The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda and PacketAGENDA CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2019 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD A.5:30 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION Note: Executive Sessions are closed to the public.If the City Council does not complete the Executive Session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda. 1.Discuss Last Written Offers for CSAH 101 RightofWay Acquisition B.6:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Note: Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda. 1.Pavement Management Funding DiscussionAnalysis of Annual Street Program Funding C.7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE) D.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS E.CONSENT AGENDA All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to the council packet for each staff report. 1.Approve City Council Minutes dated October 14, 2019 2.Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated September 24, 2019 3.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated October 1, 2019 4.Receive Environmental Commission Minutes dated September 11, 2019 5.Approve Contract Amendment for KimleyHorn for Minnewashta Parkway Project F.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) AGENDACHANHASSEN CITY COUNCILMONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2019CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARDA.5:30 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSIONNote: Executive Sessions are closed to the public.If the City Council does not completethe Executive Session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after theregular agenda.1.Discuss Last Written Offers for CSAH 101 RightofWay AcquisitionB.6:30 P.M. WORK SESSIONNote: Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the worksession items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regularagenda.1.Pavement Management Funding DiscussionAnalysis of Annual Street Program FundingC.7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE)D.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTSE.CONSENT AGENDAAll items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council andwill be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. Ifdiscussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and consideredseparately. City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to thecouncil packet for each staff report.1.Approve City Council Minutes dated October 14, 20192.Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated September 24, 20193.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated October 1, 20194.Receive Environmental Commission Minutes dated September 11, 20195.Approve Contract Amendment for KimleyHorn for Minnewashta Parkway ProjectF.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) G.FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE 1.Fire Department Update 2.Law Enforcement Update H.OLD BUSINESS I.PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.Resolution 2019XX: Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002: Order Project and Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications 2.Consider Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances 3.Resolution 2019XX: Certification of Delinquent Sewer and Water Accounts to the County Auditor J.NEW BUSINESS K.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS L.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS M.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION 1.Review of Claims Paid 10282019 N.ADJOURNMENT O.GUIDELINES GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations. Anyone seeking a response or action from the City Council following their presentation is 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 AGENDACHANHASSEN CITY COUNCILMONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2019CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARDA.5:30 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSIONNote: Executive Sessions are closed to the public.If the City Council does not completethe Executive Session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after theregular agenda.1.Discuss Last Written Offers for CSAH 101 RightofWay AcquisitionB.6:30 P.M. WORK SESSIONNote: Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the worksession items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regularagenda.1.Pavement Management Funding DiscussionAnalysis of Annual Street Program FundingC.7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE)D.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTSE.CONSENT AGENDAAll items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council andwill be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. Ifdiscussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and consideredseparately. City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to thecouncil packet for each staff report.1.Approve City Council Minutes dated October 14, 20192.Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated September 24, 20193.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated October 1, 20194.Receive Environmental Commission Minutes dated September 11, 20195.Approve Contract Amendment for KimleyHorn for Minnewashta Parkway ProjectF.VISITOR PRESENTATIONSVisitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete andsubmit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda)G.FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE1.Fire Department Update2.Law Enforcement UpdateH.OLD BUSINESSI.PUBLIC HEARINGS1.Resolution 2019XX: Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002: OrderProject and Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications2.Consider Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances3.Resolution 2019XX: Certification of Delinquent Sewer and Water Accounts to theCounty AuditorJ.NEW BUSINESSK.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONSL.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONSM.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION1.Review of Claims Paid 10282019N.ADJOURNMENTO.GUIDELINES GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONSWelcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen CityCouncil wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council. That opportunity is providedat every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations.Anyone seeking a response or action from the City Council following their presentation is required tocomplete and submit a Citizen Action Request Form. An online form is available athttps://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/action or paper forms are available in the city council chambers prior tothe meeting.Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor. Whencalled upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the CityCouncil as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the CityCouncil.If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokespersonthat can summarize the issue. Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor. If youhave 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 understandingof your concern, suggestion or request. Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be directed to the City Manager. Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Houlihan's, 530 Pond Promenade in Chanhassen immediately after the meeting for a purely social event. All members of the public are welcome. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Discuss Last Written Offers for CSAH 101 RightofWay Acquisition Section 5:30 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION Item No: A.1. Prepared By Bruce Loney, Interim Dir. of Public Works/City Engineer File No: Project No. 201408 SUMMARY Documents will be provided by Bob Lindall of Kennedy & Graven, attorney on acquisition process, with documents and discussion with Sonya Henning, Henning Professional Services on the current status of acquisitions, and Jon Horn of KimleyHorn, Inc. on the overall rightofway process and necessary ROW/easement acquisition. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Pavement Management Funding DiscussionAnalysis of Annual Street Program Funding Section 6:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Item No: B.1. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: ADM324 PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council adopts the attached Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND Over the past several months the city council has taken input on adopting a franchise fee on gas and electric utilities for the purpose of funding the city's pavement management program. The city and both electric utility companies (Xcel Energy and Minnesota Valley Electric Company) have agreed upon a franchise agreement (a franchise agreement is currently in place with the city's gas utility, CenterPoint Energy). Proposed franchise fee ordinances have also been drafted for each utility. Staff is asking the city council to first hold a public hearing on the proposed franchise agreements and the proposed franchise fee ordinances. During the public hearing, staff will review the need and the purpose for the franchise fee and show the impact to each billing classification of the franchise fee. Staff is requesting that after receiving public input, the city council consider adoption of the proposed agreements and ordinances. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the city council hold a public hearing on the adoption and approval of franchise agreement ordinances and franchise fee ordinances, and then consider adoption of the attached Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectPavement Management Funding DiscussionAnalysis of Annual Street Program FundingSection6:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Item No: B.1.Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: ADM324PROPOSED MOTION"The City Council adopts the attached Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances."Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOver the past several months the city council has taken input on adopting a franchise fee on gas and electric utilities forthe purpose of funding the city's pavement management program. The city and both electric utility companies (XcelEnergy and Minnesota Valley Electric Company) have agreed upon a franchise agreement (a franchise agreement iscurrently in place with the city's gas utility, CenterPoint Energy). Proposed franchise fee ordinances have also beendrafted for each utility.Staff is asking the city council to first hold a public hearing on the proposed franchise agreements and the proposedfranchise fee ordinances. During the public hearing, staff will review the need and the purpose for the franchise fee andshow the impact to each billing classification of the franchise fee. Staff is requesting that after receiving public input,the city council consider adoption of the proposed agreements and ordinances.RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends the city council hold a public hearing on the adoption and approval of franchise agreement ordinances and franchise fee ordinances, and then consider adoption of the attached Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances. ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation Q & A Responses MSA Projected Fund Balance PMP Web Survey Public Feedback PMP Fund Balance Minnesota Valley Electric Fee Ordinance Minnesota Valley Electric Franchise Ordinance Xcel Energy Fee Ordinance Xcel Energy Franchise Ordinance CenterPoint Energy Fee Ordinance CenterPoint Energy Franchise Ordinance Franchise Fee and Franchise Ordinance Public Hearing For the implementation of funding Pavement Management Program City Council Meeting October 28, 2019 Existing Street Conditions Inspections of streets are done on a 3-year cycle, so for any given year the average Overall Condition Index (OCI) is based off the projected OCI for 2/3 of the city and the inspected OCI for the remaining 1/3.Here are the recent results: Year OCI New Miles of Street 2019 70 2018 73 0.26 2017 74 0.00 2016 74 0.00 2015 69 0.11 2014 70 0.47 2013 69 1.00 2012 72 0.88 2011 74 0.48 2010 77 0.15 The big jump from 2015 to 2016 is likely because the roads in Carver Beach were reclaimed in 2015.There are a lot of street segments in that area, so when the average OCI is calculated per segment, a project like that skews the numbers. Existing Street Conditions Condition Category OCI Recommended Activity in Cartegraph Cost per Square Foot Impact Excellent 95 –100 Do Nothing $0 0 Good 85 –94 AC -Surface Treatment $0.16 20% Satisfactory 75 –84 AC -AC Overlay < 2”$2.00 65% Fair 50 –74 AC -AC Overlay > 2”$2.55 75% Poor 40 –49 AC -Patching – Shallow/Leveling $1.20 10% Fail 0 –39 AC -Reconstruct -Full $10.37 100 Absolute Existing Street Conditions 2019 OCI Index rating can be broken down as follows: 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Poor Fair Satisfactory GoodPercentage of Street NetworkStreet Condition 2019 Street Ratings 21%23% 16% 40% Poor (0-49) = 24 miles Fair (50-75) = 27 miles Satisfactory (75-85) = 18 miles Good (85-100) = 46 miles Total mileage = 115 miles Street Reconstruction Timing 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1960196219641966196819701972197419761978198019821984198619881990199219941996199820002002200420062008201020122014201620182020202220242026202820302032203420362038204020422044204620482050205220542056205820602062206420662068Cummulative MilesYear Original Construction Replacement (~50 years) Current Year Street Reconstruction Timing The average life expectancy of a street is 50-years. After 50-years streets need to be completely reconstructed. City streets that are 50-years old and are in need of replacement are a combination of streets that were constructed in the 1960’s and 1970’s. The average rate of new street construction between the 1960’s and 1970’s is 1.6 miles per year. 1.6 miles x $1.5M = $2,400,000 per year Mill & Overlay Timing 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1960196219641966196819701972197419761978198019821984198619881990199219941996199820002002200420062008201020122014201620182020202220242026202820302032203420362038204020422044204620482050205220542056205820602062206420662068Cummulative MilesYear Original Construction Mill & Overlay (~25 years) Current Year Mill & Overlay Timing The age at which streets should have a mill &overlay is 25 years. City streets that are 25-years old and are in need of a mill & overlay were built in the early 1990’s. The average rate of new street construction in the 1990’s was 3.5 miles per year. 3.5 miles x $0.35M = $1.2M per year Financial Impact Required Annual Budget for Streets: Street Reconstruction = $2,400,000 Street Mill & Overlay = $1,200,000 Total $3,600,000 Additional Budget Impacts of increasing spending on Roads to $3.6M •Additional $450,000/year water improvements related to street reconstructions •Additional $140,000/year sewer improvements related to street reconstructions •Additional $375,000/year storm water improvements related to street reconstructions NOTE: All three of these impacts are accounted for in the 2020 Utility Rate Study •The city council is also considering putting additional street department resources towards annual maintenance (pothole and patching) as part of the 2020 General Fund Budget Previous Funding New Funding 2020 Mill & Overlay -BASSWOOD CIR, BRULE CIR, CASCADE CIR, CASCADE CT, CASCADE PASS, CASTLE RDG, CASTLE RDG CT, CHOCTAW CIR, DAKOTA LN, HIDDEN CIR, HIDDEN CT, HIDDEN LN, KURVERS POINT RD, KURVERS PT RD, LAKE LUCY RD, MARSH DR, MOUNTAIN VIEW CT, MOUNTAIN WAY, NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD, NEZ PERCE DR, OLYMPIC CIR, OXBOW BND, PENAMINT CT, PENAMINT LN, PIEDMONT CT, REDWING LN, ROJINA LN, SHASTA CIR E, SHASTA CIR W, SINNEN CIR, STAGHORN LN, SUMMIT CIR, TRAP LINE CIR, TRAP LINE LN, TRAPPERS PASS, TROENDLE CIR, TWIN MAPLE LN, VINELAND CT, WILLOW VIEW CV 2021 Mill & Overlay -ASHTON CT, BENWOOD CIR, BLUFF VIEW CT, BOULDER RD, BRETTON WAY, BRINKER STREET, BUTTE CT, CACTUS CRV, CANYON CRV, CREEK RUN TRL, CREEK VIEW CT, CROCUS CT, DEVONSHIRE DR, FAWN HILL CT, FAWN HILL RD, GUNFLINT CT, GUNFLINT TRL, HARRISON HILL CT, HARRISON HILL TRL, HEATHER CT, HILLSDALE CT, HUNTER DR, LODGEPOLE PT, LONGACRES DR, LUKEWOOD DR, MAJESTIC WAY, MULBERRY CIR E, MULBERRY CIR W, NORTHWOOD CT, POINTE LAKE LUCY, RED FOX CIR, SADDLEBROOK RV, SADDLEBROOK PASS, SADDLEBROOK TRL, SHADOW LN, STONE CREEK DR, STONE CREEK LN E, STONE CREEK LN W, STONE CREEK RD, STRATTON CT, TETON LN, TIMBERWOOD DR, TROTTERS CIR, TULIP CT, WALNUT, WELSLEY CT 2020 Mill & Overlay -BUTTE CT, CACTUS CRV, CANYON CRV, CASCADE CIR, CASCADE CT, CASCADE PASS, CASTLE RDG, CASTLE RDG CT, MOUNTAIN VIEW CT, MOUNTAIN WAY, NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD, OLYMPIC CIR, OXBOW BND, PENAMINT CT, PENAMINT LN, PIEDMONT CT, REDWING LN, ROJINA LN, SADDLEBROOK CRV, SADDLEBROOK PASS, SADDLEBROOK TRL, SHASTA CIR E, SHASTA CIR W, STAGHORN LN, SUMMIT CIR, TRAP LINE CIR, TRAP LINE LN, TRAPPERS PASS, TROTTERS CIR 2021 Mill & Overlay -ASHTON CT, BASSWOOD CIR, BRETTON WAY, BRULE CIR, CHOCTAW CIR, DEVONSHIRE DR, KURVERS POINT RD, KURVERS PT RD, LAKE LUCY RD, NEZ PERCE DR, STRATTON CT, TETON LN, TROENDLE CIR, TWIN MAPLE LN, VINELAND CT, WELSLEY CT, WILLOW VIEW CV 5-YEAR PLAN YEAR TREATMENT MILEAGE 2020 MILL & OVERLAY 7.3 RECONSTRUCTION - 2021 MILL & OVERLAY 7.9 RECONSTRUCTION - 2022 MILL AND OVERLAY 2.2 RECONSTRUCTION 1.7 2023 MILL & OVERLAY 2.7 RECONSTRUCTION 1.4 2024 MILL & OVERLAY 3.1 RECONSTRUCTION 1.2 TOTAL MILL & OVERLAY 23.2 RECONSTRUCTION 4.3* *Does not include MSA funded reconstructions (additional 4.4 miles) 5-YEAR PLAN *Does not include MSA funded reconstructions YEAR TREATMENT*STREET NAMES 2020 MILL & OVERLAY BASSWOOD CIR, BRULE CIR, CASCADE CIR, CASCADE CT, CASCADE PASS, CASTLE RDG, CASTLE RDG CT, CHOCTAW CIR, DAKOTA LN, HIDDEN CIR, HIDDEN CT, HIDDEN LN, KURVERS POINT RD, KURVERS PT RD, LAKE LUCY RD, MARSH DR, MOUNTAIN VIEW CT, MOUNTAIN WAY, NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD, NEZ PERCE DR, OLYMPIC CIR, OXBOW BND, PENAMINT CT, PENAMINT LN, PIEDMONT CT, REDWING LN, ROJINA LN, SHASTA CIR E, SHASTA CIR W, SINNEN CIR, STAGHORN LN, SUMMIT CIR, TRAP LINE CIR, TRAP LINE LN, TRAPPERS PASS, TROENDLE CIR, TWIN MAPLE LN, VINELAND CT,WILLOW VIEW CV RECONSTRUCTION - 2021 MILL & OVERLAY ASHTON CT, BENWOOD CIR, BLUFF VIEW CT, BOULDER RD, BRETTON WAY, BRINKER STREET, BUTTE CT, CACTUS CRV, CANYON CRV, CREEK RUN TRL, CREEK VIEW CT, CROCUS CT, DEVONSHIRE DR, FAWN HILL CT, FAWN HILL RD, GUNFLINT CT, GUNFLINT TRL, HARRISON HILL CT, HARRISON HILL TRL, HEATHER CT, HILLSDALE CT, HUNTER DR, LODGEPOLE PT, LONGACRES DR, LUKEWOOD DR, MAJESTIC WAY, MULBERRY CIR E, MULBERRY CIR W, NORTHWOOD CT, POINTE LAKE LUCY, RED FOX CIR, SADDLEBROOK RV, SADDLEBROOK PASS, SADDLEBROOK TRL, SHADOW LN, STONE CREEK DR, STONE CREEK LN E, STONE CREEK LN W, STONE CREEK RD, STRATTON CT, TETON LN, TIMBERWOOD DR, TROTTERS CIR, TULIP CT, WALNUT, WELSLEY CT RECONSTRUCTION - 2022 MILL & OVERLAY ALISA CT, ALISA LN, BITTERN CT, BLUEBILL TRL, HERON DR, OSPREY LN, SUNRIDGE CT, SWAN CT, VALLEY RIDGE CT, VALLEY RIDGE PL, VALLEY RIDGE TRL N, VALLEY RIDGE TRL S, VALLEY VIEW CT, VALLEY VIEW PL S RECONSTRUCTION 76TH ST W, 77TH ST W, CHAN VIEW ST, DEL RIO DR, GREAT PLAINS BLVD, HIGHLAND DR, HURON AVE, IROQUOIS AVE, KIOWA AVE 2023 MILL & OVERLAY CHURCH RD, COUNTRY OAKS RD, HALLGREN LN, JOSHUA CIR, KINGS RD, KIRKWOOD CIR, LAKERIDGE RD, LINDEN CIR, MAPLE SHORES DR, MEADOW CT, MEADOW LN, MINNEWASHTA CT, RED OAK LN, RIDGEHILL RD, STRATFORD BLVD, STRATFORD LN, STRATFORD RDG, WHITE OAK LN RECONSTRUCTION COUNTRY OAKS DR, CRESTVIEW DR, GLENDALE DR, LESLEE CRV, MAPLE AVE, MAPLE CIR 2024 MILL &OVERLAY 86TH ST W, GREENLEAF CT, GREENVIEW DR, LAKE RILEY BLVD, MISSION CT, MISSION HILLS CIR, MISSION HILLS LN, OAKSIDE CIR, OVERLOOK CT, PARKLAND WAY, SHOREVIEW CT, SPRINGFIELD DR, SUMMERFIELD DR, SUNNYVALE DR, TIGUA CIR RECONSTRUCTION BLUFF RIDGE CT, FOX DR, FOX HOLLOW DR, FOX TAIL CT, GRAY FOX CRV, GRAY FOX LN, HUNTERS CT, PLEASANT PARK DR, QUAIL XING What we have established to this point 1. Currently, the cost for street improvements is split 60% City and 40% Assessed. THE CITY WILL CONTINUE ITS CURRENT ASSESSMENT PRACTICE. 2. The additional funding is for financing THE CITY SHARE ONLY. 3. Any Franchise Fee or Levy issued will be used ONLY for local road improvements. 4. Issuing a Franchise Fee has the same impact as a tax. However, a Franchise Fee allows for flexibility in how some customers are charged. Issuing a property tax levy only, will result in residential properties paying 83% of all road improvement costs. Why a Franchise Fee vs. a Property Tax Levy? 15 Property Tax Levy Residential Commericial/Others Franchise Fee Residential Commericial/Others •A Franchise Fee offers more flexibility than a property tax which charges 83 cents of every dollar to residential properties. A Franchise Fee could be set to meet a funding goal. •Under the proposed franchise fee rate schedule, the franchise fee itself would be collected on a 63/37 basis, rather than 83/17 which is what a property tax levy would achieve. Proposed Franchise Fee Schedule Classification Charge Per Month Per Utility Net Rev Residential $ 5.00 $1,108,860.00 Small Electric Commercial $ 14.00 $ 127,848.00 Medium Electric Commercial $ 40.00 $ 128,160.00 Large Electric Commercial $ 290.00 $ 267,960.00 Gas Commercial A $ 5.00 $ 16,860.00 Gas Commercial B $ 9.00 $ 20,520.00 Gas Commercial C $ 20.00 $ 49,440.00 Gas Small Volume, Dual Fuel $ 90.00 $ 11,880.00 $1,731,528.00 Who has a Franchise Fee in 7 County Metro Area? Includes all 7 of Chanhassen Neighboring Cities: Chaska, Eden Prairie, Excelsior, Minnetonka, Shakopee, Shorewood, Victoria 17 Location Franchise Fee Use Brooklyn Center Capital Projects Fund-Street reconstruction fund Champlin Capital Projects Fund-Infrastructure Replacement Bloomington Capital Projects Fund -Pavement Management& Bike Trails Eden Prairie Capital Projects Fund -Pavement Management Elk River Capital Projects Fund -Pavement Management Edina Capital Projects Fund-Sidewalks and Bike Trails Golden Valley Capital Projects Fund -street reconstruction fund for street Minneapolis General Fund -G,E,& C for general use except PEG fees Minnetonka Capital Projects Fund -Burial of electric lines and street lighting New Hope General Fund-Has had for 15 years Plymouth Capital Projects Fund -Street reconstruction fund Richfield Capital Projects Fund -Overlay, sealcoating and removal of diseased trees. Rogers Capital Projects Fund -City’s Pavement Management Program St. Louis Park Capital Projects Fund -City’s Pavement Management Program Victoria Capital Projects Fund –Undergrounding Power Lines Funding Scenario (Achieve $3.6M/year Improvements) 1.$5 Residential Franchise Fee and commercial fee schedule (following slide) $1.73M/year 2.Increase in the 2020 Levy of $350,000 (3%, see impact in following slide) 3.Use a portion of the Library Levy of $200,000 in 2022. Using this levy will have no tax impact Total Impact of Franchise Fee & Levy Increases on Residential Franchise Fee 2020 Property Tax Increase in 2020 Total Per Year 200K House $ 120 $ 13 $ 133 370K House $ 120 $ 26 $ 146 $1M House $ 120 $ 82 $ 202 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 Project Cost (Street Only) 1,900,000 300,000 2,200,000 -2,200,000 -2,200,000 -2,200,000 -2,200,000 -2,200,000 Assessments 40% (760,000)(120,000)(880,000)-(880,000)-(880,000)-(880,000)-(880,000)-(880,000) City Share 1,140,000 180,000 1,320,000 -1,320,000 -1,320,000 -1,320,000 -1,320,000 -1,320,000 Other project Costs (400,000)(75,000) Tsfs in 194,751 Fund Bal -BOY Estimate for 2019 1,803,825 1,003,082 1,512,744 18,099 916,061 (412,018)477,342 (731,321)214,129 (1,065,513)(107,231)(1,393,300)(461,090) Levy And/Or Franchise Fee 884,838 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 Reduction for Other purposes Repayment 400,000 400,000 400,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 $625,677 561,251 561,251 580,384 561,251 561,251 $ 561,251 Project Costs (1,900,000)(300,000)(2,200,000)-(2,200,000)-(2,200,000)-(2,200,000)-(2,200,000)-(2,200,000) Investable Balance 983,414 1,483,082 17,744 898,099 (403,939)467,982 (716,981)209,930 (1,044,621)(105,129)(1,365,980)(452,049)(1,719,839) MVHC Street Levy & Tsf Interest 19,668 29,662 355 17,962 (8,079)9,360 (14,340)4,199 (20,892)(2,103)(27,320)(9,041)(34,397) Fund Bal -EOY 1,003,082 1,512,744 18,099 916,061 (412,018)477,342 (731,321)214,129 (1,065,513)(107,231)(1,393,300)(461,090)(1,754,236) Current funding PMP Projected Fund Balance New funding PMP Projected Fund Balance 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 Project Cost (Street Only) 1,900,000 2,600,000 3,600,000 3,708,000 3,819,240 3,933,817 4,051,832 4,173,387 4,298,588 4,427,546 4,560,372 4,697,183 4,838,099 4,983,242 Assessments 40% (760,000)(1,040,000)(1,440,000)(1,483,200)(1,527,696)(1,573,527)(1,620,733)(1,669,355)(1,719,435)(1,771,018)(1,824,149)(1,878,873)(1,935,240)(1,993,297) City Share 1,140,000 1,560,000 2,160,000 2,224,800 2,291,544 2,360,290 2,431,099 2,504,032 2,579,153 2,656,528 2,736,223 2,818,310 2,902,859 2,989,945 Other project Costs Tenn Courts & (400,000)(75,000) Tsfs in Trail 194,751 Fund Bal -BOY Estimate for 2018**** 1,803,825 1,003,082 1,119,283 741,395 670,574 636,819 616,011 692,063 700,405 852,704 1,032,549 1,199,399 1,292,514 1,308,107 Franchise Fee Revenue -1,200,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 Assessment Repayment 400,000 764,254 820,575 962,030 1,110,999 1,238,930 1,452,314 1,505,995 1,772,167 1,925,146 2,041,704 2,102,955 2,166,044 2,231,025 Capital Levy Requirement 884,838 730,000 730,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 Project Costs (1,900,000)(2,600,000)(3,600,000)(3,708,000)(3,819,240)(3,933,817)(4,051,832)(4,173,387)(4,298,588)(4,427,546)(4,560,372)(4,697,183)(4,838,099)(4,983,242) Investable Balance 983,414 1,097,337 726,858 657,425 624,333 603,932 678,493 686,671 835,984 1,012,303 1,175,881 1,267,170 1,282,458 1,217,890 Interest Income 19,668 21,947 14,537 13,149 12,487 12,079 13,570 13,733 16,720 20,246 23,518 25,343 25,649 24,358 Fund Bal -EOY 1,003,082 1,119,283 741,395 670,574 636,819 616,011 692,063 700,405 852,704 1,032,549 1,199,399 1,292,514 1,308,107 1,242,248 Recommendation 22 •Staff recommends the opening of a public hearing to take input on the implementation of a Franchise Fee and Update of Franchise Ordinances with all three gas and electric utilities. •After the public hearing staff would recommend the adoption of the attached updated franchise and franchise fee ordinances. Page 1 of 7 Resident Questions/Comments We just had our street re-done two summers ago and had to pay thousands of dollars. Now you want me to pay a franchise fee for others? Doesn't seem fair • The city council has already determined that the practice of assessing 40% of the total cost of the project to the benefiting properties will continue into the future. So all property owners will be treated the same as previously assessed projects. The franchise fee and property tax levy increase that is being considered is for the city’s portion or the remaining 60% of the total cost of each of the projects. Can the utility companies distinguish or bill properties in Chanhassen on a different basis? Can the city exempt properties on private streets from a Franchise Fee? • Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B.03 provides that "[r]ates shall not be unreasonably preferential, unreasonably prejudicial or discriminatory, but shall be sufficient, equitable and consistent in application to a class of customers." Therefore having a different fee for various types of residential properties is not allowed per state law. • In addition, the City’s Attorney on this matter, James Strommen, clearly points out in his letter dated to city council of November 13, 2018: “courts acknowledge that precise equality in imposing fees or taxes to support government cannot be precise or is "impossible" given the inherent disparity in use of or benefit from the tax use across the taxpayer base.” We have found no case even considering a franchise fee exemption due to the argument that a certain percentage of transportation within the City was reduced by private road use. Even the unlikely event of total non-use of public roads would not afford exemption. Similarly, it is settled law that school district residents without children using the schools are not entitled to gain exemption from referendum levies to build and maintain the schools. We already pay high taxes so why should we have to pay more for roads? • The city portion of your property tax bill is only 20% of the total. The school district and county each have nearly double the amount of taxes they collect on property owners. • The City of Chanhassen has the lowest Tax Rate in Carver County and among the bottom 1% of all tax rates in the entire Twin Cities. • The City Tax Levy increase (new growth) for the past eleven years has resulted in the average home paying the same or less in city property taxes every year. Page 2 of 7 Because we live on a private street and use the public roads at a fraction of the amount others use public roads, we should get a reduced franchise fee or be exempt. • As noted previously, separate or exempt fees within billing classes is not allowed per state statute. • The city council is considering the use of Franchise Fees rather than a property tax levy to pay for a portion of the roads in order to have more equity between commercial and non-property tax paying properties, rather than leaving the largest burden on residential properties. • Example: Based on the proposed funding scenario the average home will pay about $146/year. If a property tax levy is issued instead of a franchise fee as currently structured, the average home would pay about $196/year. What has prompted the need for increased funding for street replacement? • The life expectancy of a typical street is 50 years. Based on this, the streets that were constructed in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s are now due for replacement. During the 1960’s the city was adding approximately 0.5 miles of streets per year. In the 1970’s new development increased significantly and the city was adding approximately 2.7 miles of streets per year. The chart below illustrates the miles of street that have been added to the city’s street network over the last 50 years. Page 3 of 7 • The city is now at the transition from 0.5 miles per year to 2.7 miles per year, so an average of 1.6 miles per year of street replacement is necessary to maintain the city’s street network or the average quality of the street network will continue to decline. The cost for replacement is $1.5M per mile x 1.6 miles = $2.4M. • Similarly, it is critical to perform mill & overlay projects as part of the life cycle maintenance of a street. A mill & overlay involves milling off the top 1.5 inches of bituminous and paving a new surface across the entire street. The appropriate timing for completing mill & overlay projects is when a street is between 20 and 25 years of age. After that a street typically decays to a point where a mill & overlay is no longer viable. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1960196319661969197219751978198119841987199019931996199920022005200820112014201720202023202620292032203520382041204420472050205320562059206220652068Cummulative MilesYear Original Construction Replacement (~50 years) 0.5 Miles/Year Current Year Page 4 of 7 • Based on the chart above, looking back 25 years the city was adding 3.5 miles of streets per year. The city should therefore be completing 3.5 miles of mill and overlay projects each year to maintain the city’s street network or the quality of the streets will continue to decline. The cost for mill and overlay projects is $0.35M per mile x 3.5 miles = $1.2M per year. • Historically, the city has done on average 1.4 miles of mill and overlay projects per year. Since the actual need is 3.5 miles per year, it will take several years to get the city caught up to where we should be. • The required annual street maintenance cost is therefore $3.6M. The current annual budget for street maintenance is $385,000. The funding shortfall is therefore $3,215,000. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1960196319661969197219751978198119841987199019931996199920022005200820112014201720202023202620292032203520382041204420472050205320562059206220652068Cummulative MilesYear Original Construction Mill & Overlay (~25 years)Current Year Page 5 of 7 How many miles of public streets and private streets are located within the city? • There are 115 miles of public streets within the city and 25 miles of private streets. What is the difference between a public street and a private street? • A public street is owned and maintained by the city and a private street is typically owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Public streets are designed to meet minimum standards for width and include additional right-of-way beyond the actual street pavement to provide area for utilities such as gas and electric to be installed as well as for sidewalks and snow storage. Private streets are narrower and do not have any right-of-way. This allows the homes on private streets to be located much closer to the street. • Private streets are primarily located in areas where the housing products are either townhomes or apartments. The primary reason for private streets is that the developers that construct those neighborhoods can fit many more housing units on their property as opposed to what they would be able to build if they had public streets. By having more housing units on their property they are able to keep the price of the homes lower. The tradeoff the developers decide to make is that the homeowners association will need to maintain the private streets in perpetuity. Do other cities use Franchise Fees? • Yes, all seven of our neighboring cities have franchise fees. They include Chaska, Eden Prairie, Excelsior, Minnetonka, Shakopee, Shorewood, and Victoria. There are at least 62 other cities within the twin cities that have a Franchise Fee. Can the Franchise Fees be used for something other than roads? • The current city council intends for all of the revenue generated from the franchise fee to be used exclusively for streets. However, future city councils could change that and use the franchise fees for something other than streets. The pavement management fund is reviewed with the city council on an annual basis as part of the budget process. That review will continue going forward and any changes in the use of the Franchise Fee would need to be a part of that discussion. 100% against the franchise fee, $10 a month for 20 years is the eternal tax. Raise the property taxes 1% for 2/3 years and be done with it. • Whether a property tax or franchise fee is issued the funding need will go on for an identical amount of time going forward into the future. Increasing the property tax levy by 1% per year for three years would only generate about $400,000 in funding for the pavement management program which is about $2 million short of the funding need. A property tax increase would need to be in the range of 15%-18%. Page 6 of 7 Charge the 15 garbage truck companies who drive up and down my cul-de-sac a fee to collect garbage in our city. Those trucks fly around our streets and cause tons of wear not to mention it’s dangerous how fast they drive. • The city does not have statutory ability to charge a special tax or wheelage tax like the county has authority to do. All neighborhoods that are interested have the ability to organize your collection services. The city has a step-by-step guide on how to organize your collection services on the city website at http://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/111/Garbage-Recycling Why doesn’t the city take over maintenance of the private streets since they already maintain similar sized streets in the Carver Beach area? • The streets within the Carver Beach area have always been public streets and were constructed early in Chanhassen’s history to provide access to the area around Lotus Lake when the housing in the area was primarily summer cabins. These streets do not have concrete curb and gutter and do not meet current city specifications for width. A new development coming into the City of Chanhassen today would not be able to construct these types of streets. Due to their age, the streets within the Carver Beach neighborhood have been grandfathered into the public city street system. • When private streets are originally approved for development the agreement is that those streets will be privately maintained in perpetuity. There are 25 miles of existing private streets. Performing snow removal on those streets would require two or three additional public works employees along with the associated trucks and equipment to perform the work. This was never agreed to and would be a significant additional cost to the city. The city would not have approved the private streets if it had ever been anticipated that they would be maintained by the city. • Private streets do not have the comparable property (right-of-way) behind the curb for snow storage that public streets have, often requiring snow to be trucked off site which is costly and labor intensive. • It is less efficient to plow private streets because it requires the use of smaller vehicles and many of the streets are dead ends requiring a lot of backing up and turning around as compared to plowing straight down a public street. This is also much more labor intensive. • Most homeowners associations contract the snow removal for each individual driveway with the snow removal of the private streets. It would be nearly impossible for the city to coordinate the removal of the snow on private streets with a separate private company performing the removal of the snow on the individual driveways. It would also be very inefficient. Page 7 of 7 What type of financial aid does the city receive from the state for road projects? • The city receives State Aid funds annually. State Aid funds can only be used for construction on roads within the city that are designated as State Aid streets or for the city’s cost share on county and state highway projects. The city is allowed to designate 20% of the city’s total street mileage as State Aid eligible. To be eligible, the streets need to be higher volume roadways that connect to other State Aid streets or a county or state highway. Some examples of State Aid streets within Chanhassen are Lake Lucy Road, Kerber Boulevard, and Audubon Road. The City receives approximately $1M per year in State Aid funds. Some recent use of these funds includes the project that was done on Park Road in 2018 and the current project on Lake Drive East. Anticipated future uses of state aid funds are for projects on Lyman Boulevard, Minnewashta Parkway and Galpin Boulevard. On State Aid street projects where assessments are included as part of the project funding, the city uses the State Aid funds to cover the city’s 60% portion of the project cost. The remaining 40% is assessed to the benefitting properties within the project area. 10/23/2019 C:\Users\kimm\Downloads\MSA_Sheet_10-15-19 City of Chanhassen, City # 194 Municipal State Aid Construction Fund Account Estimated Yearly Expenditures and Balances Assumes State Aid has sufficient funds to Advance Maximum Advancement $4M Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Beginning Year Balance $10,276 -$375,819 -$2,134,028 -$3,319,001 -$5,484,762 -$4,730,926 -$5,357,101 -$6,462,888 Allocation (assume 2% adjustment annually $923,324 $941,791 $960,627 $979,839 $999,436 $1,019,425 $1,039,813 $1,060,610 Yearly Programmed Expenditure $1,309,419 $2,700,000 $2,145,600 $3,145,600 $245,600 $1,645,600 $2,145,600 $600,000 Year Ending Balance -$375,819 -$2,134,028 -$3,319,001 -$5,484,762 -$4,730,926 -$5,357,101 -$6,462,888 -$6,002,278 Lake Drive E Minnewashta Pkwy Galpin Blvd.TH 41/82nd St. Signal Bluff Creek Drive Pleasant View Road Market Blvd $700,000 Powers Blvd. Ped Crossing $300,000 FYA - JPA with Carver County $22,000 Park Road - Add'n Expense $287,419 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $100,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $600,000 Lake Lucy Road Lake Drive W. & Great Plains $700,000 $500,000 Lyman Blvd. Galpin to 41 Lyman Blvd. Galpin to 41 Lyman Blvd. Galpin to 41 Lyman Blvd. Galpin to 41 Lyman Blvd. Galpin to 41 $1,645,600 $145,600.00 $145,600.00 $145,600.00 $145,600.00 Over/Under Maximum -$1,484,762 -$730,926 -$1,357,101 -$2,462,888 -$2,002,278 Subtotal $2.5 Million Lyman Market Blvd Imp. (78th to TH5)Signal Imp. On TH 41 Bluff Creek Drive (Pioneer Trail to Flying Cloud Drive) Pleasant View Road (Powers to TH 101) Galpin Blvd. (TH 5 to north City limits) Lyman Blvd west of Galpin Blvd Lake Drive E ( Dakota to Great Plains) Great Plains south of TH 5 Minnewashta Pkwy (TH 7 to south City limits), Lake Lucy TH 41 to Galpin Blvd., Lyman Blvd west of Galpin Blvd. Projects Lake Drive Imp. (Dell to Dakota), Powers Blvd. Ped Crossing, FYA JPA with Carver County, Park Road PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ONLINE FEED BACK Page 1 of 1 Regina Dean 1010 Barbara Court Chanhassen MN 55317 612-889-9541 reginarojas79@gmail.com Submitted: 8/19/2019 9:36:44 AM I am in support of enabling the use of franchise fees as a way to pay for pavement management. I am also in favor of using franchise fees as a way to pay for other eligible uses within the City. The nice thing about franchise fees is that everyone who uses them pays. This is an equitable way to pay for services. Uses that are tax exempt (churches, religious institutions, schools, non-profits, etc.) or people that lease are still paying a share. The City should pursue capturing franchise fees while they still can since this could be taken away by the state legislation at any time. Nancy Carruth 753 WOOD HILL RD CHANHASSEN Minnesota 55317- 9561 16127435473 nmack2000@gmail.com Submitted: 8/20/2019 9:43:32 AM I went to meetings last year and provided input. I support an increase in taxes to ensure our streets are maintained. Taxes provide transparency to constituents. Fee insinuates not a tax and is hidden in utility bills. I support the spending, just not the funding method. Thanks. Jennifer Weiner 1350 Lake Susan Hills Drive Chanhassen Minnesota 55317 952-270-0687 jawindholz@yahoo.com Submitted: 8/21/2019 11:17:49 AM I was just forced to pay to have my own street redone in 2917, Iâ€™m not particularly interested in having to fund othersâ€™ streets. This feels like double dipping. My streets probably wonâ€™t be redone for another 20 years so I will never benefit from this levy. I think my neighbors and I who have already paid for this service should be exempt from this tax for at least 10 years. Barry Weiner 1350 Lake Susan Hills Drive Chanhassen MN 55317 952-220-9079 weiner.b@yahoo.com Submitted: 8/21/2019 12:00:10 PM We have already paid high taxes for the road work that was done recently. Now you want to assess an additional levy on hard working families. This is ridiculous. I'd like the representatives I elect to actually represent the people and vote down this increase. Enough is enough! Thank you. ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING AN ELECTRIC SERVICE FRANCHISE FEE ON MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, A MINNESOTA COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City of Chanhassen Municipal Code is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance. Subd. 1. Purpose. The Chanhassen City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide electric services within the City of Chanhassen. (a) Pursuant to City Ordinance ______, a Franchise Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, a Minnesota cooperative association, its successors and assigns, the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, a Minnesota cooperative association, its successors and assigns, in an amount and fee design as allowed in Section 10 of the Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative Franchise and in the fee schedule attached hereto as Schedule A. Subd. 2. Franchise Fee Statement. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, a Minnesota cooperative association, its successors and assigns (“Company”), under its electric franchise in accordance with the schedule attached here to and made a part of this Ordinance, commencing with the Company’s March 2019 billing month. Subd. 3. Account-Based Fee. This fee is an account-based fee on each premise and not a meter-based fee. In the event that an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter at a single premise, but only one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. If a premise has two or more meters being billed at different rates, the Company may have an account for each rate classification, which will result in more than one franchise fee assessment for electric service to that premise. If the Company combines the rate classifications into a single account, the franchise fee assessed to the account will be the largest franchise fee applicable to a single rate classification for energy delivered to that premise. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance have more than one premise, each premise (address) shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a question arises as to the proper fee amount for any premise, the Company’s manner of billing for energy used at all similar premises in the city will control. Subd. 4. Payment. The franchise fee shall be payable to the City in accordance with the terms set forth in Section 10 of the Franchise. Subd. 5. Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission may allow Company to add a surcharge to customer rates of city residents to reimburse Company for the cost of the fee. 2 Subd. 6. Permit Fees. Franchise fees collected under this Ordinance shall be in lieu of permit fees otherwise payable by the Company under Section 10.1 of the Franchise ordinance, provided, however, that the Company shall continue to be required to obtain and comply with all right-of-way or other permits required by the City during the period a franchise fee is collected. Subd. 7. Documentation of Franchise Fee Payments. The Company shall annually provide the City with documentation supporting its determination of the franchise fee owed to the City. In the event there is a dispute concerning the franchise fee determination, then the Company and the City shall proceed under section 2.5 “Dispute Resolution” of the Electric Franchise Ordinance. Any verified underpayment or overpayment of franchise fees shall be paid by the party owing the underpayment or overpayment to the other within thirty (30) days of verification, plus interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Subd. 8. Enforcement. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this ordinance will be resolved in accordance with Section 2.5 of the Franchise Agreement. Subd. 9. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be after its publication and ninety (90) days after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted Ordinance to the Company by certified mail. Collection of the fee shall commence as provided above. Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota 3 SCHEDULE A Franchise Fee Rates: Electric Utility The franchise fee shall be in an amount determined by applying the following schedule per customer premise/per month based on metered service to retail customers within the City: Class Amount per month Residential $ 5.00 Sm C & I – Non-Dem $ 14.00 Sm C & I – Demand $ 40.00 Large C & I $ 290.00 Public Street Ltg $ 0 Muni Pumping –N/D $ 0 Muni Pumping – Dem $ 0 Franchise fees are submitted to the City on a quarterly basis as follows: January – March collections due by April 30. April – June collections due by July 31. July – September collections due by October 31. October – December collections due by January 31. ELECTRIC FRANCHISE ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. ______. CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, A MINNESOTA COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN IN THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA, AN ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND TRANSMISSION LINES, INCLUDING NECESSARY POLES, LINES, FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES, FOR THE FURNISHING OF ELECTRIC ENERGY TO THE CITY, ITS INHABITANTS, AND OTHERS, AND TO USE THE PUBLIC GROUNDS AND PUBLIC WAYS OF THE CITY FOR SUCH PURPOSES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1 City. The City of Chanhassen, County of Carver and Hennepin, State of Minnesota. 1.2 City Utility System. Facilities used for providing non-energy related public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer, storm sewer, water service, street lighting and traffic signals, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. 1.3 Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all or part of the authority to regulate electric retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4 Company. Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, a Minnesota cooperative association, its successors and assigns including all successors or assignees that own or operate any part or parts of the Electric Facilities subject to this franchise. 1.5 Electric Facilities. Electric transmission and distribution towers, poles, lines, guys, anchors, conduits, fixtures, and necessary appurtenances owned or operated by Company for the purpose of providing electric energy for public or private use. 1.6 Notice. A written notice served by one party on the other party referencing one or more provisions of this Ordinance. Notice to Company shall be mailed to the Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, 125 Minnesota Valley Electric Drive, Jordan, MN 55352. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City Administrator, City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, 2 Chanhassen, MN 55317. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other party. 1.7 Public Way. Any public right-of-way within the City as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.162, subd. 3. 1.8 Public Ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for park, open space or similar public purpose, which is held for use in common by the public and not a Public Way. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE. 2.1. Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the date this Ordinance is passed and approved by the City, the right to transmit and furnish electric energy for light, heat and power for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. For these purposes, Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Electric Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however, to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to ordinance or permit requirements and to the further provisions of this franchise agreement. 2.2. Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after the passage of this Ordinance and publication as required by law and its acceptance by Company. If Company does not file a written acceptance with the City within 60 days after the date the City Council adopts this Ordinance, the City Council by resolution may revoke this franchise, seek its enforcement in a competent jurisdiction or pursue other remedies in law or in equity. 2.3. Service, Rates and Area. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for electric service in City are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to the extent provided by law. The area within the City in which Company may provide electric service is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B. 37 - .40. 2.4. Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this Ordinance will be paid by City and reimbursed to City by Company. 2.5. Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within thirty (30) days of the date of written Notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. 2.6. Continuation of Franchise. If the City and the Company are unable to agree on the terms of a new franchise by the time this franchise expires, this franchise will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon, or until 90 days after the City or the Company serves written Notice to 3 the other party of its intention to allow the franchise to expire. However, in no event shall this franchise continue for more than one year after expiration of the 20-year term set forth in Section 2.1. SECTION 3. LOCATION, OTHER REGULATIONS. 3.1. Location of Facilities. Electric Facilities shall be located, constructed, and maintained so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over Public Ways and so as not to disrupt or interfere with the normal operation of any City Utility System. Electric Facilities may be located on Public Grounds as determined by the City. Company’s construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, location and relocation of Electric Facilities shall be subject to other reasonable regulations of the City consistent with authority granted the City to manage its Public Ways and Public Grounds under state law, to the extent not inconsistent with a specific term of this franchise agreement. 3.2. Street Openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, if required by a separate ordinance for which the City may impose a reasonable fee. Permit conditions imposed on Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground without a permit if (i) an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of Electric Facilities and (ii) Company gives telephone notice to the City before, if reasonably possible, commencement of the emergency repair. Within two business days after commencing the repair, Company shall apply for any required permits and pay any required fees. 3.3. Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any Public Way, the Company shall restore the Public Way in accordance with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.1100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. Company shall restore Public Ground to as good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain the surface in good condition for six (6) months thereafter. All work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground in the said condition, the City shall have, after demand to Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration of the Public Ground at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section 3.3. Company shall also post a construction performance bond consistent with provisions of the Minnesota Rules parts 7819.3000 and 7819.0100, subpart 6. 3.5. Avoid Damage to Electric Facilities. The Company must take reasonable measures to prevent the Electric Facilities from causing damage to persons or property. The Company must take reasonable measures to protect the Electric Facilities from damage that could be inflicted on the Facilities by persons, property, or the elements. The Company must take protective measures when the City performs work near the Electric Facilities, if given reasonable notice by the City of such work prior to its commencement. 3.6. Notice of Improvements to Streets. The City must give Company reasonable written Notice of plans for improvements to Public Grounds or Public Ways where the City has reason to believe that Electric Facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: 4 (i) the nature and character of the improvements, (ii) the Public Grounds or Public Ways upon which the improvements are to be made, (iii) the extent of the improvements, (iv) the time when the City will start the work, and (v) if more than one Public Ground or Public Way is involved, the order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time, considering seasonal working conditions, in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any additions, alterations or repairs to its Electric Facilities the Company deems necessary. 3.7. Mapping Information. The Company must promptly provide mapping information for any of it underground Electric Facilities in accordance with Minnesota Rules parts 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. 3.8 Shared Use of Poles. Company shall make space available on its poles or towers for City fire, water utility, police or other City facilities whenever such use will not interfere with the use of such poles or towers by Company, by another electric utility, by a telephone utility, or by any cable television company or other form of communication company. In addition, the City shall pay for any added cost incurred by Company because of such use by City. SECTION 4. FACILITIES RELOCATION. 4.1. Relocation in Public Ways. The Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.3100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. 4.2. Relocation in Public Grounds. City may require Company at Company’s expense to relocate or remove its Electric Facilities from Public Ground upon a finding by City that the Electric Facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Public Ground. Such relocation shall comply with applicable ordinances consistent with law. 4.3. Projects with Federal Funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any Electric Facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally-aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 161.46. SECTION 5. TREE TRIMMING. Unless otherwise provided in any permit or other reasonable regulation required by the City under separate ordinance, Company may trim all trees and shrubs in the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City to the extent Company finds necessary to avoid interference with the proper construction, operation, repair and maintenance of any Electric Facilities installed hereunder, provided that Company shall hold the City harmless from any liability arising therefrom. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION. 6.1. Indemnity of City. Company shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all liability, on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the Electric Facilities located in the Public Grounds and Public Ways. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City’s negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company’s plans or work. 5 6.2. Defense of City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense shall defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a period wherein Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City; and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This franchise agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. SECTION 7. VACATION OF PUBLIC WAYS. The City shall give Company at least two weeks prior written notice of a proposed vacation of a Public Way. The City and the Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, 7819.3200 and applicable ordinances consistent with law. SECTION 8. ABANDONED FACILITIES. The Company shall comply with City ordinances, Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D.01 et seq. and Minnesota Rules Part 7819.3300, as they may be amended from time to time. The Company shall maintain records describing the exact location of all abandoned and retired Facilities within the City, produce such records at the City’s request and comply with the location requirements of Section 216D.04 with respect to all Facilities, including abandoned and retired Facilities. SECTION 9. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 10. FRANCHISE FEE. 10.1. Form. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in addition to permit fees being imposed or that the City has a right to impose, the City may charge the Company a franchise fee. The fee may be (i) a percentage of gross revenues received by the Company for its operations within the City, or (ii) a flat fee per customer based on metered service to retail customers within the City or on some other similar basis, or (iii) a fee based on units of energy delivered to any class of retail customers within the corporate limits of the City. The formula for a franchise fee based on units of energy delivered may incorporate both commodity and demand units. The method of imposing the franchise fee, the percentage of revenue rate, or the flat rate based on metered service may differ for each customer class or combine the methods described in (i) - (iii) above in assessing the fee. The City shall seek to use a formula that provides a stable and predictable amount of fees, without placing the Company at a competitive disadvantage. If the Company claims that the City-required fee formula is discriminatory or otherwise places the Company at a competitive disadvantage, the Company shall provide a formula that will produce a 6 substantially similar fee amount to the City and reimburse the City’s reasonable fees and costs in reviewing the formula. The City will attempt to accommodate the Company but is under no franchise obligation to adopt the Company-proposed franchise fee formula and such review will not delay the implementation of the City-imposed fee. 10.2. Separate Ordinance. The franchise fee shall be imposed by separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least thirty (30) days after written notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon the Company. The fee shall become effective ten (10) days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon the Company by certified mail. 10.3. Condition of Fee. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against the Company unless it lawfully imposes a fee of the same or substantially similar amount on the sale of electric energy within the City by any other electric energy supplier, provided that, as to such supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee. 10.4. Collection of Fee. The franchise fee shall be payable not less than quarterly during complete billing months of the period for which payment is to be made. The franchise fee formula may be changed from time to time; however, the change shall meet the same notice requirements and the fee may not be changed more often than annually. Such fee shall not exceed any amount that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City. Such fee is subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles and customer refunds incurred by the Company. The Company agrees to make available for inspection by the City at reasonable times all records necessary to audit the Company’s determination of the franchise fee payments. 10.5. Continuation of Franchise Fee. If this franchise expires and the City and the Company are unable to agree upon terms of a new franchise, the franchise fee, if any being imposed by the City at the time this franchise expires, will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon notwithstanding the franchise expiration as provided in section 2.6 above. SECTION 11. SERVICE RELIABILITY, INFRASTRUCTURE REPORTING. The Company and the City shall meet annually at a mutually convenient time to discuss items of concern or interest relating to the Company’s service reliability in the previous year, compared to other service areas, infrastructure plans for the coming year and other matters raised by the City or Company. Upon request, the Company shall produce reports comparing its service record in the City to other service areas and provide, among other reasonably required data, System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI), Customers Experiencing Multiple interruptions (CEMI) and municipal pumping station and general customer outage data for the previous year. 7 SECTION 12. PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE. 12.1. Severability. Every section, provision, or part of this Ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part; and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part; provided, however, that if the City is unable to enforce its franchise fee provisions for any reason the City will be allowed to amend the franchise agreement to impose a franchise fee pursuant to statute. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. 12.2. Limitation on Applicability. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and Company as the only parties and no provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person (including the public at large) so as to constitute any such person as a third party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. SECTION 13. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. Either party to this franchise agreement may at any time propose that the agreement be amended. This Ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company’s written consent thereto with the City Clerk after City council adoption of the amendatory ordinance. This amendatory procedure is subject, however, to the City’s police power and franchise rights under Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B.36 and 301B.01, which rights are not waived hereby. Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING AN ELECTRIC SERVICE FRANCHISE FEE ON NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City of Chanhassen Municipal Code is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance. Subd. 1. Purpose. The Chanhassen City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide electric services within the City of Chanhassen. (a) Pursuant to City Ordinance ______, a Franchise Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns, the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns, in an amount and fee design as allowed in Section 9 of the Northern States Power Company Franchise and in the fee schedule attached hereto as Schedule A. Subd. 2. Franchise Fee Statement. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota Corporation, its successors and assigns, under its electric franchise in accordance with the schedule attached here to and made a part of this Ordinance, commencing with the NSPM March 2019billing month. Subd. 3. Account-Based Fee. This fee is an account-based fee on each premise and not a meter-based fee. In the event that an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter at a single premise, but only one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. If a premise has two or more meters being billed at different rates, the Company may have an account for each rate classification, which will result in more than one franchise fee assessment for electric service to that premise. If the Company combines the rate classifications into a single account, the franchise fee assessed to the account will be the largest franchise fee applicable to a single rate classification for energy delivered to that premise. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance have more than one premise, each premise (address) shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a question arises as to the proper fee amount for any premise, the Company’s manner of billing for energy used at all similar premises in the city will control. Subd. 4. Payment. The said franchise fee shall be payable to the City in accordance with the terms set forth in Section 9 of the Franchise. Subd. 5. Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission may allow Company to add a surcharge to customer rates of city residents to reimburse Company for the cost of the fee. 2 Subd. 6. Enforcement. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this ordinance will be resolved in accordance with Section 2.5 of the Franchise Agreement. Subd. 7. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be after its publication and ninety (90) days after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted Ordinance to NSPM by certified mail. Collection of the fee shall commence as provided above. Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota 3 SCHEDULE A Franchise Fee Rates: Electric Utility The franchise fee shall be in an amount determined by applying the following schedule per customer premise/per month based on metered service to retail customers within the City: Class Amount per month Residential $ 5.00 Sm C & I – Non-Dem $ 14.00 Sm C & I – Demand $ 40.00 Large C & I $ 290.00 Public Street Ltg $ 0 Muni Pumping – N/D $ 0 Muni Pumping – Dem $ 0 Franchise fees are submitted to the City on a quarterly basis as follows: January – March collections due by April 30. April – June collections due by July 31. July – September collections due by October 31. October – December collections due by January 31. ELECTRIC FRANCHISE ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. ______. CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN IN THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA, AN ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND TRANSMISSION LINES, INCLUDING NECESSARY POLES, LINES, FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES, FOR THE FURNISHING OF ELECTRIC ENERGY TO THE CITY, ITS INHABITANTS, AND OTHERS, AND TO USE THE PUBLIC GROUNDS AND PUBLIC WAYS OF THE CITY FOR SUCH PURPOSES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1 City. The City of Chanhassen, County of Carver and Hennepin, State of Minnesota. 1.2 City Utility System. Facilities used for providing non-energy related public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer, storm sewer, water service, street lighting and traffic signals, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. 1.3 Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all or part of the authority to regulate electric retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4 Company. Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns including all successors or assignees that own or operate any part or parts of the Electric Facilities subject to this franchise. 1.5 Electric Facilities. Electric transmission and distribution towers, poles, lines, guys, anchors, conduits, fixtures, and necessary appurtenances owned or operated by Company for the purpose of providing electric energy for public or private use. 1.6 Notice. A written notice served by one party on the other party referencing one or more provisions of this Ordinance. Notice to Company shall be mailed to the General Counsel, 401 Nicollet Mall, 8th Floor, Minneapolis, MN 55401. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City Administrator, City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other party. 2 1.7 Public Way. Any public right-of-way within the City as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.162, subd. 3. 1.8 Public Ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for park, open space or similar public purpose, which is held for use in common by the public and not a Public Way. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE. 2.1. Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the date this Ordinance is passed and approved by the City, the right to transmit and furnish electric energy for light, heat and power for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. For these purposes, Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Electric Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however, to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to ordinance or permit requirements and to the further provisions of this franchise agreement. 2.2. Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after the passage of this Ordinance and publication as required by law and its acceptance by Company. If Company does not file a written acceptance with the City within 90 days after the date the City Council adopts this Ordinance, the City Council by resolution may revoke this franchise or seek its enforcement in a competent jurisdiction. 2.3. Service, Rates and Area. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for electric service in City are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission. The area within the City in which Company may provide electric service is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B. 37 - .40. 2.4. Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this Ordinance will be paid by City and reimbursed to City by Company. 2.5. Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within thirty (30) days of the date of written Notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. 2.6. Continuation of Franchise. If the City and the Company are unable to agree on the terms of a new franchise by the time this franchise expires, this franchise will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon, or until 90 days after the City or the Company serves written Notice to the other party of its intention to allow the franchise to expire. However, in no event shall this franchise continue for more than one year after expiration of the 20-year term set forth in Section 2.1. 3 SECTION 3. LOCATION, OTHER REGULATIONS. 3.1. Location of Facilities. Electric Facilities shall be located, constructed, and maintained so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over Public Ways and so as not to disrupt or interfere with the normal operation of any City Utility System. Electric Facilities may be located on Public Grounds as determined by the City. Company’s construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, location and relocation of Electric Facilities shall be subject to other reasonable regulations of the City consistent with authority granted the City to manage its Public Ways and Public Grounds under state law, to the extent not inconsistent with a specific term of this franchise agreement. Company may abandon underground Electric Facilities in place, provided, that at the City’s request, Company will remove all abandoned Electric Facilities interfering with a City improvement project, but only to the extent the Facilities are uncovered or will be uncovered by excavation as part of the City improvement project. 3.2. Street Openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, if required by a separate ordinance for which the City may impose a reasonable fee subject to the provisions of Section 9. Permit conditions imposed on Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground without a permit if (i) an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of Electric Facilities and (ii) Company gives telephone notice to the City before, if reasonably possible, commencement of the emergency repair. Within two business days after commencing the repair, Company shall apply for any required permits and pay any required fees. 3.3. Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any Public Way, the Company shall restore the Public Way in accordance with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.1100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. Company shall restore Public Ground to as good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain the surface in good condition for six (6) months thereafter. All work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground in the said condition, the City shall have the right, after demand to Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, to make the restoration of the Public Ground at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section 3.3. The City conditionally waives any requirement for Company to post a construction performance bond, certificate of insurance, letter of credit or any other form of security or assurance that may be required, under a separate existing or future ordinance of the City, of a person or entity obtaining the City’s permission to install, replace or maintain facilities in a Public Way or the Public Ground. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City reserves the right to require a performance bond acceptable to the City and Company for new installation, replacement or repairs when the Company’s completion of its work is required in order for the City to proceed with its work for constructing a public improvement to the Public Way, or if Company has failed to properly or timely restore its work under a permit issued within two years of the Company’s project permit application. 3.4. Avoid Damage to Electric Facilities. Nothing in this Ordinance relieves any person, including Company, from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging Electric Facilities or other persons or property while performing any activity. 4 3.5. Notice of Improvements to Streets. The City must give Company reasonable written Notice of plans for improvements to Public Grounds or Public Ways where the City has reason to believe that Electric Facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: (i) the nature and character of the improvements, (ii) the Public Grounds or Public Ways upon which the improvements are to be made, (iii) the extent of the improvements, (iv) the time when the City will start the work, and (v) if more than one Public Ground or Public Way is involved, the order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time, considering seasonal working conditions, in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any additions, alterations or repairs to its Electric Facilities the Company deems necessary. 3.6. Mapping Information. The Company must promptly provide mapping information for any of it underground Electric Facilities in accordance with Minnesota Rules parts 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. 3.7 Shared Use of Poles. Company shall make space available on its poles or towers for City fire, water utility, police or other City facilities upon terms and conditions reasonably acceptable to Company whenever such use will not interfere with the use of such poles or towers by Company, by another electric utility, by a telephone utility, or by any cable television company or other form of communication company. In addition, the City shall pay for any added cost incurred by Company because of such use by City. SECTION 4. FACILITIES RELOCATION. 4.1. Relocation in Public Ways. The Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.3100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. 4.2. Relocation in Public Grounds. City may require Company at Company’s expense to relocate or remove its Electric Facilities from Public Ground upon a finding by City that the Electric Facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Public Ground. Such relocation shall comply with applicable ordinances consistent with law. 4.3. Projects with Federal Funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any Electric Facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally-aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 161.46. The City is obligated to pay Company only for those portions of its relocation costs for which City has received federal funding specifically allocated for relocation costs in the amount requested by Company. The City shall reimburse Company pursuant to this Section and the Government Prompt Payment Act, Minn. Stat. § 471.425, after relocation costs are determined. 5 SECTION 5. TREE TRIMMING. Unless otherwise provided in any permit or other reasonable regulation required by the City under separate ordinance, Company may trim all trees and shrubs in the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City to the extent Company finds necessary to avoid interference with the proper construction, operation, repair and maintenance of any Electric Facilities installed hereunder, provided that Company shall hold the City harmless from any liability arising therefrom. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION. 6.1. Indemnity of City. Company shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all liability, on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the Electric Facilities located in the Public Grounds and Public Ways. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City’s negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company’s plans or work. 6.2. Defense of City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense shall defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a period wherein Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City; and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This franchise agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. SECTION 7. VACATION OF PUBLIC WAYS. The City shall give Company at least two weeks prior written notice of a proposed vacation of a Public Way. Except where required for a City improvement project, the vacation of any Public Way, after the installation of Electric Facilities, shall not operate to deprive Company of its rights to operate and maintain such Electric Facilities until the reasonable cost of relocating the same are first paid to Company. The City and Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, subpart 7819.3200 and applicable ordinances consistent with law. SECTION 8. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 9. FRANCHISE FEE. 9.1 Fee Schedule. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in lieu of any permit or other fees being imposed on Company, the City may impose on Company a franchise fee by 6 collecting the amounts indicated in a Fee Schedule set forth in a separate ordinance from each customer in the designated Company Customer Class. The parties have agreed that the initial franchise fee collected by the Company and paid to the City in accordance with this Section 9 shall be a fixed monthly fee in accordance with the following customer classes and in amounts as set forth pursuant to section 9.2 below. The City reserves its right to modify these fees from time to time, upward or downward, subject to the amendatory procedure stated in Section 12 below. Class Fee Per Premise Per Month Residential $ 5.00 Sm C & I – Non-Dem $ 14.00 Sm C & I – Demand $ 40.00 Large C & I $ 290.00 Public Street Ltg $ 0 Muni Pumping – N/D $ 0 Muni Pumping – Dem $ 0 9.2 Separate Ordinance. The franchise fee shall be imposed by a separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least 90 days after written notice of the City’s intent to impose a fee has been served upon Company. The fee shall not become effective until the beginning of a Company billing month at least 90 days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon Company by certified mail. Section 2.5 shall constitute the sole remedy for solving disputes between Company and the City in regard to the interpretation of, or enforcement of, the separate ordinance. 9.3 Terms Defined. For the purpose of this Section 9, the following definitions apply: 9.3.1 “Customer Class” shall refer to the classes listed on the Fee Schedule and as defined or determined in Company’s electric tariffs on file with the Commission. 9.3.2 “Fee Schedule” refers to the schedule in Section 9.1 setting forth the various customer classes from which a franchise fee would be collected if a separate ordinance were implemented immediately after the effective date of this franchise agreement. The Fee Schedule in the separate ordinance may include new Customer Class added by Company to its electric tariffs after the effective date of this franchise. 9.4 Collection of the Fee. The franchise fee shall be payable quarterly and shall be based on the amount collected by Company during complete billing months during the period for which payment is to be made by imposing a surcharge equal to the designated franchise fee for the applicable customer classification in all customer billings for electric service in each class. The payment shall be due the last business day of the month following the period for which the payment is made. The franchise fee may be changed by ordinance from time to time; however, each change shall meet the same notice requirements and not occur more often than annually and no change shall require a collection from any customer for electric service in excess of the amounts specifically permitted by this Section 9. The parties acknowledge that certain elements of collecting the franchise fee are subject to the approval of the Commission. No franchise fee shall be payable by Company if Company is legally unable to first collect an amount equal to the franchise fee from its customers in each applicable class of customers by imposing a surcharge in Company’s applicable rates for electric service. Company may 7 pay the City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles, refunds and correction of erroneous billings. Company agrees to make its records available for inspection and audit by the City at reasonable times provided that the City and its designated representative agree in writing, subject to requirements of law otherwise, not to disclose any information which would indicate the amount paid by any identifiable customer or customers or any other information regarding identified customers. If any error in collection of franchise fees is discovered by either party, the City and Company shall meet as soon as reasonably practical to negotiate the means, methods and timing in which the fee payment shall be made to the City. In no event shall fees the Company cannot collect from customers be included in the amount payable to the City. 9.5 Equivalent Fee Requirement. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against Company unless it lawfully imposes and the City quarterly or more often collects a fee or tax of the same or greater equivalent amount on the receipts from sales of energy within the City by any other energy supplier, provided that, as to such a supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax. The “same or greater equivalent amount” shall be measured, if practicable, by comparing amounts collected as a franchise fee from each similar customer class, or by comparing, as to similar customer classes the percentage of the annual bill represented by the amount collected for franchise fee purposes. The franchise fee or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use related to heating, cooling or lighting, or to run machinery and appliances, but shall not apply to energy sales for the purpose of providing fuel for vehicles. The Company may waive the foregoing of this Section 9.5, to the extent of such written consent. SECTION 10. SERVICE RELIABILITY, INFRASTRUCTURE REPORTING. The Company and the City shall meet annually at a mutually convenient time to discuss items of concern or interest relating to this Franchise, including, but not limited to, collaborative infrastructure planning, vegetation management and reliability performance. Upon request, the Company shall provide to City reporting information on service reliability, including System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) and other measures as may be beneficial and mutually agreeable, such as Customers Experiencing Multiple interruptions (CEMI) or other outage data, the exact form and content of which shall all be mutually agreed to by City and Company. SECTION 11. PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE. 11.1. Severability. Every section, provision, or part of this Ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part; and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part; provided, however, if any provision is held invalid, the parties agree to negotiate in good faith to substitute, to the extent reasonably possible, amended provisions that validly carry out the primary purpose of the invalid provisions. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. 11.2. Limitation on Applicability. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and Company as the only parties and no provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person (including the public at large) so as to constitute any such person as a third party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. 8 SECTION 12. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. Either party to this franchise agreement may at any time propose that the agreement be amended. This Ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company’s written consent thereto with the City Clerk after City council adoption of the amendatory ordinance. This amendatory procedure, however, is not a waiver of Company’s or the City’s rights or arguments, whether under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 216B.36 and 301B.01 or other applicable law or otherwise. Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A GAS ENERGY FRANCHISE FEE ON CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNESOTA GAS, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FOR PROVIDING GAS ENERGY SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City of Chanhassen Municipal Code is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance. Subd. 1. Purpose. The Chanhassen City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide gas services within the City of Chanhassen. (a) Pursuant to City Ordinance ______, a Franchise Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas, its successors and assigns, the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas, its successors and assigns, in an amount and fee design as allowed in Section 7.1 of the CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas Franchise and in the fee schedule attached hereto as Schedule A. Subd. 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this Ordinance, the following terms shall have the following meanings: (a) City. The City of Chanhassen, County of Carver and Hennepin, State of Minnesota. (b) Company. CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas, its successors and assigns. (c) Franchise. The franchise agreement between the City and Company pursuant to City Ordinance No. 336. Subd. 3. Notice. Means a writing served by either party hereto to the other party. Notice to Company shall be mailed to CenterPoint Energy, Vice President Regional Operations, 505 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 55402. Notice to City shall be mailed to the City Administrator, City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317. Subd. 4. Account Fee. This fee is an account-based fee and not a meter-based fee. In the event that an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter, but only one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance have more than one account, each account shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a question arises as to the proper fee amount for any account, the highest possible fee amount shall apply. Subd. 5. Franchise Fee Statement and Payment. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on CenterPoint Energy (“Company”), under its gas franchise in accordance with the Schedule A attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance, commencing with the Company’s March 2019 billing month. Franchise fees are to be collected by the Company, consistent with the Minnesota 2 Public Utility Commission’s March 23, 2011 Order establishing franchise fee filing requirements in Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970. Subd. 6. Record Support for Payment; Audit. (a) The Company shall make each payment when due and, if requested by the City, shall provide a statement summarizing how the franchise fee payment was determined, including information showing any adjustments to the total made to account for any non-collectible accounts, refunds or error corrections. The Company shall permit the City, and its representatives, access to the Company’s records for the purpose of verifying such statements. (b) No more than once every three (3) years and upon thirty (30) days prior written notice, City shall have the right to conduct an independent review/audit of the Company’s records solely for the purpose of assessing the Company’s compliance with the franchise fee obligation herein. In the event the audit reveals an underpayment of five percent (5%) or more of the franchise fee amounts due during the period audited, the Company shall reimburse the City’s audit fees and expenses in full. Any verified underpayment of franchise fees shall be paid to the City within thirty (30) days of verification, plus interest at the same rate ordered by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission for interim rate refunds from the Company’s most recent rate case. Subd. 7. Payment Adjustments. Payment to the City will be adjusted where the Company is unable to collect the franchise fee. This includes non-collectible accounts Subd. 8. Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission may allow the Company to add a surcharge to customer rates of City residents to reimburse the Company for the cost of the fee, consistent with the Minnesota Public Utility Commission’s March 23, 2011 Order establishing franchise fee filing requirements in Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970. Subd. 9. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be after its publication and ninety (90) days after sending written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted Ordinance to Company by certified mail, whichever is later. Collection of the fee shall commence as provided above. Subd. 10. Relation to Franchise. This ordinance is enacted in compliance with the Franchise and shall be interpreted in accordance with its terms and applicable law. Subd. 11. Permit Fees. The Company will administer the collection and payment of franchise fees to the City in lieu of permit fees, or other fees that may otherwise be imposed on the Company in relation to its operations as a public utility in the City so long as the following requirements are met: (a) The Company applies for any and all permits, licenses and similar documentation as though this provision did not exist. (b) The Company requests the fee to be waived at the time of application. 3 Subd. 12. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be after its publication and ninety (90) days after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted Ordinance to the Company by certified mail. Collection of the fee shall commence as provided above. Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota 4 SCHEDULE A Franchise Fee Rates: Gas Utility The franchise fee shall be in an amount determined by applying the following schedule per customer premise/per month based on metered service to retail customers within the City: Class Amount per Month Residential $ 5.00 Firm A $ 5.00 Firm B $ 9.00 Firm C $ 20.00 Small Volume, Dual Fuel A (“SVDF A”) $ 90.00 Small Volume, Dual Fuel B (“SVDF B”) $ 90.00 Large Volume, Dual Fuel (“LVDF”) $ 90.00 Franchise fees are submitted to the City on a quarterly basis as follows: January – March collections due by April 30. April – June collections due by July 31. July – September collections due by October 31. October – December collections due by January 31. 612108v3CH135-60 GAS FRANCHISE ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. ______. CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO CENTERPOINT ENERGY RESOURCES CORP. d/b/a CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNESOTA GAS (“CENTERPOINT ENERGY”), A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION, DISTRIBUTION, MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF GAS ENERGY FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE USE AND TO USE THE PUBLIC WAYS AND GROUNDS OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA, FOR SUCH PURPOSE; AND, PRESCRIBING CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1 City. The City of Chanhassen, County of Carver and Hennepin, State of Minnesota. 1.2 City Utility System. Facilities used for providing non-energy related public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer, storm sewer, water service, street lighting and traffic signals, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. 1.3 Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all or part of the authority to regulate gas retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4 Company. CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp. d/b/a CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas (“CenterPoint Energy”), a Delaware corporation, its successors and assigns including all successors or assignees that own or operate any part or parts of the Gas Facilities subject to this franchise. 1.5 Effective Date. The date on which the ordinance becomes effective under Section 2.2. 1.6 Gas. Natural gas, manufactured gas, mixture of natural gas and manufactured gas or other forms of gas energy. 1.7 Gas Facilities. Gas transmission and distribution pipes, mains, lines, ducts, fixtures, and necessary equipment and appurtenances owned or operated or otherwise used by the Company for the purpose of providing gas energy for public or private use. 2 612108v3CH135-60 1.8 Non-Betterment Costs. Costs incurred by the Company from relocation, removal or rearrangement of Gas Facilities that do not result in an improvement to the Facilities. 1.9 Notice. A written notice served by one party on the other party referencing one or more provisions of this Ordinance. Notice to Company shall be mailed CenterPoint Energy, Vice President Regional Operations, 505 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 55402. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City Administrator, City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other party. 1.10 Public Way. Any street, alley or other public right-of-way within the City as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.162, subd. 3. 1.11 Public Ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for park, open space or similar public purpose, which is held for use in common by the public and not a Public Way. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE. 2.1. Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of twenty (20) years from the date this Ordinance is passed and approved by the City, the right to import, manufacture, transport, distribute and sell Gas for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. This right includes the provision of Gas that is (i) manufactured by the Company or its affiliates and delivered by the Company, (ii) purchased and delivered by the Company or (iii) purchased from another source by the retail customer and delivered by the Company. For these purposes, Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Gas Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however, to such lawful regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to ordinance or permit requirements and to the further provisions of this Ordinance. 2.2. Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after the passage of this Ordinance and publication as required by law and its acceptance by Company. If Company does not file a written acceptance with the City within sixty (60) days after the date the City Council adopts this Ordinance, the City Council by resolution may revoke this franchise, seek its enforcement in a competent jurisdiction or pursue other remedies in law or in equity. 2.3. Non-exclusive Franchise. This Ordinance does not grant an exclusive franchise. 2.4. Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this Ordinance will be paid by Company. 2.5. Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within thirty (30) days of the date of written Notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days after first meeting with 3 612108v3CH135-60 the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. 2.6. Continuation of Franchise. If the City and the Company are unable to agree on the terms of a new franchise by the time this franchise expires, this franchise will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon, or until ninety (90) days after the City or the Company serves written Notice to the other party of its intention to allow the franchise to expire. However, in no event shall this franchise continue for more than one year after expiration of the 20-year term set forth in Section 2.1. SECTION 3. LOCATION, OTHER REGULATIONS. 3.1. Location of Facilities. Gas Facilities shall be located, constructed, installed and maintained so as not to interfere with the City Utility System or safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over Public Ways and so as not to disrupt or interfere with the normal operation of any City Utility System. Gas Facilities may be located on Public Grounds as determined by the City. Company’s construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, location and relocation of Gas Facilities shall be subject to other reasonable regulations of the City consistent with authority granted the City to manage its Public Ways and Public Grounds under state law, to the extent not inconsistent with a specific term of this Franchise Ordinance. 3.2 Field Location. Upon request by the City, the Company must provide field locations for any of its Gas Facilities within the period of time required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D. 3.3. Street Openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, if required by a separate ordinance for which the City may impose a reasonable fee. Permit conditions imposed on Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground without a permit if (i) an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of Gas Facilities and (ii) Company gives telephone notice to the City before, if reasonably possible, commencement of the emergency repair. Within two business days after commencing the repair, Company shall apply for any required permits and pay any required fees. 3.4. Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any Public Way, the Company shall restore the Public Way in accordance with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.1100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. Company shall restore Public Ground to as good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain the surface in good condition for six (6) months thereafter. All work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground in the said condition, the City shall have, after demand to Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration of the Public Ground at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section 3.3. 3.5. Avoid Damage to Gas Facilities. The Company must take reasonable measures to prevent the Gas Facilities from causing damage to persons or property. The Company must take 4 612108v3CH135-60 reasonable measures to protect the Gas Facilities from damage that could be inflicted on the Facilities by persons, property, or the elements. 3.6. Notice of Improvements to Streets. The City must give Company reasonable written Notice of plans for improvements to Public Grounds or Public Ways where the City has reason to believe that Gas Facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: (i) the nature and character of the improvements, (ii) the Public Grounds or Public Ways upon which the improvements are to be made, (iii) the extent of the improvements, (iv) the time when the City will start the work, and (v) if more than one Public Ground or Public Way is involved, the order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time, considering seasonal working conditions, in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any additions, alterations or repairs to its Gas Facilities the Company deems necessary. If streets are at final width and grade and the City has installed underground sewer and water mains and service connections to the property line butting the streets prior to a permanent paving or resurfacing of such streets, and the Company’s main is located under such street, the City may require the Company to install gas service connections prior to such paving or resurfacing, if it is apparent that gas service will be required during the five (5) years following the paving or resurfacing. 3.7. Mapping Information. The Company must promptly provide mapping information for any of its Gas Facilities in accordance with Minnesota Rules parts 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. SECTION 4. FACILITIES RELOCATION. 4.1. Relocation in Public Ways. The Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.3100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. 4.2. Relocation of Gas Facilities in Public Grounds. City may require Company at Company’s expense to relocate or remove its Gas Facilities from Public Ground upon a finding by City that the Gas Facilities have or will become a substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Public Ground. Such relocation shall comply with applicable ordinances consistent with law. Nothing in this Section 4.2 shall be construed so as to invalidate or impair any existing company easements in Public Grounds. If Company is required to relocate from an existing easement City shall provide an equivalent easement for the relocated facilities. 4.3. Projects with Federal Funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any Gas Facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally-aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 161.46. SECTION 5. INDEMNIFICATION. 5.1. Indemnity of City. Company shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all liability, on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the Gas Facilities located in the Public Grounds and Public Ways. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City’s negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company’s plans or work. 5 612108v3CH135-60 5.2. Defense of City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense shall defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a period wherein Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City; and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This franchise agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. SECTION 6. VACATION OF PUBLIC WAYS. The City shall give Company at least two weeks prior written notice of a proposed vacation of a Public Way. The City and the Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, 7819.3200 and applicable ordinances consistent with law. SECTION 7. ABANDONED FACILITIES. The Company shall comply with City ordinances, Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D.01 et seq. and Minnesota Rules Part 7819.3300, as they may be amended from time to time. The Company shall maintain records describing the exact location of all abandoned and retired Facilities within the City, produce such records at the City’s request and comply with the location requirements of Section 216D.04 with respect to all Facilities, including abandoned and retired Facilities. SECTION 8. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 9. FRANCHISE FEE. 9.1. Form. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in addition to permit fees being imposed or that the City has a right to impose, the City may charge the Company a franchise fee. The fee may be (i) a percentage of gross revenues received by the Company for its operations within the City, or (ii) a flat fee per customer based on metered service to retail customers within the City or on some other similar basis. The City shall seek to use a formula that provides a stable and predictable amount of fees, without placing the Company at a competitive disadvantage. If the Company claims that the City-required fee formula is discriminatory or otherwise places the Company at a competitive disadvantage, the Company shall provide a formula that will produce a substantially similar fee amount to the City and reimburse the City’s reasonable fees and costs in reviewing the formula. The City will attempt to accommodate the Company but is under no franchise obligation to adopt the Company-proposed franchise fee formula and such review will not delay the implementation of the City-imposed fee. 9.2. Separate Ordinance. The franchise fee shall be imposed by separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least thirty (30) days after 6 612108v3CH135-60 written notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon the Company. The fee shall become effective ninety (90) days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon the Company by certified mail. 9.3. Condition of Fee. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against the Company unless it lawfully imposes a fee of the same or substantially similar amount on the sale of gas energy within the City by any other gas energy supplier, provided that, as to such supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee. 9.4. Collection of Fee. The franchise fee shall be payable not less than quarterly during complete billing months of the period for which payment is to be made. The franchise fee formula may be changed from time to time; however, the change shall meet the same notice requirements and the fee may not be changed more often than annually. Such fee shall not exceed any amount that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City. Such fee is subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles and customer refunds incurred by the Company. The Company agrees to make available for inspection by the City at reasonable times all records necessary to audit the Company’s determination of the franchise fee payments. 9.5. Continuation of Franchise Fee. If this franchise expires and the City and the Company are unable to agree upon terms of a new franchise, the franchise fee, if any being imposed by the City at the time this franchise expires, will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon notwithstanding the franchise expiration as provided in section 2.6 above. SECTION 11. PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE. 11.1. Severability. Every section, provision, or part of this Ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part; and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part; provided, however, that if the City is unable to enforce its franchise fee provisions for any reason the City will be allowed to amend the franchise agreement to impose a franchise fee pursuant to statute. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. 11.2. Limitation on Applicability. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and Company as the only parties and no provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person (including the public at large) so as to constitute any such person as a third party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. SECTION 12. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. Either party to this franchise agreement may at any time propose that the agreement be amended. This Ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company’s written consent thereto with the City Clerk after City council adoption of the amendatory ordinance. This amendatory procedure is subject, however, to the City’s police power and franchise rights under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 216B.36 and 301B.01, which rights are not waived hereby. 7 612108v3CH135-60 Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Approve City Council Minutes dated October 14, 2019 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: E.1. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No: PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves the City Council minutes dated October 14, 2019.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: City Council Summary Minutes dated October 14, 2019 City Council Verbatim Minutes dated October 14, 2019 City Council Work Session Minutes dated October 14, 2019 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES OCTOBER 14, 2019 Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilwoman Tjornhom, and Councilman Campion COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman McDonald and Councilwoman Coleman STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Jake Foster, Kate Aanenson, George Bender, Bruce Loney, and Roger Knutson PUBLIC PRESENT: Annette & Charles Buenger 520 Bighorn Drive Mack Titus 2747 Century Trail Mary & Gary Halama 670 Creekwood Drive Nicole Nejezchleba 4150 Red Oak Lane APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Campion seconded to move item G-2 under Public Hearings to H-1 under New Business. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: INVITATION TO HALLOWEEN PARTY, OCTOBER 26, 2019. Mayor Ryan read an invitation to the Halloween Party which will be held on Saturday, October 26, 2019 at the Chanhassen Rec Center. INVITATION TO COMMUNITY CLEAN UP FOR WATER QUALITY EVENT, SATURDAY, OCTTOBER 26. Mayor Ryan read an invitation to the Community Clean Up for Water Quality event being held on Saturday, October 26th. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: City Council Summary - October 14, 2019 2 1. Approve City Council Minutes dated September 23, 2019 2. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated September 17, 2019 3. Receive Senior Commission Minutes dated August 16, 2019 4. Resolution #2019-46: Approval of Apply For and Execute Grant Agreement with the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) 5. Resolution #2019-47: Designate No Parking for CSAH 101 from Pioneer Trail to Flying Cloud Drive 6. Resolution #2019-48: Approve Contract for Building Demolition and Site Restoration Associated with CSAH 101 Project All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. ANNETTE BUENGER CITIZEN ACTION REQUEST. Annette Buenger discussed and showed pictures of the disrepair of the property at 510 Bighorn Drive. Mayor Ryan asked the City Attorney Roger Knutson about confidentiality rights regarding correspondence between the City and residents. APPROVE CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CSAH 101 PROJECT FROM PIONEER TRAIL TO FLYING CLOUD DRIVE. Jon Horn reviewed the request for a contract amendment for engineering services associated with the CSAH 101 project. Mayor Ryan asked for clarification of the additional pedestrian bridge and pedestrian crossing at Creekwood Drive. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council approves an amendment to the consulting engineering contract for design and construction services with Kimley-Horn and Associates in the amount of $118,000. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR CSAH 101 FROM PIONEER TRAIL TO FLYING CLOUD DRIVE. Jon Horn reviewed a power point presentation on this item. Mayor Ryan asked for clarification of the demolition process before thanking Jon Horn for his hard work and leadership on this project. City Council Summary - October 14, 2019 3 Resolution #2019-49: Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council approves plans and specifications and authorizes advertisement of bids for the CSAH 101 project from Pioneer Trail to Flying Cloud Drive. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVAL OF ON-SALE BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR JIMMIE’S OLD SOUTHERN BBQ SMOKEHOUSE, 530 WEST 79TH STREET, SUITE 100. Todd Gerhardt presented the staff report on this item. Mayor Ryan opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council approves a request for an on-sale beer and wine license from Jimmie’s Old Southern BBQ Smokehouse LLC, dba Jimmie’s Old Southern BBQ Smokehouse contingent upon receipt of liquor liability insurance and all of the necessary paperwork associated with the application. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY REHABILITATION PROJECT NO. 20-02: ACCEPT FEASIBILITY STUDY; CALL PUBLIC HEARING. George Bender presented the staff report on this item. Mayor Ryan asked for clarification of the pond located near Lake St. Joe, soil replacement with undocumented fill mentioned on page 6 of the feasibility report, weight restrictions for Minnewashta Parkway, how assessments were determined, and the crosswalk configuration at Kings Road. Resolution #2019-50: Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council accepts the feasibility report for Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project Number 20-02, authorizes preparation of plans and specifications and calls for a public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Todd Gerhardt clarified information on truck traffic on Minnewashta Parkway in association with the street project in the Orchard Lane and Oriole Avenue area. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None. City Council Summary - October 14, 2019 4 Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Campion 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 8:30 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 14, 2019 Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilwoman Tjornhom, and Councilman Campion COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman McDonald and Councilwoman Coleman STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Jake Foster, Kate Aanenson, George Bender, Bruce Loney, and Roger Knutson PUBLIC PRESENT: Annette & Charles Buenger 520 Bighorn Drive Mack Titus 2747 Century Trail Mary & Gary Halama 670 Creekwood Drive Nicole Nejezchleba 4150 Red Oak Lane Mayor Ryan: Again good evening everybody and welcome to our council meeting. To those of you that are watching at home or livestreaming from the Chanhassen website, thank you for joining us. My apologies for the tardiness of starting this meeting. We, a lot of people say tis the season for other reasons. Tis the season for budget season for us so we have a, we had a lengthy conversation in the work session so I apologize for our tardiness for everybody here in chambers as well as those of you that are at home. For the record we have two council members absent tonight. Councilman McDonald and Councilwoman Coleman. Both on excused absences. Congratulations to Councilwoman Coleman for, and her husband Jake for the addition of their new baby boy. Mom and baby are both doing well and are healthy so congratulations to them. Our first action is our agenda approval. Council members are there any modifications to the agenda as printed. Councilman Campion: I have a modification correction. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion. Councilman Campion: I would like to move under public hearings item G-2 to New Business as H-1 as that’s a call for a public hearing and not a public hearing. Mayor Ryan: Okay so G-2 becomes New Business number 1. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 2 Todd Gerhardt: Correct. Under H. Mayor Ryan: Do we need to approve that? Take a motion to approve the new agenda then? Roger Knutson: Sure. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Could I get a motion to approve the new agenda by moving public hearing or G-2 to New Business H-1? Councilwoman Tjornhom: So moved. Mayor Ryan: Is there a second? Councilman Campion: Second. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Campion seconded to move item G-2 under Public Hearings to H-1 under New Business. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: INVITATION TO HALLOWEEN PARTY, OCTOBER 26, 2019. Mayor Ryan: The City of Chanhassen with the support of our local community event sponsors is proud to announce the fourth and final community event of 2019 and it’s our 35th Annual Halloween Party. So please join us on Saturday, October 26th for an evening of fun. Children 13 and under are invited to participate in a wide variety of activities including Trick or Treating, a live performance from Brian Richards. This is a tongue twister too. Brian Richards Spooky Not Scary Magic Show. Games, hayrides and much, much more. I invite all of the area residents, their families and friends to join me at the Chanhassen Recreation Center from 5:30 to 7:30. Pre- registration deadline is Friday, October 25th either at City Hall or the Chanhassen Rec Center. The fee is $5 per child. Adults are free and covers all activities. And we encourage the kids to wear their costumes and the adults will be in their costumes and it will be a great event. Another great event. INVITATION TO COMMUNITY CLEAN UP FOR WATER QUALITY EVENT, SATURDAY, OCTTOBER 26. Mayor Ryan: The next one is an invitation to the Community Clean Up for Water Quality event. The Chanhassen City Council invites all residents and service groups to volunteer on Saturday, October 26th to help clean up for water quality. Volunteers will work with master water stewards from the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District to rake, sweep or shovel leaves, dirt and debris from curbs and streets as designated, in designated locations throughout the city. This City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 3 organic material is a major source of water pollution that causes excessive algae growth and depletes oxygen needed for our fish and native plants. Impervious surface such as city streets provide a pathway for phosphorous to get to local lakes. Volunteers are asked to register on the City’s website. The clean up will take place from 9:30 a.m. until noon on Saturday, October 26th so please visit Chanhassen website for more information and to register. It’s time to clean up for water quality. We hope we get a lot of volunteers at that event. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: 1. Approve City Council Minutes dated September 23, 2019 2. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated September 17, 2019 3. Receive Senior Commission Minutes dated August 16, 2019 4. Resolution #2019-46: Approval of Apply For and Execute Grant Agreement with the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) 5. Resolution #2019-47: Designate No Parking for CSAH 101 from Pioneer Trail to Flying Cloud Drive 6. Resolution #2019-48: Approve Contract for Building Demolition and Site Restoration Associated with CSAH 101 Project All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. ANNETTE BUENGER CITIZEN ACTION REQUEST. Mayor Ryan: I know we have one scheduled visitor presentation so I welcome you to begin and please come to the podium and state your name and address. Annette Buenger: Thank you. I’ve got handouts that I can give you outlining some things that have already been done and I’ve got a jump drive with photographs on it. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Could you state your name and address for the record too please. Annette Buenger: My name is Annette Buenger at 520 Bighorn Drive, Chanhassen. Mayor Ryan: Great thank you. Welcome go ahead. Do you want? Annette Buenger: Jump drive. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 4 Mayor Ryan: Sure. Annette Buenger: And the handouts. Mayor Ryan: You can pass the handouts to Ms. Aanenson. I don’t know Jake can you put the jump drive in? Annette Buenger: I’m here to talk about my neighbor’s property at 510 Bighorn Drive that’s been in a clear dilapidated state for all the years that they’ve lived there. They moved in July of 2011 and it’s pretty much gone downhill ever since and they, he starts projects. Gets them partially done. Never completes them. At this time he’s got a lot of weeds and brush and volunteer trees growing along the entire perimeter of the property so what’s been done so far is that CSO Office Joe LeFevere sent a letter to the property owner on the 18th of September citing that he had until October 1st to clean up the property which he did not do. Also at the same time Eric Tessman sent a letter citing a number of building code violations that have gotten out of hand and he had October 4th to complete those. That was not done either. Mayor Ryan and Todd Gerhardt did come out and meet me on the 2nd of October and I showed them around the properties. What I was referring to because it seemed like the photographs that I had sent to Jake, I think I sent them to Jake. No I sent them to Eric Tessman and to Joe LeFevere and they weren’t quite getting it so thank you Mayor for coming out and letting me show you what was going on. Another letter was sent by Eric Tessman giving the property owner 2 more weeks to comply with the building code violations that were undone around with a few more that Todd Gerhardt had found when he was out visiting with Mayor Ryan. So with that I want to go ahead with the photographs and I’ll just run through them. What they all are. I did list them on the sheet of paper. Mayor Ryan: Oh it’s back. It’s on our screens. Annette Buenger: You’ve got it but I can’t see it? Okay. Kate Aanenson: You can use this. Annette Buenger: Okay. The first photograph will show where the owner built this portico and you can see some wires hanging out. That’s where some lighting is supposed to go. That’s a violation. The next photograph that is an 18 foot tall tree that’s growing within inches of the foundation of their garage between his property and mine. There’s probably about 15 feet between our two homes. Very close to us. Okay third item. This is a photograph of their deck that has no railing or stairs. He removed this about this time last fall. That’s a building violation. Let’s see the next photograph is the overgrown brush and 3 foot tall weeds that are in the back yard. That’s another photograph of the deck and you know more weeds in the foreground. This is a photograph of the broken gutters and weeds growing in their, on the house in the back yard. This is another photograph of more weeds in our backyard and those things City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 5 that he’s got under the tarps have been there 8 years. This is a photograph of again the deck, no railing and you can see the gutter is hanging with weeds growing out of it. This is in the back yard right between our two properties. A lot of brush and weeds and volunteer trees growing between the properties. This is a tree growing within inches of the foundation of their garage. This is right behind their garage where the retaining wall is rotting and because there’s no gutter it just runs down from the roof. It’s washed out this area that he filled in. This again is on the west side of the house up to their garage. This is all the weeds and excess growth that’s growing. This is a photograph of the east side of their house. He stucco over his lap siding. Never did put the second color coat on. Up there near the peak there’s a, where you see the orange there’s supposed to be a vent cover there. That’s missing and the chimney that’s in the lower right hand corner, that’s an improper vent. This is volunteer tree growth inbetween their pine trees on the front of their property. This one is a photograph of their unfinished valley and missing shingles on the front side of their house to the left of their portico. I think the right side of the portico is similar and then if you look up above he’s got no finishing on the trim. And the last photograph is a picture of his broken up driveway. So that’s what I’ve got for photographs. I do thank Mayor Ryan for coming out and moving this forward. At first I was getting a little push back. I guess they didn’t believe me or didn’t see what I was seeing so Mayor Ryan was able to get this moving forward. What I would ask the City Council to do is please get behind the Mayor and support getting this property cleaned up once and for all because it is devaluating about 9 properties in the large cul-de-sac. The other thing that I would like is to be kept in the loop of the letters that go out to Masood Sajady, the property owner. I did not get a letter about moving forward to clean up the brush and the volunteer trees so I don’t know what his deadline is. So that’s about it. Mayor Ryan: Perfect, thank you. A couple questions. And one is for Mr. Knutson. What in terms of privacy is there when we mail letters to residents? Is there any confidentiality? Are we allowed to then share that with other neighbors what we’ve asked a resident to do? Roger Knutson: Mayor, members of the council. Any person complaining about the condition of real property, the name of that person is confidential and cannot be released by the City. Mayor Ryan: And so the letters that we sent to this resident who has to fix these violations can we disclose the communication between the City and that person? Roger Knutson: Yes as long as you don’t disclose who is complaining. Mayor Ryan: As long as we don’t disclose who, okay perfect. Thank you for that clarification. Roger Knutson: Under this circumstance it probably is no secret. Under the Government Data Practices Act the name of the complainant. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 6 Mayor Ryan: Okay that’s good information to know. Thank you. And Mr. Gerhardt is there any update that you can provide today that we haven’t shared already or do you know any deadlines off the top of your head? Todd Gerhardt: Not off the top of my head. The complainant has submitted a letter to the City stating that he’s out of the country and is asking for an extension and some personal things that he’s going through but we still stand by our letters. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: And so. Annette Buenger: And has there been a decision made about whether he will be responsible for cutting down the dead maple tree in the back yard? Mayor Ryan: The one that overhangs by your garage? Annette Buenger: No that’s an ash tree and we understand that. It’s still alive. It’s not something the City can handle. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Annette Buenger: It’s the dead tree, the maple tree in the back yard. Todd Gerhardt: I’m not sure if that was on our list but we talked about a variety of volunteer trees on the property. Annette Buenger: Right. Right. Todd Gerhardt: But if we missed the dead maple tree we’ll send another letter with that. Annette Buenger: Okay, good enough. Mayor Ryan: Ms. Aanenson. Kate Aanenson: We just received a letter at the end of the day from the property owner so we haven’t had a chance to address that because he’s out of the country. Todd Gerhardt: I said that. Kate Aanenson: Okay I know but timelines aren’t going to match up so you know. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 7 Mayor Ryan: So we just, to clarify apparently we just got a letter from this resident at the end of the day. Staff has to review in what context that’s been received and what he’s asking. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Ryan: As soon as they get an opportunity I guess it came right before we met as council and staff we meet at 5:30 so I don’t think they’ve had a chance to review it. This is the first time hearing of it so as well. It was right before coming in here so as soon as they get a chance to review it and discuss it and come up with a plan going forward we’ll be in touch with you to let you know. To keep you involved. Annette Buenger: Alright thank you very much. Mayor Ryan: Okay thank you. Thanks for coming. Appreciate it. Are there any other visitor presentations this evening? Okay. APPROVE CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CSAH 101 PROJECT FROM PIONEER TRAIL TO FLYING CLOUD DRIVE. Mayor Ryan: Who’s going to take the lead on this? Jon Horn: Good evening Mayor, members of the City Council. My name is Jon Horn with Kimley-Horn and Associates. I’m handling the next two items tonight on our agenda. The first item being the approval of a contract amendment for our work associated with the Highway 101 improvement project. So the Highway 101 improvement project is a project we’ve been working on for about the last 12 months with city staff alongside Carver County and MnDOT. As the project has evolved over time there’s been a number of items that have come up and the City and County had requested some additional design work so I’ll just quickly run through those items. And a number of these items we’ll touch on a little bit more as a part of the next item on the agenda as well. So the first one is an automatic anti-icing system on 101 down the bluff. That is something because of safety issues and concerns that got incorporated into the project. Second item was an additional pedestrian bridge along Flying Cloud Drive to try to clean up some trail alignments and make for safer trail design along Flying Cloud Drive. A lot of tree removals were required as a part of the project and discussions how best to mitigate that. We did come up with a reforestation plan so that was an added design item. And then the incorporation of city trunk water and sanitary sewer improvements as a part of the project. There was some additional design analysis that city staff requested for that. There is an existing or there’s a proposed pedestrian crossing at Creekwood Drive at 101 and in conversations with county staff the desire has been to put a pedestrian actuated traffic signal at that location to make that crossing safer so that was added into the project. A lot of discussions with property owners and some additional engineering work that happened as a part of that. And then some additional traffic analysis to look at the roundabout at Flying Cloud Drive and how best to accommodate the fourth leg on City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 8 that roundabout design. So all those items in total are about $118,000 of additional services of which Carver County would pay a majority. $110,500 which are all eligible as a part of the turnback project. The $7,500 being the City of the City of Chanhassen’s component for the sanitary sewer and watermain design. I guess with that I’ll stand for questions. Mayor Ryan: Perfect thank you. Council any questions? Mr. Campion. No? I have one question. It’s not challenging or anything. I was surprised, what is the bridge? The added bridge. Was that the original bridge that we’re talking about further down the. Jon Horn: So today there’s a pedestrian trail that runs along Flying Cloud Drive, right along the north side of the roadway and that is going to get tied into the new trail system that’s being built as a part of Highway 101. The challenge was the trail that’s out there today is right up adjacent to Flying Cloud Drive so there’s some concerns about the safety of that and then trying to get the grades of the trail on Flying Cloud Drive to tie into the underpass under 101 the design became very difficult to make that work so what was proposed instead is the trail along Flying Cloud Drive is actually going to get separated. Pushed further to the north away from Flying Cloud Drive to provide better separation between cars and bikes and pedestrians and then as a result of that there’ll be an additional pedestrian bridge that will go over Bluff Creek just north of Flying Cloud Drive. Mayor Ryan: And is that in addition to, am I thinking? Jon Horn: Yeah it’s another bridge. Mayor Ryan: It is another bridge? Okay. Jon Horn: So. Mayor Ryan: Okay wow. That’s why I was surprised that there was actually another bridge. And then I know that there was a lot of talk and concern, I remember when you came to many work sessions to talk about this project was the concern of the pedestrian movement at Creekwood so it’s been proposed and accepted to do a signal. Is there going to be like a safety zone in the middle or what is going to look like? Jon Horn: So it will be basically identified as a pedestrian crossing. It will have an overhead mast arm so a pedestrian or bicyclist will be able to push the button. Traffic signal will come on to tell people to stop and then they can more safely cross. Carver County’s got some procedures in place where they evaluate crossings and decide what the appropriate type of control is and this is what came out of the process. So it would actually be a push button actuated traffic signal that would stop vehicles for pedestrians to be able to cross. Mayor Ryan: Oh okay. And will there be a landing zone in the middle or? City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 9 Jon Horn: There will be. As a part of the design there’s a center median in that area so as a part of the design that center median was actually built wider to be able to accommodate a refuge area in the middle so there will basically be pedestrians on each side of the roadway as well as a refuge area in the center median. Mayor Ryan: That’s great. That’s a great addition. I’m excited about that because I know that there was concern about some of the visibility coming up and down and at that point for crossing so I’m, glad that they did that. Council if no further questions I could stand for a motion. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I’ll make a motion. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I’d like to make a motion that the City Council approves the amendment to the consulting engineering contract for design and construction of services with Kimley-Horn and Associates in the amount of $118,000. Mayor Ryan: With a valid motion is there a second? Councilman Campion: Second. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council approves an amendment to the consulting engineering contract for design and construction services with Kimley-Horn and Associates in the amount of $118,000. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. Mayor Ryan: That motion carries 3-0. Go ahead number two, the next one. APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR CSAH 101 FROM PIONEER TRAIL TO FLYING CLOUD DRIVE. Jon Horn: Next item is to approve the plans and specifications for the Highway 101 project from Pioneer Trail to Flying Cloud Drive. It requires a simple majority of the members present. I do have a brief power point presentation which I understand it won’t show up on the TV but you guys will all see it. So I’ll just quickly walk through that. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Jon Horn: Just some project background. I know you’ve seen this project before but I just thought it’d be good to summarize prior to making the motion to approve the plans and specs so it’s a little over a mile long corridor. Existing two lane rural section of no sidewalks or trail facilities. It was originally a MnDOT roadway. Since has been turned back to Carver County. Certainly a number of improvements are needed to address safety and operation concerns along City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 10 the corridor. There’s steep grades. Tough topography. Erosion concerns. Poor sight distances. Limited right-of-way. Need to plan for future city utilities and then just to plan for future traffic growth along the corridor. So there’s a 2007 corridor study that was done. We almost have it. There’s a corridor study that was done in 2007 to really plan for the entire 101 corridor and a number of things have since been implemented so the section of 101 between Lyman and Pioneer Trail, there it is. Was reconstructed in 2013 and 2014. The segment south of Flying Cloud Drive, new Minnesota River bridge was built in 2015. The preliminary design for this segment was done in 2015 so really this is the last element of this corridor study to complete a four lane roadway connection between the Minnesota River bridge crossing and Highway 212. I did want to mention the partnership that was required for all this to happen. It’s been really fun to work alongside the City, County and MnDOT. Without the participation of all three agencies this project certainly wouldn’t have been successful and I think it’s a great example of the power of partnerships when 3 agencies work together to be able to deliver a project. So roadway and drainage improvements, this graph shows the proposed design so Pioneer Trail on the right side of the graphic and Flying Cloud Drive on the left. Four lane divided roadway design from end to end. The big blue area shows the stormwater treatment facilities that are proposed to be built as a part of the project. Going from a rural section design to an urban design of storm sewer necessitated storm sewer facilities, stormwater facilities so those have been incorporated into the project. An important element of this project just because of the erosion concerns and the bluffs that the storm sewer and the ponding will be an important element to being able to address some of those concerns. I mentioned the pedestrian and bicycle facilities an important element of this project. So over 2 miles of new trails will be built as a part of the project. There is the area in the middle at Creekwood, because of the challenges going down the bluff the trail is not extended down the west side of 101 but there will be a pedestrian crossing signal at this location to help facilitate this maneuver. And we are going to have a new pedestrian bridge crossing, the regional trail bridge crossing at this location over 101 and the other new trail bridge that we just got done talking about is right down here off of Flying Cloud Drive. Allowed this trail along Flying Cloud Drive to be pulled away from the roadway. Otherwise today it runs right along side the edge of the roadway. And then there’s also an underpass included as a part of the project so over 2 miles of new trails. Two pedestrian bridges and an underpass which really go a long ways towards making for safer pedestrian and bicycle traffic in the area. Public utilities have been an important part of the conversation for this project. A lot of desire from people in the area to have public utility services so this project will extend watermain all the way down the west side of the road. It will be a live watermain. Water will be available to the residents of the corridor once the project is completed so there’s existing watermain today that stops at Pioneer Trail. This project will take it all the way down to Flying Cloud Drive. For sanitary sewer it includes a number of elements to basically plan for future sanitary sewer service. Ultimately a lift station will be required to provide for service down at this location and then that investment would also require some additional sanitary sewer that would need to run through the golf course or along Pioneer Trail ultimately to be serviceable so it’s providing the guts of some of the important elements that are necessary just because it will be very difficult to build those facilities later once the roadway is done but it will not allow for a functional sanitary sewer system when this project is done. There’s going to be future investments that will be necessary to allow that to City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 11 happen. A special design considerations so some of the important things that were added based upon some of the feedback we received during the design process. I mentioned the pedestrian crossing signal at Creekwood Drive. Reforestation. A lot of tree removals will happen as a part of the project but just to give you some sense of the investment back in. Over 1,300 new trees will be installed as a part of the project as well as over 500 shrubs so obviously this project will have some big impacts just due to the nature of the project area but a significant investment on behalf of the City and the County to try to address that and to put a bunch of new trees and shrubs into the project corridor. And then going down the bluff a lot of discussions about how best to improve safety going down the bluff. There will actually be a raised median down the center of Highway 101 from Creekwood to the south to be able to prevent head on crashes and things like that. And the other thing that has been designed and we hope to be able to do as a part of the project will be included as a part of a bid alternate if we have money is there’s actually an automated deicing system that would happen that would keep the County from having to have trucks go out and use the deicing chemicals manually. There’s actually an automated system. Almost like a sprinkler system where it would actually spray the roadway down when necessary. There will be sensors in the pavement to detect when that’s necessary so it will be a really cool element to the project for both environmental impact issues as well as safety. Cross our fingers and hope we have enough money to be able to do as a part of the project so we hope for good bids. Councilman Campion: And that’s the same or similar to what’s on the 35W bridge? Jon Horn: Yeah so there’s like a dozen places around the metro area where this is in place. One of them is in the 35W bridge over the Mississippi River. Another close by location is the City of Bloomington. They’ve got an entrance ramp on an interchange they just built that’s got a similar technology. Public engagement has been an important part of this project. So we’ve had two open house meetings. One back in December of 2018 and one in August of 2019. We intend to have another one in February prior to construction start just to continue to keep people engaged. I’ve gotten pretty good turnout. 30 to 40 people at most of our open house meetings so, and we’ve had good engagement throughout the process. In addition a number of one on one property owner meetings to both work through design issues as well as right-of-way acquisition and I’ll touch on right-of-way acquisition here in a minute but property owner meetings and coordination of right-of-way will be an important part of the project moving forward. Generally people support the project. Understand the need to address the safety issues along the corridor but then you know they do have some questions and concerns that we’ve worked through. Timing for city utilities. A lot of desire to have city utility service in the area which watermain will be available. Sanitary sewer will not. Discussions on how best to phase the project to limit their impacts. It’s going to be a challenging project to build just due to the nature of the earthwork and the size of the project. And I’ve got a graphic here in a minute I’ll talk a little bit more about the constructing phasing staging. And then some concerns about berming, screening. What can you do to lessen the impact to my property so some conversations about that as well. Right-of-way easement acquisition. So this graph and color shows all the various right-of-way and easement acquisition that’s necessary. Six total property acquisitions have been completed City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 12 to date. Another 16 property owners are currently in some process of appraisals have been done. A majority of the offers have been extended and really over the next 4 to 5 months it’s going to be very, very important to work through the acquisition process so we’ve made a lot of progress but we have a lot more progress that needs to be done. Mayor Ryan: Did you say 16? Jon Horn: 16 more yep. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Jon Horn: And because of this process and the investment in it the intention is to come back to council at a later date and give you an update on all things right-of-way but it is really the next important part of this process. A lot of property owners to work through and to get the acquisition completed. Constructing phasing staging. Big project. It’s intended to be a two year project. So the first phase which would happen in 2020 would be the southerly portion from Creekwood down to Flying Cloud Drive so everything in purple or blue on this graphic. So basically tree removal would happen starting in March of 2020. The first thing would happen and then after that a number of improvements would happen prior to the roadway being closed down. We can’t close the roadway down until the Flying Cloud Drive work is completed which is intended to happen in the June timeframe of next year. Once Flying Cloud Drive is done the southerly leg of 101 between Creekwood and Flying Cloud will be closed to through traffic and all the access for the people on Creekwood and to the north will come from the north off of Pioneer Trail. No access will be provided from the south so that’s basically year number one. Everything in blue or purple would get completed. During the winter months no construction would happen. First phase would tie in the existing roadway to the north and then once we get through the winter season of 2021 access for the Creekwood folks would go to the south to Flying Cloud Drive and the piece to the north would get constructed. It would need to get constructed in two halves just because we have a number of residents living in the Bramble Drive area we need to provide access for as well so really two full years of construction with the first year focused on the southern part of the corridor. Second year focused on the northern part of the corridor. Project costs and financing. This has been tracking pretty consistent since we started the process a little under $32 million for the total project cost. A majority being funded by the State of Minnesota. A little over $28 million dollars. City funds are related to the utility construction. Sanitary sewer and water of about $2 million and then County funds for some of their investments of about $1.3 and as I said these numbers are pretty consistent throughout the process. We hope to get good bids in and as I said be able to do that automated deicing system as a part of the project. Schedule. So tonight we’re asking council to approve plans and specs which would allow us to go to bidding in November and December. Size of the project we’re trying to maximize the bidding environment and do it at a time when we’re early enough in the season that we’re trying to encourage the best bids we can get so we’re hoping to do that in the month of December. We would be back to the council in January asking you to award a contract. I mentioned the right-of-way and easement acquisition that is ongoing. We hope to City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 13 have that process completed in February. Mentioned the open house meeting and that would happen in February as well. Allow us to proceed to construction starting in March of 2020. Construction basically then occurring until November-December timeframe. No construction over the winter months and then starting up again in the spring with the goal of having everything wrapped up by October of 2021. Another item that the council acted on tonight as a part of the consent agenda was some initial building demolition so there are 6 existing homes in the project area but the desire was to try to get some of that building demolition taken care of this winter so that will be ongoing starting here in the next probably month with the goal of having that done in January of 2020. And we did put together a project visualization video. I thought this might be helpful just to kind of run through this just to show you what the project will look like when we’re done and I’ll maybe point out some of the key things as we go through the video. So this is basically starting, driving south starting at Pioneer Trail. You can see it’s a four lane divided roadway. Trails on either side with a divided median down the middle. And then this we’re starting to approach the Bramble Drive area with the Mustard Seed there to the right. Full access intersection at that location. That’s the stormwater facility as we mentioned. They’ll be dry basins infiltration but they’ll be landscaped. And then continuing the trails on both sides through this area. We do have some reforestation that’s going to occur in that area. In that ravine area that we’re going to address some ravine issues and erosion issues in that area. This is Creekwood Drive so at this location the trails will go away on two sides and be on one side. Shows the pedestrian crossing that will have the signal lights at that location. And then at Creekwood is where we really start going down the bluff. You can see that kind of dark box in the center median is where that center median barrier would start to happen to be able to prevent the head on accidents going down the bluff. The lighter trees on either side show the reforestation that would occur so a lot of tree plantings in these areas as we go down the bluff. More reforestation. More areas that would be impacted by grading. And then this is the bridge that would occur for the regional trail crossing. And then as we approach the roundabout at Flying Cloud Drive the stormwater areas again. The building there that shows up would be the building that would be installed as a part of the deicing system. The pedestrian bridge just missed it. The additional pedestrian bridge along Flying Cloud Drive shows up and then that would be the underpass that would happen under Highway 101. Hopefully gives you some better sense of what things would look like. Mayor Ryan: Have you been able to show this at any of the open houses or is it too new? Jon Horn: We did. Actually at the last open house we had a big TV monitor set up in the library and had it on a continuous loop so people could view it and understand the project a little bit better. It’s a little bit better than viewing things on a flat surface and drawings. Hopefully it was helpful a little bit to allow people to visualize the project. Mayor Ryan: Absolutely. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council it’s also available on our website. If you go under projects and go under the 101 project, the video is on there. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 14 Mayor Ryan: Great. Council any questions or comments at this time? Councilwoman Tjornhom: No. Mayor Ryan: No? I have a couple. In terms of the, now if I can read my notes. You talked about that you might start some of the building demolition. Does that, of the houses along there. Does that impact traffic or how, how does that work since it’s so close to the road? Jon Horn: Yeah so there’s 6 dwellings that we will be addressing as a part of the building demolition package. Four of them are on Vogelsberg Trail and they’re basically the only four buildings on Vogelsberg Trail so the intention is Vogelsberg Trail could be closed. One of the interesting wrinkles in that is two of the property owners had asked for permission to be able to move their buildings. So actually two of those dwellings are intended to be picked up and moved which certainly from an issue of you know how does that happen? There will have to be a traffic control plan for when those buildings are moved. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Jon Horn: So two of them are going to be removed. The other two will be demolished. Should have much of an impact on 101 during the demolition work because it will be off the roadway. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Jon Horn: The other two are the Milikowski property and the Carty property so again they’re off 101. So other than some truck traffic hauling away demolition debris there really won’t be any impact on 101 so it’s primarily truck traffic will be the issue. Mayor Ryan: Okay perfect. And then at, you said that there’s 16 more acquisitions that need to take place. Is that included as part of the bid? The estimation or how? Jon Horn: As a part of the overall project costs that includes both construction costs, engineering admin costs as well as right-of-way acquisition. Mayor Ryan: Okay so that’s already included with that. Jon Horn: Correct. Mayor Ryan: And then my last question I know you said that you’re looking to do another open house. Maybe February you said. At that point so you’re, you know let’s say you’ve received the bids and this is you know the council approves the plans and you go out for bid. What opportunity then at those meetings do residents have to make any changes or is it pretty much set in stone and you’re just providing an update just for clarification? City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 15 Jon Horn: Yeah probably the biggest thing that we want to try to accomplish as a part of that February open house is just to give people more detailed information on construction phasing, staging and how the construction’s going to happen. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Jon Horn: You know because we can lay out the general intent of how we want the construction to occur but then once we get a contractor on board and understand their approach a little bit better it would be to be able to share that information in detail because when you start thinking about it once we start impacting traffic. So it’s buses and garbage trucks and emergency vehicle access. How people get in and out of their property. Is there special events along the corridor that we, I mean is somebody having a wedding. Is there something happening that we need to be aware of. That’s really when we want to get into the details of how the project is going to happen and if there’s any special circumstances to be able to get input on that. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Jon Horn: Just feel like it’s really important to give the residents a chance to know more about the details about the project before trucks start running up and down the corridor. Mayor Ryan: Okay great, thank you. And then last and then I’ll open, or ask for a motion. I just, I want to thank you and all your hard work as well as our city staff. You’re still here. We’ve already gone through two but city engineers but you know really appreciate all the work and you know time and effort on behalf of city staff and your’s and like you had mentioned at the very beginning of your presentation how, what a great opportunity for the State and the County and City to work together but appreciate your leadership. I know you’ve been you know very diligent in bringing this information back to council and we’ve seen it over the course of the last many years as it’s progressed and you’ve always asked for input from all of us as you’ve moved through the process so I just want to acknowledge that and let you know how much you know we appreciate it. I think it’s going to be a great, you know a great project assuming things move forward for the region as a whole. Just from a commuter standpoint. Not only traffic but by what you’re doing with the bridges and the trails. I know that there’s a lot of bike commuter traffic as well that goes north to south and so to be able to take advantage of that I think the project overall is very well constructed and done and planned out so just want to acknowledge that and let you know how much we appreciate it. Jon Horn: Thank you. Mayor Ryan: With that council any motion? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yeah go ahead. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 16 Councilman Campion: I’ll make a motion. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion. Councilman Campion: I make a motion that the City Council approves plans and specifications and authorizes advertisement of bids for the CSAH 101 project from Pioneer Trail to Flying Cloud Drive. Mayor Ryan: We have a valid motion. Is there a second? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second. Resolution #2019-49: Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council approves plans and specifications and authorizes advertisement of bids for the CSAH 101 project from Pioneer Trail to Flying Cloud Drive. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. Mayor Ryan: That motion carries 3-0. Great, thank you. Jon Horn: Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVAL OF ON-SALE BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR JIMMIE’S OLD SOUTHERN BBBQ SMOKEHOUSE, 530 WEST 79TH STREET, SUITE 100. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council exactly. This is an on-sale beer and wine license for Jimmy’s Old Southern BBQ Smokehouse. This is Famous Dave’s new venture into the barbeque world and they’ve selected Chanhassen as one of I think 4 locations in Minnesota and they’re going to be in the old Cheer’s off-sale liquor location off of West 79th Street. Staff has done a background check on all the managers and that background check has come through with a clear bill of health and staff is recommending approval of the liquor license. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Thank you Mr. Gerhardt. Is the applicant here? Todd Gerhardt: I do not see the applicant. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Any questions of the council before I open the public hearing? Okay I hereby open the public hearing. Please step forward and state your name and address for the record. With nobody here I will close the public hearing and bring it back to council for questions, comments or action. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor and council I have been at Jimmie’s barbeque in Hudson and I think it’s another great addition to our retail development here in Chanhassen. It’s another kind of fast City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 17 casual type. You go to the counter. You order what menu items you want. I think they over 60 selections you can choose from and so I know the group I was with enjoyed their meal and I think it’s going to be a great addition. Mayor Ryan: Great, well we look forward to another new restaurant in Chanhassen so that will be great. Council any motion? Councilwoman Tjornhom: I’ll make a motion. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Is it my turn? Mayor Ryan: I think it’s your turn. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Alright I’d like to make a motion that the City Council approves a request for an on-sale beer and wine license from Jimmie’s Old Southern BBQ Smokehouse LLC, dba Jimmie’s Old Southern BBQ Smokehouse contingent upon receipt of liquor liability insurance and all of the necessary paperwork associated with the application. Mayor Ryan: There’s a valid motion. Do we have a second? Councilman Campion: Second. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council approves a request for an on-sale beer and wine license from Jimmie’s Old Southern BBQ Smokehouse LLC, dba Jimmie’s Old Southern BBQ Smokehouse contingent upon receipt of liquor liability insurance and all of the necessary paperwork associated with the application. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY REHABILITATION PROJECT NO. 20-02: ACCEPT FEASIBILITY STUDY; CALL PUBLIC HEARING. George Bender: Good evening Mayor and council members. I’m here to present the accepting of the feasibility study and ordering plans and specifications and calling of a public hearing for the Minnewashta Parkway rehabilitation project. One thing that I wanted to review to start is that this project has evolved significantly since you know it was ordered to hire a consultant and to begin preliminary design in order to prepare the feasibility study. One of the first things through some detailed research that we uncovered was that the City of Chanhassen actually owns right-of-way over Minnewashta Parkway through the city of Victoria. So this right-of-way acquisition occurred in 1992 through a decision by the Municipal Board where Victoria ceded the right-of-way to Chanhassen. The reason for it was it facilitated the allowing the use of State Aid funding to fund the improvement projects for the section of roadway between Trunk City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 18 Highway 5 and Trunk Highway 7. The original intent was to work with Victoria to create a consistent pavement surface from Trunk Highway 7 to Trunk Highway 5 but now you know upon finding that we own this section that kind of became part of our project and that added approximately 850 feet of scope to the original project limits. So this is an exhibit that shows a consistent section. From the south off of Trunk Highway 5 there’s a concrete surface that is part of a MnDOT project that goes to 77th Street so that’s where the project would pick up for the southern terminus and it would go to the south side of Trunk Highway 7. The project includes a full depth pavement reclamation is what’s being proposed, including trail rehabilitation, addition of ADA pedestrian ramps along the trail and at intersections watermain replacement. Sanitary sewer rehabilitation. Sanitary forcemain replacement. Storm sewer rehabilitation. Storm pond improvements and retaining wall improvements. Another item that has evolved from the initial project conception is the watermain rehabilitation. As an explanation the watermain on the south side of the project, and here’s an exhibit. It goes from the south terminus all the way to Glendale Drive where the dash is here. That’s constructed in a ductile iron pipe. It was mainly installed in, around 1975 and the watermain north of there is cast iron pipe and that was constructed around 1971. Around 1973 the industry manufacturing switched from cast iron pipe to ductile iron pipe and that’s why you’re seeing the change in the pipe types for the watermain. The City has a policy to replace cast iron pipe whenever there’s an opportunity due to a street project or another improvement. The cast iron watermain tends to be more brittle. Be more susceptible to the soil types and the aggressiveness of the soil that’s predominant in Chanhassen. The interesting part that in analyzing and researching the break history associated with this section, which is significant is that the ductile iron pipe has had the majority of the documented breaks in it, not the cast iron pipe so in speaking with a utility superintendent of the previous city engineer’s and they came to the conclusion that the entire length of the watermain should be replaced underneath Minnewashta Parkway. That’s a significant additional cost of course but the thought being that it’s going to be hopefully be another 30 to 50 years before we’re addressing this section of roadway again and this would be the opportunity to get after it and not deal with consistent additional breaks in the future. As part of replacing it and not, this project was never intended to be a full reconstruction project. It was originally intended as a mill and overlay. We adjusted the, that to a full depth reclamation where they’ll grind up the pavement surface. Leave it as Class V for future use but not, we won’t have to remove all of the curb and gutter and do an open cut construction for replacement of the watermain and if we did open cut that would lead to being a full reconstruct. So we analyzed different trench list technologies to facilitate that including pipe bursting, directional drilling, a new main in place and lining of the interior of the pipe. Pipe bursting was determined to be the most effective technology to replace the watermain so what that means is a, basically a cone or a peg would be inserted into the pipe that’s a little larger than the type and it would be winched or pulled through the pipe in 300 to 400 foot sections and it would burst the pipe, the existing pipe into pieces and a new HDB pipe would be pulled behind it at the same time in order to construct the new watermain. So there would have to be a boring hole to allow this to happen every 300 to 400 feet depending on the curvature of the roadway where junctions are for services and for valves and bends and hydrants. All of which would have to be excavated but the idea and concept is to do as little excavating as possible. The sanitary sewer is also rehabilitated or analyzed for rehabilitation. There are 6 City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 19 segments from manhole to manhole that were determined to need to be lined. You know that’s kind of a small percentage of the overall length. There are two lift stations for conveying sanitary sewage by pumping along this corridor. Both of those forcemains are cast iron and both of them have a break history associated with them and were determined it needed to be replaced. There would also be some miscellaneous sanitary manhole rehabilitation as far as trying to avoid infiltration and inflow in bringing them back up to a more reasonable standard. The storm sewer system along the corridor was also analyzed. The good thing that we determined was the capacity of the existing system is not only adequate for now but also adequate for future infill and development as available along the corridor. There will be, need to be significant rehabilitation to the structures. In total 69 structures will have work done on them to be broken out as 35 for just on the chimney section for casting and adjusting ring replacements. 14 will need some sort of other additional reconstruction such as patching. Going after the pipe connections. Plugging holes. Taking care of so that we don’t have any sink holes and 20 structures require complete replacement. There are in total 7 ponds along the corridor. Three ponds along Lake St. Joe were determined to need additional work. There’s one small pond along Lake St. Joe that has completely failed. It was a pond. It no longer is. It just flows through the vegetation straight to the lake. It’s completely, it’s hard to even find. The forestation and volunteer growth is there and it was such a small pond. The pipes have become separated and you know it’s in need of, dire need of maintenance. So this area and the slopes along the side of the roadway don’t even facilitate reconstructing of the pond. Engineering doesn’t feel that it’s, was a great design to begin with so what we’d like to do is, we’re proposing to replace it with a sump structure and new piping to outlet to the lake. That will have to be you know approved by the watershed district through final design but that’s what we’re currently, the thought process is. Two other ponds along Lake St. Joe have significant sediment accumulation and volunteer overgrowth along it and it’s proposed to clean out these ponds by dredging them and taking care of the volunteer tree growth. Similar to the 101 project this is a project, another of the project evolutions is there’s a significant amount of work at this point to warrant allowing two construction seasons to ensure that the work can occur and get completed. We also feel that this would lessen the impact on the residents. It would give them half of the project to go one way or the other throughout the project and a contractor wouldn’t be taking up more of the roadway than we absolutely need to. It will, it’s proposed to construct the southern half of the project first. Currently final design will confirm that this is the best approach but to, one of the most important comments that we’ve received back from residents through meeting with them in a neighborhood meeting format and through issuing of a survey to the residents along the corridor and getting feedback is the left turn at Trunk Highway 5 and getting there so what we included in the feasibility study was a temporary signal at this location and this will allow us more time to coordinate with MnDOT to facilitate getting that approved and installed by doing the southern half first before we direct traffic to the south so. Estimated cost summary. Using State Aid funds primarily for the street improvements. Using utility funds for the watermain and sanitary sewer and stormwater improvements. And a total of the watermain is up to $2.3 million for the work. Street improvement’s up to about $2.2 million and sanitary sewer and storm sewer improvements come in at just under $400,000 for a total of $5.25 million dollars. Funding for the project is as shown. Very similar to the costs that I presented before. The main difference is City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 20 the addition of some special assessments to the benefiting properties along the corridor. This is a collector roadway. There are not a lot of driveways along the corridor. I think there’s 37 in total of which 35 are in Chanhassen and 2 are in Victoria. So we would need to work with Victoria to be allowed to assess the 2 properties that are actually in Victoria but the right-of-way is in Chanhassen so that’s a bit of an item to work through with the City Attorney. Proposed project schedule is to basically approve, accept the feasibility study. Approve plans and specifications. I see that I got a typo here but, and then tonight then have the, have the public hearing at the next council meeting on October 28th. Approve the design on December 9th. The last City Council meeting of the 2019 calendar year. And then have a bid opening or approve bidding on December 9th and then have a bid opening in January of 2020. Have an additional neighborhood meeting to show the project to the residents on February, 2020. Have an assessment hearing and award of the construction contract in March, 2020. Start construction in the spring of 2020 you know with, we don’t feel that each construction season is going to take the, you know all the way up to November to finish up. It’s more probably about a 4 month period but you know to be determined by, as part of the final design and working with the contractor once we have one but hopefully finish up construction of Phase 1 in October of 2020. Starting back up in the spring of 2021 and completing Phase 2 in October of 2021. So at this point I’ll stand for questions. Mayor Ryan: Great, thank you for the report. Council any questions? There was a lot of information there. Councilman Campion: I have one question about the cast iron, the CIP versus the DIP sections. You said that the, was it 10 breaks had occurred on the. George Bender: In the ductile iron sections. Councilman Campion: In DIP section yeah. George Bender: Yep. Councilman Campion: The cause of that is what tree roots or? George Bender: It’s more so the hot soils and corrosion of the metallic pipe so it, we found holes in the pipe. We found where the bolts have pretty much rotted to the point of once we remove the soil around them it comes apart. Councilman Campion: Okay. Okay. George Bender: And some of our leaks have been bigger than others but you know to wait we’ll continue to have breaks and once we have a new pavement surface over the top that means that we’ll be cutting into it to fix breaks. Councilman Campion: Understood, thank you. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 21 George Bender: Yep. Mayor Ryan: No questions? I have a couple and I’m going to break them in to two parts. One kind of the specifics of the projects and then just generally speaking and you might be able to answer some of them as well Mr. Gerhardt, but you did a great job and you checked, answered a lot of the ones that I had. I was all excited to ask you about pipe bursting and you did such a nice job explaining that. But it seems to me that some of the drainage and correction with the ponds, I know you have to still get water, the watershed approval. My one concern had to do with the sump structure that you talked about. You know we hear it from a lot of residents with ponds being there and then ponds going away and then dredging and what, you know what they think is going to be the new pond versus what isn’t so can you provide some clarification around how you’re going to manage the ponds? And maybe this is too early in the process to even ask that question. George Bender: Specific to the pond that we’re proposing to eliminate, I don’t know if pond us actually for what it was, was the right terminology. It was so small. Mayor Ryan: Right. George Bender: It was basically bermed up on the side of a hill it had a pipe coming into it that, and there was, the water just, that would come off the roadway just blew it completely out and. Mayor Ryan: So does that cause flooding because I don’t know where it is. I know that there are homes surrounding Lake St. Joe. Where in relation, I guess my concern is all of a sudden you’re, you know you’re working on this project. You’re putting in pipes. Redirecting water somewhere else. Where is this water going to go and is it going to affect any resident’s ponds in their back yards? George Bender: This, it’s on the east side of Lake St. Joe. Mayor Ryan: Okay. George Bender: There’s one main property along that’s a pretty big property. I don’t remember the acreage from, off the top of my head but there’s one owner. It’s to the south of his property.. Mayor Ryan: Okay. George Bender: And the lake is actually very close to the roadway at this location. There’s not much room. There’s probably no more than 50 feet and so this was the design originally. I can’t really comment on how it, how they came to building this pond but the velocity never came out of the water flow into it and it kind of, you know it never stood a chance. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 22 Mayor Ryan: So there’s no water in it is what you’re saying? George Bender: Right now it just goes from the inlet pipe straight through where the pond was into an outlet pipe and it’s all eroded around this area and the water doesn’t even get into the outlet pipe that was originally constructed. Mayor Ryan: Okay. George Bender: And it just makes it’s way to the lake. There’s kind of a little bit of a settling area that it formed naturally. Mayor Ryan: Okay. George Bender: But it’s no the greatest situation and so the thought is to collect sand particulates and bigger floating solids, leaves and everything in, by creating a new structure that’s in the curb line with sump in the bottom of it that we can more proactively clean and get to from a maintenance perspective rather than the location of this pond was, I mean to get a piece of equipment in there to clean it was going to be very challenging in and of itself if that is ever recreated. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council, just to add. If we were to go in and build a new pond we would probably have more of an impact on the environment surrounding that new pond being so close to Lake St. Joe so the benefit of putting a sump manhole in and not getting in and digging up so close to the lake and the wetlands that exist in that area, a sump manhole is preferred and I would think the watershed district would agree with that. Mayor Ryan: Okay so it’s not adding any more water going directing water to Lake St. Joe that all of a sudden they’re going to, because of this road project they’re going to see a significant increase in the water levels in the lake. Todd Gerhardt: No we’re hoping it’s going to improve the water quality going into Lake St. Joe. Mayor Ryan: Quality, okay. Todd Gerhardt: Because it’s going to let the particulates settle out in that sump manhole versus just directly being discharged into the lake. Mayor Ryan: Okay. George Bender: We’ve actually not proposing to add any significant amounts of storm sewer or try to redirect the water to a pond further to the south end of the lake. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 23 Mayor Ryan: Right. George Bender: That would require significant more improvements. I mean it will be something if the watershed district doesn’t approve the sump manhole concept then you know we may have to look at alternative solutions. Mayor Ryan: Okay. George Bender: But in hopes to maintain the storm system as it is because it does have capacity and functions as needed right now. We wouldn’t really be changing where the water is being routed currently. Mayor Ryan: Okay I appreciate that. It just, I mean we hear all the time about you know ponds in people’s back yards and I know you do as well and it’s just a concern so I wanted to make sure that we weren’t changing anything as it relates to this. There was something in there that stood out in terms of soil correction. It was on page 6 of the feasibility report and it talked about that the soils weren’t great. It says due to the large impacts of the complete soil replacement, da, da, da, I guess I was looking for clarification on when they were talking about soil replacement or the undocumented fill. George Bender: The geotechnical study basically and the borings that facilitated it basically identified an area that has significant underlying soils that are under performing. It’s causing current problems along the roadway. Mayor Ryan: Okay. George Bender: Certain settlements and more frost heave areas for, and a sub-base that isn’t well supporting the existing roadway. So as part of that we worked with the geotechnical engineer that prepared the report because some of this is fill. A lot of it is more of a peaty type soil that doesn’t have the bearing strength that the majority of the roadway has so we looked at either removing this and it’s I believe it was up to about 9 feet deep and the cost of that or trying to create more of a bridging effect by using probably like a larger crushed rock like a 3 inch minus geotechnical fabric for separation and then our standard road section over the top of it. Mayor Ryan: So the result would be the same and the only reason why I ask is it said you know we didn’t want to make the project any longer or make you know, to do something like you just suggested but are we still by offering up this solution are we going to end up with a buckling road after making such a significant investment in this road if we’re not addressing the underlying issue with the bad soils? George Bender: The geotechnical engineer did that analysis. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 24 Mayor Ryan: Okay so it’s. George Bender: And felt that we really could bridge over the top of the road. This is not an uncommon technique that we use to stabilize over areas just due to the expense of you know there could be very deep areas that you know we run across consistently like this where we have inferior soils supporting a roadway. Mayor Ryan: Okay thank you. And sorry I have so many. Todd Gerhardt: The Petromat is going to keep the separation of the water. There’s probably a spring or something below the surface that is saturating the sub-base of the road. Mayor Ryan: Right. Todd Gerhardt: Which is making it soft and instead of going down and excavating out 9 feet of soil we can go down and put down what is a Petromat and Class V and make a solid road base. A bridge as he calls it and not have to spend the money to go down 9 feet to correct the soil. Mayor Ryan: Okay. I just again with an investment of $5 million I just wanted to make sure that we were correcting all the issues going forward so that was just a concern. Todd Gerhardt: And that’s why we have a structural engineer, a geotechnical engineer that made this recommendation so if we keep getting potholes or soft spots in this spot you know we can go back to them and say you know we followed your directions. Why are we having soft spots here? Mayor Ryan: Okay, perfect. Perfect. And then my last couple questions, I know council received a number of emails as it relates to the impact to some of the neighbors. Residents along that way. What that roadway, the parkway is supposed to be for. My first question can you just explain, and I know Mr. Gerhardt you could as well but explain what that, you know how the weight limit. Weight restrictions for Minnewashta Parkway. What the road standard was built for. George Bender: Yep. The roadway is designated as a collector roadway which means that it is a roadway that carries a significant amount of traffic out of neighborhoods and has a higher average daily traffic associated with it. As part of being a collector roadway it is designed to a 10 ton design rather than the standard residential 7 ton design so it’s significantly stronger roadway. Mayor Ryan: Because this is 10 ton? George Bender: Yes. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 25 Mayor Ryan: Right, okay. George Bender: And as such you know it is designated, it’s allowed to be designated as a municipal state aid route and by doing that it’s required to be constructed to those design standards such as a 10 ton roadway. Mayor Ryan: Okay. George Bender: It is meant to carry the heavier trucks and the greater traffic volume that it sees on a daily basis. Mayor Ryan: Okay perfect, thank you. And then my last question, and maybe Todd you can just answer this and if you could go back to the slide where you talk about assessments. How you come up, I know there’s 37 properties but when you’re using the MSA funds and some others how did you arrive with the special assessments at this? With this number. Todd Gerhardt: Well 35 of which are in Chanhassen and then we have a joint powers agreement with Victoria which allows us to assess the other two properties in Victoria. What is a residential equivalent so like Lake Lucy Road there’s probably 2 dozen homeowners that use Lake Lucy as their local street. As I live on Stratton that’s my local street. Lake Lucy is their local street so they should pay an equivalent of the same as I do on Stratton to be fair across the board for all residents so there is a local street equivalent, assessment that will go against 37 property owners and that estimate right now is. George Bender: A little over $4,400 which falls in line with what our average amounts are for a comparison to a full depth reclamation type of project. Mayor Ryan: Right and I think that’s kind of what I was looking for like what is, how did you arrive, is there a formula for that average or is it truly the average? I know we have some that are $7,000. There are some that are less. Is it truly the average? George Bender: It’s the bid items when they break the project down that go to just the street portion of the project. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Okay. Todd Gerhardt: And it’s not the 10 ton street project. You subtract what would be a 6 ton local street project. George Bender: Yeah, 7. Mayor Ryan: Okay 7 ton and that’s how you base it? City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 26 Todd Gerhardt: Or 7. George Bender: Yep. Mayor Ryan: And that’s how you base the assessments on that. Okay I just, I know that’s a concern. I’ve heard about it from people on Lake Lucy with the anticipation of Lake Lucy so I want to make sure that we’re clear on how we assess folks that have driveways right along Minnewashta. That’s it for my questions. Thank you. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor I’ve got a couple. Mayor Ryan: Sure. Todd Gerhardt: George you talked about dredging. Is it a backhoe cleaning out of the ponds? George Bender: Yes. Todd Gerhardt: It’s not like what I consider a dredging of a lake. George Bender: It’s not like a dredging of a channel, literally no. Todd Gerhardt: Okay. So it is a backhoe type construction where we pull out the materials with a piece of equipment. We’re not pumping sediment out of the ponds so it’s directly will be backhoed out. Put into a dump truck to the elevation that was established when the ponds were originally built. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Oh and I forgot one. The crosswalk at Kings Road. Was anything determined on that? George Bender: We did get some comments from, through the survey and also through the public engagement. It is not determined, or it has not been determined that the crosswalk improvements that some people asked for are warranted. There’s not enough people crossing at that crosswalk in particular to do anything more than zebra stripe across it and designate it as a crosswalk. Anything. Mayor Ryan: They were looking for more than just the designation of a crosswalk? George Bender: Yes. We had people you know going as far as asking for that RRFB for, so that flashing type system that’s up by Minnetonka Middle School West or is going in along Powers Avenue at Lake Lucy Road eventually here so there, people felt that with having the beach on the east side of the roadway, the parking lot on the west side of the roadway that there’s, you know it warrants such a thing. There is not enough pedestrian traffic to actually justify that. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 27 Mayor Ryan: Okay. Okay. Council any, thank you. Appreciate all your answers tonight. Council any motion? I don’t know who’s turn it is. Todd Gerhardt: Dan’s. Councilman Campion: I’ll go. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion. Todd Gerhardt: I’m keeping track. George Bender: There was a slight re-wording that was done for the resolution that’s in the city staff report versus what’s on the screen. Councilman Campion: Okay. George Bender: So that what’s on the screen is correct. Todd Gerhardt: This one is correct. Councilman Campion: Okay. Alright I propose a motion that the City Council accepts the feasibility report for Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project Number 20-02, authorizes preparation of plans and specifications and calls for a public hearing. Mayor Ryan: We have a valid motion. Is there a second? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second.. Resolution #2019-50: Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council accepts the feasibility report for Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project Number 20-02, authorizes preparation of plans and specifications and calls for a public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. Mayor Ryan: That motion carries 3-0. And just so for a point of clarification because we’ve talked about a number of different dates for the public hearing. I think in the report it said November 12th. In the motion it’s, can we just clarify for people. Do we have a set date for the public hearing? George Bender: Yes. It’s going to be October 28th. Mayor Ryan: Oh it is. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 28 George Bender: We moved it up that one council meeting to help facilitate the schedule. We have notified the newspaper. Todd Gerhardt: So 2 weeks from today. George Bender: Yep. Mayor Ryan: Okay. George Bender: So that is already in to put that in motion. Mayor Ryan: Okay perfect, thank you. George Bender: Yep. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor I want to thank George for taking this project on in absence of our Public Works Director and did a great job and thank you to Jon and so good job. Mayor Ryan: Well done. Good job in the hot seat. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Todd Gerhardt: I just wanted to clarify, there were a lot of notes going out about Minnewashta Parkway and the amount of truck traffic that’s going on there. The truck traffic, if you noticed it’s trucks going to the north on Minnewashta Parkway and it’s associated with the City’s project on the reconstruction of Forest Circle and Forest Lane? George Bender: Yeah Orchard Lane and Oriole Avenue. Todd Gerhardt: Oriole, okay. And unfortunately we could not use State Highway 41 to make a left hand turn into those streets. The State as part of their safety improvements on Highway 7 eliminated all left hand turns into that area so they had to come down 41. Take Highway 5 and then go up on Minnewashta Parkway and then take a right onto Highway 7 to get to those streets and the road can handle that truck traffic. We apologize for the inconvenience of those, the amount of trucks but it made our project costs less by taking that route and it should be done within a week or so right now. Trying to beat the weather. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Todd Gerhardt: So I just wanted the public to know why the truck traffic is going on. City Council Summary – October 14, 2019 29 George Bender: I can add a little bit to that. Todd Gerhardt: Okay. George Bender: I did check with the inspector today that’s managing that project. The excavation for the Phase 2 roadway, which is primarily 64th and Oriole Avenue and a small portion of Orchard Lane was completed today. So that also included the placement of the sand and gravel sub-bases so the majority of the trucking should be completed. There still was obviously paving to go which comes from the south from what’s called the Jackson Plant so there still will be asphalt when they get to that point but I believe the concrete comes in from a Cemstone Plant from a different direction so from a curb and gutter perspective it won’t be as many trucks. Todd Gerhardt: So we just have pavement trucks coming in the future? George Bender: Yep. Mayor Ryan: Okay thank you for the clarification. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Campion 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 8:30 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 14, 2019 Mayor Ryan called the work session meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. COUNCIL MEMBER PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilwoman Tjornhom, and Councilman Campion COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Coleman and Councilman McDonald STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Jake Foster, Kate Aanenson, Todd Hoffman, Greg Sticha, and Bruce Loney PUBLIC PRESENT: Gary and Mary Halama 670 Creekwood DISCUSS CODE AMENDMENTS. Kate Aanenson reviewed the following list of proposed code amendments: Paver design plates Recreational beach lots Traffic impact Solar energy systems Electronic Message center (EMC) funds Interim uses Special/temporary events Removing commissioners Driveway configurations Require walkways and pads Airport zoning standards Birds of prey Parking graphic correction Kate Aanenson explained that the public hearing for these city code amendments will be held at the Planning Commission. Councilman Campion asked for clarification on special/temporary events. Mayor Ryan explained how the council will proceed moving forward and that Councilman Campion can bring up the issue of food trucks when these city code amendments are brought back to the City Council for discussion. City Council Work Session – October 14, 2019 2 2020-2024 CIP REVIEW. Greg Sticha reviewed his memo regarding the Capital Replacement Equipment Fund. Councilman Campion asked for clarification of the proposed remodeling of the front desk area at city hall and if the budgeted $800,000 per year is adequate to keep up with equipment upgrades. Staff explained that when the $800,000 was established it wasn’t anticipated to use reserves for fire equipment or computer/software purchases. Mayor Ryan asked about the reasoning behind using reserves for different departments and not the general fund, and the similarities in using reserves for the pavement management program. She voiced her concern with the use of reserve money. Greg Sticha explained that staff can bring a list of projects earlier to be reviewed in the budget process. Councilwoman Tjornhom asked why the replacement of pavers in City Center Park isn’t listed under the Park and Recreation fund. Councilman Campion asked about the products used for paver replacements. Mayor Ryan asked staff to keep projects closer to the budgeted $800,000 and not use reserves. Councilwoman Tjornhom asked for clarification of the funding source for fire equipment. Todd Gerhardt explained how raising the levy for the fire department would mean an increase to the levy. Mayor Ryan expressed concern and frustration over the proposed increase in spending in the capital fund over the next 5 years. Greg Sticha explained that staff will bring the detailed CIP expenses earlier next year. Todd Hoffman clarified what materials are being used for paver replacements. Greg Sticha continued with review of the park dedication fund. Mayor Ryan asked for an update on final costs for the Arboretum underpass trail. Greg Sticha continued review of the park replacement fund, Lyman Boulevard street improvement project from Galpin Boulevard to TH 41 which will use MSA funds through the County, Galpin Boulevard from Highway 5 north to the city limits, how these street projects affect MSA funding and options for funding future shortfalls through 2026. Greg Sticha explained that the council will see this item for approval on December 9th. Mayor Ryan asked for a detailed presentation on costs associated with the $3.6 million being asked to fund the pavement management program and the affect on utility funds. REVIEW OF 2020 SPECIAL REVENUE AND ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS. Greg Sticha reviewed details of the charitable gambling fund, Cable television fund, cemetery fund noting no significant changes in any of the funds before reviewing the enterprise funds for water, sewer, and surface water management which are not being affected by the increase in the pavement management program. Todd Gerhardt explained that staff will bring back the results of the I/I study. Mayor Ryan adjourned the work session at 7:00 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated September 24, 2019 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: E.2. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No: PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council receives the Park and Recreation Commission minutes dated September 24, 2019.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Summary Minutes Verbatim Minutes CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 Chairman Boettcher called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Boettcher, Meredith Petouvis, Joe Scanlon, Karl Tsuchiya, Matt Kutz, Sandy Sweetser, and Haley Pemrick STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Superintendent; Adam Beers, Park Superintendent; Jodi Sarles, Recreation Center Manager; and Mary Blazanin, Senior Center Coordinator PUBLIC PRESENT: Ann Miller APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Tsuchiya moved, Petouvis seconded to approve the agenda as proposed. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Tsuchiya moved, Pemrick seconded to approve the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated August 27, 2019 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. 2019 LAKE ANN PARK CONCESSION/BOAT RENTAL EVALUATION. Jerry Ruegemer presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Tsuchiya asked about food trends and who typically uses the concession stand. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. Ann Miller, 6561 Fox Path requested that the City provide a public boat access to Silver Lake off of Pleasant View Road and include bike and walking paths with the reconstruction of Pleasant View Road. OLD BUSINESS: Commissioner Petouvis asked for an update on the status of the Arboretum trail. REPORT: PARK MAINTENANCE QUARTERLY UPDATE. Adam Beers provided the update on work being done by the park maintenance staff. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – September 24, 2019 2 2019 HALLOWEEN PARTY PREVIEW. Jerry Ruegemer previewed the activities involved with the upcoming 35th Annual Halloween Party being held on Saturday, October 26th. RECREATION CENTER QUARTERLY UPDATE. Jodi Sarles provided the quarterly update on activities and programs at the Recreation Center. SENIOR CENTER QUARTERLY REPORT. Mary Blazanin provided the quarterly update on activities and programs at the Senior Center. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS: DISCUSSION ON POSSIBLE FUTURE PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT BOND REFERENDUM. Todd Hoffman provided background information on referendums held in the past and asked for commission feedback on how to proceed with this item in the future. After discussion from commission members staff was directed to bring this item back for further discussion once the referendum questions are completed for the citizen survey. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Todd Hoffman provided updates on the Highway 101 trail project and shelter surveys. Petouvis moved, Kutz seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Rec Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 Chairman Boettcher called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Boettcher, Meredith Petouvis, Joe Scanlon, Karl Tsuchiya, Matt Kutz, Sandy Sweetser, and Haley Pemrick STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Superintendent; Adam Beers, Park Superintendent; Jodi Sarles, Recreation Center Manager; and Mary Blazanin, Senior Center Coordinator PUBLIC PRESENT: Ann Miller APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Tsuchiya moved, Petouvis seconded to approve the agenda as proposed. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Boettcher: Public announcements. Anything Todd, Jerry? Ruegemer: No. Boettcher: We have a plethora of people over here. Senior center. Adam, Jodi. We’ll get all your’s later. Okay. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. Boettcher: I see nothing from the public at this point in time. Approval of Minutes. Anyone have any changes, deletions. Commissioners Petouvis and Sweetser were you? Sweetser: Nothing. Boettcher: First time in 4 months… That was she said she said. Alright seeing no changes motion to approve. Tsuchiya: So moved. Boettcher: Second. Pemrick: Second. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 2 Tsuchiya moved, Pemrick seconded to approve the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated August 27, 2019 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. 2019 LAKE ANN PARK CONCESSION/BOAT RENTAL EVALUATION. Boettcher: We’re already up to new business. Item G-1, Lake Ann Park concession/boat rental evaluations and I believe Jerry this is you. Ruegemer: Thank you Chair Boettcher, good evening the rest of the Park and Rec commissioners. I will go through the 2019 Lake Ann Park concession and boat rental evaluation so great, we’re very fortunate to have Lake Ann Park and is one of our community parks out there. We have a lot of different activities going on out there for concessions and boat rentals remain popular. Up there just a quick snapshot of where we were for our watercraft revenue and food sales revenue so we did take in over $29,000 for revenue. As per our agreement that we mentioned down below here, a little bit more with Twin Cities Paddleboards. We do owe them 30 percent of the revenue for the paddleboards and with that so that would be their payment for the 2019 and then add in sales tax so total revenue is just over $24,200 for that so again with our agreement that we have with Twin Cities Paddleboards, that’s been a great partnership. Jeff Geffen with Twin Cities Paddleboards loves the arrangement that we have with that. That we supply basically the labor to rent the paddleboats out there. They’re extremely popular out there so we were down a little bit this year just because of the, kind of the rainy weather and stuff that we’ve had. Now it’s kind of across the board with boat rentals but we still had a pretty strong year for that so Jeff has indicated that he would like to continue our relationship into 2020 so he’s happy with the arrangement and we certainly are too with our contract that we have through them so just general comments. We still continue to do the, kind of the staff crossover kind of in the middle shifts so we have kind of overlaps so people, when during kind of our busy times during the weekend we’ll have 2 people working to assist with customer service with that to get people through the lines quicker. Get the boats rented faster and just really be aware of our customer’s out at Lake Ann. We want them to have a good experience with that. Just a lot of different things. We tried, you know always try new beverage choices. We tried bottled ice tea this year and it was not a real big hit which I was a little surprised about but we’ll try different things again next year. The SpongeBob ice cream bars were the all time favorite out there so they did pretty good with that. We will purchase a two person kayak out there. We get a lot of requests for that this year so I did secure some funding from our finance department for 2020 for next summer so that will be introduced into the fleet of boats out there and then of course our trolling motors are pretty popular with the fishing boats out there so we’ll always look to get a new trolling motor kind of in operation. We seem to have issues with kind of broken tabs with the tilt switches and different things like that but Adam and his crew are extremely you know on the spot when it comes to, if there’s a broken paddleboat or a trolling motor type of thing so they’re very good at repairing. Very quickly get on the fly and to get the boats back in service again so just kind of a page 2 is just kind of a quick snapshot of last year and this year as it Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 3 comes to the boat rentals. Total revenue expenditures as it relates to hours and wages and then kind of our vendor costs as it comes to with what we have to purchase to supply to sell out at Lake Ann so also then done after expenses we did still make over $7,000 out there for the summer which that which wasn’t too bad with the weather and that that we had this year but, and then just kind of a vending expenses on the next page and then the total boat rentals by kind of on a daily basis from Memorial Day weekend until we closed in August. Boettcher: Any questions for Jerry? Tsuchiya: Jerry you’re noticing or any trends emerging about you know, I like that you guys are trying new foods and I realize there are constraints upon what you guys can stock there but are you guys noticing any trends over the last couple years of categories of items that are more popular? I know you’re trying like the ice tea and that was surprising. Ruegemer: Tried ice tea. We’re going to continue to try different you know probably get into more of the carbonized waters type of thing. They seemed to be pretty popular with that. Like LaCroix. I was going to say White Clouds but those are…but we’ll try some of those type of things and it seemed like a lot of the healthier stuff that we’ve had really doesn’t seem to sell but we’ll keep taking a look at that. You know and like you said Karl we are kind of limited for counter space out there as to what we can do. We have a Department of Ag license so we’re a little bit limited as to what we can serve. It has to be more kind of pre-packaged items so we’re always looking to kind of streamline and kind of get product out to the customers as quick as we can but we’ll continue to look for that. Tsuchiya: Do you have any idea of the average type of customer? Are you seeing individual like teenagers? Are you seeing a lot of families with young kids? Is it all over the area? Ruegemer: It’s kind of all over but I’d say a lot of families that are down there. One thing we certainly want to, we’ve had discussions about with our finance department is having type of a square or a credit card type of payment down there where people are you know renting out 5-6 paddleboards at a time at $16 bucks a piece a lot of people don’t have a checkbook or cash to take care of that so I think we’re getting to that point where it’s a little bit more readily accessible to there. We do have potential hot spot options to run something like that so that’s something that staff will take a look at. Tsuchiya: I like that idea. Thank you. Kutz: I have a question. The concession stand between the softball fields and baseball fields, is that included in the concession numbers in the presentation? Ruegemer: That is not. This would just be the beach concession stand closer to, kind of by the turnaround area by the rental docks so. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 4 Kutz: Could you talk about that concession stand? Is that for rent for like boy scouts or somebody like that or how do they, how does that get staffed? Ruegemer: About the only thing it gets staffed at these days is through these weekend tournaments. We tried through the course of time years ago to operate it on a kind of seasonal basis. The City did but CAA did to try to offer concessions throughout the course of the year on a nightly basis so I think they had trouble with volunteers and just kind of staffing it so it was about a 1 or 2 year run and that was that but I’d say for the most part it’s just on the weekend tournaments. Kutz: Gotch ya, thanks. Boettcher: Any other discussion? Hoffman: One trend for sure you’re going to see at the Lake Ann concession stand is during Lake Ann Adventure week you’re guaranteed you’re going to sell $300 worth of Lolli suckers and about $500 bucks worth of Powerade. 75 kids that buys those things daily by the dozen. Ruegemer: A quarter a piece. They are popular. That we account for. Boettcher: Alright, thank you Jerry. Another great year out there it looks like. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. Boettcher: Looks like we do have a visitor that showed up. If you want to do, introduce yourself. Name and address for the record and reason for your visit. Ann Miller: I was stopped coming in the back way by the police because I didn’t have my lights on. He was very kind, yes. Oh dear. My new car. So much for that. My name is Ann Miller, 6561 Fox Path, Chanhassen. I’m here tonight because I’ve requested public boat access to Silver Lake from Pleasant View Road as that land is, the southern tip there is owned by the City. In light of reconstruction of Pleasant View Road and asking for a safer bike path and walkway on Pleasant View Road and also in doing that there’s a Minnesota law, Statute Section 103G.235 that says we can have, we have that right to have the public access on Silver Lake. I guess I have a couple questions and I don’t know if anyone here can answer them but I went to the Riley- Purgatory meeting last, a couple weeks ago. Did you get that letter to them Todd? Everyone here or not that I emailed so everyone knows what I’m talking about, okay. And so that’s what picked my interest was going to that meeting and finding out the source of the phosphate. I’ve lived here since 1992 and I’m well aware of the water issues in the area. I guess in having a public access there I know Silver Lake is small. It’s only 18 acres. However the depth appears to be the same depth in some places as Lotus. I learned, these are just some things that I’ve already learned is, and that was something that was passed out in 1995 in spring and I wish this could be repeated because it kind of explains things very simply for the public. But at any rate Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 5 and you can look at that although I’d like it back. But it just talks about phosphorus and ground water. I have the ground water protection plan from 1995. I have all my grading and soil borings. This is only one-third of the information I have in my own area and I just think that having public access there would really enhance our neighborhood for walkability and riding. I’m not sure about Silver Lake. I have questions about it. I understand that it lays, it’s 18 acres. I guess I’d like to know is there any flow of water speed in that area? I understand from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency that there is some sort of tributary that comes out of there but I understand that too that the Purgatory Creek source is Lotus Lake and I guess I would like to know has anybody seen water being fed into Lotus Lake? Where that exactly is? Purgatory Creek where it starts in Lotus Lake. Does anyone here know? And/or if you don’t I guess I would like to know where that is. I’m sure there must be a homeowner or someone that knows where the water comes out of the ground into Lotus Lake and I don’t believe it would be under water but I would just like to know that source. I’d also like to know the source of water for Silver Lake. Is it a spring? I have no idea. And also it just seems when I look at the difference between Christmas, Silver and Lotus the significant differences at least between Christmas and the other two is depth obviously but the other two as far as having poor water, you know water quality with, and you guys know what the phosphorus levels are etcetera, Silver and Lotus are not that far apart. Lotus Lake has been from 1970to 2018 it virtually has kind of unchanged statistically which is kind of amazing so then I’m wondering, I don’t know what the City as done for Lotus Lake as far as I guess I do know some things along the park but I mean has the return on that investment paid off because I learned too that it takes about 10 years of data collection by volunteers and then you guys have data, data, data, data and someone has to interpret it so I guess I have all those questions. I do think if there can’t be motorized craft on Silver Lake, and I don’t know why there couldn’t be but then I would ask for non-motorized. Canoe, paddleboards, things like that. And as you’re aware in 1986 30 to 50 tons of mud went into Lotus Lake from the 100 year rainfall that year so I’m wondering too maybe Silver Lake should be dredged. There are aerators. There are many different ways of making water clean and I don’t know, I know from the satellite picture that I saw of Silver Lake there are 7 docks on that lake. So that’s what I’m proposing. Now what? Boettcher: Well the only thing we could, any of the water quality issues would be watershed district related. Ann Miller: Yes. And the Riley watershed district proposed catching Powers Boulevard water that runs down Pleasant View, a huge hill, into Silver Lake. Boettcher: Right. Because our organization here we’re parks and rec so we have nothing to do with water quality or. Ann Miller: Okay so I’ve been at the, I’ve been at that meeting so they. Boettcher: So we can’t. We wouldn’t. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 6 Ann Miller: I’d propose the same thing, okay. Boettcher: We wouldn’t be able to address any of that. Ann Miller: Okay. Boettcher: What is the, you live in the vicinity? You live on the lake? Where’s your? Ann Miller: I do not live on the lake. I live at 6561 Fox Path. Boettcher: Right I’m looking at a map here. I don’t see which. So are you across the street from someone that does live on the lake? Ann Miller: No. Boettcher: You’re just in the neighborhood? Ann Miller: Right. Boettcher: Okay. Ann Miller: My access on Fox Path is Pleasant View period. Boettcher: Okay. Ann Miller: Above my house, I live in the big ditch as Mr. Cunningham would say. He’s now deceased but above me is the Van Eeckhout pond. Holding pond for that area and those sides are very steep there. Boettcher: I guess the biggest concern here number one is you’re talking about the south end like the portion that is in Chanhassen. That is natural preserve and based on the Cit y’s comp plan the 800 acres that we have as a natural preserve by definition means we keep them natural. Ann Miller: Yes. Boettcher: So any modification, a ramp, parking lot access. Ann Miller: What about the Minnesota Statute that we have rights to public access? Boettcher: Which one over is which I don’t know. Ann Miller: Pardon me? Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 7 Boettcher: But according to the City’s plan these natural preserves stay in their natural state. Ann Miller: So you’re not going to follow the law? The Minnesota State law? Boettcher: It’s the City’s law. Ann Miller: So which takes priority? Boettcher: I don’t know. You tell me. I don’t know if that’s. Ann Miller: Are there any lawyers here? Boettcher: That’s the way the comp plan is set up for the City. There’s nothing in the City’s, the park, what it’s called the Parks Master Plan. Hoffman: Correct. Boettcher: We just completed 2 years ago there was, there was nothing in there regarding this. There’s nothing in the City’s comp plan and then the problem is because it’s a preserve making that change. Ann Miller: Would be what? Boettcher: I don’t know. I don’t know that we can. Ann Miller: I say. Petouvis: Can I chime in with a question? Ann Miller: Yes. Petouvis: Let’s talk about what exactly constitutes public access to a lake. Does that mean we have a dock? We have a boat ramp? Or does that simply mean that people in the public can walk up to the lake and enjoy the lake as one of our natural resources? Ann Miller: Is it, I don’t know how to pronounce the word. Is it r-i-p-a-r-i-a-n, is it riparian or riparian? Boettcher: Riparian. Ann Miller: We have riparian rights to that area. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 8 Hoffman: Sure any member of the public can walk up there right now and walk to the edge of the lake. Ann Miller: So does that constitute public access? Not it does not because there are things in that area, no it doesn’t. That need to be cleaned up. That are unsafe. Sweetser: So what does the, excuse me but what does the public access have to do with the clean up? I’m sorry. I’m confusing the, I’m sorry it’s me. I’m confusing those two issues. Ann Miller: Well first number one we should, it’s Minnesota Statute Section 103G.235. A public road abutting a body of water gives the public riparian rights to water whether or not the lake is navigable. Okay. And then there is a SUVD, I’m thinking that stands for subdivision. I’m not sure. Point 15 that says public waters means water basins where there is publicly owned and controlled access that is intended to provide public access to the water basin. So that’s what I’m asking for. It’s a Minnesota law. Kutz: But it sounds like you do have public access to the lake. We just don’t have a ramp to it. Like you could go through the preserve right to the lake without anybody stopping you from doing so, so that is what you’re. Ann Miller: I couldn’t do it safely right now because of what’s down in there. Kutz: Okay. Ann Miller: And you have to make that safe. Sweetser: How about the docks that are out, you know I think 7 docks. Ann Miller: Seven owned by private people. It’s from the satellite picture I can see that there are 7 docks. So what is the, I guess I’m asking, and I won’t, I’ll be, you know I’m going to, who else do I go to to ask? Or get my questions answered. Tsuchiya: Ann what was the Section again? 103G what? Ann Miller: .235. Tsuchiya: 235. Ann Miller: 103G.235 yeah. Minnesota Statute. Tsuchiya: 103G.235 correct? Ann Miller: Correct. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 9 Tsuchiya: Restrictions on access to wetlands. Ann Miller: I’m looking at it as well. Tsuchiya: Subsection one says that the public health or safety local units of government may by ordinance restrict public access to public waters, wetlands from municipality, county or township roads that abut public water wetlands. Subsection 2, private restored or created wetlands. I guess I fail to see how, unless we have the wrong subsection. Ann Miller: Unless you have the wrong one, right. I just know that we have riparian rights to water, whether or not the lake is navigable. Tsuchiya: Okay so what do riparian rights mean? Ann Miller: That the public, all of us, you don’t have to be a landowner. Tsuchiya: Yes. Ann Miller: Have rights to use that lake. Tsuchiya: Right to what? Right to us it how? Ann Miller: Recreationally. Tsuchiya: Okay. I guess I’m unclear how. Ann Miller: And that includes, that includes wetlands too. Tsuchiya: I understand that but I’m unclear how your interpretation of the statutes applies to this situation. I’m unclear exactly what you’re asking and if what you’re asking is within statutory law and case law on this matter, and I guess we’re not going to answer that tonight. Ann Miller: Okay. Tsuchiya: That’s going to take somebody to look into it. Ann Miller: Okay. Tsuchiya: And whether that be staff or that be the City Attorney. Ann Miller: Okay. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 10 Tsuchiya: We’re going to have to get a legal opinion of some kind. Ann Miller: Okay. Tsuchiya: On what you’re asking here because we’re not going to answer that for you here tonight. Ann Miller: Okay fair enough. Tsuchiya: Okay. I would say while I am an attorney I’m not acting as an attorney right now so I’m not going to venture any kind of legal opinion on this. Ann Miller: Okay. But you all would agree that Silver Lake is a designated lake. Tsuchiya: I do not because I don’t know what a designated lake is. I want to start at the very foundation and work my way up. I take nothing for granted. Ann Miller: Okay. Oh okay. Tsuchiya: So what is a lake? Define a lake. Does Silver Lake qualify as a lake? Ann Miller: Yes it does. Tsuchiya: And we establish that then what’s the next step. Ann Miller: It is a lake. Tsuchiya: Well you say it is but you know I want to make sure I go through the full analysis and I would ask whoever renders a legal opinion on this to go to the full analysis to say is there merit to what you’re asking and if there is merit then based upon Silver Lake being 10 percent or so in Chanhassen and 90 percent or so in, is it Shorewood? Boettcher: Shorewood. Tsuchiya: Shorewood, Ann Miller: Correct. Tsuchiya: We have a joint jurisdictional issue here. Ann Miller: It doesn’t matter. The animals and the public, it doesn’t matter. Tsuchiya: The animals? Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 11 Ann Miller: Yeah the animals they don’t know where the county lines are or anything. Tsuchiya: But the animals aren’t asking for riparian rights. Ann Miller: They cross back and forth, no but the public, we do have riparian rights. Tsuchiya: Oh I understand that so I’m just wondering because we’re dealing with a lake that is across city boundaries we have two different governmental organizations that have different proportionate jurisdiction over the lake so we need to coordinate with the other city. Ann Miller: Right. Tsuchiya: To say okay, do we need to public access in there and if so who would need to do it. Ann Miller: I have, I have notified them yes. Tsuchiya: Well I understand that but that’s going to. Ann Miller: About my request. Tsuchiya: Well I understand that but my point is, it’s a matter of coordination with the other city. Ann Miller: I totally agree yeah. Tsuchiya: You know do we have an obligation to do this? And if so how does that obligation fall on each municipality? Ann Miller: I think you do have an obligation. Tsuchiya: Well I understand that’s your position but. Boettcher: But as Karl’s saying what we think doesn’t matter. We need a legal opinion. Ann Miller: Okay, alright. Boettcher: Because every one of us in here will interpret it differently. We can’t go on that. We have to have the exact definition. Ann Miller: Okay. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 12 Boettcher: Again with authority you know which city, 90 percent versus 10 percent that makes it pretty easy. Ann Miller: What makes it pretty easy? Tsuchiya: But we’re not just dealing with two cities. Boettcher: Right. Tsuchiya: We’re dealing with a lot of different jurisdictional bodies. The watershed district. Ann Miller: Yes I know. The Van Eeckhout that sits right above me, that watershed was, because that water drains towards us I believe my information is correct, that they had to get permission from Riley-Purgatory to, Minnehaha Creek had to get permission to send the water our way but I think there’s also a rule, somewhere I read and I could be wrong, that wherever the water drains to that’s the watershed district that is in charge. Tsuchiya: Okay. Ann Miller: And the water that comes down Pleasant View runs into. Sweetser: The location that you’re talking about who owns that property? Ann Miller: The City of Chanhassen. Sweetser: So it is, it’s not a private. Ann Miller: No it is not. Sweetser: Okay. Because I believe riparian rights probably are based on owners of, if an owner owns that property then they have, I think that’s kind of a. Ann Miller: It’s a public road and it’s public property. Petouvis: Let me read, this is from the Cornell Law School so a source I trust, just a brief blurb on riparian doctrine. In dealing with water rights the riparian doctrine states that water belongs to the person who’s land borders the body of water. Riparian owners are permitted to make reasonable use of this water provided it does not unreasonably interfere with the reasonable use of this water by others with riparian rights. So and I’m on the Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources what are riparian rights. Riparian rights are property rights arising from owning the shoreland so the City to me has the riparian rights of that particular property. Using your terms. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 13 Ann Miller: And I live in the city. Petouvis: Well and I think the question extends you know the question extends from here does the City have an obligation to clear that land in any way that has been designated by the City as preserve area and does the City have an obligation to provide watercraft access in the portion of that lake, the very small percentage of that lake that is within the city of Chanhassen? Do we have any legal obligation? Ann Miller: It’s a lake. I can get on any lake in this state. Petouvis: Well I know but you’re suggesting that we have a legal obligation as the City of Chanhassen which I do believe is outside the bounds of our commission but we need to understand as a commission, as the City do we in fact have these legal obligations. So Todd. Hoffman: I’ll be happy to offer some input and then start to answer some of Mrs. Miller’s questions. Petouvis: Thank you. Hoffman: So the City has no obligation, legal or otherwise to provide a public access to Silver Lake on land owned by the City of Chanhassen. That would be something that would be a choice. A decision that the City would make on behalf of the public but it has no obligation to provide that by State law. Ann Miller: Does the State have an obligation? Hoffman: No. Ann Miller: No, okay. Hoffman: No. Silver Lake is 71 acres in size. It’s average depth is about 5 feet and it’s max depth is about 14 feet. Purgatory Creek is the outflow to Lotus Lake and it outflows underneath Highway 41, or excuse me Highway 101 about half way down the lake so about. Ann Miller: Wait say that again, Purgatory Creek is an outflow? Hoffman: Of Lotus Lake. It leaves on the east side of the lake underneath Highway 101. Ann Miller: Okay. Right near where that little walkout is when you’re on the path? Hoffman: A little south of that. So you’ll see there’s a weir structure in there on the outflow. It’s a pretty significant creek that leaves there and then the inflow, go ahead. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 14 Ann Miller: When you say significant creek you mean constant flow or water running or? Hoffman: (Yes). And then inflow is a variety. So watershed, Lotus Lake has a large watershed as does Silver Lake. I think Silver Lake has a 700 acre watershed and all the water from that watershed gets to that lake via some form. Either storm sewer or creek running directly off, so there’s a lot of different sources of inflow into both of these water bodies. So I think that answered some of the questions I heard. Regarding the trail or sidewalk on Pleasant View, oh many years ago Pleasant View had a line on it that would designate a trail or a sidewalk on the City’s Comprehensive Plan. If you drive that road or stayed on that road at all you know there’s no room there to create a trail or sidewalk. There might be a few exceptions. A few short segments where you could do that but you could not physically build a trail or sidewalk that would meet the standards that would be required to guarantee the safety of the public on that trail or sidewalk and so that line has been removed and there is no, there’s no plans by the City to grade a public trail or sidewalk on Pleasant View from east to west. Ann Miller: That is very sad. That is very sad. And so then my, I guess my response to that would be then from Peaceful Lane out to North Lotus Park make Pleasant View a one lane road. A one way road so that the public can have a place to walk and ride their bikes. Hoffman: Well that’s the decision of the park board. Ann Miller: Okay. But it’s a thought. So when the reconstruction of Pleasant View is done there’s, you’re saying there is no give as far as having a sidewalk and/or a path for bikes or safety. Hoffman: Pleasant View is currently scheduled for 2025 or beyond for a reconstruction and again based on the comp plan there would be no trail included. I can’t tell you what the decision would be at that time. If there would be any small segments. You know we live in a world that has a variety of different circumstances. Pleasant View Road was to be Crosstown back in the mid 60’s. Mid 1960’s so when Crosstown was constructed it would have continued on right behind oh kind of what they call the summit up in that area and then down along Pleasant View Road, all the way down Lake Lucy Road and stop at State Highway 41. That would have Crosstown. Obviously that would have changed the environment of that area. The City Council in 1965 said to the State of Minnesota we’re not interested in your road. They blocked that road, at that time they said we like Pleasant View Road just the way it is. We’re not going to make any improvements to it and so what you see today for Pleasant View was submitted by a City Council that sat in this, well a different building in 1965 in 1965 but sat in a different building and said we’re not going to make improvements to Pleasant View Road. We like it the way it is and we’re not going to change the neighborhood. To create a trail or a sidewalk you would have to take people’s driveways are already tight. You would have to take a lot of people’s front yards. A lot of their landscaping. A lot of the retaining walls. It would change the character significantly to try to even attempt that kind of public improvement and you’re simply not going to get public support to make that happen. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 15 Ann Miller: Well I disagree with that summation but if that is your final decision and the future then I guess my request for public boat access and on that piece of property is even more important since you’re saying that there is no way we can have a path. So where do we go from here? Because I’m going, I’ve already sent the letter out to all the houses in my neighborhood and I will further investigate. I guess I will be calling the DNR people. I mean you will too but we do, it is a designated lake and we do have rights to have a public boat landing there. A safe one and a dock. Thanks for listening. Boettcher: Alright, thank you. Kutz: Thanks for your presentation. OLD BUSINESS. Boettcher: Alright next item we’re up to H, old business. Anything Todd from the last meeting? Hoffman: No none thank you. Petouvis: May I ask quickly for an update on the Arboretum trail? Is there any update on estimates, plans, engineering reports for the Arboretum trail? Hoffman: The Arboretum trail is, the bid date was extended so it was to be bid on September 24th and so the project is, continues to be held up by the State of Minnesota permitting and some of the design work. Some of the wetland work so Marty continues to let me know when it’s being postponed and bidding dates are being postponed. So that’s the only update I have. Petouvis: Thank you. REPORT: PARK MAINTENANCE QUARTERLY UPDATE. Boettcher Alright next item into Section I for reports. Number one, park maintenance quarterly report. I believe that would be Adam Beers. Beers: Thank you Chair Boettcher and commissioners. I’m here to provide just a brief update and kind of highlight some of the things staff has been working on over the last quarter. As part of the CIP in 2019 we, as a recommendation from you guys did some work on some tennis courts at the Chanhassen Rec Center, Lake Susan Park and South Lotus Lake Park. The Chanhassen Rec Center was completely milled and overlaid because it was beyond any sort of repair that we could have done. Lake Susan Park and South Lotus Park were still in decent enough shape we could crack fill. Put a product on called Petromat and then a small overlay so that work is now completed and the courts are open for play. As a part of the park equipment replacement schedule, which is we’re in the first year of. We did some work at Sunset Ridge Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 16 Park, Herman Field Park and Prairie Knoll Park which includes all new playgrounds and playground borders. And we are finally kind of rounding the corner at Prairie Knoll Park. The playground is in. The concrete sidewalks are in. All the drainage material is in and we’re hoping to get the engineered wood fiber in at the end of this week. Next week we’ll follow up with the restoration and get that opened up for public use so the other two that we’ve already completed and restored, I received a warm welcome from the neighborhoods. We’ve gotten a ton of great response on Facebook and social media. I’m sure you guys have probably seen that a little bit so it’s been a good project. We’re looking forward to wrapping it up. As far as some just routine maintenance. Things that are going on right now. As part of the fall program we go around to each of our sports complexes, soccer fields and baseball fields, lacrosse fields and apply our fall fertilizer so that’s going on right now. Each year we take out a certain, a specific soccer field to kind of provide a little more cultural practices to it. Aerification. Over seeding. Just to give it a break so Bandimere Number One was selected this fall to take out of our routine so just to give it a rest so we’re aerified. Over seeded and we’ll continue just to kind of baby that through the fall and then it will be ready for use in the spring. Each fall staff goes around and we try to address as many trail segments as we can with pruning just to kind of help make room for our plowing equipment, tree health. Just to kind of take the time to move through and prune so it’s safe for walking and residents to use so we’re just about finished with running through most of our plowing sections right now. And with all of our outdoor facilities coming to an end we, it’s kind of a long process with blowing out the buildings. Shutting down Jerry’s buildings and concession stands and we typically come in and do some upkeep, painting and any repair work. Didn’t mean to throw you under the bus there. So that usually starts in September. Goes to November so we’re kind of we’re approaching that shut down mode right now and we’ll kind of work our way into the winter. Tsuchiya: Jerry’s buildings take that long? Beers: Ah there’s some things to be done. Tsuchiya: Okay. Beers: So that’s kind of where we’ve been working on. I’d like to kind of just let you guys know and a little nod to our seasonal staff, we have, we’re down to our last 4 right now and it’s just the retired guys that kind of help us out with the mowing so just so you guys are aware of how important and critical they are. You know we have 16 to 17 college kids, high school kids that come onboard just to help do a lot of the daily maintenance things. The mowing. The trash collection. The weed whipping. Just a lot of the stuff, the bathroom cleaning that you know nobody really notices but until it doesn’t get done so, and they’re a huge, huge help to our success and so I just wanted you guys to be aware of how important they are and how much we value them as a resource so just wanted to let you guys know that and we are working our way down to the last few that will take us into the fall so that’s what I got. Boettcher: Okay. On the tennis court refurbish is that as needed or is there a schedule? Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 17 Beers: No, there is definitely a schedule. Boettcher: What 4-5 years? 7 years? Beers: God you have that going out to 2050? Hoffman: Yeah so about 7 years on an overlay and 15 years on a refurbishment. Beers: Oh yeah sorry. Boettcher: They always look good even though we used to have a commissioner said no one used them. Beers: No? They are definitely being used. Boettcher: I do see people on them all the time so. Any other questions for Adam? If not thank you Adam. You keep the city looking good. 2019 HALLOWEEN PARTY PREVIEW. Boettcher: Alright next item, Halloween party preview and Jerry I believe this is you. Ruegemer: Thanks again Chair Boettcher. Our 35th Annual Halloween Party will be held Saturday, October 26th out at the Chanhassen Recreation Center from 5:30 until 7:30 out there. The annual event is open to children ages 12 and under so they’re certainly welcome to come out there and we have a variety of trick and treating options for the kids. We have a limited spooky rooms that people can go through and gather some additional candy and that sort of thing. We have treats available. We have carnival games. Jumping houses, that sort of thing in the school. Bluff Creek Elementary School gym for that so it’s with another performance by Brian Richards this year so that will be at 6:30 so we just do one performance now for that. Flyers are ready to go and getting copied as we speak here for the October 10th edition of the Villager so we’ll do an insert in there for people in our community so they kind of get the word out. We’ll do some tweets on Twitter and some Facebook posts and that sort of thing as well for that so. I did get all the link for the sign up for the volunteers out to the local high schools. That went to Minnetonka High School, Chaska High School and Chan High School and then we’ll also get that out to our teen volunteers as well. The links is also available on our Halloween page on our community events page on our city web page so if any of the commissioners would like to volunteer for the event please let me know. I can get you signed up for that and we can get you a costume if you need a costume as well so I will send out another email reminder asking commissioners if they would like to volunteer that night. If you do please let me know. Hoffman: Or bring your own. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 18 Ruegemer: Or bring your own. Boettcher: We have a former Commissioner that used, was it Mr. Incredible? Ruegemer: Mr. Incredible. Boettcher: So I spoke to him a couple weeks ago and that issue came up and he says I need somebody to replace me and I said you know there’s this guy named Karl. He seems like he would be Mr. Incredible if there ever was someone as a protégé. Tsuchiya: I’d have to hit the weights. Boettcher: It actually has…the Nike shoes. You can pump up the biceps of course it might take a lot of pumping up. I was looking at the spooky room too and based on what Adam says about cleaning up your rooms, if you just leave one in disorder that should be spooky. Spider webs and things leaning and falling. Ruegemer: Right. Real life. Boettcher: Is this the, in terms of popularity the third largest event of the year? Ruegemer: Of the year? Yeah I’d say it’s pretty close probably a little bit bigger than the Easter Egg Candy Hunt so yeah, 4th of July. Yeah Boettcher: Good. Sounds good. Hoffman: How many attendees, 500? Ruegemer: Yeah 500 to 800. With parents and grandparents and kids so. We’ll have hayrides again this year so it’s always kind of fun to get out there on a horse drawn hayride so. We’ll have chocolate chip cookies too Commissioner Boettcher. Boettcher: I was just going to say I need a cookie. I have a scheduling conflict because I’ll still be in the Mediterranean but if anyone wants extra credit or extra points with the Chair of the commission save me a dozen chocolate chip cookies. Tsuchiya: Don’t they have chocolate chip cookies in the Mediterranean? Boettcher: Yeah but it’s not real chocolate. Tsuchiya: It’s that Swiss stuff that you don’t like? Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 19 Boettcher: You take a bite and you go oh. Sounds like fun though Jerry. I will not be here but if Mr. Incredible, please take pictures. Ruegemer: Thank you. RECREATION CENTER QUARTERLY UPDATE. Boettcher: This would be Jodi. Sarles: Hi, thank you Chair Boettcher and commissioners. Just a little bit of update and we’ll see what we have going on at the Rec Center. Every summer we kind of go through a bit of a deep cleaning with the Bluff Creek Elementary School. They come in and they sand down our floors and reseal them so they, we do both the gym and the studio. Last year they repainted everything so it’s nice to have them come back through. Clean it all up again and get us all shiny. So that process is shrunk down which is fortunate for us. We used to take about a month for them to get that done and then they’ve kind of brought it down to about 4 or 5 days so. Boettcher: Big change. Sarles: A change in product they use for that sealant and a lot more…so that’s great. Tsuchiya: Don’t feel so funny? Sarles: There were days. Yep. And with that we usually do a back to school punch card sale right after we get our floors redone so this year we had about 50 of those 40 punch cards sold in 8 days. We do sales a year so the next one will come up for the entire month of December and that’s usually a big one so people will stock up for the year and hopefully we see them back. Sometimes those cards look a little duller than when we handed them out but that’s fantastic. They still work so I’ve seen a wide variety of them come through so. And then another thing as we go back to school we have an agreement and it was District 112 Star Program and those are 18 to 21 year olds that have special needs so they get a little bit of job training. So they come out with one of their coaches and, so we have two helpers that come in primarily to do a little bit of light cleaning the white tables. They help us stack chairs. Sometimes we’ll do some shredding but I usually the job coach can’t handle an hour of shredder running so that’s been shorten a bit so, but no we appreciate their help and it’s great to have a partnership with the school district so we usually get them all year round. Sometimes we don’t get some in the second semester…so it’s a fun program and it’s great for the kids to get out there in the public and do some help and learn some new good skills and sometimes they even bring their laundry so that’s even better. As far as some programs, the Dance for Fun. We started up our new season now. We have 25 classes going and we have 144 total dancers that participate in the program so it’s a fun program. It’s a good recreational program for the kids. We do have the…that participate in competition and they kind of travel around the metro area for a couple, 2 to 3 competitions and we’ve had some really successful dancers so it’s fun to see and we get some nice trophies in our trophy case Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 20 so if you come by that’s what, why there’s so many finger prints is the little kids coming by we’ve got to get this trophy and it’s about this big so hopefully they will win again this year. And now we’ll roll into the Rec Center Sports program. I’m very happy to announce that we have a new Rec Sports Coordinator. His name is Art Galvan. He is, he’s been a long time coach for the Minnetonka Girls Softball Association. Minnetonka Fast Pitch Director. Art has a full time job being the financial advisor by day so it’s great to have somebody in that has a passion. He got right in and jumped in the last few weeks of T-ball so my summer of T-ball, I got some help by the end which was fun and he had some great tips for the kids so onto soccer and that’s what we left a little bit early tonight with the lightning so. So our Small Fry soccer and it’s the program that’s going on and that’s a 6 week program and there’s 40 little ones and we had 64 kids in our last session of T-ball so it’s a fun program. The kids really love it and learn, there’s all sorts of games around soccer. Tonight they were learning their goalie skills so that was great fun. First time we’ve let them touch the ball with their hands so. Not voluntarily though. And then we also do our Lil’ Star Sports. That’s a little bit older ages so that’s actually 5 to 6. Looks like a typo there so we have 36 kids in that one so a little bit smaller group in there with… We tend to get a few kids that will come out of the Small Fry and then kind of jump into the CAA programs because I believe they start at 5 so. And a few weeks ago and I believe Commissioner Scanlon was at our Barnyard Boogie. Yeah so it’s a very fun event for families and little ones so we had a petting zoo. We had arts and crafts. A Go Gymnastics program. The woman puts on a demonstration where you can come in and go through all of the gymnastic equipment so they’re walking the balance beam and trying to swing around on the bars and everything and jumps and somersaults and then of course we have the dance and bounce house and we do this one with Victoria. We split a couple events each year so we have our Super Hero Party is over at the Victoria Rec Center in March and we do this one back in Chan so it’s a nice partnership. A way to get more people and kind of cover our costs that way too and…because it looked like it could have rained a bit so fortunately it didn’t and then… And then as far as a few things that are coming up at the Rec Center. We’ve got some trial class so free chair is a trial class. Fit for Life trial class. Our annual artisan fair is going to be in November. That first Saturday in November. That’s a fun one to see all the art that your neighbors make because you have no idea that they can do what they do and it’s fun. And then again the Holiday Boutique is another fun one so. And plenty of more activities going on at the Rec Center but that’s just a little update… Does anybody have any questions? Boettcher: You just stay busy 12 months a year over there. Sarles: We try. We try. Boettcher: I mean I just look at these, every time we do a quarterly report and it’s just the number of things going on at all times is just pretty amazing how you keep everything straight. Keep coordination. Logistics and all. Sarles: Yeah it’s fun. It’s fun and so it’s good to see all sorts of different people coming in and using the Rec Center and for all sorts of different reasons too so it’s great. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 21 Boettcher: Good. Sarles: Thank you. Boettcher: Thank you very much. SENIOR CENTER QUARTERLY UPDATE. Boettcher: Mary looks like you’re next with the senior center update. Blazanin: …Chair Boettcher and commissioners. We’ve been busy too at the senior center. We have seen many new faces walk through the door which is always fun and exciting. One thing that’s been kind of fun for me to watch is how many seniors have been inviting families and friends to come along because they may have attended something last week that was really fun and they bring their neighbors for the next one so that’s really fun to see. We have been doing a lot of stuff this summer. Our highlights include over 22 events both large and small. Some of our most popular events is Soup, Salad and Song or Soup, Salad and Speaker events that I’ve been hosting. In the past 3 months we’ve had over 200 people participate in those. That’s a lot of food going through. One of the most well attended was our musical tribute to the Mills Brothers and everyone really, really loved that. In fact I turned around and rehired the guy that came in and performed for that for a February event and so people are already talking about that. All of these events typically include a simple luncheon and one thing that’s kind of interesting during these events is that people don’t always sit with the same group every time so they really are kind of branching out and meeting each other. Building community at the senior center. We took many trips to local plays, concerts. We went to go to a Saints game and a Twins game. We sat through the longest Twins game of all time… Yep we didn’t get home until 8:00 that night. It as a very long game but those seniors they’re tough. So we patted ourselves on the back for making it through that. Most of our trips we partner with Chaska. Their community adult, active older adult group with the Lodge. It just helps us fill the bus and it’s a lot of fun to partner so we do a lot of trips with Chaska. This year we also included Victoria in our trip to the Guthrie and also to the Saints game. They partnered with us on that. We also had educational and informational classes. Anywhere from understanding Medicare to, I’m trying to think the 1936 Olympics and what that looks like and those again engaged another 200 seniors so they really do like those classes and specialty speakers. We continue to have strong groups. Specialty groups that are thriving. Enjoying hobbies like wood carving. Our wood carvers if you didn’t know are also have gotten engaged in teaching students. Young students. Kids who are home schooled come in and learn how to wood carve with them once a week. Right now we have 5 kids working with the seniors learning how to carve so if you’re ever here on Wednesday morning they’re usually here from 9:00 until about 11:00. It’s really fun to just walk back there and kind of observe and watch wat they’re up to. We have a lot of cards and games. Group set play. The Chan-o-laires started up again and practice every Tuesday. Diane Prieditis who was the Chan-o- Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 22 laires Director for 14 years just recently retired. She and her husband are moving out of state to be closer to family and we just had a big party last Thursday. Or what day was that? Hoffman: Thursday. Blazanin: Thursday. Todd gave a little speech. It was very nice. It was a good turnout and it was a good tribute to Diane for all her hard work with that group. We continue to provide support groups, counseling care, outreaches, health clinics. We did a flu shot clinic this year that brought in several seniors to get those taken care of. In the last 3 months we’ve served at least 75 clients in different capacities. Insurance counseling. Foot care. A number of things that we provide just to help them get those things either for free or at reduced prices… We are still working on getting our Maple Room which is now called the Maple Corner redecorated and updated and on October 10th we’re going to have a big grand opening open house event which I hope you’ll be able to attend from 11:30 to 1:30. Mayor Ryan will come at 11:30 and cut the ribbon and officially open it up. This has been an amazing ride honestly. It started out with my just sort of reaching out to Love INC to see if they’d be willing to help me refurnish it with some updated furniture and it’s turned into a complete remodel with a lot of community partners and businesses jumping onboard so not only are we moving furniture, we got the walls painted. We’re getting new carpeting. We’re getting just some new woodwork in there. It’s a very exciting project and it’s been a really, truly a very, I don’t even know how to describe it. People have just come together to make it happen so it’s been really cool so we will announce further on we’ll definitely recognize those businesses and individual organizations that have been involved in that project going in. It’s a super comfortable space. It’s really fun to go back there and just see seniors sitting in a cozy chair reading a book or working on their laptop or having some coffee with a friend. It’s already starting to be used just the way it should be which is a comfortable space to hang out. We’re also gearing up for our very busy fall and winter programming. I have a lot of holiday events coming up. In November we’re going to be recognizing Alzheimer’s Awareness Month with several event speakers and special events. One of these events includes our partnering with the Chanhassen Cinema on November 2nd which is a Saturday morning and we’re going to show the Glen Campbell documentary entitled I’ll Be Me. It chronicles his journey from the time that he was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s through a farewell tour that he put on to say good bye to all his fans. It’s quite a moving and touching story about his walk through his journey with Alzheimer’s and his family’s journey as care givers for him. The Cinema has graciously offered to let us use their space. We also had very many community partners who are offering to provide food, donuts and coffee and lunch after the show and we have counseling groups at the end of the show to be there to talk with people if they want to make a connection to find out how they can get help or how you can get more information…maybe dealing with a loved one that’s struggling…so already, it’s not until November but I’ve already gotten more than 50 people signed up for that so we’ll certainly get at least 100 by the time. That’s a really cool thing. Our annual Holiday Party is scheduled for Friday, December 6th and of course I always enjoy having Park and Rec Commissioners show up so let me know if you are able to make it. Lunch is at noon, then we have entertainment after Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 23 that…just let me know. I’ll make sure there’s a table top for you. Do you have any questions for me? Sweetser: When do you sleep? Wonderful. Wonderful calendar. Tsuchiya: I’m just Mary with the developments going in, is there any planning for that? Just I’m assuming there’s going to be a fair share of those newer residents in. Blazanin: For In the senior center? Tsuchiya: Yeah just you know I’m, they’ll stay within their facility but I think some of the more mobile individuals might venture up this way. Hopefully they do obviously. Blazanin: Yeah I think…actually I’ve had a few phone calls from who had said we just got, secured an apartment at Riley Crossing and I’m just calling to find out what the senior center has to offer so. Tsuchiya: Good. Blazanin: …I’ve been doing that. I do try to reach out to staff at those places to let them know, I send them our newsletter. I send them our calendars. I’m always telling them please bring a bus load of… They run a lot of similar programs in their own places so if they don’t feel comfortable…but sometimes it’s nice to have them coming in and I do get people from a lot of those folks do come in so I don’t know if it’s going to affect the numbers or if more people will come. I’m hoping that they’ll feel welcomed. Tsuchiya: Yeah. I hope there’s a great opportunity in there. If they stay within their facility that’s understandable but. Blazanin: …field trips. Tsuchiya: More partnerships. Fill up another bus. Blazanin: I did invite all of those seniors housing facilities to come and do a Cruise the World of Senior Housing. It was a one day event. They came and each one shared a little bit about their building and about their community and answered questions… Anything from you know what’s a special event to what does it look like to live there and that was really well attended. We had over 30 people show up for that. Plus they fed them which…so it’s a good way to connect our seniors with that community and they really do work well together. I have to say Chanhassen, the senior housing communities are unique in that they talk to each other and they really do work together. I was working with a client that doesn’t see a good fit for their place they’ll refer them onto somebody else. It’s really cool. Really cool community around here. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 24 Tsuchiya: Thank you. Blazanin: You’re welcome. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS: DISCUSSION ON POSSIBLE FUTURE PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT BOND REFERENDUM. Boettcher: Do we still need money and how do we get it? Hoffman: This is just a self guided tour of your thoughts about, we have a school referendum coming up. You have a Lake Ann Park project that is some point in the future, you still don’t know the final cost on the Arboretum trail so I think it’s a good time to start an initial conversation about you know how are these things all going to come into play. What’s the timing of each? How much cash will be generated by park dedication fees in the future? You know Avienda’s on the horizon. If that even comes to fruition that’s about $2.7 to $3 million dollars in park referendum fees. There’s other big projects that potentially come in would generate some additional cash so I know the council and the park commission talked about this and so timing is an issue. You know do you want to do it on a presidential election if you would do it that would be 2020. Or do you want to do it in the spring of the year. The last referendum was in ’97. It was on June 19th I believe, just a single question referendum. You could wait until an off election year. Off presidential election year which is 2021 but those are all decisions that would be made in the future. This would be a basic conversation about philosophies and where each of you are at as commissioners. Boettcher: So with the Prince property and everything happening there the earliest is probably two years out. Would it be better to wait until, you don’t want to wait until we’re actually making decisions to think about money. You want to do that 12 months in advance with referendum talk? Hoffman: Yeah and you don’t know the cost yet. The feasibility study will identify that and that’s been pushed off for you until October. Your October meeting and then council for November so you’re going to be a month or two from now you’ll know a lot more information as far as your financial obligations, both for committed projects such as the Arboretum trail. Even the trail that’s in the Chan Nature Preserve that, the building is under construction right now but we don’t have the, we budgeted 120 but we don’t have the actual cost so we’ll know that number here in the near future as well so a variety of these questions are going to be known soon and then we’ll have additional information to guide your discussions. Pemrick: Quick question on the Arboretum trail. Memory is serving me that the federal grant that was kind of a big catalyst for this, wasn’t that decision needed by the end of September or October of this year to get that federal grant otherwise we lose it? Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 25 Hoffman: Correct. Pemrick: Okay. Hoffman: So there has to be an action, they have to take the bidding and so they’ll take the bidding in time for that and. Pemrick: Okay. But the decision doesn’t need to be made in that short of a timeframe? Hoffman: No. And the bids could actually all be rejected and it could be rebid but the initial bid has to be done by that certain timeline. Pemrick: Wonderful, thank you for that clarification. Hoffman: And the County’s got that. The County’s got that timeline set. Boettcher: Anyone else? Joe? Karl? Anything? Tsuchiya: What are the, so if I’m leaving any out, funding options for our projects is bonding. We ask the City Council to do bonding. And then I don’t know these other options. I know Mayor Ryan charged us to think out of the box. Not just with what we do with the space but probably I would say that extends to funding so the City’s talking about the franchise fee for roads but do we also look at the funding that we’re asking for, how much are we asking for and is this just to complete a finite number of projects or is this a funding source that can supplement the park dedication fund you know looking at having a broader view and a more long time view. Is that something that we would maybe want to consider and propose to City Council but you know taking the temperature of the community as a whole a well. Boettcher: Right and I think initially our thought was to include like a final completion of Bandimere. Two or three at least things, shelter and stuff like that we’ve been talking about for a long time. If we were going to do this, if we were going to get the influx of money through a bond referendum that we would have enough to cover the projects that we’ve had that we’ve been pushing down the road and I think that would make sense. Rather than do something and find out 12 to 18 months later well now we don’t have money for this. I mean it’s kind of a tough timeframe is kind of bad too with the school referendum. You know two other things going on and then we want to come in. There was the article in the paper, the editorial was it weeks ago Todd? Where a former council member wrote and talked about the franchise fee and somewhere in there he threw in a blurb about watch something’s coming from park and rec and I went oh great. Now we’re already being looked at as bad guys and girls because we may ask for money too. I mean shame on us but we have been putting that discussion off for so long and if we were going to do it, if it was going to come to fruition I would be one in favor of enough to cover what we’ve been talking about. You know there are the big projects. Todd was talking Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 26 about Avienda and such but know what we have on our plate, doing a final tally and say this is what we would need realistically. Petouvis: I would also like to just toss out for consideration. I know that historically the commission’s responsibility has been more towards new building and to developing the city’s infrastructure of park and recreation amenities. Without, as far as I understand and I could be wrong we’re without a funding source, set reliable funding source for replacement. Maintenance. Keeping what we’ve built over decades an asset that really attracts people to the city and makes people enjoy living here. Want to stay here and it’s just a niggling concern that’s always in the back of my head that we don’t have something solid in our hands to make sure that we can maintain what we build. So if there’s any discussion we can have any options that we have in relation to funding these larger new projects that can help us build a nest egg of sorts for what we already have to make sure it stays beautiful and the weeds and the cracks and the pathways don’t go up to my knees. Just stay at my ankles and you know it’s, there’s a lot to consider because we have wonderful, wonderful amenities in this city and it would be just a shame to stay laser focused on the new, new, new and lose sight of making sure we take good care of what we’ve got so if we have an opportunity to build you a base that will just grow and support that that’d be great. Tsuchiya: Todd is there like a balance sheet that you guys have as a city that maintains, you know watches the assets and depreciation and then projects the replacement cost for shelters and playground equipment. Everything on the park and rec side. Hoffman: Yes. Tsuchiya: And any ballpark idea of? Hoffman: So I can give you a couple examples commissioners. So to Commissioner Petouvis’ question, so last evening go to the City Council meeting from last evening when you have a chance and pull up the work session item which talked about establishing the maximum levy for 2020 and there were 3 scenarios and the final scenario included such things as an additional staff member for street maintenance, an additional staff member for park maintenance. Permanent funding for the City’s share of the street pavement management program. Permanent funding for the City’s park replacement schedule and so as you’ll remember really the catalyst behind the last, well the catalyst behind the park and recreation system master plan was the need to start that program so we have all of this infrastructure in place. Millions and millions of dollars of trails, buildings, parks, those type of things but we did not have a funding or program to pay for their repair and replacement. So park dedication, you can only build new. You can’t take park dedication money because it’s based on the premise that when you bring new people or new businesses you increase the demand. If you increase the demand you must take their money and build new. You can’t take that money to replace and repair so how do you find money to replace and repair? Well who’s wearing your equipment out? Your current residents and visitors to the community. Who would pay for that? Your current residents would pay for that and that would Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 27 be typically through the levy so you would levy up for that. So the park replacement schedule right now is about $250,000 annually. This was the first year. It’s not guaranteed that will be approved for another $250,000 in 2020. We’re hopeful that it will be but I can tell you last night and as the council met here they talked about adding $510,000 as a potential to the max levy but that did not include at least from what I saw, that did not include a permanent funding of the park replacement schedule. That was one of the items listed. Really what they were focusing on potentially, but they could change their mind, was the two employees and then the pavement management and so last night they had that very conversation that you were asking about today and they chose not to, at least make a statement last night that they would like to do that as a permanent funding and raise the levy to make that a permanent funding source. So I would encourage you to read that report and then follow that conversation and talk to your council members as it continues on into the fall. Petouvis: And is the levy our only, the City’s only option for funding that on a permanent basis? Hoffman: For the most part. Yep. So most of the City’s business, operation and maintenance is all based on the levy and you know what you pay in taxes pays for operations and maintenance of the City. Well it’s not the only, I mean some cities use franchise fees for other things. Some cities use franchise fees for parks. Right now that conversation is use it for streets. Eden Prairie they run a liquor operation. Million dollars a year revenue. They use it to replace playgrounds on an annual basis for other, a variety of cities have a variety of funding mechanisms for their current replacement of all of their equipment and you know we’re fairly new in that game. Another example I can give you is so pavement management is operated by engineering and public works. This year they’re doing one pavement management path and so it’s about $320,000 to repair and replace the path around the headwaters of Bluff Creek so this is right behind, it’s east of 41. North of Highway 5. Right in the corner by Highway 5 and 41 so that trail that goes around the wetland, Longacres is on your north. So one section of trail in our entire system, $320,000 and our Finance Director is telling us that’s all you get for 3 years. And I go well Greg this is not enough. You know you’ve got 30 or 4 and so it’s about $320,000 to repair and replace the path around the headwaters of Bluff Creek so this is right behind, it’s east of 41. North of Highway 5. Right in the corner by Highway 5 and 41 so that trail that goes around the wetland, Longacres is on your north. So one section of trail in our entire system, $320,000 and our Finance Director is telling us that’s all you get for 3 years. And I go well Greg this is not enough. You know you’ve got 30 or 40 million dollars worth of asphalt in the ground and you can’t repair and replace it at a level of $320,000 every 3 years. Well that’s you know all you’re going to get so to your point at some period if our future somebody’s going to have to face the music and say you know what we’ve got to fund this up at a much higher level if we want to maintain the quality of the infrastructure that we currently have in place because it will begin to deteriorate and you know anything deteriorates slowly in it’s first half of life. It deteriorates very fast in it’s second half of life so that’s the scary Halloween monster in the closet and they’re starting to recognize it in streets and so that’s why all the focus right now is on streets because we built a very large chunk of our streets in a certain period of time that are now coming due. We also built a very large chunk of our park infrastructure at that same time. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 28 Petouvis: So there’s a reason why it bothers me. Hoffman: Good reason. Boettcher: Very legitimate reason. Tsuchiya: Todd out of curiosity that quarter million dollars that they’ve been using, how does that compare to the actual needs of the park and recreation for replacement? Does that meet, you know does that meet the, if you schedule out you know replacement of park equipment and such. Hoffman: You’re falling behind more slowly. Tsuchiya: Yeah okay. I’m just like is it meeting it or is it a short fall for what would actually be required if you? Hoffman: Oh it’s a short fall. Tsuchiya: Okay. Hoffman: It’s just a portion of the, you’re making a dent in the future and you’re just falling behind more slowly with that 250. Tsuchiya: And to your point Todd now people are noticing streets. I know we’ve had playground replacement which has been very well received by the communities but, have we seen any uptick in the communications for residents on you know I’m starting to notice this and? Hoffman: Oh sure yeah. So we receive things called request trackers and so those are catalogued and so we receive oh you know a few of those a week and so people are noticing their trails. Maintenance of ballfields. You know fencing. There’s a variety of things that you know the public notices. And what I can tell you from my years of experience here is people have an expectation that you’re the ones doing this so we probably shouldn’t have to ask that you go maintain this and so there can be a pretty big gap in communication so your quality can fall quite some way. Quite far before somebody picks it up and says hey, you know aren’t you taking care of this and in reality there are just some things we can’t and so if you take another example just of our general, and so the reason for this conversation about this additional staff member is we haven’t had a full time staff since 2005 so 2005 was the last time we had a full time park maintenance staff. We added 2 in 2005 and so we’ve grown 14 years, which is about 30 to 40 percent of our total maintenance responsibilities without adding an additional staff member. So that necessitates that we work towards the core. We protect the core facilities and services but the extremities fall by the wayside so there are many things that we did very well in 2005 which we don’t do very well now. And again people wouldn’t have that expectation. They would have the expectation as a grown community you’re probably either doing the same or better when in Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 29 reality we’re actually doing worst and we have a lower capacity to perform our functions on a daily basis. Tsuchiya: Okay thank you. Boettcher: Any other questions for Todd or discussion? Sandy? Sweetser: That was fast. Hoffman: Well they do a very good job of what they do but it’s a challenge and it also is I think can be a morale issue because it’s, they’re pressed pretty hard on a daily basis and they jump around from one project to the next because it’s really hard to focus when you’ve got them working… Kutz: I guess I’d just like to summarize. I think we need to get our master list together and then we need to come up with an annual, we need to come up with a proposal for the council and say we need this and we’re going to have to do a good job convincing them hey we need a dedicated source of funding. Sweetser: And ongoing. Kutz: And ongoing source of funding. One percent of the levy. Half a percent of the levy, whatever it is and that’s what we need. We’ve got to have it so let’s get our list together. Let’s get our proposal together and then let’s present to council saying hey this is our recommendation. Boettcher: And I agree that’s the best. What time wise would we be looking at, a couple months? Hoffman: Timing wise you would be doing that for the 2021 budget. Boettcher: For 2021. Hoffman: You have the first half of 2020 to establish that proposal. Petouvis: And that’s independent of any funding source for new projects. Pemrick: I would say too to focus on the street you know with the franchise fee right now. That’s a can that’s been kicked down the road for 30 years and really stressing you know we’re just trying to prevent 30 years from now a park can being dented and flatten and part of the street that’s not really there any more. You know and using that because we know what happens when we don’t look at it. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 30 Petouvis: Yep, well and the park system is one that is held out there constantly as the beacon of light that draws people to Chanhassen and I mean I am one of those people that was drawn to Chanhassen because of a park. And so it’s true but it’s, if we let them slide and if we keep Adam’s staff exhausted it just won’t, it just won’t work and I think as a commission we can beat a drum and say this is, it’s irresponsible to go any farther into the future so. Boettcher: Just when you said the future I had a flash of the movie Back to the Future and the scene is when Michael J. Fox goes from 1955 to 1985 and his old neighborhood that was brand new being built had the banners on it and the saying at the entrance is not riddled with old houses and vagabonds and meth heads and whatever so. Petouvis: Somehow it always comes back to. Tsuchiya: That’s very dark. Boettcher: It’s in the movie. No it’s dark, it’s in the movie. But I mean that’s, I know what you’re going at. That’s what comes to mind though when I think of it and it is true, I mean I look at some of the stuff that we’ve just done in the last 3 years as far as replacement and the one park that I wasn’t really familiar with and we took a little excursion out there and we all get of the vehicle and I looked and I went oh my god. It looked pretty, I won’t say which but it looks good now with everything new but it really looked ragged at that time compared to the level of everything else. And Bandimere, Susan and all. It really did look pretty rough. I thought oh, that’s what people are talking about. Tsuchiya: Before we move on to discussion I just want to, just came to mind is you know as a commission to make the recommendation I think the course we’re going is the right one at this point but realistically we’re not the, the 7 of us aren’t really going to move the needle much with the commission. It’s going to be public input so in the what, 8-9 months we have until we need to have a real proposal we have to also consider how are we going to get public input to support recommendation to council because they’ll listen to us but unless they feel the public is behind such, you know yes I’m willing to pay my property taxes toward park replacement fund. That’s important to me as a citizen. You know without that it’s not going to go anywhere and that can might be kicked again so I think, I don’t know. I don’t have a solution on how to do that right now but I just, that’s an important aspect of securing this is you know, the commission’s going to have to, we’ll recommend it and the council will approve it. The public will vote on it and we want to make sure if we’re going to put it before a ballot or something like that, that it has a chance of succeeding. I don’t want it to come down to just a handful of votes. I’d rather have a little more of a sure thing. Boettcher: So timing wise as far as a starting our major discussion would we be talking the first of the year? And then by the time we meet with council in April we’d have a solid plan that we can hand them and say here. Here’s what we’re looking at. Here’s what our request is. Here’s the reasoning. Here’s the direction. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 31 Tsuchiya: But at that April meeting is that where we also have to have you know public input to say not only do we recommend this but here’s the market research to say you know so many percentage of citizens would be behind this. Sweetser: How did we get public input in previous referendums? Hoffman: The two, the ’97 referendum there was two full blown surveys and then you could start it this time around so our next survey, citizen survey is being distributed in the first half of November and so I can request that two questions go on there. What is the appetite of the public to fund maintenance of park equipment and what is the appetite of the public to finance new future improvements in the city. And if we ask those questions they’ll draft those questions in an appropriate manner. They’ll put those on the survey. They’re typically additional questions about lots of questions about how you like your streets, your parks, your water, sewer. The overall safety of your community but then there’s these separate questions, would you feel that you would support financing, and there typically is a number attached to it. $20 bucks a month. $10 bucks a month. Whatever the number is so I’ll make the request that those could go in in November. Sweetser: Thank you. Petouvis: That would be excellent. Boettcher: So we’d have that by January then. We’d have our solid discussion ready. Tsuchiya: That survey you said Todd was November? Hoffman: November. First half of November, yep. Tsuchiya: Okay. And I don’t want to be too manipulative of this but is there a way to kind of start making, having people think about that before the survey comes out with the Villager or something? Hoffman: Sure. Tsuchiya: Can we get the Villager involved or some other outlet where we can maybe you know give some honest information about this is what you’ll see this question. This is what it’s all about because the survey itself is just a couple of sentences so you’d want to give them a full explanation. Hoffman: What was most effective during the park system master plan was that the commission drafted a letter that was then sent to the, so you would publish an editorial. You would public an opinion piece in the Villager that would say park and recreation commission knows this about Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 32 where we’re at and parks and trails in our city. We understand that we have all of this infrastructure in place that we need to repair and replace and we don’t have a current permanent funding source. We want your input on this. There’s an opportunity to do that in November and then there will also be additional public hearings after the first of the year and so you write that editorial. Get the conversation started in the community. Then the survey comes out. After the first of the year you host a meeting right here in this room where people can come in and offer their opinions on both of those questions. So it’s just a continual conversation as we move through, and council’s like that because what you are is you’re a gap between them and the public so you can take the input, both positive and negative about those and kind of sort it out. They can watch that all play out and then when your recommendation gets there in April obviously if you’ve heard a whole bunch of negative it’s pretty difficult to make a recommendation the other way but if you’ve heard a lot of positive it’s pretty easy to make that recommendation and move forward. I think I’ve talked a little bit about the history. So the referendum was in ’97 the last time around. The conversation started here in ’94. So it was a 3 year process. Tsuchiya: I want to make a motion that Meredith writes the editorial. Petouvis: Oh that’s right the editorial. I will take a first stab. Boettcher: It was actually between her and Mr. Incredible. I didn’t know which one. Or you being Ms. Incredible. Tsuchiya: She’s just incredible. Petouvis: I’d be Elastic Girl right? Hoffman: Right. Like it. Petouvis: I would be happy to do that. Boettcher: So we don’t have to make a motion and force you to do that? Petouvis: No. The only thing is don’t make we make any more motions but I think I filled the field last month so. Hoffman: First we have to get the questions on the survey and then once we do I’ll let you know. Petouvis: Yes, okay. Tsuchiya: Thank you Todd. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 33 Boettcher: I think that’s the direction we’re looking for. I mean that’s. Petouvis: I think we just have to, we I think as a commission it’s time to start to get noisy about what this means. Boettcher: And I like what Matt said about we just, we’ve got to put it together and put the number out there. Petouvis: Yep. And people need to know what we’re talking about. Tsuchiya: Todd can you share with us just a conservative, of just here’s the assets. Here’s the depreciation schedule. Here’s a replacement schedule. This is just if you just take it on a linear basis this is how much you’re going to need every year. Hoffman: Yep, be happy to. Tsuchiya: That will give us an idea of you know sure we’re getting a quarter million dollars right now but if what Todd said is correct it’s just a drop in the bucket. How much are we actually, expand on that, how much are we actually asking for per year with the projection that that number’s just going to grow as the city grows. Not only that but costs are going to increase over time so you have to do a, you know factor in some growth in that fund otherwise it’s just going to keep falling farther and farther behind which you know maybe people are okay with. Some is better than nothing but you know let’s go for as much as we can that’s tolerable for the citizenship. Boettcher: And comparing too with the number you threw out about the amount of pavement that’s down, the dollar value and how much we’re using annually. I mean that’s just the pavement. That doesn’t include anything else. Jerry’s spooky house and everything else. I mean when you look at that maintenance number percentage wise I mean that is so miniscule of the total investment and I think anyone with any business…would look at that and say you’re never going to be caught up at that rate. You’re always going to fall behind so. Hoffman: Yeah and there’s examples. This is a common scenario in society and so cities like Plymouth, they just lost a whole chunk of trails. They just $10 million onto the trails. They’re just forced in that position and so it does happen because it’s challenging to say hey, we want to spend more now to make sure that the future is bright. That’s really a hard thing to sell. So often times the can gets kicked down the road. So pavement management for trails was not in engineering and public works at a certain period of time. That was lumped in so now it’s everything. It’s streets. Public parking lots. Trails and so the year that was put in, all combined for the next 9 years not a single trail project was completed. The previous 9 years $50,000 was done annually and so you see what happens when you give that to somebody who is in charge of streets they’re going to baby their streets far before they baby their park trail because that park director over there doesn’t get a say in it anymore and so that’s just another example of how if Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 34 you want a program to work effectively but in my opinion it hasn’t worked… We fell behind faster. Kutz: And that’s what we need. We need those examples to formulate our opinion for the board. I mean you have the knowledge and we’re going to lean on you to give us those examples so we can use those as knowledge for our opinion so. Hoffman: Be happy to. Boettcher: Any other discussion? If not what do we have left? ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET. Boettcher: What do we have left? Administrative packet. Anything in there Todd that needs to be brought to our attention? Hoffman: Lots of good stuff in there. Always fun to read the surveys on how people like our shelters and the trail news is in there. That’s some pretty big news. So the trail slough happened in 2014 and now it will be fixed in 2020 and 2021 along with the 101 project so the 101 down the bluff project will incorporate the road itself and then the trail slough repair and the bridge. The bridge over the top of 101. Very impressive project. So not all is lost. Beautiful…project. Boettcher: It’s only been washed out for 5 years. Not like anybody was going to use it in that time. Hoffman: Patience. Patience. Public projects are sometimes challenging. Tsuchiya: Sometimes. Boettcher: Anyone have anything else to discuss? Sweetser: Just one last, just a quick update. I did reach out to Chanhassen High School. To one of the counselors. I haven’t gotten a response back yet with any actual you know opportunities but he is going to look into it and see if there are any students that are interested in working with us so. Boettcher: Good. Sweetser: So I’ll let you guys know as soon as I hear any details. Boettcher: Appreciate it. No other business I’ll entertain a motion to adjourn. Park and Recreation Commission – September 24, 2019 35 Petouvis moved, Kutz seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Rec Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated October 1, 2019 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: E.3. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No: PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council receives the Planning Commission minutes dated October 1, 2019.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Summary Minutes dated October 1, 2019 Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes dated October 1, 2019 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES OCTOBER 1, 2019 Acting Chairman Randall called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mark Undestad, Mark Randall, Michael McGonagill, Doug Reeder, and Laura Skistad MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Weick and John Tietz STAFF PRESENT: MacKenzie Walters, Associate Planner; and Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner PUBLIC PRESENT: Brian Timm 6860 Lotus Trail Randy Rutledge 680 Carver Beach Road PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR LOT COVER AND FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AT 690 CARVER BEACH ROAD. MacKenzie Walters presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner McGonagill asked for clarification on the location and size of the rain garden. Acting Chairman Randall called the public hearing to order. Randy Rutledge, 680 Carver Beach Road expressed concerns with damage to trees located north and south of this property, how the rain garden is going to operate before requesting a 5 year maintenance plan insuring the health of the trees to the north and south. He also expressed concerns with the height of the building not fitting in with the character of the neighborhood. Acting Chair Randall closed the public hearing. After comments from commission members the following motion was made. McGonagill moved, Undestad seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 5 foot front yard setback variance and a 9 percent lot cover variance for the construction of a single family home, subject to the following conditions and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit. 2. The applicant must apply for and receive a demolition permit prior to removing the existing structures. Planning Commission Summary – October 1, 2019 2 3. The applicant must apply for and receive all necessary permits from the Watershed District. 4. Construction traffic and parking cannot block emergency response road access. 5. The applicant must install a rain garden. The rain garden’s design and location must be approved by the city’s Engineering Department. 6. Eaves may encroach up to an additional 24 inches into the required front yard setback, as shown on the submitted plan. 7. The applicant shall resubmit the site plan which indicates the height of the retaining wall (top of wall and bottom of wall elevations). Retaining walls shall be design in accordance with City Code of Ordinances Sec. 20-1025. 8. The applicant shall include all trees 6” dbh and larger on the building permit survey and note tree(s) to be removed or preserved. All preserved trees in the rear yard must be protected by fencing during construction. 9. One tree will be required to be planted in the front yard if no tree in the front yard is present at the end of construction. 10. The applicant shall install tree protection fencing at 690 Carver Beach Road around the neighboring oak to the south 11. Tree branches from neighboring trees shall be properly pruned by a certified arborist before demolition activities begin. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Undestad noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated September 17, 2019 as presented. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE. MacKenzie Walters provided an update on action taken by the City Council at their September 23, 2019 meeting and items scheduled for upcoming meetings. Commissioner Undestad 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 7:37 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 1, 2019 Acting Chairman Randall called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mark Undestad, Mark Randall, Michael McGonagill, Doug Reeder, and Laura Skistad MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Weick and John Tietz STAFF PRESENT: MacKenzie Walters, Associate Planner; and Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner PUBLIC PRESENT: Brian Timm 6860 Lotus Trail Randy Rutledge 680 Carver Beach Road PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR LOT COVER AND FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AT 690 CARVER BEACH ROAD. Randall: MacKenzie do you want to tell us about it? Walters: Yep absolutely. So this is Planning Case 2019-14. This will be going, this will be handled here tonight. If appealed it would go to the City Council on October 28, 2019 for a final determination. The applicant is requesting a 5 foot front yard setback variance and a 9 percent lot cover variance to facilitate the construction of a single family home at 690 Carver Beach Road. So the area is zoned Residential Single Family. It’s located in the shoreland overlay district. What this means is the lot, the minimum lot size for this district is typically 15,000 square feet. It has a 30 foot front and rear setback. 10 foot side yard setback and is limited to 25 percent impervious surface coverage. The parcel in question is a sub-standard lot with only 6,000 square feet of lot area. It currently has 21 percent lot cover based on a survey submitted by the applicant. It has a non-conforming 6.7 foot side yard setback here. Front yard setback is currently a non-conforming 15.3 feet and then there’s currently a garage that is about 1 foot over the neighbor’s property line to the south. It does meet the required 30 foot rear setback however. This graphic here shows where the buildable area would be if all setbacks were met and the area in red is the existing structures. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing home and construct a new single family home. The footprint of that home is shown here in green. I have the porch in blue and then walkway and driveway in gray. As mentioned to do this they would need a 5 foot front yard setback variance and then they’d be going to about 34 percent lot cover Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 2 so they’d need a 9 percent lot cover variance. The main justification for this is the small size of the lot. At 6,000 square feet it is not actually possible to construct a new home that meets the minimum requirements of the city code without a lot cover variance. Because they recognize that 9 percent lot cover is substantially above 25 they are proposing a rain garden to help mitigate some of the impervious surface and they do know that this project would bring the side yards into compliance as well as reduce the existing non-conformity of the front yard by increasing the front yard setback by 10 feet. They also noted that a very similar variance was approved for the property immediately behind this property. In 2001 the City granted that property a 5 ½ foot front setback variance, a 7 foot side yard variance and an 11 foot lot cover variance so, and that was also for a 6,000 square foot lot. So they noted that it was consistent with what had previously been granted in the area. We have been contacted by 2 residents. One in favor sent an email which I believe we, you have in front of you. They stated that the property in it’s current state is an eye sore and they feel that a new home would be a huge improvement for the area. We did have a resident contact us with concerns. They were particularly concerned with the impact of the trees on the neighboring properties. They noted that the construction activities would likely cause some damage to the root structure of the trees that are on the neighboring properties and that likely trimming would need to be done which could damage the trees and the branches for the overhangs. They felt the building was too massive and that two stories would be out of place next to the neighboring one story houses. They had concerns about the amount of lot cover proposed and also concerns about grading and elevations. We had the Environmental Resources Coordinator look over the trees, and I actually went out to the site with her. She believes that with good pruning, professionally done and effective tree preservation there isn’t a serious risk to the neighboring trees. Her memo’s included in your staff report as well as the conditions she would like to place on the variance in order to protect those trees. Regarding the building’s height, it is under the maximum height permitted by the zoning code so it is a by rights in regards to the height. The absolutely amount of proposed lot cover, while staff acknowledges 34 percent is quite a bit larger than 29 percent. In absolute terms you’re looking at about 2,000 square feet of lot cover which is a pretty small footprint for a home and garage and we do note that a rain garden will hopefully help mitigate some of that runoff. Regarding the grading, the final grading and elevations are something we’ll review as part of the building permit process if the variance is granted and that’s when engineering will scrutinize and that will be expected to be at final level. Right now this is to be considered to be preliminary. So I mostly touched on these points in my previous comments but staff’s assessment of the request is that it’s not possible to construct a single family home on this property without a variance. Therefore the question is what is a reasonable variance. Staff looked it over. Proposed house size is about a 2,000 square foot living area. Average house size in the U.S. is about 2,600 square feet so it’s certainly not an excessively sized home. Code requires a minimum 2 car garage as well as minimum footprints. Again this isn’t significantly beyond those minimums. One of the reasons why the applicant proposed reducing the front yard by 5 feet was because that cuts about 1 ½ percent off the impervious coverage. It’s a little bit of a balancing act. The further you push the house back on the property the more lot cover you end up with. Staff feels this does a good job of balancing setback and lot cover. Staff does appreciate that one non- conforming setback is being reduced and that two have been removed and brought into Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 3 compliance with code and staff notes this less extensive than the variance that was granted to the neighboring property for the construction of a new home. For these reasons staff recommends approval and I’ll be happy to take any questions you have at this time. McGonagill: MacKenzie I have one question on the drawing. Where’s the rain garden going? Walters: Yep so it’s not on the survey there. I believe the proposed location is in this quadrant where we have the water moving along the side to hopefully capture that before it hits the road. The design and final location of the rain garden would be subject to approval by the City’s Water Resources Coordinator and engineering department but I believe that’s the location we discussed with the applicant. McGonagill: And the applicant’s talking about a professionally designed rain garden. Something that would be adequately designed with the drainage. French drains, etcetera to bring the water in there and try to retain it long enough. Walters: The requirement for the condition of the variance as staff has written is that it be designed and approved by the engineering department so it would have to meet our standards and we’d have to believe it would work as intended for it to meet the condition. McGonagill: So just one final question on that rain garden MacKenzie. Do you happen to have a general square foot rain garden? I’m just, I’m trying to put it in context with some that I’ve worked around and been around. Walters: Yep to be honest I don’t believe that’s been determined. It was something the applicant expressed a willingness to do. We placed it as a condition. I don’t believe they’ve met with the Water Resources Coordinator to discuss size or actual details of construction. McGonagill: Okay. And there’s going to be a retaining wall on that bottom, what I call the bottom of the lot. Is that what that is? Walters: Yeah there’d be a retaining wall here on the south as well as a retaining wall here on the north with a gap. To facilitate the stairs and walkway. McGonagill: Okay so the driveway would actually be down and the retaining wall would be, okay. Got it. Thank you MacKenzie. Randall: Any further questions for staff? Alright I guess we’ll move onto the applicant. The applicant want to come forward? Adam Loken’s Dad: Good evening. Thank you council members. I am Adam’s dad. He’s on his honeymoon in Italy. We want to get this project going because you know what comes next. So I’m willing to answer any questions. I’m pretty familiar with the property and can answer Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 4 any questions you might have. His goal today is to for sure get the variance so he can start his demolition permit before frost and get his basement in. McGonagill: Why don’t you just take us through why you ended up with the design that he did? Adam Loken’s Dad: I’m sorry. McGonagill: Could you just take us through quickly why he ended up with the design he did. His thought process for the house. Adam Loken’s Dad: Well he wanted to remodel about 1927 cabin and I, we had to have hazmat suits to get in there and I just convinced him all you’re going to have is a remodeled 1927 cabin so he wanted to move forward and went through a pretty extensive design process with a couple different draftsmen and architects to find something that fit. Kind of like your Lake Minnetonka 50 foot lots. You want to do something stacked and tucked under and that’s what his process was to try to come up with a design. McGonagill: So he, basically what he did in order to make it conforming he brought it, made it narrow but that forced him to go up. Adam Loken’s Dad: Yeah. The garage he pretty much had to eliminate that because it was on the neighbor’s property and then to get anything of value to match the neighborhood he needed to do something of a nicer design with a two story tuck under and I think he’s put that together. McGonagill: Okay, thank you sir. Adam Loken’s Dad: I think it will be a nice addition to the neighborhood and certainly a better tax advantage for the City. Reeder: What happens to the, there’s a…in front of the house now. Is that gone? Adam Loken’s Dad: That would have to be cut away for the tuck under garage. Reeder: And the trees are gone too? Adam Loken’s Dad: Yes. Reeder: Alright. Adam Loken’s Dad: And they are beautiful. I just went there. They’re beautiful maples but to try to get a drive that comes off of the road that works it’s got to be cut down. Reeder: So the driveway come in at street level then pretty much? Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 5 Adam Loken’s Dad: Yes. Yes. Reeder: Okay. Randall: Any other questions? Alright seeing none sir, we’ll have the public come up and speak. Adam Loken’s Dad: Okay great, thank you. Randall: Thank you. Adam Loken’s Dad: Mike did you just work at Superior Plating? McGonagill: No sir. Adam Loken’s Dad: Okay. There was a Mike McGonagill that was part owner there. McGonagill: Probably better looking. Randall: Alright, we’ll open this up for the public hearing. You’re welcomed to approach and state your name and your address and any comments that you have regarding the proposed variance. Good evening sir. Randy Rutledge: Good evening. My name is Randy Rutledge. I’m the property owner at 680 Carver Beach Road. I’m the property adjacent to the south side of the proposed project. I had some, well concerns I guess over this, over the proposed project one of which was obviously the trees. I did make a call to staff. I believe I spoke to in regards to that and after reading the, Jill Sinclair’s memo, totally agree with the concerns that she put forth. You know the heavy equipment driving on the roots. All of the compaction. The fill. The cutting of the roots and then if we don’t manage to kill the tree on the underside then we’re looking at arborist costs to then trim the trees literally straight up. Both the north and the south side trees will be extremely affected both of which are well over 100 year old trees. That’s a major concern of I guess myself causing an undue hardship long term here because most of those trees are not going to show any damage or immediate response to the damage caused by the construction for at least 2 years and I’ve been told somewhere between 2 and 5 by most arborists I spoke to and really what I guess I you know am concerned about is the water retention/rain garden being not shown. Grading plans not submitted how he’s going to handle all the water on the property. That’s going to be a tough one when he’s trying to stick it behind a retaining wall. I’m not quite sure how he’s going to do that and the major one for me is the long term care and maintenance of these trees and possibly removal. Rich to the north and myself would be both impacted and have an undue hardship on the basis of financial removal of these trees and from the impact of the construction. And I guess I’m looking, you know I’m not opposed to obviously a new house going in there but I guess I’d Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 6 you know to say that the tree is going to be fine for the limited access to the rear of the property as you can see I don’t know how he plans on getting all of the said rain garden, said materials, back fill equipment through that 10 foot without driving you know directly over the root structure. Now Jill Sinclair also mentioned in her memorandum that she proposed a protection ring and such around the trees. Generally that would encompass that 10 foot section that adjacent to the house to the property line. I’m not exactly sure how that’s going to be handled. That would be a major concern if that’s maintained as well as the erosion control during the course of the construction which you did mention in your recommendations. The other one, so I’m basically requesting that a maintenance plan be put in place of some sort of a 5 year or something of that nature to maintain those trees, both north and south side. If I had something like that I guess I would feel a little bit more secure in the fact that the property and the construction would be at least, you know there would be a cost to cover the removal of the tree obviously if he kills it. Both on the north and south because the north side he’s going to be putting window wells and such into that side of the property as well. Digging into the impact of that tree as well so those are my two major points of concern and I don’t know if you can impose that 5 year maintenance plan to cover all those trees long term. If that’s even possible but that’s kind of what I’m looking for because I can, I don’t know exactly how he plans on doing it or how that logistically could take place to accomplish the grading that would need to be done to establish that rain garden or said rain garden, which we don’t know where it’s at or how it’s going to be constructed or how it’s going to handle that amount of water. Now in this area, been there for quite a few years you know and it handles a lot of water coming down through those, those neighborhoods as I’m sure you guys are well aware so. I guess those are my only requests or only considerations I guess I would ask the council to, the commission to take into. McGonagill: Before you sit down Mr. Chairman may I ask a question? Randall: Sure, go ahead. McGonagill: Can you show me on the drawing where the tree’s he’s talking about are? Walters: Sorry that mic was off. My recollection was that the one was right around here was a large honey locust and I believe the red oak was there but I could be off because they are not shown on the survey. McGonagill: I think they could show it on the overhead. Randy Rutledge: Can you do that? Walters: Oh yeah we got a document camera. McGonagill: On paper yes. Walters: Put it on there sir. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 7 McGonagill: Very good, thank you. So my question is these trees, I’m trying to figure out who’s property they’re on to start with so why don’t you. Randy Rutledge: Rich is to the north and they’re. McGonagill: Rich is Mr. Who? Randy Rutledge: I don’t, I can’t remember Rich’s last name. McGonagill: Okay. Randy Rutledge: It’s right, that tree right up here. McGonagill: Okay and your property is to the south? Randy Rutledge: This is the red oak. McGonagill: And you’re mister? Randy Rutledge: Randy Rutledge. McGonagill: Mr. Rutledge, okay thank you Mr. Rutledge. Reeder: Is that a retaining wall in front of that tree? The height differentiation there of 2-3 feet isn’t there? Randy Rutledge: No it’s about one foot. Reeder: Okay. Randall: So do you have issues with water coming into your yard now because I see the street photo of it and it looks like there’s like a downward slope down to where your house is. Randy Rutledge: Actually there was a, well it’s kind of gotten troughed. Randall: Yep. Randy Rutledge: So we troughed it right down the property line. Randall: Okay. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 8 Randy Rutledge: So that’s currently where the water flow is going and it’s basically directly down from the rear all the way down. Randall: Okay. McGonagill: And so you’ve had, if I may. If the garage was actually on your property if I recall right from the original drawing to the south. Randy Rutledge: Correct. McGonagill: And so it was dumping I guess looking at the slope of the garage it was probably dumping water on your as well right? Randy Rutledge: Correct. McGonagill: So getting that out of the way should help the water. Randy Rutledge: The water situation yes. I’m just kind of curious as to how he plans on using a retaining wall at the garage side while maintaining a rain garden. Those two usually don’t go together too well but it can be done. But I guess my more, the biggest concern is the tree, or trees. Mine in particular because if he’s got to run that equipment I don’t know how he’s going to get to the back yard conceivably within the, because you know they’ll resize the foundation to accommodate the foundation installation and you’re still going to need equipment around the facility, or around the house. Reeder: How far off your property line is your tree? Randy Rutledge: About 3 ½ feet. Maybe 4. McGonagill: And the two trees in the front will have to come out MacKenzie said? Randy Rutledge: Yeah those would be gone. Those are the two there, which are really nice trees so I’m trying to I guess put forth a concern I guess of trying to maintain at least some of the old growth trees in the neighborhood. Adam Loken’s Dad: Randy if I might interrupt. What kind of tree is that? Is that a maple? Randy Rutledge: Red oak. Adam Loken’s Dad: Oak so. So they have a 10 foot root base in that wouldn’t affect it if it doesn’t work good. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 9 Randy Rutledge: No. According to Jill Sinclair, I don’t know if you read that memorandum that she put out, no the root structure does not do well under equipment. Adam Loken’s Dad: And knowing that the south setback is in conformity. I’m just trying, I’m trying to think of the construction. I’m a contractor and I’m trying to think of the construction starting on the northeast and coming around and minimalizing less effect you know. Randy Rutledge: The compaction. Adam Loken’s Dad: The root damage and I’m sure Adam would be more than willing to put a 30 foot fence around that root ball or root barrier. I think 30 foot is protective of that? Randy Rutledge: It would be but you don’t have that from the edge of the construction. The corner of the construction of the building to the base of the. Adam Loken’s Dad: It’s only 10 feet. Randy Rutledge: It’s 10 feet. So that’s my major concern and that’s why I’m asking for the insurance policy basically on the tree as long as, as well as maintenance because the odds of taking this thing out and it’s probably a $3,000 tree if the construction goes and kills it. Adam Loken’s Dad: Another question would be could an arborist provide any documentation and/or research study where if you took off the branches along the north side of the tree it would minimalize the root damage? Randall: Sir, we just have this public forum. You’ve already had your chance to speak. I’m not trying to, the trees. One of the things we’re dealing with is the setback variance and I understand the trees are a concern right now. Randy Rutledge: Yes. Randall: But we’re really focused on the variances right now. Randy Rutledge: Yes. Randall: The issue of the trees is there and I think it’s been raised as a concern. Randy Rutledge: Correct. Randall: Do you have any concerns about the setback or anything like that with the variance or? Randy Rutledge: Yes. There was a concern on the front street setback. There’s multiple different ways to get to the hard cover. I know that the recommendation was to have the Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 10 consistency of the houses that was approved across the way, there was a reasoning for that because he was forced up by the swamp and the wetlands area. In this particular case I don’t see that being a really big concern and I think because of the 35, it’s basically a 35 though it wasn’t clearly called out on the plans, foot he is within the height requirements of the city but this thing’s going to look like a sheer wall when you drive down the street. It’s going to go straight up and now we’re moving it closer to the road so aesthetically that’s going to be even harder to kind of you know look at if you want to call it that. It’s not, there’s nothing soft about it. It’s literally a 35 foot straight up in the air sheer wall so that was another concern that I had. That was and as far as affecting the aesthetics of the neighborhood. Randall: Okay. Randy Rutledge: Now there’s other ways to get to the hard cover. Saying that he leaves his house the same size just moves it back, you know pervious pavers. There’s all kinds of different aspects you could address there to accommodate the hard cover. As well as there was one other aspect that was not included. It said it was going to be presented at some point is this rear deck that is not on any of the prints that was provided by the city or provided by you guys or provided by him and that would encroach onto the rear setback currently so that would have to be also something else dealt with on that one if the house were to move back so that’s another thought. But I guess the big one is the front yard hard cover because obviously it would affect the trees and more so with the larger size house. I know he’s within the setbacks but odds are that if the hard cover was observed the house would shrink most likely leaving more room for the tree but I guess that’s kind of where I’m at at the moment. Randall: Alright, thank you. Anyone else from who wishes to speak? Anyone? Alright. Alright we’ll move onto our discussion about that. Walters: Would the Chair like to close the hearing please? Randall: Yes we’ll close the hearing now. We’ll close the public hearing and move onto discussion. Go ahead. I can tell you want to talk. Undestad: Well I mean again looking at the plan it looks like they’ve done a lot of work to clean up a lot of issues that are already existing on there. You know it sounded like the main concern was the trees on here. I think that the trees were old. Obviously they’re old trees but looking at where the garage to the north sits in relation to that tree and the garage to the south in relation to that tree, I’m sure those structures were built around those trees and they’re still doing well today and my guess is if they follow Jill’s recommendations and minimize the impact around there, I just don’t know how we could put a, put anything on the homeowner to say you know if something happens to that tree you’re going to do something about it. Randall: Yep. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 11 Undestad: If something happened to that tree that has nothing to do with the homeowner so I don’t really know we could put any restrictions on that. Aside from that I think that there’s been a, for that small of a lot I think they did an outstanding job of trying to make something look nice on there and minimize the impacts that they could have done so. McGonagill: I concur with that. That you know they’ve narrowed it down. Tried to take care of all the non-conformities. Gotten a structure off of a neighbor’s property which is always a good thing to clean it up. Rain gardens do work. I have one. I have a large one and I was surprised how good it works so I’m a real supporter of those if they, they do a nice job if they’re put in professional and I’m sure they will. And you know the trees are a concern but I just, there’s no, you can’t protect everything with this and so I think it’s an improvement to the neighborhood. Reeder: I happen to live in the neighborhood about a block from this house and I think that what they’re proposing is exactly what makes sense. The point of one story houses as you know there’s one story and there’s two and three stories all over this area and they’ve been, a lot of one stories have been replaced but I think what he’s proposed here makes a lot of sense. It fits on that little lot. I think he has the right to have a house on that lot. We can’t make the lot any bigger and I think that what the proposal is fits in. It’s too bad to lose those trees in their front yard. I feel bad about that. I don’t think we can do anything as far as protecting trees on anybody else’s lot except there are requirements during construction we try to do the kind of thing he suggested. Put as much a barrier and keeping trucks off of the root area. The drip line of that tree as much as possible and I think we can require that as part of the staff approval and I think that’s all we can do. We certainly, I don’t, I’m not aware if ever required one neighbor to insure the other guy’s tree so I don’t think that’s something I’d be interested. I think it’s a wonderful addition to the neighborhood. Skistad: And I would concur with all of you on everything that you said. I just have a point of order question which I don’t really need to ask. I’ll ask afterwards but I think it makes sense as well. Randall: Alright. I guess I’ll do mine. I appreciate everyone’s input on it. My thoughts on it, you know the variance, you know in these neighborhoods especially where these back in 1927 these were all small cabin lots at one time. Chanhassen’s changed since then. If people are trying to add homes that they can actually live in at the time. I would assume with your son being in Italy that he’s going to want to make the neighbors happy and try to preserve those trees as much as possible. Now that you guys know about that, that can be an issue with the contractor to try to save those trees at the time. As far as the aesthetics go, I understand that concern from people but you know it’s private property and if people want to build a house that looks like a star they can do it. To me it looks like the house is going to fit into the neighborhood and eventually there’s going to be a lot of turnover in that neighborhood where homes will come up to that standard and it’s one of those neighborhoods too which makes Chanhassen unique. That you can have a variation of houses in that neighborhood of all Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 12 different generations and they all fit in together. I’ll be in favor of the variance if someone would like to make a motion. McGonagill: Before we do that. Randall: Yeah. McGonagill: I applaud the neighbors for coming and talking openly and honestly to each other here tonight. This is the proper forum for doing that. I think you all handled, each of you all handled yourself very well and we appreciate that and I do hope as babies do come, and I hope they do to the neighborhood, that everyone will be welcomed there and so thank you all for that response for coming here tonight. I’ll make the motion sir. Randall: Go ahead. McGonagill: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 5 foot front yard setback variance and a 9 percent lot cover variance for the construction of a single family home subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. Randall: Do we have a second? Undestad: Second. Randall: Alright I have a second. All in favor of the proposed motion. McGonagill: Any further discussion? Randall: Any further discussion? Alright. So my parliamentary procedure is off a little bit alright. We’ll take a vote on it. McGonagill moved, Undestad seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 5 foot front yard setback variance and a 9 percent lot cover variance for the construction of a single family home, subject to the following conditions and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit. 2. The applicant must apply for and receive a demolition permit prior to removing the existing structures. 3. The applicant must apply for and receive all necessary permits from the Watershed District. 4. Construction traffic and parking cannot block emergency response road access. 5. The applicant must install a rain garden. The rain garden’s design and location must be approved by the city’s Engineering Department. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 13 6. Eaves may encroach up to an additional 24 inches into the required front yard setback, as shown on the submitted plan. 7. The applicant shall resubmit the site plan which indicates the height of the retaining wall (top of wall and bottom of wall elevations). Retaining walls shall be design in accordance with City Code of Ordinances Sec. 20-1025. 8. The applicant shall include all trees 6” dbh and larger on the building permit survey and note tree(s) to be removed or preserved. All preserved trees in the rear yard must be protected by fencing during construction. 9. One tree will be required to be planted in the front yard if no tree in the front yard is present at the end of construction. 10. The applicant shall install tree protection fencing at 690 Carver Beach Road around the neighboring oak to the south 11. Tree branches from neighboring trees shall be properly pruned by a certified arborist before demolition activities begin. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Randall: The motion passes for the variance. Reeder: You want to tell him when it’s going to come to the council? Randall: Well it will be coming to the council, what’s the date for that MacKenzie? Walters: So if appealed, and for the record any individual aggrieved by this decision has the right to submit an appeal in writing. There’s a 4 business day window to do that. If appealed this variance would go before the City Council on October 28th. If an appeal is not received within 4 days this would be a permanent decision and the variance would go into effect. Adam Loken’s Dad: Is that 4 days from today or before that meeting? Walters: Four days from today so if I do not receive an appeal by 4:30 Monday then it would, then a letter of approval will be sent out to the applicant. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Undestad noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated September 17, 2019 as presented. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE. Randall: MacKenzie can we get a City Council update? Walters: You can indeed. At the Monday, September 23rd meeting the council approved the Interim Use Permit for Moon Valley that had, came before you previously and they also upheld the requested variance to replace and move a septic system for the property at 1181 Homestead Lane. So those were the two items that went before the City Council. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 1, 2019 14 Randall: Can you shut that door real quick? Thank you ma’am for doing that for us. Walters: Sorry, would you like me to repeat that or did it come through? Randall: Oh why don’t you go ahead and repeat it. Walters: Alright, so the first item was the Interim Use Permit for the Moon Valley gravel pit. The council approved that and then also the bluff setback variance for the septic system at 1181 Homestead Lane was also approved so those were the two action items that went before the council. Randall: Okay. Alright anything more that you need to add about that or anything coming up that we need to know about? Walters: Yep in terms of stuff coming up, next meeting there will be a rear yard setback variance request for 832 Woodhill to discuss putting a screen porch, 6 foot encroachment into the rear setback so you’ll be getting that staff report oh in a week or so. Randall: Okay. Walters: And then on November 19th there will be a bunch of code amendments so I would recommend you caffeinate yourselves because I’ve got about 14 of them in the works and it could go long. So that’s what I know of that’s coming up. Randall: Alright. Do we have any presentations at all by members of the commission? Point of order that you wanted to talk about? Skistad: I’ll ask afterwards. Randall: Okay. Alright, does anyone have anything further to add? Commissioner Undestad 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 7:37 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Receive Environmental Commission Minutes dated September 11, 2019 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: E.4. Prepared By Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resources Coordinator File No: PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council receives the Environmental Commission minutes dated September 11, 2019.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Summary Minutes 1 Chanhassen Environmental Commission (EC) Regular Meeting September 11, 2019 Members Present: Bill Chappell, Keith Butcher, Greg Hawks, Rachel Popken, Kristin Fulkerson, Jeff Harken, Don Vasatka Members Absent: Staff Present: Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resource Specialist; Minutes: June minutes were approved. Chair/Vice-chair selection: The commission elected a new chair and vice-chair at the meeting since Keith had resigned as Chair at the previous meeting. Don Vasatka was nominated and voted in as Chair and Jeff was nominated and voted in as Vice-Chair. RPBCWD Event: Jeff attended the 50th anniversary event at the watershed district on Aug. 28. He said there was a short program in which staff and managers received awards and the district was presented with an award from the state. There was a water tasting ‘game’ as well as artwork and history exhibits. CEE Energy Hub: The Center for Energy and Environment had sent out a link to their online resource center ‘Energy Hub’. Some of the commissioners had looked at it and said it provided broad information on lots of subjects. The commission decided to promote it in the next city newsletter and at the energy efficiency workshop. Bill will ask CEE to talk about it at the workshop event. Fall Energy Efficiency workshop: As of Sept. 11, CEE, MVEC and Xcel have been confirmed to attend. The commission talked about the agenda and developed the following tentative outline: CEE – present overall reasons why to be energy efficient – 30 min Xcel – present individual rebate programs – 10-15 min MVEC – present individual rebate programs – 10-15 min It was decided to leave CenterPoint off of the program since they have not been confirmed. A commissioner will still try and secure them. It was recommend that CEE be told that CP may not be available and that CEE could cover gas energy efficiency in their presentation. For giveaways, the commission decided to request 2 trivia questions from each organization which can be asked to the audience. Winners get a pack of LED lights. Refreshments will be cookies and juice Winter Connection article: Jeff had drafted an article about energy star products. The commission reviewed and had no changes. It was suggested to add a call out box highlighted holiday purchases with Energy Star in mind. Jeff will add and send to Jill. 2 General Discussion: • Bill brought up an article highlighting St Paul and how they’re getting money for the purchase of electric vehicles. • The commission thinks recycling may be next year’s focus. • July 4 recap – commission said it was underwhelming; need an attention grabber for next year; should get the recycling trailer from DemCon; there were more adults than kids therefore not many stickers given out. Rachel said she attended a city festival in Plymouth and the EC was there near popular booths and maybe had more interest due to people standing in line in front of table. • Clean Up for Water Quality – leaf clean up event is scheduled for Sat., Oct 26. No one from the commission is able to attend. • The GreenStep Cities worksheet review will be moved to the October agenda, from November. Along with the discussion of the 2020 focus topic. Terry Jeffery is scheduled for November. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 pm Minutes prepared by Jill Sinclair CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Approve Contract Amendment for KimleyHorn for Minnewashta Parkway Project Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: E.5. Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002 PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves an amendment to the consulting engineering contract for design and construction services with KimleyHorn and Associates in the amount of $244,015.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND On October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) for consultant services for the project. On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professional services for the Minnewashta Parkway project. On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates and authorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project. On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held on October 28, 2019. DISCUSSION Minnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 and Highway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Plan planned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extended from the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near the intersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be the jurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section of roadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5. During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns right ofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria, the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway between Hawthorne Circle and State Trunk Highway 5 would be ceded from the City of Victoria to the City of Chanhassen. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectApprove Contract Amendment for KimleyHorn for Minnewashta Parkway ProjectSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: E.5.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council approves an amendment to the consulting engineering contract for design and constructionservices with KimleyHorn and Associates in the amount of $244,015.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOn October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professionalservices for the Minnewashta Parkway project.On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates andauthorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project.On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held onOctober 28, 2019.DISCUSSIONMinnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 andHighway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Planplanned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extendedfrom the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near theintersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be thejurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section ofroadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5.During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns rightofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria, the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway between Hawthorne Circle and State Trunk Highway 5 would be ceded from the City of Victoria to the City of Chanhassen. This allowed Minnewashta Parkway to be eligible for StateAid funding and Chanhassen subsequently adding the length of Minnewashta Parkway to their MSA road segments. Due to this finding, the project limits were revised to include the section of Minnewashta Parkway between Hawthorne Circle and 77th Street West. The section of Minnewashta Parkway between 77th Street West and the rightofway for Highway 5 is not in need of rehabilitation. In addition, sanitary sewer and water utilities are not under the majority of this section of roadway. Staff utilized the city's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the original project limits as shown in Figure 1. The project included a 1.35mile long urbanized street corridor. The existing road section was originally constructed in 1990. The revised project limits will add approximately 850feet of street and utilities to the rehabilitation project. Figure 1: Project Area Map During the preliminary engineering it was determined the rehabilitation of the watermain and the two sanitary forcemains dictated the surfacing rehabilitation technique change from a mill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation. The most effective trenchless utility rehabilitation method was identified in the feasibility report to be pipe bursting. This installation technique will require excavations at bend locations, services, hydrants, and boring pits every 300400 feet depending on conditions encountered and the contractor. The overall amount of excavations and associated curb removals affect the feasibility of a mill and overlay project and make a fulldepth reclamation project more effective. The current pavement overall condition index (OCI) is 63 which is within the range where overlays should be considered. The road is heavily patched and would score a lower OCI if the road was not constantly patched. Staff has received many complaints about the surface condition of Minnewashta Parkway. The preliminary geotechnical information indicated the surfacing improvements for the street section could be accomplished via a mill and overlay in areas that did not require significant excavation for utility improvements. The original intent was to replace only the cast iron watermain per City policy and to minimize the amount of excavations. The break history in the utilities identified problems mostly in the ductile iron sections. Hence, it was determined the entire length of the watermain and the two forcemains needed to be replaced to avoid future breaks under the new pavement. The selection of an appropriate trenchless installation method allows the project to use a fulldepth reclamation method in lieu of making it a full reconstruction project. UTILITIES CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectApprove Contract Amendment for KimleyHorn for Minnewashta Parkway ProjectSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: E.5.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council approves an amendment to the consulting engineering contract for design and constructionservices with KimleyHorn and Associates in the amount of $244,015.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOn October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professionalservices for the Minnewashta Parkway project.On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates andauthorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project.On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held onOctober 28, 2019.DISCUSSIONMinnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 andHighway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Planplanned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extendedfrom the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near theintersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be thejurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section ofroadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5.During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns rightofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria,the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway betweenHawthorne Circle and State Trunk Highway 5 would be ceded from the City of Victoria to the City of Chanhassen. This allowed Minnewashta Parkway to be eligible for StateAid funding and Chanhassen subsequently adding thelength of Minnewashta Parkway to their MSA road segments.Due to this finding, the project limits were revised to include the section of Minnewashta Parkway between HawthorneCircle and 77th Street West. The section of Minnewashta Parkway between 77th Street West and the rightofwayfor Highway 5 is not in need of rehabilitation. In addition, sanitary sewer and water utilities are not under the majorityof this section of roadway.Staff utilized the city's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the original project limits asshown in Figure 1. The project included a 1.35mile long urbanized street corridor. The existing road section wasoriginally constructed in 1990. The revised project limits will add approximately 850feet of street and utilities to therehabilitation project.Figure 1: Project Area MapDuring the preliminary engineering it was determined the rehabilitation of the watermain and the two sanitaryforcemains dictated the surfacing rehabilitation technique change from a mill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation. The most effective trenchless utility rehabilitation method was identified in the feasibility report to be pipe bursting. This installation technique will require excavations at bend locations, services, hydrants, and boring pits every 300400feet depending on conditions encountered and the contractor. The overall amount of excavations and associated curbremovals affect the feasibility of a mill and overlay project and make a fulldepth reclamation project more effective.The current pavement overall condition index (OCI) is 63 which is within the range where overlays should beconsidered. The road is heavily patched and would score a lower OCI if the road was not constantly patched. Staffhas received many complaints about the surface condition of Minnewashta Parkway. The preliminary geotechnicalinformation indicated the surfacing improvements for the street section could be accomplished via a mill and overlay inareas that did not require significant excavation for utility improvements. The original intent was to replace only thecast iron watermain per City policy and to minimize the amount of excavations. The break history in the utilitiesidentified problems mostly in the ductile iron sections. Hence, it was determined the entire length of the watermain andthe two forcemains needed to be replaced to avoid future breaks under the new pavement. The selection of anappropriate trenchless installation method allows the project to use a fulldepth reclamation method in lieu of making ita full reconstruction project. UTILITIES Watermain: The existing main is 12inch cast iron and ductile iron pipe of early 1970's vintage. The city's policy is to replace existing cast iron watermain when a street project occurs due to past history, existing soil conditions, and the attributes associated with the material. The existing watermain has had 10 breaks associated with it since 2001. The break locations are identified in Figure 2 below. The most recent break was recently repaired in December 2018 and the location is not indicated on the map. Figure 2: Watermain Break Map (since 2001) The location of the cast iron pipe within the project limits is within the northern half of the street length. The majority of the breaks are in the southern half of the street length that is ductile iron pipe. The consultant and the City agreed the entire watermain needed to be replaced as part of the project. This was determined due to the break analysis, soil conditions, age of the pipe, and the opportunity for replacement due to the need for a project. It would likely be another 20 to 30 years before another replacement opportunity would be available. Originally, only the cast iron watermain was intended to be replaced as part of the project. The revised scope included replacement of all of the watermain within the revised project limits. Sanitary Sewer: The forcemain conveying sanitary sewage from LS#7 was included in the original scope. The forcemain from LS#6 was additional scope. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectApprove Contract Amendment for KimleyHorn for Minnewashta Parkway ProjectSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: E.5.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council approves an amendment to the consulting engineering contract for design and constructionservices with KimleyHorn and Associates in the amount of $244,015.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOn October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professionalservices for the Minnewashta Parkway project.On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates andauthorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project.On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held onOctober 28, 2019.DISCUSSIONMinnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 andHighway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Planplanned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extendedfrom the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near theintersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be thejurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section ofroadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5.During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns rightofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria,the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway betweenHawthorne Circle and State Trunk Highway 5 would be ceded from the City of Victoria to the City of Chanhassen. This allowed Minnewashta Parkway to be eligible for StateAid funding and Chanhassen subsequently adding thelength of Minnewashta Parkway to their MSA road segments.Due to this finding, the project limits were revised to include the section of Minnewashta Parkway between HawthorneCircle and 77th Street West. The section of Minnewashta Parkway between 77th Street West and the rightofwayfor Highway 5 is not in need of rehabilitation. In addition, sanitary sewer and water utilities are not under the majorityof this section of roadway.Staff utilized the city's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the original project limits asshown in Figure 1. The project included a 1.35mile long urbanized street corridor. The existing road section wasoriginally constructed in 1990. The revised project limits will add approximately 850feet of street and utilities to therehabilitation project.Figure 1: Project Area MapDuring the preliminary engineering it was determined the rehabilitation of the watermain and the two sanitaryforcemains dictated the surfacing rehabilitation technique change from a mill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation. The most effective trenchless utility rehabilitation method was identified in the feasibility report to be pipe bursting. This installation technique will require excavations at bend locations, services, hydrants, and boring pits every 300400feet depending on conditions encountered and the contractor. The overall amount of excavations and associated curbremovals affect the feasibility of a mill and overlay project and make a fulldepth reclamation project more effective.The current pavement overall condition index (OCI) is 63 which is within the range where overlays should beconsidered. The road is heavily patched and would score a lower OCI if the road was not constantly patched. Staffhas received many complaints about the surface condition of Minnewashta Parkway. The preliminary geotechnicalinformation indicated the surfacing improvements for the street section could be accomplished via a mill and overlay inareas that did not require significant excavation for utility improvements. The original intent was to replace only thecast iron watermain per City policy and to minimize the amount of excavations. The break history in the utilitiesidentified problems mostly in the ductile iron sections. Hence, it was determined the entire length of the watermain andthe two forcemains needed to be replaced to avoid future breaks under the new pavement. The selection of anappropriate trenchless installation method allows the project to use a fulldepth reclamation method in lieu of making ita full reconstruction project. UTILITIESWatermain:The existing main is 12inch cast iron and ductile iron pipe of early 1970's vintage. The city's policy is to replaceexisting cast iron watermain when a street project occurs due to past history, existing soil conditions, and the attributesassociated with the material. The existing watermain has had 10 breaks associated with it since 2001. The break locations are identified in Figure 2below. The most recent break was recently repaired in December 2018 and the location is not indicated on the map. Figure 2: Watermain Break Map (since 2001)The location of the cast iron pipe within the project limits is within the northern half of the street length. The majority ofthe breaks are in the southern half of the street length that is ductile iron pipe. The consultant and the City agreed theentire watermain needed to be replaced as part of the project. This was determined due to the break analysis, soilconditions, age of the pipe, and the opportunity for replacement due to the need for a project. It would likely beanother 20 to 30 years before another replacement opportunity would be available.Originally, only the cast iron watermain was intended to be replaced as part of the project. The revised scopeincluded replacement of all of the watermain within the revised project limits.Sanitary Sewer: The forcemain conveying sanitary sewage from LS#7 was included in the original scope. The forcemain from LS#6 was additional scope. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Budget for the proposed work had been included in the 2019 CIP for the project to be constructed in 2020. Through the preliminary design and preparation of the feasibility analysis and report preparation, it was necessary to review and update the CIP in addition to the project planning relative to the schedule based upon construction needs and cost estimates after the preliminary design identified changes to the initial assumptions related to the rehabilitation project. The project increased in scope in several ways. The length of the project increased due to the 850foot addition through Victoria, the watermain replacement length nearly doubled, the replacement of both forcemains was determined to be necessary, and the utility improvements required the pavement rehabilitation to be modified from a mill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation. The project was initially budgeted at an overall construction cost of $2.625 Million in the 2019 CIP. The cost has increased to an estimated amount of $5.25 Million in the feasibility report. The project is being recommended as a twoyear construction project in the feasibility report to facilitate the completion of the necessary work within a reasonable time frame and to allow the funding to be spread out over a twoyear period. In detail, the twoyear time frame for construction added the majority of the costs in the amendment. An additional 16 weeks of construction supervision and administration was added to the project to facilitate the proposed timeline. In addition, due to the additional complexity of the project, it was prudent to modify the average time the resident project representative would be on site from 40 hours per week to 50 hours per week. This added $166,600 of the $244,015 total amendment amount. COST ANALYSIS KimleyHorn's original contract amount is $249,655. The amendment amount is $244,015 for the additional services due to the increased scope. Pending approval of the amendment; KimleyHorn's contract amount would total $493,670. See Exhibit B below for a cost breakdown of the contract amendment: The estimated construction cost of the project per the feasibility study is $5,254,000. Therefore the amount for the CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectApprove Contract Amendment for KimleyHorn for Minnewashta Parkway ProjectSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: E.5.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council approves an amendment to the consulting engineering contract for design and constructionservices with KimleyHorn and Associates in the amount of $244,015.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOn October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professionalservices for the Minnewashta Parkway project.On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates andauthorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project.On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held onOctober 28, 2019.DISCUSSIONMinnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 andHighway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Planplanned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extendedfrom the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near theintersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be thejurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section ofroadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5.During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns rightofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria,the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway betweenHawthorne Circle and State Trunk Highway 5 would be ceded from the City of Victoria to the City of Chanhassen. This allowed Minnewashta Parkway to be eligible for StateAid funding and Chanhassen subsequently adding thelength of Minnewashta Parkway to their MSA road segments.Due to this finding, the project limits were revised to include the section of Minnewashta Parkway between HawthorneCircle and 77th Street West. The section of Minnewashta Parkway between 77th Street West and the rightofwayfor Highway 5 is not in need of rehabilitation. In addition, sanitary sewer and water utilities are not under the majorityof this section of roadway.Staff utilized the city's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the original project limits asshown in Figure 1. The project included a 1.35mile long urbanized street corridor. The existing road section wasoriginally constructed in 1990. The revised project limits will add approximately 850feet of street and utilities to therehabilitation project.Figure 1: Project Area MapDuring the preliminary engineering it was determined the rehabilitation of the watermain and the two sanitaryforcemains dictated the surfacing rehabilitation technique change from a mill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation. The most effective trenchless utility rehabilitation method was identified in the feasibility report to be pipe bursting. This installation technique will require excavations at bend locations, services, hydrants, and boring pits every 300400feet depending on conditions encountered and the contractor. The overall amount of excavations and associated curbremovals affect the feasibility of a mill and overlay project and make a fulldepth reclamation project more effective.The current pavement overall condition index (OCI) is 63 which is within the range where overlays should beconsidered. The road is heavily patched and would score a lower OCI if the road was not constantly patched. Staffhas received many complaints about the surface condition of Minnewashta Parkway. The preliminary geotechnicalinformation indicated the surfacing improvements for the street section could be accomplished via a mill and overlay inareas that did not require significant excavation for utility improvements. The original intent was to replace only thecast iron watermain per City policy and to minimize the amount of excavations. The break history in the utilitiesidentified problems mostly in the ductile iron sections. Hence, it was determined the entire length of the watermain andthe two forcemains needed to be replaced to avoid future breaks under the new pavement. The selection of anappropriate trenchless installation method allows the project to use a fulldepth reclamation method in lieu of making ita full reconstruction project. UTILITIESWatermain:The existing main is 12inch cast iron and ductile iron pipe of early 1970's vintage. The city's policy is to replaceexisting cast iron watermain when a street project occurs due to past history, existing soil conditions, and the attributesassociated with the material. The existing watermain has had 10 breaks associated with it since 2001. The break locations are identified in Figure 2below. The most recent break was recently repaired in December 2018 and the location is not indicated on the map. Figure 2: Watermain Break Map (since 2001)The location of the cast iron pipe within the project limits is within the northern half of the street length. The majority ofthe breaks are in the southern half of the street length that is ductile iron pipe. The consultant and the City agreed theentire watermain needed to be replaced as part of the project. This was determined due to the break analysis, soilconditions, age of the pipe, and the opportunity for replacement due to the need for a project. It would likely beanother 20 to 30 years before another replacement opportunity would be available.Originally, only the cast iron watermain was intended to be replaced as part of the project. The revised scopeincluded replacement of all of the watermain within the revised project limits.Sanitary Sewer:The forcemain conveying sanitary sewage from LS#7 was included in the original scope. The forcemain from LS#6was additional scope.CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULEBudget for the proposed work had been included in the 2019 CIP for the project to be constructed in 2020. Throughthe preliminary design and preparation of the feasibility analysis and report preparation, it was necessary to review andupdate the CIP in addition to the project planning relative to the schedule based upon construction needs and costestimates after the preliminary design identified changes to the initial assumptions related to the rehabilitation project.The project increased in scope in several ways. The length of the project increased due to the 850foot additionthrough Victoria, the watermain replacement length nearly doubled, the replacement of both forcemains wasdetermined to be necessary, and the utility improvements required the pavement rehabilitation to be modified from amill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation.The project was initially budgeted at an overall construction cost of $2.625 Million in the 2019 CIP. The cost hasincreased to an estimated amount of $5.25 Million in the feasibility report. The project is being recommended as atwoyear construction project in the feasibility report to facilitate the completion of the necessary work within areasonable time frame and to allow the funding to be spread out over a twoyear period. In detail, the twoyear time frame for construction added the majority of the costs in the amendment. An additional 16weeks of construction supervision and administration was added to the project to facilitate the proposed timeline. Inaddition, due to the additional complexity of the project, it was prudent to modify the average time the resident projectrepresentative would be on site from 40 hours per week to 50 hours per week. This added $166,600 of the$244,015 total amendment amount.COST ANALYSISKimleyHorn's original contract amount is $249,655. The amendment amount is $244,015 for the additional servicesdue to the increased scope. Pending approval of the amendment; KimleyHorn's contract amount would total$493,670. See Exhibit B below for a cost breakdown of the contract amendment: The estimated construction cost of the project per the feasibility study is $5,254,000. Therefore the amount for the engineering services is 9.4% of the estimated construction cost. This percentage is inline with calculated percentages for engineering services in comparison to prior street improvement projects and considered to be a fair amount by Staff for the services to be provided. RECOMMENDATION Due to the additional scope added to the project and the revised timing associated with constructing the work; Staff recommends the City Council accept the contract amendment in the amount of $244,015 contingent upon project approval. ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Contract Amendment for KimleyHorn 2002 Signed Agreement with KimleyHorn 2020 CIP Sheet 1 INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER (IPO) NUMBER 33A Describing a specific agreement between Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (“Consultant”), and the City of Chanhassen (“City”) in accordance with the terms of the Agreement for Professional Services dated March 3, 2003, which is incorporated herein by reference. Identification of Project: Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation City Project No. 2020-02 General Category of Services: Feasibility Report, Final Design, and Construction Phase Services Specific Scope of Basic Services: Provide additional feasibility report, final design, and construction phase services for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway as detailed in the attached Scope of Services (Exhibit A). Additional Services if Required: None identified at this time Deliverables: Feasibility Report Final Plans and Specifications Construction Documentation Method of Compensation: To be billed on an hourly (cost plus) basis as detailed in the attached Estimated Costs summary (Exhibit B) Schedule: See attached Project Schedule (Exhibit C) Special Terms of Compensation: None Other Special Terms of Individual Project Order: None ACCEPTED: CITY OF CHANHASSEN KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. BY: BY: TITLE: TITLE: DATE: DATE: 2 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER (IPO) NO. 33A MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 2020-02 IPO 33 included feasibility report, final design and construction phase services for the rehabilitation of approximately 1.35 miles of Minnewashta Parkway, a Municipal State Aid Street. Minnewashta Parkway is located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 and Highway 7. During the feasibility report phase of the project, the scope of the project expanded to include the following additional work:  Extension of the project limits to include an additional 700 feet of roadway and utility improvements to the south within the city of Victoria.  Change in roadway improvements from a mill and overlay to a pavement reclamation project.  Extension of the construction schedule to a two-year project to be completed in 2021. This IPO is for additional feasibility report, final design and construction phase services necessary for the additional project scope. The specific tasks included in the proposed Scope of Services are as follows: 1. Design and Bidding Services a) Preparation of Feasibility Report We will update the feasibility report to include the improvements within the city of Victoria as follows:  Update project description and scope of improvements.  Update feasibility study exhibits to include the improvements within the city of Victoria.  Provide separate construction cost estimates for the improvements within the city of Victoria.  Coordinate with the city of Chanhassen on a financing plan for these additional improvements, including changes to the assessment roll, if necessary. We will also prepare the feasibility report to reflect pavement reclamation in lieu of mill and overlay roadway improvements and a two-year construction schedule. b) Preparation of Preliminary and Final Plans We will prepare preliminary and final plans for the proposed roadway and utility improvements for the project within the city of Victoria. We have made the following assumptions for the scope of work:  We have assumed pavement reclamation of the roadway within the Victoria city limits. We have assumed the project was previously constructed to MnDOT State Aid standards. We have assumed stacked plan view only sheets with no profile or cross sections necessary for the design and plan preparation.  Storm water and utility improvements as necessary based on condition assessments.  We will calculate proposed quantities separately for the improvements within the city of Victoria. 3 We will prepare our final construction plans assuming the following additional scope:  Pavement reclamation in lieu of mill and overlay  3000 feet of additional curb and gutter replacement  20 storm sewer structure replacements Based on conversations with City staff and public input from the Open House meeting, we understand traffic control and construction phasing will be a critical component of the project. Since the original scope of work only included mill and overlay improvements, we did not assume any traffic control or construction phasing plans. We will add traffic control and construction phasing plans to address the utility and roadway construction, as well as the two- season construction approach. c) Evaluate Existing Storm Sewer and Propose Surface Water Management Systems At City staff request, we will perform a condition assessment of all storm sewer structures along Minnewashta Parkway within the project limits. d) Identify Right-of-Way/Easements Required No additional services. e) Preparation of Assessment Rolls We will coordinate with City staff to update the assessment roll to reflect assessments to the additional properties within the city of Victoria. We will also strategize with City staff on the appropriate assessment methodology to be consistent with past assessment practices. f) Bidding Services No additional services. 2. Surveying for Design Services Additional topographic survey will be completed from 77th Street to the Victoria city limits. The survey will include all existing land features within the existing right-of-ways including public and private utilities and tree locations and sizes. Existing right-of-way will be established based on plat and section map information. In addition, the survey crews will make reasonable attempts to locate property corner pins to confirm the plat and section map information. We will survey water main field locations provided by City staff in the vicinity of the fire station on the north end of the project. We will also provide additional topographic survey of the three pond locations adjacent to Lake St. Joe. The survey will be completed by a Kimley-Horn subconsultant, Pioneer Engineering. 3. Meetings We have assumed that we will prepare presentation materials for and attend the following meetings for the project:  Staff Meetings as Necessary – Assumed (4) Additional Meetings  Site Visits with City Staff – Assumed (2) Site Visits  Additional Weekly Construction Meetings – Assumed (16) Additional Meetings 4 4. Surveying for Construction Services We will provide construction staking for the additional scope of the project improvements, including the following:  Blue top stakes along centerline of Minnewashta Parkway for pavement reclamation  3000 feet of additional curb and gutter replacement  500 feet of open cut water main replacement (assuming the majority of the water main improvements will be trenchless.  Additional improvements within the extended project limits within the city of Victoria. Construction staking will be completed by a Kimley-Horn subconsultant, Pioneer Engineering. 5. Construction Observation and Administration Our original scope of work was based on an assumed 16-week construction schedule. This scope was based on the understanding that a mill and overlay improvement would be performed on the roadway and the utility improvements could be completed during the same construction season. Based on discussions with City staff, due to the complexity of the utility construction, change to a pavement reclamation roadway improvement, and the desire to fund the project over two years, the construction season has been extended to two construction seasons. We have included additional construction observation assuming 50 hours/week for a total of 32 weeks of construction. We have also included additional construction administration time for the duration of the construction schedule. 6. As-Built Preparation We will prepare as-builts based on the following additional scope of work:  Additional 700 feet of roadway and utility improvements within the city of Victoria  20 storm sewer structure replacements 5 EXHIBIT B ESTIMATED COSTS INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER (IPO) NO. 33A MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 2020-02 We propose to perform all services for the project on an hourly (cost plus) basis. The following is a summary of our estimated not to exceed costs for the project. Work Estimated Task Description Fees/Expenses 1. Design and Bidding Services $ 47,665 2. Surveying for Design Services $ 5,000 3. Meetings $ 12,070 4. Surveying for Construction $ 10,500 5. Construction Administration and Observation $153,700 6. As-Built Preparation $ 2,180 Subtotal $231,115 Reimbursable Expenses $ 12,900 Total Estimated Fees and Expenses $244,015 Our total estimated not to exceed cost for the Scope of Services included as a part of this IPO is, therefore, $244,015 including all labor and reimbursable expenses. 6 EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER (IPO) NO. 33A MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 2020-02 The proposed schedule for the project is as follows: Award Consultant Contract Neighborhood Project Open House Accept Feasibility Report/Call Public Hearing Public Hearing Approve Plans & Specifications Bid Opening Neighborhood Meeting Assessment Hearing/Award Contract Start Construction Substantial Construction Complete January 2019 July 2019 August 2019 September 2019 November 2019 December 2019 January 2020 February 2020 April/May 2020 September 2021 IPO 33A - DETAILED ESTIMATED COST SUMMARY MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY REHABILITATION - CITY PROJECT 20-02 CHANHASSEN, MN PREPARED BY: KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TITLE PROJECT PROJECT DESIGN CADD CONSTRUCTION SUB- TOTAL TOTAL MANAGER ENGINEER ENGINEER TECHNICIAN INSPECTOR CONSULTANT COST HOURS 1. DESIGN AND BIDDING SERVICES a) Preparation of Feasibility Report 4 20 8 $4,880 32 b) Preliminary and Final Plans 20 60 100 80 $37,300 260 c) Evaluate Existing Storm Sewer 12 24 $4,980 36 d) Right of Way/Easement Identification $0 0 e) Preparation of Assessment Rolls 1 2 $505 3 f) Bidding Services $0 0 TOTAL 25 82 120 80 24 $47,665 331 2. SURVEYING FOR DESIGN SERVICES a) Design Surveying $5,000 50 TOTAL $5,000 50 3. MEETINGS a) Staff Meetings As Necessary (4)12 12 12 $5,940 36 b) Site Visits (2)6 $1,170 6 c) Weekly Construction Meetings (16)32 $4,960 32 TOTAL 18 44 0 12 0 0 $12,070 74 4. SURVEYING FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES a) Construction Staking $10,500 105 TOTAL $10,500 105 5. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION AND OBSERVATION a) Construction Administration 4 24 80 $14,500 108 b) Construction Observation 960 $139,200 960 TOTAL 4 24 80 0 960 0 $153,700 1068 6. PREPARATION OF AS-BUILT DRAWINGS a) Prepare As-Built Drawings 2 4 2 $1,000 $1,180 8 TOTAL 2 4 $1,000 $1,180 8 PROJECT SUBTOTALS 43 128 120 96 24 $16,500 $214,615 1636 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES $12,900 PROJECT TOTALS $244,015 1636 INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER (IPO) NUMBER 33 (T'HIRTY.THREE) Describing a specific a$eement between Kimley-Hom ard Associates, Inc. (..consultant',), and the city of Chanhassen ("City") in accordance with the terms ofthe Agreernent for Professional Services dated March 3, 2003, which is incorporated herein by reference. Identification of Project:Minnervaslrta Parkway Rehabilitation City Project No. 2020-02 Ceneral Category of Services: Specific Scope ofBasic Services: Feasibility Repo4 Final Design, and Constructiol phase Services Provide feasibility repo& final design, and construction phase selices for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta parkway as detailed in the attaclred Scope ofservices (Exhibit A). Additional Services if Required: Deliverables: Method of Compensation: Schedule: Special Terms of Compensation: Otlrer Special Tenns of lndividual Pruject Order: ACCEPTED: CITY OF CHANTIASSEN BY: ( DATE: tl Lq l,t None identified at this tinre Feasibility Report Final Plans and Specifications Construction Documentation To be billed on an hourly (cost plus) basis as detailed in the attached Estimated Costs summary (Exhibit B) See attached Project Schedule (Exhibit C) None None KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCI,ATES. INC. TITLE VV 4rr"la BY: TITLE: DArE: t lz</iq EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER (IPO) NO. 33 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY RETIABILITATION CITY PROJECT NO. 2O2O-02 Kinrley-Horn will provide feasibility report, ilnal design and construction phase services for the rehabilitation of approximately 1.35 rniles of Minnewashta Parkway, a Municipal State Aid Street. Mi-nnewashta Parkway is located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 and Highway '1. The improvernents will include rnill and overlay over the entire project linits from Highway 7 to the southern City limits. Other anticipated irnprovements include the following: o Curb and gutter replacement at select locations . Bituminous trail replacement o ADA ramps upgades . Retaining wall replacement as necessary to accommodate trail and ADA modifications o Drain tile at several locations . Storm capacity and water quality evaluation . Water rnain rehabilitation . Sanitary sewer rehabilitation The following is a summary ofthe scope ofwork to be completed for these lrrprovements: l. Design and Bidding Services a) Preptatiol of Feasibility Report We will plepare a feasibility report that Dreets MS 429 requirements and will acconlplish the following objectives: . Identiry roadway improvements. r Identiry storm water improvements. . Identiry water main improvements. . Identi& sanitary sewer improvements based on televising reports. o ldentify right-of-way/easement requirements for the project. . Identify estimated cosh for the project and develop a financing plan. . Prepare a prelirninary assessment roll based on City shndard assesslnent practices. . Identify a proposed schedule for the construction ofthe improvements. b) Preparation of Preliminary and Final Plals We will prepare prelirninary and final plans for the proposed roadway, storm sewel sanitary sewer, and \yater nain improvements for the project. We have made the following assumptions fo: the scope ofwork for each project arta: . We have assumed rnill and ovellay of 1.35 miles of roadway in the project area, We have assumed the project was previously constucted to MnDOT State Aid standads. We have assumed stacked plan view only sheets with no profile or cross sections necessary for the design and plan preparation. 2 o Storm water improvements where feasible and at a [rinimum to meet Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requirements. We have assumed up to 2,000 feet of storm sewer construction. o Improvements and clean out ofthree existing small ponds adjacent to [,ake St. Joe. . Evaluation of water main including services to the right-of-way. We have assumed the water main improvements will include trenchless construction methods for the rehabilitation of the entirc water main wilhin the project area. We have assumed no open cut water main replacelnent. We have assumed utility sheets will be plan view only. o We have assumed lining ofapproximately 1050 feet ofthe existing sanitary sewer forcc rnain at Lift Station #7. We have assumed utility sheets will be plan view only. . We will review sanitary sewer televising reports to detemrine the scope ofadditional sanitary sewer repair or replacement. c) Evaluate Existing Storm Sewer and Propose Surface Water Management Systems We will include the following scope ofwork as a part ofthe surface water management portion of the project- o Identi8 and address existing infrastructure and drainage issues. . Review existing City and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District hydraulic and hydrologic models for issues. . Prepare a lnemoraldum ofpossible stonnwater improvements. . ldentiry potential areas for water quality treatment. . Identiry potential aleas for abstraction through infiltration, capture and use or other methods. o Provide discussion on intbasibility if that is the findings. . Identi& areas where impervious surface may be minirnized. . Incoryorate agreed upon solutions into contract documents. We will delineate wetlands as necessary and design the project to meet the sequencing requirements of MN WCA. We will coordinate with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and prepare and submit ajoint notification application ifnec€ssary. We will also prepare a stormwater pollution prevention plan for the project. d) Idertify Right-of-Way/Easements R€quired We will identify any additional right-of-way or easements that may be required for the project. We have assumed that right-otway or easemena docuDlent preparation will be an additional service. e) Preparation of Assessment Rolls We will work with City staffto prepale a final assessment roll based on actual bid pr.ices. f) Bidding Services We will prepare an advertisement for bids for the project, distribute plans and sp€cifications, respond to bidder's inquiries, issue addenda as needed, attend the bid opening, tabulate the bid results, and prepare a bid sunlmary letter. 2. Surveying for Design Services A topographic su:vey will be conpleted ofthe project area to allow for the fmal design ofthe improvements. The survey will include all existing land features within the existing right-of-ways including public and private utilities and tree locations and sizes. Existing right-of-way will be established based on plat and section map information. In addition, the survey crews will make reasonable attempts to locate property comel pins to confirm the plat and section map infornration. The survey will be completed by a Kimley-Hom subconsultan! Pioneer Engineering. Since the roadway ilnprovements are lirnited to a mill and ovellay, we recommend the City consider using GtS information as a basis for the design and supplement with a limited amount of field survey as necessary. We successfully delivered the Kerber Boulevald project for the City in 2015 which was a MnDOT State Aid roadway with a similar scope of work using GIS based mapping. 3. Meetings We have assumed that we will prepare prcsentation materials for and attend the following meetings for the project: . Two (2) City Council Meeting . Two (2) Neighborhood Informational Meetings o StaffMeetings as Necessary - Assumed Three (3) o Individual Property Owner Meetings as Needed - Assurned Tluee (3) . Weekly Construction Meetings - Assumed Sixteen (16) 4. Surveying for Construction Services We will provide construction staking for the improvements. The scope ofwork identified in the final design phase was used to develop our fees for construction staking- Since the project includes rnill and overlay and spot curb replacement, we have assumed a lirnited amount of construction staking will be necessary for the project. Construction staking will be completed by a Kimley-Hom subconsultant, Pioneer Engineering. 5. Construction Observation and Administration We will provide construction observation and administration for the implovemenls. We have assumed 40 hours/week ofconstruction otrservation for an assumed l6-week constmction schedule. Due to the scope ofwork, fult-time inspection for the entire conshuction duration may not be necessary. Consu uction adrninishation will include facilitation of a preconstruction meeting, preparation of contractor payments, and final project closeout. 6. As-BuiltPreparation Upon completion ofthe improvements, rve will provide suryeying to obtain as-built information. We will provide paper and electronic as-builts and tie cards mceting City standards/requirements 4 EXHIBIT B ESTIMATED COSTS INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER (IPO) NO. 33 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT N O. 2O2O.O2 We propose to perform all services for the project on an hourly (cost plus) basis. The following is a summary ofour estimated not to exceed costs for the project. Work Task Description Estimated Fees arrd ExDenses I 2 J 4 5 Design and Bidding Services Surveying for Design Services Meetings Surveying for Construction Construction Administration and Observation $ 105,120 $ 24,500 $ 13,105 $ 10,500 $ 80,840 Subtotal $ 237,505 Total Estilnated Fees and Expcnses $ 249,655 Our total estimated not to exceed cost for the Scope of Services included as a part of this IPO is, therefore, $249,655 including all labor and reimbunable expenses. EXHIBIT C SC1IEDULE INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER (rpo) NO. 13 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY RETIABILITATION CIry PROJECT NO.2O2O-02 The proposed schedule lor the project is as follorvs: Award Consultant Cofltract Neighborhood Project Open House Accept Feasibility Report/Call Public Hearing Public Hearing Approve Plans & Specifieations Bid Opening Neighborhood Meeting Assessment Hearing/Award Con*act Start Construction Substantial Construction Complete January 2019 May 2019 July 2019 August 2019 September 2019 December 2019 January 2020 lanuary 2020 Spring 2020 August 2020 6 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Fire Department Update Section FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE Item No: G.1. Prepared By Don Johnson, Fire Chief File No: SUMMARY Monthly Fire Department Update including response data for September. ATTACHMENTS: Narrative Report September Graphs and Tables TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Don Johnson, Fire Chief DATE: October 28, 2019 SUBJ: Monthly Fire Department Update, October 2019 Fire Department Staffing Department staffing is at 43 of 45 paid on-call firefighters. One firefighter is on personal leave. Fire Department Response The fire department responded to 85 calls for service in September. (1) Chief Only, (23) Day Only, (28) Duty Crew Calls leaving (33) all calls for the month. Duty Crew calls YTD = 192 Significant calls for July included the following: • (44) Rescue/EMS calls with (8) motor vehicle accidents. • (6) Fire Responses o (4) Building Fire Bath Fan Fire -Pheasant Circle Lightning Strike Fire – Stone Creek Mutual Aid responses to Minnetonka and Eden Prairie o (1) Lawn Mower Fire o (1) Burnt Food • (1) Unauthorized burning incident Monthly Training Training that occurred since my last update: • Firefighters assisting with Open House on October 7 receive training hours towards fire prevention • Fire Officers completed a pre-plan walk through of Riley Crossing Building • Auto Extrication Training Todd Gerhardt Fire Department Update Page 2 Other Activities • The fire department Open House was held on October 7 from 6pm – 8pm. We had live fire demonstrations with fire prevention messaging, auto extrication demonstrations, and several vendors and booths. The event was significant in attendance and one of the busiest as my time as Fire Chief. Fire Marshal Nutter did a fantastic job coordinating this effort and I am proud of all of the fire departments participation in this event. • The Fire Marshal, assisted by several members of the fire department, also participated in school visits and station tours over the remainder of the month. Final numbers will be reported on Novembers report. • October 9-11, several members of the department visited Appleton Wisconsin to conduct a final build inspection of Engine 1. • Engine 1 was on display at the Minnesota Chiefs Conference on October 17 in Duluth. Myself, Fire Marshal Nutter, Captain(s) Dowds and Rindahl attended the 3 day educational conference this year. • Planning for the functional exercise at Westwood in May of 2020 continued with a meeting on October 24. Fire Marshal Council Update for September 2019 • Much time spent planning and organizing for the upcoming Open House in October as well as Fire Prevention Week. • Several fire department members have donated their time and efforts to building our side by side burn house we plan on exhibiting at the open house. We also have started to build the kids firefighter obstacle course. We also have many retirees who have rsvp’d to assist with the open house. • We have visits for fire prevention scheduled from the first week in October all the way into November. Age ranges from pre-school daycares to high school students. We have several staff signed up to assist with the visits. • The Venue Apartments: final inspections completed and occupancy was granted to The Venue. Small items left to check off were put on the conditional CO, including adding a public safety radio repeater system as there is no radio coverage in the basement and first floor of the building. • Aldi: final life safety inspections were completed and a temporary certificate of occupancy was given for employees to come in and stock the shelves and coolers. Full occupancy and grand opening looks like mid-October. Todd Gerhardt Fire Department Update Page 3 • Riley Crossing Senior Living: looking for temporary occupancy mid-October to bring staff in for training. Full Occupancy for residents and daycare expected early November. • Several fire extinguisher training classes for conducted for Waytek Inc in Chanhassen. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 July Aug Sept 2019 Calls by Month and Type Rescue & Emergency Medical Service Alarm Calls Good Intent Call Hazardous Condition Service Call Fire 55 51 63 65 55 86 66 60 59 80 57 56 71 50 66 79 86 76 66 72 84 85 85 101 94 88 76 64 71 88 102 85 85 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Chanhassen Fire Department Calls By Month Comparison 2017 2018 2019 645 559 513 573 621 691 690 753 921 1,007 TOTAL CALLS FOR THE LAST 5 YEARS 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 PROJECTED Calls for Service By Year Rescue & Emergency Medical Service 55% Alarm Calls 15% Good Intent Call 13% Hazardous Condition 7% Service Call 7% Fire 3% 2019 Calls for Service by % of Call Type "F)³CH ±"F) !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( LakeMinnewashta Lake Lucy LakeAnn Lotus Lake Lake Susan LakeRiley LakeHarrison Rice MarshLake Rice Lake LakeSaintJoe LakeVirginia LakeMinnewashtaRegional Park(County Park) HermanField Park RoundhousePark MinnewashtaHeights Park PheasantHillPark NorthLotusLakePark CarverBeachPark MinnesotaLandscapeArboretum Minnesota Landscape Arboretum ChanhassenNaturePreserve Bluff CreekPreserve BluffCreekPreserve BluffCreekPreserve PioneerPassPark Bluff Creek Golf Course Hesse FarmPreserve Seminary FenScientific and Natural Area(SNA) Raquet WildlifeManagement Area(WMA) Raquet WildlifeManagement Area(WMA) MN Valley NationalWildlife Refuge FoxwoodsPreserve RileyRidgePark BandimerePark Lake SusanPark LakeSusanPreserve LakeAnnPark MeadowGreenPark SouthLotusLakePark PowerHillPark PleasantViewPreserve M innesota R iverCathcartPark K eber P ondChristmasLake BrendanPond ?©A@?©A@?©A@ ?©A@ +¢ +¢ +¢ ?ûA@ ?ûA@ ?«A@ ?«A@ ?ÌA@ ?ÌA@ ?ÌA@ ?ûA@ ?ûA@ GoWX GrWX GrWX GrWX GïWX GqWX GqWX GqWX GqWX GqWX GnWXGnWXGnWX GÇWX GÇWX GÇWX GïWX Date Created: 10/11/2019 Document Path: K:\WSB\Maps\Fire\FireIncidentMap_September2019.mxd Created By: City of Chanhassen - Fire Department !(Calls For Service - September 2019 ³C H ±City Hall "F)Fire Station Railroad Rivers Lakes Parks Parcel Boundaries Fire Box Alarm Zones North Box South Box West Box City of ChanhassenFire Calls for Service - September 2019 µ0 4,000Feet 0 0.5Mile CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Law Enforcement Update Section FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE Item No: G.2. Prepared By Lt. Lance Pearce, CCSO File No: ATTACHMENTS: Memo September breakdown September activity reports September 2019 City of Chanhassen 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Felony Assault Felony Theft Drug Felony Other Sept 2019 Group A 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Sept 2019 Non Criminal Total Calls For Service=890 35 12 405 426 Felony Misdemeanor Non Criminal Traffic Sept 2019 Types of Calls CFS=890 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Resolution 2019XX: Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002: Order Project and Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: I.1. Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002 PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council adopts a resolution ordering the project and authorizes preparation of the plans and specifications for the Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002. Approval requires a 4/5 Vote. BACKGROUND On October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) for consultant services for the project. On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professional services for the Minnewashta Parkway project. On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates and authorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project. On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held on October 28, 2019. DISCUSSION Minnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 and Highway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Plan planned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extended from the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near the intersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be the jurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section of roadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5. During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns right ofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria, the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway between CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectResolution 2019XX: Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002: Order Projectand Authorize Preparation of Plans and SpecificationsSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: I.1.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution ordering the project and authorizes preparation of the plans and specificationsfor the Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002.Approval requires a 4/5 Vote.BACKGROUNDOn October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professionalservices for the Minnewashta Parkway project.On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates andauthorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project.On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held onOctober 28, 2019.DISCUSSIONMinnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 andHighway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Planplanned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extendedfrom the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near theintersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be thejurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section ofroadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5.During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns right ofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria, the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway between Hawthorne Circle and State Trunk Highway 5 would be ceded from the City of Victoria to the City of Chanhassen. This allowed Minnewashta Parkway to be eligible for StateAid funding and Chanhassen subsequently adding the length of Minnewashta Parkway to their MSA road segments. Due to this finding, the project limits were revised to include the section of Minnewashta Parkway between Hawthorne Circle and 77th Street West. The section of Minnewashta Parkway between 77th Street West and the rightofway for Highway 5 is not in need of rehabilitation. In addition, sanitary sewer and water utilities are not under the majority of this section of roadway. Staff utilized the city's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the original project limits as shown in Figure 1. The project included a 1.35mile long urbanized street corridor. The existing road section was originally constructed in 1990. The revised project limits will add approximately 850feet of street and utilities to the rehabilitation project. Figure 1: Project Area Map As Minnewashta Parkway is designated as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) route the city will utilize State Aid funding in addition to special assessments to finance the street improvements. The special assessments will be to benefiting properties as defined by the City's Assessment Practice. Utility funds collected by the City will be used for funding the utility improvements. During the preliminary engineering it was determined the rehabilitation of the watermain and the two sanitary forcemains dictated the surfacing rehabilitation technique change from a mill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation. The most effective trenchless utility rehabilitation method was identified in the feasibility report to be pipe bursting. This installation technique will require excavations at bend locations, services, hydrants, and boring pits every 300400 feet depending on conditions encountered and the contractor. The overall amount of excavations and associated curb removals affect the feasibility of a mill and overlay project and make a fulldepth reclamation project more effective. The current pavement overall condition index (OCI) is 63 which is within the range where overlays should be considered. The road is heavily patched and would score a lower OCI if the road was not constantly patched. Staff has received many complaints about the surface condition of Minnewashta Parkway. The preliminary geotechnical information indicated the surfacing improvements for the street section could be accomplished via a mill and overlay in areas that did not require significant excavation for utility improvements. The original intent was to replace only the cast iron watermain per City policy and to minimize the amount of excavations. The break history in the utilities identified problems mostly in the ductile iron sections. Hence, it was determined the entire length of the watermain and CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectResolution 2019XX: Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002: Order Projectand Authorize Preparation of Plans and SpecificationsSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: I.1.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution ordering the project and authorizes preparation of the plans and specificationsfor the Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002.Approval requires a 4/5 Vote.BACKGROUNDOn October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professionalservices for the Minnewashta Parkway project.On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates andauthorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project.On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held onOctober 28, 2019.DISCUSSIONMinnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 andHighway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Planplanned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extendedfrom the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near theintersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be thejurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section ofroadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5.During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns rightofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria,the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway betweenHawthorne Circle and State Trunk Highway 5 would be ceded from the City of Victoria to the City of Chanhassen. This allowed Minnewashta Parkway to be eligible for StateAid funding and Chanhassen subsequently adding thelength of Minnewashta Parkway to their MSA road segments.Due to this finding, the project limits were revised to include the section of Minnewashta Parkway between HawthorneCircle and 77th Street West. The section of Minnewashta Parkway between 77th Street West and the rightofwayfor Highway 5 is not in need of rehabilitation. In addition, sanitary sewer and water utilities are not under the majorityof this section of roadway.Staff utilized the city's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the original project limits asshown in Figure 1. The project included a 1.35mile long urbanized street corridor. The existing road section wasoriginally constructed in 1990. The revised project limits will add approximately 850feet of street and utilities to therehabilitation project.Figure 1: Project Area MapAs Minnewashta Parkway is designated as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) route the city will utilize State Aid fundingin addition to special assessments to finance the street improvements. The special assessments will be to benefitingproperties as defined by the City's Assessment Practice. Utility funds collected by the City will be used for funding theutility improvements.During the preliminary engineering it was determined the rehabilitation of the watermain and the two sanitaryforcemains dictated the surfacing rehabilitation technique change from a mill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation. The most effective trenchless utility rehabilitation method was identified in the feasibility report to be pipe bursting. This installation technique will require excavations at bend locations, services, hydrants, and boring pits every 300400feet depending on conditions encountered and the contractor. The overall amount of excavations and associated curbremovals affect the feasibility of a mill and overlay project and make a fulldepth reclamation project more effective.The current pavement overall condition index (OCI) is 63 which is within the range where overlays should beconsidered. The road is heavily patched and would score a lower OCI if the road was not constantly patched. Staffhas received many complaints about the surface condition of Minnewashta Parkway. The preliminary geotechnicalinformation indicated the surfacing improvements for the street section could be accomplished via a mill and overlay inareas that did not require significant excavation for utility improvements. The original intent was to replace only the cast iron watermain per City policy and to minimize the amount of excavations. The break history in the utilities identified problems mostly in the ductile iron sections. Hence, it was determined the entire length of the watermain and the two forcemains needed to be replaced to avoid future breaks under the new pavement. The selection of an appropriate trenchless installation method allows the project to use a fulldepth reclamation method in lieu of making it a full reconstruction project. UTILITIES Watermain: The existing main is 12inch cast iron and ductile iron pipe of early 1970's vintage. The city's policy is to replace existing cast iron watermain when a street project occurs due to past history, existing soil conditions, and the attributes associated with the material. The existing watermain has had 10 breaks associated with it since 2001. The break locations are identified in Figure 2 below. The most recent break was recently repaired in December 2018 and the location is not indicated on the map. Figure 2: Water Main Break Map (since 2001) The location of the cast iron pipe within the project limits is within the northern half of the street length. The majority of the breaks are in the southern half of the street length that is ductile iron pipe. The consultant and the City agreed the entire watermain needed to be replaced as part of the project. This was determined due to the break analysis, soil conditions, age of the pipe, and the opportunity for replacement due to the need for a project. It would likely be another 20 to 30 years before another replacement opportunity would be available. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectResolution 2019XX: Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002: Order Projectand Authorize Preparation of Plans and SpecificationsSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: I.1.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution ordering the project and authorizes preparation of the plans and specificationsfor the Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002.Approval requires a 4/5 Vote.BACKGROUNDOn October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professionalservices for the Minnewashta Parkway project.On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates andauthorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project.On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held onOctober 28, 2019.DISCUSSIONMinnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 andHighway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Planplanned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extendedfrom the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near theintersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be thejurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section ofroadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5.During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns rightofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria,the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway betweenHawthorne Circle and State Trunk Highway 5 would be ceded from the City of Victoria to the City of Chanhassen. This allowed Minnewashta Parkway to be eligible for StateAid funding and Chanhassen subsequently adding thelength of Minnewashta Parkway to their MSA road segments.Due to this finding, the project limits were revised to include the section of Minnewashta Parkway between HawthorneCircle and 77th Street West. The section of Minnewashta Parkway between 77th Street West and the rightofwayfor Highway 5 is not in need of rehabilitation. In addition, sanitary sewer and water utilities are not under the majorityof this section of roadway.Staff utilized the city's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the original project limits asshown in Figure 1. The project included a 1.35mile long urbanized street corridor. The existing road section wasoriginally constructed in 1990. The revised project limits will add approximately 850feet of street and utilities to therehabilitation project.Figure 1: Project Area MapAs Minnewashta Parkway is designated as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) route the city will utilize State Aid fundingin addition to special assessments to finance the street improvements. The special assessments will be to benefitingproperties as defined by the City's Assessment Practice. Utility funds collected by the City will be used for funding theutility improvements.During the preliminary engineering it was determined the rehabilitation of the watermain and the two sanitaryforcemains dictated the surfacing rehabilitation technique change from a mill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation. The most effective trenchless utility rehabilitation method was identified in the feasibility report to be pipe bursting. This installation technique will require excavations at bend locations, services, hydrants, and boring pits every 300400feet depending on conditions encountered and the contractor. The overall amount of excavations and associated curbremovals affect the feasibility of a mill and overlay project and make a fulldepth reclamation project more effective.The current pavement overall condition index (OCI) is 63 which is within the range where overlays should beconsidered. The road is heavily patched and would score a lower OCI if the road was not constantly patched. Staffhas received many complaints about the surface condition of Minnewashta Parkway. The preliminary geotechnicalinformation indicated the surfacing improvements for the street section could be accomplished via a mill and overlay inareas that did not require significant excavation for utility improvements. The original intent was to replace only thecast iron watermain per City policy and to minimize the amount of excavations. The break history in the utilitiesidentified problems mostly in the ductile iron sections. Hence, it was determined the entire length of the watermain andthe two forcemains needed to be replaced to avoid future breaks under the new pavement. The selection of anappropriate trenchless installation method allows the project to use a fulldepth reclamation method in lieu of making ita full reconstruction project. UTILITIESWatermain:The existing main is 12inch cast iron and ductile iron pipe of early 1970's vintage. The city's policy is to replaceexisting cast iron watermain when a street project occurs due to past history, existing soil conditions, and the attributesassociated with the material. The existing watermain has had 10 breaks associated with it since 2001. The break locations are identified in Figure 2below. The most recent break was recently repaired in December 2018 and the location is not indicated on the map. Figure 2: Water Main Break Map (since 2001)The location of the cast iron pipe within the project limits is within the northern half of the street length. The majority ofthe breaks are in the southern half of the street length that is ductile iron pipe. The consultant and the City agreed theentire watermain needed to be replaced as part of the project. This was determined due to the break analysis, soilconditions, age of the pipe, and the opportunity for replacement due to the need for a project. It would likely be another 20 to 30 years before another replacement opportunity would be available. Sanitary Sewer: The existing sanitary sewer consists of 8inch and 10inch PVC pipe. The city has had all of the sanitary mains televised within the last 10 years. The remaining pipe sections that had not been recently televised were completed in 2018. The consultant reviewed and analyzed the sewer video and reports to determine the necessary repairs. Several sections of gravity main will be lined as part of the project. Inflow and infiltration barriers will be installed on all manholes. In conjunction with the city, the consultant distributed a survey to properties along the project in regards to identifying sewer and drainage concerns. Within the survey, the city inquired if there were any known issues with their sanitary service lateral and offered to televise the residents' lateral to determine if there are any existing concerns. There are two sanitary lift stations (LS#6 & LS#7) along Minnewashta Parkway. The forcemains associated with each lift station were analyzed. The forcemains' condition was determined to require replacement. The most effective forcemain replacement method was determined to be pipe bursting. Directional drilling a new main and structural lining methods were also considered. Storm Sewer: The existing storm sewer system was reviewed and analyzed from an existing capacity perspective utilizing updated Atlas14 precipitation data and compared to any expected future capacity needs. The existing storm sewer capacity was determined to be sufficient to convey a 10year storm event including the future redevelopment needs. The consultant reviewed the existing storm sewer structures and determined there are 69 structures that require maintenance or replacement. Drain tile will be added behind the existing curbing in several areas with connections made to the existing storm system. Low areas, geotechnical data, historical observations, and the resident survey results will be used to identify wet areas where tiling can help protect the roadway. Surface water management was another focus within the preliminary design and feasibility analysis. There are seven stormwater ponds adjacent to Minnewashta Parkway where no improvements or work has been completed since the 1990's. The consultant reviewed our existing data relative to the ponds and visited the site with staff. A holistic analysis will be completed based on drainage capacity and the ponds will receive improvements such as tree clearing and dredging as needed. Three ponds adjacent to Lake St. Joe will be hydraulically modeled. One of these ponds was very small and it has completely failed and is essentially no longer a pond. This will likely be addressed by adding a sump manhole in the roadway and reconstructing the storm piping towards Lake St. Joe because this is not a good location for a pond. The other two ponds are expected to need to be cleaned out and improved. Recommendations for improvements will be provided by the consultant for solutions to existing drainage issues and develop capacity for the future. Proposed improvements will be designed to current NPDES and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) requirements in regards to water quality treatment and best management practices for stormwater runoff. Potential treatment and abstraction through infiltration, capture and reuse, or other methods will be considered. The consultant will be expected to review city and MCWD wetland protection plans for requirements. The National Wetland Inventory and Public Waters Inventory, and other resources will be used to identify potential wetlands within the project area. Wetland delineation will be provided by the consultant as needed. Project sequencing and design will meet the Minnesota Clean Water Act and Section 404 of the US Clean Water Act. Coordination with various Federal and State agencies will be part of this work. A standalone SWPPP will be prepared by the consultant. Retaining Walls The condition of the existing retaining walls along the corridor was evaluated by a structural engineer. A report on the existing walls is included in the feasibility report. Overall, the walls are generally in good condition but some of them require improvements. Repair of existing or the addition of new fencing along the top of the walls is a common deficiency. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectResolution 2019XX: Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002: Order Projectand Authorize Preparation of Plans and SpecificationsSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: I.1.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution ordering the project and authorizes preparation of the plans and specificationsfor the Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002.Approval requires a 4/5 Vote.BACKGROUNDOn October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professionalservices for the Minnewashta Parkway project.On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates andauthorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project.On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held onOctober 28, 2019.DISCUSSIONMinnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 andHighway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Planplanned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extendedfrom the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near theintersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be thejurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section ofroadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5.During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns rightofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria,the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway betweenHawthorne Circle and State Trunk Highway 5 would be ceded from the City of Victoria to the City of Chanhassen. This allowed Minnewashta Parkway to be eligible for StateAid funding and Chanhassen subsequently adding thelength of Minnewashta Parkway to their MSA road segments.Due to this finding, the project limits were revised to include the section of Minnewashta Parkway between HawthorneCircle and 77th Street West. The section of Minnewashta Parkway between 77th Street West and the rightofwayfor Highway 5 is not in need of rehabilitation. In addition, sanitary sewer and water utilities are not under the majorityof this section of roadway.Staff utilized the city's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the original project limits asshown in Figure 1. The project included a 1.35mile long urbanized street corridor. The existing road section wasoriginally constructed in 1990. The revised project limits will add approximately 850feet of street and utilities to therehabilitation project.Figure 1: Project Area MapAs Minnewashta Parkway is designated as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) route the city will utilize State Aid fundingin addition to special assessments to finance the street improvements. The special assessments will be to benefitingproperties as defined by the City's Assessment Practice. Utility funds collected by the City will be used for funding theutility improvements.During the preliminary engineering it was determined the rehabilitation of the watermain and the two sanitaryforcemains dictated the surfacing rehabilitation technique change from a mill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation. The most effective trenchless utility rehabilitation method was identified in the feasibility report to be pipe bursting. This installation technique will require excavations at bend locations, services, hydrants, and boring pits every 300400feet depending on conditions encountered and the contractor. The overall amount of excavations and associated curbremovals affect the feasibility of a mill and overlay project and make a fulldepth reclamation project more effective.The current pavement overall condition index (OCI) is 63 which is within the range where overlays should beconsidered. The road is heavily patched and would score a lower OCI if the road was not constantly patched. Staffhas received many complaints about the surface condition of Minnewashta Parkway. The preliminary geotechnicalinformation indicated the surfacing improvements for the street section could be accomplished via a mill and overlay inareas that did not require significant excavation for utility improvements. The original intent was to replace only thecast iron watermain per City policy and to minimize the amount of excavations. The break history in the utilitiesidentified problems mostly in the ductile iron sections. Hence, it was determined the entire length of the watermain andthe two forcemains needed to be replaced to avoid future breaks under the new pavement. The selection of anappropriate trenchless installation method allows the project to use a fulldepth reclamation method in lieu of making ita full reconstruction project. UTILITIESWatermain:The existing main is 12inch cast iron and ductile iron pipe of early 1970's vintage. The city's policy is to replaceexisting cast iron watermain when a street project occurs due to past history, existing soil conditions, and the attributesassociated with the material. The existing watermain has had 10 breaks associated with it since 2001. The break locations are identified in Figure 2below. The most recent break was recently repaired in December 2018 and the location is not indicated on the map. Figure 2: Water Main Break Map (since 2001)The location of the cast iron pipe within the project limits is within the northern half of the street length. The majority ofthe breaks are in the southern half of the street length that is ductile iron pipe. The consultant and the City agreed theentire watermain needed to be replaced as part of the project. This was determined due to the break analysis, soilconditions, age of the pipe, and the opportunity for replacement due to the need for a project. It would likely beanother 20 to 30 years before another replacement opportunity would be available.Sanitary Sewer:The existing sanitary sewer consists of 8inch and 10inch PVC pipe. The city has had all of the sanitary mainstelevised within the last 10 years. The remaining pipe sections that had not been recently televised were completed in2018. The consultant reviewed and analyzed the sewer video and reports to determine the necessary repairs. Severalsections of gravity main will be lined as part of the project. Inflow and infiltration barriers will be installed on allmanholes.In conjunction with the city, the consultant distributed a survey to properties along the project in regards to identifyingsewer and drainage concerns. Within the survey, the city inquired if there were any known issues with their sanitaryservice lateral and offered to televise the residents' lateral to determine if there are any existing concerns.There are two sanitary lift stations (LS#6 & LS#7) along Minnewashta Parkway. The forcemains associated with eachlift station were analyzed. The forcemains' condition was determined to require replacement. The most effectiveforcemain replacement method was determined to be pipe bursting. Directional drilling a new main and structurallining methods were also considered. Storm Sewer:The existing storm sewer system was reviewed and analyzed from an existing capacity perspective utilizing updatedAtlas14 precipitation data and compared to any expected future capacity needs. The existing storm sewer capacitywas determined to be sufficient to convey a 10year storm event including the future redevelopment needs. Theconsultant reviewed the existing storm sewer structures and determined there are 69 structures that requiremaintenance or replacement.Drain tile will be added behind the existing curbing in several areas with connections made to the existing stormsystem. Low areas, geotechnical data, historical observations, and the resident survey results will be used to identifywet areas where tiling can help protect the roadway.Surface water management was another focus within the preliminary design and feasibility analysis. There are sevenstormwater ponds adjacent to Minnewashta Parkway where no improvements or work has been completed since the1990's. The consultant reviewed our existing data relative to the ponds and visited the site with staff. A holisticanalysis will be completed based on drainage capacity and the ponds will receive improvements such as tree clearingand dredging as needed.Three ponds adjacent to Lake St. Joe will be hydraulically modeled. One of these ponds was very small and it hascompletely failed and is essentially no longer a pond. This will likely be addressed by adding a sump manhole in theroadway and reconstructing the storm piping towards Lake St. Joe because this is not a good location for a pond. The other two ponds are expected to need to be cleaned out and improved. Recommendations for improvements willbe provided by the consultant for solutions to existing drainage issues and develop capacity for the future.Proposed improvements will be designed to current NPDES and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD)requirements in regards to water quality treatment and best management practices for stormwater runoff. Potentialtreatment and abstraction through infiltration, capture and reuse, or other methods will be considered. The consultant will be expected to review city and MCWD wetland protection plans for requirements. The NationalWetland Inventory and Public Waters Inventory, and other resources will be used to identify potential wetlands withinthe project area. Wetland delineation will be provided by the consultant as needed. Project sequencing and designwill meet the Minnesota Clean Water Act and Section 404 of the US Clean Water Act. Coordination with variousFederal and State agencies will be part of this work. A standalone SWPPP will be prepared by the consultant.Retaining WallsThe condition of the existing retaining walls along the corridor was evaluated by a structural engineer. A report on theexisting walls is included in the feasibility report. Overall, the walls are generally in good condition but some of themrequire improvements. Repair of existing or the addition of new fencing along the top of the walls is a common deficiency. FUNDING Budget for the proposed work had been included in the 2019 CIP for the project to be constructed in 2020. Through the preliminary design and preparation of the feasibility analysis and report preparation, it was necessary to review and update the CIP in addition to the project planning relative to the schedule based upon construction needs and cost estimates after the preliminary design identified changes to the initial assumptions related to the rehabilitation project. The project increased in scope in several ways. The length of the project increased due to the 850foot addition through Victoria, the watermain replacement length nearly doubled, the replacement of both forcemains was determined to be necessary, and the utility improvements required the pavement rehabilitation to be modified from a mill and overlay to a full depth reclamation. The project was initially budgeted at an overall construction cost of $2.625 Million in the 2019 CIP. The cost has increased to an estimated amount of $5.25 Million in the feasibility report. The project is being recommended as a twoyear construction project in the feasibility report to facilitate the completion of the necessary work within a reasonable time frame and to allow the funding to be spread out over a twoyear period. Funding for the project is proposed to come from Municipal State Aid funds, special assessments to properties directly benefiting from the project, and city utility funds. The estimated assessments for the street rehabilitation portion of this project are projected to be $4,610 per benefiting property per the City's Assessment Practice. This amount is in line with prior assessment amounts for a similar project requiring a full depth reclamation. A 'Residential Equivalency' component has been factored into the assessment amount to account for two things relative to keeping the assessment calculation fair to the benefiting properties and in compliance with the intent of the assessment practice. One is the additional capacity. The use of StateAid funding requires the road section be designed for a 10ton per axle capacity. Residential streets in Chanhassen are designed for a 7ton per axle capacity. The additional 3ton of capacity has not been included in the assessable street cost that is included in the assessment calculation. The second item that has been factored into the assessment calculation is the street frontage. Only the frontage relative to the benefiting properties has been been included in the assessment calculation. The frontage of the benefiting properties is 61% of the overall frontage along the project. Hence, the assessable street cost for a 7ton design was reduced to 61% of the total street cost. In this manner, the benefiting properties are not paying for the entire length of the roadway due to there being a limited number of benefiting properties along the collector roadway. This component is included to be fair to the benefiting properties because it is a goal of the City to eliminate accesses along collector roadways. There was not a need to include a factor for the overall street width because Minnewashta Parkway averages a width of 31 feet. Per the City's assessment practice, only 40% of the assessable street cost is charged to the benefiting properties. Most recently, the City has used similar residential equivalent calculation methodologies on other collector roadways such as Lake Lucy Road, Kerber Boulevard, and Laredo Drive. For example, the Audubon Road improvement project was adjusted for oversizing due to the increased width and Laredo Dr was adjusted for oversizing the roadway width and the additional design capacity. SCHEDULE A tentative schedule for the project is as follows: Task Date Approve Plans & Specifications December 2019 Bid Opening January 2020 Neighborhood Meeting February 2020 Assessment Hearing & Award Construction Contract March 2020 Start Construction Spring 2020 Construction Complete October 2021 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectResolution 2019XX: Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002: Order Projectand Authorize Preparation of Plans and SpecificationsSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: I.1.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 202002PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution ordering the project and authorizes preparation of the plans and specificationsfor the Minnewashta Parkway Rehabilitation Project No. 2002.Approval requires a 4/5 Vote.BACKGROUNDOn October 26, 2018, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) forconsultant services for the project.On November 8, 2018, the Engineering Department received three proposals from consultants for professionalservices for the Minnewashta Parkway project.On January 14, 2019, the City Council approved a consultant contract with KimleyHorn and Associates andauthorized preparation of a feasibility study for the project.On October 14, 2019, the City Council accepted the feasibility study and called a public hearing to be held onOctober 28, 2019.DISCUSSIONMinnewashta Parkway is a collector street located on the west side of Lake Minnewashta between Highway 5 andHighway 7. The roadway and utilities are in need of rehabilitation. The City's 2019 Capital Improvement Planplanned for the rehabilitation of Minnewashta Parkway in 2020. The original project limits on the north end extendedfrom the south side of the intersection with State Trunk Highway 7 to the City limits on the south end near theintersection of Hawthorne Circle. Hawthorne Circle south to State Trunk Highway 5 was thought at the time to be thejurisdiction of the City of Victoria. The plan was to collaborate with the City of Victoria to rehabilitate this section ofroadway to facilitate a continuous improvement project from Highway 7 to Highway 5.During the preliminary project design process, staff researched and identified that the City of Chanhassen owns rightofway within Victoria for Minnewashta Parkway. In 1992, at the request of the Cities of Chanhassen and Victoria,the Municipal Board of the State of Minnesota concluded the rightofway for Minnewashta Parkway betweenHawthorne Circle and State Trunk Highway 5 would be ceded from the City of Victoria to the City of Chanhassen. This allowed Minnewashta Parkway to be eligible for StateAid funding and Chanhassen subsequently adding thelength of Minnewashta Parkway to their MSA road segments.Due to this finding, the project limits were revised to include the section of Minnewashta Parkway between HawthorneCircle and 77th Street West. The section of Minnewashta Parkway between 77th Street West and the rightofwayfor Highway 5 is not in need of rehabilitation. In addition, sanitary sewer and water utilities are not under the majorityof this section of roadway.Staff utilized the city's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the original project limits asshown in Figure 1. The project included a 1.35mile long urbanized street corridor. The existing road section wasoriginally constructed in 1990. The revised project limits will add approximately 850feet of street and utilities to therehabilitation project.Figure 1: Project Area MapAs Minnewashta Parkway is designated as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) route the city will utilize State Aid fundingin addition to special assessments to finance the street improvements. The special assessments will be to benefitingproperties as defined by the City's Assessment Practice. Utility funds collected by the City will be used for funding theutility improvements.During the preliminary engineering it was determined the rehabilitation of the watermain and the two sanitaryforcemains dictated the surfacing rehabilitation technique change from a mill and overlay to a fulldepth reclamation. The most effective trenchless utility rehabilitation method was identified in the feasibility report to be pipe bursting. This installation technique will require excavations at bend locations, services, hydrants, and boring pits every 300400feet depending on conditions encountered and the contractor. The overall amount of excavations and associated curbremovals affect the feasibility of a mill and overlay project and make a fulldepth reclamation project more effective.The current pavement overall condition index (OCI) is 63 which is within the range where overlays should beconsidered. The road is heavily patched and would score a lower OCI if the road was not constantly patched. Staffhas received many complaints about the surface condition of Minnewashta Parkway. The preliminary geotechnicalinformation indicated the surfacing improvements for the street section could be accomplished via a mill and overlay inareas that did not require significant excavation for utility improvements. The original intent was to replace only thecast iron watermain per City policy and to minimize the amount of excavations. The break history in the utilitiesidentified problems mostly in the ductile iron sections. Hence, it was determined the entire length of the watermain andthe two forcemains needed to be replaced to avoid future breaks under the new pavement. The selection of anappropriate trenchless installation method allows the project to use a fulldepth reclamation method in lieu of making ita full reconstruction project. UTILITIESWatermain:The existing main is 12inch cast iron and ductile iron pipe of early 1970's vintage. The city's policy is to replaceexisting cast iron watermain when a street project occurs due to past history, existing soil conditions, and the attributesassociated with the material. The existing watermain has had 10 breaks associated with it since 2001. The break locations are identified in Figure 2below. The most recent break was recently repaired in December 2018 and the location is not indicated on the map. Figure 2: Water Main Break Map (since 2001)The location of the cast iron pipe within the project limits is within the northern half of the street length. The majority ofthe breaks are in the southern half of the street length that is ductile iron pipe. The consultant and the City agreed theentire watermain needed to be replaced as part of the project. This was determined due to the break analysis, soilconditions, age of the pipe, and the opportunity for replacement due to the need for a project. It would likely beanother 20 to 30 years before another replacement opportunity would be available.Sanitary Sewer:The existing sanitary sewer consists of 8inch and 10inch PVC pipe. The city has had all of the sanitary mainstelevised within the last 10 years. The remaining pipe sections that had not been recently televised were completed in2018. The consultant reviewed and analyzed the sewer video and reports to determine the necessary repairs. Severalsections of gravity main will be lined as part of the project. Inflow and infiltration barriers will be installed on allmanholes.In conjunction with the city, the consultant distributed a survey to properties along the project in regards to identifyingsewer and drainage concerns. Within the survey, the city inquired if there were any known issues with their sanitaryservice lateral and offered to televise the residents' lateral to determine if there are any existing concerns.There are two sanitary lift stations (LS#6 & LS#7) along Minnewashta Parkway. The forcemains associated with eachlift station were analyzed. The forcemains' condition was determined to require replacement. The most effectiveforcemain replacement method was determined to be pipe bursting. Directional drilling a new main and structurallining methods were also considered. Storm Sewer:The existing storm sewer system was reviewed and analyzed from an existing capacity perspective utilizing updatedAtlas14 precipitation data and compared to any expected future capacity needs. The existing storm sewer capacitywas determined to be sufficient to convey a 10year storm event including the future redevelopment needs. Theconsultant reviewed the existing storm sewer structures and determined there are 69 structures that requiremaintenance or replacement.Drain tile will be added behind the existing curbing in several areas with connections made to the existing stormsystem. Low areas, geotechnical data, historical observations, and the resident survey results will be used to identifywet areas where tiling can help protect the roadway.Surface water management was another focus within the preliminary design and feasibility analysis. There are sevenstormwater ponds adjacent to Minnewashta Parkway where no improvements or work has been completed since the1990's. The consultant reviewed our existing data relative to the ponds and visited the site with staff. A holisticanalysis will be completed based on drainage capacity and the ponds will receive improvements such as tree clearingand dredging as needed.Three ponds adjacent to Lake St. Joe will be hydraulically modeled. One of these ponds was very small and it hascompletely failed and is essentially no longer a pond. This will likely be addressed by adding a sump manhole in theroadway and reconstructing the storm piping towards Lake St. Joe because this is not a good location for a pond. The other two ponds are expected to need to be cleaned out and improved. Recommendations for improvements willbe provided by the consultant for solutions to existing drainage issues and develop capacity for the future.Proposed improvements will be designed to current NPDES and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD)requirements in regards to water quality treatment and best management practices for stormwater runoff. Potentialtreatment and abstraction through infiltration, capture and reuse, or other methods will be considered. The consultant will be expected to review city and MCWD wetland protection plans for requirements. The NationalWetland Inventory and Public Waters Inventory, and other resources will be used to identify potential wetlands withinthe project area. Wetland delineation will be provided by the consultant as needed. Project sequencing and designwill meet the Minnesota Clean Water Act and Section 404 of the US Clean Water Act. Coordination with variousFederal and State agencies will be part of this work. A standalone SWPPP will be prepared by the consultant.Retaining WallsThe condition of the existing retaining walls along the corridor was evaluated by a structural engineer. A report on theexisting walls is included in the feasibility report. Overall, the walls are generally in good condition but some of themrequire improvements. Repair of existing or the addition of new fencing along the top of the walls is a commondeficiency.FUNDINGBudget for the proposed work had been included in the 2019 CIP for the project to be constructed in 2020. Throughthe preliminary design and preparation of the feasibility analysis and report preparation, it was necessary to review andupdate the CIP in addition to the project planning relative to the schedule based upon construction needs and costestimates after the preliminary design identified changes to the initial assumptions related to the rehabilitation project.The project increased in scope in several ways. The length of the project increased due to the 850foot additionthrough Victoria, the watermain replacement length nearly doubled, the replacement of both forcemains wasdetermined to be necessary, and the utility improvements required the pavement rehabilitation to be modified from amill and overlay to a full depth reclamation.The project was initially budgeted at an overall construction cost of $2.625 Million in the 2019 CIP. The cost hasincreased to an estimated amount of $5.25 Million in the feasibility report. The project is being recommended as atwoyear construction project in the feasibility report to facilitate the completion of the necessary work within areasonable time frame and to allow the funding to be spread out over a twoyear period. Funding for the project is proposed to come from Municipal State Aid funds, special assessments to propertiesdirectly benefiting from the project, and city utility funds.The estimated assessments for the street rehabilitation portion of this project are projected to be $4,610 per benefitingproperty per the City's Assessment Practice. This amount is in line with prior assessment amounts for a similar projectrequiring a full depth reclamation.A 'Residential Equivalency' component has been factored into the assessment amount to account for two things relativeto keeping the assessment calculation fair to the benefiting properties and in compliance with the intent of theassessment practice. One is the additional capacity. The use of StateAid funding requires the road section bedesigned for a 10ton per axle capacity. Residential streets in Chanhassen are designed for a 7ton per axle capacity. The additional 3ton of capacity has not been included in the assessable street cost that is included in the assessmentcalculation. The second item that has been factored into the assessment calculation is the street frontage. Only thefrontage relative to the benefiting properties has been been included in the assessment calculation. The frontage of thebenefiting properties is 61% of the overall frontage along the project. Hence, the assessable street cost for a 7tondesign was reduced to 61% of the total street cost. In this manner, the benefiting properties are not paying for theentire length of the roadway due to there being a limited number of benefiting properties along the collector roadway. This component is included to be fair to the benefiting properties because it is a goal of the City to eliminate accessesalong collector roadways. There was not a need to include a factor for the overall street width because MinnewashtaParkway averages a width of 31 feet. Per the City's assessment practice, only 40% of the assessable street cost ischarged to the benefiting properties.Most recently, the City has used similar residential equivalent calculation methodologies on other collector roadwayssuch as Lake Lucy Road, Kerber Boulevard, and Laredo Drive. For example, the Audubon Road improvementproject was adjusted for oversizing due to the increased width and Laredo Dr was adjusted for oversizing theroadway width and the additional design capacity.SCHEDULEA tentative schedule for the project is as follows:Task DateApprove Plans & Specifications December 2019Bid Opening January 2020Neighborhood Meeting February 2020Assessment Hearing & Award Construction Contract March 2020 Start Construction Spring 2020 Construction Complete October 2021 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution ordering the project and authorize preparation of plans and specifications. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Order Project & Authorize Plans and Specifications 2020 CIP Sheet CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: October 28, 2019 RESOLUTION NO: 2019-XX MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: A RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT NO. 20-02 WHEREAS, on October 14, 2019, the City Council received a feasibility report prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates with reference to the above-referenced project and called for a public hearing to be held on October 28, 2019, for the Minnewashta Parkway Street Rehabilitation Project; and WHEREAS, ten days’ mailed notice and two weeks’ published notice of the hearing were given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 28th day of October, 2019, which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Chanhassen City Council: 1. Such improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible as detailed in the feasibility report. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the Council resolution adopted October 28, 2019. 3. Authorizes preparation of plans and specifications for the Minnewashta Parkway Street Rehabilitation Project No. 20-02. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 28th day of October, 2019. ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor YES NO ABSENT CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Consider Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: I.2. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: ADM324 PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council adopts the attached Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND Over the past several months the city council has taken input on adopting a franchise fee on gas and electric utilities for the purpose of funding the city's pavement management program. The city and both electric utility companies (Xcel Energy and Minnesota Valley Electric Company) have agreed upon a franchise agreement (a franchise agreement is currently in place with the city's gas utility, CenterPoint Energy). Proposed franchise fee ordinances have also been drafted for each utility. Staff is asking the city council to first hold a public hearing on the proposed franchise agreements and the proposed franchise fee ordinances. During the public hearing, staff will review the need and the purpose for the franchise fee and show the impact to each billing classification of the franchise fee. Staff is requesting that after receiving public input, the city council consider adoption of the proposed agreements and ordinances. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the city council hold a public hearing on the adoption and approval of franchise agreement ordinances and franchise fee ordinances, and then consider adoption of the attached Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, October 28, 2019SubjectConsider Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee OrdinancesSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: I.2.Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: ADM324PROPOSED MOTION"The City Council adopts the attached Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances."Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOver the past several months the city council has taken input on adopting a franchise fee on gas and electric utilities forthe purpose of funding the city's pavement management program. The city and both electric utility companies (XcelEnergy and Minnesota Valley Electric Company) have agreed upon a franchise agreement (a franchise agreement iscurrently in place with the city's gas utility, CenterPoint Energy). Proposed franchise fee ordinances have also beendrafted for each utility.Staff is asking the city council to first hold a public hearing on the proposed franchise agreements and the proposedfranchise fee ordinances. During the public hearing, staff will review the need and the purpose for the franchise fee andshow the impact to each billing classification of the franchise fee. Staff is requesting that after receiving public input,the city council consider adoption of the proposed agreements and ordinances.RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends the city council hold a public hearing on the adoption and approval of franchise agreement ordinances and franchise fee ordinances, and then consider adoption of the attached Franchise Agreement Ordinances and Franchise Fee Ordinances. ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation Q & A Responses MSA Projected Fund Balance PMP Web Survey Public Feedback PMP Fund Balance Minnesota Valley Electric Fee Ordinance Minnesota Valley Electric Franchise Ordinance Xcel Energy Fee Ordinance Xcel Energy Franchise Ordinance CenterPoint Energy Fee Ordinance CenterPoint Energy Franchise Ordinance Franchise Fee and Franchise Ordinance Public Hearing For the implementation of funding Pavement Management Program City Council Meeting October 28, 2019 Existing Street Conditions Inspections of streets are done on a 3-year cycle, so for any given year the average Overall Condition Index (OCI) is based off the projected OCI for 2/3 of the city and the inspected OCI for the remaining 1/3.Here are the recent results: Year OCI New Miles of Street 2019 70 2018 73 0.26 2017 74 0.00 2016 74 0.00 2015 69 0.11 2014 70 0.47 2013 69 1.00 2012 72 0.88 2011 74 0.48 2010 77 0.15 The big jump from 2015 to 2016 is likely because the roads in Carver Beach were reclaimed in 2015.There are a lot of street segments in that area, so when the average OCI is calculated per segment, a project like that skews the numbers. Existing Street Conditions Condition Category OCI Recommended Activity in Cartegraph Cost per Square Foot Impact Excellent 95 –100 Do Nothing $0 0 Good 85 –94 AC -Surface Treatment $0.16 20% Satisfactory 75 –84 AC -AC Overlay < 2”$2.00 65% Fair 50 –74 AC -AC Overlay > 2”$2.55 75% Poor 40 –49 AC -Patching – Shallow/Leveling $1.20 10% Fail 0 –39 AC -Reconstruct -Full $10.37 100 Absolute Existing Street Conditions 2019 OCI Index rating can be broken down as follows: 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Poor Fair Satisfactory GoodPercentage of Street NetworkStreet Condition 2019 Street Ratings 21%23% 16% 40% Poor (0-49) = 24 miles Fair (50-75) = 27 miles Satisfactory (75-85) = 18 miles Good (85-100) = 46 miles Total mileage = 115 miles Street Reconstruction Timing 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1960196219641966196819701972197419761978198019821984198619881990199219941996199820002002200420062008201020122014201620182020202220242026202820302032203420362038204020422044204620482050205220542056205820602062206420662068Cummulative MilesYear Original Construction Replacement (~50 years) Current Year Street Reconstruction Timing The average life expectancy of a street is 50-years. After 50-years streets need to be completely reconstructed. City streets that are 50-years old and are in need of replacement are a combination of streets that were constructed in the 1960’s and 1970’s. The average rate of new street construction between the 1960’s and 1970’s is 1.6 miles per year. 1.6 miles x $1.5M = $2,400,000 per year Mill & Overlay Timing 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1960196219641966196819701972197419761978198019821984198619881990199219941996199820002002200420062008201020122014201620182020202220242026202820302032203420362038204020422044204620482050205220542056205820602062206420662068Cummulative MilesYear Original Construction Mill & Overlay (~25 years) Current Year Mill & Overlay Timing The age at which streets should have a mill &overlay is 25 years. City streets that are 25-years old and are in need of a mill & overlay were built in the early 1990’s. The average rate of new street construction in the 1990’s was 3.5 miles per year. 3.5 miles x $0.35M = $1.2M per year Financial Impact Required Annual Budget for Streets: Street Reconstruction = $2,400,000 Street Mill & Overlay = $1,200,000 Total $3,600,000 Additional Budget Impacts of increasing spending on Roads to $3.6M •Additional $450,000/year water improvements related to street reconstructions •Additional $140,000/year sewer improvements related to street reconstructions •Additional $375,000/year storm water improvements related to street reconstructions NOTE: All three of these impacts are accounted for in the 2020 Utility Rate Study •The city council is also considering putting additional street department resources towards annual maintenance (pothole and patching) as part of the 2020 General Fund Budget Previous Funding New Funding 2020 Mill & Overlay -BASSWOOD CIR, BRULE CIR, CASCADE CIR, CASCADE CT, CASCADE PASS, CASTLE RDG, CASTLE RDG CT, CHOCTAW CIR, DAKOTA LN, HIDDEN CIR, HIDDEN CT, HIDDEN LN, KURVERS POINT RD, KURVERS PT RD, LAKE LUCY RD, MARSH DR, MOUNTAIN VIEW CT, MOUNTAIN WAY, NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD, NEZ PERCE DR, OLYMPIC CIR, OXBOW BND, PENAMINT CT, PENAMINT LN, PIEDMONT CT, REDWING LN, ROJINA LN, SHASTA CIR E, SHASTA CIR W, SINNEN CIR, STAGHORN LN, SUMMIT CIR, TRAP LINE CIR, TRAP LINE LN, TRAPPERS PASS, TROENDLE CIR, TWIN MAPLE LN, VINELAND CT, WILLOW VIEW CV 2021 Mill & Overlay -ASHTON CT, BENWOOD CIR, BLUFF VIEW CT, BOULDER RD, BRETTON WAY, BRINKER STREET, BUTTE CT, CACTUS CRV, CANYON CRV, CREEK RUN TRL, CREEK VIEW CT, CROCUS CT, DEVONSHIRE DR, FAWN HILL CT, FAWN HILL RD, GUNFLINT CT, GUNFLINT TRL, HARRISON HILL CT, HARRISON HILL TRL, HEATHER CT, HILLSDALE CT, HUNTER DR, LODGEPOLE PT, LONGACRES DR, LUKEWOOD DR, MAJESTIC WAY, MULBERRY CIR E, MULBERRY CIR W, NORTHWOOD CT, POINTE LAKE LUCY, RED FOX CIR, SADDLEBROOK RV, SADDLEBROOK PASS, SADDLEBROOK TRL, SHADOW LN, STONE CREEK DR, STONE CREEK LN E, STONE CREEK LN W, STONE CREEK RD, STRATTON CT, TETON LN, TIMBERWOOD DR, TROTTERS CIR, TULIP CT, WALNUT, WELSLEY CT 2020 Mill & Overlay -BUTTE CT, CACTUS CRV, CANYON CRV, CASCADE CIR, CASCADE CT, CASCADE PASS, CASTLE RDG, CASTLE RDG CT, MOUNTAIN VIEW CT, MOUNTAIN WAY, NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD, OLYMPIC CIR, OXBOW BND, PENAMINT CT, PENAMINT LN, PIEDMONT CT, REDWING LN, ROJINA LN, SADDLEBROOK CRV, SADDLEBROOK PASS, SADDLEBROOK TRL, SHASTA CIR E, SHASTA CIR W, STAGHORN LN, SUMMIT CIR, TRAP LINE CIR, TRAP LINE LN, TRAPPERS PASS, TROTTERS CIR 2021 Mill & Overlay -ASHTON CT, BASSWOOD CIR, BRETTON WAY, BRULE CIR, CHOCTAW CIR, DEVONSHIRE DR, KURVERS POINT RD, KURVERS PT RD, LAKE LUCY RD, NEZ PERCE DR, STRATTON CT, TETON LN, TROENDLE CIR, TWIN MAPLE LN, VINELAND CT, WELSLEY CT, WILLOW VIEW CV 5-YEAR PLAN YEAR TREATMENT MILEAGE 2020 MILL & OVERLAY 7.3 RECONSTRUCTION - 2021 MILL & OVERLAY 7.9 RECONSTRUCTION - 2022 MILL AND OVERLAY 2.2 RECONSTRUCTION 1.7 2023 MILL & OVERLAY 2.7 RECONSTRUCTION 1.4 2024 MILL & OVERLAY 3.1 RECONSTRUCTION 1.2 TOTAL MILL & OVERLAY 23.2 RECONSTRUCTION 4.3* *Does not include MSA funded reconstructions (additional 4.4 miles) 5-YEAR PLAN *Does not include MSA funded reconstructions YEAR TREATMENT*STREET NAMES 2020 MILL & OVERLAY BASSWOOD CIR, BRULE CIR, CASCADE CIR, CASCADE CT, CASCADE PASS, CASTLE RDG, CASTLE RDG CT, CHOCTAW CIR, DAKOTA LN, HIDDEN CIR, HIDDEN CT, HIDDEN LN, KURVERS POINT RD, KURVERS PT RD, LAKE LUCY RD, MARSH DR, MOUNTAIN VIEW CT, MOUNTAIN WAY, NEAR MOUNTAIN BLVD, NEZ PERCE DR, OLYMPIC CIR, OXBOW BND, PENAMINT CT, PENAMINT LN, PIEDMONT CT, REDWING LN, ROJINA LN, SHASTA CIR E, SHASTA CIR W, SINNEN CIR, STAGHORN LN, SUMMIT CIR, TRAP LINE CIR, TRAP LINE LN, TRAPPERS PASS, TROENDLE CIR, TWIN MAPLE LN, VINELAND CT,WILLOW VIEW CV RECONSTRUCTION - 2021 MILL & OVERLAY ASHTON CT, BENWOOD CIR, BLUFF VIEW CT, BOULDER RD, BRETTON WAY, BRINKER STREET, BUTTE CT, CACTUS CRV, CANYON CRV, CREEK RUN TRL, CREEK VIEW CT, CROCUS CT, DEVONSHIRE DR, FAWN HILL CT, FAWN HILL RD, GUNFLINT CT, GUNFLINT TRL, HARRISON HILL CT, HARRISON HILL TRL, HEATHER CT, HILLSDALE CT, HUNTER DR, LODGEPOLE PT, LONGACRES DR, LUKEWOOD DR, MAJESTIC WAY, MULBERRY CIR E, MULBERRY CIR W, NORTHWOOD CT, POINTE LAKE LUCY, RED FOX CIR, SADDLEBROOK RV, SADDLEBROOK PASS, SADDLEBROOK TRL, SHADOW LN, STONE CREEK DR, STONE CREEK LN E, STONE CREEK LN W, STONE CREEK RD, STRATTON CT, TETON LN, TIMBERWOOD DR, TROTTERS CIR, TULIP CT, WALNUT, WELSLEY CT RECONSTRUCTION - 2022 MILL & OVERLAY ALISA CT, ALISA LN, BITTERN CT, BLUEBILL TRL, HERON DR, OSPREY LN, SUNRIDGE CT, SWAN CT, VALLEY RIDGE CT, VALLEY RIDGE PL, VALLEY RIDGE TRL N, VALLEY RIDGE TRL S, VALLEY VIEW CT, VALLEY VIEW PL S RECONSTRUCTION 76TH ST W, 77TH ST W, CHAN VIEW ST, DEL RIO DR, GREAT PLAINS BLVD, HIGHLAND DR, HURON AVE, IROQUOIS AVE, KIOWA AVE 2023 MILL & OVERLAY CHURCH RD, COUNTRY OAKS RD, HALLGREN LN, JOSHUA CIR, KINGS RD, KIRKWOOD CIR, LAKERIDGE RD, LINDEN CIR, MAPLE SHORES DR, MEADOW CT, MEADOW LN, MINNEWASHTA CT, RED OAK LN, RIDGEHILL RD, STRATFORD BLVD, STRATFORD LN, STRATFORD RDG, WHITE OAK LN RECONSTRUCTION COUNTRY OAKS DR, CRESTVIEW DR, GLENDALE DR, LESLEE CRV, MAPLE AVE, MAPLE CIR 2024 MILL &OVERLAY 86TH ST W, GREENLEAF CT, GREENVIEW DR, LAKE RILEY BLVD, MISSION CT, MISSION HILLS CIR, MISSION HILLS LN, OAKSIDE CIR, OVERLOOK CT, PARKLAND WAY, SHOREVIEW CT, SPRINGFIELD DR, SUMMERFIELD DR, SUNNYVALE DR, TIGUA CIR RECONSTRUCTION BLUFF RIDGE CT, FOX DR, FOX HOLLOW DR, FOX TAIL CT, GRAY FOX CRV, GRAY FOX LN, HUNTERS CT, PLEASANT PARK DR, QUAIL XING What we have established to this point 1. Currently, the cost for street improvements is split 60% City and 40% Assessed. THE CITY WILL CONTINUE ITS CURRENT ASSESSMENT PRACTICE. 2. The additional funding is for financing THE CITY SHARE ONLY. 3. Any Franchise Fee or Levy issued will be used ONLY for local road improvements. 4. Issuing a Franchise Fee has the same impact as a tax. However, a Franchise Fee allows for flexibility in how some customers are charged. Issuing a property tax levy only, will result in residential properties paying 83% of all road improvement costs. Why a Franchise Fee vs. a Property Tax Levy? 15 Property Tax Levy Residential Commericial/Others Franchise Fee Residential Commericial/Others •A Franchise Fee offers more flexibility than a property tax which charges 83 cents of every dollar to residential properties. A Franchise Fee could be set to meet a funding goal. •Under the proposed franchise fee rate schedule, the franchise fee itself would be collected on a 63/37 basis, rather than 83/17 which is what a property tax levy would achieve. Proposed Franchise Fee Schedule Classification Charge Per Month Per Utility Net Rev Residential $ 5.00 $1,108,860.00 Small Electric Commercial $ 14.00 $ 127,848.00 Medium Electric Commercial $ 40.00 $ 128,160.00 Large Electric Commercial $ 290.00 $ 267,960.00 Gas Commercial A $ 5.00 $ 16,860.00 Gas Commercial B $ 9.00 $ 20,520.00 Gas Commercial C $ 20.00 $ 49,440.00 Gas Small Volume, Dual Fuel $ 90.00 $ 11,880.00 $1,731,528.00 Who has a Franchise Fee in 7 County Metro Area? Includes all 7 of Chanhassen Neighboring Cities: Chaska, Eden Prairie, Excelsior, Minnetonka, Shakopee, Shorewood, Victoria 17 Location Franchise Fee Use Brooklyn Center Capital Projects Fund-Street reconstruction fund Champlin Capital Projects Fund-Infrastructure Replacement Bloomington Capital Projects Fund -Pavement Management& Bike Trails Eden Prairie Capital Projects Fund -Pavement Management Elk River Capital Projects Fund -Pavement Management Edina Capital Projects Fund-Sidewalks and Bike Trails Golden Valley Capital Projects Fund -street reconstruction fund for street Minneapolis General Fund -G,E,& C for general use except PEG fees Minnetonka Capital Projects Fund -Burial of electric lines and street lighting New Hope General Fund-Has had for 15 years Plymouth Capital Projects Fund -Street reconstruction fund Richfield Capital Projects Fund -Overlay, sealcoating and removal of diseased trees. Rogers Capital Projects Fund -City’s Pavement Management Program St. Louis Park Capital Projects Fund -City’s Pavement Management Program Victoria Capital Projects Fund –Undergrounding Power Lines Funding Scenario (Achieve $3.6M/year Improvements) 1.$5 Residential Franchise Fee and commercial fee schedule (following slide) $1.73M/year 2.Increase in the 2020 Levy of $350,000 (3%, see impact in following slide) 3.Use a portion of the Library Levy of $200,000 in 2022. Using this levy will have no tax impact Total Impact of Franchise Fee & Levy Increases on Residential Franchise Fee 2020 Property Tax Increase in 2020 Total Per Year 200K House $ 120 $ 13 $ 133 370K House $ 120 $ 26 $ 146 $1M House $ 120 $ 82 $ 202 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 Project Cost (Street Only) 1,900,000 300,000 2,200,000 -2,200,000 -2,200,000 -2,200,000 -2,200,000 -2,200,000 Assessments 40% (760,000)(120,000)(880,000)-(880,000)-(880,000)-(880,000)-(880,000)-(880,000) City Share 1,140,000 180,000 1,320,000 -1,320,000 -1,320,000 -1,320,000 -1,320,000 -1,320,000 Other project Costs (400,000)(75,000) Tsfs in 194,751 Fund Bal -BOY Estimate for 2019 1,803,825 1,003,082 1,512,744 18,099 916,061 (412,018)477,342 (731,321)214,129 (1,065,513)(107,231)(1,393,300)(461,090) Levy And/Or Franchise Fee 884,838 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 380,000 Reduction for Other purposes Repayment 400,000 400,000 400,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 $625,677 561,251 561,251 580,384 561,251 561,251 $ 561,251 Project Costs (1,900,000)(300,000)(2,200,000)-(2,200,000)-(2,200,000)-(2,200,000)-(2,200,000)-(2,200,000) Investable Balance 983,414 1,483,082 17,744 898,099 (403,939)467,982 (716,981)209,930 (1,044,621)(105,129)(1,365,980)(452,049)(1,719,839) MVHC Street Levy & Tsf Interest 19,668 29,662 355 17,962 (8,079)9,360 (14,340)4,199 (20,892)(2,103)(27,320)(9,041)(34,397) Fund Bal -EOY 1,003,082 1,512,744 18,099 916,061 (412,018)477,342 (731,321)214,129 (1,065,513)(107,231)(1,393,300)(461,090)(1,754,236) Current funding PMP Projected Fund Balance New funding PMP Projected Fund Balance 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 Project Cost (Street Only) 1,900,000 2,600,000 3,600,000 3,708,000 3,819,240 3,933,817 4,051,832 4,173,387 4,298,588 4,427,546 4,560,372 4,697,183 4,838,099 4,983,242 Assessments 40% (760,000)(1,040,000)(1,440,000)(1,483,200)(1,527,696)(1,573,527)(1,620,733)(1,669,355)(1,719,435)(1,771,018)(1,824,149)(1,878,873)(1,935,240)(1,993,297) City Share 1,140,000 1,560,000 2,160,000 2,224,800 2,291,544 2,360,290 2,431,099 2,504,032 2,579,153 2,656,528 2,736,223 2,818,310 2,902,859 2,989,945 Other project Costs Tenn Courts & (400,000)(75,000) Tsfs in Trail 194,751 Fund Bal -BOY Estimate for 2018**** 1,803,825 1,003,082 1,119,283 741,395 670,574 636,819 616,011 692,063 700,405 852,704 1,032,549 1,199,399 1,292,514 1,308,107 Franchise Fee Revenue -1,200,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 1,732,000 Assessment Repayment 400,000 764,254 820,575 962,030 1,110,999 1,238,930 1,452,314 1,505,995 1,772,167 1,925,146 2,041,704 2,102,955 2,166,044 2,231,025 Capital Levy Requirement 884,838 730,000 730,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 930,000 Project Costs (1,900,000)(2,600,000)(3,600,000)(3,708,000)(3,819,240)(3,933,817)(4,051,832)(4,173,387)(4,298,588)(4,427,546)(4,560,372)(4,697,183)(4,838,099)(4,983,242) Investable Balance 983,414 1,097,337 726,858 657,425 624,333 603,932 678,493 686,671 835,984 1,012,303 1,175,881 1,267,170 1,282,458 1,217,890 Interest Income 19,668 21,947 14,537 13,149 12,487 12,079 13,570 13,733 16,720 20,246 23,518 25,343 25,649 24,358 Fund Bal -EOY 1,003,082 1,119,283 741,395 670,574 636,819 616,011 692,063 700,405 852,704 1,032,549 1,199,399 1,292,514 1,308,107 1,242,248 Recommendation 22 •Staff recommends the opening of a public hearing to take input on the implementation of a Franchise Fee and Update of Franchise Ordinances with all three gas and electric utilities. •After the public hearing staff would recommend the adoption of the attached updated franchise and franchise fee ordinances. Page 1 of 7 Resident Questions/Comments We just had our street re-done two summers ago and had to pay thousands of dollars. Now you want me to pay a franchise fee for others? Doesn't seem fair • The city council has already determined that the practice of assessing 40% of the total cost of the project to the benefiting properties will continue into the future. So all property owners will be treated the same as previously assessed projects. The franchise fee and property tax levy increase that is being considered is for the city’s portion or the remaining 60% of the total cost of each of the projects. Can the utility companies distinguish or bill properties in Chanhassen on a different basis? Can the city exempt properties on private streets from a Franchise Fee? • Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B.03 provides that "[r]ates shall not be unreasonably preferential, unreasonably prejudicial or discriminatory, but shall be sufficient, equitable and consistent in application to a class of customers." Therefore having a different fee for various types of residential properties is not allowed per state law. • In addition, the City’s Attorney on this matter, James Strommen, clearly points out in his letter dated to city council of November 13, 2018: “courts acknowledge that precise equality in imposing fees or taxes to support government cannot be precise or is "impossible" given the inherent disparity in use of or benefit from the tax use across the taxpayer base.” We have found no case even considering a franchise fee exemption due to the argument that a certain percentage of transportation within the City was reduced by private road use. Even the unlikely event of total non-use of public roads would not afford exemption. Similarly, it is settled law that school district residents without children using the schools are not entitled to gain exemption from referendum levies to build and maintain the schools. We already pay high taxes so why should we have to pay more for roads? • The city portion of your property tax bill is only 20% of the total. The school district and county each have nearly double the amount of taxes they collect on property owners. • The City of Chanhassen has the lowest Tax Rate in Carver County and among the bottom 1% of all tax rates in the entire Twin Cities. • The City Tax Levy increase (new growth) for the past eleven years has resulted in the average home paying the same or less in city property taxes every year. Page 2 of 7 Because we live on a private street and use the public roads at a fraction of the amount others use public roads, we should get a reduced franchise fee or be exempt. • As noted previously, separate or exempt fees within billing classes is not allowed per state statute. • The city council is considering the use of Franchise Fees rather than a property tax levy to pay for a portion of the roads in order to have more equity between commercial and non-property tax paying properties, rather than leaving the largest burden on residential properties. • Example: Based on the proposed funding scenario the average home will pay about $146/year. If a property tax levy is issued instead of a franchise fee as currently structured, the average home would pay about $196/year. What has prompted the need for increased funding for street replacement? • The life expectancy of a typical street is 50 years. Based on this, the streets that were constructed in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s are now due for replacement. During the 1960’s the city was adding approximately 0.5 miles of streets per year. In the 1970’s new development increased significantly and the city was adding approximately 2.7 miles of streets per year. The chart below illustrates the miles of street that have been added to the city’s street network over the last 50 years. Page 3 of 7 • The city is now at the transition from 0.5 miles per year to 2.7 miles per year, so an average of 1.6 miles per year of street replacement is necessary to maintain the city’s street network or the average quality of the street network will continue to decline. The cost for replacement is $1.5M per mile x 1.6 miles = $2.4M. • Similarly, it is critical to perform mill & overlay projects as part of the life cycle maintenance of a street. A mill & overlay involves milling off the top 1.5 inches of bituminous and paving a new surface across the entire street. The appropriate timing for completing mill & overlay projects is when a street is between 20 and 25 years of age. After that a street typically decays to a point where a mill & overlay is no longer viable. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1960196319661969197219751978198119841987199019931996199920022005200820112014201720202023202620292032203520382041204420472050205320562059206220652068Cummulative MilesYear Original Construction Replacement (~50 years) 0.5 Miles/Year Current Year Page 4 of 7 • Based on the chart above, looking back 25 years the city was adding 3.5 miles of streets per year. The city should therefore be completing 3.5 miles of mill and overlay projects each year to maintain the city’s street network or the quality of the streets will continue to decline. The cost for mill and overlay projects is $0.35M per mile x 3.5 miles = $1.2M per year. • Historically, the city has done on average 1.4 miles of mill and overlay projects per year. Since the actual need is 3.5 miles per year, it will take several years to get the city caught up to where we should be. • The required annual street maintenance cost is therefore $3.6M. The current annual budget for street maintenance is $385,000. The funding shortfall is therefore $3,215,000. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1960196319661969197219751978198119841987199019931996199920022005200820112014201720202023202620292032203520382041204420472050205320562059206220652068Cummulative MilesYear Original Construction Mill & Overlay (~25 years)Current Year Page 5 of 7 How many miles of public streets and private streets are located within the city? • There are 115 miles of public streets within the city and 25 miles of private streets. What is the difference between a public street and a private street? • A public street is owned and maintained by the city and a private street is typically owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Public streets are designed to meet minimum standards for width and include additional right-of-way beyond the actual street pavement to provide area for utilities such as gas and electric to be installed as well as for sidewalks and snow storage. Private streets are narrower and do not have any right-of-way. This allows the homes on private streets to be located much closer to the street. • Private streets are primarily located in areas where the housing products are either townhomes or apartments. The primary reason for private streets is that the developers that construct those neighborhoods can fit many more housing units on their property as opposed to what they would be able to build if they had public streets. By having more housing units on their property they are able to keep the price of the homes lower. The tradeoff the developers decide to make is that the homeowners association will need to maintain the private streets in perpetuity. Do other cities use Franchise Fees? • Yes, all seven of our neighboring cities have franchise fees. They include Chaska, Eden Prairie, Excelsior, Minnetonka, Shakopee, Shorewood, and Victoria. There are at least 62 other cities within the twin cities that have a Franchise Fee. Can the Franchise Fees be used for something other than roads? • The current city council intends for all of the revenue generated from the franchise fee to be used exclusively for streets. However, future city councils could change that and use the franchise fees for something other than streets. The pavement management fund is reviewed with the city council on an annual basis as part of the budget process. That review will continue going forward and any changes in the use of the Franchise Fee would need to be a part of that discussion. 100% against the franchise fee, $10 a month for 20 years is the eternal tax. Raise the property taxes 1% for 2/3 years and be done with it. • Whether a property tax or franchise fee is issued the funding need will go on for an identical amount of time going forward into the future. Increasing the property tax levy by 1% per year for three years would only generate about $400,000 in funding for the pavement management program which is about $2 million short of the funding need. A property tax increase would need to be in the range of 15%-18%. Page 6 of 7 Charge the 15 garbage truck companies who drive up and down my cul-de-sac a fee to collect garbage in our city. Those trucks fly around our streets and cause tons of wear not to mention it’s dangerous how fast they drive. • The city does not have statutory ability to charge a special tax or wheelage tax like the county has authority to do. All neighborhoods that are interested have the ability to organize your collection services. The city has a step-by-step guide on how to organize your collection services on the city website at http://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/111/Garbage-Recycling Why doesn’t the city take over maintenance of the private streets since they already maintain similar sized streets in the Carver Beach area? • The streets within the Carver Beach area have always been public streets and were constructed early in Chanhassen’s history to provide access to the area around Lotus Lake when the housing in the area was primarily summer cabins. These streets do not have concrete curb and gutter and do not meet current city specifications for width. A new development coming into the City of Chanhassen today would not be able to construct these types of streets. Due to their age, the streets within the Carver Beach neighborhood have been grandfathered into the public city street system. • When private streets are originally approved for development the agreement is that those streets will be privately maintained in perpetuity. There are 25 miles of existing private streets. Performing snow removal on those streets would require two or three additional public works employees along with the associated trucks and equipment to perform the work. This was never agreed to and would be a significant additional cost to the city. The city would not have approved the private streets if it had ever been anticipated that they would be maintained by the city. • Private streets do not have the comparable property (right-of-way) behind the curb for snow storage that public streets have, often requiring snow to be trucked off site which is costly and labor intensive. • It is less efficient to plow private streets because it requires the use of smaller vehicles and many of the streets are dead ends requiring a lot of backing up and turning around as compared to plowing straight down a public street. This is also much more labor intensive. • Most homeowners associations contract the snow removal for each individual driveway with the snow removal of the private streets. It would be nearly impossible for the city to coordinate the removal of the snow on private streets with a separate private company performing the removal of the snow on the individual driveways. It would also be very inefficient. Page 7 of 7 What type of financial aid does the city receive from the state for road projects? • The city receives State Aid funds annually. State Aid funds can only be used for construction on roads within the city that are designated as State Aid streets or for the city’s cost share on county and state highway projects. The city is allowed to designate 20% of the city’s total street mileage as State Aid eligible. To be eligible, the streets need to be higher volume roadways that connect to other State Aid streets or a county or state highway. Some examples of State Aid streets within Chanhassen are Lake Lucy Road, Kerber Boulevard, and Audubon Road. The City receives approximately $1M per year in State Aid funds. Some recent use of these funds includes the project that was done on Park Road in 2018 and the current project on Lake Drive East. Anticipated future uses of state aid funds are for projects on Lyman Boulevard, Minnewashta Parkway and Galpin Boulevard. On State Aid street projects where assessments are included as part of the project funding, the city uses the State Aid funds to cover the city’s 60% portion of the project cost. The remaining 40% is assessed to the benefitting properties within the project area. 10/23/2019 C:\Users\kimm\Downloads\MSA_Sheet_10-15-19 City of Chanhassen, City # 194 Municipal State Aid Construction Fund Account Estimated Yearly Expenditures and Balances Assumes State Aid has sufficient funds to Advance Maximum Advancement $4M Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Beginning Year Balance $10,276 -$375,819 -$2,134,028 -$3,319,001 -$5,484,762 -$4,730,926 -$5,357,101 -$6,462,888 Allocation (assume 2% adjustment annually $923,324 $941,791 $960,627 $979,839 $999,436 $1,019,425 $1,039,813 $1,060,610 Yearly Programmed Expenditure $1,309,419 $2,700,000 $2,145,600 $3,145,600 $245,600 $1,645,600 $2,145,600 $600,000 Year Ending Balance -$375,819 -$2,134,028 -$3,319,001 -$5,484,762 -$4,730,926 -$5,357,101 -$6,462,888 -$6,002,278 Lake Drive E Minnewashta Pkwy Galpin Blvd.TH 41/82nd St. Signal Bluff Creek Drive Pleasant View Road Market Blvd $700,000 Powers Blvd. Ped Crossing $300,000 FYA - JPA with Carver County $22,000 Park Road - Add'n Expense $287,419 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $100,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $600,000 Lake Lucy Road Lake Drive W. & Great Plains $700,000 $500,000 Lyman Blvd. Galpin to 41 Lyman Blvd. Galpin to 41 Lyman Blvd. Galpin to 41 Lyman Blvd. Galpin to 41 Lyman Blvd. Galpin to 41 $1,645,600 $145,600.00 $145,600.00 $145,600.00 $145,600.00 Over/Under Maximum -$1,484,762 -$730,926 -$1,357,101 -$2,462,888 -$2,002,278 Subtotal $2.5 Million Lyman Market Blvd Imp. (78th to TH5)Signal Imp. On TH 41 Bluff Creek Drive (Pioneer Trail to Flying Cloud Drive) Pleasant View Road (Powers to TH 101) Galpin Blvd. (TH 5 to north City limits) Lyman Blvd west of Galpin Blvd Lake Drive E ( Dakota to Great Plains) Great Plains south of TH 5 Minnewashta Pkwy (TH 7 to south City limits), Lake Lucy TH 41 to Galpin Blvd., Lyman Blvd west of Galpin Blvd. Projects Lake Drive Imp. (Dell to Dakota), Powers Blvd. Ped Crossing, FYA JPA with Carver County, Park Road PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ONLINE FEED BACK Page 1 of 1 Regina Dean 1010 Barbara Court Chanhassen MN 55317 612-889-9541 reginarojas79@gmail.com Submitted: 8/19/2019 9:36:44 AM I am in support of enabling the use of franchise fees as a way to pay for pavement management. I am also in favor of using franchise fees as a way to pay for other eligible uses within the City. The nice thing about franchise fees is that everyone who uses them pays. This is an equitable way to pay for services. Uses that are tax exempt (churches, religious institutions, schools, non-profits, etc.) or people that lease are still paying a share. The City should pursue capturing franchise fees while they still can since this could be taken away by the state legislation at any time. Nancy Carruth 753 WOOD HILL RD CHANHASSEN Minnesota 55317- 9561 16127435473 nmack2000@gmail.com Submitted: 8/20/2019 9:43:32 AM I went to meetings last year and provided input. I support an increase in taxes to ensure our streets are maintained. Taxes provide transparency to constituents. Fee insinuates not a tax and is hidden in utility bills. I support the spending, just not the funding method. Thanks. Jennifer Weiner 1350 Lake Susan Hills Drive Chanhassen Minnesota 55317 952-270-0687 jawindholz@yahoo.com Submitted: 8/21/2019 11:17:49 AM I was just forced to pay to have my own street redone in 2917, Iâ€™m not particularly interested in having to fund othersâ€™ streets. This feels like double dipping. My streets probably wonâ€™t be redone for another 20 years so I will never benefit from this levy. I think my neighbors and I who have already paid for this service should be exempt from this tax for at least 10 years. Barry Weiner 1350 Lake Susan Hills Drive Chanhassen MN 55317 952-220-9079 weiner.b@yahoo.com Submitted: 8/21/2019 12:00:10 PM We have already paid high taxes for the road work that was done recently. Now you want to assess an additional levy on hard working families. This is ridiculous. I'd like the representatives I elect to actually represent the people and vote down this increase. Enough is enough! Thank you. ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING AN ELECTRIC SERVICE FRANCHISE FEE ON MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, A MINNESOTA COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City of Chanhassen Municipal Code is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance. Subd. 1. Purpose. The Chanhassen City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide electric services within the City of Chanhassen. (a) Pursuant to City Ordinance ______, a Franchise Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, a Minnesota cooperative association, its successors and assigns, the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, a Minnesota cooperative association, its successors and assigns, in an amount and fee design as allowed in Section 10 of the Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative Franchise and in the fee schedule attached hereto as Schedule A. Subd. 2. Franchise Fee Statement. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, a Minnesota cooperative association, its successors and assigns (“Company”), under its electric franchise in accordance with the schedule attached here to and made a part of this Ordinance, commencing with the Company’s March 2019 billing month. Subd. 3. Account-Based Fee. This fee is an account-based fee on each premise and not a meter-based fee. In the event that an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter at a single premise, but only one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. If a premise has two or more meters being billed at different rates, the Company may have an account for each rate classification, which will result in more than one franchise fee assessment for electric service to that premise. If the Company combines the rate classifications into a single account, the franchise fee assessed to the account will be the largest franchise fee applicable to a single rate classification for energy delivered to that premise. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance have more than one premise, each premise (address) shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a question arises as to the proper fee amount for any premise, the Company’s manner of billing for energy used at all similar premises in the city will control. Subd. 4. Payment. The franchise fee shall be payable to the City in accordance with the terms set forth in Section 10 of the Franchise. Subd. 5. Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission may allow Company to add a surcharge to customer rates of city residents to reimburse Company for the cost of the fee. 2 Subd. 6. Permit Fees. Franchise fees collected under this Ordinance shall be in lieu of permit fees otherwise payable by the Company under Section 10.1 of the Franchise ordinance, provided, however, that the Company shall continue to be required to obtain and comply with all right-of-way or other permits required by the City during the period a franchise fee is collected. Subd. 7. Documentation of Franchise Fee Payments. The Company shall annually provide the City with documentation supporting its determination of the franchise fee owed to the City. In the event there is a dispute concerning the franchise fee determination, then the Company and the City shall proceed under section 2.5 “Dispute Resolution” of the Electric Franchise Ordinance. Any verified underpayment or overpayment of franchise fees shall be paid by the party owing the underpayment or overpayment to the other within thirty (30) days of verification, plus interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Subd. 8. Enforcement. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this ordinance will be resolved in accordance with Section 2.5 of the Franchise Agreement. Subd. 9. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be after its publication and ninety (90) days after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted Ordinance to the Company by certified mail. Collection of the fee shall commence as provided above. Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota 3 SCHEDULE A Franchise Fee Rates: Electric Utility The franchise fee shall be in an amount determined by applying the following schedule per customer premise/per month based on metered service to retail customers within the City: Class Amount per month Residential $ 5.00 Sm C & I – Non-Dem $ 14.00 Sm C & I – Demand $ 40.00 Large C & I $ 290.00 Public Street Ltg $ 0 Muni Pumping –N/D $ 0 Muni Pumping – Dem $ 0 Franchise fees are submitted to the City on a quarterly basis as follows: January – March collections due by April 30. April – June collections due by July 31. July – September collections due by October 31. October – December collections due by January 31. ELECTRIC FRANCHISE ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. ______. CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, A MINNESOTA COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN IN THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA, AN ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND TRANSMISSION LINES, INCLUDING NECESSARY POLES, LINES, FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES, FOR THE FURNISHING OF ELECTRIC ENERGY TO THE CITY, ITS INHABITANTS, AND OTHERS, AND TO USE THE PUBLIC GROUNDS AND PUBLIC WAYS OF THE CITY FOR SUCH PURPOSES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1 City. The City of Chanhassen, County of Carver and Hennepin, State of Minnesota. 1.2 City Utility System. Facilities used for providing non-energy related public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer, storm sewer, water service, street lighting and traffic signals, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. 1.3 Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all or part of the authority to regulate electric retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4 Company. Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, a Minnesota cooperative association, its successors and assigns including all successors or assignees that own or operate any part or parts of the Electric Facilities subject to this franchise. 1.5 Electric Facilities. Electric transmission and distribution towers, poles, lines, guys, anchors, conduits, fixtures, and necessary appurtenances owned or operated by Company for the purpose of providing electric energy for public or private use. 1.6 Notice. A written notice served by one party on the other party referencing one or more provisions of this Ordinance. Notice to Company shall be mailed to the Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, 125 Minnesota Valley Electric Drive, Jordan, MN 55352. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City Administrator, City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, 2 Chanhassen, MN 55317. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other party. 1.7 Public Way. Any public right-of-way within the City as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.162, subd. 3. 1.8 Public Ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for park, open space or similar public purpose, which is held for use in common by the public and not a Public Way. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE. 2.1. Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the date this Ordinance is passed and approved by the City, the right to transmit and furnish electric energy for light, heat and power for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. For these purposes, Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Electric Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however, to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to ordinance or permit requirements and to the further provisions of this franchise agreement. 2.2. Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after the passage of this Ordinance and publication as required by law and its acceptance by Company. If Company does not file a written acceptance with the City within 60 days after the date the City Council adopts this Ordinance, the City Council by resolution may revoke this franchise, seek its enforcement in a competent jurisdiction or pursue other remedies in law or in equity. 2.3. Service, Rates and Area. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for electric service in City are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to the extent provided by law. The area within the City in which Company may provide electric service is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B. 37 - .40. 2.4. Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this Ordinance will be paid by City and reimbursed to City by Company. 2.5. Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within thirty (30) days of the date of written Notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. 2.6. Continuation of Franchise. If the City and the Company are unable to agree on the terms of a new franchise by the time this franchise expires, this franchise will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon, or until 90 days after the City or the Company serves written Notice to 3 the other party of its intention to allow the franchise to expire. However, in no event shall this franchise continue for more than one year after expiration of the 20-year term set forth in Section 2.1. SECTION 3. LOCATION, OTHER REGULATIONS. 3.1. Location of Facilities. Electric Facilities shall be located, constructed, and maintained so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over Public Ways and so as not to disrupt or interfere with the normal operation of any City Utility System. Electric Facilities may be located on Public Grounds as determined by the City. Company’s construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, location and relocation of Electric Facilities shall be subject to other reasonable regulations of the City consistent with authority granted the City to manage its Public Ways and Public Grounds under state law, to the extent not inconsistent with a specific term of this franchise agreement. 3.2. Street Openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, if required by a separate ordinance for which the City may impose a reasonable fee. Permit conditions imposed on Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground without a permit if (i) an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of Electric Facilities and (ii) Company gives telephone notice to the City before, if reasonably possible, commencement of the emergency repair. Within two business days after commencing the repair, Company shall apply for any required permits and pay any required fees. 3.3. Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any Public Way, the Company shall restore the Public Way in accordance with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.1100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. Company shall restore Public Ground to as good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain the surface in good condition for six (6) months thereafter. All work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground in the said condition, the City shall have, after demand to Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration of the Public Ground at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section 3.3. Company shall also post a construction performance bond consistent with provisions of the Minnesota Rules parts 7819.3000 and 7819.0100, subpart 6. 3.5. Avoid Damage to Electric Facilities. The Company must take reasonable measures to prevent the Electric Facilities from causing damage to persons or property. The Company must take reasonable measures to protect the Electric Facilities from damage that could be inflicted on the Facilities by persons, property, or the elements. The Company must take protective measures when the City performs work near the Electric Facilities, if given reasonable notice by the City of such work prior to its commencement. 3.6. Notice of Improvements to Streets. The City must give Company reasonable written Notice of plans for improvements to Public Grounds or Public Ways where the City has reason to believe that Electric Facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: 4 (i) the nature and character of the improvements, (ii) the Public Grounds or Public Ways upon which the improvements are to be made, (iii) the extent of the improvements, (iv) the time when the City will start the work, and (v) if more than one Public Ground or Public Way is involved, the order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time, considering seasonal working conditions, in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any additions, alterations or repairs to its Electric Facilities the Company deems necessary. 3.7. Mapping Information. The Company must promptly provide mapping information for any of it underground Electric Facilities in accordance with Minnesota Rules parts 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. 3.8 Shared Use of Poles. Company shall make space available on its poles or towers for City fire, water utility, police or other City facilities whenever such use will not interfere with the use of such poles or towers by Company, by another electric utility, by a telephone utility, or by any cable television company or other form of communication company. In addition, the City shall pay for any added cost incurred by Company because of such use by City. SECTION 4. FACILITIES RELOCATION. 4.1. Relocation in Public Ways. The Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.3100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. 4.2. Relocation in Public Grounds. City may require Company at Company’s expense to relocate or remove its Electric Facilities from Public Ground upon a finding by City that the Electric Facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Public Ground. Such relocation shall comply with applicable ordinances consistent with law. 4.3. Projects with Federal Funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any Electric Facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally-aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 161.46. SECTION 5. TREE TRIMMING. Unless otherwise provided in any permit or other reasonable regulation required by the City under separate ordinance, Company may trim all trees and shrubs in the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City to the extent Company finds necessary to avoid interference with the proper construction, operation, repair and maintenance of any Electric Facilities installed hereunder, provided that Company shall hold the City harmless from any liability arising therefrom. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION. 6.1. Indemnity of City. Company shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all liability, on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the Electric Facilities located in the Public Grounds and Public Ways. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City’s negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company’s plans or work. 5 6.2. Defense of City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense shall defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a period wherein Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City; and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This franchise agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. SECTION 7. VACATION OF PUBLIC WAYS. The City shall give Company at least two weeks prior written notice of a proposed vacation of a Public Way. The City and the Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, 7819.3200 and applicable ordinances consistent with law. SECTION 8. ABANDONED FACILITIES. The Company shall comply with City ordinances, Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D.01 et seq. and Minnesota Rules Part 7819.3300, as they may be amended from time to time. The Company shall maintain records describing the exact location of all abandoned and retired Facilities within the City, produce such records at the City’s request and comply with the location requirements of Section 216D.04 with respect to all Facilities, including abandoned and retired Facilities. SECTION 9. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 10. FRANCHISE FEE. 10.1. Form. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in addition to permit fees being imposed or that the City has a right to impose, the City may charge the Company a franchise fee. The fee may be (i) a percentage of gross revenues received by the Company for its operations within the City, or (ii) a flat fee per customer based on metered service to retail customers within the City or on some other similar basis, or (iii) a fee based on units of energy delivered to any class of retail customers within the corporate limits of the City. The formula for a franchise fee based on units of energy delivered may incorporate both commodity and demand units. The method of imposing the franchise fee, the percentage of revenue rate, or the flat rate based on metered service may differ for each customer class or combine the methods described in (i) - (iii) above in assessing the fee. The City shall seek to use a formula that provides a stable and predictable amount of fees, without placing the Company at a competitive disadvantage. If the Company claims that the City-required fee formula is discriminatory or otherwise places the Company at a competitive disadvantage, the Company shall provide a formula that will produce a 6 substantially similar fee amount to the City and reimburse the City’s reasonable fees and costs in reviewing the formula. The City will attempt to accommodate the Company but is under no franchise obligation to adopt the Company-proposed franchise fee formula and such review will not delay the implementation of the City-imposed fee. 10.2. Separate Ordinance. The franchise fee shall be imposed by separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least thirty (30) days after written notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon the Company. The fee shall become effective ten (10) days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon the Company by certified mail. 10.3. Condition of Fee. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against the Company unless it lawfully imposes a fee of the same or substantially similar amount on the sale of electric energy within the City by any other electric energy supplier, provided that, as to such supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee. 10.4. Collection of Fee. The franchise fee shall be payable not less than quarterly during complete billing months of the period for which payment is to be made. The franchise fee formula may be changed from time to time; however, the change shall meet the same notice requirements and the fee may not be changed more often than annually. Such fee shall not exceed any amount that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City. Such fee is subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles and customer refunds incurred by the Company. The Company agrees to make available for inspection by the City at reasonable times all records necessary to audit the Company’s determination of the franchise fee payments. 10.5. Continuation of Franchise Fee. If this franchise expires and the City and the Company are unable to agree upon terms of a new franchise, the franchise fee, if any being imposed by the City at the time this franchise expires, will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon notwithstanding the franchise expiration as provided in section 2.6 above. SECTION 11. SERVICE RELIABILITY, INFRASTRUCTURE REPORTING. The Company and the City shall meet annually at a mutually convenient time to discuss items of concern or interest relating to the Company’s service reliability in the previous year, compared to other service areas, infrastructure plans for the coming year and other matters raised by the City or Company. Upon request, the Company shall produce reports comparing its service record in the City to other service areas and provide, among other reasonably required data, System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI), Customers Experiencing Multiple interruptions (CEMI) and municipal pumping station and general customer outage data for the previous year. 7 SECTION 12. PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE. 12.1. Severability. Every section, provision, or part of this Ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part; and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part; provided, however, that if the City is unable to enforce its franchise fee provisions for any reason the City will be allowed to amend the franchise agreement to impose a franchise fee pursuant to statute. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. 12.2. Limitation on Applicability. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and Company as the only parties and no provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person (including the public at large) so as to constitute any such person as a third party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. SECTION 13. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. Either party to this franchise agreement may at any time propose that the agreement be amended. This Ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company’s written consent thereto with the City Clerk after City council adoption of the amendatory ordinance. This amendatory procedure is subject, however, to the City’s police power and franchise rights under Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B.36 and 301B.01, which rights are not waived hereby. Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING AN ELECTRIC SERVICE FRANCHISE FEE ON NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City of Chanhassen Municipal Code is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance. Subd. 1. Purpose. The Chanhassen City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide electric services within the City of Chanhassen. (a) Pursuant to City Ordinance ______, a Franchise Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns, the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns, in an amount and fee design as allowed in Section 9 of the Northern States Power Company Franchise and in the fee schedule attached hereto as Schedule A. Subd. 2. Franchise Fee Statement. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota Corporation, its successors and assigns, under its electric franchise in accordance with the schedule attached here to and made a part of this Ordinance, commencing with the NSPM March 2019billing month. Subd. 3. Account-Based Fee. This fee is an account-based fee on each premise and not a meter-based fee. In the event that an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter at a single premise, but only one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. If a premise has two or more meters being billed at different rates, the Company may have an account for each rate classification, which will result in more than one franchise fee assessment for electric service to that premise. If the Company combines the rate classifications into a single account, the franchise fee assessed to the account will be the largest franchise fee applicable to a single rate classification for energy delivered to that premise. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance have more than one premise, each premise (address) shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a question arises as to the proper fee amount for any premise, the Company’s manner of billing for energy used at all similar premises in the city will control. Subd. 4. Payment. The said franchise fee shall be payable to the City in accordance with the terms set forth in Section 9 of the Franchise. Subd. 5. Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission may allow Company to add a surcharge to customer rates of city residents to reimburse Company for the cost of the fee. 2 Subd. 6. Enforcement. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this ordinance will be resolved in accordance with Section 2.5 of the Franchise Agreement. Subd. 7. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be after its publication and ninety (90) days after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted Ordinance to NSPM by certified mail. Collection of the fee shall commence as provided above. Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota 3 SCHEDULE A Franchise Fee Rates: Electric Utility The franchise fee shall be in an amount determined by applying the following schedule per customer premise/per month based on metered service to retail customers within the City: Class Amount per month Residential $ 5.00 Sm C & I – Non-Dem $ 14.00 Sm C & I – Demand $ 40.00 Large C & I $ 290.00 Public Street Ltg $ 0 Muni Pumping – N/D $ 0 Muni Pumping – Dem $ 0 Franchise fees are submitted to the City on a quarterly basis as follows: January – March collections due by April 30. April – June collections due by July 31. July – September collections due by October 31. October – December collections due by January 31. ELECTRIC FRANCHISE ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. ______. CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN IN THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA, AN ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND TRANSMISSION LINES, INCLUDING NECESSARY POLES, LINES, FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES, FOR THE FURNISHING OF ELECTRIC ENERGY TO THE CITY, ITS INHABITANTS, AND OTHERS, AND TO USE THE PUBLIC GROUNDS AND PUBLIC WAYS OF THE CITY FOR SUCH PURPOSES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1 City. The City of Chanhassen, County of Carver and Hennepin, State of Minnesota. 1.2 City Utility System. Facilities used for providing non-energy related public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer, storm sewer, water service, street lighting and traffic signals, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. 1.3 Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all or part of the authority to regulate electric retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4 Company. Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns including all successors or assignees that own or operate any part or parts of the Electric Facilities subject to this franchise. 1.5 Electric Facilities. Electric transmission and distribution towers, poles, lines, guys, anchors, conduits, fixtures, and necessary appurtenances owned or operated by Company for the purpose of providing electric energy for public or private use. 1.6 Notice. A written notice served by one party on the other party referencing one or more provisions of this Ordinance. Notice to Company shall be mailed to the General Counsel, 401 Nicollet Mall, 8th Floor, Minneapolis, MN 55401. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City Administrator, City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other party. 2 1.7 Public Way. Any public right-of-way within the City as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.162, subd. 3. 1.8 Public Ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for park, open space or similar public purpose, which is held for use in common by the public and not a Public Way. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE. 2.1. Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the date this Ordinance is passed and approved by the City, the right to transmit and furnish electric energy for light, heat and power for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. For these purposes, Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Electric Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however, to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to ordinance or permit requirements and to the further provisions of this franchise agreement. 2.2. Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after the passage of this Ordinance and publication as required by law and its acceptance by Company. If Company does not file a written acceptance with the City within 90 days after the date the City Council adopts this Ordinance, the City Council by resolution may revoke this franchise or seek its enforcement in a competent jurisdiction. 2.3. Service, Rates and Area. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for electric service in City are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission. The area within the City in which Company may provide electric service is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B. 37 - .40. 2.4. Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this Ordinance will be paid by City and reimbursed to City by Company. 2.5. Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within thirty (30) days of the date of written Notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. 2.6. Continuation of Franchise. If the City and the Company are unable to agree on the terms of a new franchise by the time this franchise expires, this franchise will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon, or until 90 days after the City or the Company serves written Notice to the other party of its intention to allow the franchise to expire. However, in no event shall this franchise continue for more than one year after expiration of the 20-year term set forth in Section 2.1. 3 SECTION 3. LOCATION, OTHER REGULATIONS. 3.1. Location of Facilities. Electric Facilities shall be located, constructed, and maintained so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over Public Ways and so as not to disrupt or interfere with the normal operation of any City Utility System. Electric Facilities may be located on Public Grounds as determined by the City. Company’s construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, location and relocation of Electric Facilities shall be subject to other reasonable regulations of the City consistent with authority granted the City to manage its Public Ways and Public Grounds under state law, to the extent not inconsistent with a specific term of this franchise agreement. Company may abandon underground Electric Facilities in place, provided, that at the City’s request, Company will remove all abandoned Electric Facilities interfering with a City improvement project, but only to the extent the Facilities are uncovered or will be uncovered by excavation as part of the City improvement project. 3.2. Street Openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, if required by a separate ordinance for which the City may impose a reasonable fee subject to the provisions of Section 9. Permit conditions imposed on Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground without a permit if (i) an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of Electric Facilities and (ii) Company gives telephone notice to the City before, if reasonably possible, commencement of the emergency repair. Within two business days after commencing the repair, Company shall apply for any required permits and pay any required fees. 3.3. Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any Public Way, the Company shall restore the Public Way in accordance with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.1100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. Company shall restore Public Ground to as good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain the surface in good condition for six (6) months thereafter. All work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground in the said condition, the City shall have the right, after demand to Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, to make the restoration of the Public Ground at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section 3.3. The City conditionally waives any requirement for Company to post a construction performance bond, certificate of insurance, letter of credit or any other form of security or assurance that may be required, under a separate existing or future ordinance of the City, of a person or entity obtaining the City’s permission to install, replace or maintain facilities in a Public Way or the Public Ground. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City reserves the right to require a performance bond acceptable to the City and Company for new installation, replacement or repairs when the Company’s completion of its work is required in order for the City to proceed with its work for constructing a public improvement to the Public Way, or if Company has failed to properly or timely restore its work under a permit issued within two years of the Company’s project permit application. 3.4. Avoid Damage to Electric Facilities. Nothing in this Ordinance relieves any person, including Company, from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging Electric Facilities or other persons or property while performing any activity. 4 3.5. Notice of Improvements to Streets. The City must give Company reasonable written Notice of plans for improvements to Public Grounds or Public Ways where the City has reason to believe that Electric Facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: (i) the nature and character of the improvements, (ii) the Public Grounds or Public Ways upon which the improvements are to be made, (iii) the extent of the improvements, (iv) the time when the City will start the work, and (v) if more than one Public Ground or Public Way is involved, the order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time, considering seasonal working conditions, in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any additions, alterations or repairs to its Electric Facilities the Company deems necessary. 3.6. Mapping Information. The Company must promptly provide mapping information for any of it underground Electric Facilities in accordance with Minnesota Rules parts 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. 3.7 Shared Use of Poles. Company shall make space available on its poles or towers for City fire, water utility, police or other City facilities upon terms and conditions reasonably acceptable to Company whenever such use will not interfere with the use of such poles or towers by Company, by another electric utility, by a telephone utility, or by any cable television company or other form of communication company. In addition, the City shall pay for any added cost incurred by Company because of such use by City. SECTION 4. FACILITIES RELOCATION. 4.1. Relocation in Public Ways. The Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.3100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. 4.2. Relocation in Public Grounds. City may require Company at Company’s expense to relocate or remove its Electric Facilities from Public Ground upon a finding by City that the Electric Facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Public Ground. Such relocation shall comply with applicable ordinances consistent with law. 4.3. Projects with Federal Funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any Electric Facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally-aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 161.46. The City is obligated to pay Company only for those portions of its relocation costs for which City has received federal funding specifically allocated for relocation costs in the amount requested by Company. The City shall reimburse Company pursuant to this Section and the Government Prompt Payment Act, Minn. Stat. § 471.425, after relocation costs are determined. 5 SECTION 5. TREE TRIMMING. Unless otherwise provided in any permit or other reasonable regulation required by the City under separate ordinance, Company may trim all trees and shrubs in the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City to the extent Company finds necessary to avoid interference with the proper construction, operation, repair and maintenance of any Electric Facilities installed hereunder, provided that Company shall hold the City harmless from any liability arising therefrom. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION. 6.1. Indemnity of City. Company shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all liability, on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the Electric Facilities located in the Public Grounds and Public Ways. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City’s negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company’s plans or work. 6.2. Defense of City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense shall defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a period wherein Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City; and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This franchise agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. SECTION 7. VACATION OF PUBLIC WAYS. The City shall give Company at least two weeks prior written notice of a proposed vacation of a Public Way. Except where required for a City improvement project, the vacation of any Public Way, after the installation of Electric Facilities, shall not operate to deprive Company of its rights to operate and maintain such Electric Facilities until the reasonable cost of relocating the same are first paid to Company. The City and Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, subpart 7819.3200 and applicable ordinances consistent with law. SECTION 8. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 9. FRANCHISE FEE. 9.1 Fee Schedule. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in lieu of any permit or other fees being imposed on Company, the City may impose on Company a franchise fee by 6 collecting the amounts indicated in a Fee Schedule set forth in a separate ordinance from each customer in the designated Company Customer Class. The parties have agreed that the initial franchise fee collected by the Company and paid to the City in accordance with this Section 9 shall be a fixed monthly fee in accordance with the following customer classes and in amounts as set forth pursuant to section 9.2 below. The City reserves its right to modify these fees from time to time, upward or downward, subject to the amendatory procedure stated in Section 12 below. Class Fee Per Premise Per Month Residential $ 5.00 Sm C & I – Non-Dem $ 14.00 Sm C & I – Demand $ 40.00 Large C & I $ 290.00 Public Street Ltg $ 0 Muni Pumping – N/D $ 0 Muni Pumping – Dem $ 0 9.2 Separate Ordinance. The franchise fee shall be imposed by a separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least 90 days after written notice of the City’s intent to impose a fee has been served upon Company. The fee shall not become effective until the beginning of a Company billing month at least 90 days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon Company by certified mail. Section 2.5 shall constitute the sole remedy for solving disputes between Company and the City in regard to the interpretation of, or enforcement of, the separate ordinance. 9.3 Terms Defined. For the purpose of this Section 9, the following definitions apply: 9.3.1 “Customer Class” shall refer to the classes listed on the Fee Schedule and as defined or determined in Company’s electric tariffs on file with the Commission. 9.3.2 “Fee Schedule” refers to the schedule in Section 9.1 setting forth the various customer classes from which a franchise fee would be collected if a separate ordinance were implemented immediately after the effective date of this franchise agreement. The Fee Schedule in the separate ordinance may include new Customer Class added by Company to its electric tariffs after the effective date of this franchise. 9.4 Collection of the Fee. The franchise fee shall be payable quarterly and shall be based on the amount collected by Company during complete billing months during the period for which payment is to be made by imposing a surcharge equal to the designated franchise fee for the applicable customer classification in all customer billings for electric service in each class. The payment shall be due the last business day of the month following the period for which the payment is made. The franchise fee may be changed by ordinance from time to time; however, each change shall meet the same notice requirements and not occur more often than annually and no change shall require a collection from any customer for electric service in excess of the amounts specifically permitted by this Section 9. The parties acknowledge that certain elements of collecting the franchise fee are subject to the approval of the Commission. No franchise fee shall be payable by Company if Company is legally unable to first collect an amount equal to the franchise fee from its customers in each applicable class of customers by imposing a surcharge in Company’s applicable rates for electric service. Company may 7 pay the City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles, refunds and correction of erroneous billings. Company agrees to make its records available for inspection and audit by the City at reasonable times provided that the City and its designated representative agree in writing, subject to requirements of law otherwise, not to disclose any information which would indicate the amount paid by any identifiable customer or customers or any other information regarding identified customers. If any error in collection of franchise fees is discovered by either party, the City and Company shall meet as soon as reasonably practical to negotiate the means, methods and timing in which the fee payment shall be made to the City. In no event shall fees the Company cannot collect from customers be included in the amount payable to the City. 9.5 Equivalent Fee Requirement. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against Company unless it lawfully imposes and the City quarterly or more often collects a fee or tax of the same or greater equivalent amount on the receipts from sales of energy within the City by any other energy supplier, provided that, as to such a supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax. The “same or greater equivalent amount” shall be measured, if practicable, by comparing amounts collected as a franchise fee from each similar customer class, or by comparing, as to similar customer classes the percentage of the annual bill represented by the amount collected for franchise fee purposes. The franchise fee or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use related to heating, cooling or lighting, or to run machinery and appliances, but shall not apply to energy sales for the purpose of providing fuel for vehicles. The Company may waive the foregoing of this Section 9.5, to the extent of such written consent. SECTION 10. SERVICE RELIABILITY, INFRASTRUCTURE REPORTING. The Company and the City shall meet annually at a mutually convenient time to discuss items of concern or interest relating to this Franchise, including, but not limited to, collaborative infrastructure planning, vegetation management and reliability performance. Upon request, the Company shall provide to City reporting information on service reliability, including System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) and other measures as may be beneficial and mutually agreeable, such as Customers Experiencing Multiple interruptions (CEMI) or other outage data, the exact form and content of which shall all be mutually agreed to by City and Company. SECTION 11. PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE. 11.1. Severability. Every section, provision, or part of this Ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part; and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part; provided, however, if any provision is held invalid, the parties agree to negotiate in good faith to substitute, to the extent reasonably possible, amended provisions that validly carry out the primary purpose of the invalid provisions. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. 11.2. Limitation on Applicability. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and Company as the only parties and no provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person (including the public at large) so as to constitute any such person as a third party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. 8 SECTION 12. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. Either party to this franchise agreement may at any time propose that the agreement be amended. This Ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company’s written consent thereto with the City Clerk after City council adoption of the amendatory ordinance. This amendatory procedure, however, is not a waiver of Company’s or the City’s rights or arguments, whether under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 216B.36 and 301B.01 or other applicable law or otherwise. Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A GAS ENERGY FRANCHISE FEE ON CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNESOTA GAS, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FOR PROVIDING GAS ENERGY SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City of Chanhassen Municipal Code is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance. Subd. 1. Purpose. The Chanhassen City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide gas services within the City of Chanhassen. (a) Pursuant to City Ordinance ______, a Franchise Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas, its successors and assigns, the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas, its successors and assigns, in an amount and fee design as allowed in Section 7.1 of the CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas Franchise and in the fee schedule attached hereto as Schedule A. Subd. 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this Ordinance, the following terms shall have the following meanings: (a) City. The City of Chanhassen, County of Carver and Hennepin, State of Minnesota. (b) Company. CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas, its successors and assigns. (c) Franchise. The franchise agreement between the City and Company pursuant to City Ordinance No. 336. Subd. 3. Notice. Means a writing served by either party hereto to the other party. Notice to Company shall be mailed to CenterPoint Energy, Vice President Regional Operations, 505 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 55402. Notice to City shall be mailed to the City Administrator, City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317. Subd. 4. Account Fee. This fee is an account-based fee and not a meter-based fee. In the event that an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter, but only one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance have more than one account, each account shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a question arises as to the proper fee amount for any account, the highest possible fee amount shall apply. Subd. 5. Franchise Fee Statement and Payment. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on CenterPoint Energy (“Company”), under its gas franchise in accordance with the Schedule A attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance, commencing with the Company’s March 2019 billing month. Franchise fees are to be collected by the Company, consistent with the Minnesota 2 Public Utility Commission’s March 23, 2011 Order establishing franchise fee filing requirements in Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970. Subd. 6. Record Support for Payment; Audit. (a) The Company shall make each payment when due and, if requested by the City, shall provide a statement summarizing how the franchise fee payment was determined, including information showing any adjustments to the total made to account for any non-collectible accounts, refunds or error corrections. The Company shall permit the City, and its representatives, access to the Company’s records for the purpose of verifying such statements. (b) No more than once every three (3) years and upon thirty (30) days prior written notice, City shall have the right to conduct an independent review/audit of the Company’s records solely for the purpose of assessing the Company’s compliance with the franchise fee obligation herein. In the event the audit reveals an underpayment of five percent (5%) or more of the franchise fee amounts due during the period audited, the Company shall reimburse the City’s audit fees and expenses in full. Any verified underpayment of franchise fees shall be paid to the City within thirty (30) days of verification, plus interest at the same rate ordered by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission for interim rate refunds from the Company’s most recent rate case. Subd. 7. Payment Adjustments. Payment to the City will be adjusted where the Company is unable to collect the franchise fee. This includes non-collectible accounts Subd. 8. Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission may allow the Company to add a surcharge to customer rates of City residents to reimburse the Company for the cost of the fee, consistent with the Minnesota Public Utility Commission’s March 23, 2011 Order establishing franchise fee filing requirements in Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970. Subd. 9. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be after its publication and ninety (90) days after sending written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted Ordinance to Company by certified mail, whichever is later. Collection of the fee shall commence as provided above. Subd. 10. Relation to Franchise. This ordinance is enacted in compliance with the Franchise and shall be interpreted in accordance with its terms and applicable law. Subd. 11. Permit Fees. The Company will administer the collection and payment of franchise fees to the City in lieu of permit fees, or other fees that may otherwise be imposed on the Company in relation to its operations as a public utility in the City so long as the following requirements are met: (a) The Company applies for any and all permits, licenses and similar documentation as though this provision did not exist. (b) The Company requests the fee to be waived at the time of application. 3 Subd. 12. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be after its publication and ninety (90) days after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted Ordinance to the Company by certified mail. Collection of the fee shall commence as provided above. Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota 4 SCHEDULE A Franchise Fee Rates: Gas Utility The franchise fee shall be in an amount determined by applying the following schedule per customer premise/per month based on metered service to retail customers within the City: Class Amount per Month Residential $ 5.00 Firm A $ 5.00 Firm B $ 9.00 Firm C $ 20.00 Small Volume, Dual Fuel A (“SVDF A”) $ 90.00 Small Volume, Dual Fuel B (“SVDF B”) $ 90.00 Large Volume, Dual Fuel (“LVDF”) $ 90.00 Franchise fees are submitted to the City on a quarterly basis as follows: January – March collections due by April 30. April – June collections due by July 31. July – September collections due by October 31. October – December collections due by January 31. 612108v3CH135-60 GAS FRANCHISE ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. ______. CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO CENTERPOINT ENERGY RESOURCES CORP. d/b/a CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNESOTA GAS (“CENTERPOINT ENERGY”), A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION, DISTRIBUTION, MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF GAS ENERGY FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE USE AND TO USE THE PUBLIC WAYS AND GROUNDS OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA, FOR SUCH PURPOSE; AND, PRESCRIBING CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1 City. The City of Chanhassen, County of Carver and Hennepin, State of Minnesota. 1.2 City Utility System. Facilities used for providing non-energy related public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer, storm sewer, water service, street lighting and traffic signals, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. 1.3 Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all or part of the authority to regulate gas retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4 Company. CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp. d/b/a CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas (“CenterPoint Energy”), a Delaware corporation, its successors and assigns including all successors or assignees that own or operate any part or parts of the Gas Facilities subject to this franchise. 1.5 Effective Date. The date on which the ordinance becomes effective under Section 2.2. 1.6 Gas. Natural gas, manufactured gas, mixture of natural gas and manufactured gas or other forms of gas energy. 1.7 Gas Facilities. Gas transmission and distribution pipes, mains, lines, ducts, fixtures, and necessary equipment and appurtenances owned or operated or otherwise used by the Company for the purpose of providing gas energy for public or private use. 2 612108v3CH135-60 1.8 Non-Betterment Costs. Costs incurred by the Company from relocation, removal or rearrangement of Gas Facilities that do not result in an improvement to the Facilities. 1.9 Notice. A written notice served by one party on the other party referencing one or more provisions of this Ordinance. Notice to Company shall be mailed CenterPoint Energy, Vice President Regional Operations, 505 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 55402. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City Administrator, City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other party. 1.10 Public Way. Any street, alley or other public right-of-way within the City as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.162, subd. 3. 1.11 Public Ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for park, open space or similar public purpose, which is held for use in common by the public and not a Public Way. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE. 2.1. Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of twenty (20) years from the date this Ordinance is passed and approved by the City, the right to import, manufacture, transport, distribute and sell Gas for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. This right includes the provision of Gas that is (i) manufactured by the Company or its affiliates and delivered by the Company, (ii) purchased and delivered by the Company or (iii) purchased from another source by the retail customer and delivered by the Company. For these purposes, Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Gas Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however, to such lawful regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to ordinance or permit requirements and to the further provisions of this Ordinance. 2.2. Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after the passage of this Ordinance and publication as required by law and its acceptance by Company. If Company does not file a written acceptance with the City within sixty (60) days after the date the City Council adopts this Ordinance, the City Council by resolution may revoke this franchise, seek its enforcement in a competent jurisdiction or pursue other remedies in law or in equity. 2.3. Non-exclusive Franchise. This Ordinance does not grant an exclusive franchise. 2.4. Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this Ordinance will be paid by Company. 2.5. Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within thirty (30) days of the date of written Notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days after first meeting with 3 612108v3CH135-60 the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. 2.6. Continuation of Franchise. If the City and the Company are unable to agree on the terms of a new franchise by the time this franchise expires, this franchise will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon, or until ninety (90) days after the City or the Company serves written Notice to the other party of its intention to allow the franchise to expire. However, in no event shall this franchise continue for more than one year after expiration of the 20-year term set forth in Section 2.1. SECTION 3. LOCATION, OTHER REGULATIONS. 3.1. Location of Facilities. Gas Facilities shall be located, constructed, installed and maintained so as not to interfere with the City Utility System or safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over Public Ways and so as not to disrupt or interfere with the normal operation of any City Utility System. Gas Facilities may be located on Public Grounds as determined by the City. Company’s construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, location and relocation of Gas Facilities shall be subject to other reasonable regulations of the City consistent with authority granted the City to manage its Public Ways and Public Grounds under state law, to the extent not inconsistent with a specific term of this Franchise Ordinance. 3.2 Field Location. Upon request by the City, the Company must provide field locations for any of its Gas Facilities within the period of time required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D. 3.3. Street Openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, if required by a separate ordinance for which the City may impose a reasonable fee. Permit conditions imposed on Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground without a permit if (i) an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of Gas Facilities and (ii) Company gives telephone notice to the City before, if reasonably possible, commencement of the emergency repair. Within two business days after commencing the repair, Company shall apply for any required permits and pay any required fees. 3.4. Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any Public Way, the Company shall restore the Public Way in accordance with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.1100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. Company shall restore Public Ground to as good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain the surface in good condition for six (6) months thereafter. All work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground in the said condition, the City shall have, after demand to Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration of the Public Ground at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section 3.3. 3.5. Avoid Damage to Gas Facilities. The Company must take reasonable measures to prevent the Gas Facilities from causing damage to persons or property. The Company must take 4 612108v3CH135-60 reasonable measures to protect the Gas Facilities from damage that could be inflicted on the Facilities by persons, property, or the elements. 3.6. Notice of Improvements to Streets. The City must give Company reasonable written Notice of plans for improvements to Public Grounds or Public Ways where the City has reason to believe that Gas Facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: (i) the nature and character of the improvements, (ii) the Public Grounds or Public Ways upon which the improvements are to be made, (iii) the extent of the improvements, (iv) the time when the City will start the work, and (v) if more than one Public Ground or Public Way is involved, the order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time, considering seasonal working conditions, in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any additions, alterations or repairs to its Gas Facilities the Company deems necessary. If streets are at final width and grade and the City has installed underground sewer and water mains and service connections to the property line butting the streets prior to a permanent paving or resurfacing of such streets, and the Company’s main is located under such street, the City may require the Company to install gas service connections prior to such paving or resurfacing, if it is apparent that gas service will be required during the five (5) years following the paving or resurfacing. 3.7. Mapping Information. The Company must promptly provide mapping information for any of its Gas Facilities in accordance with Minnesota Rules parts 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. SECTION 4. FACILITIES RELOCATION. 4.1. Relocation in Public Ways. The Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.3100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. 4.2. Relocation of Gas Facilities in Public Grounds. City may require Company at Company’s expense to relocate or remove its Gas Facilities from Public Ground upon a finding by City that the Gas Facilities have or will become a substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Public Ground. Such relocation shall comply with applicable ordinances consistent with law. Nothing in this Section 4.2 shall be construed so as to invalidate or impair any existing company easements in Public Grounds. If Company is required to relocate from an existing easement City shall provide an equivalent easement for the relocated facilities. 4.3. Projects with Federal Funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any Gas Facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally-aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 161.46. SECTION 5. INDEMNIFICATION. 5.1. Indemnity of City. Company shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all liability, on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the Gas Facilities located in the Public Grounds and Public Ways. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City’s negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company’s plans or work. 5 612108v3CH135-60 5.2. Defense of City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense shall defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a period wherein Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City; and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This franchise agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. SECTION 6. VACATION OF PUBLIC WAYS. The City shall give Company at least two weeks prior written notice of a proposed vacation of a Public Way. The City and the Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, 7819.3200 and applicable ordinances consistent with law. SECTION 7. ABANDONED FACILITIES. The Company shall comply with City ordinances, Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D.01 et seq. and Minnesota Rules Part 7819.3300, as they may be amended from time to time. The Company shall maintain records describing the exact location of all abandoned and retired Facilities within the City, produce such records at the City’s request and comply with the location requirements of Section 216D.04 with respect to all Facilities, including abandoned and retired Facilities. SECTION 8. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 9. FRANCHISE FEE. 9.1. Form. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in addition to permit fees being imposed or that the City has a right to impose, the City may charge the Company a franchise fee. The fee may be (i) a percentage of gross revenues received by the Company for its operations within the City, or (ii) a flat fee per customer based on metered service to retail customers within the City or on some other similar basis. The City shall seek to use a formula that provides a stable and predictable amount of fees, without placing the Company at a competitive disadvantage. If the Company claims that the City-required fee formula is discriminatory or otherwise places the Company at a competitive disadvantage, the Company shall provide a formula that will produce a substantially similar fee amount to the City and reimburse the City’s reasonable fees and costs in reviewing the formula. The City will attempt to accommodate the Company but is under no franchise obligation to adopt the Company-proposed franchise fee formula and such review will not delay the implementation of the City-imposed fee. 9.2. Separate Ordinance. The franchise fee shall be imposed by separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least thirty (30) days after 6 612108v3CH135-60 written notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon the Company. The fee shall become effective ninety (90) days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon the Company by certified mail. 9.3. Condition of Fee. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against the Company unless it lawfully imposes a fee of the same or substantially similar amount on the sale of gas energy within the City by any other gas energy supplier, provided that, as to such supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee. 9.4. Collection of Fee. The franchise fee shall be payable not less than quarterly during complete billing months of the period for which payment is to be made. The franchise fee formula may be changed from time to time; however, the change shall meet the same notice requirements and the fee may not be changed more often than annually. Such fee shall not exceed any amount that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City. Such fee is subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles and customer refunds incurred by the Company. The Company agrees to make available for inspection by the City at reasonable times all records necessary to audit the Company’s determination of the franchise fee payments. 9.5. Continuation of Franchise Fee. If this franchise expires and the City and the Company are unable to agree upon terms of a new franchise, the franchise fee, if any being imposed by the City at the time this franchise expires, will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon notwithstanding the franchise expiration as provided in section 2.6 above. SECTION 11. PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE. 11.1. Severability. Every section, provision, or part of this Ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part; and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part; provided, however, that if the City is unable to enforce its franchise fee provisions for any reason the City will be allowed to amend the franchise agreement to impose a franchise fee pursuant to statute. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. 11.2. Limitation on Applicability. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and Company as the only parties and no provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person (including the public at large) so as to constitute any such person as a third party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. SECTION 12. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. Either party to this franchise agreement may at any time propose that the agreement be amended. This Ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company’s written consent thereto with the City Clerk after City council adoption of the amendatory ordinance. This amendatory procedure is subject, however, to the City’s police power and franchise rights under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 216B.36 and 301B.01, which rights are not waived hereby. 7 612108v3CH135-60 Passed and approved: _________________________, ______. Mayor of the City of , Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, , Minnesota CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Resolution 2019XX: Certification of Delinquent Sewer and Water Accounts to the County Auditor Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: I.3. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: ADM244 PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council adopts a resolution certifying delinquent utility accounts to the County Auditor.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND Chanhassen city ordinances provide two methods for collection of delinquent water and sewer accounts. The ordinance states, “In the event any water service is not paid within three (3) months after the time it is rendered, the city council may recover said amount in an action brought in any court of competent jurisdiction, or in the alternative, may certify the amount due together with penalties to the county auditor to be collected with other real estate taxes levied against the premises served.” The procedure for collecting the water and sewer bills is that a bill is generated once a quarter for each account. If not paid, we then send a letter in the fall (August through October, depending on which district the account is in) notifying the property owner of the delinquency and the consequences of nonpayment. They are allowed to attend a public hearing to dispute the certification. The list is then sent to the county by December 1. The list of delinquent properties is available in the Finance Department. There were no accounts who notified us wishing to dispute these delinquent charges as of October 15, 2018. Current practice is to certify the amount due to the property taxes, as allowed by State Statute 444. There are 203 accounts with a total value of $110,817.86 to be collected this year. This compares to 206 accounts with a total dollar amount of $119,225.54 last year. We believe that at least several accounts will be paid in full by the time the final list is established in December. The other accounts will be certified to the county for collection with a fee of 10% added for the administrative costs incurred plus an additional $5.00 Carver County Certification Fee (for properties within Carver County). Approval of this item requires a simple majority vote of those city council members present. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution List of Accounts CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: October 28, 2019 RESOLUTION NO: 2019- MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING UTILITY ACCOUNTS TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR WHEREAS, State Statute 444 authorized cities to specially assess delinquent sewer and water charges against the benefiting property being delinquent for said charges; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the attached Exhibit A represents utility customers who have been delinquent in paying their current sewer and water billings for more than one quarter. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chanhassen hereby authorizes the City Manager to certify the attached Exhibit A to the appropriate County Auditor for collection with property tax certifications being certified in 2019, collectible in 2020. These assessments will run for one year and not accrue any additional interest. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 28nd day of October, 2019. ATTEST: __________________________________ ____________________________________ Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor YES NO ABSENT Exhibit A PID Certify PID Certify 25-0010200 84.62 25-1870230 713.53 25-0010300 1398.35 25-1870370 424.8 25-0011400 793.81 25-1900310 2317.63 25-0024500 924.94 25-1980300 163.36 25-0050900 173.82 25-2000050 577.99 25-0241900 89.24 25-2000160 1010.71 25-0242100 49.77 25-2000600 534.4 25-0251510 821.76 25-2000880 895.33 25-0253900 49.38 25-2020080 523.65 25-0262110 80.74 25-2020150 347.68 25-0340400 49.38 25-2020200 347.75 25-0350100 49.38 25-2020300 627.58 25-0350110 49.38 25-2020570 472.71 25-0361300 1328.61 25-2020650 957.64 25-0363000 2474.09 25-2020780 354.28 25-0363300 89.24 25-2020910 566.45 25-0500130 339.86 25-2021270 962.06 25-0610470 315.59 25-2021540 315.57 25-0640370 961.82 25-2021570 325.44 25-0640460 348.96 25-2030460 706.46 25-0800270 623.43 25-2030700 644.4 25-0880060 266.22 25-2030710 316.65 25-0880160 656.17 25-2031140 409.55 25-0880370 137.41 25-2040090 976.99 25-0880770 324.42 25-2080100 1351.76 25-0880810 111.22 25-2150010 1351.64 25-1200010 89.24 25-2160010 49.38 25-1290140 900.98 25-2160040 33.01 25-1400090 904.83 25-2240060 50.73 25-1520040 170.77 25-2260020 1121.59 25-1520050 712.28 25-2460010 4532.46 25-1600451 820.51 25-2510100 407.33 25-1600710 456.4 25-2540020 1401.24 25-1602400 243.94 25-2560350 77.27 25-1700080 268.78 25-2620010 252.14 25-1720020 4019.77 25-2620440 1204.98 25-1800130 987.96 25-2620530 405.73 25-1850350 842.76 25-2670050 475.89 25-1860290 1234.56 25-2700130 843.52 PID Certify PID Certify 25-2730170 273.37 25-4810110 1,025.94 25-2730240 781.12 25-4820010 839.12 25-2730300 574.03 25-4820040 507.92 25-2830010 325.82 25-4820110 575.77 25-2840050 625.21 25-4950240 773.45 25-2850040 529.44 25-4950400 604.30 25-2950010 703.25 25-4950460 474.85 25-3000390 1,259.43 25-4950470 681.82 25-3000800 454.74 25-4950620 304.67 25-3250030 89.24 25-4950630 1,057.10 25-3300010 58.03 25-4950660 63.01 25-3320300 89.24 25-4990240 226.14 25-3360260 121.06 25-5050200 240.71 25-3410150 87.44 25-5250070 958.89 25-3450060 711.02 25-5250250 336.54 25-3450200 237.78 25-5300250 986.83 25-3450210 480.61 25-5540230 897.88 25-3450660 715.14 25-5550220 1,271.47 25-3450910 827.25 25-5630220 334.14 25-3500100 636.29 25-5630230 317.36 25-3500180 88.85 25-5630260 143.37 25-3500271 654.24 25-5630280 64.12 25-3530070 50.87 25-5640300 76.69 25-3900100 854.26 25-5670410 1,346.97 25-3950070 1,238.25 25-6060041 1,062.12 25-3980160 632.55 25-6100190 113.31 25-4030380 980.33 25-6150040 1,062.16 25-4040030 1,946.13 25-6380050 739.71 25-4040110 828.34 25-6390120 257.49 25-4060070 1,474.78 25-6450530 566.29 25-4060180 1,273.67 25-6500150 503.58 25-4070010 89.24 25-6510030 90.25 25-4170180 173.07 25-6600090 150.63 25-4200120 464.39 25-6700110 148.26 25-4200250 746.51 25-6840010 89.24 25-4480020 82.74 25-7550010 450.30 25-4520020 93.73 25-7550100 1,703.80 25-4530140 718.87 25-7550120 956.75 25-4700160 791.15 25-7550190 928.48 PID Certify 25-7550200 1,089.33 25-7550360 86.54 25-7550460 309.61 25-7550730 1,521.13 25-7551290 531.01 ***Total of 196 accounts*** 25-7551300 597.90 Revised 10/23/2019 25-7600090 1,086.58 ____________ 25-7720112 67.85 25-7760100 972.54 25-7850430 86.22 25-7850610 204.75 25-7900080 962.22 25-7930100 481.86 25-7990050 496.15 25-8020110 173.54 25-8050020 459.89 25-8060110 868.76 25-8090060 88.85 25-8130020 773.19 25-8190080 877.86 25-8280130 240.41 25-8480050 1,129.95 25-8480250 1,046.56 25-8481650 372.11 25-8481720 218.42 25-8481830 321.89 25-8481880 1,353.58 25-8482250 355.99 25-8650160 966.26 25-8710120 837.32 25-8800050 232.93 25-8810250 303.83 25-8840080 696.48 25-8910180 434.00 25-8950110 548.51 25-8960140 370.39 65-4780270 738.26 65-4800010 117.24 65-4800030 763.49 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, October 28, 2019 Subject Review of Claims Paid 10282019 Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: M.1. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: SUMMARY The following claims are submitted for review on October 28, 2019: Check Numbers Amounts 171795 – 171938 $632,997.47 ACH Payments $460,835.69 Total All Claims $1,093,833.16 ATTACHMENTS: Check Summary Check Summary ACH Check Detail Check Detail ACH Accounts Payable User: Printed: dwashburn 10/22/2019 9:19 AM Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount UB*01801 KURT KAUDY 10/10/2019 0.00 8.61171795 UB*01812 WHITNEY & LAURA ALEXANDER 10/10/2019 0.00 167.45171796 UB*01799 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 10/10/2019 0.00 6.70171797 AmeTir AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC 10/10/2019 0.00 525.02171798 AspMil ASPEN MILLS 10/10/2019 0.00 51.95171799 BCATRA BCA 10/10/2019 0.00 15.00171800 BluCro BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 0.00 78,693.46171801 BendGeor GEORGE BENDER 10/10/2019 0.00 628.68171802 BenPro BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 10/10/2019 0.00 535.00171803 BergGary GARY BERG 10/10/2019 0.00 235.72171804 BerCof BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 10/10/2019 0.00 919.45171805 BluBel Blue Bell Enterprises Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 113.39171806 BoyBui BOYER BUILDING CORPORATION 10/10/2019 0.00 750.00171807 BROMUS BROADCAST MUSIC INC 10/10/2019 0.00 343.14171808 UB*01790 CYNTHIA BROWN 10/10/2019 0.00 24.86171809 BryRoc BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 10/10/2019 0.00 823.24171810 UB*01793 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 0.00 132.04171811 UB*01807 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 0.00 21.60171812 UB*01809 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 0.00 70.38171813 CARAUT CAR-CO AUTO PARTS INC 10/10/2019 0.00 359.04171814 CenEne CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/10/2019 0.00 399.44171815 CenLin CenturyLink 10/10/2019 0.00 64.00171816 UB*01820 CERBERUS SFR HOLDINGS LP 10/10/2019 0.00 22.91171817 CorMai CORE & MAIN LP 10/10/2019 0.00 5,026.05171818 CulBot Culligan Bottled Water 10/10/2019 0.00 113.56171819 UB*01792 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 10/10/2019 0.00 50.20171820 UB*01800 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 10/10/2019 0.00 8.07171821 UB*01814 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 10/10/2019 0.00 84.53171822 UB*01811 EDINA REALTY TITLE 10/10/2019 0.00 18.98171823 EdnDis Edney Distributing Co., Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 2,912.90171824 EmePro Emerson Process Management 10/10/2019 0.00 60,000.00171825 UB*01821 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 10/10/2019 0.00 108.14171826 FacMot FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 10/10/2019 0.00 298.06171827 FirHea FIRESIDE HEARTH & HOME 10/10/2019 0.00 15.33171828 UB*01813 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 10/10/2019 VOID 124.94 0.00171829 UB*01804 ARTHUR & RUTH GALVAN 10/10/2019 0.00 32.45171830 Hach Hach Company 10/10/2019 0.00 3,733.36171831 HARTLIFE Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company10/10/2019 0.00 1,043.35171832 HealStev Steve Healy 10/10/2019 0.00 102.00171833 HOOPTHRE Hoops & Threads LLC 10/10/2019 0.00 45.00171834 ICMART ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 10/10/2019 0.00 1,366.67171835 Loc49 IUOE Local #49 10/10/2019 0.00 700.00171836 UB*01819 ARUNKUMAR JOTHIRAMALINGAM 10/10/2019 0.00 268.87171837 UB*01817 THOMAS & MARY KELLY 10/10/2019 0.00 87.05171838 UB*01805 YEONG HYE KWON 10/10/2019 0.00 18.66171839 UB*01803 DAVID & ADRIENNE LAURSEN 10/10/2019 0.00 24.26171840 ManHor Mangold Horticulture 10/10/2019 0.00 250.00171841 Page 1AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (10/22/2019 9:19 AM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount MarcTom Tom Marcsisak 10/10/2019 0.00 2,014.50171842 MetSup METAL SUPERMARKETS 10/10/2019 0.00 33.04171843 Metco2 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 10/10/2019 0.00 157,423.55171844 UB*01816 DEBRA MEYER 10/10/2019 0.00 131.58171845 MidMete Mid America Meter Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 50.00171846 MILWIN Milbank Winwater Works 10/10/2019 0.00 3,878.58171847 UB*01815 LORI & JESSE MILLS 10/10/2019 0.00 41.61171848 UB*01795 MINNETONKA TITLE 10/10/2019 0.00 162.08171849 NCPERS MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 10/10/2019 0.00 80.00171850 MWOA MN Wastewater Operator Assn 10/10/2019 0.00 80.00171851 NorAsp NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC 10/10/2019 0.00 4,941.50171852 NusTru Nuss Truck Group Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 12.32171853 UB*01796 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 10/10/2019 0.00 60.40171854 UB*01797 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 10/10/2019 0.00 47.00171855 QUAFIR Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 400.00171856 RanSan Randy's Sanitation Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 643.50171857 UB*01802 RESULT TITLE 10/10/2019 0.00 25.34171858 UB*01791 WALTER & KATHLEEN SCHOLLMAN 10/10/2019 0.00 33.97171859 SheWil SHERWIN WILLIAMS 10/10/2019 0.00 25.42171860 ShoTru SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 10/10/2019 0.00 84.96171861 SouSub Southwest Suburban Publishing 10/10/2019 0.00 901.64171862 SpeScr Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 851.32171863 SUSA SUSA Treasurer 10/10/2019 0.00 150.00171864 UB*01806 RONALD & CHRYS TARVIN 10/10/2019 0.00 49.91171865 TFOFIN TFORCE FINAL MILE 10/10/2019 0.00 45.61171866 UB*01818 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES INC 10/10/2019 0.00 132.40171867 TwiHar TWIN CITY HARDWARE 10/10/2019 0.00 22.36171868 UB*01794 KATHLEEN VANREVELEN 10/10/2019 0.00 173.08171869 UB*01808 THOMAS VECCHI 10/10/2019 0.00 61.77171870 WastMana Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 1,271.98171871 UB*01798 CLAYTON MORRIS WENNER 10/10/2019 0.00 17.14171872 UB*01810 JOHN WEUM 10/10/2019 0.00 5.73171873 1stStr 1st Street Builders and Remodeling Inc 10/17/2019 0.00 5.00171874 4ACE 4 ACE PRODUCTIONS 10/17/2019 0.00 295.00171875 AARP AARP 10/17/2019 0.00 110.00171876 AARP AARP 10/17/2019 0.00 110.00171877 AblHos Able Hose & Rubber Inc 10/17/2019 0.00 249.64171878 ApaGro APACHE GROUP 10/17/2019 0.00 693.80171879 AspMil ASPEN MILLS 10/17/2019 0.00 223.55171880 bcatra BCA 10/17/2019 0.00 15.00171881 BorSta BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 10/17/2019 0.00 518.26171882 BranEric Eric and Megan Brandt 10/17/2019 0.00 500.00171883 BroGar Brookside Garden Center, Inc.10/17/2019 0.00 118.11171884 BryRoc BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 10/17/2019 0.00 310.85171885 BurTit BURNET TITLE 10/17/2019 0.00 124.94171886 CEMPRO CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO 10/17/2019 0.00 250.00171887 CenEne CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/17/2019 0.00 245.81171888 CouVet Countryside Veterinary Clinic PLLC 10/17/2019 0.00 506.25171889 DRKes D.R. Kes Concrete 10/17/2019 0.00 250.00171890 DemCon DEM-CON LANDFILL 10/17/2019 0.00 1,362.92171891 Ehlers EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 10/17/2019 0.00 4,252.50171892 ElliEarl Earl Ellis 10/17/2019 0.00 1,000.00171893 EpiEve EPIC EVENT RENTAL 10/17/2019 0.00 54.50171894 eulman Eull's Manufacturing Co Inc 10/17/2019 0.00 160.55171895 FacMot FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 10/17/2019 0.00 355.11171896 FarrAdam ADAM FARRELL 10/17/2019 0.00 89.98171897 ForCon Forterra Concrete Products, Inc 10/17/2019 0.00 1,201.60171898 Page 2AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (10/22/2019 9:19 AM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount GOGYMN Go Gymnastics 10/17/2019 0.00 630.00171899 gonhom GONYEA HOMES 10/17/2019 0.00 750.00171900 GuaGre Guaranteed Green, Inc.10/17/2019 0.00 250.00171901 HageMark MARK HAGEN 10/17/2019 0.00 750.00171902 HENCHE HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEF'S ASSN10/17/2019 0.00 671.16171903 HerLan HERMAN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES INC 10/17/2019 0.00 160.00171904 JAGCOM Jaguar Communications Inc 10/17/2019 0.00 53.60171905 JohnDon Don Johnson 10/17/2019 0.00 12.87171906 K2Ele K2 Electrical Services Inc 10/17/2019 0.00 3,313.00171907 KjorKeLe Kelly & Leif Kjorness 10/17/2019 0.00 2,400.00171908 KochNico NICOLE KOCHAR 10/17/2019 0.00 571.10171909 KoehThEr Thomas & Erica Koehnen 10/17/2019 0.00 3,000.00171910 leamin LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 10/17/2019 0.00 837.00171911 LecBro Lecy Bros. Homes 10/17/2019 0.00 1,000.00171912 MauEnt MAUND ENTERTAINMENT INC 10/17/2019 0.00 540.00171913 McDCon MCDONALD CONSTRUCTION 10/17/2019 0.00 6,300.00171914 mcfoa MCFOA 10/17/2019 0.00 10.00171915 MeyeJay Jay Meyer 10/17/2019 0.00 500.00171916 MidPla MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 10/17/2019 0.00 7,650.00171917 MinuPre Minuteman Press 10/17/2019 0.00 16.00171918 MTIDis MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 10/17/2019 0.00 276.86171919 NorAsp NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC 10/17/2019 0.00 243,164.22171920 PeaHea Peak Heating and Cooling 10/17/2019 0.00 276.25171921 PELRICK RICHARD PELZEL 10/17/2019 0.00 500.00171922 BobSte Randy's Bobby & Steve's Auto World 10/17/2019 0.00 172.04171923 RetkThom Thomas Retka 10/17/2019 0.00 220.00171924 RuegJerr JERRY RUEGEMER 10/17/2019 0.00 350.00171925 SaffSamu SAMUEL SAFFRIN 10/17/2019 0.00 250.00171926 SEH SEH 10/17/2019 0.00 3,653.21171927 Senja Senja Inc 10/17/2019 0.00 224.00171928 ShouAaRa Aaron & Rachel Shoutz 10/17/2019 0.00 250.00171929 Signso SIGNSOURCE 10/17/2019 0.00 159.00171930 SpeScr Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 10/17/2019 0.00 426.04171931 SteSer Stein Services LLC 10/17/2019 0.00 30.00171932 TheiKen KENNETH A THIES 10/17/2019 0.00 550.00171933 Truwes TruWest LLC 10/17/2019 0.00 1,500.00171934 TwiPad Twin Cities Paddleboard 10/17/2019 0.00 2,700.00171935 WesRem West Metro Remodeling 10/17/2019 0.00 250.00171936 WSDPer WS & D PERMIT SERVICE 10/17/2019 0.00 225.12171937 Zacks ZACK'S INC.10/17/2019 0.00 331.77171938 Report Total (144 checks): 632,997.47 124.94 Page 3AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (10/22/2019 9:19 AM) Accounts Payable Checks by Date - Summary by Check User: dwashburn Printed: 10/22/2019 9:21 AM Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount ACH AdaPes ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC 10/10/2019 0.00 131.25 ACH AllBla ALLIED BLACKTOP 10/10/2019 0.00 196,733.40 ACH badsta Badger State Inspection LLC 10/10/2019 0.00 1,900.00 ACH BoyTru Boyer Ford Trucks 10/10/2019 0.00 109.60 ACH CamKnu CAMPBELL KNUTSON 10/10/2019 0.00 14,696.15 ACH carcou Carver County 10/10/2019 0.00 890.00 ACH ComInt COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 10/10/2019 0.00 49,970.00 ACH Dalco DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC. 10/10/2019 0.00 31.60 ACH WashDani DANIELLE WASHBURN 10/10/2019 0.00 59.16 ACH EngWat Engel Water Testing Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 520.00 ACH Granic GRANICUS INC 10/10/2019 0.00 8,950.00 ACH SticGreg GREG STICHA 10/10/2019 0.00 153.12 ACH HawChe HAWKINS CHEMICAL 10/10/2019 0.00 4,700.87 ACH ImpPor IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 10/10/2019 0.00 9,850.90 ACH IndLan Indoor Landscapes Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 187.00 ACH JasEng Jasper Engineering & Equipment Co 10/10/2019 0.00 1,446.28 ACH KatFue KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 10/10/2019 0.00 3,433.51 ACH KidPlu Kidd Plumbing Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 258.00 ACH KimHor KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 10/10/2019 0.00 27,348.70 ACH LocSup LOCATORS AND SUPPLIES INC 10/10/2019 0.00 170.68 ACH Marco Marco Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 970.68 ACH MerAce MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 0.00 3,780.02 ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/10/2019 0.00 5,860.89 ACH napa NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/10/2019 0.00 296.93 ACH Oreaut O'Reilly Automotive Inc 10/10/2019 0.00 72.61 ACH PotMN Potentia MN Solar 10/10/2019 0.00 10,622.65 ACH PreMRM PRECISE MRM LLC 10/10/2019 0.00 135.50 ACH SPSCom SPS COMPANIES INC 10/10/2019 0.00 40.43 ACH SunLif Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 0.00 2,931.23 ACH UltCon ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 10/10/2019 0.00 3,175.50 ACH UniFar United Farmers Cooperative 10/10/2019 0.00 2,488.67 ACH UNIWAY UNITED WAY 10/10/2019 0.00 29.40 ACH VERIZO VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 0.00 3,535.05 ACH WarLit Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc. 10/10/2019 0.00 115.00 ACH WmMue WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/10/2019 0.00 3,558.45 ACH BoyTru Boyer Ford Trucks 10/17/2019 0.00 191.72 ACH CarCou Carver County 10/17/2019 0.00 18,244.41 ACH CCPNIM CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 10/17/2019 0.00 8,227.55 ACH CenFen CENTURY FENCE COMPANY 10/17/2019 0.00 4,190.00 ACH Choice Choice, Inc. 10/17/2019 0.00 176.32 ACH EngWat Engel Water Testing Inc 10/17/2019 0.00 520.00 ACH FasCom FASTENAL COMPANY 10/17/2019 0.00 8.66 ACH SticGreg GREG STICHA 10/17/2019 0.00 29.63 ACH HawChe HAWKINS CHEMICAL 10/17/2019 0.00 1,050.00 Page 1 of 2 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 10/17/2019 0.00 32.98 ACH JohSup JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 10/17/2019 0.00 183.29 ACH KatFue KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 10/17/2019 0.00 15,756.33 ACH LitBli Little Blind Spot 10/17/2019 0.00 130.00 ACH LymLum LYMAN LUMBER 10/17/2019 0.00 224.00 ACH Metco Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 10/17/2019 0.00 36,902.25 ACH MNLABO MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 10/17/2019 0.00 4,644.08 ACH MRPA MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC. 10/17/2019 0.00 125.00 ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/17/2019 0.00 194.53 ACH Napa NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/17/2019 0.00 232.66 ACH PRTURF PRO TURF 10/17/2019 0.00 1,442.00 ACH SPRPCS SPRINT PCS 10/17/2019 0.00 103.44 ACH STRGUA STRATOGUARD LLC 10/17/2019 0.00 176.00 ACH TCIInc TCIC, Inc. 10/17/2019 0.00 1,001.00 ACH Tennan TENNANT 10/17/2019 0.00 546.75 ACH TwiSee TWIN CITY SEED CO. 10/17/2019 0.00 256.50 ACH WmMue WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/17/2019 0.00 6,028.56 ACH ZarBru ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC 10/17/2019 0.00 1,064.80 Report Total: 0.00 460,835.69 Page 2 of 2 Accounts Payable Check Detail-Checks User: dwashburn Printed: 10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM Name Check Da Account Description Amount 1st Street Builders and Remodeling Inc 10/17/2019 101-0000-2033 refund permit overpayment-3713 South Cedar Drive 5.00 1st Street Builders and Remodeling Inc 5.00 4 ACE PRODUCTIONS 10/17/2019 101-1614-4300 Halloween party performance 295.00 4 ACE PRODUCTIONS 295.00 AARP 10/17/2019 101-1560-4300 Driver safety-4 hour refresher 110.00 AARP 10/17/2019 101-1560-4300 Driver safety-4 hour refresher 110.00 AARP 220.00 Able Hose & Rubber Inc 10/17/2019 700-0000-4150 fire hose/pin lug cplg/clamp 249.64 Able Hose & Rubber Inc 249.64 ALEXANDER WHITNEY & LAURA 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 61.21 ALEXANDER WHITNEY & LAURA 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 85.04 ALEXANDER WHITNEY & LAURA 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 18.71 ALEXANDER WHITNEY & LAURA 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.49 ALEXANDER WHITNEY & LAURA 167.45 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.47 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.10 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.67 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.46 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 6.70 AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC 10/10/2019 101-1220-4120 tires 525.02 AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC 525.02 APACHE GROUP 10/17/2019 101-1170-4150 toilet tissue/towels 693.80 APACHE GROUP 693.80 ASPEN MILLS 10/10/2019 101-1220-4240 patch/white shirt 51.95 ASPEN MILLS 10/17/2019 101-1220-4240 pants 214.70 ASPEN MILLS 10/17/2019 101-1220-4240 name tag 8.85 ASPEN MILLS 275.50 BCA 10/10/2019 101-1120-4300 background investigation 15.00 BCA 10/17/2019 101-1120-4300 background investigation 15.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 1 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount BCA 30.00 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 101-0000-2012 Health insurance-November 39,214.37 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 210-0000-2012 Health insurance-November 472.24 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 700-0000-2012 Health insurance-November 6,460.18 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 701-0000-2012 Health insurance-November 4,571.24 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 101-0000-2012 Health insurance-November 20,520.24 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 210-0000-2012 Health insurance-November 755.81 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 700-0000-2012 Health insurance-November 2,550.87 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 701-0000-2012 Health insurance-November 1,795.04 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 101-1220-4483 Firefighter EAP-November 105.60 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 720-0000-2012 Health insurance-November 75.58 BCBSM, Inc.10/10/2019 720-0000-2012 Health insurance-November 2,172.29 BCBSM, Inc. 78,693.46 BENDER GEORGE 10/10/2019 101-1310-4370 AWWA conference-lodging 437.28 BENDER GEORGE 10/10/2019 101-1310-4380 AWWA conference-mileage 191.40 BENDER GEORGE 628.68 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 10/10/2019 101-1550-4300 mowing & trimming 535.00 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 535.00 BERG GARY 10/10/2019 101-1550-4240 Work boots 193.22 BERG GARY 10/10/2019 101-1550-4240 pants 42.50 BERG GARY 235.72 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 10/10/2019 101-1170-4110 coffee/k cups 919.45 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 919.45 Blue Bell Enterprises Inc 10/10/2019 101-1560-4300 Memory Cafe open house event catering 113.39 Blue Bell Enterprises Inc 113.39 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 10/17/2019 701-0000-4530 heater 518.26 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 518.26 BOYER BUILDING CORPORATION 10/10/2019 815-8201-2024 Landscape escrow-2991 Washta Bay Road 750.00 BOYER BUILDING CORPORATION 750.00 Brandt Eric and Megan 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-8445 Mission Hills Lane 500.00 Brandt Eric and Megan 500.00 BROADCAST MUSIC INC 10/10/2019 101-1530-4300 annual fee 343.14 BROADCAST MUSIC INC 343.14 Brookside Garden Center, Inc.10/17/2019 101-1550-4150 pulverized dirt 118.11 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 2 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Brookside Garden Center, Inc. 118.11 BROWN CYNTHIA 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 9.70 BROWN CYNTHIA 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.79 BROWN CYNTHIA 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.57 BROWN CYNTHIA 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.80 BROWN CYNTHIA 24.86 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 10/10/2019 101-1550-4150 3/4" screened/3" sc clean 823.24 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 10/17/2019 420-0000-4751 3/4" screened 310.85 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 1,134.09 BURNET TITLE 10/17/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund utility account-6971 Pima Lane 39.69 BURNET TITLE 10/17/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund utility account-6971 Pima Lane 66.07 BURNET TITLE 10/17/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund utility account-6971 Pima Lane 19.18 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 44.60 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 64.09 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 20.61 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.74 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.76 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.09 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.24 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.51 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 18.17 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 32.18 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 17.67 BURNET TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.36 BURNET TITLE 348.96 CAR-CO AUTO PARTS INC 10/10/2019 700-0000-4120 primer/catalyst/hardner/activator/solvent 359.04 CAR-CO AUTO PARTS INC 359.04 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO 10/17/2019 701-0000-4551 4000, 3/4 GV, AE 250.00 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO 250.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/10/2019 700-7019-4320 gas charges 21.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/10/2019 101-1190-4320 gas charges 220.51 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/10/2019 700-0000-4320 gas charges 15.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/10/2019 101-1550-4320 gas charges 21.45 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/10/2019 101-1170-4320 gas charges 70.47 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/10/2019 700-7043-4320 gas charges 51.01 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/17/2019 101-1220-4320 gas charges 87.94 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/17/2019 101-1530-4320 gas charges 26.45 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/17/2019 101-1171-4320 gas charges 15.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/17/2019 101-1600-4320 gas charges 15.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/17/2019 701-0000-4320 gas charges 16.97 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/17/2019 101-1370-4320 gas charges 67.55 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/17/2019 700-0000-4320 gas charges 8.45 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 10/17/2019 701-0000-4320 gas charges 8.45 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 3 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 645.25 CenturyLink 10/10/2019 700-0000-4310 phone charges 32.00 CenturyLink 10/10/2019 701-0000-4310 phone charges 32.00 CenturyLink 64.00 CERBERUS SFR HOLDINGS LP 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.62 CERBERUS SFR HOLDINGS LP 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 7.42 CERBERUS SFR HOLDINGS LP 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.24 CERBERUS SFR HOLDINGS LP 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.63 CERBERUS SFR HOLDINGS LP 22.91 CORE & MAIN LP 10/10/2019 700-0000-4552 curb box/valve box riser/hyd ext/rod 1,972.15 CORE & MAIN LP 10/10/2019 700-0000-4552 stargrip restraint/gasket/3 way connector 526.70 CORE & MAIN LP 10/10/2019 700-0000-4552 valve boxes/pipe/gasket/t-head 1,921.61 CORE & MAIN LP 10/10/2019 700-0000-4552 cplg/pipe/gasket 605.59 CORE & MAIN LP 5,026.05 Countryside Veterinary Clinic PLLC 10/17/2019 101-1260-4300 safehaven intake 506.25 Countryside Veterinary Clinic PLLC 506.25 Culligan Bottled Water 10/10/2019 101-1220-4300 bottled water 113.56 Culligan Bottled Water 113.56 D.R. Kes Concrete 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-7610 Windsor Court 250.00 D.R. Kes Concrete 250.00 DEM-CON LANDFILL 10/17/2019 101-1320-4150 street sweepings 1,362.92 DEM-CON LANDFILL 1,362.92 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 35.79 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.51 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.50 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.40 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.72 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.35 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 84.53 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 142.80 EDINA REALTY TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 7.57 EDINA REALTY TITLE 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.60 EDINA REALTY TITLE 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.13 EDINA REALTY TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.68 EDINA REALTY TITLE 18.98 Edney Distributing Co., Inc 10/10/2019 101-1320-4120 bearing/support/washer/rotor/circlip 2,912.90 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 4 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Edney Distributing Co., Inc 2,912.90 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 10/17/2019 601-0000-4300 Franchise Fee Analysis 612.50 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 10/17/2019 700-0000-4300 Utility rate study 1,131.67 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 10/17/2019 701-0000-4300 Utility rate study 1,131.67 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 10/17/2019 720-0000-4300 Utility rate study 1,131.66 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 10/17/2019 300-0000-4300 TIF Reporting 245.00 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 4,252.50 Ellis Earl 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-6900 Lucy Ridge Lane 1,000.00 Ellis Earl 1,000.00 Emerson Process Management 10/10/2019 601-0000-4902 Community Growth Initiative Grant 60,000.00 Emerson Process Management 60,000.00 EPIC EVENT RENTAL 10/17/2019 202-0000-4300 stage 54.50 EPIC EVENT RENTAL 54.50 Eull's Manufacturing Co Inc 10/17/2019 701-0000-4551 manhole rings 160.55 Eull's Manufacturing Co Inc 160.55 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 48.45 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 48.67 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 9.74 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.28 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 108.14 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 10/10/2019 101-1370-4350 20HR140 5HR113 298.06 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 10/17/2019 101-1320-4140 Del 31-900Ct 355.11 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 653.17 FARRELL ADAM 10/17/2019 101-1550-4240 sweatshirts 89.98 FARRELL ADAM 89.98 FIRESIDE HEARTH & HOME 10/10/2019 101-0000-2033 Refund pemrit overpayment-9611 Meadowlark Lane 15.33 FIRESIDE HEARTH & HOME 15.33 Forterra Concrete Products, Inc 10/17/2019 420-0000-4751 gasket/rcp/tie rod 1,201.60 Forterra Concrete Products, Inc 1,201.60 GALVAN ARTHUR & RUTH 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.96 GALVAN ARTHUR & RUTH 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 14.44 GALVAN ARTHUR & RUTH 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.46 GALVAN ARTHUR & RUTH 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.59 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 5 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount GALVAN ARTHUR & RUTH 32.45 Go Gymnastics 10/17/2019 101-1537-4300 Gymnastics class 630.00 Go Gymnastics 630.00 GONYEA HOMES 10/17/2019 815-8201-2024 Landscape escrow-760 Hawkcrest Circle 750.00 GONYEA HOMES 750.00 Guaranteed Green, Inc.10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-750 Lake Susan Hills Dr 250.00 Guaranteed Green, Inc. 250.00 Hach Company 10/10/2019 700-0000-4530 Chlorine anlzr free cl17 w/rgts 3,733.36 Hach Company 3,733.36 HAGEN MARK 10/17/2019 815-8201-2024 Landscape escrow-205 Chan View 750.00 HAGEN MARK 750.00 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1120-4040 LTD-October 70.40 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1130-4040 LTD-October 39.10 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1160-4040 LTD-October 26.39 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1250-4040 LTD-October 106.39 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1310-4040 LTD-October 71.02 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1320-4040 LTD-October 133.76 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1370-4040 LTD-October 46.30 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1520-4040 LTD-October 35.96 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1530-4040 LTD-October 14.61 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1560-4040 LTD-October 11.99 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1600-4040 LTD-October 16.16 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1700-4040 LTD-October 1.80 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1550-4040 LTD-October 94.49 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1420-4040 LTD-October 80.50 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1430-4040 LTD-October 4.81 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 210-0000-4040 LTD-October 18.03 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 720-7201-4040 LTD-October 5.68 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 720-7202-4040 LTD-October 5.68 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1170-4040 LTD-October 12.61 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 101-1220-4040 LTD-October 43.14 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 701-0000-4040 LTD-October 77.26 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 700-0000-4040 LTD-October 104.00 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 10/10/2019 720-0000-4040 LTD-October 23.27 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 1,043.35 Healy Steve 10/10/2019 101-1767-4300 Adult softball umpire fall league 102.00 Healy Steve 102.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEF'S ASSN 10/17/2019 101-1220-4370 Blue Card SIM training-Frisbie 425.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEF'S ASSN 10/17/2019 101-1220-4360 annual blue card instructor support renewal fee 246.16 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 6 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEF'S ASSN 671.16 HERMAN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES INC 10/17/2019 101-1320-4150 pulverized dirt 160.00 HERMAN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES INC 160.00 Hoops & Threads LLC 10/10/2019 700-0000-4240 Utility Dept logo on left chest 22.50 Hoops & Threads LLC 10/10/2019 701-0000-4240 Utility Dept logo on left chest 22.50 Hoops & Threads LLC 45.00 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 10/10/2019 101-0000-2009 10/11/19 ID #304303 1,060.42 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 10/10/2019 700-0000-2009 10/11/19 ID #304303 152.50 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 10/10/2019 701-0000-2009 10/11/19 ID #304303 152.50 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 10/10/2019 720-0000-2009 10/11/19 ID #304303 1.25 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 1,366.67 IUOE Local #49 10/10/2019 101-0000-2004 PR Batch 00411.10.2019 Local 49 dues 448.01 IUOE Local #49 10/10/2019 700-0000-2004 PR Batch 00411.10.2019 Local 49 dues 175.69 IUOE Local #49 10/10/2019 701-0000-2004 PR Batch 00411.10.2019 Local 49 dues 76.30 IUOE Local #49 700.00 Jaguar Communications Inc 10/17/2019 700-7043-4310 monthly charges 53.60 Jaguar Communications Inc 53.60 Johnson Don 10/17/2019 101-1220-4360 Drop box business account 12.87 Johnson Don 12.87 JOTHIRAMALINGAM ARUNKUMAR 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 164.19 JOTHIRAMALINGAM ARUNKUMAR 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 87.82 JOTHIRAMALINGAM ARUNKUMAR 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 14.88 JOTHIRAMALINGAM ARUNKUMAR 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.98 JOTHIRAMALINGAM ARUNKUMAR 268.87 K2 Electrical Services Inc 10/17/2019 101-1550-4300 repair underground circuits/wiring 3,313.00 K2 Electrical Services Inc 3,313.00 KELLY THOMAS & MARY 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.97 KELLY THOMAS & MARY 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 28.84 KELLY THOMAS & MARY 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 41.46 KELLY THOMAS & MARY 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 14.78 KELLY THOMAS & MARY 87.05 Kjorness Kelly & Leif 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-319 West 77th Street 2,400.00 Kjorness Kelly & Leif 2,400.00 KOCHAR NICOLE 10/17/2019 101-1535-4130 Revolution Dancewear-dance shoes 571.10 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 7 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount KOCHAR NICOLE 571.10 Koehnen Thomas & Erica 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-1760 Ringneck Drive 3,000.00 Koehnen Thomas & Erica 3,000.00 KURT KAUDY 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.08 KURT KAUDY 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.01 KURT KAUDY 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.10 KURT KAUDY 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.42 KURT KAUDY 8.61 KWON YEONG HYE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.40 KWON YEONG HYE 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 7.05 KWON YEONG HYE 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.48 KWON YEONG HYE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.73 KWON YEONG HYE 18.66 LAURSEN DAVID & ADRIENNE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 15.26 LAURSEN DAVID & ADRIENNE 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 7.39 LAURSEN DAVID & ADRIENNE 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.42 LAURSEN DAVID & ADRIENNE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.19 LAURSEN DAVID & ADRIENNE 24.26 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 10/17/2019 101-1160-4220 Acrobat Pro DC annual renewal 837.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 837.00 Lecy Bros. Homes 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-7264 Bent Bow Trail 1,000.00 Lecy Bros. Homes 1,000.00 Mangold Horticulture 10/10/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-6490 Devonshire Ln 250.00 Mangold Horticulture 250.00 Marcsisak Tom 10/10/2019 101-1766-4300 Adult Softball umpire summer league 1,402.50 Marcsisak Tom 10/10/2019 101-1767-4300 Adult Softball umpire fall league 612.00 Marcsisak Tom 2,014.50 MAUND ENTERTAINMENT INC 10/17/2019 101-1614-4300 Halloween party face painters 540.00 MAUND ENTERTAINMENT INC 540.00 MCDONALD CONSTRUCTION 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-1661Anthem Place 3,150.00 MCDONALD CONSTRUCTION 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-1631 Anthem Place 3,150.00 MCDONALD CONSTRUCTION 6,300.00 MCFOA 10/17/2019 101-1120-4370 Liquor licensing training 10.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 8 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount MCFOA 10.00 METAL SUPERMARKETS 10/10/2019 101-1370-4510 aluminum angle 33.04 METAL SUPERMARKETS 33.04 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 10/10/2019 701-0000-4509 waste water service 157,423.55 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 157,423.55 MEYER DEBRA 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 41.52 MEYER DEBRA 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 39.81 MEYER DEBRA 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 44.34 MEYER DEBRA 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.91 MEYER DEBRA 131.58 Meyer Jay 10/17/2019 815-8201-2024 landscape escrow-6410 Yosemite 500.00 Meyer Jay 500.00 Mid America Meter Inc 10/10/2019 700-0000-4300 meter testing 50.00 Mid America Meter Inc 50.00 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 10/17/2019 401-0000-4706 engineered wood fiber 7,650.00 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 7,650.00 Milbank Winwater Works 10/10/2019 700-0000-4250 1.5 SSM meter-ultrasonic 3,878.58 Milbank Winwater Works 3,878.58 MILLS LORI & JESSE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 11.58 MILLS LORI & JESSE 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 26.72 MILLS LORI & JESSE 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.30 MILLS LORI & JESSE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.01 MILLS LORI & JESSE 41.61 MINNETONKA TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 52.74 MINNETONKA TITLE 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 88.63 MINNETONKA TITLE 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 18.28 MINNETONKA TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.43 MINNETONKA TITLE 162.08 Minuteman Press 10/17/2019 101-1170-4110 business cards-generic city hall/pw 16.00 Minuteman Press 16.00 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 10/10/2019 101-0000-2011 PR Batch 00411.10.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 55.98 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 10/10/2019 210-0000-2011 PR Batch 00411.10.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 4.02 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2011 PR Batch 00411.10.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 9.60 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 10/10/2019 701-0000-2011 PR Batch 00411.10.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 9.61 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 10/10/2019 720-0000-2011 PR Batch 00411.10.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 0.79 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 9 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 80.00 MN Wastewater Operator Assn 10/10/2019 701-0000-4370 Registration-Crooks/Gillen/Martinson/Syverson 80.00 MN Wastewater Operator Assn 80.00 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 10/17/2019 101-1550-4120 bumper/tube-inner/hyd hose asm 276.86 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 276.86 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC 10/10/2019 700-0000-4550 replace broken valve 4,941.50 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC 10/17/2019 601-6038-4751 Orchard Lane Area Street Recon 243,164.22 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC 248,105.72 Nuss Truck Group Inc 10/10/2019 101-1320-4140 o-rings 12.32 Nuss Truck Group Inc 12.32 Peak Heating and Cooling 10/17/2019 101-1250-3305 Refund permit-9150 Degler Circle 276.25 Peak Heating and Cooling 276.25 PELZEL RICHARD 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-6681 Amberwood 500.00 PELZEL RICHARD 500.00 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 20.90 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 35.43 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.11 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.96 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.69 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 27.36 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.81 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.14 PILLER TITLE SERVICES 107.40 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 10/10/2019 101-1370-4350 PW cleaning-September 320.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 10/10/2019 700-0000-4350 PW cleaning-September 40.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 10/10/2019 701-0000-4350 PW cleaning-September 40.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 400.00 Randy's Bobby & Steve's Auto World 10/17/2019 101-1220-4375 vehicle tow 172.04 Randy's Bobby & Steve's Auto World 172.04 Randy's Sanitation Inc 10/10/2019 101-1613-4410 Taste of Chan garbage service 643.50 Randy's Sanitation Inc 643.50 RESULT TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.40 RESULT TITLE 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.85 RESULT TITLE 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.03 RESULT TITLE 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.06 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 10 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount RESULT TITLE 25.34 Retka Thomas 10/17/2019 101-1560-4300 Oktoberfest entertainers 220.00 Retka Thomas 220.00 RUEGEMER JERRY 10/17/2019 101-0000-1027 Halloween party petty cash 350.00 RUEGEMER JERRY 350.00 SAFFRIN SAMUEL 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-2314 Hunter Drive 250.00 SAFFRIN SAMUEL 250.00 SCHOLLMAN WALTER & KATHLEEN 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 14.07 SCHOLLMAN WALTER & KATHLEEN 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.96 SCHOLLMAN WALTER & KATHLEEN 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 6.13 SCHOLLMAN WALTER & KATHLEEN 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.81 SCHOLLMAN WALTER & KATHLEEN 33.97 SEH 10/17/2019 701-7052-4751 Chanh PP I&I Study 3,653.21 SEH 3,653.21 Senja Inc 10/17/2019 101-1539-4300 Tai Chi instruction 224.00 Senja Inc 224.00 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 10/10/2019 101-1370-4510 paint 16.94 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 10/10/2019 101-1370-4510 empty paint cans 8.48 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 25.42 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 10/10/2019 101-1370-4510 screws & nuts 4.56 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 10/10/2019 101-1170-4510 mice station refills 32.97 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 10/10/2019 101-1220-4510 cleaner 5.49 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 10/10/2019 101-1220-4510 iron fighter pellets 41.94 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 84.96 Shoutz Aaron & Rachel 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-8490 Swan Court 250.00 Shoutz Aaron & Rachel 250.00 SIGNSOURCE 10/17/2019 101-1170-4110 name plates 159.00 SIGNSOURCE 159.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing 10/10/2019 101-1110-4340 Printing/advertising 292.86 Southwest Suburban Publishing 10/10/2019 720-7201-4340 Printing/advertising 263.20 Southwest Suburban Publishing 10/10/2019 101-1220-4375 Printing/advertising 263.20 Southwest Suburban Publishing 10/10/2019 101-1410-4340 Printing/advertising 82.38 Southwest Suburban Publishing 901.64 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 11 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 10/10/2019 101-1550-4120 waverly cap in navy - 48 851.32 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 10/17/2019 101-1250-4240 shirts/sweatshirt 426.04 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 1,277.36 Stein Services LLC 10/17/2019 700-0000-4550 shop certification of Flow Meter 30.00 Stein Services LLC 30.00 SUSA Treasurer 10/10/2019 700-0000-4370 Registration-Crooks 75.00 SUSA Treasurer 10/10/2019 700-0000-4370 Registration-Carlson 75.00 SUSA Treasurer 150.00 TARVIN RONALD & CHRYS 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 16.55 TARVIN RONALD & CHRYS 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 25.43 TARVIN RONALD & CHRYS 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 6.44 TARVIN RONALD & CHRYS 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.49 TARVIN RONALD & CHRYS 49.91 TFORCE FINAL MILE 10/10/2019 700-0000-4330 deliver-MN Dept of Health 45.61 TFORCE FINAL MILE 45.61 THIES KENNETH A 10/17/2019 101-1614-4300 Halloween party Hay rides 550.00 THIES KENNETH A 550.00 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES INC 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 44.45 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES INC 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 66.52 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES INC 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 18.91 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES INC 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.52 TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES INC 132.40 TruWest LLC 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-775 Crossroads Court 1,500.00 TruWest LLC 1,500.00 Twin Cities Paddleboard 10/17/2019 101-1540-3635 Lake Ann Paddleboard rental 2,700.00 Twin Cities Paddleboard 2,700.00 TWIN CITY HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1190-4260 stop door floor hd 22.36 TWIN CITY HARDWARE 22.36 VANREVELEN KATHLEEN 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 70.36 VANREVELEN KATHLEEN 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 81.74 VANREVELEN KATHLEEN 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 18.52 VANREVELEN KATHLEEN 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.46 VANREVELEN KATHLEEN 173.08 VECCHI THOMAS 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.15 VECCHI THOMAS 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 35.17 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 12 of 13 Name Check Da Account Description Amount VECCHI THOMAS 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.91 VECCHI THOMAS 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.54 VECCHI THOMAS 61.77 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 10/10/2019 101-1220-4350 garbage service-October 77.97 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 10/10/2019 101-1170-4350 garbage service-October 205.66 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 10/10/2019 101-1220-4350 garbage service-October 33.19 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 10/10/2019 101-1190-4350 garbage service-October 257.51 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 10/10/2019 101-1370-4350 garbage service-October 134.48 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 10/10/2019 700-0000-4350 garbage service-October 16.81 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 10/10/2019 701-0000-4350 garbage service-October 16.81 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 10/10/2019 101-1550-4350 garbage service-October 529.55 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 1,271.98 WENNER CLAYTON MORRIS 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 6.16 WENNER CLAYTON MORRIS 10/10/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.32 WENNER CLAYTON MORRIS 10/10/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.00 WENNER CLAYTON MORRIS 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.66 WENNER CLAYTON MORRIS 17.14 West Metro Remodeling 10/17/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion escrow-6881 Utica Lane 250.00 West Metro Remodeling 250.00 WEUM JOHN 10/10/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.73 WEUM JOHN 5.73 WS & D PERMIT SERVICE 10/17/2019 101-1250-3301 Refund permit-1070 Hesse Farm Road 225.12 WS & D PERMIT SERVICE 225.12 ZACK'S INC.10/17/2019 101-1320-4120 serrated magnesium lute bar 331.77 ZACK'S INC. 331.77 632,997.47 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 13 of 13 Accounts Payable Check Detail-ACH User: dwashburn Printed: 10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM Name Check Da Account Description Amount ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC 10/10/2019 101-1170-4300 Pest control 131.25 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC 131.25 ALLIED BLACKTOP 10/10/2019 420-4223-4751 2019 Sealcoat Project 196,733.40 ALLIED BLACKTOP 196,733.40 Badger State Inspection LLC 10/10/2019 815-8221-2024 Antenna review/structural review 1,900.00 Badger State Inspection LLC 1,900.00 Boyer Ford Trucks 10/10/2019 101-1320-4120 Uph Cush G 109.60 Boyer Ford Trucks 10/17/2019 101-1320-4140 long strok 143.18 Boyer Ford Trucks 10/17/2019 101-1320-4140 armrest ad 48.54 Boyer Ford Trucks 301.32 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 10/10/2019 101-1140-4302 professional/legal fees 14,696.15 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 14,696.15 Carver County 10/10/2019 700-7043-4320 Dark fiber-WWTP 350.00 Carver County 10/10/2019 101-1160-4320 Internet/Fiber 540.00 Carver County 10/17/2019 101-1210-4300 background investigation-JImmie's Old Southern BBQ 250.00 Carver County 10/17/2019 700-0000-4120 tires 204.00 Carver County 10/17/2019 101-1210-4300 3rd quarter police contract overtime 17,790.41 Carver County 19,134.41 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 10/17/2019 101-1220-4320 September 2019 138.04 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 10/17/2019 101-1350-4320 September 2019 3,604.54 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 10/17/2019 101-1540-4320 September 2019 405.39 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 10/17/2019 101-1550-4320 September 2019 431.69 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 10/17/2019 101-1600-4320 September 2019 33.10 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 10/17/2019 700-0000-4320 September 2019 126.86 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 10/17/2019 700-7019-4320 September 2019 2,016.51 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 10/17/2019 701-0000-4320 September 2019 1,471.42 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 8,227.55 CENTURY FENCE COMPANY 10/17/2019 700-0000-4550 Lake trail water tower fence and gate repair 1,200.00 CENTURY FENCE COMPANY 10/17/2019 701-0000-4551 Lake trail water tower fence and gate repair 2,990.00 CENTURY FENCE COMPANY 4,190.00 Choice, Inc.10/17/2019 101-1220-4350 fire station cleaning 176.32 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 1 of 7 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Choice, Inc. 176.32 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN.10/10/2019 400-4126-4703 Network storage array, compellent SCv3020 50,058.77 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN.10/10/2019 400-4126-4703 refund shipping-Network storage array, compellent SCv3020 -88.77 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 49,970.00 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC.10/10/2019 101-1370-4150 bowl cleaner 31.60 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC. 31.60 Engel Water Testing Inc 10/10/2019 700-0000-4300 water samples 520.00 Engel Water Testing Inc 10/17/2019 700-0000-4300 water samples-July 520.00 Engel Water Testing Inc 1,040.00 FASTENAL COMPANY 10/17/2019 101-1370-4120 carbon brushes 5.92 FASTENAL COMPANY 10/17/2019 101-1550-4120 nylock Z 2.74 FASTENAL COMPANY 8.66 GRANICUS INC 10/10/2019 210-0000-4300 Novus Agenda annual license 8,950.00 GRANICUS INC 8,950.00 HAWKINS CHEMICAL 10/10/2019 700-7019-4160 Azone 15 4,700.87 HAWKINS CHEMICAL 10/17/2019 700-7043-4150 chlorine 1,050.00 HAWKINS CHEMICAL 5,750.87 IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 10/10/2019 101-1550-4400 portable restrooms-September 4,918.25 IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 10/10/2019 101-1550-4400 portable restrooms-August 4,932.65 IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 9,850.90 Indoor Landscapes Inc 10/10/2019 101-1170-4300 October plant service 187.00 Indoor Landscapes Inc 187.00 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 10/17/2019 101-1170-4110 office supplies 20.75 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 10/17/2019 101-1170-4110 office supplies 12.23 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 32.98 Jasper Engineering & Equipment Co 10/10/2019 700-0000-4530 submersible pressure transmitter 1,446.28 Jasper Engineering & Equipment Co 1,446.28 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 10/17/2019 101-1190-4510 kit ignitor for boilers 183.29 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 183.29 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 10/10/2019 101-1370-4170 15W40 oil/grease/tractor fld 3,433.51 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 10/17/2019 101-1370-4170 unleaded 87 eth 10/ultra low #2 dyed B5 15,756.33 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 2 of 7 Name Check Da Account Description Amount KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 19,189.84 Kidd Plumbing Inc 10/10/2019 101-1170-4300 toilet repair-Men's restroom city hall 258.00 Kidd Plumbing Inc 258.00 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC10/10/2019 400-0000-1155 Private Dev Insp-Mission Hills 16,223.50 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC10/10/2019 601-6043-4752 Minnewashta Parkway rehab 11,125.20 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 27,348.70 Little Blind Spot 10/17/2019 101-1190-4510 repair blinds 130.00 Little Blind Spot 130.00 LOCATORS AND SUPPLIES INC 10/10/2019 701-0000-4150 RDTX leads 170.68 LOCATORS AND SUPPLIES INC 170.68 LYMAN LUMBER 10/17/2019 101-1370-4120 plywood for PW shelving 224.00 LYMAN LUMBER 224.00 Marco Inc 10/10/2019 101-1170-4410 monthly copier charge 720.68 Marco Inc 10/10/2019 700-0000-4410 monthly copier charge 100.00 Marco Inc 10/10/2019 701-0000-4410 monthly copier charge 100.00 Marco Inc 10/10/2019 720-0000-4410 monthly copier charge 50.00 Marco Inc 970.68 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1560-4130 misc parts/supplies 6.72 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1600-4130 misc parts/supplies 3.99 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 700-0000-4150 misc parts/supplies 69.53 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 700-7043-4150 misc parts/supplies 19.92 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 700-0000-4120 misc parts/supplies 10.21 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1550-4150 misc parts/supplies 141.91 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 700-7019-4120 misc parts/supplies -1.82 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1560-4120 misc parts/supplies 12.59 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 700-7019-4150 misc parts/supplies 8.61 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1160-4150 misc parts/supplies 26.09 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1220-4120 misc parts/supplies 61.85 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1220-4260 misc parts/supplies 2,924.86 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1220-4290 misc parts/supplies 296.96 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1220-4375 misc parts/supplies 18.13 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1320-4150 misc parts/supplies 11.86 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1350-4120 misc parts/supplies 10.79 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 10/10/2019 101-1550-4120 misc parts/supplies 157.82 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 3,780.02 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 10/17/2019 101-1250-3816 SAC-September -372.75 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 10/17/2019 701-0000-2023 SAC-September 37,275.00 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 36,902.25 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 3 of 7 Name Check Da Account Description Amount MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 10/17/2019 101-1250-3818 Surcharge-September -94.78 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 10/17/2019 101-0000-2022 Surcharge-September 4,738.86 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 4,644.08 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC.10/17/2019 101-1120-4300 Job posting-Rec Supervisor 125.00 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC. 125.00 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/10/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 31.08 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/10/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 170.30 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/10/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 78.48 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/10/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 36.92 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/10/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 4,897.36 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/10/2019 101-1600-4320 electricity charges 34.28 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/10/2019 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 88.01 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/10/2019 701-0000-4320 electricity charges 524.46 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/17/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 194.53 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 6,055.42 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/10/2019 700-0000-4120 return-valve/oil pressure switch/ujoint -107.43 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/10/2019 101-1320-4140 belt & tensioner kit 261.58 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/10/2019 101-1550-4120 oil filters/fuel filter/threadlocker/work lmp/battery cleaner 142.78 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/17/2019 101-1320-4120 seal ld acid battery/core deposit 107.64 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/17/2019 700-0000-4140 oil filters/fuel filters/atp filter 64.44 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/17/2019 101-1260-4140 oil filter 3.28 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/17/2019 101-1320-4120 brake away kits acces 28.65 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/17/2019 101-1320-4120 brake away kits acces 28.65 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 529.59 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 10/10/2019 101-1220-4140 misc parts/supplies 5.42 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 10/10/2019 101-1370-4120 misc parts/supplies 62.23 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 10/10/2019 101-1370-4260 misc parts/supplies 9.79 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 10/10/2019 101-1550-4120 misc parts/supplies -26.45 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 10/10/2019 700-0000-4120 misc parts/supplies 21.62 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 72.61 Potentia MN Solar 10/10/2019 700-0000-4320 August 2019 2,459.49 Potentia MN Solar 10/10/2019 101-1190-4320 August 2019 4,618.24 Potentia MN Solar 10/10/2019 101-1170-4320 August 2019 3,544.92 Potentia MN Solar 10,622.65 PRECISE MRM LLC 10/10/2019 101-1320-4310 pooled data/network access fee 135.50 PRECISE MRM LLC 135.50 PRO TURF 10/17/2019 101-1550-4300 fall application 165.00 PRO TURF 10/17/2019 101-1550-4300 fall application 111.00 PRO TURF 10/17/2019 101-1550-4300 fall application 1,166.00 PRO TURF 1,442.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 4 of 7 Name Check Da Account Description Amount SPRINT PCS 10/17/2019 700-0000-4310 monthly charges 51.72 SPRINT PCS 10/17/2019 701-0000-4310 monthly charges 51.72 SPRINT PCS 103.44 SPS COMPANIES INC 10/10/2019 101-1190-4530 venting regulators 40.43 SPS COMPANIES INC 40.43 STICHA GREG 10/10/2019 101-1130-4370 Mileage-MNGFOA conference 153.12 STICHA GREG 10/17/2019 101-1130-4370 lunch/mileage-SRA meeting 29.63 STICHA GREG 182.75 STRATOGUARD LLC 10/17/2019 101-1160-4300 Proofpoint email filtering serv 176.00 STRATOGUARD LLC 176.00 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1700-4040 Life insurance-September 0.77 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-0000-2011 Life insurance-September 781.92 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-0000-2011 Life Insurance-October 5.95 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1120-4040 Life Insurance-October 32.56 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1130-4040 Life Insurance-October 21.30 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1160-4040 Life Insurance-October 11.21 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1550-4040 Life insurance-September 39.69 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1420-4040 Life insurance-September 34.58 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1370-4040 Life insurance-September 19.10 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 210-0000-4040 Life insurance-September 9.54 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 720-0000-4040 Life insurance-September 3.30 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 210-0000-2011 Life insurance-September 6.29 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1520-4040 Life insurance-September 13.50 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1530-4040 Life insurance-September 6.21 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1560-4040 Life insurance-September 5.13 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1600-4040 Life insurance-September 6.89 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1430-4040 Life insurance-September 2.05 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 720-7201-4040 Life insurance-September 2.43 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 720-7202-4040 Life insurance-September 2.43 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1170-4040 Life insurance-September 3.51 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1220-4040 Life insurance-September 18.72 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 701-0000-4040 Life insurance-September 32.91 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 700-0000-4040 Life insurance-September 42.26 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 700-0000-2011 Life insurance-September 109.52 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 701-0000-2011 Life insurance-September 109.52 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 720-0000-2011 Life insurance-September 0.76 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-0000-2011 Life insurance-September cobra 5.95 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1250-4040 Life Insurance-October 45.36 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1310-4040 Life Insurance-October 38.71 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1320-4040 Life Insurance-October 48.25 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1370-4040 Life Insurance-October 19.10 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1520-4040 Life Insurance-October 13.50 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1530-4040 Life Insurance-October 6.21 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1560-4040 Life Insurance-October 5.13 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1600-4040 Life Insurance-October 6.89 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1700-4040 Life Insurance-October 0.77 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1550-4040 Life Insurance-October 39.69 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 5 of 7 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1420-4040 Life Insurance-October 34.58 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1430-4040 Life Insurance-October 2.05 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 210-0000-4040 Life Insurance-October 7.65 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 720-7201-4040 Life Insurance-October 2.43 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 720-7202-4040 Life Insurance-October 2.43 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1170-4040 Life Insurance-October 3.51 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1220-4040 Life Insurance-October 18.72 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 701-0000-4040 Life Insurance-October 32.91 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 700-0000-4040 Life Insurance-October 42.26 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 720-0000-4040 Life Insurance-October 10.14 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-0000-2011 Life Insurance-October 781.92 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 210-0000-2011 Life Insurance-October 6.29 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 700-0000-2011 Life Insurance-October 109.52 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 701-0000-2011 Life Insurance-October 109.52 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 720-0000-2011 Life Insurance-October 9.00 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1130-4300 Life insurance-September 3.63 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1120-4040 Life insurance-September 38.23 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1130-4040 Life insurance-September 21.30 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1160-4040 Life insurance-September 11.21 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1250-4040 Life insurance-September 45.36 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1310-4040 Life insurance-September 38.71 Sun Life Financial 10/10/2019 101-1320-4040 Life insurance-September 48.25 Sun Life Financial 2,931.23 TCIC, Inc.10/17/2019 701-0000-4310 FCC license 1,001.00 TCIC, Inc. 1,001.00 TENNANT 10/17/2019 700-0000-4120 blade assy 60.00 TENNANT 10/17/2019 700-0000-4120 guide/skirt/squeegee/blade 486.75 TENNANT 546.75 TWIN CITY SEED CO.10/17/2019 700-0000-4552 straw blanket/staples/ditch mixture 256.50 TWIN CITY SEED CO. 256.50 ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC10/10/2019 700-0000-4530 new receptacle for diesel pump in generator room 3,175.50 ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 3,175.50 United Farmers Cooperative 10/10/2019 101-1550-4260 pole pruner/backpack blower/loop trimmer/chain 2,523.62 United Farmers Cooperative 10/10/2019 700-0000-4120 return-brush knife -34.95 United Farmers Cooperative 10/10/2019 101-1550-4260 pole pruner/backpack blower/loop trimmer/chain -2,603.61 United Farmers Cooperative 10/10/2019 101-1550-4260 pole pruner/backpack blower/loop trimmer/chain 2,603.61 United Farmers Cooperative 2,488.67 UNITED WAY 10/10/2019 101-0000-2006 PR Batch 00411.10.2019 United Way 29.40 UNITED WAY 29.40 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1550-4310 cellular phone charges 457.51 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1520-4310 cellular phone charges 42.82 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1600-4310 cellular phone charges -2.75 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 6 of 7 Name Check Da Account Description Amount VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1530-4310 cellular phone charges 42.82 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 700-0000-4310 cellular phone charges 572.35 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 701-0000-4310 cellular phone charges 419.43 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 720-0000-4310 cellular phone charges 108.19 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1160-4310 cellular phone charges 90.64 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1120-4310 cellular phone charges 261.82 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1170-4310 cellular phone charges 25.36 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1260-4310 cellular phone charges 35.01 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1130-4310 cellular phone charges 42.82 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1250-4310 cellular phone charges 290.69 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1310-4310 cellular phone charges 224.19 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1370-4310 cellular phone charges 93.54 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1320-4310 cellular phone charges 322.47 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-1220-4310 cellular phone charges 505.76 VERIZON WIRELESS 10/10/2019 101-0000-2033 cellular phone charges 2.38 VERIZON WIRELESS 3,535.05 Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc.10/10/2019 700-0000-4300 traffic control plan 115.00 Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc. 115.00 WASHBURN DANIELLE 10/10/2019 101-1130-4370 mileage-MNGFOA conference 59.16 WASHBURN DANIELLE 59.16 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/10/2019 420-0000-4751 1/2" Blacktop 585.90 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/10/2019 700-0000-4552 binder rock 2,972.55 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/17/2019 420-0000-4751 3/8" fine mix/1/4" fine mix 545.99 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/17/2019 420-0000-4751 1/4" fine mix 426.70 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/17/2019 420-0000-4751 1/4" fine mix 471.75 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/17/2019 420-0000-4751 1/4" fine mix 471.75 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/17/2019 700-0000-4552 granular bor/conbit 2,238.93 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/17/2019 700-0000-4552 conbit 620.14 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/17/2019 700-0000-4552 granular bor 557.30 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/17/2019 700-0000-4552 lundquist cy 696.00 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 9,587.01 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC 10/17/2019 101-1550-4120 poly conv wafer k 1,064.80 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC 1,064.80 460,835.69 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (10/22/2019 - 9:23 AM)Page 7 of 7