09-26-2022 Agenda and PacketA.5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Note: Unless otherwise noted, work sessions are held in the Fountain Conference Room in
the lower level of City Hall and 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.
A.1 2023 Preliminary Budget, Levy, and CIP
A.2 Fire Department Open House
A.3 Future Work Session Schedule
B.7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER (Pledge of Allegiance)
C.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
C.1 Chanhassen Lions Service 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.
D.1 Approve City Council Minutes dated September 12, 2022
D.2 Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated September 6, 2022
D.3 Receive Senior Commission Minutes dated August 19, 2022
D.4 Approve Claims Paid dated September 26, 2022
D.5 Award Contract for Fox Hollow Drainage Improvement Project
AGENDA
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD
1
D.6 Resolution 2022-XX: Approve Interfund Loan for Tax Increment Financing District 12 -
Lake Place Housing
D.7 Resolution 2022-XX: Accept Donation from Kwik Trip in the Amount of $1,000 for the
Parks and Recreation Department Senior Expo on September 29, 2022
D.8 Resolution 2022-XX: Authorize Purchase of Replacement Network Server and Storage Array
Located at Public Works
D.9 Ordinance XXX: Amending the City Fees and Charges for 2022
D.10 Ordinance 696: Adopt Summary of Ordinance 696 for Publication Purposes - Avienda PUD
Amendment
E.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Visitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete and
submit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda).
F.FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE
F.1 Monthly Fire Department Update
F.2 Law Enforcement Update
G.PUBLIC HEARINGS
H.GENERAL BUSINESS
H.1 Resolution 2022-XX: Adopt the Preliminary Tax Levy, Budget and Establish the Truth-In-
Taxation Public Hearing Date
I.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
J.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
K.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
K.1 Southern Valley Alliance Letter dated September 13, 2022
K.2 League of Minnesota Cities Magazine September/October 2022 Issue-Gnomadic Gnome
Scavenger Hunt Article
L.ADJOURNMENT
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 seeking a response or action from the City Council following their presentation is
2
required to complete and submit a Citizen Action Request Form. An online form is available at
https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/action or paper forms are available in the city council chambers
prior to the meeting.
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 Tequila Butcher, 590 West
79th Street in Chanhassen immediately after the meeting for a purely social event. All members of the
public are welcome.
3
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item 2023 Preliminary Budget, Levy, and CIP
File No.Item No: A.1
Agenda Section 5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Prepared By Kelly Grinnell, Finance Director
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
Discussion of 2023 Preliminary Budget, Levy and CIP
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority Financial Sustainability
SUMMARY
Staff will present an update on the preliminary General Fund budget, maximum tax levy, and
preliminary CIP for tax-supported funds for Council discussion and direction.
The Strategic Plan adopted by the Council in 2022 provides focus and direction for the development of
the budget and allocation of resources. The City's strategic priorities are:
Financial Sustainability
Asset Management
Development & Redevelopment
Operational Excellence
Communications
BACKGROUND
The Council has met in two work sessions to discuss and review the 2023 budget, CIP, and levy. At the
4
July 11 work session staff requested guidance for the 2023 budget preparation. When the 2022 budget
was adopted it included a projection for the 2023 budget showing a 7.2% levy increase. The Council
discussed the proposed COLA and other elements of the budget and requested staff work to lower the
levy increase from 7.2% if possible. At the August 22 work session, the Council heard a presentation on
the preliminary 2023 General Fund budget, reviewed proposed CIP items and fund balance projections
for capital project funds, and discussed options for the proposed maximum levy at 5.2% or 7.2%.
Staff has continued to meet and work on department budgets and CIP items. After the last work session,
staff identified some items in the General Fund budget to increase, most notably fuel, which was
increased $31,700 based on current year actual amounts. Other items increased a total of $7,000. These
items decreased the contingency amount to about $45,000. There are still some uncertain expenses at
this point; however, it looks like the health insurance increase will be minimal at 2-3%. Staff
recommends keeping the $45,000 (0.3% of budget) contingency due to these uncertain expenses and for
items that may come up during 2023.
The preliminary General Fund budget for 2023 is still balanced, with both projected revenues and
expenditures at $14,343,095, compared to $14,343,275 discussed last month. The budget includes wage
increases for performance adjustments (steps) for those below the range maximum (in accordance with
the compensation study) and a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) of 2.5%.
Ending fund balance for the General Fund for 2023 is projected to be $7,970,000. The required reserve
amount is approximately $5,500,000. One of the items for consideration is whether to set aside a portion
of General Fund fund balance as committed for revenue stabilization. At the last work session staff
proposed setting aside one year’s worth of budgeted building permit revenue ($1,402,000) as committed
fund balance. These funds would be available for use if building permit revenue comes in under
budget. Staff is recommending that one year’s worth of investment income (140,000) also be set aside
given that this line item can also be volatile due to fair value allocation and interest rate changes. Staff
will review this in depth during the work session. If the City Council adopts this approach, there would
fund balance of approximately $750,000 that could be used for one-time projects or remain in fund
balance.
The projected levy for the General Fund is $10,749,000, up $554,254 (5.4%) from 2022. This amount
has not changed from what was presented on August 22.
There are currently four capital project funds and one debt service fund with a property tax levy. There
have been minor changes to the previously presented CIP request items for 2023-2027 for property tax
supported funds. The Council has discussed whether to add a levy for the Park Renovation Fund. There
are several park renovation projects pending, but there is currently no dedicated funding source for
those projects. In the next couple of months, Council will need to decide on the several items that
currently do not have an identified funding source, such as several park renovation projects. If the
Council wants to fund those items for 2023, the City could use $250,000 in General Fund balance
toward park renovation (as it has in previous years) or consider a levy increase in 2023.
The chart below shows the total 2022 levy and the two 2023 projected levy options (one includes a levy
for the Park Renovation Fund):
5
5.2% Increase 7.2% Increase
Fund 2022 Levy 2023 Levy
2023
Increase $
and (%)
2023 Levy
2023
Increase $
and (%)
General $10,194,746 $10,749,000 $554,254
(5.4%)$10,749,000 $554,254
(5.4%)
Pavement
Management $900,000 $918,000 $18,000
(2.0%)$918,000 $18,000
(2.0%)
Capital Facilities $125,000 $155,000 $30,000
(24.0%)$155,000 $30,000
(24.0%)
Capital Fleet &
Equipment
Replacement
$565,000 $615,000 $50,000
(8.8%)$615,000 $50,000
(8.8%)
Transportation
Infrastructure
Management
$394,490 $406,000 $11,510
(2.9%)$406,000 $11,510
(2.9%)
Park Renovation
Fund $0 $0 $0
(N/A)$250,000 $250,000
(NEW)
Debt Levy $483,840 $482,000 $-1,840
(-0.4%)$482,000 $-1,840
(-0.4%)
Total $12,663,076 $13,325,000 $661,924
(5.2%)$13,575,000 $911,924
(7.2%)
One of the benefits of adopting the 7.2% levy is that it would allow for smoothing out the levy for the
next several years with the addition of debt levies for a new city hall campus and a possible park
referendum.
CIP and Unfunded Items
The City completed a comprehensive facilities study in 2022. A small amount for deferred maintenance
is included in the preliminary budget but the facilities study recommendations are not currently funded,
along with other facility-related items. The Council is in the process of considering a new City Hall, a
decision that will impact the deferred maintenance needs and priorities.
American Rescue Plan
The City has received payments totaling $2.88 million. A small portion of these funds have been
committed to economic development and fire staffing initiatives. The Council has preliminarily
reserved approximately $1.3 million to start the Lake Ann Preserve Project. An open house for the
project is scheduled for September 27. All funds must be obligated by December 31, 2024, and
expended by December 31, 2026.
Budget and Levy Calendar
6
The City must adopt a maximum tax levy by September 30. Staff has prepared two resolutions for the
Council meeting on September 26, one with a 5.2% levy increase and the other with a 7.2% increase.
Staff will continue to work on the proposed budget and CIP throughout the fall and additional work
sessions will be held on October 24, November 14, and November 28 if needed.
On December 12 the Council will hold its Truth-in-Taxation meeting and adopt the final 2023 tax levy,
budgets, and CIP.
DISCUSSION
The Council and Staff will discuss further at the workshop.
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
7
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Fire Department Open House
File No.Item No: A.2
Agenda Section 5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Prepared By Ana Fatturi, Fire Inspector/Admin Specialist
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
Attend Fire Department Open House between 6-7 p.m.
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
8
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Future Work Session Schedule
File No.Item No: A.3
Agenda Section 5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
The City Council is tentatively scheduled to hold the following work sessions:
October 10, 2022
1. Lake Ann Park Preserve Master Plan: Open House Follow-up and Project Update
2. Civic Campus Update
October 24, 2022
1. General Fund & Property Supported Funds Discussion
2. Financial Policy Discussion
3. City Council Roundtable
November 14, 2022
9
1. CIP, Debt & Utility Rate Study Discussion
2. Tree Policy Discussion
BACKGROUND
Staff or the City Council may suggest topics for work sessions. Dates are tentative until the meeting
agenda is published. Work sessions are typically held at 5:30 pm on the second and fourth Monday of
each month in conjunction with the regular City Council meeting, but may be scheduled for other times
as needed.
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
10
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Chanhassen Lions Service Recognition
File No.Item No: C.1
Agenda Section PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
Prepared By Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Recreation Director
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
The Chanhassen Lions Club was chartered in 1988 and is a member of Lions International, a service
organization with more than 1.4 million members in 48,000 clubs around the world.
The Chanhassen Lions have been active in the community and have made past donations and
participated with following projects and events.
Park Improvement Projects
Partially funding the ballfield lighting of Lake Ann Park Ball Field #4
Purchased and installed a monument sign recognizing Lake Ann Field #4 as Lions Field
Purchased and installed a memorial bench at Lake Ann Field #4 (Lions field)
Purchased and installed five park benches at Bandimere Community Park
11
Purchased and installed the Chanhassen Lions drinking fountain at Lake Ann Park playground
City Service Projects
Sponsorship of the Chanhassen Senior Center Summer Picnic for 20+ years and counting
Fishing Contest Marshalls at February Festival
100% Sponsored Senior Center Drive-In Concert
Participated in Chanhassen's "Great Stuff Food Drives" and helped deliver all donations to PROP
Food Shelf
Volunteer at various city community events
Fire Department/Lions Pancake Breakfast
The Chanhassen Lions have been providing service to our Chanhassen Community for 34 years. Their
support and commitment to Chanhassen are very much appreciated and recognized.
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
Lions Club Certificate of Appreciation
12
Certificate of Appreciation
Thank you for providing your service to the City of Chanhassen for 34 years.
Your support and commitment to the community is appreciated.
RECOGNITION PRESENTED TO:
Chanhassen Lions Club
On behalf of the City Council and the Park & Recreation Commission, we
recognize the Chanhassen Lions Club, chartered in 1988. Members of Lions International,
which services more than 1.4 million members in 48,000 clubs around the world.
Elise Ryan
City of Chanhassen Mayor
13
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Approve City Council Minutes dated September 12, 2022
File No.Item No: D.1
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council approves the City Council minutes dated September 12, 2022."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
City Council Work Session Minutes dated September 12, 2022
14
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes dated September 12, 2022
15
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilman McDonald, and
Councilwoman Rehm.
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT:Councilman Campion and Councilwoman Schubert.
STAFF PRESENT: Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager; Charlie Howley, City Engineer/Public
Works Director; Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; and Kim Meuwissen, City
Clerk.
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Tim Little, ReMax Advantage Plus
C. Chanthakhammy, Import Motors, LLC
Andrew Lutaya, MnDOT Metro District West
Diane Langenbach, MnDOT
Brandon Bourdon, Kimley Horn
Mayor Ryan called the Work Session to order at 5:30 p.m.
VALLEY AUTO SALVAGE REQUEST FOR EXPANSION OF NON-CONFORMING
USE FOR RECYCLING
Community Development Director Kate Aanenson introduced the real estate agent and property
owner of the subject property, Tim Little and C. Chanthakhammy. Mr. Chanthakhammy
provided information on other sites he owns and operates, as well as his plans for the subject site.
His proposal is to create an environmental-friendly recycling facility to collect and process scrap
metal. Cars would be processed by decontaminating the fluids, safely removing parts and selling
them to his buyers to be recycled into new metal.
Ms. Aanenson presented location, zoning, and land use maps of the property, a history of the
site, and the proposed expansion of the existing non-conforming use.
Mr. Little reviewed the proposed site plan including traffic movements, and location of the truck
scales, office/processing building, and unloading site. The purpose of the expansion is to provide
additional metal recycling services to include residential items such as lawn mowers and fans, or
metal scrap from construction sites. The processing building will include stalls to drain fluids
from vehicles. Autos will be recycled by being decontaminated and dismantled, and then the
shells are moved off the site. The site is also proposed to be enclosed by an opaque fence.
Ms. Aanenson provided a history of the Highway 61 Corridor adjacent to the site, specifically
the future development of the Moon Valley site to the north. The site was originally approved as
16
City Council Work Session Minutes – September 12, 2022
2
a non-conforming use by the Township of Chanhassen in 1958. The property owner would like
to expand the recycling operation to include scrap metal, appliances, electronics, etc. Pros
include improving aesthetics of the property through permanent screening and addition of a
building and reduce environmental impacts by providing storm water best management practices,
hazardous fluid containment and collection, and elimination of dirt tracking off site. Cons
include expanding and extending the existing non-conforming use and the significant
improvement costs.
Mayor Ryan asked about Watershed District review and the business process. Mr. Little
responded that they have spoken with the Watershed District and have hired a knowledgeable
contractor to address drainage and pollution issues. Mr. Chanthakhammy added that a lot of
items will be taken in by businesses (such as machine shops), placed in a roll-off container,
weighed, and payment issued. Smaller items brought in by residents would be weighed and
processed inside the building. He anticipates receiving and processing items from Scott and
Carver Counties, as there is a need for the service and there are no nearby competitors. Cars will
be decontaminated and processed on site. The shells will not be crushed and stored on the site
but be transported off site on semi-trucks. The site is proposed to be aesthetically pleasing, and
the developer plans to work with the City in this regard.
Councilwoman Rehm asked about visual impact from on the bluff on the Moon Valley site and
also asked what happens to the fluids. Ms. Aanenson responded visual impacts would be
something staff would consider during the review process. Mr. Chanthakhammy responded that
specialized equipment would decontaminate the fluids which would then be placed in holding
tanks.
Councilman McDonald asked if there will be any crushing or shredding of cars on the site, how
they plan to process catalytic converters, and what the noise level will be from the facility. Mr.
Little replied that the car shells are hauled off the site to be shredded. Mr. Chanthakhammy
responded that at his St. Cloud facility they require a title and ID before they accept catalytic
converters, and that noise was not a concern because there are no neighbors.
Mr. Howley asked what the site would look like in ten years if the use didn’t change and no
improvements were made. Mr. Little responded that it could revert back to a salvage yard similar
to how the site looked like prior to the cleanup.
HIGHWAY 7 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT
Public Works Director/City Engineer Charlie Howley introduced representatives from MnDOT
and their consultant from Kimley Horn.
Mr. Lutaya explained the definition and purpose of a Road Safety Audit. The goal is to identify
potential projects/strategies to improve safety. Strategies include the Four Es of Safety:
education, enforcement, engineering, and emergency medical and trauma services. Highway 7
was divided into three study corridor segments. Existing traffic volumes and posted speeds were
reviewed as well as previous plans and studies. Public engagement was also conducted via an
interactive map and survey, and an online open house.
17
City Council Work Session Minutes – September 12, 2022
3
Mr. Bourdon provided an overview of the technical aspects of the segment that runs through
Chanhassen, which included addressing safety concerns at various locations along the segment.
Bar charts were displayed showing crash severity, manner of collision, and causes of fatal and
serious injury crashes, as well as a map showing the locations of fatal and serious injury crashes
along the segment. Corridor-wide initiatives include installing enforcement lights, increasing
signal conspicuity (yellow borders), increasing enforcement, and creating a Highway 7 Corridor
Coalition. Short-term segment-wide improvements include a corridor study, additional lighting,
potential pedestrian improvements/connections, and installation of street name signs. Medium-
term improvements include battery backup at signals and construction of signal improvements,
and to improve visibility to reduce the number of drivers who run red lights. Long-term
improvements would be as recommended in a future corridor study. Slides were presented
showing proposed short, medium, and long-term improvements at specific locations along the
corridor.
Mr. Lutaya discussed additional recommendations to consider to ensure safety projects continue
to be implemented in the study areas. He also provided a list of next steps which include meeting
with stakeholders/cities, sharing information with elected officials, sharing findings from the
study with the public, and identifying funding and project prioritization.
Mr. Howley asked what comments were received from previous outreach meetings such as this
one. Mr. Lutaya replied that a majority showed an interest in forming a coalition.
Mayor Ryan expressed her appreciation for the presentation and would be interested in forming a
coalition. Councilwoman Rehm asked how coalitions are formed and how having a coalition
would help the process, and asked if tunnels were considered from a pedestrian or biker
standpoint. Ms. Langenbach responded that coalitions are important, especially relating to
applying for different funding. Mr. Bourdon replied that tunnels were not specifically looked at
and it depends on the results of a deeper analysis of the corridor study. Ms. Langenbach added
there was a paving project for that segment of Highway 7 scheduled for 2027 which would
provide an opportunity to take a closer look at what the needs are and how tunnels can be
incorporated.
Mr. Howley asked for an explanation of the Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) report at the
intersection of Minnewashta Parkway. Mr. Lutaya responded that it has everything to do with
funding. The signal was proposed last year but ultimately a roundabout is recommended. Ms.
Langenbach added that usually an ICE report compares a signal to a roundabout to determine the
best option; however, funding for a roundabout is an issue. Mr. Howley asked if this ICE report
is a precursor to the project that is going to happen or are there still a lot of decisions that need to
made funding wise to make the signal even happen. Mr. Lutaya replied that there are funds
identified for a signal.
Councilwoman Rehm asked about reducing the speed limit. Mr. Lutaya responded that
historically there has not been good success at reducing speed limits. It is more likely that speed
limits might be recommended to go up. Ms. Langenbach added that they found that installing a
18
City Council Work Session Minutes – September 12, 2022
4
lower speed limit sign doesn’t change driving speeds. Installing a roundabout or making a road
feel more confined slows traffic.
Mayor Ryan thanked the representatives for their presentation.
2023 PRELIMINARY BUDGET, LEVY, AND CIP DISCUSSION
Item postponed to September 26, 2022.
FUTURE WORK SESSION SCHEDULE
Date Item
September 26 2023 Preliminary Budget, Levy, and CIP Discussion
Fire Department Open House, 6-7 p.m.
October 10 Lake Ann Park Preserve Master Plan: Open House Follow-up and Project
Update
October 24 General Fund & Property Supported Funds Discussion
November 14 CIP, Debt & Utility Rate Study Discussion
The work session adjourned at 6:45 p.m.
Submitted by Laurie Hokkanen
City Manager
Prepared by Kim Meuwissen
City Clerk
19
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022
Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge
of Allegiance.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilwoman Rehm, and Councilman
McDonald.
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT:Councilman Campion and Councilwoman Schubert.
STAFF PRESENT: Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager; Charlie Howley, City Engineer/Public
Works Director; Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Park &
Recreation Director; Priya Tandon, Recreation Coordinator; Andrea McDowell Poehler, City
Attorney; and Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk.
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Teen Volunteers: Clara Christenson
Mahi Madhan Kumar
Jacob Landon
Briella Lesinski
Svea Moberg
Blake Patka
Nischay Pattanashetty
Zoey Zvanovec
Christie Larson, Southern Valley Alliance
Rob Schatzle, RSI Marine
Mark Nordland, Nordland Partners
Kendra Lindahl, Landform Professional Services, LLC
Steve Sabraski, Landform Professional Services, LLC
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
1. Teen Volunteer Recognition
Mayor Ryan invited the teens to the front and said: On behalf of the City Council and the Park &
Recreation Commission, I would like to recognize the 2022 Teen Volunteers. These 13-16-year-
olds were selected to serve as volunteers for City-sponsored recreation programs from June
through August. Programs included the Summer Concert Series, Summer Discovery Playground
Program, Lake Ann Adventure Camp, Senior Center activities, and Rec Center Sports programs.
The City would like to thank this year's teen volunteers for their service. Together they compiled
over 945 hours of service to the City of Chanhassen, the most of any group of volunteers
20
City Council Minutes – September 12, 2022
2
throughout the years. Mayor Ryan read the names of the students: Erin Anderson, Anna Blong,
Clara Christenson, Arunabh Dogra, Daschle Duwe, Tucker Fritsch, Sara Koester. Mahi Madhan
Kumar, Jacob Landon, Briella Lesinski, Isabella Lund, Henry Lund, Jack Maves, Svea Moberg,
Blake Patka, Nischay Pattanashetty, Noah Vukelich, Owen Wilkinson, Zoey Zvanovec.
CONSENT AGENDA
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Rehm seconded that the City Council
approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s
recommendations:
1. Approve City Council Minutes dated August 22, 2022
2. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated August 16, 2022
3. Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated June 28, 2022
4. Receive Senior Commission Minutes dated June 17, 2022
5. Approve Claims Paid dated September 12, 2022
6. Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License, St. Hubert Catholic Community, Harvest
Festival on September 24, 2022
7. Approve Fireworks Display Permit for St. Hubert Catholic Community Harvest Festival on
September 24, 2022
8.Resolution 2022-68:Authorize Entering into a Memorandum of Understanding with Carver
County for a Cardboard Recycling Drop-off Site in Chanhassen
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
1. Christie Larson, Southern Valley Alliance - Domestic Violence Awareness Month
Presentation
Ms. Larson noted the agency is the domestic violence service provider for all of Carver County
and Scott County and are located in Belle Plaine and celebrating 40 years in existence. They
have served over 23,000 individuals in the communities (men, women, and children). Services
include a 24/7 confidential crisis line, crisis intervention and advocacy, safety planning, assisting
with State housing partnerships, and three support groups for individuals, education and
community engagement including going into the schools and teaching teens about healthy
relationships. Ms. Larson shared they will be moving their office to Shakopee in 2023 as they
have purchased a property and will build a new building to meet the needs of their clients. The
Southern Valley Alliance website is www.svamn.org.
21
City Council Minutes – September 12, 2022
3
Mayor Ryan asked during awareness month in October as well as throughout the year, in
addition to financial donations, are there certain items the agency looks for or collects.
Ms. Larson replied they provide a number of personal care items to victims, especially if they are
fleeing a situation with nothing, including toothpaste, toothbrushes, shampoo, conditioner,
diapers (especially the larger sizes), and other personal care products.
Mayor Ryan asked to learn more about the partnership with the County.
Ms. Larson noted the previous year the agency received a grant through the Office for Justice
programs to implement a legality assessment program which is an 11-question screen officers are
doing on the scene of domestic violence calls. The screen shows which victims are most likely to
be victims of homicide or very severe violence; if the screen scores high the police immediately
call a Southern Valley advocate from the scene and connect the victim with that advocate to
begin the safety planning process. It is shown that it can reduce up to 60% of domestic violence
homicides by using that screen and connecting with an advocate. All police departments in the
two counties have implemented the screening and over the last two months of implementation
they are seeing a 20% increase in the ability to connect with the victim.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:None.
GENERAL BUSINESS
1. Ordinance 695: RSI Marine, 10500 and 10520 Great Plains Boulevard: Consider a
Request for Rezoning to Planned Unit Development with Site Plan, Consolidation of
Lots, and Variances
Community Development Director Aanenson gave an update noting RSI Marine is requesting
rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD) with Site Plan approval for four boat storage
buildings and initial concept does not need all public services. The site is guided for mixed use,
the acreage is 8.33, and the proposed use is warehousing. Rezoning to the PUD allows some
flexibility in exchange for higher quality and sensitive development. The proposed buildings will
be for boat storage, allow for future redevelopment, and allow for transition between Highway
101 and the high-density residential to the east. Ms. Aanenson noted the use is to bring the boats
in once per year and out once per year. She spoke about architectural compliance, landscaping,
and a variance request regarding landscape islands which is supported by Staff. She shared about
public utilities including fire suppression, and that sanitary services are not required at this time.
She noted if a property to the east wanted to extend municipal services, this property owner
would need to agree to pay those assessments. Ms. Aanenson shared that the County was
provided the conceptual PUD and commented, there are no wetlands on the site, the lack of a
bluff on site, grading, and stormwater. Staff recommends approval.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Rehm seconded that the City Council
approve the rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD), site plan, and variances subject
to the conditions of approval, and adopt the attached Findings of Fact and
22
City Council Minutes – September 12, 2022
4
Recommendation. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3
to 0.
2. Ordinance 696: Avienda-Consider a Request to Amend Planned Unit Development-
Regional Commercial
Ms. Aanenson reminded everyone that the original Environmental Assessment document was
done in 2005 and most of the property was developed except for the last segment. If a property is
inactive for a number of years, they must update those environmental documents. The Applicant
is requesting an amendment to the 2020 approved PUD regional commercial zoning district
based on looking at adding a movie theater, moving some office around, and the Applicant noted
some of the uses in that district no longer met their marketing needs. Today they have approved
outlots for all properties and have a preliminary plat on outlot C and a portion of outlot A. A
neighborhood meeting was held on August 6, 2022 and combined with email concerns included
the percentage of housing; Ms. Aanenson shared that the housing calculation does not exceed
what was originally put into the PUD, and the Applicant has taken the opportunity to maximize
all of those units. She spoke about access onto Lyman Boulevard, Mills Street, and the
townhouse connection for fire access safety. The Planning Commission recommended approval
of the PUD amendment and encouraged the City Council to fully consider the value, size,
location, and configuration of a gathering place as an integral part of the project. Ms. Aanenson
spoke about the large usage area noting the Planning Commission and Staff would like to see a
mixed use of 10 acres or approximately 60% of District 3 developed as amusement, recreation,
or entertainment use which could include a golf course, hockey rinks, indoor amusement arcades,
and a convention/performance center, and should be constructed prior to approval of some of the
other subsidies to ensure that it happens. Ms. Aanenson showed slides from the developer on
screen of potential recreational uses as well as a slide showing potential new changes to the site.
All of the uses have been combined into the District Master Plan which is part of the PUD; in
each district those uses are described with updates/changes. Ms. Aanenson shared about the PUD
ordinance which has all design standards, the five districts, engineering conditions, and traffic
modeling. She clarified each project must come through for a public hearing and site plan review
and will be measured against the PUD standards. Staff believes this is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and recommends approval of the PUD ordinance and adoption of the
Findings of Fact.
Councilwoman Rehm received an email from someone living on Powers Boulevard who was
concerned about increased traffic from Avienda. Ms. Aanenson stated there will be less and
asked to hear more about that.
City Engineer Howley noted the statement about less traffic is based on the currently approved
PUD, the zoning and uses of what currently is approved to be built compared to what they are
proposing with this amendment, the projected traffic volumes are less. Not meaning that when
the project is fully built out the traffic will be less than today, just comparing the approved
project versus the proposed amended PUD, the traffic would be less.
23
City Council Minutes – September 12, 2022
5
Ms. Aanenson clarified that traffic will change and there will be more; however, it was always
anticipated since 2005. Also, MnDOT required that Bluff Creek Boulevard connect to Powers
Boulevard.
Mayor Ryan had a similar concern regarding traffic about people exiting this area and heading
downtown. She thinks Powers Boulevard as it is today a concern with pedestrian crossings, and
she noted the Traffic Safety Committee is looking at that and will continue to evaluate that
situation.
Mark Nordland is happy to see that things are moving forward and is looking forward to building
happening soon.
Mayor Ryan noted concerns are similar to what Mr. Nordland heard at the Planning Commission
including increased housing, traffic, the entertainment space, and senior housing. She asked
about one building for senior housing versus two buildings.
Mr. Nordland replied that it really is the different operators and how they meet their residents’
needs. Initially they planned on one with senior services including assisted living and memory
care with a small assisted-living component with a separate building that is 55+ independent
living. He shared they have been working with a senior housing provider with a business model
that combines those; they have a significant 55+ component plus assisted living and memory
care all within the facility. That would mean a larger facility that is around 250 units that
incorporates all of those. Mr. Nordland noted they feel very good about them as a user and
operator, and it fits on the southern side rather than the northern side. He noted they are not sure
which way it will go but wants to make sure the approval is in place if they come forward that
they will be able to do it within the zoning.
Mayor Ryan asked about the entertainment and green space.
Mr. Nordland shared they are proposing a fairly large-scale central plaza at the center of the
development surrounded by restaurants and other entertainment uses that would be programmed
with things happening for the overall community. He noted they have been in discussion with the
City about potentially doing a partnership on a larger recreational facility in the southeast corner
of the project.
Mayor Ryan asked about the transition of percentage of housing that was compared to the
housing that is now proposed.
Mr. Nordland replied the primary outside factor is the change in the way outside goods and
services are received, especially since the pandemic. The overall square footage of retail space
required in the United States has been reduced based on market demand. He noted they have
tried to create other regional uses to help bolster that and they try to mix residential and
entertainment retail uses in the appropriate way. He thinks adding the rowhomes is another step
up in density but also adds nicely to the project and is a good transition to a regular apartment
building.
24
City Council Minutes – September 12, 2022
6
Mayor Ryan noted a grocer is still an element of the project.
Mr. Nordland replied in the affirmative, they are working with a grocer right now and it is a
critical component to the project.
Councilwoman Rehm would like to hear more about the plans for the water.
Mr. Nordland shared that Chanhassen has a lot of clay in their soil which does not infiltrate water
very well. At the beginning they tried to do full infiltration on the project but after grading and
tests throughout the site they have reworked the permit with the Watershed District to
accommodate that. Because of the infiltration rates they must mitigate and will use a rainwater
reuse system throughout the site for irrigation. There is a backup system for lack of rain, but a
significant amount of rainwater will be collected and reused.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Rehm seconded that the City Council
approve amending the Planned Unit Development-Regional Commercial (PUD-RC)
Ordinance 657 for Avienda and adopt the Findings of Fact. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0.
3. Adopt the Preliminary Tax Levy, Budget and Establish the Truth-In-Taxation Public
Hearing Date
This item was postponed until September 26, 2022.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: None.
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
1. 2022 Building Permit Activity
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Rehm seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. The City Council
meeting was adjourned at 8:04 p.m.
Submitted by Laurie Hokkanen
City Manager
Prepared by Kim Meuwissen
City Clerk
25
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated September 6, 2022
File No.Item No: D.2
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Jenny Potter, Sr. Admin Support Specialist
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council receives the Planning Commission minutes dated September 6,
2022."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Operational Excellence
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
26
Planning Commission Minutes dated September 6, 2022
27
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 6, 2022
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Chair von Oven called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Eric Commissioner Noyes, Mark Chair von Oven, Erik
Commissioner Johnson, Perry Commissioner Schwartz, and Kelsey Commissioner Alto.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ryan Soller and Edward Goff.
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; MacKenzie Young-
Walters, Associate Planner.
PUBLIC PRESENT:
George Bizek 8750 Powers Boulevard
Mark Bliss 7333 Hazeltine Boulevard
Dave Bloomquist 8800 Powers Boulevard
Brad Bladine 6791 Briarwood Court
Bruce Geske 7325 Hazeltine Boulevard
Don Giacchetti 6679 Lakeway Drive
Chris Mozina 6670 Pointe Lake Lucy Drive
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. SHORT TERM RENTAL CODE AMENDMENT
Associate Planner Young-Walters gave a presentation on the item and shared background
information noting over the past year the City has seen an uptick in complaints about short-term
rental properties. City Council directed staff to look into the issue with intent towards acting and
coming up with a system. The most common concern is the properties being used as party houses
and causing parking and noise issues for surrounding neighborhoods. The existing Ordinance is
not well-suited to dealing with these issues. Staff proposes defining short-term rentals as rental
of a property for a period of less than thirty days, requiring the properties have a license which
establishes maximum occupancy, parking, and to provide the City with a 24/7 contact number to
reach out in the event of complaints or problems, placing standards on the license reflecting the
nuisance Ordinance, occupancy, and parking limits, and establishing an enforcement procedure
for violations of the annual license.
Commissioner Alto asked how they will know if it is a short-term rental, other than the
Applicant coming forward to apply for the license.
Mr. Young-Walters shared staff met with an external vendor who has a proprietary AI that surfs
40-50 sites for short-term rentals. The AI determines which are located within the community
28
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
2
and found a list of 37 short-term rentals that are currently active in the City of Chanhassen. They
would run regular checks, notify the City, and then staff would notify people regarding the rental
regulations and requirements.
Commissioner Schwartz noted in the memorandum it said that short-term rentals have the
potential to become nuisance properties and adopting these standards will mitigate the potential
impacts and operate with a minimal impact on surrounding properties. He asked if it is
reasonable to ask surrounding owners to accept minimal impact.
Mr. Young-Walters noted minimal is a subjective standard and they must balance the property
owner’s right to use their property with the impact on neighbors. He shared about potential
impacts and responses including parking on a public street versus consistently parking in front of
someone’s driveway, having loud parties, or having trash all over. A property that had a few
extra cars a few times a year would be a slight impact and would be the minimal threshold which
they believe is a fair balance. He spoke about one instance within the City which is a shared
private drive and is challenging for municipal enforcement as the City does not own that right-
of-way which is governed by private agreements between neighbors. While the Ordinance would
allow the City to address many behaviors of a short-term rental there may be issues outside the
purview of municipal jurisdiction.
Chair von Oven asked when an owner resides in the short-term rental residence, are they subject
to the maximum occupancy rules.
Mr. Young-Walters replied in the negative. The company they have contracted with on the
enforcement has a 24-hour complaint line; for example, on Thanksgiving Day it would go to the
24/7 contact (presumably the homeowner) and they could reply that it is the large extended
family present and is not being used as a rental. The City would log it and note it is not a
violation and no action would be taken by the City.
Chair von Oven asked if violations “double up” on misdemeanors so if there truly is an infraction
the short-term renter and the owner could face a misdemeanor.
Mr. Young-Walters replied in the affirmative. In theory the renter could be prosecuted for
violating the City’s noise Ordinance and the City could go after the property owner for allowing
that violation to happen. The idea was to create a mechanism to put pressure on some of the less
responsible owners to take more ownership of their properties.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if the renter is from out of state and how that would affect the
violation process and prosecution.
Mr. Young-Walters replied the renter would either get a citation the day-of from the Carver
County Sheriff (in an extreme situation) or they will be out of town. The problem is less with
one-off renters than with properties that have a series of one-off renters that violate community
norms. That is why the City wanted to shift enforcement toward the property owner rather than
the renters.
29
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
3
Commissioner Noyes noted one licensing requirement is to grant the City ability to enter the
property which is a vague term to him. He asked if that is to access the lot, enter the home,
facilities, or building. He stated it seems the City would need that fully defined.
Mr. Young-Walters spoke about the exact language stating yard/private property and the
intention was external rather than internal on the property. The provision exists in the City’s
stable Ordinance and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) standards. The City Attorney reviewed the
draft Ordinance and did not raise a flag on that issue. If the Commission would feel more
comfortable having that defined as exterior only, they can certainly recommend that. He stated
the standards say that a “good neighbor brochure” must be present which outlines City
Ordinances and they could make it clear that if one generates a noise complaint staff has the right
to inspect the property in response to that complaint.
Commissioner Noyes thinks the mention of adults-only in the definition of occupancy rates is a
little too strict. He does not want someone to say the City is not allowing them to rent to families.
He asked whether they need to change the language “adults” to “person” or “people.”
Commissioner Noyes spoke about size of property or type of property and that some may apply
to this and others may not.
Chair von Oven asked whether the City has ever issued licensing and a process for exemption.
Community Development Director Aanenson replied the City has very few licensing
requirements. The City is trying to capture something that is equitable.
Mr. Young-Walters stated if one is running an operation that is not bothering neighbors or
creating an issue, he does not feel these standards would be super onerous as one would be asked
to apply for a license annually. If there was something that absolutely could not work for the way
one has historically run their operation, they could go through the variance process. He would
prefer that than trying to hard-bake an exemption clause.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if trash and noise is part of the complaint, why would the City
need access to the property as they could stand on the street and hear the noise.
Mr. Young-Walters replied in the case of a loud and energetic pool party behind a six-foot
privacy fence, and perhaps they had more than 25 people, if the City has access to the property
they would know whether one knowingly broke the licensing restriction of 10 people.
Commissioner Alto asked if the Sheriff is considered City Staff.
Mr. Young-Walters replied in this context, yes.
Chairman Chair von Oven opened the public hearing.
George Bizek 8750 Powers Boulevard, lives next to Mr. Bloomquist’s short-term rental and
noted he has never had any issues. Being on such a large lot, Mr. Bloomquist keeps the property
30
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
4
spotless and must be very good at screening renters as Mr. Bizek has never had an issue and does
not have trouble with the rentals next door.
Mark Bliss, 7333 Hazeltine Boulevard, noted he and his wife Jessica have two daughters aged 4
and 6 and a German shepherd. They moved to Chanhassen for the small community feel, great
schools, quiet neighborhoods, and access to parks and trails. Their home shares a driveway with
7331 Hazeltine Boulevard which is four 1-acre lots. In January of this year the neighbor sold and
the property became an AirBNB rental. Mr. Bliss stated living next to an AirBnB can be
interesting and unfortunately in his case has been more negative than positive; the property
owner lives in Florida, the property manager is in California, and he has observed a steady list of
renters nearly every night for the last two months including wedding families, bachelorette
parties, German businessmen, tourists, college meet-up groups, and some nice, quiet families.
Mr. Bliss stated he has seen intoxicated fights break out in the backyard, trash blowing against
his fence, burning of Styrofoam in the fire pit, and nine cars in his driveway. He noted they share
the driveway and these cars blocked their exit. He shared about party buses pulling into the
driveway at 2:00 a.m., renters parked in the driveway, cleaning crews waiting in the driveway,
trash left on the street for days on end, and cans overflowing because the property manager
depends on its renters to take out the trash and many forget. Mr. Bliss agrees a proposed
Ordinance is needed and he is happy about that, however the current proposal addresses most
concerns except three. First daytime parking, as currently written the neighbors can have two
cars in the garage and two cars in the driveway at night. During the day there are not defined
limits of additional cars and the Bliss family would like it limited to four cars. He said at one
time there were nine cars and his wife who is a nurse could not get to work. The family called
the Sheriff, however the Sheriff does not have jurisdiction to enter the shared driveway because
it is private. Mr. Bliss noted there is also nothing in the Ordinance about off-leash animals and
pets or defecation standards and he thinks all pets should be on-leash or within a fenced-in area.
He noted he has a very friendly German shepherd but dogs have wandered into his backyard. Mr.
Bliss spoke about general property upkeep such as snow removal noting the neighbor did not
plow from January to March and he spoke about lawn standards which often goes two weeks
without mowing. In his experience, the rental owners are trying to make a quick buck and do
everything possible to limit their expenses. Right now the yard is dead and Mr. Bliss asked for
some lawn standard rules or text. He also spoke about general property maintenance including
asphalt, dead trees, and branches. Mr. Bliss asked whether the Sheriff will have jurisdiction to
enter the property and/or will a Community Service Officer (CSO) have that jurisdiction.
Chair von Oven asked if Mr. Bliss has any legal documentation that helps govern the shared
driveway.
Mr. Bliss replied when they built the house it was three lots that were subdivided which was
approved by the City Council with one common driveway and four split-offs. He noted there is
nothing written as to what it is although there is a survey. There is no agreement as it was kind of
handshake and now it is a free-for-all. He spoke about instances with nine cars parked on the side
and his family cannot get out. What if something was wrong, his wife could not get to work and
what if she is on-call? If things go wrong and they call the Sheriff, they cannot fix it and he
asked what they do when a party bus comes on the property? He said at 2:00 a.m. when the dog
and kids are awakened it is a pain.
31
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
5
Chair von Oven thinks if this were to pass the answer to the question would be yes, the Sheriff
and CSO would be able to enter the property.
Mr. Bliss noted they live on the walking path with hundreds of people walking by. Many people
coming in to the rental property cruise in very fast and he noted there could be an accident with
someone getting hurt. There is nothing posted about slowing down or a stop sign at his address.
The previous weekend there was a head-on collision and he stated people drive very fast.
Mr. Young-Walters recommended bringing that up to the Traffic Safety Committee who will
then investigate and take appropriate action.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if the noise and nuisance Ordinance would apply to Mr. Bliss’
concern regarding dogs.
Mr. Young-Walters replied, the property maintenance and general nuisance Ordinance apply to
all properties in the City. For efficiencies sake he chose not to fully reiterate every provision of
the nuisance Ordinance within the short-term rental. However, if a dog was running loose that
generated a complaint that would be a violation of the standard of license and would be grounds
for the City taking action against the short-term rental as it is currently written. The pet waste
issue may be nebulous because it is on private property, but he would have to read through it to
be sure.
Dave Bloomquist, 8800 Powers Boulevard, noted when one searches on VRBO in Chanhassen
his property is the top search and he has over one hundred 5-star reviews and not a single issue.
Many customers immediately rebook as soon as they leave. He spoke about the proposal
regarding providing a name and number to all neighbors and noted his closest neighbor and the
only one within 300 feet is George Bizek. Regarding City staff having access, he sees the house
being private property and is a fourth amendment issue. Related to noise and disturbing the
peace, Mr. Bloomquist was speaking with Dan Campion earlier in his backyard with kids playing
on a trampoline and he could see on a normal City lot (under 1/3 acre), if someone is sensitive or
it is late at night they may be annoyed. Mr. Bloomquist thinks the cookie-cutter Statute is not
appropriate and noted his neighbors are hundreds of feet away with the house in the middle of
the property. He spoke about decibel ratings and shared about family events at the base of the hill
even closer to the neighbor to the south who shared they never heard anything. He spoke about
trash cans and recycle bins noting he checks it bi-weekly or whenever they drive by it. He spoke
about the stipulation limiting guests and noted he has 4 acres, 200,000 square feet (14 times the
size of a City lot) and if his wife’s family gathered for a holiday that is 28 people and they would
have to take three shifts. Many families want to get together like that on the property at
Christmas or New Year which are always booked. He noted it does not seem appropriate as he
could subdivide the property into eight lots. Regarding overnight parking, his driveway is 295
feet long with a parking area of 45x48 and it will easily hold 12 cars but he would be limited to
two plus two. In finding ways to rectify the licensing issue and deal with problem home owners,
in St. Louis Park they had a resolution based on how a property is zoned. Mr. Bloomquist noted
his property is zoned agriculture and he thinks the City should be looking at zoning
commonalities with offenders and go after them that way. It is not reasonable to limit the parking
32
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
6
on his property because they are 300 feet off the road and he thinks there need to be different
requirements based on zoning to recognize the differences.
Commissioner Noyes asked if the proposed Ordinance was passed and Mr. Bloomquist had the
ability to come before the City and ask for a variance such as parking, amount of guests, etcetera,
would that meet the need?
Mr. Bloomquist replied that puts him in another meeting before the Commission in hopes of
convincing them that he is not a problem. He shared they pre-screen their renters and his wife
goes with chocolate chip cookies to meet everyone, shares how the house works, and gives them
the rules and where the book is which covers all the rules (a welcome packet). Regarding a
variance it is a risk; if it was based on how it is zoned, then it becomes clear who the
troublemakers are.
Commissioner Schwartz commended Mr. Bloomquist for being a model short-term rental owner.
He noted it seems that is unusual if not unique, given what staff has said about a wide range of
properties in the City including the Bliss family at the opposite spectrum. It would appear to be
very difficult to write an Ordinance that covers each and every instance which is why the
Commission thinks a variance may be the answer and he cannot imagine why there would be any
issue with Mr. Bloomquist receiving said variance.
Mr. Bloomquist replied a long time ago they put a third stall on their existing home and had
dealings with Sharmeen whose reply was that it is 100 feet to the next door neighbor and they
should have bought a different house. He is obviously hesitant on that route, but noted he
received the third stall because he worked with the City Engineer who saw that it would not be a
problem and shared ideas on how to fix it. Mr. Bloomquist noted one individual kind of soured
the batch. He noted the starting age for renting the property is age 30+ and the Bloomquists find
out the reason they are coming to the property.
Bruce Geske, 7325 Hazeltine, is a neighbor of Mark Bliss and has lived at the residence since
1984 and was part of the planning on the trail system that went through. His concern is not as
much with the house although he has heard the noise and complaints but his concern is that
someone is going to get killed, the City will be held liable, and he fears he will also be held liable
as he allowed the City to have an easement to put the trail across his property. This weekend he
witnessed a renter come in too fast who then got out of the car and swore at the family that was
walking. Mr. Geske warned the City that if they do not do anything and do not take heed to this
matter someone will get hit and killed and there will be multiple lawsuits.
Mr. Young-Walters noted staff will relay these concerns to the Traffic Safety Committee who
will be looking into the situation.
Brad Bladine, 6791 Briarwood Court, shared that most of his concerns have been talked through
already. One of his concerns is around the day occupancy limit noting his extended family does
not fit Chanhassen’s small family ratio so when they get together for holidays, funerals, or
weddings they have a very large gathering. He noted his seven siblings and their families could
not ever be at the same rental property.
33
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
7
Chair von Oven clarified if he owns the home, Mr. Bladine could have as many people as he
wanted there. However, if he decided to rent it to his family that would be a problem.
Mr. Bladine understands and noted it limits the use. The way his family operates, they like to
spend time together and have been in other short-term rental properties for those experiences.
They can get loud but not rambunctious; they just like to spend time together. His concern is
about the day occupancy rate noting they will not all be living together in a rental and suggested
taking into consideration the number of bedrooms and square footage of the rental.
Chair von Oven asked what the clause is in the proposed Ordinance regarding daytime
occupancy.
Mr. Young-Walters stated it is written that a nighttime occupancy (# of bedrooms x 2 + 2) and
the daytime occupancy states no more than 4 additional adult guests can be on the property.
Mr. Bladine suggests a different kind of limit or way to manage that such as number of cars but
not the number of heads.
Chairman Chair von Oven closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if something should be added relative to the square footage of the
home and how many people it can adequately and safely contain.
Mr. Young-Walters replied the main issue is the larger the group the higher the chance of the
property being used as a party house. He also thinks the formula could get overcomplicated as an
unfinished basement does not provide the same amenities as a fully finished house. He
suggested the Commissioners talk about whether a daytime occupancy limit is necessary to
protect the parking and noise issues. If they feel the 10:00 p.m. quiet hours plus the maximum
overnight vehicles present is sufficient to ensure no late-night parties, then perhaps the daytime
occupancy limit is moot. He noted excessive noise can always go under the noise Ordinance.
Commissioner Alto asked if there is a City Code about occupancy.
Mr. Young-Walters believes at some point the Fire Code is involved but he is not certain on the
thresholds.
Ms. Aanenson noted it is pretty open as long as it is a family unit without separate kitchens,
etcetera which may be a large family living together or four college students.
Commissioner Schwartz is intrigued by the variance concept and would like to discuss adding it
to the Ordinance is special circumstances such as Mr. Bloomquist’s.
Chair von Oven stated they never want to create an Ordinance knowing that it already will not
work for some people. At the same time he does not see a path where they can make it work. He
asked about the zoning of agricultural and how much that was explored.
34
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
8
Mr. Young-Walters replied it was not extensively explored. It is possible Mr. Bloomquist is the
only agricultural or there may be more. If the Commission wants to build in relief he suggests
directing staff to put in a clause that allows staff to approve higher occupancy and parking limits
based on specific characteristics of the property. At that point anyone could appeal a staff
decision to the City Council. He thinks this may be a stronger route than forcing someone to go
through the variance process where they would have to prove Practical Difficulties, etcetera,
which are not well-suited to these situations. This would also prevent the situation where
someone with a large A-2 property decides to rent it out to ATV Clubs or other situations the
City would want to avoid.
Chair von Oven is in favor of building that relief in for these properties rather than forcing
people to go through a variance.
Commissioner Alto noted Mr. Bloomquist has five acres but it is a four bedroom three bathroom
house and she wonders where the City draws the line. Although they have more acreage, that
does not mean they can pack 10 more people at night into a house that size.
Commissioner Noyes thinks they can put a stipulation explaining the permit process,
requirements, and say if one is both zoned agricultural and the property is five acres or more the
parking limit and daytime occupancy limit do not apply.
Chair von Oven noted they are trying to put a maximum number of people because lots of people
make noise, however the City has a noise Ordinance. He said if it is his house and he is living in
it he can have 20 people sleep there if he chose to. If 20 quiet people are sleeping on the floor the
neighbors probably do not care. He is not in favor of eliminating the maximum number of people
but if they are unable to choose the right amount of people maybe they do eliminate the
maximum and allow the noise Ordinances, pet Ordinances, and other nuisance-type things. He
does not know if that is the right solution.
Commissioner Noyes noted they could say the same thing about parking and thinks some things
need to be defined and the number of people spending the night is critical to him although the
daytime occupancy is less so. If they start to get loud there is already a mechanism in place to
take care of that.
Commissioner Alto noted a popular situation after Covid is to rent a large home and have a
wedding there with the entire wedding party staying there. They should discuss whether they
should allow large parties as an agricultural five acre could advertise to host weddings because
they have a large yard. She again asked where they draw the line for short-term rentals to also be
a short-term venue.
Chair von Oven asked Commissioner Alto if she would be opposed to Mr. Bloomquist renting to
someone for a wedding.
Commissioner Alto replied if it was every weekend, because then it is a wedding venue without
meeting the proper permitting, business license, or alcohol license.
35
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
9
Commissioner Noyes noted the emails the City received show two very different extremes with a
large property, very well managed, and zero issues. Then they have another one that is a
complete crap show with owners there to make a profit, who are not managing it, and there are
problems. Commissioner Noyes thinks today the Commissioners are trying to address that side
of it and he does not want to address the situation and cause problems on the good side of it
which is what they need to think through.
Commissioner Schwartz agrees they need to find a way to make exceptions while providing
relief for properties like the Bliss family. He thinks they need to focus on how to solve the
problem while still making it possible for Mr. Bloomquist to run his business in the manner he
would like to given he is such a good property owner.
Mr. Young-Walters reiterated his earlier suggestion to put in standards that based on unique
characteristics of the property staff can approve a higher overnight occupancy and parking limit.
If an individual was not happy with what staff settled on, it would be appealable to the City
Council who could look at it and overrule.
Commissioner Noyes asked if Mr. Young-Walters is putting himself in a difficult position by
granting variances for one property over another.
Mr. Young-Walters would likely draft some more concrete standards as guidelines for staff.
However, because the owner can appeal to the City Council he is confident in staff’s ability to
provide a written reply as to why they were or were not granted an exception. Ultimately if staff
is wrong, the City Council will tell them.
Chair von Oven stated if the Commission decides to table this, then Mark Bliss will still be
waiting. If they table, Chair von Oven would like to find a way to get this back by the next
meeting.
Commissioner Alto noted nothing would change until January so they would still have time.
Commissioner Johnson suggested tabling and getting it back in front of the Commission as soon
as possible while giving Mr. Young-Walters time to work on some of the items.
Commissioner Alto moved, Commissioner Noyes seconded to table until the next Planning
Commission in two weeks. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a
vote of 5 to 0.
2. APPEAL REGARDING ALLEGED ERROR IN AN: ORDER, REQUIREMENT,
DECISION, OR DETERMINATION, MADE BY A CITY ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICER ON THE GAYLE MORIN ADDITION - 1441 LAKE LUCY ROAD
Ms. Aanenson noted she received an email from the party requesting the appeal which she has
not had a chance to look at. The City Attorney has advised regarding the new information that it
arrived too late to be addressed. Before the Commissioners tonight are the allegations that were
made which is what staff presented their findings on. She wants to be clear on the record that if
36
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
10
there are new allegations staff would need to know and would not be able to make a
recommendation tonight due to those new allegations. If there is new information this Planning
Commission will not be able to make a recommendation as staff would need to go back and
address those concerns.
The appealing party, Chris Mozina, stated there is plenty of new information in there.
Ms. Aanenson clarified to Mr. Mozina that staff can only address the allegations presented as
part of his application which is what is being presented tonight and said it will not reflect what
came in his email at 6:38 p.m. this evening.
Chris Mozina, 6670 Point Lake Lucy Road, said it is interesting what happened in the session
before. He stated this is the first time in 30 years that there has been any appeal brought before
this committee. There is absolutely no Ordinance specifying the protocols, rules, procedures,
forms, which is part of the reason why he as the Appellant (he wants to distinguish that they are
not an “Applicant” as they are not applying for anything) and the current process of the Planning
Commission as the Board of Appeals is a separate body. This is not a Planning Commission
meeting so they must take their Planning Commission hat off and put the Board of Appeals hat
on. If they want to hear the whole truth and the entire appeal, he asked them to table, set up the
rules just like they did for the Ordinance and shared that he has an appeal and is happy to present
it. His opening statement was going to be this.
Chair von Oven said if they are going to step by the rules, let’s step by the rules. When it’s time
for Mr. Mozina’s opening statement Chair von Oven will invite Mr. Mozina to the microphone.
There is an order in which they conduct these meetings whether they are the Planning
Commission or the Board of Appeals.
Mr. Mozina stated that is incorrect, sir. This is a Board of Appeals meeting and there are no rules
specified for such meetings.
Chair von Oven said to hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any
order, requirement, or determination made by a City Administrative officer in the enforcement of
this Chapter. Chair von Oven stated he will follow Robert’s Rules of Order in this setting as he
always has and will invite Mr. Mozina to the microphone when it is time, sir.
Mr. Mozina replied that is fair enough and thanked Chair von Oven.
Ms. Aanenson continued noting the Planning Commission is acting as the Board of Adjustment
and Appeals. These appeals are under the Administrative Officer under Chapter 20. Anything to
do with a subdivision, as she stated at the last meeting, those appeals would go to the State Court
if they have not been exhausted by the City Council. Any alleged error has not been weighed-on
yet by the City Council; this subdivision has not been before the City Council and is in holding.
The City Attorney reviewed the recommendations in the packet and if they are going to add
additional information not in the application they would review that before making findings. Ms.
Aanenson clarified the findings are based on the allegations that were made. She read the
allegations:
37
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
11
1. City presented a unified indivisible proposal that included both a Zoning approval and a
Preliminary Platt approval. By virtue of the unified proposal, any defects/allegations exposed in
the Zoning proposal by definition pollutes the Preliminary Platt proposal and any
defects/allegations exposed in the Preliminary Platt by definition pollute the Zoning proposal.
Ms. Aanenson noted staff’s finding is that there are no Ordinance restrictions prohibiting
rezoning in subdivisions from being processed concurrently. Cities are required to process and
decide such applications in the time provided by State law from the date the applications are
received, and processing concurrently is generally necessary to meet the required deadlines. It is
routinely done by the City.
b. City Staff by not addressing the numerous, specific and legitimate questions raised in a Letter
and 3 Addendums from the "Task Force"(all represented in the list of Interested Parties)"(Letter
and 3 Addendums)
Ms. Aanenson stated for the record in the attachments on the agenda with this application the
following items were attached including the staff report, Findings of Fact, application,
application narrative, the property tax information for 1441 Lake Lucy Road, the property tax of
all interested parties, the affidavit of mailing, and the staff response to the task force questions.
Ms. Aanenson stated again the allegation was a failure to “secure equity among individuals in the
use of their property.” The staff report addressed pertinent questions relating to the subdivision,
there were numerous questions going back and forth over a series of weeks, the questions were
answered, and are included a part of the record.
c. Will not cause depreciation - The interest parties allege that this finding of fact is in fact not a
fact and has no expert factual basis to support it such as a Comparative Market Analysis of
adjacent properties.
Ms. Aanenson stated the finding is irrelevant to this application which is Chapter 18 not Chapter
20 zoning and is not a required finding for approval of the zoning or subdivision application for
the Property under the City Code.
d) Allegations from Preliminary Plat Requirements not met and not formally waived by the City
Planners
Ms. Aanenson shared the findings that the Preliminary Plat Requirements are stipulated by
Chapter 18 and are not subject to appeal under 20-28, which applies only to appeals of orders,
requirements and decisions made by a city administrative officer under Chapter 20. In any event,
the language “officially waived” does not appear in the City Code. Section 18-40 reads “Unless
waived by city…” the Code does not state a mechanism for waiving the requirements and staff’s
decision to accept an application as complete without a given item, is understood to constitute
waiving the requirement. Ms. Aanenson noted staff typically walks through with someone and
ticks the boxes they think are necessary for the application.
38
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
12
e) Pre-emptive allegation of intended granting of variances without due process to assess the
buildability of the property - perching water, soil samples inaccurate: Civil Site essentially
described how it is possible to overcome any building obstacle, i.e. through variances
Ms. Aanenson stated no variances were requested in the applications related to the property,
therefore it is not applicable.
f) Zoning Erroneous Findings of Fact, The proposed zoning will not tend to or actually
depreciate the area in which it is proposed."
Ms. Aanenson noted the finding is irrelevant to this application. It is not a required finding for
approval of the zoning or subdivision application for the Property under the City Code.
g) Traffic generation by the proposed use within the zoning district is within capabilities of
streets serving the property."
Ms. Aanenson stated the private street serving the proposed single-family home on the property
was previously approved in 1993 to provide access to 5 homes. That street was previously
planned and approved to point access to that property.
h) According to Sec 20-43 Public Hearing should have occurred prior to the July 19th Planning
Commission Meeting
Ms. Aanenson shared the finding that Public Hearings for zoning amendments are held at the
Planning Commission. No public hearing is required prior to the public hearing scheduled with
the Planning Commission on the July 29, 2022.
i) "(b) If a development is proposed adjacent to a lake or will affect the usage of the lake, the
community development director may require an expanded mailing list for sites fronting on
lakeshore where the development would be visible over a large area. The Applicant is
responsible for meeting with affected homeowners."
Ms. Aanenson noted the findings are Section 20-43(b) states “If a development is proposed
adjacent to a lake or will affect the usage of the lake, the Community Development Director may
require an expanded mailing list for sites fronting on lakeshore where the development would be
visible over a larger area. The Applicant is responsible for meeting with affected homeowners.”
The use of the word “may” establishes that this is a discretionary requirement, and the
subsequent language provides guidance on when the expanded mailing can be required. The
existing lot (Morin property) could have had a dock or water oriented accessory structure, put
fence on the property, or the like. Adding the additional lot extinguishes any lakeshore rights of
the existing home, so the new home would not increase any lake usage. The proposed
subdivision would sever lakeshore rights of the existing home. The proposed subdivision lot
would be permitted lake shore rights, thus not changing the intensity of the lakeshore use. The
City mailed notification to properties within 500 feet of the subject site which exceeds the 350-
foot notification standard required by the State of Minnesota. A Proposed Development
notification sign has been placed on Lake Lucy Road for those that lived beyond the 500 feet.
39
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
13
j) Preliminary Plat Failed Requirements from Section 18-40: Section 18-40 Preface: "Unless
waived by the city because of the limited size and nature of the proposal, the following shall be
furnished with a preliminary plat:" Further the City in the proposal to the Planning Commission
on page 6 of 16 made the following determination: "The existing conditions survey now appears
to meet all applicable requirements from Section 18-40 of Ordinance." However, that is not the
case, and the City did not demonstrate a waiver of any of the following requirements which were
not met: "An accurate soil report indicating soil conditions, permeability and slope" - The
Watershed concluded that this requirement was not met, and substantial evidence was provided
at the public hearing on July 19th to support that conclusion.
Ms. Aanenson stated they are talking about allegations made under the Subdivision regulations
and allegations can only be made under Chapter 20.
k) "All proposed retaining walls must be shown on the plan. The top and bottom elevations of the
wall must be noted."
Ms. Aanenson noted the findings that in Chapter 18, Subdivision Regulations are not appealable.
It is noted that City staff responded to this question that the retaining wall elevation was shown
on page C3.
l) "The style of home (e.g. slab on grade, split entry, lookout, walkout, full basement) must be
noted on the plan."
Ms. Aanenson spoke about Chapter 18, Subdivision Regulations, which are not applicable under
this appeal and said again this has not gone before the City Council for final preliminary or final
plat. At preliminary plat the lowest floor and garage elevation were shown.
m) "Proposals for street lighting, curb and gutters, sidewalks and boulevard improvements."
Ms. Aanenson said Chapter 18, Subdivision Regulations, are not appealable. Access to the
property was previously approved by the City Council as a private street.
n) "Photocomposite images, artistic renderings, or site elevations which depict the visual impact
of the proposed development's design, landscaping, street layout, signage, pedestrian ways,
lighting, buildings, or other details that affect land use within the city shall be submitted. Such
images and renderings shall be from key vantage points and provide an undistorted perspective
of the proposed development from abutting properties, less intensive land uses, and/or from
entryway locations. Appropriate levels of resolution for the visualization shall be used from flat
shading for massing studies and preliminary design to photorealistic imaging for final design."
Ms. Aanenson noted Chapter 18, Subdivision Regulations, are not appealable.
o) Remedies Requested Prior to the hearing of the Appeal: (These requests were articulated at a
meeting held on August 17, 2022 with City Staff and the City Attorney. It is requested that they
again be reviewed and addressed).Immediately halt any further proceedings concerning this
development City Staff to answer all Task Force Questions in writing as per the commitment
40
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
14
from Kate Aanenson in a 22-minute conversation with Christopher Mozina on July 25, 2022 at
12:14 pm. The City Staff at a meeting on 8.17.22 indicated refusal to answer any previously
presented questions or any further questions from the Interested Parties thus again reinforcing
the failure to meet the very purpose of Section 20 '"'(g) Secure equity among individuals in the
use of their property."
Ms. Aanenson noted staff has answered numerous pertinent questions including engineering and
planning. She believes staff has answered all pertinent questions received. Pursuant to state law
and city Code, the City cannot halt proceedings on a zoning or subdivision application which
must be processed and decided within the required timelines.
p) Allow sufficient time for the interested parties to evaluate the answers provided by the City,
and present additional evidence to support the appeal
Ms. Aanenson shared this is not a requirement of the City Code. The City is under specific
timelines required by state law and city Code to process and decide zoning applications from the
date of the application. The required public hearing was provided allowing Applicants to raise
concerns regarding the proposed rezoning. The City Council has not yet weighted in on the
preliminary plat, nor the final plat.
q) City Planning assistance to ensure all required forms and protocols are understood by
Interested Parties so that Appeal is not disqualified on procedural grounds. - At the meeting with
City Staff and the City Attorney it was articulated numerous times by the City Staff that the City
Staff was unclear how such an appeal should be addressed and what procedures to follow in
doing so.
Ms. Aanenson clarified this is the first administrative appeal that the City has received in many
years. The appeal process is established in the City Code and was provided to the Applicant and
only covers items within the zoning ordinance.
r) No guidance was received from the City Attorney other than pointing to the limited
requirements in Section 20-29.
Ms. Aanenson stated the City Attorney represents the City, not the Applicant, and provided the
information concerning the appeal process as identified in the City Code.
s) City Planning assistance in describing how the appeal will be administratively heard (verbally
or in writing, with what submission deadlines). - Per the meeting with the City Attorney and City
Staff on 8.17.22, Other than administrative scheduling elements with Section 20-29, there are no
documented rules or standards of how an appeal will be heard and dispositioned.
Ms. Aanenson said staff provided the relevant provisions in the Code for appeals. The method of
disposition is provided in the Ordinance, which provides that the Planning Commission will hold
a public hearing on the appeal and decide the appeal.
t) Conference to be scheduled with City Staff as per the Zoning Application Checklist.
41
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
15
Ms. Aanenson sated this is a statement and no appeal is identified.
u) City to provide, as soon as possible, Zoning Appeal Application Form. - Per the meeting with
the City Attorney and City Staff on 8.17,22, there is no specific "Zoning Appeal Application
Form", but instead, interested parties were asked to use the "Application for Development
Review Form". The meeting clearly evidenced that this form did not seem to lend itself to the
purpose of an Appeal, and indeed the City staff indicated that in 30 years the form was never
used for an Appeal. Thus indicating there really isn't a well-defined Appeal process although this
is indeed stipulated as a requirement of Minnesota Statutes.”
Ms. Aanenson stated she has been here for 30 years and this is the first appeal she has had. She
reiterated one can only appeal from the Zoning Ordinance, the form was never used for an appeal
and the allegation indicating that there is not a well-defined appeal process although it is
stipulated as a requirement of Minnesota Statutes. While the City did not have a specific Zoning
Appeal Form, in the interest of time and urgency as expressed by the Applicant, City Staff
recommended using the Application for Development Review Form and indicated it would be
acceptable to City staff and Applicant’s use of the form was accepted by City Staff.
Ms. Aanenson stated there are many allegations and the City Council has not weighed in on it.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments
deny the appeal, and adopts the Findings of Fact and decision in the staff report.
Commissioner Schwartz read a brief email he sent to staff earlier in the day regarding a question
and he is looking for clarification as to why this item is on tonight’s agenda. At the last meeting
the Commission recommended only that a single lot at 1441 Lake Lucy Road be rezoned from
rural residential district to single-family residential district and subdivision of 4.84 acres into two
lots. He stated that is all they did and the recommendation comes before the City Council on
September 12 and he does not understand why they are subjecting themselves to a litany of
issues that the Council has not weighed in on yet.
Commissioner Alto agreed they have already made the recommendation.
Chair von Oven asked staff if there is a reason this is on the agenda tonight versus after the City
Council meeting.
Ms. Aanenson asked that the Commissioners ask the Appellant that question.
Commissioner Alto stated there is no historical precedence for appealing a recommendation to
City Council.
Ms. Aanenson stated that was her comment when the question came up as she has never in 30
years had someone before it was weighed in on. She stated at the Planning Commission public
hearing, one must exhaust administrative remedies and the City Council can change the Findings
of Fact, add for additional information; however, the Planning Commission made a
42
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
16
recommendation which is where they now sit. Within that there are allegations that staff erred in
the administration of something, and she stated they believe they have followed their practices.
Chair von Oven asked if there is a clear definition of City Administrative Officer.
Ms. Aanenson replied engineering and planning staff.
Chair von Oven asked if Commissioner Alto is a City Administrative Officer.
Ms. Aanenson replied in the negative.
Chair von Oven asked if anyone “up here” is a City Administrative Officer.
Ms. Aanenson replied in the negative.
Chair von Oven turned over the floor to Mr. Mozina.
Mr. Mozina apologized for his ongoing passion. He stated it was an amazing weekend, an
amazing day today, and they live in an awesome country. He noted they have poured a huge
amount of time since March and over the weekend into this appeal and it was a joy for him to
study the history related to the Statutes, rule of law, the Constitution, the Ordinances, checks and
balances, and it is a privilege to stand here in relative peace under the rule of law to argue the
appeal. He asked how many souls chose the harder right than the easier wrong to make our
country the rule of law and this appeal possible. He said it is amazing and they are truly blessed.
He stated everything presented they have evidence to support and presented a narrative of the
appeal as requested by the City Attorney and they are on the docket tonight because the City
Attorney gave the City Planners the go-ahead to put it on the docket and to appeal at this point in
time which is the least expensive path to choose. He turned the floor over to Don Giacchetti and
clarified they will call themselves the Appellant.
Don Giacchetti, 6679 Lakeway Drive, noted he and his wife Nancy have lived there for almost
21 years and gave a presentation showing some charts. He thanked the Planning Commissioners
for the job they do and noted he will focus on location, location, and freeboard. He stated the
information he provides tonight is both true and accurate to the best of his knowledge and ability
and without any doublespeak. He asked the Commissioners not to make any decision tonight but
to take several days to absorb it because this is a serious matter. He spoke about the video on the
City website where Planning Commission meetings are listed along with agenda packets and
videos. Mr. Giacchetti noted there were major errors and omissions in the information presented
to the Planning Commission at the July 19, 2022 public hearing. The 6679 Lakeway Drive home
where he and his wife Nancy live must be considered as an adjacent building which requires at
least 3 feet of freeboard elevation from the bio filtration basin (BMP) with a high-water level
(HWL) or 100-year event of 974.83 feet per City Policy 1.12 on page 343 of the City of
Chanhassen 2040 Comprehensive (Comp) Plan. Mr. Giacchetti took the Minutes, videos,
Findings of Facts, staff report, and read it all multiple times. He gave examples noting page 3 of
the Minutes from July 19, 2022 noting they look at City Ordinance, rules, and regulations and
apply those; if it meets the rules and regulations that is the basis of staff’s Findings of Fact. He
43
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
17
gives this a thumbs-up as it makes sense to him. He clarified the clippings he is showing on
screen are exact screenshots. On page 5 of the City Staff report it says staff notes that the
proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which Mr. Giacchetti is not familiar with as
a normal citizen. On page 2 Findings of Fact and Recommendation he noted it says the proposed
subdivision is consistent with all applicable City, County, and regional plans including but not
limited to the City’s Comprehensive Plan. He shared page 3 of the Minutes where engineer Matt
Sheehan spoke and he noted he could not find a Matt Sheehan but eventually found out his name
was Mike Sheehan who is a certified and licensed professional engineer who joined Civil Site
Group 6 months ago and is a very qualified individual. He noted Matt Pavek stated he feels they
have the puzzle of drainage solved and going into final plans they will be able to refine all those
requirements. Mr. Giacchetti has questions about this. In the staff report it talks about the City’s
Surface Water Management Plan which says the City requires 3 feet of freeboard between a
building elevation and adjacent ponding features. He noted the design only provides 2.31 feet of
freeboard to the existing home on adjacent property 6675 Lakeway Drive. Mr. Giacchetti shared
from the Minutes that Mr. Seidl noted the development appears to meet all the City rules and
asked why he does not make it definitive. It was also mentioned the Commissioners are not
experts and he tries to do a fact check on what he agrees to be true and accurate. After the
aforementioned comment, another comment was made in the Minutes that said there is only one
water expert in the room tonight. Mr. Giacchetti understands that if one is not aware of who else
is in the room but after reviewing he noted there are at least four other experts and feels the
record ought to be corrected for that. The experts include Matt Pavek (Civil Site Group), Kevin
Teppen (Senior Project Manger and certified/licensed Landscape Architect), Mike Sheehan, and
Commissioner Erik Johnson who is a professional engineer who works for EVS as a Senior
Geotechnical Engineer according to his LinkedIn page. Mr. Giacchetti shared that Mr.
Commissioner Johnson had some employment with Haugo Geotechnical Services. He reiterated
there are at least four other experts and noted comments were made that the engineering design is
trying to mimic the natural design, mimic Mother Nature, and he always has questions about
mimicking something. Is it a knock-off? Is it real? Did they get it as good as the original? Mr.
Giacchetti noted when making a decision the things to focus on need to be both true and
accurate. However, it is also critical to be aware of what is absent and what is not stated. He
showed a page on screen showing all the things he did in the Minutes relating to water and
freeboard issues. Mr. Giacchetti searched for a URL that brought him into the Comp Plan noting
the large amount of pages the Commissioners must get their arms around and he compliments
them. On page 2 he found Mayor Elise Ryan, Dan Campion, and Jerry McDonald who are three
of the five members on the City Council who approved/adopted the Comp Plan in 2020. In
Chapter 9 it speaks about the local surface water management and found Elise Ryan, Dan
Campion, and Jerry McDonald were all Councilmembers in 2018 on the report. He noted Policy
1.12 says require building elevations to provide at least 3 feet of freeboard adjacent to ponding
areas and floodplains for all development and redevelopment or when drainage facilities are
constructed for an area. He showed the Staff Report from July 19 on screen which spoke about
6679 Lakeway Drive and stops at ponding features which is a major omission, and the Planning
Commissioners were not give the benefit of what the policy states. They were given an outlined,
truncated version that said not to worry about the property. Mr. Giacchetti showed an elevation
infographic chart on screen and spoke about freeboard calculations, BMP, anchors, and how it
ties into Policy 1.12 and the proposed house. He noted they are now introducing an artificial bio
drain because they want to build a home which has some impervious surfaces introduced into the
44
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
18
natural bio system. This means they must calculate through water CAD software how big it has
to be. All of the natural filtration that used to flow down the hill is now being concentrated in the
artificial bio drain and is supposed to seep down into the ground. By Mr. Giacchetti’s rough
calculation, he comes up with 29,922.22 gallons of water.
Commissioner Noyes asked about the 60x60 foot pad shown on screen, and what is the water
capacity of that area.
Mr. Giacchetti does not know but is sure the water CAD model would calculate that and the
water coming off impervious surface from the driveway.
Commissioner Noyes noted when Mr. Giacchetti is doing those, he is comparing an unknown to
his estimated capacity of the BMP.
Mr. Giacchetti estimated by dimensions as it is 80 feet long, 20-30 feet wide, and 2-3 feet deep.
Commissioner Noyes said that is right but it takes a professional engineer to do that where the
60x60 foot pad is just a piece of land at this point in time. He noted Mr. Giacchetti is focusing
on the BMP and they are not focusing on what is there now and the carry and capacity absorption
of that which is a little misleading
Mr. Giacchetti replied it was stated that they were trying to mimic what is there now and the
existing condition which is what they analyzed. He spoke about the existing Morin home, the
amount of gallons of water, the freeboard infographic chart, and stated they are not safer, he has
a big bathtub in front of his home, and they are 50-60 feet away. Mr. Giacchetti does not think
they calculated for all the water coming outside the western portion of the map on screen and
noted their water CAD models do not do that. He noted water is coming down from Lake Lucy
Road, down Lakeway Drive, gets to his private drive, and comes down. He heard that it is
physically impossible to have 3 feet of standing water coming off that little pond and said they
are building an artificial bio drain that has 30,000 gallons which is more than 3 feet of standing
water right over the banks of wetland A. He showed photos on screen of cars underwater on 494
noting he lived through the 1986 super storm and his business had water up to the first level of
the racking system. He is sure the engineers and designers did the best they could but did not
anticipate the worst case. Mr. Giacchetti has two water experts that will comment on this.
Commissioner Schwartz appreciates the effort of Mr. Giacchetti’s presentation and asked if any
part of the presentation addresses the recommendation that the Planning Commission made to
the City Council.
Mr. Giacchetti replied yes it does.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if Mr. Giacchetti can jump ahead to that.
Mr. Giacchetti stated the Planning Commission recommended to adopt all of the City’s findings
that everything is according to the rules and consistent and we’re moving forward.
45
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
19
Commissioner Schwartz replied no, sir, that is not true. What the Planning Commission
recommended to the City Council was that one lot be subdivided into two lots, period. That
recommendation is coming before the City Council at its next meeting. Until the City Council
approves, modifies, or denies the Planning Commission’s recommendation, all of this
information is just information. There is nothing that the Planning Commission can do tonight to
deal with this because the administrative process as not followed through to its logical
conclusion.
Chair von Oven recognizes getting all this information on the record which he is all for. He
agreed there is a certain limit to what the Planning Commissioners are allowed to decide on
tonight. At the beginning of Mr. Giacchetti’s presentation, he asked them not to make a decision
tonight, except an appeal is before the Commissioners and stated he has yet to hear anything that
would make him not decide to deny the appeal. He fully admits what Mr. Giacchetti is speaking
about has merit. On tonight’s agenda, and the powers this committee holds in this particular
session, he would appreciate if they can focus on any of the things they have been asked to come
together on tonight.
Mr. Giacchetti is sympathetic to what Chair von Oven is saying and noted this is what he read
and asked them to tell him if he is wrong, the City Planning Commission at the July 19 meeting
voted 5-0 to adopt as a recommendation to go on to the City Council, all of the Findings of Fact,
all of the City Report, and everything else. In there, Mr. Giacchetti showed the red X’s which are
major error and omission and thinks this body would have the ability to rescind because if they
are not presented with all facts and true and accurate statements, the Commission did not have
the benefit of making an informed decision. He thinks 6679 Lakeway Drive being excluded as
“not an adjacent home” (and he has two experts that will attest) is major and does not comply
with what the Commission approved as the Findings of Fact.
Commissioner Noyes clarified the Commission did not approve Findings of Fact. They approved
a subdivision based on facts and that they spent a lot of time reading, listening, and they did not
vote on Findings of Fact. They voted on one thing: should the subdivision happen or not and it
has not gone any further than that. Mr. Giacchetti keeps going back and saying the Commission
got the wrong facts or omissions and that is Mr. Giacchetti’s opinion. Commissioner Noyes
stated they are in the first inning of this whole process and have not even gotten the subdivision
fully approved. Beyond that, every aspect of that project will go through the City, City
Engineers, any variances will come to the Planning Commission, then it will go to the City
Council. Commissioner Noyes said Mr. Giacchetti is kind of giving them a business pitch and
noted Mr. Giacchetti does not like the project and Commissioner Noyes gets that.
Mr. Giacchetti disagrees, it is not that he does not like the project. The issue is very simple: the
Commission based their decision to move it forward on a subdivision based upon the City’s
Findings of Facts, and the recommendation in the City Staff Report. That is what the Minutes
reflect.
Commissioner Schwartz thinks Mr. Giacchetti is incorrect. There was a significant amount of
discussion and the meeting lasted until 11:30 p.m. where there was conflicting information
between what City Staff and engineering experts were saying and what the task forces experts
46
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
20
were saying. Because of those conflicts the Planning Commission is not in a position to make a
decision on that, so they limited what they recommended to the City Council to only recommend
subdividing the single lot that currently exists into two lots, that’s it.
Mr. Giacchetti stated it was to recommend the subdivision according to the plans that were
specified.
Chair von Oven stated one of the constant battles for everyone in the City is educating on how
things work. He has learned that there is a beautiful system of checks and balances. He is not a
water expert, he is a computer engineer, so when the City tells him they think they have this
puzzle figured out, the reason this body is enabled to move forward with a recommendation is
because they can recommend to divide into the sub lots but at the end of the day a building
permit or some engineer will have to sign off on a plan that meets fully the City’s plan. If the
puzzle is not fully solved today and this body had to wait until every puzzle was fully solved,
nothing would ever get done in the City. Chair von Oven clarified this body recommends to the
City Council what they believe should happen to this property but it cannot happen unless every
rule is met. Therefore, if what Mr. Giacchetti is sharing tonight is true, there will be a barrier at
which this project will stop. He noted under his Robert’s Rules of Order hat, the Commission is
being presented with an appeal with an alphabet of allegations. If any of those allegations tonight
are what Mr. Giacchetti is speaking to, Chair von Oven asked him to please point it out to the
Commissioners so they can make a decision on what is before them tonight. Chair von Oven
thinks all of this information is very pertinent for City Council in making their decision going
forward and he will tell Mr. Giacchetti the City Council also holds the City to the same
standards. These things will still have to fall in order against the regulations. The Planning
Commission’s recommendation is that if all these boxes check when the time comes, they are in
favor of subdividing this lot. He stated that is the difference between what is being litigated
tonight by the Appellants. Chair von Oven asked to focus the rest of the presentation on those
items.
Mr. Giacchetti thinks what was concluded right before the 5-0 vote, the Commission heard from
a water expert who said that it meets everything which was not true and accurate, we will get
there, and we have solved the puzzle. What was not introduced and was absent was that Mr.
Pavek pointed to the chart and said the -4.4is not adjacent, does not really matter, and
Commissioner Schwartz asked if that is a non-issue. Mr. Pavek responded that is a non-issue.
Mr. Giacchetti noted it is a big issue and he is trying to help the Commissioners out tonight, there
is a fly in the ointment called Policy 1.12 which was alluded to and was then ignored. On page 7
of the Riley Purgatory Watershed there is a chart that defines what an adjacent facility is, talks
about the bio drain, and noted it is common sense. It says “to achieve low floor elevation for the
adjacent structure at 6679 Lakeway Drive” so it is being called an adjacent structure. However,
the Commission was not given that information and were told it is not adjacent, there will be
water flowing around it, and he said that is a major elephant in the room. He noted it is an
arbitrary and capricious kind of decision at 5-0 to forward this on to the City Council. He could
not find this document on any City websites, Minutes, referenced in the video, it was an outline
that stopped at 3 feet above ponding levels and did not mention this adjacent facility. They have
a qualified, acknowledged expert and that was shielded from the Commissioners. The whole
point is that if the Watershed defined 6679 Lakeway Drive as an adjacent property and the City
47
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
21
says everything is hunky-dory because we are ignoring that adjacent property, but it is in
violation of Policy 1.12. Full stop. Go get it right, go redesign it, go do something else because
the plans do not comport to that. That is not what Mr. Pavek said, he said it was not an issue and
it is right there on video. He makes the allegation that the City has to have page 7 and 8 from the
Watershed. He asked why does the City Staff not tell the Planning Commission about the
elephant in the room and ignore Policy 1.12. Mr. Giacchetti is here to tell the Commission this is
a major issue and he is trying to spare them some embarrassment. He thinks they have an
opportunity to study what he is saying because this is a major, major issue. He will send the
Commissioners his complete “deck of cards” and they will see.
Chair von Oven asked if 6679 Lakeway Drive is adjacent to this stormwater facility and does not
conform to Policy 1.12 of the stormwater management guide.
Mr. Giacchetti replied yes, that is his allegation.
Chair von Oven asked if that is on the docket tonight and asked which letter of the allegations it
falls under.
Mr. Mozina replied they will see it as a combination of allegation f and c. He approached the
podium and stated he thinks the Commission saw from Ms. Aanenson that in the narrative
describing the appeal, Mr. Mozina asked for clarifications. The City provided none and the City
Attorney provided none other than to point to 20-29 which has no specification for how this
proceeding would be carried out. Mr. Mozina in what he thought was good conscience working
all weekend and up to 5:00 p.m. providing the evidence that supports the appeal. Once the
Commissioners hear that evidence along with Mr. Giacchetti’s evidence, they will be compelled
to reverse their adoption of the Findings of Fact provided by the City Administrators. He
clarified the City Administrators birth the Findings of Fact, the Planning Commission adopts
them, and the City Council approves them. There is more to what they approve than just a zoning
feature because they approved a preliminary plat.
Chair von Oven noted the Planning Commission is the recommending body and do not adopt it.
Ms. Aanenson clarified Chapter 18, the subdivision regulation cannot be appealed because it has
not gone through the process. All the Planning Commission has done is give recommendation.
Mr. Mozina stated that is Ms. Aanenson’s opinion.
Ms. Aanenson replied that is the City Attorney’s opinion and Mr. Mozina will not listen when
the City has talked to him about this. He can only appeal the zoning administration which is
Chapter 20 and that is why they are here.
Mr. Mozina stated they will hear more about that and within the Ordinance itself it talks about
the risk when an Applicant tries to file a preliminary plat and a final plat at the same time
because if one fails the other fails. That is a precedent-setting section within the Ordinance which
says “at your own risk.” If one does a zoning application and a preliminary plat application in the
same unified application, one pollutes the other. He held up a packet and stated “here is what you
48
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
22
approved,” and said there was a lot of discussion during the Planning Commission meeting and
they were all looking at each other “what are we approving tonight?” Mr. Mozina stated they did
not approve accepting the deeding of the right-of-way on Lake Lucy Road. He wants to point out
in the appeal process they are here to hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an
error in any order, requirement, and it was read earlier in the meeting. Mr. Mozina asked if there
is any time specified in there and does it limit when he can allege that an error has been made?
Chair von Oven replied not that he knows of.
Mr. Mozina stated then they are okay being here then.
Chair von Oven noted Mr. Mozina is absolutely okay being here. He wants to be clear why he
even asked the question. He asked to say for a moment that his eyes have been opened and the
light has shined upon him, he still cannot do anything about what Mr. Mozina’s appeal is tonight.
This is why they don’t want the Commission to decide tonight, however he must look at what
has been appealed and decide whether or not to make a decision. If Chair von Oven looks at
what Mr. Mozina has appealed at this moment, to this body, on this project, it does not include
what is shown on screen.
Mr. Mozina stated they are talking about accurate soil samples, as well.
Chair von Oven asked Mr. Mozina to please give him the letter that this points to and he will
work to support Mr. Mozina. He asked to point to the allegation before this body tonight that
specifically says this and he can look at it with different eyes. However, until Chair von Oven
sees that he cannot.
Mr. Mozina said now they are back to the beginning. He asked (and Ms. Aanenson showed it on
screen) for clarity as to what he should bring to this appeal. He noted that is in the allegation.
Commissioner Alto asked if Mr. Mozina is talking about the allegation that the City Attorney not
providing more information.
Ms. Aanenson stated, as she understands it, most allegations fall under the zoning and that is not
what they can do.
Mr. Mozina thinks it is allegation labeled “u.”
Ms. Aanenson stated the reason the City disagrees with the Appellant is because the subdivision
has not been exhausted yet.
Mr. Mozina stated allegations labeled “u”(City provide zoning appeal form), “s” (City erred in
not providing assistance with appeal or pre-meeting to address the format). Mr. Mozina clarified
it is alliteration “s”, “u”, and “v” (the accurate soil samples). He noted allegation “v” was not in
the narrative, but that this does not mean it is not valid.
Ms. Aanenson pointed out that is a subdivision requirement, as well.
49
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
23
Chairman Chair von Oven opened the public hearing.
Mr. Mozina tried to stick to the narrative describing the appeal and listing the items in order, but
then he added additional allegations. Again, there was no restriction on him adding additional
allegations, evidence, and documentation to support the appeal.
Commissioner Noyes noted Mr. Mozina did it at 6:38 p.m. today.
Mr. Mozina stated he worked 20 hours this weekend.
Commissioner Noyes understands but Mr. Mozina needs to understand what the Commissioners
are up against and 22 minutes is not enough for them to review it. He noted everyone on this
Commission has read all of the documents, whether it is the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, they
have spent countless hours just like Mr. Mozina has. The expectation to put something forth 22
minutes beforehand and for the Commissioners to digest it and assume it is all accurate and
truthful is not a fair assumption.
Mr. Mozina went back to Commissioner Alto’s comments that they need to take the emotion out
of it.
Commissioner Noyes replied they need to focus on procedure.
Chair von Oven stated there is a procedure, they will follow it, and that is his job. Mr. Mozina is
speaking for the public comment portion and asked him to please bring his comments forward in
a timely fashion.
Mr. Mozina stated the Board of Appeals summary choosing the harder right than the easier
wrong. When looking at the packet he sent today, he put a table of allegations, some of which are
specifically designated to zoning. He expects the Commissioners to be shocked by his first
example because it is directly related to the zoning Ordinance and there is a direct Finding of
Fact provided by City Staff that is actually impossible to state. As discussed, checks and
balances are crucial at each stage of the process and stakeholders are the checkers and the
Commission talked pretty extensively about the check and balance to look for. The answer was
the next step in the process and Mr. Mozina thinks that is the wrong answer and will show the
reason in the presentation. There is a lack of protocol, rules, procedures, and Ordinance clarity in
the Board of Appeal process. He said the Board must consider what is true and accurate, what is
absent or not stated, the whole truth. The appeal finds its justification and direction from several
north stars, chief among them is Section 20-2 “secure equity among individuals in the use of
their property.” Mr. Mozina said Section 20-2 is the section in the zoning Ordinance. When Mr.
Giacchetti talks, he is talking about his equity interest among individuals in the use of their
property and that evidence applies here. The Board of Appeals has obligations as an independent
trier of fact. City Staff gives birth to facts, just like a police officer with laws to enforce they
arrest someone with a set of facts, it goes up to the district attorney who either creates a grand
jury or decides to prosecute. There is a finder of facts, someone that adopts the fact, and then it
goes to the City Council for approval. Within the birthing of facts that is where they have a
50
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
24
problem, to Mr. Giacchetti’s point, the Commission did not see all the facts, and nobody pointed
out specific Statutes and sections of the Ordinance that were missed. He is going to point those
out tonight. Mr. Mozina said the Board must not vote on the recommendation provided by City
Staff as it is inappropriate, incomplete, and premature. Based on the fact that there are no rules
describing when documentation is required or what type of documentation is required.
Allegations are serious and compelling and deal with issues of public safety like Mr. Giacchetti
was going to get to. If that bio filtration basin collapses as showed in the pictures that will all go
into Mr. Giacchetti’s house. It also deals with questions of ethics. The allegations will require
serious, dedicated time to investigate, likewise as a trier of fact the Board’s written responses to
each allegation should be thoughtfully considered and documented for full transparency. It is the
Appellant’s belief that the presented allegations warrant the Board of Appeals reverse and/or
revoke the Planning Commission adoption of the 1441 Lake Lucy Road development proposal
rendered on July 19, 2022. Mr. Mozina stated as mentioned above, the Board, City, and
Appellant have to keep track of over 30 allegations and answers. He stated it feels important to
review several examples of the allegations up front and then examine more closely the
inappropriateness of the City Staff’s Recommendation to this Board and the very nature of
checks and balances as designed into the U.S. Constitution, Minnesota State Statutes, and City
Ordinances. He spoke about Allegation “c”, Allegation “w”, Allegation “g”, and Allegation “o”
in his packet of information and said these examples serve to further illustrate why it is wholly
inappropriate to adopt the City Staff’s recommendations presented prior to this meeting. The
City Staff’s responses to the initial narrative describing the appeal are misplaced, inaccurate,
insufficient, and premature. Mr. Mozina stated the City Staff provided their recommendations
without notifying Mr. Mozina (although they sent an email, fair enough) he clicked on the
agenda and then saw the recommendations. He asked when did that come out? On Thursday. Mr.
Mozina worked all day Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday so he was prepared to not waste
the Commissioners’ time. He spoke about allegation “c” which states “will not cause
depreciation” and said City Staff responded that this is irrelevant to this application. This
response is categorically incorrect and as stated in the City Staff’s birthed Findings of Fact on
page 22 of the July 19, 2022 agenda packet, it is the City’s statement that the zoning Ordinance
directs the Planning Commission. Mr. Mozina showed a slide which he took from the proposal
adopted on July 19 where it says the proposed zoning will not tend to add to or actually
depreciate the area in which it is proposed. He stated those are adverse findings that they were
directed to review. Mr. Mozina spoke about letter f which makes it clear that the Planning
Commission must assess whether the proposal meets all traffic and street requirements and said
the Appellant alleges that the private street cannot accommodate emergency fire vehicles and
that the Applicant did not address that in their proposal. Mr. Mozina stated the tone of City
Staff’s response is concerning and the zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to
consider adverse effects, so it is clearly relevant. He stated he believes the City’s own words
show that the allegation is relevant otherwise why would it be included to begin with? Why put
something into the Findings of Fact if it is not relevant?
Ms. Aanenson asked to clarify again, that the findings relate to the things that are applicable in
Chapter 20 versus Chapter 18. What is in the subdivision Ordinance cannot be before the
Planning Commission today because it has not been weighed-in by the City Council. She stated
that is the reason those findings are not aligned with what Mr. Mozina is saying and that is still
51
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
25
the breakdown of communication here. She stated clearly, they will have to bring things back
and clarify that.
Mr. Mozina stated he must have missed that completely because he thought there was a
rezoning.
Chair von Oven clarified there has not yet been anything.
Mr. Mozina understands there was a birthing, an adoption, and they have not yet had an
approval. He gets that.
Chair von Oven noted there was a recommendation from the recommending body and none of
this is relevant until City Council weighs in. He understands what Mr. Mozina is saying but
clarified they are not there yet.
Mr. Mozina stated the Planning Commission is not there yet and that forms the basis of appeal
because they are disagreeing on whether the Commission thinks this appeal is timely right now.
They are not actually disagreeing with what he is saying, they are disagreeing on whether they
think it is timely.
Chair von Oven replied the Commission is not in a position to agree or disagree with what Mr.
Mozina is saying because it is not timely for what they are here to decide on this issue.
Commissioner Schwartz said based on Ms. Aanenson’s repeated statements, he fails to see how
any of this is relevant at this time. He is happy to sit here and listen to the allegations but there is
nothing the Commission can do about it at this time because if and until the City Council makes
a decision on the recommendation to subdivide that lot into two lots, all of this will come back to
the Planning Commission at some point in the future. Why they are spending tonight to hear
these allegations, as interesting and important as they might be, it is not appropriate at this time
to hear them.
Mr. Mozina noted the City Attorney already granted him that right.
Chair von Oven replied that is correct and they are holding a public hearing right now and Mr.
Mozina is free to speak. He noted he will end the public hearing at 10:30 p.m.
Mr. Mozina said every single word written in his presentation has meaning.
Ms. Aanenson clarified Mr. Mozina is talking about the packet he sent earlier in the day.
Mr. Mozina replied in the affirmative. The action the Commission can take is to reverse their
adoption and not send it to the City Council.
Chair von Oven noted in the earlier presentation the Commissioners were asked not to make a
decision and clarified that Mr. Mozina would like the Commission to approve the appeal tonight.
52
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
26
Mr. Mozina would like, as Mr. Giacchetti said, to spend the time studying what is here and then
render a decision. One of those possible decisions is to withdraw what they are sending to the
City Council and instead have the Applicant go back and do what they should have. Mr. Mozina
said crucially, City Staff did not address the actual allegations on the merits. The erroneous
response from the City is further evidence as to why the Board should not and cannot adopt the
appeal recommendation City Staff provided. Instead, the Board will need to thoughtfully
consider all of the allegations throughout this appeal and provide its independent written
response to each allegation on the merits. Mr. Mozina said the finding that the proposed zoning
will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed is simply impossible to
prove at this time, both because the building site has not yet been proven to be viable based on
the need for accurate geotechnical analysis required by the Applicant, and because there is no
actual representation of any kind provided by the Applicant as to the style or image of the home
to be built that in turn would allow for a comparative market analysis. Regarding photo-
composite images, it is not refuted, it was not provided, and a preliminary plat was sent for
adoption and approval. Furthermore, the Appellants request that the Board also consider the
likely results of a conditional probability or decision-tree analysis, specifically to determine the
probability of success. This means the probability that the site is buildable, finding a builder, that
the builder can complete the project profitably without walking away or creating harm, as well as
the probability of what could be built would meet the same level of market values as the
surrounding homes. Those two things would be methods by which they could determine whether
the surrounding area would be depreciated. The above arguments are directly relevant under the
zoning Ordinance by the City’s own admission and mandate the Board to accept the appeal and
reverse the Planning Commission adoption of the July 19, 2022 Applicant proposal. Mr. Mozina
noted an additional allegation not present in the narrative, going forward this will be called item
“w”, it is alleged that Commissioner Erik Johnson, a Planning Commissioner, had a potential
conflict of interest which he did not disclose, in terms of his prior employment with Haugo
Geotechnical Services. By not disclosing that potential conflict of interest the Appellant believes
his vote, and the entire vote of the Commission present should be voided. Haugo’s work was
clearly deficient as indicated by the Watershed and the Task Force. Mr. Mozina asked
Commissioner Johnson if this is humorous.
Commissioner Johnson replied in the negative.
Mr. Mozina noted he would go to one of the sections that talks about misdemeanors in the
enforcement of these odes. Mr. Mozina continued saying according to Mr. Seidl, the
geotechnical work is required to prove the viability of the building site. It is also noted by the
Appellant that the number of companies in the local area that specialize and provide
employment, in the field of geotechnical engineering is limited. The City requires the resumes of
all prospective Planning Commissioners; therefore the City knew or should have known that a
potential conflict of interest existed. Commissioner Johnson should have recused himself but he
did not. It is therefore alleged that the vote is invalid. An excerpt from Commissioner Johnson’s
LinkedIn page was shown.
Chair von Oven asked Mr. Mozina if he will be adding additional comments to the packet sent to
the City or whether he will be reading from the packet the rest of his allowed time. Does Mr.
Mozina have anything to add beyond what has already been submitted in the packet?
53
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
27
Mr. Mozina does not believe that there is. He continued saying traffic generation by the
proposed use within the zoning district is within capabilities of streets serving the property. The
Appellant alleges that there are two streets in question but only one was talked about which was
the private street. The packet received also described a 7-foot right-of-way that the Applicant
was proposing to provide on Lake Lucy Road. The first private street requires and does not
currently meet traffic requirements for emergency vehicles as required in section 18.57.U. There
appears to be a component of the Applicant’s proposal that related to Lake Lucy Road, which
cannot receive collector street designation under Section 20-5 to be designated as a collector
street and in certain situations qualify for federal maintenance assistance. The last remaining
right-of-way of 7 feet is required fronting the Morin property. Mr. Mozina spoke about process
noting overlap between Section 20-5 and Section 18-57: one talks about collector streets, and
one talks about the amount of right-of-way required. He asked them to see how the Section 20
zoning and Section 18 integrate with one another and noted it is important to recognize that and
that the current Section 20-5 is actually incorrect. Because this right-of-way does not exist on the
Morin property stretch of land, City Ordinance as documented right now is incorrect and Lake
Lucy Road is not a collector street. That whole process requires investigation and an answer as to
the exact motivation with respect to the granting and deeding of that 7-foot right-of-way. Mr.
Mozina’s allegation is normally when someone is going to deed something it needs to be
accepted and recorded. It is a decision and was included in the packet. In looking at the Minutes
and in the video when the Commissioners asked what they were voting on that night, they did
not vote on adopting the acceptance of a deed, it was never mentioned, the road was not
discussed, the right-of-way was not discussed in the Minutes nor in the video. He asked if the
Commissioners realized they were accepting that?
Commissioner Schwartz noted it is irrelevant at this point in time.
Mr. Mozina continued saying it is alleged that the summary of the requests for the Planning
Commission to adopt on July 19, 2022 was incomplete, therefore erroneous and requiring
reversal and/or revocation of the adopted 1441 proposal. Specifically, the Appellant alleges that
the Applicant’s deeding of a dedicated 7 foot right-of-way to provide for a consistent right-of-
way width along Lake Lucy Road, requires an approval to record that deed on behalf of the City.
This deeding would directly impact collector streets as reflected in Zoning Ordinance Section
20-5 and it is alleged that the City Ordinance is currently inaccurate because it lists Lake Lucy
Road as a collector street when without the deeded right-of-way, the Appellant alleges it is not.
Mr. Mozina stated in Section 18-57 for right-of-way measurements they will see that 7 feet is
required in order to get the 80 feet required. He spoke about a series of email exchanges between
himself and Ms. Aanenson and he asked if the right-of-way deeded by the Morins to the City
survives if the City Council denies the subdivision zoning application? He stated, no it does not.
Does the City potentially lose out on anything of value now or in the future if the City does not
get the right-of-way from the Morins? The response is if the City has to acquire it in the future,
they would likely have to pay for it. The Appellant’s concern is that there needs to be
consideration, investigation, and a documented response as to why an investor would give
something away unless value was received from that, and whose expense was that value created
by? Mr. Mozina spoke about the allegation on inaccurate soil report indicating soil conditions.
He stated it is simply inappropriate for the City to make this recommendation or suggested
54
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
28
action. He stated the actions and activities of the City Staff are what has given rise to this very
appeal. They are accepting a recommendation to dismiss this from the very group for which the
Appellant believes the birthing of the Findings of Fact created errors. Of course, the City Staff
can defend itself, and Mr. Mozina shared they live in a beautiful City and Ms. Aanenson is
responsible for that in a large degree over thirty years. That does not mean Mr. Mozina cannot
credibly challenge her. It would be wholly inappropriate for this Board to vote on this tonight
much less vote on the recommendation from the staff in question as it would be in direct conflict
of the purpose and intent of Section 20-5 and the appeal process. It would put in jeopardy any
semblance of impartiality of this Board of Appeals which is designed as a check and balance and
to act independently in listening to and evaluating the facts of the allegation of this hearing. The
Appellant respectfully requests that in all fairness to all stakeholders and in keeping with the
intent of Section 20-29 that this Board take a prudent amount of time as allotted to investigate,
compose, and render a truly independent response to this appeal. They have 15 days, and the
response is in turn appealable to the City Council as mentioned by the Chair at the beginning.
The Appellant tonight can appeal to the City Council even before they look at what was adopted
on July 19, 2022. The appeal process objectively says that all of this discussion is relevant
tonight and the Board can make a decision not to go forward in sending to the City Council
something where there was a vote with a potential conflict of interest and where there was a
right-of-way granted without true transparency of any conversation whatsoever. Mr. Mozina
stated the City Staff nor the Board of Appeals has actually heard the full appeal yet and asked
how can they adopt a recommendation based on the narrative of appeal when they have never
heard the appeal? The responsibility of the Board is to hear the whole appeal dispassionately but
with extreme passion as a trier of fact and a check and balance. Previously they may have
mistaken his passion as feelings or emotions. As Mr. Giacchetti stated, this is not about being
resistant to change, this is about understanding how change should happen properly in a country
that is governed by the rule of law and by Ordinances which are all there for a purpose. The
passion comes from the Appellant feeling like they were being ignored. In looking at the
responses from Ms. Aanenson answering all pertinent questions; that was not the question. The
Appellant sent a document with 130 questions and nobody answered them. Mr. Mozina asked
when is the Applicant responsible for holding a public meeting? In the zoning section there are
two parts and Ms. Aanenson showed part b. Under the zoning Code the Applicant is required
under the Zoning Code and Chapter 18 to hold a meeting with the public prior to the public
hearing. He noted they violated that and actually committed a misdemeanor under Section 18 by
not holding a public meeting. What did they do afterwards? On July 26, 2022 they called a
meeting. Mr. Mozina showed a chart on screen noting he feels this one is important as they keep
thinking this check and balance can be something further down the line. He gave an analogy in
keeping with building, noting if one puts a foundation down building Code requires an
inspection of the foundation before they start framing. He asked should they condition the
foundation levelness until the final inspection? Mr. Mozina asked can they condition an accurate
soil sample and put it into the final plat section of the process when it is required in the
preliminary plat? That is like doing the foundation inspection while the framers are framing. The
way the Statues are written, they are risk-averse, they must do things now otherwise they cannot
move forward. For engineering people there are requirements to hit a milestone and if one does
not hit those they must go back to the beginning. Mr. Mozina also wants to highlight the joint
stakeholder analysis noting one person missing is the people that are the checks and balances to
the process. The way City Staff, Planning Commission, Board of Appeals, Applicant, and other
55
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
29
citizens all have to get involved as stakeholders. He noted they are here appealing tonight
because they feel this should not be sent to the City Council because of all the errors they are
pointing out right now. He asked to send it back and not send it forward. Mr. Mozina stated once
it goes to the City Council everything takes on a different dimension of cost for him as a
taxpayer. Appealing to a district court gets expensive quickly and all of a sudden one is out
$10,000 just asking an Attorney to read 3,000 pages of information. Mr. Mozina stated this is the
time for “us as taxpayers,” for their appeal to be heard. Every step the Board sends it forward
costs more money and more time. He is 62 and does not have 30 more Labor Day weekends left.
Chairman Chair von Oven closed the public hearing.
Chair von Oven thanked them for their passion tonight noting they all may have disagreed on
different things and he appreciates people staying patient with the process and staying with it.
He asked if any fellow Commissioners have comments to offer up.
Commissioner Schwartz thanked the Appellants for their presentation and wants to be sure they
do not mistake his position on why they are here tonight as a dismissal of the concerns and
allegations. In his mind they are two very distinctly separate issues and he is not dismissive of
those concerns and has no intention of minimizing them.
Commissioner Schwartz made one correction to a statement that was made noting the
Commission did not approve the 1441 Lake Lucy Road proposal as indicated. The other concern
regarding a potential conflict of interest, he will not judge that one way or the other, but the vote
was unanimous and even if Commissioner Johnson had recused himself it would not have
changed the outcome. In his mind, the question is whether any of these allegations relate to or
impact the Commission’s recommendation to the City Council to subdivide a single lot into two
lots? In Commissioner Schwartz’s view, all these allegations tonight have no bearing on what is
before the City Council and until they act on the recommendation, this appeal is inappropriate
and ahead of its time. Again, he said that does not mean the concerns aren’t valid and should not
be presented. The Commissioners are bound by order and process just as staff and City Council
are but until the City Council makes a decision, the recommendation to subdivide one lot into
two, the information is interesting, but he does not what bearing it has.
Commissioner Alto asked to add in terms of the conflict of interest, they are all volunteers but
also took an Oath of Office and swore to uphold the Constitution of the State of Minnesota and
the United States. They regularly recuse themselves from cases where they know there is a
conflict of interest and that is a practice the Commissioners regularly honor.
Chair von Oven noted there is passion and then there is anger. He recognizes this group is
passionate and stated Chanhassen has a pretty fantastic City Staff and fellow Commissioners. He
stated that was uncalled for and he recognizes that people are angry. There is one debatable
allegation presented tonight that is not part of what we are here to decide tonight. Chair von
Oven appreciates the appeal to include it in there, however the document, when he signs it at the
end of the meetings needs to speak to what he believes about what is on the sheet. This is why he
was so very adamant about the Appellant pointing out if there is some new finding in the large
packet sent earlier in the evening that is part of what they are here to decide tonight. Then he
56
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
30
could stand beside it because he has to put his signature next to it. Chair von Oven has poured
through the allegations to see if some of the debatable things brought up tonight are truly in here
and he stated they are just not. If they were, the Appellant would have his appeal and he would
look at it and say yes, that has something that is either against a finding but he cannot go through
the allegations presented to Chair von Oven in the context of this meeting and say he disagrees
with the findings of City Staff. Will some of what comes through this packet bubble up through
City Council and will there be another appeal very focused on one thing that can then be debated
by this body? Chair von Oven thinks very possibly, maybe; however, it is not in here right now
for him. He loves the analogy of the foundation, but the foundation does not even get poured
until the plan is approved which is one of Chair von Oven’s checks and balances. Until all the
things that the Appellant is worried about are proven that the plan has solved the puzzle, the
foundation does not get poured. The City does not waste all this money, nor does the developer.
The only thing they might waste (although he does not think this is a waste) would be time with
the City Council discussing what was shared with them as the recommendation and what else is
provided to them in the context of this.
Commissioner Noyes stated the first thing he is going to do is stand up for Commissioner
Johnson noting he does not have a conflict of interest, he has relevant experience. It is nothing
less, nothing more. Commissioner Noyes appreciates all the information put together by the
Appellant and appreciates the fact that they took the opportunity to use a public forum to get
their information out. He would do the same thing if he had the passion for a project. However,
as his fellow Commissioners have stated, much of it is not relevant for where they are in this
stage. Commissioner Noyes said the Appellants are kind of ignoring or minimizing what this
process is about. They keep going back to new things and their experts and their opinions trying
to sway the Commissioners to make a change. He stated if they were talking about some of this
stuff down the road, Commissioner Noyes would be asking a lot of really pertinent questions, but
it is not relevant to where they are. Commissioner Noyes noted it was a lot of great discussion
but cannot stop this process because the Appellant brought all their opinions out and he is
supposed to take those as facts. He said they are trying to tell him that what the City has put
together is misrepresentation of facts and Commissioner Noyes does not know that the
Appellant’s isn’t. That is not the agenda for today and he is okay talking about it but thinks they
need to focus on how to move forward. Commissioner Noyes noted the Appellants will get a lot
of opportunity to talk about this repeatedly, if things don’t line up, if there are water issues, if
there is a holding pond issue; that will not be signed off arbitrarily. There will be more
discussion about it and Commissioner Noyes has confidence in this process and has confidence
the Appellants’ concerns will be heard. However for this appeal tonight, most of what was talked
about is outside the scope of what was decided on July 19, 2022.
Commissioner Johnson agrees with Chair von Oven and Commissioner Noyes’ points.
Regarding the conflict of interest, Commissioner Johnson strongly disagrees noting it was a
company he worked for 10 years ago, he has no affiliation, and this is totally false.
Commissioner Alto moved, Commissioner Schwartz seconded that the Planning
Commission acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments deny the appeal and adopts
the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
57
Planning Commission Minutes – September 6, 2022
31
GENERAL BUSINESS: None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED AUGUST 16, 2022
Commissioner Noyes noted the summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting
dated August 16, 2022 as presented.
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: None.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE:
Ms. Aanenson reminded everyone on September 13 at 5:30 p.m. they will be holding a
discussion with a focus on City Hall which will meet in the Senior Center. She asked everyone to
bring their thinking caps.
ADJOURNMENT:
Commissioner Alto moved to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was
adjourned at 10:41 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
58
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Receive Senior Commission Minutes dated August 19, 2022
File No.Item No: D.3
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Jenny Potter, Sr. Admin Support Specialist
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council receives the Senior Commission minutes dated August 19, 2022."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
Senior Commission Minutes dated August 19, 2022
59
1
CHANHASSEN SENIOR COMMISSION MINUTES
August 19, 2022
MEMBERS PRESENT:Jerry Cerchia, Ruth Lunde, Linda Haight, Jim Camarata, Kara Cassidy.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Susan Kibler, Bhakti Modi.
STAFF PRESENT: Sharmeen Al-Jaff.
GUESTS PRESENT: Dawn Plumer, Linnéa Fonnest.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Commissioner Camarata moved to approve the Agenda. Commissioner Cassidy seconded the
motion. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
SENIOR COMMISSION MINUTES DATED JUNE 17, 2022:
Commissioner Cassidy pointed out corrections under Memorial Day Fundraising and 4th of July
Bingo Event. Linnéa Fonnest requested the addition of the library program under the
Generations category. Commissioner Camarata moved to approve the minutes with the noted
corrections. Commissioner Lunde seconded the motion. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
SENIOR EXPO
The commission discussed the length of time of the event which will take place on
September 29, 2022 10:30 am – 2:30 pm. The question was asked if the event should have
been longer. Staff assured the commissioners that all previous expos that the city offered
were similar in length of time to this event. If additional time was needed, and if the City
offers the expo again, they will lengthen the time.
The commission made comments and requested edits to the brochure.
Commissioner Camarata will have a table at the expo addressing housing.
Chairman Cerchia reminded the commissioners to make themselves available to assist on
the day of the Expo.
SENIOR CENTER 30TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION
The commission asked if Mayor Ryan will be at the event. All commissioners were
encouraged to attend the event.
UPDATE ON SHIP GRANT INFORMATION
This is a statewide program. Carver County is investigating the option of partnering with
Wright County. One of the programs will involve a home assessment for individuals
reporting repeated falls.
4TH OF JULY BINGO EVENT:
The Senior Commission raised a total of $680.00 for Project Delta. The funds were turned
over to Beyond the Yellow Ribbon who in turn sent it to Project Delta.
60
Chanhassen Senior Commission Minutes – August 19, 2022
2
ACT ON ALZHIEMER’S UPDATE:
In November, the Senior Commission will have a table at the Library. Educational information will
be available. Commissioner Lunde asked if someone should be available at the table. There will be
multiple events at the Senior Center addressing Dementia and Alzheimer’s.
RENAMING THE MEMORY CAFÉ TO “TIPTON MEMORY CAFÉ”
The Senior Commission discussed the name and voted to change the name to “Dorina’s Memory
Café”. Commissioner Camarata moved to adopt the name “Dorina’s Memory Café”.
Commissioner Cassidy seconded the motion. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Library Adult Programs
Linnéa Fonnest informed the commission about the three intergenerational senior and teen
programs held in partnership with the Chanhassen Senior Center this summer July’s virtual
program of an Adulting 101 program for teens had 38 live views and an additional 178 views the
first week the recording was posted on the library’s social media channels. All three programs
were successful for those who participated, though attendance was low in June and August. The
August program, which paired teens and seniors for informal conversations, made first page of
the Villager.
September 12-17 is Grandparents Week and the library will offer a fund activities art activity for
grandparents and grandchildren.
The Library is offering multiple arts and crafts programs this fall, including intergenerational
programs. Authors Beth Dooley (cookbook) and author Danny Spewak (veterans) will be at the
Chanhassen Library. Most Thursdays through mid-November, Fall Walking & Booktalking
connects a librarian with readers to discuss a book while going for a leisurely hour walk. The fall
library brochure contains details on these and many more free programs of interest to seniors.
Also go to carverlib.org for details on events.
ADJOURNMENT:
Chairman Cerchia called for meeting adjournment. Commissioner Camarata moved to adjourn;
Commissioner Haight seconded the motion. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Prepared and submitted by Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner
61
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Approve Claims Paid dated September 26, 2022
File No.Item No: D.4
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Danielle Washburn, Assistant Finance Director
Reviewed By Kelly Grinnell
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council Approves Claims Paid dated September 26, 2022."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Financial Sustainability
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
The following claims are submitted for review and approval on September 26, 2022:
Check Numbers Amounts
178244 - 178336 $585,111.31
ACH Payments $271,922.09
Total All Claims $857,033.40
62
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
Check Summary
Check Summary ACH
Check Detail
Check Detail ACH
63
Accounts Payable
User:
Printed:
dwashburn
9/19/2022 10:15 AM
Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number
Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount
ASPMIL ASPEN MILLS 09/08/2022 0.00 591.80178244
AtlPoo Atlantis Pools 09/08/2022 0.00 500.00178245
BanTitle Bankers Title 09/08/2022 0.00 500.00178246
BIALFRED FRED BIALCZYK 09/08/2022 0.00 100.00178247
BraTim Tim & Vonda Brands 09/08/2022 0.00 250.00178248
CARAUT CAR-CO AUTO PARTS INC 09/08/2022 0.00 486.25178249
CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/08/2022 0.00 842.71178250
EmbMinn CENTURYLINK 09/08/2022 0.00 1,133.38178251
CHASKA CITY OF CHASKA 09/08/2022 0.00 1,066.78178252
CleSol Cleaning Solutions Services 09/08/2022 0.00 7,620.00178253
COMASP Commercial Asphalt Co 09/08/2022 0.00 957.12178254
CROCOL CROWN COLLEGE 09/08/2022 0.00 550.00178255
ElsbRuth Ruth Elsberry 09/08/2022 0.00 13.00178256
ElvJoh John & Haley Elvecrog 09/08/2022 0.00 500.00178257
EngKev Kevin & Jennifer Engebretson 09/08/2022 0.00 500.00178258
Enterpr Enterprise FM Trust 09/08/2022 0.00 4,377.75178259
ferwat Ferguson Waterworks #2518 09/08/2022 0.00 4,250.00178260
FisLoi Lois Fiskness 09/08/2022 0.00 26.00178261
FreJak Jake Freeland 09/08/2022 0.00 350.00178262
GolLak Golf Lakes Condos 09/08/2022 0.00 10,439.31178263
GraReb Rebecca Granowski 09/08/2022 0.00 9.00178264
GREMEA GREEN MEADOWS INC 09/08/2022 0.00 591.84178265
GyoKath Kathleen Gyorfi 09/08/2022 0.00 78.00178266
HartCom Hartman Companies 09/08/2022 0.00 16,450.00178267
HeaPar HealthPartners, Inc.09/08/2022 0.00 82,785.15178268
Loc49 IUOE Local #49 09/08/2022 0.00 700.00178269
LykAri Arianna Lyksett 09/08/2022 0.00 500.00178270
MagMeg Meghan Maguire 09/08/2022 0.00 63.00178271
MetHol Metronet Holdings, LLC 09/08/2022 0.00 56.05178272
MAMA Metropolitan Area Management Association 09/08/2022 0.00 25.00178273
MNTRAN MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 09/08/2022 0.00 545.54178274
NCPERS MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 09/08/2022 0.00 112.00178275
NeiOut Neil's Outdoor Services, Inc.09/08/2022 0.00 500.00178276
PinPes Pinnacle Pest Control 09/08/2022 0.00 1,125.00178277
PioMan Pioneer Manufacturing Co., Inc.09/08/2022 0.00 825.40178278
PopCha Chad Poppitz 09/08/2022 0.00 255.00178279
POWOIB POWERPLAN OIB 09/08/2022 0.00 97.42178280
PULPLU PULLTABS PLUS INC 09/08/2022 0.00 181.25178281
RMBENV RMB Environmental Laboratories Inc 09/08/2022 0.00 217.26178282
SchMeli Mark & Melissa Schulte 09/08/2022 0.00 500.00178283
SITLAN SiteOne Landscape Supply 09/08/2022 0.00 16.96178284
SOUSUB SOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA 09/08/2022 0.00 356.49178285
STPSTA SPS Works 09/08/2022 0.00 50.55178286
decdoo The Deck & Door Co Inc 09/08/2022 0.00 500.00178287
TheHart The Hartford 09/08/2022 0.00 1,580.04178288
TimSav TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc 09/08/2022 0.00 952.50178289
TruNoS TruNorth Solar LLC 09/08/2022 0.00 250.00178290
Page 1AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (9/19/2022 10:15 AM)
64
Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount
TWOTEA TWO TEACHER CONSTRUCTION 09/08/2022 0.00 250.00178291
VERIZO VERIZON WIRELESS 09/08/2022 0.00 250.20178292
ALLSTR ALLSTREAM 09/15/2022 0.00 490.84178293
APWA AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC 09/15/2022 0.00 298.00178294
AsoDavi David Asoa 09/15/2022 0.00 1,207.82178295
ASPEQU Aspen Equipment 09/15/2022 0.00 6,276.56178296
BCATRA BCA 09/15/2022 0.00 15.00178297
BITROA BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC 09/15/2022 0.00 6,645.00178298
CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/15/2022 0.00 479.11178299
CenLin CenturyLink 09/15/2022 0.00 64.00178300
CHAVIL CHANHASSEN VILLAGER 09/15/2022 0.00 116.00178301
COMASP Commercial Asphalt Co 09/15/2022 0.00 1,294.21178302
CORMAI CORE & MAIN LP 09/15/2022 0.00 163.59178303
CUBFOO CUB FOODS 09/15/2022 0.00 87.70178304
DEMCON DEM-CON LANDFILL 09/15/2022 0.00 669.85178305
EllPat Patricia Ellsworth 09/15/2022 0.00 100.00178306
ferwat Ferguson Waterworks #2518 09/15/2022 0.00 22,514.18178307
Gascom Gassen Company, AAMC 09/15/2022 0.00 90.00178308
gonhom GONYEA HOMES 09/15/2022 0.00 2,500.00178309
GreDuc Grey Duck Outdoor 09/15/2022 0.00 3,093.00178310
IndSig Indigo Signs 09/15/2022 0.00 1,527.71178311
AheFire J. F. Ahern Co 09/15/2022 0.00 53.69178312
KERRMATT Matt Kerr 09/15/2022 0.00 49.39178313
LamSon Lametti & Sons Inc 09/15/2022 0.00 20,741.57178314
LANEQ1 Lano Equipment 09/15/2022 0.00 378.17178315
LEAMIN LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 09/15/2022 0.00 21,376.00178316
LEAINS LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 09/15/2022 0.00 100,444.00178317
Lennar Lennar 09/15/2022 0.00 7,500.00178318
LlaMa Llama Mama MN 09/15/2022 0.00 300.00178319
MarPam Pamela Martin 09/15/2022 0.00 150.00178320
METCO2 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 09/15/2022 0.00 197,038.58178321
MinuPre Minuteman Press 09/15/2022 0.00 23.00178322
NorAud Northern Audio Production, Inc.09/15/2022 0.00 3,037.90178323
NOVSOL NOVEL SOLAR THREE, LLC 09/15/2022 0.00 10,327.27178324
parapart Paragon Party Ponies LLC 09/15/2022 0.00 425.00178325
ParAll Parts Alliance South 09/15/2022 0.00 195.76178326
PILDRY PILGRIM DRY CLEANERS 09/15/2022 0.00 532.82178327
PitBow Pitney Bowes Inc.09/15/2022 0.00 105.00178328
ResEnv Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 09/15/2022 0.00 331.00178329
RobHal Robert Half International, Inc.09/15/2022 0.00 184.68178330
sarljodi Jodi Sarles 09/15/2022 0.00 300.00178331
schcom Schwickert Company 09/15/2022 0.00 454.12178332
TRACON TRAFFIC CONTROL CORPORATION 09/15/2022 0.00 25,825.00178333
TruGre TruGreen Processing Center 09/15/2022 0.00 1,130.00178334
VIKELE VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 09/15/2022 0.00 38.02178335
WastMana Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/15/2022 0.00 1,660.02178336
Report Total (93 checks): 585,111.31 0.00
Page 2AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (9/19/2022 10:15 AM)
65
Accounts Payable
Checks by Date - Summary by Check
User: dwashburn
Printed: 9/19/2022 10:16 AM
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount
ACH ALLBLA ALLIED BLACKTOP 09/08/2022
0.00 143,220.42
ACH carcou Carver County 09/08/2022
0.00 3,010.00
ACH PedrChri Christine Lea Pedretti 09/08/2022
0.00 742.30
ACH engwat Engel Water Testing Inc 09/08/2022
0.00 625.00
ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 09/08/2022
0.00 1,598.28
ACH GOPSTA GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 09/08/2022
0.00 1,651.05
ACH INDLAN Indoor Landscapes Inc 09/08/2022
0.00 187.00
ACH AlHiJuli Juli Al-Hilwani 09/08/2022
0.00 172.50
ACH MacEme Macqueen Emergency Group 09/08/2022
0.00 3,710.00
ACH MatTri Matheson Tri-Gas, Inc. 09/08/2022
0.00 32.00
ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/08/2022
0.00 6,249.69
ACH OREAUT O'Reilly Automotive Inc 09/08/2022
0.00 711.04
ACH MINCON SUMMIT COMPANIES 09/08/2022
0.00 1,269.00
ACH SunLif Sun Life Financial 09/08/2022
0.00 1,974.98
ACH WSB WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 09/08/2022
0.00 408.00
ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 09/08/2022
0.00 136.99
ACH ZARBRU ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC 09/08/2022
0.00 379.00
ACH BOLMEN BOLTON & MENK INC 09/15/2022
0.00 1,355.00
ACH BROAWA BROADWAY AWARDS 09/15/2022
0.00 95.74
ACH carcou Carver County 09/15/2022
0.00 1,025.00
ACH CCPNIM CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/15/2022
0.00 8,032.93
ACH ESSBRO ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC 09/15/2022
0.00 2,395.44
ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 09/15/2022
0.00 1,461.65
ACH HANTHO HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 09/15/2022
0.00 3,454.75
ACH HOIKOE HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 09/15/2022
0.00 1,908.75
ACH ImaTre ImageTrend, Inc 09/15/2022
0.00 5,150.00
ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 09/15/2022
0.00 100.94
ACH MausKerr Kerry Maus 09/15/2022
0.00 367.50
ACH MacEme Macqueen Emergency Group 09/15/2022
0.00 1,720.50
ACH Marco Marco Inc 09/15/2022
0.00 1,010.00
ACH MERACE MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/15/2022
0.00 2,783.73
ACH METCO Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 09/15/2022
0.00 22,141.35
ACH MinPum Minnesota Pump Works 09/15/2022
0.00 1,820.00
ACH MNLABO MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 09/15/2022
0.00 6,046.01
ACH MNLABO MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 09/15/2022
0.00 27.00
ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/15/2022
0.00 230.91
ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 09/15/2022
0.00 324.84
ACH PARCON PARROTT CONTRACTING INC 09/15/2022
0.00 4,193.50
ACH PotMN Potentia MN Solar 09/15/2022
0.00 10,682.94
ACH PRARES PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 09/15/2022
0.00 1,110.00
ACH PREMRM PRECISE MRM LLC 09/15/2022
0.00 273.00
ACH PreWat Premium Waters, Inc 09/15/2022
0.00 76.39
ACH TWISEE TWIN CITY SEED CO. 09/15/2022
0.00 670.00
ACH WSB WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 09/15/2022
0.00 23,967.48
ACH WWGRA WW GRAINGER INC 09/15/2022
0.00 22.74
ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 09/15/2022
0.00 3,195.66
Page 1 of 2 66
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount
ACH ZIEGLE ZIEGLER INC 09/15/2022
0.00 201.09
Report Total: 0.00 271,922.09
Page 2 of 2 67
AP
Check Detail-Checks
User: dwashburn
Printed: 9/19/2022 10:22:16 AM
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
ALLSTREAM 101-1160-4311 490.84 9/15/2022 Mitel Phone System Maintenance Oct - Nov
490.84 9/15/2022
ALLSTREAM 490.84
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC 101-1320-4370 149.00 9/15/2022 Liquids Workshop - Nov, 2022 - Josh Girard
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC 101-1320-4370 149.00 9/15/2022 Liquids Workshop - Nov, 2022 - Ryan Lannon
298.00 9/15/2022
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC 298.00
Asoa David 700-1384-4556 603.91 9/15/2022 Damaged Items
Asoa David 701-1384-4556 603.91 9/15/2022 Damaged Items
1,207.82 9/15/2022
Asoa David 1,207.82
Aspen Equipment 400-0000-4705 6,330.00 9/15/2022 Western Series Steel - Snow Plow
Aspen Equipment 101-1550-4120 -53.44 9/15/2022 Motor Relay Kit, Blade Guide, Harness Return
6,276.56 9/15/2022
Aspen Equipment 6,276.56
ASPEN MILLS 101-1220-4240 591.80 9/8/2022 Uniform - Mat Vonbank
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 1 of 18
68
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
591.80 9/8/2022
ASPEN MILLS 591.80
Atlantis Pools 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/8/2022 Erosion Control - Permit 2021-03944 - 2071 Melody Hill Road
500.00 9/8/2022
Atlantis Pools 500.00
Bankers Title 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/8/2022 Erosion Control - Permit 2020-03921 - 2071 Melody Hill Rd
500.00 9/8/2022
Bankers Title 500.00
BCA 101-1120-4352 15.00 9/15/2022 Background Investigation
15.00 9/15/2022
BCA 15.00
BIALCZYK FRED 700-7204-4901 100.00 9/8/2022 Waterwise Rebate
100.00 9/8/2022
BIALCZYK FRED 100.00
BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC 420-0000-4150 6,645.00 9/15/2022 1724 Lake Drive W Sidewalk
6,645.00 9/15/2022
BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC 6,645.00
Brands Tim & Vonda 101-0000-2073 250.00 9/8/2022 Erosion Control - Permit 2020-03880 - 360 Chesterfield Lane
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 2 of 18
69
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
250.00 9/8/2022
Brands Tim & Vonda 250.00
CAR-CO AUTO PARTS INC 101-1220-4120 486.25 9/8/2022 Epoxy Primer, Catalsy, Reducer, Omni Code
486.25 9/8/2022
CAR-CO AUTO PARTS INC 486.25
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 700-7019-4321 32.52 9/8/2022 Monthly Service - 201 W 79th St
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1190-4321 343.51 9/8/2022 Monthly Service - 7711 Kerber Blvd
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 700-7043-4321 82.90 9/8/2022 Monthly Service - 2100 Lake Harrison Rd
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1170-4321 304.81 9/8/2022 Monthly Service - 7700 Market Blvd
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1550-4321 32.52 9/8/2022 Monthly Service - 1456 W 78th St
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 700-0000-4321 21.80 9/8/2022 Monthly Service - 2323 Lake Lucy Rd
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 701-0000-4321 24.65 9/8/2022 Monthly Service - 3900 Highway 7
842.71 9/8/2022
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 701-0000-4321 45.73 9/15/2022 August - September Utilities
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1600-4321 21.80 9/15/2022 6930 Minnewashta Pkwy, Excelsior
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1312-4321 365.85 9/15/2022 August - September Utilities
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 700-0000-4321 45.73 9/15/2022 August - September Utilities
479.11 9/15/2022
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 1,321.82
CENTURYLINK 101-1550-4310 30.04 9/8/2022 Monthly Service
CENTURYLINK 101-1220-4310 33.04 9/8/2022 Monthly Service
CENTURYLINK 101-1160-4325 125.00 9/8/2022 Monthly Service
CENTURYLINK 701-0000-4310 6.01 9/8/2022 Monthly Service
CENTURYLINK 101-1312-4310 48.06 9/8/2022 Monthly Service
CENTURYLINK 101-1350-4310 30.04 9/8/2022 Monthly Service
CENTURYLINK 101-1170-4310 855.18 9/8/2022 Monthly Service
CENTURYLINK 700-0000-4310 6.01 9/8/2022 Monthly Service
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 3 of 18
70
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
1,133.38 9/8/2022
CenturyLink 701-0000-4310 32.00 9/15/2022 September Service
CenturyLink 700-0000-4310 32.00 9/15/2022 September Service
64.00 9/15/2022
CenturyLink 1,197.38
CHANHASSEN VILLAGER 101-1530-4360 58.00 9/15/2022 1 year subscription - Chan Rec Center
CHANHASSEN VILLAGER 101-1120-4360 58.00 9/15/2022 1 year subscription - City of Chanhassen
116.00 9/15/2022
CHANHASSEN VILLAGER 116.00
CITY OF CHASKA 101-1560-4300 1,066.78 9/8/2022 Shakopee Hocokata Trip - Senior Group Trip
1,066.78 9/8/2022
CITY OF CHASKA 1,066.78
Cleaning Solutions Services 101-1312-4511 480.00 9/8/2022 Chan Public Works - Cleaning
Cleaning Solutions Services 701-0000-4511 60.00 9/8/2022 Chan Public Works - Cleaning
Cleaning Solutions Services 101-1220-4511 240.00 9/8/2022 Chan Fire Station #1 - Cleaning
Cleaning Solutions Services 101-1190-4511 3,780.00 9/8/2022 Chan Library - Cleaning
Cleaning Solutions Services 101-1170-4511 3,000.00 9/8/2022 City Hall - Cleaning
Cleaning Solutions Services 700-0000-4511 60.00 9/8/2022 Chan Public Works - Cleaning
7,620.00 9/8/2022
Cleaning Solutions Services 7,620.00
Commercial Asphalt Co 420-0000-4150 957.12 9/8/2022 MV4 Wear Rec 5.80%/4/21% BM, 12.5MM Wear Rec 5.50%/4.09%, BM
957.12 9/8/2022
Commercial Asphalt Co 700-0000-4550 1,294.21 9/15/2022 MV3 NW Rec, MV4 Wear Rec, 12.5MM Wear Rec
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 4 of 18
71
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
1,294.21 9/15/2022
Commercial Asphalt Co 2,251.33
CORE & MAIN LP 700-0000-4550 163.59 9/15/2022 W3720-4UH, W3724-4UH, W3746-4 10", W3746-4 12"
163.59 9/15/2022
CORE & MAIN LP 163.59
CROWN COLLEGE 101-1220-4370 550.00 9/8/2022 08/04/22 - 08/08/22 - EMT/EMR Refreshers
550.00 9/8/2022
CROWN COLLEGE 550.00
CUB FOODS 101-1220-4142 20.95 9/15/2022 Spring Water
CUB FOODS 101-1220-4142 30.28 9/15/2022 Spring Water, Cascade
CUB FOODS 101-1220-4290 25.74 9/15/2022 Chinet Plates
CUB FOODS 101-1220-4290 10.73 9/15/2022 Cutlery Tray
87.70 9/15/2022
CUB FOODS 87.70
DEM-CON LANDFILL 720-7207-4150 334.92 9/15/2022 Street Sweepings
DEM-CON LANDFILL 101-1320-4150 334.93 9/15/2022 Street Sweepings
669.85 9/15/2022
DEM-CON LANDFILL 669.85
Ellsworth Patricia 700-7204-4901 100.00 9/15/2022 Waterwise Rebate - Dishwasher
100.00 9/15/2022
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 5 of 18
72
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Ellsworth Patricia 100.00
Elsberry Ruth 101-1560-3637 13.00 9/8/2022 Program Refund - The County Fair - A MN Tradition
13.00 9/8/2022
Elsberry Ruth 13.00
Elvecrog John & Haley 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/8/2022 Erosion Control - Permit 2021-01828 - 7411 Fawn Hill Road
500.00 9/8/2022
Elvecrog John & Haley 500.00
Engebretson Kevin & Jennifer 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/8/2022 Erosion Control - Permit 2022-02023 - 691 Bighorn Drive
500.00 9/8/2022
Engebretson Kevin & Jennifer 500.00
Enterprise FM Trust 770-1376-4412 707.09 9/8/2022 Lease - 22 Chev Silv 214L
Enterprise FM Trust 770-1376-4412 601.25 9/8/2022 Lease - 22 GMC Sier 412
Enterprise FM Trust 770-1376-4412 857.59 9/8/2022 Lease - 22 GMC Yuko 201L
Enterprise FM Trust 770-1376-4412 730.56 9/8/2022 Lease - 22 Chev Sil 305L
Enterprise FM Trust 770-1376-4412 711.06 9/8/2022 Lease - 22 Chev Silv 140L
Enterprise FM Trust 770-1376-4412 770.20 9/8/2022 Lease - 22 Chev Sil 411
4,377.75 9/8/2022
Enterprise FM Trust 4,377.75
Ferguson Waterworks #2518 700-0000-4550 4,250.00 9/8/2022 HYD Buddy XL
4,250.00 9/8/2022
Ferguson Waterworks #2518 701-1384-4556 11,257.09 9/15/2022 Water Meter Replacement Project
Ferguson Waterworks #2518 700-1384-4556 11,257.09 9/15/2022 Water Meter Replacement Project
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 6 of 18
73
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
22,514.18 9/15/2022
Ferguson Waterworks #2518 26,764.18
Fiskness Lois 101-1560-3637 26.00 9/8/2022 Refund - The County Fair - A MN Tradition
26.00 9/8/2022
Fiskness Lois 26.00
Freeland Jake 101-1560-4343 350.00 9/8/2022 Class: Make Your Phone Your Friend
350.00 9/8/2022
Freeland Jake 350.00
Gassen Company, AAMC 101-0000-2021 6.18 9/15/2022 Credit for Oak Ponds HOA - RRC Resident - Conference Room
Gassen Company, AAMC 101-1530-3755 83.82 9/15/2022 Credit for Oak Ponds HOA - RRC Resident - Conference Room
90.00 9/15/2022
Gassen Company, AAMC 90.00
Golf Lakes Condos 101-0000-2076 10,439.31 9/8/2022 Security Escrow - Arbor Glen - Golf Lake Condos
10,439.31 9/8/2022
Golf Lakes Condos 10,439.31
GONYEA HOMES 101-0000-2072 2,500.00 9/15/2022 As-Built - 7015 Lucy Ridge Lane - Permit 2022-02445
2,500.00 9/15/2022
GONYEA HOMES 2,500.00
Granowski Rebecca 101-1560-3637 9.00 9/8/2022 Refund - Bingo in the Park
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 7 of 18
74
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
9.00 9/8/2022
Granowski Rebecca 9.00
GREEN MEADOWS INC 101-1260-1193 318.68 9/8/2022 Lawn Mowing - 470 W 78th St
GREEN MEADOWS INC 101-1260-1193 273.16 9/8/2022 Lawn Mowing - 380 Deerfoot Trl
591.84 9/8/2022
GREEN MEADOWS INC 591.84
Grey Duck Outdoor 101-1540-3635 3,093.00 9/15/2022 Lake Ann Paddleboard Rental Revenue
3,093.00 9/15/2022
Grey Duck Outdoor 3,093.00
Gyorfi Kathleen 101-1560-3637 78.00 9/8/2022 Refund - Remembering Bobby Vee - Paramount Theater
78.00 9/8/2022
Gyorfi Kathleen 78.00
Hartman Companies 720-7202-4300 16,450.00 9/8/2022 Ash Tree Replacements
16,450.00 9/8/2022
Hartman Companies 16,450.00
HealthPartners, Inc.720-0000-2012 1,724.49 9/8/2022 October - Family
HealthPartners, Inc.701-0000-2012 1,035.01 9/8/2022 October - Single
HealthPartners, Inc.700-0000-2012 3,448.98 9/8/2022 October - Family
HealthPartners, Inc.720-0000-2012 1,380.02 9/8/2022 October - Single
HealthPartners, Inc.701-0000-2012 3,448.98 9/8/2022 October - Family
HealthPartners, Inc.101-0000-2012 2,070.03 9/8/2022 October - Single- Cobra
HealthPartners, Inc.101-0000-2012 43,112.25 9/8/2022 October - Family
HealthPartners, Inc.210-0000-2012 690.01 9/8/2022 October - Single
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 8 of 18
75
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
HealthPartners, Inc.700-0000-2012 2,415.04 9/8/2022 October - Single
HealthPartners, Inc.101-0000-2012 23,460.34 9/8/2022 October - Single
82,785.15 9/8/2022
HealthPartners, Inc. 82,785.15
Indigo Signs 101-1550-4300 95.00 9/15/2022 Bench Plaque - In Loving Memory of Our Friend Donn Andrus
Indigo Signs 101-1180-4300 887.71 9/15/2022 Vinyl Graphics for Client Provided election signs
Indigo Signs 101-1170-4110 545.00 9/15/2022 Interior Standard Name Plates for Existing Frames
1,527.71 9/15/2022
Indigo Signs 1,527.71
IUOE Local #49 701-0000-2004 49.17 9/8/2022 PR Batch 00408.09.2022 Local 49 dues
IUOE Local #49 700-0000-2004 160.83 9/8/2022 PR Batch 00408.09.2022 Local 49 dues
IUOE Local #49 101-0000-2004 490.00 9/8/2022 PR Batch 00408.09.2022 Local 49 dues
700.00 9/8/2022
IUOE Local #49 700.00
J. F. Ahern Co 700-7019-4530 53.69 9/15/2022 New Copper Tube and Fittings for Air Compressor
53.69 9/15/2022
J. F. Ahern Co 53.69
Kerr Matt 101-1160-4380 49.39 9/15/2022 Travel Reimbursement Expenses
49.39 9/15/2022
Kerr Matt 49.39
Lametti & Sons Inc 601-6043-4751 20,741.57 9/15/2022 Minnewashta Parkway Rehab Hwy 5 to Hwy 7
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 9 of 18
76
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
20,741.57 9/15/2022
Lametti & Sons Inc 20,741.57
Lano Equipment 101-1320-4120 89.09 9/15/2022 Coupler Female, Tooth
Lano Equipment 101-1550-4120 289.08 9/15/2022 Glass Door
378.17 9/15/2022
Lano Equipment 378.17
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 101-1110-4360 30.00 9/15/2022 Membership Dues - Minnesota Mayors - Elise Ryan
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 101-1110-4360 21,346.00 9/15/2022 Membership Dues 2022 - 2023
21,376.00 9/15/2022
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 21,376.00
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 101-0000-2017 51,526.00 9/15/2022 Workers Compensation Coverage
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 101-1110-4483 48,918.00 9/15/2022 Property/Casualty Coverage Premium
100,444.00 9/15/2022
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 100,444.00
Lennar 101-0000-2072 2,500.00 9/15/2022 As-Built - Permit 2021-06308 - 1914 Fathers Song
Lennar 101-0000-2072 2,500.00 9/15/2022 As-Built - Permit 2021-05347 - 1913 Fathers Song
Lennar 101-0000-2072 2,500.00 9/15/2022 As-Built - Permit 2021-06100 - 1925 Fathers Song
7,500.00 9/15/2022
Lennar 7,500.00
Llama Mama MN 101-1537-4345 300.00 9/15/2022 Barnyard Boogie - Llamas
300.00 9/15/2022
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 10 of 18
77
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Llama Mama MN 300.00
Lyksett Arianna 101-1125-4381 500.00 9/8/2022 Airplane travel for conference
500.00 9/8/2022
Lyksett Arianna 500.00
Maguire Meghan 101-1807-3642 63.00 9/8/2022 Lil Star Soccer Refund - Ben Maguire
63.00 9/8/2022
Maguire Meghan 63.00
Martin Pamela 700-7204-4901 150.00 9/15/2022 Waterwise Rebate - Smart Irrigation Controller & Dishwasher
150.00 9/15/2022
Martin Pamela 150.00
Metronet Holdings, LLC 700-7043-4310 56.05 9/8/2022 September, 2022 Service
56.05 9/8/2022
Metronet Holdings, LLC 56.05
Metropolitan Area Management Association 101-1120-4370 25.00 9/8/2022 Luncheon Cost - Matt U
25.00 9/8/2022
Metropolitan Area Management Association 25.00
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 701-0000-4509 197,038.58 9/15/2022 Waste Water Services
197,038.58 9/15/2022
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 11 of 18
78
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 197,038.58
Minuteman Press 101-1170-4110 23.00 9/15/2022 Business Cards - Samantha DiMaggio
23.00 9/15/2022
Minuteman Press 23.00
MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 101-1550-4120 545.54 9/8/2022 FT Snelling Damage Claim
545.54 9/8/2022
MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 545.54
MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 700-0000-2037 8.00 9/8/2022 PR Batch 00408.09.2022 NCPERS-Life Insurance
MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 701-0000-2037 8.00 9/8/2022 PR Batch 00408.09.2022 NCPERS-Life Insurance
MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 101-0000-2037 96.00 9/8/2022 PR Batch 00408.09.2022 NCPERS-Life Insurance
112.00 9/8/2022
MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 112.00
Neil's Outdoor Services, Inc.101-0000-2073 500.00 9/8/2022 Erosion Control - Permit 2022-02101 - 9305 Eagle Ridge Rd
500.00 9/8/2022
Neil's Outdoor Services, Inc. 500.00
Northern Audio Production, Inc.101-1613-4300 2,993.00 9/15/2022 Audio Equipment, Concert Production, Lighting
Northern Audio Production, Inc.101-1613-4359 44.90 9/15/2022 Interest - Late Payment
3,037.90 9/15/2022
Northern Audio Production, Inc. 3,037.90
NOVEL SOLAR THREE, LLC 701-0000-4320 3,720.14 9/15/2022 July 2022 Production
NOVEL SOLAR THREE, LLC 700-0000-4320 6,440.26 9/15/2022 July 2022 Production
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 12 of 18
79
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
NOVEL SOLAR THREE, LLC 101-1350-4320 166.87 9/15/2022 July 2022 Production
10,327.27 9/15/2022
NOVEL SOLAR THREE, LLC 10,327.27
Paragon Party Ponies LLC 101-1537-4345 425.00 9/15/2022 Petting Zoo
425.00 9/15/2022
Paragon Party Ponies LLC 425.00
Parts Alliance South 101-1320-4140 -171.28 9/15/2022 Chamber T20.02.25 - Return
Parts Alliance South 101-1320-4140 195.76 9/15/2022 Chamber T-20.02.50
Parts Alliance South 101-1320-4140 171.28 9/15/2022 Chamber T20.2.25
195.76 9/15/2022
Parts Alliance South 195.76
PILGRIM DRY CLEANERS 101-1220-4300 532.82 9/15/2022 Wash/Dry/Fold - Chan Fire Dept
532.82 9/15/2022
PILGRIM DRY CLEANERS 532.82
Pinnacle Pest Control 101-1370-4300 250.00 9/8/2022 Pest Control - Public Works
Pinnacle Pest Control 700-7043-4300 125.00 9/8/2022 Pest Control - Water Treatment Plant West
Pinnacle Pest Control 101-1170-4300 200.00 9/8/2022 Pest Control - City Hall
Pinnacle Pest Control 101-1220-4300 200.00 9/8/2022 Pest Control - Fire Station
Pinnacle Pest Control 700-7019-4300 125.00 9/8/2022 Pest Control - Water Treatment Plant East
Pinnacle Pest Control 101-1190-4300 225.00 9/8/2022 Pest Control - Library
1,125.00 9/8/2022
Pinnacle Pest Control 1,125.00
Pioneer Manufacturing Co., Inc.101-1550-4150 825.40 9/8/2022 Athletic Striping Paint
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 13 of 18
80
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
825.40 9/8/2022
Pioneer Manufacturing Co., Inc. 825.40
Pitney Bowes Inc.101-1120-4410 105.00 9/15/2022 Postage Machine Lease - G900
105.00 9/15/2022
Pitney Bowes Inc. 105.00
Poppitz Chad 101-1767-4341 255.00 9/8/2022 Softball Umpire
255.00 9/8/2022
Poppitz Chad 255.00
POWERPLAN OIB 101-1320-4120 42.00 9/8/2022 Paint
POWERPLAN OIB 101-1550-4120 55.42 9/8/2022 Paint & Thinner
97.42 9/8/2022
POWERPLAN OIB 97.42
PULLTABS PLUS INC 101-1560-4130 181.25 9/8/2022 Bingo Game Cards
181.25 9/8/2022
PULLTABS PLUS INC 181.25
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 720-7202-4300 331.00 9/15/2022 Chan Roundabout Vegetation Mgmt
331.00 9/15/2022
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 331.00
RMB Environmental Laboratories Inc 720-0000-4300 104.00 9/8/2022 Beach Monitoring
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 14 of 18
81
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
RMB Environmental Laboratories Inc 720-0000-4300 113.26 9/8/2022 Beach Monitoring
217.26 9/8/2022
RMB Environmental Laboratories Inc 217.26
Robert Half International, Inc.101-1120-4300 184.68 9/15/2022 Admin Front Desk Support - Osthus, Charlene
184.68 9/15/2022
Robert Half International, Inc. 184.68
Sarles Jodi 101-0000-1027 300.00 9/15/2022 Barnyard Boogie Petty Cash
300.00 9/15/2022
Sarles Jodi 300.00
Schulte Mark & Melissa 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/8/2022 Erosion Contol - Permit 2021-05007 - 6360 Teton Lane
500.00 9/8/2022
Schulte Mark & Melissa 500.00
Schwickert Company 101-1550-4151 454.12 9/15/2022 Plumbing - Lake Ann Park Shed
454.12 9/15/2022
Schwickert Company 454.12
SiteOne Landscape Supply 101-1550-4151 16.96 9/8/2022 Reducer Bushing Flush Style
16.96 9/8/2022
SiteOne Landscape Supply 16.96
SOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA 101-1420-4336 40.43 9/8/2022 Planning Case Notification
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 15 of 18
82
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
SOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA 101-1420-4336 33.08 9/8/2022 Zoning Amending
SOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA 101-1110-4336 29.40 9/8/2022 Hearing on beer license
SOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA 481-0000-4336 33.07 9/8/2022 Annual Disclosure Tax
SOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA 480-0000-4336 33.08 9/8/2022 Annual Disclosure Tax
SOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA 101-1420-4336 36.75 9/8/2022 Planning Case Notification
SOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA 101-1110-4336 110.25 9/8/2022 Ordinance
SOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA 101-1310-4336 40.43 9/8/2022 Environmental Assessment
356.49 9/8/2022
SOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA 356.49
SPS Works 101-1120-4360 50.55 9/8/2022 Notary Stamps - Jennifer Potter & Amy Weidman
50.55 9/8/2022
SPS Works 50.55
The Deck & Door Co Inc 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/8/2022 Erosion Control - Permit 2021-02432 - 920 Penamint Court
500.00 9/8/2022
The Deck & Door Co Inc 500.00
The Hartford 701-0000-2015 64.15 9/8/2022 September, 2022
The Hartford 210-0000-2015 19.78 9/8/2022 September, 2022
The Hartford 700-0000-2015 99.75 9/8/2022 September, 2022
The Hartford 720-0000-2015 58.88 9/8/2022 September, 2022
The Hartford 101-0000-2015 1,337.48 9/8/2022 September, 2022
1,580.04 9/8/2022
The Hartford 1,580.04
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc 210-0000-4300 952.50 9/8/2022 Meeting Minutes
952.50 9/8/2022
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 16 of 18
83
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc 952.50
TRAFFIC CONTROL CORPORATION 601-0000-4705 25,825.00 9/15/2022 Traffic Signal Cabinet - W 78th Street @ Kerber Blvd
25,825.00 9/15/2022
TRAFFIC CONTROL CORPORATION 25,825.00
TruGreen Processing Center 101-1550-4300 1,130.00 9/15/2022 Lawn Service - Public Works S Lotus Tennis
1,130.00 9/15/2022
TruGreen Processing Center 1,130.00
TruNorth Solar LLC 101-0000-2073 250.00 9/8/2022 Erosion Control - Permit 2022-01724 - 3850 Glendale Dr
250.00 9/8/2022
TruNorth Solar LLC 250.00
TWO TEACHER CONSTRUCTION 101-0000-2073 250.00 9/8/2022 Erosion Control - Permit 2022-01443 - 1425 Hemlock Way
250.00 9/8/2022
TWO TEACHER CONSTRUCTION 250.00
VERIZON WIRELESS 701-0000-4310 125.10 9/8/2022 Monthly Wireless
VERIZON WIRELESS 700-0000-4310 125.10 9/8/2022 Monthly Wireless
250.20 9/8/2022
VERIZON WIRELESS 250.20
VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 101-1370-4120 38.02 9/15/2022 Pilot Light Switch
38.02 9/15/2022
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 17 of 18
84
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 38.02
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 720-7202-4329 77.27 9/15/2022 Monthly Service - 1801 Lyman Blvd
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1220-4329 104.15 9/15/2022 Monthly Service - 7610 Laredo Dr
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1220-4329 38.71 9/15/2022 Monthly Service - 6400 Minnewashta Pkwy
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 700-0000-4329 17.13 9/15/2022 Monthly Service - 7901 Park Pl
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1170-4329 262.09 9/15/2022 Monthly Service - 7700 Market Blvd
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 701-0000-4329 17.13 9/15/2022 Monthly Service - 7901 Park Pl
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1312-4329 136.99 9/15/2022 Monthly Service - 7901 Park Pl
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1550-4329 608.53 9/15/2022 Monthly Service - 7901 Park Pl
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1190-4329 398.02 9/15/2022 Monthly Service - 7711 Kerber Blvd
1,660.02 9/15/2022
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 1,660.02
585,111.31
AP - Check Detail-Checks (9/19/2022)Page 18 of 18
85
AP
Check Detail-ACH
User: dwashburn
Printed: 9/19/2022 10:23:12 AM
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Al-Hilwani Juli 101-1539-4343 75.00 9/8/2022 Pickleball Lessons
Al-Hilwani Juli 101-1530-4343 97.50 9/8/2022 Personal Training
172.50 9/8/2022
Al-Hilwani Juli 172.50
ALLIED BLACKTOP 420-4227-4751 143,220.42 9/8/2022 2022 Sealcoat Project
143,220.42 9/8/2022
ALLIED BLACKTOP 143,220.42
BOLTON & MENK INC 101-1310-4300 1,355.00 9/15/2022 Chan/Highway 5 Trunk Watermain Relocation
1,355.00 9/15/2022
BOLTON & MENK INC 1,355.00
BROADWAY AWARDS 101-1110-4375 95.74 9/15/2022 Heidi Hicks Maple Leaf Award
95.74 9/15/2022
BROADWAY AWARDS 95.74
Carver County 701-1384-4556 1,505.00 9/8/2022 Chan Water Meters
Carver County 700-1384-4556 1,505.00 9/8/2022 Chan Water Meters
AP - Check Detail-ACH (9/19/2022)Page 1 of 10
86
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
3,010.00 9/8/2022
Carver County 101-1160-4326 375.00 9/15/2022 CarverLink Internet / Fiber- Sept
Carver County 700-1160-4326 650.00 9/15/2022 Carver Fiber - WWTP / W-3, 7, 8 / LS-24 - Sept
1,025.00 9/15/2022
Carver County 4,035.00
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 701-0000-4320 1,435.78 9/15/2022 August 2022 - Blue Lake Enhanced Rate
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1600-4320 32.32 9/15/2022 August 2022 - Blue Lake Enhanced Rate
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 700-7019-4320 1,971.38 9/15/2022 August 2022 - Blue Lake Enhanced Rate
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 700-0000-4320 124.38 9/15/2022 August 2022 - Blue Lake Enhanced Rate
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1220-4320 134.73 9/15/2022 August 2022 - Blue Lake Enhanced Rate
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1350-4320 3,516.78 9/15/2022 August 2022 - Blue Lake Enhanced Rate
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1540-4320 395.75 9/15/2022 August 2022 - Blue Lake Enhanced Rate
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1550-4320 421.81 9/15/2022 August 2022 - Blue Lake Enhanced Rate
8,032.93 9/15/2022
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 8,032.93
Engel Water Testing Inc 700-0000-4300 625.00 9/8/2022 Water Samples
625.00 9/8/2022
Engel Water Testing Inc 625.00
ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC 720-7207-4150 793.12 9/15/2022 309 X 1 Ductile, 309 X 1 5/8 Ductile Adj Ring, Super Glue
ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC 701-0000-4150 793.12 9/15/2022 309 X 1 Ductile, 309 X 1 5/8 Ductile Adj Ring, Super Glue
ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC 720-7207-4150 809.20 9/15/2022 Tub & Rock Bag, Geotextile Sock
2,395.44 9/15/2022
ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC 2,395.44
FASTENAL COMPANY 700-0000-4550 1,598.28 9/8/2022 S-Steel Bolts
AP - Check Detail-ACH (9/19/2022)Page 2 of 10
87
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
1,598.28 9/8/2022
FASTENAL COMPANY 700-0000-4150 1,461.65 9/15/2022 S/S HCS 1/2-13 x 1, S/S HCS 3/4 - 11x4, S/S HCS 3/4 10x3
1,461.65 9/15/2022
FASTENAL COMPANY 3,059.93
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 400-0000-4300 876.15 9/8/2022 Service Calls - August, 2022
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 400-0000-4300 774.90 9/8/2022 Service Calls - June, 2022
1,651.05 9/8/2022
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 1,651.05
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 400-0000-1155 3,171.50 9/15/2022 Chan Observation Service - Cunningham 2nd Addition
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 400-0000-1155 283.25 9/15/2022 Chan Observation Service - Berrospid Addition
3,454.75 9/15/2022
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 3,454.75
HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 101-1420-4300 1,908.75 9/15/2022 Chan Civic Campus - Joint Work Session
1,908.75 9/15/2022
HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 1,908.75
ImageTrend, Inc 101-1220-4237 5,150.00 9/15/2022 Annual Fee - Elite Fire, Base Continuum, Fire Content Package
5,150.00 9/15/2022
ImageTrend, Inc 5,150.00
Indoor Landscapes Inc 101-1170-4300 187.00 9/8/2022 September Plant Service
AP - Check Detail-ACH (9/19/2022)Page 3 of 10
88
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
187.00 9/8/2022
Indoor Landscapes Inc 187.00
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 101-1170-4110 -11.31 9/15/2022 Label 1" Bk/Clear- Return
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 101-1170-4110 112.25 9/15/2022 Tape, Stick Stir, Binder Clip, Copy Paper, Sheet Protector, Pen
100.94 9/15/2022
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 100.94
Macqueen Emergency Group 101-1220-4530 2,610.00 9/8/2022 Flow Test, Facepiece, labor
Macqueen Emergency Group 101-1220-4352 1,100.00 9/8/2022 Fitting
3,710.00 9/8/2022
Macqueen Emergency Group 101-1220-4120 1,720.50 9/15/2022 Filter Hyd Gen, Filter O-Ring, Breather Hyd Tk, Filter Hydraulic
1,720.50 9/15/2022
Macqueen Emergency Group 5,430.50
Marco Inc 720-0000-4410 50.50 9/15/2022 Printer/Copier Leases
Marco Inc 701-0000-4410 101.00 9/15/2022 Printer/Copier Leases
Marco Inc 101-1170-4410 757.50 9/15/2022 Printer/Copier Leases
Marco Inc 700-0000-4410 101.00 9/15/2022 Printer/Copier Leases
1,010.00 9/15/2022
Marco Inc 1,010.00
Matheson Tri-Gas, Inc.101-1370-4120 32.00 9/8/2022 Liner, Acculock MDX
32.00 9/8/2022
Matheson Tri-Gas, Inc. 32.00
AP - Check Detail-ACH (9/19/2022)Page 4 of 10
89
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Maus Kerry 101-1539-4343 367.50 9/15/2022 Line Dancing Lessons
367.50 9/15/2022
Maus Kerry 367.50
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-0000-4120 39.98 9/15/2022 Battery
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1170-4260 71.98 9/15/2022 Tie-Down, Dremel
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1550-4150 138.82 9/15/2022 acrylic sheet, powerloc joint, glass cleaner
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-7043-4120 85.58 9/15/2022 fasteners, hook rope, car nozzle, masonry bit set
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1530-4130 29.67 9/15/2022 masking tape, command hook
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1550-4260 100.76 9/15/2022 Folding Pruning Saw, Folding Saw, Brass Hose
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-7043-4510 76.57 9/15/2022 ant killer, reg sel
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-7019-4510 0.90 9/15/2022 splyfct
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1550-4410 51.52 9/15/2022 Tray Saw, Tray Saw folding Stand
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-7019-4120 4.85 9/15/2022 cap, fasteners
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1170-4510 72.03 9/15/2022 Icemaker Supply Line, Adapter, Flex Glue, Caulk
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1320-4120 58.97 9/15/2022 galv nipple, elbow
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-0000-4150 45.39 9/15/2022 Faucet Supply, fasteners
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1320-4150 138.66 9/15/2022 contractor bag, mason wheel, cut wheel, padlock
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1550-4120 190.00 9/15/2022 Wasp & hornet Killer, Flex Seal, Forest Helmet, File Chainsaw
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1550-4151 16.17 9/15/2022 bushing, elbow
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 701-0000-4260 806.40 9/15/2022 battery pack, redlithium battery
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1731-4130 8.63 9/15/2022 Utility Lighter 2pk
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1220-4290 29.66 9/15/2022 spray adhes, fastners, gorilla superglue
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-0000-4260 817.19 9/15/2022 hexkey, battery pack, redlithium battery
2,783.73 9/15/2022
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 2,783.73
Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 701-0000-2023 22,365.00 9/15/2022 August, 2022 SAC
Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 101-1250-3816 -223.65 9/15/2022 August, 2022 SAC
22,141.35 9/15/2022
Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 22,141.35
Minnesota Pump Works 701-0000-4551 910.00 9/15/2022 Wire in UPS Bypass Circuit at Water Tower
Minnesota Pump Works 700-0000-4550 910.00 9/15/2022 Wire in UPS Bypass Circuit at Water Tower
AP - Check Detail-ACH (9/19/2022)Page 5 of 10
90
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
1,820.00 9/15/2022
Minnesota Pump Works 1,820.00
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 101-0000-2022 27.00 9/15/2022 August, 2022 Surcharge Report
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 101-1250-3818 -123.94 9/15/2022 August, 2022 Surcharge Report
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 101-0000-2022 6,169.95 9/15/2022 August, 2022 Surcharge Report
6,073.01 9/15/2022
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 6,073.01
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 5,299.18 9/8/2022 Monthly Utilities - Hwy 101/Pioneer Trl Signal
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 32.89 9/8/2022 Monthly Utilities - 96th St & St Hwy 101 Lights
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 701-0000-4320 440.45 9/8/2022 Monthly Utilities - Hwy 101/Pioneer Trl Signal
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1600-4320 33.22 9/8/2022 Monthly Utilities - Hwy 101/Pioneer Trl Signal
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 169.21 9/8/2022 Monthly Utilities - Bluff Creek Blvd Lights
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 700-0000-4320 150.57 9/8/2022 Monthly Utilities - Hwy 101/Pioneer Trl Signal
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 34.18 9/8/2022 Monthly Utilities - Bluff Crk & Audubon Rd
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 89.99 9/8/2022 Monthly Utilities - 2151 Lyman Blvd
6,249.69 9/8/2022
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 230.91 9/15/2022 County Rd 61 & St Hwy 101 Lights
230.91 9/15/2022
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 6,480.60
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 101-1550-4120 154.48 9/15/2022 Battery, Core
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 101-1320-4120 170.36 9/15/2022 Oil Filter, Fuel Filter
324.84 9/15/2022
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 324.84
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 101-1550-4140 145.55 9/8/2022 Adas Sensor
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 101-1550-4140 35.22 9/8/2022 Brake Cable
AP - Check Detail-ACH (9/19/2022)Page 6 of 10
91
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 700-0000-4140 63.69 9/8/2022 Pwr Inverter
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 101-1550-4140 145.57 9/8/2022 Adas Sensor
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 101-1250-4140 307.62 9/8/2022 Hose
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 101-1550-4140 30.06 9/8/2022 Brake Cable
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 101-1550-4140 58.41 9/8/2022 Brake Cable
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 101-1250-4140 54.42 9/8/2022 Knock Snr Kit
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 101-1250-4140 -54.42 9/8/2022 Knock Snr Kit Return
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 101-1550-4140 -75.08 9/8/2022 Brake Cable, Core Return
711.04 9/8/2022
O'Reilly Automotive Inc 711.04
PARROTT CONTRACTING INC 700-0000-4552 4,193.50 9/15/2022 Replace Curbstop at 2750 Sandpiper Trail - Equipment, Labor
4,193.50 9/15/2022
PARROTT CONTRACTING INC 4,193.50
Pedretti Christine Lea 101-1539-4343 742.30 9/8/2022 Gentle Yoga, Mat Pilates
742.30 9/8/2022
Pedretti Christine Lea 742.30
Potentia MN Solar 700-0000-4320 2,500.94 9/15/2022 July 01, 2022 - July 31, 2022 Service
Potentia MN Solar 101-1170-4320 3,611.93 9/15/2022 July 01, 2022 - July 31, 2022 Service
Potentia MN Solar 101-1190-4320 4,570.07 9/15/2022 July 01, 2022 - July 31, 2022 Service
10,682.94 9/15/2022
Potentia MN Solar 10,682.94
PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 720-7202-4300 390.00 9/15/2022 Century Blvd Vegetation Management
PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 720-7202-4300 720.00 9/15/2022 Black Locust Mgmt
1,110.00 9/15/2022
AP - Check Detail-ACH (9/19/2022)Page 7 of 10
92
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 1,110.00
PRECISE MRM LLC 101-1320-4300 273.00 9/15/2022 10MB Flat Data Plan - August 2022
273.00 9/15/2022
PRECISE MRM LLC 273.00
Premium Waters, Inc 101-1550-4120 4.00 9/15/2022 Monthly Service
Premium Waters, Inc 101-1550-4120 72.39 9/15/2022 5 gal Spring and Service charge
76.39 9/15/2022
Premium Waters, Inc 76.39
SUMMIT COMPANIES 700-7019-4510 1,269.00 9/8/2022 Fire Sprinker Service
1,269.00 9/8/2022
SUMMIT COMPANIES 1,269.00
Sun Life Financial 210-0000-2011 8.42 9/8/2022 September, 2022
Sun Life Financial 701-0000-2011 27.51 9/8/2022 September, 2022
Sun Life Financial 720-0000-2011 25.27 9/8/2022 September, 2022
Sun Life Financial 701-0000-2037 158.64 9/8/2022 September, 2022
Sun Life Financial 700-0000-2037 158.64 9/8/2022 September, 2022
Sun Life Financial 700-0000-2011 42.80 9/8/2022 September, 2022
Sun Life Financial 101-0000-2011 574.19 9/8/2022 September, 2022
Sun Life Financial 101-0000-2011 17.03 9/8/2022 September, 2022 - Cobra
Sun Life Financial 101-0000-2037 962.48 9/8/2022 September, 2022
1,974.98 9/8/2022
Sun Life Financial 1,974.98
TWIN CITY SEED CO.701-0000-4150 335.00 9/15/2022 Sun/Shade Lawn Seed Mix
TWIN CITY SEED CO.700-0000-4150 335.00 9/15/2022 Sun/Shade Lawn Seed Mix
AP - Check Detail-ACH (9/19/2022)Page 8 of 10
93
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
670.00 9/15/2022
TWIN CITY SEED CO. 670.00
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 101-1110-4300 408.00 9/8/2022 2022 Parks Referendum Task force
408.00 9/8/2022
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 601-6046-4300 1,102.50 9/15/2022 Lake Lucy Road Rehab - July 1, 2022 - July 31, 2022
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 601-6040-4300 22,864.98 9/15/2022 Galpin Blvd Improvement Project
23,967.48 9/15/2022
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 24,375.48
WW GRAINGER INC 101-1220-4120 22.74 9/15/2022 Motor Start Capacitor
22.74 9/15/2022
WW GRAINGER INC 22.74
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1600-4320 13.64 9/8/2022 Service - 7599 Minnewashta Pkwy
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1350-4320 7.17 9/8/2022 Service - 1532 Lyman Blvd
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1350-4320 27.89 9/8/2022 Service - 9000 Audubon Rd Unit Signal
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 88.29 9/8/2022 Service - 6431 Hazeltine Blvd - Water Tower
136.99 9/8/2022
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 3,195.66 9/15/2022 Monthly Services - 1720 Lake Lucy Rd
3,195.66 9/15/2022
XCEL ENERGY INC 3,332.65
ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC 101-1320-4120 379.00 9/8/2022 Dirt Shoe w/Carbide
379.00 9/8/2022
AP - Check Detail-ACH (9/19/2022)Page 9 of 10
94
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC 379.00
ZIEGLER INC 701-0000-4120 201.09 9/15/2022 Filter, Element Fuel
201.09 9/15/2022
ZIEGLER INC 201.09
271,922.09
AP - Check Detail-ACH (9/19/2022)Page 10 of 10
95
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Award Contract for Fox Hollow Drainage Improvement Project
File No.SWMP-045 Item No: D.5
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Alison Albrecht, Public Works Support Specialist
Reviewed By Charlie Burke
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council approves a Not-To-Exceed Contract of $30,637.00 with Bituminous
Roadways for the Fox Hollow Drive Drainage Improvement Project."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Asset Management
SUMMARY
The project will add two new catch basin structures and associated storm sewer to collect surface water
from the Fox Hollow Drive cul-de-sac.
BACKGROUND
This cul-de-sac area does not drain adequately. There is currently only a curb cut that allows drainage
to get into a swale and ultimately into a catch basin. The curb cut and swale routinely get clogged with
debris and occasionally snow storage, which does not allow adequate drainage for the runoff. See
attached picture showing the issue and a plan showing the improvement.
DISCUSSION
The two property owners who have driveway access onto this cul-de-sac have voiced their concerns
about this issue for many years. This is an interim solution until such time the Fox Hollow
96
neighborhood undergoes street reconstruction, which is planned for 2026. All work is located in the
public right-of-way, but restoration of driveways and turf areas will be needed. The work does not
trigger permitting from the Watershed District. If approved, the work will be completed in late October.
BUDGET
The Public Works Department solicited quotes for the project. Three (3) quotes were returned, as
summarized below. Bituminous Roadways was the low quote.
Contractor Amount
Bituminous Roadways $30,637.00
Minger Construction $37,860.50
NW Asphalt $39,753.69
Funding will come from the Surface Water Management Enterprise fund.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends implementing the project and awarding a contract to Bituminous Roadways, Inc.
ATTACHMENTS
SWMP-045
Contract
Drainage Photo
Fox Hollow Drainage Improvement Plan
97
Capital Improvement Program
City of Chanhassen, MN Contact Charlie Howley
2021 2025
thru Department Surface Water Management
Description
This project is an annual maintenance budget used to maintain or replace failing or deficient public storm water infrastructure. In some
instances public works staff can complete the work in house and pay for materials out of this fund. Other times a contractor may be needed to
complete the work.
Project #SWMP-045
Priority n/a
Justification
Every year the City replaces culverts, storm water structures and pipe throughout the City that have failed. These replacements are unforeseen
and are typically noticed only after they have failed. Often these failures result in public safety issues or pose a potential threat to private
property or other City infrastructure.
Budget Impact/Other
These activities will likely involve the utilization of public works labor.
Useful LifeProject Name Storm Water Infrastructure Maintenance/Replacement Category SWMP
Type Improvement
Account #2
Account #1 720-7025-4xxx
Total Project Cost:$600,000
Account #4
Account #3
Total2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Expenditures
250,00050,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000Construction
50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000Total
Prior
350,000
Total
Total2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Funding Sources
250,00050,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000Surface Water Utility Fund
50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000Total
Prior
350,000
Total
118 98
1
175881v1
FORM OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY OF CHANHASSEN AND CONTRACTOR
FOR
FOX HOLLOW DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 20th day of September, 2022, by and between the
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“Owner”) and BITUMINOUS
ROADWAYS, INC. (“Contractor”). Owner and Contractor, in consideration of the mutual
covenants set forth herein, agree as follows:
1.CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The following documents shall be referred to as
the “Contract Documents”, all of which shall be taken together as a whole as the contract
between the parties as if they were set verbatim and in full herein:
A.This Agreement;
B.Request for quotes, email dated September 1, 2022;
C.City of Chanhassen General Conditions of the Construction Contract;
D.Current edition of City of Chanhassen Standard Specifications & Detail
Plates.
E. Quote/Bid dated September 16, 2022.
In the event of a conflict among the provisions of the Contract Documents, the order in which
they are listed above shall control in resolving any such conflicts with Contract Document “A”
having the first priority and Contract Document “D” having the last priority.
2. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CONTRACTOR. The contractor shall provide the
goods, services, and perform the work in accordance with the Contract Documents. This contract
may be terminated by the City at any time upon discovery by the City that the Contractor or any
of its subcontractors has submitted a false statement under oath verifying compliance with any of
the minimum criteria set forth in Minn. Stat. §16C.285, Subdivision 3, the Responsible
Contractor statute.
3. CONTRACT PRICE. Owner shall pay Contractor for completion of the Work
in accordance with the Contract Documents the amount of Thirty Thousand Six Hundred Thirty
Seven and 00/100 ($30,637.00).
4.PAYMENT PROCEDURES.
A.Contractor shall submit Applications for Payment. Applications for
Payment will be processed by Engineer as provided in the General
Conditions.
99
2
175881v1
B. Progress Payments; Retainage. Owner shall make 95% progress payments
on account of the Contract Price on the basis of Contractor’s Applications
for Payment during performance of the Work.
C. Payments to Subcontractor.
(1) Prompt Payment to Subcontractors. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §
471.25, Subd. 4a, the Contractor must pay any subcontractor
within ten (10) days of the Contractor’s receipt of payment from
the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor.
The Contractor must pay interest of 1 ½ percent per month or any
part of a month to the Subcontractor on any undisputed amount not
paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest
penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100.00 or more is
$10.00. For an unpaid balance of less than $100.00, the Contractor
shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor.
(2) Form IC-134 (attached) required from general contractor. Minn.
Stat. § 290.92 requires that the City of Chanhassen obtain a
Withholding Affidavit for Contractors, Form IC-134, before
making final payments to Contractors. This form needs to be
submitted by the Contractor to the Minnesota Department of
Revenue for approval.
The form is used to receive certification from the state that the
vendor has complied with the requirement to withhold and remit
state withholding taxes for employee salaries paid.
D. Final Payment. Upon final completion of the Work, Owner shall pay the
remainder of the Contract Price as recommended by Engineer.
5. COMPLETION DATE/LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.
A. The Work must be completed and ready for final payment in accordance
with the General Conditions by November 18, 2022.
6. CONTRACTOR’S REPRESENTATIONS.
A. Contractor has examined and carefully studied the Contract Documents
and other related data identified in the Contract Documents.
B. Contractor has visited the Site and become familiar with and is satisfied as
to the general, local, and Site conditions that may affect cost, progress, and
performance of the Work.
100
3
175881v1
C. Contractor is familiar with and is satisfied as to all federal, state, and local
Laws and Regulations that may affect cost, progress, and performance of
the Work.
D. Contractor has carefully studied all: (1) reports of explorations and tests
of subsurface conditions at or contiguous to the Site and all drawings of
physical conditions in or relating to existing surface or subsurface
structures at or contiguous to the Site (except Underground Facilities)
which have been identified in the General Conditions and (2) reports and
drawings of a Hazardous Environmental Condition, if any, at the site.
E. Contractor has obtained and carefully studied (or assumes responsibility
for doing so) all additional or supplementary examinations, investigations,
explorations, tests, studies, and data concerning conditions (surface,
subsurface, and Underground Facilities) at or contiguous to the Site which
may affect cost, progress, or performance of the Work or which relate to
any aspect of the means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures
of construction to be employed by Contractor, including any specific
means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction
expressly required by the Bidding Documents, and safety precautions and
programs incident thereto.
F. Contractor does not consider that any further examinations, investigations,
explorations, tests, studies, or data are necessary for the performance of
the Work at the Contract Price, within the Contract Times, and in
accordance with the other terms and conditions of the Contract
Documents.
G. Contractor is aware of the general nature of work to be performed by
Owner and others at the Site that relates to the Work as indicated in the
Contract Documents.
H. Contractor has correlated the information known to Contractor,
information and observations obtained from visits to the Site, reports and
drawings identified in the Contract Documents, and all additional
examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data with the
Contract Documents.
I. Contractor has given Engineer written notice of all conflicts, errors,
ambiguities, or discrepancies that Contractor has discovered in the
Contract Documents, and the written resolution thereof by Engineer is
acceptable to Contractor.
J. The Contract Documents are generally sufficient to indicate and convey
understanding of all terms and conditions for performance and furnishing
of the Work.
101
4
175881v1
K. Subcontracts:
(1) Unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents, the
Contractor shall, upon receipt of the executed Contract Documents,
submit in writing to the Owner the names of the Subcontractors
proposed for the work. Subcontractors may not be changed except
at the request or with the consent of the Owner.
(2) The Contractor is responsible to the Owner for the acts and
omissions of the Contractor's subcontractors, and of their direct
and indirect employees, to the same extent as the Contractor is
responsible for the acts and omissions of the Contractor's
employees.
(3) The Contract Documents shall not be construed as creating any
contractual relation between the Owner, the Engineer, and any
Subcontractor.
(4) The Contractor shall bind every Subcontractor by the terms of the
Contract Documents.
7. WORKER’S COMPENSATION. The Contractor shall obtain and maintain for
the duration of this Contract, statutory Worker’s Compensation Insurance and Employer’s
Liability Insurance as required under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
8. COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY. Contractor shall obtain the
following minimum insurance coverage and maintain it at all times throughout the life of the
Contract, with the City included as an additional name insured on a primary and non-
contributory basis. The Contractor shall furnish the City a certificate of insurance satisfactory to
the City evidencing the required coverage:
Bodily Injury: $2,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate products and
completed operations
Property Damage: $2,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate
Contractual Liability (identifying the contract):
Bodily Injury: $2,000,000 each occurrence
Property Damage: $2,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate
Personal Injury, with Employment Exclusion deleted:
102
5
175881v1
$2,000,000 aggregate
Comprehensive Automobile Liability (owned, non-owned, hired):
Bodily Injury: $2,000,000 each occurrence
$2,000,000 each accident
Property Damage: $2,000,000 each occurrence
9. WARRANTY. The Contractor guarantees that all new equipment warranties as
specified within the quote shall be in full force and transferred to the City upon payment by the
City. The Contractor shall be held responsible for any and all defects in workmanship, materials,
and equipment which may develop in any part of the contracted service, and upon proper
notification by the City shall immediately replace, without cost to the City, any such faulty part
or parts and damage done by reason of the same in accordance with the bid specifications.
10. INDEMNITY. The Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless
from any claim made by third parties as a result of the services performed by it. In addition, the
Contractor shall reimburse the City for any cost of reasonable attorney’s fees it may incur as a
result of any such claims.
11. MISCELLANEOUS.
A. Terms used in this Agreement have the meanings stated in the General
Conditions.
B. Owner and Contractor each binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns
and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors,
assigns and legal representatives in respect to all covenants, agreements,
and obligations contained in the Contract Documents.
C. Any provision or part of the Contract Documents held to be void or
unenforceable under any Law or Regulation shall be deemed stricken, and
all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon
Owner and Contractor, who agree that the Contract Documents shall be
reformed to replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and
enforceable provision that comes as close as possible to expressing the
intention of the stricken provisions.
D. Data Practices/Records.
(1) All data created, collected, received, maintained or disseminated
for any purpose in the course of this Contract is governed by the
Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, any
other applicable state statute, or any state rules adopted to
implement the act, as well as federal regulations on data privacy.
103
6
175881v1
(2) All books, records, documents and accounting procedures and
practices to the Contractor and its subcontractors, if any, relative to
this Contract are subject to examination by the City.
E. Software License. If the equipment provided by the Contractor pursuant
to this Contract contains software, including that which the manufacturer
may have embedded into the hardware as an integral part of the
equipment, the Contractor shall pay all software licensing fees. The
Contractor shall also pay for all software updating fees for a period of one
year following cutover. The Contractor shall have no obligation to pay for
such fees thereafter. Nothing in the software license or licensing
agreement shall obligate the City to pay any additional fees as a condition
for continuing to use the software.
F. Patented devices, materials and processes. If the Contract requires, or the
Contractor desires, the use of any design, devise, material or process
covered by letters, patent or copyright, trademark or trade name, the
Contractor shall provide for such use by suitable legal agreement with the
patentee or owner and a copy of said agreement shall be filed with the
Owner. If no such agreement is made or filed as noted, the Contractor
shall indemnify and hold harmless the Owner from any and all claims for
infringement by reason of the use of any such patented designed, device,
material or process, or any trademark or trade name or copyright in
connection with the Project agreed to be performed under the Contract,
and shall indemnify and defend the Owner for any costs, liability,
expenses and attorney's fees that result from any such infringement
G. Assignment. Neither party may assign, sublet, or transfer any interest or
obligation in this Contract without the prior written consent of the other
party, and then only upon such terms and conditions as both parties may
agree to and set forth in writing.
H. Waiver. In the particular event that either party shall at any time or times
waive any breach of this Contract by the other, such waiver shall not
constitute a waiver of any other or any succeeding breach of this Contract
by either party, whether of the same or any other covenant, condition or
obligation.
I. Governing Law/Venue. The laws of the State of Minnesota govern the
interpretation of this Contract. In the event of litigation, the exclusive
venue shall be in the District Court of the State of Minnesota for Carver
County.
J. Severability. If any provision, term or condition of this Contract is found
to be or become unenforceable or invalid, it shall not affect the remaining
provisions, terms and conditions of this Contract, unless such invalid or
104
7
175881v1
unenforceable provision, term or condition renders this Contract
impossible to perform. Such remaining terms and conditions of the
Contract shall continue in full force and effect and shall continue to
operate as the parties’ entire contract.
K. Entire Agreement. This Contract represents the entire agreement of the
parties and is a final, complete and all inclusive statement of the terms
thereof, and supersedes and terminates any prior agreement(s),
understandings or written or verbal representations made between the
parties with respect thereto.
L. Permits and Licenses; Rights-of-Way and Easements. The Contractor
shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees therefore,
and give all notices necessary and incidental to the construction and
completion of the Project. The City will obtain all necessary rights-of-
way and easements. The Contractor shall not be entitled to any additional
compensation for any construction delay resulting from the City’s not
timely obtaining rights-of-way or easements.
M. If the work is delayed or the sequencing of work is altered because of the
action or inaction of the Owner, the Contractor shall be allowed a time
extension to complete the work but shall not be entitled to any other
compensation.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN CONTRACTOR:
BY: BY:
Elise Ryan, Mayor Its
BY:
Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
105
106
107
16"
ST RIM:913.78
NE908.78INV:
S908.78INV:INV:INV:INV:INV:
8"ST
RIM:913.06
E909.06INV:
SW909.06INV:
NE909.06INV:INV:INV:INV:
ST
RIM:911.41
W909.71INV:INV:INV:INV:INV:INV:RIM:912.26
NE911.26INV:
SW911.26INV:1'X1' DRAIN COVERINV:INV:INV:INV:
S RIM:913.00
W902.80INV:
E902.80INV:5 RINGSINV:INV:INV:INV:
MB
TNH ELEV: 916.10
60"
MB
MBMB
ST
RIM:
INV:
INV:
913.62
910.03
910.03
COULD NOT OPEN
N (as-built)
SW (as-built)INV:INV:INV:INV:INV:INV:
EEEE
E
E
E
E
EE
G
G G G
G
G
G
G
GG
G
GGGF F
FF
F
F
F
FFF
F
F
F
C C
C
C
C
CCCCCCE
SW
1'x1' DRAIN COVER
5 RINGS
DTLDTLDTLDTLDTL
DTL DTL
S
RIM:(not noted on as-built)
INV: 904.56 E (as-built)
INV: 904.56 NW (as-built)
S
RIM:(not noted on as-built)
INV: 906.4 NW (as-built)
INV: 906.4 SE (as-built)
30" RCP
18" CMP
INV. ELEV:910.88
INV. ELEV:910.52
INV. ELEV:908.04
30" RCP
24" RCP
21" RCP
8" PVC
8" PVC
8" DIP
6" (field verify)
INV. ELEV: 911.24'
240 FOX HOLLOW DR
6430 PLEASANT PARK DR
220 FOX HOLLOW DR
6451 PLEASANT PARK DR
6563 GRAY FOX CURV
6441 PLEASANT PARK DR
170 FOX HOLLOW DR
161 FOX HOLLOW DR
6561 GRAY FOX CURV
180 FOX HOLLOW DR200 FOX HOLLOW DR
181 FOX HOLLOW DR
6536 GRAY FOX CURV
171 FOX HOLLOW DR
6559 GRAY FOX CURV
6538 GRAY FOX CURV
6557 GRAY FOX CURV
6534 GRAY FOX CURV
10'
10'
5'
5'9119129139149
1
4
913
913914915914 9159
1
4
913
91
3
91
2
914
915
9119109099089
1
0
9079079089090+00
1+00
2+00
3+00 3+32
PLEASANT VIEW RD
FOX HOLLOW DR
GRAY FOX CRVMOUNTAIN WAYNEAR MOUNTA
IN
BLVDFOX DRQUAIL XINGTIM
B
E
R
H
I
L
L
R
D
C
A
S
T
L
E
R
I
D
G
E
C
T
PLEASANT VIEW CIRGRAY FOX LNPLEASANT VIEW WAY PLEASANT PARK DRFOX TAIL CT HUNTERS CTPLEASANT VIEW LNBLUF
F
RI
D
G
E
CT
FOX
H
O
L
L
O
W
D
R
N
E
A
R
M
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
B
L
V
D
FOX HOLLOW DRALGN - EX CURB LIPP
910
915
920
910
915
920
914.49914.50+00 913.34913.30+50 912.75912.71+00 912.29912.31+50 912.47912.52+00 912.86912.92+50 913.72913.73+00 914.36914.43+32
APPARENT EXISTING LOW POINT
STA: 1+60.99
ELEV: 912.21
EX CB
1+53.35
912.26
GRAY FOXK:\020789-000\Cad\Exhibits\020789-000-C -SITE-PLAN-SURFACES.dwg 8/19/2022 9:45:36 AM1
AS SHOWN XXX
XXXXXX
SCALE:
PLAN BY:
DESIGN BY:
CHECK BY:
SHEET
OF
WSB PROJECT NO.I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION,OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THELAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.LIC. NO:DATE:REVISIONSNO.DATEDESCRIPTIONFOX HOLLOW DRIVE SURVEY CITY OF CHANHASSEN020789-000 Professional EngineerXXXXX01-31-20191
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
N
SCALE IN FEET
0
H:
30 60
LOCATION
FOX H
O
L
L
O
W
D
R
I
V
E
NOTES:
1.SURVEY DATUM: HORIZONTAL: NAD83(1986), VERTICAL:
(NGVD-1929)
2.THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION IN THIS PLAN IS
UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL D. THIS UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL WAS
DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES IF CI/ASCE 38-02,
ENTITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND
DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." GOPHER
ONE CALL TICKET NUMBER: 221750562
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT
108
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Resolution 2022-XX: Approve Interfund Loan for Tax Increment Financing
District 12 - Lake Place Housing
File No.Item No: D.6
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Kelly Grinnell, Finance Director
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council adopts a resolution approving an Interfund Load for TIF District 12 -
Lake Place Housing."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Financial Sustainability
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
On March 22, 2021, the City Council approved the establishment of Tax Increment Financing (TIF)
District No. 12 (a housing tax increment financing district) for the Lake Place Housing project. The City
entered into a contract for private development with Lakes at Chanhassen, LLC for the project and will
issue a pay-as-you-go note to reimburse the developer for eligible expenses from available TIF revenue,
which will be equal to 90% of the tax increment generated from the property. The district is expected to
begin to generate tax increment revenue in 2023.
The City incurred expenses of $22,425 in 2021 to set up the TIF district and has had expenses of $1,398
this year for reporting and compliance. The City will continue to incur expenses throughout the life of
the TIF district for reporting and compliance purposes. The City will keep 10% of the tax increment
109
generated from the property to cover these expenses.
Since the district will not generate tax increment revenue until 2023, the fund’s cash balance is currently
negative and an interfund loan is required to eliminate the deficit. Minnesota Statute § 469.178 Subd.
7(a) allows the City to loan funds to the TIF district from its general fund or other fund. Such interfund
loans must be authorized by resolution of the City Council. The terms and conditions for repayment of
the loan must be included and include the principal amount, interest rate, and maximum term.
Staff recommends the City Council authorize up to $50,000 at the maximum interest rate permitted by
statute (currently 4%) through the date of last receipt of tax increment from the TIF district. Staff
expects the interfund loan will be repaid a few years after the commencement TIF revenues.
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the Resolution approving the interfund loan.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
110
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: September 26, 2022 RESOLUTION NO: 2022-XX
MOTION BY: SECONDED BY:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN FOR ADVANCE OF CERTAIN
COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 12
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
(the "City"), as follows:
Section 1.Background.
1.01. The City has heretofore approved the establishment of TIF District No. 12 (the "TIF
District") within Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project") and has adopted a
Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the purpose of financing certain improvements
within the Project.
1.02. The City has determined to pay for certain costs identified in the TIF Plan consisting of
site improvements/preparation, public utilities, other qualifying improvements, interest and
administrative costs (collectively, the "Qualified Costs"), which costs may be financed on a temporary
basis from City funds available for such purposes.
1.03. Under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, the City is authorized to advance or
loan money from the City's General Fund or any other fund from which such advances may be legally
authorized, in order to finance the Qualified Costs.
1.04. The City intends to reimburse itself for the Qualified Costs from tax increments derived
from the TIF District in accordance with the terms of this resolution (which terms are referred to
collectively as the "Interfund Loan").
Section 2.Terms of Interfund Loan.
2.01. The City hereby authorizes the advance of up to $50,000 from the General Fund or so
much thereof as may be paid as Qualified Costs. The City shall reimburse itself for such advances
together with interest at the rate stated below. Interest accrues on the principal amount from the date of
each advance. The maximum rate of interest permitted to be charged is limited to the greater of the rates
specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 as of the date the loan or
advance is authorized, unless the written agreement states that the maximum interest rate will fluctuate
as the interest rates specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 are from
time to time adjusted. The interest rate shall be 4% and will not fluctuate.
2.02. Principal and interest ("Payments") on the Interfund Loan shall be paid semi-annually on
each August 1 and February 1 (each a "Payment Date"), commencing on the first Payment Date on
which the Authority has Available Tax Increment (defined below), or on any other dates determined by
the City Administrator, through the date of last receipt of tax increment from the TIF District.
111
2
2.03. Payments on this Interfund Loan are payable solely from "Available Tax Increment,"
which shall mean, on each Payment Date, tax increment available after other obligations have been paid,
or as determined by the City Manager, generated in the preceding six (6) months with respect to the
property within the TIF District and remitted to the City by Carver County, all in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, all inclusive, as amended. Payments on this
Interfund Loan may be subordinated to any outstanding or future bonds, notes or contracts secured in
whole or in part with Available Tax Increment and are on parity with any other outstanding or future
interfund loans secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment.
2.04. The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Interfund Loan are pre-
payable in whole or in part at any time by the City without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment
shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular payment otherwise required to be made under this
Interfund Loan.
2.05. This Interfund Loan is evidence of an internal borrowing by the City in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, and is a limited obligation payable solely from Available
Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under this resolution. This Interfund Loan and the interest
hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any political
subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the City. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any
political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan
or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit
nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the
payment of the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto. The City
shall have no obligation to pay any principal amount of the Interfund Loan or accrued interest thereon,
which may remain unpaid after the final Payment Date.
2.06. The City may amend the terms of this Interfund Loan at any time by resolution of the City
Council, including a determination to forgive the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest to
the extent permissible under law.
Section 3.Effective Date. This resolution is effective upon the date of its approval.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 26th day of September 2022.
ATTEST:
Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
112
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item
Resolution 2022-XX: Accept Donation from Kwik Trip in the Amount of
$1,000 for the Parks and Recreation Department Senior Expo on September 29,
2022
File No.Item No: D.7
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Mary Blazanin, Senior Center Coordinator
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council adopts a resolution accepting a donation from Kwik Trip in the
amount of $1,000 to be used toward costs of the Parks and Recreation Department Senior Expo
event on September 29, 2022."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Financial Sustainability
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
113
Staff recommends that the City Council accepts the donation of $1,000 in gift cards from Kwik Trip to
Chanhassen Parks and Recreation for costs related to providing a complimentary continental breakfast
as well as door prize giveaways for Chanhassen's 55+ Senior Expo: Start Your Engines! Healthy, Fit &
Thriving, scheduled on September 29, 2022.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
114
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: September 26, 2022 RESOLUTION NO:2022-XX
MOTION BY: SECONDED BY:
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING $1,000 DONATION FROM KWIK TRIP FOR THE
CHANHASSEN 55+ SENIOR EXPO ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2022
WHEREAS, the Chanhassen Parks and Recreation Department is hosting a 55+ Senior
Expo entitled Start Your Engines! Healthy, Fit & Thriving on September 29, 2022; and
WHEREAS,Kwik Trip is donating $1,000 in gift cards for costs related to providing a
complimentary continental breakfast as well as door prize giveaways.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CHANHASSEN CITY
COUNCIL hereby accepts $1,000 in gift card donations to help offset the cost of the 55+ Senior
Expo.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is directed to prepare correspondence thanking
Kwik Trip for their generous contribution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 26
th day of September,
2022.
ATTEST:
Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
115
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Resolution 2022-XX: Authorize Purchase of Replacement Network Server and
Storage Array Located at Public Works
File No.Item No: D.8
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Rick Rice, IT Manager
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council adopts a resolution authorizing the purchase of a replacement
network server."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Asset Management
SUMMARY
Replacement of the network server and storage array located at Public Works.
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
The current Dell R730 network server located at Public Works provides a backup network environment
in the event the primary City network hosted at City Hall should become unavailable due to a disaster or
some other cause. It also hosts several virtual servers for file and directory services. It will reach its
expected service life of 5 years in November of this year and its extended warranty period will end. The
associated storage array, a Compellent SC4020 which provides all the storage for the system, will reach
its end of regular support with the manufacturer in December of this year.
116
The proposed replacement network server as configured will also replace the storage array.
BUDGET
Both the network server and the associated storage array were included in the 2022-2026 CIP with a
combined budget amount of $55,000.00.
Two quotes were obtained, one from Dell direct sales and the other from CIT, a local Dell Value Added
Reseller. The CIT quote is in a summary format and the Dell quote is in an itemized format but both are
for the same server components. Additional labor costs will be needed for some custom configuration
of the server and migration from the storage array. These costs shall not exceed $5,000.
Quote #1 $ 28,250.00 CIT
Quote #2 $ 30,761.36 Dell
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adopting a resolution authorizing the purchase of the network server replacement
with quote #1.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Computer Integration Technologies Inc. Quote
Dell Quote
T-081 CIP Sheet - Storage Area Network
117
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: September 26, 2021 RESOLUTION NO:2022-XX
MOTION BY: SECONDED BY:
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE REPLACEMENT PURCHASE OF A DELL
R750 NETWORK SERVER
WHEREAS,the City maintains a network server and an associated storage array located
at the Public Works facility; and
WHEREAS, this equipment provides a backup City network in the event the primary
City network at City Hall should become unavailable due to a disaster or other cause; and
WHEREAS, the current network server and storage array are reaching the end of their
expected service life; and
WHEREAS, the network server as configured will also replace the storage array; and
WHEREAS,two quotes were obtained as per the City purchasing policy; and
WHEREAS,the network server and storage array were included for replacement in
2022-2026 CIP
WHEREAS,the lowest quote received was from CIT.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chanhassen City Council hereby
authorizes the replacement purchase of a Dell R750 network server from CIT at a cost of
$28,250.00.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 26
th day of September,
2022.
ATTEST:
Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
118
Tuesday, September 20, 2022
Chris Goettl, Sr. Account Executive ● 651.255.5724 ● Chris.Goettl@cit-net.com
Public Works DR Server
Presented by:
City of Chanhassen
119
Service Descriptions
Executive Summary
The City of Chanhassen is ready to replace their on site Server at the Public Works building. This Server currently runs 2 local
production Servers and can be used for backup and DR purposes.
After meeting with Rick, CIT is proposing a new Server to provide:
1) Local File Serving for the 2 Virtual Servers
2) Backup Target for Veeam
3) DR Services for up to 15 Virtual Servers currently running at the Cities Main Office
Scope of Work
Procure, configure and install new ESXi host in Public Works building.
o Install ESXi to boot media
o Install latest BIOS and iLO
o Configure RAID 6
o Configure networking and vmware datastore
Configure new host as Veeam replication target for existing Veeam deployment.
Migrate two existing production VM's from old ESXi host and Complellent SAN to new host with internal storage
Hardware/Software
Description Qty Price Ext. Price
PowerEdge R750 Server, (2) Intel Xeon silver 4310 12-core procs, 384GB RAM,
(24) 1.92TB SSD SATA Read Intensive hot plug HD's, H755 adapter, redundant
800W power supplies, quad port 1GB NIC, Dual Port 10GB SFP+, Dual Port 10GB
BaseT, 5 Year ProSupport Plu
1 $28,250.00 $28,250.00
Subtotal:$28,250.00
Page: 2 of 3Quote #017935 v4
120
Public Works DR Server
Prepared by:Prepared for:Quote Information:
Computer Integration Technologies,
Inc.
City of Chanhassen Quote #: 017935
Chris Goettl
651.255.5724
Fax 651.450.0300
Chris.Goettl@cit-net.com
Attn Finance Dept
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Richard Rice
(952) 227-1111
rrice@ci.chanhassen.mn.us
Version: 4
Delivery Date: 09/20/2022
Expiration Date: 09/30/2022
Quote Summary
Description Amount
Hardware/Software $28,250.00
Subtotal:$28,250.00
Shipping:$80.00
Total:$28,330.00
By signing this quote, it is assumed that CIT will proceed with placing orders for the recommended products and services. Pricing and
availability are subject to change at any time.
Please do not pay from quote; taxes, shipping, handling and other fees may apply. Not all items are available for refund or exchange and
must be approved by CIT prior to product return. Customers may need to work directly with manufacturers for item returns.
Each of the parties hereto has caused this Schedule to be duly executed by their authorized representatives on the date expressed below. The
terms of this project proposal ("Schedule") by and between Computer Integration Technologies, Inc., (“CIT”) and Customer are part of, and
are hereby incorporated into, the Master Service Agreement executed by CIT and Customer.
Computer Integration Technologies, Inc.City of Chanhassen
Signature:
Name:Chris Goettl
Title:Sr. Account Executive
Date:09/20/2022
Signature:
Name:Richard Rice
Date:
Page: 3 of 3Quote #017935 v4
121
A quote for your consideration
Based on your business needs, we put the following quote together to help with your
purchase decision. Below is a detailed summary of the quote we’ve created to help you with
your purchase decision.
To proceed with this quote, you may respond to this email, order online through your
Premier page, or, if you do not have Premier, use this Quote to Order.
Quote No.3000131939325.1
Total $30,761.36
Customer #22843640
Quoted On Sep. 21, 2022
Expires by Oct. 22, 2022
Contract Name
Dell National Cooperative
Purchasing Alliance-NCPA
Master Agreement
Contract Code C000000005600
Customer Agreement #NCPA 01-42
Solution ID 16753559.1
Sales Rep Travis Mclaurin
Phone (800) 456-3355, 80000
Email Lathan_Mclaurin@Dell.com
Billing To RICHARD RICE
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
7700 MARKET BLVD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
Message from your Sales Rep
Please contact your Dell sales representative if you have any questions or when you're ready to place an order. Thank
you for shopping with Dell!
Regards,
Travis Mclaurin
Shipping Group
Shipping To
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
7700 MARKET BLVD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(952) 227-1111
Shipping Method
Standard Delivery
Product Unit Price Quantity Subtotal
PowerEdge R750 - [AMER_R750_14794]$30,761.36 1 $30,761.36
Page 1
Dell Marketing LP. U.S. only. Dell Marketing LP. is located at One Dell Way, Mail Stop 8129, Round Rock, TX 78682
122
Subtotal:
Shipping:
Environmental Fee:
Non-Taxable Amount:
Taxable Amount:
Estimated Tax:
Total:
$30,761.36
$0.00
$0.00
$30,761.36
$0.00
$0.00
$30,761.36
Page 2
Dell Marketing LP. U.S. only. Dell Marketing LP. is located at One Dell Way, Mail Stop 8129, Round Rock, TX 78682
123
Shipping Group Details
Shipping To
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
7700 MARKET BLVD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(952) 227-1111
Shipping Method
Standard Delivery
Quantity Subtotal
PowerEdge R750 - [AMER_R750_14794]
Estimated delivery if purchased today:
Nov. 21, 2022
Contract # C000000005600
Customer Agreement # NCPA 01-42
$30,761.36 1 $30,761.36
Description SKU Unit Price Quantity Subtotal
PowerEdge R750 Server 210-AYCG -1 -
2.5 Chassis 379-BDTF -1 -
SAS/SATA Backplane 379-BDSS -1 -
No Rear Storage 379-BDTE -1 -
No GPU Enablement 379-BDSR -1 -
Trusted Platform Module 2.0 V3 461-AAIG -1 -
2.5" Chassis with up to 24 SAS/SATA Drives 321-BGFC -1 -
Intel Xeon Silver 4310 2.1G, 12C/24T, 10.4GT/s, 18M Cache, Turbo,
HT (120W) DDR4-2666 338-CBWJ -1 -
Intel Xeon Silver 4310 2.1G, 12C/24T, 10.4GT/s, 18M Cache, Turbo,
HT (120W) DDR4-2666 338-CBWJ -1 -
Additional Processor Selected 379-BDCO -1 -
Heatsink for 2 CPU configuration (CPU less than 165W)412-AAWE -1 -
Performance Optimized 370-AAIP -1 -
3200MT/s RDIMMs 370-AEVR -1 -
Unconfigured RAID 780-BCDS -1 -
PERC H755 SAS Front 405-AAZB -1 -
Front PERC Mechanical Parts, for 2.5" x24 SAS/SATA Chassis 750-ADED -1 -
Power Saving Dell Active Power Controller 750-AABF -1 -
UEFI BIOS Boot Mode with GPT Partition 800-BBDM -1 -
Standard Fan x6 750-ADGK -1 -
Power Supply 800W RDNT D, Mixed Mode 450-AJEX -1 -
Riser Config 2, Half Length, 4x16, 2x8 slots, SW GPU Capable 330-BBRX -1 -
R750 Motherboard with Broadcom 5720 Dual Port 1Gb On-Board
LOM 329-BFGT -1 -
iDRAC9 Datacenter 15G 528-CRVW -1 -
OpenManage Enterprise Advanced Plus 528-CTZH -1 -
Broadcom 5720 Quad Port 1GbE BASE-T Adapter, OCP NIC 3.0 540-BCOB -1 -
PowerEdge 2U Standard Bezel 325-BCHU -1 -
Dell EMC Luggage Tag 350-BCED -1 -
Assembly BOSS Blank 329-BERC -1 -
Page 3
Dell Marketing LP. U.S. only. Dell Marketing LP. is located at One Dell Way, Mail Stop 8129, Round Rock, TX 78682
124
No Quick Sync 350-BBYX -1 -
iDRAC,Factory Generated Password 379-BCSF -1 -
iDRAC Group Manager, Disabled 379-BCQY -1 -
No Operating System 611-BBBF -1 -
No Media Required 605-BBFN -1 -
ReadyRails Sliding Rails 770-BBBQ -1 -
Cable Management Arm, 2U 770-BDRQ -1 -
No Systems Documentation, No OpenManage DVD Kit 631-AACK -1 -
PowerEdge R750 Shipping 340-CULS -1 -
PowerEdge R750 Shipping Material 481-BBFG -1 -
PowerEdge Non BIS Marking 389-DYHB -1 -
PowerEdge R750 CE, CCC, Marking 389-DYHC -1 -
Custom Configuration 817-BBBB -1 -
Dell Hardware Limited Warranty Plus Onsite Service 852-7274 -1 -
ProSupport Plus Next Business Day Onsite Service After Problem
Diagnosis 5 Years 852-7358 -1 -
ProSupport Plus 7x24 Technical Support and Assistance 5 Years 852-7359 -1 -
Thank you for choosing Dell ProSupport Plus. For tech support, visit
//www.dell.com/contactdell 951-2015 -1 -
On-Site Installation Declined 900-9997 -1 -
32GB RDIMM, 3200MT/s, Dual Rank 16Gb BASE x8 370-AGDS -12 -
1.92TB SSD SATA Read Intensive 6Gbps 512 2.5in Hot-plug AG
Drive, 1 DWPD,400-AXSD -24 -
No Power Cord 450-AAGG -1 -
Broadcom 57412 Dual Port 10GbE SFP+ Adapter, PCIe Low Profile 540-BBVI -1 -
Broadcom 57416 Dual Port 10GbE BASE-T Adapter, PCIe Full Height 540-BBUI -1 -
Subtotal:
Shipping:
Environmental Fee:
Estimated Tax:
Total:
$30,761.36
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$30,761.36
Page 4
Dell Marketing LP. U.S. only. Dell Marketing LP. is located at One Dell Way, Mail Stop 8129, Round Rock, TX 78682
125
Important Notes
Terms of Sale
This Quote will, if Customer issues a purchase order for the quoted items that is accepted by Supplier, constitute a contract between the
entity issuing this Quote (“Supplier”) and the entity to whom this Quote was issued (“Customer”). Unless otherwise stated herein, pricing is
valid for thirty days from the date of this Quote. All product, pricing and other information is based on the latest information available and is
subject to change. Supplier reserves the right to cancel this Quote and Customer purchase orders arising from pricing errors. Taxes and/or
freight charges listed on this Quote are only estimates. The final amounts shall be stated on the relevant invoice. Additional freight charges
will be applied if Customer requests expedited shipping. Please indicate any tax exemption status on your purchase order and send your tax
exemption certificate to Tax_Department@dell.com or ARSalesTax@emc.com, as applicable.
Governing Terms: This Quote is subject to: (a) a separate written agreement between Customer or Customer’s affiliate and Supplier or a
Supplier´s affiliate to the extent that it expressly applies to the products and/or services in this Quote or, to the extent there is no such
agreement, to the applicable set of Dell’s Terms of Sale (available at www.dell.com/terms or www.dell.com/oemterms), or for cloud/as-a-
Service offerings, the applicable cloud terms of service (identified on the Offer Specific Terms referenced below); and (b) the terms
referenced herein (collectively, the “Governing Terms”). Different Governing Terms may apply to different products and services on this
Quote. The Governing Terms apply to the exclusion of all terms and conditions incorporated in or referred to in any documentation submitted
by Customer to Supplier.
Supplier Software Licenses and Services Descriptions: Customer’s use of any Supplier software is subject to the license terms
accompanying the software, or in the absence of accompanying terms, the applicable terms posted on www.Dell.com/eula. Descriptions and
terms for Supplier-branded standard services are stated at www.dell.com/servicecontracts/global or for certain infrastructure products at
www.dellemc.com/en-us/customer-services/product-warranty-and-service-descriptions.htm.
Offer-Specific, Third Party and Program Specific Terms: Customer’s use of third-party software is subject to the license terms that
accompany the software. Certain Supplier-branded and third-party products and services listed on this Quote are subject to additional,
specific terms stated on www.dell.com/offeringspecificterms (“Offer Specific Terms”).
In case of Resale only: Should Customer procure any products or services for resale, whether on standalone basis or as part of a solution,
Customer shall include the applicable software license terms, services terms, and/or offer-specific terms in a written agreement with the end-
user and provide written evidence of doing so upon receipt of request from Supplier.
In case of Financing only: If Customer intends to enter into a financing arrangement (“Financing Agreement”) for the products and/or
services on this Quote with Dell Financial Services LLC or other funding source pre-approved by Supplier (“FS”), Customer may issue its
purchase order to Supplier or to FS. If issued to FS, Supplier will fulfill and invoice FS upon confirmation that: (a) FS intends to enter into a
Financing Agreement with Customer for this order; and (b) FS agrees to procure these items from Supplier. Notwithstanding the Financing
Agreement, Customer’s use (and Customer’s resale of and the end-user’s use) of these items in the order is subject to the applicable
governing agreement between Customer and Supplier, except that title shall transfer from Supplier to FS instead of to Customer. If FS
notifies Supplier after shipment that Customer is no longer pursuing a Financing Agreement for these items, or if Customer fails to enter into
such Financing Agreement within 120 days after shipment by Supplier, Customer shall promptly pay the Supplier invoice amounts directly to
Supplier.
Customer represents that this transaction does not involve: (a) use of U.S. Government funds; (b) use by or resale to the U.S. Government;
or (c) maintenance and support of the product(s) listed in this document within classified spaces. Customer further represents that this
transaction does not require Supplier’s compliance with any statute, regulation or information technology standard applicable to a U.S.
Government procurement.
For certain products shipped to end users in California, a State Environmental Fee will be applied to Customer’s invoice. Supplier
encourages customers to dispose of electronic equipment properly.
Electronically linked terms and descriptions are available in hard copy upon request.
^DELL BUSINESS CREDIT (DBC): Offered to business customers by WebBank, who determines qualifications for and terms of credit.
Taxes, shipping and other charges are extra and vary. The Total Minimum Payment Due is the greater of either $20 or 3% of the New
Balance shown on the statement rounded up to the next dollar, plus all past due amounts. Dell and the Dell logo are trademarks of Dell Inc.
Page 5
Dell Marketing LP. U.S. only. Dell Marketing LP. is located at One Dell Way, Mail Stop 8129, Round Rock, TX 78682
126
Capital Improvement Program
City of Chanhassen, MN Contact Richard Rice
2022 2026thru Department Technology
Description
This project funds the data storage equipment for the City storage area network, which is where the majority of all City electronic data is
maintained. This storage are network (SAN) is a system comprised of numerous individual storage arrays, all managed from a single console. The
SAN allows disk storage to be easily modified as storage needs change, without any downtime for users. This equipment also hosts the City's
virtual network servers. A primary production storage array is located at City Hall in the main server room. A backup replication storage array is
located in an auxiliary server room at the Public Works facility and also hosts several virtual machines.
Project #T-081
Priority n/a
Justification
The need for digital storage space for City documentation and applications is growing at a rate of approximately 1 to 2 Tb per year. Existing
storage space became difficult to manage on individual physical network servers. Internal storage utilization is inefficient, and requires system
downtime to reconfigure. Storage area network (SAN) technology allows for real time reconfiguration as well as the ability to make real time
copies for redundancy and for daytime backup processes. The majority of the City physical network servers were virtualized and integrated into
just three host servers which utilize this storage. A Compellent storage array was installed in 2016 as the production storage array. A new
Compellent array replaced this array in 2019. The older Compellent array then replaced the two older replication Equallogic arrays at the Public
Works building. This array is recommended for replacement in 2022. At that time other options, such as a converged platform, which integrates
host server and SAN, will be evaluated.
Budget Impact/Other
New arrays will be purchased with 5 years of warranty support. Software and hardware support for the storage arrays beyond 5 years will be
funded out of the MIS services account 101-1160-4220.
Useful Life 5-7 years
Project Name Storage Area Network (SAN)Category Technology
Type Equipment
Account #2
Account #1 400-4147-4703
Total Project Cost:$55,000
Account #4
Account #3
Status Active
Total20222023202420252026Expenditures
55,00055,000Hardware
55,000 55,000Total
Total20222023202420252026Funding Sources
55,00055,000Technology Capital
55,000 55,000Total
Wednesday, September 21, 2022Page 1 127
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Ordinance XXX: Amending the City Fees and Charges for 2022
File No.Item No: D.9
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Kelly Grinnell, Finance Director
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council adopts an ordinance amending the City Fees and Charges for 2022;
and approves a summary ordinance for publication purposes."
Motion Type 4/5 Vote
Strategic
Priority Financial Sustainability
SUMMARY
This ordinance is updated annually to establish all of the fees and charges for the City. Staff has
identified some recommended changes to certain fees adopted at the beginning of this year and amended
on May 9, 2022.
BACKGROUND
On January 10, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance 684 establishing the City Fees and Charges
for 2022. Ordinance 684 is attached for reference. This was the first year fees and charges were
consolidated into a single schedule from multiple ordinances and operating procedures. As the fee
schedule was implemented and operating practices were reviewed for clarity and consistency, Staff
identified some recommended changes to certain fees adopted at the beginning of this year. The changes
are considered minor in nature and were generally for the purpose of adding clarity in language,
consistency with operating practices, and fairness in reflecting the relative cost of providing the
services. As a result, Ordinance 689 was adopted by the City Council on May 9, 2022 (attached). Since
128
that date, Staff identified additional changes that needed to be updated. The changes are indicated in the
redlined version of the fees and charges schedule attached.
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
The fee changes have no significant effect on the revenue expectations for the 2022 budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt an ordinance amending City Fees and Charges for 2022.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance 684 adopted January 10, 2022
Ordinance 689 adopted May 9, 2022
Proposed Ordinance
Proposed Summary Ordinance
Redlined 2022 Fees and Charges Schedule Final 09-26-2022
129
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 684
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
ESTABLISHING THE CITY FEES AND CHARGES FOR 2022
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
ORDAINS:
Section 1.
(A) Policy and Purpose. By the enactment of this Ordinance, the City Council intends to
establish fees and charges required by the City Code for the year 2022 and to comply
with Minnesota Statutes, §462.353, subd. 4.
(B) Fees and Charges. The fees and charges for the City for the year 2022 are as set forth on
“Exhibit A” hereto.
(C) Application. Where a direct conflict exists between the amount of a fee or charge set by
any provision of the City Code and a fee or charge set by this Ordinance, the fee or
charge set by this Ordinance applies.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of January, 2022 by the City Council of the
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota.
Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
(Ordinance 684 published in the Chanhassen Villager on January 20, 2022)
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
130
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
1
Cemetery Fees & Charges
Licensing Fees & Charges
2021 Fees 2022 Fees
Cemetery Fees
Grave Fee
Resident
Non-Resident
$400
600
$400
600
Interment $150 $150
Excavation Fee
Caskets
Urns & Infant Burials
May be higher in
winter
$550
375
$550
375
2021 Fees 2022 Fees
Liquor License
On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License
Restaurant
Floor area under 3,000 sf
Floor area 3,000-6,000 sf
Floor Area over 6,000 sf
Exclusive Liquor Store
Floor area under 3,000 sf
Floor area 3,000-6,000 sf
Floor Area over 6,000 sf
$6,115
9,609
13,104
$4,862
11,356
14,851
$6,115
9,609
13,104
$4,862
11,356
14,851
Off-sale
Intoxicating (*set by State Statute)
Microdistillery
Non-intoxicating
Small brewer
$200
200
58
200
$200
200
58
200
On-sale
Brewer taproom
Cocktail room
Non-intoxicating
$400
400
410
$400
400
410
Sunday sales (*set by State Statute) $200 $200
Wine/beer license $410 $410
Background investigation on liquor license owners,
officers or operating managers.
(Applies to both new applications and changes to existing
license holders.)
Owner
Officer
Operating Manager
(per application)
$250
100
100
$250
100
100
Temporary on-sale liquor license $1 $1
Other Business Licenses
Waste hauler Annual fee per
company $300 $300
Peddler, solicitor or transient merchant registration fee Per individual $100 $100
Massage therapy
Business license
Background
investigation fee
$50
$250
$50
$250
Sexually oriented business license Annual $1,300 $1,300
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
131
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
Parks & Recreation Fees & Charges
Animal Control Fees
Kennel Fees $25 $25
Dog and cat impounding fees
1st offense
2nd offense
3rd offense
4th offense
5th & subsequent
offenses
(in 12-month period)
$50
100
150
200
250
$50
100
150
200
250
Other Permit Fees
Vehicle lockout services Per incident $50 $50
Bow and arrow discharge permit $20 $20
Fireworks Annual License fee $200 $200
Shotgun discharge permit $20 $20
Stable $25 $25
2021 Fees 2022 Fees
Group Picnic Reservation Fees
Resident - groups less than 100
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$100
125
$125
150
Resident - groups of 100 or more
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$150
175
$175
225
Nonresident - groups less than 100
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$200
250
$225
275
Nonresident - groups of 100 or more
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$300
350
$325
375
Nonprofit / Senior Group Discount 25% 25%
District 112/276
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$45
50
$45
50
All Other School Districts
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$100
150
$100
150
Rentals & Reservations
Canoe/Kayak Storage Rack
Residents
Nonresidents
$60
70
$60
70
Watercraft Rentals
Canoe
Kayak
Paddle Boat (4 person)
Row Boat
$12
12
12
12
$15
15
15
15
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
132
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
Recreation Center Fees & Charges
Row Boat with Electric Motor
Stand-Up Paddleboard
12
16
15
20
Volleyball Kits
Weekday
Weekend
$15
20
$15
20
Memorials
Bench $500 $500
Tree $1,000 $1,000
Other By Arrangement
Adult Softball
Summer Softball League (per team)
All resident team
1-5 non-resident members
6+ non-resident members
$850
900
950
$950
900
950
Fall Softball League (per team)
All resident team
1-5 non-resident members
6+ non-resident members
$500
550
600
$500
550
600
Adult/Senior Programs (*Fees cover program supplies and staffing costs)
Single-day Adult/Senior Programs Non-resident charge +$3 $10-65 $10-65
Multi-day Adult/Senior Programs Non-resident charge +$10 $10-175 $10-175
Senior Day Trips Non-resident charge +$10 $65-95 $65-95
Senior Overnight Trips Non-resident charge +$10 $250-450 $250-450
2021 Fees 2022 Fees
Recreation Center Fees
Daily Fee
Resident
Nonresident
Senior Resident
Senior Nonresident
$3.00
3.50
2.75
3.25
$4.00
4.50
2.75
3.25
Punch Cards
10 Punch Resident
10 Punch Nonresident
10 Punch Senior Resident
10 Punch Senior Nonresident
20 Punch Resident
20 Punch Nonresident
20 Punch Senior Resident
20 Punch Senior Nonresident
40 Punch Resident
40 Punch Nonresident
40 Punch Senior Resident
40 Punch Senior Nonresident
$30.00
35.00
27.50
32.50
55.00
66.00
50.00
61.00
106.00
129.00
94.00
117.00
$30.00
35.00
27.50
32.50
55.00
66.00
50.00
61.00
106.00
129.00
94.00
117.00
Facility
Gym Resident
Gym Nonresident
Per Hour
$40.00
50.00
$50.00
60.00
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
133
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
Permits & Inspections Fees & Charges
Community Room with Kitchen Resident
Community Room with Kitchen Nonresident
Community Room with Carpet Resident
Community Room with Carpet Nonresident
Conference Room Resident
Conference Room Nonresident
15.00
20.00
15.00
20.00
15.00
20.00
20.00
25.00
20.00
25.00
15.00
20.00
Birthday Parties
Residents
Nonresidents
Additional Time
$55
65
$55
65
Personal Training Packages
Getting Started Package (3 sessions) $130 $130
One-on-One Packages
5 Sessions
10 Sessions
15 Sessions
20 Sessions
$195
380
540
700
$195
380
540
700
2021 Fees 2022 Fees
Building Permit and Fire Prevention
Base minimum building valuation shall be as established
by the most current version of the International Code
Council Building Valuation Data.
Building Permit Fees
Base Fee
Valuation Range
$501-2,000
$1,000-25,000
$2,001-25,000
$25,001-50,000
$50,001-100,000
$100,001-500,000
$500,001-1,000,000
$1,000,000+
Base minimum building valuation shall be as established
by the most current version of the International Code
Council Building Valuation Data.
$24.95
(valuation up to $500)
+ fee per $100 of value
+$3.25
+fee per $1,000 of value
N/A
+14.85
+10.70
+7.40
+5.90
+5.05
+3.85
$80.00
(Valuation up to $1,000)
N/A
+fee per $1,000 of value
+16.50
N/A
$12.00
$8.50
$6.75
$5.50
$4.50
Plan Review Fee
When submittal of plans is required, and the
valuation is more than $3,000, a plan review fee
shall also be charged.
65% of permit fee 65% of permit fee
Fire Plan Review Fee 65% of permit fee 65% of permit fee
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
134
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
Development Review Fees & Charges
When submittal of plans is required, and the
valuation is more than $3,000, a plan review fee
shall also be charged.
HVAC Permit Fees
Total Valuation
$0 to $1,000
Plus percent of value over:
$1,001 to 10,000
$10,001 to 50,000
$50,001 and up
Base Rate $30
+2.25%
+1.75%
+1.50%
Base Rate $80
+2.25%
+1.75%
+1.50%
Industrial Heating Equipment Permit Fees
Total Valuation
$0 to $50,000
Plus percent of value over:
$50,00 to 250,000
$250,001 to $500,000
$500,001 to $750,000
$750,001 and up
1.2% of valuation,
minimum $30
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
Base Rate $80
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
Roofing/ Siding/ Windows & Door
Flat fee per permit
$150 each
$300 max combined
Development Review Fees 2021 2022
Comprehensive plan amendment
Land use amendment
Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers
$600
100
$600
100
Conditional use permit
Single-family residence
All others
Does not include site plan
review
$325
425
$325
425
Grading permits
Under 50 cubic yards
50—1,000 cubic yards
Over 1,000 cubic yards
N/A
Actual cost, minimum $50
Processed as interim use
permit
Interim use permit
Single-family residence
All others
$325
425
$325
425
Sign rental $200 $200
Planned unit development/rezoning
Major amendment
Minor amendment
$750
100
$750
100
Rezoning $500 $500
Sign permit
Permanent
Temporary
Electric Message Center
$100
35
300
$100
35
300
Sign Plan Review $150 $150
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
135
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
Site Plan Review
Commercial/industrial districts
Residential districts
Administrative
Plus $10 per 1,000 square
feet of building area
Plus $5.00 per unit
$500
500
100
$500
500
100
Subdivision
Create 3 lots or less
Create over 3 lots
Final plat
Metes and bounds division
Consolidate lots
Administrative subdivision
Plus $15.00 per lot
Plus $50.00 per lot
$300
600
250
300
150
150
$300
600
250
300
150
150
Temporary outdoor sales and events
Temporary outdoor event permit
Seasonal sales permit
Special event permit
Race addendum
$50
50
100
50
$50
50
100
50
Vacation of right-of-way/easements $300 $300
Variance $200 $200
Wetland alteration permit
Single-family residence
All other uses
$150
275
$150
275
Monumentation for all wetland buffer strip Per sign $20 $20
Zoning Appeal $100 $100
Zoning Ordinance Amendment $500 $500
Filing Fees/Attorney Costs
Recording documents
Recording plats and related documents
Per document
$50
450
$50
450
Consultant Fees Cost will be billed to
developer
Flood zone information and written zoning requests $25 $25
Property owner's list, per property All requests must be made
in writing $3 $3
Beekeeping permit $25 $25
Chicken permit $25 $25
Private Development Engineering Fees
Public Street Light $300 $300
Administration Fee
Cost of Construction of Improvements
Less than $500,000
$500,000 to $1,000,000
First $500,000
Over $500,000
Over $1,000,000
First $1,000,000
Over $1,000,000
In conjunction with the
installation of the
improvements
3% of construction costs
3% of construction costs
2% of construction costs
2.5% of construction costs
1.5% of construction costs
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
136
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
Surface Water Development Fees
Parks/Open Space
Single Family Residential
Medium Density Residential
Townhouse/Apartment Complex/High Density
Residential
Industrial
Commercial
Fees are based on the developable land. Undeveloped areas
such as wetlands and buffers placed into an outlot, public
parks, and public right-of-way are exempt from these fees.
Per acre
$4,920
8,660
10,390
15,560
22,450
32,800
$5,020
8,830
10,600
15,870
22,900
33,460
Park Dedication Fees
Duplex
Multifamily/apartment units
Commercial/industrial
Continuing care retirement facility
Per dwelling
Per dwelling
Per acre
Per bed
$5,000
3,800
12,500
500
$5,000
3,800
12,500
500
Sewer and Water Fees
Residential development & Commercial, industrial and
institutional development
Fees are based per unit. Parcels previously assessed trunk
hook-up fees are exempt. Parcels within the Lake Ann Sewer
District will be subject to the Lake Ann Trunk sewer fees in
addition to the sewer trunk hook-up fees.
Sanitary Sewer
-if a portion of the sewer
hookup fee was not paid at
the time of final subdivision
approval
Water
SAC (As established by the
Metropolitan Council and
city SAC surcharge)
$1,611
$2,302
8,253
75
$1,611
$2,302
8,542
75
Parcels in Lake Ann district subject to Lake Ann Trunk sewer
fees in addition to the sewer trunk hook-up fees
Water
Lake Ann Interceptor
Subtrunk
$1,971
2,068
$1,971
2,068
All Development: Lateral Connection Charge
Sewer
Water
$7,710
10,185
$7,980
10,541
Site Inspection for Private Developments
The city hires consultant
inspectors at an average of
20 hours/week at $80.00
per hour.
G.I.S. fees
Plat
Parcel
$100
30
$100
30
Other Inspections and Fees
Inspections outside of normal business hours Per hour $50.00 $80.00
Reinspection fees Per hour $50.00 $80.00
Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated Per hour $50.00 $80.00
Additional plan review required by changes, additions or
revisions to plans Per hour $50.00 $80.00
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
137
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
Public Works
For use of outside consultants for plan checking and
inspections, or both Actual costs
Re-inspection fee for as-built surveys Per re-inspection $50.00 $80.00
Other Permit Fees
Zoning Permit Fee $50 $50
2021 2022
Permits
Trenching & Boring Per 100 feet $15 $15
Street or ROW Per hole $40 $40
Directional Bore Per road crossing, no open cut $30 $30
Drain Tile Connection
First Inspection
Additional Inspection
ROW Permit Fee
Per hour (15 min. increments)
$30
40
$30
40
Temporary Lift of “No Parking” Zone Per week, no charge for 1st week $20 $20
Temporary Street Closure
Deposit
$20
100
$20
100
Grading Permit Actual cost of review time & inspection
($50 min.)
Underground Sprinkler System ROW permit fee (No main lines in ROW) $30 $30
Maps, As-Builts, and Photocopies
Copies
8½” x 11” Copy
8½” x 11” Color Copy
8½” x 14” or 11” x 17” Copy
8½” x 14” or 11” x 17” Color Copy
18” x 24” Copy
18” x 24” Color Copy
22” x 34” Copy
22” x 34” Color Copy
24” x 36” Copy
24” x 36” Color Copy
36” x 42” Copy
36” x 42” Color Copy
Per page
$.25
1
.50
2
5
10
6
10
10
15
10
20
$.25
1
.50
2
5
10
6
10
10
15
10
20
Aerials Copy Price by size of paper
Topography Copy Price by size of paper
Lot/Plat/RLS (full size) Copy Price by size of paper
Lot/Plat Map Copy (reduced size) Price by size of paper
Miscellaneous Fees
Standard Specifications & Detail Plates $50 $50
CADD Detail Plates $25 $25
Digital Copies (when available)
Disc
Per hour (15 minute increments) $40
5
$40
5
Encroachment Agreements Or actual time and recording fees $100 $100
Partial Release $15 $15
Certificate of Compliance $25 $25
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
138
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
Private Drinking Water Test Actual cost of lab fees
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
139
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
Utility Rates
2021 2022
Water Rates
Residential and Irrigation
Fixed Charge (minimum water charge
per quarter)
0 to 15,000 gallons per quarter
15,001 to 30,000 gallons per quarter
30,001 to 60,000 gallons per quarter
60,001 to 90,000 gallons per quarter
90,001 + gallons per quarter
Utility rates are established for
each 1,000 gallons of usage
$15.06
2.20
3.40
4.04
4.50
5.50
15.81
2.31
3.57
4.24
4.73
5.78
Commercial
Fixed Charge (minimum water charge
per quarter)
0 to 51,000 gallons per quarter
51,001 to 99,000 gallons per quarter
99,001 to 150,000 gallons per quarter
150,001+ gallons per quarter
Utility rates are established for
each 1,000 gallons of usage
$15.06
2.20
3.40
4.04
4.50
$15.81
2.31
3.57
4.24
4.73
Multi-family properties Utility rates are established for
each 1,000 gallons of usage $2.92 $2.98
Bulk sales to contractors, landscapers, etc. at
City fill stations or other designated locations
Utility rates are established for
each 1,000 gallons of usage $7.47 $7.47
Sewage Rates
Residential based on winter quarter usage Utility rates are established for
each 1,000 gallons of usage $5.67 $5.97
Commercial based on actual quarterly usage Utility rates are established for
each 1,000 gallons of usage $5.67 $5.97
Minimum sewage charge per quarter For amounts up to 6,000 gallons
per quarter $34.86 $36.75
Surface Water
Management User Fees
Single-family and Rural residential
Agricultural
Undeveloped
Per quarter $21.24
$22.53
Management User Fees
Per quarter, multiplied by the utility factor
multiplied by the acreage of the parcel.
Medium density residential
High density residential, Industrial, Office,
Institutions (churches, schools, government
buildings, hospitals)
Business/Commercial
Parks, cemeteries, golf courses, arboretum
Parking lots as a principal use
Per quarter
Utility Factors
2.22
3.30
4.23
0.46
6.14
$41.40 $43.88
DocuSign Envelope ID: D6DD1D22-011B-4256-A39A-71E2C8F92245
140
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 689
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE CITY FEES AND CHARGES FOR 2022
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
ORDAINS:
Section 1.
(A) Policy and Purpose. By the enactment of this Ordinance, the City Council intends to
establish fees and charges required by the City Code for the year 2022 and to comply
with Minnesota Statutes, §462.353, subd. 4.
(B) Fees and Charges. The fees and charges for the City for the year 2022 are as set forth on
“Exhibit A” hereto.
(C) Application. Where a direct conflict exists between the amount of a fee or charge set by
any provision of the City Code and a fee or charge set by this Ordinance, the fee or
charge set by this Ordinance applies.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of May, 2022 by the City Council of the City of
Chanhassen, Minnesota.
Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
(Summary Ordinance 689 published in the Chanhassen Villager on May 19, 2022)
141
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9, 2022
2
ADMINISTRATIVE 2022 Fees
MISCELLANEOUS
Returned check/ACH fee $20
Copy fee See Engineering fee
section
Notary Fee $1
Radon kits $8
History books $10
Election Candidate Filing Fee $5
CEMETERY
Grave Fee
Resident
Non-Resident
$400
600
Interment Fee $150
Excavation Fee
Caskets
Urns & Infant Burials
May be higher in winter
$550
375
LICENSING FEES & CHARGES 2022 Fees
LIQUOR LICENSE
On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License
Restaurant
Floor area under 3,000 sf
Floor area 3,000-6,000 sf
Floor Area over 6,000 sf
Exclusive Liquor Store
Floor area under 3,000 sf
Floor area 3,000-6,000 sf
Floor Area over 6,000 sf
$6,115
9,609
13,104
$4,862
11,356
14,851
Off-sale
Intoxicating (*set by State Statute)
Microdistillery
Non-intoxicating
Small brewer
$200
200
58
200
On-sale
Brewer taproom
Cocktail room
Non-intoxicating
$400
400
410
Sunday sales (*set by State Statute) $200
Wine/beer license $410
Background investigation on liquor license owners, officers
or operating managers.
New Application
Changes in officers or
operating managers of
existing license holders
$250
100
Temporary on-sale liquor license $1
Community festival on-sale license $50
142
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9, 2022
3
LICENSING FEES & CHARGES 2022 Fees
LICENSING FEES & CHARGES 2022 Fees
OTHER BUSINESS LICENSES
Waste hauler Annual fee per company $300
Peddler, solicitor or transient merchant registration fee Per individual $100
Massage therapy
Business license
Background investigation
fee
$50
$250
Sexually oriented business license Annual $1,300
ANIMAL CONTROL
Kennel Fees $25
Dog and cat impounding fees
1st offense
2nd offense
3rd offense
4th offense
5th & subsequent offenses
(in 12-month period)
$50
100
150
200
250
Bow and arrow discharge permit $20
Fireworks Annual License fee $200
Shotgun discharge permit $20
Stable $25
PARKS & RECREATION 2022 Fees
GROUP PICNIC RESERVATION FEES
Resident - groups less than 100
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$125
150
Resident - groups of 100 or more
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$175
225
Nonresident - groups less than 100
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$225
275
Nonresident - groups of 100 or more
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$325
375
Nonprofit / Senior Group Discount 25%
District 112/276
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$45
50
All Other School Districts
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$100
150
RENTALS & RESERVATIONS
Canoe/Kayak Storage Rack
Residents
Nonresidents
$60
70
143
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9, 2022
4
PARKS & RECREATION 2022 Fees
Watercraft Rentals
Canoe
Kayak
Paddle Boat (4 person)
Row Boat
Row Boat with Electric Motor
Stand-Up Paddleboard
$15
15
15
15
15
20
MEMORIALS
Bench $500
Tree $1,000
Other By Arrangement
ADULT SOFTBALL
Summer Softball League (per team)
All resident team
1-5 non-resident members
6+ non-resident members
$850
900
950
Fall Softball League (per team)
All resident team
1-5 non-resident members
6+ non-resident members
$500
550
600
RECREATION PROGRAM FEES 2022 Fees
Youth and Rec Center Programs
Youth program fees are determined annually and are published in the seasonal program
brochures. Fees are designed to recover program costs.
ADULT/SENIOR PROGRAMS
(*fees cover program supplies and staffing costs)
Single-day Adult/Senior Programs Non-resident charge +$3 $10-65
Multi-day Adult/Senior Programs Non-resident charge +$10 $10-175
Senior Day Trips Non-resident charge +$10 $65-95
Senior Overnight Trips Non-resident charge +$10 $250-450
CHANHASSEN RECREATION CENTER 2022 Fees
Daily Fee
Resident
Nonresident
Senior Resident
Senior Nonresident
$4.00
4.50
3.75
4.25
Punch Cards
10 Punch Resident/Non-resident
10 Punch Senior Resident/Non-resident
20 Punch Resident/Non-resident
20 Punch Senior Resident/Non-resident
40 Punch Resident/Non-resident
40 Punch Senior Resident/Non-resident
$30/35
27.50/32.50
55/66
50/61
106/129
94/117
144
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9, 2022
5
CHANHASSEN RECREATION CENTER 2022 Fees
Facility
Gym Resident
Gym Nonresident
Community Room with Kitchen Resident
Community Room with Kitchen Nonresident
Community Room with Carpet Resident
Community Room with Carpet Nonresident
Conference Room Resident
Conference Room Nonresident
Per Hour
$50.00
60.00
20.00
25.00
20.00
25.00
15.00
20.00
Birthday Parties
Residents
Nonresidents
Additional Time
$70
85
PERSONAL TRAINING PACKAGES
Getting Started Package (3 sessions) $130
One-on-One Packages
5 Sessions
10 Sessions
15 Sessions
20 Sessions
$195
380
540
700
PERMITS & INSPECTIONS 2022 Fees
Building permit fees are based on declared permit valuation. For declared
valuations that are not representative of the work being completed, the
Chanhassen valuation table may be used to determine appropriate value.
Building Permit Fees
Base Fee (Valuation up to $1,000)
+fee per $1,000 of value
Valuation Range
$1,000-25,000
$25,001-50,000
$50,001-100,000
$100,001-500,000
$500,001-1,000,000
$1,000,000+
$80.00
+fee per $1,000 of value
$16.50
12.00
8.50
6.75
5.50
4.50
Plan Review Fee
When submittal of plans is required, and the
valuation is more than $3,000, a plan review
fee shall also be charged.
65% of permit fee
Fire Plan Review Fee
When submittal of plans is required, and the
valuation is more than $3,000, a plan review
fee shall also be charged.
65% of permit fee
145
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9, 2022
6
PERMITS & INSPECTIONS 2022 Fees
Plumbing & Mechanical Permit Fees
Total Valuation
$0 to $1,000
Plus percent of value over:
$1,001 to 10,000
$10,001 to 50,000
$50,001 and up
Testing of backflow devices
Base Rate $80
+2.25%
+1.75%
+1.50%
$30
Industrial Heating Equipment Permit Fees
Total Valuation
$0 to $50,000
Plus percent of value over:
$50,00 to 250,000
$250,001 to $500,000
$500,001 to $750,000
$750,001 and up
Base Rate $80
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
Roofing/ Siding/ Windows & Door
Flat fee per permit
$150 each
$300 max combined
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & OTHER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEES 2022 Fees
Comprehensive plan amendment
Land use amendment
$600
Conditional use permit
Single-family residence
All others
Does not include site plan review
$325
500
Grading permits
Under 50 cubic yards
50—1,000 cubic yards
Over 1,000 cubic yards
N/A
$50
Processed as interim use permit
Escrow $7,500
Interim use permit
Single-family residence
All others
$325
500
Sign rental $200
Planned unit development/rezoning
Major amendment
Minor amendment
$750
100
Rezoning $500
Sign permit
Permanent
Temporary
$100
35
Sign Plan Review $150
Site Plan Review
Commercial/industrial districts
Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of
building area
$500
146
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9, 2022
7
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & OTHER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEES 2022 Fees
Residential districts
Administrative
Plus $5.00 per unit 500
100
Subdivision
Create 3 lots or less
Create over 3 lots
Final plat
Metes and bounds division
Consolidate lots
Administrative subdivision
Plus $15.00 per lot
Plus $15.00 per lot
$300
600
250
300
150
150
Temporary outdoor sales and events
Temporary outdoor event permit
Seasonal sales permit
Special event permit
Race addendum
$50
50
100
50
Vacation of right-of-way/easements $300
Variance / Appeal of Administrative Decision $200
Wetland alteration permit
Single-family residence
All other uses
$150
275
Monumentation for all wetland buffer strip Per sign $20
Zoning Ordinance Amendment $500
Filing Fees/Attorney Costs
Recording documents
Recording plats and related documents
Per document
$50
450
Consultant Fees Cost will be billed to developer
Flood zone information and written zoning requests $65
Property owner's list, per property All requests must be made in
writing $3
Beekeeping permit $25
Chicken permit $25
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM FEES 2022 Fees
Yard waste drop off fees $1/bag
$8/cubic yard
Community garden plot rental $25
Weed Wrench Deposit (returned when tool returned) $150
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING FEES
Public Street Light $300
Administration Fee
Cost of Construction of Improvements
Less than $500,000
$500,000 to $1,000,000
First $500,000
Over $500,000
In conjunction with the installation of the
improvements
3% of construction costs
3% of construction costs
2% of construction costs
147
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9, 2022
8
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING FEES
Over $1,000,000
First $1,000,000
Over $1,000,000
2.5% of construction costs
1.5% of construction costs
SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT FEES
Surface Water Development Fees
Parks/Open Space
Single Family Residential
Medium Density Residential
Townhouse/Apartment Complex/High
Density Residential
Industrial
Commercial
Fees are based on the developable land.
Undeveloped areas such as wetlands and buffers
placed into an outlot, public parks, and public right-
of-way are exempt from these fees.
Per acre
$5,020
8,830
10,600
15,870
22,900
33,460
PARK DEDICATION FEES
Park Dedication Fees
Duplex
Multifamily/apartment units
Commercial/industrial
Continuing care retirement facility
Per dwelling
Per dwelling
Per acre
Per bed
$5,000
3,800
12,500
500
SEWER & WATER DEVELOPMENT FEES
Residential development & Commercial, industrial
and institutional development
Fees are based per unit. Parcels previously assessed
trunk hook-up fees are exempt. Parcels within the
Lake Ann Sewer District will be subject to the Lake
Ann Trunk sewer fees in addition to the sewer trunk
hook-up fees.
Sanitary Sewer
-if a portion of the sewer hookup fee was
not paid at the time of final subdivision
approval
Water
SAC (As established by the Metropolitan
Council and city SAC surcharge)
$1,611
$2,302
8,542
75
Parcels in Lake Ann district subject to Lake Ann
Trunk sewer fees in addition to the sewer trunk
hook-up fees
Water
Lake Ann Interceptor
Subtrunk
$1,971
2,068
All Development: Lateral Connection Charge
Sewer
Water
$7,980
10,541
OTHER INSPECTIONS & FEES
Site Inspection for Private Developments
The city hires consultant inspectors at an
average of 20 hours/week at $80.00 per
hour.
G.I.S. fees
Plat
Parcel
$100
30
148
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9, 2022
9
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING FEES
Inspections outside of normal business hours Per hour $80
Re-inspection fees Per hour $80
Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated Per hour $80
Additional plan review required by changes,
additions or revisions to plans Per hour $80
For use of outside consultants for plan checking
and inspections, or both Actual costs
Re-inspection fee for as-built surveys Per re-inspection $80
Zoning Permit Fee $50
PUBLIC WORKS 2022 Fees
Trenching & Boring Per 100 feet $20
Street or ROW Per hole $50
Directional Bore Per road crossing, no open cut $40
Drain Tile Connection $50
Driveway Permit $50
Temporary Lift of “No Parking” Zone Per week, no charge for 1st week $20
Temporary Street Closure
Deposit
$20
100
Underground Sprinkler System ROW permit fee (No main lines in ROW) $50
Copies
8½” x 11” Copy
8½” x 11” Color Copy
8½” x 14” or 11” x 17” Copy
8½” x 14” or 11” x 17” Color Copy
18” x 24” Copy
18” x 24” Color Copy
22” x 34” Copy
22” x 34” Color Copy
24” x 36” Copy
24” x 36” Color Copy
36” x 42” Copy
36” x 42” Color Copy
Per page
$.25
1
.50
2
5
10
6
10
10
15
10
20
Aerials Copy Price by size of paper
Topography Copy Price by size of paper
Lot/Plat/RLS (full size) Copy Price by size of paper
Lot/Plat Map Copy (reduced size) Price by size of paper
Standard Specifications & Detail Plates
Printed copy
PDF copy available on city website at no
charge
$75
CADD Detail Plates $25
Encroachment Agreements Application and recording fee $200
Partial Release $15
Certificate of Compliance $25
Private Drinking Water Test Actual cost of lab fees
149
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9, 2022
10
UTILITY RATES 2022 Fees
WATER RATES
Residential and Irrigation
Minimum water charge per quarter
0 to 15,000 gallons per quarter
15,001 to 30,000 gallons per quarter
30,001 to 60,000 gallons per quarter
60,001 to 90,000 gallons per quarter
90,001 + gallons per quarter
per 1,000 gallons
15.81
2.31
3.57
4.24
4.73
5.78
Commercial
Minimum water charge per quarter
0 to 51,000 gallons per quarter
51,001 to 99,000 gallons per quarter
99,001 to 150,000 gallons per quarter
150,001+ gallons per quarter
per 1,000 gallons
$15.81
2.31
3.57
4.24
4.73
Multi-family properties per 1,000 gallons $2.98
Bulk sales to contractors, landscapers, etc. at
City fill stations or other designated locations
Per 1,000 gallons $7.47
SANITARY SEWER RATES
Residential based on winter quarter usage per 1,000 gallons $5.97
Commercial based on actual quarterly usage Per 1,000 gallons $5.97
Minimum sewage charge per quarter Minimum up to 6,000 gallons $36.75
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT RATES
Surface Water Management User Fees -
Single-family, Rural residential, Agricultural
& Undeveloped
Per quarter
$22.53
Surface Water Management User Fees –
other property types
Medium density residential
High density residential, Industrial, Office,
Institutions (churches, schools, government
buildings, hospitals)
Business/Commercial
Parks, cemeteries, golf courses, arboretum
Parking lots as a principal use
Per quarter base, multiplied by the
utility factor per acre
Utility Factor per acre
2.22
3.30
4.23
0.46
6.14
$43.88
DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS
Late Fees 10% of balance quarterly fee
Certification Fee (includes 1 year interest) 10% of Balance of account + County fee
150
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 697
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE CITY FEES AND CHARGES FOR 2022
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
ORDAINS:
Section 1.
(A)Policy and Purpose. By the enactment of this Ordinance, the City Council intends to
establish fees and charges required by the City Code for the year 2022 and to comply
with Minnesota Statutes, §462.353, subd. 4.
(B)Fees and Charges. The fees and charges for the City for the year 2022 are as set forth on
“Exhibit A” hereto.
(C)Application. Where a direct conflict exists between the amount of a fee or charge set by
any provision of the City Code and a fee or charge set by this Ordinance, the fee or
charge set by this Ordinance applies.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of September, 2022 by the City Council of the
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota.
Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
(Summary Ordinance 697 published in the Chanhassen Villager on October 6, 2022)
151
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
1
ADMINISTRATIVE 2022 Fees
MISCELLANEOUS
Returned Check/ACH Fee $20
Copy Fee See Engineering Fees
Notary Fee Per notary signature 1
Radon Kit 8
History Book 10
Election Candidate Filing Fee 5
Bow and arrow discharge permit 20
Shotgun discharge permit 20
CEMETERY
Grave Fee
Resident
Non-Resident
$400
600
Interment Fee $150
Excavation Fee (payable directly to excavator)
Caskets
Urns & Infant Burials
May be higher in winter $550
375
LICENSING FEES & CHARGES 2022 Fees
LIQUOR LICENSES
Annual license period is from May 1 to April 30. All liquor licenses are renewed annually.
On-Sale
Intoxicating Liquor License:
Floor area under 3,000 square feet
Floor area 3,000-6,000 square feet
Floor area over 6,000 square feet
Sunday Sales (set by State Statute)
Brewer Taproom
Cocktail Room
Wine/Beer
3.2% Malt Liquor
$6,115
9,609
13,104
200
400
400
410
410
Off-Sale
Intoxicating (*set by State Statute)
Microdistillery
Small Brewer
3.2% Malt Liquor
$200
200
200
58
Background investigation on liquor license owners, officers or
operating managers.
New Application
Changes in officers or
operating managers of
existing license holders
$250
100
Temporary On-Sale Liquor License $1
Community Festival On-Sale Liquor License $50
OTHER BUSINESS LICENSES
Waste Hauler Annual fee per company $300
Peddler, solicitor or transient merchant registration fee Per individual $100
Massage Therapy Business license
Background investigation fee
$50
$250
Sexually oriented business license Annual $1,300
152
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
2
LICENSING FEES & CHARGES 2022 Fees
ANIMAL CONTROL
Kennel Fee -Commercial Annual $25
Dog and Cat Impounding Fees
1st offense
2nd offense
3rd offense
4th offense
5th & subsequent offenses
(in 12-month period)
$50
100
150
200
250
Stable Permit $25
PARKS & RECREATION 2022 Fees
GROUP PICNIC RESERVATION FEES
Resident -groups less than 100
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$125
150
Resident -groups of 100 or more
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$175
225
Nonresident -groups less than 100
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$225
275
Nonresident -groups of 100 or more
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$325
375
Nonprofit/Senior Group Discount 25%
District 112/276
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$45
50
All Other School Districts
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$100
150
RENTALS & RESERVATIONS
Canoe/Kayak Storage Rack
Residents
Nonresidents
$60
70
Watercraft Rentals
Canoe
Kayak
Paddle Boat (4 person)
Row Boat
Row Boat with Electric Motor
Stand-Up Paddleboard
$15
15
15
15
15
20
MEMORIALS
Bench $500
Tree $1,000
Other By Arrangement
153
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
3
PARKS & RECREATION 2022 Fees
ADULT SOFTBALL
Summer Softball League (per team)
All resident team
1-5 non-resident members
6+ non-resident members
$850
900
950
Fall Softball League (per team)
All resident team
1-5 non-resident members
6+ non-resident members
$500
550
600
RECREATION PROGRAM FEES 2022 Fees
YOUTH AND REC CENTER PROGRAMS
Youth program fees are determined annually and are published in the seasonal program brochures.
Fees are designed to recover program costs.
ADULT/SENIOR PROGRAMS (*fees cover program supplies and staffing costs)
Single-day Adult/Senior Programs Non-resident charge +$3 $10-65
Multi-day Adult/Senior Programs Non-resident charge +$10 $10-175
Senior Day Trips Non-resident charge +$10 $65-95
Senior Overnight Trips Non-resident charge +$10 $250-450
CHANHASSEN RECREATION CENTER 2022 Fees
Daily Fee
Resident
Nonresident
Senior Resident
Senior Nonresident
$4.00
4.50
3.75
4.25
Punch Cards
10 Punch Resident/Non-resident
10 Punch Senior Resident/Non-resident
20 Punch Resident/Non-resident
20 Punch Senior Resident/Non-resident
40 Punch Resident/Non-resident
40 Punch Senior Resident/Non-resident
$30/35
27.50/32.50
55/66
50/61
106/129
94/117
Facility
Gym Resident
Gym Nonresident
Community Room with Kitchen Resident
Community Room with Kitchen Nonresident
Community Room with Carpet Resident
Community Room with Carpet Nonresident
Conference Room Resident
Conference Room Nonresident
Per Hour
$50.00
60.00
20.00
25.00
20.00
25.00
15.00
20.00
Birthday Parties
Residents
Nonresidents
Additional Time Hourly Facility Fee
$70
85
154
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
4
CHANHASSEN RECREATION CENTER 2022 Fees
PERSONAL TRAINING PACKAGES
Getting Started Package (3 sessions)$130
One-on-One Packages
5 Sessions
10 Sessions
15 Sessions
20 Sessions
$195
380
540
700
PERMITS & INSPECTIONS 2022 Fees
Building permit fees are based on declared permit valuation. For declared valuations that are not
representative of the work being completed, the Chanhassen valuation table may be used to determine
appropriate value.
Building, Fire and Septic Permit Fees
Base Fee (Valuation up to $1,000)
+fee per $1,000 of value Valuation Range:
$1,000-25,000
$25,001-50,000
$50,001-100,000
$100,001-500,000
$500,001-1,000,000
$1,000,000+
$80.00
+fee per $1,000 of value:
$16.50
12.00
8.50
6.75
5.50
4.50
Plan Review Fee
When submittal of plans is required,
and the valuation is more than $3,000,
a plan review fee shall also be charged.
65% of permit fee
Fire Plan Review Fee
When submittal of plans is required,
and the valuation is more than $3,000,
a plan review fee shall also be charged.
65% of permit fee
Plumbing & Mechanical Permit Fees
Total Valuation
$0 to $1,000
Plus percent of value over:
$1,001 to 10,000
$10,001 to 50,000
$50,001 and up
Testing of Backflow Devices
Base Rate $80
+2.25%
+1.75%
+1.50%
$30
Industrial Heating Equipment Permit Fees
Total Valuation
$0 to $50,000
Plus percent of value over:
$50,00 to 250,000
$250,001 to $500,000
$500,001 to $750,000
$750,001 and up
Base Rate $80
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
Roofing/ Siding/ Windows & Door
Flat fee per permit
$150 each
$300 max combined
155
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
5
PERMITS & INSPECTIONS 2022 Fees
State Surcharge
Fee collected on behalf of
Minnesota Dept. of Labor and
Industry
.05% of permit value
Moving Building Each (Permit fee does not
include escrow)$150
Septic Incompliance Surcharge Per month $100
Cancelled permits can receive an 80% refund of the city permit fee. State Surcharge is nonrefundable.
ESCROWS 2022 Fees
Additional escrow can be collected in the amount equal
to at least 110% of the project
As-Built
Landscaping
Erosion/Security
$2500
750
250-7500
FIRE DEPARTMENT 2022 Fees
FALSE ALARMS
Number of False Alarms:
First Alarm
Second Alarm
Third Alarm or more (each occurrence)
No Charge
No Charge
$350
Fireworks Display Permit $200
Fireworks Sales Permit $100
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & OTHER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEES 2022 Fees
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Land Use Amendment $600
Conditional Use Permit
Single-Family Residence
All Others
Does not include site plan review $325
500
Grading Permits
Under 50 cubic yards
50-1,000 cubic yards
Over 1,000 cubic yards Processed as Interim Use Permit
Escrow
N/A
$50
$7,500
Interim Use Permit
Single-Family Residence
All Others
$325
500
Sign Rental $200
Planned Unit Development/Rezoning
Major Amendment
Minor Amendment
$750
100
Rezoning $500
Sign Permit
Permanent
Temporary
$100
35
Sign Plan Review $150
156
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
6
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & OTHER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEES 2022 Fees
Site Plan Review
Commercial/Industrial Districts
Residential Districts
Administrative
Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of
building area
Plus $5.00 per unit
$500
500
100
Subdivision
Create 3 Lots or Less
Create Over 3 Lots
Final Plat
Metes and Bounds Division
Consolidate Lots
Administrative Subdivision
Plus $15.00 per lot
Plus $15.00 per lot
Plus $50.00 per lot
$300
600
250
300
150
150
Temporary Outdoor Sales and Events
Temporary Outdoor Event Permit
Seasonal Sales Permit
Special Event Permit
Race Addendum
$50
50
100
50
Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements $300
Variance / Appeal of Administrative Decision $200
Wetland Alteration Permit
Single-Family Residence
All Other Uses
$150
275
Monumentation For All Wetland Buffer Strips Per sign $20
Zoning Ordinance Amendment $500
Filing Fees/Attorney Costs
Recording documents:
Conditional Use Permit
Vacation
Metes & Bounds Subdivision
Interim Use Permit
Variance
Easements
Site Plan Agreement
Wetland Alteration Permit
Deeds
Recording plats and related documents
Per document
Flat Fee
$50
85
250
50
50
85
85
50
100
$450
Consultant Fees Costs will be billed to developer
Flood Zone Information $65
Loudspeaker $10
Property Owner's List Per property $3
Beekeeping Permit $25
Chicken Permit $25
Zoning Permit Fee $50
Zoning Letter $65
157
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
7
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM FEES 2022 Fees
Yard Waste Drop-Off Fees $1/bag
$8/cubic yard
Community Garden Plot Rental $25
Weed Wrench Deposit (Refunded When Tool Returned)$150
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING FEES 2022 Fees
Public Street Light $300
Administration Fee
Cost of Construction of Improvements:
Less than $500,000
$500,000 to $1,000,000
First $500,000
Over $500,000
Over $1,000,000
First $1,000,000
Over $1,000,000
In conjunction with the installation of
the improvements
3% of construction costs
3% of construction costs
2% of construction costs
2.5% of construction costs
1.5% of construction costs
SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT FEES
Fees are based on the developable land. Undeveloped areas such as wetlands and buffers placed into an
outlot, public parks, and public right-of-way are exempt from these fees.
Surface Water Development Fees
Parks/Open Space
Single Family Residential
Medium Density Residential
Townhouse/Apartment Complex/High-
Density Residential
Industrial
Commercial
Per acre
$5,020
8,830
10,600
15,870
22,900
33,460
PARK DEDICATION FEES
Park Dedication Fees
Single-Family
Duplex
Multifamily/Apartment Units
Commercial/Industrial
Continuing Care Retirement Facility
Per dwelling
Per dwelling
Per dwelling
Per acre
Per bed
$5800
5,000
3,800
12,500
500
SEWER & WATER DEVELOPMENT FEES
Residential development &Commercial,
industrial and institutional development
Fees are based per unit. Parcels previously
assessed trunk hook-up fees are exempt. Parcels
within the Lake Ann Sewer District will be subject
to the Lake Ann Trunk sewer fees in addition to the
sewer trunk hook-up fees.
Sanitary Sewer
Sanitary Sewer-Reduced Rate
-if 30% of the sewer hookup fee was
paid at the time of final subdivision
approval
Water
Water-Reduced Rate
-if 30% of the water hookup fee was
paid at the time of final subdivision
approval
$2302
1611
8,542
5979
158
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
8
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING FEES 2022 Fees
City SAC Surcharge
SAC (As established by the Metropolitan
Council)
75
2,485
Parcels in Lake Ann district subject to Lake Ann
Trunk sewer fees in addition to the sewer trunk
hook-up fees
Lake Ann Interceptor
Subtrunk
$1,971
2,068
All Development: Lateral Connection Charge
Sewer
Water
$7,980
10,541
OTHER INSPECTIONS & FEES
Site Inspection for Private Developments
The city hires consultant inspectors at an
average of 20 hours/week at $80.00 per
hour.
G.I.S. fees
Plat
Parcel
$100
30
Inspections outside of normal business hours Per hour $80
Re-inspection fees Per hour $80
Inspections for which no fee is specifically
indicated Per hour $80
Additional plan review required by changes,
additions or revisions to plans Per hour $80
For use of outside consultants for plan checking
and inspections, or both Actual costs
Re-inspection fee for as-built surveys Per re-inspection $80
PUBLIC WORKS & ENGINEERING 2022 Fees
Trenching & Boring Per 100 feet $20
Street or ROW Per hole $50
Directional Bore Per road crossing, no open cut $40
Drain Tile Connection $50
Driveway Permit $50
Temporary Lift of “No Parking” Zone Per week, no charge for 1st week $20
Weight Restriction $25
Temporary Street Closure
Deposit
$20
100
Underground Sprinkler System ROW permit fee (No main lines in ROW)$50
159
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
9
PUBLIC WORKS & ENGINEERING 2022 Fees
Copies
8½” x 11” Copy
8½” x 11” Color Copy
8½” x 14” or 11” x 17” Copy
8½” x 14” or 11” x 17” Color Copy
18” x 24” Copy
18” x 24” Color Copy
22” x 34” Copy
22” x 34” Color Copy
24” x 36” Copy
24” x 36” Color Copy
36” x 42” Copy
36” x 42” Color Copy
Per page
$.25
1
.50
2
5
10
6
10
10
15
10
20
Aerials Copy Price by size of paper
Topography Copy Price by size of paper
Lot/Plat/RLS (full size) Copy Price by size of paper
Lot/Plat Map Copy (reduced size)Price by size of paper
Standard Specifications & Detail Plates
Printed copy
(PDF copy available on city website at no
charge)
$75
CADD Detail Plates $25
Encroachment Agreements Application and recording fee $200
Partial Release $15
Certificate of Compliance $25
Private Drinking Water Test Actual cost of lab fees
Unauthorized water turn on $100
Meter Tampering $50
Failure to allow access to water meter Per Month $100
Water Use Restriction 1st violation
2nd violation
3rd violation
4th violation
$50
100
150
250
Small Wireless Facility Agreement Per year rent to collocate on city structure
Per year maintenance
Monthly fee for electrical service
Per radio node, less than or equal to
100 max watts
Per radio node over 100 max watts or
actual cost of electricity
$150
25
73
182
160
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
10
UTILITY RATES 2022 Fees
WATER RATES
Residential and Irrigation
Minimum water charge per quarter
0 to 15,000 gallons per quarter
15,001 to 30,000 gallons per quarter
30,001 to 60,000 gallons per quarter
60,001 to 90,000 gallons per quarter
90,001 + gallons per quarter
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
15.81
2.31
3.57
4.24
4.73
5.78
Commercial
Minimum water charge per quarter
0 to 51,000 gallons per quarter
51,001 to 99,000 gallons per quarter
99,001 to 150,000 gallons per quarter
150,001+ gallons per quarter
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
$15.81
2.31
3.57
4.24
4.73
Multi-family Properties per 1,000 gallons $2.98
Water Test $3.03
Bulk sales to contractors, landscapers, etc. at
City fill stations or other designated locations Per 1,000 gallons $7.47
SANITARY SEWER RATES
Residential based on winter quarter usage per 1,000 gallons $5.97
Commercial based on actual quarterly usage Per 1,000 gallons $5.97
Minimum sewage charge per quarter Minimum up to 6,000 gallons $36.75
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT RATES
Surface Water Management User Fees
Single-family, Rural Residential, Agricultural
& Undeveloped
Per quarter $22.53
Surface Water Management User Fees
Other Property Types
Medium density residential
High density residential, Industrial, Office,
Institutions (churches, schools, government
buildings, hospitals)
Business/Commercial
Parks, cemeteries, golf courses, arboretum
Parking lots as a principal use
Per quarter base, multiplied by the
utility factor per acre
Utility Factor per acre
2.22
3.30
4.23
0.46
6.14
$43.88
DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS
Late Fees 10% of balance quarterly fee
Certification Fee 10% of Balance of account + County fee
161
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. XXX
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY FEES AND CHARGES FOR 2022
The purpose of this ordinance is to amend Ordinance 689 adopted on May 9, 2022
concerning the2022 City Fees and Charges:
The following fee categories were amended as follows:
Permits and Inspections, Escrows, Fire Department, Development Review, Environmental
Programs, Park Dedication Fees, Sewer & Water Development Fees, Public Works & Engineering,
and Utility Rates.
A printed copy of Ordinance No. XXX is available for inspection by any person during
regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk.
PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION this 26th day of
September, 2022, by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen.
(Summary Ordinance published in the Chanhassen Villager on October 6, 2022)
162
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
1
ADMINISTRATIVE 2022 Fees
MISCELLANEOUS
Returned Ccheck/ACH Ffee $20
Copy Ffee See Engineering feeFees
section
Notary Fee Per notary signature $1
Radon kitKits $8
History bookBooks $10
Election Candidate Filing Fee $5
Bow and arrow discharge permit 20
Shotgun discharge permit 20
CEMETERY
Grave Fee
Resident
Non-Resident
$400
600
Interment Fee $150
Excavation Fee (payable directly to excavator)
Caskets
Urns & Infant Burials
May be higher in winter
$550
375
163
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
2
Licensing Fees & Charges
LICENSING FEES & CHARGES 2022 Fees
LIQUOR LICENSES
Annual license period is from May 1 to April 30. All liquor licenses are renewed annually.
On- Sale
Intoxicating Liquor License:
Restaurant
Floor area under 3,000 sfsquare feet
Floor area 3,000-6,000 square feetsf
Floor aArea over 6,000 square feetsf
Sunday Sales (set by State Statute)
Brewer Taproom
Cocktail Room
Wine/Beer
3.2% Malt Liquor Exclusive Liquor Store
Floor area under 3,000 sf
Floor area 3,000-6,000 sf
Floor Area over 6,000 sf
$6,115
9,609
13,104
200
400
400
410
410
$74,862
11,356
14,851
Off-sSale
Intoxicating (*set by State Statute)
Microdistillery
Small Brewer
3.2% Malt LiquorNon-intoxicating
Small brewer
$200
200
200
58
200
On-sale
Brewer taproom
Cocktail room
Non-intoxicating
$400
400
410
Sunday sales (*set by State Statute) $200
Wine/beer license $410
Background investigation on liquor license owners, officers or
operating managers.
New Application
Changes in officers or
operating managers of
existing license holders
$250
100
Temporary On-Sale Liquor License liquor license $1
Community festival Festival On-Sale Liquor License $50
OTHER BUSINESS LICENSES
Waste hauler Hauler Annual fee per company $300
Peddler, solicitor or transient merchant registration fee Per individual $100
Massage therapy Therapy
Business license
Background investigation fee
$50
$250
Sexually oriented business license Annual $1,300
ANIMAL CONTROL
Kennel Fees - Commercial Annual $25
Dog and cat Cat impounding Impounding feesFees
1st offense
2nd offense
3rd offense
$50
100
150
164
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
3
LICENSING FEES & CHARGES 2022 Fees
4th offense
5th & subsequent offenses
(in 12-month period)
200
250
Bow and arrow discharge permit $20
Fireworks Annual License fee $200
Shotgun discharge permit $20
Stable Permit $25
PARKS & RECREATION 2022
Fees
GROUP PICNIC RESERVAITON RESERVATION FEES
Resident - groups less than 100
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$125
150
Resident - groups of 100 or more
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$175
225
Nonresident - groups less than 100
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$225
275
Nonresident - groups of 100 or more
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$325
375
Nonprofit / Senior Group Discount 25%
District 112/276
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$45
50
All Other School Districts
Monday—Thursday
Friday—Sunday
$100
150
RENTALS & RESERVATIONS
Canoe/Kayak Storage Rack
Residents
Nonresidents
$60
70
Watercraft Rentals
Canoe
Kayak
Paddle Boat (4 person)
Row Boat
Row Boat with Electric Motor
Stand-Up Paddleboard
$15
15
15
15
15
20
MEMORIALS
Bench $500
165
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
4
PARKS & RECREATION 2022
Fees
Tree $1,000
Other By Arrangement
ADULT SOFTBALL
Summer Softball League (per team)
All resident team
1-5 non-resident members
6+ non-resident members
$850
900
950
Fall Softball League (per team)
All resident team
1-5 non-resident members
6+ non-resident members
$500
550
600
RECREATION PROGRAM FEES 2022 Fees
YOUTH AND REC CENTER PROGRAMS
Youth program fees are determined annually and are published in the seasonal program brochures.
Fees are designed to recover program costs.
ADULT/SENIOR PROGRAMS
(*fees cover program supplies and staffing costs)
Single-day Adult/Senior Programs Non-resident charge +$3 $10-65
Multi-day Adult/Senior Programs Non-resident charge +$10 $10-175
Senior Day Trips Non-resident charge +$10 $65-95
Senior Overnight Trips Non-resident charge +$10 $250-450
CHANHASSEN RECREATION CENTER 2022 Fees
Daily Fee
Resident
Nonresident
Senior Resident
Senior Nonresident
$4.00
4.50
3.75
4.25
Punch Cards
10 Punch Resident/Non-resident
10 Punch Senior Resident/Non-resident
20 Punch Resident/Non-resident
20 Punch Senior Resident/Non-resident
40 Punch Resident/Non-resident
40 Punch Senior Resident/Non-resident
$30/35
27.50/32.50
55/66
50/61
106/129
94/117
Facility
Gym Resident
Gym Nonresident
Community Room with Kitchen Resident
Community Room with Kitchen Nonresident
Community Room with Carpet Resident
Community Room with Carpet Nonresident
Conference Room Resident
Conference Room Nonresident
Per Hour
$50.00
60.00
20.00
25.00
20.00
25.00
15.00
20.00
166
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
5
CHANHASSEN RECREATION CENTER 2022 Fees
Birthday Parties
Residents
Nonresidents
Additional Time
Hourly Facility Fee
$70
85
PERSONAL TRAINING PACKAGES
Getting Started Package (3 sessions) $130
One-on-One Packages
5 Sessions
10 Sessions
15 Sessions
20 Sessions
$195
380
540
700
PERMITS & INSPECTIONS 2022 Fees
Building permit fees are based on declared permit valuation. For declared valuations that are not
representative of the work being completed, the Chanhassen valuation table may be used to determine
appropriate value.
Building, Fire and Septic Permit Fees
Base Fee (Valuation up to $1,000)
+fee per $1,000 of value
Valuation Range:
$1,000-25,000
$25,001-50,000
$50,001-100,000
$100,001-500,000
$500,001-1,000,000
$1,000,000+
$80.00
+fee per $1,000 of value:
$16.50
12.00
8.50
6.75
5.50
4.50
Plan Review Fee
When submittal of plans is required,
and the valuation is more than $3,000,
a plan review fee shall also be charged.
65% of permit fee
Fire Plan Review Fee
When submittal of plans is required,
and the valuation is more than $3,000,
a plan review fee shall also be charged.
65% of permit fee
Plumbing & Mechanical Permit Fees
Total Valuation
$0 to $1,000
Plus percent of value over:
$1,001 to 10,000
$10,001 to 50,000
$50,001 and up
Testing of backflow Backflow
devicesDevices
Base Rate $80
+2.25%
+1.75%
+1.50%
$30
167
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
6
PERMITS & INSPECTIONS 2022 Fees
Industrial Heating Equipment Permit Fees
Total Valuation
$0 to $50,000
Plus percent of value over:
$50,00 to 250,000
$250,001 to $500,000
$500,001 to $750,000
$750,001 and up
Base Rate $80
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
Roofing/ Siding/ Windows & Door
Flat fee per permit
$150 each
$300 max combined
State Surcharge
Fee collected on behalf of
Minnesota Depart.ment of
Labor and Industry
.05% of permit value
Moving Building Each (Permit fee does not
include escrow)
$150 each
Septic Incompliance Surcharge Per month $100.00
Cancelled permits can receive an 80% refund of the city permit fee. State Surcharge is nonrefundable.
ESCROWS 2022 Fees
Additional escrow can be collected in the amount equal
to at least 110% of the project
As-Built
Landscaping
Erosion/Security
$2500
750
250-7500
FIRE AlarmDEPARTMENT 2022 Fees
FALSE ALARMSNumber of False Alarms
Number of False Alarms:
First Alarm1ST
Second Alarm
Third Alarm or more2ND
3 or more (each occurrence)
$50No
Charge
No
Charge50
$350
Fireworks Display Permit $200
Fireworks Sales Permit $100
168
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
7
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & OTHER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEES 2022 Fees
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Land Use Amendment
$6000
Conditional Use Permit
Single-Family Residence
All Others
Does not include site plan review
$325
500
Grading Permits
Under 50 cubic yards
50—-1,000 cubic yards
Over 1,000 cubic yards
N/A
$50
Processed as Interim Use Permit
Escrow $7,500
N/A
$50
$7,500
Interim Use Permit
Single-Family Residence
All Others
$325
500
Sign Rental $200
Planned Unit Development/Rezoning
Major Amendment
Minor Amendment
$750
100
Rezoning $500
Sign Permit
Permanent
Temporary
$100
35
Sign Plan Review $150
Site Plan Review
Commercial/Industrial Districts
Residential Districts
Administrative
Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of
building area
Plus $5.00 per unit
$500
500
100
Subdivision
Create 3 Lots Or or Less
Create Over 3 Lots
Final Plat
Metes And and Bounds Division
Consolidate Lots
Administrative Subdivision
Plus $15.00 per lot
Plus $15.00 per lot
Plus $50.00 per lot
$300
600
250
300
150
150
Temporary Outdoor Sales aAnd Events
Temporary Outdoor Event Permit
Seasonal Sales Permit
Special Event Permit
Race Addendum
$50
50
100
50
Loudspeaker $10
Vacation oOf Right-oOf-Way/Easements $300
Variance / Appeal oOf Administrative Decision $200
Wetland Alteration Permit
Single-Family Residence
All Other Uses
$150
275
169
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
8
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & OTHER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEES 2022 Fees
Monumentation For All Wetland Buffer Strips Per sign $20
Zoning Ordinance Amendment $500
Filing Fees/Attorney Costs
Recording documents:
Conditional Use Permit
Vacation
Metes & Bounds Subdivision
Interim Use Permit
Variance
Easements
Site Plan Agreement
Wetland Alteration Permit
Deeds
Recording plats and related documents
Per document
Flat Fee
$50
85
250.00
50
50
85
85
50
100
$450
Consultant Fees Costs will be billed to developer
Flood Zone Information And Written Zoning
Requests
$65
Loudspeaker $10
Property Owner's List, Per Property Per propertyAll requests must be
made in writing $3
Beekeeping Permit $25
Chicken Permit $25
Zoning Permit Fee $50
Zoning Letter $65
170
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
9
EVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM FEES 2022 Fees
Yard Waste drop Drop-Off Fees
$1/bag
$8/cubic yard
Community Garden Plot Rental $25
Weed Wrench Deposit (Refundedturned When Tool
Returned)
$150
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING FEES 2022 Fees
Public Street Light $300
Administration Fee
Cost of Construction of Improvements:
Less than $500,000
$500,000 to $1,000,000
First $500,000
Over $500,000
Over $1,000,000
First $1,000,000
Over $1,000,000
In conjunction with the installation of
the improvements
3% of construction costs
3% of construction costs
2% of construction costs
2.5% of construction costs
1.5% of construction costs
SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT FEES
Fees are based on the developable land. Undeveloped areas such as wetlands and buffers placed into an
outlot, public parks, and public right-of-way are exempt from these fees.
Surface Water Development Fees
Parks/Open Space
Single Family Residential
Medium Density Residential
Townhouse/Apartment Complex/High
High-Density Residential
Industrial
Commerciall
Fees are based on the developable land.
Undeveloped areas such as wetlands and buffers
placed into an outlot, public parks, and public
right-of-way are exempt from these fees.
Per acre
$5,020
8,830
10,600
15,870
22,900
33,460
PARK DEDICATION FEES
Park Dedication Fees
Single-Family
Duplex
Multifamily/Apartment Units
Commercial/Industrial
Continuing Care Retirement Facility
Per dwelling
Per dwelling
Per dwelling
Per acre
Per bed
$5800
$5,000
3,800
12,500
500
SEWER & WATER DEVELOPMENT FEES
Residential development & Commercial,
industrial and institutional development
Sanitary Sewer
$1,611$2302
$2,302
171
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
10
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING FEES 2022 Fees
Fees are based per unit. Parcels previously
assessed trunk hook-up fees are exempt. Parcels
within the Lake Ann Sewer District will be subject
to the Lake Ann Trunk sewer fees in addition to the
sewer trunk hook-up fees.
-if a portion of the sewer hookup fee
was not paid at the time of final
subdivision approval
Sanitary Sewer- Reduced Rate
-if 30% of the sewer hookup fee was
paid at the time of final subdivision
approval
Water
Water-Reduced Rate
-if 30% of the water hookup fee was
paid at the time of final subdivision
approval
City SAC Surcharge
SAC (As established by the Metropolitan
Council and city SAC surcharge)
1611
8,542
5979
75
752,485
Parcels in Lake Ann district subject to Lake Ann
Trunk sewer fees in addition to the sewer trunk
hook-up fees
Water
Lake Ann Interceptor
Subtrunk
$1,971
2,068
All Development: Lateral Connection Charge
Sewer
Water
$7,980
10,541
OTHER INSPECTIONS & FEES
Site Inspection for Private Developments
The city hires consultant inspectors at an
average of 20 hours/week at $80.00 per
hour.
G.I.S. fees
Plat
Parcel
$100
30
Inspections outside of normal business hours Per hour $80
Re-inspection fees Per hour $80
Inspections for which no fee is specifically
indicated Per hour $80
Additional plan review required by changes,
additions or revisions to plans Per hour $80
For use of outside consultants for plan checking
and inspections, or both Actual costs
Re-inspection fee for as-built surveys Per re-inspection $80
Zoning Permit Fee $50
Zoning Letter $65
172
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
11
PUBLIC WORKS & ENGINEERING 2022 Fees
Trenching & Boring Per 100 feet $20
Street or ROW Per hole $50
Directional Bore Per road crossing, no open cut $40
Drain Tile Connection
$50
Driveway Permit $50
Temporary Lift of “No Parking” Zone Per week, no charge for 1st week $20
Weight Restriction $25
Temporary Street Closure
Deposit
$20
100
Underground Sprinkler System ROW permit fee (No main lines in ROW) $50
Copies
8½” x 11” Copy
8½” x 11” Color Copy
8½” x 14” or 11” x 17” Copy
8½” x 14” or 11” x 17” Color Copy
18” x 24” Copy
18” x 24” Color Copy
22” x 34” Copy
22” x 34” Color Copy
24” x 36” Copy
24” x 36” Color Copy
36” x 42” Copy
36” x 42” Color Copy
Per page
$.25
1
.50
2
5
10
6
10
10
15
10
20
Aerials Copy Price by size of paper
Topography Copy Price by size of paper
Lot/Plat/RLS (full size) Copy Price by size of paper
Lot/Plat Map Copy (reduced size) Price by size of paper
Standard Specifications & Detail Plates
Printed copy
(PDF copy available on city website at no
charge)
$75
CADD Detail Plates $25
Encroachment Agreements Application and recording fee $200
Partial Release $15
Certificate of Compliance $25
Private Drinking Water Test Actual cost of lab fees
Unauthorized water turn on $100
Meter Tampering $50
Failure to allow access to water meter Per Month $100
Water Use Restriction 1st violation
2nd violation
3rd violation
4th violation
$50
100
150
250
173
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
12
PUBLIC WORKS & ENGINEERING 2022 Fees
Small Wireless Facility Agreement
Per year rent to collocate on city structure
Per year maintenance
Monthly fee for electrical service
-Per radio node, less than or equal to
100 max wattwatts
-Per radio node over 100 max watts
or actual cost of electricity
$150
25
73
182
174
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
13
175
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2022 FEE SCHEDULE
UPDATED MAY 9SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
14
UTILITY RATES 2022 Fees
WATER RATES
Residential and Irrigation
Minimum water charge per quarter
0 to 15,000 gallons per quarter
15,001 to 30,000 gallons per quarter
30,001 to 60,000 gallons per quarter
60,001 to 90,000 gallons per quarter
90,001 + gallons per quarter
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
15.81
2.31
3.57
4.24
4.73
5.78
Commercial
Minimum water charge per quarter
0 to 51,000 gallons per quarter
51,001 to 99,000 gallons per quarter
99,001 to 150,000 gallons per quarter
150,001+ gallons per quarter
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
per 1,000 gallons
$15.81
2.31
3.57
4.24
4.73
Multi-family propertiesProperties per 1,000 gallons $2.98
Water Test $3.03
Bulk sales to contractors, landscapers, etc. at
City fill stations or other designated locations Per 1,000 gallons $7.47
SANITARY SEWER RATES
Residential based on winter quarter usage per 1,000 gallons $5.97
Commercial based on actual quarterly usage Per 1,000 gallons $5.97
Minimum sewage charge per quarter Minimum up to 6,000 gallons $36.75
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT RATES
Surface Water Management User Fees -
Single-family, Rural residentialResidential,
Agricultural & Undeveloped
Per quarter
$22.53
Surface Water Management User Fees –
Other Property Types
Medium density residential
High density residential, Industrial, Office,
Institutions (churches, schools, government
buildings, hospitals)
Business/Commercial
Parks, cemeteries, golf courses, arboretum
Parking lots as a principal use
Per quarter base, multiplied by the
utility factor per acre
Utility Factor per acre
2.22
3.30
4.23
0.46
6.14
$43.88
DELINQUENT ACCOUNTSs
Late Fees 10% of balance quarterly fee
Certification Fee (includes 1 year interest) 10% of Balance of account + County fee
176
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Ordinance 696: Adopt Summary of Ordinance 696 for Publication Purposes -
Avienda PUD Amendment
File No.Item No: D.10
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council adopts Summary Ordinance 696 amending the Avienda Planned Unit
Development."
Motion Type 4/5 Vote
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
On Monday, September 12, 2022, Ordinance 696 amending the Avienda Planned Unit Development
was approved by the City Council. The ordinance must be published in order to be effective; however,
the ordinance is rather lengthy. In an effort to reduce publication costs, staff is requesting approval to
publish a summary of Ordinance 696.
BACKGROUND
"The Chanhassen City Council adopts Summary Ordinance 696 amending the Avienda Planned Unit
Development."
DISCUSSION
177
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance 696 adopted September 12, 2022
Summary of Ordinance 696
178
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 696
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY
AMENDING THE AVIENDA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS:
Section 1. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, the City's zoning ordinance, is amended by
amending the Avienda Planned Unit Development Design Standards in its entirety as follows:
DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS
A. Intent
The use of Planned Unit Developments (PUD) for regional/lifestyle center commercial purposes should
result in a reasonable and verifiable exchange between the city and the developer. This district is
intended to provide for the development of regional and community scale integrated retail, office,
business services, personal services, and services to the traveling public near freeway interchanges. It
shall strive to create a self-sustaining pattern of land uses with cultural, employment, entertainment,
housing, shopping, and social components.
The regional/lifestyle center commercial district is a mixed commercial district with retail and
entertainment uses of a scale and function that serves a regional market. The physical environment
emphasizes an attractive, comfortable walking experience for shoppers and visitors. It shall be designed
to serve pedestrian and mass transit users as well as automobile traffic. Centers of this type, generally,
have at least two major retail anchors and are characterized by the diversity of mixed retail and service
uses. Uses within this district should complement existing retail users in the other commercial districts.
Development of these centers shall be planned as a group of organized uses and structures to
accommodate a sensitive transition between commercial activities such as loading, parking of
automobiles, lighting, and trash collection, and surrounding residential uses. Such centers shall be
designed with one theme, similar architectural style, similar exterior building materials, and a
coordinated landscaping theme, but shall avoid monotony in design and visual appearance. Vehicle and
pedestrian access are coordinated and logically linked to provide a comprehensive circulation system.
B. Design Standards
Unless otherwise provided in the PUD, the design standards shall follow the Chanhassen City Code
Chapter 20, Article VIII Division 1. 20-509. - STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR
REGIONAL/LIFESTYLE CENTER COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS and
Article XXIII, DIVISION 7. - DESIGN STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND
OFFICE-INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTS. Applies to District 1, 2 and 3.
179
2
Chapter 20 DIVISION 9. -DESIGN STANDARDS FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS and the
Avienda Development Design Guidelines.Applies to Districts 4 and 5.
September 8, 2022
The Master Plan identifies five distinct districts within Avienda. Each of these districts
(outlined on the plan below)is defined by specific site development patterns and perhaps a
distinctive character or image.The sub-districts complement one another as part of the overall
plan.The districts are shown on the attached District Map above. They include:
District 1 -Retail –provides a location for larger-scale in-line and stand-alone retail
entertainment uses. Could also include a 150-unit housing in the northwest corner.
District 2 -The Village –provides the broadest variety, highest density,and greatest
intensity of development, encouraging both vertical and horizontal mixed use.Including 53
rowhomes and up to 417 Apartments,with a minimum of 25,000 square feet of
entertainment. Common/public space shall be included in this district as well as two seated
restaurants in addition to other fast casual restaurants.
District 3 Mixed Use -10 acres or approximately 60 percent of the area in District 3 shall
be developed as amusement/recreation/entertainment use.These uses include golf
180
3
entertainment, hockey rinks, indoor amusement arcades, convention/ performance
center. The principal amusement/recreation/ entertainment use shall be constructed prior to
the approval of any accessory uses; hotel, retail/restaurant, carwash, or office use.
Sub-District 4 - Multi-Family – provides opportunities for high density senior or rental
apartments. Includes up to 300 Senior Housing units
Sub-District 5 - Low Density Residential – provides opportunities for small lot homes.
Includes 39 townhomes that have received preliminary plat approval.
C. Development Plans and Regulations
The PUD must be maintained in accordance with the following development plans which are on file
with the city, and which are incorporated herein:
1. Final Plat dated October 28, 2021
2. Development Plan DP8.2 dated September 8, 2022
3. Avienda Design Guidelines updated September 8, 2022
Permitted Uses
1.Entertainment:
Amusement/recreation/entertainment use or substantially similar as reviewed by the Design
Review Committee (DRC) and the Community Development Director.
2.Retail sales:
a. Department stores not to exceed 25,000 square feet per store, stores that carry an
assortment of merchandise from all the other categories. Such establishments may
include but are not limited to department stores, discount stores, and similar
establishments.
b. Supermarkets and other food and grocery stores such as butcher shops and fish markets,
fruit and vegetable markets, dairy products stores, candy, nut, and confectionery stores
and retail bakeries not to exceed a total of 98,000 square feet.
c. Apparel and accessory stores not to exceed 20,000 square feet per store.
d. Home furnishing stores selling interior decorating supplies, such as paint, light fixtures,
and décor. Such stores may not exceed 40,000 square feet for any single store.
e. Clothing and apparel stores, including shoes, jewelry, accessories, etc.
f. Drug stores and pharmacies.
g. One home and furniture store which includes furniture store, home improvement center,
electronic store, appliance store, and similar establishments not to exceed 50,000 square
feet.
h. Farmers market.
3.Hospitality and food service establishments including:
a. Bars and taverns.
b. Cafes, delicatessens, food catering establishments.
c. Coffee shops and cafes.
d. Patio/al fresco dining facilities; Accessory to a principal use.
e. Restaurants.
181
4
4.Hotels:
a. One hotel is permitted in the Mixed-Use District.
5.Services:
a. Personal Services
i. Professional offices: banking, insurance, legal services, and real estate, etc.
ii. Financial institutions.
iii. Health and recreation clubs, industries, and services.
iv. Health services: Offices of doctors, dentists, optometrists, etc.
v. Dry cleaning, laundry, and garment services.
b. One daycare center, childcare centers, preschools and Montessori school, not to exceed a
total of 16,000 square feet for all such uses.
6.Housing:
Residential development in the regional/lifestyle center commercial PUD may only occur in
multiple-family dwellings.
a.Senior housing developments are limited to two sites and are not to exceed 150 units per
building. Senior housing (55 Plus) includes owner, rental or service enriched.
b.Low Density Residential homes, District 5, shall be a Density of 3-6 units an acre and can
include detached townhomes and twin homes.
c.Fifty-three (53) rowhomes density of 8 units an acre in part of District 2.
d.Apartment units with number of 417.
e.The total number of housing units in the PUD shall not exceed 768.
7.Other uses:
a. Retail businesses or service establishments that generally provide commodities or
services and that are judged by the Community Development Director (1) to be similar in
character and operation to the permitted uses described above; (2) to be closely
complementary and to enhance the permitted uses; and (3) to be compatible with the
intent and purposes of the Avienda Village Regional Lifestyle Center PUD.
b. Drive-through accessory to a permitted use. (A maximum of four shall be permitted in
Avienda. In District 1 the two permitted drive-throughs can be associated with the
grocery or pharmacy or bank.
8. Prohibited Uses
a. Auto related including gas stations, tires, repair etc. except for one full-service car wash
in District 3.
a. Truck, motorcycles, boats, etc. sales.
b. Club warehouse including wholesale.
c. Gaming Establishments
9. Other comparable or superior materials may be approved by the DRC and the Community
Development Director.
D. Minimum Setbacks
Building setbacks shall follow Chapter 20, Article VIII Division 1. 20-509. - STANDARDS AND
GUIDELINES FOR REGIONAL/LIFESTYLE CENTER COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT
182
5
DEVELOPMENTS. Setbacks may be waived by the City Council when it is demonstrated that
environmental protection and design will be enhanced.
E. Development Site Coverage and Building Height
1. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development. Individual lots
may exceed this threshold.
2. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot.
3. The maximum building height shall be:
a.Retail District - 1 story
b.Village District
Apartment - 5 stories (excluding underground parking)
Retail - 1 story
Restaurants - 1 story
Entertainment - 2 story
c. Mixed Use District
Hotel - 3 stories (excluding underground parking)
Retail - 1 story
Offices - 3 stories (excluding underground parking)
d. Multi-family District – the combined senior housing shall not exceed five (5) stories in
height.
e. Low Density Housing District - 35 feet
F. Parking Requirements
1. Parking shall follow Chanhassen City Code ARTICLE XXIV. - OFF-STREET PARKING AND
LOADING.
2. There is no minimum parking setback when it abuts, without being separated by a street, another
off-street parking area.
3. Code Drive-Through Facilities. Drive-throughs must comply with the standard of the City Code
20-963 and where appropriate, the city and developer may prepare a vehicle stacking study to
determine whether more of less stacking shall be required for a particular use.
G. Landscaping Plan
An overall landscaping plan is required. The plan shall contain the following:
1. Boulevard plantings. Located in front yards shall require a mix of over-story trees and other
plantings consistent with the site. Landscaped berms shall be provided to screen the site from
major roadways, railroads, and less intensive land uses. In place of mass grading for building
pads and roads, stone or decorative block retaining walls shall be employed as required to
preserve mature trees and the site's natural topography.
2. Exterior landscaping and double-fronted lots. Landscaped berms shall be provided to buffer the
site and lots from major roadways, railroads, and less intensive uses. Similar measures shall be
provided for double-fronted lots. Where necessary to accommodate this landscaping, additional
lot depth may be required.
183
6
3.Foundation and yard plantings. A minimum budget or plan for foundation plants shall be
established and approved by the City. As each parcel is developed in the PUD, the builder shall
be required to install plant materials meeting or exceeding the required budget or prior to
issuance of certificate of occupancy or provide financial guarantees acceptable to the City.
4.Tree preservation. Tree preservation is a primary goal of the PUD. A detailed tree survey should
be prepared during the design of the PUD and the plans should be developed to maximize tree
preservation.
5.No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector
roads.
H. Signage
The intent of this section is to establish an effective means of communication in the development,
maintain and enhance the aesthetic environment and the business’s ability to attract sources of economic
development and growth, to improve pedestrian and traffic safety, to minimize the possible adverse
effect of signs on nearby public and private property, and to enable the fair and consistent enforcement
of these sign regulations. It is the intent of this section, to promote the health, safety, general welfare,
aesthetics, and image of the community by regulating signs that are intended to communicate to the
public, and to use signs which meet the city's goals:
1.Establish standards which permit businesses a reasonable and equitable opportunity to advertise
their name and service.
2.Preserve and promote civic beauty and prohibit signs which detract from this objective because
of size, shape, height, location, condition, cluttering or illumination.
3.Ensure that signs do not create safety hazards.
4.Ensure that signs are designed, constructed, installed,and maintained in a manner that does not
adversely impact public safety or unduly distract motorists.
5.Preserve and protect property values.
184
7
6. Ensure signs that are in proportion to the scale of, and are architecturally compatible with, the
principal structures.
7. Limit temporary commercial signs and advertising displays which provide an opportunity for
grand opening and occasional sales events while restricting signs which create continuous visual
clutter and hazards at public right-of-way intersections.
8. All signs shall comply with the city sign ordinance ARTICLE XXVI. – SIGNS unless otherwise
permitted in this document.
1. Project Identification Sign A
Six project identification signs shall be permitted for the development. The location of the Project
Identification signs shall be as follows:
a. Southwest and southeast of the intersection of Sunset Trail and Lyman Boulevard.
b. Southwest of the intersection of Powers and Lyman Boulevards.
c. Northwest and southwest of the intersection of Powers and Bluff Creek Boulevards.
d. The most southeasterly corner of the development facing the Highway 212.
The design and dimensions of the sign shall be identical throughout the development with exception of
the larger sign facing south on to Highway 212.
185
8
2. Off-Premise Directory Sign B
Three off-premise directory signs shall be permitted for the development. The location of the off-
premise directory signs shall be as follows:
Southeast of the intersection of Avienda Parkway and Sunset Trail.
Northwest and southwest of the intersection of Bluff Creek Boulevard and Sunset Trail.
The sign architectural structure shall not exceed 19 feet in height and shall be built in accordance with
the dimensions and design shown and labeled below.
1. The individual tenant sign panel area shall not exceed eight (8) square feet, six (6) feet wide and
1’ 4” high, no more than three panels per off-premise directional sign.
2. The overall sign area shall not exceed 58 square feet.
3. The sign shall be located outside of the sight triangle and shall not interfere with the driver’s
intersection sight distance.
4. The sign shall maintain a minimum of 10 feet from the back of the curb.
5. The sign shall maintain a 1.5-foot separation from trails/sidewalks.
6. The sign shall not interfere with snow removal operations.
7. The sign shall only include the names and logos of the businesses.
8. The sign design shall compliment the design and materials of the proposed buildings.
Project identification sign area shall not exceed 80 square feet in sign display area nor be greater
than eight (8) feet in height. The sign shall be setback a minimum of 10 feet from the property line
and be located outside the sight distance triangle.
186
9
3. Monument Sign C
a.Each lot shall be permitted one monument sign. One monument sign shall be permitted per
lot with the exception of Lots 1 and 2, Block 2. These signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in
sign display area nor be greater than five (5)feet in height. If more than one building is on a
lot, the sign must be shared.
b.All monument signs shall maintain a uniform architectural design that complements the
architecture of the buildings.
c.These signs shall be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the property line and be located
outside the sight triangle.
d.All monument signs shall face the internal streets (Avienda Parkway and Bluff Creek
Boulevard).
187
10
4.Wayfinding Signs D
Wayfinding signs shall be permitted along the internal street located within Lots 1 and 2, Block 5.
a.The sign shall not exceed eight (8)feet in height.
b.The sign area shall not exceed 32 square feet.
c.The sign shall be located outside of the sight triangle and shall not interfere with the driver’s
intersection sight distance.
d.The sign shall maintain a minimum of 10 feet from the back of the curb.
e.The sign shall maintain a 1.5-foot separation from trails and sidewalks.
f.The sign shall not be illuminated.
g.The sign shall not interfere with snow removal operations.
h.The sign lettering shall not exceed six inches and shall have a uniform style.
i.The sign shall only include the names and logos of the businesses and a directional arrow.
j.The sign design shall compliment the design and materials of the proposed building.
k.The sign shall not obstruct drivers’views of any city-owned street signage or railroad
signage.
l.The sign will be owned and maintained by the developer.
m.The applicant shall construct the sign.
5.Wall Signs
a.The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands, the
tops of which shall not extend above parapet height. The letters and logos shall be restricted to
a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall
be constructed of wood, metal, or translucent facing.
b.Second story illuminated signs that can be viewed from neighborhoods outside the PUD site,
are prohibited.
c.Tenant signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant’s
proper name and major product,or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems, and similar
identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and do
not occupy more than 30% of the sign area unless the logo is the sign.
188
11
d.Wall signs are limited to two elevations per building unless the area of square footage
exceeds 25,000 or above in a single use.
e.Single tenant buildings shall be permitted wall signs on two elevations only unless the area of
square footage exceeds 25,000 or above in a single use. The size of the sign shall be based
on Table 1.
f.Halo Lit signs are permitted consistent with the wall area criteria, including maximum nits
and only white.
6. Projecting Sign (Wall)
a. Shall be limited to the Village Retail District.
b. Sign area shall not exceed two (2) square feet and not project more than
two (2) feet from the building.
7. Festive Flags/Banners
a.Flags and banners shall be permitted on approved standards attached to the building facade
and on standards attached to pedestrian area lighting.
b.Flags and banners shall be constructed of fabric or vinyl.
c.Banners shall not contain advertising for individual users, businesses, services, or products.
189
12
d.Flags and banners shall project from buildings a maximum of two (2)feet.
f.Flags and banners shall have a maximum area of 10 square feet.
g.Flags and banners which are torn or excessively worn shall be removed at the request of the
city.
8.Building Directory
a. In multi-tenant buildings, one building directory sign may be permitted. The directory sign
shall not exceed eight square feet.
9. On-Premise Directional Signs
a.On-premise signs shall not be larger than four (4) square feet. The maximum height of the
sign shall not exceed five (5) feet from the ground. The placement of directional signs on the
property shall be so located such that the sign does not adversely affect adjacent properties
(including site lines or confusion of adjoining ingress or egress) or the general appearance of
the site from public right-of-way. No more than four (4) signs shall be allowed per lot. The
City Council may allow additional signs in situations where access is confusing,or traffic
safety could be jeopardized.
b.Bench signs are prohibited except at transit stops as authorized by the local transit authority.
c.Signs and Graphics. Wherever possible, traffic control, directional, and other public signs
should be consolidated and grouped with other street fixtures and furnishings to reduce visual
clutter and to facilitate vehicular and pedestrian movement. A system of directional signs
should also be established to direct traffic within the commercial area and away from
residential areas.
10. Prohibited Signs
a.Pylon signs.
b.Back lit awnings.
c.Window signs are prohibited except for company logo/symbol and not the name. Such logo
shall not exceed 10% of a window area.
d.Menu signs.
e.Signs on roofs, dormers, and balconies.
190
13
f. Billboards.
g. Interchangeable letter boards or panels.
h. Flashing signs.
11. Sign Design and Permit Requirements
a. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the
development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material and height
throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's
entrance monument and will be used throughout.
b. All signs require a separate sign permit.
c. Wall business signs shall comply with the City’s sign ordinance for the neighborhood
business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on
the “street” front and primary parking lot front of each building.
I. Public Realm, Streetscape
The site development, streetscape character, building placement, pedestrian realm, material expression
and color, stormwater utilization, building interest, lighting and walking paths shall be consistent with
the Avienda Development Guidelines Dated September 8, 2022.
J. Engineering Conditions
1. The applicant shall update the traffic analysis completed for the 2016 AUAR Update based
on the approved land uses for the development.
2. Each subsequent plat and/or site plan will be required to complete a Traffic Impact Study for
the abutting local road network to identify capacity deficiencies at affected intersections and
to help identify feasible solutions to identified deficiencies. This shall also include; an
assessment of internal circulation for vehicles and pedestrians; the interface between public
and private streets and trails and their respective maintenance operations; and emergency
service access and circulation.
3. The access point east of the most eastern round-a-bout on Bluff Creek Boulevard, as depicted
in Development Plan 8.1 dated July 15, 2022, is not approved.
4. An updated capacity analysis shall be provided based on the approved land uses to determine
if the municipal utilities to service the development are adequate.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 12th day of September, 2022.
ATTEST:
Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
(Summary Ordinance 696 to be published in the Chanhassen Villager on October 6, 2022)
191
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 696
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE,
BY AMENDING THE AVIENDA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-RC
The purpose of this ordinance is to amend thePlanned Unit Development-RC for
Avienda as follows:
1. Add 53 row homes between the townhomes and the apartments.
2. Increase the number of apartments from 250 to 417.
3. Combine the 150-unit senior housing development to one 300-unit building at the
southwest corner.
4. The northerly senior housing is now a retail use.
5. Plan potential locations for three to four additional drive-throughs.
6. The district plan may be fluid as future users are identified but consistent with
the Districts and PUD Ordinance.
7. Changes to District #3 including 10 acres set aside for a regional use.
A printed copy of Ordinance No. 696 is available for inspection by any person
during regular office hours at the office of the City Manager/Clerk.
PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION this 26th day
of September, 2022, by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen.
(Published in the Chanhassen Villager on October 6, 2022)
192
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Monthly Fire Department Update
File No.Item No: F.1
Agenda Section FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE
Prepared By Don Johnson, Fire Chief
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority Operational Excellence
SUMMARY
Monthly Fire Department Update with Call Response Data from August 2022.
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
193
2022 09 26 Council Update
22 09 Graphs CC
2022 08 CRR Graphs
194
TO: Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
FROM: Don Johnson, Fire Chief
DATE: September 26, 2022
SUBJ: Monthly Fire Department Update
Fire Department Staffing
Department staffing is at 33 paid on-call firefighters and 6 Full Time personnel. (1) POC
firefighters are on extended medical leave. One firefighter with 14 years of service retired as of
September 15. An additional firefighter of three years resigned effective September 30.
Fire Department Response
The fire department responded to (116) calls for service in August, our highest this year. Call
Breakdown for the month:
1 Chief Only
91 Duty Crew
24 General Alarms: (22) General Alarms occurred during times the station was not staffed
Significant calls included the following:
• Mutual Aid to Eden Prairie on a Structure Fire
• Assist to Carver County Sheriff’s Office for UAV Operations
• Lift Assists accounted for 15 calls for service with 6 coming from one specific care
facility. This is one of the call types that was shifted from deputy response to the duty
crew under the new model.
EMS Response Data:
Total EMS Responses = 55
• Difficulty Breathing (29), Serious Medical (5), Traumatic Injury/Head Injury (7)
• Motor Vehicle Accidents (4)
195
Laurie Hokkanen
Fire Department Update
Page 2
Primary Actions While on Scene
• Check For Injuries and Symptoms 8
• Assessment and Vitals 14
• Assessment, Vitals, and Interventions 3
• Packaging and Loading for Transport 17
• Canceled En Route by ALS Provider 2
• Assist ALS with Transport 1
• No Patient Contact 9
Fire Units Arrived Prior to Ridgeview 32
COVID Suspected/Confirmed 1
Medical Calls the FD was not started to 35*
*Due to changes in CAD programming, the fire department will no longer be able to collect data
on no start calls. This data will be collected annually through comparison data with Ridgeview
Ambulance. YTD data shows 200 no starts.
Other Activities
• NFPA Annual Fit testing occurred on August 29. This includes an extensive blood work up,
respirator qualification and fit testing, EKG, and hearing and eye exams.
• With high school football starting in September, the department proudly staff’s each home
game with EMT Firefighters
• We sent an engine company for citywide standby at Chaska Fire on September 12 as they were
busy with Annual Open House activities
• On Sept 24 we staffed an Engine and crew for St. Hubert’s Fall Harvest Festival , as well as, a
community event at The Gardens by the Woods
• We staffed two intersections to support Fall de Tonka on Sept 25.
• The Chanhassen Fire Department Open House is currently going on this evening (Sept 26) at the
station. Thanks to Assistant Chief Nutter and our team for putting this event together
• We are scheduled to present at the Senior Active Aging event on Sept 29 during day hours
196
Laurie Hokkanen
Fire Department Update
Page 3
Fire Training
Department members attended EMS training, Strip Mall Fire Command Training, and required
annual department physical and medical evaluations.
Fire Inspections: Including proactive, complaint based, and annual – 23 Inspections
• 2 Pre-event Inspections: Business celebration event parties involving tents and food
trucks
• 19 construction and fire sprinkler/alarm related inspections: several new fire alarm
systems in businesses tested; Primrose School new fire and sprinkler testing; Christian
Brothers Auto Sprinkler inspections; several school projects completed inspection at
Chan Elementary and Minnetonka West.
• 2 annual or follow up inspections: Follow up to business complaints for fire code
violations
Plan Reviews: including fire alarm and suppression systems, building construction and
remodel, and preliminary plan reviews: 21
• Fire related: 12: Fire alarm system at new building at Storagemart; Youngstedts remodel
project;
• Construction: 7: Plan Reviews completed for new Caribou building; Chapel Hill remodel
• Preliminary: 2: Xcel Energy preliminary review
197
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
June July Aug
Calls by Type and Month
Rescue & Emergency Medical Service Alarm Calls Good Intent Call Hazardous Condition Service Call Fire
80
75
65
79 77 74 78 82
65
84
75
83
59
66
83
78 81
91
120
105
117
86 87
105
94
66
78 75
109 106
101
116
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Chanhassen Fire Department
Calls By Month Comparison
2020 2021 2022
198
753
921
1,002
917
1,078
1,119
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Projected
Calls for Service by Year
Rescue & Emergency
Medical Service
64%
Alarm Calls
12%
Good Intent Call
7%
Hazardous Condition
5%
Service Call
8%
Fire
4%
2022 Calls for Service by % of Call Type
Rescue & Emergency Medical Service Alarm Calls Good Intent Call Hazardous Condition Service Call Fire
199
S
13%
M
16%
T
14%
W
16%
TH
11%
F
14%
Sa.
16%
2022 CALLS BY DAY OF WEEK
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
12‐4a 4‐8a 8‐12p 12‐4p 4‐8p 8‐12a
CALLS BY TIME OF DAY
2019 2020 2021 2022
200
Elite chanhassenfire Incident Type Report (Summary)
Basic Incident Type Code And
Description (FD1.21)
Total
Incidents
Total Incidents Percent of
Incidents
Total Property
Loss
Total Content
Loss
Total
Loss
Total Loss Percent
of Total
Incident Type Category (FD1.21): 1 - Fire
111 - Building fire 1 0.86%
Total: 1 Total: 0.86%Total: 0.00 Total: 0.00 Total:
0.00
Total: 0.00%
Incident Type Category (FD1.21): 3 - Rescue & Emergency Medical Service Incident
311 - Medical assist, assist EMS crew 2 1.72%
3211 - Cardiac Arrest 2 1.72%
32110 - Fall Great than 10'1 0.86%
32112 - Medical Alarm 4 3.45%
32114 - Serious Medical 5 4.31%
32115 - General Medical 4 3.45%
32116 - Weak/Dizzy/Unwell/Unspecified 2 1.72%
32117 - Diabetic Emergency 1 0.86%
3212 - Unconscious/Unresponsive 4 3.45%
3213 - Difficulty Breathing 10 8.62%
3214 - Stroke 2 1.72%
3215 - Seizure 4 3.45%
3217 - Allergic Reaction 1 0.86%
3218 - Choking 1 0.86%
3219 - Traumatic Injury/Head
Injury/Severe Burn
7 6.03%
322 - Motor vehicle accident with injuries 4 3.45%
353 - Removal of victim(s) from stalled
elevator
1 0.86%
Total: 55 Total: 47.41%Total: 0.00 Total: 0.00 Total:
0.00
Total: 0.00%
Incident Type Category (FD1.21): 4 - Hazardous Condition (No Fire)
4101 - Suspected Gas Odor Inside a
Structure
3 2.59%
4102 - Suspected Gas Odor Outside 3 2.59%
412 - Gas leak (natural gas or LPG)1 0.86%
424 - Carbon monoxide incident 1 0.86%
444 - Power line down 3 2.59%
445 - Arcing, shorted electrical equipment 1 0.86%
Total: 12 Total: 10.34%Total: 0.00 Total: 0.00 Total:
0.00
Total: 0.00%
Incident Type Category (FD1.21): 5 - Service Call
551 - Assist police or other governmental
agency
4 3.45%
554 - Lift Assist 15 12.93%
561 - Unauthorized burning 1 0.86%
Total: 20 Total: 17.24%Total: 0.00 Total: 0.00 Total:
0.00
Total: 0.00%
Incident Type Category (FD1.21): 6 - Good Intent Call
611 - Dispatched and cancelled en route 1 0.86%
6111 - EMS Dispatched and cancelled en
route
1 0.86%
622 - No incident found on arrival at
dispatch address
2 1.72%
651 - Smoke scare, odor of smoke 2 1.72%
Total: 6 Total: 5.17%Total: 0.00 Total: 0.00 Total:
0.00
Total: 0.00%
Incident Type Category (FD1.21): 7 - False Alarm & False Call
735 - Alarm system sounded due to
malfunction
2 1.72%
736 - CO detector activation due to
malfunction
2 1.72%
Printed On: 09/01/2022 01:00:21 PM1 of 2 201
Basic Incident Type Code And
Description (FD1.21)
Total
Incidents
Total Incidents Percent of
Incidents
Total Property
Loss
Total Content
Loss
Total
Loss
Total Loss Percent
of Total
741 - Sprinkler activation, no fire -
unintentional
1 0.86%
743 - Smoke detector activation, no fire -
unintentional
4 3.45%
745 - Alarm system activation, no fire -
unintentional
10 8.62%
746 - Carbon monoxide detector
activation, no CO
3 2.59%
Total: 22 Total: 18.97%Total: 0.00 Total: 0.00 Total:
0.00
Total: 0.00%
Total: 116 Total: 100.00%Total: 0.00 Total: 0.00 Total:
0.00
Total: 0.00%
Printed On: 09/01/2022 01:00:21 PM2 of 2 202
203
Community Risk Reduction Reporting Data Breakdown July 2022
2
19
2 2
Fire Inspections by Type
Construction Fire Alarm/Sprinkler Special Event Proactive/Complaint based
5
7
7
3
Plan Review by Type
Fire Alarm Fire Sprinkler Construction Special event
204
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
June July August
25 24 25
16 15
22
3 5
0
2022 Community Risk Reduction by Type
Fire Inspections Plan Reviews Public Education
205
Code Enforcement Specialist Data
33%
11%
6%
9%
6%
8%
5%
15%
6%
CES 2022 Call Breakdown
Fire Calls
Fire Inspections
Property Maintenance
Nuisances
Outdoor Storage
Traffic - Motorist Assists/PD Accident
Traffic - Parking
Animal Calls
Burning Complaints
Misc/Questions
7
12
5
9 10
22
9
26
3 4
0
2 1 2
4
100000010
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Notice of Violations
1st Notice of Violation Letters
2nd Notice of Violation Letters
Citation Issued
206
61 65
80
65
89
102
80
96
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DECTotal Calls Total Monthly Calls/Inspections
207
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Law Enforcement Update
File No.Item No: F.2
Agenda Section FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE
Prepared By Lance Pearce, Lieutenant, CCSO
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
Chanhassen City Council Meeting 9 26 22
208
August 2022 Breakdown
Comparison of Metrics 2019-2022
Activity Description by Class.pdf
August 2022
209
Page 1
Memo
TO:Mayor Ryan and Chanhassen City Council members
FROM: Lieutenant Lance Pearce
DATE: September 13, 2022
RE: Law Enforcement Update
Attached are the agenda items for the City of Chanhassen council meeting September
26, 2022 for your review and consideration.
1. Carver County Sheriff’s Office City of Chanhassen August 2022 Calls for Service
Summary; Group A, Group B, Non-Criminal, Traffic and Administrative.
2. Carver County Sheriff’s Office City of Chanhassen August Arrest Summary.
3. Carver County Sheriff’s Office City of Chanhassen August Citation Summary.
4. Staffing update: Contract remains full. Deputy Ethan Larson is the new
Chanhassen High School SRO and started there on the first day of school.
5. Training update: August training was the prep for the hands-on use-of-force
trainings scheduled for September.
Lieutenant
Chanhassen Office
210
August 2022
Carver County Sheriff’s Office
City of Chanhassen
Call for Service
Total Patrol Activity=848
59
23
428
Felony Misdemeanor Non Criminal Traffic
August 2022
Types of Calls
CFS=848
338
4
29
10
26
August 2022
Group A
Assault Theft Drug Other
211
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90 August 2022
Non Criminal
29
222
36
56
Driving Complaint
Traffic Stops
Crashes
Citations
Traffic
212
213
214
215
216
Comparison of Metrics 2019-2022
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Domestics by Month
2019 Domestics by Month 2020 Domestics by Month
2021 Domestics by Month 2022 Domestics by Month
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Domestics Assault by Month
2019 Domestic Assault by Month 2020 Domestic Assault by Month
2021 Domestic Assault by Month 2022 Domestic Assault by Month
217
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Mental Health by Month
2019 Mental Health by Month 2020 Mental Health by Month
2021 Mental Health by Month 2022 Mental Health by Month
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Fraud/ Theft by Month
2019 Fraud/ Theft by Month 2020 Fraud/ Theft by Month
2021 Fraud/ Theft by Month 2022 Fraud/ Theft by Month
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Resolution 2022-XX: Adopt the Preliminary Tax Levy, Budget and Establish
the Truth-In-Taxation Public Hearing Date
File No.Item No: H.1
Agenda Section GENERAL BUSINESS
Prepared By Kelly Grinnell, Finance Director
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council adopts a resolution approving the 2023 preliminary budget, the
preliminary 2022 tax levy, collectible in 2023, and establishing the truth-in-taxation public meeting
date."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Financial Sustainability
SUMMARY
The Council met in work session earlier to discuss the 2023 preliminary budget, levy, and CIP. The
Council is required to adopt a preliminary levy and budget by September 30.
Staff will present an update on the preliminary General Fund budget, maximum tax levy, and
preliminary CIP for tax-supported funds for Council discussion and direction.
The Strategic Plan adopted by the Council in 2022 provides focus and direction for the development of
the budget and allocation of resources. The City's strategic priorities are:
Financial Sustainability
Asset Management
Development & Redevelopment
235
Operational Excellence
Communications
BACKGROUND
The Council has met in two work sessions to discuss and review the 2023 budget, CIP, and levy. At the
July 11 work session staff requested guidance for the 2023 budget preparation. When the 2022 budget
was adopted it included a projection for the 2023 budget showing a 7.2% levy increase. The Council
discussed the proposed COLA and other elements of the budget and requested staff work to lower the
levy increase from 7.2% if possible. At the August 22 work session, the Council heard a presentation on
the preliminary 2023 General Fund budget, reviewed proposed CIP items and fund balance projections
for capital project funds, and discussed options for the proposed maximum levy at 5.2% or 7.2%.
Staff has continued to meet and work on department budgets and CIP items. After the last work session,
staff identified some items in the General Fund budget to increase, most notably fuel, which was
increased $31,700 based on current year actual amounts. Other items increased a total of $7,000. These
items decreased the contingency amount to about $45,000. There are still some uncertain expenses at
this point; however, it looks like the health insurance increase will be minimal at 2-3%. Staff
recommends keeping the $45,000 (0.3% of budget) contingency due to these uncertain expenses and for
items that may come up during 2023.
The preliminary General Fund budget for 2023 is still balanced, with both projected revenues and
expenditures at $14,343,095, compared to $14,343,275 discussed last month. The budget includes wage
increases for performance adjustments (steps) for those below the range maximum (in accordance with
the compensation study) and a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) of 2.5%.
Ending fund balance for the General Fund for 2023 is projected to be $7,970,000. One of the items for
consideration is whether to set aside a portion of General Fund fund balance as committed for revenue
stabilization. At the last work session staff proposed setting aside one year’s worth of budgeted building
permit revenue as committed fund balance. These funds would be available for use if building permit
revenue comes in under budget. Staff is recommending that one year’s worth of investment income also
be set aside given that this line item can also be volatile due to fair value allocation and interest rate
changes. Staff will review this in depth during the work session.
The projected levy for the General Fund is $10,749,000, up $554,254 (5.4%) from 2022. This amount
has not changed from what was presented on August 22.
There are currently four capital project funds and one debt service fund with a property tax levy. There
have been minor changes to the previously presented CIP request items for 2023-2027 for property tax
supported funds. The Council has discussed whether to add a levy for the Park Renovation Fund. There
are several park renovation projects pending, but there is currently no dedicated funding source for
those projects. In the next couple of months, Council will need to decide on the several items that
currently do not have an identified funding source, such as several park renovation projects. If the
Council wants to fund those items for 2023, the City could use $250,000 in General Fund balance
toward park renovation (as it has in previous years) or consider a levy increase in 2023.
The chart below shows the total 2022 levy and the two 2023 projected levy options (one includes a levy
for the Park Renovation Fund):
236
5.2% Increase 7.2% Increase
Fund 2022 Levy 2023 Levy
2023
Increase $
and (%)
2023 Levy
2023
Increase $
and (%)
General $10,194,746 $10,749,000 $554,254
(5.4%)$10,749,000 $554,254
(5.4%)
Pavement
Management $900,000 $918,000 $18,000
(2.0%)$918,000 $18,000
(2.0%)
Capital Facilities $125,000 $155,000 $30,000
(24.0%)$155,000 $30,000
(24.0%)
Capital Fleet &
Equipment
Replacement
$565,000 $615,000 $50,000
(8.8%)$615,000 $50,000
(8.8%)
Transportation
Infrastructure
Management
$394,490 $406,000 $11,510
(2.9%)$406,000 $11,510
(2.9%)
Park Renovation
Fund $0 $0 $0
(N/A)$250,000 $250,000
(NEW)
Debt Levy $483,840 $482,000 $-1,840
(-0.4%)$482,000 $-1,840
(-0.4%)
Total $12,663,076 $13,325,000 $661,924
(5.2%)$13,575,000 $911,924
(7.2%)
One of the benefits of adopting the 7.2% levy is that it would allow for smoothing out the levy for the
next several years with the addition of debt levies for a new city hall campus and a possible park
referendum.
CIP and Unfunded Items
The City completed a comprehensive facilities study in 2022. A small amount for deferred maintenance
is included in the preliminary budget but the facilities study recommendations are not currently funded,
along with other facility-related items. The Council is in the process of considering a new City Hall, a
decision that will impact the deferred maintenance needs and priorities.
American Rescue Plan
The City has received payments totaling $2.88 million. A small portion of these funds have been
committed to economic development and fire staffing initiatives. The Council has preliminarily
reserved approximately $1.3 million to start the Lake Ann Preserve Project. An open house for the
project is scheduled for September 27. All funds must be obligated by December 31, 2024, and
expended by December 31, 2026.
Budget and Levy Calendar
237
The City must adopt a maximum tax levy by September 30. Staff has prepared two resolutions for the
Council meeting tonight, one with a 5.2% levy increase and the other with a 7.2% increase.
Staff will continue to work on the proposed budget and CIP throughout the fall and additional work
sessions will be held on October 24, November 14, and November 28 if needed.
On December 12 the Council will hold its Truth-in-Taxation meeting and adopt the final 2023 tax levy,
budgets, and CIP.
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council adopt one of the two attached resolutions (one at 5.2% increase
versus 7.2% increase) approving the 2023 preliminary budget, the preliminary 2022 tax levy, collectible
in 2023, and establishing the truth-in-taxation public meeting date.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution Adopting Preliminary Budget Levy at 7.2% and Setting Public Meeting Date
Resolution Adopting Preliminary Budget Levy at 5.2% and Setting Public Meeting Date
238
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: September 26, 2022 RESOLUTION NO: 2022-XX
MOTION BY: SECONDED BY:
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2023 PRELIMINARY BUDGET,
THE PRELIMINARY 2022 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 2023,
AND ESTABLISHING THE TRUTH-IN-TAXATION PUBLIC MEETING DATE
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to adopt a preliminary maximum tax levy by
September 30 and certify the levy to the County for the purposes of preparing the Truth-in-Taxation
notices mailed to property owners in the City of Chanhassen; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has examined the preliminary budgetary and tax levy needs
for the City of Chanhassen for the calendar year 2023 through public budget meetings; and
WHEREAS, the City Council will continue to examine the final budget and tax levy needs
through public budget meetings prior to adoption of the final budget and levy; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to hold a Truth-in-Taxation public meeting
between the dates of November 25 and December 28.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen
that the 2023 preliminary budget for the following funds is adopted in the following amounts:
Fund
Revenues & Other
Financing Sources
Expenditures &
Other Financing Uses
Net Change in
Fund Balance
General $14,343,275 $14,343,275 $0
Fleet & Equipment 778,551 1,009,405 (230,854)
Facilities 160,415 469,000 (308,585)
Pavement Management Program 10,575,760 11,140,000 (564,240)
Transportation Infrastructure
Management 417,402 468,700 (51,298)
Park Renovation 250,000 310,000 (60,000)
Park Acquisition & Development 30,000 96,310 (66,310)
PW Facility Debt 502,861 455,425 47,436
Total $27,058,264 $28,292,115 ($1,233,851)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen that the
preliminary levy to be levied in 2022 upon the taxable property in the City of Chanhassen for
collection in the year 2023 for the following purposes and in the following amounts:
General Fund $ 10,749,000
Capital Funds 2,344,000
G.O. Debt (Public Works) 482,000
Total City of Chanhassen Levy $ 13,575,000
239
2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Chanhassen authorizes the Treasurer to
certify the preliminary levy to the County Auditor for preparation of the Truth-in-Taxation notices,
as set forth in the Preliminary Tax Levy Certification document; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council has scheduled the Council Meeting
on December 12 at 7:00 p.m. for the Truth-in-Taxation public meeting to discuss the budget and levy,
allow public comment, and adopt final 2023 budget and levy.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 26th day of September2022.
ATTEST:
Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
240
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: September 26, 2022 RESOLUTION NO: 2022-XX
MOTION BY: SECONDED BY:
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2023 PRELIMINARY BUDGET,
THE PRELIMINARY 2022 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 2023,
AND ESTABLISHING THE TRUTH-IN-TAXATION PUBLIC MEETING DATE
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to adopt a preliminary maximum tax levy by
September 30 and certify the levy to the County for the purposes of preparing the Truth-in-Taxation
notices mailed to property owners in the City of Chanhassen; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has examined the preliminary budgetary and tax levy needs
for the City of Chanhassen for the calendar year 2023 through public budget meetings; and
WHEREAS, the City Council will continue to examine the final budget and tax levy needs
through public budget meetings prior to adoption of the final budget and levy; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to hold a Truth-in-Taxation public meeting
between the dates of November 25 and December 28.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen
that the 2023 preliminary budget for the following funds is adopted in the following amounts:
Fund Revenues & Other
Financing Sources
Expenditures &
Other Financing Uses
Net Change in
Fund Balance
General $14,343,275 $14,343,275 $0
Fleet & Equipment 778,551 1,009,405 (230,854)
Facilities 160,415 469,000 (308,585)
Pavement Management Program 10,575,760 11,140,000 (564,240)
Transportation Infrastructure
Management 417,402 468,700 (51,298)
Park Renovation 0 60,000 (60,000)
Park Acquisition & Development 30,000 96,310 (66,310)
PW Facility Debt 502,861 455,425 47,436
Total $26,808,264 $28,042,115 ($1,233,851)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen that the
preliminary levy to be levied in 2022 upon the taxable property in the City of Chanhassen for
collection in the year 2023 for the following purposes and in the following amounts:
General Fund $ 10,749,000
Capital Funds 2,094,000
G.O. Debt (Public Works) 482,000
Total City of Chanhassen levy $ 13,325,000
241
2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Chanhassen authorizes the Treasurer to
certify the preliminary levy to the County Auditor for preparation of the Truth-in-Taxation notices,
as set forth in the Preliminary Tax Levy Certification document; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council has scheduled the Council Meeting
on December 12, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. for the Truth-in-Taxation public meeting to discuss the budget and
levy, allow public comment, and adopt final 2023 budget and levy.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 26th day of September
2022.
ATTEST:
Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
242
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item Southern Valley Alliance Letter dated September 13, 2022
File No.Item No: K.1
Agenda Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
Southern Valley Alliance Letter 09-13-2022
243
September L3,2022
Dear Chanhassen City Council,
Thank you for the amazing opportunity to share about Southern Valley Alliance (SVA), and Domestic
Violence Awareness Month (DVAM), at the Council meeting on September L}th,2022.We greatly
appreciate your continued support and your time.
Like we mentioned, domestic violence is an epidemic, affecting individuals in every community. Last
year, SVA assisted 945 victim-survivors within our community and answered 1,881 crisis line calls.
We all have a critical role to play in supporting survivors of abuse and preventing it from continuing.
Join us this October as we turn our community purple to raise awareness and support survivors.
Below are a few simple ways to get involved:
o Purple Light Campaign
o Purple is the symbolic color for DVAM. Display purple lights outside your home,
business, organization, government buildings, and city parks/lights/walkways.
o Yard Sign Campaign
o Show survivors in our community that they are not alone. Yard signs say, "October is
Domestic Violence Awareness Month" & "We believe you. We support you. You are
not alone." Signs are L8"x24" coroplast and come with a heavy-duty wire stake.o Following us on social media and sharing our posts
o @SouthernValleyAlliance (Facebook) & @svamn2020 (lnstagram)
Through increasing awareness, training, and building relationships, we can empower victims, educate
our youth, inform our neighbors, and partner with agencies invested in safety and well-being.
lf you are interested in participating in DomesticViolence Awareness Month and would like more
information, or a yard sign, contact Katie Schaumann at 952-873-4214 or
comm unitveneagement(asva m n.org
Director
rn Valley Alliance
551 E Park St, Belle Plaine, MN 56011 info@svamn.org 95 2-873-4214 sva m n. org
Scxtfreta Q[r/1"g
244
October is Domestic Violence
Awareness Month
{27e
*,O4:'iiii
lll t
SHARE A SIGN. SHINE A LIGHT. SAVE A LIFE.
Join SVA's purple light ond yord sign
compoign this October to roise oworeness
ond show your support.
For more info and to order your sign:
952-873-4214 ! officemanager@svamn.org I O@tr
Srrrnnn*%/1"y
t
-tff Si]1i'r.:{.--1.'
r
245
City Council Item
September 26, 2022
Item League of Minnesota Cities Magazine September/October 2022 Issue-Gnomadic
Gnome Scavenger Hunt Article
File No.Item No: K.2
Agenda Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, City Clerk
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
246
LMC Magazine Article-Gnomadic Gnome Scavenger Hunt
247
Bits & Briefs
REMEMBERED:
Foundirg Tmst
Administrator Pete Trrtz
When the commercial insurance market for cities reached a
crisis point in the midrTos, League staff and several city offi-
cials set out to build one of the first municipal insurance pools
in the nation.
Pete T?itz, who at the time
was supervisor of what is now
the League's Research & Infor-
mation Service, stepped up
(reluctantly, he would jokingly
point out) to lead the League
of Minnesota Cities Insurance
Trust into an unknown future.
And for 37 years Tritz did just
that, shaping the Trust into
what it is today - coverage
for cities, by cities - before
retiring in zor7.
This absolute legend of
the risk pooling and municipal league communities died
July r at the age of7o, Ieaving behind a legacy oflocal govern-
ment excellence and friendship.
"Pete believed passionately in the idea ofpublic service," said
Dan Greensweig, who has been LMCIT's administrator since
T?itz retired. "Minnesota cities are better places because of
his vision, and those ofus who had the good fortune to know
Pete are better people because ofhis wisdom and generosity of
spirit. He was an outstanding mentor, a remarkable colleague,
and a wonderful friend."
In addition to his contributions to the safety and financial
stability of city governments (towering), he will also be remem-
bered for his wit (quick), and his approach to life (spirited).
ANew Season of
Greenstep City
Workshops
The 2022-2023 season of GreenStep
Cities virtual workshops are just around
the corner. Beginning Sept. 21, you can
join in virtually for discussion
of city sustainability topics,
including financing energy
projects, addressing
outdoor air quality,
preserving dark skies,
and greening historic
places. GreenStep
is a voluntary
challenge,
assistance, and
recognition
program
that helps
communities
achieve their
sustainability and quality-of-life goals.
Actions are tailored to cities of any size,
focus on cost savings and energy use
reduction, and encourage civic innovation
Your city doesn't need to be a GreenStep
City to participate. See the full lineup and
register: eventbrite.com/ cc/2O22-2O23-
greenstep-workshop-series-957159.
Where Do Gnomes Like to Roam?
ln a garden, of course! Or in the case of
Chanhassen's recent Gnomadic Gnome
Scavenger Hunt, scattered throughout the
city's parks system. The city partnered with
The Garden by The Woods Garden Center this
spring to celebrate parks and educate residents
about local environmental matters and related
park topics. Residents first registered and
picked up a gnome buddy named "Eco" - the
collection of 14O pint-sized figurines went
quick. Participants could then visit 20 different
way stations marked with interpretative signage about
the parks and snap a picture of their gnome buddy
visiting the site.
For each five "gnomies" (that's a gnome selfie)
participants received five, free 3-inch native plants.
"lt was so well received by the public, and participants
got to learn local fun facts along the way," said
Environmental Resource Specialist Jill Sinclair.
The activity came about through the city's Park
Sponsorship Program when the business offered to
provide an in-kind donation. The city provided the park
media promotion, mapping, and the creation, design,
printing, and installation of the signs. The garden
supplied the gnomes, native plants, and the grand
prize of free garden mulch with free delivery.
g
Oz
@
o
oFoId
c I sep/ocr 2022 | MTNNESoTA clrtEg
\
rrl
=/
7
5d
,hr
248