The URL can be used to link to this page

1i Approval of Minutes)ate: 02/03/1999 Time: 11:07:02 City of Chanhassen FM - Reports - Projects - Master - Project Listing Fiscal Year: 1999 # Sub Proj Proj Type Proj Stat Project Description i Operator: DEW-- - Page 10 00 11 00 12 00 13 00 18 00 ~9 00 20 00 21 00 22 00 23 00 25 00 29 00 31 00 32 00 33 00 34 00 35 00 36 00 37 00. 39 00 ~.0 O0 ~1 00 ~2 O0 19 00 ~0 O0 .51 O0 '2 00 ~9 00 ~0 O0 :1 O0 '2 00 '3 00 ~4 O0 ~5 O0 ;6 00 '7 O0 '9 - 00 '1 00 '2 00 '3 O0 ,1 O0 9 O0 3 O0 1 O0 2 O0 3 O0 9 O0 } O0 1 O0 2 O0 3 O0 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0! 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open O )en O )en G Den O Den O'~en O~en O>en O~en O~en O ~en O~en O ~en O~en O~en O>en O~en O>en O>en O~en O~en O>en O~en 0 >en O~en 0 >eh O>en O>en O>en O~en O>en PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGIC PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD COORDINATION CITY CODE UPDATES CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD BUDGET GENERAL OFFICE OPERATIONS ADVISORY BOARD & COUNCIL COORDINATION GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SECRETARIAL POOL CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PAYROLL UTILITY BILLING/RECEIVABLE AUDIT BUDGET GENERAL FINANCE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS OVEHEAD CIVIL CRIMINAL ~ SPECIALIZED OVERHEAD RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL PUBLIC OVERHEAD NETWORK HARDWARE/SOFTWARE SUPPORT CLIENT HARDWARE/SOFTWARE SUPPORT TELECOMMUNICATIONS HARDWARE/SOFTWARE SUP GENERAL ADMINISTRATION TRAINING/INSTRUCTIONAL Y2K PROJECT GIS ACTI'VITIES SPECIAL PROJECTS OVERHEAD GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE UTILITIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE OVERHEAD ELECTION ADMINISTRATION OVERHEAD LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING/INSTRUCTIONAL GENERAL PUBLIC SAFETY CRIME PREVENTION OVERHEAD FIRE EDUCATION/PREVENTION TRAINING/INSTRUCTIONAL FIRE/RESCUE/MEDICAL/HAZMAT FIRE ADMINISTRATION Date: 02/0311999 Time: 11:07:03 City of Chanhassen FM - Reports - Projects - Master - Project Listing Operator: DEW Pa~ Fiscal Year: 1999 Proj # Sub Proj Proj Type Proj Stat Project Description 229 00 01 Open 230 00 01 Open 239 00 01 Open 250 00 01 Open 251 00 01 Open 252 00 01 Open 259 00: 01 Open 260 00 01 Open 261 00 01 Open 268 00 01 Open 269 00 01 Open 310 00 01 Open 311 00 01 Open 312 00 01 Open 313 00 01 Open 314 00 01 Open 315 00 01 Open 316 00 01 Open 317 00 01 Open 318 00 01 Open 319 00 01 Open 320 00 01 Open 321 00 01 Open 322 00 01 Open 323 00 01 Open 324 00 01 Open 225 99 91 Open 326 00 01 Open 328 00 01 Open 329 00 01 Open 349 00 01 Open 353 00 01 Open 354 00 01 Open 359 00 01 Open 370 00 01 Open 371 00 01 Open 372 00 01 Open 379 00 01 Open 420 00 01 Open 421 00 01 Open 422 00 01 Open 423 00 01 Open 428 00 01 Open 429 00 01 Open 430 00 01 Open 431 00 01 Open 432 00 01 Open 438 00 01 Open 439 00 01 Open 440 00 01 Open 441 00 01 Open 442 00 01 Open 443 00 01 Open OVERHEAD PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION OVERHEAD INSPECTION/ENFORCEMENT PLAN REVIEW GENERAL INSPECTION OVERHEAD ANIMAL CONTROL ENFORCEMENT CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS COOPERATIVE AGENCY PROJECTS INHOUSE PROJECTS MAPPING & INFORMATION SERVICES UTILITY, GRADING, ROAD USE PERMIT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE SNOW REMOVAL/ICE CONTROL STREET SWEEPING SIGNS & STRIPING STREET LIGHTS/UTILITY LOCATES MOWING/TREE TRIMMING STORM PIPE/POND MAINTENANCE CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD OVERHEAD SIGNALS STREET LIGHTS/UTILITY LOCATES OVERHEAD INHOUSE FLEET MAINTENANCE VEHICLE/EQUIPMENT PROCUREMENT BUILDING/GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OVERHEAD PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION INTERGOVERNMENTAL PARK OPERATION & DEVELOPMENT TRAIL OPERATION & DEVELOPMENT CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD - PARKS FITNESS PROGRAMMING PROGRAMMING FACILITY RENTALS CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD ACTIVITY/TRIP PROGRAMMING INTERGOVERNMENTAL CONGREGATE DINING/MEALS WHEELS VOLUNTEER TRAINING .te: 02/03/1999 Time: 11:07:03 City of Chanhassen FM - Reports - Projects - Master - Project Listing Operator: DEW Page: Fiscal Year: 1999 # Sub Proj Proj Type Proj Stat Project Description 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open O0 01 Open 00 01 Open O0 01 Open 00 01 Open O0 O1 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open O0 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open 00 01 Open FACILITIES CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD COMMUNITY EVENTS YOUTH LEISURE SERVICES FACILITIES YOUTH ASSOCIATIONS CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD ADULT SPORTS/LEISURE SERVICES YOUTH SPORTS FACILITY SCHEDULING YOUTH LEISURE SERVICES CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD FACILITIES LIFEGUARD/BEACH PROGRAM CONCESSION/BOAT RENTAL OPERATIONS CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD PARK OPERATION/CONSTRUCTION TRAIL OPERATION/CONSTRUCTION MOWING TREE CARE IRRIGATION REFUSE SKATING RINKS OVERHEAD DOWNTOWN PLANNING COMMISSION OVERHEAD PLANNING ADMINISTRATION CURRENT PLANNING LONG RANGE PLANNING PERMIT REVIEW CODE ENFORCEMENT INTERGOVERNMENTAL CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD SENIOR COMMISSION OVERHEAD CATV OVERHEAD TIF ADMINISTRATION SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS OVERHEAD TIF ADMINISTRATION SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS OVERHEAD TIF ADMINISTRATION SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL PROJECTS OVERHEAD Date: 02/03/1999 Time: 11:07:04 City of Chanhassen FM - Reports - Projects - Master - Project Listing Operator: DEW Pa Fiscal Year: 1999 Proj # Sub Proj Proj Type Proj Stat Project Description 700 00 0! 701 00 01 702 00 01 703 00 0! 704 00 01 705 00 01 706 00 01 707 00 01 708 00 01 709 00 01 710 00 01 711 00 01 712 00 01 718 00 01 719 00 01 805 00 0! 809 00 0! 810 00 01 819 00 01 850 00 01 851 00 01 858 00 01 859 00 01 860 00 0! 861 00 01 865 00 01 868 00 01 869 00 01 870 O0 01 871 O0 01 873 00 01 874 O0 01 878 00 01 879 00 01 959 00 O1 995 O0 01 996 00 01 997 00 01 998 00 01 999 00 01 ll001 00 11 Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open O'~en O'~en O>en O>en O>en 0 >en 0 >en 0 >en O>en O>en O~en O~en O>en 0 ~en SEWER CLEANING/MAINTENANCE SEWER LIFT STATION R & M WATERMAIN FLUSHING/MAINTENANCE WELLS & STORAGE TANK R & M METER INSTALL/READS UTILITY LOCATES EMERGENCY REPAIR BUILDING/GROUND MAINTENANCE CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD TRUNK SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM TRUNK WATER SYSTEM BUILIDNG/GROUND MAINTENANCE CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD DOWNTOWN OVERHEAD DOWNTOWN RECYCLING OVERHEAD LAKE MANAGEMENT INTERGOVERNMENTAL CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD FORESTRY MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW INTERGOVERNMENTAL CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD STORM WATER MANAGEMENT INTERGOVERNMENTAL PERMIT REVIEW DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CUSTOMER SERVICE OVERHEAD OVERHEAD SICK VACATION COMP TIME USED HOLIDAY PAY PERS HOLIDAY Main Street Repair Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance CITY COUNCIL " 110 00 0.00 0 28,699.49 0.00 PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 28,699.49 Project Totals: 0.00 0 28,699.49 (28,699.49) 111 00 0 0.00 0 8,208.42 0.00 STRATEGIC PLANNING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 8,208.42 Project Totals: 0.00 0 8,208.42 (8,208.42) 112 00 0 0.00 0 8,383.62 0.00 ADVISORY BOARD COORDINATION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 8,383.62 Project Totals: 0.00 0 8,383.62 (8,383.62) 113 00 0 0.00 0 62.20 0.00 CITY CODE UPDATES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 62.20 Project Totals: 0.00 0 62.20 (62.20) 1118 00 480.00 0 1,507.39 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1,507.39 Project Totals: 480.00 0 1,507.39 (1,507.39) 119 00 0 256.05 0 90,443.97 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 90,443.97 Project Totals: 256.05 0 90,443.97 (90,443.97) TOTAL COUNCIL $ $ 736.05 $ - $ 137,305.09 Just This Proiect # ! Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance ADMINISTRATION 0 120 00 = 0.00 0 1,546.52 0.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1,546.52 Proj oct Totals: 0.00 0 1,546.52 ( 1,546.52 ) 121 00 0 858.79 0 41,232.28 0.00 GENERAL OFFICE OPERATIONS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 41,232.28 Project Totals: 858.79 0 41,232.28 (41,232.28) 122 00 0 42.00 0 19,619.86 0.00 ADVISORY BOARD & COUNCIL COORD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 19,619.86 I Project Totals: 42.00 0 19,619.86 (19,619.86) 123 00 0 829.26 0 44,660.11 0.00 GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 44,660.11 Project Totals: 829.26 0 44,660.11 (44,660.11 ) 125 00 0 0.00 0 42.55 0.00 SECRETARIAL POOL #DIV/0! #D IV/0! 42.55 Project Totals: 0.00 0 42.55 (42.55) 128 00 0 0.00! 0 10,824.48 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 10,824.48 Project Totals: 0.00 0 10,824.48 (10,824.48) 129 00 0 156.03 0 15,872.54 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 15,872.54 Project Totals: 156.03 0 15,872.54 (15,872.54~ TOTALADMIN $ - $ 1,886.08 $ $ 132,251.82 $ Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance FINANCE 131 00 0 61.06 0 10,454.36 0.00 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 10,454.36 Project Totals: 61.06 0 10,454.36 (10,454.36) 132 00 0 61.06 0 37,532.45 0~00 PAYROLL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 37,532.45 Project Totals: 61.06 0 37,532.45 (37,532.45) 133 00 0 13,547.61 0 30,676.64 0.00 UTILITY BILLING/RECEIVABLE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 30,676.64 Project Totals: 13,547.61. 0 30,676.64 (30,676.64) 134 00 0 108.06 0 13,036.05 0.00 AUDIT #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 13,036.05 Project Totals:. 108..06 0 13,036.05 (i3,036.05) 135 00 0 0.00 0 3,690.88 0.00 BUDGET #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3,690.88 Project Totals: 0.00 0 3,690.88 (3,690.88) 136 . 00 0 124.92 0 33,333.11 0.00 GENERAL FINANCE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 33,333.11 Project Totals: 124.92 0 33,333.11 (33,333.11 ) 137 00 0 0.00 0 3,596.26 0.00 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3,596.26 Project Totals: 0.00 0 3,596.26 (3,596.26) 139 00 0 16.70 0 3,473.58 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3,473.58 Project Totals: 16.70 0 3,473.58 (3,473.58) TOTAL FINANCE $ $ 13,919.41 $ - $ 135,793.33 $ Just This Project# / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance LEGAL 140 O0 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 CIVIL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 141 00 0 1,053.57 0 12,875.30 0.00 CRIMINAL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 12,875.30 Project Totals: 1,053.57 0 12,875.30 (12,875.30 142 00 0 264.00 0 1,585.11 0.00 SPECIALIZED #DIV/0 ! #DIV/0 ! 1,585.11 Project Totals: 264.00 0 1,585.11 (1,585.11 ) 149 00 0 7,178.06 0 29,476.44 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 29,476.44 Project Totals: 7,178.06 0 29,476.44 (29,476.44) TOTAL LEGAL 0 8495.63 0 43936.85 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance PROPERTY ASSESSMENT 150 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 151 00 0 0.00 0 2,490.18 0.00 COMMERCIAL #DIV/0! #DIV/0 ! 2,490.18 Project Totals: 0.00 0 2,490.18 (2,490.18) 152 00 0 0.00 0 27.69 0.00 PUBLIC #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 27.69 Project Totals: 0.00 0 27.69 (27.69) 159 00 0 26.75' 0 186.75 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 186.75 Project Totals: 26.75 0 186.75 (186.75) TOTAL PROP ASSMNT 0 26.75 0 2704.62 0 Just This Proiect # I Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance MIS 160 00 0 165.08 0 25,203.68 0.00 NETWORK HARDWARE/SOFTWARE SUPP #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 25,203.68 · Project Totals: I 165.08 0 25,203.68 (25,203.68)~ 161 O0 0 0.00 0 7,014.68 0.00 CLIENT HARDWARE/SOFTWARE SUPPOR #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 7,014.68 Project Totals: 0.00 0 7,014.68 ( 7,014.68) 162 00 0 0.00 0 853.90 0.00 TELECOMMUNICATIONS HARDWARE/SOF #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 853.90 Project Totals: 0.00 0 853.90 (853.90)i 163 00 0 0.00 0 5,363.91 0.00 GENERAL ADMINISTRATION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5,363.91 Project Totals: 0.00 0 5,363.91 (5,363.91 ) 164 00 0 0.00 0 3,456.40 0.00 TRAINING/INSTRUCTIONAL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3,456.40 Project Totals: 0.00 0 3,456.40 (3,456.40) 165 O0 0 0.00 0 34,392.19 0.00, Y2K PROJECT #[31V/0! #DIV/0! 34,392.19 ' Project Totals: 0.00 0 34,392.19 (34,392.19)i 166 O0 0 2,409.65 0 15,941.09 0.00 GIS ACTIVITIES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 15,941.09 Project Totals: 2,409.65 0 15,941.09 (15,941.09) 167 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 SPECIAL PROJECTS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 169 00 0 7.48 0 2,444.47 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 2,444.47 Project Totals: 7.48 0 2,444.47 (2,444.47) TOTAL MIS 0 2582.21 0 94670.32 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance 171 00 0 0.00 0 78,596.50 0.00 GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 78,596.50 Project Totals: 0.00 0 78,596.50~ (78,596.50) 172 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 UTILITIES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 173 00 0 210.38 0 16,577.80 0.00 GENERAL MAINTENANCE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 16,577.80 Project Totals: 210.38 0 16,577.80 (16,577.80) 179 00 0 873.32 0 29,099.04 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 29,099.04 Project Totals: 873.32 0 29,099.04 (29,099.04) TOTAL CITY HALL 0 1083.7 0 124273.34 0 Just This Project #/Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance ELECTIONS 181 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 ELECTION ADMINISTRATION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 189 00 0 0.00 0 142.14 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 142.14 Project Totals: 0.00 0 142.14 (142.14) TOTAL ELECTIONS 0 0 0 142.14 C Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance LAW ENFORCEMENT 210 00 0 134.90 0 37,652.69 0.00 LAW ENFORCEMENT #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 37,652.69 Project Totals: 134.90 0 37,652.69 (37,652.69) 211 00 0 0.00 0 2,568.09 0.00 TRAINING/INSTRUCTIONAL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 2,568.09 Project Totals: 0.00 0 2,568.09 (2,568.09) 212 00 0 244,563.95 0 269,751.69 0.00 GENERAL PUBLIC SAFETY #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 269,751.69 Project Totals: 244,563.951 0 269,751.69 (269,751.69) 213 00 0 1,079.49 0 26,789.67 0.00 CRIME PREVENTION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 26,789.67 Project Totals:. 1,079.49 0 26,789.67 (26,789.67) 219 00 0 296.47 0 4,898.19 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0 ! #DIV/0 ! 4,898.19 Project Totals: 296.47 0 4,898.19 (4,898.19) TOTAL LAW ENFORCEME 0.00 246,074.81 0.00 341,660.33 ~341,660.33 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance FIRE DEPARTMENT 220 00 0 61.95 0 852.97 0.00 FIRE EDUCATION/PREVENTION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 852.97 Project Totals: 61.95 0 852.97 (852.97) 221 00 0 202.82 0 16,522.68 0.00 TRAINING/INSTRUCTIONAL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 16,522.68 Project Totals: 202.82 0 16,522.68 (16,522.68) 222 00 0 8,889.31 0 86,629.07 0.00 FI REIR ESC U ElM E D ICAL/HAZMAT #DIV/0! #D IV/0! 86,629.07 Project Totals: 8,889.31 ~ 0 86,629.07 (86,629.07) 223 00 0 163.90 0 61,886.05 0.00 FIRE ADMINISTRATION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 61,886.05 Project Totals: 163.90 0 61,886.05 (61,886.05) 229 00 0 885.42 0 15,791.93 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0 ! #DIV/0! 15,791.93 Project Totals: 885.42 0 15,791.93 (15,791.93) TOTAL FIRE DE PT. 0 '10203.4 0 '181682.7 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance PUBLIC SAFETY COMM 230 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 239 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0[ #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY C 0 0 0 0 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance INSPECTION/ENFORCEMENT 250 00 I 0 201.37 0 86,999.70 0.00 INSPECTION/ENFORCEMENT #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 86,999.70 Project Totals: 201.37 0 86,999.70 (86,999.70)' 251 00 0 15.75 0 33,471.41 0.00 PLAN REVIEW #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 33,471.41 Project Totals: 15.75 0 33,471.41 (33,471.41 ) 252 00 0 0.00 0! 79,611.59 0.00 GENERAL INSPECTION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 79,611.59 Project Totals: 0.00 0 79,611.59 (79,611.59) 259 00 0 1,428.77 0 55,457.44 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 55,457.44 Project Totals: 1,428.77 0 55,457.44 (55,457.44) TOTAL BUlLDIINSPEC 0 1645.89 0 255540.14 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance ANIMAL CONTROL 260 00 0 169.79 0 8,845.35 0.00 ANIMAL CONTROL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 8,845.35 Project Totals: 169.79 0 8,845.35 (8,845.35) 261 00 0 0.00 0 5,665.46 0.00 ENFORCEMENT #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5,665.46 Project Totals: 0.00 0 5,665.46 (5,665.46) 268 00 0 0.00 0 18,444.29 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 18,444.29 Project Totals: 0.00 0 18,444.29 (18,444.29) 269 00 0 324.12 0 2,230.03 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 2,230.03 Project Totals: 324.12 0 2,230.03 (2,230.03) TOTAL ANIMAL CONT. 0 493.91 0 35185.13 0 Paae 13 I Project # / Sub Project I BUDGET Description ENGINEERING 310 00 ;APITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Totals: 311 00 PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Project Totals: 312 00 COOPERATIVE AGENCY PROJECTS Project Totals: 313 00 IN-HOUSE PROJECTS Project Totals: 314 O0 MAPPING & INFORMATION SERVICES Project Totals: 315 O0 UTILITY, GRADING, ROAD USE PER Project Totals: 316 O0 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES Project Totals: 317 00 BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW Project Totals: 318 00 CUSTOMER SERVICE Project Totals: Just This Acct Payable % 0 96,883.28 #DIV/0! 96,883.28 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0I 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.0( 0 0.0( #DIV/0! 0.00 YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD % 0 716,362.09 #DIV/0! 0 716,362.09 YTD Variance 0.00 716,362.09 (716,362.09) 0 26,657.46 0.00 #DIV/0! 26,657.46 0 26,657.46 (26,657.46) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,697.66 #DIV/0! 7,697.66 37,699.34 #DIV/0! 37,699.34 6,158.29 #DIV/0! 6,158.29 3,155.73 #DIV/0! 3,155.73 1,848.52 #DIV/0! 1,848.52 8,904.73 #DIV/0! 8,904.73 10,053.68 #DIV/0! 10,053.68 0.00 7,697.66 (7,697.66) 0.00 37,699.34 (37,699.34) 0.00 6,158.29 (6,158.29)' 0.00 3,155.73 (3,155.73) 0.00 1,848.52 (1,848.52 0.00 8,904.73 (8,904.73) 0.00 10,053.68 (10,053.68 319 00 OVE RH EAD Project Totals: TOTAL ENGINEERING 0 267.32 #DIV/0! 267.32 97,150.60 0 23,196.31 #DIV/0! 0 23,196.31 0 44003.24 0.00 23,196.31 (23,196.31 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance i STREETS 320 00 0 2,175.61 0 104,342.61 0.00 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 104,342.61 Project Totals: 2,175.61 0 104,342.61 (104,342.61 ) 321 O0 0 5,755.09 0 85,246.16 0.00 SNOW REMOVAL/ICE CONTROL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 85,246.16 , Project Totals: 5,755.09 0 85,246.16 (85,246.16) ~322 00 0 115.29 0 27,437.28 0.00 STREET SWEEPING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 27,437.28 Project Totals: 115.29 0 27,437.28 (27,437.28). 323 00 0 66.25 0 17,039.20 0.00 SIGNS & STRIPING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 17,039.20 ' Project Totals: 66.25 0 17,039.20 7,039.20) 324 00 0 264.82 0 1,872.54 0.00 STREET LIGHTS/UTILITY LOCATES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1,872.54 I Project Totals: 264.82 0 1,872.54 (1,872.54) 325 00 0 222.33 0 36,713.55 0.00 MOWING/TREE TRIMMING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 36,713.55 Project Totals: 222.33 0 36,713.55 (36,713.55) 326 00 0 0.00 0 7,151.02 0.00 STORM PIPE/POND MAINTENANCE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 7,151.02 Project Totals: 0.00 0 7,151.02 (7,151.02 328 00 0 45.00 0 3,293.75 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3,293.75 Project Totals: 45.00 0 3,293.75 (3,293.75) 329 00 0 3,279.79 0 32,523.78 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 32,523.78 Project Totals: 3,279.79 0 32,523.78 (32,523.78) TOTAL STREETS 0 11924.18 0 315619.89 0 Just This ,Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance STREET LIGHTS/SIGNS 353 00 0 0.00 0 2,380.56 0.00 SIGNALS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 2,380.56 Project Totals: 0.00 0 2,380.56 (2,380.56) 354 00 0 0.00 0 4,861.07 0.00 STREET LIGHTS/UTILITY LOCATES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4,861.07 Project Totals: 0.00 0 4,861.07 (4,861.07) 359 00 0 907.45 0 103,362.79 0.00 OVER HEAD #DIV/0! #D IV/0! 103,362.79 Project Totals: 907.45 0 103,362.79 (103,362.79) TOTAL LIGHT/SIGNS 0 907.45 0 '110604.42 0 Just This Project# / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance CITY GARAGE 370 O0 0 0.00 0 59,048.12 0.00 IN-HOUS FLEET MAI NTENANCE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 59,048.12 Project Totals: 0.00 0 59,048.12 (59,048.12) 371 00 0 0.00 0 3,912.64 0.00 VEHICLE/EQUIPMENT PROCUREMENT #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3,912.64 Project Totals: 0.00 0 3,912.64 ( 3,912.64) 372 O0 0 67.90 0 13,702.99 0.00 BUILDING/GROUNDS MAINTENANCE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 13,702.99 Project Totals: 67.90 0 13,702.99 (13,702.99) 379 00 0 1,585.24 0 41,247.89 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 41,247.89 Project Totals: 1,585.24 0 41,247.89 (41,247.89) TOTAL CITY GARAGE 0 1653.14 0 11791t.64 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance PARK ADMINISTRATION 409 00 0 61.25 0 5,964.48 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5,964.48 Project Totals: 61.25 0 5,964.48 (5,964.48) 420 00 0 0.00 0 9,392.45 0.00 PARK 8, RECREATION COMMISSION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 9,392.45 Project Totals: 0.00 0 9,392.45 (9,392.45) 421 00 0 0.00 0 3,504.14 0.00 INTERGOVERNMENTAL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3,504.14 Project Tota Is: 0.00 0; 3,504.14 (3,504.14) 422 00 0 942.60 0 350,880.88 0.00 PARK OPERATION & DEVELOPMENT #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 350,880.88 Project Totals: 942.60 0 350,880.88 (350,880.88) 423 00 0 619.00 0 63,909.42 0.00 TRAIL OPERATION & DEVELOPMENT #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 63,909.42 Project Totals: 619.00 0 63,909.42 (63,909.42) 428 00 0 37.50 0 16,442.14 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 16,442.14 Project Totals: 37.50 0 16,442.14 (16,442.14 429 00 0 29.78 0 15,674.83 0.00 OVERHEAD - PARKS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 15,674.83 Project Totals: 29.78 0 15,674.83 (15,674.83 TOTAL PARK ADMIN 0 1690.13 0 465768.34 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance REC CENTER 430 00 0 0.00 0 16,740.31 0.00 FITNESS PROGRAMMING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 16,740.31 Project Totals: 0.00 0 16,740.31 (16,740.31) 431 00 0 3,530.18 0 32,722.21 0.00 PROGRAMMING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 32,722.21 Project Totals: 3,530.18 0 32,722.211 (32,722.211 432 00 0 0.00 0 9,650.77 0.00 FACILITY RENTALS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 9,650.77 Project Totals: 0.00 0 9,650.77 (9,650.77', 438 00 0 0.00 0 35,603.81 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 35,603.81 Project Totals: 0.00 0 35,603.81 (35,603.81', 439 00 0 329.32 0 5,598.85 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5,598.85 Project Totals: 329.32 0 5,598.85 (5,598.85'. TOTAL REC CENTER 0 3859.5 0 100315.95 Just This I Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance SENIOR CENTER 440 00 0 1,275.00 0 5,339.98 0.00 ACTIVITY/TRIP PROGRAMMING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5,339.98 Project Totals: 0.00 1,275.00 0 5,339.98 (5,339.98 441 00 0 0.00 0 1,295.54 0.00 INTERGOVERNMENTAL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1,295.54 Project Totals: 0.00 0.00 0 1,295.54 (1,295.54 442 00 0 0.00 0 1,109.62 0.00 CONGREGATE DINING/MEALS WHEELS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1,109.62 Project Totals: 0.00 0.00 0 1,109.62 (1,109.62 443 00 0 0.00 0 386.40 0.00 VOLUNTEER TRAINING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 386.40 Project Totals:. 0.00 0.00 0 386.40 (386.40) 444 00 0 44.69 0 431.60 0.00 FACILITIES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 431.60 Project Totals: 0.00 44.69 0 431.60 (431.60) 448 00 0 0.00 0 2,647.35 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 2,647.35 Project Totals: 0.00 0.00 0 2,647.35 (2,647.35) 449 00 0 0.88 0 395.86 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 395.86 Project Totals: 0.00! 0.88 0 395.86 (395.86) TOTAL SENIOR CENT 0 1320.57 0 11606.35 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance RECREATION PROGRAMS 450 O0 0 10,989.23 0 29,888.15 0.00 COMMUNITY EVENTS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 29,888.15 Project Totals: 10,989.23 0 29,888.15 (29,888.15) 452 00 0 640.71 0 10,322.82 0.00 YOUTH LEISURE SERVICES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 10,322.82 Project Totals: 640.71 0 10,322.82 (10,322.82) 453 00 0 0.00 0 16,489.49 0.00 FACILITIES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 16,489.49 Project Totals: 0.00 0 16,489.49 (16,489.49) 454 00 0 0.00 0 1,280.05 0.00 YOUTH ASSOCIATIONS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1,280.05 Project Totals: 0.00 0 1,280.05 (1,280.05) 458 00 0 0.00 0 4,967.54 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIVI0! #DIV/0! 4,967.54 Project Totals: 0.00 0 4,967.54 (4,967.54) 459 00 0 100.43 0 4,873.53 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4,873.53 Project Totals: 100.43 0 4,873.53 (4,873.53) TOTAL REC PROG 0 11730.37 0 67821.58 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance SELF SUPPORTING PROGRAMS I 460 00 I 0 1,860.50 0 9,210.28 0.00 ADULT SPORTS/LEISURE SERVICES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 9,210.28 Project Totals: 1,860.50 0 9,210.28 (9,210.28) 461 00 0 0.00 0 508.20 0.00 YOUTH SPORTS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 508.20 Project Totals: 0.00 0 508.20 (508.20) 462 00 0 0.00 0 272.86 0.00 FACILITY SCHEDULING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 272.86 Project Totals: 0.00 0 272.86 (272.86) 463 00 0 0.00 0 9,223.66 0.00 YOUTH LEISURE SERVICES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 9,223.66 Project Totals: 0.00 0 9,223.66 (9,223.66) 468 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 469 00 0 0.00 0 781.71 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #REF! Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 ~TOTAL SELF SUP PROG 0 1860.5 0 19996.71 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD IDescription % YTD % Variance LAKE ANN OPERATIONS 470 00 0 0.00 0 1,923.84 0.00 FACILITIES #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1,923.84 Project Totals: 0.00 0 1,923.84 (1,923.84'~ 471 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 LIFEGUARD/BEACH PROGRAM #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 472 00 0 2,059.97 0 12,766.41 0.00 CONCESSION/BOAT RENTAL OPERATE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 12,766.41 Project Totals: 2,059.97 0 12,766.41 (12,766.41'~ 478 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 479 00 0 1,303.04 0 4,073.13 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0 ! 4,073.13 Project Totals: 1,303.04 0 4,073.13 (4,073.13'~ TOTAL LAKE ANN OPS 0 3363.01 0 18763.38 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance PARK MAINTENANCE 480 00 0 4,131.84 0 143,066.03 0.00 PARK OPERATION/CONSTRUCTION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 143,066.03 Project Totals: 4,~131.84 0 143,066.03 (143,066.03) 481 00 0 1,704.00 0 11,977.85 0.00 TRAIL OPERATION/CONSTRUCTION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 11,977.85 Project Totals: 1,704.00 0 11,977.85 (11,977.85) 482 00 0 293.66 0 31,668.17 0.00 i MOWIN G #DIV/0! #DIV/0 ! 31,668.17 I Project Totals: 293.66 0 31,668.17 (31,668.17) 483 00 0 0.00 0 3,652.86 0.00 TREE CARE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3,652.86 ~roject Totals: 0.00 0 3,652.86 (3,652.86) i484 00 0 0.00 0 1,428.06 0.00 IIRRIGATION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1,428.06 Project Totals: 0.00 0 1,428.06 (1,428.06) 485 00 0 0.00 0 2,163.21 0.00 REFUSE #DIV/0 ! #D IV/0 ! 2,163.21 Project Totals: 0.00 0 2,163.21 (2,163.21) 486 00 0 0.00 0 12,789.62 0.00 SKATING RINKS #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 12,789.62 Project Totals: 0.00 0 12,789.62 (12,789.62) 489 00 0 1,333.87 0 11,069.37 0.00 OVERHEAD DOWNTOWN #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 11,069.37 Project Totals: 1,333.87 0 11,069.37 (11,069.37) TOTAL PARK MAINT 0 7463.37 0 217815.17 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance PLANNING COMMISSION 510 00 0 0.00 0 4,445.36 0.00 IPLANNING COMMISSION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4,445.36 Project Totals: 0.00 0 4,445.36 (4,445.361 H9 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 TOTAL PLAN COMM 0 0.00 0 4445.36 Pmnm ?R Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance PLANNING ADMINISTRATION I 520 00 I 0 18.98 0 13,281.06 0.00 PLANNING ADMINISTRATION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 13,281.06 Project Totals: 18.98 0 13,281.06 (13,281.06) 521 00 0 567.50 0 52,849.80 0.00 CURRENT PLANNING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 52,849.80 Project Totals: 567.50 0 52,849.80 (52,849.80) 522 00 0 0.00 0 10,516.02 0.00 LONG RANGE PLANNING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 10,516.02 Project Totals: 0.00 0 10,516.02 (10,516.02) 523 00 0 0.00 0 743.27 0.00 PERMIT REVIEW #DIV/0! #DIV/0! - 743.27 Project Totals: 0.00 0 743.27 (743.27) 524 00 0 0.00 0 2,805.61 0.00 CODE ENFORCEMENT #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 2,805.61 Project Totals: 0.00 0 2,805.61 (2,805.61 ) 525 00 0 20.30 0 7,298.79 0.00 INTERGOVERNMENTAL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 7,298.79 Project Totals: 20.30 0 7,298.79 (7,298.79) 528 00 0 0.00 0 19,858.35 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 19,858.35 Project Totals: 0.00: 0 19,858.35 (19,858.35) 529 00 0 9.28 0 1,452.05 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1,452.05 Project Totals: 9.28 0 1,452.05 (1,452.05 TOTAL PLANNING 0 616.06 0 108804.95 0 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance SENIOR COMMISSION 530 00 0 0.00 0 4,915.92 0.00 SENIOR COMMISSION #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4,915.92 Project Totals: 0.00 0 4,915.92 (4,915.92 539 00 0 0.00 0 304.95 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 304.95 Project Totals: 0.00 0 304.95 (304.95 TOTAL SENIOR COMM 0 0 0 5220.87 ( Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance CATV 610 00 0 196.50 0 6,525.34 0.00 CATV #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 6,525.34 Project Totals: 196.50 0 6,525.34 (6,525.34) 619 00 0 0.00 0 781.71 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 781.71 Project Totals: 0.00 0 781.71 (781.71 ) TOTAL CATV 0 196.5 0 7307.05 0 Project # / Sub Project Description TIF ADMINISTRATION 640 00 TIF ADMINISTRATION Project Totals: 641 00 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Project Totals: 649 00 OVERHEAD Project Totals: 680 00 TIF ADMINISTRATION Project Totals: 681 00 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Project Totals: 689 O0 OVERHEAD Project Totals: 690 00 'IF ADMINISTRATION ~roject Totals: 891 00 'SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Project Totals: 692 00 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Project Totals: BUDGET Just This Acct Payable % 0 5,839.91 #DIV/0! 5,839.91 0 29,651.80 #DIV/0! 29,651.80 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 520.00 #DIV/0! 520.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD % 0 108,967.60 #DIV/0! 0 108,967.60 0 29,651.80 #DIV/0! 0 29,651.80 0 1,035.76 #DIV/0! 0 1,035.76 0 9,655.06 #DIV/0! 0 9,655..06 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0 0.00 0 1,170.61 #DIV/0! 0 1,170.61 0 5,604.96 #DIV/0! 0 5,604.96 0 4,352.48 #DIV/0! 0 4,352.48 0 30,094.98 #DIV/0! 0 30,094.98 YTD Variance 0.00 108,967.60 (108,967.60) 0.00 29,651.80 (29,651.80) 0.00 1,035.76 (1,035.76) 0.00 9,655.06 (9,655.06) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,170.61 (1,170.61) 0.00 5,604.96 (5,604.96) 0.00 4,352.48 (4,352.48) 0.00 3O,O94.98 (30,094.98) 697 00 699 O0 OVERHEAD I~roject Totals: TOTAL TIF 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 36011.71 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0 0.00 0 146.68 #DIV/0! 0 146.68 0 190679.93 0.00 0:00 0.00 0.00 146.68 (146.681 IProject # / Sub Project BUDGET Description SEWER AND WATER 700 00 SEWER CLEANING/MAINTENANCE Project Totals: 701 00 SEWER LIFT STATION R & M Project Totals: 702 00 WATERMAIN FLUSHING/MAINTENANCE Project Totals: 703 00 WELLS & STORAGE TANK R & M Project Totals: 704 00 METER INSTALL/READS Project Totals: 705 00 UTILITY LOCATES Project Totals: 706 00 EMERGENCY REPAIR Project Totals: 707 00 BUILDING/GROUND MAINTENANCE I ~roject Totals: .............. .............. Project Totals: Just This Acct Payable % 0 32,675.75 #DIV/0! 32,675.75 0 1,245.80 #DIV/0! 1,245.80 0 170.85 #DIV/0! 170.85 0 96.00 #DIV/0! 96.00 0 9,030.87 #DIV/0! 9,030.87 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 2,064,50 #DIV/0! 2,064.50 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD % 0 161,173.60 #DIV/0! 0 161,173.60 0 35,724.18 #DIV/0! 0 35,724.18 0 30,106.65 #DIV/0! 0 30,106.65 0 32,637.43 #DIV/0! 0 32,637.43 0 78,693.10 #DIV/O! 0 78,693.10 0 16,746.49 #DIV/0! 0 16,746.49 0 15,768.24 #DIV/O! 0 15,768.24 0 12,312.06 #DIV/0! 0 12,312.06 0 7,468.82 #DIV/0! 0 7,468.82 YTD Variance 0.00 161,173.60 (161,173.60) 0.00 35,724.18 (35,724.18) 0.00 30,106.65 (30,106.65) 0.00 32,637.43 (32,637.43) 0.00 78,693.10 (78,693.10) 0.00 16,746.49 (16,746.49 0.00 15,768.24 (15,768.241 0.00 12,312.06 (12,312.061 0.00 7,468.82 (7,468.82) I~roject Totals: .............. 710 O0 Project Totals: 711 00 TRUNK WATER SYSTEM Project Totals: 712 00 BUILDING/GROUND MAINTENANCE Project Totals: 718 00 CUSTOMER SERVICE Project Totals: 719 00 )VERHEAD ~roject Totals: TOTAL WATER/SEWER 0 11,394.14 #DIV/0! 11,394.14 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 5,691.00 #DIV/0! 5,691.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! O.OC 0 Q.0( #DIV/0! - 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 62368.9i 0 0 0 0 0 689,245.91 #DIV/0! 689,245.91 0.00 #DIV/O! 0.00 13,489.65 #DIV/0! 13,489.65 399.21 #DIV/0! 399.21 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 954.23 #DIV/0! 954.23 1094719.57 0.00 689,245.91 (689,245.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13,489.65 (13,489.65) 0.00 399.21 (399.21) .0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 954.23 (954.23) Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance HISTORIC PRESERVATION TRUST 805 00 0 0.00 0 45,042.98 0.00 DOWNTOWN #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 45,042.98 Project Totals: 0.00 0 45,042.98 (45,042.98) 809 00 0 11.94 0 6,382.77 0.00 OVERHEAD DOWNTOWN #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 6,382.77 Project Totals: 11.94 0 6,382.77 (6,382.77) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 806 0 0.00 0 1,625.00 0.00 DOWNTOWN PARKING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1,625.00 .............................. 0.00 0.00 1,625.00 (1,625.00) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! TOTAL HISTORIC 0 11.94 0 53,050.75 0.00 Just This Project # / Sub Project BUDGET Acct Payable YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Description % YTD % Variance ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION RECYCLING 810 00 0 0.00 0 633.68 0.00 RECYCLING #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 633.68 Project Totals: 0.00 0 633.68 (633.68) 819 00 0 0.00 0 284.26 0,00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 284.26 Project Totals: 0.00 0 284.26 (284.26) SUBTOTAL-RECYCLING 0 0 0 917.94 0 LAKE MANAGEMENT 850 00 0 0.00 0 5,149.50 0.00 LAKE MANAGEMENT #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5,149.50 Project Totals: 0.00 0 5,149.50 (5,149.50) 851 00 0 0.00 0 ' 590.38 0.00 INTERGOVERNMENTAL #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 590.38 Project Totals: 0.00 0 590.38 (590.38) 858 00 0 1,511.00 0 4,807.08 0.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4,807.08 Project Totals: 1,511.00 0 4,807.08 (4,807.08) 859 00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 OVERHEAD #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 Project Totals: 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL LK MGNT 0 1511 0 10546.96 0 FORESTRY MANAGEMENT 860 00 I 01 295.001 0 33,155.79 0.00 Project Totals: 295.00 0 33,155.79 (33,155.79) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW #DIV/0!0'00 #DIV/0! 799.93 ............... 0.00 0 865 00 INTERGOVERNMENTAL Project Totals: 868 00 CUSTOMER SERVICE !_ Project Totals: 869 O0 OVERHEAD Proje~ Totals: SUBTOTAL FORESTRY 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0 25.00 #DIV/0! 25.00 0 320 0 0 516.84 #DIV/0! 516.84 922.97 #DIV/0! 922.97 238.19 #DIV/0! 238.19 35633.72 0.00 516.84 (516.84) 0.00 922.97 (922.97) 0.00 238.19 (238.19) STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 870 00 I STORM WATER MANAGEMENT Project Totals: ,71 00 INTERGOVERNMENTAL 0 13,920.32 #DIV/0! 13,920.32 0 0.00 #DIV/0! Project Totals: 873 00 Project Totals: 874 O0 DEVELOPMENT Project Totals: 878 00 CUSTOMER SERVICE Project Totals: 879 00 OVERHEAD ]~roject Totals: SUBTOTAL SWMP TOTAL ENVIRO PROT 0 #DIV/0! 0.0( 0 0.0( #DIV/0! 0 0 0.00 0.00 0 110,730.31 #DIV/0! 0 110,730.31 0 498.36 #DIV/0! 0 498.36 0 1,171.04 #DIV/0! 0 1,171.04 0 725.62 #DIV/0! 0 725.62 0 1,125.43 #DIV/0! 0 1,125.43 REVIEW 0 0.00 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 #DIV/0] 0.00 13920.32 0 1,421.30 #DIV/0! 0 1,421.30 0 115672.08 0 162770.68 0.00 110,730.31 (110,730.31) 0.00 498.36 (498.36) 0.00 1,171.04 (1,171.04) 0.00 725.62 (725.62) 0.00 1,125.43 (1,125.43) 0.00 1,421.30 (1,421.30) 0 0 15751.32 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 13:59:54 age: ave As: 1 Ranges: Vendor #: (A) Invoice ~: (A) Entry Journal #: (A) Trans ~: (A) Line #: (A) Due Date: (A) Bank #: (A) ptions: Detail / Summary: D Sort: N City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Invoice Status: A Check Over Expend: N # of copies: 1 Operator: clt endor ~ Name Jrnl ~ Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice ~ Inv. Date Due Date Voucher ~ Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date mount PO # BRAUT ABRA AUTOBODY & GLASS CHANHASSEN 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 4155 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 REPAINT FIRE CHIEFS CAB ,800.00 101-122-000-4520 R&M Vehi-General-Fire 222-00 07/1999 REPAINT FIRE CHIEFS CAR 00 Invoice Total Net: 00' 42868 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 ............................. 1,800.00 1,800.00 ABRA AUTOBODY & GLASS CHANHASSEN Net: ECENG AEC ENGINEERING 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV 23648 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 63099 DRAW FROM ESCROW 45.00 915-000-216-2024 Escrow/P-DevEscro-*-N 0-00 07/1999 DRAW FROM ESCROW 745[00 00 Invoice Total Net: 745.00 745.00 ............................ AEC ENGINEERING Net: 745.00 745.00 EHOM A & E HOME VIDEO 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 01348866 06/24/1999 07/26/1999 42765 POLICE VIDEO 4.90 101-121-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Poli 210-00 07/1999 POLICE VIDEO 34,90 00 Invoice Total Net: 34.90 34.90 A & E HOME VIDEO Net: 34.90 34.90 .IRTOU AIRTOUCH CELLULAR 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07101999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 07/10/1999 07/26/1999 00' .98.75 101-121-000-4310 Telephon~General-Poli 219-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE C}{ARGES 89.80 00 101-122-000-4310 Telephon-General-Fire 229-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 7.90 00 101-126-000-4310 Telephon-General-Anml 269-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 37.60 00 101-131-000-4310 Telephon-GeneraloEngi 319-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 7.69 00 101-152-000-4310 Telephon-General-Plan 529-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 5.74 00 101-145-000-4310 Telephon-General-Rec 459-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 15.71 00 101-143-000-4310 Telephon-General-Rec 439-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 7.90 O0 101-137-000-4310 Telephon-General-Gara 379-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 7.90 00 101-132-000-4310 Telephon-General-Str 329-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 18.51 00 Invoice Total Net: 198.75 198.75 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR Net: 198.75 198.75 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 13:59:55 City of Chanhassen Operator: Page: 2 FM Entry - Invoice Journal clt Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO ~ Description Chk Terms Check~ Chk Date ~mount ALBINS ALBINSON, INC 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 809715 42281 BROWN MAILERS 49.80 101-131-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Engi 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 319-00 07/1999 BROWN MAILERS Invoice Total Net: 49.80 49.80 49.80 -00* ALBINSON, INC Net: 49.80 49.80 _00' ALEAIR ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 12009 2 SETS OF TURNOUT GEAR, NAMETAGS 1,949.00 101-122-000-4240 Uniforms-General-Fire .00 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 42878 222-00 07/1999 2 SETS OF TURNOUT GEAR, NAMETAGS Invoice Total Net: 1,949.00 1,949.00 1,949.00 ~LLEX AIR APPARATUS INC Net: 1,949.00 1,949.00 _00' A/~EWAT AMERICAN WATER WORKS 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 188371 40819 MEMBERSHIP-BOUCHER 105.00 700-702-000-4360 Subscrip-Utility-S/W .00 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 709-00 07/1999 MEMBERSHIP-BOUCHER Invoice Total Net: 105.00 105.00 105.00 AMERICAN WATER WORKS Net: 105.00 105.00 ANCCOM ANCON COMMUNICATIONS 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 21526 REPLACE RADIO MICROPHONE 67.84 101-126-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Anml .00 .00- 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 260-00 07/1999 REPLACE RADIO MICROPHONE Invoice Total Net: 42763 67.84 67.84 67.84 .00' ANCON COMMUNICATIONS Net: 67.84 67.84 ANCTEC ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 5936 PAGER REPAIR 100.26 101-122-000-4531 R&M Radi-Heneral-Fire _00 .00' 06/29/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 PAGER REPAIR Invoice Total Net: 42874 100.26 100.26 100.26 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 5984 RADIO/PAGER REPAIR 121.49 101-122-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Fire .00 . 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 RADIO/PAGER REPAIR Invoice Total Net: 42869 121.49 121.49 121.49 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 5993 P3~DIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST 490.05 101-117-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-City _00 101-121-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Poli _00 101-122-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Fire 07/02/1999 07/26/1999 179-00 07/1999 RADIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST 219-00 07/1999 RADIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST 229-00 07/1999 RADIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST 7299 30.00 23.34 103.34 101-132-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Str 101-148-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Pk M 700-702-000-4531 R&M Radi-Utility-S/W 101-137-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Gara 101-131-000-4531 R~d~l Radi-General-Engi Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 13:59:56 3 ndor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice Description nount 329-00 07/1999 RADIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST 489-00 07/1999 RADIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST 709-00 07/1999 RADIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST 379-00 07/1999 RADIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST 319-00 07/1999 RADIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Inv. Date Due Date Voucher % Chk Terms Check~ Chk Date Operator: PO # 113.35 V0.01 53.34 13.33 13.33 clt 101-125-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Code 101-126-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Anml 259-00 07/1999 RADIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST 269-00 07/1999 RADIO MAINTENANCE-AUGUST Invoice Total Net: ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER Net: 53.34 16.67 490.05 490.05 711.80 711.80 ~ERG GARY & JOYCE ANDERSON 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 9900293 REFUND-PERMIT 3.25 101-000-000-3301 Building-General-*-* 101-000-000-2022 Surtax/P-General-*-* 00 07/16/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-PERMIT 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-PERMIT Invoice To~al Net: GARY & JOYCE ANDERSON Net: 62.25 1.00 63.25 63~25 63.25 63.25- 07/09/1999 07/26/1999- 450-00 07/1999 4TH OF JULY HELIUM, BALLOONS Invoice Total Net: 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 119-00 07/1999 HELIUM-VOLUNTEER APP PARTY Invoice Total Net: 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 220-00 07/1999 HELIUM RENTAL Invoice Total Net: 42407 130.70 130.70 130.70 42906 37.00 37.00 37.00 42883 12.00 12.00 12.00 179.70 179.70 NDON ANDON, INC. 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 106957 4TH OF JULY HELIUM, BALLOONS 30.70 101-145-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Rec 00 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 107156 HELIUM-VOLUNTEER APP PARTY 7.00 101-111-000-4375 Promotio-General-Legi 00 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 107378 I~ELIUM RENTAL .2.00 101-122-000-4375 Promotio-General-Fire 00 ANDON, INC. Net: /qNTOO ~LNN'S TOOL SUPPLY 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 11223 SPEED NUT ASSORTMENT ~58.67 101-132-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Str 00 07/03/1999 07/26/1999 320-00 07/1999 SPEED NUT ASSORTMENT Invoice Total Net: ANN'S TOOL SUPPLY Net: 41940 158.67 158.67 158.67 158.67 158.67 ATT3 AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07161999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 164.87 101-131-000-4310 Telephon-General-Engi _DO 101-132-000-4310 Telephon-General-Str ?D0-702-000-4310 Telephon-Utility-S/W 07/16/1999 07/26/1999 319-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 329-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 709-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES Invoice Total Net: 164.87 11.39 45.38 108.10 164.87 AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES Net: 164.87 164.87 RANDIR BANTA DIRECT MARKETING GROUP Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 13:59:57 Operator: clt Pa~e: 4 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice ~ Description Chk Amount 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 52876 07/03/1999 07/26/1999 105.00 101-111-000-4375 Promotio-General-Legi 118-00 07/1999 .0D Invoice Total Net: .0O* Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Terms Check# Chk Date 7399 105.00 105.00 105.00 BANTA DIRECT MARKETING GROUP Net: 105.00 105.00 .00' BAYWES BAY WEST 614 07/26/1999 A/P IN%; 99S002072 42894 OVERPAKDRUM ~53.70 221-000-000-4130 Prg Supl-HazMatSp-*-* . 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 OVERPAK DRUM Invoice Total Net: 253.70 253.70 253.70 BAY WEST Net: 253.70 253.70 .00' BEMENT BILL BEMENT 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 072099 FLEX-DAYCARE 197.92 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* .00 .00- 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-DAYCJ%RE Invoice Total Net: 197.92 197.92 197.92 BILL BEMENT Net: 197.92 197.92 .00* BOE VICKI BOE 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 072099 FLEX-HEALTH 86.00 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* .00 .00- 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-HEALTH Invoice Total Net: 86.00 86.00 86.00 VICKI BOE Net: 86.00 86.00 .00' ~ONROS BONESTRO0 ROSENE ANDERLIK & ASSOC. 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 062539 05/31/1999 07/26/1999 53199 BLUFF CREEK HILLSIDE RESTORATION 7,800.00 720-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-SurfWatr-*-* 870-00 07/1999 BLUFF CREEK HILLSIDE RESTORATION 7,800.00 Invoice Total Net: 7,800.00 7,800.00 .00' BONESTRO0 ROSENE ANDERLIK & ASSOC. Net: 7,800.00 7,800.00 OTCHE SCOTT BOTCHER 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 62299 MONTHLY CAR ALLOWANCE, LUNCHES 17.00 101-112-0'00-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-Admn 00 101-112-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-Admn 00 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 7899 LUNCH SDll2 8.00 101-112-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-Admn 00 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 070999 122-00 07/1999 MONTHLY CAR ALLOWANCE, LUNCHES 123-00 07/1999 MONTHLY CAR ALLOWANCE, LUNCHES Invoice Total Net: 517.00 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 121-00 07/1999 LUNCH SDll2 Invoice Total Net: SCOTT BOTCHER Net: 42.00 475.00 517.00 7899 38.00 38.00 38.00 555.00 555.00 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 13:59:57 age: 5 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Operator: clt ~ndor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date mount 07/09/1999 07/26/1999 320-00 07/1999 CAPS Invoice Total Net: 42~45 26.91' 26.91 26.91 26.91 26.91 OYFOR BOYER FORD TRUCKS 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 867964 CAPS 6.91 101-132-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Str 00 BOYER FORD TRUCKS Net: ~RANDT LEE BRANDT 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07161999 07/16/1999 07/26/1999 42907 ADULT SOFTBALL UMPIRE .22.00 101-146-406-4300 Serv Fee-General-SlfS 460-00 07/1999 ADULT SOFTBALL UMPIRE 222.00 00 Invoice Total Net: 222.00 222.00 LEE BRANDT Net: 222.00 222.00 00' .RARAG BRAD RAGAN, INC. 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 1674 TIRES 35.76 101-132-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Str 00 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 320-00 07/1999 TIRES Invoice Total Net: BRAD RAGAN, INC. Net: 41947 835.76 835.76 835.76 835.76 835.76 ROSOD BROWN'S CULTURED SOD 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 6104 SOD ,420.71 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk M 00 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV 6116 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 480-00 07/1999 SOD Invoice Total Net: 41841 1,420.71 1,420.71 1,420.71 ............................. 41~11 SOD 85.20 101-148-000-4150 MaintMat-General-Pk M .00 .00* 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV 63~0 SOD 153.36 101-148-000-4150 MaintMat-General-Pk M .00 .00' 480-00 07/1999 SOD Invoice Total Net: 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 480-00 07/1999 SOD Invoice Total Net: BROWN'S CULTURED SOD Net: 85.20 85.20 85.20 41510 153.36 153.36 153.36 1,659.27 1,659.27 .00' BTOFF BT OFFICE PRODUCTS INTERNATIONA3~ 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 4382641 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 7435440 121-00 07/1999 MISC. SUPPLIES 319-00 07/1999 MISC. SUPPLIES 212-00 07/1999 MISC. SUPPLIES Invoice Total Net: MISC. SUPPLIES 131.10 101-112-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Admn .00 101-131-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Engi .00 101-121-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Poli .00 .00- 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 4383970 TAPE, LABELS, FOLDERS 75.38 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 13:59:58 Page: 6 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal 58.69 65.25 7.16 131.10 131.10 7436942 Operator: clt Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Chk Terms Check% Chk Date Vendor ~ Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # PO # Description Amount .00 .00 101-112-000-4110 Off Supl-Oeneral-Admn 101-143-000-4110 Off Supl-Oeneral-Rec .00' 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 4385195 MISC. SUPPLIES 103.71 101-112-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Admn .00 700-702-000-4340 Printing-Utility-S/W .00 101-113-008-4110 Off Supl-General-Fina .0O 610 07/26/1999 A/P CRM 4386179 RETURN-ERASER -5.08 101-112-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Admn .00 .00' .00- 121-00 07/1999 TAPE, LABELS, FOLDERS 439-00 07/1999 TAPE, LABELS, FOLDERS Invoice Total Net: 07/09/1999 07/26/1999 121-00 07/1999 MISC. SUPPLIES 702-00 07/1999 MISC. SUPPLIES 139-00 07/1999 MISC. SUPPLIES Invoice Total Net: 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 121-00 07/1999 RETURN-ERASER Invoice Total Net: BT OFFICE PRODUCTS INTERNATIONAL Net: 23.26 52.12 75.38 75.38 7438154 35.62 62.47 5.62 103.71 103.71 7438163 -5.08 -5.08 -5.08 305.11 305.11 BUMBUM BUMPER TO BUMPER 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 206909 MISC. PARTS 736.44 101-122-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Fire 101-125-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Code .00 101-132-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Str 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 MISC. pARTS 250-00 07/1999 MISC. PARTS 320-00 07/1999 MISC. PARTS 210363 88.09 137.52 232.03 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk M 101-148-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Pk M 101-148-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Pk M 700-702-000-4140 Veh Supl-Utility-S/W L%BFEV CABIN FEVER 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 71999 LIFE JACKETS LK ANN CONC .44.75 101-147-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-LkAn 00 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 7599 BAIT & TACKLE - 4TH OF JULY 40.58 101-145-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Rec 00 L~DCOM CADY COMMUNICATIONS INC 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 274076 LABOR - PROGRA~ VOICEMAIL 4.15 101-117-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-City 00 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 13:59:59 ~age: 7 endor # Name Jrnl ~ Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice Description ~ount 482-00 07/1999 MISC. PARTS 480-00 07/1999 MISC. PARTS 482-00 07/1999 MISC. PARTS 700-00 07/1999 MISC. PARTS Invoice Total Net: BUMPER TO BUMPER Net: 90.74 24.22 88.39 75.45 736.44 736.44 736.44 736.44 07/19/1999 07/26/1999 472-00 07/1999 LIFE JACKETS LK ANN CONC Invoice Total Net: 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 450-00 07/1999 BAIT & TACKLE - 4TH OF JULY Invoice Total Net: CABIN FEVER Net: 42909 144.75 144.75 144.75 ............................. 42404 140.58 140.58 140.58 285.33 285.33 06/10/1999 07/26/1999 173-00 07/1999 LABOR - PROGRAM VOICEMAIL Chk 42328 Invoice Total Net: 84.15 84.15 84.15 ............................. Operator: clt City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Inv. Date Due Date Voucher ~ PO # Terms Check# Chk Date ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 275563 LABOR .26.23 101-117-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-City 00 06/28/1999 07/26/1999 173-00 07/1999 LABOR Invoice Total Net: CADY COMMUNICATIONS INC Net: ALTAN CALDWELL TANKS, INC. 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 8 1.5 MILLION GAL WATER TANK 3,390.00 706-000-000-4751 ConstrCo-WaterTwr-*-* 00 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 310-00 07/1999 1.5 MILLION GAL WATER TANK Invoice Total Net: CALDWELL TANKS, INC. Net: ~MKNU CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P 610 07/26/1999 A/D INV 594C 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 LEGAL SERVICES 910.27 101-114-000-4302 Legal-General-Legal-* 149-00 07/1999 LEGAL SERVICES 62899 126.23 126.23 126.23 ............................. 210.38 210.38 71399 53,390.00 53,390.00 53,390.00 53,390.00 53,390.00 63099 6,083.70 410-000-000-4302 Legal-PkAcq&Dv-*-* .00 101-114-000-4302 Legal-General-Legal-* .00 101-114-000-4302 Legal-General-Legal-* .00 101-114-000-4302 Legal-General-Legal-* · 00' 422-00 07/1999 LEGAL SERVICES 142-00 07/1999 LEGAL SERVICES 423-00 07/1999 LEGAL SERVICES 141-00 07/1999 LEGAL SERVICES Invoice Total Net: 8,910.27 890.00 264.00 619.00 1,053.57 8,910.27 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 594C LEGAL SERVICES 593.38 460-000-000-4302 Legal-E.D.A.-*-* .00 460-000-000-4302 Legal-E.D.A.-*-* .00 . DO* 07/19/1999 07/27/1999 680-00 07/1999 LEGAL SERVICES 640-00 07/1999 LEGAL SERVICES Invoice Total Net: 594C 593.38 520.00 73.38 593.38 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 63099 LEGAL SERVICES 1,094.36 101-114-000-4302 Legal-General-Legal-* .00' 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 149-00 07/1999 LEGAL SERVICES Invoice Total Net: 063099 1,094.36 1,094.36 1,094.36 .00' CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P Net: 10,598.01 10,598.01 CARAUD CARVER COUNTY AUDITOR 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 71399 OWNERSHIP NAME CHANGES 19.75 101-115-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Prop .00 .00- 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 159-00 07/1999 OWNERSHIP NAME CHANGES Invoice Total Net: 71399 19.75 19.75 19.75 .00' CARVER COUNTY AUDITOR Net: 19.75 19.75 CARTRA 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 1013190 RINGS, PINS 138.05 101-132-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Str .00 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 13:59:59 Page: 8 Vendor % Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Description Amount CARLSON TRACTOR EQUIP. CO. 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 325-00 07/1999 RINGS, PINS City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Chk Terms Check# Chk Date 42539 Operator: clt po ~ 138.05 _00' Invoice Total Net: 138.05 138.05 CARLSON TRACTOR EQUIP. CO. Net: 138.05 138.05 .00' CARTRE CARVER COUNTY TREASURER 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07191999 COPIES OF NAME CHANGES 7.00 101-115-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Prop .00 .00- 07/19/1999 07/26/1999 159-00 07/1999 COPIES OF NAME CHANGES Invoice Total Net: 7.00 7.00 7.00 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 3427 1999 1ST HALF POLICE CONTRACT 244,053.60 101-121-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Poll .00 .00- 06/22/1999 07/26/1999 62299 212-00 07/1999 1999 1ST HALF POLICE CONTRACT Invoice Total Net: 244,053.60 244,053.60 244,053.60 CARVER COUNTY TREASURER Net: 244,060.60 244,060.60 /ATPAR CATCO PARTS SERVICE 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 3-05360 MISC. PARTS '49.24 101-132-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Str 00 UDWCOM CDW GOVERNMENT INC 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV AH33051 INK CARTRIDGES 389.98 101-116-000-4703 Off Eqmt-General-MIS- 00 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV AK39078 DESKJET PRINTER i,373.82 101-116-000-4703 Off Eqmt-General-MIS- 00 606 07/26/1999 A/P CRM AM47642 INK CARTRIDGE -30.33 101-116-000-4703 Off Eqmt-General-MIS- 00 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV AM53613 INK CARTRIDGES £20.00 101-116-000-4703 Off Eqmt-General-MIS- 00 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV AM82904 INKJET PRINTER/ZIP DISK 315.91 101-116-000-4530 R&M Eqmt-General-MIS- .00 .00' 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV AM94839 INK CARTRIDGES 90.99 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:00 ?age: 9 ~ndor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Description Amount 07/09/1999 07/26/1999 320-00 07/1999 MISC. PARTS Invoice Total Net: CATCO PARTS SERVICE Net: 04/26/1999 07/26/1999 166-00 07/1999 INK CARTRIDGES Invoice Total Net: 06/01/1999 07/26/1999 166-00 07/1999 DESKJET PRINTER Invoice Total Net: 06/23/1999 07/26/1999 166-00 07/1999 INK CARTRIDGE Invoice Total Net: 06/24/1999 07/26/1999 166-00 07/1999 INK CARTRIDGES Invoice Total Net: 06/28/1999 07/26/1999 166-00 07/1999 INKJET PRINTER/ZIP DISK Invoice Total Net: 06/28/1999 07/26/1999 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Chk Terms Check# Chk Date 41946 549.24 549.24 549.24 549.24 549.24 42307 389.98 389.98 389.98 42307 1,373.82 1,373.82 1,373.82 42307 -30.33 ~30.33 -30.33 ......................... ~u-- 42307 120.00 120.00 120.00 315.91 315.91 315.91 42307 Operator: clt PO # 101-116-000-4703 Off Eqmt-General-MIS- .00 .00- /ENHOM CENTEX HOMES 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 6826 LANDSCAPE ESCROW 250.00 915-000-201-2024 Escrow/P-DevEscro-*-L 00 166-00 07/1999 INK CARTRIDGES Invoice Total Net: CDW GOVERNMENT INC Net: 07/19/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 LANDSCAPE ESCROW 90.99 90.99 90.99 2,260.37 2,260.37 MANCH 250.00 Invoice Total Net: 250.00 250.00 .00' CENTEX HOMES Net: 250.00 250.00 .00' ' CHACAR CHANHASSEN CARWASH 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 4295 06/14/1999 07/26/1999 61499 CARWASH 5.50 101-126-000-4520 R&M vehi-General-Anml 212-00 07/1999 CAR WASH 5.50 .00 Invoice Total Net: 5.50 5.50 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 4463 CARWASH 10.95 101-126-000-4520 R&M Vehi-General-Anml .00- 07/07/1999 07/07/1999 260-00 07/1999 CARWASH Invoice Total Net: 7799 10.95 10.95 10.95 .00' CHANHASSEN CAR WASH Net: 16.45 16.45 CHAFLO CHANHASSEN FLORAL 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 5269935 FLOWERS-FUNERAL, ASHWORTH 58.25 101-111-000-4375 Promotio-General-Legi o00' 06/25/1999 07/26/1999 119-00 07/1999 FLOWERS-FUNERAL, ASHWORTH Invoice Total Net: 52699 58.25 58.25 58.25 o00' CHANHASSEN FLORAL Net: 58.25 58.25 CHALAW CHANHASSEN LAWN & SPORTS 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV 17155 TRIMMER LINE 56.46 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk M .00 .DO* 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 '480-00 07/1999 TRIMMER LINE Invoice Total Net: 35150 56.46 56.46 56.46 . DO* CHANHASSEN LAWN & SPORTS Net: 56.46 56.46 CHAPRO CHANHASSEN PROPERTIES 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07201999 1ST HALF TAXES 18,226.00 491-000-000-4804 Spl Asse-EnterTIF-*-* _00 .00' 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 1ST HALF TAXES Invoice Total Net: 18,226.00 18,226.00 18,226.00 .00- CHANHASSEN PROPERTIES Net: 18,226.00 18,226.00 CLUUJO CLUTCH & U-JOINT Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:01 Pa~e: 10 Vendor # Name Jrnl ~ Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Description Amount City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Operator: po ~ clt 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 162482 U-JOINT KIT 46.52 700-702-000-4140 Veh Supl-Utility-S/W .00 .00- 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 700-00 07/1999 U-JOINT KIT Invoice Total Net: 42526 46.52 46.52 46.52 CLUTCH & U-JOINT Net: 46.52 46.52 .00' CMSINC COMPUTER MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 983794 04/23/1999 07/26/1999 042399 UTILITY BILL CONVERSION 13,486.55 700-701-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-Utility-Util 700-701-000-4300 Serv Fee-Utility-Util .00 .00' 133-00 07/1999 UTILITY BILL CONVERSION 133-00 07/1999 UTILITY BILL CONVERSION Invoice Total Net: 13,486.55 .00' 2,670.55 10,816.00 13,486.55 COMPUTER MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. Net: 13,486.55 13,486.55 CNS CNS 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 13810F 06/21/1999 07/26/1999 62199 BIKE HELMETS 402.75 101-121-000-4375 Promotio-General-Poli 213-00 07/1999 BIKE HELMETS 402.75 .00 Invoice Total Net: 402.75 402.75 .00' CNS Net: 402.75 402.75 .00' CRALUT CRAIG LUTH'S SANDBLASTING & PAINTIN 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 3243 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 SAND BLAST/PRIME & PAINT 5,145.00 101-132-000-4530 R&M Eqmt-General-Str 321-00 07/1999 SAND BLAST/PRIME & PAINT .00 Invoice Total Net: .00' 42553 5,145.00 5,145.00 5,145.00 5,145.00 5,145.00 CRAIG LUTH'S SANDBLASTING & PAINTIN Net: CROTRO CROWN TROPHY 611 07/26/1999 A/P INV 93 06/24/1999 07/26/1999 62499 MEDALS - SAFETY CAMP 390.21 220-000-301-4130 Prg Supl-CrimeSft-*-S 213-00 07/1999 MEDALS - SAFETY CAMP 390.21 .00 Invoice Total Net: 390.21 390.21 .00' ............................. .00' CROWN TROPHY Net: 390.21 390.21 DANEME DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIP CO 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 303535 CASE OF FUSEES 97.94 101-122-000-4260 Sml Tool-General-Fire .00 .00' 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 303887 HELMET REFLECTORS 27.53 101-122-000-4240 Uniforms-General-Fire .00 .00' 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 304345 HELMET FACE PLATES 109.15 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:01 Page: 11 rendor 9 Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice Description Amount 06/29/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 CASE OF FUSEES Invoice Total Net: 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 HELMET REFLECTORS Invoice Total Net: 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Chk 42870 97.94 97.94 97.94 42885 27.53 27.53 27.53 42899 Operator: clt Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Terms Check# Chk Date 101-122-000-4240 Uniforms-General-Fire .00 .00' 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 304346 NOZZLES 1,~37.31 101-122-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Fire .00 .00* .00- 222-00 07/1999 HELMET FACE PLATES Invoice Total Net: 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/i999 NOZZLES Invoice Total Net: DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIP CO Net: 109.15 109.15 109.15 304346 1,237.31 1,237.31 1,237.31 1,471.93 1,471.93 DAUBUS DAVIS BUSINESS MACHINES 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 139367 PRINTER TAPE 63.85 101-113-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Fina .00 .00- 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 136-00 07/1999 PRINTER TAPE Invoice Total Net: DAVIS BUSINESS MACHINES Net: 29556 63.85 63.85 63.85 63.85 63.85 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 379-00 07/1999 BREAKER BAR, GEAR WRENCH SET Invoice Total Net: DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY Net: 353.37 353.37 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY Net: .00' DEUENS JOLEEN DEVENS 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV 61699 MONTHLY EXPENSES 149.28 101-116-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-MIS- 101-116-000-4330 Postage-General-MIS-* 101-116-000-4310 Telephon-General-MIS- .00~ Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:02 Pa~e: 12 07/19/1999 07/26/1999 166-00 07/1999 MONTHLY EXPENSES 166-00 07/1999 MONTHLY EXPENSES 166-00 07/1999 MONTHLY EXPENSES Invoice Total Net: City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal 71999 102.30 11.90 35.08 149.28 149.28 Operator: clt 42766 390.00 390.00 390.00 390.00 390.00 .00' DELTO0 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 79789 42533 BREAKER BAR, GEAR WRENCH SET 353.37 101-137-000-4260 Sml Tool-General-Gara 353.37 .00 353.37 353.37 .O0* .00' DEPPUB DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV P07-MN01001009L 07/14/1999 07/26/1999 STATE COMPUTER PAYMENT 390.00 101-121-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Poli 212-00 07/1999 STATE COMPUTER PAYMENT .00 Invoice Total Net: .00' DAYTIM DAYTIMERS, INC 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 30196495 07/14/1999 07/26/1999 40820 CALENDAR FILLER 22.74 700-702-000-4110 Off Supl-Utility-S/W 709-00 07/1999 CALENDAR FILLER 22.74 .00 Invoice Total Net: 22.74 22.74 -00' DAYTIMERS, INC Net: 22.74 22.74 .00' Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Description Amount Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Chk Terms Check# Chk Date PO # EARAND EARL F. ANDERSEN & ASSOC 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 18028 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SIGNS 66.25 101-132-000-4560 R&M Sign-General-Str .00 EIDAM ELIZABETH EIDAM 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 072099 FLEX-HEALTH 106.95 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* .00 .00' .00' ENGEL1 JEFF ENGEL 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 62899 TKD INSTRUCTION-SESSION 2 864.00 101-143-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Rec .00 .00' ENGELH KAREN ENGELHARDT 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 072099 FLEX-HEALTH 55.00 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* .00 ENGELK KAREN ENGEL 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 42253 REFUND-SAFETY CAMP lO.OO 220-000-000-3629 Pub Safe-CrimeSft-*-* .00 .00' .00' EVANSD DIANE EVANS 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07121999 REFUND-CANCELLED PICNIC 50.0O 101-000-000-3634 Park Fac-General-*-* .00 JOLEEN DEVENS Net: 149.28 149.28 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 323-00 07/1999 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SIGNS Invoice Total Net: EARL F. ANDERSEN & ASSOC Net: 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-HEALTH Invoice Total Net: ELIZABETH EIDAM Net: 06/28/1999 07/26/1999 431-00 07/1999 TKD INSTRUCTION-SESSION 2 Invoice Total Net: JEFF ENGEL Net: 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-HEALTH Invoice Total Net: KAREN ENGELHARDT Net: 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-SAFETY CAMP Invoice Total Net: KAREN ENGEL Net: 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-CANCELLED PICNIC Invoice Total Net: DIANE EVANS Net: 35744 66.25 66.25 66.25 66.25 66.25 106.95 106.95 106.95 ............................. 106.95 106.95 41598 864.00- 864.00 864.00 864.00 864.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 42904 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 FEDEXP FEDERAL EXPRESS Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:02 Operator: clt Page: 13 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 7-970-49901 DELIVERY CHARGE 21.00 101-112-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Admn .00 .00- .00. FESFOO FESTIVAL FOODS 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 062999 DRINKING WATER 23.56 101-122-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Fire .00 603 07/26/1999 A/P INV 60199 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 199.12 101-147-000-4130 Pr~ Supl-General-LkAn .00 101-144-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Seni .00 101-145-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Rec .00 101-111-000-4375 Promoti0-General-Le~i .00 101-111-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-~e~i .00 101-117-000-4130 Pr~ Supl-General-City 101-137-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Gara .00- 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 6199 FOOD-BUSINESS MTG 67.94 101-122-000-4290 Misc M&S-General-Fire .00 .00' 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 62999 DONUTS/JUICE 13.5V 101-122-000-4375 Promotio-General-Fire .00 .00- .00- FIRINS FIRE INSTRUCTORS OF MINNESOTA 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 44992 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 42890 TRAINING 174.07 101-122-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-Fire 221-00 07/1999 TRAINING 174.07 Invoice Total Net: 174.07 174.07 .00' FIRE INSTRUCTORS OF MINNESOTA Net: 174.07 174.07 .00' firsta FIRSTAR TRUST COMPANY 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 DRINKING WATER Invoice Total Net: 06/28/1999 07/26/1999 472-00 07/1999 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 444-00 07/1999 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 452-00 07/1999 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 119-00 07/1999 MISCELLJ~NEOUS CHARGES 119-00 07/1999 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 179-00 07/1999 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 0-00 07/1999 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES Invoice Total Net: 06/22/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 FOOD-BUSINESS MTG Invoice Total Net: 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 DONUTS/JUICE Invoice Total Net: FESTIVAL FOODS Net: 42867 23.56 23.56 23.56 062899 33.79 44.69 70.12 14.26 25.14 7.97 3.15 199.12 199.12 42700 67.94 67.94 67.94 42866 13.57 13.57 13.57 304.19 304.19 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 129-00 07/1999 DELIVERY CHARGE Invoice Total Net: FEDERAL EXPRESS Net: 7899 21.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice ~ Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Amount 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 307466 93A T.I. BONDS - INTEREST 56,325.00 329-000-000-4802 Debt Int-93ATID-*-* .00' 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 310401 1998G T.I REFUNDING 126,725.00 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:03 Page: 14 Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Description Amount 06/07/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 93A T.I. BONDS - INTEREST Chk 186 Invoice Total Net: 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Inv. Date Due Date Voucher ~ Terms Check# Chk Date 56,325.00 56,325.00 56,325.00 198 Operator: clt PO # 350-000-000-4802 Debt Int-98GTIRef-*-* .00 .00' .00- FIRSYS FIRST SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 9900034T-0408 YEAR 2000 REPORT 3,887.25 710-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-S/W Expa-*-* .00 .00- 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 9900044T-0607 TOWER 3 SCADA 1,256.25 706-000-000-4753 In Engin-WaterTwr-*-* .00 .00' 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 9900049T-0604 WELL #4 SOFT STARTER 3,259.15 700-702-000-4530 R&M Eqmt-Utility-S/W .00 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 9900050T-0610 WELL %3 SCADA 769.50 700-702-000-4530 R&M Eqmt-Utility-S/W .00 .00' 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 9900051T-0611 LIFT STATION #24 CONTROLLER 718.50 710-000-000-4530 R&M Eqmt-S/W Expa-*-* .00 .00- 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 9900053T-0605 Y2K UPDATE 1,803.75 710-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-S/W Expa-*-* .00 .00' 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 9900054T-0606 WATER TOWER TELEMETRY 1,200.00 706-000-000-4753 In Engin-WaterTwr-*-* 0-00 07/1999 1998G T.I REFUNDING Invoice Total Net: FIRSTAR TRUST COMPANY Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 711-00 07/1999 YEAR 2000 REPORT Invoice Total Net: 06/15/1999 07/26/1999 310-00 07/1999 TOWER 3 SCADA Invoice Total Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 709-00 07/1999 WELL %4 SOFT STARTER Invoice Total Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 709-00 07/1999 WELL #3 SCADA Invoice Total Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 709-00 07/1999 LIFT STATION ~24 CONTROLLER Invoice Total Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 711-00 07/1999 Y2K UPDATE Invoice Total Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 310-00 07/1999 WATER TOWER TELEMETRY 126,725.00 126,725.00 126,725.00 183,050.00 183,050.00 63099 3,887.25 3',887.25 3,887.25 61599 1,256.25 1,256.25 1,256.25 40812 3,259.15 3,259.15 3,259.15 40811 769.50 769.50 769.50 ............................. 40813 718.50 718.50 718.50 ............................. 63099 1,803.75 1,803.75 1,803.75 ............................. 63099 1,200.00 Invoice Total Net: 1,200.00 i,200.00 .00' FIRST SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY Net: 12,894.40 12,894.40 .00' FOCONE FOCUS ONE HOUR PHOTO 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV IM9727 41840 FILM DEVELOPING 5.65 101-148-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Pk M 5.65 .00 5.65 5.65 .00' FOCUS ONE HOUR PHOTO Net: 5.65 5.65 .00* 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 480-00 07/1999 FILM DEVELOPING Invoice Total Net: Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:04 City of Chanhassen Operator: clt Page: 15 FM Entry - Invoice Journal Vendor # Name Jrnl ~ Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Amount FOLCH CHARLES FOLCH 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV 72099 72099 FLEX-DAYCARE 208.33 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* 208.33 .00 208.33 208.33 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-DAYCARE Invoice Total Net: .00- .00' CHARLES FOLCH Net: 208.33 208.33 GALLS GALL'S INC 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 532473230001 REFLECTIVE HELMET STICKERS 39.95 101-122-000-4240 Uniforms-General-Fire .00 .00- 06/29/1999 07/26/1999 42873 222-00 07/1999 REFLECTIVE HELMET STICKERS Invoice Total Net: 39.95 39.95 39.95 .00' GALL'S INC Net: 39.95 39.95 GECAP G.E. CAPITAL 609 07/26/1999 A/P IN%; 90444860 PRINTER CARTRIDGES 305.31 101-113-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Fina .O0 101-113-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Fina 101-113-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Fina .00 101-113-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Fina _00 101-113-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Fina _00 .00. 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 131-00 07/1999 PRINTER CARTRIDGES 132-00 07/1999 PRINTER CARTRIDGES 133-00 07/1999 PRINTER CARTRIDGES 134-00 07/1999 PRINTER CARTRIDGES 136-00 07/1999 PRINTER CARTRIDGES Invoice Total Net: 305.31 36616 61.06 61.06 61.06 61.06 61.07 305o31 .00' G.E. CAPITAL Net: 305.31 305.31 GENERO BOB GENEROUS 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 072099 FLEX-HEALTH/DAYCARE i~B.00 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* .00 .00' 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-HEALTH/DAYCARE Invoice Total Net: 148.00 148.00 148.00 BOB GENEROUS Net: 148.00 148.00 .00- TODD GERRARDT 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 070699 07/19/1999 07/27/1999 071999 ICMAAIR AND REGISTRATION 924.59 460-000-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-E.D.A.-*-* 640-00 07/1999 ICMA AIR AND REGISTRATION 924.59 00 Invoice Total Net: 924.59 924.59 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 072099 FLEX-DAYCARE %76.62 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* 00 _00' 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 70699 MISC. MEETINGS *4.82 210-000-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-CATV-*-* 00 101-112-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-Admn 00 00' Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:04 ~age: 16 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-DAYCARE Invoice Total Net: 07/19/1999 07/26/1999 610-00 07/1999 MISC. MEETINGS 121-00 07/1999 MISC. MEETINGS Invoice Total Net: City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal 376.62 376.62 376.62 71999 18.90 25.92 44.82 44.82 ............................. Operator: clt Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Terms Check# Chk Date ~ndor # Name Jrnl % Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # PO # Description Chk ~mount ]LEFLO GLENROSE FLORAL 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 28768 FLORAL ARRANGEMENTS-UNZE,BENIEK [02.90 101-122-000-4290 Misc M&S-General-Fire 00 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 6199 PLANT MAINTENANCE, MISC. '.46.78 101-117-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-City 00 101-111-000-4375 Promotio-General-Legi 00 101-111-000-4375 Promotio-General-Legi 00 ~PSTA GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 9060175 MONTHLY SERVICE-JUNE '12.25 400-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-CapPjtAd-*-* 00 ~NCE HANCE COMPANIES 609 07/26/1999 A/P CRM 03985 CREDIT MEMO-MISC. 134.68 101-132-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Str TODD GERHARDT Net: 1,346.03 1,346.03 06/23/1999 07/26/1999 42871 223-00 07/1999 FLORAL ARRANGEMENTS-UNZE,BENIEK Invoice Total Net: 102.90 07/02/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 PLANT MAINTENANCE, MISC. 119-00 07/1999 PLANT MAINTENANCE, MISC. 119-00 07/1999 PLANT MAINTENANCE, MISC. Invoice Total Net: GLENROSE FLORAL Net: 102.90 102.90 063099 260.00 39.35 47.43 346.78 346.78 449.68 449.68 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 409-00 07/1999 MONTHLY SERVICE-JUNE Invoice Total Net: GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL Net: 63099 712.25 712.25 712.25 712.25 712.25 11/25/1998 07/26/1999 322-00 07/1999 CREDIT MEMO-MISC. 7199 -134.68 -00 .00' 609 07/26/1999 A/P CRM 11547 CREDIT MEMO-MISC. -29.29 700-702-000-4140 Veh Supl-Utility-S/W .00 .00' 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 23522 WIPER MODULE 122.29 700-702-000-4140 Veh Supl-Utility-S/W .00 .00' 60907/26/1999 COMPRESSOR 249.97 .00 A/P INV 23597 101-132-000-4120 Eqp supl-General-Str .00' 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 32301 COMPRESSOR 249.9B 101-117-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-City .00 .00- Date: 07/20/1999 Page: 17 Time: 14:00:05 Invoice Total Net: 06/07/1999 07/26/1999 700-00 07/1999 CREDIT MEMO-MISC. Invoice Total Net: 06/18/1999 07/26/1999 700-00 07/1999 WIPER MODULE Invoice Total Net: 06/22/1999 07/26/1999 322-00 07/1999 COMPRESSOR Invoice Total Net: 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 123-00 07/1999 COMPRESSOR Invoice Total Net: City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal -134.68 -134.68 7199 -29.29 -29.29 -29.29 42510 122.29 122.29 122.29 41938 249.97 249.97 249.97 42554 249.98 249.98 249.98 Operator: clt Inv. Date Due Date Voucher ~ Terms Check# Chk Date Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # PO ~ Description Chk Amount ========================================================================= ........................................... 609 07/26/1999 A/P CRM 92452 CREDIT-MISC. -52.72 700-702-000-4140 Veh Supl-Utility-S/W .00 .00- 04/27/1999 07/26/1999 700-00 07/1999 CREDIT-MISC. Invoice Total Net: HANCE COMPANIES Net: 7199 -52.72 -52.72 -52.72 405.55 405.55 .00. HAYES1 GREGORY C HAYES 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 71499 07/15/1999 07/26/1999 71599 PARKING, LUNCH, TRAINING 28.75 101-122-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-Fire 221-00 07/1999 PARKING, LUNCH, TRAINING 28.75 .00 Invoice Total Net: 28.75 28.75 .00' GREGORY C HAYES Net: 28.75 28.75 .00' == =======~=== = = === ~ === = = = = = ~: = = =: = = === = = = = = = = = := = = ~ = = = = = === ~: = = = = = == === = = == = == = = = =~ =: =: = =:: == = = = = = =: = = = = == == = = = = = = = = 07/02/1999 07/26/1999 482-00 07/1999 TUBE Invoice Total Net: HANCO CORPORATION Net: 42530 14.47 14.47 14.47 14.47 14.47 .00- }{ANCO HANCO CORPORATION 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 093006 TUBE 14.47 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk M .00- ======================================================================== =========================================== EMPEL DAVE HEMPEL 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV 72099 FLEX-DAYCARE 37.92 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* )0 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-DAYCARE Invoice Total Net: DAVE HEMPEL Net: 72099 197.92 197.92 197.92 197.92 197.92 ERPAR HERITAGE PARK APARTMENTS 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07201999 1ST HALF TAXES 3,651.80 460-000-000-4804 Spl Asse-E.D.A.-*-* 90 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 641-00 07/1999 1ST HALF TAXES Invoice Total Net: HERITAGE PARK APARTMENTS Net: 29,651.80 29,651.80 29,651.80 ............................. 29,651.80 29,651.80 3FFE3 HOFFER'S INC. 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV 624566 WHITE MARKING PAINT 09.40 101-148-000-4150 MaintMat-General-Pk M 07/09/1999 07/26/1999 480-00 07/1999 WHITE MARKING PAINT Invoice Total Net: HOFFER'S INC. Net: 41509 809.40 809.40 809.40 ............................. 809.40 809.40 ]0' == ===== == ==~== = === = = = = = == = = = = === = = = = = = === = == = = = = == = === = == === = = = = = = = ==== == =~ = = = = ='===== = == = = == = == = = === = = =~= = = = =~= = = == ~FFIL HOFFMAN FILTER SERVICE 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 00016716 07/09/1999 07/26/1999 42505 DRUM USED OIL FILTERS 3.00 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:05 City of Chanhassen Operator: age: 18 FM Entry - Invoice Journal endor % Name Jrnl % Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO ~ Description Chk Terms Check~ Chk Date clt ~ount 101-132-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Str 00 OFFMA TODD HOFFMAN 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 060399 4TH OF JULY 2.60 101-142-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-Pk A 00 )ISET BETH HOISETH 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV 72099 FLEX-HEALTH ?4.58 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* )0 328-00 07/1999 DRUM USED OIL FILTERS Invoice Total Net: HOFFMAN FILTER SERVICE Net: 07/02/1999 07/26/1999 422-00 07/1999 4TH OF JULY Invoice Total Net: TODD HOFFMANNet: 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-HEALTH Invoice Total Net: BETH HOISETH Net: 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 070299 52.60 52.60 52.60 52.60 52.60 72099 174.58 174.58 174.58 174.58 174.58 CHRISTOPHER & DEBORA HOL 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 9856 REFUND-TENNIS 65.00 101-000-000-3636 Self-Sup-General-*-* .00 .00e 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-TENNIS Invoice Total Net: CHRISTOPHER & DEBORA HOL Net: 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-HEALTH/DAYCARE Invoice Total Net: 086 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.0O 65.00 .00- ~OLEN CATHY HOLEN 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 072099 FLEX-HEALTH/DAYCARE 262.76 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* .00 .00' CATHY HOLEN Net: 262.76 262.76 262.76 262.76 262.76 .00- HOWGRE HOWARD R. GREEN COMPANY 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 22957 WARITZ DRAINAGE ISSUE 320.00 720-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-SurfWatr-*-* .00 07/11/1999 07/26/1999 870-00 07/1999 WARITZ DRAINAGE ISSUE Invoice Total Net: 07/11/1999 07/26/1999 870-00 07/1999 CSAH 14/PIONEER HILLS Invoice Total Net: Chk 07/11/1999 07/26/1999 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Terms Check# Chk Date 320.00 320.00 320.00 435.00 435.00 435.00 Operator: clt PO # .00' 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 22958 CSAH 14/PIONEER HILLS 435.00 720-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-SurfWatr-*-* .00 .00' 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 22959 BLUFF CREEK WETLAND 3,238.08 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:06 Page: 19 Vendor ~ Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Description Amount 720-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-SurfWatr-*-* .00 .00' 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 22960 SHORE DR. STORM SEWER 2,127.24 720-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-SurfWatr-*~* .00 .00' 870-00 07/1999 BLUFF CREEK WETLAND Invoice Total Net: 07/11/1999 07/26/1999 870-00 07/1999 SHORE DR. STORM SEWER Invoice Total Net: 3,238.08 3,238.08 3,238.08 2,127.24 2,127.24 2,127.24 .00' HOWARD R. GREEN COMPANY Net: 6,120.32 6,120.32 IACP IACP 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 1567129 MEMBERSHIP-ZYDOWSKY 100.00 101-121-000-4360 Subscrip-General-Poli .00 .00' 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 210-00 07/1999 MEMBERSHIP-ZYDOWSKY Invoice Total Net: IACP Net: 42762 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 .00' ICMA1 ICMA 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 286950 06/29/1999 07/26/1999 69670 AD-FINANCE DIRECTOR 104.28 101-112-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Admn 123-00 07/1999 AD-FINANCE DIRECTOR 104.28 .00 Invoice Total Net: 104.28 104.28 ICMA Net: 104.28 104.28 .00' IKOOFF IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 23406674 REC CENTER COPIER 68.74 101-143-000-4410 Rent Eqp-General-Rec .00 .00' .00' 07/19/1999 07/26/1999 439-00 07/1999 REC CENTER COPIER Invoice Total Net: IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS Net: 148P16 68.74 68.74 68.74 68.74 68.74 INFRAT INFRATECH 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 990622 LIFT STA #24-FLOOR RESTORATION ~,245.80 710-000-000-4550 R&M util-S/W Expa-*-* .00 .00* _00' 06/02/1999 07/26/1999 41458 701-00 07/1999 LIFT STA ~24-FLOOR RESTORATION 1,245.80 Invoice Total Net:. 1,245.80 1,245.80 INFRATECH Net: 1,245.80 1,245.80 INTBAT INTERSTATE BATTERIES 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 11001857 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 42550 BATTERY 33.85 ' 101-125-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Code 250-00 07/1999 BATTERY 63.85 .00 Invoice Total Net: 63.85 63.85 INTERSTATE BATTERIES Net: 63.85 63.85 .00* IOS I.O.S. Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:07 Page: 20 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Operator: clt Vendor # Name Jrnl ~ Tr Date Tr Type.Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Amount =========== 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 44426699 REC CENTER COPIER 189.57 101-143-000-4410 Rent Eqp-General-Rec 00 00' 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 439-00 07/1999 REC CENTER COPIER Invoice Total Net: I.O.S. Net: 00' 7899 189.57 189.57 189.57 189.57 189.57 IACOBD DOLORES JACOBSON 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 42444 i%EFUArD-YOGA 8.00 101-000-402-3631 Rec Ctr-General-*-Exe 00 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-YOGA Invoice Total Net: 48.00 48.00 48.00 DOLORES JACOBSON Net: 48.00 48.00 .00' KENNGR KENNEDY & GRAVEN 609 07/26/1999 A/P INV 060899 LEGISLATIVE WORK 4,340.80 460-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-E.D.A.-*-* .00 .00' 06/09/1999 07/27/1999 640-00 07/1999 LEGISLATIVE WORK Invoice Total Net: 053199 4,340.80 4,340.80 4,340.80 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 30480 LEGAL SERVICES 501.14 460-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-E.D.A.-*-* .00 . OD* 06/08/1999 07/27/1999 640-00 07/1999 LEGAL SERVICES Invoice Total Net: 6899 501.14 501.14 501.14 .00' KENNEDY & GRAVEN Net: 4,841.94 4,841.94 KIND DEBRA KIND 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV CH902 LOGO DESIGN, ADS - 4TH OF JULY 728.80 101-145-000-4340 Printing-General-Rec .00 .00' .00' KINKOS KINKO'S 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 062100026127 COPIES 21.09 101-151-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Plan .00 .00- 07/10/1999 07/26/1999 42405 450-00 07/1999 LOGO DESIGN, ADS - 4TH OF JULY 728.80 Invoice Total Net: 728.80 728.80 DEBRA KIND Net: 728.80 728.80 06/07/1999 07/26/1999 521-00 07/1999 COPIES Invoice Total Net: 28233 21.09 21.09 21.09 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 062100026128 COPY/FOLD 4TH OF JULY BROCHURE 1,352.55 101-145-000-4340 Printing-General-Rec .00 .00' 620 07/26/1999 A/P INV 062100026327 BROCHURE PRINTING 80.94 101-145-000-4340 Printing-General-Rec .00 .00- 06/07/1999 07/26/1999 41225 450-00 07/1999 COPY/FOLD 4TH OF JULY BROCHURE Invoice Total Net: 1,352.55 06/28/1999 07/26/1999 450-00 07/1999 BROCHURE PRINTING Invoice Total Net: 41248 80.94 1,352.55 1,352.55 80.94 80.94 Date: 07/20/1999 Page: 21 Time: 14:00:07 City of Chanhassen Operator: clt FM Entry - Invoice Journal Vendor % Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # PO # Description Chk Amount Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Terms Check# Chk Date KINKO'S Net: 1,454.58 1,454.58 .00- KOCBUS KOCH BUS SERVICE, INC 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 62599 TRANSPORTATION-ORCHESTRA HALL 315.00 101-144-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Seni .00 .00' 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 42713 440-00 07/1999 TRANSPORTATION-ORCHESTRA HALL Invoice Total Net: 315.00 315.00 315.00 KOCH BUS SERVICE, INC Net: · 315.00 315.00 LAKTRU LAKELAND TRUCK CENTER 603 07/26/1999 A/P INV 333818 MISC. PARTS 30.20 101-132-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Str .00 603 07/26/1999 A/P INV 333978 CYLINDERS, TUBES 63.41 101-132-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Str .00 .00- 603 07/26/1999 A/P INV 334145 CYLINDER, TUBES 41.20 101-132-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Str .00 .00' 603 07/26/1999 A/P INV 334207 CYLINDER 268.39 101-132-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Str .00 .00- 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 321-00 07/1999 MISC. PARTS Invoice Total Net: 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 320-00 07/1999 CYLINDERS, TUBES Invoice Total Net: 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 320-00 07/1999 CYLINDER, TUBES Invoice Total Net: 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 320-00 07/1999 CYLINDER Invoice Total Net: LAKELAND TRUCK cENTER Net: 42531 30.20 30.20 30.20 ............................. 42531 63.41 63.41 63.41 42531 41.20 41.20 41.20 ............................. 42531 268.39 268.39 268.39 403.20 403.20 .00' LANEQ1 FARM PLAN 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 91010 STABILIZER BAR 84.28 101-132-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Str .00' 06/10/1999 07/26/1999 325-00 07/1999 STABILIZER BAR Invoice Total Net: FARM PLAN Net: 42483 84.28 84.28 84.28 84.28 84.28 07/15/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-YOGA Invoice Total Net: 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 LATANI PAMELA LATANIS ION 615 07/26/1999 A/P INV 42374 RE FI/ND- YOGA 8.00 101-000-402-3631 Rec Ctr-General-*-Exe .00 .00' .00' PAMELA LATANISION Net: LITTFI MARK LITTFIN Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:08 ?a~e: 22 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Operator: clt Vendor # Name Jrnl ~ Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Amount 070899 8.00 8.00 8.00 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 070899 BACKGROUND CHECK 3.00 101-122-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Fire 00 07/19/1999 07/26/1999 223-00 07/1999 BACKGROUND CHECK Invoice Total Net: MARK LITTFIN Net: 8.00 8.00 .00~ MARTO~ TOM MARTIN0 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 06191999 TV & WALL MOUNT 245.33 101-122-000-4705 OtherEqm-General-Fire 245.33 .00 245.33 245.33 .00' ............................. TOM MARTINO Net: 245.33 245.33 .00' METLAN METOR LAND SURVEYING 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 11475 STAKE LOTS SO. LOTUS LK 900.00 101-148-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Pk M .00 .00- .00- 06/19/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 TV & WALL MOUNT Invoice Total Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 480-00 07/1999 STAKE LOTS SO. LOTUS LK Invoice Total Net: 063099 900.00 900.00 900.00 900.00 900.00 METOR LAND SURVEYING Net: =====~:==== MIDASP MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP. 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 12103MB BLACKTOP-REPAIR BROKEN WATERMAIN 26.63 700-702-000-4150 MaintMat-Utitity-S/W .00 .00' 07/10/1999 07/26/1999 40817 702-00 07/1999 BLACKTOP-REPAIR BROKEN WATERMAIN Invoice Total Net: 26.63 26.63 26.63 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 66861MB BLACKTOP-REPAIR BROKEN WATERMAIN 81.75 700-702-000-4150 MaintMat-Utility-S/W .00 .00* 07/10/1999 07/26/1999 40817 702-00 07/1999 BLACKTOP-REPAIR BROKEN WATERMAIN Invoice Total Net: 81.75 81.75 81.75 .00* MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP. Net: 108.38 108.38 MIDCOC MIDWEST COCA-COLA BTLG CO 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 63239150 CONCESSION SUPPLIES 248.10 101-147-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-LkAn .00 .00* 603 07/26/1999 A/P INV 63242170 CONCESSION SUPPLIES 229.62 101-147-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-LkAn .00 .00' .00. 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 472-00 07/1999 CONCESSION SUPPLIES Invoice Total Net: 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 472-00 07/1999 CONCESSION SUPPLIES Invoice Total Net: MIDWEST COCA-COLA BTLG CO Net: 42901 248.10 42908 229.62 477.72 248.10 248.10 229.62 229.62 477.72 MIFVAL 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 0012390 REFLECTIVE HELMET MARKERS 37.65 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:08 Page: 23 Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Description Amount MIFFLIN VALLEY REFLECTIVE APPAREL 07/02/1999 07/26/1999 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Chk Terms Check% Chk Date 42872 Operator: PO # clt .00 .00' .00' MINNEG MINNEGASCO 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07141999 GAS CHARGES 116.38 101-137-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Gara .00 700-702-000-4320 Utilitie-Utility-S/W .00 800-000-506-4320 Utilitie-Historic-*-O .00 101-143-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Rec .00 .00' .00' MINPIP MN PIPE & EQUIPMENT 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 0072774 METER GASKETS 94.89 700-702-000-4250 MerchRes-Utility-S/W .00 .00' 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 0075784 COPPERHORNS 1,746.60 700-702-000-4250 MerchRes-Utility-S/W .00' 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 0076671 COPPERI{ORNS 349.32 700-702-000-4250 MerchRes-Utility-S/W .00' 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 0076967 COPPERHORNS 1,469.17 700-702-000-4250 MerchRes-Utility-S/W 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 0077428 VALVE BOX LID 292.73 700-702-000-4150 MaintMat-Utility-S/W .00 .00' 4INVA1 MN VALLEY ELECT CO-OP 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07161999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 539.84 101-145-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Rec O0 :00 O0 >age: 495-000-000-4320 Utilitie-OateWayW-*-* 101-135-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Lite 700-702-000-4320 Utilitie-Utility-S/W Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:09 24 Invoice Total Net: MIFFLIN VALLEY REFLECTIVE APPAREL Net: 07/14/1999 07/26/1999 379-00 07/1999 GAS CHARGES 709-00 07/1999 GAS CHARGES 809-00 07/1999 GAS CHARGES 439-00 07/1999 GAS CHARGES Invoice Total Net: MINNEGASCO Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 709-00 07/1999 METER GASKETS Invoice Total Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 704-00 07/1999 COPPERHORNS Invoice Total Net: 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 704-00 07/1999 COPPERHORNS Invoice Total Net: 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 704-00 07/1999 COPPERHORNS Invoice Total Net: 07/16/1999 07/26/1999 709-00 07/1999 VALVE BOX LID Invoice Total Net: MN PIPE & EQUIPMENT Net: 07/16/1999 07/26/1999 459-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 0-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 359-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 709-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES City of Chanhassen 37.65 37.65 ............................. 37.65 37.65 66.71 26.74 11.94 10.99 116.38 116.38 116.38 116.38 40796 94.89 94.89 94.89 41489 1,746.60 1,746.60 1,746.60' 41489 349.32 349.32 349.32 41494 1,469.17 1,469.17 1,469.17 ............................. 43051 292.73. 292.73 292.73 ............................. 3,952.71 3,952.71 Operator: clt 36.23 29.28 372.45 101.88 Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Amount Invoice Total Net: 539.84 539.84 MN VALLEY ELECT CO-OP Net: 539.84 539.84 .00' MINVIC MINN.-VICTORIA OIL CO. 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 01954 07/02/1999 07/26/1999 7799 UNLEADED FUEL 4,477.00 101-132-000-4170 .00 101-148-000-4170 .00 101-137-000-4170 .00 101-122-000-4170 .00 101-131-000-4170 .00 101-112-000-4170 00 101-126-000-4170 00 101-125-000-4170 00 101-121-000-4170 00 700-702-000-4170 00 Fuel&Lub-General-Str Fuel&Lub-General-Pk M Fuel&Lub-General-Gara Fuel&Lub~General-Fire Fuel&Lub-General-Engi Fuel&Lub-General-Admn Fuel&Lub-General-Anml Fuel&Lub-General-Code Fuel&Lub-General-Poli Fuel&Lub-Utility-S/W 00' 329-00 07/1999 UNLEADED FUEL 1,172.97 489-00 07/1999 UNLEADED FUEL 492.47 379-00 07/1999 UNLEADED FUEL 31.34 229-00 07/1999 UNLEADED FUEL 299.96 319-00 07/1999 UNLEADED FUEL 116.40 129-00 07/1999 UNLEADED FUEL 111.93 269-00 07/1999 UNLEADED FUEL 255.19 259-00 07/1999 UNLEADED FUEL 635.73 219-00 07/1999 UNLEADED FUEL 116.40 709-00 07/1999 UNLEADED FUEL 1,244.61 Invoice Total Net: 4,477.00 4,477.00 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 46858 DIESEL FUEL 870.00 101-122-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-Fire .00 101-132-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-Str .00 101-148-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-Pk M .00 700-702-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-Utility-S/W .00 .00' 07/02/1999 07/26/1999 229-00 07/1999 DIESEL FUEL 329-00 07/1999 DIESEL FUEL 489-00 07/1999 DIESEL FUEL 709-00 07/1999 DIESEL FUEL Invoice Total Net: 7299 870.00 49.59 674.25 127.89 18.27 870.00 MINN.-VICTORIA OIL CO. Net: 5,347.00 5,347.00 .00' MOEHL CONNIE MOEHL 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 71599 42712 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 58.90 101-144-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Seni .00 .00- 07/15/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT Invoice Total Net: 58.90 58.90 58.90 CONNIE MOEHL Net: 58.90 58.90 .00' MOOMED MOORE MEDICAL CORP. 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 91039278 42887 BASKET STRETCHER 469.95 101-122-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Fire .00 .00- 07/03/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 BASKET STRETCHER Invoice Total Net: 469.95 469.95 469.95 MOORE MEDICAL CORP. Net: 469.95 469.95 .00' MORDEV MORTENSON DEVELOPMENT CO. 615 07/26/1999 A/P INV 480 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 REFUND-SIGN ESCROW ~0. O0 915-000-204-2024 Escrow/P-DevEscro-* -S ~0 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:10 ~ge: 25 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-SIGN ESCROW Invoice Total Net: City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal 100.00 100.00 100.00 ............................. Operator: clt Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Chk Terms Check# Chk Date ~ndor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice ~ PO # Description Iount MORTENSON DEVELOPMENT CO. Net: 100.00 100.00 )RSE BRADLEY MORSE 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 072099 FLEX - DAYCARE ~9.00 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-DAYCARE Invoice Total Net: 769.00 769.00 769.00 BRADLEY MORSE Net: 769.00 769.00 )SBAR MOSS & BARNETT 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 302588 LEGAL SERVICES - CABLE TV 77.60 210-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-CATV-*-* )0 07/15/1999 07/26/1999 71599 610-00 07/1999 LEGAL SERvICEs - CABLE TV 17~..60 Invoice Total Net: 177.60 177.60 MOSS & BARNETT Net: 177.60 177.60 )SLEY PAULA MOSLEY 615 07/26/1999 A/P INV 42262 P~EFUND- TENNIS 101-000-000-3636 Self-Sup-General-*-* ~0 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-TENNIS Invoice Total Net: PAULA MOSLEY Net: 37.00 37.00 37.00 ............................. 37.00 37.00 ,PA MRPA 619 07/26/1999 A/P INV 072099 ADULT SOFTBALL-STATE /REGION BERTHS 398.00 101-146-406-4300 Serv Fee-General-SlfS )0 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 42910 460-00 07/1999 ADULT SOFTBALL-STATE /REGION BERTHS 1,398.00 Invoice Total Net: 1,398.00 1,398.00 MRPA Net: 1,398.00 1,398.00 ?IDIS M T I DISTRIBUTING CO 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV I289807 SWITCH, KEY _4.71 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk M ~0 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV I290304 BELT, CARYRIDGE .56 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk M 0 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 480-00 07/1999 SWITCH, KEY Invoice Total Net: 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 480-00 07/1999 BELT, CARYRIDGE 41844 114.71 114.71 114.71 41844 14.56 .00' 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV I290704 SPRINGS 13.76 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk M .00 .00' Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:11 Page: 26 Invoice Total Net: 07/14/1999 07/26/1999 480-00 07/1999 SPRINGS Invoice Total Net: City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal 14.56 14.56 41846 13.76 13.76 13.76 Operator: clt Inv. Date Due Date Voucher ~ Terms Check# Chk Date Vendor # Name Jrnl ~ Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice ~ PO # Description Chk Amount .00' ==:======:~ NORBAN NORWEST BANK MINNESOTA 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 12-1-90 1990B G.O. IMPRO BONDS, INT. 5,652.50 324-000-000-4802 Debt Int-90BGOImp-*-* .00 .00' M T I DISTRIBUTING CO Net: 143.03 143.03 06/25/1999 07/26/1999 62599 0-00 07/1999 1990B G.O. IMPRO BONDS, INT. Invoice Total Net: 5,652.50 5,652.50 5,652.50 60407/26/1999 A/P INV 3-1-90 1990A G.O. TI REF BONDS, INT 90,965.00 301-000-000-4802 Debt Int-90ATIRef-*-* .00 .00* 60407/26/1999 A/P INV 62599 1995B G.O. IMPRO BONDS, INT 26,658.75 339-000-000-4802 Debt Int-95BGOImp-*-* .00 .00* 60407/26/1999 A/P INV 80199 1989C G.O. CORP PURP BONDS, INT 13,025.00 323-000-000-4802 Debt Int-89C VOTE-*-* .00 .00* .00' NORTHERN STATES POWER CO 612 07/26/1999 A/P IN%; 07141999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 4,871.38 101-135-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Lite .00 700-702-000-4320 Utilitie-Utility-S/W .00 101-147-000-4320 Utilitie-General-LkAn .00 .00' 06/25/1999 07/26/1999 62599 0-00 07/1999 1990A G.O. TI REF BONDS, INT Invoice Total Net: 90,965.00 06/25/1999 07/26/1999 62599 0-00 07/1999 1995B G.O. IMPRO BONDS, INT Invoice Total Net: 26,658.75 06/25/1999 07/26/1999 80199 0-00 07/1999 1989C G.O. CORP PLTRP BONDS, INT Invoice Total Net: 13,025.00 NORWEST BANK MINNESOTA Net: 136,301.25 07/14/1999 07/26/1999 359-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 709-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 479-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES Invoice Total Net: 4,871.38 90,965.00 90,965:00 26,658.75 26,658.75 13,025.00 13,025.00 136,301.25 227.47 3,817.91 826.00 4,871.38 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO Net: 4,871.38 4,871.38 .00' ================================================================================================ .................. =:========= PARCON PA~ROTT CONTRACTING INC 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 99172 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 41493 CHAN VIEW WATERMAIN BREAK 1,111.00 700-702-000-4550 R&M Util-Utility-S/W 706-00 07/1999 CHAN VIEW WATERMAIN BREAK t,111.00 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 99179 WATER BREAK-DAKOTA CIRCLE 700-702-000-4550 R&M Util-Utility-S/W Invoice Total Net: 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 706-00 07/1999 WATER BREAK-DAKOTA CIRCLE Invoice Total Net: PARROTT CONTRACTING INC Net: 1,111.00 1,111.00 40816 953.50 953.50 953.50 ............................. 2,064.50 2,064.50 PERSONNEL CONCEPTS LTD 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 385536A 06/29/1999 07/26/1999 40268 LABOR LAW POSTER .90 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:12 City of Chanhassen Operator: ge: 27 FM Entry - Invoice Journal Inv. Date Due Date Voucher ~ Terms Check# Chk Date clt ndor # Name lrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # PO ~ Description Chk ~unt 101-137-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Gara 372-00 07/1999 LABOR LAW POSTER Invoice Total Net: 67.90 67.90 67.90 PERSONNEL CONCEPTS LTD Net: 67.90 67.90 TERR ROBIN PETERS 615 07/26/1999 A/P INV 42263 REFUND-ROUNDHOUSE PLAY .00 101-000-408-3631 Rec Ctr-General-*-Prg 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-ROUlTDHOUSE PLAY Invoice Total Net: 20.00 20.00 20.00 ROBIN PETERS Net: 20.00 20.00 TTRA TRACY PETERSEN 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07061999 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 42403 MEMBERSHIP REIMBURSEMENT 8.50 101-145-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Rec 450-00 07/1999 MEMBERSHIP REIMBURSEMENT 248.50 Invoice Total Net: 248.50 248.50 TRACY PETERSEN Net: 248.50 248.50 0* POWER SYSTEMS 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 1-12438-0 07/02/1999 07/26/1999 42006 SA/qDER MOTOR 9.89 101-132-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Str 321-00 07/1999 SANDER MOTOR 579.89 Invoice Total Net: 579.89 579.89 POWER SYSTEMS Net: 579.89 579.89 ALAW PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 57348 HANDLE/THROTTLE .96 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk M 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 482-00 07/1999 HANDLE/THROTTLE Invoice Total Net: 42538 21.96 21.96 21.96 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 57403 STARTER REWIND/HOUSING 78.10 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk M .00 .00' 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 482-00 07/1999 STARTER REWIND/HOUSING Invoice Total Net: PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN Net: 07/19/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-AWESOME ART Invoice Total Net: 42544 78.10 78.10 78.10 100.06 100.06 .00' REA AMY REA 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 42430 REFUND-AWESOME ART 35.00 101-000-408-3631 Rec Ctr-General-*-PrG .00 35.00 .00' 35.00 35.00 .00' AMY REA Net: 35.00 35.00 REAGEM REAL GEM JEWELRY Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:12 PaGe: 28 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Operator: clt 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 450-00 07/1999 ENGRAVE PLATE FISHING CONTEST Invoice Total Net: Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Amount 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 14091 42902 ENGRAVE PLATE FISHING CONTEST 11.28 101-145-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Rec .00 11.28 11.28 .00' 11.28 .00' REAL GEM JEWELRY Net: 11.28 11.28 ROARUN ROAD RUNNER 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 331322 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 DELIVERY CHARGES 47.00 101-113-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Fina 134-00 07/1999 DELIVERY CHARGES 47.00 .00 Invoice Total Net: 47.00 47.00 .00- 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 333982 DELIVERY SERVICES 20.30 101-152-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Plan .00 .00' 07/15/1999 07/26/1999 525-00 07/1999 DELIVERY SERVICES Invoice Total Net: 13526 20.30 20.30 20.30 .00' ROAD RUNNER Net: 67.30 67.30 RONMEC RON' S MECHANICAL INC. 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 70711 REFUND PERMIT #8552 30.50 101-000-000-3305 HeatinG-General- - .00 101-000-000-2022 Surtax/P-General-*-* .00 .00- 06/28/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 REFUND PERMIT #8552 0-00 07/1999 REFUND PERMIT #8552 Invoice Total Net: 30.50 30.00 .50 30.50 .00' RON'S MECFIANICAL INC. Net: 30.50 30.50 RUEGEM GERALD RUEGEMER 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07011999 TABLE CLOTHS-VOLUNTEER APP PARTY 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 62 101-111-000-4375 Promotio-General-Legi 119-00 07/1999 TABLE CLOTHS-VOLUNTEER APP PARTY 34.62 Invoice Total Net: 34.62 34.62 ............................. GERALD RUEGEMER Net: 34.62 34.62 ~MIE DEAN SCHMIEG 603 07/26/1999 A/P INV 4499 07/19/1999 07/26/1999 62799 PUBLIC WORKS CLEANING 7.50 101-137-000-4350 Cleaning-General-Gara 379-00 07/1999 PUBLIC WORKS CLEANING 877.50 Invoice Total Net: 877.50 877.50 DEAN SCHMIEG Net: 877.50 877.50 HULL NORMA SCHULLER 618 07/26/1999 A/P INV 72099 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 072099 FLEX-HEALTH 0.00 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-HEALTH 250.00 Invoice Total Net: 250.00 250.00 NORMA SCHULLER Net: 250.00 250.00 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:13 Operator: clt ~e: 29 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal ndor ~ Name ~rnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # PO ~ Description Chk ount Inv. Date Due Date Voucher ~ Terms Check# Chk Date OTT1 SCOTT & ASSOCIATES INC 611 07/26/1999 A/P INV 94000 SPORTS BOTTLES - SAFETY CAMP 6.53 220-000-301-4130 Prg Supl-CrimeSft-*-S 0 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 752 213-00 07/1999 SPORTS BOTTLES - SAFETY CAMP 286.53 Invoice Total Net: 286.53 286.53 ............................. SCOTT & ASSOCIATES INC Net: 286.53 286.53 NSYS SENTRY SYSTEMS INC 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 203536 MONITORING AT FIRE ALARM PANEL STAT 1 .00 101-122-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Fire 0 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 42881 223-00 07/1999 MONITORING AT FIRE ALARM PANEL STAT 1 29.00 Invoice Total Net: 29.00 29.00 SENTRY SYSTEMS INC Net: 29.00 29.00 DRTR SHOREWOOD TREE SERVICE 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 2253 REMO%;E OAK TREES 704.00 101-148-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Pk M 0 06/11/1999 07/26/1999 481-00 07/1999 REMOVE OAK TREES Invoice Total Net: SHOREWOOD TREE SERVICE Net: 41834 1,704.00 1,704.00 1,704.00 1,704.00 1,704.00 9TRU SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 030907 HOOK 07/15/1999 07/26/1999 42897 1.69 101-122-000-4260 Sml Tool-General-Fire .00 .00' .00' ~IGSOU SIGN SOURCE 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 16057 NAMEPLATE ALTERATION-BOE 18.98 101-152-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Plan .00 .00' 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 16117 NAME TAGS 310.29 101-122-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Fire .00 .00' 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 16146 NAMEPLATE INSERT C.MARTINO 18.98 101-125-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Code .00 .00' 222-00 07/1999 HOOK Invoice Total Net: SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE Net: 1.69 1.69 1.69 1.69 1.69 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 520-00 07/1999 NAMEPLATE ALTERATION-BOE Invoice Total Net: 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 NAME TAGS Invoice Total Net: 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 259-00 07/1999 NAMEPLATE INSERT C.MARTINO Invoice Total Net: SIGN SOURCE Net: 42273 18.98 18.98 18.98 ............................ 42898 310.29 310.29 310.29 71399 18.98 18.98 18.98 348.25 348.25 .00' clt SJFMAT SJF MATERIAL HANDLING 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 33034IN 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 42502 BEAMS/ENDS 235.09 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:14 City of Chanhassen Operator: Page: 30 FM Entry - Invoice Journal Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Terms Check# Chk Date Vendor % Name Jrnl % Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice ~ PO # Description Chk Amount 101-137-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Gara 379-00 07/1999 BEAMS/ENDS 235.09 .00 Invoice Total Net: 235.09 235.09 .00* SJF MATERIAL HANDLING Net: 235.09 235.09 .00* =========== SKYEVE SKYWAY EVENT SERVICES 603 07/26/1999 A/P INV 972120 TENTS, TABLES, 4TH OF JULY 4,657.17 101-145-000-4410 Rent Eqp-General-Rec .00 .00- 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 42409 450-00 07/1999 TENTS, TABLES, 4TH OF JULY 4,657.17 Invoice Total Net: 4,657.17 4,657.17 SKYWAY EVENT SERVICES Net: 4,657.17 4,657.17 .00' 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 393-98-064 310-00 07/1999 COULTER BLVD EAST OF CENTURY 40,973.76 Invoice Total Net: 40,973.76 40,973.76 .00' SMHEN S M HENTGES & SONS INC 613 07/26/1999 A/P INV 5 COULTER BLVD EAST OF CENTURY 40,973.76 677-000-000-4751 ConstrCo-CltrECen-*-* .00 )0e SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 06281999 06/28/1999 07/26/1999 TRANSIT LEVY OPT-OUT 867.84 101-000-000-2019 DTO Govt-General-*-* 0-00 07/1999 TRANSIT LEVY OPT-OUT Invoice Total Net: 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07091999 TRANSIT LEVY OPT-OUT ;,087.50 101-000-000-2019 DTO Govt-General-*-* 07/09/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 TPJkNSIT LEVY OPT-OUT Invoice Total Net: 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 070999 TRANSIT LEVY OPT-OUT ~137.85 101-000-000-2019 DTO Govt-General-*-* 07/09/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 TRANSIT LEVY OPT-OUT Invoice Total Net: 6,867.84 6,867.84 6,867.84 ............................. 18,087.50 18,087.50 18,087.50 3,137.85 3,137.85 3,137.85 )USUB SW SUBURBAN PUBLISHING 604 07/26/1999 A/P INV 63099 D~DVERTISINGH 012.49 101-151-000-4340 Printing-General-Plan 681-000-000-4340 Printing-98-16Lak-*-* 101-111-000-4340 Printing-General-Legi 101-145-000-4340 Printing-General-Rec 101-126-000-4340 Printing-General-Anml 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV CL010359 ADVERTISEMENT-RECEPTIONIST/SECRETARY 7.50 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:15 ~e: 31 ~ndor ~ Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Description nount SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION Net: 28,093.19 28,093.19 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 521-00 07/1999 ADVERTISINGH 310-00 07/1999 ADVERTISINGH 121-00 07/1999 ADVERTISINGH 450-00 07/1999 ADVERTISINGH 260-00 07/1999 ADVERTISINGH Invoice Total Net: 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal 63099 546.41 63.27 373.10 9~8.71 91.00 2,012.49 2,012.49 Operator: clt Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Chk Terms Check# Chk Date 101-142-000-4340 Printing-General-Pk A 428-00 07/1999 ADVERTISEMENT-RECEPTIONIST/SECRETARY 37.50 Invoice Total Net: 37.50 37.50 ............................. SW SUBURBAN PUBLISHING Net: 2,049.99 2,049.99 =~ ================== == ~ == = = = = = = = = = = === = == ~ = = = =====~ ==~ = == === = === =~= === == = = == = === = == === = = = =5 = ~ ~== = == = = == ~ ~ === = = = = === SOVRAN/WAHL & WAHL 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 7037 FUSING I/NIT-FINANCE LASER PRINTER ~5.0B 101-116-000-4530 R&M Eqmt-General-MIS- )0 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 42326 160-00 07/1999 FUSING UNIT-FINANCE LASER PRINTER 165.08 Invoice Total Net: 165.08 165.08 SOVRA/~/WAHL & WA~L Net: 165.08 165.08 )0' ?EMAR MARILYN STEWART 616 07/26/1999 A/P INV 42276 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 REFUND-IN-LINE SKATE 20.00 101-000-404-3631 Rec Ctr-General-*-Spo .00 .00. 0-00 07/1999 REFUND-IN-LINE SKATE Invoice Total Net: MARILYN STEWART Net: 20.00 20.00 20.00 ............................ 20.00 20.00 .00' SUBCHE SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 73665 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 41944 SWITCH/SEALS 40.11 101-148-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Pk M 480-00 07/1999 SWITCH/SEALS 40.11 .00 Invoice Total Net: 40.11 40.11 .00' ............................ SUBURBAN CHEVROLET Net: 40.11 40.11 .00' SUNPRI SUNSET PRINTING & ADV 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 45536 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 42888 REFLECTIVE MARKERS 176.02 101-122-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Fire 222-00 07/1999 REFLECTIVE MARKERS 176.02 .00 Invoice Total Net: 176.02 176.02 .0O* SUNSET PRINTING & ADV Net: 176.02 176.02 .00' SUPFOR SUPERIOR FORD, INC 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 11082 1999 FORD F450 SUPER DUTY 30,498.00 950-000-000-4704 Vehicles-VehEqMan-*-* .00 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 40180 700-00 07/1999 1999 FORD F450 SUPER DUTY 30,498.00 Invoice Total Net: 30,498.00 30,498.00 SUPERIOR FORD, INC Net: 30,498.00 30,498.00 .00' 07/14/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 1ST HALF TAXES Invoice Total Net: .00' TECIND TECH. INDUS. SALES INC 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07141999 1ST HALF TAXES 16,195.78 492-000-000-4804 Spl Asse-NatWeaSe-*-* .00 16,195.78 16,195.78 16,195.78 Operator: clt City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal .00- Date: 07/20/1999 Page: 32 Time: 14:00:15 Vendor % Name Jrnl % Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # PO # Description Chk Amount Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Terms Check% Chk Date TECH. INDUS. SALES INC Net: 16,195.78 16,195.78 .00' TRIART TRIARCO ARTS & CR3~FTS 611 07/26/1999 A/P INV 236844 42411 PAINTS 70.59 101-145-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Rec 70.59 .00 70.59 70.59 TRIARC0 ARTS & CRAFTS Net: 70.59 70.59 07/14/1999 07/26/1999 452-00 07/1999 PAINTS Invoice Total Net: IICAB TRIAX CABLEVIS ION 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07221999 CABLE TV CHARGES 101-122-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Fire )0 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 229-00 07/1999 CABLE TV CHARGES Invoice Total Net: TRIAX CABLEVISION Net: 16.95 16.95 16.95 16.95 16.95 )0' IIWAT TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 5512 COLIFORM BACTERIA 700-702-000-4300 Serv Fee~Utility-S/W ~0 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 703-00 07/1999 COLIFORM BACTERIA Invoice Total Net: TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC Net: 96.00 96.00 96.00 96.00 96.00 IIUNL UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 476112 SHIRT/PANTS ;.10 101-122-000-4240 Uniforms-General- Flre )0 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 78274 UNI FORMS :.72 101-122-000-4240 Uniforms-General-Fire 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 78343 UNI FORMS ,.20 101-122-000-4240 Uniforms-General-Fire 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 78398 UNIFORM '.25 101-122-000-4240 Uniforms-General-Fire )0 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 SHIRT/PANTS Invoice Total Net: 07/06/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 UNIFORMS Invoice Total Net: 07/10/0899 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 UNIFORMS Invoice Total Net: 07/01/0299 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 UNIFORM Invoice Total Net: UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Net: 42875 88.10 88.10 88.10 42895 52.72 52.72 52.72 42895 56.20 56.20 56.20 42895 27.25 27.25 27.25 224.27 224.27 ~BANK US BANK Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:16 ~ge: 33 mdor ~ Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice Description lou~t 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07191999 92B TI BONDS-INTEREST 625.00 311-000-000-4802 Debt Int-92BTIDGO-*-* 0 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Inv. Date Due Date Voucher ~ Chk Terms Check# Chk Date 07/19/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 92B TI BONDS-INTEREST Invoice Total Net: US BANK Net: Operator: clt PO # 8,625.00 8,625.00 8,625.00 ............................. 8,625.00 8,625.00 US FILTER 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 5478638 3M SPLICE CONNECTORS 319.50 700-702-000-4250 MerchRes-Utility-S/W .00 .00' 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 5501239 METERS/FLANGES 2,039.47 700-702-000-4250 MerchRes-Utility-S/W .00 .00' 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 5501887 METERS 3,106.81 700-702-000-4250 MerchRes-utility-S/W .00 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 704-00 07/1999 3M SPLICE CONNECTORS Invoice Total Net: 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 704-00 07/1999 METERS/FLANGES Invoice Total Net: 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 704-00 07/1999 METERS Invoice Total Net: US FILTER Net: 31275 319.50 319.50 319.50 35894 2,039.47 2,039.47 2,039.47 35895 3,106.81 3,106.81 3,106.81 5,465.78 5,465.78 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 01AB3786 OFFICE SUPPLIES 42.32 101-125-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Code .00 .00' 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 01AB4007 OFFICE SUPPLIES 15.75 101-125-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Code .00 .00- .00' USTOY U.S. TOY CO., INC. 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 8038615401 FIREMAN HATS 99.85 101-121-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Poli .00 101-121-000-4375 Promotio~General-Poli .00 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:16 Page: 34 Vendor # Name Jrnl ~ Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # PO # Description Amount 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 212-00 07/1999 FIREMAN HATS 220-00 07/1999 FIREMAN HATS City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # Chk Terms Check# Chk Date 42893 Operator: 49.90 49.95 clt .00' Invoice Total Net: 99.85 99.85 06/15/1999 07/26/1999 212-00 0V/1999 BINDING COVERS FOR BOOKLETS Invoice Total Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 259-00 07/1999 OFFICE SUPPLIES Invoice Total Net: 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 259-00 07/1999 OFFICE SUPPLIES Invoice Total Net: 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 251-00 07/1999 OFFICE SUPPLIES Invoice Total Net: US OFFICE PRODUCTS Net: 42764 57.79 57.79 57.79 24.97 24.97 24.97 42.32 42.32 42.32 ........................... 15.75 15.75 15.75 140.83 140.83 .00' 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 01AA4504 OFFICE SUPPLIES 24.97 101-125-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Code .00 .00' USOFF US OFFICE PRODUCTS 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 01222609 BINDING COVERS FOR BOOKLETS 57.79 101-126-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-lLnml .00 .00' U.S. TOY CO., INC. Net: 99.85 99.85 ~ES U.S. WEST COMMUNICATIONS 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07131999 TELEPHONE CHARGES 0.10 101-147-000-4310 Telephon-General-LkAn 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 479-00 07/1999 TELEPHONE CHARGES Invoice Total Net: 130.10 130.10 130.10 U.S. WEST COMMUNICATIONS Net: 130.10 130.10 LTEM VALLEY TEMPORARY STAFFING, INC. 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 43083 07/07/1999 07/26/1999 TEMPORARY HELP 5.00 101-125-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Code 259-00 07/1999 TEMPORARY HELP 0 Invoice Total Net: 0* 345.00 345.00 345.00 ............................. 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 43163 TEMPORAaRY HELP 0.00 101-125-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Code 0 07/14/1999 07/26/1999 259-00 07/1999 TEMPORARY HELP Invoice Total Net: 240.00 240.00 240.00 LFIR VOLUNTEER FIREMEN'S BENEFIT ASSOC 614 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07181999 07/18/1999 07/26/1999 MEMBERSHIP FEES .00 101-122-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Fire 223-00 07/1999 MEMBERSHIP FEES 0 Invoice Total Net: 0* VALLEY TEMPORARY STAFFING, INC. Net: 585.00 585.00 42891 24.00 24.00 24.00 VOLUNTEER FIREMEN'S BENEFIT ASSOC Net: 24.00 24.00 LLIS CORI WALLIS 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 072099 FLEX-HEALTH .50 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* 0 07/20/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 FLEX-HEALTH Invoice Total Net: 40.50 40.50 40.50 CORI WALLIS Net: 40.50 40.50 O* RLIT WARNING LITES OF MN 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 31932 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 42072 NEON SAFETY VESTS 4.82 101-135-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Lite 324-00 07/1999 NEON SAFETY VESTS 264.82 0 Invoice Total Net: 264.82 264.82 ............................. 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 31933 PLANKS/FRAMES 3.70 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk M 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 480-00 07/1999 PLANKS/FRAMES Invoice Total Net: 41838 493.70 493.70 493.70 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:17 ~e: 35 City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Operator: clt ndor % Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice ~ Inv. Date Due Date Voucher ~ PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Amount 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 31934 SIGNS FOR STREET MAINT 1,159.88 101-132-000-4150 MaintMat-General-Str .00 .00' 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 31935 REFLECTIVE ORANGE SHIRTS 180.26 700-702-000-4120 Eqp Supl-Utility-S/W .00 .00' .00' WASMAN WASTE MANAGEMENT-SAVAGE 612 07/26/1999 A/P INV 22820158518 GARBAGE REMOVAL 942.71 101-117-000-4350 Cleaning-General-City .00 101-132-000-4350 Cleaning-General-Str .00 101-122-000-4350 Cleaning-General-Fire .00 101-148-000-4350 Cleaning-General-Pk M .00 .00' 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 329-00 07/1999 SIGNS FOR STREET MAINT Invoice Total Net: 06/30/1999 07/26/1999 709-00 07/1999 REFLECTIVE ORANGE SHIRTS Invoice Total Net: WARNING LITES OF MN Net: 07/01/1999 07/26/1999 179-00 07/1999 GARBAGE REMOVAL 329-00 07/1999 GARBAGE REMOVAL 229-00 07/1999 GARBAGE REMOVAL 489-00 07/1999 GARBAGE REMOVAL Invoice Total Net: 42112 1,159.88 40815 180.26 2,098.66 942.71 1,159.88 1,159.88 180.26 180.26 2,098.66 146.69 89.46 63.06 643.50 942.71 . DO* WASTE MANAGEMENT-SAVAGE Net: WATCOM WATSON COMPANY INC 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 545921 LAKE ANN CONCESSION SUPPLIES 761.27 101-147-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-LkAn .00 .00' 942.71 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 546514 LAKE ANN CONCESSION SUPPLIES 642.44 101-147-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-LkAn .00 .00' 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 41800 472-00 07/1999 LAKE ANN CONCESSION SUPPLIES Invoice Total Net: 761.27 .00' 07/15/1999 07/26/1999 42905 472-00 07/1999 LAKE ANN CONCESSION SUPPLIES Invoice Total Net: 642.44 WATSON COMPANY INC Net: WESHEN WEST HENNEPIN COMMUNITY SERVICES 610 07/26/1999 A/P INV 67995 07/14/1999 07/26/1999 3RD QTR REC SERVICES 500.00 101-145-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Rec 452-00 07/1999 3RD QTR REC SERVICES .00 Invoice Total Net: .00' 1,403.71 71499 500.00 942.71 761.27 761.27 642.44 642.44 1,403.71 500.00 500.00 WEST HENNEPIN COMMUNITY SERVICES Net: .00' ==================================================== =========== WILNUR WILSON'S NURSERY 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 28651 POST OFFICE LANDSCAPING 24,672.00 492-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-NatWeaSe-*-* .00 .00' 07/02/1999 07/26/1999 0-00 07/1999 POST OFFICE LANDSCAPING Invoice Total Net: 500.00 24,672.00 500.00 24,672.00 24,672.00 Date: 07/20/1999 ~: 36 Time: 14:00:18 ldor # Name 'rnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Description Invoice City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Operator: clt Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Chk Terms Check# Chk Date WILSON'S NURSERY Net: 24,672.00 24,672.00 ,PAP WILCOX PAPER CO. 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 688125 PAPER .28 101-112-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Admn 07/09/1999 07/26/1999 121-00 07/1999 PAPER Invoice Total Net: WILCOX PAPER CO. Net: 42282 309.28 309.28 309.28 309.28 309.28 RICHARD WING 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07081999 MARKER BUOYS FOR DIVE TEAM 96 101-122-000-4260 Sml Tool-General-Fire 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 MARKER BUOYS FOR DIVE TEAM 23.96 Invoice Total Net: 23.96 23.96 RICHARD WING Net: 23.96 23296 JFF1 PAUL WOLFF 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07121999 ADULT SOFTBALL UMPIRE ,.50 101-146-406-4300 Serv Fee-General-SlfS 07/12/1999 07/26/1999 460-00 07/1999 ADULT SOFTB~LLL UMPIRE Invoice Total Net: PAUL WOLFF Net: 42903 240.50 240.50 240.50 240.50 240.50 )AR W. S. DARLEY & CO. 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 271100 FITTING ADAPTERS 101-122-000-4260 Sml Tool-General-Fire 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 272312 RIGIDADAPTERS ...50 101-122-000-4260 Sml Tool-General-Fire 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 273477 ADAPTER :.65 101-122-000-4260 Sml Tool-General-Fire 617 07/26/1999 A/P INV 273781 STRAP/WRENCH 15 101-122-000-4260 Sml Tool-General-Fire 06/09/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 FITTING ADAPTERS Invoice Total Net: 06/22/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 RIGID ADAPTERS Invoice Total Net: 07/08/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 ADAPTER Invoice Total Net: 07/13/1999 07/26/1999 222-00 07/1999 STRAP/WRENCH 42877 125.30 125.30 125.30 42876 201.50 201.50 201.50 42886 172.65 172.65 172.65 42896 72.15 Invoice Total Net: 72.15 72.15 .00' W. S. DARLEY & CO. Net: 571.60 571.60 .00' YMCARI YMCA RIDGEDALE BRANCH Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:18 City of Chanhassen Operator: clt Page: 37 FM Entry - Invoice Journal Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice % Inv. Date Due Date Voucher % PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Amount 606 07/26/1999 A/P INV 07021999 07/02/1999 07/26/1999 41599 T-BALL PROGRAM 2,636.40 101-143-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Rec 431-00 07/1999 T-BALL PROGRAM 2,636.40 .00 Invoice Total Net: 2,636.40 2,636.40 .00' YMCA RIDGEDALE BRANCH Net: 2,636.40 2,636.40 .00' .00' .00' Date: 07/20/1999 Page: 38 Account # Description Grand Totals Net: 954,185.55 954,185.55 Discount Lost: Time: 14:00:20 City of Chanhassen Operator: clt FM Entry - Invoice Journal Fiscal Main 101-000-000-2005 Flex/P-General-*-* 07/1999 101-000-000-2019 DTO Govt-General-*-* 07/1999 101-000-000-2022 Surtax/P-General-*-* 07/1999 101-000-000-3301 Building-General-*-* 07/1999 101-000-000-3305 Heating-General-*-* 07/1999 101-000-000-3634 Park Fac-General-*-* 07/1999 101-000-000-3636 Self-Sup-General-*-* 07/1999 101-000-402-3631 Rec Ctr-General-*-Exercise 07/1999 101-000-404-3631 Rec Ctr-General-*-SportAdt 07/1999 101-000-408-3631 Rec Ctr-General-*-PrgmYth 07/1999 101-111-000-4340 Printing-General-Legislat-* 07/1999 101-111-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-Legislat-* 07/1999 101-111-000-4375 Promotio-General-Legislat-* 07/1999 101-112-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Admn Off-* 07/1999 101-112-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-Admn Off-* 07/1999 101-112-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Admn Off-* 07/1999 101-112-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-Admn Off-* 07/1999 101-113-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Finance-* 07/1999 101-113-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Finance-* 07/1999 101-114-000-4302 Legal-General-Legal-* 07/1999 101-115-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-PropAsse-* 07/1999 101-116-000-4310 Telephon-General-MIS-* 07/1999 101-116-000-4330 Postage-General-MIS-* 07/1999 101-116-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-MIS-* 07/1999 101-116-000-4530 R&M Eqmt-General-MIS-* 07/1999 101-116-000-4703 Off Eqmt-General-MIS-* 07/1999 101-117-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-CityHall-* 07/1999 101-117-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-CityHall-* 07/1999 101-117-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-CityHall-* 07/1999 101-117-000-4350 Cleaning-General-CityHall-* 07/1999 101-117-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-CityHall-* 07/1999 101-121-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Police-* 07/1999 101-121-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Police-* 07/1999 101-121-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-Police-* 07/1999 101-121-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Police-* 07/1999 101-121-000-4310 Telephon-General-Police-* 07/1999 101-121-000-4360 Subscrip-General-Police-* 07/1999 101-121-000-4375 Promotio-General-Police-* 07/1999 101-121-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Police-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4110 Off Supl-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4240 Uniforms-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4260 Sml Tool-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4290 Misc M&S-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 Debit Cre¢ 2,873.58 28,093.19 1.50 62.25 30.00 50.00 102 00 56 00 20 00 55 00 373 10 25 14 335 91 421 77 111 93 125 28 580 92 374 78 47 00 9,114 63 26 75 35 08 11 90 102 30 480 99 1,944 46 7 97 249 98 470 38 146 69 30 00 7 16 84 80 116 40 244,443 60 89 80 100 00 452 70 23.34 176.02 1 547.60 493.51 88.09 349.55 2 387.55 695.19 170.84 77.95 101-122-000-4310 Telephon-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4350 Cleaning-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4375 Promotio-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4520 R&M Vehi-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:22 C£ty of Chanhassen ge: 39 FM Entry - Invoice Journal 7.90 63.06 202.82 25.57 1,800.00 Operator: clt Account # Description Fiscal Debit Credit 101-122-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-122-000-4705 OtherEqm-Oeneral-FirePrev-* 07/1999 101-125-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Code Enf-* 07/1999 101-125-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Code Enf-* 07/1999 101-125-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Code Enf-* 07/1999 101-125-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-Code Enf-* 07/1999 101-125-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Code Enf-* 07/1999 101-125-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Code Enf-* 07/1999 101-126-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-AnmlCntl-* 07/1999 101-126-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-AnmlCntl-* 07/1999 101-126-000-4310 Telephon-Oeneral-AnmlCntl-* 07/1999 101-126-000-4340 Printing-General-AnmlCntl-* 07/1999 101-126-000-4520 R&M Vehi-General-AnmlCntl-* 07/1999 101-126-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-AnmlCntl-* 07/1999 101-131-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Engineer-* 07/1999 101-131-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-Engineer-* 07/1999 101-131-000-4310 Telephon-General-Engineer-* 07/1999 101-131-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-En~ineer-* 07/1999 101-132-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Str Mntn-* 07/1999 101-132-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Str Mntn-* 07/1999 101-132-000-4150 MaintMat-General-Str Mntn-* 07/1999 101-132-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-Str Mntn-* 07/1999 101-132-000-4310 Telephon-General-Str Mntn-* 07/1999 101-132-000-4350 Cleaning-General-Str Mntn-* 07/1999 101-132-000-4530 R&M Eqmt-General-Str Mntn-* 07/1999 101-132-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Str Mntn-* 07/1999 101-132-000-4560 R&M Sign-General-Str Mntn-* 07/1999 101-135-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Lite&Si~-* 07/1999 101-135-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Lite&Sig-* 07/'1999 101-137-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Garage-* 07/1999 101-137-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Gara~e-* 07/1999 101-137-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-Garage-* 07/1999 101-137-000-4260 Sml Tool-General-Garage-* 07/1999 101-137-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Garage-* 07/1999 101-137-000-4310 Telephon-General-Garage-* 07/1999 101-137-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Garage-* 07/1999 101-137-000-4350 Cleaning-General-Garage-* 07/1999 101-137-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Garage-* 07/1999 101-142-000-4340 Printing-General-Pk Admn-* 07/1999 101-142-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-General-Pk Admn-* 07/1999 101-143-000-4110 Off Supl-General-Rec Cntr-* 07/1999 101-143-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Rec Cntr-* 07/1999 101-143-000-4310 Telephon-General-Rec Cntr-* 07/1999 101-143-000-4320 utilitie-General-Rec Cntr-* 07/1999 101-143-000-4410 Rent Eq~-General-Rec Cntr-* 07/1999 101-144-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-SeniorCn-* 07/1999 101-144-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-SeniorCn-* 07/1999 101-145-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-Rec Pr~m-* 07/1999 101-145-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Rec Prgm-* 07/1999 101-145-000-4310 Telephon-General-Rec Prgm-* 07/1999 101-145-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Rec Prgm-* 07/1999 101-145-000-4340 Printing-General-Rec Prgm-* 07/1999 101-145-000-4410 Rent Eqp-General-Rec Prgm-* 07/1999 101-146-406-4300 Serv Fee-General-SlfSupPg-SumSftB1 07/1999 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:23 City of Chanhassen ~ge: 40 FM Entry - Invoice Journal Account ~ Description Fiscal 325.09 245.33 83.04 18.98 201.37 635.73 585.00 53.34 57.79 255.19 37.60 91.00 16.45 84.51 115.05 116.40 19.08 13.33 1,076.18 2,092.14 1,159.88 1,847.22 63.89 89.46 5,145.00 113.35 66.25 264.82 599.92 3.15 235.09 31.34 353.37 67.90 7.90 66.71 877.50 13.33 37.50 52.60 52.12 3,500.40 7 90 10 99 258 31 103 59 315 00 459 20 712 57 15 71 36 23 3,101 00 4,657 17 1,860 50 Operator: clt Debit Credit 101-147-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-LkAnn Op-* 07/1999 101-147-000-4130 Prg Supl-General-LkAnn Op-* 07/1999 101-147-000-4310 Telephon-General-LkA~n Op-* 07/1999 101-147-000-4320 Utilitie-General-LkAnn Op-* 07/1999 101-148-000-4120 Eqp Supl-General-Pk Maint-* 07/1999 101-148-000-4140 Veh Supl-General-Pk Maint-* 07/1999 101-148-000-4150 MalntMat-General-Pk Maint-* 07/1999 101-148-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-General-Pk Maint-* 07/1999 101-148-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Pk Maint-* 07/1999 101-148-000-4350 Cleaning-General-Pk Maint-* 07/1999 101-148-000-4531 R&M Radi-General-Pk Maint-* 07/1999 101-151-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-PlanComm-* 07/1999 101-151-000-4340 Printing-General-PlanComm-* 07/1999 101-152-000-4110 Off Supl-General-PlanAdmn-* 07/1999 101-152-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-PlanAdmn-* 07/1999 101-152-000-4310 Telephon-General-PlanAd~n-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 144 75 1,915 22 130 10 826 00 2,319 17 152 72 1,047 96 620 36 2,609 65 643 50 70 01 21 09 546.41 18.98 20.30 5.74 343,165.36 .00 210-000-000-4300 210-000-000-4370 Serv Fee-CATV-*-* Trvl&Trn-CATV-*-* 07/1999 07/1999 Fund Total: 177.60 18.90 196.50 .00 220-000-000-3629 220-000-301-4130 Pub Safe-CrimeSft-*-* Prg Supl-CrimeSft-*-SafetCmp 07/1999 07/1999 Fund Total: 10.00 676.74 686.74 .00 221-000-000-4130 Prg Supl-HazMatSp-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 253.70 253.70 .00 301-000-000-4802 Debt Int-90ATIRef-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 90,965.00 90,965.00 .00 311-000-000-4802 Debt Int-92BTIDGO-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 8,625.00 8,625.00 .00 323-000-000-4802 Debt Int-89C VOTE-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 13,025.00 13,025.00 324-000-000-4802 Debt Int-90BGOImp-*~* 07/1999 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:24 City of Chanhassen Page: 41 FM Entry - Invoice Journal Account % Description Fiscal Fund Total: .00 5,652.50 Operator: clt Debit Cred 5,652.50 .00 329-000-000-4802 Debt Int-93ATID-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 56,325.00 56,325.00 .00 339-000-000-4802 Debt Int-95BGOImp-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 26,658.75 26,658.75 .00 350-000-000-4802 Debt Int-98GTIRef-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 126,725.00 126,725.00 400-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-CapPjtAd-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 712.25 712.25 .00 410-000-000-4302 Legal-PkAcq&Dv-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 890.00 890.00 .0O 460-000-000-4300 460-000-000-4302 460-000-000-4370 460-000-000-4804 Serv Fee-E.D.A. ~*-* Legal-E.D.A.-*-* Trvl&Trn-E.D.A. ~*-* Spl Asse-E.D.A.~*-* 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 Fund Total: 4,841.94 593.38 924.59 29,651.80 36,011.71 491-000-000-4804 Spl Asse-EnterTIF-*-* 07/1999 18,226.00 Fund Total: 18,226.00 492-000-000-4300 492-000-000-4804 Serv Fee-NatWeaSe-*-* Spl Asse-NatWeaSe-*-* 07/1999 07/1999 Fund Total: 24,672.00 16,195.78 40,867.78 495-000-000-4320 Utilitie-GateWayW-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 29.28 29.28 677-000-000-4751 ConstrCo-CltrECen-*-* 07/1999 Date: 07/20/1999 Time: 14:00:24 City of Chanhassen ge: 42 FM Entry - Invoice Journal Account ~ Description Fiscal Fund Total: 40,973.76 Operator: clt Debit Credit 40,973.76 681-000-000-4340 Printing-98-16Lak-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 63.27 63.27 700-701-000-4300 Serv Fee-Utility-Util Adm-* 07/1999 700-701-000-4370 Trvl&Trn-Utility-Util Adm-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4110 Off Supl-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4120 Eqp Supl-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4140 Veh Supl-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4150 MaintMat-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4170 Fuel&Lub-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4250 MerchRes-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4300 Serv Fee-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4310 Telephon-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4320 Utilitie-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4340 Printing-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4360 Subscrip-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4530 R&M Eqmt-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4531 R&M Radi-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 700-702-000-4550 R&M Util-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 10,816.00 2,670.55 22.74 180.26 162.25 401.11 i,262.88 9,125.76 96.00 108.10 3,946.53 62.47 105.00 4,028.65 53.34 2,064.50 35,106.14 706-000-000-4751 706-000-000-4753 ConstrCo-WaterTwr-*-* In Engin-WaterTwr-*-* 07/1999 53,390.00 07/1999 2,456.25 Fund Total: 55,846.25 710-000-000-4300 710-000-000-4530 710-000-000-4550 Serv Fee-S/W Expa-*-* R&M Eqmt-S/W Expa-*-* R&M Util-S/W Expa-*-* 07/1999 5,691.00 07/1999 718.50 07/1999 1,245.80 Fund Total: 7,655.30 720-000-000-4300 Serv Fee-SurfWatr-*-* 07/1999 13,920.32 Fund Total: 13,920.32 800-000-506-4320 Utilitie-Historic-*-Oldvillg 07/1999 11.94 Fund Total: 11.94 915-000-201-2024 915-000-204-2024 915-000-216-2024 Date: 07/20/1999 ~e: 43 Escrow/P-DevEscro-*-Landscap 07/1999 250.00 Escrow/P-DevEscro-*-Sign 07/1999 100.00 Escrow/P-DevEscro-*-Nextel 07/1999 745.00 City of Chanhassen Operator: clt FM Entry - Invoice Journal Account # Description Fiscal Debit Credit Time: 14:00:25 Fund Total: 1,095.00 .08 .00 950-000-000-4704 Vehicles-VehEqMan-*-* 07/1999 Fund Total: 30,498.00 30,498.00 .00 Control 101-000-000-2710 101-000-000-2720 210-000-000-2720 220-000-000-2710 220-000-000-2720 221-000-000-2720 301-000-000-2720 311-000-000-2720 323-000-000-2720 324-000-000-2720 329-000-000-2720 339-000-000-2720 350-000-000-2720 400-000-000-2720 410-000-000-2720 460-000-000-2720 491-000-000-2720 492-000-000-2720 495-000-000-2720 677-000-000-2720 681-000-000-2720 700-000-000-2720 706-000-000-2720 710-000-000-2720 720-000-000-2720 800-000-000-2720 950-000-000-2720 .00 101-000-000-2020 343,165.36 210-000-000-2020 196.50 220-000-000-2020 686.74 221-000-000-2020 253.70 301-000-000-2020 90,965.00 311-000-000-2020 8,625.00 323-000-000-2020 13,025.00 324-000-000-2020 5,652.50 329-000-000-2020 56,325.00 339-000-000-2020 26,658.75 Date: 07/20/1999 Page: 44 Account # 350-000-000-2020 126,725.00 400-000-000-2020 712.25 410-000-000-2020 890.00 460-000-000-2020 36,011.71 491-000-000-2020 18,226.00 492-000-000-2020 40,867.78 495-000-000-2020 29.28 677-000-000-2020 40,973.76 681-000-000-2020 Time: 14:00:26 Grand Totals: Revenue-General-*-* Expense-General-*-* Expense-CATV-*-* Revenue-CrimeSft-*-* Expense-CrimeSft-*-* Expense-HazMatSp-*-* Expense-90ATORef-*-* Expense-92BTIDGO-*-* Expense-89C VOTE-*-* Expense-90BGOImp-*-* Expense-93ATID-*-* Expense-95BGOImp-*-* Expense-98GTIRef-*-* Expense-CapPjtAd-*-* Expense-PkAcq&Dv-*-* Expense-E.D.A.-*-* Expense-EnterTIF-*-* Expense-NatWeaSe-*-* Expense-GateWayW-*-* Expense-CltrECen-*-* Expense-98-16Lak-*-* Expense-Utility-*-* Expense-WaterTwr-*-* Expense-S/W Expa-*-* Expense-SurfWatr-*-* 'Expense-Historic-.*-* Expense-VehEqMan-*-* 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 Control Grand Totals: A/P-General-*-* A/P-CATV-*-* A/P-CrimeSft-*-* A/P-HazMatSp-*-* A/P-90ATIRef-*-* A/P-92BTIDGO-*-* A/P-89C VOTE-*-* A/P-90BGOImp-*-* A/P-93ATID-*-* A/P-95BGOImp-*-* Description City of Chanhassen FM Entry - 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 Invoice Journal Fiscal A/P-98GTIRef-*-* A/P-CapPjtAd-*-* A/P-PkAcq&Dv-*-* A/P-E.D.A.-*-* A/P-EnterTIF-*-* A/P-NatWeaSe-*-* A/P-GateWayW-*-* A/P-CltrECen-*-* A/P-98-16Lak-*-* 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 954,185.55 375.25 311,821.84 196.50 10.00 676.74 253.70 90,965.00 8,625.00 13,025.00 5,652.50 56,325.00 26,658.75 126,725 00 712 25 890 00 36,011 71 18,226 00 40,867 78 29 28 40,973 76 63 27 35,106 14 55,846 25 7,655 30 13,920.32 11.94 30,498.00 922,122.28 Operator: clt Debit Cred .27 700-000-000-2020 ,106.14 706-000-000-2020 ,846.25 710-000-000-2020 655.30 720-000-000-2020 ,920.32 800-000-000-2020 .94 915-000-000-2020 095.00 950-000-000-2020 ,498.00 4,185.55 Discount 0 Manual Checks - Cash A/P-Utility-*-* A/P-WaterTwr-*-* A/P-S/W Expa-*-* A/P-SurfWatr-*-* A/P-Historic-*-* A/P-DevEscro-*-* A/P-VehEqMan-*-* 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 07/1999 A/P Grand Totals: Discount Grand Totals: Cash Grand Totals: .00 .00 .00 Date: 07/16/1999 Time: 08:32:12 Save AS: 1 Ranges: O~tions: Vendor Jrnl Vendor #: (A) Invoice #: (A) Entry Journal #: (A) Trans #: (A) Line #: (A) Due Date: (A) Bank #: (A) Detail / Summary: D Sort: N Name City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal Operator: clt Page: i Invoice Status: A Check Over Expend: N # of copies: i Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Amount ========================================================================= ............................ ========================== AIRTOU AIRTOUCH CELLULAR 595 07/16/1999 A/P INV 07011999 07/01/1999 07/16/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 54.02 101-122-000-4310 Telephon-General-Fire 229-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 26.57 .00 101-142-000-4310 Telephon-General-Pk A 429-00 07/1999 CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 27.45 .00 Invoice Total Net: 54.02 54.02 .00' AIRTOUCH CELLULAR Net: 54.02 54.02 .00' CHADIN CHANHASSEN DINNER THEATR 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071599 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 42710 PAYMENT FOR CHAN DINNER THEATER-SENIORS 960.00 101-144-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Seni 440-00 07/1999 PAYMENT FOR CHAI~ DINNER THEATER-SENIO 960.00 .00 Invoice Total Net: 960.00 960.00 .00* CHANHASSEN DINNER THEATR Net: 960.00 960.00 .00* F_HAAVHA CITY OF CHAN}{ASSEN 596 07/16/1999 A/P INV 07161999 07/16/1999 07/16/1999 PAYOFF ACCOUNT WITH SEC DEPOSIT 56.58 700-000-000-2026 Dep/P-Utflity-*-* 0-00 07/1999 PAYOFF ACCOUNT WITH SEC DEPOSIT 56.58 .00 Invoice Total Net: 56.58 56.58 .00* CITY OF CHANHASSEN Net: 56.58 56.58 .00* DRESSL DAVE DRESSLER 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 063099 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 CLEANING OF FIRE STATION 750.00 101-122-000-4350 Cleaning-General-Fire 222-00 07/1999 CLEJ~NING OF FIRE STATION . 750.00 .00 Invoice Total Net: 750.00 750.00 .00* DAVE DRESSLER Net: 750.00 750.00 .00* ICMA ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071699 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 EMPLOYEE DEF COMP 1,138.69 101-000-000-2009 DefCmp/P-General-*-* 0-00 07/1999 EMPLOYEE DEF COMP 1,138.69 .00 Invoice Total Net: 1,138.69 1,138.69 .00* Date: 07/16/1999 Time: 08:32:13 City of Chanhassen Operator: clt Page: FM Entry - Invoice Journal Amount Vendor # Name Jrnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 Net: 1,138.69 1,138.69 .00* LEBRUN WILLIAM LEBRUN 595 07/16/1999 A/P INV 07161999 07/16/1999 07/16/1999 REFUND OVERPAYMENT 115.50 70D-000-000-1191 A/R Util-Utility-*-* 0-00 07/1999 REFI/ND OVERPAYMENT 115.50 .00 Invoice Total Net: 115.50 115.50 .00* ........................................ WILLIAM LEBRUN Net: 115.50 115.50 .00* NAS NAS C/O SAUNDRA DOVE 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071599 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 EMPLOYEE DEF COMP 225.00 101-000-000-2009 DefCmp/P-General-*-* 0-00 07/1999 EMPLOYEE DEF COMP 225.00 .00 Invoice Total Net: 225.00 225.00 .00* NAS C/O SALSVDRA DOVE Net: 225.00 225.00 .00* NORTHERN STATES POWER CO 595 07/16/1999 A/P INV 07121999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 101-145-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Rec 700-702-000-4320 Utilitie-Utility-S/W 101-147-000-4320 Utilitie-General-LkAn 101-122-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Fire 101-135-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Lite 07/12/1999 07/16/1999 459-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 709-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 479-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 229-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES 359-00 07/1999 ELECTRICITY CHARGES Invoice Total Net: NORTHERN STATES POWER CO Net: 1,450.24 48.49 .00 559.35 .00 346.94 .00 187.93 .00 307.53 .00 1,450.24 1,450.24 .00* 1,450.24 1,450.24 .00* = = = = = = === = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ORCTRU ORCHARD TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE/CUSTODI 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071599 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 EMPLOYEE DEF COMP 510.00 101-000-000-2009 DefCmp/P-General- - 0-00 07/1999 EMPLOYEE DEF COMP 510.00 .00 Invoice Total Net: 510.00 510.00 .00* .00' ORCHARD TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE/CUSTODI Net: 510.00 510.00 == = = == = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ]~UBEMP PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOC 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071599 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 PERA 13,62~.60 101-000-000-2010 PERA-General-*-* 0-00 07/1999 PERA 13,627.60 .00 Invoice Total Net: 13,627.60 13,627.60 .00, PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREME/Tr ASSOC Net: 13,627.60 13,627.60 .00* JILL SINCLAIR 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071599 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 5 YRANNIVERSARY-SINCLAIR 25.00 211-231-000-4030 ContrRet-EnvirPrt-Rec 869-00 07/1999 5 YR ANNIVERSARY-SINCLAIR 12.50 .00 211-236-000~4030 ContrRet-EnvirPrt-Ref 869-00 07/1999 5 YR ANNIVERSARY-SINCLAIR 12.50 .00 Date: 07/16/1999 Time: 08:32:13 City of Chanhassen Operator: clt Pa~e: FM Entry - Invoice Journal ador # Name 3rnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check# Chk Date Amount Invoice Total Net: 25.00 25.00 .00- JILL SINCLAIR Net: 25.00 25.00 .00* )NS SANDR3%THON 596 07/16/1999 a/P INV 07161999 07/16/1999 07/16/1999 REFUND REMAINING SEC DEPOSIT 47.74 700-000-000-2026 Dep/P-Utility-*-* 0-00 07/1999 REFUND REMAINING SEC DEPOSIT 43.42 .00 700-701-000-4920 Interest-Utility-Util 0-00 07/1999 REFUND REMAINING SEC DEPOSIT 4.32 .00 Invoice Total Net: 47.74 47.74 .00' SANDRATHON Net: 47.74 47.74 ..00, rCAB TRIAX CABLEVISION 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071699 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 CABLE BILL 11.95 101-122-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-Fire 229-00 07/1999 CABLE BILL 11.95 .00 Invoice Total Net: 11.95 11.95 .00* TRIAX CABLEVISION Net: 11.95 11.95 .00* iWAY UNITED WAY OF MPLS AREA 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071599 UNITED WAY-EMPLOYEE DEDUCTIONS 101-000-000-2006 Wa~eDedP-General-*-* 2MDE U.S.C.M. DEF. COMP. PROG 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071299 EMPLOYEE DEF COMP 101-000-000-2009 DefCmp/P-General-*-* 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071599 EMPLOYEE DEF COMP 101-000-000-2009 DefCmp/P-General-*-* 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 120.00 0-00 07/1999 UNITED WAY-EMPLOYEE DEDUCTIONS 120.00 .00 Invoice Total Net: 120.00 120.00 .00* UNITED WAY OF MPLS AREA Ne~: 120.00 120.00 .00* 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 0-00 07/1999 EMPLOYEE DEF COMP Invoice Total Net: 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 0-00 07/1999 EMPLOYEE DEF COMP Invoice Total Net: U.S.C.M. DEF. COMP. PROG Net: 3,183.95 3,183.95 .00 3,183.95 3,183.95 .00* 6,322.86 6,322.86 .00 6,322.86 6,322.86 .00' 9,506.81 9,506.81 .00* U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS 595 07/16/1999 A/P INV 07021999 07/02/1999 07/16/1999 TELEPHONE CHARGES 570.63 101-117-000-4310 Telephon-General-City 179-00 07/1999 TELEPHONE CH3%RGES 570.63 .00 Invoice Total Net: 570.63 570.63 .00* U.S. WEST COMMUNICATIONS Net: 570.63 570.63 .00* WESTEP~N FUbrDING Date: 07/16/1999 Time: 08:32:14 City of Chanhassen Operator: clt Page: FM Entry - Invoice Journal ldor # Name ~rnl # Tr Date Tr Type Pst Invoice # Inv. Date Due Date Voucher # PO # Description Chk Terms Check~ Chk Date Amount 593 07/16/1999 A/P INV 071599 07/15/1999 07/16/1999 EMPLOYEE GA~/~ISEMENT 344.02 101-000-000-2006 WageDedP-General-*-* 0-00 07/1999 EMPLOYEE GA~RNISH~4ENT 344.02 .00 Invoice Total Net: ~44.02 344.02 .00* WESTERN FUNDING Net: 344.02 344.02 .00* Grand Totals Net: 29,513.78 29,513.78 .00* Discount Lost: .00* Date: 07/16/1999 Time: 08:32:16 City of Chanhassen Operator: clt Page: FM Entry - Invoice Journal Account # Description Fiscal Debit Credit Main 101-000-000-2006 WageDedP-General-*-* 07/1999 464.02 101-000-000-2009 DefCmp/P-General-*-* 07/1999 11,380.50 101-000-000-2010 PERA-General-*-* 07/1999 13,627.60 101-117-000-4310 Telephon-General-CityHall-* 07/1999 570.63 101-122-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 11.95 101-122-000-4310 Telephon-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 26.57 101-122-000-4320 Utilitie-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 187.93 101-122-000-4350 Cleaning-General-FirePrev-* 07/1999 750.00 101-135-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Lite&$ig-* 07/1999 307.53 101-142-000-4310 Telephon-General-Pk Admn-* 07/1999 27.45 101-144-000-4300 Serv Fee-General-SeniorCn-* 07/1999 960.00 I01-i45-000-4320 Utilitie-General-Rec Prgm-* 07/1999 48.49 101-147-000-4320 Utilitie-General-LkAn~ Op-* 07/1999 346.94 Fund Total: 28,709.61 .00 211-231-000-4030 ContrRet-EnvirPrt-Recycle-* 07/1999 12.50 211-236-000-4030 ContrRet-EnvirPrt-Reforest-* 07/1999 12.50 Fund Total: 25.00 .00 700-000-000-1191 A/R Util-Utility-*-* 07/1999 115.50 700-000-000-2026 Dep/P-Utility-*-* 07/1999 100.00 700-701-000-4920 Interest-Utility-uti1 Adm-* 07/1999 4.32 700-702-000-4320 Utilitie-Utility-S/W Oper-* 07/1999 559.35 Fund Total: 779.17 .00 Control Grand Totals: 29,513.78 101-000-000-2720 Expense-General-*-* 07/1999 3,237.49 211-000-000-2720 Expense-EnvirPrt-*-* 07/1999 25.00 700-000-000-2720 Expense-Utility-*-* 07/1999 563.67 Control Grand Totals: 3,826.16 .00 .00 A/~ 101-000-000-2020 A/P-General-*-* 07/1999 28,709.61 211-000-000-2020 A/P-EnvirPrt-*-* 07/1999 25.00 700-000-000-2020 A/P-Utility-*-* 07/1999 779.17 A/P Grand Totals: .00 29,513.78 Discount Manual Checks - Cash Date: 07/16/1999 Time: 08:32:17 Discount Grand Totals: City of Chanhassen FM Entry - Invoice Journal .00 .00 Account ~ Description Fiscal Operator: clt Debit Credit Page: Cash Grand Totals: .00 .00 PAYROLL FOR PERIOD ENDING 7-11-99 5204 3820 5206 4555 4614 1201 3824 7210 3104 3110 5203 1203 7201 3701 2103 1207 3803 7206 4502 3827 2511 3829 1602 1702 3704 2102 2104 3805 2602 3213 5207 4617 4505 1202 3210 3705 5205 1210 3702 3801 3150 2507 3804 3107 2518 4202 2513 1307 7211 7207 2519 AANENSON, KATHRYN R ABERNATHY, ANTHONY P ALoJAFF, SHARMIN M ANDERSON, CHRISTOPHER S ANDERSON, KELSEY J ASHWORTH, DONALD W AUSETH, ANGLE N BELL, LOREN J BEMENT, WILLIAM R BENSON, ANITA L BCE, VICTORIA E BOTCHER, SCOTT A BOUCHER, GERALD E BROSE, HAROLD D BURGETT, ELIZABETH B BURMEISTER, GINA M CHALUPSKY, JERRY D CHIHOS, CHARLES G CORNELIUS, SUSAN I DAGUE, MIKE A DEBNER, RANDY L DEBNER, RYAN L DEVENS, JOLEEN F DRESSLER, DAVID M DUMMER, NIKKI J DUNSMORE, CAROL M EIDAM, ELIZABETH A EILER, CHARLES A EKHOLM, DANIEL A ELGREN, ALBIN A ELKIN, PHILLIP A ELLEFSON, KINDRA A ELLWOOD, ANN R ENGELHARDT, KAREN J ENGELMANN, LOREN R FOLCH, CHARLES D GENEROUS, ROBERT E GERHARDT, TODD R GOETZE, DUANE E GREGORY, DALE J GUSTAFSON, JOSEPH A HAYES, GREGORY C HEINEN, ROBERT C HEMPEL, DAVID C HOESE, DOUGLAS W HOFFMAN, TODD J HOISETH, BETH A HOLEN, CATHY L JANES, KELLEY M JOHNSON, JERRY M KEOGH, JEFFREY J $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 2,692.00 604.50 1,774.33 218.75 470.62 3,051.20 569.63 1,365.51 1,812.17 2,308.49 1,597.20 3,096.00 2,293.47 2,181.03 1,417.28 1,387.92 1,281.44 1,599.84 198.44 492.13 1,971.52 240.00 892.50 1,479.92 1,496.89 1,644.08 1,490.18 1,607.60 558.00 1,014.00 1,784.41 321.63 495.06 2,126.22 1,653.84 2,718.23 1,945.68 2,562.24 1,845.20 2,167.20 684.00 1,492.25 1,281.44 2 218.55 1 682.41 2 519.93 1 668.48 1 612.22 1 876.63 1 556.66 1 591.21 PAYROLL FOR PERIOD ENDING 7-11-99 46O3 4521 5202 4515 3204 4524 3828 2506 3212 4504 2520 3102 4513 2512 3809 3831 2603 4523 3203 1209 4619 4615 4510 4207 4511 2517 3106 1601 3202 4203 4616 3206 4519 3208 3802 4620 1206 3822 4621 3703 5209 1306 5250 3105 4507 3806 1304 3825 2514 4506 4516 KEUSEMAN, MATTHEW R KILLIAN, JOANNE K KIRCHOFF, CYNTHIA R KNOWLES, THOMAS A LARSEN, DALE A LARSON, BRENDA L LAUMANN, JOSEPH A LITTFIN, MARK G MACZKO, PATRICK A MAREK, SUSAN J MARTINO, COLLEEN K MEUWISSEN, KlM T MILLER, DEB L MOHN, JERRITT W MORSE, BRADLEY D NAGEL, ANDREW D NOLDEN, KERRI A NYBERG, MICHAEL T OIEN, STEVEN K OPHEIM, JANANN O PEARSON, VALORIE D PEASE, JAMIE L PEKAREK, WENDY S ' PETERSEN, TRACY K PORTER, MARYANN H REID, ROBERT W REMER, DANIEL R RICE, RICHARD D ROQUETTE, KEVIN W RUEGEMER, GERALD G RUTZ, ALEXIS M SABINSKE, DEAN F SAUTER, ANDREW J SAUTER, STEPHEN M SCHMIEG, DEAN F SCHRUM, JENNIFER L SCHULLER, NORMAL SEGNER, MYRON L SHIRCLIFF, CHRISTINE S SIEGLE, CHARLES J SINCLAIR, JILL A SNELL, PAMELA A SOYSKI, GRETCHEN L STECKLING, JEAN M SURBROOK, MARGARET E THEIS, JAMES M THIBODEAU, CHRISTINE L TONN, BYRAN R TORELL, STEVEN B TORNTORE, CATHERINE M yon WALTER, JOHN R $ 671.25 $ 30.64 $ 1,365.53 $ 520.74 $ 1,346.63 $ 178.13 $ 896.25 $ 2,148.47 $ 1,858.02 $ 1,177.31 $ 1,038.40 $ 1,214.97 $ 117.39 $ 1,944.37 $ 1,436.00 $ 300.00 $ 1,467.69 $ 37.50 $ 1,510.80 $ 1,442.24 $ 509.25 $ 870.00 $ 347.09 $ 1,346.41 $ 227.54 $ 1,965.17 $ 1,711.91 $ 2,060.31 $ 1,153.60 $ 1,797.52 $ 524.13 $ 1,526.80 $ 328.13 $ 1,586.80 $ 1,927.20 $ 497.88 $ 1,406.94 $ 630.00 $ 301.88 $ 1,805.28 $ 1,016.64 $ 2,463.51 $ 792.00 $ 749.61 $ 207.00 $ 1,874.64 $ 1,624.08 $ 812.63 $ 2,228.32 $ 145.20 $ 144.32 PAYROLL FOR PERIOD ENDING 7-11-99 7212 1303 4600 3205 4622 4623 4204 2516 3826 3830 3823 4509 7203 3750 2604 WALLIS, CORI K WASHBURN, DANIELLE E WEBER, ELIZABETH WEGLER, MICHAEL J WERMERKIRCHEN, ANDREA K WESTERMANN, LORI H WlCKENHAUSER, KARA ANN A WICKLUND, LLOYD E WILLEMS, DAVID J WOOD, MICHAEL J YOUNG, RONALD R ZARN, JENNIFER L ZIERMAN, CURTIS H ZIERMANN, DANIEL B ZYDOWSKY, ROBERT A $ 1,351.10 $ 1,408.24 $ 1,107.50 $ 2,191.45 $ 52O.64 $ 357.00 $ 767.20 $ 270.00 $ 462.00 $ 431.25 $ 648.00 $ 532.50 $ 2,302.03 $ 576.00 $ 1,953.69 $ 148,772.85 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION JULY 12, 1999 Councilman Senn called the work session to order at 5:40 p.m. Mayor Mancino arrived shortly after. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Councilman Senn, Councilman Labatt, Councilwoman Jansen, and Mayor Mancino. Councilman Engel arrived near the end of the meeting. STAFF PRESENT: Scott Botcher, City Manager; Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Roger Knutson, City Attorney; and Anita Benson, City Engineer CONSENT AGENDA: ae Update on Y2K Assessment for Public Works; Authorize Preparation of Specifications for Needed Repairs. Councilwoman Jansen asked if the council was comfortable going ahead and approving this item. The City Manager outlined what the $700,000 included as per the information provided by the Finance Director. Councilman Senn asked if the Council could receive a copy of the wish list for the contingency fund and what the status of the contingency fund. The City Manager detailed which projects still needed funding out of the contingency fund and the Y2K needs. Mayor Mancino asked if this specific request was just for control panels and it was stated yes. Councilman Senn asked about the bonding limits. The City Manager stated that Springsted had informed him that there was money available. b. Award of Bids for Lake Drive West Street & Utility Improvements~ Proiect 98-16. The City Engineer explained the bids received for this project and that they had come in under what had been estimated. Ce Approve Clarification to Development Contract for Family of Christ Lutheran Church Addition~ Proiect 99-9. Councilwoman Jansen asked if the sidewalk was included in the conditions. Bob Generous stated that it should have been but was overlooked and asked that the item be amended to include a condition requiring a sidewalk on the west side of the street. d. Approval of Bills. Mayor Mancino asked if the budget numbers would be available and the City Manager said they would be. City Council Work Session - July 12, 1999 e. Approval of Minutes. Councilwoman Jansen asked for clarification on the motion on page 17 of the July 28, 1999 City Council meeting. If that motion should have included the word "Senior" along with assisted living. Councilman Senn stated that was the motion and the Minutes should be amended to reflect that change. f. Approve Naming of Three City Parks. Councilman Senn asked if anyone else was concerned with the name of parks sounding too much alike and become confusing. The City Manager stated he had heard no comments to that effect. Councilwoman Jansen stated the City should get neighbors involved in contests or something like that to name the parks. g. Approve Resolution Adding a New Member to the Southwest Mutual Aid Association. Councilman Labatt asked why Chaska wasn't in this Association. h. Lynmore Addition~ Final Plat Approval~ Second Reading of a City Code Amendment Rezoning the Propertyl and Approving Development Contract and Construction Plans and Specifications~ Project 99-10. Mayor Mancino asked if there was a mechanism in place to make future homeowners aware of the conservation easement on the property. The City Attorney explained how the process worked with the recording of this information on the Title to the property. Kate Aanenson stated that the City would be installing signs delineating the boundary of the conservation easement. This Approve Year 2000 West Hennepin Community. Services Contract~ Adaptive Recreation Services for People with Disabilities. item was deleted from the agenda. Consider Assignment of a Security, Interest in Development Contract for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition~ Project 99-11. - Councilwoman Jansen asked for clarification on this item. The City Attorney explained the request and Councilman Senn stated that the request was unusual but did not harm the City in any way. The City Attorney stated that he did not see the last two pages of the staff report and asked to modify the language to be approved by the City Council. 2. Vacation of Drainage Easement & Utility Easement~ Lot 2~ Block Iv Oakwood Estates 2aa Addition. Councilwoman Jansen asked for clarification on the conservation easemem for preservation of trees which Anita Benson explained. 2 City Council Work Session - July 12, 1999 3. Assignment of Cable TV Franchise from Triax Cablevision to Mediacom, LLC. The City Manager explained that this item was simply to solicit input from the public and that no decision would be made at this meeting. The Council discussed different options that were available to them regarding the cable franchise. e Request for Reconsideration of Site Plan Approval for Three 3-Story 54 Unit Apartment Buildings (162 units) on 9.94 Acres of Property Zoned PUD-Mixed Use; Located on the West Side of Highway 101 at Main Street in Villages on the Pond~ Chanhassen Housing Development~ The Shelard Group~ Councilman Labatt and Councilwoman Jansen. Mayor Mancino asked for an explanation of parliamentary proceedings for this item, which the City Attorney outlined. Site Plan Review for a 44~692 sq. ft. Two Story Temperature Controlled Storage Building and a 40 ft. Setback Variance to Permit the Construction of a New Building at the Established 30 ft. Setback on 3.84 Acresl Located at the Southwest Corner of TH 5 and Park Drivel Minnesota Mini-Storage. Mayor Mancino asked for clarification of the variance request, Bob Generous stated th~ variance was a result of MnDOT's additional right-of-way. Kate Aanenson stated that the footprint for the building was not changing. Councilwoman Jansen asked about landscaping and Bob Generous stated the applicant was exceeding the ordinance requirements for landscaping. Site Plan Review for a 69~990 sq. ft. Warehouse Building on 4.53 Acres Zoned PUD; Located South of Water Tower Place~ East of TH 41~ Arboretum Business Park~ Building III~ Steiner Development. Mayor Mancino asked if materials and architectural changes would be presented to the City Council as requested by Planning Commission. Kate Aanenson stated that the applicant had made some architectural changes and that the applicant was aware of the requirement to present material samples. Consider Approval of Revised Grading and Drainage Plan for Springfield 5th Addition~ Proiect 99-3. This item was being tabled so that staff could notify the affected neighbor. 10. Consider Request for Extension to Construction Hours for County Road 17 Overlay Pro,iect from Santa Vera Drive to Northern City Limits. No questions were asked on this item. City Council Work Session - July 12, 1999 11. a. Fund Selection~ $300~000 Transfer into 1998 Trail Pro.ject. No questions were asked on this item. b. Septic System on Mandan Circlet Community Development Director. No questions were asked on this item. Councilman Senn handed out for the council's information an article relating EFIS. Mayor Mancino adjourned the work session at 6:30 p.m. Submitted by Scott Botcher City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 4 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JULY 12, 1999 Mayor Mancino called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mancino, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Engel, Councilwoman Jansen, and Councilman Senn STAFF PRESENT: Scott Botcher, Roger Knutson, Kate Aanenson, Anita Benson, and Todd Gerhardt APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Jansen seconded to approve the agenda amended as follows: Item l(i), Approve Year 2000 West Hennepin Community Services Contract, Adaptive Recreation Services for People with Disabilities being deleted and number 9, Consider Approval of Revised Grading and Drainage Plan for Springfield 5th Addition being deleted. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Jansen seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: ao Update on Y2K Assessment for Public Works; Authorize Preparation of Specifications for Needed Repairs. bo Resolution #99-58: Award of Bid for Lake Drive West Street & Utility Improvements, Project 98- 16. Approve Clarification to Development Contract for Family of Christ Lutheran Church Addition, Project 99-9 amended to include the sidewalk on the west side that was prescribed. d. Approval of Bills. eo Approval of Minutes: City Council Work Session Minutes dated June 28, 1999 City Council Minutes dated June 28, 1999 as amended on page 17 to include "Senior" Assisted Living in the motion. Receive Commission Minutes: Planning Commission Minutes dated June 16, 1999 f. Approve Naming Three City Parks. Resolution #99-59: Approve Resolution Adding a New Member to the Southwest Mutual Aid Association. h. Lynmore Addition, Dave Moore: 1) Final Plat Approval and Second Reading of a City Code Amendment Rezoning the Property. 2) Approve Development Contract and Construction Plans & Specifications, Project 99-10. City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Consider Assignment of a Security Interest in Development Contract for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7~h Addition, Project 99-11 amended to change item 2 to read, the City acknowledges that the rights of the Developer in the Development Contract has been collaterally assigned to t~ Bank and the Bank holds the security interest in the Development Contract. And deleting item number 4 in the same document. Kevin Finger: My name's Kevin Finger and I own property at 9201 Great Plains Boulevard. You know where that is? You know where Bandimere Park is, you know where my property is. Myparents live- there now and that's my interest in the property. I come to the City Council because I need help more ~ than I don't get from Park and Rec. You see when Bandimere Park was first dreamed of, when the property was bought, one thing that was always stated. Always, from the very beginning was those two homes right along the north side of Bandimere Park would be buffered. They would have a berm and there would be vegetation. They would be heavily buffered from the park. When it got down to dollars and cents, the berm left but heavy vegetation. Extra buffering was on the final diagrams that was approved by everyone. Vv~en it was all done last summer, trees planted, I called Todd and I said I donor see extra vegetation. I don't see additional buffering. I was told that ran out of money. Okay. Mayor Mancino: We get told that a lot. - Kevin Finger: Well, my question is who made the decision on trees being plar~ted elsewhere and not an additional buffer, because there weren't alwaYs trees shown everywhere but there was always additional buffer on the houses. Now I know that this only affects two homes and Chanhassen has many, many residents but many, many residents are going to be using that park at the expense of my parents and at ~he expense of two new residents to Chan here, Mark and Sherry... I really seriously believe that the council and the park and rec needs to follow through with, this isn't something that at the last minute was decided. From the very beginning, if you go back to the initial plans that was there. A couple other things. There has been a lot of silt runoff. I don't blame the contractor. They did a lot of the silt fencing and that stuff but you can't stop everything. Underneath our culvert that goes underneath our _ ' driveway is now half full of dirt. And it goes out into the yard. That's a nuisance and hopefully Will be corrected. I haven't heard anything from anyone. It's my understanding ihat's on a checklist for the developer. Or for the contractor before he's done so I hope that that wilt also.be done. The other thin~ that bothers me is when the plans for the park was approved,.there was never any indication of a siren pole. Now I believe those sirens are very important. When I lived there-we couldn't hear a siren and that's great. But that pole could have been at the other end of the park. Not 150 feet from a home. N~w I know there are some sirens 150 feet from homes elsewhere but you just didn't put up the pole right n~xt to someone's home. Someone's built closer.. Those are three issues that I have thatljust don't get anywhere with and hopefully maybe something can be worked out somehow. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Well obviously this is the first time we've heard it so what we'll is take a couple weeks and we'll have Scott Botcher, our city manager check on these and get back to you. So we'll do that but those are, I'm glad you came and brought those up to us and Understand youe. concern. Kevin Finger: Thank you, City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Mayor Mancino: Yeah, thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the council? PUBLIC HEARING: VACATION OF DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT~ LOT 2~ BLOCK OAKWOOD ESTATES 2N~) ADDITION. Public Present: Name Address Tom Schrupp Donald Schultz 8990 Quinn Road 4 Square Building Anita Benson: Staff has received an application to vacate an existing drainage and utility easement which intersects Lot 1, or Lot 2, Block 1 Oakwood Estates 2"d Addition. The request is to relocate the easement outside the buildable area of the lot. On the overhead that would be the yellow area is the 20 foot easement proposed to be vacated and the darker area on the overhead shows the new easement that's proposed to be dedicated, which is a 10 foot wide easement. The existing easement was dedicated with the final plat of Oakwood Estates at no cost to the city. The relocating the easement, it is within a tree conservation easement area but it will not impact any trees. Since staff has not received any objections to the vacation request from other utility companies or residents at this point, it is recommended the council approve the vacation of the 20 foot wide drainage and utility easement contingent upon the applicant dedicating to the city at no charge the new 10 foot wide drainage and utility easement as shown on the survey which is on the overhead. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Thank you very much. Any questions for staffat this time? Councilwoman Jansen: I have one. While they're doing it, I realize we said it's not a significant amount of grading but when they come in to get the permits for this, will we be designating that they put the tree protection fencing around the existing trees that are in that area? Anita Benson: The tree protection fencing would go across the entire conservation easement area. So yes. Councilwoman Jansen: Okay, thanks. Mayor Mancino: Okay, and this is a public hearing. Are you done Councilwoman Jansen? Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here tonight wishing to address the council on this issue? Seeing none, any discussion or may I have a motion from council. Councilman Senn: Move approval. Councilman Engel: Second. Scott Botcher: I would ask one thing. I recommended in the memo that we charge all of our costs back to the applicant. If you want to do that, you may want to make that clear in your motion. Councilman Senn: Okay, move approval as per the staff report and recommendation on the charge back of costs. Councilman Engel: Second. City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Resolution #99-60: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the vacation of the 20 foot wide drainage and utility easement located on Lot 2, Block 1, Oakwood Estates 2nd Addition as shown on the attached Certificate of Survey prepared by Demars-Gabriel, dated June 15, 1999 conditioned upon the applicant dedicating to the City at no charge the new 10 foot wide drainage and utility easements as proposed on said Certificate of Survey and that all costs be charged back to the applicant. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: ASSIGNMENT OF CABLE TV FRANCHISE FROM TRIAX CABLEVISION TO MEDIACOM~ LLC. Scott Botcher: Well Nancy pretty much summed it up. The cable company does have an offer to be purchased. As part of the federal legislation we have an opportunity to hold a public hearing to gather public comment regarding the possible transfer of the franchise agreement granted by the City of Chanhassen. Beyond that I guess there's probably not much to add. My expectation this evening is that the public hearing will be held. The Assistant City Manager and I will be taking notes as we are in the process of finalizing with our attorney the report to be given to the council and in all probability considered two weeks from tonight for consideration of the transfer. There are time lines in the federal law that will require us to move ahead. Can't dally on this but that's what we're doing. And I was told that there was a gentleman from Triax who was going to be coming. Is that okay. So I've requested someone from Triax be here this evening so the company can hear any comments made by the public. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Would you like to come up and just introduce yourself so people know who you are. Mark Trefrey: First of all thank you. My name is Mark Trefrey. I am the General Business Manager for our region which includes the state of Minnesota, Iowa, and also Wisconsin. Triax Cablevision has been managing properties in these three states for a good number of years. Well back into the 80's and we are in a process of having our properties purchased by a company called Mediacom and we are in the process of transferring all of our franchise at this time and it gives us a very good opportunity, not only to sit down and talk about what we have coming up for this transfer but also give us an opportunity to listen to our customers and/or council people on the issues we have. So I'm prepared to answer any questions that anyone may have pertaining to the transfer, but also am interested in any comments or any issues that we as a company need to address as far as our cable service. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Then I'll ask for people to come up and if they have any comments. And if they have questions, then I'I1 ask you to come up and answer their questions. Thank you. So we have. Vernelle Clayton: I was here on another issue but I feel compelled to follow through with a campaign promise. I have to tell you that when I was going door to door last year, I probably got as many comments about Triax Cablevision as I did taxes. And I assured them that if elected I would see what I could do about the service. If my neighbor knew that this was an issue tonight, I'm sure she'd be here. I can't tell you, there's an awful lot of frustration out there. As a developer we ran into problems on follow-up. Lack of attention to detail. Didn't come out and pick up their old cable. And so I think it's worth letting the public really know what you're discussing. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Are there any specifics Vemelle that you would like to? Is it in outages? Is it in? City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Vernelle Clayton: Inattentive, lack of responsiveness to issues. Yes, there were outages. I don't recall what the situation was with my neighbor but it was waiting and waiting for people, someone to come and give her the service she had subscribed to. Not coming when they were supposed to come. Charging, she got up and said okay, forget it. Charged her for it anyway. Couldn't get it off the bill. Things like that. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Bob Smithsburg: Bob Smithsburg, 8657 Chanhassen Hills Drive North. This is an unexpected surprise. IfI had my choice for another company, you would be gone. It's the lousiest service I've ever encountered. So I don't have any choice. You know they're my only provider. The power is out continually, or the outage I guess you could say, my service. I can't get any response because their offices of course are in Tulsa I think it is. And locally they won't respond. So I guess if you were my employer, I'd fire you. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Bob, can I ask you a question? Is it you know, you just don't get it at all? I mean you don't get access at all or your fuzzy pictures or nothing? Bob Smithsburg: ...all the time. I think was it the World Series. I'm not'a big sports fan but I think it was the deciding game and we had our cable outage was out for about a week. It's pathetic. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. I'll let you respond. If we have anybody else. You can respond en masse if you'd like. Matt Noah: Matt Noah, 980 Lake Susan Hills Drive. And I didn't come to discuss this particular issue but since it's being discussed let me put my two cents in. One of the things that's nice about cable TV is the TV part but the other part that's coming that's really exciting is the high speed internet access which to some people is actually more important and maybe even more enjoyable than the TV service. One thing I don't know, and since you're here perhaps answering questions, I'd like to know when cable data modem service is going to be available because US West is certainly not giving us high speed access over their copper lines, and no wireless is coming in so if Triax can do it, all I'd say let's go get them. But if there's another franchisee out there that's listening, I mean that's one thing that we would desperately need. And it actually helps increase the value of homes in the community here. High speed access. So, that's nay two cents and if you're game for answering that one, I'd love to hear the answer for high speed access over cable. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Anybody else that didn't plan to say anything about this but you're here. Mark, you want to answer a few of the questions. Mark Trefrey: First of all I appreciate the comments. It isn't until we hear from our customers that we find out what our issues are, and we hear from them everyday. First of all I'm going to speak to this in two phases. One, Triax as a company. And two, for the possibility of a new operator called Mediacom. Triax as a company made an attempt to merge with the company I worked for Intermedia because the reality of the cable industry is that you have to operate a large area and a good number of subscribers to get into the business that, for example is being referred to as high speed internet. Triax as a company is actually moving out of the cable business because really the business is going to be run by people with enough capital infrastructure to bring the future of telecommunications, which is not only cable but high speed internet and also what will eventually probably be telephone service. Mediacom as a company last year, which is in 20 states in the country, had one of the most aggressive upgrade programs of any of the cable operators in the country. And it's impressive what they plan to do with this area. But in terms of City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Triax itself, first of all as you all may know we have a contractual agreement with the area here and the City of Chanhassen to rebuild this cable system. The frustrations you're hearing in part is due that we are operating on an old cable system. Actually our customer service center by the way is in Waseca, Minnesota. That's where we answer all of our customer service calls andalso any issues on cable or problems customers have. But we are upgrading this cable system to a fiber backboned, 750 plan. The 750 is megahertz term that says the system will be capable of well over 100 channels, but more importantly than the number of channels, between now and the end of the year eventually are going to have an upgraded service that is not only just capable of more channels but also improved picture quality and also reliability. It will be much easier for our technical staff to make repairs. We're introducing fiber and that's Triax's doing at this time. We think that service will be greatly improved. We have a process in the cities here, in our properties around Lake Minnetonka that started in Wayzata which we've already done the upgrade, and we will be going to Mound and then after Mound we're actually in Waconia now and will be going to Chanhassen. I think you're going to see an improved service. As far as our customer service, one of the issues that since I've been there since last fall we've been trying to address was, to make sure that our customer service staff was number one, answering the phone. But number two is that we're trying to follow up with additional staff for this area. The council may have been introduced to two particular people. First of all we have a manager in this area that we never had which he started in the first of the year. His name is Rick Finch. He couldn't be here tonight. He actually lives in Chanhassen and Rick has been a manager in Triax for a while and some of his sentiments have not been too much unlike yours with some of our service issues. He actually is the manager for your area here and upon getting here has made a number of significant improvements. But the other person is, we have a person named Theresa Sunde who is our metro communications and customer relations person and you may have been introduced to Theresa. Maybe as customers or as a council but she literally takes every call that hits our office with a major problem and tries to d~al with it personally in this metro area. No matter how many staff you have, you have to have a cable system that is viable and upgraded and that's what you're going to have come the end of this year and Triax has a commitment to you to deliver that and that's going to make a significant difference in the level of your reception and ongoing service. Just to speak real quickly to modems. Triax as a company just is in the process of doing it's first modem test in Waseca. We're working in Hutchinson and Eveleth. When this system is upgraded is when we'll be able to bring additional services like high speed internet. It's a fantastic service and it's a big part of the cable future. Mediacom, the person who is looking to take over these properties, has wide spread intemet via both telephone and also high speed data in a number of it's systems and it has an aggressive upgrade plan in the next two years to deliver not only a system of delivering high speed intemet but also telephone and other services beyond. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Any questions from councilmembers? Scott Botcher: So you will be starting in Chanhassen after Waseca and after Mound? Mark Trefrey: Right now they're in Waconia. They're in Waconia right now. And starting to do some of the fiber connections and we will be starting, and I just got an update in the Chanhassen area, actually with crews probably in the early part of August. All of our preparations are, the equipment to do it. The vast amount of cable to upgrade this community is in place and there's a process that will bring, I'm pretty sure it's after Waconia that we'll be in Chanhassen. Mayor Mancino: I thought C came before W. Councilman Engel: When do you expect it completed? City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Mark Trefrey: Well we're supposed to be done by the end of this year, and as you all know we've got a time line with winter so our biggest issue is that we need to get all of our underground work done before it freezes. And it's certainly our anticipation to meet that deadline and get our system done hopefully by the end of this year. Now as they're going it, certain sections of the community are going to benefit. There's a certain tie over. It's not all tied over at one time so as we're going through the community, you will benefit as you're tied over onto the new system. Mayor Mancino: And no more outages. Mark Trefrey: Well I will say this, that outages are a reality, and especially on this system that is this old. The whole reason we're going to go through this process is to limit the number of outages but during the construction season, and when we construct a new upgrade, we will have a number of outages. We'll try to limit them as best we can but it's inevitable that we are going to have some interruption of service. One of the things we try to do is we send out a package of information in advance of the process. When it starts. Beginning of the process. We use our local access service to try to update people on where we are and where we're going so we'll try to handle it as best we can so we are going to have some stretch of interrupted service but they try to keep it in a local area. But it's all for hopefully the benefit into the future. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Thank you very much. Thanks for coming tonight. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THREE 3-STORY 54 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDINGS (162 UNITS) ON 9.94 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED PUD- MIXED USE; LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 101 AT MAIN STREET IN VILLAGES ON THE POND~ CHANHASSEN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT~ THE SHELARD GROUP; COUNCILMAN LABATT AND COUNCILWOMAN JANSEN. Public Present: Name Address Lori & Mark Jesberg Milton Bathke Matthew Noah Wayne & Kathy Holtmeier Walter E. & Marion Paulson Shirley Robinson Mary Jane Klingelhutz Barbara Jacoby Lynn Wyffels Vernelle Clayton Bob Smithsburg 8407 Great Plains Blvd. 8404 Great Plains Blvd. 980 Lake Susan Hills Drive 8524 Great Plains Blvd. 8528 Great Plains Blvd. 8502 Great Plains Blvd. 8600 Great Plains Blvd. 8516 Great Plains Blvd. 11455 Viking Drive, Eden Prairie 422 Santa Fe Circle 8657 Chanhassen Hills Drive North Mayor Mancino: May I have a motion on this? Councilman Labatt: I motion to the City Council at our August 9th meeting if possible reconsider approval of Site Plan #99-9 for a three building apartment development within the Villages on the Ponds, Outlot J, Villages on the Ponds. And that the council instruct the staff to review the following issues and explore the possibility of alternatives for resolution and those being, preservation of the creek area south of the pedestrian trail. Look at the location and size of the NURP pond. The need of a traffic study prior City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 to proceeding with this development to verify that it is not premature. Preservation of the natural topography of the site as much is practical by adhering to the original building footprint and original approved grading plan. Provision of senior housing needs and requirement to fulfill the city's grant agreement with the Metropolitan Council. Mayor Mancino: Is there a second? Councilwoman Jansen: Second. Mayor Mancino: Discussion. Discussion from councilmembers on this before we take a vote on it. Councilman Labatt: I'll start it real quick here and if anybody else wants to comment but I'm bringing this up because issues have been brought to my attention, actually before by some residents down in Mission Hills and on the lake about this and after the fact that more concerns were brought up about the pedestrian trail. The area south of the trail and the need for a traffic study. The pedestrian path. Environmental concerns were brought up about the amount of trees being loss on the property and the allocation of the NURP pond. Councilwoman Jansen had brought up some issues that night and asked that we tabled it and in hindsight it may have been a good thing to do but, it was approved and now I'm looking to reconsider this. It is by no way an attempt to kill the project. I just want to look at these five things that I've talked about and have staff work with the developer and get them answered. Mayor Mancino: Any other discussion? Councilwoman Jansen. Councilwoman Jansen: I would want to start by echoing what Councilman Labatt just said and that's that it's not that it's looking at our disapproving the project, and I do think I said that two weeks ago. It's an excellent project and I'm not suggesting that we go back and we try to change any of the original agreements. In fact now after reviewing some of the terms of those previous negotiations with Villages on the Ponds, I'm more concerned that we might be altering the agreement with the original motion. In the discussion that we had two weeks ago it was Councilman Senn and Mr. Knutson who spoke of the previous concessions that had been negotiated with Villages on the Ponds and our inability to really affect or change any of the project due to those existing agreements, which caught my attention and I certainly appreciated that notation being made because I did go back because we hadn't really reviewed the background that had affected this particular project. We were looking at it singularly. I went back and refreshed myself on what some of those agreements had been, and some of those negotiations. And as Councilman Senn had indicated, the projects are really very interrelated. There were a lot of negotiations going on at the time that the Villages on the Ponds PUD was being drafted. We were at the same time looking at the St. Hubert's property. All of that happened over a couple of years as far as really reaching that final PUD and it was a tremendous amount of effort on both staff and council's part as far as putting that agreement together, and I can certainly appreciate it. That was finalized three years ago, and I didn't realize how long it had been going backwards that that got done. What caught my attention as I went through the original negotiations and agreements is that several of the concerns that each one of us spoke to two weeks ago, and some of the concerns that were raised by the residents, were addressed in the original agreements. They were key issues that were definitely spoken to and there were trade offs that were arranged in order to address some of those concerns between the different pieces of the property within the agreement. The spirit of the original agreement is really well documented if you go back through all of the rezoning agreements, the PUD, the wetland alteration permit and the final plat review for the entire project. This particular piece of property had some very specific conditions and considerations that were discussed and made it unique to what some of the overall points were that were made for the project. So there were some that were very specific to just this piece of property. And they termed within the documents as trade-offs with the developer for "leniency of ordinances applied to other City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 areas of the Villages on the Ponds development". So I guess not to belabor it but tonight in wanting to maybe better justify and warrant the reconsider, it seems that I don't know, maybe everyone has a fantastic memory for all of the detail that was in all of those documents from 3 years ago, but what I'm hoping we might be able to conclude is that rather than moving forward on one piece of this very intricate puzzle, if we can take a work session and walk through what all of the agreement terms are. What the trade-offs were and what we would need to realize and be aware of is that any variance that we intentionally or unintentionally put into place with this agreement that we have right now affect the rest of the parcels because there were those sorts of trade-offs. If we do this, then we do this. So if we go forward with the motion that we have currently, I would still encourage us to sit down rather quickly and review all of the current agreements that we have just now been approving and realizing that when we did the cycle shop, when we did the swim school, none of these specific trade-offs related to those properties so they didn't come up. There was no affect. Those all fell under all of the general guidelines that had been applied through the mass grading on the north side. But some of those trade-offs then for those properties exist on this parcel. And again, one of the examples of how closely interrelated these pieces are is that it's noted within the reports that there's a limited amount of impervious surface space available to accommodate any additional wetland mitigation, and it refers'to site plans would have to be revised to accommodate any additional mitigation needs created by alterations to the original site plans. Now I'm not implying that we're impacting wetlands here that weren't already planned for. I'm going to the context in that statement that the impervious surface is that delicately balanced between all of the pieces so if we affect something here that wasn't originally planned for, we're now looking at having to go back and maybe do our balancing act before we've had an opportunity to sit down and very consciously make that decision. And I don't know maybe everyone else, go ahead. Mayor Mancino: No, go ahead, Councilwoman Jansen: Maybe everyone else is tuned enough to what those original agreements are to be able to do that balancing act. We didn't discuss it so I certainly wasn't aware of it. I did pull some of those documents if anyone wants to just take a look at it tonight as far as determining if there is any justification that would be warranted, but again I'd want to emphasize that what we're reviewing is in total. It's not an objection to the conceptual plan for this property but does it, have we truly evaluated our options as a council to those other policies as to where we're going with Villages on the Pond. I don't know that we've, I know we haven't discussed it. We haven't had conversations as this council since we're just together since January, on that project so I would encourage again for us to sit down as a council rather soon and go through those things. But I was hoping that we might be able to get as little ' delay to the developer as possible but at least enable ourselves to sit down and just go through this while we can still make those very conscience decisions. Mayor Mancino: Okay thank you. Any other council person? Kate, if you would talk a little bit about your staff has taken a lot of time to go over the entire PUD and look at the averaging and the ordinances. I mean that's what you have spent. Kate Aanenson: ...PUD. We did different sectors and we did make another variance that Mark's well aware of with Famous Dave's. We had to switch some sector to commercial. We had additional conunercial. We are keeping a running balance. There were some conditions put on that to add additional. Famous Dave's went away but Ruby Tuesdays is coming in. They will still need that same number of sector balancing. It's not any different than the PUD with the balancing we keep track of as far as the F. AW that was put in place for Chan Business Center where we said there will be so much industrial. So much office. So much warehousing. And you know the Weather Service had a significant amount of open space so that's kind of carrying the rest of those pieces down there. I think what may be 9 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 helpful for us to, when we're showing you similar what we've done on Chan Business Center, if we give you a printout of where we are. Kind of a running checklist so you can see. We are doing that internally. Mayor Mancino: Because that's your responsibility. Kate Aanenson: We have to be consistent with that and I think that'd be helpful certainly to show you that so intemally we are tracking. Again, pointed out when Famous Dave's came in there was a glitch and we had to make some changes. You agreed to change that sectoring so there is a balance, a check and balance as far as... Mayor Mancino: So you're doing that as every site plan comes in, you're doing that review which is under the overall PUD contract and what we have set up which was set up in '967 '977 '96? Kate Aanenson: Yes. There are a couple things we're tracking. Not only the type of things, each a different sector but then there's also impervious. Mayor Mancino: Impervious surface. Densities, yeah. And all that. Kate Aanenson: ...housing units that can go there. That sort of thing, correct. Mayor Mancino: Sure, that were very, very specific. Okay. Councilwoman Jansen: IfI might add to that, and I realize that some of those things were very set. In conversations with Mr. Knutson today on just clarifying where ali of the guidelines do come from, not all of the agreement per se. I mean there were a lot of conversations, there was a lot of negotiation, numerous of the fine points and the trade-offs that were discussed didn't get document into the PUD. So if we're tracking off of that, we're not necessarily applying all of the spirit of the agreement and all of the trade-offs that were discussed. As a for instance to be very specific, the area south of the city trail was specifically spoken to in the original conversations about that being preserved. It was noted in the wetlands permit. It was not noted within the PUD and the city went to extra steps when development was threatening the east side of 101 south of the trail. The city stepped up and purchased that piece of property to preserve it and make sure that it stayed open space because that was the spirit of what the city was trying to accomplish. The piece of property now on the west side of 101 is the other half of what the conservation conversation was about. It was preserving the open space along the creek area from all of the direction that was given to us about how significant a resource that was to the point of not putting wetland mitigation in that area, but instead preserving the woodlands in order to also act as a water buffer going into the creek. Going into Rice Marsh Lake and eventually down to Lake Riley. It was identified as a very significant issue. Kate Aanenson: That's not a true statement. Mayor Mancino: Not in the EAW. There's a tennis court there. Kate Aanenson: ...we always envisioned on there. Councilwoman Jansen: It was shown in the right-of-way. It was shown where 101 's existing right now. It's where it was placed. Kate Aanenson: ...but in the text and the discussion that went on there, we envisioned that pond to be larger in the document. I don't want to mislead anybody but that was talked about as a ponding area. 10 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Councilwoman Jansen: It was shown as a ponding area, but there was very specific wordage about not impacting near that creek area or the cover. Kate Aanenson: ...there to be a pond there to handle the size that was necessary for development. Mayor Mancino: Yeah, I did go back and look through the EAW and some of the things. I was only on the Planning Commission at that time but I looked back in some of the records that I had that showed the storm pond there on the south of the trail and just a little north of the creek and a tennis court and etc. Roger, can you add any insight legally? I mean this is a site plan and what are, I know that there was some discussion at the last meeting on this. Okay, long discussion on this. Roger Knutson: As I advised the council last time, and my advice is really about the same. In a site plan review it's in a sense a checklist review, not a policy making act and you take out the controlling, official controls. And see do they meet the standards in those official controls. You read, here's the PUD. Here's the X to ZZ requirements. Have they met, if they apply, or is there a conflict? And if you can point out that in the PUD as a way of example that it's a conflict with term ZZ, then you have a basis for turning down the site plan. Or if it's in some other ordinance that applies, you can say oh look at this ordinance. It doesn't meet this requirement. You can turn it down. If you can't find that sort of thing, you really don't have a legal basis for turning it down. Mayor Mancino: Any other discussion from Councilman Engel or Senn? Councilman Engel: I know this predates Councilpersons Labatt and Jansen but it also predates my own term as well as yours Mayor and it is very complex. There's too many issues. I think to keep going back and retooling what staff spent literally years on with these developers, I'm not of a mind to reopen this. You've got to go along with the professionals we have on staff working with the people to put this together. So I'm not in favor of reopening. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Senn, any comments? Councihnan Senn: Well on many of the issues being raised, which I view as I'm going to say more of the regulatory or ordinance or contract type of issues. I think staff has done a good job of basically addressing those issues. Our staff is hardly known as being what you'd call a pro development staff, and if anything I think they look at these things every which way and backwards and forward to make sure the way they are. Three years ago when we did this agreement, it was a very, very lengthy process. It was a lengthy process leading up to it and a number of us fought very hard to make sure that there were a number of controls, restrictions, framework put in place that had to be adhered to all along the way. I mean I'm confident that that was all incorporated in and that staff you know had constantly I think monitors that. You know again that's something at least in my own case that I've...a number of times from the process of additional site plans coming in and Kate referencing the same occasion, that sort of thing. And the other issues that I hear are more related to affordable housing and housing for seniors. That sort of thing. I share that concern overall with the community and also share the importance of those issues. Unfortunately that's not the project we have in front of us. In my mind it's neither an affordable project nor a senior project. I mean it's effectively a market place project and that's who's tied up the land and that's who's brought it before us so I mean those are issues I think we definitely need to deal with. But as far as site plan approval goes, I mean that's not something we can deal with as it relates to the site plan approval on this particular project so given both sides of those things, having reviewed it, I just can't see any legal basis for us to basically reconsider elements or try to change the elements of a deal that's already there in place. At the same though, as I stated last meeting, is that not to 11 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 be short sighted, this is not the place to impact specific... The site plan review allows us very little leeway. But there are other considerations coming up before the EDA and City Council that council and EDA have a lot more leeway over .... requested the city for subsidy on this project. If that's the place that we want to impact that legally, and within the context of the rules we have to work with, then that's where it should be discussed and looked at and negotiated. But this is not the time nor the place nor the action for us to do that so I would not likewise favor reconsideration. Mayor Mancino: Tell me back in '96 etc when I know that the council wanted to see, I mean part of it was making sure that we had some affordable housing. Was here any discussion, and I'm jogging your memory here, about senior housing in this location at all or was it more just the discussion was around affordable housing? Councilman Senn: Well I mean, how would I say this? You know this thing was always kind of like a living, breathing thing. I mean when you talk about '96, that's when it culminated an agreement. I'm not sure that was negotiated, at least by my memory, for at least 2 years before that. The original concept we had for Villages on the Ponds is totally different than what you see there now. There was no church. You know when the church element became part of the deal and many members of the community came in and encouraged us to make it part of the deal and alter the project, and to make a number of let's say trade-off's as a result of that. I mean we listened to them and we did that but that's part of what also resulted in that eventual '96 agreement. And you know essentially at that point since that was a pretty significant alteration...land area and everything else, that's also when we tighten up a whole bunch of specific issues. Like we didn't want big box retail and we didn't want this to become more strip commercial centers and we wanted affordable housing and we wanted a combination or a mix of housing with the retail and housing and the office but probably to me the one area in this whole thing that was always the most clear cut and the most easy to understand and .... or I'm going to say was never really changed much is the area we're talking about here. It has always been programmed to be fairly high density housing. Mayor Mancino: There was an office building. Councilman Senn: Along with office. Councilwoman Jansen: And medium density. Councilman Senn: Well my words were chosen poorly here. I mean basically the density...not low density type of housing in combination with the office and/or more one way than the other but I mean essentially that's, the only sad part I see in this is when I envisioned what we did back then as far as Villages on the Ponds...is it all had a fairly significant impact of affordable housing part. And I'm just saying at the time that was a big issue for me as well as some of the people on the council but you know again, there's a place we deal with that issue is where we talk about going on in this process with the EDA and council as it relates to that issue, not over a site plan review. Mayor Mancino: Any other comments? We have a motion and a second so let us vote. Councilwoman Jansen: IfI might, I thought maybe you were going to make comment. But and again. Not to belabor it but in following up on the comments that were just made, if we are thinking that we've got this thing buttoned up and we've got the tight controls over it, if anything I learned today in my conversation with Mr. Knutson is if it isn't in the PUD, it's not buttoned up. And that document on this project does not address the trade-off's so in trying to encourage us to just review it, I just wanted to make sure that we were going in with our eyes open and if all of you feel comfortable, then obviously we 12 City Council Meeting -July 12, 1999 do that. I would just like to encourage us to very quickly schedule to sit down to go through the Villages on the Ponds project and determine where we are or where we aren't compared to where we think we are. Since we haven't discussed it and maybe staff is feeling very confident that they've got the numbers so we should be able to come around and talk about this rather quickly and rather soon and then we will know where we are or aren't if we need to address anything based upon this. Mayor Mancino: I'm assuming Kate you feel very comfortable or you wouldn't have passed it onto us and made a recommendation. Okay. Kate Aanenson: The original proposal had two apartments and office building. We had 57 units to those two apartment buildings and office buildings. We always said... Councilwoman Jansen: And I guess again that's where I'm not sure where you're going back to as far as the beginning but the beginning on the project, this was guided as owner occupied condominiums and when the neighborhood turned out against the high occupancy apartments and Mr. Labatt lived in the area at the time, where St. Hubert's is now was going to be very high density, affordable housing and those neighbors turned out in droves and it moved off of that property. It was also designated that there would be a senior housing facility, and I'm not meaning to belabor the points. Again I realize that it was two years worth of going. Kate Aanenson: The PUD spells out, we would like to achieve so much rental and so much owner occupied. Councilwoman Jansen: It does spell that out. Kate Aanenson: It doesn't say which... Councilwoman Jansen: And that's where I think it would behoove us to...and we're doing housing over commercial on the other side of the road. Are those going to be owner occupied units? . Kate Aanenson: That's where I go back to talking about a site plan issue versus another type of. Councilwoman Jansen: Right and again, that's where I'm going to trade-off's. Mayor Mancino: I think obviously the rest, but Linda I think that the rest of the council feels comfortable with the rental being on, or at least the two council members feel comfortable and from what you did last week with the rental being on the west side of 101. Councilman Engel: The two issues, why don't you like him speak to it. Councilman Senn: I think the, aside from the reconsideration, which we're going to vote on here instead of, I think there's one good point being made here and that is that we should schedule kind of a session to get the people who aren't up to speed, up to speed. They should be up to speed on Villages on the Ponds. It's not a project that's going to end tomorrow or with the advent of this site plan going forward. It's going to be with us for years yet. The second element of that is that if, you know once everybody is up to speed on it and stuff, I think you know then if there's things that we want to look at and look at doing differently or if there's anything that impacts the site, then as I said before, the place we negotiate that is where we negotiate. This is not a negotiable part of the deal. We can approve the site plan and still renegotiate elements when they're asking us for money. Okay. So put it realistically, we're...and move forward on that basis. 13 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel. Did you have a few comments? Councilman Engel: Nothing to add. I said mine. Mayor Mancino: Okay a motion is on the floor. There's a second. Councilman Labatt moved, Councilwoman Jansen seconded to reconsider the request for site plan approval for three 3 story 54 unit apartment buildings (162 units) on 9.94 acres of property zoned PUD-Mixed Use, located on the west side of Highway 101 at Main Street in Villages on the Pond, Chanhassen Housing Development, The Shelard Group. Councilwoman Jansen and Councilman Labatt voted in favor of reconsideration. Mayor Mancino, Councilman Senn and Councilman Engel voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3. Mayor Mancino: This will continue and will not be up for reconsideration and the City Manager and I will meet and talk about when to put this on a work session agenda. In fact I'm not quite sure when our next work session is. So we can do that but we will, Councilwoman Jansen, put it on a work session agenda. Councilwoman Jansen: Would you mind mentioning the EDA date? Mayor Mancino: The EDA date is July 29th, is that right? Thursday. Thursday, July 29th at what time? Scott Botcher: 7:00. Ah no. 6:30 or 7:00. Mayor MancinO: Usually 6:30. Again Thursday night, July 29t~* at 6:30 and they're here in the council chambers. So that will be the EDA meeting with who's comprised of the city council and two members at large that will be here tonight and we will be discussing the financing of the affordable housing for these units. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 44~692 SQ. FT. TWO STORY TEMPERATURE CONTROL STORAGE BUILDING AND A 40 FT. SETBACK VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW BUILDING AT THE ESTABLISHED 30 FT. SETBACK ON 3.84 ACRES; LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TH 5 AND PARK DRIVE; MINNESOTA MINI-STORAGE. Bob Generous: Thank you Madam Mayor, Council members .... approximately a 45,000 square foot building. It's a two story building located at the southwest comer of Park Drive and Highway 5. Currently it's a one level mini-storage and they're going to tear down a portion of the building at the comer and replace it with the temperature controlled building. The proposed location of the building is at the established setback of the existing structure there. On the northeast comer they are stepping the building away from the right-of-way to maintain the appropriate setback. There's approximately a 5 1/3 foot parapet at the top of the building for the screening of the rooftop mechanical equipment. The building architecture consists of a base of rock face block and then the primary building material of exterior insulating finishing system. The colors are tan. They do have burgundy accents within the building. Staff believes that this will be a welcome improvement to the industrial park there and we are recommending approval of the site plan subject to the conditions of our staff report. With that I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. 14 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Mayor Mancino: Thank you very much Bob. Any questions from Council members to staff? And is the applicant here? And would you like to address the council? Todd Jones: Good evening. My name is Todd Jones. I'm with Minnesota Mini-Storage, the applicant. 601 Carlson Parkway, Minnetonka. I'd like to thank you very much for reviewing this exciting redevelopment project tonight. I have nothing more to add but I'm available to answer any questions that you may have, thank you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions at this point? Scott Botcher: I have one for Kate. And I brought this up and I don't remember what it said in the minutes. I communicated to the Planning Commission about the issue of signage on Highway 5. And basically what you told me was that, what is here before us is allowed under code. I would just again state publicly that when planning commission, as we talked about at our joint meeting, talks about issues of signage as one of the things on the list, that this is a classic example. We've got a monument sign. We've got a big facing sign on Highway 5 and if we're going to improve the aesthetics of our con~nunity, and this building is a drastic improvement, consider whether or not we really need to have two signs in that close proximity to each other. Now understanding that it's/nice to have a sign if you're a businessman and that, but whether or not as a community we want to have that long term. I'm just sort of sending the flag up and for whatever it's worth. Kate Aanenson: The Planning Commission did address the panel signs. They felt that they could be improved. Actually... first submitted so as long as they were not... Mayor Mancino: And we are not approving the signage tonight. That that still has to go through, correct? Kate Aanenson: Well if you're agreeing to this site plan you've basically kind of acquiesced. Scott Botcher: That's one of... Kate Aanenson: Right, they come back for a separate permit. Scott Botcher: What kind of response have you had to that issue? I mean it's been brought up, which I didn't 'know, I'd be interested. Todd Jones: Well we do have an existing monument sign there and also some building mounted sign and our intent was certainly, along with everything else we're doing on the corridor to upgrade, we felt that we were doing that. We do have kind of a corporate standard. Although we're local, we have multiple locations and there is kind of an identity to our storage centers. And appreciate the comments on the sign. We'll do what we can to enhance the appearance and I'm more than happy to go through the sign submittal process as outlined by your code. Scott Botcher: So Kate we have the opportunity, because this is probably the first signage one that we've had. We have the opportunity to improve the building but not the signage? Kate Aanenson: It requires a separate permit in the fact that we would review it but it is consistent with the ordinance. Scott Botcher: What aesthetic component do we have on? 15 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Kate Aanenson: We have an ordinance. We redid that a number of years ago. Scott Botcher: This is sort of a self education process here, I recognize that but I guess if there's a way to approve the, because the building is outstanding. Really is. And deal with the signage at a different date. Kate Aanenson: Well if it was a conditional use or a variance and then we could attach conditions to mitigate that. At this point it is a, yeah there's a variance on the setback. If you want to make a, tie to that. Scott Botcher: See I mean, not that I don't trust you but I've done this enough years and Kate and I have talked many times. I've heard a lot of people say oh we'll make it better and there you go. And I'm sure that you will. The building looks fine. I guess I'd be interested in seeing what it was. And I don't want to hold it up at this time. I think we should approve it. Kate Aanenson: Unless you approve the sign and ask that, the building and ask that the sign be brought back. Mayor Mancino: Yeah, I mean that's what we can do. We can go ahead and approve this building and ask that the sign be brought back and as you heard the comments in the planning commission too, because they were pretty specific. To come back with a sign package to us to approve. Todd Jones: ...total separate submittal and we understand that and we are going to do that. Mayor Mancino: Should that be a condition we should make tonight in our motion? Bob Generous: Sure. Mayor Mancino: That kind of a condition. Will the color of the new buildings be approximately the same as what the colors right now on the building. Are you painting the whole, everything? Todd Jones: We will not be at this time repainting the balance of the facility. Aesthetic questions I guess I'd like to pass onto our architect, Paul Strother with Cluts O'Brien, Strother Architects. Paul selected the colors and he'd be more than happy to answer those. Mayor Mancino: Okay great. Thank you. You're also the owners of the one on Highway 7 and Vine Hill, correct? Todd Jones: Yes we are. Mayor Mancino: Okay, and you just went through a repainting and a reroofing and adding the second story at that. Todd Jones: That was actually a new facility. It was expansion of the existing facility that's a block away, yes. Paul Strother: Good evening. I'm Paul Strother, Cluts, O'Brien, Strother Architects. I brought in addition to the rendering that you have there, some elevation sketches that might more clearly show the colors. What we're proposing is a rock face block base on the new building that's essentially the same 16 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 color as the precast that is along Highway 5. Above that is an EFIS, synthetic stucco system that's a tan color. One tone lighter and with an accent of white and then the parapet flashings are the burgundy color which are in place on the existing building. We're looking at the feasibility of other treatments on the existing building that currently our proposal is to do the new building in that fashion. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you Paul. Any questions for Paul at this point from anyone? No? Thank you. Councilwoman Jansen: Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Any comments from Council? Comments on the building? Any changes? Councilwoman Jansen: I had one question actually that I missed asking earlier. In the MnDOT letter their second bullet point. The proposed exit only access onto Park Drive is in a poor location and is too close to the Trunk Highway 5/Park Drive intersection. If the access is necessary, MnDOT suggests restricting the exit as a right only. Did I see that in the conditions? Were we addressing that? Kate Aanenson: It's the driveway coming through. After you drop off for the storage. Todd Jones: I haven't seen that condition. I know that we have reviewed that condition specifically with your city engineer and she's very comfortable with it. Kate Aanenson: The driveway's going to remain where it is. When you go in. The other one-is the driveway where you come through and Todd can speak to the number or the volume but it's so nominal we felt it really wasn't important. 'Maybe you can speak to the volume oftrafficl Todd Jones: And I always like, when I talk about these stores and I always like to talk about traffic because they're basically, it's very, very little and of all commercial uses, probably generates or does generate the lowest traffic of any other commercial use. I have a little traffic study to make my case. We did a little snapshot of two separate weeks. One in March and one in April, getting the bottom line for a whole week, we had 117 trips. That was in the March study. In the April study there's 131. The new access, which actually goes through the proposed building, is actually kind of an amenity. This allows a majority of the access and activity that's on this building now would be internal. In other words if you're a customer of oar's and you're in this new building. You drive your vehicle in the building. You're on the second level, you'll use the elevator to get your things up to the second level. When you're done, you exit only straight out the building .... activity is in the interior. Councilwoman Jansen: Just for what's the building, okay. Todd Jones: In the winter it's warm, in the summer it's cool and again it's interior so from viewing from driving by, so on and so forth, you don't see the moving vans and all those sorts of things... Average trips, what's key these days often times if the peak times. With our proposed development that peak traffic will increase ~A car in the p.m. peak time and 1 car in the a.m. so traffic is very low. I hope that minimizes the impact. Councilwoman Jansen: Thank you. Yeah, I appreciate that. Anita Benson: If I could just add to that Linda. With the Trunk Highway 5 reconstruction project proposed to begin next year, this intersection will be limited to a right-in/right-out only. It will not be a 17 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 full access with Highway 5 so that really helps to eliminate concerns. As for the traffic volumes will be significantly less. Councilwoman Jansen: Okay. Mayor Mancino: But we love trying to turn west there and taking our lives into our hands every time we, well any other questions.'? Councilwoman Jansen: That does it for me. Councilman Labatt: No. Mayor Mancino: Okay, motion please. Councilman Senn: I'll move approval of the site plan and also approval of the setback variance. Making the setback variance contingent upon the signage plan being brought in to be approved by a separate action. Mayor Mancino: So you're adding a condition that it be a separate action by the council? Councilman Senn: Separate action by council as a condition, yeah. Of the setback variance. Mayor Mancino: Okay, good. Thanks. A second please. Councilwoman Jansen: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Jansen seconded to approve Site Plan #99-12 for a 44,692 square foot two story temperature controlled storage building and a 40 foot setback variance from the Highway Corridor District building setback contingent upon the sign plan being approved as a separate action, to permit the construction of the new building at the established 30 foot setback as shown on the plans prepared by Cluts, O'Brien, Strother Architects, dated May 14, 1999, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall be responsible for relocation of existing street lights and street wiring. All street light wiring shall be installed with conduit. The applicant shall escrow with the City $4,000 to guarantee curb replacement and boulevard restoration. Contract the City Engineering Department prior to pouring industrial driveway aprons for inspection. A minimum of 24 hour notice is required. The plans shall be revised to expand the driveway radii in the existing driveway to Park Road to 20 foot radiuses versus the 15 as proposed. In addition, traffic control signage shall be added for the new driveway access. Retaining walls in excess of four feet in height will require a building permit. A rock construction entrance shall be shown on the plans and maintained until the parking lot and drive aisles are paved with bitunfinous. 18 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 6. Relocation of the fire hydrant requires a permit and inspection from the City's Utility and/or Building Department. A 48 hour advance notice is required by the City to turn on/off water service. Contact the City Utility Department to schedule water turn off/on. 7. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 8. Separate sign permits are required for each sign. 9. Ground mounted wall wash lighting shall be deleted. I0. A permit must be obtained to demolish the existing storage building. 11. The building is required to be accessible and must be provided with an elevator. 12. The west and south walls of the building are required to be one-hour fire-resistive construction because of their proximity to assumed property lines at thirteen and sixteen feet away respectively. 13. A one hour fire resistive occupancy separation will be required between the S3 parking area and the S 1 storage area. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 69,990 SQ. FT. WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON 4.53 ACRES ZONED PUD~ LOCATED SOUTH OF WATER TOWER PLACE, EAST OF TH 41, ARBORETUM BUSINESS PARK, BUILDING III~ STEINER DEVELOPMENT. Bob Generous: Thank you Madam Mayor, council members. The applicant is requesting approval for approximately a 60,000 square foot office/warehouse building. This project is located north of the City's new water tower, east of All About Lights, and west of the Heartland Building in the Arboretum Business Park on Water Tower Place. This development, or this building acts as a transition within the development. From the more office showroom space and office space that will be seen in the perimeter of this site and the office warehouse buildings in the middle. We've triedto bring elements of the various buildings together. It has a 5 foot projection in the entrance details and on the inside of that the applicant has agreed to provide a 3 foot recess to create an additional detail when you drive by that and we've attached as part of the package to you the details on that so we'll have a little alcove at the entrances and then the rest of the building will project out from that. It's just before the minutes. And so there are some architectural things that they can do such as including recessed lights in the top of it to help highlight the opening. We believe this ties it in with both the All About Lights building to the west and the development in the Heartland Building. As an additional architectural feature they are including a masonry brick for the first 8 feet of the entrances. The majority of the building is tilt up concrete panels. Tan in color. Mayor Mancino: Is it the same pattern as the other buildings? Bob Generous: Yes it is. Mayor Mancino: Okay. 19 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Bob Generous: And a parapet to screen the rooftop equipment. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan subject to the conditions in the staff report. Mayor Mancino: Thank you very much. Any questions for staff?. Councilwoman Jansen: No. Mayor Mancino: Okay. The client would like to present to the City Council. I know you have materials tonight and some other things that the Planning Commission asked you to bring. Fred. Fred Richter: Thank you Mayor, council members. I'm Fred Richter with Steiner Development. With me tonight is Jeff Barrons on our architectural staff. I'll just kind of go quickly reinforcing some of the comments from staff. Kind of highlighting the architectural features. Going to the plan, as you're aware this is an interior lot and images from it are really from a distance. This is Water Tower Place. The service docks are totally blocked by the All About Lights building towards the west, towards 41. The sketch or rendering seen here is from this angle here and the materials will be these entrance elements... Recessed in here... This building is similar to office warehouse to out other buildings as the cast concrete. We have upgraded and added brick to the entrances. Worked with staff to create architectural elements which give it it's interest from a distance. This building will be mainly viewed from quite a distance. Otherwise...building for the industrial development. Looking quickly at the materials, this is the material board here. It shows the color palette of the precast panels. The darker is the element over the entrance. This is the brick at the base of the entrance which is the base color on the panels to the side of the entrance which is the main color of the building. This also is the primary color of the back which is very close to the All About Lights building. We have an accent reveals and the window..: We do have an actual precast sample. It just shows...but this is the precast that's laid down in the forms so it gets a very smooth finish and then the insulation in that is to the back side. There's a double row of reveals throughout the building that get different colors by some shade and Shadow so this is an abstract in the sense that it's not the total width. With that...overview of what we're proposing. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any questions at this point from anyone? Councilwoman Jansen: I don't know if mine would be a staff question or a developer question so Madam Mayor, if you would direct it. As I drove by the site, and I was trying to get a feel for how the building's going to sit compared to the All About Lights. Is that the name of the store? That building in front of it. I was trying tO get a feel for the elevation of this building sitting behind it because the pad, as it is right now and it says it's limited grading, it would make it appear as if this building might peak'up over the existing building next to 41, and I guess that's my first question is, is this going to be taller? Mayor Mancino: Than the All About Lights building. Councilwoman Jansen: Than the All About Lights, to where that back side of the building is going to be visible from 41, because I of course was reading the concerns of some of the planning commissioners about how visible that might be. Mayor Mancino: They were very concerned. Fred, can you answer that and Bob can. Fred Richter: I can address that. To the best of my knowledge, the issues, I'll say they won't be noticed. Two ways. First of all All About Lights is longer so it will be blocked in a horizontal sense. Our buildings are the same height. Ours is off, and Bob you can help me out on this. I don't know if we're 4 feet higher or our pad is higher so you're correct. What will work to the benefit of blocking our building, 20 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 anyone in a car, their eye level is below the parapet of the Ail About Lights building so that parapet will block any view you know going back. What I'm saying is, you know I don't mean to do it with my hand motions but what I'm saying is, if you're low, your eye level is low in the.automobile and you have a parapet between you and a higher object, that parapet will block the higher object behind it and they're relatively the same height. So I believe it would be totally blocked out. In the horizontal sense, this is the corner here. Here's the back side of the All About Lights. Councilwoman Jansen: Okay, very good. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Comfortable with that? Okay. Any others? I have some concerns about architectural but I'I1 talk that in my comment time. As far as getting a diversity of architecture in this PUD. Comparing it to other PUD's. Councilman Senn: Go ahead. Mayor Mancino: Other questions? I'll do it during my comment time, thank you. Any other questions? Councilman Labatt: I just want to see the colors .... the planning commission has not seen the colors? Mayor Mancino: No, they have not seen the materials. Kate Aanenson: They saw the colors, just not the samples. Mayor Mancino: Well they probably saw the colors from the renderingwhich. Councilman Labatt: Yeah, I just want to see how close that was. There's no one from the planning commission... Mayor Mancino: Who's that planning commissioner who's supposed to be here tonight. No, just kidding. Okay, no questions? Any comments? Then I'll give a couple. Waiting for me, thank you. When we did this PUD and talked a lot about what was going to go into the PUD, we talked about the high quality of an industrial park that we wanted to see. I keep, the All About Lights building has some textures. Some different things going on it. I feel that this third building is going to be very much like the other two, using the same materials and it just all looks the same to me. So I have a concern about yes, the entry is a little different but everything else about it is the same. So I have a hard time going forward with the architecture of this building. I would like to see some diversity in the PUD in the buildings. I went around and looked at some of our other business parks to say, am I asking something or talking about something that is obviously subjective but is it not what we're asking other PUD's that we have in our community to have architecturally. And so I went to the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, etc and within those there is a diversity of architecture. There is a diversity of materials. There is a diversity obviously of color. There is I would say an aesthetic feeling to the office part of the warehouse that goes beyond what we've seen here. So I have a problem going ahead and approving this building because of that. Anyway, any other comments? Councilwoman Jansen: I would echo what you just spoke to and I guess I'm concerned that the Planning Commission is typically yeah, where that would occur. And can we at this point enable them to be able to go back and work on this project or does it, is it something that's still, if we were to, and I don't know if you're going this direction. If you were to table, does it still come back to us and not them? 21 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Mayor Mancino: I think that that would be our decision. Kate, do you have some thoughts on that? know I don't know how other council members feel about that. I think the Planning Commission sounded a little concerned too. You Kate Aanenson: Yeah, let me just speak to that in a broader sense. In this project particularly he's got the main developer, Steiner Koppelman who's doing majority of the buildings so there's, but this discussion has come up before. It's come up on CSM on Dell Road where we've got the campus look which was discussed. They're going four additional buildings to the back, which are going to look similar because that's the look they're going for and I think you've got that with Mr. Undestad's development too. There's a similar look to those. Now in Chan Business Center we do have some diversity in there because we have a lot of different builders going in. We tried hard in this PUD, and they're aware of it when Kwik Trip came in, it's brick on the perimeter. We said all perimeter buildings are going to be a higher quality because we kind of acquiesced and said in the interior where we know these are large, predominantly tilt up. Again you've got Steiner doing the majority of those, which reflects some of their look and I would agree. I mean we struggled, Bob spent a lot of time just trying to figure out how we can make this look different. Is it enough? I think that's where you're struggling. Just by changing entrances, is that enough? That's the same discussion we held with CSM on the comer of Dell Road. If you remember we were looking at the entrance treatments there. Mayor Mancino: But they did go back and change them. Kate Aanenson: Yeah but they're predominantly very similar. The Planning Commission's looking at the four new ones back, which was the Welsh property and they, same thing. They're four mirrors and what they're trying to do is just tweak the entrances. And it's a tough issue because they wanted kind of a corporate look. This is where you are. You're in this area. I think that's a discussion point that we can talk about the Planning Commission but I think they've kind of felt like it reflects the developer. That's their look. Kind of a thumb print. Mayor Mancino: And the corporate identity and the architectural style. Kate Aanenson: Well no. That's the identity of the campus. That's where you are. It's a sense of place that you're in that area. That development. Mayor Mancino: Is that what we want conceptually from a PUD? I mean I thought one of the things that we all talked about was having diversity of architectural styles in the PUD. Kate Aanenson: I would agree. Mayor Mancino: So who's leading who? Fred Richter: ...I just wanted to say, I appreciate this debate and I think Kate summed up our position probably quite well and I'I1 just reiterate. First off, we entered into a PUD we do have an understanding the interior lots basically were our "office industrial lots". Those are the lots on the... I think as a building owner we feel, and I know my partners feel very strongly, I don'$ know what the correct... I think we had good input from the staff where we have tweaked...good effort in that. Had some good conceptualism. When you look at the entrances. The arch next to the water tower and a few other things and the fact that it's higher up... We've added in the recess, extra material. EFIS and stucco and I think we've made some good adjustments. The other thing that drives industrial, and it's very different...town center, within the retail, office, smaller buildings... These buildings are driven by pure economics. They're large buildings. They're large buildings dictated by the market... They then have to be 22 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 enclosed... It's kind of the nature. We're very proud of the aesthetics .... a lot of landscaping that is going in initially. Mayor Mancino: No, your landscaping is good. Fred Richter: I think in the long run...given the context that it is office industrial... Mayor Mancino: But you're also saying that the perimeter buildings will have a different architectural feel and look and materials. Fred Richter: We're aware of that and... Mayor Mancino: Any other comments? Then let's go for a motion. Councilman Senn: I think, I kind of wanted to give everybody else kind of a chance to say what they wanted to say but you know as I've often said in the past, I mean I'd still really love us to go back and just look at the overall materials issue as it relates to our requirements and uniformity you know city wide in terms of what we should be doing or would like to see as it relates to materials because in my mind that still has a lot to do with what kind of quality we're going to dictate in relationship to projects. We have not done that. I really don't like being in a situation of playing design critique or taking the architects Work. I'd much rather give them the framework up front and let them go from there. They see the intent of the framework. The thing you know you have to go back on this one and you have to again kind of look at what the ground rules are and the ground rules they're making and I know it's hard to perceive at this point but again it comes back to the issue of everything that hasn't been built, which I think is fairly well addressed. The...is also a message I think consistently is that every one of these buildings has come through that the developer has kind of heard the message loud and clear that that issue is going to be of, critiqued much more heavily on the perimeter building. And I think that's what we can't lose sight of again is that was again the ground rules that we set. But again I'd still really like to see an overall change to the ground rules as it relates to the city on a city wide perspective but I don't think it's fair to kind of go back and do it in the middle of the road in the Case of this. I mean even if we can't have great impact downtown for example, in relationship to what's already built there, we could certainly have impact when it's developed again. And in fact we do have another redevelopment proposal coming in front of us. That's on downtown and again I think we just really lack...good framework of quality materials. Mayor Mancino: That will be on the work session with Village on the Ponds. We'll talk about materials and any other comments? Councilwoman Jansen. Councilwoman Jansen: Actually I don't other than having heard the comments as to what is directly in the PUD. It would be helpful to have a copy of the PUD so, I can't really speak to whether or not this is. I have to follow your lead that you're saying that it does meet it so. Councilman Senn: Well please don't follow my lead. I think the lead to follow is...they're the ones telling us and I believe them you know. Councilwoman Jansen: No, exactly. And the developer spoke to interior buildings versus exterior. Councilman Senn: Well that's a discussion I remember very vividly from when we approved this thing but again as far as the particulars go... 23 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Councilwoman Jansen: I'm just saying I can't speak to those. Councilman Senn: Kate and Bob to say that they are or not. Mayor Mancino: Okay, may I have a motion? Councilman Senn: Move approval. Councilman Labatt: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approves Site Plan #99-13 for a 59,990 sq. ft. office warehouse building (Building III) as shown on the plans prepared by Steiner Development, Inc., dated May 14, 1999, subject to the following conditions: I. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide a $2,500 security to guarantee boulevard and curb restoration. 2. The development must comply with the Development Design Standards for Arboretum Business Park. 3. The applicant shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage on site. Increase plantings for parking lot in order to meet ordinance requirements. Placement of required trees shall first be considered on the north side of the lot, then landscape islands, and finally in other areas on site. 5. Revise plant schedule and landscape plan to specify mislabeled trees at entrance of site and along south property line. 6. The applicant shall submit revised landscape plan including the above revisions. 7. Each landscape peninsula must have one shade tree. Landscape peninsulas less than 10 feet in width must have aeration tubing installed. 8. The developer shall add two landscape peninsulas to the easterly parking lot. 9. The developer shall pay full trail fees pursuant to city ordinance. I0. Detailed storm drainage calculations including drainage area maps for each catch basin shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. The storm sewer calculations shall be for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. The calculations and drainage map shall be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. 11. The site plan shall be modified to incorporate sidewalk out to Water Tower Place following the drive aisle in the northwest comer of the site. In addition, the proposed sidewalk along the north side of the building shall be extended northerly adjacent to the parking stall in the northwest comer of the site to provide continuity between the sidewalk for Water Tower Place and the proposed building. 24 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 12. The plans shall revise the turning radius of the drive aisle out to Water Tower Place to a minimum of a 25-foot radii. In addition, if necessary, change the catch basin grate in Water Tower Place to a drive-over type pursuant to City staff. 13. The applicant and/or contractor applying for the building permit shall be responsible for the additional sanitary sewer and water hookup charges over and above what was assessed. The number of sewer and water hookup charges are based on the number of SAC units determined by Metropolitan Council Environmental Services. The 1999 hookup charges for sanitary sewer and water are $1,252 and $1,632, respectively per unit. 14. Revise plans to include rock construction entrance." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Scott Botcher: Madam Mayor, we have one issue that we need to take care of because of, housekeeping item. We have three gentlemen in the audience that wish to speak briefly for the record on the cable issue. One of the difficulties that we did, and I'm not sure why staffdid this. The public hearing notice says 7:00. We were so quick tonight that we were in and out before 7:00 and they would like an opportunity and I think consulting with our attorney, that would be appropriate to do at this point. No sense making them wait. REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ASSIGNMENT OF CABLE TV FRANCHISE FROM TRIAX CABLEVISION TO MEDIACOM~ LLC. Mayor Mancino: Please come forward. State your name and address. This will be in our minutes. On public record. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to reopen the public hearing. Councilman Senn: And at this point, point of clarification in doing so, we have taken no action on this or will we be tonight. This was just basically to get input. Dick Janus: I'm Dick Janus. I reside at 503 Island Drive in Chanhassen. I've been a Chanhassen resident for about 23 years and also would point out that I'm a sales representative working out of my home so I think somewhat of an authority. In 23 years this is my first council meeting. Mayor Mancino: Welcome, welcome. Dick Janus: But I do pick it up on the tube the council meetings which I'm interested in. I've never complained about garbage service, snow removal, city streets, retail, I think is great. Now I work for J.C. Penny's for 28 years and our motto at J.C. Penny's was customer service was number one. And I tell you folks tonight that Triax Cable is the most disgusting example of customer service I have ever seen in my life. Now it's ironic that it comes up tonight. This week the cable has been out more than it's been functional in the last 3 days. Now I think we'd all agree when something's storm related, there's a legitimate excuse. All I'm asking is two things that be taken into consideration. Ask your subscribers that pay for Triax if they're getting the value for their dollar. I will bet you that 80% of them will send back their review and it won't be a pleasant site. Number two, I would request from them this simple thing. How many times have you had interruption of service and for how long and what was the cause of this interruption? There's no doubt in my mind that the quality of the council that we have, if you look at these facts, there's no way you're going to renew their license. A year ago I got trigger to the country 25 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 western awards and so I called in to complain. Ironically it went to Iowa, and the other gentleman in Iowa that answered the phone representing Triax said, oh I know what you're talking about. We thought that we'd be kicked out of that community long ago because of the quality of service we're providing. We don't accept this in garbage or anything else. But because it's entertainment I guess we don't think it's a crucial service but I know to a lot of senior citizens or whatever that stay over to our motel, when they don't have TV, they're shut down. So I would just ask you to look at that, thank you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you very much. Ellis Thomas: Okay my name is Ellis Thomas. I live at 406 West 76th Street here in Chanhassen. I'm a 32 year member of this community. I came here prepared to address three issues and possibly make a comment at the end of these issues. One of those happened to be with frequency of outages and it's pretty well addressed at the moment so. The second one I guess dealt with the reporting, inconsistencies, problems, whatever you want to say to it. The third one dealt with the possible rebate or credit for poor service. And then I have a comment I'd like to make. I think the gentleman just made my comment for me too. The frequency of outages, for those of you, you live right in Chanhassen proper. I can't address what's happening outside of Chanhassen proper but within this area for the last several years has really been atrocious. And as the gentleman before me pointed out, it's quite interesting that the service we received this past week or so was probably one of the worst I've had in all the years we've had this and it's just before this hearing. Addresses relicensure. And it's sort of, I don't know if those folks what their management problem is but I know to me that's sort of like thumbing their nose at it. Is there a monopoly involved with these people where they know they're not going to leave? Therefore they can do whatever they wish. The frequency of outages is terrible, We're not talking about five minutes so someone can make a test. We're not talking about half an hour so that somebody can replace some equipment. We're talking about 2, 3, 4, 5 hours. And then what,s interesting.is at 5:00 your TV comes back on. And there's been times when maybe the TV's been out at night and you'll call in and they'll say gee, we don't put our technicians out at night. We'll get at it in the morning. Now for those folks that maybe working during the day and depend on some television for entertainment to relax at night, they're out. For the homebound, they're out. As the gentleman pointed out earlier, and I didn't even think of that. But the hotel business that advertises HBO, you know come stay with us. What are they going to do? So the service that we're receiving is terrible. On a scale of 1 to 10, it's a minus 50. It's really bad and somebody's got to get the message to these people. Somebody has to do that. Reporting problems has been very irritating. Past couple of years it was just really bad. I mean you'd call up and all you'd get was a busy signal. That apparently has been addressed and at least now you can get in a little bit. The other night I got in. And I asked the gal, I said what's happening. We were out of cable for a good day. She says well, we've got technicians on it. I said well what's the problem? Well I don't know They don't call in and tell us. I'm saying wow. I said somebody in your organization has to know what's happening. Somebody. Well let me see. A few minutes later I get the supervisor of dispatch. He says can I help you and I said yes. What's going on with cable? Well we've got technicians on it. What's going on? Well I don't know until they call in. Lord have mercy. Right? Nobody knows what's happening. So the reporting is bad. I would suggest that somewhere in your contract if you so renew it with these people, they'll at least provide some communications to their customers telling people what's going on. Somebody in that company has to know what's happening I think. Not too sure. I think. I understand that in the present contract there is to be no compensation to customers, no credits given unless there is a 24 hour outage. Anyone with any sense at all can figure out these folks are going to fix the problem within 24 hours. What I suggest is that maybe there be some rebate or credit given for frequency of outages. And I'd be willing to bet there wouldn't be so many frequencies. There wouldn't be as many outages. We can say 30 minutes. Let's face it. They've got to fix their equipment. They've got to put a new piece in line. I'm by trade, I'm a retired school teacher myself but I used to be in electronics. And I know that you've got to take a piece of equipment out and put another piece in and 26 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 you might interrupt the services at one time. So there's those times. It would be nice though that it would be scheduled times. If you're going to have a repair and it's a preventative maintenance repair, schedule it. And let people know this is going to happen. They have Channel 42, they show you what's going to be coming on for that day and they have the little advertisements up there. Why don't they put it on at that time and say hey folks, be ready at 2:00 at such and such a time. We're going to have a one hour outage because we have to replace some equipment. We're upgrading. Oh that's another thing. The latest thing that they tell me now when I call in is we're upgrading. We're going to make life better for you. We're going to fiber optics or some fool thing like that and boy you're going to get all these channels. My wife said yeah sure and watch the charges go up. You know. I'm not impressed with their management. And I'm really disappointed if we as a community allow them to continue on. If you renew a contract with those people, boy spell it out and I'd truly, truly recommend that you put in frequency of outages and there will be an automatic credit and I'll tell you someone that will monitor these outages. My wife. Boy she's got them right down on a piece of paper. She knows every one. When it went out. Went out, went on. She even wrote me a set of notes. But I fooled her. I remembered them all. But anyhow I want you people to take this serious. Now just out of curiosity, you all live in Chan proper I assume? Mayor Mancino: We have to. We have to. Ellis Thomas: Well I don't know this. When I say Chan proper I'm thinking this area like Western Hills, Sunrise Hills, Chart Estates. I know some of your folks live out in Lake Riley, that sort of area. To me that's out. I live in the inner city. I live next to the water tower okay. But anyhow I know that we really get it rough in that area. We've had some terrible, terrible service. Just horrible. And maybe I've sort of jumped into my comments as I've been talking. Well my comments basically dealt with what I said. Take a good hard look at these people. Take it serious. And as the gentleman said before, that spoke before me, he said any other industry that provided the service they did would be out of business. Thank god for competition. Unfortunately we don't have any here do we. I don't think. The comment was made earlier, it would take a load of dynamite to blow these people out of our community or something like that. Well I tell you what, I don't know what it takes. I've almost come back to the point here I'm going to go back to my old antenna on top of my roof. But you know part of my comment was, I guess it comes back to my wife. My wife... We get trapped into this thing. There are channels that we really like and we won't have them with the good old rabbit ears anymore. So they've got us. You know they've got us. Mayor Mancino: Satellite. Ellis Thomas: You know the problem with that? Mayor Mancino: What. Ellis Thomas: With the satellite you only got that one TV. Now if you want to pay for a selected on another TV, you've got to have another mixer so that's an extra charge. I thought of satellite. Oh I've been here. I called up so it's you know, if you were to have a representation of all the people that were dissatisfied with Triax Cable, you would have to have your meeting outside in that open lot someplace. The three of us, I guess we've got nothing to do tonight. But anyway I really, really encourage you to think hard about it. Talk about it. Don't let these folks get away with another series of bad service. And ask them to bring History Channel in would you. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. 27 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Councilwoman Jansen: Thank you. Mayor Mancino: No, you've got to get up and say something. Oh something. Ellis Thomas: Just to get your picture on TV...That was the reason I stayed up there as long as I did. Mayor Mancino: You won't break the picture tube. Thank you. Ellis Thomas: Thank you for letting us talk by the way. Mayor Mancino: Thank you for coming. Okay, going back to the agenda. CONSIDER REQUEST FOR EXTENSION TO CONSTRUCTION HOURS FOR COUNTY ROAD 17 OVERLAY PROJECT FROM SANTA VERA DRIVE TO NORTHERN CITY LIMITS (CARVER COUNTY PROJECT). Mayor Mancino: May I have a motion please. Councilman Senn: Move approval. Mayor Mancino: Unless there's some discussion. A second. Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the City Council grant William Mueller & Sons extended construction hours from 6:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday for the overlay project on County Road 17 (Powers Boulevard) from Santa Vera Drive to the north city limits. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: A. FUND SELECTION~ $300~000 TRANSFER INTO 1998 TRAIL PROJECT CITY MANAGER. Scott Botcher: You guys know as much about this as I do and I asked Todd to come tonight to give a little history on this. I talked to Mark on Friday I think it was and basically what Mark said I think is probably accurate. It appears to me that you guys just need to decide what to do with this 300 grand. I don't know, Todd is it any more complicated than that? Todd Gerhardt: You have two choices of where to get the revenue out of to pay for the overages. Councilman Senn: Actually three. Todd Gerhardt: Well three .... third is an option. Mayor Mancino: Let's bond for it. Excuse me. Todd Gerhardt: If tonight have an open discussion regarding amongst yourselves and then ask for a motion on which of the two or three that you'd like to select and then we can make those transfers. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Who'd like to open the discussion? 28 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Councilwoman Jansen: Can I ask a procedural question? And I'm not that familiar with how the referendum was worded so anybody with the history. If the referendum was passed with specific amounts budgeted for parks, trails, and open space, don't we have to spend it that way? Or legally can we reallocate open space dollars to pay for trails? Mayor Mancino: Well probably, oh go ahead. Roger Knutson: ...referendum was one amount authorizing you to spend X dollars for those three items and didn't allocate it in the ballot language. Am I correct? Mayor Mancino: I don't think it did in the ballot language but there was no, but it was very, very specific with the brochure that went out, how much each segment we were going to use on everything. So it's kind of a principle, ethical I think decision. Moral decision for us to make. Along with, yeah. It did. Councilman Senn: The brochure also said the 101 trail would be built at the same time so. Mayor Mancino: Anyway, let's go forward. I would like to suggest that we take it out of 410, the park and trail development fund because that's what we're using it for. Trail development. Councilman Senn: Good, can I ask you a question? Mayor Mancino: Yes. Councilman Senn: How does that affect the 410 fund in relationship to all the other actions we took with 410 for the year? And where does it leave us sit in relationship to a reserve and going forward and how does that fit in relationship to our five year capital program which ties into 410 also? Mayor Mancino: Well this was a recommendation from the Park and Rec Commission. I am very certain that they looked at that and looked at the CIP because this was a recommendation, if you will remember Councilman Senn, that they made I think about a year ago to us and came so they were quite comfortable with taking it from this fund. In fact have been planning that way for the last year so. Councilman Senn: But that was before we allocated everything this year that we took out of at budget time into 410. Mayor Mancino: No it wasn't. Because it was shown in their 1998 budget having, that it would come out of the reserves, the 410. Councilman Senn: Except the argument coming out of there has been ever since we took... Mayor Mancino: So where would you suggest, then where would you suggest we take it from? Councilman Senn: I don't, to be honest with you, I don't know where we'd take it from, okay. But I mean to me if somebody's asking me to impact funds to the tune of 30% or whatever and whatever I guess, to me I want to see and have all the information around those funds and how they impact the fund and how it impacts you know planned programs for the next 5 years and all that sort of thing. And maybe, I mean I don't know. In relationship to parks and rec, the minutes we get and stuff, I saw no information about that or discussion of that. 29 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Mayor Mancino: There was. I mean I don't have it with me but there was discussion of it coming out of the 410. It is for again. Councilman Senn: There is no discussion saying how it impacted 410. Nor was there any information presented which basically addressed the ongoing issues that relates to 410. Now again I'm going to invite you to go back to what we took the actions we took as it relates to 410 and made a policy decision that we wanted to take some money out of 410. All we've gotten every since...not enough money left to do other things that we wanted to do out of 410. I'm saying give us the whole picture. That's all I'm saying. So if we get the whole picture, then we can make a conscientious decision and...in this case there is or isn't there. In this case there is or isn't there. I don't see anything unreasonable about that. Councilwoman Jansen: May I ask a dumb question? Going back to the whole budget time, this money is spent, correct? So if we were to just get this taken care of and we were to decide later on that we needed another $300,000 in this fund, haven't we had that discussion about you know you could move money into this fund if down the road it needed it, i.e. because the commission was concerned that we were pulling money out for something other than trail and park development so I think that's why they were comfortable with this. But just, I guess I thought this was more ora housekeeping sort of a issue. That we just take care of it. Councilman Senn: Well, I'll be honest with you. I didn't look at it that way, especially in relationship to the other thing you were talking about which is what happens with this $700,000 contingency we've got. And if it's that important to leave the acquisition fund alone, and if there are good rationale or program for the next five years in terms of what's going to happen to 410, what I motioned to Todd three funds, I mean that is the third fund we have. Yet we're not even looking at it or considering it in relationship to this request when maybe we should be. I don't know the answer to that and maybe if you all have the information in front of you to evaluate that, go ahead. I'm just saying I haven't seen it so I'm just not comfortable with it. Mayor Mancino: Okay. I feel comfortable going ahead and taking it out of 410 because I know that there was discussion at the Park and Rec Commission and that is what they suggested. The trails have been completed because they did have open public hearings and people were very concerned that we wouldn't be able to finish the trail projects that were in the brochure so they stepped up to the plate and said we 'know we have this money in reserve and it's very important to finish what we had in the referendum. So that's our top priority with 410. To make sure that we take this money out and finish the trail project because it's not fair to go ahead and pass a referendum and say we're going to do it and not do it. And I think that that was the kind of moral decision that they made. So I would like to, my motion is that we take the $300,000 out of the 410, Park and Trail Acquisition and Development Fund and if at some point the Park and Rec Commission feels that they need to transfer some money into it from some other source, that we can do that but for right now the motion is to take the $300,000 out of the 410. Their fund. Councilman Labatt: I'll second it. Resolution #99-61: Mayor Mancino moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the $300,000 transfer into the 1998 Trail Project be taken from Fund 410, Park & Trail Acquisition and Development. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. B. SEPTIC SYSTEM ON MANDAN CIRCLE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR. 30 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 Kate Aanenson: Thank you. This item is really for your edification. Mr. Becker who lives at 10291 Mandan Circle was notified of a failing septic system. This area is outside the MUSA and will be the last area brought in in the year 2020. The problem is bigger than himself. I've included the topography in that area. He's unable to provide or locate another acceptable drain field site so in trying to be proactive, we think it's prudent to go down there and meet with some of the other neighbors because th, ey're in a similar situation based on the fact that the homes were all built in the same timeframe. The reason why I bring this for you tonight is we will be holding a neighborhood meeting out there. Randy Duepner...and myself and just find out if we need to test other systems and what solutions we can bring forward. It may end up being a collective system. Some of the neighbors have gotten together and talked about going across the street. I've given you the addresses. Maybe going to the east on Mandan. There's some relatively flat area there and do a collective system. But in doing that we're going to have to come back with some cost alternatives and just like we do on Dogwood, we provide some maintenance so there may be some assessment or cost incurred by the city. But before we do any of that, of course we bring it back but we just wanted to let you know that we're moving forward and trying to solve what we think is probably a bigger problem. And we may have a few of these areas. We are required now by law to be testing systems every three years so there may be some of these other areas that we won't be down providing service for a number of years so it's kind of a first test case, but this one we have been made aware of. So other ones may be coming so this is really just for your information. If you had any concerns that you'd like us to be aware of before we meet, I guess I'd like to hear those. Mayor Mancino: Any questions? Good idea. Great. Thank you. Scott Botcher: I have one other that I added today. I'll just pass this down. This is the press release announcing Bruce DeJong as Finance Director for the City of Chanhassen effective August 2, 1999. We got him on staff just in time so you can get us both birthday presents. He's currently Assistant Finance Director for the City of Minnetonka. He's been there for about 11 years. He went to St. Cloud but he is educable and he lives in Minnetonka. He's married. Listens to his wife as all good husbands do and has a 14 month old daughter. So you can have a copy. This was faxed to the media this morning. Mayor Mancino: With a picture? Scott Botcher: Actually Karen took his photo for the newsletter which will be, but I don't think the press will get one. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Thank you very much. Any questions, comments on Admin Section? I think we should do a resolution on the stadium, only that we're not in Hennepin County. I thought that was great of Excelsior City Council. Councilman Senn: We are in Hennepin County. Mayor Mancino: Only a little, little bit. Good, and we will schedule a work session sometime in August for Village on the Pond and talk about materials and etc. Scott Botcher: ...Kate can make it but I think that should be okay. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thanks. Good night. Scott Botcher: Do you have to make a motion for closed session? Executive Session. Take about four minutes. This actually is on the agenda and since I put it off last time because it was breakfast time or 31 City Council Meeting - July 12, 1999 something. This will take about 3 minutes do we need a motion to go into closed session. Executive Session pursuant to what'd you say? Councilman Senn: Move that we go into executive session. Scott Botcher: Because of the prospects of pending litigation. Roger Knutson: We've been threatened with litigation. We're going to close for an attorney/client discussion and advice. Mayor Mancino: And we're also closing the meeting. Scott Botcher: You close it to the outside world. Councilman Senn: Yeah. You're not adjourning the meeting. You're going into the executive session as per my motion. The City Council closed the public portion of the meeting to convene in executive session to discuss the contract status of the County Road 17 upgrade (TH 5 to Lyman Boulevard), Project 93-29. Submitted by Scott Botcher City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 32 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JULY 7, 1999 Chairman Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Deb Kind, LuAnn Sidney, Craig Peterson, Kevin Joyce, Alison Blackowiak, and Ladd Conrad MEMBERS ABSENT: Matt Burton STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Cindy Kirchoff, Planner I; Sharmin A1-Jaff, Senior Planner; and Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer (There were audio problems with the first two items on the agenda.) PUBLIC HEARING: TERRY BOLEN REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE 30 FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A THREE SEASON PORCH ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 8451 PELICAN COURT. Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Discussion by the Commission centered around the fact that the deck was already existing and if structurally an enclosed porch could be built on top of the deck, the Commission felt comfortable approving this variance. Blackowiak moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission approve Variance #99-5 for an 8 foot variance from the 30 foot rear yard setback with the following condition: The applicant must demonstrate that the existing deck structure is sufficient to support the three season porch. All voted in favor, except Joyce who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. PUBLIC HEARING: DON AND JOYCE WHITE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE 30 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN OPEN PORCH ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 8028 DAKOTA AVENUE. Public Present: Name Address Carlos Loudavid Don & Joyce White 8039 Dakota Lane 8028 Dakota Avenue Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Don and Joyce White presented pictures to the commission comparing what their house looks like to the neighboring properties. Commissioner Conrad stated that staff should relook at the ordinance for situations like this where the lot is a substandard lot of 12,000 square feet and 85 feet of street frontage. The other commissioners felt the deck was a good addition to the house. Joyee moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission approve Variance #99-9 fora 5 foot variance from the 30 front yard setbacks for the construction of an addition, All voted in favor, except Conrad and Peterson who opposed, and the motion failed with a vote of 4 to 2. PUBLIC HEARING: SAWHORSE DESIGNERS MARK AMBROSEN AND ANN SENN REQUEST FOR A- VARIANCE TO THE 10 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 3830 MAPLE SHORES DRIVE. Public Present: Name Address Kent Forss Fred Bruning Mark Ambrosen and Ann Senn 3850 Maple Shores Drive 4740 42nd Avenue No, Robbinsdale 3830 Maple Shores Drive Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. (Taping of the meeting began again at this point in the discussion.) Fred Bruning: Hi, my name is Fred Bruning from Sawhorse Designers and Builders. I'd liketo address a couple points in the staff recommendations. Adding a bedroom I think is reasonable use of a property. The issue is not putting the addition on. There are many places that we could meet the setback requirements with the addition. The hardship is created by those recommended locations, what happens to the property, views of the property. The proposed addition is off the side.; .They've got a very beautiful back yard area...side yard setbacks. While their deck's right off the dining room... Mark Ambrosen and Ann Senn have kind of a unique situation. The design of the home has a master bedroom suite on the main floor, but all the other bedrooms are on the lower level. For a newborn they showed a desire of having a newborn close by. Other homes in the neighborhood appear from the outside to be construction has most of the bedrooms on the same level. So it is kind of unique with this home. The home is also at the end ora street that rises along the lakeshore. By the time they get to the end, the last lot which is Mark and 2 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Ann's lot, the bank in back here goes from 970, goes down to 942. That's a 30 foot drop... That's all I guess I wish to add. If you have any questions I would be happy to answer them. Peterson: I have one. If you look at the rear lot is rather small. Can you give me some idea how much grass they have back there on the lawn. Fred Bruning: They actually have no, very little if no grass. They've actually chosen to pave it because it's so small to have room to get some chairs and things out front. It's 10-12 feet. There is an overhang of a deck, about a 4 foot deck so as far as your room to see the sky, you know it's probably 6 feet. The bank is pretty steep beyond that. I mean it's something you'd fall and injure yourself going down this bank. The soil, there's an erosion problem with the soil. It's that's steep. Peterson: So past the patio area, how fast does it begin dropping off?. Fred Bruning: Immediately. It's a 30 plus percent grade... Mark Ambrosen: When we moved into that house, the walk out off the back was about 6 feet. And we have an erosion problem on that hill so what we've chosen to do was build a retaining wall and it actually moves that out to the existing...so that's how we arrived at the 10 foot. Because of the erosion problem there...rectify that. Peterson: Other questions? Fred Bruning: One other point I'd like to add .... the foundation itself is actually 7 feet from the lot line but because...and cantilevers with bays and overhangs...but the foundation is 7 feet away. Peterson: Thank you. This item is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission please come forward and state your name and address please. Mark Ambrosen: I'm Mark Ambrosen. I'm at 3830 Maple Shores Drive. Fred did a nice job on the technical aspects. A little bit some of the background. We've been in for, in the house for five years and we obviously had no children five years ago. Master bedroom, main level and then bedrooms on the lower level. That was a pretty untenable situation with our daughter so we tried to rectify. Looking at our house and our neighbor's layout, the reason we chose where we are not only is because it's right off our master bedroom. We thought that it would have the least impact to the neighborhood. This side of the house is at, we border on our neighbors has no windows. We felt it was seldom used. It really wouldn't impact anybody's sight lines. On that side our neighbors just put a drainage ditch over this part of the property with some outflow, which would make it even less useable. We're not trying to make a huge addition. We're just trying to make our house livable. This is a house we intend on living in to raise our two children. The nursery will evolve into an office. My wife has an office at home that is necessary. And our existing office downstairs we're turning into a bedroom at such a point when the other children are old enough to go down there. So we're trying to make this a livable house for long term with what we thought was a minimum impact. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Kent Forss: Hi, my name is Kent Forss. I live, I'm the neighbor that is being encroached upon at 3850 Maple Shores Drive. First of all I'd like to say I respect my neighbor's right to build. I have no qualm about that whatsoever. I would like him though to stay within the legal limit of the building codes, which is within the 10 foot setback. We do have a porch that's right in the back there and so this structure would look, their window would look 15 feet away from our porch. So that's a concern for me. Any time you start cramming houses less than the 10 foot minimum setback, then you're going to be decreasing the property values of the adjacent homes so that is a concern of mine as well. In addition we have a cedar shake shingle and so do they and with the ignitability and combustibility of the two shingles, we're by 20 feet, I consider that a significant enough for us but by dropping it down to 13 feet, I think it's creating a fire hazard as well. And the last thing I'd want for his family or my family would have a fire spread from one house to another. So I do have concerns about that. Again I think a 10 foot setback is minimal enough. We're both approaching the 10 foot setback right now so to try and cram another bedroom in-between our houses seems to me not to make sense. I feel for them. I'd like to see them have some workable solution. We ended up having our baby sleep in a bassinet in our bedroom with us for the first five months. Again, I don't know if the north side of the house where right next to their master bathroom would be appropriate or not. But again I'd like to see a solution for them. I'd like to be a good neighbor but on the other hand I wish our rights weren't being violated as well. Thank you. Peterson: Anyone else? Seeing none. Close? Blackowiak moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners, thoughts on this one? Kind: Mr. Chairman, I have a question of staff. On page 3 of the staff report it talks about, there's another option available. What is that other option that's available? I couldn't quite figure it out with the following paragraph. Kirchoff: The other option is to build it on the south side. They could put an addition on the south side of the home. Kind: Because I was reading that next paragraph and I couldn't their other option in there. Totally lost. Peterson: Other discussion? Joyce: I was going to say, I like the looks of it but I'm not going to. Conrad: I think this applicant deserves an explanation. I think he's got a good, or I would do what he's doing. Again based on our ordinance, we do have to look at the hardship and there are other alternatives and again, if we don't play to the ordinance. You look for the rationale. Apply this to other people and I can't come up with a rationale so I think staff report is fair. The 4 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 applicant would be concemed with that but I think the staff report is fair because I couldn't transpose this to other people. Other houses. And that's unfortunate but that's what we have to do. Peterson: Motion please. Conrad: Well I'd make the motion that the Planning Commission denies Variance #99-7 for a 6.7 foot variance from the 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of an addition based upon the findings presented in the staff report. Kind: Second. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Kind: I'd just like to add to Ladd's comments. To me it's sort of goes without saying. I don't know if it's official in the ordinance but that you need to have the agreement of your neighbor that is being encroached upon and since the neighbor opposes this I would never approve it. Conrad: I would never put it on the neighbor. Conrad moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission denies Variance #99-7 for a 6.7 foot variance from the 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of an addition based on the findings presented in the staff report and the following: 1. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship to warrant a variance. 2. The applicant has a reasonable opportunity to construct an addition within the required setbacks. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: DON GRAY REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE 30 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION AND GARAGE ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 226 CHAN VIEW. Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff. Seeing none, would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission? If so, please come forward and state your name and address please.. May I have a motion and a second for a public hearing? Joyce moved, Kind seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward. Seeing none, a motion and a second to close. Blackowiak moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners, your thoughts? Kind: I like the idea of improving our older homes. As I said before. Peterson: So noted. Anyone else? Conrad: Yeah, looks good. Peterson: A motion and a second please. Kind: I move the Planning Commission approve Variance #99-6 for an 18 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback for the construction of an addition and a 10 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback for the construction of a detached garage based upon the findings presented in the staff report with the following condition number 1. Peterson: Is there a second? Sidney: Second. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman, yes I do have a question. Staff had recommended the garage be moved back. Should that be a condition of approval? Are you basing that on any findings or did you want it a condition? Kirchoff: The recommendation is that a 10 foot variance be granted so they'll have to maintain the 20 foot setback for the garage. Blackowiak: Okay, so that's incorporated in moving the garage back. Kirchoff.' Yep. Blackowiak: Fine, I'm clear on that. Kind moved, Sidney seconded that the Planning Commission approve Variance #99-6 for an 18 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback for the construction of an addition and a 10 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback for the construction of a detached garage based upon the findings presented in the staff report with the following condition: 6 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 The applicant shall submit a survey completed by a licensed land surveyor at the time of building permit application. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: PAT AND JUDY NEUMAN REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE 30 FOOT BLUFF SETBACK AND A VARIANCE FROM THE 25 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD- 4 AND LOCATED ON LOT 4~ BLOCK 4~ CHANHASSEN VISTA (CHIPPEWA CIRCLE). Public Present: Name Address David Segal Judy & Pat Neuman Laurie Clauson Laura Podergois Dennis Karstensen 2220 Cap Code Place, Minnetonka 1654 Portland, St. Paul 751 Chippewa Circle 720 Chippewa Circle 7482 Saratoga Drive Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: ...I assume we'll find out momentarily but does the applicant...? Okay, I'll find out in a few minutes. Other questions of staff?. Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman I have one question. What is the width of the lot right at the very, at the street? The street frontage. Kirchoff: 42 feet. Blackowiak: Okay, that is the 42 at the street. Don't we have a minimum street frontage? Kirchoff: It is 90 feet at the 30 foot setback or in this case a 25 foot setback. On cul-de-sac lots you have to measure back to make sure it's 90 feet at the 30 foot. At the required front yard setback. In this case it's 25 feet for the whole PUD. Blackowiak: Alright and so, and they meet the 25 is what? Kirchoff: If the subdivision would come in today, that's what they would be required to making. Blackowiak: Okay, and does this lot meet that setback is my question? 7 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Kirchoff: Dave, do you have a scale? Blackowiak: It's not to scale? Hempel: It's not to scale. The drawing's been reduced. Kirchoff: No, it does not meet the minimum 90 feet. But again it's a PUD and they may have approved it that way. It looks like it's about 80 feet in width at the 25 foot setback. Blackowiak: Okay, and so you're, are you comfortable then with the size of the lot? Aanenson: Well the lot's existing. What we're looking at now is the standards that were put in place with that subdivision. Applying those standards for that. It's different standards. 15,000 square foot lot with 30 foot setback, front and rear. So what we're looking at is the standards that were put in place for this lot. Was your question for a building for that lot? Blackowiak: Kind of yeah. I mean it's so tiny. At the cul-de-sac. Aanenson: The house sits toward the front of the lot. Blackowiak: I mean just the lot itself is rather small. I guess my question was, are you comfortable with the size of the house on the lot? Kirchoff: Yes we are. It's comparable in size to the neighboring properties. Conrad: And how does the building pad relate to the other neighbors? Kirchoff: You mean in terms of placement? I do have the surveys of the adjacent parcels and I could put that up on the. This is the property that is directly to the south of the subject site. The home is, as you can see, it's shifted to, away from Lot 4. This is the property that is directly to the north of the subject site and they have approximately 15 foot side yard setback so the distance between the two houses would be 25 feet if they were to maintain the 10, which is what they're planning on doing. Peterson: Other questions of staff?. Kind: Condition number 2. Grading shall not take place beyond 10 feet of the foundation. Was it your intention for the entire foundation or just on the bluff side? Kirchoff: That's correct, it should be just on the bluff side. Peterson: If there's no more questions for staff, would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission.9 8 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Pat Neuman: ...we've lived in St. Paul for 20 years and during that time the office that I work at moved to Chanhassen so I've been commuting for the last 4 or 5 years. We have two daughters... The house that we've selected to build on the...two car garage as opposed to a three car garage... Peterson: This item is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward and state your name and address please. Laura Podergois' comments were not picked up on tape. She spoke in opposition to the variance request. Laurie Clauson's comments were not picked up on tape. She spoke in opposition to the variance request. Dennis Karstensen's comments were not picked up on tape. He spoke about when this subdivision was platted and the conservation easement that was put in place around Kerber Pond Park. David Segal's comments were not picked up on tape. He was the developer of this subdivision and spoke to the size and configuration of the lot at the time of platting. Pat Neuman: ...square feet. The second floor, 1,175 for a total of 1,997 square feet. For the most, essentially that's what we're proposing is what we see on the drawing here. This isn't, the builder is saying we'll have to, you know we'll have to accommodate the slope and so forth but basically this is what we're intending to put on the property and like I mentioned before, we did go through and try to find several books that we got out of the library. We went through drawing after drawing trying to find a reasonable house that we could put on the property that was comparable, you know for a family. A family home in the area. And I do, certainly do enjoy the neighborhood and I can understand why the neighbors would not want a house in that location. But then again I can understand why someone that has been paying taxes since the mid 1980's on this piece of property and now is told that well you can't sell it because you can't put a house on it. Well there seems to be a problem there. And another point that I'd like to make is, and it might sound kind of up in the air but basically you know we're all talking about trying to reduce urban sprawl and newer houses going out further and further and consuming farmland. But I think basically in St. Paul at least, what they're trying to do there is trying to utilize the land they have so I think, just my feeling from the staff report also be a part of that larger picture. Peterson: Anyone else? Come back up to the podium, yes. Laurie Clauson: ...giving a variance when the majority should... Peterson: Anyone else? Seeing none, a motion to close. Sidney moved, Kind seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Peterson: Commissioners. Your thoughts on this one. Conrad: ... Kirchoff.' The home design is comparable with those in the surrounding neighborhood. It could have been a different design and it may have alleviated or some of the, what I'm trying to say is, any way the design is put on there, they'll still need a 30 foot bluff setback. There's such a limited buildable area that it's difficult to design a house for this lot. Peterson: Even if you find a smaller footprint... Aanenson: To make the lot buildable it has to be a variance... Joyce: Are the other homes approximately 2,000 square feet...? Kirchoff: Just a visual survey, I'd say yeah. Joyce: About the same square footage? Kirchoff: Basically yes. MaYbe a little larger. Peterson; I'd say this one is smaller than the other ones. Joyce: So we're talking about pitch rather than the style issues. Peterson: Any comments, questions? Entertain a motion. Conrad: A question Mr. Chairman...what's the rationale for that? What are we trying to do? Kirchoff: I'll explain further. On the main level there is a covered porch, or an open porch. And underneath that the applicant, in the rear part of the house, the west part of the house would like to have a deck. With only an 8 foot deck he doesn't get any light in and it's not really useful so he wanted to do another 8 feet so therefore, that's where I got the 16 feet from for the maximum encroachment into the bluff. Conrad: What protects the rest of the bluff...? Kirchoff.' Well, with the shift that staff recommended, the area of the foundation will be minimized that was proposed by the applicant. The applicant had a larger comer of the proposed house into the bluff and with the shift, two small comers of the house will be located in the bluff and actually did make a calculation and as the applicant has proposed, the deck would encroach 17 feet into the bluff and with the shift it was reduced by 1 foot. Conrad: And environmentally what are we saying this is doing? 10 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Kirchoff: Well it is hoped that by eliminating the amount of foundation in the bluff area that there will be less grading into the bluff. Conrad: So staff does not recommend... Aanenson: Well that's always an option. I guess the fact is that it's a lot of record. We have to grant a variance for them to build. The question... The question the way that Alison asked before...not have the bluff ordinance in place. The other homes are enjoying that. This one was penalized by that and...variance comes in, what is the appropriate... Having said that, the applicant is requesting that style home. So that's what we're... Peterson: Other comments or thoughts? Kind: Mr. Chairman I have another question of staff. The two neighboring homes, what are the front setbacks? Are they at the 25? Kirchoff: The home to the north maintains a 25.5 foot front yard setback. And the property to the south maintains a 25.7 foot front yard setback. Peterson: Other questions? If not, may I have a motion. Joyce: I'll make a motion the Planning Commission approves Variance #99-8 for a 5 foot variance from the 25 foot front yard setback and a 30 foot variance from the 30 foot bluff protection setback for the construction of a single family home based upon the findings presented in the staff report, conditions 1 through 5. Condition 2 stating grading shall not take place beyond 10 feet on the bluff side of the house foundation. Peterson: Is there a second? Kind: Second. Peterson: Moving and second, any discussion? Joyce moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission approves Variance #99-8 for a 5 foot variance from the 25 foot front yard setback and a 30 foot variance from the 30 foot bluff protection setback for the construction of a single family home based upon the findings presented in the staff report with the following conditions: The home shall be rotated to the south as shown on the plans prepared by staffto minimize the area of the foundation that encroaches into the bluff. 2. Grading shall not take place beyond 10 feet on the bluff side of the foundation of the home. 3. The lower deck cannot encroach more than 16 feet into the bluff. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted at the time of building permit application for review and approval by the City. o The top of the bluff shall be noted on the survey submitted as part of the building permit application. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: CSM CORPORATION REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOT 1~ (39.49 ACRES)~ BLOCK 2~ CHANHASSEN EAST BUSINESS CENTER INTO 5 LOTS AND VACATION OF EXISTING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ON PROPERTY ZONED IOP~ INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK AND LOCATED SOUTH OF LAKE DRIVE EAST AND WEST OF DELL ROAD~ SOUTHWEST TECH CENTER. Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff. Mr. Chairman I have one. Didn't we see this before? Blackowiak: A1-Jaff: Yes. Blackowiak: So why are we seeing it again? A1-Jaff: They are splitting it. The original application was withdrawn. It actually was never approved by the City Council so it's a dead plat. Blackowiak: But it was effectively the same. A1-Jaff: It was three buildings rather than four new ones. Blackowiak: Okay. AI-Jaff: And what they're doing with this one is reducing the size of the lots, the size of the buildings, adding more office and reducing the warehouse portion. Joyce: Sounds good. Blackowiak: The Eden Prairie, yes I'm sure. And then I didn't see a sidewalk as part of the south side. I know that that was something we had pushed for before and it got dropped. Is there a sidewalk there or is there not one? A1-Jaff.' No there isn't. And we will address that with the site plan. 12 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Blackowiak: Okay, so we don't need to... A1-Jaff: No. Peterson: Other questions of staff?. Seeing none, would the applicant like to address the commission? If so, please come forward. Jon Dietrich: Jon Dietrich, RLK... We are the site plan and landscape architects and civil engineers representing CSM Corporation on the development here known as Southwest Tech Center. With me tonight is the project manager...and we basically will be talking in more detail about the entire site development in two weeks. The reason we are here tonight is to look at the plats so that we can begin that process of review at the County as we're going through the site plan aspect of it so we are here to answer any questions in regards to the plat for...submitted plans to the city. They are reviewing them for the site plan, landscape, grading, utilities. We have already estimated the south, we feel this is an improved plan over what was previously approved, and the plan was approved by City Council previously. There was just a disagreement between the landowners and the developers so it never was consummated and...development did die. Peterson: Any questions of the applicant? Sidney: Yes Mr. Chairman. Do you agree with the conditions stated in the staff report? Jon Dietrich: In terms of all the conditions with the lot lines that have been adjusted, there are numbers that are not quite right so we need to go through each and every one of the conditions and make sure that they are correct and I would like to address those in two weeks. Peterson: May I have a motion and a second for a public hearing please. Joyce moved, Sidney seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward and state your name and address. Seeing none. Joyce moved, Kind seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners, thoughts on this one? Motion and a second please. Sidney: I make the motion that the Planning Commission approves the preliminary plat for Subdivision #99-8 for Southwest Tech Center as shown on the plat received June 4, 1999 with the following conditions 1 through 24. Kind: Second. 13 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Sidney moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Preliminary Plat for Subdivision #99-8 for Southwest Tech Center as shown on the plat received June 4, 1999, with the following conditions: o o o All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. All utility improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates or State Plumbing Codes. Detailed utility plans and specifications shall be submitted in conjunction with final plat approval for staff review and City Council approval. The private utilities will be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or builder shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the City. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations and drainage maps for 10-year and 100-year storm events for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and comply with their conditions of approval. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right-of-way. The easement width shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide depending on pipe depth. Consideration shall also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas. The developer shall be responsible for acquiring any easements outside the plat prior to recording the final plat No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right-of-way. Landscape materials shall not be placed within drainage swales or over utility lines. The applicant may place landscape materials within the drainage and utility easement conditioned upon the applicant entering into an encroachment agreement with the City. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings adjacent to wetlands and storm ponds shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100-year high water level. 14 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 o The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 10. The installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Dell Road is expected in the future. The developer shall be responsible or share the local cost participation of this signal on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in relation to the total traffic volume of Dell Road. Security or other acceptable means to guarantee payment for the developer's share of this traffic signal for the entire development will be required. 11. If importing or exporting of earthwork materials is necessary, a haul route and traffic control plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to construction commencing. 12. All driveway access points onto Lake Drive East shall incorporate the City's industrial driveway apron (Detail Plate No. 5207). 13. Cross access and maintenance agreements with the city shall be Prepared and recorded against Lots 1 and 2 for the city The City shall be included in the use for accessing the regional storm water pond. 14. The existing driveway access to Lot 5 shall be abandoned or reconfigured to accommodate emergency vehicle access. 15. The developer shall be responsible to obtain a temporary construction easement from the property/properties for the storm sewer construction south of Lot 3 in the City of Eden Prairie. 16. The rock construction entrances shall be shown on the Erosion control plans at every construction access point. The rock construction entrances shall be maintained until all disturbed areas are revegetated. All catch basin inlets shall be protected with silt fence, rock filter dikes or hay bales as well. 17. Pedestrian access to and along Lake Drive East shall be incorporated in the site plan design process for each lot. 18. The developer shall review the site conditions prior to construction for existing erosion control problems or damaged streets and utility improvements. Once construction activities commence the developer assumes full responsibility for site conditions and any corrections prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The developer will be responsible for removing the sand deltas in the regional pond and repair the associated erosion problem in conjunction with development of site. 19. Increase berm height along the south property line adjacent to Lots 1 and 2 by three feet. 15 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 20. Park and trail dedication fees to be collected per city ordinance. 21. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 22. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should be dedicated on the final plat for all utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right-of-way. The easement width shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide over the trunk storm sewer line. Consideration shall also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas. 23. The property lines Lots 1 and 2, and Lots 3 and 4, shall be made straight. 24. The proposed Industrial development of 39.39 net developable acres is responsible for a water quality connection charge of $93,957 and a water quantity fee of $88,421. The applicant will be eligible for credit to the water quantity fee based on oversizing the design of the trunk storm sewer system. These fees are payable to the City prior to the City filing the final plat." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Peterson: Second motion and a second please. Kind: I move the Planning Commission approve Vacation #99-2 of the utility and drainage easements over Lots 1 and 2 subject to the following condition number 1. Sidney: Second. Peterson: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Kind moved, Sidney seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Vacation #99-2 of the utility and drainage easements over Lots 1 and 2 subject to the following condition: The applicant shall provide the city with the legal description of the easements proposed to be vacated. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: EDEN TRACE CORPORATION FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO REPLAT LOTS 9 AND 10, BLOCK Ii CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 7TM ADDITION INTO LOTS Iv 2i 3~ BLOCK 1 AND OUTLOTS A AND Bi CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 8TM ADDITION ON PROPERTY ZONED IOPi INDUSTRIAL 16 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 OFFICE PARK. Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff?. Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman, I have a couple. I believe they'll be to you Dave. First of all there is mention of a possible future traffic signal at Lake Drive West and Powers. Do you foresee anything at Lake Drive West and Audubon? And then my second question is the possibility of a daycare on the north side and a large park area on the south side of Lake Drive West, should we be considering a crosswalk of some sort or what kind of provision could there be for safely crossing in the middle of Lake Drive West? Hempel: Mr. Chairman, commissioners. To address the traffic signal issue. The traffic studies.., at the intersection of Audubon Road and Lake Drive West would not meet warrants for installation of a traffic signal. Only at the intersection of Lake Drive West and County Road 17 (Powers Boulevard). To address the crosswalk issue. That's a very valid point. I think we were kind of relying on...parcel on the south side of Lake Drive West...high density apartment type dwellings. To try and coordinate with their access point. Curvature of the road, horizontal and vertical alignment of the road to create a crosswalk area. There is one crosswalk being proposed down by the city park entrance west of the proposed cul-de-sac by the name of Upland Court I believe it is, which is probably in the range of 2 to 3 blocks west of this proposed cul-de-sac that's before you tonight so we can certainly look into the need for an additional crosswalk in that location but I think it would be more realistically looked at when that vacant parcel, the high density gets reviewed in the future. Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. Peterson: Other questions of staff?. Kind: Mr. Chairman I have a question. Piggy backing off of Alison's. Are daycares required Sharmin to have their own play equipment? A1-Jaff.' They're not required by city ordinance, no. Kind: How about State? Aanenson: Don't know. AI-Jaff: I don't know. Kind: I feel like that's a rule. Play school or a preschool that my daughter went to, they were required to have a play structure. It seems like it might fall under the same category. It's worth looking into. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 A1-Jaff: The State, as part of the approval we would require the State to submit in writing approval of the daycare center. So if it's a requirement by the State, I'm sure that they would have to provide it. Kind: Because the demand for going across the street to the public park would be less if the daycare had their own play structure. A1-Jaff: Sure. Blackowiak: I agree but I still think they're going to do it occasionally. Kind: You're right. Blackowiak: A picnic, special... I just don't want, think ahead. Peterson: Other questions of staff?. Kind: I have one more question along the lines of safety for kids. With the railroad tracks being right behind, obviously the fence is really critical. Is there any specific rules against a chain link style fence for instance that could be climbed by small feet? I just want to put that forth as maybe not a good fence for the daycare. Something slippery and with narrow slates that maybe could go through. Something to think about. Peterson: Okay, would the applicant like to address the commission? If so, please come forward and state your name and address please. Just give you a key to city hall. Mark Undestad: Mark Undestad. I'd like to just point out a couple, in your comments Alison on the crosswalk idea. They do, they will take little field trips here and there. The initial industrial park has the trail on the north side of the road. That they would stay on that side until they got up to the park crossing and then at that crosswalk at that time. And they do have an area that.., equipment, swing sets, that kind of stuff on site there. So it's mainly just special field trips that they'll wander off every one and then. That's it, do you have any questions? Peterson: My only comment, I think I give it to you every time but if you can get a copy, a color copy of that prior to the council. It's still a valuable. Any other questions? Thank you. Mark Undestad: Thank you. Peterson: A motion and a second for public hearing please. Blackowiak moved, Sidney seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward and state your name and address please. Motion to close. 18 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Joyce moved, Sidney seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners, comments please. Motion please. Kind: I'll make a motion. I move the Planning Commission approve the preliminary plat for Subdivision #99-9, for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 8th Addition as shown on the plat received June 4, 1999 with the following conditions. 1 through 22. Joyce: Second. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Conrad: Just a bit. I don't catch...pedestrian circulation in here. Was everybody comfortable with that? It raised any issues. Peterson: What did you see that made you uncomfortable? Conrad: Tough time picking it up. No flags raised? Kind: Worth looking again. Al-Jarl: There is a sidewalk... Conrad: And they go where? Just around. Connectivity to anything? A1-Jaff: ... Conrad: And that site, that's okay? Aanenson: You want to see how it relates to the bigger piece? Conrad: Yeah. Yeah, that's really where I'm struggling. Aanenson: We've got the entire parcel. Conrad: So there's really not a circulation flow that we're. Aanenson: It's a cul-de-sac you're worried about, getting down to. Conrad: de-sac. A1-Jaff: Yeah. Not really trying to make a point other than be comfortable with that in this cul- I thought I made it a condition of approval. 19 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Hempel: Mr. Chairman, there is a condition that the cul-de-sac street have a sidewalk installed. Along 8th Street. It's 21. Page 19. It's of the plat. Preliminary plat. Conrad: That's in which one? Aanenson: 21. Peterson: Page 19. Other comments? It's been moved and seconded. Kind moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat for Subdivision #99-9 for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 8th Addition as shown on the plat received June 4, 1999, with the following conditions: The final plat shall revise the cul-de-sac street design to include a 30-foot radius at the point where the street connects to the cul-de-sac on the southwesterly comer of the cul- de-sac. The developer shall submit street names to the Public Safety for review and approval. The final street name shall be listed on the final plat and construction documents. o All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. All side slopes in excess of 3 to 1 shall be restored with erosion control blankets after site grading is completed. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The street shall be constructed in accordance with the city's urban industrial street section. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. All private streets/driveways shall be constructed to support a minimum of 7- ton per axle design weight in accordance with the City Code 20-1118 "design of parking stalls and drive aisles. o All driveway access points shall incorporate the City's Industrial Driveway Apron Detail Plate No. 5207. o The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post- developed stormwater calculations for 100-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basin, and/or creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to 20 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 o I0. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and comply with their conditions of approval. No berming shall be permitted within the city's right of way. Landscaping may be permitted subject to staff review and approval. Street and utility improvements located within the public street right-of-way upon completion will become City maintained and owned. Individual sewer and water services through each lot shall be privately owned and maintained. Building permits will be required from the City's Building Department for the private utility portion of the project. Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated over the public utility lines located outside of the right-of-way on the final plat. Depending on the depth of the utilities, the minimum drainage and utility easement width shall be 20 feet wide. Consideration for access routes shall also be incorporated in the easement width. The developer shall escrow with the City a financial guarantee for a share of the local cost participation based on traffic generated from the site for a future traffic signal at the intersection of Lake Drive West and Powers Boulevard. The cost of the traffic signal is not known at this time. Preliminary estimates between the City and County may be used for an security escrow. Driveway access points to the lots shall be limited to the interior street system and not Lake Drive West. Access to Lots 1,2 and 3, Bk. 1 shall be reviewed by the city on an individual basis as site plans are submitted. Stormwater ponds must have side slopes of 10:1 for the first ten feet at the normal water level and no more than 3:1 thereafter or 4:1 throughout for safety purposes. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. The developer shall petition the City to vacate the drainage and utility easements dedicated over Lots 9 and 10, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition, prior to recording the final plat. 21 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. The developer shall be responsible for adjustments to existing infrastructure impacted by site improvements. Park and trail dedication fees to be collected per city ordinance. The applicant shall submit a boulevard tree landscape plan for city approval. The plan shall list location, species and size of materials. The lot frontage for lot 2 shall be increased to a minimum of 60 feet. One ground low profile business sign is permitted per lot. The area of the sign may not exceed 80 square feet and a height of 8 feet. Also, one wall mounted sign per business shall be permitted per street frontage. The total display area shall not exceed 15% of the total area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted. No sign may exceed 90 square feet. All signage must meet the following criteria: a. All businesses shall share one monument sign per lot. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument standards in the sign Ordinance. b. Wall signs are permitted on no more that 2 street frontages. c. All signs require a separate permit. d. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and add an architectural accent to the building. e. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights. f. No illuminated signs within the development may be viewed from the residential section south of the site. g. Back-lit individual letter signs are permitted. h. Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit will be permitted on the sign. i. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site. A detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting, acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. A sidewalk shall be extended along A Street. Fire Inspector conditions: a. All the post indicator valves going into the building must have tamper protection. 22 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 bo Please refer to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention policies for site and building requirements for plans to be issued to the Building Department." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Peterson: Go back to site plan review. Is there a motion please? Blackowiak: I'll recommend the Planning Commission approves Site Plan Review (499-14 for a daycare, office/warehouse building as shown on the site plan received June 4, 1999, subject to the following conditions and those would be 1 through 21. Kind: Second. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Blackowiak moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Review #99-14 for a daycare, office/warehouse building as shown on the site plan received June 4, 1999, subject to the following conditions: Grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans shall be submitted to staff for review and approval by to the City Council consideration of the site plan. The applicant shall work with staff in revising westerly curb radii at the driveway entrance to accommodate fire apparatus vehicles Detailed storm drainage calculations for a 1 O-year, 24-hour storm event shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Installation of the private utilities throughout the site will require building permits through the City's Building Department. o The proposed driveway access shall incorporate an industrial driveway apron and pedestrian ramps on the plans in accordance with City detail plate 5207 o The applicant will need to provide financial security in the amount of $2,500 to guarantee the boulevard restoration, and erosion control measures. Security may be in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow which will be returned upon satisfactorily completing the project. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc mulch or wood fiber blanket or sod in accordance with the approved plans within two weeks the completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 All utility improvements shall be construction in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates and/or state plumbing codes. o All private streets/driveways shall be constructed to support a minimum of 7-ton per axle design weight in accordance with City Code 20-1118. 10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agency, i.e. Watershed District. 11. No berming is permitted within the City's right-of-way. Landscaping improvements may be permitted subject to staff review and approval. 12. Site plan approval shall be contingent upon final plat approval of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 8th Addition. 13. The lowest floor or opening elevation of the building shall be a minimum of two feet above the flood elevation, the adjacent wetland or stormwater ponding area. 14. The applicant shall be responsible for any adjustments to the existing sanitary sewer manholes that are impacted with development of the site. 15. The applicant shall modify the design of the building by introducing new architectural elements. 16. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. The applicant shall provide a detailed sign plan for review and approval. 17. The applicant shall provide a meandering berm with landscaping surrounding the parking lot. The height of the berm shall be between 3 to 4 feet. 18. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required for landscaping. 19. Environmental Resource Specialist conditions: ao Increase plantings for buffer yard area in order to meet ordinance requirements. Increase parking lot trees by nine in order to meet ordinance requirements. The applicant shall submit a revised landscaping plan that shows shrub quantities, sod or seed limits, landscaping for the daycare play area, and details of the landscaped areas and paving near the building. 20. Building Official conditions: ao The daycare facility must be separated from an adjoining office, warehouse or manufacturing use by a one-hour fire-resistive occupancy separation. 24 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 The building owner and or their representative meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. 21. Fire Marshal conditions (Refer to attachment #2 for detailed policies): ao Regarding the note referencing all trash and recycling to be inside the building it must be in compliance with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #20-1991. (Copy enclosed.) b. Submit utility plans for review and approval. c. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of fire lane signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to Section 904.1, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. d. Submit radius turn dimensions to the City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. Pursuant to Section 9002.2.2.3, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. e. On the north side of the building provide approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for options available. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29-1992. (Copy enclosed.) go Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department policy regarding fire department notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #04- 1991. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Peterson: Next motion. Conditional Use Permit please. Kind: I move the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit #99-2 to allow a daycare center in an IOP District subject to the following conditions 1 through 3, and I would like to suggest that number 3 specify a chain link fence is not acceptable. Peterson: Is there a second? Kind: You can take that out if you want. Joyce: ...type of fence. Sidney: I think that's something that can be rectified by them. Kind: Leave that out. Just 1 through 3. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Blackowiak: They have that chain link fence with that slate stuff in it. Kind: They can come out.., small feet with those chain link fences. Adults can't climb them but little people can. Conrad: Did you leave that out of your motion? Kind: I can leave it out of my motion. Conrad: Second. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Other discussion? Kind moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit #99-2 to allow a daycare center in an IOP District subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with conditions of site plan and plat approval. 2. Obtain all applicable state, county and city licenses. 3. Show type of fence and landscaping for the outdoor play area. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: CHANHASSEN PROPERTIES~ LLC~ REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION AND SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING CHANHASSEN BOW AND FILLY'S BAR AND REPLACE IT WITH EIGHT ADDITIONAL THEATERS WITH A SEATING CAPACITY OF 1~400 SEATS~ WITH AN AREA OF 30~000 SQ. FT. AND 9~000 SQ. FT. OF RETAIL SPACE~ VARIANCES FOR SIGNAGE~ HARD SURFACE COVERAGE~ SUBDIVISION CREATING LOTS WITH NO DIRECT FRONTAGE ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY~ HWY 5 OVERLAY DISTRICT PITCHED ROOF ELEMENT REQUIREMENT AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS ON PROPERTY ZONED BG~ GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT~ LOCATED NORTH OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND PAULY DRIVE; EAST OF MARKET BOULEVARD; AND SOUTH OF WEST 78TM STREET. Public Present: Name Address John D. Rice 551 West 78th Street 26 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Ron Krank Bob Copeland Gerald Rummel KKE Architects 5300 Highland Greens, Suite 200, Bloomington Representing Chanhassen Bowl Sharmin AI-Jaff and Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: A couple questions for you Kate. On the impervious surface. I mean I don't recall seeing 95% before. That's an overwhelming number when you look at a percentage standpoint. Have we don't other similar projects with that high of a ratio? Aanenson: The only place would be more downtown. Medical Arts. Again this is a unique thing to do. You'd be actually adding landscaping to it but they are doing, providing additional trees and they are providing additional green space but they are providing additional landscape. There will be some parking lot... Peterson: You referenced a couple of the variances and I was trying to pull all of them out that we will be affecting with this. Over and above the ones you just mentioned, are there additional ones that you can see that we can see in the summary of really what We are granting. Aanenson: It's on the, Sharmin has it on the front page of that cover proposal. The non street frontage signs. Again, because it's an anomaly, it's a theater. It's a different type use. We would support that. Cinema in itself is, the only one in town. ~ Peterson: Based on the ones you mentioned? Aanenson: Yeah. There was one other one and that was the parking drive aisle. Where the Hoisington-Koegler study included an unobstructed drive aisle entrance going to Pauly's Drive, which we want to have the continuity so not all traffic will be exiting out onto Market. It gives you...to go out the other way onto Great Plains. We see that as an advantage, especially if we'll be doing shared parking. Not congesting that intersection. The engineering department's recommendation to have an unobstructed drive aisle. What that does is it takes away approximately 50 parking. Hempel: I believe 37. Aanenson: Excuse me, 37 parking stalls. So that's some of the loss so it would be our recommendation to have it unobstructed. The applicant is proposing, was showing the Hoisington-Koegler study to leave the drive. They would prefer to leave the parking in the drive aisle and slow the traffic down. Peterson: A couple more questions. Aanenson: That's one of the variances. The drive aisle was, or... Peterson: Is there a style Sharmin that, on the recommendation you say should the Planning 27 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Commission recommend. Normally you're more straight forward in asking for recommend approval. Is there some hidden agenda, Freudian slip perhaps? Aanenson: No, I think the conclusion speaks for itself. We're saying, this is an entertainment complex. There's been a lot of discuss on the council. I think the decision before the planning commission tonight is, there's been a lot of discussion and what includes the entertainment district. The Vision 2002 looked at what constitutes the downtown. What should be a proponent of the entertainment, in the downtown district. Certainly entertainment is a component. It's different than retail.., for this is you're actually providing a different service and that is...different and it adds certainly a lot of energy to the downtown. Certainly there's been a lot of discussion internally in the staff. The 8 versus 16, but the proposal before us tonight and for the job of the planning commission is to say does this meet the standards. You feel strongly about this project that you think it's appropriate to give those variances because you think this is going to be an asset and it's a good design to the, and you would support it. I guess that's what we're saying. That's kind of how that language came about. Just to sum up to say, if you feel strongly about the design of this building and the project itself and what it can bring to the community, then by doing that you are accepting the fact that it needs variances to make it happen. That was our attempt to explain that. Peterson: One more question. Pedestrian flow. Trying to get an idea of, obviously there's a main entrance to the cinema but if there going to be a main exit over where the old cinema entrance is? Parking? I think it's a pretty substantial difference between your entrance and exit and that affects the parking and then also whether you can address or the applicant, traffic flow in that alley way. Is that all pedestrian? Or is that going to be garbage units in there? Kind of help me understand that if you know. Aanenson: ...let the architect... Peterson: So the intent, are there entrances to the retail in the back? Aanenson: Service entrance, yes. Peterson: A strong likelihood that that will... A1-Jaff: There's a condition of approval that nothing can be placed within that 10 foot corridor. Aanenson: Building code. Peterson: Chances are it will though. Other questions of staff?. Joyce: I'm going to piggy back on what Craig was just talking about. Or mention about the alternative parking, and I think we have a nice little, well I wouldn't call them alley ways. A street on the east side of the building. Are those garbage enclosures are all, I mean how old is this? The garbage, 2-3 years old. And the garbage enclosures, the doors are smashed up. Today there was stuff all over the street. So I'm saying, I'm really, I think this alley idea is a beautiful 28 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 idea but if it's going to be, you know if you're going to have containers at the end of it and people not taking care of it, it's just not going to last. I don't know, I don't have a recommendation as to how, where we're going to put the trash but I think that's a concern. Aanenson: The trash is not in the alley. It's to the north...Country Suites has a sitting area. They've got a pool and window...but it has been revised since the... Joyce: So you're saying the enclosure, that's where I'm trying to figure out this flow. Maybe I should just wait for the applicant to come through but my question is how people are going to walk back and forth between there. AI-Jaff: ... Joyce: But you can walk all the way through that alley, past the trash enclosures into the hotel? A1-Jaff: Yes. Peterson: Other questions? Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. Currently Southwest Metro either, I'm assuming they lease spaces or use parking spaces. What is their...at that location should a proposal of this size go through? Because it appears that they're counting all the Southwest Metro parking spots as well in their parking, you know their number which I don't, to me it doesn't rationally follow. Aanenson: Well they're non peak times. On Saturday and Sunday. And also 5:00. When we did the count last April, it disburses quickly between 5:00 and 6:00 so it will not be a conflict as commuters... Sharmin can talk about the lease and how many parking stalls they have and have reconfigured. Blackowiak: Yeah, I mean it just looks, what's the future? I mean does Southwest Metro plan to, I mean they built that little. AI-Jaff: They plan on staying there until they can find another location. And even if they move, it would, they would move, or vacate a portion of the parking stalls. They wouldn't vacate the entire area. Right now with this proposal what they will end up doing is reconfiguring their parking spaces. It would remain in the same overall area but the area immediately next to the building will be dedicated to the retail and movie theaters and as you reach the outskirts of the parking lot, that's where Southwest Metro would end up parking. Blackowiak: Okay. Peterson: Other questiOns? Sidney: Yes Mr. Chair. Question for Sharmin. Condition 19. You asked that all new painted, precast building material shall be upgraded to a better material. What do you mean by better? 29 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Al~Jaff.' Right now what you have on the existing movie theaters is precast and it's painted and we've heard numerous negative comments regarding that material. It could be upgraded into... Sidney: More texture is that? A1-Jaff: Something with more texture. Something that's more appealing than what you have on the existing precast building. Conrad: Do you like the design? Aanenson: It's a large building. A lot of discussion was held about trying to make the building look like one theater. The theaters, retail space look different. Than going back to...kind of reduce the scale. Comparing the 50,000 square feet, comparing it to Target. 100,000... It's going to be imposing so some of the. . .make it look like it's not one building. Some of the.., as far as the material use on the existing building. How do you make some of the same... It's going to walk and talk like a theater in scale but... Conrad: In your staff report the window issue. In your recommendations you resolved your concerns with the architect? Aanenson: Yeah, I think for the most part. We went through a lot of iterations on the sign. ...material and tried to, if going through the attachments... I think that's what happened on the first page. What was done wasn't what we understood...and modify that which has been accomplished. The green line running along the top, there was a lot of discussion on that...up or down the scale of the building. Little details like that. Then we go back to the...expertise on that. Conrad: So you're comfortable? Aanenson: Well I think we can certainly resolve... I think if you listen to their explanation... Conrad: Do you like the marquee? Is the marquee as spectacular as we'd like it to be? And maybe that's me and not you. Is it. Aanenson: Again that's been a moving target too. I think we're getting close. Conrad: I'd rely on you to tell me. It should be spectacular, and again I'm probably the Lone Ranger here. It should be spectacular. It should be very good. Aanenson: Yep. A1-Jaff: It will be a very festive look and that's the look we would like to achieve. Conrad: Some things that I don't understand here and I've got to go back to where Craig started 30 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 on the impervious surface. Your staff report, did you change condition 14 Kate? Aanenson: Correct. Conrad: To 95% Aanenson: Right. That's what's out there now. It's all, pretty much all. They are taking out some additional green by providing the unobstructed drive aisle. That takes out additional. Conrad: Market Square impervious surface? Aanenson: 55% Festival... Conrad: Condition 6. You're addressing the parking issue backwards by limiting the seat size? Or maybe that's forward. Aanenson: No. No, actually we modified that condition to say that we are recommending that but you have to accept that there will be times when there will not be enough parking. And that's why I showed the overall, there may be places that you'll have to walk further to get there, but. Conrad: What is the parking capacity that you're comfortable with? A1-Jaff: Seating capacity. Conrad: Now I'm off. Give me the parking capacity. Aanenson: I think we're relying on, we've got a standard. Is that the best number 4? 4 per. Al-Jarl: One stall per 4 seats. Aanenson: That's the number. Is that the best number? That we allow proof of parking. That's what this... 1 per 5.9 seats. We're saying that number...and it may be, they've been trying to track what the use is. Again, going by the Hoisington-Koegler study with the shared parking, that was that 525 number so we're not that far off. We may be again...with unobstructed drive aisle. Conrad: And they're providing 487? Aanenson: Correct. Conrad: Are there opportunities in softening that parking area that we have? Aanenson: That's what we talked about with the applicant. You know we want to make sure that it is pedestrian friendly. Have street furniture. Have an easy access. If you're going to walk, you've got a ways to go across the parking lot and to make it human and you're going to have 31 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 kids walking through that parking lot. Conrad: theater? A1-Jaff: Conrad: Yeah, once you get there you're fine. And what do they walk on? Are there sidewalks that are natural that get you to the I don't see them. There's a sidewalk that surrounds the theater itself. Aanenson: We talked about...then we end up giving away additional parking but that...talk about stripe and painted walking paths. Conrad: So they have proposed more vehicular use, landscape area than is required based on. They've put more green space in the parking lot than our ordinance requires? A1-Jaff.' No. Aanenson: They're putting in additional landscaping. There's minimal there now .... there is a sidewalk Ladd that's going. Conrad: Yeah, show me that. Aanenson: Here's a sidewalk... AI-Jaff.' It's an extension of the sidewalk by the bus shelter. Conrad: Okay. So that's on Pauly Drive. Aanenson: Right, so if you get off the bus and you want to walk that. Or walk to the bus. Conrad: And your chart on page 8, it's vehicular use landscape area. Required 8,144. Proposed 9,150. Help me with that. That's what I would interpret the green space in the parking lot. They're exceeding our ordinance. Aanenson: It is to fit the buffer yard to your parking lot... Conrad: Can I tell that staff feels uncomfortable with the interior landscaping in the parking lot or is staff comfortable with it? The staff report says increase, and I'm not sure, that's all it says. To meet ordinance. And I'm not looking for the ordinance. Aanenson: Right. And that's when I say that they're putting additional landscape and going over towards Market. Green space...the sidewalk along the south side of the building. Conrad: Pauly Drive. The vision for extension through the Dinner Theater, is it, what is the vision for Pauly Drive? How does the rest of it play out? I probably should know but I don't. 32 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Hempel: Mr. Chairman, the Hoisington-Koegler report showed one alternative. Basically running parallel to the railroad tracks. North of the railroad tracks. I think the applicant is, through negotiations with the Dinner Theater, we'll maybe let him address that future. Conrad: Is it an asset right now or is just a way to get out of the parking? Is it just a second way to unload this parking lot at peak time? Hempel: Essentially yes. Conrad: Is it easy to get, who owns the right-of-way for that right now? The balance to the Dinner Theater property. Would it have to be condemned or is it, who owns it? Hempel: Who owns it right now, I believe the Dinner Theater owns it and the applicant probably will address this but I believe that he would be negotiating with. Conrad: Is that a condition of approval? Hempel: Yes it is. Conrad: That's all. Peterson: I'm starting to feel as though, I think it may be good for us to go onto the applicant presentation if there are no other specific questions. Hearing none, would the applicant like to address the commission? If so, please come forward and state your name and address please. Ron Krank: Good evening again. My name is Ron Krank. You've probably seen me here many times through the years. And you probably have seen me here with this project, which we've been working on for the last year, year and a half. We are very aware this is a very important property and project in your community. We are aware of that through dialogue we've had with the staff. Through the past history that we've studied and numerous discussions with a lot of people in the community. We know that this is a very important entryway to the site so as such we appreciate the fact that staff has spent a great deal of time with us and they have given us a great deal of direction and we've tried to be responsive to that and frankly we feel that we really have, I hope Mr. Conrad, this will be a spectacular project. That is our goal. We want this to be a project by which you can measure other projects in the community and tell them to look at what we've been able to accomplished. I'm going to show you some pictures here in a minute of projects that we have designed. Similar scope. Similar character. Similar importance. Give you an idea of the kind of care and quality that we're talking about in terms of proportions, materials, detailing, signage, canopies. All the things that are so important here. But those are other communities and we just want you to know that we have walked the streets here. We have looked at the details of the surrounding buildings which we have tried to use in terms of bringing some of the historical character and detail and main street theme and character that you have in your community. You're a very charming community. I know you and many others before you have put a lot of effort into that and we're here to tell you that our program, dictated to us by our 33 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 client, as well as the city, has been through a really excellent job with this project. We also are aware of the past history and that the building that's there right now hasn't necessarily met your expectations originally. We were not a part of that. Can't comment on that. All we can do is tell you we're taking this existing building and we're doing a lot to it to change it's character, it's quality, the detailing. Everything we possibly can to change it so that it will tie into what we're proposing and be a better building than it is. We're basically in agreement with most of the staff report. There's some minor details and some things that we'd like to bring to your attention. And I'd like to maybe begin by showing you some photographs, ifI can use this and if it will work. Projects that are very similar in quality and character of what we're proposing here. It's very hard of course, even though it's a large scale elevation, to really get the three dimensional character so if you would indulge me, I have nine photographs I'd like to show. Is it possible to zoom in? This project is in Golden Valley. It's called Golden Valley Commons. It's at the intersection of Winnetka Avenue and Highway 55. It's about 43,000 square foot project.., coffee shop. Small restaurant...and it truly is a gathering area. Even though it's small, we hear from people that they will travel great distances just to go there because of the environment. And because of the design and that's what we're trying to achieve here in terms of the character we're proposing. This is another view of that. This is a little closer detail. Gives you an idea of the kind of streetscape that we provided there and what we intend to provide also in this project that we're doing here in this community. Showed in the plan. What you see here are some roof details. We have some peaked roofs. Metal roofs. There's again some awnings. They're textured with sidewalk. There's street furniture and that's the general character again of what we're trying to achieve. Next project that I want to show you is a project called the Plymouth Town Center. This is on Highway 55, near the Plymouth City Hall. It's a small project. Only about 15,000 square feet and it has an Applebee's. It is a double loaded restaurant and small shops and it serves a lot of...Large Cub Foods across in that area. This is a view of it at night time. We think it's spectacular. We do pay very careful attention to lighting. Not just lighting of the parking lot but lighting within and lighting...building and copings and other locations on the building. This is a photograph of a project called Plymouth. i. Also in Plymouth. When you go past City Hall on Highway 55. View of the sidewalk and...architectural sidewalk with brick.., and concrete rock face... Again we have a roof form, architectural... Another shot of that. A building that undulates several feet...the roof height varies somewhat and this is a view of it at night. You can get an idea of...internal proportions and details and things of that sort. So this is the character that we're trying to achieve and we believe that the project we're proposing here is going to have, is similar to kind of Main Street schematic here with a...give you more information about those. In terms of the plan, there was some questions on that the alley way or walkway between the cinema and retail building, this is just a portion of it but remember there is a walkway and that's between the two buildings. 10 feet wide. Required by code. The cinema has screens or theaters on this side here. They have to have a second exit. There's a required exit. You cannot block it. The Fire Department would issue a citation. It can't be blocked. There are service doors. Trucks are expected to either park on the side or in front because these are very small shops and you would service through the front or through the, call this an alley way. An arch and columns which staff recommended on the side... It has to be nice. You can't have trash. You can't have it because the building code requires, the fire marshal require it. We're not going to let it happen. That's why we have an enclosed roofed over, trash enclosed area. On the other side of the buildings so anybody in the area can go out the front door or the 34 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 back door down there and dump their trash. That exposure has an overhead door so that a truck can come up, back up to it. Open the door. Take their trash out and close it. Somebody that wants to put trash in there will have a manned door and at the end of this corridor where... So hopefully that answers your questions in terms of what that's all about. Another question was on the side of the building, the side facing the, this would be the west side. I think there's just some misunderstanding what the material is. The existing building up to this point...precast concrete. The rest of the building...is all masonry. Concrete block with material added to it. Brick, drivit, brick, concrete block. A beige which I'm showing you on some of these details. This is also masonry with drivit over it. This is, it's hard to read. There are so many things happening out here. We can understand that. I have to look at this continually myself frankly to be able to tell you where all the pieces are. It starts here with the existing cinema. You might recall that this is all like fairly flat...is what's flat. We're taking that surface. We're adding to it. Columns that are a little different location than you see now. We feel the proportions to be changed a little bit. These are forged projections. We're adding a drivit cap which right here is a stucco like material that allows you to do a lot with it. So we're creating this dentil kind of detail. We're taking existing roof flashing and moving it out so that we can in effect have the same detail. It will be a dark green or having the coping underneath it or the horizontal band. We're having dentil, this...in-between will be set back in probably a couple inches set back in from that space and then the brick beyond that. There's some comments in the report that these should be 12 inches out. I have to disagree with that because here's what happens. We're starting here with a comer...flashing. It comes down three steps. 2 inches is what we have there now. Also we...detail on the building to the west of us which has a hair salon and coffee shop. It's the same detail, same proportion...steps in. If we then take that, we're out 6 inches at the top. Come back to the stucco, the drivit, back 2 inches and then 2 inches more to the brick and then...if we make that 12 inches high...I think it's going to be just huge and...so I show you these piCtures of other projects because that, they just have to trust us. We're not saving any money here by doing this. We just want it to look right and our opinion is, if we had...dentils sticking out...just way too much and we want to call attention to the building with pedestrian access. All this nice detail...provide here. So that's one...we would have a diverge from the staff. Secondly, a very, very minor but staff has indicated in the report the...and then recessed in. Wood window and the...about 4 inches projecting out... I think what you saw in the other details, in photographs we showed you, we can do it in rock face block to give the same texture as the rest of the, the old part of the building. We can do it in brick to match the soldier courses of the brick we're doing elsewhere. To me that's the right detail and again, that's what we would recommend very strongly as opposed to what we believe is what we're being directed to have in stone... If it's just meant that they're supposed to recess these.., give a sense of scale. You walk by. It just kind of feels right. That also is how we lined up the base of the windows with the 18 and the 24 inches wide. We called it field brick but we're really saying it's the field, the background of brick that is going to represent most of all of this new building except where we have drivit accents. On the existing portion of the cinema, the remaining, the existing precast will be...this brown color to match as close as we can to match the brick so that we'll have the same feeling here and here where we're building the new building to add brick, to make it out of brick as well as this area. And then we're proposing some accent brick so it will be soldier and/or roll off portions in various points of the building. And that's the kind of detail that continues on obviously around the side of the building or we continue to do the same thing. Have a soldier course here. A iow 35 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 lot course there and then we have a series of different awnings that we encourage flexibility and innovation with the various details and do some things that...given that it works with the general colors we have. And this is the colors that we're proposing for the drivit. These services the upper band. It's there and also here and here. Now what we've done with those details with the band on top of the building is try to lower... We want people to realize...that's why we have taken that and that's why we have these various levels of materials. That's why we track this line down by having the dark base and a lighter band and same thing here. And of course this is a transitional element in the middle. We don't need the height all the way to the top. We're doing it as a transition. The lower portion of the existing building which is not... Anyway, we'll just label it. It's intended, this is the original, new precast. We're not using any new precast anywhere...Otherwise we concur with staff and... Peterson: Questions of the applicant? Joyce: Yeah I had two, just a quick question. You're disagreeing with the staff on the dentil block and I'm sorry, the staff is suggesting a projection of one foot and you're suggesting? Ron Krank: I'm suggesting that it is, well this is a section of the building here. That dentil block is 2 inches beyOnd the face of the material...so we come down from this...we've got three steps. Each one which are metal and...so we're already 6 inches down. Then we come vertically down to this dentil block. Then we come back 2 more inches to a 4 inch column and then that retums to the wall so it's hard to describe except that I know what we're doing here. Everything is 2 inches from the next surface except the column is 4 inches up. I'm just concerned sticking up 12 inches is just over power and the first thing you look at is the roof detail. Aanenson: Can I ask a question of what's out there today on the cinema? As far as articulation on that top. That's our concern. It's not enough. Ron Krank: ...metal flashings... Peterson: I'm getting more confused the more we talk. Aanenson: ... Bob Copeland made a comment from the audience. Peterson: Other questions? Sidney: Questions for the applicant. I guess I still am bothered by the painted precast... I'm one who has a large aversion to it. Large spaces of painted precast concrete. Bob Copeland: The reason we chose not to is...because it is concrete. It's not falling. We do intend of course to go over... Sidney: I guess I'd suggest that as something like personally I would think it'd be much more 36 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 appealing...putting the two buildings together. You know the old and the new rather than... Peterson: Okay. Other questions? Kevin? Conrad: The vision for the alley way between the cinema and retail, is that really not a pedestrian friendly corridor? Would you consider blocking that off'?. What's the code for that? There may be another way to... them out. The applicant's comments from the audience were not picked up on tape. Conrad: ...detailing is back there...I mean to the front. This diagram is labeled concrete sidewalk through the parking. Is that just the island? Other than in front of the marquee? Ron Krank: Yes. Conrad: Right in front of your main entrance you've got some islands it looks like. Ron Krank: ... Conrad: And what's the idea of the horizontal sidewalk that you have? Is that really functional or is, what are you trying to accomplish there? Are you trying to focus people on that to get them through the center? Sidewalk. Ron Krank: ... Conrad: Okay, Pauly Drive is, okay it's in there. And the extension to the east of Pauly Drive is where? Where does it exit? Ron Krank: ... Conrad: In peak periods you're asking for, the report says that based on other municipalities you may need 745 stalls here basically. Almost 300 stalls short so where are those people parking and how are they getting into the theater? Ron Krank: ... Conrad: But it's such a disparity. And I think we would endorse what you're saying. We're trying to do that here. I don't see that many pedestrians walking. You're so far off. How can you comfort, you're so far off. We're not talking about 20 stalls or 50. We're talking about hundreds and how can we, how can I. I don't know where the planning, the rest of them are but how can I say this is good planning? How can you sell us on that, and it's not new urbanism. That's... Ron Krank: ... 37 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Blackowiak: I'll piggy back on that too Mr. Chairman. You've been in operation for two years but retail...buildings is relatively new. How can you assure us that their needs won't increase at the same time yours do...further compound the whole parking problem. Ron Krank: ... Peterson: Tough one. Other questions of the applicant? Sidney: One I was thinking, you don't show an east elevation for the existing cinema. Ron Krank: The east eleVation, right now it is precast with some brick tiers. It will be our intention to keep that. It's sort of an alley way in effect. Concrete block I think on the Frontier Building on their side. It'd be our intention to paint that so it ties in with the front of the building. Sidney: You know I was going to say. But I guess I'd suggest you have that for city council as well. Peterson: I have a question for you. On the west elevation, there's some overhead doors. Now is that for the trash? Ron Krank: Yes. Peterson: And on the north elevation where you simply have block down the alley way. Where does that wall come in, what's that made out of'?. Earlier you said you wanted the alley way all the way through, yet on this side, the north elevation there's some kind of small... Aanenson: Actually that's the... Peterson: More questions? Kind: I have a question about the trash enclosure. Is it totally enclosed on the top? Ron Krank: Yes. Kind: So odors will emit or anything like that? Ron Krank: ... Kind: And Kevin I think spoke to the fact that these doors tend to be left open all the time, and I was over at Houlihan's too. Their trash enclosure doors are always open. Is there any assurance that those will always be closed, because they're on a pretty prominent front, that west frontage. And they tend to be left open I'm guessing just based on history of other places. Bob Copeland: ...that's their job. They're supposed to do it... 38 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Kind: Could it be put on the north elevation along the side of the retail so that you're not seeing if the doors are open? Ron Krank: ... Peterson: If no additional questions, thank you for your time. Is there a motion and a second for public hearing please. Blackowiak moved, Kind seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This item is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward. John Rice: My name is John Rice. I'm an attorney here in Chanhassen. I'm the attorney for Bloomberg Companies Incorporated. I have my office at 551 West 78th Street in the Frontier Building. I'm here on behalf of Bloomberg Companies Incorporated. They request that the Planning Conunission adopt and approve and recommend that this project be approved with two exceptions to the recommendations of the staff. Those two recommendations to which we take exception are number 3(a), which is on page 14 of the staff report. It is the...28 foot unimpeded' street from Market Boulevard to Great Plains Boulevard. And the second one is paragraph 7 on page 15 of the staff report which requires the applicant to acquire a 30 foot easement to Great Plains Boulevard. An easement for a street is not acceptable to Bloomberg Companies Incorporated which owns the land to the east of the current cinema building over to Great Plains Boulevard. Do not promise to deliver an easement for a street to Chanhassen Properties LLC. There are other reasons I think not to include these two recommendations as conditions to the approval of the project. One is that you are casting a burden upon the applicant that is uncertain and asking for difficulty. In effect compelling him to acquire from someone else, from some third party landowner that just happens to be my client, a 30 foot easement. I didn't measure out the distance from the east end, east boundary line of the cinema property to Great Plains Boulevard but I think it's something like 2,000 feet~ That's... If you cast this burden upon the applicant, what will happen is the project becomes in danger of withering and not going through. ...well all Bloomberg has to do is to agree to the easement. That's not possible. And this gets to the third reason why I think this is an improvidence requirement to put on the approval of the project and that is, we have got a large area which everybody has been talking about off and on behind the Dinner Theater. East of Great Plains Boulevard. West of the Frontier Center and west of the current cinema building. There probably isn't one of you who has seen that property that doesn't say that eventually you want something to be done there. To ordain now that in some place through that area them shall be a permanent street or easement of 30 foot width for travel of vehicles, not counting the additional width that gets consumed to provide for the 30 feet, is going to provide or is going to restrict what can be done in the future with that piece of property which is not beneficial to Bloomberg Companies Incorporated that owns the land. And it's not beneficial to the city. You folks who have got to decide and hope for and expect and try to bring to the city the best possible project that can go in there. Both to provide some 39 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 enhancement of value. Enhancement of the city services and what can be done. There had been talk, it never quite came to fruition but talk about an office building to go in there. Well right now I don't think there's anyone here that can predict where is going to be the location of an office building would go on that space and the parking space and how it would fit in and where the streets would then go. And that is a far more important project to consider and to talk about when you're talking about laying out the streets. To alleviate an egress problem for the cinema parking lot. What really is apparently driving, and somebody asked the question what's the reason for this street. Solely to provide access. The difficulty according to the traffic report seems to be a stacking for left tums onto Market Boulevard off'Pauly Drive. The solution to run to Compel an easement or a street off of Great Plains Boulevard is totally disproportionate to what that stacking egress problem would be. Solve the stacking egress problem. Work on that. It seems to me that this report and I'm not going to claim to be a traffic expert. I have enough trouble being a property lawyer. But that this solution, without considering whether or not there's a way to create a stacking lane for left tums, without considering what are you going to do? Just dump the problem on Great Plains Boulevard? Without considering there's a significant business entity over there. Their theater patrons exit onto Great Plains Boulevard off of that driveway and that's the Chanhassen Dinner Theater and there's not a mention of that in those traffic reports. Just shifting it over there is not a solution to the problem when it's just even putting that in as a condition, it seems to me is grossly disproportionate to the problem. There is no mention that I, at least in my reading of the traffic report, about use of the northwestern corner driveway for egress to get out of the parking lot when the movies are over. So that's why we want this property, the bowling alley property developed. We think this is a great project. We have worked with Mr. Copeland. I happen to live not in the city of Chanhassen and I go by that Golden Valley Commons, not daily but 3 times weekly and I'm there at least twice weekly. I didn't know that Mr. Krank's firm had done that but that is a beautiful project and what he says about it, that it's both pedestrian friendly and effective and a beautiful addition to that city is true. So we can have confidence in what they are proposing. But we need to have this go ahead without having this impediment of the mandatory easement for a street compelled to go across the Bloomberg property. Questions if anybody has any. Peterson: Kate, do you want to care to comment on that? Aanenson: Yeah. With the condition of the staff report and Mr. Bloomberg, and I'll let Dave speak to it but I see a big red flag and we've got to actually go back and do the traffic study because everything is predicated on shared parking. The study that the city paid for, the shared parking and all of a sudden I'm just shocked the rules have kind of changed. Caught me off guard. I'd let Dave discuss that but I would recommend that you either go back and do the traffic...I'm just flabbergasted. Peterson: Dave any comments? Hempel: It's quite a surprise to me as well .... problem with the east/west connection out to Great Plains. Traffic report indicates a vital connection to help alleviate the congestion that's going to be created at the intersection of Pauly Drive and Market Boulevard. The left turn movement out of the site. Left turn from Pauly Drive southbound on Market. I'm not a traffic 40 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 engineer either but a traffic engineer looked at it actually twice and that was a concern. An additional report and an updated report. Both reports indicate the necessity to have an east/west connection to alleviate the traffic congestion out to Market Boulevard. Now we can certainly go back and revisit it again without this connection to Great Plains Boulevard to see what the traffic study results...possible traffic signal on Pauly Drive/Market Boulevard .... if that's the way they want to proceed, then we'll have to revise the...and request an update of that study. Comments as far as burdening the applicant to obtain the necessary easements...I agree it is a burden. However it'd be a considered premature development of the site if you don't have...just like any single family residential development. If you don't have adequate sewer and water and street circulation to provide for a subdivision, it will be premature. The city could certainly go ahead if we want to see this happen and City Council could order a condemnation proceedings to acquire the necessary easements...but I guess I would encourage leaving those conditions as they are or adding another condition that the applicant's engineer go back and prepare another study without an east connection off of Great Plains Boulevard and recommend the appropriate traffic mitigation measures on Market Boulevard. Peterson: Are we asking for more work than, it's more work but is it logical? We've already been there twice and it's clear. I mean going back there again and spending additional time and money doesn't seem prudent. Hempel: I agree and at some future point the Dinner Theater, behind the Dinner Theater will develop. If this is an interim connection, it's an easement. An easement can be vacated to facilitate future development of the Dinner Theater property. It's flexible. Peterson: Can I have a motion to close the public hearing. Kind moved, Blackowiak seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Who wants to tackle this one? Blackowiak: Well I'll jump right in. I saw the surprise on Kate's face when the east/west connection street issue came up and that makes me think maybe staff needs some time to take a look at this and prepare some options. I think one over riding concern is, from my point of view that the city is pledging $1.3 million of TIF funding to do this. I think the city has every reason to make sure it's done right and every obligation to make sure it's done right. If that means an east/west connection, then so be it. We have to do it. I certainly wouldn't want to spend my money on something that's going to snarl up traffic for who knows how long. So if we need to look at it, no east/west connection and doing a traffic study, well maybe we need to do that. But I certainly am not comfortable going forward with spending that kind of money on a project that's going to effectively block a lot of people in a parking lot for an awful long time. I don't think the parking is sufficient. I'm really worried about the numbers. We're talking about a 35% variance in the required parking spaces. The idea that it's going to be pedestrian friendly and people are going to walk from location to location is great but I don't think Festival's going to want people parking in their lots to go over and use the theater. I don't think pedestrian circulation is 41 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 adequately addressed, and I wonder what happened with the boardwalk on the initial proposal that we did see on the theater Phase I. We were supposed to have boardwalk and streetscape and all this wonderful stuff and it's not there. I don't see it here. I don't see anything that encourages pedestrian movement. I'm worried about the hard surface coverage. 95% is amazing. And also I'm worried about materials. We need to have high quality materials. We have every right to demand them and I'm not sure that I've seen them here tonight. I'm not seeing a cohesive package yet. So I would certain support a motion to table so we can resolve those issues as well as specifically the street connections and traffic issues. Peterson: Do you still recommend tabling if east/west wasn't an issue? Blackowiak: I believe so, yes. Peterson: Other comments? Joyce: Well I'd have to disagree with Alison, except for the point that I think the east/west thing has to be resolved. But I've heard a couple of commissioners worry about the parking. I don't have that feeling about the parking. I think parking's over emphasized. I think there's an ability to share parking here. I think there'd be adequate parking in front of the Frontier and retail. So up until 5 minutes ago I was very much in favor of this project. I think it's a good project. But I feel the development is premature if they can't figure out the traffic situation. Peterson: ...can't be done. Joyce: Well I think you're subjecting it then to being, if it was tabled it might be worked out where we can get a better feel for what exactly is going to happen. I have a feeling that there's some negotiations that have to be taken place here. That's a good point. I don't have any problem. My opinion is I don't have any problem with the, what's being presented. I guess I would have to leave in those, I'd like to leave... Peterson: Other questions? Kind: I have a question I think of staff. I'm wondering if somebody could speak to the parking that's proposed along Pauly Drive. How that compares to the on street parking that's in Village on the Ponds and why you like it in one area and not in the other? Aanenson: That is a good question because... It is a private street. As far as traffic, slowing traffic. Forces safety. Kind: You like it? You don't like it? Hempel: They like it, we don't. Kind: That certainly adds parking spots. 42 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Aanenson: Right. Kind: And then the turning radius for the bus, that doesn't, to me it looks like you can avoid being there. I'm talking about this spot right here. It would be left the way it is. It doesn't have to be realigned with the...20 degree radius. Hempel: I would concur. I think there's some slight modifications that could be done to that intersection to accommodate the bus radius. Kind: I'm sure that's the issue with that tum around there. Sidney: Mr. Chairman I guess a question of Dave. About a traffic study, if that were to be done about the east/west connection. The east connection. How long would that take? Could it be completed before council? Hempel: That's a very good question. I'm not comfortable, I'd estimate 30 days. Sidney: Really? Okay. Peterson: I've just got a couple. I think that I still am not comfortable with the alley way. Part of it maybe I just can't picture it other than an eyesore. Doors being traditional, very dark metal doors and over lighted it's going to attract more eyes to something that I think is a negative. ... lighted you've got safety issues .... like the first time, I guess I don't like it now. I don't have an alternative. As it relates to the parking, I feel like Kevin to some degree. I don't think parking, the number of spots is as much of the issue as the impervious surface is an issue to me. I don't think we should lower the parking. That says lower the number of cinema's. And I don't want it to look like Target parking lot that it's one big, wide area of people walking down the blacktop .... usage and quality of the structure that the parking lot is speeding to. Lastly, I'm a little bit concerned about the, if you look at the old entrance to the theater, you've got an area up there that is pretty big as far as the "boardwalk" in that area. Essentially it's going to be vacated. It's going to look like something that was meant to be pedestrian friendly but is never going to be used by pedestrians in all probability. Nothing other than exiting the theater that you're going to want to walk up those steps in one area. That part doesn't fit. Other than that, it gives me the feel that I was hoping for. I haven't got a problem towards for the recommendation for approval this evening. Conrad: I would recommend we table Mr. Chairman to get a traffic review of the impact of not having an east/west corridor through this site. Blackowiak: Second that. Aanenson: Point of order. We're at the end of the 120 days so if you are going to table, I'd like to have the applicant's consent. Otherwise...talking to Sharmin. We're at the end. Peterson: Hearing that, would the applicant agree to that or not? 43 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Aanenson: We're at the end of the 120 days so we have to have a letter, write something, a letter for the extension. Bob Copeland: ... Peterson: Based upon Dave's comments earlier, I don't really see a compelling reason for another traffic study. If it's that obvious that it won't work, why go through hoops? Blackowiak: But then this will go to council before the traffic study's back and they won't know. Peterson: I'm saying we already know about the east/west... It wasn't a question. Aanenson: I guess the point was maybe put a signal or something like that... There may be other ways to mitigate it. Hempel: Maybe some traffic mitigation measures along Market Boulevard that could be . incorporated. Peterson: Okay. Point noted. We have a motion to table and a second. Any discussion on that? Conrad moved, Blackowiak seconded that the Planning Commission table the Site Plan Review #95-21 to demolish the existing Chanhassen BowFFilly's building and construct eight movie screens and a retail element, variance to allow non street frontage signs, marquee sign, and hard surface coverage and preliminary plat for the Cinema Addition and direct staff to prepare a traffic study regarding the impacts of not having the east/west connection to Great Plains Boulevard. All voted in favor, except Peterson who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. Peterson: For the mason I noted. I don't think it's necessary. There was a question asked from the audience that was not picked up on tape. Peterson: Dave. Hempel: I would use the existing traffic engineer that you retained previously. He's got all the data. Conrad: Mr. Chairman could I comment? Peterson: Yes. Conrad: I don't think, until you solve the parking issue and make it clearer for me, you're going to have a hard time persuading me. I think it's a pretty project .... that point. I want it here. 44 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Until you can tell me where those excess cars are going to park, and until you can somehow significantly tell me that they're not ever going to be needed. I know I'm talking about hocus pocus. You never know. You have to assure me there's a place for them. It can't be across the street until you get, if you get a commitment from other merchants that said it will happen, I think I can start buying some of the building. I think you have to also solve some of our, the impervious and landscaping issues. The staff report, I'm still not, the staff report was in conflict with what I heard. Staff has, there's a lot of reasons this should be tabled. It's not just one. I'm hoping you're heating some of the things that we said and come back. I don't want it to just...with one issue here. There are several. It's a good project. We'll try to make it happen if it's justified but...95% impervious surface, there has to be something that resolves some of what impervious surface is meant to accomplish. That's either take out concrete. We've got to do something. Aanenson: What I heard is the east/west, number of parking stalls. Particularly how that works. Landscaping. Hard surface coverage and the quality of materials. I think what we had asked in the report is to show a cross section articulating, see how much back and forth. Conrad: Did you hear pedestrian circulation as a concern? Aanenson: Yes, and I also added to what Craig said is that boardwalk. What happens over at' that other end when it's no longer the emphasis and how that works. And the alley way. Conrad: Yeah, the alley is a big deal. Peterson: Talk myself out of my nay. One of the things about traffic you may want to do, with Mr. Copeland leaving but I think I'm sure he's done proforma's on percentage of vacant seats in the theaters at any time. I think show us those. You know they're not going to be full 100% of the time, if ever. So that can be very compelling to us too as far as the number of people. Aanenson: Okay I've got a, we're in a legal bind here and I'm not sure how to resolve it. If you want to call the City Attorney. We need a letter tonight to keep, I mean you've recommended tabling. The applicant is not going to give us a letter to keep the contract with the timeframe. Bob Copeland: ... Aanenson: What happens if you don't get the letter then I would recommend denial or approval with conditions. That's what I would recommend. Otherwise. Peterson: Then it moves on. Otherwise it's not going to move on. Aanenson: It exposes us to the possibility of getting it approved because we passed the time frame. I don't have a letter that's existing in the file in front of me. A1-Jaff: I haven't either. 45 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Blackowiak: He said verbally. I mean...he said he would do it. Aanenson: I'm not the City Attorney. I can't address that. Bob Copeland: We've given a letter. You did ask for it. A1-Jaff: We don't have it. We never received it. And that's what we're asking. Aanenson: We're just saying if you can write it and sign it tonight, and I'm not sure that that's happened before. Conrad: The time limit expires when? Aanenson: The next City Council meeting. I don't have it. I'm relying on Sharmin. Peterson: The effect of letting it expire is what? Aanenson: It gets approved. A1-Jaff: It's automatically approved. Bob Copeland: ...I already did this but I'll do it again. Peterson: Okay Kate, what do we at a minimum need tonight? Or can it be done tomorrow? We won't be here tomorrow so we can't. We have to get it. Aanenson: Exactly. Therein lies the problem. I can't get you back. I have a letter on file, we're asking for 30 days extension. Peterson: So we either need a letter tonight or we'll reactivate the motion and either accept it or not. Blackowiak: So is it 30 days from tonight or 30 days from the end of the original? Aanenson: Based on the end. Blackowiak: Okay. Aanenson: Sharmin said end of this month. Blackowiak: So an additional 30 days. Peterson: Are you comfortable giving us a letter tonight or would you like us to vote on it again? We're just talking. This is...politics per se but we have to do it the right way to make it work. 46 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Ron Krank: ...we would like to work... Peterson: Let's do that tonight. Sharmin, do you want to do that? Gerald Rummel: My name is Gerald Rummel...and my comment here about...and he's in limbo with what's going to happen. If it's going to be extended for 30 days...get the traffic study done and bring it back... Peterson: Kate, when will that start? The 30 days? 30 days is a maximum. It won't necessarily be extended the full 30 days. Aanenson: It's all predicated on their traffic study. The next available planning commission, it's not going to be until the first one in August. I don't think they can get the traffic study done, so that would put you to the first one in August. We've got a full agenda. I don't know how we'd get it on. Then we would go to. Peterson: I'm willing to dedicate 20 minutes to a half hour to it... If we can work towards that and let's do the 30 day letter and see it signed and move this out. Aanenson: Even if you get... Peterson: Everybody comfortable? Okay. Let's take a 5 minute break. PUBLIC HEARING: STEINER DEVELOPMENT REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE PUD FOR ARBORETUM BUSINESS PARK TO PERMIT CHURCH ASSEMBLY WORSHIP AS AN ANCILLARY USE IN THE DEVELOPMENT. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Could you explain, I did not get the City Manager's cover memo as to what he's trying to say. Aanenson: That we can't require that. Peterson: The part I didn't get was specifically that. Aanenson: The applicant can speak to that but they are leasing the space so it's really moot. It's a non issue because they're leasing the space so the underlying property owner is paying taxes. They are leasing as a tenant. So they are paying taxes. Peterson: Paying the prorated portion of the expenses. Blackowiak: I kind of like that idea though. I mean theoretically that, I mean there's a PUD 47 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 agreement. Certain things were discussed and okay. If they want to change the rules, we're counting on a certain tax stream so I mean theoretically it's a good idea. So I mean it doesn't apply to this one specifically because it's a tenant but I like it. Peterson: Other questions of staff?. Conrad: So this is just applying to this PUD? Aanenson: Correct. Now as I stated, the way this reads that, say 6% of any building. It would open it up to other buildings... Kind: Does that mean, we're getting back to this tax question, and I probably have to hear it three different ways. Will 6% of that building not be paying taxes? Aanenson: No. Kind: It's just a rental thing. It's not, yeah. Non issue. And there's no way it could ever be converted to non taxable status so the city manager's recommendation really. Aanenson: To take that a step further. If they are located in this community, more than likely they'll be looking for... Peterson: Other questions? Does the applicant care to make any further comments? You waited this long, you have to say something. Fred Richter: I'm Fred Richter with Steiner Development. Appreciate you taking such a long time and still letting me talk. I'll be very brief, and I'll just reiterate. We did go in front of the council for an interpretation. At that time we just stated that this is really an interim use. A lease for a church called the New Life Christian Fellowship that's located now in Chanhassen. They would have a four year lease in this building. The building is owned by ourselves and the anchor tenant. It is going to stay on the tax role. This is just a lease situation. Don Finger, the Pastor was here for the interpretation so he understood the rules of what we're getting into and it really is just a clarification on our PUD to allow this tenant, which we feel works well in the building in terms of parking and type of use and all. And we also thought there was some logic in the PUD which two parcels to the north are guided convention, hotel and a sports type, sports health club so this is right adjacent to that. So the real issue became, because this was not industrial or office, that they wouldn't actually have like a big conference room or an assembly space and we would get this clarified. So we're here tonight to just clarify the PUD and then we can get on with leasing the building and it will stay on the tax roles. Blackowiak moved, Kind seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address us, please come forward. Motion to close. 48 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Kind moved, Sidney seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Thoughts commissioners? Kind: Looks good to me. Peterson: Motion? Kind: Move approval. Do I have to read the whole thing? Peterson: Yes. Kind: I move the Planning Commission recommends approval of the amendment to PUD #92-6, Arboretum Business Park to permit a church as an interim use within the Arboretum Business Park development. The following criteria shall apply to churches as interim uses. There are three of them listed. And do I read that second part? Aanenson: No. New motion. Kind: New motion, okay. Blackowiak: I'll second that. Peterson: Do we have any discussion? Conrad: Do we need to specify, like Kate said in this motion, what lots, block we're talking about? Are we talking? Blackowiak: There are two motions. Aanenson: You can either apply it. Conrad: Well the issue is, are you applying it to the entire business park? That's what that motion says. The second one says specifically, which is okay. Blackowiak: So maybe we don't want to do this? Conrad: No, no, no, no. I'm just saying, how broad is that motion? Kind: I'm find with it being in the whole PUD. Peterson: As long as they're paying taxes. Blackowiak: Well that's what I'm saying. That's why I looked at this, I think this is good. I 49 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 think it's a good idea because this person number one is a tenant. Person number two may not be SO. Conrad: Okay, let's vote. Kind moved, Blackowiak seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the amendment to PUD #92-6, Arboretum Business Park to permit a church as an interim use within the Arboretum Business Park development. The following criteria shall apply to churches as interim uses: Church facilities, i.e. assembly or worship halls and associated office, meeting and other required spaces shall not occupy more than six percent (6%) of any building. The church congregation may not exceed 200 adult members. Shall be reviewed and approved in accordance with the same procedures specified in the city code for conditional use permits. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Conrad: I make the motion the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Interim Use Permit for New Life Christian Fellowship for an office and assembly 4,400 square foot space on Lots 3 and 4, Block 2, Arboretum Business Park 2nd Addition subject to the conditions 1 through 3 of the staff report. Joyce: I second that. Peterson: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Conrad moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the interim use permit for New Life Christian Fellowship for an office and assembly 4,400 square foot space on Lots 3 and 4, Block 2, Arboretum Business Park 2nd Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. The church must vacate the building prior to exceeding 200 adult members. 2. The church facility is limited to 4,400 square feet of the building area. o The church shall submit to the city annually the number of adult members in it's congregation. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 50 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Kind: I do have a couple changes to the Minutes. Peterson: What? It's quarter to 11:007 Kind: I read them and there's a couple, I don't know, minor changes. Should I just give the written changes or should I speak to them? Peterson: A lot of it is...I wouldn't bother with them. Kind: Don't bother. I don't make any sense when you read them. Peterson: Get used to it. Conrad: Read other people's stuff. Peterson: Yeah, read somebody other than own. Kind noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated June 16, 1999 as presented. ONGOING ITEMS: Aanenson: I'll just give you the ongoing, what's going to be on for the 21 st. The RSF Golf... coming in. They want to amend that for lights. Second, a deck on top of the, I mean the driving range. A second deck... Joyce: I thought we already gave them lights? Sidney: No. Joyce: So they have no lights out there? Blackowiak: Kate, could I just make a comment on that issue? Can we make sure that we notice the Hesse Farm people that are not actually in the 500 feet but we made a point of including them last time. Can we get them this time? Aanenson: Chan Business Center. Amcon's coming in with a building on the comer, south of the Jehovah Witness on Audubon. And CSM, who we saw the subdivision tonight will be coming in with four buildings... We have one, just one variance up in Carver Beach. We are looking at the bluff ordinance. Had a problem at Lake Riley with boulder retaining walls. The ordinance allows you when you have lakeshore lots a 30 foot clearing. We've had conflicts with the bluff ordinance so we're going to have... We also want to spend some time going over the landscaping. We're not doing. Sidney: Buffer yard? 51 Planning Commission Meeting - July 7, 1999 Aanenson: Yeah. We're not doing a good job communicating how we came up with the criteria and going back to the buffer ordinance so we'll have that and then... Kind: I have a question for Kate along these lines. The criteria for variances. How old, how long standing is that criteria? Is that something that's up for change or? Aanenson: That's I believe pretty standard. Kind: Because the hardship part of it seems to be hard to. Aanenson: Well it's the hard and fast rules. If something, topography. An anomaly in the lot. Odd shaped lot. Pie shaped lot. That you're being denied something that somebody else would have based on no fault of your own. Generally if there's a lot that doesn't have a garage, is that a hardship? It may not be the best place to put a garage but... Peterson: Okay, anything else? Conrad moved, Kind seconded to adjourn the meeting. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 52