hill. It froze in the wintertime and pushed my basement in. I had to have it
dug out. Jacked up. Steel beams put in. State of Minnesota came out to do the structural work
on it and I know that there’s other houses in my neighborhood that have had water problems. I
have 2 sump pumps and I have a generator that has the cord ready to go the minute we lose our
power because my basement is flooded more than once but I still choose to live there. But not
for long if this keeps up.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you for your comments Cheree. Welcome.
Barb Klick: Good evening. I’m Barb Klick and I reside at 7116 Utica Lane in Chanhassen for
31 years and I get to use Lake Ann almost every day of my life and I’ve been blessed. So the
first moral of the story here as a 40 year old nurse, 40 years. I wish I was 40 years old. 40 years
I’ve been a nurse. Please if Prince would only have some estate planning in advance, health care
directive things would be easier so please everybody do that. I think that.
Mayor Laufenburger: Very well said. It’s a little late for Prince but it’s not too late for all of us.
Barb Klick: Everybody else. We live here and we’re so proud of this town and what Todd
Gerhardt and Todd Hoffman, is he not the best director of parks and recs you’ve ever had. Right
here. This guy.
Mayor Laufenburger: He’s the best one that I’ve ever seen.
Barb Klick: Right here, this guy. And we’re here for the green space and we’re here for the
lakes and that’s why people keep rating us number 2 and number 1, number 5 and yet we don’t
have $20 million dollars and America’s a great country to live in and Lennar can buy this land so
maybe there’s some guide posts we could come up with around our green space and the things
that we value and maybe Lennar would be willing to work with us about saying we know that
you have a right to build but we really want to preserve the things that are near and dear and if
we had some guide posts to help maybe that would move this along. Thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Barb.
Cheree Theisen: I’ve got a footnote. I’ll come up with a few more here too.
Mayor Laufenburger: Recalling the witness.
Cheree Theisen: When I decided I wanted to build a house where I’m at I went to the City of
Chanhassen and I said okay, I’m right next to Prince’s property. He’s got a beautiful tree line. If
he sells that property what’s going to happen to that tree line? The City told me flat out they will
not take that out. They’ll never remove a natural tree line. Now granted that was 23 years ago
and a lot changes but that’s still disheartening.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
46
Mayor Laufenburger: Yeah. Cheree let me ask you a question. Do you have trees that are on
your property back there?
Cheree Theisen: No. That’s why. Most of our neighbors in our neighborhood, we have huge
open back yards with maybe one tree back there. I have the forest and so does my neighbors.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Cheree Theisen: They might have like, well my neighbor has a pool and landscape but for the
most part there isn’t a lot of trees in our neighborhood.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you Cheree.
Jon Hebeisen: Good evening.
Mayor Laufenburger: Good evening.
Jon Hebeisen: Jon Hebeisen, 2150 Majestic Way.
Mayor Laufenburger: Jon could I just stop you for a second?
Jon Hebeisen: Sure.
Mayor Laufenburger: I think you spoke at the Planning Commission didn’t you?
Jon Hebeisen: I did but I think that’s a made up rule.
Mayor Laufenburger: Say that again.
Jon Hebeisen: I think your rule is a made up rule, am I not right council?
Mayor Laufenburger: Well actually it’s a practice that I’ve been following for almost 4 years so
I’m not saying you can’t speak. I would just like to give, if anybody else who hasn’t spoken yet
so if you wouldn’t mind just taking a seat for a moment and we’ll give some time.
Jon Hebeisen: I was doing that.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you. Is there anybody else who has not yet spoken at the
Planning Commission that would like to speak at this time?
Jay Gerczak: Hi I’m Jay Gerczak and I live at 1941 Topaz Drive in Ashling Meadows and I
think we’ve heard enough about the environmental and the safety issues so you guys all get that.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
47
I’m here a little bit about the process and I know that tonight there was discussions about, that
you’re not voting on a plan.
Mayor Laufenburger: Right.
Jay Gerczak: We’re really kind of at a artist depiction level. But I’m in software development
and we start with an artist depiction of kind of what the future is going to be and then we work
down into the engineering and my concern is that if we’re saying conceptually that we agree to
one of these plans, it’s really giving the builder the notion that they’re headed in the right
direction and I think we’ve heard a lot of concerns tonight, in letters, at the Planning
Commission meeting which I did not receive a notice which you’ve addressed, and there’s
concerns and we want to see those concerns addressed in another concept view and I think that
was discussed tonight but I didn’t really hear maybe your viewpoints on the process of that
moving forward.
Mayor Laufenburger: Well let me speak to that Jay if I may. I tried to make it clear at the
beginning that there’s a sequence of steps that we’re going to follow which will conclude with
comments from the council to city staff and developer and then the developer will be able to hear
those comments in conjunction with the comments of the public. Through emails. City staff.
You saw me reference 13 pages of comments from city staff. It’s really up to the developer then
to, with all of that information decide if and how they choose to move forward. As you heard me
say before I don’t believe we’re approving A or B. I understand that the inclination would be
well if we say yes to B that means that’s the direction they’re going to go to or if we say yes to
A, that’s the direction they’re going to go through. But this is a, this is intended to be an iterative
process. Ultimately the developer decides or the potential developer decides if they feel like they
can work the economies the way they need to but those economies are governed by what they
hear from this council and from city staff on what we’re looking to see on this development so I
stated right up front. This can be a cumbersome process but it’s a deliberate process that we try
to follow to ensure that all views, all facts, all perspectives are heard so I’m sorry you weren’t
able to be at the Planning Commission. I hope that tonight turns out to be informative for you.
You have the last comment if you’d like. No, just the last work between you and I. Anything?
Jay Gerczak: Okay. Maybe I misunderstood because I thought that they’re really looking for
feedback on what concept to go with and so. And then I just would like to hear a little more on
so if they do come back you know when does the public get back involved and does it go back to
the planning committee. I was thinking of your slide that you had up there and back to the City
Council and how many iterations does that go through before something is finalized.
Mayor Laufenburger: Good. Those are good questions. I think you’ll get your answers tonight.
Somebody else?
Peter Polingo: I’m Peter Polingo, 1981 Topaz Drive.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
48
Mayor Laufenburger: Hello Peter.
Peter Polingo: Just following up on what Jay has to say Mr. Mayor. To keep it simple we’re
asking you to listen to the things we’re saying about not connecting the subdivisions. About
trying to build something that we can be proud of as a quality community and to make sure the
safety is fundamental and the congestion. Just keep it simple. That’s what we’re asking you to
do. Then we want you to come back and tell us what you think and then let us get back together
again. Okay?
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you Peter.
Peter Polingo: Thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: Appreciate your comments. Anybody else? Going once. Going twice.
Mr. Hebeisen, would you join us please.
Jon Hebeisen: Since you asked so nice. Jon Hebeisen, 2150 Majestic Way. I’m the guy that did
the trespassing by the way, with my sons for the last 16 years.
Mayor Laufenburger: Your secret’s safe with us Jon.
Jon Hebeisen: Statute of limitations has run. Two questions both rhetorical. Where is it written
that Lennar or whoever buys this property has to build 200 houses? That seems to be the
assumption we’re making here. 200 houses. Either on the big version we’re going to have it
near the water or we’re going to cram them all in. That’s the assumption. They don’t. Lennar is
an $8 billion dollar company. Not to demonize them but they’re an $8 billion dollar company.
They build, according to their own publicity they’re going to build 35,000 homes this year. It’s
not a big deal to Lennar. This is not a big deal. Do you think they care about Chanhassen? We
are .0057 percent, this development that they want to do of one year’s production and of course
this would be several years in building. They don’t care about Chanhassen and they don’t have
to care about Chanhassen. That’s your job. You guys got to care about Chanhassen. They’re
here to make money. We don’t need to conform to their business plan of allowing the Prince
heirs to monetize their property by selling 200 houses. I don’t buy the premise. Build 50 less.
50 less out of your 35,000 annual. They can do that. At what cost to them? Nothing. What do
we get from that? We maybe preserve these gems. These lakes. Maybe we don’t clear cut some
of the big woods. Can you believe we’re going to clear cut the big woods. So they can build
.0057 percent of one year’s houses. Do you think that’s a smart long term plan for the city of
Chanhassen that has the maple leaf? I don’t think so. Second rhetorical question. Why do you
think we get something for nothing? Why do you think, you said 94 acres. What’s the price?
Being implied being very little or nothing. Maybe a dollar. Free. It’s free. This is great. I can’t
believe it and you shouldn’t believe it either. If you’re going to get that land for free it’s going to
be on the backs of the rest of these people, including myself obviously. I heard the term, the
number 15,000 square foot lots bandied about. There’s some of those up on the north side and I
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
49
understand this plan is not etched in stone but it’s the only plan we’ve seen. We don’t have a
Plan C. The lots along the back side, not coincidentally which border my home.
Mayor Laufenburger: Back side, south side?
Jon Hebeisen: Correct, south side. Well the city minimum is 9,000. Those lots are 6,000.
That’s not a variance. As I said previously the Planning Commission that’s an evisceration.
That’s part of the price you’re paying. We’re paying. The homeowners are going to pay for that
land that you’re getting for free. And speaking of Lake Ann and free land, we have a gentleman
here that knows, he was here back then. We didn’t Lake Ann Park for free. We paid for it. Why
aren’t we paying for this land? Why do we think we’re getting it for nothing? I’m saying we’re
not and any intelligent analysis would tell too, there’s a price to pay. We’re going to get the free
land including the wetlands and we’re going to jam in 200 houses because that is written in stone
that you have to have 200 houses and you don’t. Just do your jobs looking out for Chanhassen.
Not for Lennar. Thanks.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Hebeisen. Is there anybody else? Is there anybody else
either that did or did not speak at the Planning Commission who would like to address the
council at this time? Okay I thank you for your comments. For your respectful presentation of
information and now I’m going to bring this back to the council. First of all is there any
questions or clarifications that any council member would like to ask for at this time? Okay.
Mr. McDonald I’ll start with you and we’ll just move down the row here and I will reserve my
comments until last. I’m looking for your comments on, everybody comments to the developer
and to city staff on what you would like to see in this property.
Councilman McDonald: Well this is a very difficult decision but you know I do believe that the
owners of the property have got a right to sell the property. They’ve elected they’re not going to
divide it up and sell it piecemeal so what we need to do as government to do our responsibility is
we have certain rules in place as to how property can be developed. So based upon that one of
the things I would like to see, I would be in favor of the density transfer because I do want to see
us get the land around Lake Ann and develop that into a park. I also would like to see more
detailed drawings and one of the things I would like staff to particularly do is any connection
between the Prince property and the property to the north I would like that to be looked at and if
it has to go to any kind of structural engineering or we have to put up all kinds of retaining walls
then I would like to see that connection not be there. The other thing that helps that is that’s also
the school boundary line between Chanhassen and Minnetonka so it’s kind of a natural barrier
from a school district. It’s also a natural barrier from the topography so I would like staff to look
at that. Then what I would like to also see is that again as I’ve said we do need the detailed
engineering plans. At this point all this is is lots drawn on paper. I’m not sure all those lots are
even buildable and I would like to get a count as to what actually is buildable. As far as the trees
to the north and to the south, yeah I would like to see all of those preserved. I would like staff to
work with the developer to find some way to make sure that any cutting of trees is minimized
and that to the best that we possibly can to keep those barriers between neighborhoods to kind of
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
50
have a transition between areas and to keep the trees in place in order to do that. Beyond that I
think that again looking at the two choices, because the developer as I said, you have to first start
with the premise can they develop the land and the answer to that question is yes. Then the thing
you need to look at is okay, what’s best for the city. I hear the gentleman that wants Lennar to
build fewer homes. Then let’s get an idea of what the buildable lots are to address that. The
wildlife and those issues, yes that’s why I want to see as many trees and habitat left as possible.
As far as Lake Ann and the environmental potential damage there. I think that that should be
something that’s built into the next PUD and I would like staff to come back with assurances as
to how we’re going to protect Lake Ann. And especially during a construction process and even
after the construction process because as everybody has mentioned one of the big problems up
on Lake Lucy was phosphorus and those types of chemicals. Well that comes off of people
fertilizing their yards so let’s look at a way to keep all of that out of Lake Ann. And that’s what I
would ask and give direction to staff to do.
Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you Mr. McDonald. Moving on down the line.
Councilmember Tjornhom do you have any comments you’d like to make to the staff and to the
developer?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I do. I do. I think Councilman McDonald explained how this whole
process started. It started back with Walmart and the fact that Walmart brought a bunch of stuff
to the table. Spent a bunch of money and we said no thank you. It was not something that was a
good fit for our community and now when I look back on it, this community was absolutely right
when they made that very loud and clear. Tonight once again we are with a developer that
would like to create a project in this town and once again tonight we are having a meeting.
Letting the developer know what our expectations are. What our concerns are. What we want to
see happen with this project. I’m pretty sure he heard the concerns about traffic. He heard
concerns about the tree lines being cut down. He heard concerns about water quality. He heard
concerns about density. He heard concerns about your quality and your life being changed
because of 200 homes being built in the area that you just feel isn’t ready for that type of
development. I don’t believe that doing an RSF is the right thing to do. I believe that a PUD,
and this is me talking to the developer saying that a planned unit development makes way more
sense than you having carts blanche just to go in and build the lots you want, where you want
and how you want. I don’t think that’s responsible as a city or a council to go ahead and say yep,
you bought the land. Go ahead and do that so I think that we have expressed very well what
we’re all really concerned about and I think that the Lennar representative has heard those
comments and you’re not the first developer. This isn’t your first meeting where you’ve heard
these things but I think that this is the first meeting everybody and so I think we have to realize
that. Once he goes back and he has his conference with his partners tomorrow and he talks about
our comments. Our frustrations. Our concerns. Our hesitancy to have this happen they’ll
discuss the options. What is going to make sense for them? Will it make sense for them to
proceed by maybe cutting out 50 homes from this development. You know maybe rearranging
where the roads go. Rearranging some of the grading so we’re not totally destroying what’s
already there. And then he’ll come back and he’ll say you know what, we can do this. Let’s
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
51
work together and find a way or he’ll say this isn’t for us and so to me that’s why I’m here
tonight to listen to you and to send a message at the request of the developer as to what our
expectations are and so my expectation is that if you were to move forward it would be a PUD
but it would be with all of these elements everyone has talked about here tonight.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Councilmember Tjornhom. Councilmember Ryan, your
comments.
Councilwoman Ryan: Thank you Mayor. I would like to see an Option C so I, and I say that in
all seriousness. I say that because I would like to take one additional step in the process so
instead of approving or moving forward with either RSF or PUD I’d like to have the developer
take these comments and this feedback and I’d like to have another concept review conversation.
I don’t think that then we have to move immediately forward to Lennar making the, making the
investment with the engineering and the planning because I understand you know that situation
for Lennar so I think that if we take an extra step along this way we’re thinking long term versus
kind of the tactically short term how are we going to get this done and what streets are going to
be. How the streets are going to connect and what not so I’d like to in all seriousness I would
like to have another option or options or thoughts from the developer in how they’re going to
work around some of the constraints of the site. Some of the thoughts that I would like to hear
from Lennar and again not specific engineering detail but I look to get a better understanding of
what’s the intention when it comes to your grading plan. What is that going to look like? What
is it going to look like when you, you know when you lay the plan that you presented over this,
what’s up on the screen right now, all the development is occurring where the woods are and as I
understand Ms. Sinclair’s going to evaluate the trees that we’d like to keep. Is that one tree? Is
it two trees? I mean what are we.
Kate Aanenson: Again we’re weighing that against the area in preservation so this, if you look at
what percentage I mean I think we don’t have that number. What percentage is being impacted
so yes, there’s specific spot trees that we would try to, she would try to preserve.
Councilwoman Ryan: And again I would like to have that feedback as part of this. I know we
had sent out some jurisdictional review. My understanding again when they reviewed this is that
it was what would you prefer the option, or Plan A or Plan B and I don’t doubt that anybody in,
with the DNR or the watershed is going to say let’s develop on Plan A so I would like to get a
better understanding of what their concerns are with the PUD and the environmental impacts so
I’d like to hear some of that. Specifically when we talk about each parcel of land and the way
that when I was evaluating I was looking at it, I was looking at the northern, the central and the
southern portion of it and when I look at the northern piece of this parcel I would like to see a
concept where Lake Lucy Ridge and Ashling Meadows either have a cul-de-sac so there is no
connection through off to Galpin. It’s a cul-de-sac or that land up on the ridge, that 10 acres
remains undeveloped because of the potential impact into Lake Lucy. If it is something that
Lennar feels that they need to develop and don’t want to sell off the property, obviously that’s
their discretion. I would like to ask them to consider larger lots that mirror or match the existing
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
52
neighborhood up there so I would ask that for that 10 acre parcel. Moving directly south I still
find it very hard to believe that the homes that are listed, well really that whole area is all big
woods and the thought of cutting all that down and what that’s going to do to the drainage and
the wetland is concerning to me. I would like to get a better understanding of how that is even a
viable option to build out those lots. I think there’s a stream running through a portion of it.
There’s a wetland at the entrance of Galpin. Again I just, I don’t see how this is a possibility so
is there another configuration that Lennar is willing to consider? And safety is a concern. I
know we’re going to, the proposal would be to build retaining walls but in the documents that we
read, our engineering department said that the bluff stability is part of the, a concern over there.
At the center of the property when you look at it that’s planned for 102 lots and that just seems in
my view excessive the way that you’re, that those lots build out. If you look at Lots 10 through
23 which is that cul-de-sac off to the northeast there. That cul-de-sac, again that would require
significant tree loss of oak trees abutting the edge of the wetland and I understand this is all part
of the density transfer but I think that regardless of the density transfer we still need to be
stewards of the environment here. And again understanding your grading plan because when we
did the walking that was one of the high points and I’m concerned about what the grading is
going to do. On the southern portion we heard people tonight talk about the runoff and the high
water flooding their basements. I also believe that at the Planning Commission there were
comments that although that the, some of the wetlands were identified maybe we could take
another look at that if those are all of the wetlands because there was some thought that the ones
that were identified is not a complete picture of what those wetlands are. And maintain a buffer.
Keep the trees and protect the houses on the south side of the home and I skipped ahead. And
again on the center when I talk about the number of lots, I would prefer to see it mirrored to what
is going on in Longacres or west of Galpin. Those lot comparisons are, it’s, I just don’t like the
look of that, the density right across the street from Longacres. Mass grading. And then finally
again understanding that’s part of when we talk about a density transfer the 35 percent lot
coverage. We’re so careful and diligent when we look at individual properties and coming in for
variances for lot coverage and that’s on a single property and we’re looking at a 35 percent lot
coverage on you know the central and south portions of this development and that to me is
unacceptable. So to sum up my specific points and long term is I’d like to take one more look at
a Plan C or additional options with a little more work on Lennar’s end but I think in the long run
it will pay off for Lennar but more importantly for our community. Thank you.
Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Councilmember Ryan. Mr. Campion do you have any
comments?
Councilman Campion: I do. So I’d also like to thank everyone for sharing their opinions tonight
and over the past few weeks and month and at the Planning Commission meeting as well. My
input is that I also support a Plan C that would be a modification of the PUD. Something we
haven’t seen yet but something that addresses you know most or as many as possible of the
concerns that have been raised by the neighbors. I want to see things like you know sharing of
what the buffers or habitat, tree cover. You know what the, what the grading plan is going to
look like before we can really respond you know with a strong support of one plan over another.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
53
Obviously the RSF just, you know is not acceptable in general. I would like Lennar to seriously
consider offers that might come from the neighbors to purchase that 10 acres to hold that as a
buffer. Increased buffer for Lake Lucy to help protect and preserve that. I don’t know what the
mechanism is to trigger it but I would like the watershed ideally to either update that UAAU or
water quality measurements before this comes back to us next. Whether it’s another concept
review or the preliminary plat but I think it’d be good to see if there has been a shift in the past
year since those other, that development went in off Lake Lucy Road. And I acknowledge
development will continue to happen as long as there’s a willing seller and a willing buyer but
even in my short tenure on council here over the last 4 years I’ve seen developers that do listen
to the neighbors and you know they make some concessions to make sure that this development
is you know well received by the community and has a positive feeling going forward and I
would think that that would show well upon Lennar for when they’re potentially looking at
trying to make another development in Chanhassen down the line. Right to leave a good picture
in people’s minds. An example of that I think there was a West Park development that I think is
still in progress now off of Great Plains and that was one where I know that there was a lot of
feedback on it but it seemed like the issues just got addressed between the developer and
neighbors and I’d love to see that happen here. In going forward I would like to see the process
run more smoothly next time and from now on. You know make sure that all residents are
notified before there’s a potential for public input. Make sure signs are posted for potential
connections and all that and I trust we’ll do better going forward. But again I just want to close
that I appreciate the dialogue. Keep sharing your input. Good job.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, anything else Mr. Campion? Okay. Before I make comments Peter
Polingo asked the question regarding the time line. Kate could you speak to that? I know you
had a triangle that showed the sequence of steps. Can you just give us a, not specifics but can
you give us a general timeline of what you think would likely occur here.
Kate Aanenson: Sure. I guess a lot of it is predicated on what the developer chooses to do.
Mayor Laufenburger: Absolutely. The developer has a choice but let’s assume that the
developer chooses to move forward with something.
Kate Aanenson: So whether he comes back formally before this group with a concept. So some
of the things you’re asking for is really going into the preliminary plat so now we’re into pretty
committed on that so I think they’re up to.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, so what’s his timeline for him to deliver a preliminary plat?
Kate Aanenson: Well you’d have to do a lot of engineering so I’m guessing it’s going to be at
least 2 to 3 months I’m guessing. Yeah.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
54
Kate Aanenson: Yeah it’s pretty common. I mean it’s a lot of engineering.
Mayor Laufenburger: Oh yeah. Yeah. Do we have any other developments in town that we
could look at as a predictor of how this might happen like?
Kate Aanenson: Well you know we did the Woods in Longacres which is equal the number of
lots on the other side of the street and.
Mayor Laufenburger: Yeah a little bit bigger in fact I think isn’t it?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, yeah. Combined so it really depends on that complexity of the issues
there so, and the timeliness of getting through the watershed district and all the other approvals
from the other jurisdictions so.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. So it sounds like we’re looking at 60 to 90 days probably.
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mayor Laufenburger: Before something comes back.
Kate Aanenson: But I want to be clear on one other question that came up. And so what we’ve
spoken to Lennar about is that, whether they come back here for C or whatever, what path they
choose to go down. We’ve asked them to meet with the property owners on the north side and
the south side to work through their issues so they can see the plans as they’re working drawings
before it comes back. We’ve asked them to do that in this process because it is hard when you’re
in a formal setting to look at something. The concept review is not formalized for that specific
purpose so we can have this dialogue and they can get that feedback so however the developer
chooses to come back with is a more informal concept C here or in working with the neighbors
to formalize that before they bring it back under a concept that would extend the process in and
of itself before they make a more formal plan.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. I want to be very specific with my comments, as specific as I can.
I don’t support A or B either which means that in my view there is a C somewhere. Whether it’s
a D or an E or an F, I don’t know but I can’t support A or B the way it is present. However I do
support the guidance and the policies of previous councils that have established land use
guidance and zoning as presented in the Comprehensive Plan and obviously Mr. Jablonski
you’ve reviewed that so you know what the City would like to do. I do support reasonable and
multiple access points to the development from Galpin Boulevard. Now I know that that, I know
that Mr. Oehme spoke about the study, the traffic study and you took that into consideration. I’m
not prescriptive about where they occur but it’s logical that they occur at intersections that
already exist and it seems to me that some of the, you know multiple access points. They don’t
exist now so I would support multiple but from Galpin Boulevard. I do agree with the planned
unit development which allows the density transfer from the east to the west. And I do that
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
55
because most of primary important is to preserve and protect a majority of the shoreline of both
Lake Ann and Lake Lucy and I’m pleased to see that that concept of density transfer was also
supported by Riley-Purgatory watershed district and the DNR. Neither of which gave tacit
approval for the plan but they said conceptually we support keeping as much development as you
can away from Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. I do not support the purchase of these parcels by the
City. I think the purchase of Lake Ann back in 1967, that was a different circumstance than
we’re faced with right here and yes Mr. Hebeisen it’s not free land. I understand that. There is a
cost associated with it but the financial burden to the citizens of Chanhassen with a concept PUD
is significantly less than purchasing 41 acres from the developer, or excuse me from the land
owner. I support the concepts of the city staff and a review of the concept PUD and I’m
referring to the 13 pages that I made reference to you Mr. Jablonski. There’s a lot of detail in
there that Lennar may be very familiar with accomplishing satisfactory resolution of these and
some of them are minutia but they all represent a picture of what the city staff is willing to
comment on and call it a laundry list if you will but that’s a laundry list that I trust because the
city staff has proven to me over the 11 years that I’ve been involved with city government that
the city staff knows what’s right for this community and they do the due diligence to make sure
that those of us in elected leadership don’t make a mistake. Okay I’m confident that you as a
developer in working with city staff can provide a preliminary plan, whether it’s C or D that the
council could ultimately agree with. However I’m not sure it’s a plan that the developers can
find, that satisfies your economies. This was a phrase that you used at the Planning Commission.
However that’s for you to determine based on what the City is allowing you. It’s not our job in
the city to make you a profit. Our job is to give you the parameters by which we will allow your
development of this land. As many of the council members have said here, we want a quality
project. Our objective is not for you to make money. I do support the spectrum of home options
and I’m not going to give a specific number to this development but I insist that each and every
lot must be buildable and in the packet there was the, I like the idea of building the lots, or
building the homes on each lot in such a way that the eventual homeowner has the ability to
expand their hard surface coverage 5 percent and not exceed the allowable limit. I’m not
interested in homeowners having to come to the City Council to ask, seek for a variance to go
over 5 percent. Regardless of what we, what you build I know that homeowners want to add
value to their home. They want to add a patio. They want to add a fire pit. They want to add a
who knows. Whatever it is that they want. I’d like to make sure that they have an opportunity to
do that without having to ask for a variance. Regarding lot sizes. Like Councilmember Ryan
said, I’d like to see the lots adjacent to the existing neighborhoods be a size closely similar to the
lots that they abut. And if you can’t do that I would ask for perhaps additional buffer space as a
transition to these lots. I’m reminded or I’m remembering that on the south side of Walnut
Curve there is very, very dense housing and that housing serves a very valuable purpose for this
community. Those are Ms. Aanenson do you have any idea what, what’s the general market
value of those homes. I think it’s under $200,000 isn’t it? $200,000 to $250,000?
Kate Aanenson: Around there, yeah probably.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
56
Mayor Laufenburger: So we know that there can be a coexistence of more dense property in
reasonable proximity. I’m not opposed to that. I just, let’s recognize that the buffers are
important to maintain. Regarding the infrastructure, specifically the northern portion of the
property. Topaz, Lucy Ridge Lane and Ruby were all stubbed for eventual connection to future
development. I know the realtors know that. The City policy is such that our policy is to
connect neighborhoods, and here’s why. For public safety. For efficient delivery of services.
That’s why we connect neighborhoods. But the Comprehensive Plan also speaks to limiting the
use of existing streets to handle high volume of pass through traffic. And the Comprehensive
Plan also speaks to a limited use of cul-de-sacs unless topography and/or other natural features
prevent pass through. So this becomes a judgment call and is often the case with things that
aren’t clearly stipulated in city code or policy. So here’s my view on this Mr. Jablonski. And
more importantly city staff. I could support not connecting Ruby Lane south. I understand that
there’s topography issues there. I could support turning that into a cul-de-sac. Also I could
support connecting Topaz to Lucy Ridge Lane, and I think Councilmember Ryan you talked
about that as a, what’s the word that you used? Like a loop cul-de-sac or something. Loop cul-
de-sac. Now what’s interesting is that if in fact a road then goes from Galpin, as I talked about
an entry point from Galpin to the development, that cul-de-sac would be 1,760 feet long. The
city code allows 800 feet of cul-de-sac. We have a cul-de-sac in Chanhassen that’s 4,200 feet so
does the City allow longer cul-de-sacs? Our preference is 800 feet but we allow longer so that’s
one consideration. Another consideration for safety purposes, I’m not sure who said it. Who
spoke about, who’s in California? Was that you Greg? Yeah. I gave some thought to this. Is it
possible in that Topaz to Lucy Ridge Lane cul-de-sac, is it possible to extend a cul-de-sac down
into the Galpin property a little bit. Make those homes similar, or those lot size similar to the
Lucy Ridge Lane and could it possibly be that we create like a, what did you call it Greg?
Greg Andrews: Almost like a park.
Mayor Laufenburger: Yeah like a park road.
Greg Andrews: A green space.
Mayor Laufenburger: Yeah for public service. I mean I think about this, if there’s an emergency
services on the end of that 1,760 foot cul-de-sac and there’s anything going on on the street
before that, that could be a problem for that family so just city staff that’s something I’d like you
to consider. Lastly, I understand Mr. Jablonski that the sellers have requested that the developer
work with the City to include a memorial or a remembrance of Prince’s ownership of that land.
If given suggestions I would be open to consider that if it’s done tastefully. I don’t know what
that looks like, and by the way for those of you that may have seen. You may have seen the
KSTP Channel 5 Tom Houser who lives in your neighborhood, he interviewed me and he said so
what are you, what are they going to call these streets and I said they’re not going to call them
Love Sexy Lane, Purple Rain Parkway or Little Corvette Court. Those are trademark intellectual
property. If the heirs can get them to you know name those streets, I don’t care but I didn’t think
that that was a likelihood so for the record I got into some heat from the heirs about saying that
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
57
so I wanted to clarify. I could support something that would memorialize Prince’s ownership.
And with that Mr. Jablonski, Kate and staff, Mr. Gerhardt and all of you present you now have
the sum total of the comments and I’m hoping that you would take those comments, not only
from city staff but also from the public and work the magic that Lennar has proven to be able to
work, not only in our community but all across the country and give us a development that truly
we can be proud of. That honors and respects the desires of your council and the citizens here in
Chanhassen. And with that I’m going to.
Kate Aanenson: Can I just make one more comment?
Mayor Laufenburger: You always do Kate.
Kate Aanenson: Because I know all these people are going to want to call, call and ask. If we
could put something out once they make a decision kind of what their course is going to be. I
don’t know when that’s going to be that if we can somehow figure out.
Mayor Laufenburger: Can we do that?
Kate Aanenson: Well we put under development site. What the current action is so they can go
to the City’s website and check this project and get an update.
Mayor Laufenburger: Well when you say put it on the development site. You mean the place
where the sign was.
Kate Aanenson: No, no, no, no. I’m talking about the City’s website.
Mayor Laufenburger: Website okay.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Yeah. So people are going to call and ask what’s going on so when we
know something we’ll put something out.
Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. Thank you Kate. That concludes this item on our agenda
and if you don’t mind I think we’re going to conclude the rest of the meeting very quickly so
would you bear with us folks.
CONTROL CONCEPTS: APPROVE SITE PLAN WITH A VARIANCE FOR LOT 2,
BLOCK 1, ARBORETUM BUSINESS PARK 7TH ADDITION.
This item was tabled.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS.
Chanhassen City Council – August 13, 2018
58
Mayor Laufenburger: Council presentations, do you have any council presentations anybody?
Okay I have two. Go ahead.
Councilman McDonald: I was going to give you a segue. The Red Birds played this past
weekend and I.
Mayor Laufenburger: Could I just ask you to remain here for just a second so we don’t have to
speak over your movement. We’ll do this in 4 minutes okay. Thank you.
Councilman McDonald: And I think they did the City proud by gaining the number one seed in
the upcoming State Tournament so I think that’s something the City should be very proud of.
The guys fought back on both games. It was nip and tuck but they did prevail and they looked
very good doing it.
Mayor Laufenburger: Good, alright. Any other council presentations? Two things I want to
add. Number one, Wednesday, August 15th is Chanhassen Day at the Arboretum. Free entry at
the Arboretum on Chanhassen and activities begin at 8:00 in the morning and they go all through
the day so if you, if you happen to have some kids that you want to entertain on Wednesday, take
them out to the Arboretum. And secondly next Monday night, August 20th we are having a City
Council meeting, and it’s not a regularly scheduled meeting but it’s a council meeting solely for
the purpose of hearing from the public regarding the pavement management program and how
we fund it and one of the considerations is a franchise fee so if you’d like to come back and
make public comment to the council, that would be next Monday night. We start at, is it 7:00 or,
7:00. Yeah 7:00. Okay.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS.
Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt any administrative presentations?
Todd Gerhardt: None this evening Mr. Mayor.
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The City
Council meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated August 7, 2018
Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.2.
Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No:
PROPOSED MOTION
“The City Council receives the Planning Commission minutes dated August 7, 2018.”
Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.
ATTACHMENTS:
Summary Minutes
Verbatim Minutes
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
AUGUST 7, 2018
Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Steve Weick, Nancy Madsen, Mark
Randall, and Michael McGonagill
MEMBERS ABSENT: John Tietz
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; George
Bender, Assistant City Engineer, and Vanessa Strong, Water Resources Coordinator
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Russ & Diana Jones 3961 Country Oaks Drive
Lynn & Nancy Simpson 3980 Country Oaks Drive
Court MacFarlane 3800 Leslee Curve
Jane Bender 4001 Stratford Ridge
Steve Arndt 2960 Stratford Ridge
David Robertson 2900 Stratford Ridge
Jason Watt 3961 Stratford Ridge
Trent Birkholz 3851 Stratford Ridge
David & Diane Lieser 3881 Stratford Ridge
Linda Brand 3981 Country Oaks
Garit Solheim-Witt 3850 Leslee Curve
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONTROL CONCEPTS: REQUEST FOR SETBACK VARIANCE.
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Weick asked for
clarification on the need for the trail. Commissioner McGonagill asked about fencing.
Chairman Aller asked for clarification on the speed of runoff between having one or two
retaining walls. Representing the applicant, Cory Watkins explained that the need for the
variance was because of requests to have the trail be a different user experience than the first
proposal. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was
closed.
Undestad moved, McGonagill seconded that the Planning Commission recommends
approval of a variance to permit construction of retaining walls within the Bluff Creek
primary zone setback as shown in the plans prepared by Loucks, dated 06-15-2018, revised
Planning Commission Summary – August 7, 2018
2
7-12-18, subject to the following conditions and adoption of the Findings of Fact and
Recommendation:
Building
1. Retaining walls over 4 feet in heights require an engineered design.
Environmental Resources
1. The applicant shall coordinate a trail inspection with the city arborist to review tree
removals prior to any trail construction activities.
2. Tree protection fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits along the trail.
Parks
1. The developer shall be responsible for planning, engineering, and constructing the
“wetland trail.” Connection points for this new trail shall be the terminus of the Trotters
Ridge trail and the intersection of Century Boulevard and Water Tower Place. Bid
documents, including plans and specifications, shall be approved by the Park &
Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to soliciting bids. Project bidding shall
occur in a competitive environment with a minimum of three bids being received. The
results of the bidding process shall be reviewed with the Park & Recreation Director and
City Engineer prior to award. Cash payment for trail construction shall be made from the
City of Chanhassen to the developer upon completion, inspection, and acceptance of the
trail.
2. Trail easements within Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th shall be dedicated to
the city to accommodate the “wetland trail”.
Water Resources and Engineering
1. The limits of the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) shall be identified throughout the
plan set.
2. Add detailed design for the retaining walls including a profile, proposed construction
materials, and railings/fences.
3. Add cut sections through the retaining walls and the trail to provide for easier
visualization and enhance constructability.
4. Create a parapet design along the upper wall when it is above the trail.
5. Extend the silt fence installation as appropriate to protect from construction.
Planning Commission Summary – August 7, 2018
3
6. Identify snow storage locations on the plans.
7. Provide a restoration plan for grading in the wetland buffer and in the Bluff Creek
Overlay District (BCOD) buffer.
8. The proposed redevelopment will need Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District
(RPBCWD) permits.
9. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure and submit proof that permits are received
from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers,
DNR, MnDOT, Carver County, RPBCWD, Board of Water and Soil Resources, PCA,
etc.).
10. The grade through the ADA areas of the parking lot shall be a maximum of 2% slope in
any direction. The point elevations should be re-checked. Add this code requirement in a
note on the plans.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
GLENDALE DRIVE SUBDIVISION REQUEST.
Sharmeen Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. George Bender addressed the street
layout and Vanessa Strong discussed stormwater runoff issues. The applicant, Curt Fretham
with Lake West Development, 14525 Highway 7, Minnetonka, discussed issues related to the
subdivision standards, requirement for a through street from Stratford Ridge to Glendale Drive,
and how cul-de-sac lengths are determined. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. Jason
Watt, 3961 Stratford Ridge expressed concerns and frustration with notification, issues
associated with Minnewashta Parkway being a collector road and how that affects the request for
a through street connection with Stratford Ridge, and asked how undue hardship is defined.
David Lieser, 3881 Stratford Ridge expressed opposition to the extension of the cul-de-sac on
Stratford Ridge to Glendale or any other road. David Robertson, 3900 Stratford Ridge discussed
the fact that when he bought his property there was nothing in the title search that indicated that
the Stratford Ridge cul-de-sac was temporary, and how this subdivision will affect their
Homeowners Association. Court MacFarlane, 3800 Leslee Curve expressed concern with
stormwater runoff and the confusion surrounding how cul-de-sac footage is measured, but noted
he was in favor of this development. Carin Moore, 6760 Minnewashta Parkway, owner of the
property directly south of the development, explained that her major concern was drainage,
future development possibilities of her property, and traffic circulation. Jane Bender, 4001
Stratford Ridge expressed concern with adding these 5 lots to the Pleasant Acres Homeowners
Association and the additional hard cover being added. Chairman Aller closed the public
hearing. After discussion by commission members the following motion was made.
Planning Commission Summary – August 7, 2018
4
McGonagill moved, Madsen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission tables
action on the preliminary plat to subdivide 2.14 acres into 5 lots and one outlot and a
variance to allow a 50 foot public right-of-way and directs the applicant to address the
issues, address issues in the staff report and preserves the right for public comment. All
voted in favor, except Commissioner Weick who opposed, and the motion carried with a
vote of 5 to 1.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Weick noted the verbatim and summary
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated July 17, 2018 as presented.
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Bob Generous presented the update on City
Council action and outlined future Planning Commission agenda items.
Randall moved, Madsen seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was
adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 7, 2018
Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Steve Weick, Nancy Madsen, Mark
Randall, and Michael McGonagill
MEMBERS ABSENT: John Tietz
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; George
Bender, Assistant City Engineer, and Vanessa Strong, Water Resources Coordinator
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Russ & Diana Jones 3961 Country Oaks Drive
Lynn & Nancy Simpson 3980 Country Oaks Drive
Court MacFarlane 3800 Leslee Curve
Jane Bender 4001 Stratford Ridge
Steve Arndt 2960 Stratford Ridge
David Robertson 2900 Stratford Ridge
Jason Watt 3961 Stratford Ridge
Trent Birkholz 3851 Stratford Ridge
David & Diane Lieser 3881 Stratford Ridge
Linda Brand 3981 Country Oaks
Garit Solheim-Witt 3850 Leslee Curve
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONTROL CONCEPTS: REQUEST FOR SETBACK VARIANCE.
Generous: Thank you Chairman, commissioners. Control Concepts, this is part two Planning
Case 2018-11. We saw the site plan at the July 17th meeting. As part of that there was concern
about the size of the retaining walls adjacent to the pedestrian trail that’s being put in. So we
worked with the applicant to come up with an alternative design that would reduce the size of
those walls. However to do that they need a variance to encroach the retaining walls into the
Bluff Creek primary zone setback. Not into the primary zone itself but into the 40 foot setback
from that one. The property is located at 8077 Century Boulevard. This is in the Arboretum
Business Park planned unit development. The request is in conjunction with the site plan so this
is only a recommendation that we’ll make tonight. You won’t make a final decision as a Board
of Appeals and Adjustments to permit the retaining wall to encroach into the primary zone
setback as shown on their plans. The property is guided for office industrial uses. It’s zoned
planned unit development as part of the Arboretum Business Park. It’s also within the Bluff
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
2
Creek corridor which has additional protection requirements. This was the site plan that was
approved on, or recommended for approval on the 17th. Unfortunately it’s only two dimensional
so it looks really great and easy on the screen. It’s a 54,600 square foot building. The western
portion is, has a two story office component and then it has warehouse and manufacturing or
manufacturing space on the eastern side. There is a tenant space on the extreme eastern end of
the building. As submitted with the site plan review they were proposing one, a single retaining
wall adjacent to the trail system. This raised, had high points of over 18 feet at the corner of the
property. At the turning points in the trail and then also down on the east end of it. That was a
concern of the Planning Commission and staff and the Parks Director and what type of
environment would that create for the trail users. The applicant was able to provide us with a
cross section to give you an idea of what the experience would be and you can see that wall
would really dominant the walking in that area so, and this is I believe at the point 7 on the trail.
So as part of the alternative design we came up with the tiered wall system. It reduced, basically
split the height of the retaining wall so half was on top and half was below. It reduced the
highest point in the retaining wall to 12 feet on the eastern end of the building but at that corner
point down in here it had an upper elevation of almost 9 feet. Just under 9 feet for the retaining
wall and then another 9 foot retaining wall below it so they created like an overview or shelf area
in the corner that would allow people to look over the wetland complex to the northeast of that.
This is, however having this wall encroach into the 40 foot setback requires a variance and so
that’s what we’re here for tonight. Again they provided a cross section to show how the
experience for people using the trail would be much more human scale and so we would think it
will provide an enhanced environment for people to go forward. Staff is recommending that the
Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance to permit the retaining walls within
the Bluff Creek primary zone setback. We have Findings of Fact that it is in harmony with our
ordinance and it does not change the character of the area but we believe will enhance the
pedestrian experience as they use this trail system. Additionally there’s adoption of Findings of
Fact and Recommendation. With that I’d be happy to answer any questions.
Aller: Any questions at this time of staff? Commissioner Weick.
Weick: First time this came up I just did a bad job of getting clarification for myself so I just,
I’m looking for clarification on the necessity for the trail. So is there currently like a dead end
trail in the Preserve that’s waiting to be connected?
Generous: There is a fork that was established with the 7th Addition which was built in 2007 to
come towards the north.
Weick: Okay.
Generous: And so that was the plan and this would actually connect to the heart of the
Arboretum Business Park area and provide really easy access for people to get onto the system.
Right now you can get into it off of 82nd Street. There’s a connection that goes around, there’s a
big stormwater pond in that corner.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
3
Weick: Yeah.
Generous: And then into it so it was felt at the time of the subdivision and approval that this was
an important connection so we’re trying to implement that. As part of the approval for the 7th
Addition the developer was required to do that but we allowed them to wait until this site
developed before putting in the trail. We could have had them put in the trail back in 2007 and
then the development would have to come in and either fit into, their design into where the trail
was or.
Weick: Yeah, okay. That’s all I had.
Aller: Great. Any additional questions? Commissioner McGonagill.
McGonagill: Bob on the down slope wall, what would the fencing be along that wall to keep
people from falling off of it? Do you recall?
Generous: Yeah it’s a dual pipe system so two rails of pipe. Black pipe that would go along
there. About 42 inches high.
McGonagill: Okay, thank you.
Generous: And it’s the open design so when we push snow it can go through that in the winter
so that people would be able to use that year round.
McGonagill: Okay thank you. Keeps bikes from going off it.
Generous: Yes.
Aller: Commissioner Madsen. Is that fence similar to the one that goes along 101? It’s on the
right side, or on the west side of 101.
Generous: Yes that’s what the design that they were talking, the Parks Director was talking
about. That it’d be similar to that.
Madsen: Yep south of Lyman, north of Pioneer Trail.
Generous: Correct.
Madsen: Okay thank you.
Aller: Okay I have a question for Ms. Strong. As always I’m always concerned about the Bluff
Creek so obviously they made an effort to alter their plans based upon the comments from the
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
4
last hearing. The question I have basically is going towards when we stagger this we’re going to
reduce the speed of the runoff. How will that impact, based upon the grade and the elevations or
would it impact the flow as compared to, are we getting a better deal with the two as opposed to
one?
Strong: I thought about that too. It’s really tough to say. I think they’re attempting the best they
can to meet the needs for the trail so I think when it comes to runoff, the ground level versus the
two tiered, the difference is not considerable compared to the fact that they actually need to meet
the trail in the first place. Obviously ideal would be to have a wider buffer. That’s really what
we need. But with a balance to meet many needs so.
Aller: Any additional questions based, hearing none we’ll have the applicant come forward and
make a presentation. Answer questions. If you could state your name and address and
representational capacity for the record that would be great.
Cory Watkins: Hi. Cory Watkins. I’m with Control Concepts. We’re at 18760 Lake Drive East
in Chanhassen.
Aller: Welcome back.
Cory Watkins: Thank you. You know I don’t have a lot to present. Your staff did a good job of
presenting what we’re doing. I would say that the original proposal that we put forward did not
require a variance and so the variance is really specifically because of requests to have it be a
different user experience so it’s more of a trail causing the variance versus us as an entity
looking for the variance so that’s really our position on it so.
Aller: Additional questions, comments. Alright, thank you sir.
Cory Watkins: Alright thank you.
Aller: At this time I’ll open up the public hearing portion of the item. This is an opportunity for
those present to come forward and speak either for or against the item. Seeing no one come
forward I’m going to close the public hearing portion of the item and open it up for
commissioner discussion or action.
Weick: Yeah the only comment I would make, I’m not opposed to this in any way. It seems like
we’re putting an awful lot of work into making this connection. I’m, I don’t know that we really
need to make this connection. I use that area and you can get around. I think sufficiently
without that connection. It’s really not that far from the 82nd Street that kind of brings you
around in on the other side so I, personally I don’t even think we need to make the connection. It
doesn’t, you know if that’s what we want to do that’s fine. It seems like a good solution. I’m
just not convinced that it’s needed.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
5
Aller: Additional comments? Questions? I’d entertain a motion for or against.
Undestad: I’ll make a motion that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval
of a variance to permit retaining walls within the Bluff Creek primary zone setbacks subject to
the conditions of approval and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation.
Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
McGonagill: Second.
Aller: Having a motion and a second, any further discussion? Okay. Comments. Otherwise
we’ll entertain a vote.
Undestad moved, McGonagill seconded that the Planning Commission recommends
approval of a variance to permit construction of retaining walls within the Bluff Creek
primary zone setback as shown in the plans prepared by Loucks, dated 06-15-2018, revised
7-12-18, subject to the following conditions and adoption of the Findings of Fact and
Recommendation:
Building
1. Retaining walls over 4 feet in heights require an engineered design.
Environmental Resources
1. The applicant shall coordinate a trail inspection with the city arborist to review tree
removals prior to any trail construction activities.
2. Tree protection fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits along the trail.
Parks
1. The developer shall be responsible for planning, engineering, and constructing the
“wetland trail.” Connection points for this new trail shall be the terminus of the Trotters
Ridge trail and the intersection of Century Boulevard and Water Tower Place. Bid
documents, including plans and specifications, shall be approved by the Park &
Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to soliciting bids. Project bidding shall
occur in a competitive environment with a minimum of three bids being received. The
results of the bidding process shall be reviewed with the Park & Recreation Director and
City Engineer prior to award. Cash payment for trail construction shall be made from the
City of Chanhassen to the developer upon completion, inspection, and acceptance of the
trail.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
6
2. Trail easements within Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th shall be dedicated to
the city to accommodate the “wetland trail”.
Water Resources and Engineering
1. The limits of the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) shall be identified throughout the
plan set.
2. Add detailed design for the retaining walls including a profile, proposed construction
materials, and railings/fences.
3. Add cut sections through the retaining walls and the trail to provide for easier
visualization and enhance constructability.
4. Create a parapet design along the upper wall when it is above the trail.
5. Extend the silt fence installation as appropriate to protect from construction.
6. Identify snow storage locations on the plans.
7. Provide a restoration plan for grading in the wetland buffer and in the Bluff Creek
Overlay District (BCOD) buffer.
8. The proposed redevelopment will need Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District
(RPBCWD) permits.
9. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure and submit proof that permits are received
from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers,
DNR, MnDOT, Carver County, RPBCWD, Board of Water and Soil Resources, PCA,
etc.).
10. The grade through the ADA areas of the parking lot shall be a maximum of 2% slope in
any direction. The point elevations should be re-checked. Add this code requirement in a
note on the plans.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
GLENDALE DRIVE SUBDIVISION REQUEST.
Al-Jaff: Chairman Aller, members of the Planning Commission. The application before you is
for a 5 lot subdivision and a variance that is being recommended by city staff for narrowed width
of a right-of-way from 60 feet to 50 feet. Briefly the subject site is located southeast of the
intersection of Glendale Drive and Minnewashta Parkway. It is zoned single family residential.
It is guided low density. It does lie within 1,000 feet of Lake Minnewashta which makes it
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
7
within the shoreland overlay district. Any regulations pertaining to shoreland will apply to this
site. The grades overall slope southeast on this property. There is Roundhouse Park located
within the service area of the site. There are trails along Minnewashta Parkway which this site
will have access to. Just a brief background. The reason we’re going to provide this information
is because staff has received a large number of phone calls and inquiries. Whenever a
subdivision appears before staff and when we meet with a property owner or a developer, staff
does not look at a property in a vacuum. We always have to look at the big picture. How is the,
yes we do look at lot areas such as in the single family residential district we look at lot area that
has to be 15,000 square feet. Lot frontage on a street that is 90 feet. Depth that is 125. Those
are the simple things. The way we provide connection to other properties located in the
surrounding area. How do we extend sewer, water. If we do add development to an area can
emergency vehicles approach these sites. Can they, if we build homes where is the water going?
Overall what direction is it going? When you have property that is next to shoreland where is the
water being treated before it goes into the lake because ultimately that’s where it’s going to end
up so again overall when we look at a subdivision there is more to it than just meeting the simple
requirements of lot area, lot width and lot depth. We have to look at circulation. We have to
look at emergency management. With that said that will allow me to talk about the surrounding
area. One of the issues that we need to point out or one of the facts that we need to point out at
this point, the property that is immediately west of the subject site which is the Country Oaks
development left a very small sliver that was always intended to be part of the development that
is before you today. It was going to be combined with it and subdivided. That piece went tax
forfeit and the City ended up owning it. It is our intent to turn over that piece of property. The
other thing I want to point out is this bubble of a cul-de-sac right here which is temporary in
nature, back in 1987 there was a development proposed for this site which is the Stratford Ridge
development. As I mentioned earlier whenever city staff looks at a development we cannot, we
may not look at it in a vacuum. We have to look at the big picture. The developer for Stratford
Ridge came back with two options for developing these sites and at that time the only existing
development that was a platted development was northwest of where we are right now. Of the
site we’re looking at. Throughout this area the roads were extended specifically through to the
north between Stratford Ridge and Glendale. Option B, which is closer to what actually got
developed cul-de-sacked this section rather than putting it through on both sides. But this
connection still was maintained through these parcels to the north. At this point I want to turn it
over to our engineering staff that will address both, will address the stormwater as well as the
street connections and basically elaborate on that portion of the background and why we’re
recommending some of the issues be resolved.
Bender: Okay I’ll take it from there Sharmeen. Thank you very much. To speak about the
access one thing that I want to explain is Minnewashta Parkway is a, known as a, has collector
status designation by the city code. It means that it’s a primary street with higher average daily
traffic volumes. It’s meant to be a faster circulation road rather than residential, just a regular
residential street. And as such along Minnewashta Parkway it is a goal of the City and as
expressed in the city code to limit the access to it so similar to more of a highway type design
where it’s controlled access. So the goal essentially that we apply when engineering projects
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
8
touch these type of things, these roadways, is to not allow additional accesses to the collector
street and to eliminate accesses where possible. So when areas redevelop that is a consideration.
In addition to the area that Sharmeen was explaining is this bubble down here is actually platted
with a stub to go to the northeast towards Leslee Circle. Or Curve. And that’s the, one of the
primary indications that led us to go looking through our records to find the information from
1987 that Sharmeen presented. In addition there’s narrative within the development files that
discusses it as she was trying to summarize for it to go through. One of the things that the 5 lot
development would do is cut off access to Leslee Curve from Stratford Ridge. In speaking with
the Fire Marshal about that on behalf of the fire department and emergency management services
they would be against doing that so if the two parcels to the south developed, that cul-de-sac
would essentially have to propagate to the north and become permanent and the fire department,
Fire Marshal’s review would prefer more access, quicker access and more convenient access as
in a through street through the area. And in addition this cul-de-sac is already at a maximum
length per our city code. It’s at 782 feet. Our city code is currently maximizes that length at 800
feet. As a technicality the fire code actually limits that to 750 feet that is currently applied so
there’s a little bit of a discrepancy between our code and the fire code by 50 feet. What it says is
you know we’re basically at the maximum length. So extending that further would have to be
you know a special consideration that would be recommended by City Engineer and then
approved by many other parties along the way that believed it would be the right thing to do.
One last consideration is that bubble is 90 feet in diameter. That would place an awful lot of
extra area coming off of these two lots that instead of having the through street that would go
here. So in order to allow 5 lots here there’s a little bit of a future undue burden upon the two
lots to the south. So you know there’s access so the lots that would be considered with a through
street along here would have access off, taken off of Minnewashta Parkway which we feel is a
benefit and they would have a through street in order to allow however the development
configuration takes place and these lots up here of course would have access to Glendale so.
From an access standpoint that’s the discussion that I wanted to convey. So this is kind of a
ghost plat. Kind of shows the size of the bubble. I don’t even believe the size of that bubble is
actually the true 90 feet in diameter. It would actually look bigger. And you know it also is
going to have to work from a stormwater perspective as well and that’s where access kind of
turns it over to you know water resources to you know holistically look at this development. So
lastly that’s kind of what this statement is saying. It’s kind of our guidance from developing
street design. You know we consider traffic circulation. We consider the topography. We
certainly consider the runoff of storm water where it’s headed. We look at the public
convenience and public safety. You know how the land is being proposed to be developed in
serving the community. So you know and this is another statement in the city code where street
arrangement and configurations are not allowed to cause undue hardship upon owners of
adjoining property when a subdivision is going, taking place. At this point I’ll turn it over to
Vanessa.
Strong: So there were many, many comments from a water resources perspective when we
reviewed this. I’m just going to highlight kind of maybe the major four that made it very, very
difficult and in fact not possible to, for the staff to give a decision at this time. Because
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
9
addressing these big questions could significantly change the overall design of the development
to the point where conditions of approval may not apply or it may not even be able to make the
appropriate conditions of approval. So the first thing I’m going to start out with is, this diagram
here, now this is something that I made. I overlaid the applicant’s submission over the City’s
GIS system and then I highlighted his ponds and I drew the arrows and I identified where he put
information. Emergency overflows are where your stormwater during a significant rain event
goes so we’re talking in this case anything over an inch and we all know we have a lot of storms
over an inch and these are big storms so this is very focused. Very heavy water that’s moving
through which is why city code has a couple of really important rules when it comes to
emergency overflows. One of them that it be identified. Well first and foremost he didn’t
identify any, the applicant did not identify any. It were just the overflow routes. My biggest
concern is that many of these ponds are all right along the property line. Well I mean I’m just
guessing. I’m guessing but you know based upon the contours those emergency routes are going
directly onto the neighbor. Well that’s not really a route. That’s just discharging directly onto
your neighbor. So city code says emergency overflow routes, if it’s adjacent to a property the
lowest building opening must be a minimum of one foot above the emergency overflow. Well
this lowest based upon the property records from the building file of this home, the lowest floor
opening is 976 feet. The emergency overflows for 4 of these ponds is at 978. To meet code they
would have to be a minimum of at 975. As proposed there’s no grading contour at 975 for this
entire parcel so they’re very high. The lowest building opening is very low. How are they going
to meet that elevation difference? The second piece is that again these emergency overflow
routes are discharging directly onto this property. We do have responsibility to look out for all
surrounding properties and city code again says they must not create a nuisance condition onto
adjacent property and at this point the applicant hasn’t provided information to at all address
whether or not that can be done. This is also a bit of a land locked parcel so there’s not really a
good outlet for all the water that comes here. So yes while you are allowed to send storm water
in it’s natural direction, when it comes to high volume, high rate emergency out falls and
overflows, there are requirements that must be met and there are many questions based upon how
this was addressed. Can you go to the next slide please? The second piece is placements and
easements. Now I just took two different pages from the applicant’s documents. Unfortunately
they did not place all of the stormwater information that would be relevant on one page so I kind
of had to flip and line out the best I could. Private storm water best management practices, that’s
what these rain gardens are that they proposed, they’re not actually permitted in public drainage
and utility easements. These are private structures so to the best of my ability it looks a bit like
these are the drainage utility easements for the City and when the applicant proposed them
they’re right against the property line in several cases. So between that and the fact that
infiltration/filtration basins must be located a minimum of 10 feet from the building envelope of
any primary structure because again this is a typical proposed pad. We don’t know where in here
that they’re actually going to put the house per se and that’s plumbing code and storm that, they
must be a minimum of 10 feet away from the structure to prevent any issues with water
infiltration into basements. That leaves a very small, little gap here. In fact you take the full 30
feet that’s given here, you subtract 10 feet from the rear property line. 10 feet from that building
setback and you’ve got now a tiny 10 foot strip. So it was very difficult to see how the applicant
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
10
was proposing these would actually be placed. It was just very unclear. So next slide please.
Additionally, I won’t go to great depths but the lot area, pervious and impervious calculations
were inconsistent between the plan set and stormwater report and the soil borings. You have to
use all 3 together to build their case and unfortunately if they’re not consistent data I’m not, you
know it’s never quite clear which data is the accurate data and what are we reviewing here at this
point. For example it appeared the draft soils report identified moderately slow permeability of
soils. Yet it would appear that the basins were designed for high draining soils. So these are
different inconsistencies that made it very difficult to make a recommendation because you
weren’t sure exactly what was the accurate data you were reviewing. Finally this is also rather
significant. Operation and maintenance of private storm water best management practices is
required in perpetuity. Both through the watershed district stormwater rule and the City’s MS4
Permit, Part 3D5, Section sub 5. That means private stormwater treatment devices, which these
are 5 little rain gardens, they most, first of all they’ve got to be placed in stormwater easements
that are recorded against the property. They must have an operation and maintenance plan
approved and recorded against the properties that provide for the permanent inspection,
maintenance and funding mechanism to ensure that they will function as designed permanently.
They need to provide, in order for us to make a decision, an operation and maintenance plan that
meets those requirements. And some explanation as to how they can ensure whichever resident
lives here and from now until forever basically has that capacity and to me that seems like a very
complex hurdle to overcome. I don’t know how you can anticipate any resident would have that
technical skill or funding mechanism and how you can ensure that in perpetuity. So you know
staff tries very hard to provide recommendations. Unfortunately there are times when it is just
too difficult. The applicant is responsible for submitting the proof necessary for staff to make a
decision and we’re not there right now so.
Al-Jaff: As far as the plat goes, and as I mentioned at the beginning that we look at lot area,
depth, width. All of that information has been provided by the applicant and yeah, we do have
parcels that exceed 15,000 square feet, 90 foot frontage, 125 foot depth for lots. One of the, we
really don’t know how this happened but the parcel extends across the public right-of-way and
into adjacent to neighboring properties that the applicant is proposing to outlot the right-of-way
over Country Oaks Drive will be dedicated to the City. The outlot, it is our recommendation that
the applicant contact the adjacent property owner and see if they would be interested in this
parcel because otherwise it will be a parcel that will not benefit anyone. With that said it is
staff’s intent to recommend approval. We want to recommend approval of a subdivision and
historically and with every subdivision that appears before the Planning Commission, City
Council we recommend conditions attached to an application. The approval always has some
adjustments that need to be made. In this case staff found it very difficult to make a
recommendation that we knew what the outcome would be that we would feel comfortable with
presenting it to you and to the City Council that we can stand behind. We do recommend that
you direct the developer to look at staff’s recommendation that they, you table action on this
application. Allow the developer to address these concerns and bring it before you at a future
date and I’ll be happy to answer any questions that you might have for us.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
11
Aller: Questions at this time of staff? Commissioner McGonagill.
McGonagill: Pretty simple. George, can we go to your map that you had where it showed, it had
that yellow arrow one. That one. How, you know I just want to be sure I understand on the
Minnewashta Parkway side it looks like there’s two driveways that you’re trying to eliminate or
is there 3 and you’re going to...at some point that you’re trying, would like to see.
Bender: Yeah there is two and you know the lot that’s currently being developed does not have
an access off of Minnewashta Parkway. There’s not a home on the property.
McGonagill: Okay, thank you.
Bender: Yep.
Aller: Additional questions? If this matter was tabled are we up against the timeline for the City
to make a decision where the applicant would have to sign a request?
Al-Jaff: We have 120 days with subdivisions. We contacted legal counsel, city attorney and he
concurred that we are fine.
Aller: So there’s sufficient time for this to be tabled to a reasonable date?
Al-Jaff: Correct. And it should give the applicant adequate time to make the revisions should
the Planning Commission recommend tabling action on the application.
Aller: Additional questions of staff based on any of the questions asked already? Hearing none,
if the applicant would like to come forward. If you could state your name and address and
representational capacity for the record that would be great.
Curt Fretham: Good evening Planning Commission and city staff. My name is Curt Fretham
from Lake West Development. Our address is 14525 Highway 7, Minnetonka. My phone
number is 952-930-3000. I appreciate you taking the time to review our application. There are
certainly some additional work that needs to take place on it. We have acknowledged that and
we’ll work with you and staff and the neighbors to, with hopes to come up with a plan that
everybody can feel good about and be a win/win. I prepared an exhibit that I want to share with
you but I’d like to go through the staff report a little bit and if I could take you to page 1 of the
staff report. Towards the bottom of the page, the first paragraph it says the City’s discretion in
approving or denying preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the
standards outlined in subdivision regulations and zoning ordinance. If the standards are met the
City must approve, I repeat must approve the preliminary plat. So my thoughts were we felt we
were submitting a preliminary plat that was conforming and met all the requirements and I know
there’s some uncertainty with that but I want to go through that tonight to hopefully bring some
clarity to myself and understand it better but also for the other parties that have concerns over it.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
12
I also look to the next paragraph and I’m not intending to go through every paragraph on this
page but, or the pamphlet but, or the City’s report but it talks about a variance and we did not ask
for a variance. I understand why city staff is recommending a variance but we also feel like we
could make a minor modification to allow for that additional right-of-way that you’re asking for
by, because we have the square footage and the lot right-of-way that we could make those
adjustments to remove that variance requirement and we’re willing to do that so just wanted to
make that point known. If I go to, and I also want to turn you to Exhibit A on this pamphlet that
was handed out it just shows the site and then if I go to the bottom of the staff report page 2, not
that I mean to skip over things but a lot of this was covered so I’m trying to hit the highlights but
the bottom of page 2 in the staff report talks about the streets and it’s the first sentence the
development does not incorporate a through street stubbed to facilitate the extension of Stratford
Ridge to Glendale Drive. I understand the rationale as to why it’s being asked for but when I go
to Exhibit B, the second page of the pamphlet that I hand out to you, this is an excerpt from the
comprehensive guide plan.
Generous: Yeah just put it on there.
Curt Fretham: Oh right here?
Generous: Yes. Then you can…
Curt Fretham: Excellent, I’ll do that. Under roadways on the comprehensive guide plan it says
residential street systems should be designed to discourage through traffic and to be compatible
with other transportation modes including transit, bicycle, walking, et cetera. But my point is
here’s your rules. Here’s what the City’s asking for. It’s written. It’s a goal. It’s in your
comprehensive guide plan. I’m getting conflicting direction to do exactly the opposite, put in a
through street. It says the property also was planned for a through street by, back in 1988 when
some of the other properties were platted. However there’s a contradictory plan in that our site
has 7 sewer and water stub in’s that were paid for so there must have been an alternative plan
that called for 7 lots on Glendale and if there was going to be 7 lots that conflicts with any kind
of a stub in for a through street connection so what plan over rules which plan? I’m not sure. I
want to talk about, so it just adds to some additional confusion. I could go to the top of the page
on the next page 3 but I’m going to skip and go to the second paragraph first. Second paragraph
talks about, we had proposed to, showing that the properties to the south could be developed by
extending the cul-de-sac on the south and I’ve got an exhibit that I want to put up to help show
that. Right here. It shows that you’re ghost platting this or showing how this, these two parcels
could be developed in the future with extension of this cul-de-sac. Showing 5 homes on here. It
allows these homes to stay. There was another concern about removing driveways onto
Minnewashta Parkway. This plan accomplishes that because it gives them alternative access
through a cul-de-sac so there’s not an advantage for the through street for that purpose.
Alternatively if you look at the through street scenario what it does is it provides for 1, 2, 3, 4
lots for this property owner loses one of their lots. Less efficient layout. Less, and it causes
removal of the home whether they choose to or not. It also is a disservice to this lot right here
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
13
because it creates a double frontage lot which if I go to city code it talks about double frontage
lots on C-2. No, let’s see it’s on, is it C-2? C-2(f) talks about street arrangements proposed shall
not cause undue hardship. Lot 4 has undue hardship by the through street from the fact that it’s
not going to meet the additional lot depth requirements by a double frontage lot. Double
frontage lots require, can you share with me where that section’s at? I think I missed it but. I’ll
come back to that in a moment but, but regardless it is a much less desirable. On the cul-de-sac
version that’s an A lot. If it’s a through street that lot becomes a D lot. I think that’s an undue
hardship to that property in and of itself. What does it do to Lot 5? My lot. It takes my best lot
in the group. A nice corner lot that fronts Minnewashta Parkway and turns it into a lot that has
street frontage on 3 sides. Three sides. It’s not a double frontage. It’s a triple frontage lot. It
creates an undue hardship onto my development. But none of that can happen according to the
staff report unless you issue a variance. Maybe that’s why the variance talk is on the front page
of the staff report but I would suggest that another level of confusion I have is I read the second
paragraph about where it starts out that it says the current length of the cul-de-sac is
approximately 700, put it right here. 782 feet. Measured from the center line of Minnewashta
Parkway. Then along Stratford Lane. Then along Bradford Boulevard. Then along Stratford
Ridge to the center of the cul-de-sac. I’m going wow. If I look at city code and that is on D-1.
Excuse me D-3. How do you define the depth of a cul-de-sac? D-3. This is out of city code.
It’s out of 518457, Section K. It says the length of a cul-de-sac shall be measured from the
intersection of the cul-de-sac to the street’s center line. To the center point of the cul-de-sac turn
around. It doesn’t say go down this street and that street and this street and that street. Here’s a
diagram right here. And so if I put the dimensions about how this is measured here it is right
here. It’s taking it down this street, then down this street, then down here. According to city
code it’s measured at the intersection right here. If that’s 782 feet so be it. This is only less than
half that so we’ll call it 350 plus a slight extension I’m up around 400 plus or minus. An
extension of a cul-de-sac meets city code requirements. And then furthermore you can say no,
that’s not how we measure it. Alright if that’s not, if we measure it from the other streets, which
is not how city code reads, take a look at Exhibit D-2. Alright here’s Minnewashta Parkway.
Let’s measure it the way that the staff report calls it out. Starting at Minnewashta Parkway.
Down Kings Point Road. Go north on this street. West on that street. It’s 2,100 feet. That’s
two blocks south. Is that how you measure it? I’m confused because that’s not what city code
says how you measure it. Let’s take a look at another one. They’re all over. Mine’s one of the
shortest ones after extended. So I don’t believe, unless I’m mistaken but it appears to me this is
a big error in this entire staff report. With that said go back to the paragraph above and it’s
referring me to section of city code of 18.57 and 18.60. They’re moot points. I’ll take you back
to this first exhibit. Look at the make-up of this neighborhood right here. What do you see?
Cul-de-sac, cul-de-sac, cul-de-sac, cul-de-sac, cul-de-sac, cul-de-sac, cul-de-sac, cul-de-sac, cul-
de-sac. All dead ends and then we’re going to put a through street in right there. The only
through street in the whole neighborhood. It’s against historically against the make up of the
neighborhood so you wonder why we’re not interested in putting a through street in. There’s a
lot of reasons behind it. I have a lot more but I think I’ve given you enough already to be
respectful of your time. We’re willing to work with staff. We know there’s some water resource
issues that we can work through and they can be happy with. We know we can accomplish the
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
14
city goals. We think we can do the best we can to satisfy the neighbors on their concerns. I’m
available for additional questions if you have any. Thank you so much for hearing us.
Aller: Thank you. Any questions of the applicant before he steps down? No questions? Okay
we’ll open up the public hearing portion of this item. Any individual wishing to come forward
and speak either for or against the item before us can do so. The matter is open. As you come
forward please state your name and address for the record and tell us what your concerns or your
proposals are.
Jason Watt: Sure. Good evening. My name is Jason Watt. I live at 3961 Stratford Ridge.
Lived there for about 4 years. Thank you very much for your service. I was once…employee as
well and appreciate your service. I’ve had to do a lot of education in the past 8 hours and that’s
what I maybe want to start with is just maybe to share with you my perspective of some
frustration in just terms of notice. Probably about 2-3 weeks ago there was a sign posted at the
corner of Stratford Ridge and Minnewashta Parkway stating that there was a proposed
development or a variance so I called the City or the County. City and asked what is this all
about and that employee, which I can give you the name at another date. I don’t have the name
with me, had informed me that all that has really nothing to do with your neighborhood. It’s
north of you so no concerns. So I shared that with the rest of our neighborhood that really
there’s no concern at all. And then as of late last night it was discovered that actually this does
affect our neighborhood. There’s an affidavit in the handout tonight that I, it says that there was
something mailed out just today and I just want to note for the record that my address doesn’t
have a name assigned to it for some reason so if it’s helpful again my name is Jason Watt. My
wife’s name is Katie. We live at 3961 Stratford Ridge. So just I’ll start with that just some
frustration in terms of process and notice. You mentioned that the decision cannot be made in a
vacuum but I feel like from what I’ve seen so far in the report that although it may be accurate
it’s not complete and that’s kind of why we’re here this evening is to share our perspective on
this proposal. You’ve mentioned that Stratford Ridge is a collector. I’m not familiar with that
term. Just learned that term today but it’s a collector road and I would just ask for some
consistency I guess in terms of how we apply that rule. I just counted north of where our turn in
for our neighborhood is and there’s 12 homes already that exist right on the parkway so
removing these 2 homes, I’m not sure what the logic of that is. It’s not really going to
accomplish that much in terms of what the intent of that ordinance is. In addition to that when
you look north from where we turn into our neighborhood I know that there was a new
development just north of us on the parkway within the past year or two. Just south of us there
was another new development that was split that this also attaches directly to the parkway so to
me it seems a little bit inconsistent in the analysis or the application of that rule. I’ll just leave it
at that. Also with the idea of the collector road, without knowing much about real estate
development I would think that you’d want those lots to be used for best use so the 2 existing
homes that have access straight to Stratford Ridge, if you drive along that parkway you’ll notice
that most of the homes that are placed right on the parkway they’re very large homes. They have
lake access so I don’t really think they would be best used for those homes to not have a direct
driveway from Stratford Ridge, or from Minnewashta Parkway to their homes. It just doesn’t
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
15
seem logical to me to reverse that into a cul-de-sac versus having direct access to the parkway. I
think they’d probably get a better dollar for those lots if they’re directly, they have direct access
from the parkway. There was a comment about the Fire Marshal and his desire to have a direct
route through our neighborhood. This is National Night Out. You can see that most of our
neighborhood is here rather than celebrating at home with our neighbors. We’ve had the fire
department there many years. They’ve never had a problem getting in and out of our
neighborhood so I don’t know that that’s necessarily a requirement for us to install a road simply
for fire access. We’d prefer that this not be installed period. Whether it’s an entire road or if it’s
a cul-de-sac we just, it’s not our preference to have this done. I would be curious to learn a little
bit more about how you define undue hardship. I think maybe there’s one other option of how
this, these properties could be developed that’s not been discussed so far. I don’t have a diagram
with me but you have the 5 lots have been proposed. Then you have 2 lots south of that there as
well and is it Leslee Curve I think that is to the west of there. If you’re talking about undue
hardship we don’t necessarily have to have the easiest way to develop it but just a way in which
it could be developed so I’m curious how we define undue hardship. If you look at the middle
lot it technically could have access through the road to the west of there. Then the farther south
lot that’s partially developed above our development, it could just have access through our little
cul-de-sac there so maybe one additional home rather than blowing us all up and installing a
whole new cul-de-sac or putting a road through. There are different ways to have access for
development for those 2 lots for the future. Just one other note that maybe there’s a lack of
creativity or we’ve not discussed all options on the table. That we’re just talking about access.
We’ve not talked about runoff or all the dimensions but just wanted to note that there are
different ways to have access to those 2 lots. We have about 15 kids in our neighborhood so
we’re talking about safety. Again back to the Fire Marshal’s comment. We really would prefer
not to have more cars coming through there. We’re already worried with other cars coming
through with you know high school kids getting a little bit lost so we’re always watching our
little kids. I used to live in Minneapolis. We wanted to put some speed bumps on our street
because they had redirected traffic onto our street. We were willing to pay for them. Same
number of kids. The City had declined our offer to pay for those speed bumps. That was one of
the primary reasons why we left the city so I feel like 4 years later I’m in the same spot here
dealing with something that we never anticipated and I know that maybe justice or the idea of
this being unfair is not really something that’s considered in this process but there was never,
when we looked at this, you know the possibility of buying a home in this neighborhood we did
our title check. We did all, I’m an attorney. We did all the responsible things that you should
do. I guess we never looked at the plots or about you know potential development in the future.
There’s a term that I’m not familiar with but what is that road called where it’s called a partial
road? You just kind of put in the curbs there. A stub road so there was never a stub road
installed in that northern cul-de-sac. I think that would have been a nice way to maybe give
people notice that that was the plan of the city to install a road in the future. With that any
questions?
Aller: If we were to take action tonight what action would you like to see?
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
16
Jason Watt: Well I think the motion is that we delay the decision so we would be in favor of
delaying the decision but bottom line I think we’re going to fight the best we can against having
that road installed. Or a cul-de-sac.
Aller: Thank you.
Jason Watt: Thank you.
Weick: I’m sorry, can you just restate your address so I can…
Jason Watt: You can update it. 3961 Stratford Ridge.
Weick: So you’re on that, okay. Thank you.
Jason Watt: Yeah, thank you.
David Lieser: Good evening. My name is David Lieser. My wife and I own the property at
3881 Stratford Ridge.
Aller: Welcome.
David Lieser: In addition to the things that Jason has brought up I’d like to point out that it
seems to me, and I think to many other people that considerations on future hardship which may
be incurred possibly by people subdividing 2 other properties between our properties and the
Glendale Road project. Measuring that against the actual hardship to 15 families on Stratford
Ridge is kind of a no brainer. I don’t know how far the rest of the project is going to get
considering the fact that there were so many objections by the planning people involved here as
to the water problems. It looked like there was an issue about density with the 5 lots versus
perhaps strict adherence to the city code. But I do know that when I bought my house 21 years
ago that there was no, no document was pointed out to us in any way, whether it was title
document or whether it was reviewing the plat which I believe that the attorneys did. That would
indicate to us that the cul-de-sac at our end of the street had what you’re calling a stub and that
any Comprehensive Plan of the city was to make this into a super highway running parallel to
Minnewashta Parkway. We have the same concerns that the neighbors do about their children.
We have grandchildren that visit with us and our primary concern is their safety. Secondary
concern is that now that the City is bringing up the idea that oh there should be this grand
through way to Leslee Curve, it seems to me that our property values are already being impacted
by that because now that this is said to be a possibility because of all this adherence that we have
to have to the possible rights of subdivision to possible future owners of 2 lots between us and
Glendale that would deprive us of our cul-de-sac. That would have to be revealed to any
possible buyers of our properties in the future and I think just the fact that that’s now on this
collateral record to the property, we’re in a position to really be at a great disadvantage as a
result of this. We don’t, I personally and my wife don’t have information enough about the
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
17
impact of the water problems and so forth that would, whether there would be any impact on us
or the other requirements that the city staff has set forth on the report, and I got a copy of today
to read but our concern is strictly as to the extension of the road from our cul-de-sac to either
Glendale or any other space inbetween where it is now and the Glendale project. And that’s the
gist of what I have to say. If you have any questions.
Aller: Thank you sir.
David Lieser: Thank you.
David Robertson: This is a tag team from Stratford Ridge just so you know.
Aller: If you can spend National Night Out together.
David Robertson: You bet. My name is David Robertson. I live at 3900 Stratford Ridge which
puts me right on that cul-de-sac that’s outlined in blue. That means that if any road is extended it
will go through my property as well as Trent’s somewhat and will affect us probably most
dramatically. Jason summarized a lot of the main concerns from a neighborhood perspective.
David added a few. I would just like to elaborate a little bit more on one. When we bought our
property 4 years ago in there, there was nothing in my title, and I looked at it today, that
indicated that this was ever a temporary cul-de-sac which is what is reflected in the report. We
have not had the time to review all of the titles of every neighbor or any narrative or anything
else but obviously if we see nothing there that could be an actionable thing on our part if it ever
came to that and I just wanted, I should express that. The other thing about it as well is I don’t
understand, again a little bit dovetailing on what David’s point. We bought into this property
because we had 14 homes, a house, an association that owned 450 feet of lakeshore collectively
that we share. I renovated a good portion of our house 2 years ago by gutting the entire main
level under the auspices of the fact that I have lake access and if our neighborhood has changed
in any way I believe it will diminish our property values because I don’t know how we include
these additions in regard to our HOA. I don’t know, I do know that when my house was
appraised to pay for the renovations that we did, that they took that into consideration. The
HOA. The lake frontage. The partial ownership. That still continues but that creates a mess for
us down the road as a neighborhood and how do we deal with this depending on what happens so
you know I’m, I talked to the developer the other day. I don’t have a fundamental issue with his
idea of what he’s going to do but I do have some concerns on how it would affect the
neighborhood if any stub is required by him that would in my mind insure that there’s probably
going to be a road put in at some point. Right through our property. Thank you.
Aller: Thank you.
Court MacFarlane: Good evening. My name is Court MacFarlane. I live at 3800 Leslee Curve.
I’m on the north end of the property, or north side of the property.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
18
Aller: Welcome.
Court MacFarlane: At the corner of Glendale Drive and Leslee Curve. I didn’t realize that there
were the issues with the water as far as you know the stormwater that would run off of those 5
lots. I’m hoping that there’s some way to solve that. My wife and I have lived, my wife built
that house 50 years ago. I’ve been there for the last 40 years and we’re very much in favor of the
kind of development that’s proposed to go across the street from us. I think there’s some real
confusion as to the way the measurements are made as far as how far a cul-de-sac has to be from
a main artery. In other words Minnewashta Parkway. I think there have been an awful lot of
good examples of just how inconsistent that is. I was surprised to hear or to see your diagram as
to just how far they had to go back to come up with the footage. One more thing would be the
through street that’s proposed or you might want to see go through. I would be very opposed to
additional traffic going through there. We get an awful lot of traffic coming up Glendale Drive
off of Minnewashta Parkway. That gets to be a bit of a speedway. The only good thing I think is
as you turn off of Minnewashta Parkway onto Glendale Drive there’s a real dip in the road so
nobody goes through there fast but they accelerate up the hill quite a bit. It would just another
dimension. There’s a stop sign on Leslee Curve as you turn onto Glendale Drive and people
don’t always stop there either. My driveway’s on Glendale Drive but that’s basically all I
wanted to say. I’m in favor of what he’s proposing.
Aller: Thank you.
Carin Moore: My name is Carin Moore, C-a-r-i-n and actually I’m the owner of the property
directly to the south of the development. 6760 Minnewashta Parkway. I was actually born and
raised at this property so I’m not going to say how many years I lived there. I’m just kidding.
42 years. I actually do not currently live at the property. My parents have both passed. I am
now the owner of the property and looking at the for sale sign in my yard currently. I do have
major concerns for the drainage. Obviously. The Knetson’s who live to the south, I’m not going
to speak for them but you can see on the watershed, the maps, it not only drains into my property
but it goes right into their’s as well. They actually have the low point of all 3 properties. There
is the, if it’s called the actual water table or the actual draintile, there is actually an underground
path that goes underneath the parkway out to the lakeshore. About 17 to 20 years ago there was
a major washout and actually the access going down to both our property and the association’s
property, the road was washed away and a portion of it and we had to get it fixed and that came
right down on the south side. On the north side property line of our property and the south side
of Foy’s, that’s the direction it came down and washed out. The City I believe made some
improvements with the roadway at that point as well. 17 years ago I wasn’t quite as involved but
I do know that my parents you know played a part along with Pleasant Acres to make sure that
that was maintained and fixed. So definitely I would like to see some work done to understand
how this is not going to continue especially adding 5 new homes to that causing that potential
damage again. And also causing damage to our property. I have questions and comments but I
don’t want to take up too much time too. I’ve met for the last 6 years I think with Sharmeen on
this property. We’ve looked at other options. We’ve actually looked at access on the back side.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
19
Not possible currently with the way the property lines are marked and we’ve tried because we
were looking at trying to get a, split our property in half east to west and put an access between
the Dorsey’s who is to the west side of our property right on Country Oaks and our property and
create a driveway to allow for a split property and leave it at that. No additional roads. No
additional stuff. Driving into the sewage and electricity and drainage and everything for Country
Oaks and keeping the parkway, okay. So unless something changes there that’s not a possibility.
The Stratford including a new development, I wanted to comment on that. We actually own 187
feet of lakeshore private as well as our neighbor’s to the south owning another 133 feet of
lakeshore. Pretty sure that if any development came on those two properties we would not be
including Stratford. It would be just that lakeshore so I think that HOA concerns for Stratford in
my opinion, take it or leave it, would not be an issue because we actually have our own private
lakeshore property. The biggest thing for me, like I said is the drainage. I am not, I’m not
opposed or for either option quite, right at this moment because I don’t think there’s enough
detail. I think throwing a cul-de-sac into my neighbor’s backyard and into my backyard is
potentially damaging in essence because it’s taking up a lot more of my land. I’m also not fully
looking at the diagram that Curt you know showed me, which I appreciate as being really
verbatim. I don’t see how a house can come on one of these lots. I don’t, you know I would
love to see more information and be totally in support of that but I don’t have it today to be able
to be in support of that. As for a road I’ve, like I said I grew up there. I learned how to ride my
bike there. I learned how to swim there. I’ve walked to friends houses before Stratford was even
there. I walked through that field and I rode horses. I mean I’ve been there since it was
cornfields and hay. My parents could have said even longer than that but the traffic that I see
potentially coming in if a road was added, you’re adding 4 lots. I don’t see how anybody who’s
familiar with the area would think jumping onto Glendale and coming down that road is more
convenient to get into Stratford and vice versa, why would they skip the parkway and jump onto
Stratford to go through the windy road to get over to Glendale Drive? That’s not, doesn’t make
sense. Again I’m not an engineer. I’m not a traffic coordinator so that’d be good information to
know. I have noticed a lot more traffic going through there. I have been there quite a bit so I do
understand those concerns. I also have concerns. I have little children. We go to the lake. We
have to cross Minnewashta Parkway to get to our property so I understand that but at the same
time I think that some sort of actual facts would be really helpful in understanding that because I
think a lot of people are just really nervous of the what if’s without any details behind it. I think
I’ve kind of hit most of my concerns at this time. I know you asked the other people. I’d say
table it. I think more information is needed. Thank you.
Aller: Thank you. Yes sir.
Court MacFarlane: I have just one point and I think I can help clarify. The property that’s being
developed was part of the original land that was owned by Les and Lee Anderson that was
subdivided into Pleasant Acres and then later Country Oaks. But on their title any property that
was part of their original parcel of land, when it was eventually subdivided any owner of those
lots would become members of the Pleasant Acres Homeowners Association and have access to
the beachlot that we have which is down, well just immediately down from Glendale Drive so I
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
20
don’t think there should be any concern by the people in Stratford, is it Stratford? That there
would be any use of the shoreline by these 5 lots. They would then become members of Pleasant
Acres. That’s my understanding.
Aller: Just for the record you’re Mr. MacFarlane right?
Court MacFarlane: Pardon?
Aller: You’re Mr. MacFarlane?
Court MacFarlane: MacFarlane yes. Yes.
Aller: Thank you.
Jane Bender: Hi I’m Jane Bender. I’m at 4001 Stratford Ridge. I’m at the other end of the cul-
de-sac but I’ve been there for 20 years. I enjoyed raising my children in the area and I want to
thank you for your dedication to having parks so close to all the homes and being conscious of
green space as well as conserving our lake. I just kind of feel like a little bit of clarification in
terms of using the Pleasant Acres area. We’re concerned about if we extend our cul-de-sac, we
already have a homeowners association and so then that would add, and this is like preparing for
something that hasn’t even been, you know no one has asked for yet but should the cul-de-sac be
expanded then if the new homes were put in that cul-de-sac they wouldn’t really be part of our
homeowners association so that could run into some awkwardness. But along the lines too I just
wanted to mention that adding all of these roads and adding the cul-de-sac and being concerned
about drainage and water and things I feel that we’re just taking away more green space. I hate
to see more cement lay down and then you have to maintain it and our cul-de-sac, I don’t know
the last time it was actually kind of smoothed over, redone. It’s been several years and I know
it’s very, very expensive but just that whole maintenance part of it too is a concern for me. We,
you know we really do take pride in our curbside appeal and you know roads and access in and
out is part of that.
Aller: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to come forward at this point?
Audience: Can the City define undue hardship for us?
Aller: I think it’s.
Bender: I’ll try to and maybe Sharmeen will jump in and add something to that. It’s about an
uneven distribution of the land required in order to allow each of these 3 lots a fair course at
subdivision. So is that understood? I mean did I explain?
Audience: …or is that just your, I’m not trying to disrespectful. Is it somewhere with that
definition or?
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
21
Bender: No I was just trying to explain it there so.
Generous: Mr. Chairman.
Aller: Yes.
Generous: There’s nothing specifically written. It says you look at it is there a reasonable
expectation that if they follow the requirements of the ordinance they won’t be unduly prohibited
from having a reasonable use of their property. But there’s nothing, you know there’s no
quantitative measure that you could really look at. It’s a little bit subjective because it’s not
quantifiable. But it’s when you put too much burden on someone else so that your, you can go
forward with what you do then that’s a hardship.
Aller: Thank you.
Al-Jaff: There is one other thing that we might want to point out. If you look at the grade at the
end of the cul-de-sac there is approximately a 10 foot drop. You need a distance, the grade of a
street has to be no more than 7 percent and to maintain that 7 percent you really need to grade
those, the area over a stretch and we don’t believe that they would be able to meet ordinance
requirements with just an extension of a cul-de-sac. If the cul-de-sac ended in this vicinity with
that type of drop they’re not going to be able to make the 7 percent. It would need to be
extended further so that’s one of the reasons also why we recommended the road extend out to
Glendale Drive.
Aller: Okay. Was anyone else going to come forward? So you just got back or you just
appeared. Would you like an opportunity to speak on the Glendale matter?
Audience: No.
Aller: Okay. Having no one come forward at this time I’m going to go ahead and close the
public hearing on this matter at this point in time and open it up for commission discussion,
action including the recommendation. Commissioner Randall.
Randall: This is pretty complicated here. I think there’s a lot of issues on the table with it. I
appreciate everyone coming in to talk tonight about it. Their concerns and their feedback on it.
There’s a lot of different moving parts to this. I mean obviously we have 2 other property
owners right there at the end of this stub or cul-de-sac, whatever you want to call it. At this time
I would feel better tabling it so we can get those water runoff issues going and after hearing their
concerns I think we got a lot of unanswered questions right now with it. That’s how I feel about
it.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
22
Aller: Any additional comments at this time? If someone was to make a motion to table it is
non-debatable so we would not have an opportunity to discuss any further so any additional
comments or concerns at this point? Commissioner Madsen.
Madsen: I would agree to table it. I would like to see more information about if the through
street was developed what sort of traffic would that be expected to generate just so that could be
quantified. I would also like to find out the reasoning why extending the road to the middle lot
was not an opportunity previously and so that it can’t be considered going forward and then more
information about why you’re proposing that it needs to be a through street and not a cul-de-sac
on Stratford Ridge. More information about geographical limitations.
Al-Jaff: Okay.
Aller: Additional, Commissioner Weick.
Weick: This might be difficult and I might be all over the place a little bit but bear with me if
you will. I do want to make a couple comments and then it might ultimately get to a point at the
end and it might not. But I share your heartbreak over losing green space. It’s something I
struggle with every time a development comes in front of us personally. I agree with you the
reality of large lots becoming small lots I just, it hurts. But it’s also a reality of kind of our city
and there’s a lot of large lots that have the opportunity to be profitable for the landowner and so I
think we need to respect that as well. The second thing is I’m concerned, I’ve heard a little bit
about not wanting the through street necessarily or at least the stubs for the through street. I’m
just concerned like, we can’t promise what those other 2 lots will develop into in the future so
I’m concerned, I am just, I think the reality is even if there weren’t stubs for a through street put
in it’s not to say that in the future something wouldn’t happen on those 2 southern lots that would
be you know potentially a cul-de-sac or an extension or something. I mean who knows and
that’s, so that needs to be considered as well. I’m opposed though to tabling this because I’m not
sure, and this is where it sort of comes around. I probably go 360 but, or 180. The burden to me
is on the landowners and so the conditions that exist around these 3 properties are the realities of
kind of how that land has been developed. I think in my opinion the, I don’t see anything in that,
in what’s been proposed today that we would oppose or could oppose as a preliminary plat and I
would welcome contrary opinion to that. So that land is developable, if that’s a word. The
impact that that has in the future on the 2 properties to the south unfortunately if people aren’t
working together with that land, I don’t know that we should be taking that into consideration
today so I don’t think we should suggest a through street or the stubs. I think that property can
be developed into 5 lots that make sense. I’m not sure we have a position contrary to that and so
if we do, maybe I’m misunderstanding but we’re considering things that are, we’re sort of
looking into the future and saying well if all of these properties would be developed together it
might look different but they’re not. Right? It’s one property that’s being developed and I think
we have to consider if the middle property wants to develop we have to consider that separately
and if the third southern property wants to try and develop at that time that needs to be
considered separately but, am I, and if I’m missing please correct me.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
23
Aller: I just look at it as, and that’s why I asked originally whether there was a timeline in
position that would be impacting and maybe prejudicial to either side and since we have the time
to do it and we have everyone basically coming in, or most people coming in, in my mind and
saying there’s a lot more information that they would like to have to perhaps to voice a different
opinion then I would be in favor, if somebody was going to table it to go ahead and table it. If
they were requesting a, if they want to go through with a plat I don’t think I have enough
information. You know how I am with my water issues to really determine whether or not the
water impacts would be protected and whether or not the, there’s enough information for me to
move forward and vote for the project at this point so I would be voting against so for me I think
it’s favorable to go ahead and table it and give the City and the neighborhood and the applicant
to get together on some of these issues and come back and maybe we’ll see something different.
I mean I’ve heard people say that wisdom, it’s not really smart to be in a position not to change
your mind. It’s being in a position of wisdom and shown by actually changing your mind when
you’re shown different facts and circumstances so I’m a great believer in the fact that, as in the
prior situation where people are, the City and the applicants are willing to get together and work
on things and we’ve had plenty of input from the neighborhood at this point in time, that they
can all use that to their benefit and come up with a plan that again may not be perfect but it’s
going to be better than this one.
McGonagill: If I may.
Aller: Commissioner McGonagill.
McGonagill: Commissioner Weick I agree with you it’s one property we’re talking about. I
look at it that way and it’s with the issue of that one property that I also will vote to table because
I have the concerns on the water and how it will accelerate, to use that word or increase the
amount of water runoff to the lots to the south and to me that’s a hardship on the, you know
we’ve just got to be sensitive to and be sure that there’s a good water management plan in place.
There’s already a bad, well I say there’s a bad situation there. You can look at the topo’s and see
it and ultimately I agree with what you said. Those lots will be developed and water issues, how
we manage those here are going to start setting precedent for how that water will be managed
down the road and the impact it has on Lake Minnewashta itself. As one of the public
commenters tonight is there’s a lot of water that moves through there in big storm events and so I
want to see a better plan for that or better understanding of that or what we’re going to do. I
realize we’re only doing the one and that’s what we have to consider but what I saw tonight
didn’t answer my questions to the point where I could vote in favor.
Weick: Can I ask a question?
Aller: Sure.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
24
Weick: Is preliminary plat, do you have to have your water plan complete at the time of
preliminary plat approval?
Al-Jaff: Yes.
Weick: You do, okay.
Al-Jaff: It’s required by ordinance.
Aller: And I think the staff report went through and said, these are things that we’re looking at
as being required and that we would require of all applicants and we don’t have enough
information to really make a decision or a recommendation to us. I don’t feel comfortable
making a decision with them not feeling comfortable. But I may decide I don’t agree with them
but I don’t even have that before me to make my decision.
Weick: Okay. And that’s good information I think because I certainly wouldn’t approve based
on the water alone the plat. I think that does need to be fixed. I just want to be clear that I’m not
in favor of tabling this in order to study the road situation anymore. I don’t, I’m concerned about
the canopy coverage which I think was probably just an omission because there was just all
zeroes. And then the water which is significant. I think if that can be fixed over this time that
we table it I think that would be a benefit to the developer.
Aller: Additional comments? Or action. I can’t make a motion so.
Weick: What did you think?
Undestad: No I agree. I know what you’re saying there but again it’s not tabling it just for the
street. It would be for, and the zeroes on the canopy coverage, there was no landscape plan
submitted.
Weick: That’s what I mean, yeah.
Undestad: So there is nothing, you know again that was more information that’s required to get
that covered too so I agree with it. I think tabling is the right thing to do.
Weick: Okay.
Aller: So I’ll entertain a motion of some sort.
McGonagill: Mr. Chairman I can do that.
Aller: Commissioner McGonagill.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
25
McGonagill: Recommend that the Chanhassen Planning Commission tables action on the
preliminary plat to subdivide 2.14 acres into 5 lots and one outlot and a variance to allow a 50
foot public right-of-way and directs the applicant to address the issues, address issues in the staff
report.
Aller: And with the, I would like to add that we preserve the right to have a continuation of a
public hearing on any information provided so we basically, because we’ve heard what the
public has said and what the community wants to do based on the information that they have in
front of them but that might change.
McGonagill: I would agree to that addition to the motion, is that what you’re requesting? Okay
so it would read like we said but add an addition for additional time for public comment.
Generous: Preserve the right.
McGonagill: Preserve the right for public comments. I would agree with that Mr. Chairman.
Aller: And I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Madsen: Second.
Aller: Having a motion and a second, it’s non-debatable so there’s no further comment.
McGonagill moved, Madsen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission tables
action on the preliminary plat to subdivide 2.14 acres into 5 lots and one outlot and a
variance to allow a 50 foot public right-of-way and directs the applicant to address the
issues, address issues in the staff report and preserves the right for public comment. All
voted in favor, except Commissioner Weick who opposed, and the motion carried with a
vote of 5 to 1.
Aller: So the motion carries with Commissioner Weick opposing. That’s fine. Before you leave
I’d like to thank everyone present for coming tonight and sharing your National Night Out with
us and making us a part of your neighborhood. We really appreciate you coming in and giving
us your viewpoint and since I had to miss mine and leave mine early I was just grateful to have
you all here and share it with you so thank you for being here. Let’s take a one minute recess
while the room clears.
(There was a short recess at this point in the meeting.)
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Weick noted the verbatim and summary
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated July 17, 2018 as presented.
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
26
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS.
Aller: We’ll have a City Council action update.
Generous: The subdivision on the Red Cedar Point was approved with a variance. It was
creating two lots and they used a cul-de-sac…with variance. And future Planning Commission,
there’s no meeting on the 21st unless this item can magically turn around by Friday.
Aller: I don’t think it will. There’s a lot of work to be done but I think that, they all realize that
and that it will get done.
Generous: And just to remind you that the joint commission tour is tomorrow night so be here at
6:00. If you can make it let me know, or let Kate know.
McGonagill: It starts at 6:00?
Generous: Yes. And you’ll just meet right out front here. And we have a bus.
Aller: How’s the weather report?
Generous: It’s going to be hot.
Aller: Hot and muggy right?
Generous: (Yes).
Al-Jaff: You will be done by 8:00 we promise.
Aller: Footwear?
Al-Jaff: Comfortable shoes. There will be a half mile walk.
Aller: Great.
Generous: On the trail. On the new trail. By the water treatment plant.
Aller: Wonderful.
Generous: We’ll start at the bottom and finish up on top.
Aller: That’s a water treatment plant? It doesn’t look like a water treatment plant.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018
27
Generous: That’s my summer home. If you go on Manchester that looks great. We do have 2
items for the September 4th meeting. There’s a variance request on South Shore Drive and then a
PUD amendment for the Target Chanhassen Retail Center. It’s a minor amendment regarding
signage so. That’s it for now.
Aller: Great. So those of you at home want to see what’s coming up make sure you check the
website and take a look at the packets as they appear on the website and you can come on in and
make comments if you desire to do so as matters come before us. I’ll entertain a motion to
adjourn.
Randall moved, Madsen seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was
adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Receive Park & Recreation Summary Minutes dated July 24, 2018
Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.3.
Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder'File No:
PROPOSED MOTION
“The City Council receives the Park & Recreation Commission summary minutes dated July 24, 2018.”
Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.
ATTACHMENTS:
Summary Minutes
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
JULY 24, 2018
Chairman Scharfenberg called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Karl Tsuchiya, Cole Kelly, Jim Boettcher, Meredith Petouvis, Rick
Echternacht, Grant Schaeferle and Steve Scharfenberg.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Joseph Scanlon
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park ad Rec Director; and Katie Mathews, Recreation Supervisor
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: the agenda was approved as presented
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS; Park and Recreation Director Hoffman informed the commission about
Night Out on the Town, Thursday, July 26 downtown Chanhassen and National Night Out, Tuesday,
August 7
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Dennis Gallaher, Southwest Metro Pickelball Club
APPROVAL OF MINUETS: Boettcher moved, Echternacht seconded to approve the verbatim and
summary minuets of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated June 26, 2018. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
NEW BUSINESS
Initiate discussion regarding recommendation to City Council, 2019 through 2023 park and trail
acquisition and development capital improvement program (CIP): Todd Hoffman gave an overview
of the scheduled 2019 Park and Trail Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
REPORTS: Katie Mathews gave a report on the 2018 4th of July Celebration
COMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS – None
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS – None
AMINISTRATIVE PACKET
ADJOURNMENT
Boettcher moved, Echternacht seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
The Park and Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned.
Prepared and submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Director
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Approve Flood Reduction Grant Agreement for Acquisition of Property at 770 Pioneer Trail
Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4.
Prepared By Paul Oehme, Director of Public
Works/City Engineer
File No: SWMP19: 8802
PROPOSED MOTION
“The City Council approves a DNR Flood Mitigation Grant Agreement for Acquisition of Flood Prone Property at
770 Pioneer Trail."
Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.
BACKGROUND
On March 12, 2018, the City Council authorized submitting to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) a grant application for acquisition of three properties located at 730, 750 and 770 Pioneer Trail. The homes
were constructed in the 1960's and 1970's and have historically been susceptible to flooding. Rain events over 2.5
inches in a 24hour period flood the yards, and events over 3.5 inches can potentially flood the structures on the
properties. The properties are in an 11.4acre subwatershed that extends east to Foxford Road in the Lake Riley
Woods Development. Most of the acreage on these parcels are in a wetland so flood mitigation opportunities are
limited per wetland rules. Flooding on these properties has been reported as far back as the 1970's before significant
development in the area began.
The DNR has awarded grant funds to help the city purchase one of the homes at this time.
DISCUSSION
The Minnesota DNR Flood Reduction Grant Assistance Program (FDR) application was approved to purchase the
property at 770 Pioneer Trail. The city will be reimbursed 50% for eligible project expenses, not to exceed
$180.000.00. The city must provide a match equal to the State’s contribution. The proposed project would be to
purchase the home, remove the structures, cap the well and remove the septic system. Staff has discussed purchasing
the parcels and reestablishing wetlands on the parcel with the RileyPurgatoryBluff Creek Watershed District staff
and Board. The Watershed District has stated they are very interested in the project and are willing to financially
partner on the property acquisition and a future wetland restoration project. Also, the project was identified during the
Avienda WCA permit process. If the Avienda project moves forward, the developer is required to contribute funds to
the city for a wetland or stormwater project. These funds could be used to help with the acquisitions and a future
wetland improvement project.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 27, 2018SubjectApprove Flood Reduction Grant Agreement for Acquisition of Property at 770 Pioneer TrailSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4.Prepared By Paul Oehme, Director of PublicWorks/City Engineer File No: SWMP19: 8802PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council approves a DNR Flood Mitigation Grant Agreement for Acquisition of Flood Prone Property at770 Pioneer Trail."Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOn March 12, 2018, the City Council authorized submitting to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources(DNR) a grant application for acquisition of three properties located at 730, 750 and 770 Pioneer Trail. The homeswere constructed in the 1960's and 1970's and have historically been susceptible to flooding. Rain events over 2.5inches in a 24hour period flood the yards, and events over 3.5 inches can potentially flood the structures on theproperties. The properties are in an 11.4acre subwatershed that extends east to Foxford Road in the Lake RileyWoods Development. Most of the acreage on these parcels are in a wetland so flood mitigation opportunities arelimited per wetland rules. Flooding on these properties has been reported as far back as the 1970's before significantdevelopment in the area began.The DNR has awarded grant funds to help the city purchase one of the homes at this time. DISCUSSIONThe Minnesota DNR Flood Reduction Grant Assistance Program (FDR) application was approved to purchase theproperty at 770 Pioneer Trail. The city will be reimbursed 50% for eligible project expenses, not to exceed$180.000.00. The city must provide a match equal to the State’s contribution. The proposed project would be topurchase the home, remove the structures, cap the well and remove the septic system. Staff has discussed purchasingthe parcels and reestablishing wetlands on the parcel with the RileyPurgatoryBluff Creek Watershed District staffand Board. The Watershed District has stated they are very interested in the project and are willing to financiallypartner on the property acquisition and a future wetland restoration project. Also, the project was identified during theAvienda WCA permit process. If the Avienda project moves forward, the developer is required to contribute funds tothe city for a wetland or stormwater project. These funds could be used to help with the acquisitions and a future
wetland improvement project.
If the grant agreement is approved, city staff will obtain an appraisal, work on a sale amount with the homeowner and
secure additional matching funds from either a WMO or use the Avienda funds if they are available. The City Council
will still need to approve the sale of the property so staff will have a complete funding package with the future
acquisition Council item.
The City Attorney has reviewed the agreement.
ATTACHMENTS:
Agreement
Location Map
145835 / 3000138988
Grant (Rev. 08/2018) 1
STATE OF MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND GRANT CONTRACT
WITH THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN FOR ACQUISITION OF FLOOD PRONE PROPERTY
This grant contract is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Natural Resources,
("State") and the City of Chanhassen, 7700 Market Boulevard, PO Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317
("Grantee").
Recitals
1. Under Minnesota. Statutes, Section 103F.161, Subdivision 1, the State is empowered to enter into this grant
agreement.
2. The State agrees that removal of structures from flood prone areas is in the interest of the State.
3. The Grantee represents that it is duly qualified and agrees to perform all services described in this grant
contract to the satisfaction of the State. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §16B.98 Subdivision 1, the Grantee
agrees to minimize administrative costs as a condition of this grant contract.
4. The Grantee attests it has the financial capacity to provide any required local match for the project or phase
funded under the terms of this grant contract, and agrees to complete the project or phase if the cost of the
project or phase exceeds the amount of state funding and required local match.
5. The monies allocated to fund the grant to the Grantee are proceeds of state general obligation (G.O.) bonds
authorized to be issued under Article XI, § 5(a) of the Minnesota Constitution; and
6. The Grantee’s receipt and use of the G.O. Grant to acquire an ownership interest in and/or improve real
property (the “Real Property”) and, if applicable, structures situated thereon (the “Facility”) will cause the
Public Entity’s ownership interest in all of such real property and structures to become “state bond financed
property”, as such term is used in Minn. Stat. § 16A.695 (the “G.O. Compliance Legislation”) and in that
certain “Fourth Order Amending Order of the Commissioner of Finance Relating to Use and Sale of State
Bond Financed Property” executed by the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget and dated
July 30, 2012, as amended (the “Commissioner’s Order”), even though such funds may only be a portion of the
funds being used to acquire such ownership interest and/or improve such real property and structures and that
such funds may be used to only acquire such ownership interest and/or improve a part of such real property and
structures.
Grant Contract
1 Term of Grant Contract
1.1 Effective date: August 15, 2018, or the date the State obtains all required signatures under Minnesota
Statutes §16C.05, subdivision 2, whichever is later.
1.2 Expiration date: December 31, 2019 or until all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever
occurs first.
1.3 Survival of Terms. The following clauses survive the expiration or cancellation of this grant contract:
8. Liability; 9. State Audits; 10. Government Data Practices and Intellectual Property; 13. Publicity and
Endorsement; 14. Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue; and 16. Data Disclosure.
2 Grantee’s Duties
The Grantee, who is not a state employee, will be responsible for:
Acquisition of as many flood prone properties identified in the Grantee’s March 13, 2018 application for
Flood Damage Reduction Grant Assistance as funding allows. The Grantee shall acquire title to property,
remove all structures, disconnect utilities, and restore topsoil and landscaping. All demolition material is to
be disposed of in compliance with Federal, State, and local standards. Property acquired by the Grantee
shall remain in permanent public ownership. The Grantee agrees that the land shall be used only for
purposes compatible with open space, recreational, or wetlands management practices per adopted State and
local floodplain and shoreland management ordinances.
145835 / 3000138988
Grant (Rev. 08/2018) 2
All project expenses not identified as being related to work outlined above, or as subsequently amended in this
agreement, must be approved by the State in writing prior to the Grantee incurring said expense.
3 Time
The Grantee must comply with all the time requirements described in this grant contract. In the performance
of this grant contract, time is of the essence.
4 Consideration and Payment
4.1 Consideration. The State will reimburse for all eligible services performed by the Grantee under this grant
contract as follows:
(a) Compensation. The Grantee will be reimbursed 50% for eligible project expenses, not to exceed
$180.000.00. Grantee must provide a match equal to the State’s contribution.
(b) Travel Expenses. Reimbursement for eligible project-related travel and subsistence expenses actually
and necessarily incurred by the Grantee as a result of this grant contract will be reimbursed in the same
manner and in no greater amount than provided in the current "Commissioner’s Plan” promulgated by
the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB). The Grantee will not be
reimbursed for travel and subsistence expenses incurred outside Minnesota unless it has received the
State’s prior written approval for out of state travel. Minnesota will be considered the home state for
determining whether travel is out of state.
(c) Eligible Expenses. Eligible expenses are those costs directly incurred by the Grantee that are solely
related to and necessary for producing the work products described in Provision 2 of this Agreement.
Eligible costs may include the following:
advertising costs for bids and proposals; capital expenditures for facilities, equipment and other capital
assets as expressly approved by the State; materials and supplies; architectural and engineering services;
construction management and inspection services; surveys and soil borings; attorney fees solely related and
necessary to accomplish the Project, as determined by the State and actual construction of the Project.
Certain other types of costs may be eligible provided that they are (1) directly incurred by the Grantee; (2)
are solely related to, and necessary for, producing the work products described in Provision 2; and (3) have
prior written approval of the State. Any cost not defined as an eligible cost or not included in the Project
Plan shall not be paid from State funds committed to the Project.
(d) Ineligible Expenses. Non-eligible costs for reimbursement means all costs not defined as eligible
costs, including but not limited to the following:
Any costs incurred before the effective date of this Grant; fund raising; taxes, except sales tax on goods
and services; insurance, except title insurance; attorney fees not necessary to accomplish the project; loans,
grants, or subsidies to persons or entities for development; financing; bad debts or contingency funds;
interest; operation and maintenance costs; options for acquisition of real estate; lobbyists; and political
contributions.
4.2. Payment
Invoices. To obtain reimbursement for eligible costs under this Grant, the Grantee shall provide the State
with invoices and evidence that the portion of the Project for which payment is requested has been
satisfactorily completed. All invoices shall be sent to the person designated in Section 6. Grantee shall
submit invoices and evidence that the required contribution toward any required local match are being met.
Invoices will be submitted for the amount and should differentiate, when applicable, between the Federal
and Non-Federal Project costs, as well as the State and local share of the Project costs. Invoices must be
received by the State within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Project or the expiration of this
Grant as set forth in Section 1.2, whichever occurs first. Invoices received after that date may not be
145835 / 3000138988
3
eligible for reimbursement, at the State’s discretion. The State’s authorized agent has final authority for
acceptance of Grantee’s services, determination as to whether the expenditures are eligible for
reimbursement under this Grant, and verification of the total amount requested. The Grantee shall not
receive payment for work found by the State to be unsatisfactory, or performed in violation of federal, state
or local law, ordinance, rule or regulation. At its discretion, the State may retain 10% of the total grant
award until the State has determined that the Grantee has satisfactorily fulfilled all of the terms of this
Grant. If requested by the State, the Grantee shall arrange for a tour of the Project area prior to release of
the final ten (10) percent of the funds. Invoices must be submitted timely and according to the following
schedule:
It is required that invoices be submitted, at a minimum, at the close of each state fiscal year which is July 1
– June 30. If expenses are extensive, reimbursement requests may be submitted monthly or quarterly.
Please itemize the eligible expenses by the month of occurrence, not liquidation. If invoices are not
received in this format, it could delay receipt of payment.
5 Conditions of Payment
All services provided by the Grantee under this grant contract must be performed to the State’s satisfaction, as
determined at the sole discretion of the State’s Authorized Representative and in accordance with all applicable
federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. The Grantee will not receive payment for work
found by the State to be unsatisfactory or performed in violation of federal, state, or local law.
6 Authorized Representative
The State's Authorized Representative is Patrick Lynch, Floodplain Hydrologist, Department of Natural Resources,
500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, Minnesota, 55155, 651-259-5691, pat.lynch@state.mn.us , or his/her successor, and
has the responsibility to monitor the Grantee’s performance and the authority to accept or reject the services
provided under this grant contract. If the services are satisfactory, the State's Authorized Representative will certify
acceptance on each invoice submitted for payment.
The Grantee’s Authorized Representative is Paul Oehme, Public Works Director/City Engineer, City of
Chanhassen, 7700 Market Blvd., PO Box 17, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, 952-227-1169,
poehme@ci.chanhassen.mn.us . If the Grantee’s Authorized Representative changes at any time during this grant
contract, the Grantee must immediately notify the State.
7 Assignment, Amendments, Waiver, and Grant Contract Complete
7.1 Assignment. The Grantee shall neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this grant
contract without the prior written consent of the State, approved by the same parties who executed and
approved this grant contract, or their successors in office.
7.2 Amendments. Any amendments to this grant contract must be in writing and will not be effective until it
has been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original grant
contract, or their successors in office.
7.3 Waiver. If the State fails to enforce any provision of this grant contract, that failure does not waive the
provision or the State’s right to enforce it.
7.4 Grant Contract Complete. This grant contract contains all negotiations and agreements between the State
and the Grantee. No other understanding regarding this grant contract, whether written or oral, may be
used to bind either party.
8 Liability
The Grantee must indemnify, save, and hold the State, its agents, and employees harmless from any claims or
causes of action, including attorney’s fees incurred by the State, arising from the performance of this grant contract
by the Grantee or the Grantee’s agents or employees. This clause will not be construed to bar any legal remedies
145835 / 3000138988
4
the Grantee may have for the State's failure to fulfill its obligations under this grant contract.
9 State Audits
Under Minn. Stat. §16B.98, Subd.8, the Grantee’s books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and
practices of the Grantee or other party relevant to this grant agreement or transaction are subject to examination by
the State and/or the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end
of this grant agreement, receipt and approval of all final reports, or the required period of time to satisfy all state
and program retention requirements, whichever is later.
10 Government Data Practices
The Grantee and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, as it
applies to all data provided by the State under this grant contract, and as it applies to all data created, collected,
received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Grantee under this grant contract. The civil remedies of
Minn. Stat. § 13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by either the Grantee or the State.
If the Grantee receives a request to release the data referred to in this Clause, the Grantee must immediately notify
the State. The State will give the Grantee instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party
before the data is released. The Grantee’s response to the request shall comply with applicable law.
11 Prevailing Wages
Grantee agrees to comply with all of the applicable provisions contained in Chapter 177 of the Minnesota Statutes,
and specifically those provisions contained in Minn. Stat. §§ 177.41 through 177.435, as they may be amended,
modified or replaced from time to time with respect to the Project.
12 Workers’ Compensation
The Grantee certifies that it is in compliance with Minn. Stat. § 176.181, subd. 2, pertaining to workers’
compensation insurance coverage. The Grantee’s employees and agents will not be considered State employees.
Any claims that may arise under the Minnesota Workers’ Compensation Act on behalf of these employees and any
claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of these employees are in no
way the State’s obligation or responsibility.
13 Publicity and Endorsement
13.1 Acknowledgments. The Grantee agrees to acknowledge the State's financial support for the Project. Any
statement, press release, bid, solicitation, or other document issued describing the Project shall provide
information reflecting that State funds were used to support the Project and will contain the following
language:
This Project is made possible in part by a grant provided by the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, through an appropriation by the Minnesota State Legislature.
Any site developed or improved by the Project shall display a sign, in a form approved by the State,
stating the same information.
13.2 Endorsement. The Grantee must not claim that the State endorses its products or services.
14 Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue
Minnesota law, without regard to its choice-of-law provisions, governs this grant contract. Venue for all legal
proceedings out of this grant contract, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent
jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
145835 / 3000138988
5
15 Termination
15.1 Termination by the State. The State may immediately terminate this grant contract with or without cause,
upon 30 days’ written notice to the Grantee. Upon termination, the Grantee will be entitled to payment,
determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed.
15.2 Termination for Cause. The State may immediately terminate this grant contract if the State finds that
there has been a failure to comply with the provisions of this grant contract, that reasonable progress has
not been made or that the purposes for which the funds were granted have not been or will not be
fulfilled. The State may take action to protect the interests of the State of Minnesota, including the
refusal to disburse additional funds and requiring the return of all or part of the funds already disbursed.
16 Data Disclosure
Under Minn. Stat. § 270C.65, Subd. 3, and other applicable law, the Grantee consents to disclosure of its social
security number, federal employer tax identification number, and/or Minnesota tax identification number, already
provided to the State, to federal and state tax agencies and state personnel involved in the payment of state
obligations. These identification numbers may be used in the enforcement of federal and state tax laws which
could result in action requiring the Grantee to file state tax returns and pay delinquent state tax liabilities, if any.
17 Preservation of Tax Exempt Status
In order to preserve the tax-exempt status of the G.O. Bonds, the Grantee agrees as follows:
A. It will not use the Real Property or, if applicable, Facility, or use or invest the G.O. Grant or any
other sums treated as “bond proceeds” under Section 148 of the Code including “investment proceeds,” “invested
sinking funds,” and “replacement proceeds,” in such a manner as to cause the G.O. Bonds to be classified as
“arbitrage bonds” under Section 148 of the Code.
B. It will, upon written request, provide the Commissioner of MMB all information required to satisfy
the informational requirements set forth in the Code including, but not limited to, Sections 103 and 148 thereof,
with respect to the G.O. Bonds.
C. It will, upon the occurrence of any act or omission by the Grantee or any Counterparty that could
cause the interest on the G.O. Bonds to no longer be tax exempt and upon direction from the Commissioner of
MMB, take such actions and furnish such documents as the Commissioner of MMB determines to be necessary
to ensure that the interest to be paid on the G.O. Bonds is exempt from federal taxation, which such action may
include either: (i) compliance with proceedings intended to classify the G.O. Bonds as a “qualified bond” within
the meaning of Section 141(e) of the Code, (ii) changing the nature or terms of the Use Contract so that it
complies with Revenue Procedure 97-13, 1997-1 CB 632, or (iii) changing the nature of the use of the Real
Property or, if applicable, Facility so that none of the net proceeds of the G.O. Bonds will be used, directly or
indirectly, in an “unrelated trade or business” or for any “private business use” (within the meaning of Sections
141(b) and 145(a) of the Code), or (iv) compliance with other Code provisions, regulations, or revenue
procedures which amend or supersede the foregoing.
D. It will not otherwise use any of the G.O. Grant, including earnings thereon, if any, or take or permit
to or cause to be taken any action that would adversely affect the exemption from federal income taxation of the
interest on the G.O. Bonds, nor omit to take any action necessary to maintain such tax exempt status, and if it
should take, permit, omit to take, or cause to be taken, as appropriate, any such action, it shall take all lawful
actions necessary to rescind or correct such actions or omissions promptly upon having knowledge thereof.
18 Use of State Bond- Financed Property, Deed Restrictions, and Real Estate Declarations
"State bond- financed property" means property acquired or bettered in whole or in part with the proceeds of state
145835 / 3000138988
6
general obligation bonds authorized to be issued under article XI, section 5, clause (a), of the Minnesota
Constitution. Use of State bond- financed property must be operated in compliance with the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes chapter 16A.695, all state and federal laws, and in a manner that will not cause the interest on
the state general obligation bonds to be or become subject to federal income taxation for any reason.
Upon acquisition or betterment of any land and or structures using these grant funds, Grantee shall record
permanent deed restrictions requiring any new or future public structures on the parcels to be in strict conformance
with adopted floodplain and shoreland standards.
Grantee shall record a declaration for real estate rights acquired or property bettered under this Agreement. The
declaration must acknowledge the property rights or betterments were acquired in whole or in part with State
general obligation bond funds and subject to the encumbrance created and requirements imposed by Minnesota
Stat. Sec. 16A. Grantee shall submit a copy of the recorded real estate declaration for real estate acquired or
bettered under this Grant to the State’s Authorized Agent using the form in Attachment A of this Grant or on an
alternative form pre- approved by the State.
Proof of recordation of the deed restrictions and declaration for each property acquired or bettered under the terms
of this Agreement must be submitted to the State’s authorized agent within 60 days of acquisition or betterment,
and before final payment is made by the State to the Grantee.
19 Invasive Species
The DNR requires active steps to prevent or limit the introduction, establishment, and spread of invasive species
during contracted work. The contractor shall take measures to prevent invasive species from entering into or
spreading within a project site by cleaning equipment prior to arriving at the project site. If the equipment,
vehicles, gear, or clothing arrives at the project site with soil, aggregate material, mulch, vegetation (including
seeds) or animals, it shall be cleaned by contractor furnished tool or equipment (brush/broom, compressed air or
pressure washer) at the staging area. The contractor shall dispose of material cleaned from equipment and clothing
at a location determined by the DNR Contract Administrator. If the material cannot be disposed of onsite, secure
material prior to transport (sealed container, covered truck, or wrap with tarp) and legally dispose of offsite.
20 Jobs Reporting
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 16A.633, subd. 4, the Grantee shall collect, maintain and, upon completion of
the project, provide the information to the State on forms provided by the State. The information must include
the number and types of jobs created by the project, whether the jobs are new or retained, where the jobs are
located, and pay ranges of the jobs.
21 Construction Contract Language on Jobs Reporting
The Contractor is hereby advised that this Project is funded all or in part by state bond funds and subject to the
reporting requirements of Minnesota Statute 16A.633, Subdivision 4 (MN Laws of 2012 Chapter 293, Section
28).
22 Permits, Approvals and Environmental Review
This grant does not constitute State approval of the project or phase funded under this agreement, and neither
negates nor precludes any mandatory environmental review or permitting requirements that may apply to the
project or phase. Grantee may not commence construction until all necessary permits and approvals have been
obtained and the requirements of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410 have been satisfied.
145835 / 3000138988
7
1. STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION 3. STATE AGENCY Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as Individual certifies the applicable provisions of Minn. Stat.
required by Minn. Stat. §§16A.15 and 16C.05. §16C.08, subdivisions 2 and 3 are reaffirmed.
Signed: ___________________________________________ By: __________________________________________
(with delegated authority)
Date: __8/7/2018_________________________________ Title _______________________________________
SWIFT Contract/PO No(s)._145835/3000138988__________ Date: _______________________________________
2. GRANTEE
The Grantee certifies that the appropriate person(s)
have executed the grant contract on behalf of the Grantee as
required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions, or ordinances.
By: ________________________________________________
Title: ______________________________________________
Date: _______________________________________________
By: ________________________________________________
Title: ______________________________________________
Distribution:
Date: _______________________________________________ Agency
Grantee
State’s Authorized Representative - Photo Copy
Lake
Ann
Park
Rice Marsh
Lake Preserve
North
LotusLake
ParkLake
Minnew ashta
Regional
Park
(County Park)SunsetRidgeParkMeadowGreenPark
K erb erP o n d P a rk
Lake Susan PreserveBluff
C reek
Preserve
ChanhassenRecreationCenter
Hesse Farm Preserve
Pheasant
HillPark
CurryFarmsPark
CityCenterParkStoneCreekPark
RoundhousePark
HermanFieldPark
CarverBeachPlayground
Park
PrairieKnollParkPowerHillPark
Ch an hassenHillsPark
Bandi mereHeightsPark
Greenwood Shores Park
CarverBeachPark
Bluff Creek Golf Course
RaguetWildlifeManagement Area (WMA)
MN Valley NationalWildlife Refuge
Minnesota Landscape Arboretum
S ugar bushPark
ChanhassenNaturePreserve
M innesota
Land sc ape
Ar bor etum Pleasant ViewPreserveFoxwoodsPreserve
Minnewashta
Heights Park
S LotusLake Park
B andim erePark
Chanhassen Estates Park
Lake Susan Park
Seminary FenScientific andNatural Area (SNA)
Park
RileyRidge Park
PioneerPass Park
Raguet WildlifeManagement Area (WMA)
Bluff CreekPreserve
Rice MarshLake Park
OHW 877.0
OHW 699.2
OHW 896.3
OHW 865.3
OHW 944.5
OHW 956.1
OHW 881.8
OHW 955.5
OHW 993.6
O HW945.2
OHW 932.77
OHW 929.8
Lotus
Lake
Lake
Riley
Lak e
M innew ashta
Lake Lucy
Rice
Lake
Lake Susa n
Lake
Ann
Lake Virginia
Lake
Harrison
Rice
Marsh Lake
C lasen
Lake
La ke
St J o e
Christmas
Lake Ca
stle
Rid
g
e
C
a
s
c
a
d
e
P
a
s
s
Town Line Road
Pleasant View Road
C a s c a de Pass
Trapp e r s P a s s
Timber
H
ill
Road
Sta gHornLane
Trap
Lin
e
Circle
TrapLineLane
O x b owBendOxbow
Bend
Oxbo w B e n d
Shasta Cir E
C a s c a de Circle
M ountainV iewCo urtP i e d m o n tCourt
TrappersPassOxbowBendOx
b
o
wBe
n
d
FoxHollow Dri ve
Pleasant View Road
FoxH o ll ow DriveHuntersCourt
BluffRidgeCourtF
o
x
H
ollow
Drive
G
r
a
yFoxCur
veFoxta il C o urtQuailCrossi
ngGrayFoxCurv
GreyFoxCurve
Gray F o xCurveGrayFoxCurveBruleCircleChocta
w
Circle
S a n d y HookRoad
Hwy101GreatPlainsBlvdFox Path
F o x C o u rtLake
P
oint
Lotus TrailNava
jo
D
rCa
r
v
e
r
Bea
c
h
Ro
ad
Ponderosa Drive
Broken Arr
o
w
D
r
L
o
t
u
s
T
r
a
i
l
Lotus Trail
R ojinaLanePle
a
s
a
n
t
V
i
e
w
R
o
a
d
Pleasa n tV iew RoadHorseshoeC u rv e
Pleasant
Vie
w
R
oa
d
F o x P a thFox Pat
h
Vineland Court
H o lly L a n e
Holly Lane
W illo w C reekP
ow
e
r
s
B
l
v
d
(C
.R
.
1
7
)PleasantViewC o v e
Pleasant View Road
Peaceful LanePleasant View R o a d
Nez Perce
DrivePowers Blvd (C.R. 17)DevonshireDrWelsleyCourtArlingtonCrt.DevonshireD riv eStrattonCourtBrett
o
n
Wa
y
Teton L a n e
Bretton
Way
Ashton Court Teton LaneIthilienTroendle CircleCharingBendShadowLaneYosemite AveYosemite AveLakew a y Lane
PointeLakeLucyKerber Blvd
Kerber BlvdPowers Blvd (C.R. 17)P im licoLaneK
e
r
b
e
r
B
l
v
d
P ontia c L a n e
Buckingw oodC tTrotter
sCi
r
cl
ePon t i a cCircleP o n tia c
C o u rtButte Co u rtPont
i
acCir
c
l
e
Pontiac Lane
Redman LaneDeclarationDrShawnee LaneU ti c a L a n e
Powers
B
lvd
(C
.R
.
17
)
C actusCurve
Canyon
C urve
Powers Blvd (C.R. 17)Santa Vera DriveTargetLaneW 78th S
t Hwy 101 Great Plains BlvdHwy 101 Great Plains BlvdHwy101GreatPlainsBlvdWest Village Road
S a n d y Hook
Road
Sand
y
Hook C irCheyenneDakotaDakota
C
ir
cl
e
Dakota
Cheyenne
Basswood CirKurversPointRoad
W illow ViewCove
Twin
M
aple Lan e
S o u th S h oreCourtChan View
Erie AvenueErieAvenueSouthShoreDriveSouth
Shore
Dr
i
veHill StreetW 77th St
Canterbury Circle
DerbyDriveBelmo
nt
L
n
Kerber BlvdK
e
r
b
e
r
B
l
v
d
Laredo Drive(W 78th St)
C hanView
StoneCr
ee
k
Dr AudubonRoadCommerce
Drive AudubonRoadP a rk R o a d
P a rk R o a d
Park Court
Pa
rk
Place Park DrivePark Road
PowersBlvd(C.R.17)V
alley
Vie
w
Crt
ValleyRidgeCrtValleyRidge Trail North
Coulter Boulevard
T im b e rw oodD rP
i
n
e
w
o
o
d
C
i
r
Oakwoo
d
R
i
d
g
eTimberwoodDr
Ti
mberwoodDrBluffView
Crt
StoneCreekD
r
CreekviewCrt
StoneCreekDrRenaissance Crt
Lyman Blvd (CSAH 18)BoulderR o a d StoneCreek
D
r
Bethesda CirWashi
ngtonBlvdWashingtonBlvdCommonwealthBlvdLincoln Ln
W
a
shingtonCirFranklin L nJefferson DrMadison DrTWIN CITI
E
S
&
W
E
S
T
E
R
N
R
AI
L
R
O
A
D
Lake
R
il
eyTrlHighover LaneJe rs e y Way
L
a
k
e
A
n
n
P
a
rkDrIroquois AveHuronKiowaGreatPlainsBlvdW 78th St
W 76th St
Frontier TrailW
78th S t re e t
S t a t e Hw y No .5
Hill Str
e
et
Chippewa Cir
Chippewa TrailS a n ta Ve r a Drive SaratogaDriveSaratoga DriveSaratogaCir Laredo
L
a
n
e
Laredo LaneIr
oqu
o
is
Santa Fe TrailDelRioDrive Del Rio Drive
Cimarro n Circ leLaredoDrive
FrontierTrailFrontier Court
F
r
o
n
t
i
e
r
T
r
a
i
l Kurver
s
Point
Road
Frontier Trail
Highland DriveLaredoDriveLongview CircleSierra Court
Sierra T ra ilConestogaCourtConestoga TrailBighor n DriveF
r
o
ntier Trail
KiowaFrontier TrailHighland Drive
S
h
a
d
owm
e
r
e
Bighorn
D r ive
State Hwy 5 Arboretum Boulevard
Shasta
Cir
W
Olympic Cir
Castle Ri
d
g
e
Ca
s
t
l
e
R
i
d
g
e
C
o
u
r
t
Ca
s
c
a
d
e
C
o
u
r
t
NearMountainBlvdN
ear
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
nBl
vdNe ar MountainBlvdMountain Way
S
u
mm
i
t
C
i
r
c
l
e
Pleasant View Road
Indian Hill RdPleasantParkDrGrayFoxLaneMarketBl
vdM
arket
B
lv
d
S t a t e H w y 5 A r b o r e tu m B o u le v a rd
StateHwy5ArboretumBoulevardKerberBlvdPicha
Chan View
V ioletRoadCarverB
e
a
c
h
RoadCree DriveYuma Dr
ive
Ri
n
g
o
D
r
i
v
e
Yuma
D
r
iveDeerwoodDrN
e
z
P
e
r
c
e
D
r
i
v
e
Imperial Dr
Ponderosa DriveNezPerceDrive
NezPerceCtHeatherCourt H
o
p
i
R
d
Carver Beach Road
Penamint
Court
P e n a m intLaneRedw
ing
LaneChaparral LaneChaparral CtRedman LaneUtica CircleTecumsehLan e
Preakness Lane
R e d w i n g L a n e
R
e
d
wing
Lane
Pi
maLaneUtica LanePreakness
Lane
Carver Beach Road
RooseveltDrLake Lucy Road
Western Drive
Hiawatha Dr
Cree Drive
Woodhill Dr
Redwi
ng
Crt
C
h
a
p
a
rr
al
LaneUtica La
n
eUticaTer
r
a
c
eLakewayDriveLake Lucy Road
Lake Lucy Road
West 63rd StAudubon CirCreekRu
nTr a ilCardinalBlue Jay CirWest 63rd St
Koehnen Circle East
Koehnen Circle West
Ringneck D rive
P hea santCirRingneck
D
r
ive
WoodDu c k L anePartridge Cir
WhiteDo
ve
Drive
PheasantDrive
S te ll e r Cir
WoodD uckCirWood D u c k L aneTe
a
l
C
i
r
PintailCir
WhiteDoveCirWood Duck LaneL a k e L u cy Road
Lak
e
L
u
c
y
L
a
n
eMurray Hill RoadGal
pi
nBl
vd.(C.R.117)ChaskaRoadMelody Hill
Lake Lucy RoadHummingbird RoadMolineCirMelody
HillCirGalpinBlvd.(C.R.117)Melody H ill
West 65th St reetMurrayHillRoad
W h it e T a ilR id g e C t
Crestv i e w C i r
GalpinBlvd.(C.R.117)Crestview Dr
Steller
C
o
u
r
t
Galpin Blvd. (C.R. 117)Highgate Cir
Briarwood Ct.ManchesterDriveLakeLucyRoadLakeLucyRoadBrenden
C
r
t
Lake
L
u
c
y
R
oad
HighoverDriveHighoverWay
HighoverCrtSHa
r
ri
s
onHillTrailHa rriso n H illCrtHazeltineBlvd(Hwy41)Galpin Blvd. (C.R. 117)NorthwoodCrtLonga c r e s D r iv e
FawnHillRoadRed F o x C i r
LodgepolePointLongacresD riv e
Hunte
r
Drive Hunter
Drive
GalpinBlvd.(C.R.117)H
unter DriveFawnHillRoad
FawnHillRoadFawnHill C r t
L o n g a c r e s D riveS o u th e r n
C rtGunflintCrt
GunflintTrailH
ills
d
ale
C
ourt
M
occasinTrl BentBowTrail
M o cc a sinTrlBentBowTrailL
o
n
g
a
cr
esDrive
HazeltineBlvd(Hwy41)Tanadoona Drive
Ma j e s t i c W ay
Windmill DriveBrinker StreetTulip CrtCrocusCrtWalnut Curve
Praire
Flower
Blvd
Galpin Blvd. (C.R. 117)St at e Hw y 5 Arboretum Boulevard
S t a t e H w y 5 A r boretum Boulevard Cactus Cu rveS addlebrookC u r v e SaddlebrookPass
Cany
o
n C u r v e
State Hwy 5 A rbo re tum Boulevard
A rboretumDrCri m sonBayRoadDogwood RdDogwood RdTanadoona Drive Chaska RoadHazeltineBlvd(Hwy41)Sommer Gate
Hazeltine Blvd (Hwy 41)North
M
a
n
o
r
R
o
a
d
TanagersPointPiper R id g e L a n eTanagers LaneS a n d p ip e rTrailMinnew as hta WoodsDriveO r c h a r d Lane
ForestCirForestAve
Foxford RoadEastwood Court
Foxford RoadP io n e e rT ra il(C S A H 14)Pioneer CirD e e rb ro o kD riveMea
d
o
wl
arkLaneHwy101
GreatPl
a
i
nsBlvdW
94th
S
TSummerfieldDriveSummerfieldDr iveG
reenview Dr i v eStone Creek CtLake Drive East
Lake Drive East
Ess
e
xRdSuffolkDrBurlwood DrR ose w o o dD rRo
s
e
w
o
o
d
D
r
Po wers PlacePowers PlacePowersPlaceLake Riley BlvdLake R
i
l
e
y
B
l
v
d
W 78th Street
6
4thStreetState Hwy 7
O r c h a r d L a n e
Oriole AveState Hwy 7W.62nd St.S t a t e H w y 7
FirtreeAveDogwoodAveState Hwy 7
B a rbe
rr
yCircleCy
pr
es
s
Dri
v
eEl
mtreeAveMaplew
o
od
Cir Gr
eenbri
ar
AveShore Drive
ShoreDrive
S ta te H w y7Church
Road
M
eadow
Crt
MeadowL a n eCartway LaneW. 62nd St.
S tateH w y 7 LandingsCourtL a n dingsDriveL a n d ingsDriveMinnewashtaParkwayK irk w ood
C
ir
L in d e n Circle
J
o
s
h
u
a
Cir
LindenCircle
PipewoodCurveP a d dock
L
ane
StateHwy7Leslee CurveGlendaleDrive LesleeCurveCrestvie
w
D
r
Crestview Dr Maple DriveMaple Cir
Glendale Drive
Glendale Drive
MinnewashtaParkwayCountryOaksRoadWhite Oak Lane
Red Oak Lane
CountryOaksRoadKings Road
MinnewashtaParkwayJuniper AvenueRed Cedar Point Road
South
Cedar
Driv
e
Red C
e
d
a
r
P
o
i
n
t
R
o
a
d
Maple S h or es D r i v e
Hawthorne Cir
Lakeridge R d
MinnewashtaCrt
MinnewashtaParkwayLak e ridgeRd
Laker i d g e R d
F o rrestRidgeCir77th
St
77th St LoneCedarLa
n
e
StateHwy5
W82ndStW 8 2 n d S t Highway 41W 82nd St CenturyBlvdGalpin Blvd (C.R. 15)BridleCre
e
kCir
Stone Cre ek L n W
Lukew
ood Dr
BenwoodCi
rS t o n e C reek
L
nEStoneCreekRdGal
pi
nBl
vd(C.R.19)Stone Cr ee k D rS to n e C r e e k D r
LymanBlvd
(
C
S
A
H
1
8
)Ly
manBl
v
d(CSAH18)ValleyViewPlaceValley Ridge Place
ValleyRidge Trail South
Sunrid g e C ourtAudubon RoadAudubon RoadAudubon RoadLake Drive West
Lyman Blvd (CSAH 18)
LymanBlvd(CSAH 18)Alisa LaneAlisaCourtOsprey Lan
e Osprey Lane
O
s
p
r
eyLaneBluebill Trai lSpoonbillCirB luebill
TrailHeron Dr HeronD rBitternC
o
urt SwanCourtHeron Dr
M allardCrt
I
bi
s
CourtSunsetTrailFlamingoDr
Her o n D rLakeS us a n H i l l s D rive
EgretCourtPelican
Crt
M erganserC rtTern Crt
L
ake
S
usa
n
H
ill
s
Driv
e
PowersBlvd(C.R.17)Lake Drive W estLake Driv
e
W
e
s
tMal
lory CrtUpland
C
i
rc
le
Lake Dri
v
e
WestLa k e Court
LakeSusanHillsD riv e
West Lake DrLake
S
u
sanHillsDriveDove Court
Lake Sus a n H illsD riveWest Lak e D r
DrakeCourtL
a
k
e
Su
s
a
n
H
ills
DriveLake Susan Drive
Mary
J
aneCirLake Su
s
a
n
Dri
v
eChanhassenHillsDrNorthBarbara Crt
LymanCourt
L
a
k
e
SusanDriveLyman Blvd (CSAH 18)PowersBlvd(C.R.17)OaksideCirLakeSusanHill
s
D
rive
FlamingoDrThrush Crt
Kingfisher
Crt
FlamingoDrLyman Blvd (CSAH 18)AudubonRoad(CSAH15)Audubon Road (CSAH 15)Pione e r T r a il(C S A H 1 4)
Bl
u
f
f
C
r
e
e
k
D
r
i
v
e
Bluff Creek Drive
WestFarmRoad
We
st
F
a
r
mRoadHeidi Lane
West
F
a
r
m
R
o
a
d
Bluff CircleWest Far
m
Road
He sse FarmRd
He
s
s
e
F
a
r
m
C
i
r
c
l
e
Bl
u
f
f
C
r
e
e
k
D
r
i
v
e
Hesse Farm Rd
CS
A
H
6
1
/
F
l
y
i
n
g
C
l
o
u
d
D
r
i
v
e
Stoughton Ave (C.R. NO. 10)StoughtonAve(C .R .N O .1 0 )CSAH
6
1/
Fl
yi
n
g
Cl
o
u
d
Dr
CSAH 61/Fl
yi
n
g
Cl
o
u
d
D
r
CSAH 61/Flying Cloud Dr Hwy101GreatP la in s B lvdS
tate
H
ig
h
w
a
y
1
0
1
C S A H 6 1 /F ly in g C lo u d D rCo Rd 61/
Fl
yi
n
g
Cl
o
u
d
Dr
Vogelsb
e
r
g
T
r
l Hwy1 0 1 G r e atPlainsBlvdLakota Lan
eMandanCreekwood Drive
Hwy101
G
r
e
at
Pl
ai
nsBl
vdBramble Driv
eDelphinum LaneRaspberryHillHwy101GreatPlainsBlvdPioneer Trail (CSAH 14)
Homestead LaneHomesteadLane FlintlockTrailH
o
me
s
t
ea
dLaneW. 96th Street
Hwy101GreatPlainsBlvdPioneer Trail (CSAH 14)
Pineview Court FoxfordRoadOverlookCrtSpringfieldDrive SpringfieldDriveS un n y v a l e D r iv e
Sunnyvale
D
riv
e
S
h
o
r
e
v
ie
wCrt
Par klandWa y GreenleafCrtDeerfoot Trail
DeerfootTrail
Lyman Blvd (CSAH 18)Kiowa TrailLyman Blvd (CSAH 18)Quinn RoadL y m a n Blvd
Lak
e
v
i
e
w
R
o
a
d
E
N o rth B ayDr
W
8
6
t
h
S
t
T
i
g
u
a
L
a
n
e
Mission H illsCrt
MissionHillsLaneHwy101GreatPlainsBlvdHwy101
Gr
e
at
P
lai
n
s
B
lv
d
Lake Drive
Main StreetHidd
e
n
CourtH iddenLane
H id denLaneHiddenCourtSinne n C irMar
s
hDriveD a k o t a LaneLake Drive
E
ast
Hi
d
d
e
n
C
i
r
DakotaLaneErie CirDakotaLaneErie SpurErie AveErie AveC h e yenneAveDakota
A
v
e
Cheyenne
Av
eDakota AveErie Av
e
Lake Drive East
LakeDriveEastDell RoadDell RoadW 78th St.
W 7 9 t h S t
DakotaAveDakotaCir
C h e ySp u r
MarshDrive
Grandview RdDakotaLnSantaFeCirES a d d l e b rook Trail
Saddl
eb
r
o
o
k
Tr
ailHighoverDriveChes Mar DrLilac Lane Lilac Lane
Ridge RoadInd
i
a
n
H
i
l
l
R
d
Quiver D
r
Napa Dr
Fox Hill Dr
A u tu m n
R id g e C tA
utumnRidge W
a
yAutumn Ridge LNHarvest Way
AutumnRidgeAveHarvestLaneAndrew Court
McGlynn Drive
77th St.77th St.W 187th Ave.Q uattroDrDell RoadDell RoadDell RoadBlue Sage LN E
S
napdragonDrL
a
d
ySlipperLN
B lu e B o n n e t B lv d BlueBonnetBlvdPoppy Dr
C o n e f l o w e rCrvSBanebe r r y W ay E BaneberryWayE
But
t
ercupCr
tConeflower CrvNPrimrose PlChicory WayCentury BlvdTrails
E
n
d
RdT ra ilsE n d R dTrailsEndRdArboretumVillageCt.Highwood Dr
Market St
Crestview Dr
ManchesterDriveChest
nutL
N
EdgewoodCt
Expl o r e r T r .TrailsEndRdBridleCreekTr ai l
BridleCreekTra i l
TWIN
CI
TI
E
S
&
W
E
S
T
E
R
N
R
AI
L
R
O
A
D
TWIN CI
TI
E
S
&
W
E
ST
E
R
N
R
AI
L
R
O
A
D
TWIN CITIES
&
W
E
S
T
E
R
N
R
A
I
L
R
O
A
D
W 86th St
Marshland Trl
M
o
n
k
C
r
t
R ic e CrtMissionWayHillW Mission W ayHillEHeartlandCrtBlac
k
birdCrt
M
a
y
f
ieldCrtLake Susan DriveLake Riley DrMissionH ills
Dr.
Mission Hills
Dr.Frisc
oCrtCoulter Blvd.
Coulter Bl
v
d
.
Acorn
L
a
n
e
Maple
wood Ter
Mission HillsLane
MissionHillsCircleMerry Pl
a
c
e
Lone Eagle Dr
M
e
l
o
d
y
H
i
l
l
Melody LaneCypressDriveTop
a
z
Dri
veSapphireLaneDia
mo
n
dCrt
RubyLaneRuby
L
a
n
e
BaneberryWay W Clov e r Cou rt Clover Co
u
r
t
B l u e S a g e
L N W
WaterleafLane EWaterleafLaneW
Century Cir
W78th
Stre
e
t
Arbo r e tu mVillageCir(pvt. rd)Pleasant View WayRedCedarCoveRed CedarCove
Ches M
a
r
F
a
r
m
R
d
Big Wood s Blvd
KimberlyL n Kimberly LN
Kelly Ct
N ic k o lasWaySantaFeCirWMulberryCir
cl
e
WMulb
e
rry
Circl
eEC h anhassenHillsDrSouthL
ake
Sus a nC ourtHallgren L
a
n
e
Country Oaks Drive
Stratford LnStratfordBlvdStratfordRidge HorseshoeCrvState Hwy 5 Arboretum Boulevard
W 78THStreet
W 7 8 T H Street
Chan h assen Hills Dr North
T.H.212T.H.212
T.H.212T.H.212T.H.212Century Tr a ilArboretum VillageCirLucyRidge
C
ourtLucyRidgeLan
eCoulter Boul e v a r dCentury BlvdCorporate Place
Village Lane
Village Crt
Powers BlvdWestwood DrVillage Cir
Village PlVi
l
lage
S
t CoachCtC
o
a
c
h
Dr
Arboretum V i l la g e T rCoachLnCoach PlArboretum Vill. Ln.Century CtCentury PlArboretum Village Crv
ArboretumVillagePl.W78TH Street
Murray Hill Crt
L ake Drive
P o n d P rom e n a d ePipewoodCurvePipewood LanePipewood Curve
Leslee C
u
r
v
e
Emerald L a n e
RubyLaneTopaz Drive
Ridgevie
w
P
oi
n
t
Water Tower Place
VassermanTr
RidgeviewWayRi
d
g
e
v
i
e
w
W
a
y Mohawk DrPawnee DriveArbor
LaneWashtaBay Ct
D a r t m o u t h Drive
Ridgehill RdTristin
Knol
l
TristinDrive
Was
h
t
aBayRoad
KNOB HILL LA
N
E
Vasse
r
manTrailVassermanPlace
Hickory Rd
Hick
ory
R
o
a
d
Shenandoah
GoldenCourtTreetop RoadMill Creek LnKings Road
Kings RoadPipew
ood
Crt
Pipewood
Cir
W79th S t
Great Plains BlvdGreat Plains BlvdS te llers CtPinehurstDrA
m
berwo o d L a n e
Al
d
e
r
W
a
y
F
o
x
DrLakeHarriso
n
C
ircle
L
a
k
e
H
arrisonRoad
Highov e r T r a ilGal
pin
CourtL ongacre s D riv eArrowheadLnGunflintTrailHighcrestCirHighoverDrHighoverCrtNPipewood Lane
StonefieldLaneB lu ffCreekBlvdColonial Ln
Plymouth Ln
Freedom LnIndependence CirI
ndependenceCirHorseshoe LnBlaze TrlB lu ffCreekBlvdEllendale LnPembrokePass
Degler Circle
RiverRockDriveN78thStW BeaconCrtW atersEdgeDrWaters Edge DrFoxHollowCtCrossroadsBlvd
Co lu mb ia Ln
Co
m
m
o
n
w
ealth Blvd
Bluff Creek BlvdHwy 101 Great Plains BlvdWestw
o
o
d
D
r Westwood DrSouthwest Village Dr Southwest Village DrApple Tree LaneBluffCreekDriveM a y a p p lePassH e m lo c k W a y
Mills Drive
Mills Drive Lake Riley DrHallgren Ct
6829RockyI
sl
a
ndLN
RileyRidge
Arrow-
head Ct
ReflectionsRdChesterfieldLn
Motorplex
Ct
C o u l t e r Boulevard
Reflections RdBellevueCtL a k e viewRoadEDegler
Circl
e
Hemlock Way
H
e
mlo
c
k
Way
Cottongr
a
s
s
Ct
M a r ig o ld C o u r tWy
n
s
o
n
g
L
N
Jeurissen LnRiverR
oc
k
Dr
SRiver Rock Dr NRive r RockDriveS
C a md en RidgeDrHenryCo
urtSouthWestVillage LoopStra w b e r r y L a n eStrawbe
r
r
y
Lane
F
a
wnHi
l
l
Road
Pres e r v e CtDegler LNRiver Rock Dr N StateHWY101EagleRidgeR dHawkcrestCir
HawkcrestCtEagle CtEagleRidgeRdCrossroad Ct
AnthemPlace
Potential Property Acquisition
Taxparcel
µ
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,0001,000
FeetDelphinum LaneRaspberryHillPioneer Trail (CSAH 14)FlintlockTrailH
o
me
s
t
ea
dLanePioneer Trail (CSAH 14)
Pictometry 2017
0 500 1,000250
Feet
Potential Property Acquisition
K:\NickLH\Projects\PW\Engineering\For Paul\2018\January\PropertyAcquis\Property Acquistion_V2.mxd
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Resolution 201841: Authorize the City of Chanhassen to participate in the GreenStep Cities
program
Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.5.
Prepared By Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resources
Specialist
File No:
PROPOSED MOTION
“The Chanhassen City Council Adopts a Resolution Authorizing the City of Chanhassen to participate in the GreenStep
Cities program.”
Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.
DISCUSSION
The Chanhassen Environmental Commission is requesting authorization for the city to participate in the Minnesota
GreenStep Cities program. This is a voluntary, nonregulatory program that dovetails into current city practices, such
as permeable pavers.
The program recognizes cities’ accomplishments through a series of steps. Cities are under no obligation to complete
any of the steps and can withdraw from the program at any time. Step 1 is passing a resolution to participate. By
adopting this resolution, the city would become a Step 1 city. Step 2 involves documenting current practices, which the
Environmental Commission will assist city staff in gathering. There are no expectations to achieve any number of
actions or steps and the city will work at its own pace and interest.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: RESOLUTION N0:
MOTION BY: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ SECONDED BY-: - - - - - - - - -
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF
CHANHASSEN TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MINNESOTA
GREENSTEP CITIES PROGRAM
WHEREAS, Minnesota Session Laws 2008, Chapter 356, Section 13 directed the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (“MPCA”) and Office of Energy Security in the Department
of Commerce (“Office of Energy Security”), in collaboration with Clean Energy Resource Teams
(“CERTs”); and
WHEREAS, a broad coalition of public and private stakeholders including the
League of Minnesota Cities, the MPCA, Office of Energy Security, and CERTs responded to the
2008 legislation by establishing the Minnesota GreenStep Cities program; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota GreenStep Cities is a voluntary challenge program; and
WHEREAS, GreenStep is a free, continuous improvement program, managed by a public-
private partnership, and based upon 29 best practices covering five categories: (1) Buildings and
Lighting; (2) Transportation; (3) Land Use; (4) Environmental Management; and (5) Economic and
Community Development; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota GreenStep Cities program with 122 currently participating
municipalities, including many neighboring cities, assists in collaboration and facilitating technical
assistance; and
WHEREAS, efforts taken by the City of Chanhassen closely align with the goals
promoted by the GreenStep Cities Program. To date, the City of Chanhassen has already:
(1) Adopted a comprehensive plan approved by the Metropolitan Council; and
(2) Adopted a water ordinance to preserve and protect drinking/ground water resources;
and
(3) Been designated as a Tree City USA for the last 23 years; and
(4) Adopted a tree preservation and/or native landscaping ordinance; and
(5) Adopted a shoreland ordinance for all river and lake shoreland areas; and
(6) Created a mechanism to address failed or non-compliant septic systems; and
(7) Adopted a subsurface sewage treatment system ordinance based on the Association
of Minnesota Counties’ model ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen continues ongoing pursuit of voluntary activities and
continual process improvements such as:
(1) Conducting public service education campaigns to conserve our community’s water
resources; and
(2) Continuing to improve the City’s parks and trails; and
(3) Promoting recycling and composting; and
(4) Promoting and implementing cost-effective energy efficiency improvements in all city
operations to minimize the tax burden on our citizenry; and
(5) Continuing to be good stewards of our valuable and limited natural resources.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Chanhassen City Council does
hereby authorize the City of Chanhassen to participate in the Minnesota GreenStep
Cities program. Be it further resolved that the City appoints the City of Chanhassen
Environmental Commission to serve as GreenStep coordinator to document, identify,
and facilitate best practice implementation. In addition, the Environmental
Commission shall provide a report to the City Council once a year on how well the
GreenStep Cities Program is serving the city.
Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this ____ day of _______, 201_.
ATTEST:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Denny Laufenburger, Mayor
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Resolution No. 201842: Accept Ads for Bid; Award Contract for the Lake Susan Trail
Rehabilitation Project
Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.6.
Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: PW440A
PROPOSED MOTION
“The City Council approves the low bid for the Lake Susan Trail Rehabilitation Project from Barber Construction in
the amount of $202,800.00."
Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.
BACKGROUND
The Engineering and Parks departments have worked together to determine the overall condition of the trail along the
west side of Lake Susan which has declined to the point of necessitating a rehabilitation project in order to maintain its
functionality.
In several areas, tree roots have grown under the trail and created problematic areas. Engineering has also identified
several areas where drain tile should be installed to address high groundwater and areas that drain poorly. Culverts
under the trail have deteriorated and should be replaced.
The Parks department suggested several improvements to assist with the maintenance of the trail. There are sharply
curved areas along the existing trail that are being widened or slightly realigned to allow maintenance and plowing
vehicles improved access in order to efficiently perform their tasks.
In addition, there are trail connections to the nearby streets that required Engineering to coordinate with existing
homeowners in order to facilitate access and trail widening. New ADA accessible pedestrian ramps meeting current
standards are being added at the trail connections to the street.
DISCUSSION
The existing trail is proposed to be reclaimed and the gravel generated by the project will be reused under the trail. A
new bituminous trail section built to current city standards will be paved to reestablish the trail surface. Several
improvements are being made to address user safety such as removal of some trees that have matured over time or
individual roots that are growing under the trail and creating hazards.
RECOMMENDATION
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 27, 2018SubjectResolution No. 201842: Accept Ads for Bid; Award Contract for the Lake Susan TrailRehabilitation ProjectSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.6.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: PW440APROPOSED MOTION“The City Council approves the low bid for the Lake Susan Trail Rehabilitation Project from Barber Construction inthe amount of $202,800.00." Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDThe Engineering and Parks departments have worked together to determine the overall condition of the trail along thewest side of Lake Susan which has declined to the point of necessitating a rehabilitation project in order to maintain itsfunctionality.In several areas, tree roots have grown under the trail and created problematic areas. Engineering has also identifiedseveral areas where drain tile should be installed to address high groundwater and areas that drain poorly. Culvertsunder the trail have deteriorated and should be replaced. The Parks department suggested several improvements to assist with the maintenance of the trail. There are sharplycurved areas along the existing trail that are being widened or slightly realigned to allow maintenance and plowingvehicles improved access in order to efficiently perform their tasks.In addition, there are trail connections to the nearby streets that required Engineering to coordinate with existinghomeowners in order to facilitate access and trail widening. New ADA accessible pedestrian ramps meeting currentstandards are being added at the trail connections to the street.DISCUSSIONThe existing trail is proposed to be reclaimed and the gravel generated by the project will be reused under the trail. Anew bituminous trail section built to current city standards will be paved to reestablish the trail surface. Severalimprovements are being made to address user safety such as removal of some trees that have matured over time orindividual roots that are growing under the trail and creating hazards.
RECOMMENDATION
The City of Chanhassen put together a rehabilitation project and solicited bids from contractors. Bids were opened on
Tuesday, August 21, 2018 at 2:00 p.m. Three quotes were received as follows:
1. Barber Construction $202,800.00
2. Bituminous Roadways $308,856.05
3. GMH Asphalt $336,466.10
The low bidder was Barber Construction. The Engineer's Estimate for the project was $229,212.50.
Barber Construction has previously worked for the city on other trail projects; the most recent being the Rice Marsh
Lake trail project. This project was constructed in 2013 and was similarly sized to the Lake Susan Hills Trail project
from an overall value perspective. Barber Construction's previous work has been acceptable.
Funding is proposed to come from the revolving street assessment fund. The 2018 project was delayed due to
funding discussion regarding proposed franchise fees.
ATTACHMENTS:
Bid Summary and Tabulation
Resolution
PROJECT:
Lake Susan Trail Rehabilitation Project
OWNER:
City of Chanhassen
CITY PROJECT NO.:
PW440A
Bids Opened: Tuesday, August 21st, 2018 at 2:00PM
Contractor
Bid
Security
(5%)
Add. No. 1
Rec'd.Grand Total Bid
Corrected Total
Bid
1 Barber Construction Co., Inc. X N/A $202,800.00
2 Bituminous Roadways, Inc. X N/A $308,856.05
3 GMH Asphalt Corporation X N/A $336,466.10 $342,457.10
Engineer's Opinion of Cost $229,212.50
Denotes corrected value
Assistant City Engineer
BID TABULATION SUMMARY
George Bender, PE
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct tabulation of the bids as received
on August 21st, 2018.
Item Description Estimated Unit Total Unit Total Unit Total Unit Total#Quantity Units Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price1 Mobilization1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $27,000.00 $27,000.002 Perimiter Erosion Control Fence1,650 LF $2.00 $3,300.00 $1.50 $2,475.00 $1.55 $2,557.50 $2.25 $3,712.503 Bio Logs1,650 LF $2.00 $3,300.00 $1.00 $1,650.00 $2.75 $4,537.50 $3.50 $5,775.004 Remove Culvert49 LF $20.00 $980.00 $5.00 $245.00 $50.00 $2,450.00 $7.50 $367.505 Clear and Grub1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,600.00 $5,600.00 $5,800.00 $5,800.006 Clear and Grub per Tree 6"-10"6 EA $800.00 $4,800.00 $300.00 $1,800.00 $330.00 $1,980.00 $575.00 $3,450.007 Clear and Grub per Tree 10" & Greater3 EA $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $500.00 $1,500.00 $550.00 $1,650.00 $650.00 $1,950.008 Remove Tree Roots Under Trail (See S.P.) 6 EA $100.00 $600.00 $200.00 $1,200.00 $220.00 $1,320.00 $300.00 $1,800.009 Common Excavation38 CY $10.00 $380.00 $20.00 $760.00 $100.00 $3,800.00 $55.00 $2,090.0010 Subgrade Excavation (For Soft Areas Encountered) 50 CY $10.00 $500.00 $20.00 $1,000.00 $100.00 $5,000.00 $65.00 $3,250.0011 Full Depth Reclamation5,283 SY $3.50 $18,490.50 $1.50 $7,924.50 $5.35 $28,264.05 $8.90 $47,018.7012 Topsoil Borrow200 CY $20.00 $4,000.00 $20.00 $4,000.00 $48.00 $9,600.00 $65.00 $13,000.0013 Seed MnDOT Mix 25-1316,900 SY $0.25 $1,725.00 $0.25 $1,725.00 $0.45 $3,105.00 $0.30 $2,070.0014 Sod Disturbed Area850 SY $7.00 $5,950.00 $10.00 $8,500.00 $16.50 $14,025.00 $7.50 $6,375.0015 Erosion Control Blanket (Cat. 3N)6,901 SY $2.00 $13,802.00 $1.50 $10,351.50 $1.50 $10,351.50 $1.50 $10,351.5016 Adjust Existing Sanitary Manhole Casting 2 EA $500.00 $1,000.00 $250.00 $500.00 $350.00 $700.00 $600.00 $1,200.0017 I & I Shield For Sanitary Manholes2 EA $200.00 $400.00 $250.00 $500.00 $750.00 $1,500.00 $100.00 $200.0018 12" RCP Class 584 LF $50.00 $4,200.00 $50.00 $4,200.00 $100.00 $8,400.00 $104.75 $8,799.0019 12" FES6 EA $1,000.00 $6,000.00 $800.00 $4,800.00 $900.00 $5,400.00 $1,225.00 $7,350.0020 RIP RAP Class III28 CY $100.00 $2,800.00 $100.00 $2,800.00 $220.00 $6,160.00 $125.00 $3,500.0021 4" PVC Pipe145 LF $30.00 $4,350.00 $5.00 $725.00 $26.00 $3,770.00 $23.50 $3,407.5022 4" Perforated PVC Draintile w/Drainage Rock & Fabric 295 LF $30.00 $8,850.00 $9.00 $2,655.00 $28.00 $8,260.00 $29.60 $8,732.0023 4" Drain Tile Clean Out5 EA $95.00 $475.00 $250.00 $1,250.00 $600.00 $3,000.00 $175.00 $875.0024 Pipe Foundation34 CY $35.00 $1,190.00 $30.00 $1,020.00 $80.00 $2,720.00 $29.25 $994.5025 Remove Exisitng Casting & Replace with R-3501-TR Casting 1 EA $850.00 $850.00 $950.00 $950.00 $1,400.00 $1,400.00 $750.00 $750.0026 Adjust Existing Storm Manhole Casting2 EA $500.00 $1,000.00 $250.00 $500.00 $350.00 $700.00 $600.00 $1,200.0027 4" Concrete Headwall5 EA $200.00 $1,000.00 $600.00 $3,000.00 $1,200.00 $6,000.00 $350.00 $1,750.0028 Remove Exisitng Curb & Gutter w/Sawing 60 LF $5.00 $300.00 $14.00 $840.00 $23.00 $1,380.00 $12.00 $720.0029 Sawcut Bituminous90 LF $3.50 $315.00 $5.00 $450.00 $1.65 $148.50 $3.50 $315.0030 Remove Existing Concrete Sidewalk w/Sawing 100 SF $1.00 $100.00 $5.00 $500.00 $14.50 $1,450.00 $6.25 $625.0031 Remove Existing Bituminous Pavement 68 SY $4.00 $272.00 $7.00 $476.00 $18.00 $1,224.00 $6.25 $425.0032 Class 5 Aggregate Base 200 TON $35.00 $7,000.00 $20.00 $4,000.00 $36.00 $7,200.00 $33.60 $6,720.0033 3" Minus Rock (For Soft Areas Encountered) 50 CY $90.00 $4,500.00 $49.00 $2,450.00 $115.00 $5,750.00 $40.00 $2,000.0034 Bituminous Wear (MnDOT 2360 SPWEA340B) 943 TON $95.00 $89,585.00 $86.00 $81,098.00 $103.00 $97,129.00 $127.45 $120,185.3535 Concrete Mountable Curb & Gutter60 LF $30.00 $1,800.00 $70.00 $4,200.00 $72.00 $4,320.00 $69.75 $4,185.0036 Bituminous Pavement Patching18 SY $6.00 $108.00 $50.00 $900.00 $80.00 $1,440.00 $33.60 $604.8037 5' Concrete Sidewalk w/ 4" Base200 SF $7.00 $1,400.00 $20.00 $4,000.00 $18.00 $3,600.00 $13.75 $2,750.0038 Pedestrian Curb Ramp3 EA $2,000.00 $6,000.00 $3,500.00 $10,500.00 $3,650.00 $10,950.00 $3,500.00 $10,500.0039 Type 3 Barricades6 EA $300.00 $1,800.00 $500.00 $3,000.00 $950.00 $5,700.00 $1,200.00 $7,200.0040 Remove Stump/Rock from Trail Subgrade 4 EA $200.00 $800.00 $250.00 $1,000.00 $350.00 $1,400.00 $350.00 $1,400.0041 Street Sweeping10 HR $120.00 $1,200.00 $100.00 $1,000.00 $165.00 $1,650.00 $140.00 $1,400.0042 Floating Silt Curtain50 LF $60.00 $3,000.00 $10.00 $500.00 $15.50 $775.00 $16.50 $825.0043 Class 5 Aggregate Base for Trail Bypass Lane 24 TON $35.00 $840.00 $20.00 $480.00 $36.00 $864.00 $28.75 $690.0044 6' Cedar Fence175 LF $30.00 $5,250.00 $65.00 $11,375.00 $55.00 $9,625.00 $52.25 $9,143.75TOTALS$229,212.50 $202,800.00 $308,856.05 $342,457.10Corrected due to error =Lake Susan Trail Rehabilitation ProjectBid Tabulation and ComparisonBarber Construction Co., Inc. Bituminous Roadways, Inc.Engineer's EstimateGMH Asphalt Corporation
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: August 27, 2018 RESOLUTION NO: 2018-43
MOTION BY: SECONDED BY:
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT
FOR THE LAKE SUSAN TRAIL REHABILITATION PROJECT
PW440A
WHEREAS, pursuant to an ad for bids for the Lake Susan Trail Rehabilitation project, three
bids were received and opened. The bids are as follows:
AND WHEREAS, Barber Construction is the lowest responsible bidder with a total bid
amount of $202,800.00.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Chanhassen City Council:
1. The mayor and clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Barber
Construction in the name of the City of Chanhassen for the Lake Susan Trail Rehabilitation
project according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on
file in the office of the city clerk.
2. The city clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits
made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest
bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 27th day of August, 2018.
ATTEST:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Denny Laufenburger, Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
Bidder Total Bid
1. Barber Construction $202,800.00
2. Bituminous Roadways $308,856.05
3. GMH Asphalt $336,466.10
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Award of Bid: Audit Services Contract for Fiscal Years 20182020
Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.7.
Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: A066
PROPOSED MOTION
“The City Council awards the bid for the Audit Services Contract for Fiscal Years 20182020 to Redpath and
Company.”
Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.
BACKGROUND
Approximately every three years staff accepts bids for a professional services contract for auditing services. The city’s
current contract is with Redpath and Company.
Attached are the bids received from five firms that specialize in local government audits. Staff also requested that the
proposals include a bid to provide audit services for the Chanhassen Fire Relief Association. The evaluation was
based on five criteria:
1. Cost
2. Audit Start Date
3. Experience of Staff
4. Audit Approach
5. Involvement in the MNGFOA
After reviewing the bids for both the City and Fire Relief Association, it is staff’s opinion that the proposals were all
relatively close in terms of cost, staff experience, and involvement with the MNGFOA. The separating factors were
the audit approach proposed by Redpath and Company of a continuous audit that reviews more of the inputs, and the
audit start date. Staff is recommending that the city engage the firm of Redpath and Company for audit years 2018
2020.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council award the bid for the audit services contract in years 20182020 with
Redpath & Company, per the attached engagement.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 27, 2018SubjectAward of Bid: Audit Services Contract for Fiscal Years 20182020SectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.7.Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: A066PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council awards the bid for the Audit Services Contract for Fiscal Years 20182020 to Redpath andCompany.”Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDApproximately every three years staff accepts bids for a professional services contract for auditing services. The city’scurrent contract is with Redpath and Company.Attached are the bids received from five firms that specialize in local government audits. Staff also requested that theproposals include a bid to provide audit services for the Chanhassen Fire Relief Association. The evaluation wasbased on five criteria:1. Cost2. Audit Start Date3. Experience of Staff4. Audit Approach5. Involvement in the MNGFOAAfter reviewing the bids for both the City and Fire Relief Association, it is staff’s opinion that the proposals were allrelatively close in terms of cost, staff experience, and involvement with the MNGFOA. The separating factors werethe audit approach proposed by Redpath and Company of a continuous audit that reviews more of the inputs, and theaudit start date. Staff is recommending that the city engage the firm of Redpath and Company for audit years 20182020.RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council award the bid for the audit services contract in years 20182020 with
Redpath & Company, per the attached engagement.
ATTACHMENTS:
Bid Results
Engagement Letter/Contract
CityFirm 2018 2019 2020 Audit Start Date Involve MNGFOA Staff Experience Audit Approach Audit Start Date Cost ScoreRedpath 37,000$ 38,000$ 39,000$ 4/22/2019 20 15 20 20 10 85KDV34,800 35,200 35,750 April 15 15 10 15 20 75MMKR38,400 39,140 39,950 April 15 15 15 15 10 70Abdo Eick & Meyers 37,000 37,900 38,800 4/1/2019 15 15 15 15 10 70Clifton Larson Allen 34,500 35,500 36,500 4/22/2019 15 15 10 20 20 80Fire ReliefFirm 2018 2019 2020Redpath6,250$ 6,600$ 6,850$ KDV5,950 6,000 6,100 MMKR6,595 6,710 6,850 Abdo Eick & Meyers 6,700 6,830 6,960 Clifton Larson Allen 6,100 6,250 6,400 City of Chanhassen2018 City & Fire Relief Audit Bids
4810 White Bear Parkway, St. Paul, MN, 55110 651.426.7000 www.redpathcpas.com
August 16, 2018
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Blvd.
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
We are pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide the City of
Chanhassen, Minnesota (the City) for the years ending December 31, 2018 through 2020.
The scope of services includes the following:
Audit and Related Services
We will audit the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-
type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information,
including the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise
the basic financial statements of the City of Chanhassen , Minnesota as of and for the
years ending December 31, 2018 through 2020. Accounting standards generally
accepted in the United States of America provide for certain required supplementary
information (RSI), such as management’s discussion and analysis (MD&A), to
supplement the City’s basic financial statements. Such information, although not a
part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting
Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for
placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or
historical context. As part of our engagement, we will apply certain limited
procedures to the City’s RSI in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States of America. These limited procedures will consist of inquiries of
management regarding the methods of preparing the information and comparing the
information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic
financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic
financial statements. We will not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the
information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence
to express an opinion or provide any assurance. The following RSI is required by
generally accepted accounting principles and will be subjected to certain limited
procedures, but will not be audited:
1. Management’s discussion and analysis
2. Budgetary comparison schedules presented as RSI
3. Pension Related RSI (GASB 68)
4. Schedule of funding progress - OPEB
City of Chanhassen
Contract for Auditing Services
Page 2
2840062
We have also been engaged to report on supplementary information other than RSI
that accompanies the City’s financial statements. We will subject the following
supplementary information to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the
financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and
reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records
used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves, and
other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States of America and will provide an opinion on it in relation to the
financial statements as a whole in a report combined with our auditors report on the
financial statements:
1. Combining and Individual Fund Statements and Schedules
2. Supplementary Financial Information
The following other information accompanying the financial statements will not be
subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements,
and our auditor’s report will not provide an opinion or any assurance on that other
information:
o Introductory section
o Statistical section
The following other reports will be issued in conjunction with the financial audit:
State Legal Compliance Audit
Audit Management Letter
Nonaudit Services
Preparation of draft financial statements document. City to provide introductory
section, MD&A, footnote information and statistical section.
Copying and binding of financial statement document.
Audit Objectives
The objective of our audit is the expression of opinions as to whether your financial
statements are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles and to report on the fairness of the supplementary information
referred to in the second paragraph when considered in relation to the financial statements as
a whole. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally
accepted in the United States of America and the standards for financial audits contained in
Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and
the minimum procedures for auditors as prescribed by MS 6.65, and will include tests of the
City of Chanhassen
Contract for Auditing Services
Page 3
2840062
accounting records of the City of Chanhassen and other procedures we consider necessary to
enable us to express such opinions. We will issue a written report upon completion of our
audit of the City’s financial statements. Our report will be addressed to the Honorable Mayor
and Members of the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. We cannot provide
assurance that unmodified opinions will be expressed. Circumstances may arise in which it
is necessary for us to modify our opinions or add emphasis-of-matter or other-matter
paragraphs. If our opinions on the financial statements are other than unmodified, we will
discuss the reasons with you in advance. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the
audit or are unable to form or have not formed opinions, we may decline to express opinions
or issue reports, or may withdraw from this engagement.
We will also provide a report (that does not include an opinion) on internal control
related to the financial statements and compliance with the provisions of laws, regulations,
contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a material effect on
the financial statements as required by Government Auditing Standards. The report on
internal control and on compliance and other matters will include a paragraph that states (1)
that the purpose of the report is solely to describe the scope of testing of internal control and
compliance, and the result of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness
of the entity’s internal control on compliance, and (2) that the report is an integral part of an
audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the
entity’s internal control and compliance. The paragraph will also state that the report is not
suitable for any other purpose. If during our audit we become aware that the City is subject
to an audit requirement that is not encompassed in the terms of this engagement, we will
communicate to management and those charged with governance that an audit in accordance
with U.S. generally accepted auditing standards and the standards for financial audits
contained in Government Auditing Standards may not satisfy the relevant legal, regulatory,
or contractual requirements.
Audit Procedures - General
An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the
number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. An audit also includes
evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of
significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
presentation of the financial statements. We will plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable rather than absolute assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement, whether from (1) errors, (2) fraudulent financial reporting, (3)
misappropriation of assets, or (4) violations of laws or governmental regulations that are
attributable to the entity or to acts by management or employees acting on behalf of the
entity. Because the determination of abuse is subjective, Government Auditing Standards do
not expect auditors to provide reasonable assurance of detecting abuse.
City of Chanhassen
Contract for Auditing Services
Page 4
2840062
Because of the inherent limitations of an audit, combined with the inherent limitations of
internal control, and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions,
there is a risk that material misstatements may exist and not be detected by us, even though
the audit is properly planned and performed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted
auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards. In addition, an audit is not designed
to detect immaterial misstatements or violations of laws or governmental regulations that do
not have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. However, we will inform
the appropriate level of management of any material errors, any fraudulent financial
reporting, or misappropriation of assets that come to our attention. We will also inform the
appropriate level of management of any violations of laws or governmental regulations that
come to our attention, unless clearly inconsequential, and of any material abuse that comes to
our attention. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by our audit and
does not extend to later periods for which we are not engaged as auditors.
Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions
recorded in the accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories, and
direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence
with selected individuals, funding sources, creditors, and financial institutions. We may
request written representations from your attorneys as part of the engagement, and they may
bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the conclusion of our audit, we will require certain
written representations from you about the financial statements; compliance with laws,
regulations, contracts, and grant agreements; and other responsibilities required by generally
accepted auditing standards.
Audit Procedures - Internal Controls
Our audit will include obtaining an understanding of the entity and its environment,
including internal control, sufficient to assess the risks of material misstatement of the
financial statements and to design the nature, timing, and extent of further audit procedures.
Tests of controls may be performed to test the effectiveness of certain controls that we
consider relevant to preventing and detecting errors and fraud that are material to the
financial statements and to preventing and detecting misstatements resulting from illegal acts
and other noncompliance matters that have a direct and material effect on the financial
statements. Our tests, if performed, will be less in scope than would be necessary to render
an opinion on internal control and, accordingly, no opinion will be expressed in our report on
internal control issued pursuant to Government Auditing Standards.
An audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify significant
deficiencies or material weaknesses. However, during the audit, we will communicate to
management and those charged with governance internal control related matters that are
required to be communicated under AICPA professional standards and Government Auditing
Standards.
City of Chanhassen
Contract for Auditing Services
Page 5
2840062
Audit Procedures—Compliance
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free
of material misstatement, we will perform tests of the City’s compliance with the provisions
of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, agreements, and grants. However, the objective of
our audit will not be to provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express
such an opinion in our report on compliance issued pursuant to Government Auditing
Standards.
The Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Cities requires that we test whether
the auditee has complied with certain provisions of Minnesota Statutes. Our audit will
include such test of the accounting records and other procedures as we consider necessary in
the circumstances.
Management Responsibilities
Management is responsible for designing, implementing and maintaining effective
internal controls, including evaluating and monitoring ongoing activities, to help ensure that
appropriate goals and objectives are met; following laws and regulations; and ensuring that
management is reliable and financial information is reliable and properly reported.
Management is also responsible for implementing systems designed to achieve compliance
with applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements. You are also responsible
for the selection and application of accounting principles, for the preparation and fair
presentation of the financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles, and for compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the
provisions of contracts and grant agreements.
Management is also responsible for making all financial records and related information
available to and for the accuracy and completeness of that information. You are also
responsible for providing us with (1) access to all information of which you are aware that is
relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements, (2) additional
information that we may request for the purpose of the audit, and (3) unrestricted access to
persons within the government from whom we determine it necessary to obtain audit
evidence.
Your responsibilities include adjusting the financial statements to correct material
misstatements and for confirming to us in the written representation letter that the effects of
any uncorrected misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and
pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial, both individually and in the
aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
City of Chanhassen
Contract for Auditing Services
Page 6
2840062
You are responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to
prevent and detect fraud, and for informing us about all known or suspected fraud affecting
the government involving (1) management, (2) employees who have significant roles in
internal control, and (3) others where the fraud could have a material effect on the financial
statements. Your responsibilities include informing us of your knowledge of any allegations
of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the government received in communications from
employees, former employees, grantors, regulators, or others. In addition, you are
responsible for identifying and ensuring that the entity complies with applicable laws,
regulations, contracts, agreements, and grants and for taking timely and appropriate steps to
remedy fraud and noncompliance with provisions of laws, regulations, contracts or grant
agreements, or abuse that we report.
You are responsible for the preparation of the supplementary information in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. You agree to include our report on the
supplementary information in any document that contains and indicates that we have reported
on the supplementary information. You also agree to include the audited financial statements
with any presentation of the supplementary information that includes our report thereon.
Your responsibilities include acknowledging to us in the written representation letter that (1)
you are responsible for presentation of the supplementary information in accordance with
GAAP; (2) you believe the supplementary information, including its form and content, is
fairly presented in accordance with GAAP; (3) the methods of measurement or presentation
have not changed from those used in the prior period (or, if they have changed, the reasons
for such changes); and (4) you have disclosed to us any significant assumptions or
interpretations underlying the measurement or presentation of the supplementary
information.
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining a process for tracking the
status of audit findings and recommendations. Management is also responsible for
identifying for us previous financial audits, attestation engagements, performance audits or
other studies related to the objectives discussed in the Audit Objectives section of this letter.
This responsibility includes relaying to us corrective actions taken to address significant
findings and recommendations resulting from those audits, attestation engagements,
performance audits, or other studies. You are also responsible for providing management’s
views on our current findings, conclusions, and recommendations, as well as your planned
corrective actions, for the report, and for the timing and format for providing that
information.
With regard to the electronic dissemination of audited financial statements, including
financial statements published electronically on your website, you understand that electronic
sites are a means to distribute information and, therefore, we are not required to read the
City of Chanhassen
Contract for Auditing Services
Page 7
2840062
information contained in these sites or to consider the consistency of other information in the
electronic site with the original document.
You agree to assume all management responsibilities relating to the financial statements
and related notes and any other nonaudit services we provide. You will be required to
acknowledge in the management representation letter our assistance with preparation of the
financial statements and related notes that you have reviewed and approved the financial
statements and related notes prior to their issuance and have accepted responsibility for them.
Further, you agree to oversee the nonaudit services by designating an individual, preferably
from senior management, with suitable skill, knowledge, or experience; evaluate the
adequacy and results of those services; and accept responsibility for them.
Engagement Administration, Fees and Other
We may from time to time, and depending on the circumstances, use third-party service
providers in serving your account. We may share confidential information about you with
these service providers, but remain committed to maintaining the confidentiality and security
of your information. Accordingly, we maintain internal policies, procedures, and safeguards
to protect the confidentiality of your personal information. In addition, we will secure
confidentiality agreements with all service providers to maintain the confidentiality of your
information and we will take reasonable precautions to determine that they have appropriate
procedures in place to prevent the unauthorized release of your confidential information to
others. In the event that we are unable to secure an appropriate confidentiality agreement,
you will be asked to provide your consent prior to the sharing of your confidential
information with the third-party service provider. Furthermore, we will remain responsible
for the work provided by any such third-party service providers.
We understand that your employees will prepare all cash or other confirmations we
request and will locate any documents selected by us for testing.
We will provide copies of our reports to the City, however, management is responsible
for distribution of the reports and the financial statements. Unless restricted by law or
regulation, or containing privileged and confidential information, copies of our reports are to
be made available for public inspection.
The audit documentation for this engagement is the property of Redpath and Company,
Ltd. and constitutes confidential information. However, subject to applicable laws and
regulations, audit documentation and appropriate individuals will be made available upon
request and in a timely manner to a federal agency providing direct or indirect funding, or the
U.S. Government Accountability Office for purposes of a quality review of the audit, to
resolve audit findings, or to carry out oversight responsibilities. We will notify you of any
such request. If requested, access to such audit documentation will be provided under the
City of Chanhassen
Contract for Auditing Services
Page 8
2840062
supervision of Redpath and Company, Ltd. personnel. Furthermore, upon request, we may
provide copies of selected audit documentation to the aforementioned parties. These parties
may intend, or decide, to distribute the copies or information contained therein to others,
including other governmental agencies.
The audit documentation for this engagement will be retained for a minimum of five
years after the report release date or for any additional period requested by the federal
agency. If we are aware that a federal awarding agency or auditee is contesting an audit
finding, we will contact the party(ies) contesting the audit finding for guidance prior to
destroying the audit documentation.
David J. Mol, CPA is the engagement partner and is responsible for supervising the
engagement and signing the report.
Our standard hourly rates vary according to the degree of responsibility involved and the
experience level of the personnel assigned to your audit. Our invoices for these fees will be
rendered each month as work progresses and are payable on presentation. Unless additional
work is requested, or circumstances require additional work, we estimate the basic audit fees
will be as follows:
2018 2019 2020
Financial and State legal
compliance audits and
CAFR preparation and
processing
$37,000
$38,000
$39,000
The above fees are based on the anticipated scope of services and the completion of
accurate special assessment work papers by City personnel. An increase in the scope of
service will necessitate an addendum (change order) to this agreement. Examples of items
that may result in an increase in the scope of service include additional audit procedures
resulting from certain accounting issues or events, significant change in the level of
activity/number of transactions, if there is an indication of misappropriation or misuse of
public funds, or difficulties encountered due to lack of accounting records, incomplete
records, inaccurate records or turnover in the City’s staff.
City of Chanhassen
Contract for Auditing Services
Page 9
2840062
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota and
believe this letter accurately summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you
have any questions, please let us know. If you agree with the terms of our engagement as
described in this letter, please sign the enclosed copy and return it to us.
Sincerely,
REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD.
David J. Mol, CPA
DJM/ajf
Response
This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota:
Management signature: Governance signature:
By: By:
Title: Title:
Date: Date:
Nonaudit Services
The employee(s) assigned to oversee the nonaudit services is as follows:
Finance Director
Other employee (name and title)
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject The Garden by the Woods: Proposal for Pollinator Garden on City Property
Section VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Item No: E.1.
Prepared By Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resources
Specialist
File No:
SUMMARY
A representative from The Garden by The Woods will be giving a Visitor Presentation to the City Council regarding a
proposed pollinator garden project to be located on city property near the garden center. The proposed project will
beautify city property, offer an opportunity for community members to be engaged, and provide habitat for pollinators.
The project proposal is attached.
ATTACHMENTS:
Project Proposal
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Fire Department Update
Section FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW
ENFORCEMENT UPDATE
Item No: F.1.
Prepared By Don Johnson, Fire Chief File No:
SUMMARY
The monthly update for the Chanhassen Fire Department to include call data from June/July 2018.
BACKGROUND
Fire Department Staffing
Staffing is at 43 of 45 paid oncall firefighters as of the end of July. We have one firefighter currently on medical leave.
The 2018 rookie class started the Southwest Fire Academy on July 31st and will be in training until May 2019. The
academy is currently being held in Edina and Captain LeFevere is assisting with much of the teaching. The current
curriculum is Firefighter I training scheduled to wrap up at the end of the November. This group can begin responding
to calls after completing FF1.
Fire Department Response
The fire department responded to 76 calls in June and 66 calls in July. Yeartodate total was 494 calls by the end of
July and represents a 12% increase over 2017 of 441 calls.
Significant calls included the following:
73 Rescue/EMS calls with 9 motor vehicle accidents
3 Structure Fire Responses (Long Lake, Excelsior, Eden Prairie)
Monthly Training
Training that occurred since my last update:
EMS Training
Response to Commercial Structures – Westwood Church
Officer Development Training
Ladders/Ropes/Knots
Truck Maintenance Checks
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 27, 2018SubjectFire Department UpdateSectionFIRE DEPARTMENT/LAWENFORCEMENT UPDATE Item No: F.1.Prepared By Don Johnson, Fire Chief File No: SUMMARYThe monthly update for the Chanhassen Fire Department to include call data from June/July 2018. BACKGROUNDFire Department StaffingStaffing is at 43 of 45 paid oncall firefighters as of the end of July. We have one firefighter currently on medical leave.The 2018 rookie class started the Southwest Fire Academy on July 31st and will be in training until May 2019. Theacademy is currently being held in Edina and Captain LeFevere is assisting with much of the teaching. The currentcurriculum is Firefighter I training scheduled to wrap up at the end of the November. This group can begin respondingto calls after completing FF1.Fire Department ResponseThe fire department responded to 76 calls in June and 66 calls in July. Yeartodate total was 494 calls by the end ofJuly and represents a 12% increase over 2017 of 441 calls.Significant calls included the following:73 Rescue/EMS calls with 9 motor vehicle accidents3 Structure Fire Responses (Long Lake, Excelsior, Eden Prairie)Monthly TrainingTraining that occurred since my last update:EMS TrainingResponse to Commercial Structures – Westwood ChurchOfficer Development Training
Ladders/Ropes/Knots
Truck Maintenance Checks
Other Activities
All annual 4th of July Events went very well again this year.
Assist to Park and Rec with spraying kids for water week at several city parks
Assist to Camp Tanadoona with spraying kids during a water event day
I assisted the Carver Fire Department with Fireground Incident Command training on August 6th
Assist with National Night Out with 5 apparatus and 2 command vehicles visiting over 40 parties
Assist to Tonka Mud Run again this year – Reimburse staff costs
Annual Firefighter Physical Exams on August 6th
Annual SCBA certification for NFPA Compliance on August 6th
Assist Carver County with a crew at the Carver County Fair for the Demolition Derby
I assisted Mdewakanton Fire as an instructor for their Tactical Medical Course for 3 days in August.
A contingency of the truck committee traveled to Appleton WI on 8/168/17 for a midconstruction inspection
on the new ladder.
Both new command vehicles were placed in service in August. These vehicles replaced two agedout vehicles in
the fleet.
Fire Marshal Update
Construction Projects of Note/Fire Inspections:
West Park II Townhomes: several more units were given final occupancy inspections with many more sprinkler
system final inspections. Several units are now occupied while the second set of buildings are going up just to
the north/east.
Several businesses applied for and were inspected for retail fireworks sales including Target and Cub Foods.
Hydro and sprinkler inspections were completed at the new West Water Treatment Plant. Fire alarm plans were
submitted and approved. Generator power transfer testing was witnessed and approved.
Demolition of the Frontier building was completed. Several site meetings with the contractor took place to pre
plan the area for emergency response into and out of the gated areas as well as the safety of the other buildings
surrounding the work area.
Camp Tanadoona completed all fire inspection violations and I signed off on their DHS licensing for the year.
Several smaller remodel projects were inspected and given occupancy including: Remax; Edward Jones, and
several residential townhomes and small office spaces.
Fire Code issues at Powers Ridge Senior Living were addressed relating to open fire doors and tenant storage.
Remodel of the Coffee Store at Cub foods was completed and occupancy given.
Preoccupancy inspection of Discovery Methodist Church for Prairie Adult Daycare to be licensed to move the
daycare operation into the church. Temporary license was granted for 30 days during modifications being made
to come up to code.
The West Water Treatment Plant was given temporary occupancy. Final testing of all fire alarm, preaction, and
sprinkler systems was completed. Building signs were ordered to be placed on building. Permission was given
to begin bringing chemicals into building.
Fire Prevention
I attended the International Association of Arson Investigators meeting at Bloomington Fire Department for the
quarterly meeting and training. More focus on Lithium Ion battery fires was the topic.
Publications were completed for both city social media and the upcoming Connection on Battery and Charger
Safety; Chanhassen Fire Open House; Fall Yard Clean Up/Burning Restrictions.
We hosted Chanhassen Elementary PreSchool Fire Station tour at our Station 1. Over 60 children and 10 staff
attended.
CPR/AED Training Class for The Bernard Group – several sessions with over 40 people trained.
I collaborated with the Minnetonka Aquatics Safety Group at the annual Safety Camp at Minnetonka West
Middle School. Fire Safety presentations and handouts were given to over 100 children ages 514.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 27, 2018SubjectFire Department UpdateSectionFIRE DEPARTMENT/LAWENFORCEMENT UPDATE Item No: F.1.Prepared By Don Johnson, Fire Chief File No: SUMMARYThe monthly update for the Chanhassen Fire Department to include call data from June/July 2018. BACKGROUNDFire Department StaffingStaffing is at 43 of 45 paid oncall firefighters as of the end of July. We have one firefighter currently on medical leave.The 2018 rookie class started the Southwest Fire Academy on July 31st and will be in training until May 2019. Theacademy is currently being held in Edina and Captain LeFevere is assisting with much of the teaching. The currentcurriculum is Firefighter I training scheduled to wrap up at the end of the November. This group can begin respondingto calls after completing FF1.Fire Department ResponseThe fire department responded to 76 calls in June and 66 calls in July. Yeartodate total was 494 calls by the end ofJuly and represents a 12% increase over 2017 of 441 calls.Significant calls included the following:73 Rescue/EMS calls with 9 motor vehicle accidents3 Structure Fire Responses (Long Lake, Excelsior, Eden Prairie)Monthly TrainingTraining that occurred since my last update:EMS TrainingResponse to Commercial Structures – Westwood ChurchOfficer Development TrainingLadders/Ropes/KnotsTruck Maintenance ChecksOther ActivitiesAll annual 4th of July Events went very well again this year.Assist to Park and Rec with spraying kids for water week at several city parksAssist to Camp Tanadoona with spraying kids during a water event dayI assisted the Carver Fire Department with Fireground Incident Command training on August 6thAssist with National Night Out with 5 apparatus and 2 command vehicles visiting over 40 partiesAssist to Tonka Mud Run again this year – Reimburse staff costsAnnual Firefighter Physical Exams on August 6thAnnual SCBA certification for NFPA Compliance on August 6thAssist Carver County with a crew at the Carver County Fair for the Demolition DerbyI assisted Mdewakanton Fire as an instructor for their Tactical Medical Course for 3 days in August.A contingency of the truck committee traveled to Appleton WI on 8/168/17 for a midconstruction inspectionon the new ladder.Both new command vehicles were placed in service in August. These vehicles replaced two agedout vehicles inthe fleet.Fire Marshal UpdateConstruction Projects of Note/Fire Inspections:West Park II Townhomes: several more units were given final occupancy inspections with many more sprinklersystem final inspections. Several units are now occupied while the second set of buildings are going up just tothe north/east.Several businesses applied for and were inspected for retail fireworks sales including Target and Cub Foods.Hydro and sprinkler inspections were completed at the new West Water Treatment Plant. Fire alarm plans weresubmitted and approved. Generator power transfer testing was witnessed and approved.Demolition of the Frontier building was completed. Several site meetings with the contractor took place to preplan the area for emergency response into and out of the gated areas as well as the safety of the other buildingssurrounding the work area.Camp Tanadoona completed all fire inspection violations and I signed off on their DHS licensing for the year.Several smaller remodel projects were inspected and given occupancy including: Remax; Edward Jones, andseveral residential townhomes and small office spaces.Fire Code issues at Powers Ridge Senior Living were addressed relating to open fire doors and tenant storage.Remodel of the Coffee Store at Cub foods was completed and occupancy given.Preoccupancy inspection of Discovery Methodist Church for Prairie Adult Daycare to be licensed to move thedaycare operation into the church. Temporary license was granted for 30 days during modifications being madeto come up to code.The West Water Treatment Plant was given temporary occupancy. Final testing of all fire alarm, preaction, andsprinkler systems was completed. Building signs were ordered to be placed on building. Permission was givento begin bringing chemicals into building.Fire PreventionI attended the International Association of Arson Investigators meeting at Bloomington Fire Department for thequarterly meeting and training. More focus on Lithium Ion battery fires was the topic.Publications were completed for both city social media and the upcoming Connection on Battery and ChargerSafety; Chanhassen Fire Open House; Fall Yard Clean Up/Burning Restrictions.We hosted Chanhassen Elementary PreSchool Fire Station tour at our Station 1. Over 60 children and 10 staffattended.CPR/AED Training Class for The Bernard Group – several sessions with over 40 people trained.I collaborated with the Minnetonka Aquatics Safety Group at the annual Safety Camp at Minnetonka West
Middle School. Fire Safety presentations and handouts were given to over 100 children ages 514.
Fire Investigations
The bus fire at Bluff Creek Elementary was investigated and proved to be accidental and mechanical in nature. Exact
cause of the fire is unknown.
ATTACHMENTS:
June/July Graphs and Tables
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
May June July
2018 Calls by Month and Type
Rescue & Emergency Medical Service Alarm Calls Good Intent Call Hazardous Condition Service Call Fire
50 53 53 53
58 61
81
54 52
66
51
5855
51
63 65
55
86
66
60 59
80
57 56
71
50
66
79
86
76
66
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Chanhassen Fire Department
Calls By Month Comparison
2016 2017 2018
621
691 690
753
621
691 690
753
851
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 PROJECTEDNumber of CallsYears
Chanhassen Fire Department
Total Calls by Year ‐5 Year Table
51%
17%
17%
6%
5%4%
2018 % OF TOTAL CALLS BY TYPE
Rescue & Emergency Medical Service
Alarm Calls
Good Intent Call
Hazardous Condition
Service Call
Fire
City of Chanhassen
Fire Calls for Ser vice6/1/2018 - 6/30/2018
K
Fire Box Alarm Zones
Calls for Serv ice
North Bo x
South Bo x
We st Bo x
Date: 7/10/2018Document Path: K:\Nick LH\Pro jects\Fire\Fo rDon\FireCa llMa ps\2 018\J une\Fire Incident Map Ge ocode June 2 018.mxd
City of Chanhassen
Fire Calls for Ser vice7/1/2018 - 7/31/2018
K
Fire Box Alarm Zones
Calls for Serv ice
North Bo x
South Bo x
We st Bo x
Date: 8/6/2018Document Path: K:\Nick LH\Pro jects\Fire\Fo rDon\FireCa llMa ps\2 018\J uly\Fire Incident Ma p Geocod e July 2018 .mxd
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Law Enforcement Update
Section FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW
ENFORCEMENT UPDATE
Item No: F.2.
Prepared By Lieutenant Eric Kittelson, Carver County
Sheriff's Office
File No:
SUMMARY
Monthly law enforcement update for June/July 2018.
ATTACHMENTS:
Cover Memo
Activity Description by Class
June 2018 Statistics
July 2018 Statistics
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, August 27, 2018
Subject Review of Claims Paid 08272018
Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: L.1.
Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No:
SUMMARY
The following claims are submitted for review on August 27, 2018:
Check Numbers Amounts
167598 – 167703 $865,542.46
ACH Payments $402,162.94
Total All Claims $1,267,705.40
ATTACHMENTS:
Check Summary
Check Summary ACH
Check Detail
Check Detail ACH
Accounts Payable
User:
Printed:
dwashburn
8/17/2018 9:11 AM
Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number
Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount
UB*01442 DOUGLAS AHRENS 08/09/2018 0.00 25.54167598
ASPMIL ASPEN MILLS 08/09/2018 0.00 323.80167599
BluCro BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 0.00 87,140.02167600
BENPRO BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 08/09/2018 0.00 500.00167601
BORSTA BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 08/09/2018 0.00 162.60167602
BroGar Brookside Garden Center, Inc.08/09/2018 0.00 281.28167603
UB*01439 BURNET TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 0.00 30.28167604
UB*01444 BRIAN & DEANN CARIGNAN 08/09/2018 0.00 75.00167605
CARVCO Carver Construction Inc 08/09/2018 0.00 250.00167606
UB*01457 CCA & T 08/09/2018 0.00 47.19167607
CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 0.00 513.83167608
UB*01460 CHAMPION TITLE & SETTLEMENT INC 08/09/2018 0.00 175.22167609
UB*01449 BRYANT & STEPHANIE COOPER 08/09/2018 0.00 130.22167610
CORMAI CORE & MAIN LP 08/09/2018 0.00 2,857.78167611
CulBot Culligan Bottled Water 08/09/2018 0.00 129.34167612
UB*01451 DOROTHY S JAMES TRUST 08/09/2018 0.00 38.72167613
UB*01456 EAGLE CREEK TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 0.00 57.55167614
EARAND Earl F Andersen Inc 08/09/2018 0.00 50.00167615
UB*01454 EDINA REALTY TITLE 08/09/2018 0.00 5.27167616
FOXWOO FOXWOOD LLC 08/09/2018 0.00 504,365.19167617
UB*01452 JAMES GALAROWICZ 08/09/2018 0.00 54.06167618
UB*01445 KAREN & TIMOTHY GETTY 08/09/2018 0.00 58.01167619
UB*01448 GRAEBEL RELOCATION SERVICES WORLDWIDE INC08/09/2018 0.00 163.50167620
UB*01455 GUARDIAN TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 0.00 36.65167621
HARTLIFE Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company08/09/2018 0.00 1,040.28167622
HERLAN HERMAN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES INC 08/09/2018 0.00 59.63167623
HOMEDEP Home Depot USA Inc 08/09/2018 0.00 82.56167624
INDSCH INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 112 08/09/2018 0.00 8,330.72167625
JAGCOM Jaguar Communications Inc 08/09/2018 0.00 53.46167626
JOHNNANC NANCY JOHNSON 08/09/2018 0.00 30.00167627
josroy Joseph Roy Construction 08/09/2018 0.00 250.00167628
K2Ele K2 Electrical Services Inc 08/09/2018 0.00 877.00167629
UB*01446 PATRICIA KOHN 08/09/2018 0.00 86.78167630
KOSKDUST DUSTIN KOSKELA 08/09/2018 0.00 74.50167631
MADGAL MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 08/09/2018 0.00 390.00167632
MCFOA MCFOA 08/09/2018 0.00 45.00167633
MetGar Metro Garage Door Company 08/09/2018 0.00 623.81167634
METCO2 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 08/09/2018 0.00 152,094.89167635
UB*01438 HOWARD & MARY MEUWISSEN 08/09/2018 0.00 6.74167636
UB*01441 KJRSTEN & JAMES MICKESH 08/09/2018 0.00 124.42167637
MIDCOU MID COUNTY COOP 08/09/2018 0.00 19,371.59167638
MIDPLA MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 08/09/2018 0.00 4,985.79167639
MILLDAVE Dave Millard 08/09/2018 0.00 30.25167640
MNHEAL MN DEPT OF HEALTH 08/09/2018 0.00 175.00167641
Ove&Son Overline & Son, Inc.08/09/2018 0.00 1,350.00167642
UB*01459 PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 08/09/2018 0.00 54.17167643
PREMRM PRECISE MRM LLC 08/09/2018 0.00 146.16167644
Page 1AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (8/17/2018 9:11 AM)
Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount
UB*01453 PREMIER TITLE INC AGENCY 08/09/2018 0.00 17.89167645
UB*01440 PREMIER TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY INC08/09/2018 0.00 29.61167646
UB*01458 CODY & AMANDA PRIBBLE 08/09/2018 0.00 5.53167647
RAITRE RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 08/09/2018 0.00 12,335.70167648
UB*01443 RESULTS TITLE 08/09/2018 0.00 61.54167649
UB*01447 RESULTS TITLE 08/09/2018 0.00 84.40167650
UB*01450 KENNETH & ELLEN ROWE 08/09/2018 0.00 9.93167651
SATDES Sather Design/Build 08/09/2018 0.00 500.00167652
SHEWIL SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/09/2018 0.00 22.99167653
SIGNSO SIGNSOURCE 08/09/2018 0.00 85.00167654
SpeScr Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 08/09/2018 0.00 450.05167655
STEPAARO Aaron Stephan 08/09/2018 0.00 250.00167656
UB*01461 STEWART TITLE COMPANY 08/09/2018 0.00 123.39167657
SUBRAT SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY 08/09/2018 0.00 1,329.00167658
UB*01437 SUE SUTER 08/09/2018 0.00 12.40167659
THORSUSA Michael and Susan Thorud 08/09/2018 0.00 250.00167660
TIMLAN TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC.08/09/2018 0.00 313.00167661
TOWFEN TOWN & COUNTRY FENCE 08/09/2018 0.00 2,150.00167662
USMINE U S MINERALS INC 08/09/2018 0.00 281.20167663
UNIMIN UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 08/09/2018 0.00 5,390.00167664
VavrMatt Matthew Vavrichek 08/09/2018 0.00 300.00167665
WastMana Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 08/09/2018 0.00 1,613.56167666
MNCHPO MN Chiefs of Police Assoc 08/10/2018 0.00 110.00167667
AARP AARP 08/16/2018 0.00 265.00167668
ASPMIL ASPEN MILLS 08/16/2018 0.00 119.30167669
BCATRA BCA 08/16/2018 0.00 60.00167670
BERCOF BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 08/16/2018 0.00 1,025.75167671
BLAMAN Blackburn Manufacturing Company 08/16/2018 0.00 734.16167672
CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/16/2018 0.00 128.52167673
CenLin CenturyLink 08/16/2018 0.00 64.00167674
CUBFOO CUB FOODS 08/16/2018 0.00 217.64167675
EHLERS EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 08/16/2018 0.00 4,450.00167676
hach Hach Company 08/16/2018 0.00 1,115.81167677
HANSJESS Nicholas and Jessica Hansgen 08/16/2018 0.00 1,000.00167678
HOOTHREA HOOPS AND THREADS LLC 08/16/2018 0.00 56.00167679
ICMART ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/16/2018 0.00 1,445.83167680
INNWOO INNOVATIVE WOODWORKING SOLUTIONS08/16/2018 0.00 5,800.00167681
kraande Kraus Anderson Inc 08/16/2018 0.00 432.80167682
LANSALAN ALAN LANGSETH 08/16/2018 0.00 392.00167683
MetGar Metro Garage Door Company 08/16/2018 0.00 3,317.76167684
METPLU Metropolitan Plumbing 08/16/2018 0.00 30.05167685
MOOMED MOORE MEDICAL 08/16/2018 0.00 664.07167686
NARCON NARR CONSTRUCTION 08/16/2018 0.00 2,500.00167687
PULTGROU Pulte Group Pulte Homes of MN LLC 08/16/2018 0.00 5,000.00167688
PULTHOME Pulte Homes of Minnesota LLC 08/16/2018 0.00 2,500.00167689
PYRZSUSA Susan or Joseph Pyrz 08/16/2018 0.00 87.65167690
ReaWat Ready Watt Electric 08/16/2018 0.00 4,815.00167691
RotRoo Roto Rooter Services Company 08/16/2018 0.00 40.00167692
RUEGJERR JERRY RUEGEMER 08/16/2018 0.00 300.00167693
SHEWIL SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/16/2018 0.00 686.13167694
SHOTRU SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 08/16/2018 0.00 71.00167695
SIGNSO SIGNSOURCE 08/16/2018 0.00 1,267.00167696
SouRen Southwest Rental & Sales 08/16/2018 0.00 91.14167697
SpeScr Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 08/16/2018 0.00 1,047.05167698
SRCM SRCM, LLC 08/16/2018 0.00 1,500.00167699
STACONLL Sta Con LLC 08/16/2018 0.00 8,193.11167700
triedeea DeeAnn Triethart 08/16/2018 0.00 46.70167701
Page 2AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (8/17/2018 9:11 AM)
Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount
WESBAY WEST BAY HOMES CORPORATION 08/16/2018 0.00 2,500.00167702
WINGRICH RICHARD WING 08/16/2018 0.00 100.00167703
Report Total (106 checks): 865,542.46 0.00
Page 3AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (8/17/2018 9:11 AM)
Accounts Payable
Checks by Date - Summary by Check
User: dwashburn
Printed: 8/17/2018 9:11 AM
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount
ACH adveng Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc 08/09/2018 0.00 594.47
ACH AppEco Applied Ecological Services Inc 08/09/2018
0.00 981.00
ACH BENEXT BENEFIT EXTRAS INC 08/09/2018
0.00 130.00
ACH CAMKNU CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/09/2018
0.00 13,648.87
ACH CCPNIM CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 08/09/2018
0.00 6,160.07
ACH DAMFAR DAMON FARBER ASSOCIATES 08/09/2018
0.00 2,094.75
ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 08/09/2018
0.00 96.22
ACH GENPAR GENERAL PARTS LLC 08/09/2018
0.00 122.00
ACH GMHASP GMH ASPHALT CORP 08/09/2018
0.00 248,290.28
ACH GOPSTA GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 08/09/2018
0.00 827.55
ACH HAWCHE HAWKINS CHEMICAL 08/09/2018
0.00 13,935.86
ACH IdeSer Ideal Service Inc. 08/09/2018
0.00 1,982.50
ACH IMPPOR IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 08/09/2018
0.00 4,825.55
ACH IndPla Indelco Plastics Corporation 08/09/2018
0.00 75.44
ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 08/09/2018
0.00 517.01
ACH JEFFIR JEFFERSON FIRE SAFETY INC 08/09/2018
0.00 896.33
ACH JOHSUP JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 08/09/2018
0.00 76.50
ACH LARSDALE DALE LARSEN 08/09/2018
0.00 208.50
ACH Marco Marco Inc 08/09/2018
0.00 4,030.29
ACH MERACE MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018
0.00 1,206.40
ACH MINCON SUMMIT COMPANIES 08/09/2018
0.00 500.00
ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/09/2018
0.00 6,001.10
ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 08/09/2018
0.00 26.49
ACH OREAUT O'Reilly Automotive Inc 08/09/2018
0.00 223.84
ACH PotMN Potentia MN Solar 08/09/2018
0.00 8,390.47
ACH PRARES PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 08/09/2018
0.00 660.00
ACH PreWat Premium Waters, Inc 08/09/2018
0.00 82.69
ACH RBMSER RBM SERVICES INC 08/09/2018
0.00 175.00
ACH TESSEE TESSMAN SEED CO 08/09/2018
0.00 877.00
ACH ULTCON ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 08/09/2018
0.00 5,269.00
ACH USABLU USA BLUE BOOK 08/09/2018
0.00 31.97
ACH VERIZO VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018
0.00 4,374.02
ACH WATSON WATSON COMPANY 08/09/2018
0.00 167.75
ACH WMMUE WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/09/2018
0.00 392.00
ACH WWGRA WW GRAINGER INC 08/09/2018
0.00 1,497.32
ACH ADAPES ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC 08/16/2018
0.00 125.00
ACH ALLENG Alliant Engineering Inc 08/16/2018
0.00 2,312.07
ACH CENFEN CENTURY FENCE COMPANY 08/16/2018
0.00 6,388.00
ACH engwat Engel Water Testing Inc 08/16/2018
0.00 520.00
ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 08/16/2018
0.00 17.67
ACH FergEnte Ferguson Waterworks #2516 08/16/2018
0.00 610.01
ACH GRANIC GRANICUS INC 08/16/2018
0.00 5,040.00
ACH HAWCHE HAWKINS CHEMICAL 08/16/2018
0.00 4,982.76
ACH INDLAN Indoor Landscapes Inc 08/16/2018
0.00 187.00
ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 08/16/2018
0.00 36.58
Page 1 of 2
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount
ACH JOHSUP JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 08/16/2018
0.00 96.21
ACH METCO Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 08/16/2018
0.00 39,362.40
ACH MNLABO MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 08/16/2018
0.00 5,543.93
ACH SafVeh Safety Vehicle Solutions 08/16/2018
0.00 3,850.00
ACH SPRPCS SPRINT PCS 08/16/2018
0.00 103.44
ACH UNIWAY UNITED WAY 08/16/2018
0.00 28.40
ACH WarLit Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc. 08/16/2018
0.00 219.50
ACH WMMUE WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/16/2018
0.00 2,539.67
ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 08/16/2018
0.00 832.06
Report Total: 0.00 402,162.94
Page 2 of 2
Accounts Payable
Check Detail-Checks
User: dwashburn
Printed: 08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM
Name Check D Account Description Amount
AARP 08/16/2018 101-1560-4300 Driver Safety-Refresher Course 265.00
AARP 265.00
AHRENS DOUGLAS 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 25.54
AHRENS DOUGLAS 25.54
ASPEN MILLS 08/09/2018 101-1220-4240 Cargo Pants, Belt 80.95
ASPEN MILLS 08/09/2018 101-1220-4240 Cargo Pants, Belt 80.95
ASPEN MILLS 08/09/2018 101-1220-4240 Cargo Pants, Belt 80.95
ASPEN MILLS 08/09/2018 101-1220-4240 Cargo Pants, Belt 80.95
ASPEN MILLS 08/16/2018 101-1220-4240 Name Tag, Pants, Shirt, Patches 119.30
ASPEN MILLS 443.10
BCA 08/16/2018 101-1120-4300 Background investigation 60.00
BCA 60.00
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 101-0000-2012 September - Family 43,998.29
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 101-0000-2012 September - Family Cobra 6,994.96
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 700-0000-2012 September - Family 6,457.23
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 701-0000-2012 September - Family 4,708.49
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 720-0000-2012 September - Family 2,544.41
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 101-0000-2012 September - Single 16,023.35
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 210-0000-2012 September - Single 874.64
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 700-0000-2012 September - Single 2,361.52
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 701-0000-2012 September - Single 1,661.81
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 720-0000-2012 September - Single 1,469.40
BCBSM, Inc.08/09/2018 101-1220-4483 September - Firefighter EAP 45.92
BCBSM, Inc. 87,140.02
BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 08/09/2018 101-1550-4300 Round-Abouts , weed pulling/spraying and debris removal 500.00
BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 500.00
BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 08/16/2018 101-1170-4110 Coffee 75.36
BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 08/16/2018 101-1170-4110 Coffee 711.59
BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 08/16/2018 101-1180-4110 Coffee - Elections 238.80
BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 1,025.75
Blackburn Manufacturing Company 08/16/2018 701-0000-4150 Marking Products 734.16
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 1 of 11
Name Check D Account Description Amount
Blackburn Manufacturing Company 734.16
BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 08/09/2018 101-1190-4510 Lamps 162.60
BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 162.60
Brookside Garden Center, Inc.08/09/2018 101-1550-4150 CP-Pulverized Dirt bulk per yard 88.00
Brookside Garden Center, Inc.08/09/2018 101-1550-4150 CP-Mulch-Western Red Cedar bulk 193.28
Brookside Garden Center, Inc. 281.28
BURNET TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.86
BURNET TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.32
BURNET TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.48
BURNET TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.62
BURNET TITLE LLC 30.28
CARIGNAN BRIAN & DEANN 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 8.60
CARIGNAN BRIAN & DEANN 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.52
CARIGNAN BRIAN & DEANN 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 22.48
CARIGNAN BRIAN & DEANN 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 42.40
CARIGNAN BRIAN & DEANN 75.00
Carver Construction Inc 08/09/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 2383 Longacres Drive 250.00
Carver Construction Inc 250.00
CCA & T 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 17.33
CCA & T 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 28.26
CCA & T 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.79
CCA & T 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.81
CCA & T 47.19
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 101-1190-4320 gas charges 153.41
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 101-1550-4320 gas charges 23.77
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 101-1170-4320 gas charges 128.06
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 700-7019-4320 gas charges 48.68
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 700-0000-4320 gas charges 16.98
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 101-1370-4320 gas charges 83.59
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 700-0000-4320 gas charges 10.45
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 701-0000-4320 gas charges 10.45
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 701-0000-4320 gas charges 21.46
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/09/2018 101-1600-4320 gas charges 16.98
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/16/2018 101-1220-4320 monthly charges 6/27/18-7/30/18 76.35
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/16/2018 101-1530-4320 monthly charges 6/27/18-7/30/18 35.19
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 08/16/2018 101-1120-4320 monthly charges 6/27/18-7/30/18 16.98
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 642.35
CenturyLink 08/16/2018 700-0000-4310 Monthly services Aug 2018 32.00
CenturyLink 08/16/2018 701-0000-4310 Monthly services Aug 2018 32.00
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 2 of 11
Name Check D Account Description Amount
CenturyLink 64.00
CHAMPION TITLE & SETTLEMENT INC 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 175.22
CHAMPION TITLE & SETTLEMENT INC 175.22
COOPER BRYANT & STEPHANIE 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.22
COOPER BRYANT & STEPHANIE 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 38.10
COOPER BRYANT & STEPHANIE 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 63.97
COOPER BRYANT & STEPHANIE 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 23.93
COOPER BRYANT & STEPHANIE 130.22
CORE & MAIN LP 08/09/2018 700-0000-4550 CB 1 1/4" MIP Repair CPLG 108.66
CORE & MAIN LP 08/09/2018 700-0000-4550 12 and 18 HYD EXT 5 1/4 MED 2,277.90
CORE & MAIN LP 08/09/2018 701-0000-4551 Pipe, EPXY IMP, Gasket, T-Head 471.22
CORE & MAIN LP 2,857.78
CUB FOODS 08/16/2018 101-1220-4290 Special Event Lunch - buns, hamburger, pop, cheese, salad 58.64
CUB FOODS 08/16/2018 101-1540-4130 Buns 39.78
CUB FOODS 08/16/2018 101-1540-4130 Chips, Paper Towels 51.56
CUB FOODS 08/16/2018 101-1540-4130 Buns, Chips, Cheese 32.55
CUB FOODS 08/16/2018 101-1540-4130 Wipes, Chips 23.11
CUB FOODS 08/16/2018 101-1540-4130 Buns 12.00
CUB FOODS 217.64
Culligan Bottled Water 08/09/2018 101-1220-4300 Water/Aug 2018 equipment rental 129.34
Culligan Bottled Water 129.34
DOROTHY S JAMES TRUST 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.79
DOROTHY S JAMES TRUST 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 21.73
DOROTHY S JAMES TRUST 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.50
DOROTHY S JAMES TRUST 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.70
DOROTHY S JAMES TRUST 38.72
EAGLE CREEK TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 33.30
EAGLE CREEK TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.24
EAGLE CREEK TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.74
EAGLE CREEK TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.27
EAGLE CREEK TITLE LLC 57.55
Earl F Andersen Inc 08/09/2018 700-0000-4150 6X18 W/BLUE DG3 2100 - SIGN 50.00
Earl F Andersen Inc 50.00
EDINA REALTY TITLE 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.27
EDINA REALTY TITLE 5.27
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 08/16/2018 300-0000-4300 Continuing Disclosure Reporting, County Auditor Fee 4,450.00
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 3 of 11
Name Check D Account Description Amount
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 4,450.00
FOXWOOD LLC 08/09/2018 700-7025-4706 Foxwood Highway 101 Trail Construction 41,579.42
FOXWOOD LLC 08/09/2018 410-0000-4710 Foxwood Highway 101 Trail Construction 462,785.77
FOXWOOD LLC 504,365.19
GALAROWICZ JAMES 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 21.02
GALAROWICZ JAMES 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 26.09
GALAROWICZ JAMES 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.91
GALAROWICZ JAMES 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.04
GALAROWICZ JAMES 54.06
GETTY KAREN & TIMOTHY 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.04
GETTY KAREN & TIMOTHY 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 37.03
GETTY KAREN & TIMOTHY 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.94
GETTY KAREN & TIMOTHY 58.01
GRAEBEL RELOCATION SERVICES WORLDWIDE INC08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.41
GRAEBEL RELOCATION SERVICES WORLDWIDE INC08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 114.96
GRAEBEL RELOCATION SERVICES WORLDWIDE INC08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 24.76
GRAEBEL RELOCATION SERVICES WORLDWIDE INC08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.37
GRAEBEL RELOCATION SERVICES WORLDWIDE INC 163.50
GUARDIAN TITLE LLC 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 36.65
GUARDIAN TITLE LLC 36.65
Hach Company 08/16/2018 700-7043-4150 Buffer, Citrate Type 54.24
Hach Company 08/16/2018 700-7019-4150 misc parts/supplies 1,061.57
Hach Company 1,115.81
Hansgen Nicholas and Jessica 08/16/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 7555 Walnut Curve 1,000.00
Hansgen Nicholas and Jessica 1,000.00
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1120-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 69.45
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1130-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 47.83
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1160-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 24.74
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1250-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 106.89
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1310-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 73.97
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1320-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 112.04
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1370-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 44.79
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1520-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 35.08
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1530-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 14.05
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1560-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 11.58
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1600-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 22.34
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1700-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 5.59
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1550-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 88.54
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1420-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 73.79
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1430-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 4.67
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 4 of 11
Name Check D Account Description Amount
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 210-0000-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 17.84
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 720-7201-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 5.51
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 720-7202-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 5.51
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1170-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 12.37
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 101-1220-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 42.30
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 701-0000-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 79.12
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 700-0000-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 104.95
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 08/09/2018 720-0000-4040 August 2018 insurance premium 37.33
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 1,040.28
HERMAN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES INC 08/09/2018 101-1550-4150 Yd Pulverized Dirt 59.63
HERMAN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES INC 59.63
Home Depot USA Inc 08/09/2018 101-1250-3301 Refund permit fee. Job cancelled. 82.56
Home Depot USA Inc 82.56
HOOPS AND THREADS LLC 08/16/2018 700-0000-4240 Utilities logo on left chest above pocket 8.00
HOOPS AND THREADS LLC 08/16/2018 701-0000-4240 Utilities logo on left chest above pocket 8.00
HOOPS AND THREADS LLC 08/16/2018 701-0000-4240 Utilities logo on left chest 20.00
HOOPS AND THREADS LLC 08/16/2018 700-0000-4240 Utilities logo on left chest 20.00
HOOPS AND THREADS LLC 56.00
ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/16/2018 101-0000-2009 8/17/2018 ID #304303 1,114.56
ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/16/2018 210-0000-2009 8/17/2018 ID #304303 25.00
ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/16/2018 700-0000-2009 8/17/2018 ID #304303 152.52
ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/16/2018 701-0000-2009 8/17/2018 ID #304303 152.49
ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/16/2018 720-0000-2009 8/17/2018 ID #304303 1.26
ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 1,445.83
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 112 08/09/2018 101-1530-4320 electricity/gas/water and sewer - May-June 2018 8,330.72
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 112 8,330.72
INNOVATIVE WOODWORKING SOLUTIONS 08/16/2018 422-0000-4704 Tahoe, Rear Cargo Organizer #205, #206 5,800.00
INNOVATIVE WOODWORKING SOLUTIONS 5,800.00
Jaguar Communications Inc 08/09/2018 700-7043-4310 August 2018 phone charges 53.46
Jaguar Communications Inc 53.46
JOHNSON NANCY 08/09/2018 101-1539-3631 Refund Gentle Flow Yoga 30.00
JOHNSON NANCY 30.00
Joseph Roy Construction 08/09/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 981 Saddlebrook Trail 250.00
Joseph Roy Construction 250.00
K2 Electrical Services Inc 08/09/2018 101-1550-4300 Lake Ann Park - Labor/Materials for parking lot lights/ballast 387.00
K2 Electrical Services Inc 08/09/2018 101-1550-4300 State Permits filed for 4th Celebration/Temp pwr units/Generator 180.00
K2 Electrical Services Inc 08/09/2018 101-1550-4300 Labor for troubleshoot/repair lighting on Lake Ann Field #4 310.00
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 5 of 11
Name Check D Account Description Amount
K2 Electrical Services Inc 877.00
KOHN PATRICIA 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 24.14
KOHN PATRICIA 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 43.50
KOHN PATRICIA 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 16.27
KOHN PATRICIA 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.87
KOHN PATRICIA 86.78
KOSKELA DUSTIN 08/09/2018 101-1550-4240 2 pairs of cargo pants 74.50
KOSKELA DUSTIN 74.50
Kraus Anderson Inc 08/16/2018 101-1250-3301 refund overpayment on permit# 2018-01203 247.15
Kraus Anderson Inc 08/16/2018 101-1250-3302 refund overpayment on permit# 2018-01203 160.65
Kraus Anderson Inc 08/16/2018 101-0000-2022 refund overpayment on permit# 2018-01203 25.00
Kraus Anderson Inc 432.80
LANGSETH ALAN 08/16/2018 101-1766-4300 Adult Softball Umpire - 16 games 392.00
LANGSETH ALAN 392.00
MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 08/09/2018 101-1140-4302 Labor Relations Services - July 2018 390.00
MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 390.00
MCFOA 08/09/2018 101-1120-4360 Membership - K Meuwissen 45.00
MCFOA 45.00
Metro Garage Door Company 08/09/2018 101-1370-4510 Repair SE over head door 623.81
Metro Garage Door Company 08/16/2018 101-1370-4510 Replaced springs and loop detector on city service building 2,812.17
Metro Garage Door Company 08/16/2018 101-1370-4260 Drums 83.82
Metro Garage Door Company 08/16/2018 101-1370-4510 Replaced both drums, service and adjust the south door 421.77
Metro Garage Door Company 3,941.57
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 08/09/2018 701-0000-4509 Waste Water Services - Sept 2018 152,094.89
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 152,094.89
Metropolitan Plumbing 08/16/2018 101-0000-2033 Overpayment - refund permit# 2018-02131 30.05
Metropolitan Plumbing 30.05
MEUWISSEN HOWARD & MARY 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.87
MEUWISSEN HOWARD & MARY 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.96
MEUWISSEN HOWARD & MARY 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.47
MEUWISSEN HOWARD & MARY 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.44
MEUWISSEN HOWARD & MARY 6.74
MICKESH KJRSTEN & JAMES 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.53
MICKESH KJRSTEN & JAMES 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 55.15
MICKESH KJRSTEN & JAMES 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 20.00
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 6 of 11
Name Check D Account Description Amount
MICKESH KJRSTEN & JAMES 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 45.74
MICKESH KJRSTEN & JAMES 124.42
MID COUNTY COOP 08/09/2018 101-1370-4170 No Lead Gasoline, Diesel Fuel 19,371.59
MID COUNTY COOP 19,371.59
MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 08/09/2018 101-1550-4150 Engineered Wood Fiber 2,827.79
MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 08/09/2018 400-4008-4706 Medium Group Grill 2,158.00
MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 4,985.79
Millard Dave 08/09/2018 101-0000-2022 Refund permit# 2018-02113 0.25
Millard Dave 08/09/2018 101-1250-3305 Refund permit# 2018-02113 30.00
Millard Dave 30.25
MN Chiefs of Police Assoc 08/10/2018 101-1120-4370 Todd Gerhardt: Training Fee 110.00
MN Chiefs of Police Assoc 110.00
MN DEPT OF HEALTH 08/09/2018 700-0000-4550 Water Well Status Report - Permit Renewal 8/26/18-8/25/19 175.00
MN DEPT OF HEALTH 175.00
MOORE MEDICAL 08/16/2018 101-1220-4130 Cold packs, gloves 117.23
MOORE MEDICAL 08/16/2018 101-1220-4130 Oxygen Regulator, Sheears, Cutter, Wound wash, Bandages 546.84
MOORE MEDICAL 664.07
NARR CONSTRUCTION 08/16/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 6611 Horseshoe Curve 2,500.00
NARR CONSTRUCTION 2,500.00
Overline & Son, Inc.08/09/2018 701-0000-4551 Unscheduled televising/reporting of sewer lines 1,350.00
Overline & Son, Inc. 1,350.00
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 16.34
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 34.00
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.26
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.57
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 54.17
PRECISE MRM LLC 08/09/2018 101-1320-4310 pooled data plan/network access fee 146.16
PRECISE MRM LLC 146.16
PREMIER TITLE INC AGENCY 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.15
PREMIER TITLE INC AGENCY 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 11.35
PREMIER TITLE INC AGENCY 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.73
PREMIER TITLE INC AGENCY 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.66
PREMIER TITLE INC AGENCY 17.89
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 7 of 11
Name Check D Account Description Amount
PREMIER TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY INC 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 11.88
PREMIER TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY INC 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.47
PREMIER TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY INC 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.62
PREMIER TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY INC 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.64
PREMIER TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY INC 29.61
PRIBBLE CODY & AMANDA 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.47
PRIBBLE CODY & AMANDA 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.67
PRIBBLE CODY & AMANDA 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.39
PRIBBLE CODY & AMANDA 5.53
Pulte Group Pulte Homes of MN LLC 08/16/2018 815-8226-2024 As-Built Escrow - 727,729,731,733 Wildflower Lane 2,500.00
Pulte Group Pulte Homes of MN LLC 08/16/2018 815-8226-2024 As-Built Escrow - 701,703,705,707 Rockburn Road 2,500.00
Pulte Group Pulte Homes of MN LLC 5,000.00
Pulte Homes of Minnesota LLC 08/16/2018 815-8226-2024 As-Built Escrow - 719,721,723,725 Wildflower Lane 2,500.00
Pulte Homes of Minnesota LLC 2,500.00
Pyrz Susan or Joseph 08/16/2018 101-0000-2033 Overpayment - Admin Subdivision 87.65
Pyrz Susan or Joseph 87.65
RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 08/09/2018 720-7202-4300 2018 EAB Treatments 12,335.70
RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 12,335.70
Ready Watt Electric 08/16/2018 101-1220-4300 18-620 2018 Siren Maintenance 4,815.00
Ready Watt Electric 4,815.00
RESULTS TITLE 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.94
RESULTS TITLE 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.72
RESULTS TITLE 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 37.06
RESULTS TITLE 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.82
RESULTS TITLE 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 37.89
RESULTS TITLE 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.43
RESULTS TITLE 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.37
RESULTS TITLE 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 30.71
RESULTS TITLE 145.94
Roto Rooter Services Company 08/16/2018 101-1310-3307 Refund permit# R18-62 40.00
Roto Rooter Services Company 40.00
ROWE KENNETH & ELLEN 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.11
ROWE KENNETH & ELLEN 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.35
ROWE KENNETH & ELLEN 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.61
ROWE KENNETH & ELLEN 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.86
ROWE KENNETH & ELLEN 9.93
RUEGEMER JERRY 08/16/2018 101-0000-1027 Petty Cash - Extra Change Lake Ann Concessions 300.00
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 8 of 11
Name Check D Account Description Amount
RUEGEMER JERRY 300.00
Sather Design/Build 08/09/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 20 Hill Street 500.00
Sather Design/Build 500.00
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/09/2018 101-1370-4510 POLYUREA JOINT FILLE 22.99
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/16/2018 700-0000-4550 Paint 36.99
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/16/2018 700-0000-4550 Paint 36.99
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/16/2018 700-0000-4550 POLANE RETRDR REDCR, 8511 RESP 2 PACK 93.39
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/16/2018 700-0000-4550 Supplies 79.35
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/16/2018 700-0000-4550 Supplies 439.41
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 709.12
SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 08/16/2018 101-1220-4350 Bleach, Cleaners, Garbage bags 54.93
SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 08/16/2018 700-0000-4150 Galv Coupling 9.58
SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 08/16/2018 101-1190-4510 MNT Tape 6.49
SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 71.00
SIGNSOURCE 08/09/2018 101-1550-4560 No Parking Vinyl Text 85.00
SIGNSOURCE 08/16/2018 700-7043-4510 Room ID Signs 971.00
SIGNSOURCE 08/16/2018 101-1220-4120 Helmet Graphics - FF's 296.00
SIGNSOURCE 1,352.00
Southwest Rental & Sales 08/16/2018 420-0000-4751 Concrete Vibrator 1 1/2" x 8' 45.57
Southwest Rental & Sales 08/16/2018 101-1320-4410 Concrete Vibrator 1 1/2" x 8' 45.57
Southwest Rental & Sales 91.14
Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 08/09/2018 101-1550-4120 Caps 450.05
Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 08/16/2018 101-1731-4300 Lake Ann Camp T-shirts 1,047.05
Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 1,497.10
SRCM, LLC 08/16/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 2071 West 65th Street 1,500.00
SRCM, LLC 1,500.00
Sta Con LLC 08/16/2018 701-0000-4551 Control Panel 8,193.11
Sta Con LLC 8,193.11
Stephan Aaron 08/09/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 8661 Chan Hills Dr 250.00
Stephan Aaron 250.00
STEWART TITLE COMPANY 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 123.39
STEWART TITLE COMPANY 123.39
SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY 08/09/2018 101-1310-4300 2018 Membership - 2nd half 1,329.00
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 9 of 11
Name Check D Account Description Amount
SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY 1,329.00
SUTER SUE 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.56
SUTER SUE 08/09/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.61
SUTER SUE 08/09/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.59
SUTER SUE 08/09/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.64
SUTER SUE 12.40
Thorud Michael and Susan 08/09/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 8243 Marsh Drive 250.00
Thorud Michael and Susan 250.00
TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC.08/09/2018 101-1550-4150 Holland Autumn Blend, Borgert Pallet, Paver Seal Xtreme 313.00
TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC. 313.00
TOWN & COUNTRY FENCE 08/09/2018 101-1550-4300 Repair/Replace fence - Hwy 101 @ Kiowa Trail 2,150.00
TOWN & COUNTRY FENCE 2,150.00
Triethart DeeAnn 08/16/2018 101-1250-4130 Supplies-Forks, Spoons, Plates 46.70
Triethart DeeAnn 46.70
U S MINERALS INC 08/09/2018 700-0000-4550 80# Bag, Dust Suppressant 281.20
U S MINERALS INC 281.20
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 08/09/2018 700-0000-4370 HazMat Training July 23-27 5,390.00
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 5,390.00
Vavrichek Matthew 08/09/2018 101-1766-3636 Return Adult Summer Softball League Fee 300.00
Vavrichek Matthew 300.00
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 08/09/2018 101-1220-4350 garbage service - Aug 2018 26.25
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 08/09/2018 101-1190-4350 garbage service - Aug 2018 212.18
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 08/09/2018 101-1370-4350 garbage service - Aug 2018 165.90
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 08/09/2018 700-0000-4350 garbage service - Aug 2018 20.74
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 08/09/2018 701-0000-4350 garbage service - Aug 2018 20.74
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 08/09/2018 101-1170-4350 garbage service - Aug 2018 173.94
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 08/09/2018 101-1220-4350 garbage service - Aug 2018 67.89
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 08/09/2018 101-1613-4410 garbage service - Aug 2018 553.17
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 08/09/2018 101-1550-4350 garbage service - Aug 2018 372.75
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 1,613.56
WEST BAY HOMES CORPORATION 08/16/2018 815-8226-2024 As-Built Escrow - 6950 Highover Drive 2,500.00
WEST BAY HOMES CORPORATION 2,500.00
WING RICHARD 08/16/2018 101-1220-4350 Station 2 Cleaner - July 2018 100.00
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 10 of 11
Name Check D Account Description Amount
WING RICHARD 100.00
865,542.46
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 11 of 11
Accounts Payable
Check Detail-ACH
User: dwashburn
Printed: 08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM
Name Check D Account Description Amount
ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC 08/16/2018 101-1170-4300 Monthly service 125.00
ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC 125.00
Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc 08/09/2018 701-0000-4300 P05126-2018-000 2018 SCADA Services through 6/2/18-7/6/18 594.47
Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc 594.47
Alliant Engineering Inc 08/16/2018 410-0000-4300 Foxwood Hwy 101 Pedestrian Trail Extension - 4/1/18 to 6/30/18 2,312.07
Alliant Engineering Inc 2,312.07
Applied Ecological Services Inc 08/09/2018 720-7202-4300 14-0988 The Preserve Management - Prairie 981.00
Applied Ecological Services Inc 981.00
BENEFIT EXTRAS INC 08/09/2018 101-0000-2012 Monthly COBRA Participant Admin Fees 130.00
BENEFIT EXTRAS INC 130.00
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 08/09/2018 101-1140-4302 Legal Services 13,648.87
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 13,648.87
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 08/09/2018 101-1220-4320 June 2018 103.34
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 08/09/2018 101-1350-4320 June 2018 2,699.19
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 08/09/2018 101-1540-4320 June 2018 303.55
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 08/09/2018 101-1550-4320 June 2018 323.24
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 08/09/2018 101-1600-4320 June 2018 24.78
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 08/09/2018 700-0000-4320 June 2018 95.11
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 08/09/2018 700-7019-4320 June 2018 1,506.88
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 08/09/2018 701-0000-4320 June 2018 1,103.98
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 6,160.07
CENTURY FENCE COMPANY 08/16/2018 700-0000-4530 Generator Enclosure - Furnish & Install 6,388.00
CENTURY FENCE COMPANY 6,388.00
DAMON FARBER ASSOCIATES 08/09/2018 410-0000-4300 18-199 Chanhassen Commons Paver Replacement 1,433.25
DAMON FARBER ASSOCIATES 08/09/2018 400-0000-4706 18-159 Chanhassen Depot Improvements 661.50
DAMON FARBER ASSOCIATES 2,094.75
Engel Water Testing Inc 08/16/2018 700-0000-4300 26 water samples collected - July 2018 520.00
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 1 of 6
Name Check D Account Description Amount
Engel Water Testing Inc 520.00
FASTENAL COMPANY 08/09/2018 101-1550-4120 Steel banded earmuff 71.72
FASTENAL COMPANY 08/09/2018 101-1550-4120 Flex GuardXL Gloves 30.16
FASTENAL COMPANY 08/09/2018 700-0000-4240 Med 3 Piece Rainsuit 14.17
FASTENAL COMPANY 08/09/2018 101-1320-4120 PPHM #1172590 -6.33
FASTENAL COMPANY 08/09/2018 101-1320-4120 supplies #1136314, #1171029 -13.50
FASTENAL COMPANY 08/16/2018 101-1320-4140 Washer, Lock Nuts 17.67
FASTENAL COMPANY 113.89
Ferguson Waterworks #2516 08/16/2018 101-1370-4510 6" butterfly valve for washbay fill station 610.01
Ferguson Waterworks #2516 610.01
GENERAL PARTS LLC 08/09/2018 101-1170-4350 repair soap system 122.00
GENERAL PARTS LLC 122.00
GMH ASPHALT CORP 08/09/2018 601-6032-4751 Street Reconstruction Proj 16-01 Minnewashta Manor 248,290.28
GMH ASPHALT CORP 248,290.28
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 08/09/2018 400-0000-4300 FTP Tickets - July 2018 827.55
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 827.55
GRANICUS INC 08/16/2018 210-0000-4300 Granicus Encoding Appliance Software, Transparency Suite 5,040.00
GRANICUS INC 5,040.00
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 08/09/2018 700-7043-4160 Chlorine - West Plant 2,100.00
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 08/09/2018 700-7019-4160 Chlorine Cylinder 130.00
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 08/09/2018 700-7043-4160 LPC-9 Corrosion Inhibitor 683.16
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 08/09/2018 700-7043-4160 150 Lb Chlorine Cylinder - Water Plant 80.00
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 08/09/2018 700-7019-4160 Hydrofluosilicic Acid, LPC-9 Corrosion Inhibitor 10,942.70
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 08/16/2018 700-7019-4160 Azone 15 - EPA Reg No 7870-5 4,982.76
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 18,918.62
Ideal Service Inc.08/09/2018 701-0000-4551 Lift Station #5 - svc/labor, Motortronics/misc parts 1,982.50
Ideal Service Inc. 1,982.50
IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 08/09/2018 101-1550-4400 Portable Rest Rooms - June 2018 4,825.55
IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 4,825.55
Indelco Plastics Corporation 08/09/2018 700-7043-4150 MPT CONNECTOR, ELBOW 75.44
Indelco Plastics Corporation 75.44
Indoor Landscapes Inc 08/16/2018 101-1170-4300 August Plant svc 187.00
Indoor Landscapes Inc 187.00
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 2 of 6
Name Check D Account Description Amount
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 08/09/2018 400-0000-4703 Bookcase 249.00
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 08/09/2018 101-1170-4110 Tape dispenser 4.84
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 08/09/2018 101-1170-4110 Pens, Tape, Paper, Post-Its 48.01
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 08/09/2018 101-1170-4110 Paper 130.80
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 08/09/2018 101-1170-4110 Tape, Envelopes, Pads, Cocoa, Flags 84.36
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 08/16/2018 101-1170-4110 Adhesive, Badges, Clips 36.58
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 553.59
JEFFERSON FIRE SAFETY INC 08/09/2018 400-4105-4705 21 - Airgas Hex Armor Chrome Extrication Gloves 896.33
JEFFERSON FIRE SAFETY INC 896.33
JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 08/09/2018 101-1190-4530 Flame Sensor 76.50
JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 08/16/2018 101-1190-4530 Kit Ignitor, Hex Driver Dual 96.68
JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 08/16/2018 101-1190-4530 Credit sales tax from inv# 1157992 -0.47
JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 172.71
LARSEN DALE 08/09/2018 101-1320-4240 3 pairs of cargo pants 208.50
LARSEN DALE 208.50
Marco Inc 08/09/2018 101-1170-4410 Overage charge 675.65
Marco Inc 08/09/2018 700-0000-4410 Overage charge 100.00
Marco Inc 08/09/2018 701-0000-4410 Overage charge 100.00
Marco Inc 08/09/2018 720-0000-4410 Overage charge 50.00
Marco Inc 08/09/2018 101-1170-4410 Overage charge 2,328.48
Marco Inc 08/09/2018 700-0000-4410 Overage charge 310.46
Marco Inc 08/09/2018 701-0000-4410 Overage charge 310.46
Marco Inc 08/09/2018 720-0000-4410 Overage charge 155.24
Marco Inc 4,030.29
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 101-1220-4290 misc parts/supplies 41.37
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 101-1320-4150 misc parts/supplies 7.73
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 101-1530-4120 misc parts/supplies 32.39
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 101-1530-4130 misc parts/supplies 3.23
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 101-1530-4150 misc parts/supplies 7.51
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 101-1550-4120 misc parts/supplies 321.35
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 101-1550-4150 misc parts/supplies 21.35
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 101-1600-4130 misc parts/supplies 89.89
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 101-1613-4410 misc parts/supplies 209.88
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 700-0000-4150 misc parts/supplies 150.19
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 700-7019-4150 misc parts/supplies 38.37
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 700-7019-4530 misc parts/supplies 80.99
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 700-7043-4150 misc parts/supplies 116.03
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 700-7050-4705 misc parts/supplies 68.86
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 08/09/2018 701-0000-4150 misc parts/supplies 17.26
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 1,206.40
Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 08/16/2018 701-0000-2023 SAC-July 39,760.00
Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 08/16/2018 101-1250-3816 SAC-July -397.60
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 3 of 6
Name Check D Account Description Amount
Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 39,362.40
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 08/16/2018 101-1250-3818 Surcharge - July 2018 -113.14
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 08/16/2018 101-0000-2022 Surcharge - July 2018 5,657.07
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 5,543.93
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/09/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 4,857.26
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/09/2018 101-1600-4320 electricity charges 36.83
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/09/2018 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 186.12
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/09/2018 701-0000-4320 electricity charges 639.57
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/09/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 32.35
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/09/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 146.87
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/09/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 70.74
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/09/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 31.36
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 6,001.10
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 08/09/2018 101-1550-4120 Coupler 26.49
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 26.49
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 08/09/2018 101-1220-4120 misc parts/supplies 11.74
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 08/09/2018 701-0000-4150 misc parts/supplies 20.06
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 08/09/2018 101-1170-4120 misc parts/supplies 8.22
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 08/09/2018 700-0000-4140 misc parts/supplies 143.77
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 08/09/2018 101-1250-4140 misc parts/supplies 16.64
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 08/09/2018 101-1550-4120 misc parts/supplies 23.41
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 223.84
Potentia MN Solar 08/09/2018 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 1,940.38
Potentia MN Solar 08/09/2018 101-1190-4320 electricity charges 3,642.97
Potentia MN Solar 08/09/2018 101-1170-4320 electricity charges 2,807.12
Potentia MN Solar 8,390.47
PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 08/09/2018 720-7202-4300 Bluff Creek Prairie Mgmt 660.00
PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 660.00
Premium Waters, Inc 08/09/2018 101-1550-4120 Chippewa 5 Gal Spring/Monthly charge Aug 2018 82.69
Premium Waters, Inc 82.69
RBM SERVICES INC 08/09/2018 101-1170-4350 Extract/scrub accounting department 7/11/18 175.00
RBM SERVICES INC 175.00
Safety Vehicle Solutions 08/16/2018 422-0000-4704 Tahoe #2 3,850.00
Safety Vehicle Solutions 3,850.00
SPRINT PCS 08/16/2018 700-0000-4310 monthly charges 51.72
SPRINT PCS 08/16/2018 701-0000-4310 monthly charges 51.72
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 4 of 6
Name Check D Account Description Amount
SPRINT PCS 103.44
SUMMIT COMPANIES 08/09/2018 700-7019-4300 MCFS-Monitoring June 2018-May 2019 Water Treatment Plant 500.00
SUMMIT COMPANIES 500.00
TESSMAN SEED CO 08/09/2018 101-1550-4150 Turface MVP/REG, Turface Quick Dry 877.00
TESSMAN SEED CO 877.00
ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 08/09/2018 700-0000-4530 Chanhassen Well House VFD - Well House #2 1,688.25
ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 08/09/2018 700-7050-4706 Chanhassen New Water Plant SCADA Material 1,110.75
ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 08/09/2018 700-0000-4530 Chanhassen Service Work - Well House #2 2,470.00
ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 5,269.00
UNITED WAY 08/16/2018 101-0000-2006 PR Batch 00417.08.2018 United Way 28.40
UNITED WAY 28.40
USA BLUE BOOK 08/09/2018 700-0000-4550 Sampling Tap 1/2"-14 NPT, 3/4"x1/2" Bushing M x F 31.44
USA BLUE BOOK 08/09/2018 701-0000-4260 42' Alloy T-Probe 255.88
USA BLUE BOOK 08/09/2018 701-0000-4551 ABS S20-2W Grinder Pump -1,789.95
USA BLUE BOOK 08/09/2018 700-7043-4510 Submers Caged Level Transmittr 1,281.25
USA BLUE BOOK 08/09/2018 700-7043-4120 Foot Valve 1/2 185.93
USA BLUE BOOK 08/09/2018 700-7043-4510 Diecut Lettering 67.42
USA BLUE BOOK 31.97
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1550-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 437.98
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1520-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 51.42
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1600-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 151.44
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1530-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 51.42
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-0000-2006 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 10.00
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 700-0000-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 619.67
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 701-0000-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 486.05
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 720-0000-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 118.17
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1160-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 112.84
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1120-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 374.38
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1170-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 31.74
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1260-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 103.49
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1130-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 51.42
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1250-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 144.58
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1310-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 270.17
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1370-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 119.90
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1320-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 411.42
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1320-4320 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 339.98
VERIZON WIRELESS 08/09/2018 101-1220-4310 phone charges 06/19/18-07/18/18 487.95
VERIZON WIRELESS 4,374.02
Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc.08/16/2018 101-1320-4410 Grasper Cones, Barricades, Road Closed, Arrows 219.50
Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc. 219.50
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 5 of 6
Name Check D Account Description Amount
WATSON COMPANY 08/09/2018 101-1540-4130 Lake Ann concession supplies 167.75
WATSON COMPANY 167.75
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/09/2018 700-0000-4552 Watermain Breaks 392.00
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/16/2018 700-0000-4552 Pond Excavation 120.00
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/16/2018 700-0000-4552 Pond Excavation 120.00
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/16/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 602.77
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/16/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Tack 741.00
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/16/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 322.32
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/16/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 633.58
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 2,931.67
WW GRAINGER INC 08/09/2018 700-7050-4703 Lateral File Cabinet #48YC39 1,497.32
WW GRAINGER INC 1,497.32
XCEL ENERGY INC 08/16/2018 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 7/10/18-8/8/18 832.06
XCEL ENERGY INC 832.06
402,162.94
Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/17/2018 - 9:16 AM)Page 6 of 6