10-14-2024 City Council Agenda and PacketA.5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Note: Unless otherwise noted, work sessions are held in the Fountain Conference Room in the
lower level of City Hall and are open to the public. If the City Council does not complete the work
session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda.
Public comment is not allowed at the Work Session.
A.1 Hope House Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Project Update
A.2 General Fund Budget Update
A.3 Discuss Citywide Speed Limit Reduction Proposal
A.4 Review Conceptual Development for 6535 Peaceful Lane (Pleasant View Pointe) no earlier
than 7:30 p.m.
A.5 Madison AI demonstration
A.6 Future Work Session Schedule
B.7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER (Pledge of Allegiance)
C.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
D.CONSENT AGENDA
All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will
be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is
desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City
council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to the council packet for
each staff report.
D.1 Approve City Council Work Session Minutes dated September 23, 2024
D.2 Approve City Council Minutes dated September 23, 2024
AGENDA
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2024
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD
1
D.3 Receive Commission on Aging Minutes dated August 16, 2024
D.4 Receive Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 27, 2024
D.5 Approve Claims Paid dated October 14, 2024
D.6 Approve an Encroachment Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and the property
owner at 8831 Lake Susan Court
D.7 Approve an Encroachment Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and the property
owner at 8634 Valley View Court
D.8 Approve an Encroachment Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and the property
owner at 7576 Walnut Curve
D.9 Approve Contract Amendment With SEH Related For The Lake Ann Park Preserve Project.
D.10 Approve Development Contract for Avienda Townhomes Addition
D.11 Approve Contract for Adding Bluetooth Enabled Card Readers to the Public Works
Overhead Bay Doors
D.12 Resolution 2024-XX: Approval to enter into a Cooperative Grant Agreement with Great
River Greening for the Lake Ann Park Preserve
D.13 Resolution 2024-XX; Call for Improvement Hearing for Crimson Bay Road Improvements
Project
E.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Visitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete and
submit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda).
E.1 Southern Valley Alliance Presentation, Domestic Violence Awareness Month - Kevin Hill
F.PUBLIC HEARINGS
G.GENERAL BUSINESS
H.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
I.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
J.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
J.1 Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) Annual Summary
J.2 Follow-up on Citizen Action Request Items
J.3 Notice of Public Hearing to Consider an Ordinance Amending the County Code and
Cannabis Regulations: Carver County
J.4 Postcard: Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center Referendum
2
K.ADJOURNMENT
GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the interest of open communications, the
Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council.
That opportunity is provided at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations.
Anyone seeking a response or action from the City Council following their presentation is
required to complete and submit a Citizen Action Request Form. An online form is available at
https://www.chanhassenmn.gov/action or paper forms are available in the city council chambers
prior to the meeting.
A total of thirty minutes is alloted for Visitor Presentations. Priority is given to Chanhassen
residents. An additional thirty minutes may be provided after General Business items are
complete at the discretion of the City Council.
Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the
Mayor. When called upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks shall be
addressed to the City Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is
not a member of the City Council.
If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a
spokesperson that can summarize the issue.
Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the
Mayor. If you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council. Comments may also be
emailed to the City Council at council@chanhassenmn.gov.
During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in
discussion. Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a
thorough understanding of your concern, suggestion or request.
Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an
individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be
directed to the City Manager.
Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Tequila Butcher, 590 West
79th Street in Chanhassen immediately after the meeting for a purely social event. All members of the
public are welcome.
3
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Hope House Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Project Update
File No.24-16 Item No: A.1
Agenda Section 5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Prepared By Rachel Jeske, Planner
Applicant Westwood Church & Open Hands Foundation
Present Zoning Rural Residential District (RR)
Land Use Residential Low Density
Acerage 1.08
Density
Applicable
Regulations Chapter 20, Article 20-XI, “RR” Rural Residential District
SUGGESTED ACTION
No action suggested; general discussion only.
SUMMARY
Westwood Church and Open Hands Foundation have rescinded their application requesting approval of
a CUP to allow for a group home serving up to 8 persons.
Representatives from Westwood Church and Open Hands Foundation will provide an update to the City
Council on their decision to rescind the application and their plans moving forward. Those plans do still
include construction of a new Hope House that would include 8 standard and 1 ADA bedroom;
however, they would only be permitted to serve up to 6 occupants based on the current zoning
limitations for group homes under a permitted use. They anticipate construction of the new Hope
House commencing this fall.
4
Included with this agenda item is a draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that would require
future approval by the City Council and execution by both the City and Westwood Community Church
related to allowing a second principal structure to be constructed on a single property prior to the
existing principal structure being demolished. The City utilized this tool in 2022 when a new home was
being constructed on a property located at 2961 Washta Bay Court which already had an existing home
on it but the owners desired to build a new home and needed to live in the current home while the new
one was being built. Staff proposes that the same tool be used to facilitate Hope House in constructing
a new building while needing to occupy the current building. This MOU is tentatively scheduled for the
October 28, 2024 City Council meeting.
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
Draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
5
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
MOU made this day of , 2024, by and between the CITY
OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”) and WESTWOOD
COMMUNITY CHURCH (“Westwood”).
WHEREAS, Westwood owns a home on certain real property (the “Subject Property”) located
in the City, which is unplatted and identified as PID 25-0093-200, and
WHEREAS, Westwood desires to construct a new principal structure (“New Principal
Structure”) on the Subject Property which already has an existing principal structure (“Existing
Principal Structure” where City Code does not allow for two principal structures to be located on a
singular property unless through a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning designation, and
WHEREAS, Westwood intends to either connect the New Principal Structure to the Existing
Principal Structure or demolish the Existing Principal Structure upon completion of the New
Principal Structure, and
WHEREAS, the City is not required to issue Westwood a building permit for the New Principal
Structure until the Existing Principal Structure has been demolished or connected to the
Existing Principal Structure;
WHEREAS; The City is willing to issue Westwood a building permit and allow them to begin
construction on the New Principal Structure without first demolishing or connecting the
Existing Principal Structure;
NOW, THEREFORE; on the basis of the mutual covenants and agreements herein provided, it
is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows:
1. Issuance of a Building Permit:
Provided the New Principal Structure proposed by Westwood meets all of the conditions
for issuance of a building permit, as determined by the City, and complies with the terms of this
MOU, the City agrees to issue to Westwood a building permit for the New Principal Structure
to be located on the Subject Property.
2. Demolition:
Unless the Existing Principal Structure is connected to the New Principal Structure to
create a singular Principal Structure on the Subject Property, Westwood shall apply for and
secure a demolition permit for the Existing Principal Structure before the City will issue a
permanent Certificate of Occupancy for the New Principal Structure. Westwood shall demolish,
and remove the Existing Principal Structure within twenty-four (24) months of issuance of a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the New Principal Structure.
3. Costs:
6
The costs of the demolition shall be borne entirely by Westwood. Westwood shall
provide the City with an escrow for 110 percent of the cost for demolition stated in the estimate
set forth on Exhibit A. This amount shall be held in escrow until the New Principal Structure
construction and demolition of the Existing Principal Structure is complete. In the event
Westwood does not secure the demolition of the Existing Principal Structure within the above
described time frame, Westwood grants a license to the City entering the arranging for the
demolition of the Existing Principal Structure as soon as reasonably practical. Westwood shall
pay for all of the City’s expenses incurred in the demolition of the Existing Home; provided,
however, that if any portion of said costs exceed the amount in escrow and be outstanding more
than thirty (30) days after mailing of an itemized statement for the costs to Westwood, the
deficiency shall be certified by the City Clerk to the County Auditor for the entry on the tax rolls
of the County as a special assessment against the Subject Property. Westwood does hereby
agree to waive any and all procedural or substantive objections to any assessments against the
Subject Property concerning the costs of demolition, including but not limited to the Notice and
Hearing requirements, and any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the Subject
Property. Westwood waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to law or equity.
4. Release:
Westwood for itself, its heirs, successors and assigns, hereby forever extinguishes,
releases and discharges the City and any of its elected or appointed officials, employees,
attorneys, agents, indemnitors, representatives, insurers and assigns, of and from any and all
claims, demands, obligations, actions or causes of action, at law or in equity, which arise from
the City’s issuance of the building permit as stated in this Agreement, the demolition of the
Existing Principal Structure or from the construction of the New Principal Structure on the
Subject Property, whether arising by statute, common law or otherwise, and for all claims for
damages, of whatever kind or nature, and for all claims for attorney fees, costs and expenses.
5. Indemnification:
Westwood, for itself, its heirs, successors, and assigns, hereby agree to defend,
indemnify, keep and hold the City and any of its elected and appointed officials, employees,
attorneys, agents, indemnitors, representatives, insurers and assigns, harmless from any and all
past, present or future claims, demands, obligations, actions or causes of action, at law or in
equity, which arise from the City’s issuance of the building permit, demolition of the Existing
Principal Structure or from the construction of the New Principal Structure on the Subject
Property, whether arising by statute, common law or otherwise, and for all claims for damages,
of whatever kind or nature, and for all claims for attorney fees, costs and expenses.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day
and year first above written.
7
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
Elise Ryan, Mayor
AND:
Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2022 by Elise Ryan and Laurie Hokkanen, the Mayor and City Manager
respective of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the
corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
Notary Public
(Notary Seal)
By: ______________________________
Its: ______________________________
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2024, by ________________________, the ____________________
representing Westwood Community Church, a ____________________, on behalf of the
___________________ and pursuant to the authority granted by its ________________.
Notary Public
8
Exhibit A
Bid for demolition and escrow amount to be added upon receipt of demolition bid.
9
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item General Fund Budget Update
File No.Item No: A.2
Agenda Section 5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Prepared By Kelly Grinnell, Finance Director
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority Financial Sustainability
SUMMARY
Staff will provide an update on the 2025 General Fund levy. There are several items that staff requests
council feedback on. The attached report provides additional information.
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
10
ATTACHMENTS
Memo - Prelim 2025 Budget and Levy Discussion 2024-10-14.docx
Parks Maintenance FTE 2025
11
1
Date: October 14, 2024
To:Mayor and Council Members
From: Kelly Grinnell, Finance Director
Re:Preliminary 2025 General Fund Budget & Levy Discussion
2025 General Fund Budget
The city council has met three times in work session to review the 2025 preliminary General Fund budget. Since those
meetings, staff has continued to refine the 2025 General Fund budget. There are still a few pending items, such as
employee open enrollment decisions. Staff would like council feedback on certain items to prepare the next budget draft.
Changes to Expenditures
The table below shows the 2024 adopted budget, the 2025 preliminary budget from September 9, and the current 2025
preliminary budget.
Expenditures by
Function
2024 Adopted 2025
Preliminary
from 9/9/24
2025
Preliminary -
Current
Change from
9/9 Preliminary
General Government $
3,583,105
$
3,668,554
$
3,686,166
$
17,612
Public Safety $
5,440,053
$
5,744,784
$
5,738,579
$
(6,205)
Public Works $
3,102,598
$
3,118,293
$
3,090,567
$
(27,726)
Parks & Recreation $
2,920,552
$
3,160,985
$
2,997,739
$
(163,246)
Community Development $
607,042
$
541,251
$
694,429
$
153,178
Total Expenditures $
15,653,350
$
16,233,867
$
16,207,480
$
(26,387)
Overall expenditures are projected to be about $26,000 lower than the September 9 projection, largely due savings from
employee benefits. The current budget incorporates current insurance enrollment plus a $40,000 contingency in case
more employees opt in or change to family coverage during open enrollment next month.
Expenditures for General Government in the current draft increased due to the addition of $25,000 for a market study on
employee wages. The City conducted a full compensation study in 2021, but staff recommends a market update to
comparable cities. The City will engage in union negotiations in 2025, so this information will be helpful in that effort.
Expenditures for Community Development are increasing (with a corresponding decrease in Parks & Recreation) due to a
shift in forestry and other natural resources related items that were previously accounted for in Parks & Recreation. The
employee that manages these items is accounted for in Community Development, so it makes sense to move the other
items to that function.
12
2
The current draft of the budget also includes the following items for council direction on their ultimate inclusion:
Wildlife population management - $5,000 budgeted – this amount will likely increase in future years, as the city
will be limited in what can be done in 2025 due to regulations.
Lifeguard Contract - $40,000 is included but may not be needed – the 2024 season at Lake Ann went well without
lifeguards.
Parks Maintenance Operator - $50,000 is included for this full-time position to start on July 1, 2025.
Contingency - $25,000 is included for unexpected opportunities or expenditures. The City Manager would have
discretion on how this would be spent, but any item over $20,000 would require Council approval.
Changes to Revenues
The table below shows the 2024 adopted budget, the 2025 preliminary budget from September 9, and the current 2025
preliminary budget.
Revenues by Type 2024 Adopted 2025
Preliminary
from 9/9/24
2025
Preliminary -
Current
Change from
9/9 Preliminary
Property Tax $
11,851,000
$
12,270,000
$
12,270,000
$
-
Cable Franchise Fees $
145,000
$
145,000
$
145,000
$
-
Licenses & Permits $
1,582,500
$
1,571,000
$
1,571,000
$
-
Fines & Penalties $
70,000
$
72,000
$
72,000
$
-
Intergovernmental $
466,000
$
524,900
$
554,900
$
30,000
Charges for Service $
654,350
$
631,700
$
641,000
$
9,300
Investment Income $
275,000
$
325,000
$
325,000
$
-
Other Income $
369,500
$
374,500
$
374,500
$
-
Transfers In $
330,000
$
330,000
$
330,000
$
-
Total Revenues $
15,743,350
$
16,244,100
$
16,283,400
$
39,300
Overall revenues are projected to be about $39,300 higher than the September 9 projection, largely due to an increase in
Police Aid. Charges for service are also higher due to the shift in forestry and recycling related items from the Storm Water
Fund.
Budget Surplus
The current budget draft shows a budget surplus of about $76,000, up from $10,000 on September 9. This surplus could
increase depending on what is decided for the following:
Contingency for Open Enrollment $ 40,000 This amount will be known in mid-November
Lifeguards $ 40,000
Park Maintenance Operator New Hire $ 50,000 Staff recommends keeping this in the budget
General Contingency $ 25,000 Staff recommends keeping this in the budget
Total of these Items $155,000
13
3
Council has several options to consider for the budget surplus, including, but not limited to, the following:
Keep the surplus intact and add to General Fund reserves (staff does not think this is necessary due to current
reserve levels)
Reduce the General Fund levy (a reduction of $232,000 would change the year over year levy increase from 6.9%
to 5.3%
Reduce the General Fund levy and increase one or more Capital Fund levies
The council will review the 2025 budgets for the Capital Funds and the 2025-2029 CIP at the next work session on October
28. Funding for replacement and maintenance of Parks continues to be an issue due to a lack of dedicated funding. The
long-term levy projections include starting a dedicated levy for this purpose in 2029, but this budget surplus could allow
for this to start sooner.
Property Tax Levy Projections
The table below shows the adopted 2025 preliminary levy. The levy projections include new debt service for the Civic
Campus and with the potential addition of debt for the Chanhassen Bluffs Recreation Center:
Next Steps
The council has three additional work sessions scheduled this fall:
October 28, 2024 –Presentation of 2025 Preliminary Capital Fund Budgets and 2025-2029 Preliminary CIP
November 18, 2024 –Presentation of 2025 Preliminary Utility Fund Budgets and Utility Funds Preliminary CIP
November 25, 2024 –Final Review of Proposed 2025 Levy, Budgets, and CIP for all funds
The Truth in Taxation public meeting is scheduled for Monday, December 9, 2024, at 7:00 p.m.Adoption of the levy,
budgets, and CIP is expected to occur at this council meeting.
14
Memo
From: Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
Jerry Ruegemer, Parks and Recreation Director
Adam Beers, Parks Maintenance Superintendent
Date: October 9, 2024
Subject: Parks Maintenance FTE 2025 Consideration
As part of the 2025 budget process, staff identified a possible addition to the budget - a Parks
Maintenance FTE in July 2025. At the work session, Parks staff will be available to discuss this request
further and respond to any City Council questions.
Background
The 2023 Organizational Study identified the need for an additional Parks Maintenance staff member as
one of four positions to consider adding over the coming years. The report noted that the position
would help reduce the City’s reactive maintenance needs and extend the useful life of existing facilities
and equipment.
Current Staffing and Operations
The Parks Maintenance team currently includes seven full-time staff members responsible for snow
removal, trail and park maintenance, and other seasonal tasks. The team plows 70+ miles of trail, 12
miles of sidewalk, City Hall, the Fire Station, the Rec Center, Pioneer Cemetery, and more. A snapshot of
metrics is attached to this report.
One staff member is “loaned” to the Streets department for a regular plow route. The remaining staff
have six park plowing routes, including a mobile bobcat route. An average storm takes three days to
fully respond to, including using overtime on Day 1 and Day 2. A map of the parking lot and trail plowing
routes is available in the City’s Snow and Ice & Ice Policy (Page 8 of this document).
In the last two to three years, we have shared resources between departments to provide the best
possible service. For example, the Parks and Utilities teams have assisted with cul-de-sac plowing using
pick-up trucks at the beginning of a storm. Then, the Streets department can help Parks with tasks like
clearing community park parking lots using their larger equipment on the back half of a storm event.
See the attached chart, which provides an overview of the Parks Maintenance Department's major
tasks.
Technological Advancements and Efficiencies
Recognizing that adding staff is not the sole solution, the city has proactively invested in new
technologies to enhance efficiency and reduce labor demands. Key examples include:
Garbage Truck Attachment (Purchased in 2023): This new attachment has increased operational
efficiencies by making waste collection faster and safer for workers.
15
Robotic Lawn Mower Pilot (Coming in 2025): Set to be introduced in 2025, we will test this technology to
automate certain mowing tasks, possibly reducing the manual workload for the Parks Maintenance
team.
Automated Line Striper (2025 CIP): This equipment will enable a single staff member to handle the line
striping of fields, a task that previously required five people and took several days each spring and fall.
Gutter Sprayer (Under Investigation): The city is exploring the purchase of a gutter sprayer, which would
streamline curb and gutter cleaning, an area of growing resident expectations.
Impact of Additional Staffing
Reducing Reactive Maintenance:
By adding a new staff member, the city can move from a largely reactive approach to a more proactive
maintenance approach. For example, with current staffing levels, sports field maintenance, aeration,
weed control spraying, and fertilizing are only completed once per year, where best cultural practices
would be 2x, with both spring and fall applications. We have researched contracting for these services,
but the bids have been cost-prohibitive, and finding contractors to work at peak season is difficult.
Aging Infrastructure:
Many of the City’s assets, like irrigation systems, are over 30 years old and require constant
maintenance. With one dedicated staff person handling irrigation during peak seasons, there are delays
in addressing issues, particularly in high-visibility areas such as boulevards and sports fields.
Meeting Increasing Resident Expectations:
As more residents utilize professional lawn services at home, expectations for the same level of care on
public properties have risen. Residents are asking for more frequent and detailed work in public spaces,
including curb and gutter maintenance, as well as lawn edging. The additional staff person will help
meet these expectations and reduce service requests. We currently receive about 200 See Click Fix
requests for parks maintenance each year. Proactive work, including small beautification efforts, is often
neglected in favor of reactive maintenance due to staffing limitations.
Winter Operations and Sidewalk Maintenance:
An additional staff member will significantly improve the City's ability to complete snow removal on
Priority A routes, including the sidewalks along W. 78th Street, which often face delays. Ensuring timely
snow removal in these high-traffic areas will improve public safety and enhance the overall quality of
service during winter months.
16
Table 11: Recommended Parks Maintenance Service Standards
Function Recommended Standard
Basketball Courts, Pickleball Courts,
and Skate Park
• Weekly inspection
• Maintenance as needed
Boat Ramp • Daily cleaning and enforcement
Debris and Litter • Daily pick-up (7 days a week)
Grass and Plants • Mowing twice a month during peak
season
• Edging three times per month during peak
season
• Irrigation up to two times per week during
peak season, depending on rainfall
Facilities • Monthly inspection
• Maintenance as needed
Hockey Rink • Cleaning and inspection daily during peak
season
Leaves • Daily leaf blowing during peak season
Parking Lots • Daily enforcement
Picnic Areas and Shelters • Daily cleaning
Piers and Docks • Weekly inspection
• Maintenance as needed
Playgrounds • Daily cleaning and overall inspection
• More thorough inspection monthly
Recreation Fields • Daily cleaning and maintenance during
peak season
Restrooms • Daily cleaning (May-Sept)
• Weekly deep cleaning (May-Sept)
Picnic Areas/Shelters • Daily cleaning during peak season (May-
Sept)
Softball/Baseball Fields • Dragged daily (May-Sept)
• Field Striping Weekly
Trash Cans • Emptying five times per week
Trees • Monthly inspections and pest
management
• Trimming every five years
Cemetery • Daily/Weekly cleaning, mowing, leaf
blowing
Downtown Maintenance • Daily/Weekly cleaning, mowing, leaf
blowing
Aerification • 1x per season (fan)
Beach Maintenance • Beaches cleaned/ groomed weekly/ as
needed
Irrigation • 4 total – 2 Thursday, 2 Friday
Field Lighting Repairs • Yearly maintenance, bulb replacement
• 20-30 bulbs per season
Civic Campus •
See Click Fix • 200 parks requests annually
Lake Ann Preserve Boardwalks •
17
Performance Measures
Park Maintenance
Metric 2021 2022 2023
Miles of Trails 66 66 70
Sidewalk Miles Maintained 12 12 12
Community Parks 4 6 6
Neighborhood Parks 24 24 24
Acres of Park Space 466 466 445
Preserves 14 14 14
Acres of Open Space 528 528 693
Playgrounds 28 29 29
Picnic Shelters 22 23 23
Lake Susan Picnic Shelter Rentals 32 39 38
Picnic Shelter Users 11,100 10,704 10,275
Basketball Courts 26 25 25
Tennis Courts 16 16 16
Pickleball Courts 10 10 10
Volleyball Courts 4 4 4
Soccer Fields 19 20 20
Youth Baseball/Softball Fields 20 20 20
Youth/Adult Baseball Fields 4 5 5
Adult Softball Fields 3 3 3
Athletic Field Use Hours 11,000 2,440 15,000
Public Beaches 5 5 5
Fishing Piers 10 10 10
Boat Launches 3 5 5
Outdoor Ice Rinks 11 11 11
Seasonal Skaters 4,000 5,844 5,293
Rink Attendants 12 15 21
Sledding Hills 5 5 5
Disc Golf Courses 1 1 1
Skate Park 1 1 1
Off-Leash Dog Parks 1 1 1
18
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Discuss Citywide Speed Limit Reduction Proposal
File No.N/A Item No: A.3
Agenda Section 5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Prepared By Charlie Howley, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A - Discussion only
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority Operational Excellence
SUMMARY
Discuss the possibility of lowering the standard speed limit on residential streets from 30 to 25 MPH
citywide.
BACKGROUND
In October 2022, the City Council discussed the topic of a citywide speed limit lowering from 30 to 25
MPH (refer to attached presentation). The outcome of that discussion was to not move forward with a
citywide lowering, but rather keep the status quo and consider speed limit lowering requests on a case-
by-case basis. Since that time, there have been very few requests from the public that gathered enough
steam/support to move ahead with a speed limit lowering on a certain section of street(s) in the City.
Recently there has been a heavy push from residents around the Minnewashta Parkway area to lower
the speed limit on the Parkway from the existing 30 MPH to 20 MPH due to concerns about the
proposed Highway 5 improvements that proposes to move the Arboretum entrance to align with the
Minnewashta Parkway/Highway 5 intersection. The initial thought on this topic is that reducing to 20
19
MPH would not be the right course of action and may be a bridge too far, and that any consideration of
lowering the speed limit should be done citywide rather than on this street only.
DISCUSSION
The City prepared a Flashvote with questions about speed limits and how drivers react to them, which
ran from Oct. 2 to Oct. 4, 2024 (see attached). We have also developed a communications plan for how
to advertise and solicit additional feedback on this topic over the next few months. Staff will go over an
updated presentation at the work session and will look for Council feedback on direction. The plan
would be that if supported, we would bring back an official resolution sometime in early 2025, with a
tentative enacted date of May 1, 2025.
Staff has created a webpage and feedback form that would be promoted following the work session:
https://www.chanhassenmn.gov/departments/public-works/speed-limit-change
BUDGET
The estimated cost of the signage needed to make this change is ~$130 for each sign needed. Between
swapping out the applicable standard speed limit signs from 30 MPH to 25 MPH, and adding some
entry point notification signs at various locations, we need approximately 100 signs, resulting in a total
expense of $13,000. With a proposed implementation of Spring 2025, we will add this to the upcoming
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) currently under development, with the revenue being from the Streets
Operations Department of the General Fund.
RECOMMENDATION
City Staff recommends moving ahead with planning for a citywide speed limit reduction to 25MPH.
ATTACHMENTS
Speed Limit Changes Map
Oct 2024 Speed Limit Change Flashvote Results
20221024 Council Presentation_Speed Limit Reduction
20
Lake
Virginia
Christmas
Lake
Lotus Lake
Brendan
Pond
Lake
Harrison
Kerber Pond
Lake Susan Rice
Marsh
Lake
Lake Riley
Rice Lake
Lake
St.
Joe
Lake
Minnewashta
Lake Ann
Lake Lucy
Minnewashta
Regional Park
North
Lotus
Lake Park
Meadow
Green
Park
Lake Ann Park
Chanhassen Pond Park
Chanhassen
Nature
Preserve
Chanhassen
Recreation
Center
Lake
Susan Park
Rice Marsh
Lake Preserve
Power
Hill
Park
Fox Woods
Preserve
Bandimere
Community
Park
Bluff Creek
Golf Course
Hesse Farm
Park
Preserve
Lake
Susan
Preserve
Raguet Wildlife
Management
Are
MN Valley
National Wildlife Re
MN Landscape
Arboretum
Seminary Fen
Scientific
& Nat*
Bluff Creek
Preserve
Independent
School
District 11
Independent
School District
112
Independent
School
District 276
Riley
Ridge
Park
Lake Ann Park
Preserve
Document Path: K:\Departments\Engineering\Speed Limit Changes\Speed Limit Changes.aprxDate Created: 9/24/2024
Created By: City of Chanhassen - Engineering Department µ0 3,000
Feet
0 0.5
Mile
Proposed 25 MPH Speed Limit Map
City of Chanhassen
Legend
25 mph
Speed Limit Unchanged
Private Road
Not Under City Jurisdiction,
Speed Limit Unchanged
21
Survey Results: Speed Limits
Survey Info - This survey was sent on behalf of City of Chanhassen to the FlashVote community for Chanhassen, MN.
These FlashVote results are shared with local officials
523
Total
Participants
478 of 720 initially invited (66%)
45 others
Margin of error: ± 4%
Applied Filter:
All Responses
Participants for
filter:
520
Started:
Oct 2, 2024 11:06am CDT
Ended:
Oct 4, 2024 11:04am CDT
Target Participants:
All Chanhassen
Q1 Which of the following do you think makes the most sense for the speed limits on residential
streets in Chanhassen?
(520 responses)
Q2 Which best describes how the posted speed limit influences the speed at which you drive?
(512 responses)
Response Time (ho…
1 9 17 25 33 41 49
0
200
400
Votes
0%10%20%30%40%50%
Increase them to 40 mph
Increase them to 35 mph
Keep them at 30 mph
Decrease them to 25 mph
Decrease them to 20 mph
Not Sure
1.3%
6.0%
46.7%
31.0%
13.5%
1.5%
Percent
Options Votes (520)
Increase them to 40 mph 1.3% (7)
Increase them to 35 mph 6.0% (31)
Keep them at 30 mph 46.7% (243)
Decrease them to 25 mph 31.0% (161)
Decrease them to 20 mph 13.5% (70)
Not Sure 1.5% (8)
Options Votes (512)
I usually keep my top speed 5+ mph slower than the posted speed limit 5.1% (26)
I usually keep my top speed 1 to 4 mph slower than the posted speed limit 5.1% (26)
I usually keep my top speed right around the posted speed limit 45.9% (235)
I usually keep my top speed 1 to 4 mph faster than the posted speed limit 35.4% (181)
I usually keep my top speed 5+ mph faster than the posted speed limit 7.0% (36)
22
Q3 Is there any specific road(s) in Chanhassen, where you think the speed limit is too low?
(505 responses)
Votes
0%10%20%30%40%50%
I usually keep my top speed 5+
mph...
I usually keep my top speed 1 to
4...
I usually keep my top speed
right...
I usually keep my top speed 1 to
4...
I usually keep my top speed 5+
mph...
I don’t really watch my speed
I don't drive
Not Sure
5.1%
5.1%
45.9%
35.4%
7.0%
0.6%
0.4%
0.6%
Percent
Votes
0%20%40%60%80%
No
Not Sure
Yes, such as:
69.1%
19.6%
10.7%
Percent
Options Votes (512)
I don’t really watch my speed 0.6% (3)
I don't drive 0.4% (2)
Not Sure 0.6% (3)
Options Votes (505)
No 69.1% (349)
Not Sure 19.6% (99)
Yes, such as:10.7% (54)
23
Anywhere it's 25 mph. School zones I understand it being lower, as it should be.
Lake Drive W
Powers south of the railroad tracks
101 from lyman to shakopee circle
101 by the Kwik trip is 40 should be 45
Powers, 101 btween 5 and 212.
Hwy 5, 101 north, audobon, lyman
W 78th St
Mill St south of 7
Pleasantview Dr
Powers between Lyman and 5.
Powers south of 5 north o Lyman
Powers Blvd
powers by the church makes some sense with no sidewalks, but just build the walkway!
Powers Blvd. between Highway 5 and Lyman Blvd.
101 south of 5
TH-101
Residential streets
78th Street between powers and galpin
101, Powers
78th Street
Unnecessary except for the most congested areas ie in neighborhoods central to the city
78th from Powers toward City Center/Target/Byerly's
Kerber Blvd, 101, Lake Dr
Many places
All of them
The road to Lake Anne, Audubon south to Lyman, Powers, south to Lyman, Market Blvd South to Pioneer
powersblvd101
lymansouth
hwylake
roadcoulter
street
78th
city mph
drive
40
galpin
212
fly
pioneer northbluff
creek
peoplemarket
cloud
know 25lower
trailslow
audubon
dell
55
residential
dr
lucy
rd
st
anne
park
sides
24
Hwy 41 should be 55, no residential should be below 25, 101 south btwn pioneer trail & flying cloud
The road along Lake Anne park
City streets in the Chapparel n'borhood due to little kids
Dell road between 5 and 212
Hwy 101 by 212 is 40 mph
Lake Lucy Rd
Powers has speeds that change 3 times depending on where you are at. Consistent is better
Near Mountain, Vine Hill, Pleasant View, 101
101/Market between Lyman and Flying Cloud should be 45mph…yes I know it’s a county road…pass it on
Coulter blvd
Coulter Blvd - should be 40!
Coulter Blvd
Lyman from Powers to Galpin. People routinely drive 55 mph or more. It’s crazy.
Coulter Boulevard
Narrow city streets where cars parked on both sides of the streets should be lower than 30
Minnewashta Parkway
Coulter blvd between Audubon and Galpin
Hazeltine blvd
Bluff Creek Drive between 61 and Pioneer Trail feels slow. It may benefit from a 5 mph bump
i know it's not in Chan but Dell Rd is too slow by 10mph
Bluff creek and river rock. I’m possible to see people when turning and they fly much faster
Powers blvd south of Hwy 5
Hwy 5, Hwy 212
Lake Lucy Road from Galpin to Powers and Powers blvd from hwy 5 to excelsior.
Parts of powers north of 5
Timberwood drive. The trees need to be cut back on sides, it has very POOR visibility.Many walkers
Lyman Blvd should be 40
Q4 Is there any specific road(s) in Chanhassen, where you think the speed limit is too high?
(487 responses)
Votes
0%10%20%30%40%50%
No
Not Sure
Yes, such as:
46.0%
18.1%
35.3%
Percent
Options Votes (487)
No 46.0% (224)
Not Sure 18.1% (88)
Yes, such as:35.3% (172)
25
Kerber
Hwy 41 between Highway 7 and Highway 5
Galpin boulevard
Laredo Drive north of the school. There are many households with young children and dog walkers.
101
Galpin BLVD. the speed limit is too fast by a school and cars go toofast to stop for crosswalks/kid
Longacres Drive and not sure if there's a limit on Hunter and Fawn Hill but people speed on those
Kiowa Trail, Chanhassen. People from Springfield fly down Kiowa
Most neighborhood streets are 30 and that is too high
Bluff creek blvd
Hwy 101 north of 5
Powers blvd
Neighborhood streets
Marsh Dr, the speed limit is 30 when it shpuld be 20. It’s a neighborhood street.
Pontiac circle and lane
Powers
Minnewashta Parkway
Powers Blvd heading to Shorewood
78th street between 101 and downtown.
Chanhassen estates neighborhood
78th Street; Great Plains Blvd; Arboretum Blvd; Hwy 5; Loredo Drive; Frontier Trail;
Pleasantview is a life gamble any time you choose to walk or ride a bike on it.
Powers blvd south of 5
residential streets
within neighborhoods, wish it was 25 and not 30
Lake Riley Blvd
Residential neighborhoods
blvdpower
drivestreetneighborhood
road residential
hwy galpin
lake
kerber
minnewashta
101
78th
parkway
peoplefast
30
mph
cars
go
chanhassen
45
st
41 trail
speedlucy
20
longacres
north
rd
high
sidewalk
highway
limit
great
plains
lyman carver
50
55 beach
25
lane
kid
dr
school
dakota
212
26
101 - the road right in front of Foxwood and Bandiemere
Hwy 5 through Chanhassen. Everyone exceeds the posted limit by a lot
Powers Blvd
W78thSt
5 between Powers and 101
Every residential street that does NOT have a sidewalk.
Most roads with sidewalks/crosswalks.
Galpin
Utica, Tecumseh, Red Man, Shawnee (any residential road that does not pass through opposite ends
Chanhassen estates neighborhood is too fast for the curvy, high pedestrian roads
The easternmost stretch of W. 78th St, between the old St Hubert's Church and Chanhassen Rd
Neighborhood roads
Local residential streets. 30 mph is fast for neighborhoods with driveways, pedestrians, kids
Lake Lucy Road, Powers
Bluff Creek Drive in Liberty on Bluff Creek neighborhood
Dakota Lane in Chan Estates. Schoolbuses and Amzn go TOO fast!
Highway 5 from EP through Chanhassen
Powers North of lake Lucy
all Neighborhoods should be 20 mph- Kerber-Bighorn-Pioneer Trail- W78th- Market Blvd-
Powers north of 5
Hwy 5 through Chanhassen
101 as cars are often going 10 over the speed limit
W. 78th embetween Powers and 41.
Hwy 5 can the city please influence the state between Dell and powers or 41
Highway 5
Cars go too fast down Laredo. they drive straight through the stop sign on 76th st.
Minnewashta Parkway
Lake Lucy Rd, especially between Hwy 41 and Galpin.
101 from 5 to Shakopee
Bighorn Drive
Oxbow Bend - frequent speeding cars are dangerous to residents and children. Would like speed bumps
Hwy 101 between Townline and Hwy 5. The post speed limit is 45 but most people drive 50 to 55
neighborhoods without sidewalks
Audubon between Lyman and Pioneer
Kerber, especially near park. It's dangerous and hard to see when cars parked both sides.
Powers
I think Hwy 5 is too fast through town. I'd prefer if it was 45 mph instead of 55 mph.
Any road with roundabouts probably should be adjusted downward so folks respect slowing down.
W 78th between Great Plains and 101N
Lake Lucy Road
W 78th St
Frontier Trail
27
Powers Blvd
Most neighborhoods
Kerber
Roads though neighborhoods that have no sidewalk.
101 between 212 and 5. 40 jumps to 45 by Riley Crossing Sr. Living, St. Hubert’s, etc.
Galpin Blvd North of 5, Hwy 41 between 5 and 7, Audubon between Powers and Lyman
Saddlebrook Curve and Kerber Blvd. Drivers don't stop for people trying to cross Kerber.
Minnewashta Parkway
Frontier Trail, around the curvy sections. Since there are no sidewalks, people are in the road.
Hwy 5
Neighborhoods should be 15-20. There’s always kids in our neighborhood and many cars drive too fast
Powers. At Powers and Kerber area, when cars want to turn left, can cause quick stops.
Neighborhoods 30 is high- you get a garbage truck or ups or Amazon going at 30- too fast for kids
Santa Fe Trail, used as a shortcut rather then Larado
Minnewashta Parkway
78th street by Lake Ann
Galpin
Lake Lucy Rd, Nez Perce, Troendle Circle
Highway 41 between Hwy 5 & Hwy 7. Collector streets should be 25
Powers, it is difficult to cross when walking or biking.
Galpin Blvd South of Highway 5
Powers
All residential streets.
Great Plains Blvd between Hwy5 and Lyman Blvd
Frontier Trail
Bighorn Drive
Highway 41 at the middle school. People are going 55 in the 35 mph school zone. Chaska road
Most residential streets, Power’s Blvd north of Lake Lucy should be slower due to the curve and trs
Residential streets with driveways should be 20 or 25 and not 30
Longacres Drive, all residential streets in Chanhassen
Flamingo is curvy, people drive too fast. Powers limit chgs from 50 to 45 to 40 from 212 to 5
Powers - same as before. Pick a speed and keep it.
Collector residential streets
Laredo
All residential roads should be 20 and not 30. Longacres Dr is a racetrack.
Galpin Blvd, Alphabet St, Pearl Drive, Paisley Path, Purple Pkwy,
Lake Drive East between Great Plains Blvd and Dakota Ave
East Lake Drive
Galpin Blvd North of hwy 5
Galpin (pre road work at least
I think the stretch of Powers Blvd from 78th St to Lake Lucy Rd should be 45 instead of 50.
Audubon Rd between 5 & Lyman
28
Longacres Blvd. Should be reduced to 25 mph.
Longacres Drive, Galpin, Hunter DR, Lake Lucy (to name a few) all residential and lots of families
Kerber south of Santa Vera, 40 MPH too high
Cheyenne Trail, Dakota Ave, Sandy Hook
Lake Susan Hills Drive
Devonshire, it's 30 mph, this is way too high!!
Audubon…people regularly go 55+
Longacres Drive!!!!
Carver beach road
Carver Beach Rd, Nez Perce
Kerber, near the school ballfields. Residential streets.
Minnewashta Parkway
Most roads in Carver Beach
Residential streets without lane striping - most streets with housing abutting, minnewashta parkway
Roads in older neighborhoods which are narrow and have cars parked and no sidewalks
Minnewashta Pkwy
Minnewashta Parkway
Minnewashta Parkway
Lyman between Great Plains and Galpin. Cars are driving 55mph or more at times and pedestrians cros
Possibly Kerber blvd. people seem to drive 45 to 50. Not sure of reducing 35 mph would help
Pearl . All streets in The Park Community should be 20 MPH. Way too many kids
I think 78th St is too high. I also think Galpin, Powers are too high
Sadddlebrook curve
Minnewashta Pkwy
Galpin Road
People move pretty fast down Hwy 41 and Galpin Blvd
Lyman BLVD from 101 to Lake Riley
Powers should be 45 north of 5
Lake Lucy, Galpin Blvd
Dakota Ave / Chanhassen estate’s neighborhood. Posted is 30. All residential neighborhoods at 20
Kerber Blvd
Between powers and Great Plains on hwy 5, we should decrease that to 45 for safety
Carver beach road and all of carver beach neighborhood.
Minnewashta Parkway
Residential streets. 30 is too high. In our previous cities in Michigan, residential sts were 25 mp
Red Cedar Point, it should be 20 on the main road and 10 where it is a single lane
Highway 101 at hwy 5. Reduce speeds to avoid so many accidents?
Narrow, residential streets at 30 mph is too fast. Cars routinely drive at 35
Tecumseh Lane, Utica, Shawnee Lane and Redman Lane
Residential streets. If Chanhassen neighborhoods had sidewalks it wouldn't be as big of an issue
Pleasantview Rd
Longacres Dr
29
Any street where a bicycling child could fall off bike and into traffic.
Kerber blvd.
Nez Perce Drive, especially the section from Kerber to Carver Beach Road.
101 south of Hwy 5, around the curve is 45 mph. State controls this, but people go 50!
Galpin, Longacres, Hunter
Hwy 101 - stretch between 62 and 5
41
Powers Blvd - posted 45MPH - but everyone drives 50-55 when going between HWY 5 & 212/Pioneer Trail
101 off of 212. People go very fast
Minnewashta Parkway
Powers Blvd
Pleasantview Rd, W 78th
Minnewashta Parkway
W 78th St from Galpin to Century
Pleasant view road
Minnewashta Parkway
Kerber (between 78th & Saddlebrook area); Powers
78th St west of downtown
Kerber
Q5 Any other comments or suggestions about speed limits in Chanhassen?
(150 responses)
Have actually speed traps so people in Chan are aware traffic laws are not a suggestion
The amount of people looking at their phones while driving is alarming.
Enforcement could help or more mechanical or electronic deterrents
I think it's important to make sure that residential areas are kept as friendly as possible for the folks tgat I've there.
Lyman Blvd east of 101 and 101 south of 5 have become drag strips- lots of fast cars at night- more enforcement officers would be
appreciated
speedlimit
roadstreet
people
need
lower
enforcedrive
residential
go
mph
sign think
stop
fast
see
neighborhood
traffic
light
20
30
use
change
car
101
minnewashta
please
reduce
area
like
increase
city
25
chanhassen
slow make
school
driver
kid
post
turn
near
seem
lot
way
pedestrian
sidewalk
hwy
parkway
30
They need to be in line with crosswalks on the roads. A majorly vast majority of cars don't stop at crosswalks and it is made worse
when the speed limit is too high- cars cruise and do not expect pedestrians at high speeds, such as near schools. I mentioned
Galpin for this. Highway 41 also needs to decrease speed at the roundabouts (not sure where it becomes Chaska). Cars going 50
mph often think they can just fly through the round abouts and go too fast to stop
I support lowering them
Neighbors should have lower speed limits. Lots of kids, dogs and walkers where cars are going way too fast
I think we have more than an acceptable number of accidents at intersections. I don't believe speed is the issue. I see way too
many drivers running RED turn signal lights (predominately Left turns). I see it often, that the light is already RED before the car
even enters the intersection.
Speed limit on Powers Blvd needs to be enforced. It is very common to hear motorcycles racing between Hwy 5 and Lyman,
especially at night.
Drivers are distracted. Lower speed limits could help avoid crashes.
No, but it would be nice if we had better roads to drive on!
I don’t think there is an issue. Maybe more patrols and enforcement would go a long way in speeding issues.
Post Twenty is Plenty signs in neighborhood like many of our neighboring suburbs have done.
more enforcement, please
There are a significant amount of accidents along Hwy 5, in particular the corridor between 101 and Powers Blvd. It would helpful
to at a minimum reduce speed to at least reduce deadly accidents but long term helpful to add roundabouts to reduce traffic
accidents and traffic related deaths.
Motorized scooters riding (at any speed) on bike/walking trails in Chanhassen has become notable safety issue. I hope the city is
working to come up with a solution before someone gets seriously injured.
Flashing yellow left turn light are a bad idea at 101 an hwy 5. As people going straight on 101 to market tend to be going fast in
order to make the light and left turners dont always see them in time. Several accidents have happened
Everyone exceeds on Hwy 5 through Chan making it dangerous when merging onto 5. High speeds on Hwy 5 are a great danger to
pedestrians and cyclists.
Most people aren't flying through neighborhoods at 30, it feels too fast when you are. I think most people already go more like 25
which truthfully even seems fast at times or depending on the curves in a street, etc.. Are you really going to have the police
enforce? What is the cost to change all of the signs? I don't think changing the speed limit will cause the very few people who do
go more like 30-35 in neighborhoods to change their speed. I also think Chan does a great job with sidewalks and extensive trails
in residential areas so pedestirans can safely walk. I would leave everything as is.
West 78th Street traffic is out of control. Entering from Erie and Frontier Trail is dangerous and drivers entering from Hwy 101
actually increase their speed as the merge onto W 78th St.
Highway 5 and Highway 7 are out if control with speeding. When 5 is closed, Minnewashta Parkway has many people cutting
through and speeding. It’s a concern for bikers and walkers
Speed bumps would be awesome around schools...
Edina lowered most residential streets to 25 mph and it made a noticeable improvement in the quality of life.
Leave Minnewashta Parkway roads as is please!!!!
Stop light at Dakota and Lake (corner by Starbucks/McDonalds) would be safer- always a gamble.
The larger collectors and county roads have good speed limits and should be driven at higher speeds. The local residential and
neighborhood streets should be lowered to 25 or 20 mph. Compliance will not likely change much, but it may help slow down
some vehicles knowing it is a law though.
People go way too fast on most roads - usually above the speed limit. Doesn’t make sense to increase.
Roads that pass through a neighborhood and are used to get to destinations outside the neighborhood should have higher speed
limits than roads only used to reach destinations within the neighborhood.
Please tell buses and amzn delivery to slow down
I think quieter residential neighborhood streets (ie Chan view neighborhood) should have a 25mph (or lower) speed limit.
Highway 5 is too fast.
People need to stop for pedestrians
Not the speed limit per se, but when the traffic is routed onto different roads due to road construction - people get frustrated and
start to speed on the alternative routes. The issue is now resolved for Pleasantview, but with the blind curves on that road it would
of been useful to have layed down temporary speed bumps to keep peole within the normal limits. Another thought - we have so
many trash services available to us. With fewer customers per provider the trash trucks (3 per company - garbage, recycle, lawn)
- drive quite quickly in order to complete their routes. It might be beneficial for the city to negotiate one contract with a company
31
to provide all services and have the residents directly pay that company for the services they select. Less wear and tear on our
roads and safer streets.
In Chanhassen neighborhoods, a 30 mph speed limit is too fast to ensure pedestrian safety, particularly for children. Limited
visibility due to parked cars, hills, and curves further increases the risk, making it difficult for drivers to react quickly. In my
neighborhood alone, there have been three incidents where children at bus stops were nearly hit, and last summer, a cyclist was
struck. To create a safer community, the speed limit should be reduced to 20 mph, especially with the rise in distracted driving
due to phone use. This change is crucial for the safety and well-being of all residents.
It is alarming to see the blatant disregard for speed limits, stop signs, yellow/red lights and turn signals. This seems to have
become a significant problem in recent years, worse than I’ve ever seen it before - and more dangerous.
I think the posted speed limit in Minnewashta Heights should be 20mph!
No
Residential streets should not be 30
The bigger 101 through many residences is now a super loud dangerous race track. So sad that motorcycles play on it & trucks
jake brake.
Motorized scooters used by children are my biggest traffic safety concern. We need to require drivers licenses to operate a
motorized scooter - not just the 15 year age minimum, which is also not enforced. I have personally been hit on my bicycle by
children on motorized scooters, and a friend was hospitalized and now requires a year of physical therapy to regain motion due to
being hit by one.
None
Have officers soot check areas to enforce the limits.
I totally support the use of cameras to pinpoint areas of speeding. The radar signs do seem to be a good reminder to slow down.
Arterial roads in residential areas should all have sidewalks. This is probably the most important way to safeguard walkers and
young bikers.
Lower Lowe lower on our residential streets
Folks really speed in west 78th between the cemetary and 101
Hwy 5 is a nightmare. Speeding at very high rates of speed always
I think the decrease from 55 to 45 on hwy 41 near the minnetonka middle school west is poorly signed. There are generally too
many signs and it's confusing in that area (school zones, speed, turn lane, etc) the area is dangerous would like to see the speed
limit lowered until the roundabout is in place
30 MPH is fine for Minnewashta Pkwy. I like the radar speed indicators.
If you need to go faster, try leaving earlier!! Watch out for kids, more, where sidewalks don't exsist.
I appreciate being asked for input!!
101 speed limits south of city are two. Also sneaky drop from 45 to 40 is just a reason for speed traps from carver county sheriffs
office
We need a rec center in town with a public pool. We need easier ways to get around without using a car. The Bluff /Avienda Rec
Center’s planned location is problematic. It will require people who are not wealthy enough to live in the $1M+ homes to drive to
and from the center. That’s not accessible for kids and others. Please move location closer to downtown and make it more
accessible.
As more land is developed we should review roads for speed limits - more housing on smaller or winding roads deserves a
reduction of speed. It's unclear when the last evaluation or adjustments may have been done, but most roads seem reasonable
(or within ~5 mph of where they should be?)
101 should be consistent at 40 mph rather than increasing to 45 near Riley Crossing Sr. Housing/Daycare, through St Hubert’s,
Kiddie Academy, Summerwood, etc. The increase encourages drivers to accelerate in this area, which makes turns from the
uncontrolled intersections at 86th St., Mission Hills Ln. main St. and Lake Drive dangerous. In general, speed limits throughout the
city should be reduced as we are seeing in cities such as Edina, Richfield and Chaska and calming measures should be enacted for
safety.
Seems ok.
Need more signs/signals at crosswalks. Drivers rarely stop for pedestrians crossing Kerber at Saddlebrook curve and Kerber and
West Village (by the park). Drivers also often don't slow down if they see someone in the crosswalk, because they think the person
will have crossed before the driver reaches them.
So many other cities around us are brave enough to limit the speed limits. Chan needs to step up.
I believe all speed limits in the city of Chanhassen should be increased to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion. With modern
vehicles being safer and more efficient, higher speed limits can lead to shorter travel times, reducing road stress and increasing
productivity for commuters. Additionally, raising speed limits can reflect the capabilities of newer infrastructure, allowing for
smoother traffic management without compromising safety, as long as proper enforcement and clear signage are maintained. A
review of accident rates and road design could provide data supporting a safe increase across the city.
32
Powers should be more consistent at 50 mph with better signage. It changes and is different in different directions.
Remove the stop sign on Frontier Trail at Highland Drive (keep it only for the Highland Drive side). It is annoying and serves no
good purpose.
Powers and Kerber see crashes a few times a year. If we can get a round about there, that would be awesome. People going North
on Powers, and then turn onto Utica, stop short and can be scary. Would be great if Utica was an exit only, no entrance.
Nope
Safety should be the priority, not speed. Please don't raise the speed limit.
Like many laws in Chanhassen, we don’t need to refine them, we need enforcement of them.
Residential is fine at 30 and should NOT be slower. Logistically it’s difficult to drive a car at such slow speeds and frankly it’s
unnecessary. Cars bear responsibility to look but so do people. I think many forget that.
Need traffic signals at 78 street and Great Plains.
mostly fine
Residential roads need to be slower speed to protect our families and kids!
All roads 25 unless posted
I think Chanhassen has reasonable speed limits. It would be nice if there were more clear markers concerning when/where to
decrease speed on Kerber for school hours/children present.
They are perfect. Don't see any abuse or need to adjust.
Too fast and limits need to be enforced.
We need more enforcement of the current speed limits. No or little enforcement means people feel they can drive whatever speed
they want, tailgate law abiding systems and ignore stop signs.
Residential streets are dangerous at 30 mpg, especially curvy roads with limited visibility.
I would like to see a road diet on Chaska road and highway 41 at the middle school. People are going over 10 mph the speed limit
constantly.
Leave the residential speed limit as is. Don't turn us into Mpls or one of the other inner ring suburbs that lowered the speed limit.
A patchwork of speed limits is too hard to keep track of. I.e. is this town 20, 25 or 30 mph.
Maybe we can start a sustained educational push of courtesy and caring for others when driving or walking; pausing; slowing
down. Good manners & no rushing. Helping each other across the street& making sure everyone is safe. One accident can ruin so
many lives. Possibly our new paper can assist with this.
Speed limits, mainly on county roads are really inconsistent. I think Lyman has 3 or 4 different speed limits within the few miles
that it runs. It would be nice if speed limits didn't change so close on a road.
I support a 25 MPH speed limit for all Chanhassen streets.
People drive way too fast as it is, please do not increase the speed limits
Speeding and red light running has gotten out of control! Physical changes to streets may be warranted if nothing else is working.
Powers Blvd speed limit chgs from 50 to 45 to 40 between 212 to 5. Results in people going too fast once the limit decreases from
50 to 45. Seems odd to have 3 limits on such a short section of road.
It seems people are driving faster and faster these days. It seems logical to keep the speed limit on the lower side for that reason.
For example Kerber Blvd is posted at 40 and it sure seems people drive far over that ALOT.
All good
We need to take action now and lower the speed limits! We should not wait until something bad happens. Please lower to 20 in all
residential areas.
I’d love it if speed limits were decreased to 20/25 on neighborhood residential streets and 30 on arterials. Also, residential
roadways should only be about 22 ft wide. There’s no need to provide free parking along the full length of all public roads.
Have to work with the county.
Don't lower speed limits
On the streets I travel the speed limit is fine.
I know a lot of people who choose to fill this out will want to complain but honestly the speed limits are fine, don't give in and
change them because of a small number of complaints
Hwy 5 from McDonalds/101 thru Powers should be reduced to 45.
33
If you don’t change them, you could enforce existing rules more (speed, or especially call/text while driving). Could help just as
much.
Roads with a lot of pedestrian traffic should be at 25 mph.
Leave them alone. People do not pay attention to posted speed limits.
20 is plenty... too many families, kids on electric scooters and animals/pets
Vehicles — even school buses — drive VERY fast through our neighborhood (Walnut Grove/Brinker), which has many blind curves
and no sidewalks. We need either a lower speed limit or signage alerting drivers to watch for children/pedestrians.
People constantly drive thru red lights in downtown Chan. Increasing speed limits could result in more accidents.
Having official streets with sidewalks for pedestrians, especially kids, curb and gutter, makes the higher speed on a street safer. If
you street doesn’t have those things then the speed should be capped at 20 mph. We don’t have curb and gutter or sidewalks and
I have seen many near misses.
My kids would follow the posted speed (at least when I was in the car with them) so slower is better, especially on narrower
residential streets with NO sidewalk!
Lower speed limits are a good idea, people are constantly rushing/not paying attention or on there phones, if there going slower at
least there’s a bit more reaction time built in. Plus if people choose to speed, issue tickets and can be a stream of revenue for all
of the city’s new spending
Not only are slower neighborhood limits necessary, enforcement needs to be present. The sheriff's office is non-existent in
Chanhassen.
When there are children playing in driveways and sidewalks near the street, 30 miles an hour feels much too fast, and many
people go over that speed limit. I would like to see it lowered, and enforced.
I think there should be speed bumps on Carver Beach Road between Powers Blvd and the park at the corner.
I think speed limits should be reduced near parks just like they are by schools. Maybe even include speed bumps.
Can you please add flashing lights to the speed limit sign on Lyman where it changes to 35 mph after crossing Great Plains? Many
cars go too fast on Lyman on this stretch.
Active communities have dogs, kids and bikes / e-bikes. 20 is plenty
They need to be enforced better.
Follow the lead of all of the neighboring cities, most have reduced residential to 20 MPH or 25 MPH. There is really no reason for
residents to be exposed to higher speeds.
The streets within Carver Beach are narrow and are difficult to maneuver at night. Please add street lights
In favor of reductions of non striped roads to 20, and on striped collecter streets from 30 to 25
I think Minnewashta Pkwy where there's a path to walk on is fine at 30. But many of the side roads with no sidewalk and where
people need to walk in the street should be lower.
Minnewashta Pkwy speed limit is a talk of neighborhood and lowering that speed limit to 20mph. I disagree! 20mph is a school
zone when school children are in abundance, not a suitable speed for driving efficiently on this type of road. I drive that road
multiple times each day. I usually drive the posted speed limit. Every day, while driving the posted speed, I have a line of cars
stacked behind me urging me to go faster. Yes, some neighbors have smaller kids that go to the water in the summer. I would urge
their parents to take them while they are young and as they grow, teach them to use the designated crosswalks and to look both
ways before crossing. My parents taught this to me and I taught it to my children. It is their turn now to tech their children this
portion of civic responsibility and situational awareness.
There seems to be a push by a very activist group of retired residents that are trying to get stop signs and speeds reduced on
Minnewashta Parkway. It isn't for safety concerns, as engineering studies have already shown there is no justification for either
speed reduction or stop signs. Their push is to deter drivers from using the Parkway to access the entrance to the upcoming new
Arboretum entrance. There are other ways to accomplish their goals and I hope the City uses existing nationwide standards, not
the opinions of a select group of residents.
I live on Minnewashta Parkway. I know there is lobbying to have the 30 MPH speed limit reduced. I'm not in favor of that. I want it
kept at 30 or raised to 35. I think the new stop sign at Kings road will provide the impact needed without lowering the speed limit.
Lower the speeds and enforce the speed limit and running of stop signs and lights.
Unrelated to speed, but want to mention safety concern- Concern about crosswalk on Kerber by school. Trees need to be trimmed
to see crosswalk signs better. The signs are covered by branches. Not safe. Thank you.
Please reduce the speed limit on Minnewashta Parkway to 20 mph to avoid becoming a through street. I've witnessed multiple
occasions where traffic has been backed up along the parkway, including large semi vehicles coming through, which the road is
not able to handle. We have kids using beaches and e-bikes on the streets. It's not a safe area to redirect large amounts of traffic.
The problem isn’t necessarily the speed limit but people obeying the speed limit. Cars fly down Fawn Hill Road and more often
now with all the construction. People that don’t live on our street are having to use it as a detour.
34
Slower speed saves lives. Make sure you monitor streets regularly. I hardly ever see folks pulled over.
Slow Down!
People seem to drive very fast turning into the Kurvers Point neighborhood from 101.
The speed limits in the carver beach neighborhood are way too high. The roads are arrow, the area is hilly, and there are no
sidewalks. Additionally, people should stop parking on the hills in the neighborhood. It forces oncoming traffic into opposing lanes,
creating a conflict at a blind intersection. This has been reported to the city and nothing has been done.
You do not have the resources to enforce the lowering of speed limits or enforcing the current speed limits.
No changes in my opinion.
People do not respect the speed limits on residential streets such as Minnewashta Parkway, because there is no consequence,
how about you start handing out speeding tickets? How about you monitor the new stop sign at kings road? A lot of people just
slow down to 5-10mph and roll on through. What’s it going to take? A kid or someone getting hit? Killed?
Do a better job of syncing traffic lights. It is unnecessary to wait at lights with no traffic opposing or be stopped on Hwy 5 when
traveling the speed limit. Let traffic flow. Less energy wasted.... time and fuel.
More traffic enforcement. More signs showing your speed.
In the Greenwood Shores neighborhood we have a lot of families with children. Delivery trucks, school busses and neighbors and
friends of neighbors all speed through. We need 20MPH here for safety. The roads aren't very long and some have curves and lots
of trees where you can't see if a child comes running out if you go over 20 mph
The limits are fine. The enforcement of traffic violations is lacking. The speeding on Powers Blvd and Market Blvd is out of control.
Do we not have officers assigned to traffic enforcement? Running red lights on 78th street is a norm. One time it was done in front
of a sheriffs vehicle with no consequences.
For the most part, keep them where they are.
25 MPH limit on residential streets would likely keep speeds under 30 MPH … which is desirable.
I will speed on the highway but not in residential areas. Wish there was more enforcement of racing on Highway 5 in the far east.
Enforcement. In 20 years have never seen a driver pulled over for speeding in chanhassen communities. I have coworkers who
openly talk about speeding in Chanhassen because they know that they won’t be stopped versus Eden prairie, Minnetonka or
excelsior.
I am opposed to lowering the speed limit on Minnewashta Parkway. The new stop sign has worked to remove any concerns about
speed.
Kerber had lines painted to entice people to slow down. It has not worked. It is near downtown, with lots of trails, pedestrians,
children, a school, elderly, and bikers. Vehicles still regularly speed much over the speed limit.
Yes. A sign post was installed between 6865 and 6853 a few months ago. Looked like it was going to be a speed/radar sign of
some sort. Then nothing. We are left with a naked sign post.
Mostly concerned about highway intersections - too many crashes. Highway through Chanhassen needs to have lowered speed.
See people on phones at red lights every day - not paying attention.
Speed limits currently posted as 30mph are much too high in residential streets.
Place more mobile radars on various streets periodically so people can see how fast.they are actually going. Those mobile radars
make you think about speed more.
Since many of our neighborhoods do not include sidewalks, and also because we have some pretty busy roadways (101, 5, etc), I
would like speed limits to remain low so that bikers & walkers & families can remain safely sharing the roads. Also, please
consider more lighting in the downtown area. I was driving around that area at 8 pm this week and could not see several groups of
walkers as they stepped into the crosswalks near Cub Food, the dinner theater, etc.
Probably should have a stoplight at 101 and 78? Near Riley Crossing
Speed cameras would be great.
Road design has a lot more influence on driven speeds than posted speed limits. Posted limits should follow expected speeds
people will actually drive and then changes to that design (painting narrower lanes or adding painted shoulders for example)
should be used to keep speeds in safe ranges.
I do not want to change anything.
Please install speed bumps in pleasant view road to slow traffic. It is consistently fast and dangerous on pleasant view road.
Minnewashta Parkway speeds by vehicles are increasing!!!!
I appreciate the efforts to use the speed detector. Hopefully more can be done to reduce speeds in some of the densely populated
areas. It is really becoming a concern.
35
Chan View and 76th get a lot of teenagers speeding. I know Life Time Fitness in Chanhassen puts rubber speed bumps in their
parking lot and remove before it snows which seems to help slow down speeders where there are a lot of pedestrians.
Slower is better
Additional survey reports
(c) Copyright 2013-2024 Governance Sciences Group, Inc., Patent pending
36
Consider city-wide Speed Limit reduction
from 30mph to 25mph
City Council Work Session
October 24, 2022
37
The Question
On 8/8/22, the Council asked staff to research a city-wide lowering of the
30mph statutory speed limit to 25mph
Questions from Council included:
•What have other city’s done
•What were the results
•How would it affect Chanhassen streets
•Study it, Take a position on it, Document it
Note: Staff only looked at typical residential neighborhood streets
(Statutory Speed Limits), not collector streets (Regulatory Speed Limits)
38
Strategic Priorities
What area does this fall under?
•Asset Management
•Financial Sustainability
•Development/Redevelopment
•Operational Excellence
o Operational effectiveness – resident
complaints
•Communications
o Improved understanding of city
operations – survey results
39
Authority
In 2019, the State Legislature gave municipalities the authority to govern speed limits on
streets under their jurisdiction
Subd. 5h. Speed limits on city streets.
A city may establish speed limits for city streets under the city's jurisdiction, other than the limits
provided in subdivision 2, without conducting an engineering and traffic investigation. This
subdivision does not apply to town roads, county highways, or trunk highways in the city. A city that
establishes speed limits pursuant to this section must implement speed limit changes in a consistent
and understandable manner. The city must erect appropriate signs to display the speed limit. A city
that uses the authority under this subdivision must develop procedures to set speed limits based on the
city's safety, engineering, and traffic analysis. At a minimum, the safety, engineering, and traffic
analysis must consider national urban speed limit guidance and studies, local traffic crashes, and
methods to effectively communicate the change to the public.
40
Statutory Speed Limits
The neighboring states to Minnesota all have a
statewide 25mph default speed limit
41
Local Data
Speed study data on various local residential streets
around the City shows there is not a pronounced
speeding issue (see map)
The number of crashes over the last 10-years where
speeding was identified as the cause shows there is not
a pronounced crash issue:
•5 total
•0 associated with pedestrians
42
Perception
Consider that many concerns are “perceived”
•The City of Crystal prepared a video to address this concern
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIp5ysHVdcA
43
Resident Concerns and Outreach
Over the last year, there has been 17 TSC cases concerning speeding
•This is about ¼ of all the cases
•3rd most common (behind Pedestrian/Crosswalk issues and Signage)
We understand that Council receives numerous questions concerning speeding and/or
speed limit reduction
Flashvote
•449 total respondents
•80% indicate current 30mph speed limit is about right or too low
•17% indicate support for lowering speed limit city-wide
•43% indicate support for lowering speed limit on a case-by-case basis
•103 written comments indicate a mix of opinions (no clear consensus)
44
Safe Systems Approach
There is a shift in thinking about speed limits toward a Safe Systems Approach
rather than strictly speed study approach
•85th Percentile
•Prioritize non-vehicular traffic
•Risk based
45
What other’s have done
City of Victoria
•Approved 25mph in 2020, only residential streets, limited study, no elevated
enforcement, limited communication, no follow-up study
City of St. Louis Park
•Approved 20mph in 2021, all streets, prioritizing pedestrians, large communication
campaign
City of Edina
•Approved 25mph in 2021, most (not all) streets, large communication campaign,
follow-up study in 2023 to see impact
City of Golden Valley
•Currently studying, volume-based approach (not Arterials), increased enforcement
planned
Minneapolis, St. Paul & Rochester
•Not comparative, large urban city’s, all streets, varying speed limits based upon
classification & location
46
Results of Changing Speed
Limits
No metrics have been developed from the other Minnesota
City’s on their lowering……it’s too early.
MnDOT did a study in 2019, see Table 1
IIHS did a study after the City of Boston lowered speed limit
from 30mph to 25mph
•Showed no reduction is 85th % speeds, however one
data point showed that the probability of super
speeders declined dramatically
MnDOT uses the term “drivers read the road, not the signs”
47
Cost
Implementation cost is estimated at $13,000
•Signage cost only, not staff time
•Approx. 100 signs to be replaced
•Adding approx. 40 gateway signs
•Outreach materials and staff time not included
48
Enforcement
CCSO has no strong opinion on whether to lower the speed limit or not
If it were to be lowered, it’s not reasonable for CCSO to change operational
parameters as far as enforcement for the following reasons:
•For the majority of streets, the data indicates vehicles would still be
under the limit
•Lack of personal injury crashes on the local residential roads
•Takes away from the high danger situations, such as highways
•It’s not common practice to stop people driving at a speed of 2 or 3mph
over a posted limit, and unreasonable in the court's eyes to issue
citations for such minor infractions
If lowered, additional patrol and stops (warnings) could be considered but not
isn’t accounted for in the existing level of service
49
Implementation
Develop a full Communications campaign
Potential Open House/Public Hearing
Official Resolution approving the lower speed limit
Order and install signage
Estimate a rollout timeframe of approx. 6-months
50
Alternatives
1. Continue existing strategies such as:
•Education
o Focus on the data (speed studies, crash history)
•Enforcement for super-speeders
•Speed trailer deployment
•Physical Improvements (make the driver want to slow down)
o Road diets
o Bump outs
o Driver feedback signs
o Signing/Striping
o Crosswalk Improvements
o We don’t support speed bumps/humps/tables
2. Go with a Case-by-Case scenario
3. Just wait……….there is a reasonable chance that the State will eventually lower the
Statutory Speed Limit to align with neighbors and the current industry trend AND/OR
wait for other city’s to do their follow up studies
51
Summary – Why and Why not do this
Some PROS of lowering speed limit city-wide Some CONS of lowering speed limit city-wide
Assuming compliance, reduces Risk of severe
injury or death in the event of a vehicle/ped crash,
even though the probability of such crashes is
quite small (Safe Systems Approach)
Likely no actually reduction in speeds
(Cost/Benefit)
Shows a city action/response resulting from a
small number of reoccurring resident concerns
Likely an increased number of enforcement
complaints
Differs from the majority opinion (per Flashvote)
Doesn’t solve an actual data supported problem
(crash history)
Creates inconsistency and confusion in the city and
surrounding metro area
52
Recommendations
Traffic Safety Committee
•Vast majority, but not unanimous, favor leaving speed limit as is. Mainly due to the
belief, based on studies, that it won’t change driver behavior.
Engineering
•No recommendation, has merits either way, but none rise to a level of priority to
outweigh the other
•Case-by-Case basis certainly has some merit, but need clear qualifiers
•Continue with existing strategies
Law Enforcement
•Leave as is, will create elevated enforcement challenges with no actual speed reduction
Data indicates drivers “read the road, not the signs” and there will always be “super speeders”
53
Options
1.Remain as is, maintain the current 30mph Statutory speed limit
•Consider alternatives
2.Defer making a decision, pending additional information or more time for discussion
3.Proceed with next steps on lowering city-wide speed limit to 25mph
•Develop a Communications campaign
4.Other
54
Discussion
19 55
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Review Conceptual Development for 6535 Peaceful Lane (Pleasant View
Pointe) no earlier than 7:30 p.m.
File No.Item No: A.4
Agenda Section 5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Prepared By Eric Maass, Community Development Director
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
No action. General discussion only.
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority Development & Redevelopment
SUMMARY
Rachel Development, in partnership with Charles Cudd Homes, is looking to develop property located
generally at 6535 Peaceful Lane and includes PID's 25-8710-190, 25-8690-130, 25-8700-063, 25-8700-
060, and 25-8700-062.
The Developer will be attending the City Council's work session meeting to get feedback from the City
Council on the conceptual development plans. One concept includes the extension of Nez Perce Drive
to Pleasant View Road. The second concept shows a development that would not provide a connection
of Nez Perce Drive to Pleasant View Road.
During a neighborhood meeting hosted by the developer and during a meeting between City Staff and a
few neighborhood residents, concern was shared at both meetings regarding the potential for increased
traffic as a result of a connection of Nez Perce Drive to Pleasant View. The Developer is willing to
move forward with either concept and is seeking feedback from the City Council as to its opinion on
whether or not Nez Perce Drive should be connected to Pleasant View Road as part of the development.
56
During meetings with residents, the access road to the city's water tower at Powers Blvd and Lake Lucy
Rd. was also a point of discussion. The city is not planning any changes to the driveway at this time.
However, the existing access is steep, in poor condition, and in very close proximity to the intersection,
which presents safety and maintenance issues. This access is used by both city staff as well as
telecommunications companies which have approvals for various antennas and equipment on the water
tower. Staff does support keeping our options open for a potential future relocation of the access drive if
an alternate route is deemed to be needed for safety or maintenance reasons. The city owns a 50' wide
outlot that was dedicated with the Carver Beach Estates Plat, which is located between homes at 1060
and 1080 Lake Lucy Road. Both proposed development concepts show a triangular outlot on the SW
corner of Lot 13 - which when paired with the existing 50' wide outlot would create a corridor for a
future driveway to access the water tower site.
Another drive option could be from the new street being proposed by this development. Neither
development option currently shows a path for a future tower driveway route from the new street.
BACKGROUND
City Code Section 18-57(k) establishes a maximum cul-de-sac length of 750 feet measured from the
centerline of the intersection and the center point of the turnaround radius. The concept which does not
connect Nez Perce Drive to Pleasantview Road would create a cul-de-sac that is approximately 1,000
feet long which would require a variance approval with the subdivision request. A variance request is
measured based on standards in City Code Section 20-58 which includes identifying practical
difficulties in the ability to adhere to the City's zoning code.
If Nez Perce Drive is not connected to Pleasant View Road, the Troendle Addition subdivision adjacent
to this proposed development will have a permanent cul-de-sac length of approximately 1,500 feet. A
condition of approval for the Troendle Addition was the future extension of Nez Perce Drive to Pleasant
View and an escrow of $17,000.00 and another escrow of $10,000 was received by the City from that
Developer to help cover the costs of the city building the future Nez Perce Drive extension to
Pleasantview road. It is unclear at this time whether or not the City will have to return those escrows
plus 7% simple interest which as of October 1, 2024 would require a payment of $63,746.69.
The concept of a connection from Nez Perce to Pleasant View is not a new one and is rich with history.
Back when the Troendle Addition was being developed, there was intense debate amongst the city,
groups of residents, and the developer of that project concerning this connection. At the end of the day,
the city had made the decision to plan for the street connection and went so far as to condemn the land.
The street was stubbed and a barricade was installed indicating the future street connection, which still
exists today. Attached to this staff report is the stipulation and court order related to the city's
condemnation of land to gain control of public right of way for the extension of Nez Perce Drive to
Pleasant View Road. Also included is the staff report for the Troendle Addition and conditions of its
approval which included the manner and timing of an extension of Nez Perce Drive to Pleasant View
Road.
Unrelated to the street extension, but also a topic that will be highly debated is the topic of the
wetland/stormwater pond on the north end of the site. The issue is ultimately one of whether or not the
area is considered a wetland or not, and what protections should be made based on that decision. This is
currently being discussed by the city, TEP, and developer, and is not meant to be a main topic of
discussion at the work session.
57
DISCUSSION
N/A
BUDGET
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Staff does not have a recommendation of a preferred development plan at this time.
ATTACHMENTS
Pleasant View Pointe Concept - no connection
Pleasant View Pointe Concept - makes connection
Nez Perce Stipulation and Court Order
Staff Report - Troendle Addition Amendments to Condition of Approval
Developer Narrative - Pleasant View Point Concept Review
Work Session Presentation (Draft Only)
58
9-18-24PLEASANT VIEW POINTEChanhassen, MN 10-3-24No Public Access59
9-18-24PLEASANT VIEW POINTEChanhassen, MN 10-3-24Public Road Access60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
td
C I TY 0 F SOL,
cHANHAssEN1
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN; MINNESOTA 55317
612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739I A ct al by NI
Endou ' 1 / i P
1 mo.:;•,...____ m T0E7RANWMDon Ashworth, City Manager noectei--, ----
DB.e.--t---
II FROM:Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner 1
THROUGH: Paul Krauss, Planning D irector NI,
IDATE:AUgust 7, 1991 V i'•:-
SUBJ:Amendments to Conditions of Approval and Final Plat
1 Approval, Troendle Addition, South of Pleasant View Road
and West of Vineland Forest Subdivision, Frank Beddor
knrl,
BACKGROUND tr
The applicants are requesting final approval to subdivide an 8,7
I
acre parcel into twelve single family lots and one outlot. The
property is zoned RSF and is located between Pleasant View Road and
Lake Lucy Road adjacent to Vineland Forest subdivision e Access is
proposed to be provided by an extension of Nez Perce Drive running
I northwest from Vineland Forest. Concept plans previously approved
by the city, illustrate the' ultimate extension of this road to
Pleasant View Road as a thru street connection, with the connection
being made in the vicinity of Peaceful Lane.
A5P''V
The Planning Conunission reviewed this item on October 17, 1990 and
III
recommended its approval. The City Coun9-4.1 reviewed and tabled
action on this item on NoveullDer ,5_,,19904, The 'item was tabled
because ,residents on 'Lake' Lucy Road weie• that excessive
levels of traffic would be generatedoiNess 1 , the „Nez Perce
I connection to Pleasant View Road was made concurrently with the
development of this . plat. Requiring the connection at this time
between Nez Perce and Pleasant View Road .. via Peaceful Lane is
I complicated by the fact that the property lo to the west of
Troendle Addition (Owens propertY)ais in bankruptcy and the state
has a lien against it. In addition, development of that parcel is
111,
not being proposed now.
On January 14, 1991, the City Council reviewed a staff proposal
that the subdivision be developed into phases to eliminate the
traffic generation problem. Phase L would include Lots 1-4, BlockII1andLots1and11, Block 2 of the preliminary plat. The
remaining area was tor be platted as an outlot. Lots 2-10, Block 2
II Pt
vele PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
I 71
1
Mr. Don Ashworth
August 7, 1991
Page 2
would not be platted until such time when Nez Perce is constructed
through to Pleasant View Road. The City Council approved the
preliminary plat subject to this condition.
Recently staff met with the applicant to discuss the conditions of
approval. The applicant indicated a belief that it was inequitable
for the city to condition the full development of his property
solely upon the decisions of another individual, i.e. the adjoining
property owner, Mr. Owens. Staff believes that there is some
validity to the applicant's position. He clearly has little or no
control over the adjoining property. The status of the adjoining
property is further complicated by the fact that it is presently in
bankruptcy. We have contacted the Attorney General's office and
they indicate that this matter should be resolved within a year,
but Mr. Owens or anyone else will not be in a position to develop
the property until that time. In a related matter, the applicant
indicated that under the original condition they would only be able
to construct a portion of the streets and utilities on the Troendle
Addition at this time. They would be forced into bringing back a
contractor at some later date to construct the cul -de -sac and other
utilities.This is clearly not a very economical method of
constructing the plat and they would like to be able to build all
the improvements at one time.
Based on these discussions, an alternative set of conditions has
been developed for your review. Rather than limit construction to
a total of six lots, four of which would access onto Nez Perce, the
current proposal calls for the platting of all eleven lots on
Troendle Circle plus a lot created around the existing Troendle
home. All twelve lots would access off of Nez Perce and be
constructed immediately. The balance of the parcel, which would
ultimately include up to two lots accessing directly from Pleasant
View plus one additional lot on Nez Perce, would remain as an
outlot until such time as the property owner wishes to proceed with
subdivision. In exchange for being allowed to develop the property
at this time, and recognizing that the desire of the city and of
the area residents is to complete Nez Perce to Pleasant View Road
as expeditiously as possible, the applicant would escrow $10,000
dollars which would be used in lieu of direct assessments of the
lots in Troendle Addition for their fair share of the costs
associated with constructing the connection to Nez Perce. The city
would have these funds sitting in the bank and would employ them to
1 facilitate construction of the road as soon as possible.
Until the road is connected through to Pleasant View Road, a
temporary cul -de -sac would be provided. Consistent with city
policy, the temporary cul -de -sac would be paved and would be
provided with a barricade. A sign containing a notice that this
street is intended to be extended in the future will be required to
be affixed to the barricade. In addition, a notice shall be placed
72
1
Mr. Don Ashworth
August 7, 1991
Page 3
in the chain of title of each lot indicating that Nez Perce will
ultimately be extended as a thru street to Pleasant View.
We believe that this alternative set of conditions is reasonable 1andwillensurethattheconnectiontoPleasantViewisconstructed
as soon as possible. Staff is recommending that this alternative
set of conditions be approved with the final plat.
A second issue that was discussed during the preliminary plat
approval was the setback distance of an existing shed /garage from
proposed Nez Perce. The original alignment of the extension of Nez
Perce would have created a front yard setback variance. Revisions
have been made on the attached plan to eliminate this variance.
This was accomplished by realigning the future extension of Nez
Perce to maintain the required 30 -foot front yard setback. The
revision to the Nez Perce right -of -way to eliminate the setback
variance on Lot 1, Block 1 is acceptable to staff. However, this
requires the realignment of right -of -way on Nez Perce located east
of the site in the Vineland Forest Addition. Staff has been
informed that these lots are under the control of the applicant at
this time and that the revised right -of -way easements can be
provided. Staff is recommending that provision of these easements
be conditioned as a part of the final plat request.
Overall this proposal is acceptable and staff is recommending
approval with appropriate conditions.
Staff Recommendation 1
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion:
The City Council approvespproves Final Plat 90 -15 for Troendle
Addition without variances, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The applicant shall enter into a development contract and
provide the city with the necessary financial securities
to guarantee proper installation of the improvements.
2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of the
Watershed District Department requirements.
3. A tree removal plan consistent with city ordinances and
policies shall be submitted for Lot 1, Block 1 prior to
issuance of a building permit. Clear cutting, except
the house pad and utilities, is prohibited.
4. Final street plans shall be developed for approval by the
City Engineering Department.
73
1
Mr. Don Ashworth
August 7, 1991
Page 4
1 5. The applicant shall install erosion control sift fence
around the ponding area until such time as turf is
established.
6. Provide the following easements and rights -of -way:
a. The drainage easement along the westerly property
line of Lot 9 -11, Block 2, and the ponding area on
Outlot A (previously Lots 3 -4, Block 1) as shown on
the Grading and Erosion Control Plan, shall also be
shown as a drainage and utility easement on the
final plat accordingly.
1 7. Park and trail fees shall be required in lieu of parkland
dedication.
8. Lot 1, Block 1 shall be serviced by Nez Perce Drive and
the gravel driveway to Pleasant View Road shall be
removed.
9. The temporary cul -de -sac should be provided with an
easement to accommodate the temporary pavement and be
provided with a barricade equipped with a sign indicating
the road will be extended. A similar notice shall be
placed into the chain of title of all lots platted in the
Troendle Addition.
1 10. Lots 1 and 11, Block 2 are required to have access from
proposed Troendle °Circle.
1 11. Pay a fee of $10,000 to the city that will be utilized in
lieu of assessments for the fair share of costs related
to the extension of Nez Perce to Pleasant View Road.
12. Provide revised right -of -way easements along Nez Perce in
the Vineland Forest plat to eliminate the "jog" in the
1 right -of -way between this plat and the Troendle Addition.
Attachments
1. Memo from Paul Krauss dated January 9, 1991.
2. Staff report dated November 5, 1990.
3. City Council minutes dated January 14, 1991.
4. Memo from Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician dated August
8, 1991.
5. Final Plat.
1
1 74
CITYOF
cHANHAssEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 .
612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM i
TO:Don Ashworth, 'City Manager
FROM:Paul Krauss, Planning Director
DATE:January 9, 1991
SUBJ:Update Report #90 -15 Subdivision Troendle Addition i
Preliminary Plat -----
BACKGROUND i
The applicants are requesting approval to subdivide an 8.7 acre
parcel into 15 single family lots. The property is zoned RSF and
is located between Pleasant View Road and Lake Lucy Road, adjacent
to the recently approved Vineland Forest subdivision. Access is
proposed to be provided by an extension of Nez Perce Drive running
northwest from Vineland Forest. Concept plans previously approved
by the City illustrate the ultimate extension of this road to
Pleasant View Road as a through- street connection with the
connection being made in the vicinity of Peaceful Lane.
The Planning Commission reviewed this item on October 17, 1990, and
recommended it's approval.The City Council reviewed it on 1November5, 1990, and ultimately voted to continue action on the
item. During review of the plat, the subdivision itself did not
generate significant issues rather concern focused on the access
question. Several neighborhood residents, primarily located along
Lake Lucy Road, had raised a concern that their street would see,
in their opinion, excessive levels of traffic generated unless the
Nez Perce connection to Pleasant View was made concurrently with
the development of this plat. Another resident questioned how the
design of the street connection would impact his property. The
City Council asked that this matter be further reviewed prior to
taking action on the plat.
MEETING WITH THE DEVELOPER AND ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER S
Since the City Council last reviewed this item, staff has had an
opportunity to organize a meeting between ourselves, Daryl Fortier,
who represents the developer of the Troendle Addition, Frank
Beddor, and Art Owens, who owns the parcel located immediately west
i75
1
Troendle Addition
January 9, 1991
Page 2
of the proposed Troendle Addition.Mr. Owens's property
constitutes the final link over which the connection to Pleasant
View must go if it is to be completed. The following constitutes
a summary of the meeting.
Staff outlined the City Council's stated goal to obtain an
early completion of the Nez Perce /Pleasant View connection in
an attempt to gain both the understanding and support of both
individuals.
Both individuals indicated understanding of this concept and
voiced no direct opposition to it.
Mr. Owens indicated that, although he is not presently in a
position to develop his property, this may be a long term goal
on his part. At the present time the property is tied up in
a bankruptcy p.;oceeding such that he is unable to consider or
directly participate in further development of his property.
Both individuals indicated that they were, at that point,
unwilling to participate in funding the feasibility study for
the street connection. However, they did indicate that they
were willing to consider participation in any project that may
be assessed to the property over a long period of time.
Staff indicated that as a result of this meeting, we would
proceed to get cost estimates on undertaking the feasibility
study and return to the City Council at the first meeting in
January.
LEGAL ISSUES
There are two legal issues which were investigated relative to this
issue. The first concern is the matter of Mr. Owens's bankruptcy
proceeding and if the city would be in a position to condemn
property needed for the right -of -way extension, if so desired.
This question was of particular interest due to Mr. Owens's current
financial status relative to his property. You may recall that at
the meeting, Julius Smith, Attorney for Mr. Beddor, indicated that,
in his opinion, Mr. Owens could not directly participate in the
development of his property but would probably be comfortable with
the city taking action that would result in his ability to develop
his property in the future. As noted above, Mr. Owens confirmed
this opinion in our meeting with him. The City Attorney has
reviewed the matter and has indicated a belief that the city may be
able to condemn a portion of Mr. Owens's property for the street.
I However, he believes that such a condemnation would have to get the
approval of the bankruptcy court and that this is not assured. He
also indicated that the City may have a difficult time sustaining
assessments against Mr. Owens's property for the street improvement
11
i 76
Troendle Addition
January 9, 1991
Page 3
until such time as the bankruptcy proceedings are completed. Thus,
if the road were actually to be built, the City would be in a
position of probably needing to carry the cost of construction for
and as yet, indefined period of time. Of course the portion of
those assessments that would be brought against the Troendle
Addition could be reimbursed in a normal time frame.
The second legal issue is relative to the street extension and the.
Troendle plat itself. Staff asked the City Attorney to comment on
our ability to link approval of this plat to completion of Nez
Perce out to Pleasant View Road. The City Attorney indicated that
this could be done but only to the extent that the City could
verify that completion of Nez Perce to Pleasant View Road was_
inherently required to meet the access needs of this plat.
The area residents that have been present at recent meetings have
raised concerns regarding the ability of the existing Nez Perce
functioning as a dead -end street to carry traffic from 13 of the 15
lots being platted in the Troendle Addition. This street already
carries traffic that would be generated from 19 of the.21 home
sites being developed in the adjacent Vineland Forest Addition.
Staff believes that there is a valid point being raised in this
discussion.While we initially envisioned Nez Perce being
constructed on an incremental basis at the time it was first
conceptually proposed in 1989, we were unsure as to how this would
proceed. Nez Perce is currently a 740 foot long street dead - ending
in a temporary cul -de -sac at the east property line of Troendle
Addition. As proposed, it would extended through the Troendle
Addition ending in another temporary cul -de -sac at the new end of
Nez Perce which would result in an 1100 foot long temporarily dead
ended as measured from Lake Lucy Road) street. The proposed
Troendle Circle would result in a 1400 foot long cul-de-sac. Staff
is uncomfortable with cul -de -sacs of this length serving up to 32
home sites without any clear indication as to when the street will
ultimately be connected with Pleasant View Road. The City's
Subdivision Ordinance states the maximum street length of a street
terminating in a cul -de -sac shall be determined as a function of
the expected development density along the street.Although
interpretation of this standard is not entirely clear to staff, it
is clear that this can be raised as a valid issue.
At the last City Council meeting, it was indicated that Mr.
Beddor's goal in proceeding with the plat at this point in time is
more one of being able to close on the property with Mr. Troendle
then it is to immediately develop home sites. It was indicated
that the development of home sites would likely be put off until
some point in the future.
Based upon the considerations outlined above, staff would like to
propose the following as a possible solution.We would be
177
1
Troendle Addition
January 9, 1991
Page 4
1 recommending that Lots 1 -4, Block and Lots 1 and 11, Block 2 be
allowed to be platted in the first phase of a two phase platting
scheme for the Troendle Addition with the balance of the lots being
platted into an outlot. As a part of the first phase construction
program, Nez Perce Drive would be constructed up to the west
property line of the site. The remaining lots in the Troendle
Addition would be considered a second phase of the development.
Approval of platting for the second phase of the development would
be made contingent upon the owners petitioning the City to
construct the extension of Nez Perce from the Troendle property to
Pleasant View Road. Another condition would be added such that the
developer of the Troendle Addition waive the right to contest area
assessments on benefiting lots in the addition relative to the
ultimate construction of Nez Perce to Pleasant View Road.
The proposal outlined above accomplishes several goals. It will
limit the initial construction in the Troendle Addition to 6 home
sites, 2 of which will use Pleasant View Road for access, the
remaining 4 would utilize the newly extended Nez Perce. The
addition of 4 additional homes on Nez Perce Drive does not appear
to raise the specter of extensive impact for the Lake Lucy Road
neighborhood. Secondly, it will minimize the length of the cul-de-
sacs that will be constructed until such time as the neighborhood
has a second entrance. This will hopefully minimize emergency
vehicle response times and city maintenance costs. The third
result is that Mr. Beddor can proceed with his plat and close on
the property in an expeditious manner. Lastly, it will provide for
the ultimate construction of Nez Perce to Pleasant View Road and
the equitable distribution of costs without running into problems
that may result with the City financing the project ahead of
development or dealing with the bankruptcy proceedings on the
Owens's property. If the Owens parcel is developed in advance of
1
the second phase of the Troendle Addition, Nez Perce Drive would be
completed through the Owens's property as a requirement of any
related development approval.
FEASIBILITY STUDY
In an attached memorandum from the Assistant City Engineer, we are
bringing forth a proposal from OSM and Associates to undertake the
feasibility study for the extension of Nez Perce. The estimated
cost of the study is approximately $3,700 and is outlined in detail
in a memo prepared by Bud Osmundson, Professional Engineer with
OSM. Since we do not have anybody volunteering to pick up..the
initial costs of the street connection and since it is the City
Attorney's opinion that we could be on shaky ground attempting to
II link those costs to the Troendle Addition plat, the City Council is
in the position of needing to consider front - ending the costs
associated with the fea study, and, potentially, front
ending the actual assessments (improvements). This is not prudent
78
I/
Troendle Addition
January 9, 1991
Page 5
and re- supports staff's position to phase the Troendle plat. If
the Council supports this recommendation, the necessity for a
feasibility study is now a moot point.
OTHER ISSUES
Two other issues were raised at the Council meeting that warrant
some discussion.These concern the location of an existing
garage /barn relative to the new road extension and consideration of
potential road improvements to the curve near the intersection of
Nez Perce and Lake Lucy Road. On the first issue, staff had
recommended against approval of variances associated with the
location of an existing garage relative to the new street right -of-
way. Lot 2, Block 1, which would contain an existing residence and
garage and barn would have a 21.7 foot setback between the garage
and the extension of Nez Perce, whereas, a 30 foot setback is
required. Staff and the Planning Commission have recommended
against approval of such a variance since there does not appear to
be a persuasive hardship. In the past in similar cases, as
development occurs, the property owner is normally asked to remove
the offending structure.It is generally assumed that the
financial benefits accruing from the plat far off -set the costs
associated with making the lot comply with city ordinances. The
applicants have indicated a willingness to ultimately remove the
structure but wish to leave it in place for the duration of time
the property is owned or controlled by Mr. Troendle, who is being
given a life estate by Mr. Beddor.
The City Council took no direct action on this request but appeared
to be leaning in the direction of finding some mechanism to allow
it. Julius Smith, Mr. Beddor's Attorney, suggested that they would
find it acceptable if a deed restriction was written into the title
of Lot 2 indicating that the barn must be removed whenever title on
the property is transferred. Staff does not really have a problem
with this proposal since we do not view it to be a highly
significant matter, however, we are concerned that administratively
conditions such as these are difficult to manage. We also note
that it puts the City in an unusual position since a variance
cannot be granted on a temporary basis so that the City Council is
essentially being asked to approve what would become a non-
conformity for a limited and undefined duration. As noted above,
apart from the unwieldiness of the proposal, staff does not view
this as a major issue, but we continue to recommend that this
building be removed or relocated in a manner consistent with other
11subdivisionsthathavebeenapprovedovertheyearsinthecity.
Should the City Council wish to allow the garage /barn to remain on
a temporary basis, the sentence in Condition #11 should be deleted
and the following sentence substituted, 11. A deed restriction
acceptable to the City shall be drafted concerning the garage /barn
on Lot 2. The restriction shall clearly state that the barn is a
79
1
11 Troendle Addition
January 9, 1991
Page 6
1 non - conforming structure that must be removed concurrent with Mr.
Troendle relocation off the life estate to another individual."
The second concern that was raised by area residents at the meeting
dealt with the intersection of Nez Perce and Lake Lucy Road. This
concerns a corner on the road with relatively poor sight distances
that resulted from difficult engineering constraints when Lake Lucy
Road and Nez Perce were connected several years ago. Staff had an
opportunity to discuss this matter with former City Engineer Gary
1
Warren and it was his opinion that the road as it is currently
constructed represented the best alternative design available
without significantly impacting adjacent properties. While it is
possible to realign the street to .improve this curve, to do so
would likely require the taking of properties on adjoining lots and
potential impact to area homeowners. Should the City Council wish
to reassess this design or the residents from Lake Lucy Road
prepare a written petition for the Council to do so, the City
Council should direct staff to obtain cost estimates on a
feasibility study associated with this project. However, the City
Council should be aware that resolution of this matter should not
be tied in with the Troendle Addition plat since there is no direct
linkage to the plat that is obvious to staff. It should also be
recognized that any such road improvement project would likely
result in an area assessment over a large number existing
homeowners. Staff is not recommending any additional action in
this regard but will respond to the directions received from the
City Council.
RESPONSE TO LETTER RECEIVED JANUARY 4, 1991 FROM FRANK BEDDOR, JR.
Staff recently obtained a copy of a letter prepared for Frank
Beddor regarding two issues concerning this plat. A copy of this
letter is attached. This section of this report is being used to
respond to issues raised in this letter. The letter covers two
issues. It touches briefly on the request for a 7 foot setback
variance for the existing garage on Lot 2 but most of the letter
focuses on the proposal by staff and approved by the Planning
Commission that an additional 7 feet of right -of -way be taken along
Pleasant View Road.
The letter implies that staff is being inconsistent on
recommendations concerning the width of Pleasant View Road. It
attempts to make the case that traffic will not increase on
Pleasant View Road and thus, improvements will not be required and
the need for additional right- of -i - eliminated.The writer
utilizes information contained in, -the Eastern Carver County
Transportation Study and the draft City Comprehensive Plan to make
these points. Unfortunately, these matters were never discussed
with staff ahead of time and we believe as a result, there is a
1 80
1
Troendle Addition
January 9, 1991
Page 7
fairly sizable amount of misunderstanding or misinformation that is
conveyed as a result.
The letter first makes the case that the city is inconsistent in
it's policies as to road width on Pleasant View. If inconsistency
can be equated with a learning process whereby the city learns by
it's mistakes, then we are probably guilty. The 80 foot right -of-
way that we are attempting to achieve on Pleasant View Road is
fully consistent with the recommendations contained in the Eastern
Carver County Study. Table 5 on Page 17 of the study a copy of
which is attached to this report) clearly states that a 2 lane
Class II collector should have a minimum right -of -way width of 80
feet. We note that the Eastern Carver County Study is a relatively
new document that was not available when the items mentioned in the 11letterwerereviewedandtherefore, staff did not have the benefit
of this recommendation to act upon. The letter also appears to
indicate that the Eastern Carver County Study is somehow a document
that is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Nothing
could be further from the truth and in fact, the Eastern Carver
County Study is incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan and as the
Council is aware, city staff actively participated in the drafting
of that study.
The letter discusses the issue of the collector designation of
Pleasant View Road. The Eastern Carver County Study classifies
Pleasant View Road as a Class II collector which is the lowest
intensity road designation in this study. As a Class II collector,
Pleasant View is grouped in the same category as Lake Lucy Road.
I believe that this is consistent with the actual use of these
streets. The Comprehensive Plan utilizes a different designation
system than does the Eastern Carver County Study. The reason for
this is that we are able to look at our community on a much more
detailed basis than was possible during that study and we realize
that we have a class of collectors, called Class II collectors,
that are simply too small to be investigated during the Eastern
Carver County Study. These would include streets such as Nez Perce
through the Troendle Addition, which clearly has minor collector
status.The Class I collectors identified in the city's
Comprehensive Plan are the equivalent of the Class II collectors
identified in the Eastern Carver County Plan.
Population growth and employment growth projections that have been
prepared for the city during the Comprehensive Plan are questioned.
As the Council is aware, these population projections are a
conservative estimate of city growth and represent a significantly
slower rate of growth than the city as experienced over the last
few years. The letter indicates that it would be "unreasonable" to
have one job for every 1.8 people in the city. I am not sure why
the writer believes that this is unreasonable since this is almost
precisely the ratio of jobs to employment that we have today.
181
1
Troendle Addition
January 9, 1991
Page 8
1 There is a population of 12,000 with. approximately 6,000 jobs. In
the same paragraph we are asked to believe that the all or
nothing" figures represent true traffic demand for Pleasant View
Road. Traffi forecasting is a fairly complex science and without
wishing to enter into a protracted discussion regarding the
forecast, the capacity restraint forecast is the one that we are
actively using with the Eastern Carver County Study. The capacity
restraint forecast is a real world number that is based on the
actual limitations of how much traffic a street can handle. For
example, the all or nothing forecast might assume that rather than
use Pleasant View Road, traffic will utilize Highway 5, but that
the traffic on Highway 5 is well beyond the theoretical capacity of
that road to handle it. The capacity restraint model assumes that
there are real world limitations on how much traffic a street can
handle and when this number is approached, cars and drivers will
reasonably seek alternatives. The letter goes on to indicate that
it is their belief that the 500 vehicles forecasted by the all or
nothing forecast represents a true traffic demand figure. This
seems extremely implausible .given the fact that the current traffic
volume on Pleasant View Road is approaching 1,000 vehicles per day.
Whereas, the all or nothing projection calls for only 500 trips per
day. Staff notes that there continues to be development in the
area and that the demand for through trips will also grow. Please
keep in mind that the Crosstown Highway is scheduled to be extended
from I -494 to Hwy. 101 in the next few years.
The letter then states that the preparers of the county study do
not believe that such an increase along Pleasant View will be
acceptable. This is true. I wrote that section of the Eastern
Carver County Plan to put county planners on notice that the city
has real limitations in what we expect to be able to do on Pleasant
View Road.
Lastly, the writer questions the city's ability to take the 7 ft.
of property for a roadway that "most probably never will be built".
As the Council is aware, the city is fully within it's legitimate
rights to obtain right -of -way for future road expansions at the
1 time property is subdivided. Staff takes this authority very
seriously and would never want to be in a position of abusing it.
Staff has been consistent stating in the Eastern Carver County
Transportation Study, the Comprehensive Plan and in the Troendle
Addition staff report that we do not envision a major upgrading of
Pleasant View Road at any time in the foreseeable future. While we
are attempting to find alternativeroutings for Pleasant View Road
traffic, realistically those alternatives are limited and traffic
is virtually certain to increase in the future. If this increase
does not come by trips through the neighborhood, and we believe
that there will be a component of this in the future, it will occur
by additional home sites being created along Pleasant View Road.
The City Council should recall that the Crosstown Highway is
1
82
It
Troendle Addition
January 9, 1991
Page 9
scheduled to be extended from I -494 to Hwy. 101 in the next few 111
years. This will result in greatly increased pressure to travel
through the northeast corner of the city.
It should again be stressed that staff does not foresee a major
upgrading of Pleasant View Road due to the real limitations and
potential impacts that exist in this area. We do believe that it
will be necessary at some point in time to consider safety related.
improvements. Safety related improvements could include widening
the pavement so that cars are able to pass one another safely,
modifications to curves to improve sight distances and the ability
of traffic to negotiate the area. Any such improvements that are
considered in the future would only be done with extensive
neighborhood involvement and with great sensitivity to maintaining
the character of the area. However, no such improvements are being
considered by the city at this point in time and there is no
schedule for their consideration.
Based upon this discussion, staff is continuing to recommend that
the 7 ft. of right -of -way be dedicated along Pleasant View Road.
As future subdivisions occur along Pleasant View, this is the
standard that will be employed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1
Staff recommends the Council adopt the following motion:
The City Council approves Preliminary Plat 90 -15 for Troendle
Addition without variances subject to the following conditions:
1. Final plat shall be limited to Lots 1 -4, Block 1 and Lots 1
and 11, Block 2, of the preliminary plat. The remaining area
is to be platted as an outlot. Notice shall be placed in the
chain -of -title that as a condition of platting the outlot, the
owner must petition the City to construct Nez Perce through to
Pleasant View Road. Approval of the first phase will require
the construction of Nez Perce up to the proposed temporary
1cul -de -sac located on the site's west property line.
2. A tree removal plan shall be submitted for Lots 1, 2 and 3,
Block 1 prior to issuance of a building permit.Clear
cutting, except for the house pad and utilities, will not be
permitted.
3. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the 1
city and provide the city with the necessary financial
securities to guarantee proper installation of the
improvements.1
1
183
1
Troendle Addition
January 9, 1991
Page 10
4. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of
the Watershed District permit.
5. The developer shall dedicate the utilities within the right -
of -way for permanent ownership.
6. The cul -de -sac on Troendle Way shall have a radius of 60 feet
and the street name shall be modified to either Troendle
Circle or Troendle Court to eliminate any confusion in
applying it as a through street. Final street plans shall be
developed for approval by the City Engineering Department.
7. The applicant shall install erosion control silt fence around
the ponding area until such time that turf is established.
Turf or sod shall be placed behind all curbing.
8. Shared driveway access off of Pleasant View Road for Lots 1
and 4, Block 1 is required and a cross access easement shall
be provided. This common section of the driveway shall be
constructed to a 7 ton design paved to a width of 20 feet and
have a maximum grade of 10 %.
9. Provide the following easements and rights -of -way:
the drainage and utility easements along the westerly
property line of Lots 9, 10 and 11, Block 2 and the
ponding area on Lots 3 and 4, Block 1 that are shown on
the grading and erosion control plan shall also be shown
on the preliminary plat accordingly.
additional 7 feet of right -of -way along Pleasant View
Road.
standard drainage and utility easements.
10. The applicant shall submit storm sewer calculations verifying
size and capacity of the storm sewer system and ponding basin.
Eight inch sanitary sewer at a minimum rate of 0.4% shall be
constructed on this subdivision and service locations for all
of the lots on this plat shall be shown for final submittal
review. The final plans and specifications shall be submitted
to the City Engineer for review and approval.
11. Park and trail fees shall be required in lieu of parkland
dedication.
12. The garage /barn on Lot 2, Block 1 will be removed or relocated
to an appropriate location so no variances are required. Lot
2, Block 1, shall be serviced by Nez Perce Drive and the
gravel driveway to Pleasant View Road shall be removed.
1
84
I/
Troendle Addition
January 9, 1991
Page 11
13. The temporary cul -de -sac should be provided with an easement
to accommodate the temporary pavement and be provided with a
barricade equipped with a sign indicating the road will be
extended in the future.
14. Lots 1 and 11, Block 2 are required to have access from
Troendle Way.1
15. The developer waives the right to contest area assessments
that may be placed upon all lots platted in the Troendle
Addition relative to the completion of Nez -Perce through
adjoining parcels to link with Pleasant View Road. This
condition shall be placed in the chain -of -title of all lots in
the plat."1
ATTACHMENTS
1. Reductions of preliminary plat, grading plan and contours.
2. Letter from Frank Beddor, Jr. dated January 4, 1991.
3. Excerpts from Comprehensive Plan.
4. Excerpts from Eastern Carver County Transportation Study.
5. Letter from Bud Osmundson, OSM, dated January 3, 1991.16. Notice to residents.
7. City Council agenda dated November 19, 1990.
8. Staff report dated October 17, 1990.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
185
NM 7 MN I= IIM 11111 IIIIII NE MI MI MN NM .Mal Ell. Mal MIN 11111111 MI Illir 1111111
1
1 1
v N.1./.04_,
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF
TROENDLE ADDITION
DT ,survg..yp COMPANYAlt&CITY OF CHANHASSEN I qLANDSURVEYORS 14•,., 4Y,1 f.:fi
f .
e.:- '
11 /
I11.,11.....mm...Z...r''''... 1.1i 0 :1 I 11...
V : NELAND I 4-1 I: C E 5 T
lbtill1N4„I e...... I I I , ir N.I
N.
I ii r .-. N r
1 7 -• I /
1 1 I 1 -="7---
ri .
t‘7,7--,:.;
12- lr'` -----
1 r ' NP11
Nw! _,..t li .1.1
0\ \ I ----,,Ni ' s , 4..!Ii t I • I: -1- - --- -17 -":?: -.7 " °5 -7. - lr 1 1 fl., (
I L I I _../..... e i I
7 I 4.. I i • --sr1 I \ g I k - -.-,-,z-.. idi 7 M 1.I 1 1 ii 1 0 ,s fi1. NZ''..( Nc 9 .1 „--,?-,.._- 42:,,, 2 1 - LVdg I tl 1 r-, VI 1 4, II 1 3 i 1 1 4( N 6., \ \ 91 iWA - I ••• .... ,I i ' . kF. ....% .--.--, I '3 - -- ,1 I I: 1,, t '-- / I I I lk "1,006ti v---....., \t )r atepOre 1_ - .:- - .7' -- •) - i fT -N IP ".......--.". pi- ,-----I pi
L k.,-.:-... 4 . 1.....7-12 . ; ....:-.. fi: , : ,L",..,- I
r -
3.1_, T: L._..-
t
i.ey / / ,.....i, 4. i
if II f Nip l ' .. ..l LE ---- . \ \ \
1
y i 8 i 10
t
I)Xi 1 1 1/
L--. i IAiq4,_ _ -
7 — r 1 N T 7- ‘11 I r 1-7-- \ --''.7. ' •j I rii •! '-) CI141I3ii / .« i i r _1 r 1 1VI1AIII1 ' 4 ".
41 S, I Ixttg3Ru: i 1.I i\,7 ji-- I 1 1 r? s •V10119 1 2c. c.. i t..11 i 1 1 V , 1 e3. :.4 1 I .-7 •-... 1 1
1 , \ r. tsk I i A 0 • -1 .1 I 1 itt r t , s.m. :ward Ns -,,_; , 4 IA I i I I 1 111.4....4 its:134. ,I I
44.___ t_z_ _ 1 j...., ' _ a ,-Ig .... 4 - Tr -74 '
I') ... 6
I fil - . )f : it) BE s'ACATEr.: ..... - / V / t 1 v
lik i
I I 4.:.:i I I7 )4 . :-... \ % , 1 1 I s:1,141___,,1 I "C to i. : I 1 FT aII ' . Il , : r I 411%1411 % % Cl ‘ 1 1 i I 4*6 I I I C l I 0 4, I 1 I .1 1/ t/i 1
No V. 1 \ \ \ \ % \ i i I I I I 1
1 F .: il ..‘i• /I i ‘. , 1 \ 1 \ \ i 1 \ I / I N III
I .' I I I I
I
t •
1 I I-
I I
1 1
OM.
14 u . I
it' ; 1 I Me . 1 . _S..,i. .
4
20 o so ego
1.1•
1.
311E-___WW
LII' I " I
7L'ItT 7 .1 " 111 1
ler ,/ 41,..• ...:. 1 r 1 tli. I .... a 1.0,
I 1\ 11114railIO I W ..2 110 AI 'V Poil
Att 04 r 11. 4 I. • 0...., $ •I
1
os up ,,, 1 )4e , .,
Illsp tr 1 .4 li
11; .10 ••,,,21 4.111-..,,.:7—'"
4 •
ow* 4 Tar moll . r.'••••0. ... 1:, r .. • 1 ". . • .
1.1. 41 4...11 111p.... ...v., .1 r I Ire 1 ... I •
Or b •
i '
i .
2•114 ,...,S 6/ PA.04-
86
1 1 ,
r„,,..........,
mown GAADIFOI 1
EROSION CONTROL PLAN RM.
TROENDLE ADDITION Earcert 1LOTSURVEYSCOMpaNtINC.CITY OF CHANHASSEN like..L AM) SURVEYORS
7 r -1 I
I
1 a
1 •
cism-24
Pt. 4" 111% ,
1 1 I N .
1 ai i •
a I to I ‘ I • IIII-T FlEttokrkiL 1 =1 1 1
3/4. '3/4.1 1Ij13117...,
i 1 •, • I.
1 Fr --1- I 10 12 " —
r — — ' •- — ' .":
i
11 ‘ I 47: 3 4.4.0. ow... I
1 e"
q . :I. , ., .I 1 —1
1 1 r - - 1 1 I r— .
I ' 111 • '
crtv:z..... • i I 1, v. 1 :\ -2 a. 1 .
1 i il 1 1 I I „ I , 1 3 Mr •...,1 , •. ,ki .. I ......... .0.4, 4 I.. ft , ••1 L I IL' l' I I" v ,,,,. ,,
lamow.e•d• . ......
a I I 7......e •tl. rIIssflt . _ 1 • i
1-:_:77. ,l
I...- INAWr 1 ,_. 4. . . :::: ,,
p, 4 t(t:,, . 41 . 1 ---.-A.‘ 1,.1 --- • - f 1... rui 1 1
r I j 10 , , 3, .1 ti
I Pa ,1 • ai I \ .INar' ; 41. t ' p. / • rairjeWiag I
WIN Ma•allailli t „ 1 I .t • I 4 III / 1
I-111/91 1 p 1 " l
i If N,
i
1 I
1 1 6 4! I, i. I I.P.;awl 1 ,j , .'. . , 1 ij .‘: op.! I II ' i ' II‘Ja_J ti 1 i 1 ., 1 . I 00 c. ‘t , k---....1.....a.1-- 1 ,I J f
i I I Ler i el i • % 7 .......\ . \ \\ilJ11. A .... 1, ..,41 ......., _./ , ; „" I/f.• \ .. 2 ).,. a f0
14 • .• 4 ... ,.:- x-•' 11," ' ''',4 •• -.A.: .2 ... 1 ) 1 I 1 IA ., I 4. -:' . ,
I \ s.j p 1 1 ,,•.. ., ., : m et VAC•11T.:
44_ 47 6.... 7 4,3....... zr - 7 1 4 il 1 t , I ... . .
I 1 ' r—
r
1
ti. v itit‘i i 1It Oh 1 t ;1 1 1
4..1. 's
t
I L I •I 1 1 , .,HI 1
1I1
IMAMS PLAN eV •
I I
1 1 I V ai.ai
1
A I
Z.IILIG matmairs , wc.
LSr
6/011• .... Om*
9
I IIt
III' VP LOCK_
87.4..",..."."4.7.11,,,:mmo:t. SKID -- -.
S
immt•raul. au
MI*I 11,,,,,....,i,..1.,.....:or Ir ...„
j.
1 or
ti-all,
inIPrilkiinWilitVICP•••
EiltUtifMistiF2/241:6 mown mom son
I I 12.
misarw.• \ , .. ....... Oyu lomninlP11. • NM /111.1.1.540 L ..-Ii+__Pet-Pou awl.
our_ , iiiiiiiiii;;— TYPEAL IMIEETJECTEri gas Mel We MIMI
mt. ,... / i ...' •••( r ..ISSUEDN7-
r.1.Nowelesimen.
111•ItAl. WIMP Me* MTN&
PRELIMINAli I •
IIIIIII MN NM 11111 MI OM MN NM INIII IMO MI INN MIll INN IMII Mil 41.11187
NM MI I= RN IMI NE NS MN 1 IMII I MI Er Mall
1
N.1
N .
1 2./.:4--f-tjfi,*
S
I I \k `'L ten„, ---.1 1 w''
0
s. ,• . v .':
1 k • i
I/ \ \ '
1 ,
fir I 111 1 1 '/ i•I
f ,r
t 1 1
I 1 o e_ ; 3.;
ti
I Leene_
I' ._ _ _ _ —_ .7 _ .. 7;: 4 'S '\ 11
I 5. Lt! I M •
PRELIMINI
II N
1 KIM IIC/al
s
N II reasects. ma
I' v y I
11tLa IM1T NamRM WI
I /I /17t r 1Y
1 5 : ',\ M,.•./at' a I- tartankALEN I CT
1.111 •11 -1lt _
yy
a
o 1 1
FORTIER & ASSOCIATES, INC..IAMCS
naga 1„aMa•11a
1 aars - a —a 11MM.. aMa I IIMa •M \a•. Num111013 33313
I 14,1,1 NI.,...
88
gg
ti 2 /
N F,,Ili • X ,
444. if t k' A/0/E/4 ri 14 104 ----
V i 1 II I ? 4 $ aft, ...1 ,i
i it, I 1 . 1. N 1*,:p•111 4061 .
r 7 44i let: .1 ' f. . 11 i :Ar.... . 5 . 11iri r-
s.
4' i c id!.1 , 1 1
1 1 N V
J'009
itoc .
c b
1 1 -pi 1 i'? i
i yy
44
11 1 4 A /
hi
7- i 1 71-' - ' '. f -- a_P lit - ,-..
Ilffillre ;.3 ,..._:'
1 4 . -- # If f 8 A iiitli, —
i 1= i a a
1 'I
0 #iv N \(
1I
I ' (i ',--; 1 14 v i 'I 1:\ti 4 . .
1 I I 1 / 1;4 1- ill
1 CIj t
1 . I V I i ) /
I i-E 711 \ "111111N I 1 I
A .,11 ( i - 7. , 1... ic
li/ i I
1 f f
i-T i
Sri j , •
1 te
I :.ri 4- I 2 i
fr 7:-.„„ - A ! a - '
4• 4 4SW
1 i i
T.riar aL a Mt
S
fir.... -
J 4 a - "mot-- 1 y ' 1 1
C
89
CITYOF
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1
January 10, 1991
Mr. Frank Beddor, Jr.
7951 Powers Boulevard
Chanhassen, MN 55317
1 Dear Mr. Beddor:
I am writing in response of your letter dated January 4, 1991,
concerning the Troendle Addition plat. As you are aware, my staff
and I are in the process of completing our review on the Troendle
Addition plat for which you are the developer. To date, all of my
contacts to you have been through Daryl Fortier, who has been
representing your interests on this project. I appreciate the time
that you took to respond to your concerns on the Planning
Department's recommendations concerning Pleasant View Road. Since
we have not had an opportunity to discuss these personally, I
wanted to take this opportunity to respond to the issues that were
raised in your letter. I am certainly available to discuss these
with you in person at your convenience.
First, let me state that we have long been aware of the difficulty
1 that would be encountered in improving Pleasant View Road and have
never envisioned it's widening on a significant scale. However, in
representing the best interests of the City, we note that Pleasant
View Road is a collector street that already carries a significant
volume of traffic and that this will only increase over time. The
construction of the Crosstown Highway between I -494 and Hwy. 101
that will occur in a few years can only add to this pressure. As
such, I would be professionally irresponsible if I did not make
allowances for the City to, at some point in the future, make
safety related improvements to Pleasant View Road.These
improvements could include items such as providing sufficient
pavement width for cars to maneuver and to provide for pedestrian
safety and opening up curves or grades to improve sight distances
I and maneuvering ability. It is with this goal in mind that we have
been recommending the additional 7 foot of right -of -way along
Pleasant View Road.
1
90
Mr. Frank Beddor, Jr.
January 10, 1991
Page 2
Your letter indicates that we have been inconsistent in the past as
to what we have recommended with this street. I should point out
that the City, as with any good organization, learns by it's
mistakes over time. We have been going through a process of
updating our codes and plans and attempt to use the most current
data possible to review development proposals. The Eastern Carver
County Study, which as you are aware has recently been completed,
has some specific recommendations for.Pleasant View Road. The plan
notes the difficulty of improvements to it and the sensitivity of
the surrounding neighborhood. It also recommends that an 80 foot
right -of -way be preserved for roads such as this. What it appears
that you are not aware of from the letter is that the City was an
active participant in the Eastern Carver County Study and the
inclusion of special information on Pleasant View Road was
requested by me.
There is some understandable confusion about the designation of
Pleasant View relative to the Easter Carver County Study and the
new draft Comprehensive Plan being prepared by the City. This
confusion stems from the fact that the City Comprehensive Plan is
much more detailed relative to local streets then is the Eastern
Carver County Study. This has given us flexibility to talk about
a Class II collector street in the City Plan that does not appear
anywhere in the Eastern Carver County Study.Locally, the
comparison would be that Pleasant View equates to Lake Lucy Road
and Galpin Boulevard as Class I collectors, while Nez Perce, when
completed, would be a Class II collector. There also appears to be
some question as to the population and employment projections
contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Let me assure you that these
are reasonable projections that actually represents significant
decreases from the rates of growth that we have experienced over
the last 5 years. You may also find it interesting that, at the
present time, we have approximately 12,000 people living in the
community and based upon a recent survey completed by my staff, we
have almost-6,000 jobs. From this we have concluded that a 2 to
1 ratio in the future may be reasonable although we have not
specifically provided projections for employment, the plan only
contains projections for population and households.
The letter goes on to raise questions regarding traffic forecasts.
Traffic forecasting is a rather complex science but I can summarize
the pertinent information fairly quickly. The all -or- nothing"
forecast is a modeling technique that is used to outline where
vehicle trips would occur if they were unconstrained by such real
world factors as roadway capacity. The capacity restraint model,
on the other hand, takes into account the fact that roadways do
have a limiting capacity and that when traffic backs up
significantly, people will find alternate routes. Therefore, as
the capacity restraint model that is being heavily relied upon for
the Eastern Carver County Study, in my opinion, it is unreasonable
191
1
Mr. Frank Beddor, Jr.
January 10, 1991
Page 3
to expect that if the current traffic volumes on Pleasant View Road
is approaching 1000 trips a day, that 10 years from now, with added
development in the area 4nd added pressure for through trips, that
the amount of vehicles would be decreased to 500 trips per day.
The capacity restraint forecast of 1900 trips per day appears to be
much more reasonable although as noted above, we have put the
County on notice that there is some very significant constraints
that are encountered when introducing more trips on Pleasant View
Road is considered. Thus, the realistic forecast for Pleasant View
Road is probably somewhat less.
1 I hope that this responds to the questions raised in your letter.
Again, I would enjoy the opportunity of having the chance to speak
directly with you about these matters or any related questions that
you may have in the future.
Sincerely,
haul Krauss, AICP
Director of Planning
PK:v
cc: City Council
Troendle Addition Staff Report
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 92
GFrank GBeddor, Jr.
It
January 4, 1991 1
Councilman Thomas Workman
CITY HALL
City of Chanhassen
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: Troendle Addition Plat
Dear Councilman Workman:
On January 14th, the request for approval of the above plat is on your agenda
and has been recommended by your planning staff. This plat has been before
you on several occasions generally recommended with conditions or exceptions
involving essentially two issues. One has to do with the temporary setback
variance or a temporary approval of the use of the existing garage by Mr. Troendle
until such time as his life estate terminates; and the second involving the
recomendation or requirement that I dedicate an additional 7 feet along Pleasant
View Road, presumably because the present 66 foot wide roadway is expected
to be widened in the future to 80 feet.
A few thoughts regarding Pleasant View Road: the typical right -of -way in Chanhassen
for a collector, such as Lake Lucy Road, is 66 feet. This is the right-of-
way width that your planning staff has requested for Pleasant View Road at
the Vineland Forest plat and also the proposed Art Owens plat. Also, contrary
to Staff's opinion, the right -of -way requested for the Beddor Addition (Zahn
property) was 33 feet. That right -of -way also matches the property line for
the plat of Christmas Acres. From this point of view alone, there seems to
be little justification for the planning staff asking for dedication of an
additional 7 feet to get a total for an 80 foot right -of -way for Pleasant View
Road.
The city seems very inconsistent in their policy as to what is required for
a road right -of -way. On September 11, 1989, there was a request by Carl McNutt
to subdivide his property located at 185 Pleasant View Road. At that time,
it was pointed out that there was a 66 foot right -of -way at his end of the.
property and JoAnn Olson stated, "we've got full right -of -way at that point ".
This apparently is also close to Councilman Johnson's residence and he commented
at length that the right -of -way appeared to be 66 feet all the way out to TH 101.
The City Engineer, Gary Warren, then clarified that at that location the right -
of -way was actually 73 feet wide. The Council then asked that if they gave him
back some of that right -of -way would his lot then conform; they were actually
thinking of reducing the right -of -way back to 66 feet in width which they earlier
suggested was the standard for a collector withn the City of Chanhassen. While -
the subdivision was ultimately denied, it was very clear from the minutes of
that meeting that the Council and Staff felt very comfortable with a 66 foot
right -of- way for Pleasant View Road.
Jr:N C b 1,1
rf Y
7951 POWERS BOULEVARD • CHANHASSEN,MINNESOTA 55317 • TELEPHONE 612/474 -0231 • FAX 612/474 -0379 193
Councilman Thomas Workman
Page Two
January 4, 1991
In the Comprehensive Guide Plan, the City has Pleasant View Road as a "Class 1
Collector ". This indicates a speed limit of 35 -45 mph and that it is used for
inter -city travel. This is the same classification as County Road 17, Lake
Lucy Road, Kerber and Galpin Boulevards. This is the first time that the City
has classified Pleasant View Road as a collector and I believe, if they were
to make such a classification stick it should be a "Class 2 Collector ". A Class 2
is limited to 30 -40 mph and is used for inter - neighborhood travel. The 1980 Compre-
hensive Guide Plan did not list Pleasant View had as a collector at all. The
2010 Guide Plan Recommended Base Roadway System classifies Pleasant View Road
as a "Class 2 Collector ". It was noted that Pleasant View Road currently has
capacity /alignment problems and that the right -of -way width should be 60 -100
feet wide. Pleasant View Road currently serves Zones 540 -1 and 540 -6. It is
projected that in the year 2010 these two districts will have a total population
of 1,396 which represents 537 households.
The eastern Carver County traffic Study also provides forecasts of traffic
volume for Pleasant View Road and throughout Chanhassen for the year 2010.
Interestingly enough, it is based on a population growth of 222% and an employment
growth of 815 %. I personally find that basis for projections to be unreasonable,
as they would not have one job for every 1.8 people in the city. This means
that Chanhassen would be importing workers from other Communities. Nevertheless
the predictions of traffic for Pleasant View Road is most interesting as follows:
Current Volume 880 Vehicles per weekd•.
All or Nothing"500 Vehicles per weekday
Capacity Restraint"1,900 Vehicles per weekday
Believe it or not, the "All or Nothing" figures represent "true traffic demand"
assuming none of the arteries and roadways are congested, how would people
travel. The volume under the "Capacity Restraint" reflects the fact that the
other" routes are clogged and congested and that Pleasant View Road becomes
a relief valve or an alternate route . . . not the primary intended route.
The report further states that the preparers of the county study do not believe
that such an increase along Pleasant View Road will be acceptable, as this
is primarily a residential district. To alleviate such anticipated congestion,
they recommend that County Road 17 and TH 101 be increased in capacity to provide
4 lanes of traffic. This would reduce the traffic flow along Pleasant View
Road considerably, say, to be current levels or less. Accordingly there would
be no reason or demand to widen or improve Pleasant View Road.
Additionally, of course, is the matter of taking of a parcel of land of approxi-
mately 335 feet by 7 feet for roadway that most probably will never be built.
II It is a poor use of the property. If the roadway is ever bult, the city would
need to purchase property all along Pleasant View Road. Since there will be
1
94
1
Councilman Thomas Workman
Page Two 1January4, 1991
1
few future possibilities to require dedication along an already built -up
Pleasant View Road, it seems particularly inequitable that I should be treated
differently than cther owners in that I am to give up the land when almost
100% of the other owners will be compensated. Primarily, however, dedication
of that 7 foot strip for an 80 foot roadway. - which has had fierce opposition
in the past and which will most likely never be built - strikes me as an
unreasonable requirement. I would urge you to approve the plat of Troendle
Addition without the requirement of the dedication f the 7 foot strip.
Sincerely,
Frank Beddor Jr.
FB:djl
cc: Mayor Don Chmiel
City Council Members
Don Ashworth, City Manager
Paul Krause, Planning Director/—
City Engineer
1
1
1
1
r
1
1
195
JJanuary10, 1991
I 1 ,
oL11991
Mayor Don Chmiel
rl r cf h r`Y` cSE/vCITYHALL
City of Chanhassen
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: Troendle Addition Plat
Dear Mayor Chmiel:
On Monday, January 14, our request to replat the Troendle property
will come before the City Council. Unfortunately I will be out of
town but I will be represented by Jules Smith and Daryl Fortier.
By way of background Marilyn and I had negotiated over a year ago
with Joe Troendle to purchase his property. Joe is 81 years old and
has lived on this property all his life so he has to be one of the
oldest living, long -term residents of Chanhassen. Joe has been a
neighbor of our's for over 33 years and we made what we feel is a
very generous offer to Joe - -all in cash, plus giving him a life
estate.
We are very hopeful this plat will be approved on Monday night because
our purchase agreement with Joe is contingent upon getting this plat
approved. We would feel very badly if for some reason Joe should
unexpectedly die before this contract can be completed because he
would not have an opportunity to enjoy the proceeds from this sale.
From our personal standpoint the timing is not important but I am
sure it is to Joe Troendle.
I would hope that you and the Council members would be in sympathy
with this position. We certainly hope Joe has many more years of
a healthy and full life and that he will have a chance to enjoy lifetoitsfullest.
I have another subject to address - -the Planning Staff has recommended
we donate a seven foot easement on Pleasant View Road and we feel
there is a "FAIRNESS ISSUE" involved here. The City Council just
recently approved the Vineland project which is directly next door
to Joe Troendle's property and did not request an easement from the
developer. The City also approved the plat on Art Owens' property
on the other side of Joe Troendle's land and did not request this
dedication from Art Owens.
Marilyn and I are purchasing the last remaining undeveloped parcel
along Pleasant View Road and do not understand why at this time and
place we should be singled out as the only owners being asked to
II give up a seven foot strip of property.
910 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD 0 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 TELEPHONE: 612/474 -6010
t 96
1
Mayor Don Chmiel
Page Two 1January10, 1991
This is also ironic because Marilyn and I have led the drive to keep 1
Pleasant View Road safe and sane, to keep the traffic level down
on Pleasant View Road and we are adamantly opposed to widening Pleasant
View Road, as outlined in my letter to Councilman Thomas Workman
on January 4.
If you approach the "fairness issue" from another standpoint, if
years from now Pleasant View is widened, Marilyn and I would be the
only owners who would not be compensated for their land.
Again, I apologize for not being able to attend on 1
January 14; however I hope you can approve this plat so we can pay
Joe Troendle. I would also be in hopes that you would not insist
on taking the seven foot strip of land just as a "fairness issue ".1
Thanks a million for your consideration.
Sincerely,1
Marilyn and Frank Beddor, Jr.1
MFB:djl
cc: City Council Members
Don Ashworth, City Manager
Paul Krause, Planning Director
City Engineer
1
1
1
1
1
1
197
4t Co ?lc vt
1 1 It it Ii >I I :.. -t- _' t i t¶'tt t1t
4 I:.
Mil `r •11` = _
p OFAt
q
r--
IP 1 I r c _v
maIr 1 ! iN . _
Mai fi rt - a
r nrr
Irrl' ....
1 t
A e
r r
4....... ..................$4,_
ifisr.,t air .Ili - : ...„. 1 1
WI
on A.
i iii -.... •• , a
Alin. ....
01.1=6.1r ..71.41 ji as 1111P - . 7
ii
e IMAM Oft
t i t t
1
arr of R= w t —
Mr
i
n
Existing Functional i rr. .
Classification E -=
IPE[IE Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial — Class 1 -
i
j
solu Minor Arterial — Class II I. _-
Collector — Class 1
i' -' I 14, ---: - LI mim .
ow- olie-
I
i i 1 r•
s
M
1 1 1
i I 1 1 I 1
I
o
WC wt
98
IT Y C) F Pc DATE: 10/17/90
CHANHASSEN CC DATE: 11/5/90
23 It
CASE #: 90 -15 SUB It
By: -- Al- Jaff /v
STAFF REPORT li
PROPOSAL:Subdivision of 8.7 Acres into 15 Single Family Lots,
Troendle Addition
1-
Z LOCATION:Lots 4 and 8, Vineland Forest - West of Vineland Forest,
Q south of Pleasant View Road, north of Carver Beach
V Estates and east of Lots 5, 6 and 7, Vineland Forest
l
APPLICANT:Fortier and Associates Frank Beddor, Jr. owner)
408 Turnpike Road 7951 Powers Boulevard
Q
Golden Valley, MN 55422 Chanhassen, MN 55317
1
1
PRESENT ZONING:RSF, Residential Single Family
ACREAGE:8.7 acres gross) 7.5 acres net)II
DENSITY:2 units per acre
II ADJACENTZONINGAND
LAND USE:N - RSF; single family
Q S - RSF; single family II '--E - RSF; single family
Q ,W - RSF; single family
WATER AND SEWER:Available to the site.II
W
PHYSICAL CHARACTER.:The northeastern portion of the site isMINIM
heavily vefetated with mature trees. - The
site generally slopes to the northwest to
form a low area.II
1
199
0
1
1111111110 MIMI Mill IMIMI11411NM
1 lkI11......3 N c
a . ,1-- Co-4. i 00
I .,'
tk
Atiktf 1 ,
Th.......4. Clia
4- 4 ' •-`‘ 1112Fr /MN 1300III
11111% . PW4RIWNW 1J v,.\ .._ t.k, ....,____i
t.,Si MP , rip..4 r • ,.. i
ank. " (2.T. IwillimPAig7DJIle2IMIE.: d al 161 .1:1- ' 4' s
1
1200 p1111111111111111setIcalio.../4
1livuammunrinni,.a I) Vk CT 41.W .9j. iliPt A a
4 owo..wommu-11111r
um — iloot4tap270.'. • „ . m ': .NI
t41 ,00,\ Illgurittitt.,1w ,.. 1 1 '
s ^
TM 7 . •kfillinN, illro-, ...Si' mud& ,I, 11 V. a
C-. 4 .,..44:1;:::;" IOC . r 471 /ill
lal k iti ' ;'20A ,4 g O . p w /I\iliii p in _Ihn ' r..... W......q
s' rzli• wite ere, .4.4 a LI 1..,n MIM
1000
I t,..) )tp40
rii Nt1 - 0.5 ..1% ei s s /041,1,E4V,r 3 900pi.-4
v.Vri w -s- 104 op 4k ,_‘ . .11161 !IP s4b•-:\ Oil 3 .4 I-
p
Emu Ai ---,
io.
SA vi r o t4, g NI 4 ti rail ° 4W, 1 ,,,' i z :s , ,,, . , ;.,
800 ,a .114 4 C3 " ( - )''i- A. K
r :
I millo04i: Lima. T 00 4! ,4L g4 ":. 4, ,,-,, li FA; 1 tiolArts,,, 41,p•i#,,d', ;or:04 Atfil 444' 41' r:''
P
i.
C g2Alpk-
1 --
in.. la . erAttr; ' •ist50 10.. f,,11` , ell410 7i VI411 "- agi,..-- . 0 fAve* um 4.74
Illipa, 0 ,,...V1St I ',‘ 7,
1 44A 700 6 - a)4111b, we r- -1,,.___
c... 0 ,
IIIIP Ii. ' 11111 " Ilki w 0- c.. •60071111111110110;71 e ...iir,
re % 111 pi op 4. N.' go XIil — 4ow. =A godo ...... ,iv wo 1'i
4w, : .__I r —500
717. tar :kw ::; 'NI op tip Lii.-. Am v-i N. Ai= atir4v JVAizilL ,.-.1•1 :de Ili wig
do, yaw: —
z
00 714li;ik.416 itinra o
43, ,/,-..,-,--
1000 '
I.
15 4 of`•CIS ilk„„„,;,,, SIONA?isa
v 0 lb.
100
1
Troendle Addition
October 17, 1990 irPage2
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
The applicant is proposing to subdivide 8.7 acres into 15 single
family lots. The property is zoned RSF. The average lot size is
21,855 square feet with a resulting gross density of 1.7 units per
acre. The site is located north of Carver Beach Estates and west
of Vineland Forest. Access to the subdivision will be provided by
an extension of Nez Perce Drive. The extension of Nez Perce Drive 11isconsistentwithaconceptualaccessplandevelopedbytheCity
during review of the adjacent Vineland Forest plat.It will
terminate in a temporary cul -de -sac at the west property line.
Ultimately, when the adjoining parcel is developed, the street will
be extended to Pleasant View Road via Peaceful Lane. A cul -de -sac,
Troendle Way, extends south from Nez Perce to service many of the
proposed lots.
All of the proposed lots meet the minimum requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance_.Proposed Lot 2, Block 1 has an existing
residence and an existing garage /barn. Presently, access to this
site is gained from Pleasant View Road via a gravel driveway. The
barn will be located 21.7 feet from the proposed extension of Nez
Perce Drive.City ordinance does not permit any accessory
structures to be located in the front yard setback. Therefore,
staff is recommending that this structure be removed or relocated
as it will create a non - conforming use.1
Grading and drainage issues are relatively straightforward. Storm
water retention will be provided by an expanded storage pond on Lot
4, Block 1. This will overflow into a wetland on an adjoining
parcel that has been partially filled by the property owner.
Municipal utilities are available with no unusual issues in this
regard.
In summary, staff believes that the proposed Troendle Addition
represents a high quality plat that is consistent with the
standards of the Zoning Ordinance and with city plans concerningthisarea. We are recommending that it be approved.
BACKGROUND
On September 11, 1989, the City Council approved an access concept
plan for Vineland Forest. The concept plan would loop Nez Perce
Drive to the west parallel' to Pleasant View Road and hook up with
Peaceful Lane Attachment 1). As designed, the access concept
creates a road that bisects and provides access to the Troendle
parcel. The Vineland Forest plat was approved on December 18,
1989. The plat has been constructed with Nez Perce terminating in
a temporary cul -de -sac at the Troendle property line.
1
1101
Troendle Addition
October 17, 1990
Page 3
1 Access
Access into this area of the City was explored in detail with the
review and approval of the adjacent Vineland Forest subdivision..
During review of that subdivision, it became clear that the City
wished to maintain continuity of north /south flow between Pleasant
11 reasonable
Road and Lake Lucy Road and points further south to maintain
reasonable access for emergency vehicles and residents. At the
same time, residents along Pleasant View Road were concerned that
if traffic were introduced too far to the east that Pleasant View
Road would have an undue burden from increased traffic.
Consequently, an access concept was developed whereby Nez Perce
Road would be ultimately extended through the Vineland Forest plat
and over to adjacent parcels where it would intersect with Pleasant
View Road at the current site of Peaceful Lane. The ultimate
completion of this roadway connection was to be contingent upon the
development of adjoining parcels.Vineland Forest plat was
consequently built with Nez Perce Drive terminating in a temporary
cul -de -sac at the east property line which it shares in common with
the Troendle property line.
The current proposal is fully consistent with the approved access
concept. Nez Perce Drive would be extended through the Troendle
Addition where it would terminate in a similar temporary cul -de -sac
at the eastern property.The temporary cul -de -sac should be
provided with an easement to accommodate the temporary pavement and
be provided with a barricade equipped with a sign indicating that
the road will be extended in the future. This is being done to put,
all future residents on notice of the City's intent to extend the
street.A new cul -de -sac called Troendle Way will extend
approximately 400 feet south from Nez Perce Drive to service most
of the lots in the subdivision. Nez Perce Drive as proposed will
far exceed city guidelines for cul -de -sac length. However, since
we believe that this is a temporary situation that will ultimately
be rectified by it's extension to the west, staff does not believe
that this presents a problem.
1 Preliminary Street Design
The preliminary street designs are generally consistent with Citystandards.The Troendle Way needs to be increased from the
proposed 50 feet to the current 60 foot requirement by ordinance.
Two of the lots, Lots 1 and 4, Block 1, will have direct frontage
I
on Pleasant View Road and will gain access from this street.
Pleasant View Road is a highly traveled street and traffic levels
are expected to increase in the future. Since the number of curb
cuts is directly related to potential for traffic safety issues,
1 staff is recommending that Lots 1 and 4 share a common curb cut on
the property line. A corresponding cross access easement in favor
of both parcels should be provided and notice should be placed in
1
1 102
1
Troendle Addition
October 17, 1990
Page 4
the chain of title to give information on the access provisions to - IIfuturepropertyowners. Lots 1 and 11, Block 2 are corner lots
fronting on the intersection of Nez Perce and Troendle Way. Since
Nez Perce will be the through street carrying a higher volume of
traffic, staff is recommending that these lots be required to take
access off Troendle Way. An appropriate notice should be placed in
the chain of title of these lots. An existing gravel driveway
serving the existing home on Lot 2, Block 1 should be removed.
This lot will gain direct access from Nez Perce and there is no
longer the need for the driveway connection. It is highly likely
that Pleasant View Road will need to be upgraded in the future. A
desired right -of -way of 80 feet should be maintained: Therefore,
an additional 7 feet of right -of -way should be provided along the
Pleasant View exposure. Final street plans should be developed for
approval by the City Engineering Department.
Utilities
Municipal sewer is available to the site from the Vineland Forest
Addition. They will serve all but two of the lots which front
along Pleasant View Road and will take access from lines in that
street. Watermain is similarly available which is stubbed into Nez
Perce Drive. The watermain will be extended through this plat
ultimately creating a loop when the property to the west is
developed. Final utility plans should be developed for approval by
the City Engineering Department.
Grading /Drainage
Natural site drainage is in two directions, much of the site drains
to the northwest into a partially filled former wetland located on
an adjoining parcel. The balance of the site drains to the
southeast into what is being developed into Vineland Forest plat.
The proposal calls for most of the site drainage to be directed
into a newly expanded retention pond located almost entirely on Lot
4, Block 1. The size of this pond will significantly impact
development on this lot since it essentially eliminates the
potential for an actively developed rear yard area. In staff's
opinion, the future residence would be better served by pushing the
pond somewhat to the south onto the adjacent Lot 3 so that the
burden can be shared in the buildable area on Lot 4 can be
increased. Drainage calculations need to be provided for this pond
to ensure that it is appropriately sized to eliminate impacts on
adjoining parcels. Final plans should be submitted to the City
Engineering Department for further review. The small portion.of
the site that will continue to ' to the southeast is
accommodated by drainage provisions in the adjacent Vineland Forest
plat.1
103
Troendle Addition
II October 17, 1990
Page 5
I An erosion control plan has been submitted and is generally
acceptable with some modifications as proposed by the
City Engineer. Project approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
IDistrict is required.
Park Dedication
I Staff has concluded that cash should be obtained in lieu of land on
this plat. An appropriate condition is provided.
II Easements
The following easements and rights -of -way should be provided:
II 1. Right -of -way for all street improvements.
2. An additional 7 feet of right -of -way along Pleasant View Road.
3. Standard drainage and utility easements.
II
4.Drainage easements over the retention pond and provision of
adequate access to the retention pond.
5. Utility easements over all storm sewer and utility lines
1 running outside of right -of -way.
6.Cross access easements for the common driveway on Lots 1 and
1 4, Block 1.
I COMPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE - RSF DISTRICT
Lot Lot Lot Home
Area Width Depth Setback
1 Ordinance 15,000 100'125' 30'front /rear
10' sides
I BLOCK 1
Lot 1 35,420 140'259'N/A
II
Lot 2 32,200 140'232.5'134' front/
73' rear
50'- E63' -W
Lot 3 37,200 215'187.5'
Lot 4 49,050 195'259.5'
1
II
II 104
It
Troendle Addition
October 17, 1990 IIPage6
Lot Lot Lot Home IAreaWidthDepthSetback
BLOCK 2
Lot 1 15,750 Double Frontage 140'II120' 140'
Lot 2 15,000 107'140'
Lot 3 15,000 107'140'II
Lot 4 15,000 110'•130'1
Lot 5 19,400 55' cul -de -sac 126.5'
90' front setback
1Lot616,340 55' cul -de -sac 155.5'
90' front setback
Lot 7 15,625 55' cul -de -sac 148'II
90' front setback
Lot 8 15,250 125'129'1
Lot 9 15,000 107'140'
II Lot1015,000 107'140'
Lot 11 16,940 Double Frontage 150'195' Troendle Way
160' Nez Perce Dr.
Variance Required - Lot 2, Block 1 contains an existing residence IIandagarage /barn. The proposed front property line will be
located 21.7 feet from the garage /barn. City ordinance requires 30
feet front yard setbacks. To support a variance, the applicant IImustshowthatthereisahardshipthatisnotself- created. In
this case, the applicant is creating the hardship and a non-
conforming use which is prohibited by city ordinances. For this IIreason, staff does not support granting the variance but rather
have the garage removed or relocated.
SUMMARY 1
Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is reasonable and
consistent with city plans and'ordinances. Our issues with it are IIrelativelyminorandcanbeacccanodatedthrough' appropriateconditions. There is, however, an issue relative to the existinghomeandgarageonLot2, Block 1. It is our understanding that IIthishomeandgaragewillcontinuetobeutilizedforaperiodoftime. This lot currently gets access via a private driveway
1
1105
i
Troendle Addition
October 17, 1990
Page 7
running north to Pleasant View Road, whereas, Lot 2, in the future
will have frontage and take direct access from Nez Perce Drive.
Additionally, we note that the garage structure would be located
only 21.7 fe from Nez Perce Drive and thus would become a non-
conforming structure as to setback, whereas a 30 foot setback is
required. Staff believes that this building should either be
removed or relocated to an appropriate site so that no variances
are required.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
On October 17, 1990, the Planning Commission reviewed the request.
The major issue that was brought up at that meeting by the public
was the additional traffic that will occur on Lake Lucy Road and
Nez Perce Drive and also the future extension of Nez Perce which
would eventually hook up with Peaceful Lane. At the present time,
Peaceful Lane is a27 foot wide road. The mouth of Peaceful Lane
as it connects with Pleasant View Road is 130 feet. The residents
were 'concerned that introducing additional traffic onto Peaceful
Lane could create some safety issues. The property located west to
the Troendle plat is currently under the ownership of Art Owens and
is not currently proposed for development. Staff gave an overview
of the development of access concepts for this area. It was
explained that the access concept presented by the applicant's
architect was inconsistent with the city's approved concept in that
it indicated Nez Perce running into Peaceful Lane at a T"
intersection which was oriented towards and existing home. It was
explained that it was the intent of the city that Nez perce have a
rounded curve to the north and that the intersection between
Peaceful Lane and Pleasant View would be rebuilt at such time in
I the future as the connection is finally made. It was indicated
further that although no final plans have been developed and that
staff would work to ensure that the home located west of Peaceful
Lane is provided with a sufficient setback from the new street.
ams wo;; mpt be developed until the Owens parcel is platted. The
residents then indicated a desire to see an access to Pleasant View
be provided with the development of the Troendle plat, since in
their opinion this would off -load traffic from Lake Lucy Road.
While this would in fact offer an alternative means of access into
the subdivisipn, staff described why it is not possible to install
1 this at this time. It was indicated that site topography makes it
inappropriate to make this connection and that while we acknowledge
that we can not give a definitive date as to when the connection
will be made, it is clearly the city's intent as evidenced by the
approved concept plans to ultimately make the connection between
Nez Perce and Peaceful Lane /Pleasant View. The residents then
raised questions regarding the use of Lake Lucy Road as a through
street. Staff agrees that Lake Lucy Road is being used as a
through street but that this is in fact the intended design of this
street. Lake Lucy Road was connected as a through street to Nez
1
1 106
1
Troendle Addition
October 17, 1990 1Page8
Perce prior to the construction of the homes in which most the
persons present at the meeting reside. The city will attempt to do
whatever it can to minimize traffic safety hazards but this is a
through street that serves a large neighborhood that otherwise has
only one meats of access. Lastly, the residents raised concerns
with the intersection of Nez Perce and Lake Lucy Road. There is a
difficult curve with inadequate sight distance in this area. Staff
acknowledges that there is a problem with this curve but the city
has attempted to remedy this problem in the past and it would be
difficult to make a significant change without a large expenditure
of funds to acquire property. This curve is well outside of the
specific Troendle Plat and is only peripherally related to this
request since an increase in traffic will be experienced. Should
the residents wish to see this matter pursued, we believe the City
Council could direct staff to further investigate this matter but
you should be aware that there is likely to be a significant cost
attached to any proposed improvements.
A second issue that was discussed at the Planning Commission 1
meeting was the vacation of right -of -way on Pleasant View Road.
The applicant had indicated that they do not wish to give up any
additional right -of -way on Pleasant View Road as they do not wish
Pleasant View to be widened. It has always been city policy to
require right -of -way at the time of subdivision. Staff believes
that the right -of -way should be acquired at the present time and
should be a condition of approval. We do not anticipate proposing
the widening of Pleasant View at any time in the future and
recognize that any such widening is likely to be extremely
controversial. However, we are aware that traffic levels on this
street are already high and are building and will continue to do
so, particularly with the opening of County Road 62 to Hwy. 100 in
the next few years. We believe that the issue of safety related
improvements, if not capacity related improvements, on Pleasant
View will ultimately need to be addressed in some way. Therefore,
we are recommending that our original proposal for the taking of
additional right -of -way along Pleasant View to preserve future
options to be approved.
A third issue was proposed Lot 4, Block 1. Lot 4, Block 1 appeared 1
to be an unbuildable lot. It contains the detention pond for the
Troendle Addition. The Planning Commission requested that the
applicant ensure it's buildability to the satisfaction of city
staff. The applicant reshaped the detention pond by extending the
perimeters further to the south and leaving the area to the
southeast as a back yard. While the pond has been revised- to
buffer a larger back yard, there is still some question as to the
adequacy of engineering calculations that have been provided by the
applicant.In an attached memo, the Asst. City Engineer is
indicating that we still require engineering calculations
consistent with the current plan to ensure that city standards are
1
1107
1
Troendle Addition
October 17, 1990
Page 9
complied with. We believe that city standards are in fact being
met, however, if upon review of this information, this appears not
to be the case, we would again recommend that Lot 4 be eliminated.
A fourth issue that was discussed at the meeting was the relocation
of the garage /barn and it's setback distance from Nez Perce. The
applicant requested a temporary variance to the setback
requirements. There is no such thing as a temporary variance and
the city has never granted one before. There also is no hardship
to granting a variance in this case. The Planning Commission
recommended the following condition:
11. The garage /barn on Lot 2, Block 1 will be removed or
relocated or the road shall be adjusted so that no
variances are required. If it is necessary to remove or
relocate the garage or barn, that shall be done prior to
the issuance of a building permit for Lot 2, Block 1 or
when Mr. Troendle is no longer a full time resident of
that property, whichever should occur first. Lot 2,
Block 1 shall be serviced by Nez Perce Drive and the
gravel driveway to Pleasant View Road shall be removed.
Staff maintains it's position of recommending that the garage /barn
on Lot 2, Block 1 be removed or relocated to an appropriate
location so that no variances are required. We do not believe it
is possible to effectively administer the Planning Commission's
condition.
RECOMMENDATION
1 Planning staff recommends the City Council adopt the following
motion:
The City Council approves Subdivision #90 -15 for Troendle Addition
as shown on the plans dated September 17, 1990, subject to the
following conditions:
1 1. A tree removal plan shall be submitted for Lots 1, 2 and 3,
Block 1 prior to issuance of a building permit.Clear
cutting, except for the house pad and utilities, will not be
1 permitted.
2. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the
city and provide the city with the necessary financial
securities to guarantee proper installation of the
improvements.
3. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of
the Watershed District permit.
1
108
1
Troendle Addition
October 17, 1990
Page 10
4. The developer shall dedicate the utilities within the right-
IIof -way for permanent ownership.
5. The cul -de -sac on Troendle Way shall have a radius of 60 feet
and the street name shall be modified to either Troendle
Circle or Troendle Court to eliminate any confusion in
applying it as a through street. Final street plans shall be
developed for approval by the City Engineering Department.
6. The applicant shall install erosion control silt fence around
the ponding area until such time that turf is established.
Turf or sod shall be placed behind all curbing.
7. Shared driveway access off of Pleasant View Road for Lots 1
and 4, Block 1 is required and a cross access easement shall
be provided. This common section of the driveway shall be
constructed to a 7 ton design paved to a width of 20 feet and
have a maximum grade of 10 %.
8. Provide the following easements and rights -of -way:
the drainage and utility easements along the westerly
property line of Lots 9, 10 and 11, Biock 2 and the
ponding area on Lots 3 and 4, Biock 1 that are shown on
the grading and erosion control plan shall also be shown
on the preliminary plat accordingly.
the acquisition of a drainage easement through the
property immediately west of Lots 3 and 4, Block 1 will
be required for the discharge of the detention pond.
additional 7 feet of right -of -way along Pleasant View
Road.
9. The applicant shall submit storm sewer calculations verifying
size and capacity of the storm sewer system and ponding basin.
Eight inch sanitary sewer at a minimum rate of 0.4% shall be
constructed on this subdivision and service locations for all
of the lots on this plat shall be shown for final submittal
review. The final plans and specifications shall be submitted
to the City Engineer for review and approval.
10. Park and trail fees shall be required in lieu of parkland
dedication.
11. The garage /barn on Lot 2, Block 2 will be removed or relocated
to an appropriate location so no variances are required. Lot
2 Block 1, shall be serviced by Nez Perce Drive and the
gravel driveway to Pleasant View Road shall be removed.
1
109
1
Troendle Addition
October 17, 1990
Page 11
12. The temporary cul -de -sac should be provided with an easement
to accommodate the temporary pavement and be provided with a
barricade equipped with a sign indicating the road will be
extended in the future.
13. Lots 1 and 11, Block 2 are required to have access from
Troendle Way.
14. Lot 4, Block 1 appears to be an unbuildable lot.The
applicant must either adjust the lot lines or combine the lot
with the other 3 lots in Block 1 or in some other way ensure
it's buildability to the satisfaction of city staff."
ATTACHMENTS
1. City Council minutes dated September 11, 1989.
2. Memo and Update from Asst. City Engineer , dated October 12,
1990 and November 15, 1990.
3. Vineland Forest City Council staff report.
4. Planning Commission minutes dated October 17, 1990.
5, Letter from Lake Lucy Road neighborhood dated November 11,
1990.
6. Letter from Daryl Fortier dated November 12, 1990.
7. Revised configuration for Lot 4, Block 1.
8.Letter to Art Owens dated November 15, 1990 and aerial photos.
9. Aerial photo of Troendle property.
10. Preliminary plat.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 110
1
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 17, 1990 It
Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Emmings, Ladd Conrad, Brian Batzli and Joan Ahrens
MEMBERS ABSENT: im Erhart, Jim Wildermuth and Annette Ellson 1
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner 1;
Charles Folch, Asst. City Engineer and Todd Gerhardt, Asst. City Manager II
PUBLIC HEARING:
PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW TO SUBDIVIDE 8.7 ACRES INTO 15 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF "AND LCOATED SOUTH OF PLEASANT VIEW ROAD AND VINELAND 11FORESTPLATANDEASTOFPEACEFULLANE, TROENDLE ADDITION.
Public Present:,1
Name Address
Daryl Fortier Fortier and Associates, Applicant
Jules Smith Attorney for Applicant
Jim & Mary Stasson 6400 Peaceful Lane
Brad Johnson 1001 Lake Lucy Road
Jim Duchene 961 Lake Lucy Road
Craig Weinstock 1101 Lake Lucy Road
Rodd Johnson 1061 Lake Lucy Road
Linda Barrk 960 Lake Lucy Road
Sharon Morgan 940 Lake Lucy Road
Rob Drake 980 Lake Lucy Road
Richard Wing 3481 Shore Drive
Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Conrad
called the public hearing to order.
Conrad: We'll open it up for public comments and we'll give the applicant
who is Fortier and Associates and Frank Beddoor Jr., if Daryl you have
anything to say. A presentation or any comments on the staff report. We'll"
start it with you.
Daryl Fortier: My name is Daryl Fortier. I represent Mr. Beddor. We are IpurchasingthispropertyfromMr. Joseph Troendle. I have a larger drawing
here and I believe each member of the commission has received an 8 x 10
copy of this so perhaps it'd be easier if I just show it to the audience
off to the side here so they can see it a bit easier. For the most part we
are in agreement with the staff report. We do have two items that we'd
like to bring to the Planning Commission's attention. The first addresses IItheadditionalright -of -way off of Pleasant View Road. We understand that
staff is of the opinion that eventually f`easant View Road will be widened.
We also understand that the Pleasant View Homeowner Association as well as
other people along the Pleasant View Road have fought this issue before and IIitisahighlychargedpolitically. Previously, I believe it was 1981
there was a proposal to widened the road and that proposal was rejected by
the City Council after lengthy debates. We don't believe that there is any IIpolicyorprograminplacethatwouldsuggestthatthewideningoftheroad
ATTACH. 4111
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 2
is indeed going to happen. Therefore, Mr. Beddor is not of, he is also one
of the people, one of the many who are opposed to the widening of the road.
Therefore he would not like to take any actions which would favor widening
the road and that would include the giving of additional right -of -way for
that purpose. He is therefore requesting that that be striken from the
staff report or not be accepted. Be rejected. Whichever word we would
choose. He is not in favor of giving up the extra 7 feet and he would like
to see his property treated the same way any other piece of property along '
Pleasant View Road would be treated. Should the City that they will
widened Pleasant View Road let's say 3 years from now or 5 years from pow,
this piece of property should be treated no differently than any other
piece of property including Mr. Beddor's residence across the street. You
would use whatever political consensus and finances are necessary to
achieve to take the land by condemnation or to purchase it and widened the
road. It will be part of the same battle as the remaining 2 miles
of Pleasant View Road would be. So with that background Mr. Beddor is not
in agreement to granting the 7 foot easement. The other issue we have to
discuss is the Troendle garage which staff correctly points out is 21 1/2
feet from the right -of -way and this would put it in violation of the 30
foot setback requirement. We have been unable to reach Mr. VanEeckhout who
is the adjacent property owner but we believe, we have reason to believe
that we may be successful in altering the alignment of the road such that
the 30 foot setback can be required. If I can direct your attention to the
overhead projection, under Block 1, Lot 2, which is the Troendle property
where the garage sits, if you will look at where the road comes in from the
I
east which is the Vineland Estates, you'll notice that the road does not
come in at a right angle. It comes in at about a 97 degree angle. We
would like to see that changed to 93 1/2 degrees. If we change it to 93
1/2 degrees, it only affects 7 feet of property, less than 7 feet of
property on Vineland Estates. Mr. Beddor is willing to buy one of those
lots to help achieve this. We believe Mr. VanEeckhout will cooperate.
This will allow us to make a subtle adjustment to the road such that the
I road will not angle but the road will be closer to a true east /west. This
will put Mr. Troendle's garage 30 feet back from the right -of -way in which
case the issue will disappear. However, we haven't reached such an
I agreement yet and so as a result we are asking that consideration be given
to a variance, a temporary variance. The reason we are doing this request
and we are going through these extraordinary measures in trying to
accommodate Mr. Troendle is that his folks originally purchased this land.
He was born on this land and he is now 80 years old and has always lived on
this land. We, Mr. Beddor is granting him a lifetime estate and has agreed
that there will be no development in the four lots off Pleasant View Road
1
as long as Mr. Troendle resides in his residence. He would like to make it
as comfortable for Mr. Troendle as possible to see the ultimate development
of his property without impacting his lifestyle or causing him any
distress. Mr. Troendle does use that barn. I'm not sure for the exact
I purposes. He does park a car in there. he does do a number of hobbies in
there. He is constantly in the yard so we are requesting that a temporary
variance for a non - conforming use of that garage in terms of setbacks be
I granted only so long as Mr. Troendle personally resides in the residence.
If he should become ill and require long term care which would not enable
him to return, we would agree to immediately dismantle that garage or
I
remove it. Similarly, if for some reason he were to decide to sell his
piece of property we would similarly agree that it would be immediately
removed. We are asking this only as a consideration for Mr. Troendle's
112
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 3
comfort and care and it really does not affect the development. We will
try our best to get the road moved but failing to do that, we would ask
that the variance be granted. The other items we have are really no longer '
issues. I've not had a chance to review the issue of a shared access off
Pleasant View for Lots 1 and 4 and I've had a brief chance to review with
Mr. Beddor the idka of park dedication fees in lieu of parkland. I've also'talked to staff and they've indicated that they have some concern with Lot
4 of Block 1 which is immediately off Pleasant View. There was concern as
to whether or not this area was filled or whether it was a wetland. We
would like the opportunity to talk to Park and Recreation and consider
giving that lot to Park and Recreation for a vest pocket sort of park. And
depending upon how the wetlands adjacent to it on the Art Owen's property
is defined, it may turn out to be a very fine addition as a park. We are
not in favor or opposed to that. We are simply saying that option should
be left. open. Park and Recreation may not have a chance to realize that we
would be willing to donate that land. Any questions I'll be pleased to
answer?
Conrad: Okay. We'll probably have some later on. We'll open it up for
other comments. Are there any?
Jim Stasson: My name is Jim Stasson. I live at 6400 Peaceful Lane. My
house is this house right here with the brown roof on the corner. Back
when the Vineland Forest thing was developed, we were never notified
through mail by the City that anything was going on there and as
I understand when it was first developed it really didn't affect us because'the access to that was going to go right out to Pleasant View Road. Right
now if you could see, they plan on running this right over here to Peaceful
Lane and we're going to have, instead of 3 houses connecting to
Peaceful Lane, an infinite amount of houses. That Peaceful Lane also has allverywideradiuscornerwhichpeopledonotslowdowntogoaroundatall.
With 3 houses there it's not too bad, although Art Owens has a big family
and Sunday afternoons it can be quite a traffic jam in there. Mr. Beddor IIseemstobegoingtogainoutofthisandwe're going to pay the bill by
having all the traffic go by our house. We don't really think that's fair.
He's so far off of Pleasant View Road, you can see his tennis court between
the road and his house. He moved his driveway and took a good half a dozen '
trees off of Mr. Troendle's lot. We're talking big trees and planted them
all on so he doesn't see any of the traffic. I guess I'd do the same thing
if I was in the position to be able to do that. Peaceful Lane is a 27 foot
road. The mouth of Peaceful Lane is 130 feet. If nothing else, we've
talked to Jim Chaffee when he was the safety guy. We talked to him 2 years
ago the last year. I realize he's no longer here. He said he would report IIbacktousonyouknow, whether they could square that corner off and we've
never heard anything from him, or from anybody. So thank you.
Conrad: Good comments. Thank you. Other comments.1
Rodd Johnson: I'm Rodd Johnson from 1061 Lake Lucy Road. The issue I see
at hand for myself and the homeowners along the street that we're on is
number one, it's open already back to Nez Perce and we get a lot of traffic
that way. Sure I'd like to see that closed off at the end but I know that
won't happen necessarily from what I can see. And I'm not necessarily
opposed to developing the land in here in that I also built a house and the II
land was developed but what I have a problem with is that if the, and this
113
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 4
is corrected to what I see,they'reisthattheyre going to put it through but I
don't like the way that it's going to go through number one. I think it
should go straight across. Due to the fact that if it doesn't go straight
across to Pleasant View, people are going to be more apt to come down the
road that I'm on now anyway because it's straight. I mean they're already
going down it at 40 or 45 which has been witnessed by everybody that's on
the road. And the second we have emergency vehicle access. I look at that
and think the route in and out of there would be better facilitated to go
straight through. I have to kind of chuckle the way that it's been all of
a sudden altered around the guy that's developing his property. It's not,
it seems a little like he doesn't want to'bear his part of the burden yet
he's going to make the money on all this and that is kind of outrageous.
Conrad: Thanks. Maybe I should just interject and maybe you weren't
involved in previous hearings but we have been and maybe you weren't
notified simply because you may not have been within the notification
distance and we have some standards of who gets notified. I'm not sure but
that's a quick guess. In the past when we've looked at this parcel, other
homeowners in the area have been real concerned where the road's go and it
wasn't Mr. Beddor as much as it was other homeowners along Pleasant View.
They weren't, although it does look like it benefits Mr. Beddor and it
probably does, I think the other homeowners were pretty consistent in terms
of what they wanted. Especially the neighbor that that road would have
gone right next to, within a few feet of his door and I recall that very
clearly feeling rather concerned for a roadway given what he's lived in for
a while. You probably have the same concerns understandably.
Mary Stasson: But that neighbor was also a renter.
Conrad: I wasn't aware of that. Yes sir.
Brad Johnson: I'm Brad Johnson. I live at 1001 Lake Lucy Road. We're
just concerned about additional lots here. It looks like there'll be what,
13 additional lots that would have their only access to the trunk highway
through Lake Lucy Road. I don't believe Lake Lucy Road east of CR 17 was
I intended as a major thoroughfare from it's construction, design and width.
As Rodd already said, we've got an awful lot of traffic there as it is. I
think it's unfair that we bear the full burden of the traffic out of both
I
the current development and this proposed one. I know that they're showing
this road supposedly going through to Peaceful Lane. That's kind of
presumptions. They don't own the land. They don't know that they can
acquire the land. They don't know that they can develop there even when it
I
would be available for acquisition. I'm sure people on Pleasant View have
some concerns. So do we. The burden should be shared fairly.
I
Conrad: It's a funny thing how everybody does sell their land and we wish
they didn't, some of us who've been around a while but you're right.
There's no guarantee that that property will be subdivided but it's, land
in Chanhassen is extremely valuable.
I 'Resident: Someday. 20 years•from now when my kids have maybe been run
over by one of the fast cars on there. We get a police car through there
Ionce every 3 months.
Conrad: Other comments.
114
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 5
1
Daryl Fortier: If I can just address some of the concerns of Mr. Brad
Johnson has raised. The extension of the road through Mr. Owens' property
is not as presumptious as it may seem. We have already studies grades..
We've already studied roadways. We've already studied utilities and we
have submitted much of that material to staff. We've also more importantly
talked to Mr. Art Owens, the owner of the land who would favor this and he Iisonpublicrecordoffavoringit.
Resident: When?
Daryl Fortier: We talked to Mr. Art Owens within.
Resident: When would this happen?1
Daryl Fortier: We don't know. Mr. Owens is right now tied up. It is
similar to the issue of when does Pleasant View get widened. We don't
know.
Resident: We live there now.
Daryl Fortier: Yes. And people are driving down Pleasant View right now
and people are driving down Nez Perce. Nez Perce at points only measures
22 feet wide and people are flying through there. We believe,, now I don't
want to expand this whole argument on one parcel of development to a whole
city wide issue but we know there are apparent limitations in every city
and some of the limitations are particular bottlenecks and I'm sure the
city will do it's best to correct them. That's beyond the scope of this
proposal. The proposal will really reduce density as proposed to other
proposals. Not to you and not to other people but the overall development,
it is following in a fairly good comprehensive plan that has been directed.)My whole point of being up here is not to defend all of those issues but
simply to point out to you that Mr. Art Owens is aware of this. Mr. Art
Owens has been cooperative and he would favor this proposal.
Resident: I noticed you said bottleneck, making sure that there isn't one.
Wouldn't it be more of a bottleneck going that route than it would be to go '
straight through to Pleasant View?
Krauss: Mr. Chairman, could I address this because there's some misleading
information in Daryl's plan and I'd like to give some background on it.
Conrad: Why don't you address the Peaceful Lane issue too if you can.
Krauss: Yeah, I will. We first became involved with this with the
Vineland Forest plat which is the chunk of land that's immediately east of
the subject site. There were a number of alternative access concepts
IIlookedatforthatincludingcul -de -sacs from Pleasant View. Cul -de -sacs
from Nez Perce. Throughout it all staff 'dvocated a thru street. We-
thought from a public safety standpoint, emergency vehicle access and the
need to provide proper service, since there really is no north /south route IbetweenPowersandthelake, that a thru connection should be made through
there. And we looked at a number of alternatives to do that. Ultimately
and correct me if I'm wrong Ladd, but the Planning Commission wound up IapprovingthatwithoutarecommendationonthestreetasIrecallbecause
it was such a complex issue. It went up before the City Council and the
115
11 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 6
II Planning Department with the Engineering Department looked at a variety of
alternatives to provide access into that area.' There is no particular
I
order. In this one you can see the dashed line was one of the originally
proposed plats of Vineland Forest...cul -de -sac from Pleasant View. Staff
had a problem with this one as did some of the property owners. But this
alternative had the thru street coming through down to Peaceful Lane. It
I was hooked into basically I think what was Art Owens' plat. Art Owens had
approval to subdivide his property and that plat has since lapsed. But he
apparently did intend to develop at some point in time. Another
II alternative here was a loop back basically from Pleasant View to Peaceful
Lane. We didn't think it accomplished what the City needed to obtain
through here which was a thru movement. Alternative 4. Here was the thru
1 movement directed...by Vineland Forest but there was also a link through
here so we didn't have an inordinate number of dead end streets. They
weren't cul -de -sacs to provide the residential atmosphere. Ultimately the
one that the City Council went with was Alternative 3 and this is what the
I Vineland Forest was built to. There's a temporary cul -de -sac which I'm
sure you're all aware of that sits sort of right over here right now and
there's a sign on the end of it that says this street is intended to be
I extended in the future. What we did is lay out a route that made grades
and made some sense from a design standpoint that really is...cul -de -sacs,
we were most concerned with the thru movement, that obtained a reasonable
connection to Pleasant View Road. One difference with the plan that Daryl
showed tonight is the thru movement comes through here. Now it was never
intended to go straight into Peaceful Lane and it was always assumed that
when and if this is done, that this whole intersection needs to be rebuilt -
I and that question of the 127 foot wide road would be resolved at that point
in time. There is no replat on Art Owens' property right as I understand
and this is kind of hearsay, that the property is tied up with a tax issue
I
or something like that or an estate issue. But basically the City Council
adopted a concept that was supposed to guide these decisions as properties
are developed in the future. Is that the only way to serve it? No.
Clearly there were other alternatives but this was talked about for a good
1 3 months or so and this was the compromise that came out of it. As to
traffic on Pleasant View which was one of the comments that Mr. Fortier
raised, nobody denies the fact that improvements to Pleasant View would be
I a long and arduous process and nobody envisions a 4 lane street going
through there necessarily at some point in the future. I believe at one
point in time the extension for the crosstown highway was supposed to come
I
through there. Around through there but there's no denying that Pleasant
View Road is a highly inadequate and often unsafe road. It's underwidth.
The turn radaii are too tight. We've got over 1,000 cars a day using it
today. We've just gotten the Eastern Carver County Transportation Study
I and in a weighted model that basically says that people will realize how
bad a street this is and try to avoid it, even in the weighted model it's
anticipating that in the next 10 to 15 years, traffic on that street will
I grow up to about 2,500 trips a day. Now at that point in time, while
you're not seeking to widened it to 4 le >,es, you certainly will be seeking
to widened it so that there's sufficient '- avement width for people to pass
I
one another in opposite directions and that you can safely take curves.
Nobody's looking forward to dealing with those issues. We realize it's
going to be tough but it's something that somebody sitting in this chair at
some point in the future's going to have to deal with. That gives an
1 overview of the process.
II 116
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 7
Conrad: Other comments?
Mary Stasson: I have a comment. Alternative #4. This one. I live on the
corner of Pleasant View Road and Peaceful Lane and this proposal shares
access by everybody. Pleasant View Road which I'm a part of, Peaceful Lane
which I'm also a Hart of and Nez Perce and Lake Lucy Road. Here I see this
is the perfect way to go because the burden is shared by everybody in this
proposal.
Conrad: I think the concern at that time, and there were a lot of
concerns. A lot of different opinions. What a lot of residents along
Pleasant View were concerned with was to get the access as close to CR 17
as possible.1
Mary Stasson: But see the thing is, if they want to go down Pleasant View
Road, they're still going to go up Peaceful Lane and then they're going to
turn and go down Pleasant View Road. You're talking just a minimal amount
of space.
Conrad: That was their opinion. To get the access as close to CR 17.
Mary Stasson: They're still going to go down Pleasant View Road...
Brad Johnson: that stretch can be what, a quarter mile if not a half
mile at the most?
Conrad: But the other end of Pleasant View as it dumps out on TH 101 had IIthesame. The residents had the same concern. Same exact concern and I
heard both those.
Resident: The traffic I don't believe would be going that direction.
They're going to go out to CR 17.
Krauss: No, that's not true really. You've got to realize that 1
Crosstown Highway is going to be extended to TH 101 in the next two years
and that's going to introduce a lot of movement to the east through there.
How they're going to get there we frankly don't know. Pleasant View Road's
the only road that goes there.
Brad Johnson: I acknowledge that you did the Vineland Forest. Those of us IIonLakeLucy, we are naive. We saw the way they were doing things and we
thought that street was going through there. It was at one time. We
didn't know anything about these processes so we weren't here. We were
quite upset when we found out it wasn't and we realized it was a little
late then. We don't really...
Jim Stasson: Also at that time the way this is shown on Art's property,1thatwasalreadydone. We knew about that and okay we're going to have 15
more houses on there. We can live with th but now when you connect it
all up and you get rid of the other access to Pleasant View Road, we've got
50 -100 houses coming by now. Or after that.
Mary 5tasson: Our driveway, it comes out right here.
1117
1 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 8
II Jim Stasson: You're looking at the wrong side. We're right here. Our
driveway comes out right there and the people that come around this corner,
like 1 said before. They'll come around it at 30 -40 mph.
I Mary Stasson: This is 130 feet across here.
I
Jim Stasson: Right now there's 3 houses accessing that. With 50 or 60
houses accessing that, my dog won't be safe more than 2 steps off the
driveway.
II Mary Stasson: We have a 30 foot driveway that empties out on that road.
Conrad: As Mr. Krauss said, if development goes through that road has to
I change. Period. In terms of access to Pleasant View. It just has to and
the City's committed to doing that. It can't stay the way it is.
I
Mary Stasson: We're not going to be able to get out of our driveway.
That's what's going to happen to us and that's why we've already been
trying to get ahold of Jim Chaffee to have him come out there and look at
the situation for us. Even the way it sits right now.
IJim Stasson: You mentioned that this, Nez Perce is 22 feet on the corner?
t Krauss: No, I never.
Jim Stasson: Where it ties into Lake Lucy? Right down here.
I Krauss: Oh!
Jim Stasson: Is that 22 feet?
II Krauss: Yes. Nez Perce is an undersized street. Lake Lucy Road was built
to a better standard. Nez Perce road and that whole neighborhood to the
I
southeast'of there, I think we're all painfully aware of the fact that it
was built with inadequate roads. It was buit without storm sewer and the
utility systems are old and beginning to fail and something's going to have
Ito give in there but that is the only thru street in that neighborhood.
Brad Johnson: Have you done a study on how many cars are going on it now?
IJim Stasson: That street wasn't there until what, 3 years ago.
Jim Duchene: 2 1/2 years ago when they put Lake Lucy thru. There's
I
another street down, Carver Beach Road which is down. I'm Jim Duchene on
961 Lake Lucy Road and what I guess I'm opposed to is the traffic that
we're getting back from the other side of Nez Perce. We're getting a great
deal of traffic feeding out onto our road our front. It is a bad corner.
If you haven't been down there, 22 feet. They come around on probably a 90
degree corner. It's a problem. I don't know. I think the City ought to
look at that. I think it should be closed off. I think they should take
I that road out and still leave a fire lane through there. It wasn't there
before. We're feeding now these other homes. We have a new development
and I'm not sure how many lots are back there.
I Krauss: 15. In this plat?
II 118
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 9
Jim Duchene: No. In the previous one?
Krauss: Oh, in Vineland was about 21 but 2 of those accessed out
to Pleasant View.
Jim Duchene: 21. We're talking another 15 plus we're feeding everyone
else off Nez Pere now off of Lake Lucy Road. I have not seen any traffic IIstudies. I don't know if you have as far as cars on Lake Lucy Road but
being out there I do know and the homeowners that are here, we're all here
tonight. Every home that's on that street is represented here. We have
one missing? And it's a problem and that's why we're here in front of the IIPlanningCommission.
Conrad: Okay, thanks.
Jim Stasson: Lake Lucy tends to become a dragstrip. You've got a 30 mph
speed limit. You're got lower speed limits on roads that are wider around IIhere. They come off Nez Perce and they, especially the younger people, and
they are really flying.
Brad Johnson: Because it goes downhill. They have a good time on there. IIThentheygoup...S curve before it gets to CR 17 and they're all over the
place there. Then last spring when Vineland Forest was in, all the heavy
trucks were coming through before the road restrictions were off fully
loaded. Our street's going to be torn up. You put development...
Conrad: Anything else? Is there a motion to close the public hearing?
Emmings moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Conrad: Joan. Questions? Comments?
Ahrens: Isn't the option of having Nez Perce Road run down to Pleasant
View Road a dead issue anyway because of the plan?
Krauss: It's certainly a dead issue through the Vineland Forest plat.
That plat is over and done. We have no capacity to get that right -of -way II
save buying 2 lots I suppose.
Ahrens: So the only access to Pleasant View Road is in this fashion that's 1shownonthisphotographthatwehaveinourplans? Is that what you're
saying?
Krauss: Yes.
Ahrens: Unless they purchase these Lots 1 and 2 and run the...
1Krauss: At this point in time running the street north through Vineland
Forest is not possible from the standpoint of the City being able to get
the right -of -way through the platting process. That's all platted
property. I suppose theoretically you could run that connection over on
the Troendle property but I haven't looked at the grades over there. If
memory serves they're not that bad. But if you move at all to the west of
119
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 10
Troendle 's house, you start falling off into that low wet area which makes
it impossible to make the road connection.
Ahrens: What about this low wet area on Lot 4 of Block 1? What do you
think about his proposal to turn that over to the City for parkland?
Krauss: The Park Board's already reviewed this proposal and does not want
the property. I don't know that they were asked specifically about that
lot but traditionally taking individual lots that happen to be conveniently
located for a developer is not, that does not fit the bill for the Park
Board. That's pocket parks. Are interesting design features in urban
areas but what they become in communities like ours is a very difficult
II maintenance problem and they don't serve enough people to make them
worthwhile. Consequently there's a policy that the City's funds and
efforts should be devoted to more significant facilities.
1 Ahrens: I have a lot of questions about that wetland in there as I
mentioned to you earlier. There seems to be a question about whether or
not it's even a wetland, from what you said. And I've noticed over the
last few years trucks bringing fill in there and it was a low area. I mean
it looked like a wetland to me before they started filling it in. Can you
shine some light on that? What is going on with that wetland?
Krauss: A little bit. For more extensive report I'll really have to get
Jo Ann Olsen to give it to you because she's been involved with that
I
property for some time. But Mr. Owens' has been filling that property.
The City's been going out there and having it stopped for at least the last
year and a half to 2 years. That area was never pristine wetland. As
I understand it, it took on wetland characteristics when drainage out of
I the area was altered and there's been some indication that the City may
have altered it somehow during a construction project, whatever. But since
the water's impounded now, it's causing wetland vegetation to spring up.
I The wetland proper or the more significant part of the wetland does not
truly fall on the Troendle property but to the extent that it does, it's
being preserved or improved if you will into a retention pond that will
have some water in it. We still have an issue with the fill on Owens'
Iproperty. There was a hope that it would have been rectified. I believe
Mr. Owens wanted to have some lots there with his plat and staff always
said that that's where your drainage goes and even if it wasn't a wetland,
I it's a retention pond so there was always an issue there and it was one
that was supposed to have been resolved as I understood it when he came in
for his final plat but in the event he never did.
I Ahrens: How was he going to resolve that?
I
Krauss: At this point I'm honestly not sure. I'd need to get updated by
my staff.
Conrad: Joan, it was not an officially mapped wetland but it sure was one.
I - Ahrens: Well that's what I thought. I've driven by it and before he
started filling it it sure looked like a wetland.
Conrad: It always was what was mapped Paul? Things over an acre and a
half I think. This might have been under so it wasn't mapped. It was a
120
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 11
wetland.1
Ahrens: The City's asking for a 7 feet of right -of -way along .Pleasant View'Road and the developer has said that they're not going to go along with
that at all. I imagine that, I mean I don't know how, if Pleasant View
Road is going to in the future be improved, I don't know how we can approve'a plat without an allowance for the additional right -of -way along Pleasant
View Road. Do you see how that can happen?
Krauss: Well it's obviously our recommendation that we do take the 7 foot IIright -of -way. As I said earlier, we believe that there is a significant
traffic volume on that street now. We expect that to grow regardless of
everybody's efforts to keep it low.
Ahrens: Didn't we require that further up on Pleasant View?
Krauss: There was right -of -way that was taken off a subdivision across the'
street that was for Mr. Beddor's son. I don't recall exactly how much it
was. Christmas Acres.
Ahrens: And also further east.
Batzli: Did we take it for Vineland?
Krauss: I don't believe, no. We did not take it for Vineland.
Ahrens: Not for Vineland but for the one that's on the other end. The
three lots that was, what was that? It starts where Pleasant View curves
and goes down the hill. There's some lots being developed right in there
where it's going to be divided into 3 lots.11
Krauss: I think that's the Christmas Acres. That's across the street.
Ahrens: No, no. It's way down at the other end. Anyway.
Gerhardt: The east end.
Jay Johnson: She's on the other side of the lake. All the way on the
other side.
Ahrens: Right. Where we just divided those 3 lots.
Gerhardt: Fox Chase? That one?
Krauss: That's next door to this.
Jay Johnson: North Lotus Lake Park.
Batzli: Right. Yeah. The one across from the North Lotus Lake Park which
is what Jay just said. Right across the street there where they subdivided"those. The guy that had the water in his basement continuously.
Krauss: Oh, oh, oh. By the street that.
Batzli: Well those right there and then across the .street again.
1121
11 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 12
Krauss: Yes. We did take extra right-of-way off ofgyo that, yes. The one
where we had the city lift station down by the lake?
Batzli: Yeah. Those and directly west.
Krauss: Baldur Avenue?
Batzli: Yes.
Krauss: Sathre Addition.
Ahrens: I mean that's a nothing isn't it? That's what I thought. You
know it seems to me that Mr. Troendle's also making a lot of money off this
development. I kind of feel like with all the new proposals that the
developer has brought in tonight, I feel like it's real difficult to
discuss this. There's a road change that's being proposed and a slight
road alteration and he wants a variance. And the 7 foot right -of- way...
I
Conrad: But that road alteration would eliminate the variance.
Ahrens: The what?
IConrad: The road alteration would eliminate the variance.
Ahrens: I have more comments but I agree that the sight lines on Peaceful
Lane are terrible and I realize that the City does intend to fix that road
but boy, it's bad now.
Batzli: Why didn't we take 7 feet or additional at Vineland there right
next door to the east?
Krauss: Commissioner, we're really not certain. I think it falls into the
I category of being an oversight. I mean things were so focused on which end
you're coming in on and it was running in a different direction from there.
I don't offer that as an excuse but just I think it was overlooked. I'd
I also have to say too that the data that we're using now for the traffic
forcast and it comes out of the Eastern Carver County Transportation Study
and that's only been completed and delivered to the City in the last 3
weeks.
I Ahrens: When was that approved?
I Krauss: The Carver County Transportation Study?
Ahrens: No, no. Vineland.
IKrauss: It was approved in something like November of last year.
Batzli: On the plat it shows a portion of Pleasant View Road to be vacated
Ion one of the maps here of the plans. Is that assuming I would suppose
that they don't have to give up the additional 7 feet? What is that for?
That's Lot 4, Block 1.
Krauss: Oh, I see what you're saying. I don't know. That's probably a
presumption by the applicant that they were going to maintain existing
122
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 13
right -of -way Daryl? We're looking to maintain 80 feet throughout. Now
that's 40 foot on either side of the center line and I believe we have a 66
footer there so it's traditional that you take 7 foot on either side. We IIwouldseekto, assuming the condition is upheld, we would seek to rectify.
that.
Batzli: How long is this Troendle Way cul -de -sac?
Krauss: It's approximately 400 feet. Well from Nez Perce it's
approximately 400 feet.
Batzli: What's our normal guideline on that just out of curiousity?
Krauss: We've traditionally used 500 feet. There's been a lot of them
approved between 500 and 1,000. Until the connection's put through to
Peaceful Lane or to Pleasant View, this is quite a lengthy cul -de -sac
because you've got to add in all the distance back to Lake Lucy Road. The IIonlyreasonwe're somewhat comfortable with that is that so much effort's
been put into the conceit of how this is ultimately going to be connected
that we view this as a temporary situation.11
Batzli: Is there any problem from staff's point of view in any of the
realignments of the roads regarding lot sizes after it's either widened
and /or adjusted?
Krauss: The proposal that Mr. Fortier brought to you tonight?
Batzli: That as well as the proposal, I think the cul -de -sac road isn't
wide enough as I understand it.
Krauss: Oh, no. Those lots are all oversized. There's plenty of give
with that. The lot in Vineland Forest where they would propose to swap
land if they swung that road a little further south, that's an 18,000
square foot lot so there's probably room for that too. We'd want to see
how this layout occurs that Mr. Fortier's proposing. It looks reasonable.
We don't want to introduce too many curves into this street though because
it's already somewhat curvalinear and this is supposed to be a connecting
street. The more curves you introduce, the less utility it will have.
Batzli: I would be much more in favor if it's possible to realign the IIstreetalittlebitthanprovideavarianceevenifit's just for lifetime
estate on that particular structure. If I had my druthers.
Folch: Just a correction on that Troendle Way. The actual right -of -way
width on the street portion at 50 feet is currently adequate. It's just
the cul -de -sac, the radius of the cul -de -sac that's being increased to 60
feet.1
Batzli: Okay. My other questions had tc:do with whether Lot 4 is a
wetland or not. I guess we've already discussed that a little bit and II - having been through staff's study of the various ways to have traffic flow
through these potential developments, I guess I didn't expect the problem
tonight. It sounds like until the road goes through to Pleasant View and
until they improve that particular corner, there may be some problems and I
don't know what we do about that in the meantime.
123
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 14
Conrad: Problems where?
Batzli: Regarding traffic both loading up south and as far as eventually
coming out onto Pleasant View from, this small route here.
Conrad: Is that a concern with Nez Perce traffic?
Batzli: Yeah.
Conrad: Okay. Steve?
Emmings: I support the recommendation that's been made by staff. Just a
comment on the issues that we've got that have been brought up tonight. At
least the ones on that proposal. There's no doubt in my mind that we
should require the additional right -of -way. We have the right to do that
as a condition of the plat and it should be done. As far as treating Mr.
Beddor the same as everybody else. Everybody else isn't subdividing or
we'd be requiring it of them too I'm sure. And with regard to the, the only
other one that kind of. my attention is the garage that's located on
Lot 2 on Block 1. I guess I'd make a proposal or there shouldn't be any
variance granted. That's clear to me but I think maybe, it's my
understanding Mr. Troendle is what, 80 years old? I think that we could
rnake an accommodation here that would be reasonable and I what I'd propose
is that we simply say that either that the garage be removed or relocated
or the road will be adjusted to create the necessary setback. And that the
timing of that, that will be done prior to the issuance of a building
permit for Lot 2, Block 1 or when Mr. Troendle is no longer a full time
resident of that property, whichever occurs first. I think I could live
with that, to not change his property until he's no longer living there.
Otherwise I don't have anything else.
Batzli: But I mean the road, if it's adjusted will happen before anything
develops so it's an either or really. Either the road is adjusted or then
you don't issue a building permit for Lot 2. Is that what you said?
I
Emmings: Right. That's essentially right. I guess I just said that
either you move the building or you move the road. If you have to move the
building, you do it before there's a building permit or when he's no longer
living there full time. I don't know how we'd ever know but that's a
1 separate issue.
Conrad: That's staff's problem. Anything else?
Emmings: No. I guess as far as the location of the road, that's done.
Resident: There's always alternatives.
Emmings: As far as the road goes, that's done as far as what we're doing
tonight. It's a non -issue and what I was going to say was I think you have
I some valid concerns but I think they ought to be addressed to the City
Council.
I
Jim Stasson: You mean the existing roads or are you talking about the
proposed roads?
r 124
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 15
Emmings: I'm talking about Nez Perce the way it's lined up to go. If
you're interested in...
Jim Stasson: You mean outside of the development? Where are you talking
about?
Emmings: The road, as Nez Perce is designed to go through to Peaceful
Lane, that has been determined by the City Council and if you've got issues
on that, address it to the City Council.
Brad Johnson: Are you saying that that part over Art Owens' property is a
done deal?
Emmings: This path, as I understand it, this path for Nez Perce.
Batzli: It's not platted.
Krauss: There's a conceptual alingment. It only becomes effective when
their property is platt-ad.
Jim Stasson: So it's not done.
Emmings: Okay, it's not done. Then don't address your concerns to the
City Council. I mean I'm telling you that if you have concerns, this isn't
the forum for them. This is not an issue in this plat. This fits with the
conceptual plan of the road.
Brad Johnson: We don't think the plat should be approved unless that issue
is taken care of.
Rodd Johnson: This plat is still open. He can still access the Pleasant
View Road right through.
Mary Stasson: Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4.
Batzli: What I think, we get our guidance from the City Council and they IIhavelookedatthisandrevieweditandbasicallygiventheguidancetous
that conceptually this is what they want to see and for us to tell the City
Council now that no, we don't like that. Do something else. We probably.
won't take that step because they told us what they think they want to see. II
Mary Stasson: But when do we get a chance to speak?
Batzli: You'll get a chance to go to the City Council when this goes up to
the City Council and that's really, I think you have to get your group back
together and address your concerns to them because they're the ones. that
told us this is what they want to see.
Brad Johnson: So what is the purpose for tonight then?
Rodd Johnson: Why are we all here for an hour and a half?
Jim Stasson: If you guys don't have anything to say about it.
125
1 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 16
IBatzli: Well we have a lot to say about a lot of issues but on this
particular issue, I don't think we're going to change what the City Council
I has told us they want to see.
Conrad: I'm interested. I think we have our input so I guess I'll reflect
I
a different opinion. I feel comfortable with the alignment that was
proposed and only because we struggled with it for so long. I think it's
unfortunate, and there weren't any good solutions. I think most people
that live in the area don't want that area developed at all, as I would
I guess you wouldn't but on the other hand it is. Flat out it is and I think
we struggled with that. I think the alternatives that I heard mentioned
tonight were not acceptable to me before and they still aren't. That
I
doesn't mean we explored other alternatives. I guess I'm interested from a
Planning Commission standpoint. Not that the City Council decree that this
is the road alignment. They did to a degree do that. I'm curious if
anybody feels that you'd like to reopen that issue and suggest to the City
I Council that they reopen the issue.
Emmings: I can tell you for me I think that this is the plan they adopted
I is a good one because it doesn't put another entrance out onto a road that,
out onto Pleasant View. So I preferred this one.
I
Conrad: And that was my opinion when we looked at that. I think two roads
and especially the straight that would have connected the Carver Beach area
and the strip straight across to Pleasant View I thought was a negative
I
alternative. This is a better alternative as I see it. This is just me
speaking. Brian. Joan. Do you have a feeling to want to open up or to
recommend that the City Council looks at road alignment or are you
comfortable or do you not know enough at this point in time to even, you
I may not have been around. I don't know. Brian, you were around. Joan, I
don't think you were.
I
Batzli: Of the options that we have remaining since Vineland went in and
the road is where it's at, I think that this is the best alternative that
I've seen. I mean sure there's probably other alternatives and I thought
we addressed a fair number of them and this was a reasonable alternative at
Ithat time.
Ahrens: I agree. I think that we should be directing as much traffic as we
I can as quickly as possible onto CR 17.
Conrad: Just a comment. Paul, this neighborhood obviously was not
I
involved when the other neighborhoods along Pleasant View were and they're
thinking they got the short straw in this one.
Brad Johnson: How about know?
1 Conrad: Don't be so negative. We're trying.
IBrad Johnson: I'm sorry. It's our street.
Conrad: I know it is. I empathize. I know what you're feeling. What was
the reason they weren't involved?
126
Planning Commission Meeting IIOctober17, 1990 Page 17
Krauss: I honestly don't recall who was notified. I know that we had some
comments from people on Peaceful Lane because... I certainly got phone
calls from someone.
1
Conrad: I thought we did too.
Brad Johnson: I called after I found out what was going on but that was 1afteritwasalreadygoingtoCityCouncil. Before we even had a shot at
coming in here and saying. This was done in November.
Krauss: The final plat was approved in November.II
Conrad: Okay, it might have been. Mr. Emmings gave you some input and
probably nothing that you're really thrilled with. I guess I'm telling you'
from my position I'm pretty comfortable given all the negatives and
positives and some of the things, requirements we were trying to do and
really it's hard to reflect back months ago. But I'm not uncomfortable
with this road alignment. I think you really should be at the City Council
meeting to express your concern. They did say that this is what they'd
like. I don't say that we'll just dump it off on them. I'm telling you IthatIfeelcomfortablewiththisroadalignmentasIlookedatthe
alternatives many months ago but I think you've got to stay, as I prefaced
before, if you all go in with the numbers you had tonight, they may pay
Isomeattentiontoyoutoreopentheissue. Okay? Some other questions.
Block 1, Lot 4. That's a buildable lot?
Krauss: Frankly Mr. Chairman I don't believe it is. It's very tight which"is why we've recommended a shift of lot lines to increase the building pad.
And some of that pond is being excavated out and it's also possible to
shift that excavation somewhat further to the south.II
Conrad: So, okay. I missed that.
Ahrens: How could you adjust the lot line of 3 and 4...buildable. I IIlooksliketheonlycornerthat's buildable.
Krauss: No, not between 3 and 4. Between 1 and 4. We require 90 foot of IIwidthandthatlot1is140. Basically you skew the property line so that
it runs to the northeast.
Conrad: Help me Paul. Where's the recommendation that we do what you just"
said? I'm scanning real fast and maybe I just can't pick it up.
Ahrens: You talk about it in the report.I
Krauss: I'm sorry, it should be in there. I know we talked about it in
the text.II
Conrad: Yeah, it's not there so I don't know that I can approve that
unless there's a motion to claim it an unbuildable lot right now until it's"proved that a building pad could meet setback. I too, I don't have any
problem with the 7 foot requirement in the staff report. That's the way
it's got to be. It's an absolute. We'll take it. Now's the time to do
it. Not that I'm really wild about expanding Pleasant View to tell you the ItruthbutIthinknow's the time to do it and that's not even a debate in
1127
1 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 18
my mind. I agree with Steve in terms of his motion. I think that road
should be realigned to try to meet the setbacks. I don't know, I could
I never say what you said but I hope you can reconstruct what you said Steve.
And from the neighborhood standpoint, we'll look into finding Paul, can
you get back to me next, 2 weeks from now. Is that a public hearing for
I the Comprehensive Plan? What's 2 weeks from now, anything?
Krauss: It should be a regular meeting.
I Conrad: Okay. I'd like to know why this group was not involved. Every 2
weeks we come here and we talk to our neighbors like yourselves and there's
always somebody saying he wasn't informed. As Paul says, the first thing
I
he learned in planning school is the neighborhoods come in and say why
wasn't I informed of this so it's pretty standard but it appears to me that
they're are a lot of you here that were not informed so I'd kind of like to
look and find that out. It may not help you, you know right now and you'reIsortofattheendofaprocesswhichisunfortunate. I think if the
Plesant View owners that were here in the other time periods, they're
probably double your numbers that were here talking about they don't want
I this at all. Maybe very similar to what you're saying and then okay, if
we've got to have it, how do we minimize the traffic coming from Carver
Beach? How do we minimize the traffic going down Pleasant View? How are
I
we safe? How are we this? How are we that? Here's what we came up with.
I know you don't like it but that's what we tried to, we tried to satisfy
some of those needs and now you have another one. I think the only other
thing I can say is that the road access out to Peaceful Lane will be
I improved to be acceptable when that link is made. It would be acceptable
to according to standards. There couldn't be any other way. That may not
feel comfortable either but it would have to be.
1 Resident: would- that be south where it used to run down CR 17?
Krauss: Yes.
I Resident: That was looked at?
I Krauss: There's actually a stub right -of -way that comes up from Lake Lucy
inbetween two homes.
I Resident: They did look at that?
Krauss: Yeah. As I recall the grade was too significant coming through
there.
IBrad Johnson: That's our big problem...Art Owens property. The access
to Pleasant View. And to approve this thing now when that is, people can
Isay what they want but nobody here knows when that's going to happen_
Conrad: That's true. Yeah. We have situations like that all the time.
IIs that good or bad? It's probably bad but there's no perfect way to solve
that problem. You can't hold up somebody's right to develop unless you can
prove that it's unsafe.
IRodd Johnson: When you talk about being unsafe...Nez Perce and Lake Lucy
corner that we're talking about that was 22 feet and I believe...
128
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 19
Krauss: No. A normal right -of -way which is the land we own is 50 feet.
Charles, normal pavement width is what curb to'curb now?
Folch: It is 28 feet face of curb to face of curb on a minor. residential II
street.
Rodd Johnson: Is Lake Lucy a minor residential street?
Jim Stasson: Lake Lucy it would be okay but it's that Nez Perce corner...
There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.)
Conrad: I think the comments from Mr. Fortier, I understand them but I
don't agree with them. I do agree with Steve, your comments and I don't
want Lot 4, Block 1 to be a buildable lot at this time until it's proven to
be buildable. So how do we handle that one Paul?
Krauss: Well I'd add a condition. It was an omission on our part because
under the grading /drainage section we do discuss the fact that that lot is
marginally buildable and there's no rear yard for the homes should they Ibuildonethere. Put in a condition to the effect that the lot lines and
grading shall either be reconfigured to enlarge the buildable area on that
lot or it should be combined with Lot 1 to make a single larger lot.
111Conrad: Okay. Any other comments? Is there a motion?
Emmings: I'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of
Subdivision #90 -15 of the Troendle Addition as shown on the plans dated
Received September 17, 1990" subject to the conditions in the staff
report. 1 thru 13 as presented in the staff report and then an alteration '
to 11 as follows. That one will read that the garage barn on Lot 2, Block
1 will be removed or relocated or the road shall be adjusted so that no
variances are required. If it is necessary to remove or relocate the
garage or barn, that shall be done prior to the issuance of a building
permit for Lot 2, Block 1 or when Mr. Troendle is no longer a full time
resident of that property, whichever should occur first. The balance of
that 11th condition will stay the way it is. Then add a condition 14 that IIwouldstatethefollowing. That Lot 4, Block 1 appears to be an
unbuildable lot. That the applicant must either adjust the lot lines or
otherwise combine the lot with the other 3 lots in Block 1 or in some other'way insure it's buildability to the satisfaction of the City staff.
Conrad: Okay, thanks Steve. Is there a second? I'll second it. Any
discussion.
Batzli: Yeah. I'd like to make two minor amendments to the plan and the
third point of the 8th condition I'd like to add the following sentence.
This is after the additional 7 feet of right -of -way. No vacation of.
Pleasant View Road shall occur notwithstading the plans submitted by
applicant. And then the 10th condition I'd cross off, -will be accepted and'insert the words, shall be required from the applicant.
Conrad: Would you modify your motion?
Emmings: Sure.
129
11 Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 20
1 Conrad: Any other discussion?
Batzli: Yeah. I think that that's the first motion I've ever heard you
second and I was really impressed.
Emmings: I'll second that.
Emmings moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Subdivision #90 -15 for Troendle Addition as shown on the plans
dated September 17, 1990, subject to the following conditions:t:
1. A tree removal plan shall be submitted for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1
prior to issuance of a building permit. Clear cutting, except for the
house pad and utilities will not be permitted.
2. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and
provide the city with the necessary financial securities to guarantee
proper installation of the improvements.
t
3. The applicant shal=l, obtain and comply with all conditions of the
Watershed District. permit.
4. The developer shall dedicate the utilities within the right -of -way for
permanent ownership.
5. The cul -de -sac on Troendle Way shall have a radius of 60 feet and the
street name shall be modified to either Troendle Circle or Troendle
Court to eliminate any confusion in applying it as a through street.
Final street plans shall be developed for approval by the City
U Engineering Department.
6. The applicant shall install erosion control silt fence around the
ponding area until such time that turf is established. Turf or sod
shall be placed behind all curbing.
7. Shared driveway access off of Pleasant View Road for Lots 1 and 4,
Block 1 is required and a cross access easement shall be provided.
This common section of the driveway shall be constructed to a 7 ton
design paved to a width of 20 feet and have a maximum grade of 10 %.
8. Provide the following easements and rights -of -way:
a. The drainage and utility easements along the westerly property line
of Lots 9, 10 and 11, Block 2 and the ponding area on Lots 3 and 4,
Block 1 that are shown on the grading and erosion control plan
shall also be shown on the preliminary plat accordingly.
b. The acquisition of a drainage easement through the property
immediately west of Lots 3 and 4, Block 1 will be required for the
I discharge of the detention pond.
c. Additional 7 feet of right -of -way along Pleasant View Road. No
vacation of Pleasant View Road shall occur notwithstanding the
plans submitted by applicant.
130
Planning Commission Meeting 1October17, 1990 - Page 21
9. The applicant shall submit storm sewer calculations verifying size and
capacity of the storm sewer system,and ponding basin. Eight inch
sanitary sewer at a minimum rate of 0.4% shall be constructed on this
subdivision and service locations for all of the lots on this plat
shall be shown for final submittal review. The final plans and
specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and
approval.
10. Park and trail fees will be required from the applicant in lieu of
parkland dedication.
11. The garage barn on Lot 2, Block 1 will be removed or relocated or the
road shall be adjusted so that no variances are required. If it is
necessary to remove or relocate the garage or barn, that shall be done
prior to the issuance of a building permit for Lot 2, Block 1 or when
Mr. Troendle is no longer a full time resident of that property,
whichever should occur first. Lot 2, Block 1 shall be serviced by
Nez Perce Drive and the gravel driveway to Pleasant View Road shall be
removed.
12. The temporary cul-de-sac should be provided with an easement to
accommodate the temporary pavement and be provided with a barricade
equipped with a sign indicating the road will be extended in the
future.
13. Lots 1 and 11, Block 2 are required to have access from Troendle Way.
14. Lot 4, Block 1 appears to be an unbuildable lot. The applicant must II
either adjust the lot lines or otherwise combine the lot with the other
three lots in Block 1 or in some other way insure it's buildability to
the satisfaction of the City staff.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Conrad: This goes to the City Council on the 5th. Are you telling them
that? Okay. I think you've got to go into them with some specifics. It's
pretty characteristic. What you said tonight is pretty standard for what IIwehearfromneighborsonalotofthings. If you want a particular road
alingment, if you don't like that one you know, you should have a
recommendation that says City Council we would like you to do this. We
would like you to study the traffic patterns from Nez Perce. It's
dangerous now and we can prove it. You've got to go in with some solid
stuff because we hear this all the time. They really were the ones that
did set this alignment in terms of the general direction and I think
they're the ones that can take another look into it. So thank you and
don't stop your interest.
Mary Stasson: Will they again look at the safety?
Conrad: I'm not sure. It was a major issue of all other homeowners who
came in at previous times and. safety is an issue with the Planning staff. IWejustdon't like to do things that don't make sense. This is not a high
intensive use of that land. It's a pretty low intensive use. You know if
we were talking about 12,000 square foot things and high rises and what
have you, we're not talking a whole lot of intensity here. Even though
131
Planning Commission Meeting
October 17, 1990 - Page 22
I it's far more than what's acceptable to you because you're dealing with, it
is. It's not out of character with what Chanhassen is becoming.. And so
it's, the safety issue was a concern before as we made that link between
the Carver Beach area and Pleasant View because it was simply a straight
shot across and that was the concer. It was going to be a dumping ground
for, you know it's just going to be the quick route to the Crosstown. Paul
is telling us tonight, it's still going to be a quick route to the
Crosstown no matter what so you know, we dealt with that information
before. Well, I just wanted to talk to you a little bit.
Brad Johnson: Lake Lucy now is a dumping ground and a quick shot for
everyone down on Nez Perce so, talking about safety, that corner is bad. I
think that's what our homeowners are concerned about.
1 Conrad: I appreciate you coming in.
Brad Johnson: Is there a record that goes to City Council?
Conrad: They get. this. We have a City Council member here tonight so.
Emmings: They get verbatim Minutes also.
Batzli: Tune in every Saturday and watch the video broadcast of this
thing.
PUBLIC HEARING:
MODIFICATION OF THE PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2 -1. THE
PURPOSE OF THE MODIFICATION IS TO AUTHORIZE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENT TO
AUDUBON ROAD.
Todd Gerhardt presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Conrad
called the public hearing to order.
Batzli moved, Emmings seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Conrad: Steve?
Emmings: I don't have any comments.
Conrad: Brian?
Batzli: I don't have any questions. I think it's a wonderful resolution.
Perfectly consistent with the development of the city of Chanhassen.
Conrad: You go along with anything the government wants right?
Batzli: Right.
Conrad: Anything else? Is there a motion?
Resolution #90 -2: Batzli moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning
Commission adopt the attached resolution finding the Modified Plan for Tax
Increment Financing District No. 2 -1 consistent with the City's
r 132
11
November_ 11, 1990 I
Chanhassen City Council II
690 Coulter Drive
PO Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
City Council Member:II
The purpose of this letter is to express the viewpoint of
the residents of Lake Lucy Road residing east of Powers
Boulevard, to the plans for development of the Troendle
Addition. We have organized together to offer an opinion on
the development plans and make our concerns known to the
council. In this manner we hope that a development plan can
be defined which satisfies the needs of all concerned
parties.
We support the proposed development plan for the Troendle
Addition and feel that a thorough evaluation of the options
was performed and the resulting plan represents good work by
a number of people. There are several aspects of the plan
that are appealing to us: shared traffic burden between Lake
Lucy Road and Pleasant View Road as a means of exiting theneighborhoodtoPowersBlvd., and the proposal for a park in
the new development, among other aspects.
The major concern of the neighborhood is with regard totrafficsafetyonLakeLucyRoadeastofPowersBlvd.).
We feel that a serious problem exists at the present time
with the speed and driving patterns of people driving this
road in light of the large number of young children livinginthisneighborhood. There are, or soon will be, thirteen
children, ten years old and younger on this street. It is
safe to assume that this number will grow in the future as
the demographics of the neighborhood reflect young families.
The neighborhood is willing to work with the appropriate
safety groups to find solutions to this existing problem.
Development of the Troendle Addition will add traffic volume
to Lake Lucy Road, and increase the risk of injury tochildreninourneighborhood. We accept this fact as partofdevelopmentinthecommunity. However, our neighborhood
does not wish to provide the only access from Powers Blvd.
to the Vineland Forest and Troendle Addition on a
temporary" basis until the proposed Nez Perce road
eventually connects with Peaceful Lank... We feel that
construction on the Troendle Addition must not proceed untilNezPerceisconnectedtoPeacefulLane.1
A TTM4
133
II
1 The residents of Lake Lucy Road are bearing the complete
volume of construction traffic for Vineland Forest and feel
II that this burden should be shared by creating access for
construction traffic from Pleasant View Road for development
of the Troendle Addition. The planning committee and the
council have previously raised concerns over the difficulty
1 of completing planned road connections at future dates. We
agree. This provides another good reason to complete the
Nez Perce connection to Peaceful Lane prior to construction
1
on the Troendle Addition. Future residents of the Troendle
Addition and Vineland Forest would then be provided with a
second access for safety reasons without delay.
IIn summary, the residents of our neighborhood feel that the
proposed development plan is basically a very good one. Our
major concern is traffic safety, and our philosophy is that
1 traffic volume must be shared. We are not stating that some
increase in traffic volume is unacceptable, that is the
price of community development. We are stating that this
1
increase in traffic volume, caused by these additions, must
be shared between Lake Lucy Road and Pleasant View Road in
an equitable manner prior to construction on the Troendle
Addition. This is ultimately in the best interests of all
I of those concerned. We will continue to strive for a
solution to this issue until it can be resolved in an
acceptable manner.
II Sincerely,
1 The Lake Lucy Road Neighborhood
1 G 44e.rt..e
Ue* Chi.
1 4• ,i
IF
1 1/ dhig J
C
irIIi . .1 / ,7 42
OrLOW mil v ei
i /7 56liIc„,...,..u.„.„:„.0..,1-,
4 ,„„J„, ,...,,_set,
1 etrvu-lont."'4,7t; ---ai
11 A)134
FORTIER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
November 12, 1990 A RCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIOR DESIG
Ms. Scharmin Al -Jaffe
Planning Dept.NOV 14 1990CityofChanhassen
CITY Ur690CoulterDrive
P. 0. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: TROENDLE PLAT
Comm: 89 -20
Dear Ms. A1- Jaffe:
As requested, we are herein submitting an alternate alignment for Nez
Pierce as it connects to Peacful Lane and then on to Pleasant View
Road. The revised road alignment does not affect the proposed
Troendle Plat and is merely one alternative of numerous alignments
possible for the connection to Pleasant View Road.1
As we have previously stated, we can make no representations on
behalf of adjacent property owners, Mr. Troendle, nor Mr. Beddor, as
to the desirability of the attached sketch.
As previously stated, any design considerations for the road
interchange must address the apparant wetland off Peaceful Lane and
Pleasant View Road. It was my understanding that you were to forward
to me copies of the minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting to
confirm their interest in the road alignment and also copies of any
information that your engineering staff may have establishing the
dimensions and elevations of this pond. We have not received that
information as of this date.
I have spoken to Mr. Owens regarding the pond on his property. He
has advised me that this pond was created due to the collapse of a
drain tile and that this area is not intended to hold water. Thus,
the resulting growth of vegetation which suggests-that it is a
wetland is artificial and is'not in conformance with the intended use
of this land. It is my further understanding that the area now
ponding water was intended to be fully developed as residential and
that the City of Chanhassen was aware of the collasped drain tile and
agreed that this was not a wetland, but rather a buildable parcel of
land. It is very important for all parties to clarify this issue and
I believe it would be appropriate for u, to have a meeting with City
Engineering. Mr. Art Owens has indicated that he would attend such a
meeting. Please advise as to when your schedule and that of your
engineering department will allow for this meeting.
ATTACH. Eil
408 Turnpike Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55416 612) 593 -1255 1135
Page 2
Ms. Al -Jaffe
November 12, 1990
Comm: 89 -20
1
Regardless of the disposition of the ponded water on the Art Owens
property, we believe that the Troendle Plat should proceed as
requested. Should you have any difficulty with this request, please
contact me.
You truly,
21.1R if
EAMPV
Daryl P. Fortier
DPF /sf
encl: Sketch of Nez - Pierce- Pleasant View Road
cc: Frank Beddor, Jr.
Jules Smith
Art Owens
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
II
II
1 136
0
0
o
10
i
V .:. a ,3k Q v. d, .ifs 4;,j •
5;
r
o.,.7 7
p,ii(«,-
it--i.,..
1
L
A/ / ,
V
1
1'IJ
11
41:1":
1
f
r ! j
of @`L l
A may_: I 4 r::, .
x
tip' f + r'
JA .vs_.nc.'fyS;N r ' ` • jig s 1
r /
V4-4 (
10
7/ _ —
4 :‘,7-t• .. / . / r (
A / 1 1137
r1 J.,k,..,N 9 - 1. 1 ----
tS k- 1 1 /
14 -, g NIZ
I.' 2 4i r
T il17-7:"41N70.64.:
Y V I I i
t k ,
I .J 1 I - Ms
y O 110 lie '' -
N II qP.o •
zI I i ' 1. 4\
j I t o - --_, ........- ."--- __.....
4c.,! 1 1 ii ..1 : Po r ...r - 4. ---- ; ----- z-z- - ---\_. r-
w I
1 Arb r i V 004---- -
Ir C'; /I , V 1\tea,
r ..O koc
V.(r 1 i Rr: i qq 4
71-- -- j , e _. e A
I Li — _a
imi I ft ? I :
7 vs ,
fa I W aa:
it
i I
i/W
W
I
L W W 1 I V
0
0 i i d 1.2 co
r i i r- '.) 1 1 ,0, .1 i 1. .
4-o 8 f
1 1 ia •-:. -
a 1 r
1 Lp.i +.w
V 1 1
Ilikt..;. ,
r
t o
7=1 al 41.4,---..its e ( -2 ' 1
P.. • \ ej ,.. .t si si 0111 f., n ,
1 I.;-, 6
i i‘: i,..&I v . 2_ i. i
Is... -I 0. C.....IMF\ ish, . O..
cv_____ • . 0.8
1 1 a 61
1
I ab 1 ff `' y It Ce*
i iimmvpi:st
o
0.
cc1 \1 iti i / _g'5- 1 i
s
g
v , ? , y i
mo °
D
44.. , a _;,138
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
1
Councilwoman Dimler: Right.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second?
i Councilman Workman: Second. So are you going with the submersible or which
one was more expensive?II
Councilwoman Dimler: Alternate B.
Jim Bullert: The vertical turban is cheaper.
Councilman Workman: The above ground?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. Because we have the pump house there.
Resolution #91 -8: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded that
in order to prevent further damage, to approve a resolution for emergency repair
to Well No. 4 with Alternate B from Bergerson- Caswell in the total amount of
16,571.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
A. PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 8.7 ACRES INTO 15 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, LOCATED
SOUTH OF PLEASANT VIEW ROAD AND VINELAND FOREST PLAT AND EAST OF PEACEFUL 1LANE, TROENDLE ADDITION.
B. AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR EXTENSION OF NEZ PERCE DRIVE
FROM PROPOSED TROENDLE ADDITION TO PLEASANT VIEW ROAD.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, the applicants are requesting approval to divide a 8.7
acre parcel into 15 lots. You reviewed this at a meeting in November. The
Planning Commission had recommended approval. There was a concern raised by the
neighborhood regarding the potential extension of Nez Perce out to Pleasant View
and when that might occur. We were asked to then research that issue further
and report back to you. We met with the developer and the adjoining property
owner and basically concluded several items. Staff outlined the City Council's
goal of extending Nez Perce to Pleasant View as soon as possible and we
basically got the understanding of support of both individuals. They didn't
oppose the concept. Mr. Owens did indicate however that although he's not
presently in a position to develop his property because of a bankruptcy
proceeding, that in fact it may be some sort of a long term goal on his part.
Both individuals indicated that they were at this point unwilling to undertake
the cost of the feasibility study. That they did not believe that that would be
their responsibility if they had an ability to pay for it. Concurrently we also
said that we'd go out and get an estimate on cost of the feasibility study and
we've done that and under a separate action item tonight, you'll see that
there's a proposal to do a $3,700.00 feasibility study. There's basically two IIlegalissuesthatweinvestigatedrelativetothisissue. The first concerned
Mr. Owens' bankruptcy. There was a question as to whether or not we could. If
the City Council wanted to finish this road project at this time, you'd be in
the position of needing to condemn the property. Mr. Owens has no ability to
sell it to us at this point, and undertake fir::`cing of the road and basically
absorb that portion of the expense that we can't assess back to the Troendle
Addition and sit on that until Mr. Owens develops his property and you can then 1
31
1
1139
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
levy assessments. The City Attorney did confirm that we could probably condemn
land that was needed although we may need approval from the bankruptcy court.
However, it's not clear if we could sustain assessments against that property.
So again that puts you kind of behind the 8 ball. You need to finance or front
end the cost of the feasibility study and the actual road construction in the
expectation that at some point in the future you'd be reimbursed. The second
legal issue that we want to investigate is whether or not the extension of Nez
Perce can rightfully be tied to the Troendle Addition. In there there's kind of
a mixed answer and the City Attorney can clarify this if need be but basically
you can only limit or connect the two items to the extent that the Troendle
Addition needs the extension to proceed. Beyond that we would have difficulty
doing that. After we had an opportunity to review the issues that were raised a
little bit further, we also have some concerns that we have some extraordinarily
long temporary cul -de -sacs that would result as currently proposed. As
currently proposed, if Nez Perce was built up to this point and a temporary dead
end provided, by the time you came in off of Lake Lucy, came up Nez Perce and
got down to the end of Troendle Way, you're going in approximately 1,400 feet.
Nez Perce itself is approximately 1,100 feet. Now we don't have a specific
standard in our ordinance, as many ordinances do, about how long a cul -de -sac
1 should be but that's quite a bit longer than most cities would find comfortable
and the reasons are several. Emergency vehicle response time gets rather
lengthy. Streets like that are expensive for us to maintain and snowplow
because you have to go all the way up and all the way back. You're always
doubling around. They provide less than adequate or optimal access and there is
a concern that when you add in the number of homes in this addition to the
I number of homes in Vineland Forest that would get access off this, you're up to
I think it's 32 homes. What we did is we had some meetings on this late last
week or some conference calls with the City Manager, myself and the City
Attorney to kind of work our way through this and what we came up with is kind
of a revised recommendation. If you'll recall, the applicant indicated that it
was not their intention to proceed immediately with construction of homes on
this plat. That their primary goal was to take title to the property and get
I the plat recorded so they could do that and that they were planning on
developing at some point in the future. What we've worked out and honestly
I have not had an opportunity to speak directly with the applicant about this.
We came to this decision last Thursday and I tried to contact him since then and
was unable to. What we've come up with is a recommendation that you sort of
make this into a two phase proposal whereby Phase 1 would be north of this line.
Phase 2 south and Phase 2 would be under our proposal platted as an outlot.
Phase 1 would be allowed to develop initially with Nez Perce constructed up to
the Art Owens property. Two of those homesites access off of Pleasant View so
they're not really a concern coming off of here. There will be 4 new potential
homesites and that fourth homesite does not occur until Mr. Troendle vacates the
life estate. What we're proposing is that outlot, as a condition of platting
for that outlot int he future, that when the developer wishes to plat it, that
they have to petition the City Council for the extension of Nez Perce out to
Pleasant View. In that manner we'd be tying it together with the completion of
that street so by the time we add in the full component of 32 homes, we'd have
the street completed. Now if in the meantime the Owens property is sold or
developed and the road's built, then obviously we meet our goal and the
subdivision of that second phase can proceed u-':ndered. We think that that
accomplishes a few things. It limits the amour;: of homes that are going to go
II in there intially so I think we've addressed the concerns of the traffic
32
140
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
1
concerns on Lake Lucy. It gets Mr. Beddor his plat as quickly as possible in
recognition of his timeframe. And finally it provides for the ultimate
construction of Nez Perce and what we think is an equitable manner and avoids
all those issues that we have in dealing with the bankruptcy of Mr. Owens
property that makes me a little concerned and I don't know if I'd advise dealing
with the front end of those costs because I couldn't guarantee you when we'd
recover that. As I said, we did get an estimate on a feasibility study.and
there's another action tonight on that but if you proceed with the
recommendation as r- oposed, you wouldn't need to act on that feasibility study.
We wouldn't undertake that feasibility study until we had a proposal to develop
in mind. There were a couple other issues that were raised at the Council
meeting. The first one concerned the location of an existing barn on Mr.
Troendle's life estate relative to the extension of the new street. It requires
a variance to leave that in place. Staff had recommended against it and the
Planning Commission had as well but there appeared to be some desire on the part
of the City Council to approve it. There was no action taken on it. Now staff
continues to recommend against it. We think that while it's a relatively minor
issue, that new subdivisions do create a lot of financial benefit for
individuals and that typically in the past we've recommended removal of
impending structures. However as I indicated in the report, we don't view this
as a life and death issue. We are not recommending it's approval but we did
provide revised language ip there should you wish to approve it, that you could
adopt that would basically allow it to remain in place as long as Mr. Troendle's
on the property and that that would be filed against the property so that it
would be of record. It's a little clunks. I can't ask you to approve a
temporary variance because there is no such animal but I believe we can work it
out that way. There is an error in the report though. The language that
I added in there, if you do wish to approve this, and it says added to condition
number 11. It's actually condition number 12. There was a second issue of
concern raised by the neighbors and we don't have a good response to this one.
For those of you familiar with the area, there was a concern raised about the
curve between Lake Lucy Road and Nez Perce. It is a tight curve and it's not an
optimal design but in talking with the former, I guess, City Engineer about
that, he indicated to me that it was a design compromise. That when the road
was connected, that there was a desire to minimize the impact on adjoining
properties. Now we can look at fixing that curve but fixing that curve is
likely to require the taking of somebody's lawn or you know, it's going to
involve some property acquisition. Also, and our opinion is not linked to the
Troendle Addition. It's quite a ways away from it. To give you a feel for it,
it's about 300 feet down this way so you basically have to go all the way
through Vineland Forest. It's a worthy idea to pursue I guess but I wouldn't
tie it to the Troendle Addition and I'd exercise some caution if you will in
terms of who might absorb the cost of that. The last item is we received
several letters from Frank Beddor relative to the staff proposal that we take 7
feet of right -of -way along Pleasant View Road. The response is quite lengthy. I
won't go into that in detail but suffice it to say, we still think the idea has
merit and we think that in terms of setting a precedent and based upon what we
know today, that the 7 feet doesn't sound like a lot but we are continuing to
recommend that we do obtain it at the time we can obtain it which is during the
platting process. I'd reiterate that nobody envisions a major upgrading of
Pleasant View Road that would disturb that res_'ential environment that's kind
of unique that we have over there. All we're a-iticipating at this point is at
best some safety related improvements that probably, in our opinion, will have
33
1141
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
to be undertaken at some point as traffic continues to build there. Withh that
we are recommending approval of the preliminary plat subject to the conditions
in the staff report. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Anyone wishing to address that?
Daryl Fortier: Good evening Your Honor, Councilmembers, I'm Daryl Fortier. I'm
here to represent Mr. Frank Beddor, Jr. Also with me tonight is Jules Smith.
Of the 15 items on the staff report we are in agreement with 11 of them. The
first one we would like to discuss that presents a problem to Mr. Beddor is item
number 1 and that is a suggestion that this be a dual part plat. If we are
uncertaih of the objectives. We have not been able to talk to staff but if the
apparent objective is to get some petition or someone to request the city to try
to proceed with Nez Perce, I'm sure Mr. Beddor has no objections to joining the
residents along Lake Lucy Road and filing such a petition. We don't quite
understand what is behind it but 1 guess on first glance we would join with the
residents in filing such a petition. We see no difficulty in that. The second
thing we'd like to point out is some of the issues that are being raised or
justification for the splitting of the parcel into two plats if you will. We're
uncertain of, it does present a difficulty to Mr. Beddor in his execution of the
life estate to Mr. Troendle and that's one of his primary reasons for doing this
plat. We are not in a particular hurry to develop. That's true. We would even
I be willing to say that we-will not file the plat or the City need not sign the
plat until January of next year. Therefore you could be assured we couldn't
proceed and actually in January of next year we intend to come in here and ask
for another year's extension. We realize you cannot grant that tonight but if
you could, we would request it tonight. But in order for Mr. Beddor to proceed
with his life estate he must be able to make sure that the value of the plat is
there and that the plat will be approved by the City as it's being submitted.
In other words, a plat with 6 lots on him cannot be accepted to the other party
when they are anticipating 15 lots. The value is not the same so it does
present a severe problem to Mr. Beddor. Regarding the safety issues that are
being raised, we're not certain that a good case can be made or no compelling
case can be made at least that this presents, this extensive cul -de -sac presents
a significant problem to health, safety or welfare within the city. The issue
of plowing and turning around. Whether you go the extra 300 feet you're
proposing to cut off seems to be really a minor point. You would be going that
extra 300 feet on any cul -de -sac which comes off a main thoroughfare. As far as
the amount of traffic coming off, over at Fox Chase you have, immediately
adjacent to this, you have 52 residents off a much longer cul -de -sac. Now we're
not suggesting that you repeat any mistakes that may have been made in the past.
We are simply pointing out that at Fox Chase where there are 52 residences,
there is no chance for a second outlet. In this particular plat we are
proposing a maximum of 32 which would include the Vineland Estates. And any
time the city sees that as a problem, the physical wherewithal to solve the
problem and the political wherewithal is all within the control of the city.
This is not another Fox Chase situation where you will be stuck with it. Any
time the city choses, they could proceed to condemn the land across the Art
Owens property and execute the concept study that was previously agreed upon and
1 complete Nez Perce all the way through to Pleasant View Road. That's within the
choice and the discretion of the city whenever they see that problem which may
arise. We cannot do that of course as a private party. So I guess that really
II
sums up the difficulty we have with 1. Again, if it is simply an issue of who's
34
142
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
1
making a request that we proceed with a road, we would be pleased to join with
the other residents and request Nez Perce. If that is not the issue and you are
seeking some other solution to it, we think we don't understand it and we
simply ask that, you approve the plat because we don't think there's a compelling
reason to deny it based on those reasons. We think it is always within the
city's realm to solve any problems that have been suggested. We agree with 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. When we come to point 9 regarding right -of -ways, we agree
with the 2 of the 3 points in point 9. We disagree with the right -of -way for
Pleasant View Road. The additional 7 feet being requested. We have prepared a
brief little grapoic here. If you can see this small map, what I've done is
shown the Vineland Estates. We are immediately next door and the areas along
Pleasant View highlighted in red are those areas where 66 foot right -of -way has
within the past 7 or 8 years or how long I've been representing Pleasant View
Homeowners Association, been approved. Those are the only plats approved along
this road and all of them have been approved with a 66 foot right -of -way. In
the future if you decide that you need an 80 foot right -of -way, you will , to
go back against all of these properties and all of the properties in white and
request that you get an additional 7 feet from all of them. We are simply
saying that an issue of fairness, treat Mr. Beddor the same and in the future
take the additional 7 feet from Mr. Beddor if that's what you decide tc do but
take it in the future when you address those issues with the rest of the
property owners. Do not do it now. It is a straight away situation. This is
not a curve. This is no an alignment detail that you are sure you're going to
need. It is the safest part of the road and we don't see any justific•tion for
taking it now. The reason we are objecting is one of fairness as Mr. eddor has
stated in his letter. We have been involved with the City on a separ.= e issue
where we have installed a portion of a public improvement and we have round in
the future that when the rest of the public improvement goes ahead, t t there
is no way to recoup the loss that the client puts in initially. For • :ample,
the value of the 7 foot that he gives up now will be lost to him. In .he future
he will still get assessed including the value of land taken from other people
and he will have to share an equal share of that. He will be paying wice for
that land. We think the way to solve that is either to adjust your a sessment
policy or to defer it until the widening of the road or the improvements of the
road are incurred. We think it is unfair to do that at this time. T)e next
point we'd like to point out is number 12. We are in agreement with 10. We are
in agreement with 11. Point 12 suggests that the variance for the garage
setback not be approved. We would just like to make it clear that we believe
there is ample grounds for granting a variance. Of all of the projects we've
been in front of you with over the past 10 or 15 years, this one is the easiest
to justify for a variance. It is a condition not of our making. It is an
alignment of a road that we cannot change. We have tried. We cannot change
this. We are being forced to put the road into this location. It results in a
non - conforming use. We agree but there is nothing we can do about that. We
cannot move the road. The City may have that authority. We do not. We are
suggesting however instead of requesting a variance, that we would certainly be
willing to set Lots 1 and 2 aside on Block 1 and we would put into their deed
that no improvements would be made to either lot until such time as Mr. Troendle
vacates his property or that the garage structure must be•moved to be in
conformance with the 30 foot setback. Either or. We will put that on the title
of the deed of both properties. In that case Mr. Troendle's driveway will staywhereitis, He will not be permitted to connected to Nez Perce Road and we
will not be permitted to sell or build Lots 1 or 2. Those are 2 lots we'll be
35
1143
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
tying up for Mr. Troendle's benefit. The final condition that we would have
some disagreement with is, we agree with 13. We agree with 14. Point 15 is
perhaps only a minor disagreement also. It is requesting that we agree today
that in the future we will not argue about some future assessments or we will
not contest them. We would agree that if assessments for any public
improvements in this area were to be'uniformily shared, equally based on square
footage or lot area with all those parties participating who are benefiting, we
would have no objection but the recommendation does not say that. It simply
says that we will not object. We cannot make such a statement for future
homeowners. We think that their rights to object to assessments should be kept
with them. As a developer we can certainly make the agreement that we would
put onto a deed a restriction that all of these lots are subject to future
assessments equally based on the shared value of the improvements in that area.
Specifically I have a feeling we're talking about Nez Perce as it goes to
Pleasant View Road. We agree with that but we think the person on say Lot 2 off
the cul -de -sac benefits equally as a person off Vineland Estates or the person
off the Art Owens property and we are simply asking that for the benefit of
future residents, that these assessments be uniform and equal. Therefore that
one causes us some problems also. I'm sure Mr. Smith can, Jules here can
address it more eloquently than I certainly can. I'll be pleased to answer any
questions.
Councilwoman Dimler: Would you repeat again what did you want for condition 12?
I didn't quite catch that.
Daryl Fortier: For number 12, rather than seeking a variance, we would agree
that both Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1 would have a deed restriction precluding their
development until Mr. Troendle vacates his property or until the garage is
brought into a conforming use. Conformance with the setback.
Councilwoman Dimler: How do you propose to do that?
Jules Smith: Because the way you've stated it, the Troendle's life estate...go
ahead and do something with it even though the garage is still within. What
we're really saying is, we will not do anything to those two lots for as long as
Mr. Troendle has a life estate. There after we won't do anything until that
garage is removed. I mean we will take down the garage after he...or after his
life estate...
Councilwoman Dimler: Is that what you were saying in your substituted wording?
Paul Krauss: I didn't link in the second lot but it basically does the same
thing.
Jules Smith: All we're saying about Lot 1 is that, just the way it is now, his
I driveway would just stay the same as long as he's using it. As soon as he
doesn't use it, then that lot would have to go the other way. And there
wouldn't be, as a matter of fact, an easement over Lot 1 that we would execute
in his life estate is only for his life so it would be turned automatically but
I however we want to put it on record, we would put on record that easement would
terminate on Lot 2 as soon as he dies. It would be on record anyway but we
would put it in the developer's agreement or anything you would want to put it
II on record.
36
1
1 144
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
Councilman Workman: That would still be a temporary variance of sorts.
Jules Smith: Well it's not going to be a variance.1
Daryl Fortier: We're requesting that you delay implementation of compliance
until the life estate lapses.II
Councilman Workman: We all butter our toast a little differently.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions? Does anyone have anything to discuss
regarding the additional 7 feet right -of -way?
Roger Knutson: Can I ask a question? You're resisting just final platting Lots
1 thru 4 and making the rest of it an outlot because you want the City's
assurance that the whole layout is acceptable? Is that my understanding?
Daryl Fortier: We need some way of, Mr. Beddor is concerned about Vineland
Estates lots off Pleasant View. The owner of Vineland Estates has indicated a
willingness to swap lots. In order for that to occur, we must have some kind of
platted lot that we can swap. That is one difficulty. The other difficulty is
he, in establishing the value of Troendle Addition, Mr. Beddor's realtors or his
financial advisors and Mr. Troendle's must reach agreement as to how many lots
there can be. Therefore some understanding that the City will indeed approve
something is critical.
Roger Knutson: If the City for example were to, I don't know that they would,
but approve the preliminary plat of the whole thing as you have it set out there
and then in terms of the development agreement that you final plat four lots now
at stage 1 and you've already approved the concept of the preliminary for stage 112ifthat's what happens and the rest of it, stage 2 will be developed at such
time as Nez Perce is constructed for example.
Daryl Fortier: Unfortunately we only got the, I only got the staff report at 1about6:20 this evening and I have not had a chance to contact Mr. Beddor as to
what other difficulties that would entail. I do know of the two difficulties
I've been mentioning. As to whether or not Mr. Van Eeckhout next door has some
difficulties with it, it's a very uneasy situation for me to say yes or no to
simply because I see this being connected to some future event for which this
developer has no control over.
Don Ashworth: Could we pose the question to Mr. Smith? I mean do you see what
we're trying to get at? I think a preliminary plat for the entire parcel, a
phasing plan fully protects your client and yet provides some assurances that
the City is looking for as far as potentially getting that road through at a
future point in time.
Jules Smith: If you're saying that, and as I read this, well before I answer
that one there's just one other little minor problem. If we were to put in Nez
Perce and that little punch down of the road because this says those two lots
have to go on Troendle Way or Troendle Circle whatever it finally ends up.
being called, and we don't do the rest for a k=ale, that's a very, that's kind
of an expensive way to do it. Obviously when we go in there to develop that
eventually, you know we should do it all at once. The grading of the roads and
37
145
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
the whole thing. So you don't really, we would really think long and hard
before we would develop that separately. I mean put sewer and water and roads
in at two separate times. That would be really expensive. But as I read this,
and correct me if I'm wrong Paul. As I read this, what you're saying to us is
okay, we'll do that and we'll do this as an outlot. We'll approve it but we
will not let you actually. We'll let you subdivide it when you petition to have
that road put in. Is that what I'm reading? Well as I say, I haven't had a
chance to talk to Frank. In that sense, I don't think we'd have, I don't want
to categorically say this because I haven't talked to him about it because I
only saw this thing at 4:00 this afternoon but I don't think we would have a
problem with that just as the filing of the petition. You know, gee I'd like to
see the road come in and here's a petition but if the petition is tied to the
number 15 that says we have to pay for the whole road, yeah I think we'd have a
real problem with that because I don't think we should pay for the whole road.
The whole thing may be mute, well moot. I may be mute on it, because if Art
Owens plats and the road is built, hey that's it. I mean it's going to be part
of his plat. He just builds it just like we build our section of it. He builds
his section of it. It never comes to assess. I mean it may be a moot point. I
don't have a problem I don't think. I'd want to talk to Frank. I really...do
that but all we have to do is petition and we're going to be assessed just like
everybody else is assessed, I mean we're not opposed to paying our share of the
costs that are involved in that and I'm sure there are some costs over and above
the typical platting costs because of some other problems on, what is it
Peaceful Way and some of that. You know they'd be more than say you would
require from the developer platting that. Art Owens property so you might have
some additional costs in there. We wouldn't be opposed to that. But if all we
have to do is petition for it, I think we'll petition for it tonight.
Don Ashworth: If I may. One of the reasons that staff went in the direction
that we did, recognizes that if you provide a preliminary plat approval for the
entire subdivision, you're guaranteeing them x number of lots. You're allowing
them the right to move ahead with the first phase. They literally are
guaranteed that they can do a second phase if they do it within some period of
time. One year or two years. That kind of buys the time necessary that Mr.
Smith was originally looking at. On the other side, if you do a final plat for
the entire lots, hypothetically Mr. Beddor could sell that plat to whomever
tomorrow and you have really no assurance that we're going to have an
opportunity to look at that road extension at a future point in time. Before he
moves ahead with Phase 2, at least he has to come in and see you and at that
point in time we can look to again forcing the petition, or at least instituting
that process as it may go against the Owens property. I do not agree with Mr.
Fortier's position that you can literally put that remaining road section in at
any time you want and assess the full cost. I really believe that they should
be looked at concurrently. This recommendation allows you to do that. I think
to go in, put in a road on one singular piece.of property which is what you'd
have left at that point in time, at least if it were me, I might question the
public purpose that was being accomplished but that's neither here nor there. I
personally think that the recommendation has been given. Hopefully can meet the
needs of Mr. Beddor. I'd like to see that occur. I'd like to see us help Mr.
I
Troendle sell the property. I'd like to make sure we protect the interests of
the property owners in that area that would war' to see that road go through and.
I think it can be done in a fashion that protec?' Mr. Mr. Troendle, Mr.
Owens and the City.
I 38
1 146
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I basically agree. Paul, did you want to say something?
Paul Krauss: Just to clarify something briefly. Maybe Roger will jump in andthisisonadifferentissuethough. Mr. Fortier commented on the equity of
assessments that might result from a road being built in the future and it's
kind of tough to second guess what you or future council might do in thatregard. However, I think it's fair to state that as we see the benefit
distributed from this road extension, the benefit it seems to us to bedistributedacro.,s the Troendle lots and across Art Owens property. Vineland
Forest has already built a rather extraordinarily lengthy street so thatTroendleAdditioncanhookin. I mean it went further than it needed to in thatsubdivisionbasicallytogiveaccesstothenextlotinacoordinatedmanner.
You know I fail to, I'm not certain but I don't think we could sustain
assessments to show benefit in Vineland Forest. As far as the equity ofassessmentsgoesIguess, maybe I'm naive but I take equity for granted. Iwouldenvisionsomesortofanareaassessment. Again, we can't bind a futureCouncilbutanareaassessmentthat's based on lot area would probably be themostequitablewayofdoingthat. Without having a feasibility study, nobody'swillingtofrontendthecostofthefeasibilitystudy. I have a difficult timeaskingyoutodoitbecauseIdon't know when we'd be reimbursed. If we took afeasibilitystudy, if we actually went ahead with the project, we would knowexactlyhowmucheachlot's going to pay. Unfortunately we don't seem to havethatoptionopentous.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes sir. Please state your name and address.
Terry Barke: Good evening. My name is Terry Barke and my address is 960 LakeLucyRoad. I'm here tonight with a number of my neighbors from Lake Lucy Road.I addressed the Council in November, you may remember. I'd just like to make
this statement that it may not be obvious to you but my neighborhood, or just toconfirmthatmyneighborhood, my neighbors and myself, we basically like thestaff's recommendation. If there was any question, we have no problem with thatwhatsoever. It seems to us to be actually a very good solution. It sounds likeitdoessolvealotofpeople's problems. What's being discussed tonight in
terms of making sure the plat's get laid out so that these folks can proceed and
get what they want and again if that proceeds that way closely according to theplanherethatthestaffisrecommending, that's great with us too. It soundslikeagoodwaytogo. So I just wanted to make sure that if there are anyquestions, we like what we're hearing from the staff and it sounds like it's 11goinginadirectionthatwefeelgoodabout. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else? Any other discussion?
Jim Stasson: My name is Jim Stasson. I live at 6400 Peaceful Lane. NothingshowsonthistonightbuttheroadthathasbeenproposedtogothroughArt'spropertyshowsabigsweepingcurveasitcomesintoPeacefulLane. Now we'retryingtogetridofthebigsweepingcurveontheothersideanditdoesn'tseemtomakesensetoputabigsweepingcurvecomingintoPeacefulLanefromthat. I don't understand why that can't be a squared off corner like a normalcornerwouldbe. I just want to get that on record now before it all gets madepermanentastheysay. Yeah, this corner her &'that shows a big radius cornercomingin. If we're trying to get rid of the big radius corner on the other end
39
11
147
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
of us to slow the traffic down, you know this is just going to be the same thing
coming the other way.
Paul Krauss: We laid that out for a few reasons. The reason for constructing
Nez Perce is clearly so that it becomes a connection. A thru street. Now it's
a very minor collector but it's just basically made for that neighborhood but
what you want to do is promote the flow of traffic through here and out. Now
this is not a final design and we've indicated to the gentlemen that, this house
is over here, that we try to take pains to...to shift the road as far away from
his home as possible. Right now there's a wide curve right through here off of
Pleasant View and the way we're showing it is that that piece of road would be
knocked out and it could turn back to lawn and we could vacate that for all we
care at this point. But we don't have a final design. I mean that's what the
feasibility study's supposed to do. What will probably happen if Peaceful Lane
needs to extend further south to the Owens property or whatever, it would
1 probably come in at a T intersection as we've envisioned this but again this is
a little hypothetical because it hasn't been designed.
I
Jim Stasson: I realize it hasn't been designed but when you start showing
curves like that at this stage, you know I live right on the corner of where the
other curve is and if we're going to try to slow the traffic down that way, it
mattes sense to to bring them into a regular T type corner down there. I
don't understand why they can't come to a stop and make a turn rather than come
around like a racetrack.
Paul Krauss: I guess the point is that on Peaceful Lane there may be or 2
homes south of that intersection. We don't know at this point. If th re's
considerably more homes than that depending on how the Owens property _evelops,
maybe it makes sense to do that. But we want to promote the thru movement
through there. Now there would have to be a stop sign.
Jim Stasson: I want to unpromote the thru movement.
Paul Krauss: There would be a stop sign over here and if the road came in like
that, there'd be a stop sign over there.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, there would. You'd have to.
Councilman Wing: It doesn't solve his problem though. He's talking about just
the general speed and flow of traffic with that type of curve. I heard what you
said.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Any other discussion?
Jules Smith: If I may. I'd just like to make a quick other point and that is
on the 7 foot matter. We're on a straight away and Paul now says we're not
talking about widening the road. We're talking about some safety features and
what have you. That's the straightest part of the road except maybe way, way on
the other end, I'm not sure but it certainly is. It's in the center of
straightest part of the road and it just seems to be, nobody knows what they're
going to do. Nobody knows whether anything's needed there other than the 66
feet you already have which is plenty wide enough to put in an extra lane for
II parking or anything else. A 36 foot or whatever of paving surface and it just
40
1 148
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
seems to me to take the 7 when you don't know if you're ever going to need it
doesn't seem very right in addition to what Frank says. But beyond all that,1beforethewholematterbecomesmoot, we really would like to proceed on this
plat rather than have it either tabled again or whatever because we're running
into some time problems.
Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else?
Councilwoman Dimle,: I do have one question. Since we were talking about
linking this to Pleasant View and that's going to be done through Peaceful Lane.
As I mentioned before, Peaceful Lane is basically a driveway and at this point I
hope that we're planning to upgrade Peaceful Lane at that time. Is that what
we're planning to do?
Paul Krauss: Again, I can only tell you the concepts that we've developed. The
concept would require, I mean you look at that street. It needs to be rebuilt
all the way out to Pleasant View.
Councilwoman Dimler: So are we going to change the name at that time?1
Paul Krauss: Presumably the entirety of the road would be called Nez Perce. Now
if Peaceful Lane continues to drop down south of here, I guess Peaceful Lane
would start here instead of starting there.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Thank you.
Jim Duchene: I have a question. I'm Jim Duchene. I live on 961 Lake Lucy Road
and a couple questions for Paul on the cul -de -sac. You said the length was
quite long. What were you recommending on that? I didn't quite follow you.
Paul Krauss: The cul -de -sac, Troendle Way or Lane or whatever it is runs about
1,400 feet. Now our Code basically says that we should exercise judgment and
care of some such language when we have overlengthed cul -de -sacs. A lot of City
Codes set an arbitrary limit of 500 feet on a cul -de -sac and there's some real
reasons to set some kind of a limit. You know 1,400 feet in my professional
judgment is clearly beyond what you'd prefer. Now that's on a temporary basis.
At such time that Nez Perce is constructed as a thru street, the entirety of the
cul -de -sac length is from here to here and that's a permissible length in the
long run.
Jim Duchene: Okay. My other question was, up on Lake Lucy Road and Nez Perce,
the other direction, will there be stop signs up in that direction? You pointed
it out on the other end, the north end, but how about the south end? On Lake
Lucy and Nez Perce where it comes into the development.
Paul Krauss: Lake Lucy and Nez Perce is a curve. It's not an intersection. We
do have a stop sign, I mean that's somethjng I suppose we could look at but I'm
not sure where we'd put it. I guess I'd defer to Charles on that but Vineland
Forest does have a stop sign where it enters onto Lake Lucy.1
Jim Duchene: Is there a stop sign up there? Okay. And could we not address
Nez Perce coming onto Lake Lucy by putting a stop sign coming north?
41
149
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
Charles Folch: Paul, that's certainly something we could look at if directed sobytheCouncil. At this point my gut feeling is that the alignment that Lake
Lucy Road has currently joining with that portion of Nez Perce, it's intended to
be a thru movement and not necessarily stop but that's something we could
11 certainly take a look at.
Jim Duchene: That is a total blind spot if you've been up there. I think a fewofyouhadcommentedyouhad, Dick I think you were up there. You stopped atthehouse. But as you come around the corner, you cannot see down so that is a
blind spot and I noticed when we read the report, the initial report, I think a
lot of you had walked up there and had seen that that road, I believe it was 18feetiswhatthatroad, the width is that I measured up there so, on Nez PercepriortoLakeLucy.
Councilman Wing: Don, isn't this a completely and separate issue totallyunrelatedtowhatwe're discussing tonight? That particular intersection?
Jim Duchene: Well it is tied on to what I've got here.
11 Mayor Chmiel: Not necessarily. It eventually is oin to connect.9 nnect.
Paul Krauss: Well, I guess in terms of conditions on the Troendle plat, myrecommendationwouldbethatyoucanconsideritaseparateissue. In terms ofthisbeingavalidissuethatyouwanttopursuethatjusthappenstoberaised
I at
the same time, yeah. That's fine.
Jim Duchene: Thank you.
11 Councilman Wing: I'd just like to recommend that the last comments be referredtothePublicSafetyCommissionandpossiblyaddressedatthatpoint.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, that's fine.
Jim Stasson: I'd just like to make, Jim Stasson at 6400 Peaceful Lane again.Why would Peaceful Lane have to change to Nez Perce? Can't Nez Perce end at theintersectionandwestillbePeacefulLane?
Paul Krauss: Generally when you lay out a street that connects Point A to Point
B, you want the same name on the entirety of the street so people can.
Jim Stasson: But if you made that a real intersection where it came into
Peaceful Lane, then it would be just like Peaceful Lane coming into PleasantViewRoad. Otherwise if you use that logic, every street would have the samename.
Paul Krauss: Every street that has continuity should have the same name.
I guess, you know you're asking me to comment on your concept that has thatcomingintoaTintersection. Right now I don't feel comfortable with that Tintersectionbutifitdiddesignthatway, yes.
Jim Stasson: What's the reason that you don't like a T intersection there?
1
42
1 150
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
Paul Krauss: Because you're introducing a turning movement on the street that's
going to carry more traffic and you're providing a thru movement to a street 1thatonlyhastwohousesonit.
Jim Stasson: I didn't catch that. When you come up on Peaceful Lane to
Pleasant View Road, you've got a T interse_ction.II
Paul Krauss: Right.
Jim Stasson: What's the problem with having a T intersection two houses further
back? I guess I don't see why that.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I think it's really beyond the scope of what we're doing
right now and I don't think that's a discussionary thing but I agree with what
you're saying that you don't want to change from Peaceful Lane to Nez Perce.
Jim Stasson: Right.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I agree because there's a lot of given problems that you
have to go through as an individual.
Jim Stasson: Well yeah. I have to change.1
Mayor Chmiel: Everything you have.
Jim Stasson: I have to change everything I have.1
Mayor Chmiel: And that does create a problem. I would just as soon see =hat
remain as Peaceful Lane rather than call it Nez Perce.
Paul Krauss: Certainly, if there's a way to work that out.
Councilwoman Dimler: I don't want to make that decision right now.
Mayor Chmiel: No. Okay. I think we have discussed this substantially unless
someone else wants to throw something else in. If not, Roger?
Roger Knutson: Just one last point. I think it is germane. Considering what
the discussion has been about petitioning and what that significance is, maybe
I could suggest. If this is the direction you want to go in. I don't want to
put that in your mouth but is the wording of condition 1. I could suggest
rewording the first two sentences, the second sentence after the first sentence
is fine. The second sentence of condition 1 to read. Third sentence. There we
go. Notice shall be placed in the development contract as a condition of
platting the outlot. Then Nez Perce must be constructed thru to Pleasant View
Road as a condition of platting the outlot. I'll do it again. Notice must be
placed in the development contract that as a condition of platting the outlot,Nez Perce must be constructed through to Pleasant View Road. I think that's
what the intent is. That doesn't answer the question of finances.
Mayor Chmiel: That might also pertain to the specific one discussion we had
here. If we're talking Pleasant View, the City construct Nez Perce through to
43
1
1151
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
Pleasant View Road,I think it'd be from Nez Perce to Peaceful Lane to PleasantView.
Councilwoman Dimler• Is that alright?
Roger Knutson: I think as Mr. Smith aptly pointed out, filing a petition
doesn't really do much.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. That doesn't look, I think that's reasonable.
Jules Smith: I just have a question. We have to file a plat within a year and
say we get a year's extension. Two years or whatever it is. In two years not alotishappening. What you're really saying is, we would have to, well there's
no way we could control the construction of that road. What you're really saying
is, well we'll give you preliminary approval of this plat for 2 years, orwhatever. For how long as you extend it but if the road isn't there, you lostthesecondphase. You can't build it. Well that gets right back to where we
were with Daryl's problem. The land isn't worth that to us. We don't have thelots, there's no way we can force it. We can't make it. We can't build a road.
We can't make the city build it. We can't do anything. We just lose our plat.That's essentially what you're telling us. Is that it? All I can do as an
owner of that property is ask the city to build it. If they think the road is
necessary, hey they've got a petition in front of them. Let's build it. I mean
you guys are in control of that, I'm not.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't see where that's the responsibility of the City.
Jules Smith: Well, the point is, the City doesn't have to do it because
1 obviously if Art Owens plats or if that land is ever platted, whoever plats itisgoingtobuilditandthat's probably as it should be. What I'm saying is,
essentially we're getting approval for 4 lots or 6 lots tonight period because
we have no guarantee we can do the rest of them ever and it's beyond our controltodoanythingtogetthatapproval. We can't force a road to be built. We
can't pay for the road to be built. We can't do anything.
Roger Knutson: We can certainly put in there, I don't think the Council would
have a problem with it, that if you want to pay for it.
Jules Smith: Well, that's outrageous.
Roger Knutson: You just said...
Jules Smith: What you're really saying is we're not going to approve, we
approve 6 lots this evening. That's what we'll approve.
Don Ashworth: Jules, let's see if we can't work something that's reasonable. I
think that having a requirement in there that they simply agree that they'll
petition the City to have the feasibility study completed, etc., that does puttheauthoritybacktous. That gives us the ability at that point in time tocommissionthestudyandpotentiallyassess. I 4hink we should look at itthoughintermsthatthere's a possibility you rsi.v have sold those 6 lots. If
that is the case, those people are not going to want to pay for any costs
IIassociated with Nez Perce. In fact, they're going to come back in front of this
44
152
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
Council and say, no. We like this cul -de -sac condition. We don't want you to
do that.
Jules Smith: I have no problem with saying that those lots will be subject to
some approval. If there is an areawide assessment for those that are benefitted
by that section, they're going to be covered. I have no problem putting that of
record.
Don Ashworth: Or something to the effect that if you've already sold those, and
that's really beyond your.
Jules Smith: they're still stuck with it whether we own it or they own it.
Don Ashworth: Well again, it gets kind of back to like Kerber Blvd.. When we
went to put through Kerber and you had people in the Saddlebrook area, Chan
Vista. Those people surely didn't want to pay for Kerber. They bought that lot
and the last thing they wanted. I've got to believe though Jules that we can
come up with some reasonable language that says that those lots, excluding those
lots no longer under your control, that the developer is willing to pay his fair
share. So he might end up with a situation where you don't have what I'll call
is a uniform assessment roll in terms of you may, those first 6 lots.
Jules Smith: Those that "have already sold?1
Don Ashworth: That's correct. And I've got to believe that we can come up with
language that is going to protect Mr. Beddor but still protect the city...and I
would recommend that you accept the language of simply having them petition but
I think that we do need to work in the section of the development contract that
talks about their willingness to potentially accept a portion of those
assessments and as that may apply to lots that are still under their control
because again they could potentially have sold those lots between then and now.
Roger Knutson: How about petition and pay for the cost of the feasibility
report?
Don Ashworth: What?
Roger Knutson: Petition and pay for the cost of the feasibility report.
Don Ashworth: Well, we can make a determination at that point in time that we
want to include the costs of the feasibility study.
Jules Smith: If you're going to build a road, it's usually in the cost of the
road...
Don Ashworth: That's correct. I don't have a problem there either.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I think we know where we're at. I would look for a motion
in regard to proposal for •a staff recommendation and maybe with some minor
revisions which we just discussed.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'll attempt a motion tee. I need some help. Okay, I
move item 6(a) to approve the subdivision, the Troendle Subdivision with the 15
45
1153
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
1
conditions with condition number 1 to be worked out. Okay, it's a preliminaryplat #90 -15. With the following conditions. Condition number 1 with language
to be worked out with staff and legal counsel in a way that protects the City.
Is that enough to go on?
Roger Knutson: We have the intent of the Council.
Mayor Chmiel: Yep.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Condition number 2, condition number 3 as is.
Condition number 4 as is. Condition number 5 as is. Condition number 6 as is.
Condition number 7 as is. Condition number 8 with the addition that this, to
make sure that it does get recorded so we don't have another Peterson /Blanski
situation. Condition number 9 (a) and (b) and (c) as is. Condition number 10,
condition number 11 with a substitute for condition number 12 and here's where I
need help. With the intent that yes, Mr. Troendle can live there as is and when
that terminates, that the building, the barn garage gets removed and that
something about the driveway at that time, the easement is vacated.
1 Jules Smith: The easements go on...access onto Nez Perce.
Councilwoman Dimler: ^ Okay, do you understand the intent?
Jules Smith: The easement would terminate upon the life estate terminating.
Mayor Chmiel: Also a deed restriction in there of some type.
Councilwoman Dimler: Ah yes. With a deed restriction acceptable to the City.
Councilman Workman: On what, Lot 1 and 2?
Councilwoman Dimler: On Lot 2. Do you want to add Lot 1 and 2?
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Jules Smith: Yeah. It'd be 1 and 2. You want to make sure the...
Councilwoman Dimler: Alright. So a deed restriction acceptable to the City
shall be drafted concerning the garage /barn and Lot 1 and 2.
Roger Knutson: You said deed restriction. That's really, you really put those
in the development contract.
Jules Smith: You just file what's there. You just want something on record.
Mayor Chmiel: That's right. Just protection.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, you understand the intent of that one?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilwoman Dimler: Until the end of the life estate, yeah. Condition 13, 14and15asis.
46
154
City Council Meeting - January 14, 1991
Councilman Workman: First can you reiterate 9?
Councilwoman Dimler: 9 as is with the (b) part there that was being discussed.
I would like to see us take that because I think it's perfectly acceptable to
ask for right -of -way and easements with the subdivision and preliminary plat
approval plus in the future if we don't need it, we can always vacate it.
Councilman Workman: Paul, was Daryl's map with the red ink correct?
Paul Krauss: Well I didn't have a chance to review it but it looked accurate.
Councilman Workman: In light of that and his comment that they'll pay twice. In
other words, we won't pay him for it and then when the assessments come out
he'll have to pay for those. Is that a situation that's?
Paul Krauss: I guess maybe the City Manager can respond to that.
Councilman Workman: I mean we're going to have to pay for everybody else's on
that road if this map is correct just about.
Councilman Wing: We have to look to the future because we're trying to be
consistent now. I mean they can say we were inconsistent years ago and I would
dispute that but we're trying to be consistent now that anything that occurs
along that road from this day forward is going to be in that same position. It's
going to be an automatic request for the easement. If we are inconsistent this
time, then we might as well be inconsistent from there over to TH 101 from this
point on. The only question I would have is why even go 80 feet. Why not stay
with the 66 feet on this.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess that makes sense too as far as I'm concerned.
Councilman Workman: But you know what I mean. I mean the other ones are
developing. They're not going to do anything else but we're going to take this
here. Granted we're going to start to be consistent although it would appear
from this point we're being inconsistent but we're taking it, which is our
right, but we're not going to be able to get the other ones without paying forthem.
Councilwoman Dimler: Or if they come in to subdivide we can take it.
Councilman Workman: Yeah, but that's done I think isn't it?
Councilwoman Dimler: No.
Paul Krauss: If I could. You know you pointed out you do have the right to doit. That's unquestionable. You have the right. I guess you're looking for the
moral ground in doing it and I can't sit here today and tell you that with great
certainty that we need that 7 feet because I'm not sure. While we don't
anticipate any significant rebuilding of Pleasant View, one of the things you
need to look at when you improve a street is sight distances and you know, theroadstartstocurvedownasyou're just going past that property. Now it could
well be that you need to skim off a knob on the road or something else that
requires grading to do that in.the future. As to the moral higher ground on
47
1155
Lity Louncii Meeting - January 14, 1991
11 this, when somebody subdivides property, I think there's a presumptionthey're doing it for some financial gain and clearly when
o
u
that
lots, you're going to be making a profit on that. Does that compensate for the11publiccostthatwewouldentertaininthefuture? I don't know. I think itdoes. I mean we're talking about a relatively nominal amount of land here. IguessforthesamereasonthoughI'd be relunctant to set a precedent whereby weburdenthepublicinthefuturewithahighercostofdoingtheimprovementsthatareneededwhenwecouldhavegottenitbasicallyforfreeatsomepointinthepast.
Councilman Workman: I guess in relationship to that I just don't see this roadeverhavingtheabilitytowidenthewaywewantittowidenandsointhatcasewemighttakeitbutitseemsmoot.
Councilwoman Dimler: We can always vacate it.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, if that need's not there.
Councilman Workman: I just, in driving that road, I don't drive it. I thinkFrankisprobablythebiggestflagwaveronthatroadandnobodyshoulddrive ontheroadandhe's probably correct. I don't drive on that road if my lifedependsonit.
Councilwoman Dimler: But see to me Tom it's inconsistent.
Mayor Chmiel: I drive on it all the time Tom.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, and it's inconsistent to say that we'repopulationhereandatthesametimekeeptheroadthesamewayit is. Plus add
you're going to have Crosstown.
Councilman Workman: But I'm just saying the development in those corners is sotightandmaybewe're going to be removing houses.
Mayor Chmiel: I doubt that.
Councilwoman Dimler: But TH 101 might go to 4 lane. CR 17 might go to 4 lane.I think you're going to see a lot of traffic in there in the future.
Mayor Chmiel: Well you may see an increase.. I don't think you're going to seean...
Councilwoman Dimler: Well no, I'm saying it's going to increase. It's notgoingtodecrease. And safety concerns on that road as well.
Councilman Workman: But there's going to be places where we can't widen it so.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. We have that motion on the floor and we have a second.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve PreliminaryPlat #90 -15 for Troendle Addition without variances subject to the followingconditions:
II 48
i
156
TY Q i:1 r' L4, 1991 II
IHASSEN
ti to Lots 1 -4, Block 1 and Lots 1 and 11, Block 2 1ieremainingareaistobeplattedasanoutlot.
development contract that as a condition of
ce must be constructed through to Pleasant View
BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
1900 • FAX (612) 937 - 5739 submitted for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1 prior to
er t. Clear cutting, except for the house pad and IIrmted.
to a development contract with the city and 1eessaryfinancialsecuritiestoguaranteeproper
4/
tints.
h nic ian 0 n d comply with all conditions of the Watershed II
Addition
a• the utilities within the right -of -way for II
e ty shall have a radius of 60 feet and the street
endle Addition prepared by
e her Troendle Circle or Troendle Court to II
following recommendations plying it as a through street. Final street
approval by the City Engineering Department.
11 rosion control silt fence around the i
or the retention pond and ponding
modified to a drainage and f is established. Turf or sod shall be placed
II
Pence to the existing Nez Pleasant View Road for Lots 1 and 4, Block 2
L. s easement shall be provided and recoreded with
IIyesnotalign. There is a
e ion of the driveway shall be constructed to a 783feet. It is recommended
f 20 feet and have a maximum grade of 10%.by conveying to the City
Block 1, Vineland Forest
would vacate a portion of
m is and rights -of -way:IILot3, Block 3, Vineland
asements along the westerly property line of
c1 and the ponding area on Lots 3 and 4, Block 1 IIgtlinganderosioncontrolplanshallalsobe
plat accordingly.
is of -way along Pleasant View Road.II
ity easements.
s rm sewer calculations verifying size and II
stem and ponding basin. Eight inch sanitary
o shall be constructed on this subdivision and II )f he lots on his plat shall be shown for Final
Tans and sp';.ifications shall be submitted to
nd approval.
squired in lieu of parkland dedication.II
49 1
1157
4180 Napier Ct NE Michael, MN 55376
Office: 763.424.1500
www.racheldevelopment.com
Pleasant View Pointe – Beddor Property – Concept Plan Narrative
To: City of Chanhassen
From: Rachel Development, Paul Robinson – Development Director
Date: 9/20/24 (updated 10/7/24)
A. Submittal Documents
1. Narrative
2. Concept Plan Set
a. Property Survey
b. Site Plan
c. Site Plan Alternate
d. Grading Plan
e. Grading Proflles
f. Concept Utility Plan
3. Color Site Plan(s)
B. Applicant and Consultants
1. Developer - Rachel Development, Paul Robinson, Development Director
2. Builder – Charles Cudd Co., Rick Denman – Charles Cudd
3. Civil Engineer - Mark Raush, Alliant Engineering
4. Survey, Dan Ekram, Alliant Engineering
5. Wetland Consultant – Kjolhaug Engineering, Melissa Barrett
6. Attorney – Larkin Hoffman, Peter Coyle
C. Site Basics
• Land Use Plan Guiding – Low Density Residential – 1 - 4 units/acre
• Zoning – RSF
• Property Size – 13.25 acres
• PID’s: 258700063, 258690130, 258710190, 258700060, and 258700062.
158
Pleasant View Pointe – Concept Plan
September 20, 2024
Page 2
D. Introduction
We are excited to work on a new neighborhood within the City of Chanhassen. Rachel
Development and Charles Cudd Co are working hand in hand on the design of the neighborhood
and homes to meet the needs of the evolving market within this area of the City.
The Concept Plan as provided complies with or exceeds the requirements of the RSF zoning district.
If we were to strictly adhere to the zoning minimum requirements, we could add 4-7 more
homesites than what is shown in the current concept. What we have done is voluntarily match the
general lots sizes of the properties within the adjacent neighborhoods.
E. Site Characteristics
Woodlands
We have completed a tree survey. We will follow the City code on tree removal. While we have not
completed a site wide grading plan to determine the exact areas and trees being removed it is our
expectations that we will
be removing
approximately 50% of the
existing 7. 7 acres of tree
canopy. This will exceed
the allowed removal of
20%. We understand that
we will need to provide
some additional trees or
tree payments to off-set
this tree removal. That
said we will be working
hard to maintain as many
trees as possible along the
perimeter of the site.
159
Pleasant View Pointe – Concept Plan
September 20, 2024
Page 3
Topography
In general, the existing
topography of the site is being
respected. The high point
within the nearby area is the
water tower site. The higher
portions of the property are on
the south end of the property
the 1050 contours. The
southern portions of the
property generally fiow to the
north and to the low areas on
the west. The lowest point is
the existing pond which is at a
933 elevation. Overall, there is
60 ~ feet of topographical
change across the property.
Wetlands
There were two wetland areas
identifled on the property. The
one located in the northern
portion of the property is a
storm pond and the one on the
southern portion of the
property is a degraded wetland
that the landowner never knew
existed on the property. We
are planning to use and
expand the storm pond and
follow the wetland impact
process to flll the wetland in
the southern portion of the
property and offset that impact
with wetland credit purchases.
160
Pleasant View Pointe – Concept Plan
September 20, 2024
Page 4
F. Plan Details
• Lots – 19
• Lot Sizes
o North Portion
30,000 – 60,000 sf
o Southern Portion
15,000 – 30,000 sf
• Following the set-
backs of the RSF as
shown on the plan
Roadways
• Nez Pearce – We are
continuing a 31’ wide
roadway within a 50’
ROW. That is the
same ROW width as
was previously
dedicated for Nez
Perce. We are also proposing a slight realignment of the roadway along with a revised
connection onto Peaceful Lane. We would like some feedback from the City if the Peaceful
Lane connection is, for any reason, not acceptable as shown or if the City has other plans
for this connection.
Also discussed in greater detail below is an alternative plan that would not connect Nez
Perce but instead have private driveway accesses, one to Nez Perce and two to our internal
roadway labeled Road B.
• Road B – Road B is a cul-de-sac and similar to Nez Perce and the parallel cul-de-sac in the
Troendle neighborhood. This is shown as a 31’ roadway within a 50’ easement. The same
measurements as on Troendle Circle. We understand that if Nez Perce we not to connect
this cul-de-sac would need a variance for length and City staff would want a 60’ wide ROW.
Storm Water
We are planning to use and modify the existing storm pond for storm water treatment. We are
aware that we will need to work within the MCWD rules as well as the City’s.
1 - Primary Concept Plan
161
Pleasant View Pointe – Concept Plan
September 20, 2024
Page 5
Builder
As mentioned above we are working with Charles Cudd Co. on this neighborhood. Below are some
examples of the types homes that could be built in this neighborhood.
Outlot
There is only one outlot shown on the plans, adjacent to Lot 13. This has been provided to allow a
possible future connection to the City water tower. It is our understanding that there are no plans to
create an access here at this time but that the City wants to preserve access in case it is needed in
the future.
162
Pleasant View Pointe – Concept Plan
September 20, 2024
Page 6
Alternative Concept Plan
In the plans provided is an Alternate Concept Plan. We created this plan because a number of
residents in the adjacent neighborhoods both in the Troendle additional and on Lucy Lane have told
us they would very much like to avoid having a connection on Nez Perce to Peaceful Lane. This, we
heard loud and clear at the neighborhood meeting we held.
We hold neighborhood meetings in large part to understand the concerns of the neighborhood and
when there seems to be a reasonable win-win change to include those changes as a part of our
plans. We met with the City staff about our development plan and this connection. They told us
that the Nez Perce connection has been planned for a long time, has been known by most in the
area and is good transportation and City planning so they would likely need to recommend keeping
this connection. We understand that.
That said, we did look for ways to make or not make a connection to Nez Perce that could possibly
appease all parties. We explored a private roadway connection but ultimately with staff
consultation ended up with
the alternative version shown
in the packet that would not
connect Nez Perce.
The residents within the
Troendle Addition are
primarily the ones that would
beneflt from a Nez Perce
connection. They are telling
us and the City that they do
not want it. We hope this
concept review will give us a
chance to evaluate this option
with you. In the end we will
build a plan with the Nez
Perce connection that is
ultimately approved by the
City Council.
Neighborhood Meeting
On July 31 we held a neighborhood meeting on the Pleasant View Pointe development plans.
Approximately 30 people came to the meeting. We gave a presentation and answered a number of
questions. Many of those questions are summarized below.
2 - Alternate Concept Plan
163
Pleasant View Pointe – Concept Plan
September 20, 2024
Page 7
1. Traffic Concerns - Concerns about traffic in general and construction traffic are combined.
There were slightly differing concerns about traffic during construction and traffic overall.
a. Residents on Peaceful Lane – NOTE: There are only two residences on Peaceful
Lane. The owners of one of the residences were in attendance and were concerned
about the Nez Perce connection to Peaceful Lane and the traffic that they would
now be experiencing. They would prefer no connection to Peaceful Lane. The
Peaceful Lane resident liked the idea from the Pleasant View resident(s) that there
should be a connection to Powers or that the development use Nez Perce going
south without a connection to Peaceful Lane. Concerned if a connection was made
to Peaceful that the roadway could not handle the wear and tear. Also, concerned
that the intersection of Peaceful and Pleasant view is dangerous and cannot handle
the additional traffic safely.
b. Residents on Pleasant View – There were not a lot of residents in attendance from
Pleasant View. Those there did not think there should be any connection to Pleasant
View but that the development should connect directly to Powers instead. There
was some mention of a promise made by the City Council to not connect to
Pleasant View and of actions made by Frank Beddor to make a connection to
Pleasant View more difficult. (NOTE: Pleasant View is considered a minor collector
in the City/County roadway system)
c. Residents on Nez Perce and Troendle Circle – In general concern about cut
through traffic. Residents do not see the beneflt or need to connect Nez Perce. They
think that all would be better off without this connection. Less traffic potential for
those on Nez Perce and for those on Pleasant View and Peaceful Lane. They said
they would support the project if Nez Perce was turned into a cul-de-
sac/hammerhead with no through connection to Nez Perce.
d. Residents on Lake Lucy Rd – In general residents on Lake Lucy Road have
concerns about the amount and speed of traffic on their roadway. Concerns about
safety and that connecting the development to Nez Perce will create more traffic
and a potential cut through for traffic after construction and create a route for
construction traffic during construction.
2. Stormwater Drainage into Lot 13 – The owner of the home adjacent to Lot 13 said they
currently receive a lot of water from the Beddor property (and also City water tower
property). There was a concern that this could get worse with development. Mark Rausch,
the developers engineer, let the homeowner know that the watershed area fiowing into her
property would actually be reduced and while there would still be some water it will be less
water after development than prior to development. In general, we cannot control water
coming from areas not on our property.
164
Pleasant View Pointe – Concept Plan
September 20, 2024
Page 8
3. Residents adjacent to Lot 11 – The residents of the two homes on Troendle Circle behind
Lot 11 were concerned about how close the homes would be to their homes. They asked if
there was any way that we could adjust to lots to make the distance larger. Our response
was that it may not be possible we are meeting the standards of the zoning district but that
we would look at additional plantings to help screen the lots from each other.
4. Water Tower Access Road – The residents along Lake Lucy Rd adjacent to, across from and
near this potential access strenuously object to having this become a water tower access.
They believe they were told by the City that this would never be needed or used as an
access. Some residents had called and talked to the City Engineer and were told that no
plans were being considered. We let residents know that this was coming from Charlie the
Public Works Director and that he would be the one to contact. There is a 50’ wide outlot in
this location. Another resident said he thought the adjacent neighbor was offered to buy
the property from the City at one point.
5. Existing Tree Lines – Owners of homes adjacent to the Beddor property implored us to save
the trees on the Beddor property adjacent to their properties. We said that it was generally
in our mutual interest to do so. We said will try to save as many of the trees along the
property lines as possible.
6. Storm Water
a. Concern about Christmas Lake – Do not want any water quality impacts to the lake
due to this development. We stated that we will be required to meet stormwater
management requirements of the City and MCWD for rate, quality and volume
control.
7. City Sanitary Sewer & Water
a. Concerns about Water Pressure – neighbor(s) stated that they have very low water
pressure (40 psi) and wanted to know how this could impact them.
b. General questions about how we would connect to City sewer and water.
8. General Questions
a. How will the lots along Pleasant View connect to the roadway system. We said that
they would directly access Pleasant View much like the neighboring properties.
b. Concern about lot sizes relative to neighborhood - We said they are the same if not
larger than the neighboring lots.
c. Is the existing home being torn down? – We indicated that the existing home would
be torn down.
d. Would there be model homes or spec homes? – We said yes that there would likely
be a spec home/model home.
165
Pleasant View Pointe – Concept Plan
September 20, 2024
Page 9
e. Questions about allowable work hours. We did not know exactly but said Monday –
Saturday with Saturday we thought 7:00 a.m. – 7:00 p.m. and no work on Sunday.
f. Question about how long the development buildout would take. We mentioned we
thought it would take about 3 years.
9. Types & Price of Homes - We said in general we saw the homes on the 15,000 sf lots being
1 ½ story to 2 story homes starting in the 1.3 million range. The large lots would be custom
lots with a wider range of overall value above that.
10. Lot Layout/Density
a. Size of Lots - Residents asked why the lots south of Nez Perce are smaller than the
6 proposed north of Nez Perce – explanation was provided that all lots meet current
zoning and the design was created to match the existing lot sizes in each area.
b. Larger or Fewer Lots/No Development – In general if the residents could waive a
magic wand, they would have not development or would have fewer larger lots. We
let the residents know that we are meeting/exceeding the standards of the zoning
district and that we are on the very low end of what could be allowed based on the
Comprehensive Plan guiding which could allow up to 4 units/ ac.
G. Closing
We are looking forward to discussing our development plans with you. Please let us know if there is
any additional information you would like to see to help inform your review.
166
Pleasant View Pointe
Development Proposal
City Council Workshop
DRAFT PRESENTATION
City Council –October 14, 2024
167
Zoning:
•Residential Single Family (RSF)
Land Use:
•Low Density Residential
Lot Size:
•1.06 acres
Location: 6535 Peaceful Lane
168
July 31st – Developer held neighborhood meeting
Sept 12th – Project webpage published
September 16th – Meeting between staff / neighborhood group
October 2nd – Wetland decision issued
October 14th – Concept review by City Council
Nov/Dec 2024 - Formal subdivision application anticipated
Timeline
169
No connection option
Concept Notes:
-Variance for cul-de-sac
length.
-60’ ROW for Road B
-Lots 7-10 and 15-19
are reduced in lot
depth by 5 feet
moving new homes
closer to existing
ones.
170
Connection option
Concept Notes:
-No variances.
-50’ ROW for Road B
-Lots 7-10 and 15-19
are increased in lot
depth by 5 feet
moving new homes
further from existing
ones.
171
Plats:
(1986) Carver Beach Estates
(1990) Vineland Forest
(1991) Troendle Addition
1991 Aerial
Property History – Area Developments
950’1,521’
1,223’
2024 Aerial
172
Prior Development Conditions
•Court Case –
•City of Chanhassen condemned the right of way (red) for a future Nez
Perce extension to Pleasant View road following the Troendle Addition
Plat.
Extension of Nez Perce
450’440’
173
Prior Development Conditions
•Troendle Addition approved with
the condition of future extension
of Nez Perce to alleviate lengthy
cul-de-sac.
•Sign placed at cul-de-sac
indicating future road
extension.
•Development approval
condition included
requirement of placing notice
on deeds of properties within
the Troendle Addition
regarding the future extension
of Nez Perce.
Extension of Nez Perce
174
Prior Development Conditions
•The City received escrow payments as an assessment for the future
construction of the Nez Perce road extension. The City may be
required to repay those funds plus 7% interest if the terms of the court
order and stipulation are not met.
•$17,000 Escrow (1/5/96)
•7% simple interest
•$10,000 Escrow (2/10/21)
•7% simple interest
$63,746.69 Balance as of 10/1/24
Extension of Nez Perce
175
Nez Perce Road Connection
•Concern that the
connection of Nez Perce
to Pleasant View Rd will
create a N/S alternate to
Powers Blvd for drivers.
•Concern that connection
will change character of
neighborhood.
Neighborhood
Feedback
176
Water Tower Access Road
Neighborhood Feedback
•Current road is steep
with maintenance
issues.
•Used by City staff as well
as telecommunications
companies with cellular
antennas on the water
tower.
177
Water Tower Access Road
Neighborhood Feedback
•Both development options provide an
outlot (Yellow) at the SW corner of lot
13 which aligns with an existing 50’
wide city owned lot (red).
•No current plan to relocate the
access drive; however, this outlot
gives the city an additional option, if
in the future, the access needs to be
moved.
178
Next Steps
•Wetland determination has created additional questions that
may impact layout of proposed development which may require
future City Council review.
•Anticipating development application in Nov/Dec 2024
•Developer seeking answer to Nez Perce connection prior to
submitting for formal land use entitlements.
179
City Council Discussion
180
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Madison AI demonstration
File No.Item No: A.5
Agenda Section 5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Prepared By Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
n/a
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority Operational Excellence
SUMMARY
Laurie Hokkanen will give a brief demonstration of the city's newest software tool, Madison AI.
The city's innovative approach recently caught the attention of the Minnesota Star Tribune. See attached
article.
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
181
ATTACHMENTS
Chanhassen will start using AI to speed up staff work
182
TWIN CITIES SUBURBS
Chanhassen will start using artificial intelligence to speed up staff work
City Manager Laurie Hokkanen said she hopes the technolo y will reduce the amount of time staff need to spend researching some issues.
The Minnesota Star Tribune
SEPTEMBER 26, 2024 AT 9:00AM
Chanhassen will begin using artificial intelligence in hopes of speeding up some staff work.
City Manager Laurie Hokkanen said Chanhassen lost a lot of institutional knowledge when employees retired in recent years, and she
hopes the new technolo y will reduce the amount of time workers need to spend researching some issues. The City Council this week
approved a $25,000 contract with Nevada-based Madison AI.
For example, Hokkanen said that if a worker wants to learn more about a particular piece of land, the new technolo y from Madison AI
will be able to scan city records and send a synopsis of the history of the land and links to documents for parcels contained within it.
“I know how to find the answer to the question,” Hokkanen said, but the program might find it faster.
She said city workers will still be responsible for fact-checking the materials produced by the program.
Share Comment
ABOUT THE WRITER
By Liz Navratil
10/7/24, 4:01 PM Chanhassen will start using AI to speed up staff work
https://www.startribune.com/chanhassen-will-start-using-artificial-intelligence-to-speed-up-staff-work/601152054 1/4183
Liz Navratil
HIGHER EDUCATION REPORTER
Liz Navratil covers higher education for the Star Tribune. She spent the previous three years covering Minneapolis City Hall as leaders responded to the
coronavirus pandemic and George Floyd’s murder.
See More
More from Twin Cities Suburbs See More
TWIN CITIES SUBURBS
Motorcyclist waiting to turn in Anoka County struck from behind by driver in SUV and killed
The Sheriff ’s Office so far has yet to address why she failed to avoid hitting the the motorcyclist.
MINNEAPOLIS
Guilty plea in Minneapolis gun battle that killed beloved Twin Cities firefighter
TWIN CITIES SUBURBS
Woman admits to sexually assaulting 2 teen hockey players in Roseville hotel room
GIFTS FOR MINNESOTANS
C E L E B R AT E M I N N E S O TA
Shop Star T
puzzles and
Shop No
COMPANY
10/7/24, 4:01 PM Chanhassen will start using AI to speed up staff work
https://www.startribune.com/chanhassen-will-start-using-artificial-intelligence-to-speed-up-staff-work/601152054 2/4184
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Future Work Session Schedule
File No.Item No: A.6
Agenda Section 5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Prepared By Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
The City Council is tentatively scheduled to hold the following work sessions:
October 28, 2024
Civic Campus tour at 5 p.m. (optional)
CIP and Capital Project Funds
Cannabis regulation and zoning code amendments
Tennis and Pickleball Courts
November 18, 2024
Utility Funds and Utility Rate Study
Pending items:
Police and Fire Staffing Levels
Mental Health presentation from CCSO
185
Assessment Policy Revisions
Sign Code updates
Carver County Housing study presentation (likely January)
BACKGROUND
Staff or the City Council may suggest topics for work sessions. Dates are tentative until the meeting
agenda is published. Work sessions are typically held at 5:30 pm in conjunction with the regular City
Council meeting, but may be scheduled for other times as needed.
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
186
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Approve City Council Work Session Minutes dated September 23, 2024
File No.Item No: D.1
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Jenny Potter, City Clerk
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council approves the City Council work session minutes dated September 23,
2024."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Chanhassen City Council approves the City Council work session minutes
dated September 23, 2024.
187
ATTACHMENTS
City Council Work Session Minutes dated September 23, 2024
188
1
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
MINUTES
September 23, 2024
Mayor Ryan called the work session to order at 5:30 p.m.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilmember von Oven, Councilmember
Kimber
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilmember McDonald, Councilmember Schubert
STAFF PRESENT: Charlie Howley, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Jerry Ruegemer, Parks
Director; Eric Maass, Planning Director; Kelly Grinnell, Finance Director; Patrick Gavin,
Communications Manager; Jenny Potter, City Clerk
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Lake Ann Park Preserve Construction and Approach Discussion
Jerry Ruegemer, Parks Director, gave an overview of the paving of the path around Lake Ann
Park. He reviewed that there had been a few artifacts found in places around the lake and that
triggers the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to require the city to do further
examination of the trail. Mr. Ruegemer gave several options for moving forward with the plan.
The options included expanding the archaeological survey both north and south of the site,
realigning the trail north or south to avoid the site, reroute the entire section of the trail, do not
pave the section of the trail where they found artifacts, keep all existing paths natural, and
complete phase II and mitigation. He said that if we decide to not pave the trail at this time and
want to looking at doing that in the future, then the process would have to start again and the city
would have to do the work that SHPO is requesting at that time. Staff is recommending that we
complete phase II at a cost of $70,000 to determine if there are archeological sites that need to be
addressed.
Mayor Ryan asked about the grant and how we would then plan for future costs of the project.
Kelly Grinnell, Finance Director, answered that the ARPA money would have to be spent or
obligated by the end of the year. The city would reallocate those dollars to the general fund and
then in 2025 would transfer that money out of the general fund and reallocate it for the project.
Mr. Ruegemer stated that there is currently $20,000 in the archeological fund that can be used
toward phase II and that we would need $50,000 more dollars to get to the total cost of $70,000.
He said that the consultant would be committed to finishing phase II this year and though that is
not guaranteed due to weather, he felt that it could be done this year.
Councilmember von Oven asked if the paving of the path is what triggers the SHPO review.
Mr. Ruegemer replied that yes, that is the case.
189
City Council Work Session Minutes – August 26, 2024
2
Councilmember Kimber said if the intent is to have a year-round accessible path then re-routing
and starting over isn’t a good plan.
Mayor Ryan said that there has been some feedback that the path stays natural but a majority of
people have asked for the path to be accessible and paved. She asked if the path could be plowed
if there was crushed limestone placed on it.
Mr. Ruegemer said that plowing would be difficult on an unpaved path due to the softness of the
ground, trees, and the hilly nature of the path.
The council would like to have more data and have that brought back to the October 14 meeting.
They would like to move forward with using the money that is currently in the archeological
fund to start working on phase II. The mayor would like to have more details about why the
plowing an unpaved path isn’t feasible as well as a summary of the timeline for the project.
There was also a question about ADA compliance if the whole path wasn’t paved. The goal is to
get the path open for people to use.
Civic Campus: Playground and Playable Water Feature material and colors selection
Jerry Ruegemer, Parks Director, showed the council potential water feature options and colors for the
playground equipment at the Civic Campus. There were five options of colors for the council to
choose from.
Mayor Ryan asked for examples of the colors to be brought in person.
Mr. Ruegemer said that he would request samples to show the Council.
Market Boulevard Reconstruction Project Update
Charlie Howley, Public Works Director/City Engineer, showed a video model of traffic flow for the
new design of Market Boulevard. The model shows traffic at the afternoon commute time. Mr.
Howley said that the goal would be to put the model on the website in the coming weeks to share
with the public how traffic would look for the redesigned Market Boulevard.
Councilmember von Oven suggested to put the names of the businesses on the model so people could
orientate themselves on the map.
Councilmember Kimber suggested calling out the changes that will be made in list form.
Mayor Ryan suggested to put the street names on the model.
City Council Roundtable
Councilmember Kimber asked if there was a way to get information out to the public more quickly
about things discussed at the work session.
Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager, said that before the Communication Manager left there was a
synopsis of the meeting sent out after the work session meeting. She said she would look into that
again now that we had a new Communication Manger in place.
190
City Council Work Session Minutes –August 26, 2024
3
Commissioner von Oven wanted to make sure we were capturing the energy from our residents like
Judy Harder who is trying to improve the city. He wanted to make sure we were getting the Citizen
Action Request forms and following up on them.
Mayor Ryan adjourned the meeting at 6:58 p.m.
Submitted by Laurie Hokkanen
City Manager
Prepared by Jenny Potter
City Clerk
191
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Approve City Council Minutes dated September 23, 2024
File No.Item No: D.2
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Jenny Potter, City Clerk
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council approves the City Council minutes dated September 23, 2024."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Chanhassen City Council approves the City Council minutes dated
September 23, 2024.
192
ATTACHMENTS
City Council Minutes dated September 23, 2024
193
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 23, 2024
Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of
Allegiance.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilmember von Oven, and
Councilmember Kimber.
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilmember McDonald and Councilmember Schubert.
STAFF PRESENT Charlie Howley, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Eric Maass
Community Development Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Parks and Recreation Director; Kelly
Grinnell, Finance Director; Jenny Potter City Clerk
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Judy Harder, 541 West 78th Street
Linda Paulson, 7603 Frontier Trail
Tyler Adam, 900 Saddlebrook Trail
Nora Nashawaty, 7320 Kurvers Point
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilmember Kimber moved, Councilmember von Oven
seconded that the City Council approve the following consent agenda items 1 through 14
pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations:
1. Approve City Council Work Session Minutes dated September 9, 2024
2. Approve City Council Minutes dated September 9, 2024
3. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated September 3, 2024
4. Receive Economic Development Commission Minutes dated July 9, 2024
5. Approve Claims Paid dated September 23, 2024
6. Consider Avienda Townhomes Preliminary Plat and Final Plat Approval
7. Approve contract with MadisonAI
8. Authorize Purchase of Electronic Message Boards
194
City Council Minutes – September 23, 2024
2
9. Award Contract for Galpin Blvd Retaining Wall Replacement
10. Approve a Conditional Use Permit for Contracting Yard at 1591 Park Road
11. Resolution 2024-61: Authorize Design and Construction Administration Services Contract
for 2024 Stormwater Pond Improvement Project
12. Resolution 24-62: Joint Powers Agreement for CSAH 18/82nd Street
13. Ordinance 733: Amending Chapter 2 of Chanhassen City Code Relating to Compensation of
City Council
14. Ordinance X34: Amending Chapter 10 of the Chanhassen City Code Relating to Regulation
of Lawful Gambling
All voted in favor, and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS.
1. Citizen Action Request: Judy Harder
Judy Harder, 541 West 78th Street, stated that she installed a hosta garden at the Public Library.
She moved perennial plants to this garden as well. She asked if it would be possible to do
plantings near the school in 2026 if she could find matching dollars.
Linda Paulson, 7603 Frontier Trail, thanked the City Council for adding J1 to the agenda. She
suggested the mailer that was received should be more detailed. She commented that she
received a mailer from Comcast and called them but did not receive a call back.
Tyler Adam, 900 Saddlebrook Trail, stated that fruit and nut trees were barren due to a lack of
pollinators in the spring. He said the city sprayed chemicals and took down trees, which
impacted the environment. He claimed that the city served the rich and provided an example of
the City Community Center. He expressed concerns about government corruption and
encouraged people to discuss it.
Nora Nashawaty, 7320 Kurvers Point, expressed interest in learning about solar energy from
Eden Prairie when considering the civic campus.
PUBLIC HEARINGS. None.
GENERAL BUSINESS. None.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS.
195
City Council Minutes – September 23, 2024
3
Mayor Ryan thanked the members of the Senior Center who came to the presentation about the
projects occurring in the City of Chanhassen.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS.
1. Receive Second Quarter Economic Development Activity Report
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
1. Name and Address Memo
2. Letter to Property Owners – 2024 City Pavement Rehab Project
3. Chanhassen Bluffs Flyer
Councilmember von Oven moved, Councilmember Kimber seconded to adjourn the
meeting. All voted in favor, and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 3 to 0. The
City Council meeting was adjourned at 7:14 p.m.
Submitted by Laurie Hokkanen
City Manager
Prepared by Jenny Potter
City Clerk
196
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Receive Commission on Aging Minutes dated August 16, 2024
File No.Item No: D.3
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Kate Vogt, Admin Support Specialist
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council receives the Commission on Aging Minutes dated August 16, 2024."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
Commission on Aging Minutes 8.16.24
197
Chanhassen Commission on Aging, August 16, 2024
Meeting was called to order at 10:03am by Commissioner Cassidy.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Gwen Block, Jim Camarata, Kara Cassidy, Ruth Lunde, Beth Mason, Phyllis
Mobley, Ruth Slivken
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bhakti Modi
GUESTS PRESENT: Allison Streich, Deputy Director, Carver County CDA; Emmanuel
Ngabire, Carver County HHS; Sharmeen Al-Jaff; Elyette Block; Jeff Miller.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The agenda was reviewed as submitted. Commissioner Camarata
made a motion to approve the agenda as amended. Commissioner Lunde seconded the motion.
All members voted in favor; the motion was carried.
COMMISSION ON AGING MINUTES July 19, 2024 Minutes were reviewed. No changes
noted. Commissioner Block made a motion to approve the minutes from the July 19, 2024
meeting which was held at the Carver County Health and Human Services location in Chaska.
Commissioner Mason seconded the motion. All members voted in favor; the motion was carried.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: none
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Allison Streich, Deputy Director, Carver County CDA, presented highlights from the
Comprehensive Housing Needs Analysis for Carver County with an emphasis on Chanhassen
Data. Allison provided an overview of the study along with final analysis and recommendations
for housing needs in Chanhassen and Carver County. Discussion revolved around types of
housing, costs, availability, accessibility and aging in place services in our community. She
especially noted that Aging in Place initiatives impacts the home sale market, keeping homes
unavailable for resale much longer than in the past. Other discussions revolved around increasing
costs of HOA and other insurance, which impact those with limited income to stay in their
current homes, and information on how to use this study to improve housing options for 65+
residents. Alison will send a copy of the study to Mary to share with the COA at the next
meeting, particularly noting the Chanhassen specific data. Final comments covered data to
consider as Chanhassen plans for housing seniors in the next six years, with the following quote:
“Between 2023 and 2030, senior (age 65 and older) population growth is expected to be
strongest in the Chanhassen submarket, with the addition of 1,972 seniors (54% growth),
followed by Chaska (1,055 senior, 36% growth).” Allison’s power point presentation as well as
the study will be posted with the COA minutes on the Chanhassen Website, as well as linked to
the Chanhassen Senior Center information page on the City of Chanhassen website.
LeeAnn Eiden, Senior Community Services was unable to attend. Mary shared information
about the upcoming Dementia Friends session on August 27, sponsored by Riley Crossing and
presented by LeeAnn Eiden. Commissioners were encouraged to attend if possible.
Emmanual Ngabire, Carver County Office of Aging, invited Commissioners to attend the
198
County wide Commission on Aging meeting scheduled for Friday, September 6 at the MN
Arboretum. He encouraged commissioners to come ready to discuss visibility of programs for
seniors in and around the County, and to share current work being done for this population group
in their city. Special speakers and small discussion break out groups will be part of the event.
Chanhassen Commissioners volunteered to help as table group discussion leaders and greeters.
Commissioners able to attend from Chanhassen are Commissioners Cassidy, Camarata, Block,
Lunde, Mason, and Slivken. Other invited cities include Watertown, Waconia, Chaska,
Hamburg, Victoria and Cologne.
Mary Blazanin provided an overview of the Chanhassen Library’s fall schedule as sent by
Linnea Fonnest, who was unable to attend the meeting today.
COA DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. 4th of July. Commissioner Lunde suggested starting requests for corporate donations
earlier in the year, preferably January or February, to allow companies the time needed to
secure donations from their main offices. She also asked for better clarification on the
letters going out related to General Park and Recreation donations from local businesses
and how the 4th of July Bingo donations differ. Commissioners agreed to begin planning
for the 4th of July Bingo event in January 2025.
2. Communications Update. Commissioner Camarata reported that Carver County is in the
process of investigating the possibility of creating a county newspaper. Commissioner
Lunde updated a list of initial cities interested in combining efforts on a newspaper. She
stated a group is also working on a voter guide which can be digitally promoted for the
upcoming election year.
3. Bridging with Seniors Update. Commissioner Slivken reported that the high school
seniors who’ve graduated from Book Club said their goodbyes at the last meeting and
want to stay in touch with the older adults in the group. The book club is starting up again
in the fall; Chanhassen Library created flyers and posters to promote it. Commissioner
Slivken will be meeting with student volunteers soon. She stated they are available on
weekends to take part in programs/clubs. They may also be interested in offering Tech
support help for older adults, and the possibility of partnering on a Red Cross Blood
drive. She would also like to create another Butterfly Garden project with them.
OPEN DISCUSSION: None
ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Mobley made a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Camarata
seconded the motion. All members voted in favor; the motion was carried and the meeting
adjourned.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:36am
Minutes prepared and submitted by Mary Blazanin, Senior Center Coordinator.
199
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Receive Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 27, 2024
File No.Item No: D.4
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Kate Vogt, Admin Support Specialist
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council receives the Park and Recreation Commission minutes dated August
27, 2024."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
200
PRC Minutes 08-27-24
201
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
AUGUST 27, 2024
Chair Peck called the meeting to order at 5:58 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Peck, Chair; Dan Eidsmo; Rob Swanson; Scott Pharis; Kristin
Fulkerson; Michael Leisen; Sean Morgan; Aayan Shrestha, youth; Clara Christenson, youth.
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Recreation Director; Priya Tandon, Recreation
Manager; Luke Kegley, Recreation Supervisor; Jenny Potter, City Clerk.
PUBLIC PRESENT: Judy Harder.
OATH OF OFFICE – YOUTH COMMISSIONERS
Jenny Potter, City Clerk, administered the oaths of office to Aayan Shrestha and Clara
Christenson.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Commissioner Pharis moved, Commissioner Swanson
seconded to approve the agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously with a vote of 9 to 0.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Luke Kegley, Recreation Supervisor, introduced himself and summarized his background
experience. He voiced excitement to work for Chanhassen.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
1. Approve Park & Recreation Minutes dated June 25, 2024
Commissioner Fulkerson moved, Commissioner Pharis seconded to approve the minutes of
the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated June 25, 2024, as presented. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 9 to 0.
GENERAL BUSINESS:
202
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes – August 27, 2024
2
1. Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center Update
Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Recreation Director, presented an update about the portions of
Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center. He explained that the voter-approved one-half percent
local option sales tax would finance the project and would be on the ballot on November 5, 2024.
He reviewed the current facility uses and noted the proposed facility amenities. He summarized
the funding source for the Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center. He explained how the sales tax
would help fund the project. He noted that the sales tax would be up to 20 years but could be
paid off early.
Commissioner Morgan asked if the sales tax would automatically go up to the $40 million and
then expire.
Mr. Ruegemer responded that sponsorships and naming rights would be a separate source of
money.
Commissioner Morgan asked if the sales tax would not go up to $40 million or 20 years if
additional funds, such as grants, were received.
Mr. Ruegemer answered that if it gets to $40 million before 20 years, it will go away sooner. He
said if the $40 million was paid off in fewer years, they could not utilize the tax for other
projects.
Chair Peck asked if the approval of the sales tax from the State of Minnesota was one-time only.
Mr. Ruegemer confirmed this information and said that the city had two years to put it in a
referendum. They did not have elections in 2023, so they elected to put the item on the ballot in
2024. He said if residents do not approve the tax levy, there will not be a project. He said that the
staff is trying to communicate the project clearly to residents.
Commissioner Leisen asked how the staff is building awareness about the project.
Mr. Ruegemer answered that the staff is attending community events, will hold open houses in
September, and will send out direct mailings in September.
Commissioner Leisen asked how the residents have responded to the project so far.
Mr. Ruegemer responded that many residents are excited about the project, but some residents
are disappointed that there is no pool. He said that the pool had a large construction cost and has
limited revenue. The city would need to subsidize the operating cost of the pool.
Chair Peck asked if the school had expressed interest in buying the former recreation center.
203
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes – August 27, 2024
3
Mr. Ruegemer answered that there was some interest in purchasing the former recreation center
but no formal conversations have take place at this time.
Commissioner Pharis questioned how the facility construction was paid for in 1995.
Mr. Ruegemer stated that he thought it was paid for by the tax increment financing district. He
did not remember the cost of constructing that building and purchasing the land. He thought that
there would be a high percentage of voter turnout for the elections in November.
Commissioner Eidsmo asked if the vote was no, that the levy would not be initiated.
Mr. Ruegemer answered that if it did not pass, the higher levy to cover the construction costs of
the community center would not move forward.
Commissioner Swanson asked how long this proposed location would last with the population
growth.
Mr. Ruegemer responded that he thought this new facility would carry Chanhassen into the
future with no problems.
Commissioner Swanson asked what perks the Chanhassen residents would have access to with
the new facility.
Mr. Ruegemer answered that they had not gotten to that level of detail, but there would likely be
a break given to Chanhassen residents to use the facility verses non residents.
Commissioner Fulkerson asked if the facility income would cover the deferred maintenance in
addition to the operating costs.
Mr. Ruegemer responded that they are proposing to cover the operating costs, but there would be
additional discussions about the deferred maintenance.
Commissioner Morgan encouraged focusing on elements of regional cost-sharing and not have a
facility only funded by local levies was important. He said that the City highlighted these
elements, and he encouraged the City to build awareness of the economic benefit of being a
regional draw.
Youth Commissioner Christenson asked about the staffing needs.
Mr. Ruegemer responded that there would be increased staffing needs.
Youth Commissioner Christenson asked when the community center would open.
204
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes – August 27, 2024
4
Mr. Ruegemer estimated that it would open in 2027.
REPORTS:
1. 2024 4th of July Celebration Evaluation
Priya Tandon, Recreation Manager, summarized the 4th of July Celebration. She reviewed the
activities offered and different sponsors for the event. She noted the new activities at the
celebration, such as a mobile book truck.
Chair Peck asked if people buy the books at the mobile book truck.
Ms. Tandon answered that they purchased the books, it is not a mobile library. The fire
department provided a mister, which patrons enjoyed. She said that the mobile care center
received positive feedback. She summarized the events that had to be canceled because of the
bad weather.
Commissioner Morgan asked what events had the sponsorship element.
Ms. Tandon answered that the February Festival, the Easter Egg Candy Hunt, and the Halloween
Party were also sponsorship events.
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS: None.
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS: None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Chair Peck said that Ms. Tandon would not be at the next meeting since it was her wedding
week. He wished her the best. He asked about the park north of the City Hall that was often
empty and how to get more use out of that park.
Mr. Ruegemer said that they need to balance the use with parking. He provided examples of how
that park had been utilized in the past.
Ms. Tandon said that some parks are out of use because of the heavy rain on July 4th, which
caused major damage.
ADJOURNMENT:
Commissioner Leisen moved, Commissioner Morgan seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 9 to 0. The Park and
Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned at 7:02 p.m.
205
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes – August 27, 2024
5
Submitted by Jerry Ruegemer
Park and Recreation Director
206
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Approve Claims Paid dated October 14, 2024
File No.Item No: D.5
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Danielle Washburn, Assistant Finance Director
Reviewed By Kelly Grinnell
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council Approves Claims Paid dated October 14, 2024."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Financial Sustainability
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
The following claims are submitted for review and approval on October 14, 2024:
Total Claims $1,506,776.51
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
207
ATTACHMENTS
Payment Summary
Payment Detail
208
Accounts Payable
Checks by Date - Summary
Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount
1Password 08/16/2024
0.00 35.88
Acme Tools 08/16/2024
0.00 321.91
Amazon 08/16/2024
0.00 5,124.11
American Legion 08/16/2024
0.00 128.38
American Water Works Association 08/16/2024
0.00 240.00
Apple.com 08/16/2024
0.00 43.34
Association of MN Emergency Managers 08/16/2024
0.00 300.00
Avision Inc 08/16/2024
0.00 99.00
Bitly, Inc 08/16/2024
0.00 70.00
Buffalo Outdoor Storage 08/16/2024
0.00 1,236.00
Cabin Fever Sporting Goods 08/16/2024
0.00 37.92
Carver County 08/16/2024
0.00 2.00
Carver County Environmental Center 08/16/2024
0.00 47.38
Carver Junk Co 08/16/2024
0.00 112.80
CDW Government 08/16/2024
0.00 94.10
Chick-Fil-A 08/16/2024
0.00 232.19
Chipotle Mexican Grill 08/16/2024
0.00 228.19
Core & Main LP 08/16/2024
0.00 2,227.49
Costco Wholesale 08/16/2024
0.00 821.82
Courtyard St. Cloud 08/16/2024
0.00 1,228.77
Cub Foods 08/16/2024
0.00 783.23
Dell 08/16/2024
0.00 2,662.10
Delta Airlines 08/16/2024
0.00 138.96
Dollar Tree Stores Inc 08/16/2024
0.00 36.62
Experts Exchange 08/16/2024
0.00 199.95
Fab-Tex Filtration 08/16/2024
0.00 149.85
Facebook 08/16/2024
0.00 215.00
Five Below 08/16/2024
0.00 45.80
Fleet Farm 08/16/2024
0.00 545.05
Full Source 08/16/2024
0.00 443.37
Gertens 08/16/2024
0.00 1,960.00
Global Music Rights 08/16/2024
0.00 850.00
Grainger 08/16/2024
0.00 50.95
Hach Company 08/16/2024
0.00 1,683.55
Hogan Brothers 08/16/2024
0.00 54.00
Home Depot 08/16/2024
0.00 971.15
Hootsuite Inc 08/16/2024
0.00 1,188.00
Hotels.com 08/16/2024
0.00 19.24
Jimmy Johns 08/16/2024
0.00 198.63
Jules' Bistro 08/16/2024
0.00 72.92
Kwik Trip 08/16/2024
0.00 131.09
Lasercrafting 08/16/2024
0.00 11.50
LogMeIn Inc 08/16/2024
0.00 1,040.40
Lunds & Byerly's 08/16/2024
0.00 57.80
Page 1 of 6 209
Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount
Menards 08/16/2024
0.00 94.63
Merlins Ace Hardware 08/16/2024
0.00 39.17
Metropolitan Council Enviromental Services 08/16/2024
0.00 20,000.00
Michaels 08/16/2024
0.00 24.64
MN Association of Government Communicators 08/16/2024
0.00 30.00
MN Pollution Control Agency 08/16/2024
0.00 597.58
Moe's American Restaurant 08/16/2024
0.00 17.00
Party City 08/16/2024
0.00 34.14
Pickleball Central 08/16/2024
0.00 79.77
Pizzaioli 08/16/2024
0.00 267.67
Postmaster 08/16/2024
0.00 27.20
Radwell International, Inc. 08/16/2024
0.00 225.38
Smartpress.com 08/16/2024
0.00 3,285.34
South Hennepin Recycling & Problem Waste 08/16/2024
0.00 9,170.00
Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 08/16/2024
0.00 40.00
Stampli 08/16/2024
0.00 1,362.00
Stratoguard, LLC 08/16/2024
0.00 230.56
Target 08/16/2024
0.00 767.07
The Garden By The Woods 08/16/2024
0.00 769.47
USA Inflatable 08/16/2024
0.00 671.66
USABlueBook 08/16/2024
0.00 176.80
VehicleCounts.com 08/16/2024
0.00 1,873.00
Vista Flags 08/16/2024
0.00 195.03
Walgreens 08/16/2024
0.00 10.99
Wal-Mart 08/16/2024
0.00 206.92
Wild West Hackin' Fest 08/16/2024
0.00 1,150.00
Zoom 08/16/2024
0.00 86.70
ALICE RUFF 09/18/2024
0.00 91.48
ALLISON & JEFFREY ENGEL 09/18/2024
0.00 145.27
ANCONA TITLE 09/18/2024
0.00 5.22
ANCONA TITLE & ESCROW 09/18/2024
0.00 91.31
BURNET TITLE 09/18/2024
0.00 163.24
BURNET TITLE 09/18/2024
0.00 62.95
Carver County Court Administrator 09/18/2024
0.00 27,000.00
CARVER COUNTY LICENSE CENTER 09/18/2024
0.00 3,986.51
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/18/2024
0.00 1,260.67
CenturyLink 09/18/2024
0.00 64.00
CHRISTINE JOYCE 09/18/2024
0.00 17.45
DANIEL & WENDY PETERSON 09/18/2024
0.00 124.12
DAVID & WENDY BRUCKS 09/18/2024
0.00 39.88
DAVID KING DREALAN 09/18/2024
0.00 35.33
DEAN & JACQUELINE SIMPSON 09/18/2024
0.00 49.67
DONALD & JUDITH LEIVERMANN 09/18/2024
0.00 49.27
DONALD & MAUREEN KVAM 09/18/2024
0.00 28.00
EXECUTIVE TITLE 09/18/2024
0.00 92.16
Jack Allrich 09/18/2024
0.00 26.75
JACOB POMPLUN 09/18/2024
0.00 8.84
JEFFREY BUCKLEY 09/18/2024
0.00 34.67
JEREMY & NANETTE DIETERLE 09/18/2024
0.00 195.68
KRISTOPHER & PATTI GRIESE 09/18/2024
0.00 46.25
MARIIA SHEVCHENKO 09/18/2024
0.00 88.00
MICHAEL VAN SANT 09/18/2024
0.00 28.82
MINNETONKA TITLE 09/18/2024
0.00 41.80
Page 2 of 6 210
Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/18/2024
0.00 267.21
Nick Kopp 09/18/2024
0.00 29.25
PARTNERS TITLE 09/18/2024
0.00 12.56
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 09/18/2024
0.00 61.52
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 09/18/2024
0.00 34.46
STEVEN & TARA CLARK 09/18/2024
0.00 73.28
THE TITLE GROUP INC 09/18/2024
0.00 19.37
TODD FOSSUM 09/18/2024
0.00 13.46
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 09/18/2024
0.00 181.89
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 09/18/2024
0.00 18.81
WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/18/2024
0.00 57.04
ALLSTREAM 09/19/2024
0.00 592.69
American Environmental, LLC 09/19/2024
0.00 41,744.88
ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS 09/19/2024
0.00 65.90
Blackburn Manufacturing Company 09/19/2024
0.00 497.10
BOLTON & MENK INC 09/19/2024
0.00 13,342.00
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 09/19/2024
0.00 11,850.00
CAMPION BARROW & ASSOCIATES 09/19/2024
0.00 555.00
CUB FOODS 09/19/2024
0.00 76.15
DEM-CON LANDFILL 09/19/2024
0.00 1,218.89
DISPLAY SALES COMPANY 09/19/2024
0.00 2,561.00
Earl F Andersen Inc 09/19/2024
0.00 2,779.72
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 09/19/2024
0.00 753.30
GREEN MEADOWS INC 09/19/2024
0.00 483.65
GS DIRECT INC 09/19/2024
0.00 201.75
Health Strategies 09/19/2024
0.00 207.00
HealthPartners, Inc. 09/19/2024
0.00 95,935.35
Holton Electric Contractors LLC 09/19/2024
0.00 595.45
ImperialDade 09/19/2024
0.00 203.16
Indigo Signs 09/19/2024
0.00 95.00
Indoor Landscapes Inc 09/19/2024
0.00 187.00
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 09/19/2024
0.00 115,509.00
Lockridge Grindal Nauen P.L.L.P 09/19/2024
0.00 3,333.33
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/19/2024
0.00 682.13
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 09/19/2024
0.00 230,855.78
Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 09/19/2024
0.00 7,380.45
Minnesota Roadways Co 09/19/2024
0.00 373.80
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 09/19/2024
0.00 2,971.18
MN STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSOC. 09/19/2024
0.00 325.00
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 09/19/2024
0.00 33.47
NEOGOV 09/19/2024
0.00 7,206.45
NvoicePay 09/19/2024
0.00 763.66
Pinnacle Pest Control 09/19/2024
0.00 1,125.00
POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 09/19/2024
0.00 2,391.62
Premium Waters, Inc 09/19/2024
0.00 4.32
Rain for Rent 09/19/2024
0.00 1,914.10
RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 09/19/2024
0.00 22,308.98
Rent N Save Portable Services 09/19/2024
0.00 10,462.00
RUFFRIDGE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT CO 09/19/2024
0.00 109.50
Tee Jay North, Inc. 09/19/2024
0.00 702.00
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company 09/19/2024
0.00 160.00
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc 09/19/2024
0.00 334.00
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/19/2024
0.00 426.48
Page 3 of 6 211
Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount
WS & D PERMIT SERVICE 09/19/2024
0.00 120.00
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 09/19/2024
0.00 15,623.50
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/25/2024
0.00 3,901.75
CenturyLink 09/25/2024
0.00 60.00
Marco Inc 09/25/2024
0.00 735.00
Minnesota Secretary of State - Notary 09/25/2024
0.00 120.00
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/25/2024
0.00 132.64
XCEL ENERGY INC 09/25/2024
0.00 7,855.29
Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, LLC 09/26/2024
0.00 1,582.75
ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 09/26/2024
0.00 172.93
Bauer Built Inc 09/26/2024
0.00 1,092.97
BigDeck.com Inc 09/26/2024
0.00 500.00
BioBase LLC 09/26/2024
0.00 2,944.05
BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 09/26/2024
0.00 402.83
Boyer Ford Trucks 09/26/2024
0.00 235.78
BOYER HEAVY TRUCK SALES & SERV 09/26/2024
0.00 57,292.86
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 09/26/2024
0.00 19,829.50
BROADWAY AWARDS 09/26/2024
0.00 24.67
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 09/26/2024
0.00 18,788.09
CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO 09/26/2024
0.00 448.00
City of Bloomington 09/26/2024
0.00 784.00
City of Victoria 09/26/2024
0.00 780.55
Clow Valve Company - iHydrant 09/26/2024
0.00 900.00
COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 09/26/2024
0.00 2,107.52
Dave Van Sant 09/26/2024
0.00 150.00
Decks Unlimited of Cokato 09/26/2024
0.00 500.00
DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 09/26/2024
0.00 35.55
ECM PUBLISHERS INC 09/26/2024
0.00 278.07
Ferguson Waterworks #2518 09/26/2024
0.00 12,418.20
GRAYBAR 09/26/2024
0.00 519.78
Greg & Susan Provo 09/26/2024
0.00 500.00
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 09/26/2024
0.00 10,689.50
Health Strategies 09/26/2024
0.00 152.50
Infosend, Inc 09/26/2024
0.00 4,107.19
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 09/26/2024
0.00 170.51
Jessica Kessekert 09/26/2024
0.00 100.00
Jill Ramsey 09/26/2024
0.00 100.00
Juli Al-Hilwani 09/26/2024
0.00 393.75
Katie Kleinwachter 09/26/2024
0.00 100.00
Kerry Maus 09/26/2024
0.00 540.00
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 09/26/2024
0.00 7,665.00
Konen Homes Inc 09/26/2024
0.00 2,500.00
Lakeside Promotions 09/26/2024
0.00 453.31
Melinda Colwell 09/26/2024
0.00 600.00
MIDWEST LUBE INC 09/26/2024
0.00 363.90
Minuteman Press 09/26/2024
0.00 272.21
MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 09/26/2024
0.00 418.50
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 09/26/2024
0.00 7.94
Nuss Truck & Equipment 09/26/2024
0.00 341.52
PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 09/26/2024
0.00 310.00
Shadywood Tree Experts and Landscaping 09/26/2024
0.00 1,957.00
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 09/26/2024
0.00 100.90
Snidar Construction 09/26/2024
0.00 500.00
Page 4 of 6 212
Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount
SOFTWARE HOUSE INTERNATIONAL 09/26/2024
0.00 4,456.51
SOUTHVIEW DESIGN INC 09/26/2024
0.00 500.00
Tammy Gorsuch 09/26/2024
0.00 100.00
TRAFFIC CONTROL CORPORATION 09/26/2024
0.00 409.50
Utility Logic LLC 09/26/2024
0.00 103.45
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/26/2024
0.00 1,695.52
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/26/2024
0.00 1,623.08
WW GRAINGER INC 09/26/2024
0.00 250.36
CENTURYLINK 10/02/2024
0.00 1,762.24
Cody Balk 10/02/2024
0.00 175.00
DANIELLE WASHBURN 10/02/2024
0.00 409.14
DeeAnn Triethart 10/02/2024
0.00 97.38
Drew Baumgartner 10/02/2024
0.00 8,218.50
IUOE Local #49 10/02/2024
0.00 735.00
James G Gunville 10/02/2024
0.00 8,665.00
MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 10/02/2024
0.00 144.00
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 10/02/2024
0.00 7,350.15
MNDNR Region 3 Fisheries Office 10/02/2024
0.00 135.00
Nokomis Energy, LLC 10/02/2024
0.00 6,295.45
Northdale Construction Company, Inc 10/02/2024
0.00 56,372.51
Potentia MN Solar 10/02/2024
0.00 9,339.85
Priya Tandon 10/02/2024
0.00 400.00
Tammy Diethelm 10/02/2024
0.00 800.00
VERIZON WIRELESS 10/02/2024
0.00 5,728.00
XCEL ENERGY INC 10/02/2024
0.00 5,795.38
XCEL ENERGY INC 10/02/2024
0.00 9,172.72
Alex Huseth 10/03/2024
0.00 10,000.00
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 10/03/2024
0.00 516.50
American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus 10/03/2024
0.00 124.80
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC 10/03/2024
0.00 1,033.00
AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC 10/03/2024
0.00 680.54
ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 10/03/2024
0.00 1,485.46
Calibrations and Controls Inc 10/03/2024
0.00 750.00
Carver County 10/03/2024
0.00 1,450.00
Carver County Parks 10/03/2024
0.00 776.00
CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO 10/03/2024
0.00 1,108.10
Chucks Excavating Inc 10/03/2024
0.00 2,250.00
CITY OF CHASKA 10/03/2024
0.00 248.40
Cleaning Solutions Services 10/03/2024
0.00 8,707.20
Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 10/03/2024
0.00 189.54
COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 10/03/2024
0.00 810.00
DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 10/03/2024
0.00 44.64
Echo Data Analytics 10/03/2024
0.00 5,500.00
Edney Distributing Co., Inc 10/03/2024
0.00 216.94
Fidelity Security Life 10/03/2024
0.00 321.47
GONYEA HOMES 10/03/2024
0.00 7,300.00
GRAYBAR 10/03/2024
0.00 623.52
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 10/03/2024
0.00 7,425.70
HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 10/03/2024
0.00 4,600.00
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 10/03/2024
0.00 67.35
Jennifer Xuan Tuyet Doan-Nguyen 10/03/2024
0.00 435.78
Juli Al-Hilwani 10/03/2024
0.00 300.00
K2 Electrical Services Inc 10/03/2024
0.00 612.00
Page 5 of 6 213
Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount
Kendell Doors & Hardware, LLC 10/03/2024
0.00 14,190.00
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 10/03/2024
0.00 257,805.08
Kraus-Anderson Construction Company 10/03/2024
0.00 84,801.48
Lano Equipment 10/03/2024
0.00 307.99
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 10/03/2024
0.00 7,803.00
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 10/03/2024
0.00 233.57
Nathan and Brianna Kirt 10/03/2024
0.00 1,500.00
Nathaniel & Stephanie Josephs 10/03/2024
0.00 618.82
Nexgen Contracting LLC 10/03/2024
0.00 1,000.00
Pedego Electric Bikes Twin Cities 10/03/2024
0.00 420.00
Peterson Companies 10/03/2024
0.00 5,979.01
Pitney Bowes Inc. 10/03/2024
0.00 440.04
Roberts Residential Remodeling Inc 10/03/2024
0.00 1,000.00
Scanning America Inc 10/03/2024
0.00 612.71
SEH 10/03/2024
0.00 17,843.22
Semper Fi 10/03/2024
0.00 1,000.00
Senja Inc 10/03/2024
0.00 96.00
Shadywood Tree Experts and Landscaping 10/03/2024
0.00 3,742.50
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 10/03/2024
0.00 49.39
Silva Screenprinting & Dist, LLC 10/03/2024
0.00 2,612.70
SiteOne Landscape Supply 10/03/2024
0.00 1,014.43
SM HENTGES & SONS 10/03/2024
0.00 16,170.95
Southview Design 10/03/2024
0.00 500.00
Stericycle, Inc 10/03/2024
0.00 279.88
Sun Life Financial 10/03/2024
0.00 3,719.52
Taylor Pederson 10/03/2024
0.00 1,307.34
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc 10/03/2024
0.00 698.50
Travis Ott 10/03/2024
0.00 435.78
TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 10/03/2024
0.00 1,432.50
Utility Logic LLC 10/03/2024
0.00 13,429.30
VALLEY-RICH CO INC 10/03/2024
0.00 8,700.00
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10/03/2024
0.00 605.52
Report Total:0.00 1,506,776.51
Page 6 of 6 214
AP
Check Detail
User: dwashburn@chanhassenmn.gov
Printed: 10/4/2024 10:41:39 AM
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
1Password 101-1160-4205 35.88 8/16/2024 password manager
35.88 8/16/2024
1Password 35.88
Acme Tools 701-0000-4140 160.96 8/16/2024 Milwaukee Packout Crate 4 Drawer Divider
Acme Tools 700-0000-4140 160.95 8/16/2024 Milwaukee Packout Crate 4 Drawer Divider
321.91 8/16/2024
Acme Tools 321.91
Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, LLC 700-0000-4300 791.38 9/26/2024 support for lift station and well
Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, LLC 701-0000-4300 791.37 9/26/2024 support for lift station and well
1,582.75 9/26/2024
Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, LLC 1,582.75
Al-Hilwani Juli 101-1539-4343 225.00 9/26/2024 Beginner PB 9/7 9/22 Beyond PB 9/22
Al-Hilwani Juli 101-1530-4347 168.75 9/26/2024 5 pack Drelan
393.75 9/26/2024
Al-Hilwani Juli 101-1530-4347 300.00 10/3/2024 10 pk Koestler
300.00 10/3/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 1 of 58
215
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Al-Hilwani Juli 693.75
Allrich Jack 101-1320-4360 26.75 9/18/2024 temporary commercial learner permit
26.75 9/18/2024
Allrich Jack 26.75
ALLSTREAM 101-1160-4310 592.69 9/19/2024 Phone System Maint 10/17 - 11/18
592.69 9/19/2024
ALLSTREAM 592.69
Amazon 101-1120-4110 16.79 8/16/2024 Coffee Filters for Bldg
Amazon 101-1616-4130 55.87 8/16/2024 Extra Large Grouting Sponge Water Balloons
Amazon 101-1120-4110 26.99 8/16/2024 Monitor Stands for Jenny's Office
Amazon 101-1220-4144 36.98 8/16/2024 Promo Supplies Med Tent-Fire Band-aids/Glow Bracelet
Amazon 101-1160-4133 1,030.00 8/16/2024 Env Monitor City hall server room
Amazon 101-1530-4150 75.98 8/16/2024 Towels for Fitness
Amazon 101-1160-4530 29.99 8/16/2024 Replacement mouse for Mike Wegner
Amazon 101-1120-4110 14.08 8/16/2024 Ink Pens for Jenny
Amazon 101-1160-4131 65.98 8/16/2024 Bluetooth Mouse for Jerry R
Amazon 101-1312-4510 177.81 8/16/2024 CS LiftMaster Commercial Door Operator
Amazon 101-1120-4110 12.99 8/16/2024 Coffee Filters for Bldg
Amazon 101-1220-4530 8.85 8/16/2024 Lithium Batteries
Amazon 101-1160-4132 9.99 8/16/2024 SD Reader adapter for Fire Dept
Amazon 101-1370-4120 48.74 8/16/2024 CS Air Line Tubing
Amazon 101-1220-4142 24.00 8/16/2024 Ear Plugs
Amazon 101-1220-4290 31.94 8/16/2024 Storage Bags & Aluminum Foil
Amazon 101-1120-4110 128.29 8/16/2024 Rubber Floor Mats for Planning Dept
Amazon 101-1616-4130 63.85 8/16/2024 Case of 125 Instant Cold Packs
Amazon 101-1220-4142 33.98 8/16/2024 Back straps & door stops
Amazon 101-1550-4120 700.05 8/16/2024 JG PTO Clutch for Toro Mower
Amazon 101-1160-4132 109.74 8/16/2024 Restock items
Amazon 101-1120-4110 16.38 8/16/2024 Ink Pens
Amazon 101-1120-4110 23.74 8/16/2024 Hand Sanitizer
Amazon 101-1220-4520 19.99 8/16/2024 Buffing Pad Polishing Wheel Kit
Amazon 101-1120-4110 26.58 8/16/2024 Stir Sticks for Coffee Station
Amazon 101-1120-4110 52.99 8/16/2024 Water Tank for Jamie
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 2 of 58
216
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Amazon 101-1160-4133 900.00 8/16/2024 Wireless APs for fire station 1
Amazon 101-1312-4510 75.81 8/16/2024 CS Liftmaster Brake Solenoid Replacement Kit
Amazon 700-7043-4150 39.59 8/16/2024 MW ERA Sch 80 PVC 2 Inch 90 Degree Elbows
Amazon 101-1616-4130 99.14 8/16/2024 School Glue
Amazon 101-1120-4110 7.88 8/16/2024 Tide Sticks for FD
Amazon 101-1160-4207 12.16 8/16/2024 Televised Sewere Video Access Fee - June
Amazon 101-1220-4142 13.88 8/16/2024 Sunscreen for Boat
Amazon 101-1220-4144 12.63 8/16/2024 Sunscreen for Med Tent
Amazon 101-1120-4110 42.78 8/16/2024 Document Holders / Laminator sheets
Amazon 101-1120-4110 64.28 8/16/2024 Happy Birthday Banner File Folders Jacket Paper Cups
Amazon 101-1616-4130 169.90 8/16/2024 Tropical Party 6 pk Water Balloons
Amazon 101-1220-4240 8.81 8/16/2024 Glove Strap for Gear
Amazon 101-1120-4110 118.72 8/16/2024 Laminator Pouches for 4th and Storage Organizer for Sam
Amazon 101-1220-4120 53.00 8/16/2024 Saw Blades
Amazon 101-1120-4110 4.99 8/16/2024 AA Hole Punch for Shop
Amazon 101-1220-4120 42.95 8/16/2024 Saw Blades
Amazon 101-1540-4130 47.58 8/16/2024 Nacho Chips - Lake Ann Concessions
Amazon 700-7043-4150 67.95 8/16/2024 MW Clear PVC Y Strainer Inline Filter
Amazon 101-1120-4110 260.19 8/16/2024 Toner finance printer
Amazon 101-1220-4144 29.39 8/16/2024 Fire Blanket
Amazon 101-1160-4132 89.05 8/16/2024 Universal dock for Plumbing Office TV
Amazon 101-1120-4110 109.97 8/16/2024 Laminating Sheets/Scissors/Tape Dispensers/Magic Tape
Amazon 101-1220-4144 10.89 8/16/2024 Bug Spray for Med Tent
5,124.11 8/16/2024
Amazon 5,124.11
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 601-6058-4303 516.50 10/3/2024 MMSW/TH41 Roundabout
516.50 10/3/2024
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 516.50
American Environmental, LLC 701-7013-4751 41,744.88 9/19/2024 25-04 Sewer Televising
41,744.88 9/19/2024
American Environmental, LLC 41,744.88
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 3 of 58
217
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus 101-0000-2008 124.80 10/3/2024 September 2024 premium
124.80 10/3/2024
American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus 124.80
American Legion 101-1120-4381 128.38 8/16/2024 New Hire Breakfast
128.38 8/16/2024
American Legion 128.38
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC 101-1310-4360 1,033.00 10/3/2024 APWA Membership/Dues
1,033.00 10/3/2024
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC 1,033.00
AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC 101-1550-4140 262.18 10/3/2024 tires
AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC 101-1250-4140 418.36 10/3/2024 tires
680.54 10/3/2024
AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC 680.54
American Water Works Association 700-0000-4360 240.00 8/16/2024 MW AWWA Water Membership
240.00 8/16/2024
American Water Works Association 240.00
ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS 101-1220-4531 65.90 9/19/2024 Pager Knob Replacement kit
65.90 9/19/2024
ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS 65.90
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 4 of 58
218
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
ANCONA TITLE 701-0000-2020 2.57 9/18/2024 Refund Check 006936-000, 7616 SOUTH SHORE DRIVE
ANCONA TITLE 700-0000-2020 0.07 9/18/2024 Refund Check 006936-000, 7616 SOUTH SHORE DRIVE
ANCONA TITLE 720-0000-2020 0.90 9/18/2024 Refund Check 006936-000, 7616 SOUTH SHORE DRIVE
ANCONA TITLE 700-0000-2020 1.68 9/18/2024 Refund Check 006936-000, 7616 SOUTH SHORE DRIVE
5.22 9/18/2024
ANCONA TITLE 5.22
ANCONA TITLE & ESCROW 701-0000-2020 36.93 9/18/2024 Refund Check 098367-000, 6441 PLEASANT PARK DR
ANCONA TITLE & ESCROW 720-0000-2020 30.08 9/18/2024 Refund Check 098367-000, 6441 PLEASANT PARK DR
ANCONA TITLE & ESCROW 700-0000-2020 2.45 9/18/2024 Refund Check 098367-000, 6441 PLEASANT PARK DR
ANCONA TITLE & ESCROW 700-0000-2020 21.85 9/18/2024 Refund Check 098367-000, 6441 PLEASANT PARK DR
91.31 9/18/2024
ANCONA TITLE & ESCROW 91.31
Apple.com 101-1420-4120 43.34 8/16/2024 Species Identification App for Landscaping Inspections
43.34 8/16/2024
Apple.com 43.34
ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 101-1120-4110 76.76 9/26/2024 Public Works Water Filter
ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 101-1120-4110 96.17 9/26/2024 Chan Fire Water Filter
172.93 9/26/2024
ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 101-1120-4110 765.24 10/3/2024 Coffee for Building Front Desk and Senior
ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 101-1120-4110 222.86 10/3/2024 Coffee for Fire
ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 101-1120-4110 497.36 10/3/2024 Coffee for PW
1,485.46 10/3/2024
ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC 1,658.39
Association of MN Emergency Managers 101-1220-4360 200.00 8/16/2024 AMEM membership dues-Heger
Association of MN Emergency Managers 101-1220-4360 100.00 8/16/2024 AMEM Membership (Fatturi)
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 5 of 58
219
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
300.00 8/16/2024
Association of MN Emergency Managers 300.00
Avision Inc 101-1125-4300 99.00 8/16/2024 Drone Authorization and Flight Planning Software
99.00 8/16/2024
Avision Inc 99.00
Balk Cody 101-1220-4370 175.00 10/2/2024 UAV Training
175.00 10/2/2024
Balk Cody 175.00
Bauer Built Inc 101-1320-4140 1,092.97 9/26/2024 tires
Bauer Built Inc 101-1320-4140 1,341.37 9/26/2024 Tires
Bauer Built Inc 101-1320-4140 -1,341.37 9/26/2024 tires
1,092.97 9/26/2024
Bauer Built Inc 1,092.97
Baumgartner Drew 701-7060-4901 8,218.50 10/2/2024 Reimbursement for PPII Grant Program
8,218.50 10/2/2024
Baumgartner Drew 8,218.50
BigDeck.com Inc 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/26/2024 Erosion escrow 6451 Bretton Way #624186
500.00 9/26/2024
BigDeck.com Inc 500.00
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 6 of 58
220
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
BioBase LLC 720-0000-4300 2,944.05 9/26/2024 EcoSound Habitat Subscription
2,944.05 9/26/2024
BioBase LLC 2,944.05
Bitly, Inc 101-1125-4229 35.00 8/16/2024 Bitly subscription
Bitly, Inc 101-1125-4229 35.00 8/16/2024 Link shortening service
70.00 8/16/2024
Bitly, Inc 70.00
Blackburn Manufacturing Company 700-0000-4150 248.55 9/19/2024 locating supplies
Blackburn Manufacturing Company 701-0000-4150 248.55 9/19/2024 locating supplies
497.10 9/19/2024
Blackburn Manufacturing Company 497.10
BOLTON & MENK INC 720-6053-4303 2,935.24 9/19/2024 Surface Water Mgmt Fund @ 22%
BOLTON & MENK INC 700-6053-4303 1,334.20 9/19/2024 Water Fund @ 10%
BOLTON & MENK INC 701-6053-4303 1,067.36 9/19/2024 Sanitary Sewer Fund @ 8%
BOLTON & MENK INC 601-6053-4303 8,005.20 9/19/2024 2025 City Pavement Project - PMP @ 60%
13,342.00 9/19/2024
BOLTON & MENK INC 13,342.00
BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 101-1220-4142 13.90 9/26/2024 Medical Supplies
BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 101-1220-4142 388.93 9/26/2024 Medical Response Supplies
402.83 9/26/2024
BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 402.83
Boyer Ford Trucks 101-1320-4140 235.78 9/26/2024 102 Brake Valve
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 7 of 58
221
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
235.78 9/26/2024
Boyer Ford Trucks 235.78
BOYER HEAVY TRUCK SALES & SERV 700-7025-4704 28,646.43 9/26/2024 302 F600 Cab & Chassis
BOYER HEAVY TRUCK SALES & SERV 701-7025-4704 28,646.43 9/26/2024 302 F600 Cab & Chassis
57,292.86 9/26/2024
BOYER HEAVY TRUCK SALES & SERV 57,292.86
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 101-1320-4546 11,850.00 9/19/2024 Pavement Inspections
11,850.00 9/19/2024
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 414-4010-4303 19,829.50 9/26/2024 Civic Campus
19,829.50 9/26/2024
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 31,679.50
BROADWAY AWARDS 101-1120-4110 24.67 9/26/2024 Magnetic Nametag for Mackenze Grunig
24.67 9/26/2024
BROADWAY AWARDS 24.67
BRUCKS DAVID & WENDY 700-0000-2020 12.35 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100812-000, 750 CROSSROADS COURT
BRUCKS DAVID & WENDY 720-0000-2020 10.18 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100812-000, 750 CROSSROADS COURT
BRUCKS DAVID & WENDY 700-0000-2020 1.28 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100812-000, 750 CROSSROADS COURT
BRUCKS DAVID & WENDY 701-0000-2020 16.07 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100812-000, 750 CROSSROADS COURT
39.88 9/18/2024
BRUCKS DAVID & WENDY 39.88
BUCKLEY JEFFREY 701-0000-2020 13.75 9/18/2024 Refund Check 020832-000, 1522 MILLS DRIVE
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 8 of 58
222
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
BUCKLEY JEFFREY 720-0000-2020 9.74 9/18/2024 Refund Check 020832-000, 1522 MILLS DRIVE
BUCKLEY JEFFREY 700-0000-2020 10.03 9/18/2024 Refund Check 020832-000, 1522 MILLS DRIVE
BUCKLEY JEFFREY 700-0000-2020 1.15 9/18/2024 Refund Check 020832-000, 1522 MILLS DRIVE
34.67 9/18/2024
BUCKLEY JEFFREY 34.67
Buffalo Outdoor Storage 101-1550-4140 1,236.00 8/16/2024 CS Used 8' Chevy Truck Bed
1,236.00 8/16/2024
Buffalo Outdoor Storage 1,236.00
BURNET TITLE 720-0000-2020 20.76 9/18/2024 Refund Check 018537-000, 8583 DRAKE COURT
BURNET TITLE 700-0000-2020 110.79 9/18/2024 Refund Check 018537-000, 8583 DRAKE COURT
BURNET TITLE 700-0000-2020 1.69 9/18/2024 Refund Check 018537-000, 8583 DRAKE COURT
BURNET TITLE 701-0000-2020 30.00 9/18/2024 Refund Check 018537-000, 8583 DRAKE COURT
BURNET TITLE 700-0000-2020 1.14 9/18/2024 Refund Check 007465-000, 92 SHASTA CIRCLE E
BURNET TITLE 720-0000-2020 13.91 9/18/2024 Refund Check 007465-000, 92 SHASTA CIRCLE E
BURNET TITLE 701-0000-2020 28.21 9/18/2024 Refund Check 007465-000, 92 SHASTA CIRCLE E
BURNET TITLE 700-0000-2020 19.69 9/18/2024 Refund Check 007465-000, 92 SHASTA CIRCLE E
226.19 9/18/2024
BURNET TITLE 226.19
Cabin Fever Sporting Goods 101-1613-4130 37.92 8/16/2024 4th of July Fishing Contest Scale
37.92 8/16/2024
Cabin Fever Sporting Goods 37.92
Calibrations and Controls Inc 700-0000-4550 750.00 10/3/2024 flow meters wells
750.00 10/3/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 9 of 58
223
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Calibrations and Controls Inc 750.00
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 601-6040-4701 526.04 9/26/2024 Galpin ROW - 50% City
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 101-1140-4302 17,736.01 9/26/2024 Legal services-August 2024
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 601-6140-4701 526.04 9/26/2024 Galpin ROW - 50% County
18,788.09 9/26/2024
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 18,788.09
CAMPION BARROW & ASSOCIATES 101-1220-4352 555.00 9/19/2024 Promotional assessment for Battalion Chief process
555.00 9/19/2024
CAMPION BARROW & ASSOCIATES 555.00
Carver County 101-1420-4120 2.00 8/16/2024 Carver County Records Request
2.00 8/16/2024
Carver County 101-1160-4326 700.00 10/3/2024 Internet + Dark Fiber CH FD1 FD2 PW RC
Carver County 700-1160-4326 750.00 10/3/2024 Dark Fiber EWTP WWTP W3 W7 W8 LS24 T3
1,450.00 10/3/2024
Carver County 1,452.00
Carver County Court Administrator 601-6040-4701 13,500.00 9/18/2024 10-CV-24-912 - condemnation deposit
Carver County Court Administrator 601-6140-4701 13,500.00 9/18/2024 10-CV-24-912 - condemnation deposit
27,000.00 9/18/2024
Carver County Court Administrator 27,000.00
Carver County Environmental Center 720-7201-4300 47.38 8/16/2024 Old Equipment recycle charge
47.38 8/16/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 10 of 58
224
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Carver County Environmental Center 47.38
CARVER COUNTY LICENSE CENTER 700-7025-4704 1,993.26 9/18/2024 319 License & Registration
CARVER COUNTY LICENSE CENTER 701-7025-4704 1,993.25 9/18/2024 319 License & Registration
3,986.51 9/18/2024
CARVER COUNTY LICENSE CENTER 3,986.51
Carver County Parks 101-1638-4343 776.00 10/3/2024 Archery instructors Lake Ann Camp
776.00 10/3/2024
Carver County Parks 776.00
Carver Junk Co 101-1110-4375 112.80 8/16/2024 Carver County Junk Co Merch Order
112.80 8/16/2024
Carver Junk Co 112.80
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 701-0000-4320 319.21 9/25/2024 January Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 700-0000-4320 32.44 9/25/2024 December Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1540-4320 103.28 9/25/2024 December Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1600-4320 7.27 9/25/2024 January Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 700-7019-4320 438.55 9/25/2024 January Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1350-4320 803.69 9/25/2024 January Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1350-4320 917.96 9/25/2024 December Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 700-7019-4320 513.59 9/25/2024 December Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1550-4320 92.74 9/25/2024 January Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1120-1193 35.16 9/25/2024 December Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 701-0000-4320 375.20 9/25/2024 December Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1550-4320 110.04 9/25/2024 December Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1120-1193 30.63 9/25/2024 January Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1600-4320 8.43 9/25/2024 December Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 700-0000-4320 24.42 9/25/2024 January Solar Charges
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 101-1540-4320 89.14 9/25/2024 January Solar Charges
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 11 of 58
225
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
3,901.75 9/25/2024
CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 3,901.75
CDW Government 101-1160-4131 94.10 8/16/2024 Handstrap for Patrick K's Getac
94.10 8/16/2024
CDW Government 94.10
CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO 720-7207-4150 448.00 9/26/2024 concrete for storm water repair
448.00 9/26/2024
CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO 700-0000-4550 1,047.50 10/3/2024 concrete for water sampling station
CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO 700-0000-4150 60.60 10/3/2024 sauna tubes
1,108.10 10/3/2024
CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO 1,556.10
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1550-4321 38.64 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1312-4321 201.38 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 700-7043-4321 94.10 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1170-4321 460.38 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 700-7019-4321 39.44 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1600-4321 22.10 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1530-4321 45.21 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1190-4321 124.80 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 701-0000-4321 79.68 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 101-1220-4321 107.67 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 700-0000-4321 47.27 9/18/2024 Gas Charges
1,260.67 9/18/2024
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 1,260.67
CenturyLink 700-0000-4310 32.00 9/18/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 12 of 58
226
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
CenturyLink 701-0000-4310 32.00 9/18/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
64.00 9/18/2024
CenturyLink 700-7043-4310 60.00 9/25/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
60.00 9/25/2024
CENTURYLINK 101-1350-4310 30.94 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 101-1550-4310 30.94 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 101-1120-4310 49.50 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 700-0000-4310 6.19 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 101-1540-4310 62.04 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 101-1170-4310 828.11 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 101-1160-4325 250.87 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 101-1190-4310 124.08 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 701-0000-4310 6.19 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 700-0000-4310 15.56 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 700-7019-4310 216.38 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 101-1160-4325 125.88 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
CENTURYLINK 701-0000-4310 15.56 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
1,762.24 10/2/2024
CENTURYLINK 1,886.24
Chick-Fil-A 101-1110-4372 232.19 8/16/2024 City Council Meal
232.19 8/16/2024
Chick-Fil-A 232.19
Chipotle Mexican Grill 101-1120-4381 228.19 8/16/2024 Lunch for Communications Manager interview panels
228.19 8/16/2024
Chipotle Mexican Grill 228.19
Chucks Excavating Inc 101-0000-2073 1,000.00 10/3/2024 Erosion escrow 1571 Lake Lucy Rd #554888
Chucks Excavating Inc 101-0000-2073 1,250.00 10/3/2024 Erosion escrow 1571 Lake Lucy Rd #554887
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 13 of 58
227
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
2,250.00 10/3/2024
Chucks Excavating Inc 2,250.00
City of Bloomington 720-0000-4323 784.00 9/26/2024 Lab Testing Services
784.00 9/26/2024
City of Bloomington 784.00
CITY OF CHASKA 101-1560-4349 248.40 10/3/2024 Bus to Treasure Island - day trip
248.40 10/3/2024
CITY OF CHASKA 248.40
City of Victoria 101-1537-3631 780.55 9/26/2024 Barnyard Boogie revenue split
780.55 9/26/2024
City of Victoria 780.55
CLARK STEVEN & TARA 700-0000-2020 47.81 9/18/2024 Refund Check 099944-000, 6401 FOX PATH
CLARK STEVEN & TARA 700-0000-2020 1.15 9/18/2024 Refund Check 099944-000, 6401 FOX PATH
CLARK STEVEN & TARA 720-0000-2020 14.15 9/18/2024 Refund Check 099944-000, 6401 FOX PATH
CLARK STEVEN & TARA 701-0000-2020 10.17 9/18/2024 Refund Check 099944-000, 6401 FOX PATH
73.28 9/18/2024
CLARK STEVEN & TARA 73.28
Cleaning Solutions Services 101-1312-4511 514.19 10/3/2024 Cleaning Services-September
Cleaning Solutions Services 101-1220-4511 257.09 10/3/2024 Cleaning services-September 2024
Cleaning Solutions Services 101-1190-4511 560.00 10/3/2024 Carpet Cleaning at Library
Cleaning Solutions Services 101-1170-4511 3,198.15 10/3/2024 Cleaning services-September
Cleaning Solutions Services 701-0000-4511 64.27 10/3/2024 Cleaning Services-September
Cleaning Solutions Services 700-0000-4511 64.27 10/3/2024 Cleaning Services-September
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 14 of 58
228
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Cleaning Solutions Services 101-1190-4511 4,049.23 10/3/2024 Cleaning Services-September
8,707.20 10/3/2024
Cleaning Solutions Services 8,707.20
Clow Valve Company - iHydrant 700-0000-4220 900.00 9/26/2024 Annual iHydrant software subscription
900.00 9/26/2024
Clow Valve Company - iHydrant 900.00
Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 700-0000-2008 106.50 10/3/2024 September premium
Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 101-0000-2008 37.20 10/3/2024 September premium
Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 701-0000-2008 45.84 10/3/2024 September premium
189.54 10/3/2024
Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 189.54
Colwell Melinda 101-1560-4343 600.00 9/26/2024 Mah Jong Instructor fee
600.00 9/26/2024
Colwell Melinda 600.00
COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN.101-1160-4200 1,972.09 9/26/2024 KACE Deployment Appliance Annual Renewal
COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN.101-1160-4200 135.43 9/26/2024 HPE Foundation Support AP - Renewal
2,107.52 9/26/2024
COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN.101-1160-4211 488.80 10/3/2024 Datto O365 Backup Service - Sep
COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN.101-1160-4211 321.20 10/3/2024 O365 Add On Licenses - Sep
810.00 10/3/2024
COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 2,917.52
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 15 of 58
229
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Core & Main LP 700-7043-4160 388.36 8/16/2024 MW Ammonia
Core & Main LP 700-7043-4160 1,839.13 8/16/2024 MW Optical DO Sensor/Orthophosphate/Cyanide Reagent
2,227.49 8/16/2024
Core & Main LP 2,227.49
Costco Wholesale 101-1613-4130 109.39 8/16/2024 Sprite Diet Mt Dew Diet Coke Coke
Costco Wholesale 101-1220-4375 218.30 8/16/2024 Charms Mini Pops Assorted Flavors
Costco Wholesale 101-1120-4340 97.66 8/16/2024 Wagon for Chan Bluffs Community Center supplies
Costco Wholesale 101-1220-4381 396.47 8/16/2024 Chips Beef Patties Hot Dogs Brats Cookies Potato Salad
821.82 8/16/2024
Costco Wholesale 821.82
Courtyard St. Cloud 101-1123-4381 331.14 8/16/2024 EDAM Summer Conference Hotel
Courtyard St. Cloud 101-1420-4381 181.33 8/16/2024 EMaass_EDAM Conference Lodging
Courtyard St. Cloud 101-1420-4381 353.64 8/16/2024 Rachel Jeske _ EDAm Conference Lodging
Courtyard St. Cloud 101-1420-4381 362.66 8/16/2024 Rachel Aresenault _ EDAM Conference Lodging
1,228.77 8/16/2024
Courtyard St. Cloud 1,228.77
Cub Foods 700-7019-4150 8.67 8/16/2024 JC EWTP Q-Tips
Cub Foods 101-1613-4126 146.70 8/16/2024 Rice Krispy Minute Maid Lemonade
Cub Foods 101-1110-4372 32.88 8/16/2024 City Council Waters / Coffee Filters
Cub Foods 101-1560-4130 50.00 8/16/2024 Gift card door prizes - Lions Club picnic
Cub Foods 701-0000-4120 67.69 8/16/2024 CS Water & Dish Soap
Cub Foods 101-1540-4130 110.58 8/16/2024 Chips/Hot Dog Buns & Ice-Restock Lake Ann Concessions
Cub Foods 101-1540-4130 61.90 8/16/2024 Chips & Hot Dog Buns - Restock
Cub Foods 101-1320-4150 126.69 8/16/2024 CB Gatorade Lemonade
Cub Foods 101-1540-4130 140.47 8/16/2024 Chips/Hot Dog Buns/Condiments/Jalapenos-Restock
Cub Foods 101-1616-4130 37.65 8/16/2024 Motts Fruit Snacks
783.23 8/16/2024
CUB FOODS 101-1220-4165 28.16 9/19/2024 Laundry detergent
CUB FOODS 101-1220-4370 47.99 9/19/2024 drinks for training
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 16 of 58
230
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
76.15 9/19/2024
CUB FOODS 859.38
Decks Unlimited of Cokato 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/26/2024 Erosion escrow 6830 Utica Cir #620853
500.00 9/26/2024
Decks Unlimited of Cokato 500.00
DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 101-1370-4260 35.55 9/26/2024 socket
35.55 9/26/2024
DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 101-1370-4260 13.64 10/3/2024 mirror
DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 101-1370-4120 31.00 10/3/2024 vaccuum filters
44.64 10/3/2024
DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 80.19
Dell 101-1160-4131 175.00 8/16/2024 Dock for Charles Howley Laptop
Dell 101-1160-4131 175.00 8/16/2024 Dock for Jerry Ruegemer Laptop
Dell 101-1160-4131 2,312.10 8/16/2024 Laptop for Jerry Ruegemer
2,662.10 8/16/2024
Dell 2,662.10
Delta Airlines 101-1220-4381 138.96 8/16/2024 Nutter airfare to Blue Card Conference
138.96 8/16/2024
Delta Airlines 138.96
DEM-CON LANDFILL 101-1320-4150 1,110.47 9/19/2024 Street sweeping
DEM-CON LANDFILL 101-1320-4150 108.42 9/19/2024 Items for disposal
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 17 of 58
231
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
1,218.89 9/19/2024
DEM-CON LANDFILL 1,218.89
DIETERLE JEREMY & NANETTE 701-0000-2020 45.21 9/18/2024 Refund Check 099321-000, 1460 LAKEWAY COURT
DIETERLE JEREMY & NANETTE 700-0000-2020 1.36 9/18/2024 Refund Check 099321-000, 1460 LAKEWAY COURT
DIETERLE JEREMY & NANETTE 700-0000-2020 132.45 9/18/2024 Refund Check 099321-000, 1460 LAKEWAY COURT
DIETERLE JEREMY & NANETTE 720-0000-2020 16.66 9/18/2024 Refund Check 099321-000, 1460 LAKEWAY COURT
195.68 9/18/2024
DIETERLE JEREMY & NANETTE 195.68
Diethelm Tammy 202-0000-4300 800.00 10/2/2024 Exhume 210.7 & Reburial 210.5
800.00 10/2/2024
Diethelm Tammy 800.00
DISPLAY SALES COMPANY 101-1550-4120 2,561.00 9/19/2024 Flags (Restock)
2,561.00 9/19/2024
DISPLAY SALES COMPANY 2,561.00
Dollar Tree Stores Inc 101-1613-4129 6.78 8/16/2024 Mini Basketball Sticky Catch Set
Dollar Tree Stores Inc 101-1613-4126 29.84 8/16/2024 Glittery Pail/Fruit Canteen/Grab-A Bubble/Water Squirt
36.62 8/16/2024
Dollar Tree Stores Inc 36.62
DREALAN DAVID KING 701-0000-2020 14.11 9/18/2024 Refund Check 010449-000, 1110 CHAPARRAL COURT
DREALAN DAVID KING 700-0000-2020 1.17 9/18/2024 Refund Check 010449-000, 1110 CHAPARRAL COURT
DREALAN DAVID KING 720-0000-2020 14.36 9/18/2024 Refund Check 010449-000, 1110 CHAPARRAL COURT
DREALAN DAVID KING 700-0000-2020 5.69 9/18/2024 Refund Check 010449-000, 1110 CHAPARRAL COURT
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 18 of 58
232
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
35.33 9/18/2024
DREALAN DAVID KING 35.33
Earl F Andersen Inc 101-1320-4155 2,779.72 9/19/2024 street signs
2,779.72 9/19/2024
Earl F Andersen Inc 2,779.72
Echo Data Analytics 101-1220-4237 5,500.00 10/3/2024 Incident response data analytics program
5,500.00 10/3/2024
Echo Data Analytics 5,500.00
ECM PUBLISHERS INC 101-1420-4336 48.36 9/26/2024 Planning Affidavit for Public Hearing 2024-17
ECM PUBLISHERS INC 101-1310-4336 48.36 9/26/2024 PH Notice -Lift Station 08-09
ECM PUBLISHERS INC 101-1420-4336 44.33 9/26/2024 Public Hearing Notice Planning 2024-16
ECM PUBLISHERS INC 101-1310-4336 96.72 9/26/2024 PH Notice Roers Vacation
ECM PUBLISHERS INC 101-1420-4336 40.30 9/26/2024 Affidavit for public hearing 2024-09
278.07 9/26/2024
ECM PUBLISHERS INC 278.07
Edney Distributing Co., Inc 101-1550-4120 216.94 10/3/2024 pto shield
216.94 10/3/2024
Edney Distributing Co., Inc 216.94
ENGEL ALLISON & JEFFREY 720-0000-2020 13.58 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100807-000, 6855 RUBY LANE
ENGEL ALLISON & JEFFREY 700-0000-2020 1.11 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100807-000, 6855 RUBY LANE
ENGEL ALLISON & JEFFREY 700-0000-2020 96.51 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100807-000, 6855 RUBY LANE
ENGEL ALLISON & JEFFREY 701-0000-2020 34.07 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100807-000, 6855 RUBY LANE
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 19 of 58
233
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
145.27 9/18/2024
ENGEL ALLISON & JEFFREY 145.27
EXECUTIVE TITLE 701-0000-2020 46.26 9/18/2024 Refund Check 020264-000, 6216 CASCADE PASS
EXECUTIVE TITLE 700-0000-2020 1.57 9/18/2024 Refund Check 020264-000, 6216 CASCADE PASS
EXECUTIVE TITLE 700-0000-2020 25.04 9/18/2024 Refund Check 020264-000, 6216 CASCADE PASS
EXECUTIVE TITLE 720-0000-2020 19.29 9/18/2024 Refund Check 020264-000, 6216 CASCADE PASS
92.16 9/18/2024
EXECUTIVE TITLE 92.16
Experts Exchange 101-1160-4207 199.95 8/16/2024 Experts Exchange Renewal
199.95 8/16/2024
Experts Exchange 199.95
Fab-Tex Filtration 701-0000-4551 149.85 8/16/2024 JJ Sewer Blower Filter
149.85 8/16/2024
Fab-Tex Filtration 149.85
Facebook 101-1613-4340 35.00 8/16/2024 Facebook Ad for the 4th of July Celebration
Facebook 101-1613-4340 50.00 8/16/2024 Facebook Ad for the 4th of July Celebration
Facebook 101-1613-4340 75.00 8/16/2024 Facebook Ad for the 4th of July Celebration
Facebook 101-1620-4340 20.00 8/16/2024 Facebook ad for Summer Concert Series Kickoff
Facebook 101-1613-4340 35.00 8/16/2024 Facebook Ad for the 4th of July Celebration
215.00 8/16/2024
Facebook 215.00
Ferguson Waterworks #2518 700-0000-4250 12,418.20 9/26/2024 3 inch water meter
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 20 of 58
234
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
12,418.20 9/26/2024
Ferguson Waterworks #2518 12,418.20
Fidelity Security Life 720-0000-2007 6.63 10/3/2024 Vision insurance-October 2024
Fidelity Security Life 701-0000-2007 9.11 10/3/2024 Vision insurance-October 2024
Fidelity Security Life 700-0000-2007 26.35 10/3/2024 Vision insurance-October 2024
Fidelity Security Life 101-0000-2007 279.38 10/3/2024 Vision insurance-October 2024
321.47 10/3/2024
Fidelity Security Life 321.47
Five Below 101-1613-4129 45.80 8/16/2024 Nerf Turbo Football/Gummy Bear Float/Beach towel
45.80 8/16/2024
Five Below 45.80
Fleet Farm 701-0000-4140 272.53 8/16/2024 BM Mounting Plate Deep Organizer Tool Box
Fleet Farm 700-0000-4140 272.52 8/16/2024 BM Mounting Plate Deep Organizer Tool Box
545.05 8/16/2024
Fleet Farm 545.05
FOSSUM TODD 700-0000-2020 4.69 9/18/2024 Refund Check 014424-000, 1563 BLUEBILL TRAIL
FOSSUM TODD 700-0000-2020 0.28 9/18/2024 Refund Check 014424-000, 1563 BLUEBILL TRAIL
FOSSUM TODD 720-0000-2020 3.46 9/18/2024 Refund Check 014424-000, 1563 BLUEBILL TRAIL
FOSSUM TODD 701-0000-2020 5.03 9/18/2024 Refund Check 014424-000, 1563 BLUEBILL TRAIL
13.46 9/18/2024
FOSSUM TODD 13.46
Full Source 701-0000-4150 221.68 8/16/2024 BM Krylon Quik Mark Solvent
Full Source 700-0000-4150 221.69 8/16/2024 BM Krylon Quik Mark Solvent
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 21 of 58
235
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
443.37 8/16/2024
Full Source 443.37
Gertens 101-1550-4300 1,235.00 8/16/2024 AB 78th St Planting Beds July 4th
Gertens 101-1550-4300 725.00 8/16/2024 AB 78th St Planting Beds
1,960.00 8/16/2024
Gertens 1,960.00
Global Music Rights 101-1530-4125 850.00 8/16/2024 Global Music Rights license
850.00 8/16/2024
Global Music Rights 850.00
GONYEA HOMES 101-0000-2075 750.00 10/3/2024 Landscape Escrow-2005 Della Dr.
GONYEA HOMES 101-0000-2075 750.00 10/3/2024 Landscape Escrow- 6995 Lucy Ridge Ln.
GONYEA HOMES 101-0000-2075 750.00 10/3/2024 Landscape Escrow- 7035 Lucy Ridge Ln.
GONYEA HOMES 101-0000-2075 750.00 10/3/2024 Landscape Escrow-1981 Della Dr.
GONYEA HOMES 101-0000-2073 2,800.00 10/3/2024 Erosion escrow 7030 Lucy Ridge Ln #559517
GONYEA HOMES 101-0000-2075 750.00 10/3/2024 Landscape Escrow- 1897 Della Dr.
GONYEA HOMES 101-0000-2075 750.00 10/3/2024 Landscape Escrow- 1993 Della Dr.
7,300.00 10/3/2024
GONYEA HOMES 7,300.00
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 701-0000-4300 376.65 9/19/2024 Utility locates-August
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 700-0000-4300 376.65 9/19/2024 Utility locates-August
753.30 9/19/2024
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 753.30
Gorsuch Tammy 700-7204-4901 100.00 9/26/2024 Water Wise Rebate- Dishwasher
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 22 of 58
236
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
100.00 9/26/2024
Gorsuch Tammy 100.00
Grainger 701-0000-4551 50.95 8/16/2024 JJ LS 24 Pump Install
50.95 8/16/2024
Grainger 50.95
GRAYBAR 101-1350-4120 519.78 9/26/2024 res bulbs for traffic lights
519.78 9/26/2024
GRAYBAR 101-1350-4120 623.52 10/3/2024 street lights
623.52 10/3/2024
GRAYBAR 1,143.30
GREEN MEADOWS INC 101-1250-1193 483.65 9/19/2024 Code Enforcement- Lawn Mowing
483.65 9/19/2024
GREEN MEADOWS INC 483.65
GRIESE KRISTOPHER & PATTI 720-0000-2020 6.80 9/18/2024 Refund Check 016637-000, 6800 HIGHOVER DRIVE
GRIESE KRISTOPHER & PATTI 701-0000-2020 23.35 9/18/2024 Refund Check 016637-000, 6800 HIGHOVER DRIVE
GRIESE KRISTOPHER & PATTI 700-0000-2020 0.56 9/18/2024 Refund Check 016637-000, 6800 HIGHOVER DRIVE
GRIESE KRISTOPHER & PATTI 700-0000-2020 15.54 9/18/2024 Refund Check 016637-000, 6800 HIGHOVER DRIVE
46.25 9/18/2024
GRIESE KRISTOPHER & PATTI 46.25
GS DIRECT INC 101-1120-4110 201.75 9/19/2024 Plotter Toner
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 23 of 58
237
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
201.75 9/19/2024
GS DIRECT INC 201.75
Gunville James G 701-7060-4901 8,665.00 10/2/2024 Reimbursement for PPII Grant Program
8,665.00 10/2/2024
Gunville James G 8,665.00
Hach Company 700-7019-4160 1,492.55 8/16/2024 JC Chemkey Dissolved Iron Orthophosphate Ammonia
Hach Company 700-7019-4160 191.00 8/16/2024 JC Nitrogen Ammonia
1,683.55 8/16/2024
Hach Company 1,683.55
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 101-1310-4300 274.00 9/26/2024 Cypress Drive Vacation
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 400-0000-1155 265.50 9/26/2024 Deer Haven
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 420-4229-4303 7,013.00 9/26/2024 Galpin Blvd Retaining Wall
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 601-6062-4303 2,143.50 9/26/2024 Rec Center Parking Lot
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 400-0000-1155 816.50 9/26/2024 Audubon Business Park
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 400-0000-1155 177.00 9/26/2024 Xcel Service Center
10,689.50 9/26/2024
HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON 10,689.50
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 700-7019-4160 20.00 10/3/2024 1 ton chlorine cylinder
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 700-7019-4160 7,405.70 10/3/2024 chemicals
7,425.70 10/3/2024
HAWKINS CHEMICAL 7,425.70
Health Strategies 101-1220-4352 207.00 9/19/2024 Annual medical evaluation
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 24 of 58
238
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
207.00 9/19/2024
Health Strategies 101-1220-4352 152.50 9/26/2024 Return to duty assessment
152.50 9/26/2024
Health Strategies 359.50
HealthPartners, Inc.700-0000-2012 10,045.69 9/19/2024 Health Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.101-0000-2012 2,192.49 9/19/2024 Health Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.720-0000-2012 1,461.66 9/19/2024 Health Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.101-0000-2012 27,771.54 9/19/2024 Health Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.700-0000-2012 0.01 9/19/2024 Health Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.720-0000-2013 91.08 9/19/2024 Dental Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.701-0000-2013 318.86 9/19/2024 Dental Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.700-0000-2013 364.40 9/19/2024 Dental Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.101-0000-2013 227.76 9/19/2024 Dental Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.701-0000-2012 1,461.65 9/19/2024 Health Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.101-0000-2013 3,598.22 9/19/2024 Dental Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.101-0000-2012 1,826.49 9/19/2024 Health Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.701-0000-2012 2,739.74 9/19/2024 Health Insurance-October
HealthPartners, Inc.101-0000-2012 43,835.76 9/19/2024 Health Insurance-October
95,935.35 9/19/2024
HealthPartners, Inc. 95,935.35
Hogan Brothers 101-1420-4381 54.00 8/16/2024 Team lunch at City of Northfield Tour
54.00 8/16/2024
Hogan Brothers 54.00
HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 414-4010-4300 4,600.00 10/3/2024 Civic Campus Improvements
4,600.00 10/3/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 25 of 58
239
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 4,600.00
Holton Electric Contractors LLC 701-7025-4705 595.45 9/19/2024 CIP wet well wizard LS26
595.45 9/19/2024
Holton Electric Contractors LLC 595.45
Home Depot 101-1550-4120 96.61 8/16/2024 AB July 4th Banner
Home Depot 701-0000-4120 4.32 8/16/2024 JG Cleaner
Home Depot 700-7043-4120 54.14 8/16/2024 MW WWTP Wet/Dry Vac Filter
Home Depot 700-0000-4120 4.33 8/16/2024 JG Cleaner
Home Depot 101-1220-4152 519.08 8/16/2024 Pressure Washer
Home Depot 701-0000-4551 153.07 8/16/2024 GF Terminal Adapter Coupling
Home Depot 101-1320-4150 139.60 8/16/2024 JG Rebar
971.15 8/16/2024
Home Depot 971.15
Hootsuite Inc 101-1125-4229 1,188.00 8/16/2024 Annual subscription for social media scheduling suite
1,188.00 8/16/2024
Hootsuite Inc 1,188.00
Hotels.com 101-1160-4381 19.24 8/16/2024 Hotel travel cancelation insurance
19.24 8/16/2024
Hotels.com 19.24
Huseth Alex 701-7060-4901 10,000.00 10/3/2024 Reimbursement for PPII Grant Program
10,000.00 10/3/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 26 of 58
240
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Huseth Alex 10,000.00
ImperialDade 101-1120-4110 203.16 9/19/2024 Restroom Supplies
203.16 9/19/2024
ImperialDade 203.16
Indigo Signs 101-1550-4120 95.00 9/19/2024 Memorial bench plaque
95.00 9/19/2024
Indigo Signs 95.00
Indoor Landscapes Inc 101-1170-4300 187.00 9/19/2024 Plant maintenance-September
187.00 9/19/2024
Indoor Landscapes Inc 187.00
Infosend, Inc 720-1130-4111 265.93 9/26/2024 Statements
Infosend, Inc 701-1130-4330 928.55 9/26/2024 Postage
Infosend, Inc 720-1130-4330 928.55 9/26/2024 Postage
Infosend, Inc 700-1130-4330 928.56 9/26/2024 Postage
Infosend, Inc 101-1120-4340 523.74 9/26/2024 Chan Bluffs Insert
Infosend, Inc 700-1130-4111 265.93 9/26/2024 Statements
Infosend, Inc 701-1130-4111 265.93 9/26/2024 Statements
4,107.19 9/26/2024
Infosend, Inc 4,107.19
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 101-1120-4110 170.51 9/26/2024 Public Works Office Supply Order
170.51 9/26/2024
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 101-1120-4110 67.35 10/3/2024 Office Supplies (paper whiteout tape)
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 27 of 58
241
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
67.35 10/3/2024
Innovative Office Solutions LLC 237.86
IUOE Local #49 700-0000-2004 188.36 10/2/2024 Union Dues-October 2024
IUOE Local #49 701-0000-2004 56.64 10/2/2024 Union Dues-October 2024
IUOE Local #49 101-0000-2004 490.00 10/2/2024 Union Dues-October 2024
735.00 10/2/2024
IUOE Local #49 735.00
Jimmy Johns 101-1613-4130 103.16 8/16/2024 4th of July Dinner For Street Dance Band
Jimmy Johns 101-1616-4130 95.47 8/16/2024 Staff and volunteer training dinner
198.63 8/16/2024
Jimmy Johns 198.63
Josephs Nathaniel & Stephanie 101-1250-3302 118.82 10/3/2024 Permit Cancelled - Plan Review refund
Josephs Nathaniel & Stephanie 101-0000-2073 500.00 10/3/2024 Erosion Control refund - permit cancelled
618.82 10/3/2024
Josephs Nathaniel & Stephanie 618.82
JOYCE CHRISTINE 700-0000-2020 8.94 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103523-000, 3616 RED CEDAR PT RD
JOYCE CHRISTINE 720-0000-2020 3.36 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103523-000, 3616 RED CEDAR PT RD
JOYCE CHRISTINE 700-0000-2020 0.27 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103523-000, 3616 RED CEDAR PT RD
JOYCE CHRISTINE 701-0000-2020 4.88 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103523-000, 3616 RED CEDAR PT RD
17.45 9/18/2024
JOYCE CHRISTINE 17.45
Jules' Bistro 101-1123-4381 72.92 8/16/2024 EDAM Conference-Dinner for Sam/Rachel J/Rachel A
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 28 of 58
242
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
72.92 8/16/2024
Jules' Bistro 72.92
K2 Electrical Services Inc 101-1550-4300 612.00 10/3/2024 Scoreboard repair
612.00 10/3/2024
K2 Electrical Services Inc 612.00
Kendell Doors & Hardware, LLC 101-1312-4510 4,745.00 10/3/2024 PW Metal Door Replacement - Welding shop
Kendell Doors & Hardware, LLC 101-1312-4510 4,700.00 10/3/2024 PW Metal Door Replacement - Mechanics Bay
Kendell Doors & Hardware, LLC 101-1312-4510 4,745.00 10/3/2024 PW Metal Door Replacement
14,190.00 10/3/2024
Kendell Doors & Hardware, LLC 14,190.00
Kessekert Jessica 700-7204-4901 100.00 9/26/2024 Water Wise Rebate- 2 Toilets
100.00 9/26/2024
Kessekert Jessica 100.00
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 601-6060-4300 4,522.35 9/26/2024 Chan 2024 Reconst Feas @59%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 701-6060-4300 613.20 9/26/2024 Chan 2024 Reconst Feas @8%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 720-6060-4300 1,686.30 9/26/2024 Chan 2024 Reconst Feas @22%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 700-6060-4300 843.15 9/26/2024 Chan 2024 Reconst Feas @11%
7,665.00 9/26/2024
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 720-6060-4300 25,654.86 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @22%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 601-6060-4300 68,801.67 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @59%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 700-6060-4300 5,183.45 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @11%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 700-6060-4300 4,609.37 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @59%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 720-6060-4300 10,366.91 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @22%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 400-0000-1155 205.00 10/3/2024 Avienda Townhomes
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 601-6060-4300 24,723.00 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @59%
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 29 of 58
243
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 400-0000-1155 205.00 10/3/2024 Erhart Farm
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 720-6060-4300 9,218.75 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @22%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 601-6057-4303 23,498.88 10/3/2024 Market Blvd
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 700-6060-4300 12,827.43 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @11%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 701-6060-4300 3,769.79 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @8%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 601-6060-4300 27,802.16 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @59%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 701-6060-4300 3,352.27 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @8%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 400-0000-1155 2,767.50 10/3/2024 Avienda Development
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 210-0000-4300 17,682.50 10/3/2024 Comcast Support Services
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 701-6060-4300 9,329.04 10/3/2024 2024 Reconst Feas @8%
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 210-0000-4300 7,807.50 10/3/2024 Metronet Support Services
257,805.08 10/3/2024
KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 265,470.08
Kirt Nathan and Brianna 101-0000-2073 1,500.00 10/3/2024 Erosion escrow 3911 King Rd #570053
1,500.00 10/3/2024
Kirt Nathan and Brianna 1,500.00
Kleinwachter Katie 700-7204-4901 100.00 9/26/2024 Water Wise Rebate- Toilet
100.00 9/26/2024
Kleinwachter Katie 100.00
Konen Homes Inc 101-0000-2072 2,500.00 9/26/2024 As Built escrow 3734 Hickory Rd #589633
2,500.00 9/26/2024
Konen Homes Inc 2,500.00
Kopp Nick 101-1550-4370 29.25 9/18/2024 CDL Permit Reimbursement
29.25 9/18/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 30 of 58
244
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Kopp Nick 29.25
Kraus-Anderson Construction Company 414-4010-4702 84,801.48 10/3/2024 Civic Campus CM Fee
84,801.48 10/3/2024
Kraus-Anderson Construction Company 84,801.48
KVAM DONALD & MAUREEN 701-0000-2020 12.04 9/18/2024 Refund Check 009183-000, 105 SANDY HOOK ROAD
KVAM DONALD & MAUREEN 700-0000-2020 0.68 9/18/2024 Refund Check 009183-000, 105 SANDY HOOK ROAD
KVAM DONALD & MAUREEN 700-0000-2020 6.99 9/18/2024 Refund Check 009183-000, 105 SANDY HOOK ROAD
KVAM DONALD & MAUREEN 720-0000-2020 8.29 9/18/2024 Refund Check 009183-000, 105 SANDY HOOK ROAD
28.00 9/18/2024
KVAM DONALD & MAUREEN 28.00
Kwik Trip 101-1560-4112 38.94 8/16/2024 Lions Club Picnic - Ice
Kwik Trip 101-1613-4130 64.90 8/16/2024 Ice for coolers - 4th of July Celebration
Kwik Trip 101-1560-4342 13.47 8/16/2024 Twins Game - waters
Kwik Trip 700-0000-4170 13.78 8/16/2024 MD Small Equipment Fuel
131.09 8/16/2024
Kwik Trip 131.09
Lakeside Promotions 101-1766-4129 453.31 9/26/2024 Adult Softball Championship Shirts
453.31 9/26/2024
Lakeside Promotions 453.31
Lano Equipment 101-1320-4120 307.99 10/3/2024 window glass hydraulic couplers
307.99 10/3/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 31 of 58
245
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Lano Equipment 307.99
Lasercrafting 101-1120-4110 11.50 8/16/2024 EDC New Commissioner Name Plate
11.50 8/16/2024
Lasercrafting 11.50
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 101-1110-4360 7,803.00 10/3/2024 League of MN Cities membership dues
7,803.00 10/3/2024
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 7,803.00
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 101-0000-2017 59,952.00 9/19/2024 Work comp premium
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 101-1170-4483 55,557.00 9/19/2024 General liability insurance
115,509.00 9/19/2024
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 115,509.00
LEIVERMANN DONALD & JUDITH 701-0000-2020 20.58 9/18/2024 Refund Check 009184-000, 7003 CHEYENNE TRAIL
LEIVERMANN DONALD & JUDITH 720-0000-2020 12.21 9/18/2024 Refund Check 009184-000, 7003 CHEYENNE TRAIL
LEIVERMANN DONALD & JUDITH 700-0000-2020 15.48 9/18/2024 Refund Check 009184-000, 7003 CHEYENNE TRAIL
LEIVERMANN DONALD & JUDITH 700-0000-2020 1.00 9/18/2024 Refund Check 009184-000, 7003 CHEYENNE TRAIL
49.27 9/18/2024
LEIVERMANN DONALD & JUDITH 49.27
Lockridge Grindal Nauen P.L.L.P 101-1110-4312 3,333.33 9/19/2024 lobbying-September
3,333.33 9/19/2024
Lockridge Grindal Nauen P.L.L.P 3,333.33
LogMeIn Inc 101-1160-4300 1,040.40 8/16/2024 Logmeinrescue renewal
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 32 of 58
246
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
1,040.40 8/16/2024
LogMeIn Inc 1,040.40
Lunds & Byerly's 101-1220-4381 57.80 8/16/2024 Food and drink for half day Auto Ex training for crew
57.80 8/16/2024
Lunds & Byerly's 57.80
Marco Inc 101-1160-4411 735.00 9/25/2024 copier lease
735.00 9/25/2024
Marco Inc 735.00
Maus Kerry 101-1539-4343 540.00 9/26/2024 Line Dance Instruction 4244.106
540.00 9/26/2024
Maus Kerry 540.00
Menards 720-0000-4120 19.50 8/16/2024 Materials for Lake Level Gauges
Menards 700-7043-4150 75.13 8/16/2024 MW Comfort Mat/Knee Pad/Rafter Hanger/Washer 11 pc
94.63 8/16/2024
Menards 94.63
Merlins Ace Hardware 101-1530-4130 10.82 8/16/2024 Wasp spray and reflectors for Bone Adventure
Merlins Ace Hardware 101-1220-4372 16.23 8/16/2024 bitting Insect Spray Deep Woods off
Merlins Ace Hardware 101-1540-4130 9.31 8/16/2024 Fly Trap - Lake Ann Concessions
Merlins Ace Hardware 101-1540-4130 2.81 8/16/2024 Fly Swatter - Lake Ann Concessions
39.17 8/16/2024
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1550-4120 113.18 9/19/2024 Caulk Kwik Seal Fasteners Bolt Eye
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 33 of 58
247
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1320-4150 56.68 9/19/2024 Oil Gallons Woodcutter Bar Oil Subfloor
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-0000-4140 37.62 9/19/2024 blk vinyl adhv numbers
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1638-4130 28.99 9/19/2024 oscillating sprinkler
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1550-4560 13.18 9/19/2024 lock cam door
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 701-0000-4260 43.58 9/19/2024 trowl cement margin 5X2 level 48
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1550-4260 89.96 9/19/2024 Hand pruner folding saw 10in staplegun
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1220-4120 29.97 9/19/2024 16pk battery AAA 16 pk battery AA
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-7043-4150 71.97 9/19/2024 nipple galv wet/dry hepa filter
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1220-4144 32.58 9/19/2024 Firewood Fire Ext
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 701-0000-4150 10.29 9/19/2024 plug lighter twin mounting tape
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-0000-4150 63.27 9/19/2024 plug lighter twin mounting tape Anchor wedge
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 101-1550-4151 24.32 9/19/2024 Plug insert poly plug sch 40 pvc
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 700-0000-4260 57.55 9/19/2024 wrench gear 3/4 socket 3/8
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 701-0000-4551 8.99 9/19/2024 spider & ground bee killer
682.13 9/19/2024
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 721.30
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 701-0000-4509 230,855.78 9/19/2024 Wastewater services-October 2024
230,855.78 9/19/2024
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 230,855.78
Metropolitan Council Enviromental Services 701-0000-4509 20,000.00 8/16/2024 MCES Aug WW Charge
20,000.00 8/16/2024
Metropolitan Council Enviromental Services 20,000.00
Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 101-1250-3816 -74.55 9/19/2024 August 2024 SAC
Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 701-0000-2023 7,455.00 9/19/2024 August 2024 SAC
7,380.45 9/19/2024
Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 7,380.45
Michaels 101-1560-4130 12.96 8/16/2024 Art supplies-Watercolor Pencil Art class Summer2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 34 of 58
248
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Michaels 101-1110-4375 11.68 8/16/2024 Prop repair supplies - Chan Bluffs
24.64 8/16/2024
Michaels 24.64
MIDWEST LUBE INC 101-1550-4120 363.90 9/26/2024 grease fittings
363.90 9/26/2024
MIDWEST LUBE INC 363.90
Minnesota Roadways Co 101-1320-4157 373.80 9/19/2024 Emulsion for pothole patching
373.80 9/19/2024
Minnesota Roadways Co 373.80
Minnesota Secretary of State - Notary 101-1120-4360 120.00 9/25/2024 Notary Commission Application Fee
120.00 9/25/2024
Minnesota Secretary of State - Notary 120.00
MINNETONKA TITLE 700-0000-2020 0.48 9/18/2024 Refund Check 012149-000, 6390 TETON LANE
MINNETONKA TITLE 700-0000-2020 22.70 9/18/2024 Refund Check 012149-000, 6390 TETON LANE
MINNETONKA TITLE 701-0000-2020 12.72 9/18/2024 Refund Check 012149-000, 6390 TETON LANE
MINNETONKA TITLE 720-0000-2020 5.90 9/18/2024 Refund Check 012149-000, 6390 TETON LANE
41.80 9/18/2024
MINNETONKA TITLE 41.80
Minuteman Press 101-1120-4110 147.21 9/26/2024 business cards (Priya Wall Joe Seidl Mackenze Grunig)
Minuteman Press 101-1120-4110 125.00 9/26/2024 Business cards for Sam & Mackenze
272.21 9/26/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 35 of 58
249
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Minuteman Press 272.21
MN Association of Government Communicators 101-1125-4370 30.00 8/16/2024 MAGC Northern Lights Awards Attendee Ticket
30.00 8/16/2024
MN Association of Government Communicators 30.00
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 101-1250-3818 -60.65 9/19/2024 August 2024 Surcharge
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 101-0000-2022 3,031.83 9/19/2024 August 2024 Surcharge
2,971.18 9/19/2024
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 2,971.18
MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 101-0000-2037 144.00 10/2/2024 Life Insurance-October 2024
144.00 10/2/2024
MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 144.00
MN Pollution Control Agency 701-0000-4370 12.58 8/16/2024 JC SA/SB Exam Refresher
MN Pollution Control Agency 701-0000-4370 585.00 8/16/2024 JC SA/SB Exam Refresher
597.58 8/16/2024
MN Pollution Control Agency 597.58
MN STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSOC.101-1220-4370 325.00 9/19/2024 Rindahl Conference registration
325.00 9/19/2024
MN STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSOC. 325.00
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 267.21 9/18/2024 Electric Charges
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 36 of 58
250
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
267.21 9/18/2024
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 132.64 9/25/2024 Electric Charges
132.64 9/25/2024
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1600-4320 48.55 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 701-0000-4320 772.31 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 46.58 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 700-0000-4320 158.53 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 5,750.44 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 39.89 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 232.51 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 106.75 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 48.43 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 101-1350-4320 146.16 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
7,350.15 10/2/2024
MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 7,750.00
MNDNR Region 3 Fisheries Office 101-1611-4345 135.00 10/2/2024 FebFest 2025 fishing contest permit application fee
135.00 10/2/2024
MNDNR Region 3 Fisheries Office 135.00
Moe's American Restaurant 101-1123-4381 17.00 8/16/2024 Chamber Ambassador Meeting/Lunch
17.00 8/16/2024
Moe's American Restaurant 17.00
MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 101-1550-4120 322.63 9/26/2024 mower parts
MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 101-1550-4120 95.87 9/26/2024 mower parts
418.50 9/26/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 37 of 58
251
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 418.50
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 101-1550-4120 12.24 9/19/2024 Tire Buffer
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 101-1320-4120 -14.47 9/19/2024 filter
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 101-1550-4120 35.70 9/19/2024 Filter License Kit Lamp
33.47 9/19/2024
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 101-1320-4120 7.94 9/26/2024 Grommet
7.94 9/26/2024
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 101-1320-4120 179.27 10/3/2024 Filters
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 101-1220-4120 54.30 10/3/2024 6-12V 1.5A Automatic Batteries
233.57 10/3/2024
NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 274.98
NEOGOV 101-1120-4300 7,206.45 9/19/2024 subscription fee
7,206.45 9/19/2024
NEOGOV 7,206.45
Nexgen Contracting LLC 101-0000-2073 1,000.00 10/3/2024 Erosion escrow 415 Lakota Ln #606103
1,000.00 10/3/2024
Nexgen Contracting LLC 1,000.00
Nokomis Energy, LLC 700-7043-4320 5,475.92 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
Nokomis Energy, LLC 701-0000-4320 81.95 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
Nokomis Energy, LLC 101-1312-4320 655.63 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
Nokomis Energy, LLC 700-0000-4320 81.95 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
6,295.45 10/2/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 38 of 58
252
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Nokomis Energy, LLC 6,295.45
Northdale Construction Company, Inc 701-7059-4751 56,372.51 10/2/2024 Lift Station #3 Forcemain Replacement Project #23-08
56,372.51 10/2/2024
Northdale Construction Company, Inc 56,372.51
Nuss Truck & Equipment 101-1320-4140 341.52 9/26/2024 108 Valve & O-Rings
341.52 9/26/2024
Nuss Truck & Equipment 341.52
NvoicePay 101-1130-4300 763.66 9/19/2024 Payment processing-August
763.66 9/19/2024
NvoicePay 763.66
Ott Travis 101-1539-4343 435.78 10/3/2024 Summer tkd
435.78 10/3/2024
Ott Travis 435.78
PARTNERS TITLE 701-0000-2020 1.71 9/18/2024 Refund Check 102594-000, 6541 QUAIL CROSSING
PARTNERS TITLE 720-0000-2020 9.87 9/18/2024 Refund Check 102594-000, 6541 QUAIL CROSSING
PARTNERS TITLE 700-0000-2020 0.17 9/18/2024 Refund Check 102594-000, 6541 QUAIL CROSSING
PARTNERS TITLE 700-0000-2020 0.81 9/18/2024 Refund Check 102594-000, 6541 QUAIL CROSSING
12.56 9/18/2024
PARTNERS TITLE 12.56
Party City 101-1220-4290 34.14 8/16/2024 Table Cloths 4th of July
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 39 of 58
253
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
34.14 8/16/2024
Party City 34.14
Pedego Electric Bikes Twin Cities 101-1539-4343 420.00 10/3/2024 Ebike Ride
420.00 10/3/2024
Pedego Electric Bikes Twin Cities 420.00
Pederson Taylor 101-1538-4343 1,307.34 10/3/2024 Summer TKD
1,307.34 10/3/2024
Pederson Taylor 1,307.34
Peterson Companies 720-7025-4751 5,979.01 10/3/2024 2022 Pond Maintenance Project #22-05
5,979.01 10/3/2024
Peterson Companies 5,979.01
PETERSON DANIEL & WENDY 700-0000-2020 2.32 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103313-000, 6629 POINTE LAKE LUCY
PETERSON DANIEL & WENDY 720-0000-2020 28.47 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103313-000, 6629 POINTE LAKE LUCY
PETERSON DANIEL & WENDY 701-0000-2020 85.42 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103313-000, 6629 POINTE LAKE LUCY
PETERSON DANIEL & WENDY 700-0000-2020 7.91 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103313-000, 6629 POINTE LAKE LUCY
124.12 9/18/2024
PETERSON DANIEL & WENDY 124.12
Pickleball Central 101-1530-4120 79.77 8/16/2024 Pickleball frame & net set
79.77 8/16/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 40 of 58
254
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Pickleball Central 79.77
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 701-0000-2020 33.76 9/18/2024 Refund Check 012733-000, 2831 NORTH MANOR ROAD
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 700-0000-2020 0.68 9/18/2024 Refund Check 012733-000, 2831 NORTH MANOR ROAD
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 700-0000-2020 18.65 9/18/2024 Refund Check 012733-000, 2831 NORTH MANOR ROAD
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 720-0000-2020 8.43 9/18/2024 Refund Check 012733-000, 2831 NORTH MANOR ROAD
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 701-0000-2020 12.52 9/18/2024 Refund Check 006260-000, 8103 DAKOTA LANE
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 720-0000-2020 13.26 9/18/2024 Refund Check 006260-000, 8103 DAKOTA LANE
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 700-0000-2020 7.60 9/18/2024 Refund Check 006260-000, 8103 DAKOTA LANE
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 700-0000-2020 1.08 9/18/2024 Refund Check 006260-000, 8103 DAKOTA LANE
95.98 9/18/2024
PILLAR TITLE SERVICES 95.98
Pinnacle Pest Control 101-1312-4510 250.00 9/19/2024 pest control
Pinnacle Pest Control 700-7019-4510 125.00 9/19/2024 pest control
Pinnacle Pest Control 700-7043-4510 125.00 9/19/2024 pest control
Pinnacle Pest Control 101-1220-4510 200.00 9/19/2024 pest control
Pinnacle Pest Control 101-1190-4510 225.00 9/19/2024 pest control
Pinnacle Pest Control 101-1170-4510 200.00 9/19/2024 pest control
1,125.00 9/19/2024
Pinnacle Pest Control 1,125.00
Pitney Bowes Inc.101-1120-4410 440.04 10/3/2024 Equipment service Oct 01 2024-Sept 30 2025
440.04 10/3/2024
Pitney Bowes Inc. 440.04
Pizzaioli 101-1613-4130 267.67 8/16/2024 Pizza for Parks Department
267.67 8/16/2024
Pizzaioli 267.67
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 41 of 58
255
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
POMPLUN JACOB 720-0000-2020 8.84 9/18/2024 Refund Check 101908-000, 2980 WASHTA BAY COURT
8.84 9/18/2024
POMPLUN JACOB 8.84
POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 700-0000-4140 606.08 9/19/2024 tires
POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 101-1220-4140 1,785.54 9/19/2024 tires
2,391.62 9/19/2024
POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 2,391.62
Postmaster 101-1120-4330 27.20 8/16/2024 Stamps for Rec Center + FD
27.20 8/16/2024
Postmaster 27.20
Potentia MN Solar 101-1190-4320 4,051.50 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
Potentia MN Solar 700-0000-4320 2,153.64 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
Potentia MN Solar 101-1170-4320 3,134.71 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
9,339.85 10/2/2024
Potentia MN Solar 9,339.85
PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 101-1550-4574 310.00 9/26/2024 Prairie Restorations- IPM at 5 Sites
310.00 9/26/2024
PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 310.00
Premium Waters, Inc 101-1550-4120 4.32 9/19/2024 Lake Ann Water
4.32 9/19/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 42 of 58
256
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Premium Waters, Inc 4.32
Provo Greg & Susan 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/26/2024 Erosion escrow 1762 Valley Ridge Trail S #618670
500.00 9/26/2024
Provo Greg & Susan 500.00
Radwell International, Inc.700-7019-4120 225.38 8/16/2024 JC Mead V4A-0307 FX1
225.38 8/16/2024
Radwell International, Inc. 225.38
Rain for Rent 701-0000-4405 1,914.10 9/19/2024 FOG container
1,914.10 9/19/2024
Rain for Rent 1,914.10
RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 101-1550-4574 22,308.98 9/19/2024 EAB City Tree Treatments
22,308.98 9/19/2024
RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 22,308.98
Ramsey Jill 700-7204-4901 100.00 9/26/2024 Water Wise Rebate- Clothes Washer
100.00 9/26/2024
Ramsey Jill 100.00
Rent N Save Portable Services 101-1550-4400 5,231.00 9/19/2024 portable restrooms
Rent N Save Portable Services 101-1550-4400 5,231.00 9/19/2024 Portable restrooms
10,462.00 9/19/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 43 of 58
257
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Rent N Save Portable Services 10,462.00
Roberts Residential Remodeling Inc 101-0000-2073 1,000.00 10/3/2024 Erosion escrow 8470 Mission Hills Cir #624362
1,000.00 10/3/2024
Roberts Residential Remodeling Inc 1,000.00
RUFF ALICE 720-0000-2020 17.54 9/18/2024 Refund Check 101215-000, 4130 KINGS ROAD
RUFF ALICE 700-0000-2020 29.01 9/18/2024 Refund Check 101215-000, 4130 KINGS ROAD
RUFF ALICE 700-0000-2020 1.43 9/18/2024 Refund Check 101215-000, 4130 KINGS ROAD
RUFF ALICE 701-0000-2020 43.50 9/18/2024 Refund Check 101215-000, 4130 KINGS ROAD
91.48 9/18/2024
RUFF ALICE 91.48
RUFFRIDGE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT CO 101-1320-4120 109.50 9/19/2024 bearing
109.50 9/19/2024
RUFFRIDGE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT CO 109.50
Scanning America Inc 101-1160-4353 612.71 10/3/2024 Final Document Indexing Fee
612.71 10/3/2024
Scanning America Inc 612.71
SEH 410-4410-4300 10,834.70 10/3/2024 Lake Ann Park Preserve
SEH 410-4410-4751 7,008.52 10/3/2024 Lake Ann Park Preserve
17,843.22 10/3/2024
SEH 17,843.22
Semper Fi 101-0000-2073 1,000.00 10/3/2024 Erosion escrow 8408 Waters Edge Dr #607808
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 44 of 58
258
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
1,000.00 10/3/2024
Semper Fi 1,000.00
Senja Inc 101-1539-4343 96.00 10/3/2024 Tai Chi class 4244.129
96.00 10/3/2024
Senja Inc 96.00
Shadywood Tree Experts and Landscaping 101-1550-4572 1,900.00 9/26/2024 Red Oak Removal- 621 Fox Hill Dr.
Shadywood Tree Experts and Landscaping 101-1550-4359 57.00 9/26/2024 LC Per MN Statute 471.425
1,957.00 9/26/2024
Shadywood Tree Experts and Landscaping 601-6060-4751 700.00 10/3/2024 24-01 Haul Tree Debris 7606 Iroquois
Shadywood Tree Experts and Landscaping 601-6060-4751 667.50 10/3/2024 #24-01 Tree Pruning
Shadywood Tree Experts and Landscaping 601-6040-4751 568.75 10/3/2024 Galpin Stump grinding City @ 25%
Shadywood Tree Experts and Landscaping 601-6140-4751 1,706.25 10/3/2024 Galpin Stump grinding County @ 75%
Shadywood Tree Experts and Landscaping 601-6060-4751 100.00 10/3/2024 #24-01 Tree Removal
3,742.50 10/3/2024
Shadywood Tree Experts and Landscaping 5,699.50
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 101-1550-4150 100.90 9/26/2024 Aerosol turf paint (restock)
100.90 9/26/2024
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 700-7019-4150 49.39 10/3/2024 east water treatment paint supplies
49.39 10/3/2024
SHERWIN WILLIAMS 150.29
SHEVCHENKO MARIIA 700-0000-2020 49.53 9/18/2024 Refund Check 098560-005, 7720 BLUEBONNET BLVD
SHEVCHENKO MARIIA 701-0000-2020 38.47 9/18/2024 Refund Check 098560-005, 7720 BLUEBONNET BLVD
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 45 of 58
259
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
88.00 9/18/2024
SHEVCHENKO MARIIA 88.00
Silva Screenprinting & Dist, LLC 101-1806-4127 1,697.80 10/3/2024 T-shirts
Silva Screenprinting & Dist, LLC 101-1807-4127 914.90 10/3/2024 T-shirts
2,612.70 10/3/2024
Silva Screenprinting & Dist, LLC 2,612.70
SIMPSON DEAN & JACQUELINE 700-0000-2020 20.40 9/18/2024 Refund Check 013136-001, 2590 ARROWHEAD LANE
SIMPSON DEAN & JACQUELINE 701-0000-2020 23.02 9/18/2024 Refund Check 013136-001, 2590 ARROWHEAD LANE
SIMPSON DEAN & JACQUELINE 720-0000-2020 5.77 9/18/2024 Refund Check 013136-001, 2590 ARROWHEAD LANE
SIMPSON DEAN & JACQUELINE 700-0000-2020 0.48 9/18/2024 Refund Check 013136-001, 2590 ARROWHEAD LANE
49.67 9/18/2024
SIMPSON DEAN & JACQUELINE 49.67
SiteOne Landscape Supply 101-1550-4151 1,014.43 10/3/2024 Athletic field sprinkler heads (Restock)
1,014.43 10/3/2024
SiteOne Landscape Supply 1,014.43
SM HENTGES & SONS 700-0000-4552 16,170.95 10/3/2024 water main break emergency Galpin @ wynson
16,170.95 10/3/2024
SM HENTGES & SONS 16,170.95
Smartpress.com 101-1120-4340 36.75 8/16/2024 Chan Bluffs Printing
Smartpress.com 101-1613-4340 486.54 8/16/2024 Parade Signs
Smartpress.com 101-1120-4340 -73.51 8/16/2024 Chan Bluffs Printing
Smartpress.com 101-1120-4340 1,819.55 8/16/2024 Chan Bluffs Printing
Smartpress.com 101-1613-4340 752.01 8/16/2024 Xfinity appreciation banners
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 46 of 58
260
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Smartpress.com 101-1120-4340 264.00 8/16/2024 Postcards-Chan Bluffs Community Center referendum
3,285.34 8/16/2024
Smartpress.com 3,285.34
Snidar Construction 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/26/2024 Erosion escrow 8559 Drake Ct #620771
500.00 9/26/2024
Snidar Construction 500.00
SOFTWARE HOUSE INTERNATIONAL 101-1160-4200 4,456.51 9/26/2024 ManageEngine Service Desk Annual Renewal
4,456.51 9/26/2024
SOFTWARE HOUSE INTERNATIONAL 4,456.51
South Hennepin Recycling & Problem Waste 101-1550-4573 9,170.00 8/16/2024 Hennepin County Tree Order
9,170.00 8/16/2024
South Hennepin Recycling & Problem Waste 9,170.00
Southview Design 101-0000-2073 500.00 10/3/2024 Erosion escrow 7015 Lucy Ridge Ln #613816
500.00 10/3/2024
Southview Design 500.00
SOUTHVIEW DESIGN INC 101-0000-2073 500.00 9/26/2024 Erosion escrow 746 Carver Beach Rd #593171
500.00 9/26/2024
SOUTHVIEW DESIGN INC 500.00
Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 101-1123-4381 40.00 8/16/2024 Chamber Membership Lunch
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 47 of 58
261
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
40.00 8/16/2024
Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 40.00
Stampli 101-1130-4300 1,362.00 8/16/2024 Stampli - Monthly AP Processing Fee
1,362.00 8/16/2024
Stampli 1,362.00
Stericycle, Inc 101-1120-4300 279.88 10/3/2024 Swap out of shredding bin
279.88 10/3/2024
Stericycle, Inc 279.88
Stratoguard, LLC 101-1160-4205 230.56 8/16/2024 Email Filtering Service -July
230.56 8/16/2024
Stratoguard, LLC 230.56
Sun Life Financial 701-0000-2015 62.34 10/3/2024 LTD-October 2024
Sun Life Financial 101-0000-2015 1,279.00 10/3/2024 LTD-October 2024
Sun Life Financial 101-0000-2037 1,170.73 10/3/2024 Life Insurance-October
Sun Life Financial 720-0000-2015 38.26 10/3/2024 LTD-October 2024
Sun Life Financial 700-0000-2015 96.43 10/3/2024 LTD-October 2024
Sun Life Financial 720-0000-2011 19.34 10/3/2024 Life Insurance-October
Sun Life Financial 701-0000-2037 108.28 10/3/2024 Life Insurance-October
Sun Life Financial 700-0000-2011 47.33 10/3/2024 Life Insurance-October
Sun Life Financial 101-0000-2011 111.51 10/3/2024 Life Insurance-October Cobra
Sun Life Financial 101-0000-2011 647.94 10/3/2024 Life Insurance-October
Sun Life Financial 700-0000-2037 108.28 10/3/2024 Life Insurance-October
Sun Life Financial 701-0000-2011 30.08 10/3/2024 Life Insurance-October
3,719.52 10/3/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 48 of 58
262
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
Sun Life Financial 3,719.52
Tandon Priya 101-0000-1027 400.00 10/2/2024 Halloween Party change
400.00 10/2/2024
Tandon Priya 400.00
Target 101-1616-4130 11.98 8/16/2024 Popsicle
Target 101-1616-4130 81.69 8/16/2024 Old Dutch Betty Crocker Motts Fruitsnacks Crayola
Target 101-1613-4129 -11.92 8/16/2024 4th of July prizes return
Target 101-1110-4375 54.18 8/16/2024 Prop Light - Chanhassen Bluffs Booth
Target 101-1616-4130 17.04 8/16/2024 Vanilla Frosting Pretzel Rods
Target 720-7201-4130 12.55 8/16/2024 Smarties Sour Punch
Target 101-1613-4129 75.27 8/16/2024 Swim Tube Sun Squad Beach ball fruit Snacks
Target 101-1616-4130 43.31 8/16/2024 Skinnypop Mondo Llama
Target 101-1616-4130 16.20 8/16/2024 Motts Fruit Snacks
Target 101-1616-4130 5.99 8/16/2024 FD Cookies
Target 101-1616-4130 -30.83 8/16/2024 Fruit Snacks
Target 101-1613-4126 89.53 8/16/2024 Sun Squad JollyRancher Balloons
Target 101-1616-4130 6.50 8/16/2024 Dixie Ultra
Target 101-1613-4126 -63.88 8/16/2024 Balloon Sun Squad
Target 101-1616-4130 30.83 8/16/2024 Motts Fruit Snacks
Target 101-1616-4130 42.34 8/16/2024 Popsicle Markers
Target 101-1616-4130 6.50 8/16/2024 Dixie Ultra
Target 101-1613-4129 19.51 8/16/2024 Sun Squad Lego
Target 101-1613-4126 37.93 8/16/2024 AW Rootbeer
Target 101-1806-4130 7.89 8/16/2024 Spray sunscreen
Target 101-1613-4126 36.80 8/16/2024 Sunkist Steamers
Target 101-1616-4130 25.16 8/16/2024 Favorite Day
Target 101-1613-4130 132.51 8/16/2024 Gatorade/Dt Pepsi/Dr Pepper/Mt Dew/Red bull/Nat valley
Target 101-1613-4126 69.99 8/16/2024 Arm & Hammer Sun Squad Lego
Target 101-1560-4130 50.00 8/16/2024 Gift card door prizes - Lions Club picnic
767.07 8/16/2024
Target 767.07
Tee Jay North, Inc.101-1190-4510 702.00 9/19/2024 Library Door Maintenance
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 49 of 58
263
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
702.00 9/19/2024
Tee Jay North, Inc. 702.00
The Garden By The Woods 101-1550-4300 769.47 8/16/2024 AB 78th St Plantings July 4th
769.47 8/16/2024
The Garden By The Woods 769.47
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company 101-1320-4140 160.00 9/19/2024 paint wheels
160.00 9/19/2024
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company 160.00
THE TITLE GROUP INC 701-0000-2020 12.56 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103572-000, 8743 NORTH BAY DRIVE
THE TITLE GROUP INC 720-0000-2020 1.78 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103572-000, 8743 NORTH BAY DRIVE
THE TITLE GROUP INC 700-0000-2020 5.03 9/18/2024 Refund Check 103572-000, 8743 NORTH BAY DRIVE
19.37 9/18/2024
THE TITLE GROUP INC 19.37
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc 101-1125-4300 334.00 9/19/2024 Minutes for Park and rec and Planning
334.00 9/19/2024
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc 101-1125-4300 698.50 10/3/2024 City Council and Planning Minutes
698.50 10/3/2024
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc 1,032.50
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 720-0000-2020 19.85 9/18/2024 Refund Check 104196-000, 6840 LUCY RIDGE LANE
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 700-0000-2020 127.37 9/18/2024 Refund Check 104196-000, 6840 LUCY RIDGE LANE
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 700-0000-2020 1.62 9/18/2024 Refund Check 104196-000, 6840 LUCY RIDGE LANE
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 50 of 58
264
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 701-0000-2020 33.05 9/18/2024 Refund Check 104196-000, 6840 LUCY RIDGE LANE
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 701-0000-2020 6.42 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100566-000, 6830 PENAMINT LANE
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 720-0000-2020 9.06 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100566-000, 6830 PENAMINT LANE
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 700-0000-2020 0.74 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100566-000, 6830 PENAMINT LANE
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 700-0000-2020 2.59 9/18/2024 Refund Check 100566-000, 6830 PENAMINT LANE
200.70 9/18/2024
TRADEMARK TITLE SERVICES 200.70
TRAFFIC CONTROL CORPORATION 101-1350-4120 409.50 9/26/2024 push buttons for crosswalk
409.50 9/26/2024
TRAFFIC CONTROL CORPORATION 409.50
Triethart DeeAnn 101-1120-4110 97.38 10/2/2024 Forks Knives & Spoons
97.38 10/2/2024
Triethart DeeAnn 97.38
TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 700-0000-4510 1,432.50 10/3/2024 Water Tower #2 Garage Door Repair
1,432.50 10/3/2024
TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 1,432.50
USA Inflatable 101-1220-4144 671.66 8/16/2024 Inflatable for Open house
671.66 8/16/2024
USA Inflatable 671.66
USABlueBook 700-7019-4150 176.80 8/16/2024 JC EWTP 90 Degree Ell Sampling Tap
176.80 8/16/2024
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 51 of 58
265
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
USABlueBook 176.80
Utility Logic LLC 700-0000-4150 51.73 9/26/2024 locating paint
Utility Logic LLC 701-0000-4150 51.72 9/26/2024 locating paint
103.45 9/26/2024
Utility Logic LLC 101-1320-4260 4,286.62 10/3/2024 utility locator
Utility Logic LLC 701-0000-4260 4,286.63 10/3/2024 utility locator
Utility Logic LLC 700-0000-4260 4,286.63 10/3/2024 utility locator
Utility Logic LLC 701-0000-4260 284.71 10/3/2024 locator
Utility Logic LLC 700-0000-4260 284.71 10/3/2024 locator
13,429.30 10/3/2024
Utility Logic LLC 13,532.75
VALLEY-RICH CO INC 700-0000-4550 8,700.00 10/3/2024 repair 12 inch water valve
8,700.00 10/3/2024
VALLEY-RICH CO INC 8,700.00
Van Sant Dave 700-7204-4901 150.00 9/26/2024 Water Wise Rebate- Irrigation Controller and Washer
150.00 9/26/2024
Van Sant Dave 150.00
VAN SANT MICHAEL 720-0000-2020 3.43 9/18/2024 Refund Check 101723-000, 8565 POWERS PLACE
VAN SANT MICHAEL 700-0000-2020 1.29 9/18/2024 Refund Check 101723-000, 8565 POWERS PLACE
VAN SANT MICHAEL 700-0000-2020 7.83 9/18/2024 Refund Check 101723-000, 8565 POWERS PLACE
VAN SANT MICHAEL 701-0000-2020 16.27 9/18/2024 Refund Check 101723-000, 8565 POWERS PLACE
28.82 9/18/2024
VAN SANT MICHAEL 28.82
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 52 of 58
266
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
VehicleCounts.com 101-1310-4120 1,873.00 8/16/2024 Traffic Counting Equipment
1,873.00 8/16/2024
VehicleCounts.com 1,873.00
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1600-4310 179.32 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1250-4310 307.00 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1530-4310 41.38 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 700-0000-4310 647.15 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1550-4310 456.97 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1220-4310 1,543.16 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1370-4310 89.94 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 701-0000-4310 125.10 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1420-4310 170.51 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1120-4310 152.78 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 720-0000-4310 303.24 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1160-4310 389.13 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1310-4310 128.55 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 701-0000-4310 502.10 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1320-4310 313.23 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 700-0000-4310 125.10 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1312-4310 74.79 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1170-4310 46.38 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1110-4310 40.01 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1520-4310 52.15 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
VERIZON WIRELESS 101-1540-4310 40.01 10/2/2024 Telephone & Communication Charges
5,728.00 10/2/2024
VERIZON WIRELESS 5,728.00
Vista Flags 101-1613-4120 195.03 8/16/2024 Replacement first aid and info flags
195.03 8/16/2024
Vista Flags 195.03
Walgreens 101-1220-4142 10.99 8/16/2024 Antiseptic Wound Wash
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 53 of 58
267
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
10.99 8/16/2024
Walgreens 10.99
Wal-Mart 101-1613-4129 125.72 8/16/2024 Fruit Punch Min Maid Crush Sprite Coke
Wal-Mart 101-1560-4112 58.45 8/16/2024 Lions Club Picnic - Beverages
Wal-Mart 101-1560-4130 22.75 8/16/2024 Art supplies-Watercolor Pencil Art class Summer2024
206.92 8/16/2024
Wal-Mart 206.92
WASHBURN DANIELLE 101-1130-4381 136.68 10/2/2024 MNGFOA-mileage
WASHBURN DANIELLE 101-1130-4381 272.46 10/2/2024 MNGFOA-Arrowwood Resort
409.14 10/2/2024
WASHBURN DANIELLE 409.14
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 701-0000-4405 426.48 9/19/2024 Fog Disposal
426.48 9/19/2024
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1220-4329 117.58 9/26/2024 Garbage Service-September 2024
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1312-4329 150.53 9/26/2024 Garbage Service-September 2024
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1550-4329 713.40 9/26/2024 Garbage Service-September 2024
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1170-4329 216.53 9/26/2024 Garbage service-September 2024
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 701-0000-4329 18.81 9/26/2024 Garbage Service-September 2024
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 101-1190-4329 360.59 9/26/2024 Garbage Service-September 2024
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 700-0000-4329 18.81 9/26/2024 Garbage Service-September 2024
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 720-7202-4329 99.27 9/26/2024 Garbage Service-September 2024
1,695.52 9/26/2024
Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 2,122.00
WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 700-0000-2020 15.89 9/18/2024 Refund Check 019001-001, 3321 WEST 78TH STREET
WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 720-0000-2020 14.70 9/18/2024 Refund Check 019001-001, 3321 WEST 78TH STREET
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 54 of 58
268
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 701-0000-2020 25.25 9/18/2024 Refund Check 019001-001, 3321 WEST 78TH STREET
WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 700-0000-2020 1.20 9/18/2024 Refund Check 019001-001, 3321 WEST 78TH STREET
57.04 9/18/2024
WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 57.04
Wild West Hackin' Fest 101-1160-4370 1,150.00 8/16/2024 Conference ticket and training Matt
1,150.00 8/16/2024
Wild West Hackin' Fest 1,150.00
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 101-1320-4157 778.77 9/26/2024 pothole patching
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 101-1320-4157 620.31 9/26/2024 pothole patching
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 700-0000-4150 224.00 9/26/2024 spoils from water repairs
1,623.08 9/26/2024
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 101-1320-4157 605.52 10/3/2024 pothole patching
605.52 10/3/2024
WM MUELLER & SONS INC 2,228.60
WS & D PERMIT SERVICE 101-1250-3301 120.00 9/19/2024 Permit Cancelled - 1821 Pheasant Dr
120.00 9/19/2024
WS & D PERMIT SERVICE 120.00
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 414-4010-4303 808.00 9/19/2024 Civic Campus platting - City Hall %
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 414-4011-4303 808.00 9/19/2024 Civic Campus platting - Site %
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 720-0000-4300 3,230.00 9/19/2024 WCA Support Services
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 720-0000-4300 1,977.00 9/19/2024 Water Resources Support Services
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 720-7025-4300 111.50 9/19/2024 2023 Pond Maintenance Project
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 700-0000-4303 8,689.00 9/19/2024 Biological Water Treatment Pilot Study
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 55 of 58
269
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
15,623.50 9/19/2024
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 15,623.50
WW GRAINGER INC 700-7043-4150 478.46 9/26/2024 pvc mesh strainer
WW GRAINGER INC 700-7043-4120 250.36 9/26/2024 PVC Mesh strainer
WW GRAINGER INC 700-7043-4150 -478.46 9/26/2024 pvc mesh strainer
250.36 9/26/2024
WW GRAINGER INC 250.36
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 182.11 9/25/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 7,673.18 9/25/2024 Electric Charges
7,855.29 9/25/2024
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1190-4320 -840.51 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1220-4320 934.80 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1312-4320 -78.58 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1600-4320 349.15 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1120-1193 71.77 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1170-4320 -1,057.05 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1312-4320 1,394.89 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 -183.48 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1170-4320 -1,699.54 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 122.38 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1220-4320 1,196.82 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 2,940.81 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-7043-4320 -522.34 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1170-4320 -758.14 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1312-4320 676.01 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 122.38 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 -308.49 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1120-1193 -15.15 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1190-4320 -1,756.46 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1350-4320 22,002.81 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-7043-4320 -352.23 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 -21.42 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1220-4320 837.97 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 56 of 58
270
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 -2,057.55 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 -2,100.00 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1312-4320 -51.58 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-7043-4320 -1,628.54 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1190-4320 -213.46 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-7043-4320 590.03 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1220-4320 852.35 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1120-1193 6.76 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1170-4320 -758.61 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 -1,284.55 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-7043-4320 -2,677.92 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1170-4320 -191.31 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1190-4320 857.55 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 2,218.68 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1220-4320 -2.66 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1170-4320 -2,152.83 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1120-1193 61.28 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1190-4320 -1,802.08 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1312-4320 979.01 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1600-4320 24.98 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 -9.82 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1190-4320 -88.25 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1120-1193 89.44 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1120-1193 49.57 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 174.36 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 84.50 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 -580.77 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 -6.45 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1220-4320 1,092.69 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 84.50 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1190-4320 -1,766.51 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1190-4320 -310.42 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 -2,391.58 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1120-1193 -65.73 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 -1,369.10 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-7043-4320 602.05 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-7019-4320 7,284.14 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1170-4320 -729.35 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 -6.45 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 106.08 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 -1,437.17 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 -1,703.54 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-7043-4320 -767.96 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 57 of 58
271
Last Name Acct 1 Amount Check Date Description
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1170-4320 -227.18 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 685.44 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1550-4320 -394.47 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 -3,161.02 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 -2,219.75 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 1,835.26 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 106.08 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1312-4320 848.67 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1540-4320 1,829.00 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 -9.82 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-7043-4320 2,039.67 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1220-4320 1,163.15 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 700-0000-4320 79.92 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 701-0000-4320 174.36 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1220-4320 71.00 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
XCEL ENERGY INC 101-1120-1193 87.61 10/2/2024 Electric Charges
14,968.10 10/2/2024
XCEL ENERGY INC 22,823.39
Xuan Tuyet Doan-Nguyen Jennifer 101-1539-4343 9.12 10/3/2024 summer tkd
Xuan Tuyet Doan-Nguyen Jennifer 101-1538-4343 426.66 10/3/2024 Summer tkd
435.78 10/3/2024
Xuan Tuyet Doan-Nguyen Jennifer 435.78
Zoom 101-1160-4207 86.70 8/16/2024 Monthly Zoom charge
86.70 8/16/2024
Zoom 86.70
1,506,776.51
AP - Check Detail (10/4/2024)Page 58 of 58
272
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Approve an Encroachment Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and the
property owner at 8831 Lake Susan Court
File No.N/A Item No: D.6
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Stacy Osen, Administrative Support Specialist
Reviewed By Charlie Howley
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council approves an Encroachment Agreement allowing the property owner
to install a fence on the subject property that encroaches into the city's existing easement area at
8831 Lake Susan Court."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Asset Management
SUMMARY
N/A
BACKGROUND
The property owner of 8831 Lake Susan Court (Scott W. Larson) desires to construct a fence on the
subject property. The property is legally described as Lot 4, Block 1, Chanhassen Hills 2nd Addition,
and shown in Exhibit A (consisting of two pages). This fence will encroach into the city's public
easement area that has an active storm sewer pipe and therefore the city requires an Encroachment
Agreement (EA) be entered into to protect the access to our asset.
DISCUSSION
273
The attached EA was drafted by the City Attorney's office and is signed by the property owner. Upon
city approval and execution, the EA will be recorded against the property.
BUDGET
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends City Council approve the Encroachment Agreement.
ATTACHMENTS
8831 Lake Susan Court -EA 10.14.24
274
(res erved fo r rec<trding info rmat ion)
ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT made this Jfrcnv ot (uiW ,2024, by and between the
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"), and SCOTT W.
LARSON, a single person ("Owner").
1. BACKGROLND. Owner is the fee owner of certain real property located in the
City of Chanhassen, County of Carver, State of Minnesota,legally described as follows:
Parcel ID No. 25.1860040
Lot 4, BIocK 1, CHANHASSEN HILLS 2ND ADDITION
(abstract)
having a street address of 8831 Lake Susan Court, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 ("Subject
Property"). The City owns easements for drainage and utility purposes over portions of the Subject
Property ("Easement Areas"). Owner desires to construct a fence on the Subject Property that
encroaches on the City's Easement Areas as depicted on the attached Exhibit "A" (consisting of
two pages).
2. ENCROACHMENT AUTHORIZATION. The City hereby approves the
encroachment in its Easement Areas on the Subject Property for the fence conditioned upon
1232830v1
275
removable fence panels in areas where the fence encroaches on existing utilities and/or installation
of gates having a clear span the width of the easement for City access to its Easement Areas.
Further conditions of encroachment approval are as follows:
o The fence must allow water to pass under it so as not to impede overland water flow
during rain events.
. The fence must remain a minimum distance of five (5') feet from the outside edge of
all drainage and utility structures (or 7.5' from the center of the manhole structure) and
a minimum of two (2') feet from the outside edge of all storm sewer piping (or 2' 6"
from the center of the pipe) as indicated on Exhibit A. Pipe location will be verified
during final inspection of the fencing.
o The fence posts shall be placed on the Subject Property but not attached to neighboring
fences and must not cross the property lines.
. The City shall have no responsibility to maintain the fence located in the Easement
Areas.
o Owner must maintain the fence located on the Subject Properly.
o Owner is fully responsible and liable for any and all damage caused to the fence
because of their location in the Easement Areas.
Further, Owner agrees that the fence shall be constructed consistent with all applicable
federal, state and local laws and regulations.
3. HOLD HARLLESS AI\D INDEMNITY. In consideration of being allowed to
encroach in the Easement Areas, Owner, for himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby
agrees to indemniff and hold the City harmless from any damage caused to the Subject Property,
including the fence and removal of fence panels and/or gates in the Easement Areas, caused in
whole or in part by the encroachment into the Easement Areas.
4. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT. The City may terminate this Agreement
at any time if it is reasonably necessary for the City to occupy the Easement Areas for drainage or
utility purposes and the fence is inconsistent with the City's use of the easement. Prior to
termination, the City will give the then owner of the Subject Property thirty (30) days advance
written notice, except that no notice period will be required in the case of an emergency condition
as determined solely by the City and this Agreement may then be terminated immediately. The
2232830v1
276
property owner shall remove that portion of the fence to the extent it impacts the Easement Areas
to the effective date of the termination of this Agreement. If the owner fails to do so, the City may
remove the fence to the extent it impacts the Easement Areas and charge the cost of removal back
to the owner for reimbursement.
5. RECORDING. This Agreement shall run with the land and shall be recorded
against the title to the Subject Property.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
By
(SEAL)Elise Ryan, Mayor
And
Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF CARVER
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2024, by Elise Ryan and by Laurie Hokkanen, respectively the Mayor
and City Manager of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of
the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
Notary Public
)
)ss.
)
J232830v1
277
OWNER:
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
A )ss'l'.rrVe,( )COUNTY OF
DRAFTED BY:
ClNrpsuLL KNUTSoN,
Pr ofes sional A s soc iqtio n
Grand Oak Office Center I
860 Blue Gentian Road, Suite 290
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
Telephone: (65 l) 452-5000
AMP/mkl
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this n day of
2024, by Scott W. Larson, a single
Notary
4232830v1
K.AMY
NotarY
278
EXIIIBIT *A"
Page I of2
f,o, Iflr4ilr DIrEldrlcs, !rlc,--I
&at'!r- -.rr& ti-! r.!,.{*4L.
-
CERTIFICATE
OF
SURVEY
Suw.y lq':a?e l|o E-g . Erle .Job tlo. --A!t8-
8831 Lale Susan Court
t c]., rp- 9&
3/9At)
a
coileT
L.
Pffi€fDEIIIAINA
l(,|rGsl FLE,} *Z t1 tarf
olnlc ft@* 9'a o --
10P(r Fcl'fir rDl ?, l9
airngoli,n as!ica!!ba t'irta
Stom MH -o
,.)
lrJJ
(Jo
r rtitiyceirtfy rx rTHrS o^tfi,rc
^r.ocoe.Est
@EtertAnolrortl{E a(trroliGt or LoT 4t Dla,/ ---cHAr{HASSEN HttL9 2taD AOOltrOt{
,r*r,,-., rarra z-*r*
L KruEGEF
x)q oE]oIE3 Erlnt(i g.EVAno{
(ux) . FptEs ffiE) crEv rE.. oErOIfs OF€gtU{ c Floycr
g,FrcE OR^XTGE
5
I
N
,t4 !s
?*n4.9t.e
Fence
,o
\
\
-\
I
I ,
I
l
I
L
1
L
I
232830v1
{n
&.
-F!" -
279
Page 1 of2
FENCE
gTRUCTUftT OUTEtl OIAIIEIEIT
PIPE OUTFR OIAf,'€T€R
LINE
OFFSET
5'STRUCTURE OFT'$ET
FEr'lCE Mtr{. 1 "
I,.ISIDE PftOPERIY LINE
1 O' D&U EASEi,EI.TT Ltr{ES 7 FROPERTY LINE
FENCE OFFSET FROM STRUCTURE AND PIPING
232830v1 6 280
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Approve an Encroachment Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and the
property owner at 8634 Valley View Court
File No.N/A Item No: D.7
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Stacy Osen, Administrative Support Specialist
Reviewed By Charlie Howley
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council approves an Encroachment Agreement allowing the property owner
to install a fence and shed located within the city's easement areas at 8634 Valley View Court."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Asset Management
SUMMARY
N/A
BACKGROUND
The property owners of 8634 Valley View Court (David & Barbara Deters, Nicole Deters Spader, and
Carolyn Deters) desire to construct a fence and a shed located within the city's easement areas. The
property is legally described as Lot 4, Block 1, Bluff Creek Estates 5th Addition, and shown in Exhibit
A (consisting of two pages). This fence and shed will encroach into the city's public easement area that
has an active storm sewer pipe and therefore the city requires an Encroachment Agreement (EA) be
entered into to protect the maintenance access to our asset.
DISCUSSION
281
The attached EA was drafted by the City Attorney's office and is signed by the property owner. Upon
city approval and execution, the EA will be recorded against the property.
BUDGET
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends City Council approve the Encroachment Agreement.
ATTACHMENTS
8634 Valley View Court -EA 10.14.24
282
(reserued for rccoftlins infornwlion)
ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT made this _ day of 2024, by and between the
CITY OF CHANIIASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"), and DAVTD DETf,RS
and BARBARA DETERS, married to each other, NICOLE A. DETERS SPADE& a single
person and CAROLYN A. DETERS, a single person (collectively the "Owners").
1. BACKGROUND. Owners are the fee owners of certain real property located in
the City of Chanhassen, County of Carver, State of Minnesota, legally described as follows:
Parcel ID No. 25.1290040
LOt4,BIOCK I, BLUFF CREEK ESTATES 5TIADDITION
(abstract)
having a street address of 8634 Valley View Court, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 ("Subject
Property"). The City owns easements for drainage and utility purposes over portions of the Subject
Property ("Easement Areas"). Owners desire to construct a fence on the Subject Property that
encroaches on the City's Easement Areas and request approval of a shed also located within the
City's Easement Areas, an as depicted on the attached Exhibit "A" (consisting of two pages)
("Improvements").
I232895v1
283
2. ENCROACHMENT AUTIIORIZATION. The City hereby approves the
encroachment in its Easement Areas on the Subject Property of the Improvements conditioned
upon removable fence panels in areas where the fence encroaches on existing utilities and/or
installation of gates having a clear span the width of the easement for City access to its Easement
Areas. Further conditions of encroachment approval are as follows:
o The Improvements must allow water to pass under it so as not to impede overland water
flow during rain events.
o The fence must remain a minimum distance of five (5') feet from the outside edge of
all drainage and utility structures, a minimum of one (1") inch from the property line,
and a minimum of tvro (2') feet from the outside edge of all storm sewer piping (see
detail provided in Exhibit A). Pipe location will be verified during final inspection of the
fencing.
o The fence posts shall be placed on the Subject Property but not attached to neighboring
fences and must not cross the property lines.
o The City shall have no responsibility to maintain the Improvements located in the
Easement Areas.
o Owners must maintain the Improvements located on the Subject Property.
o Owners are fully responsible and liable for any and all damage caused to the
Improvements because of the Improvements being constructed in the Easement Areas.
Further, Owners agree that the Improvements shall be or are constructed consistent with
all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations.
3. HOLD HARIVILESS AND INDEMNITY. In consideration of being allowed to
encroach in the Easement Areas, Owners, for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agree to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any damage caused to the Subject
Properly, including the Improvements and removal of Improvements or portions thereof in the
Easement Areas, caused in whole or in part by the encroachment into the Easement Areas.
4. TERLINATION OF AGREEMENT. The City may terminate this Agreement at
any time if it is reasonably necessary for the City to occupy the Easement Areas for drainage or
utility purposes and the Improvements are inconsistent with the City's use of the Easement Areas.
Prior to termination, the City will give the then owners of the Subject Property thirty (30) days
2232895v1
284
advance written notice, except that no notice period will be required in the case of an emergency
condition as determined solely by the City and this Agreement may then be terminated
immediately The property owners shall remove that portion of the Improvements to the extent the
Improvements impact the Easement Areas to the effective date of the termination of this
Agreement. If the owners fail to do so, the City may remove the Improvements to the extent the
Improvements impact the Easement Areas and charge the cost of removal back to the owners for
reimbursement.
5. RECORDING. This Agreement shall run with the land and shall be recorded
against the title to the Subject Property.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
By
(sEAr)Elise Ryan, Mayor
And
Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF CARVER
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2024, by Elise Ryan and by Laurie Ilokkanen, respectively the Mayor
and City Manager of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of
the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
Notary Public
)
)ss.
)
J232895v1
285
PROPERTY OWNERS:
o
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF
The
David Deters
Barbara Deters
instrument was acknowledged before me this
2024,by David l)eters, spouse to Barbara Deters.
)
)ss.
foregoing day of
s,
jl -"*ryJENNIFER ANN POTTER
Notary Public-Minnesota
My Commission Expires Jen 3t, 2027
STATE OF MTNNESOTA )
couNrY o. (0,*rn- ltt
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1 day of
2024,by Barbara Deters, spouse d Deters.to
Notary
DRAFTEDBY:
C.rurnr,u KNUTSoN,
h ofe ssion a I A s so cidion
Grand Oak Office Center I
860 Blue Gentian Road. Suite 290
Eagan Minnesota 5-5121
Teleplnne: (65 l) 452-5m0
AMP/mkI
4
JENNIFER ANN
Public-Minnesota
POTTER
Notary
202731,Expiros JanCommls3bnMy
232895v1
286
OWNERS:
A.
Carolyn A
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COI.]NTY OF
)
)ss.
)
)
)ss.
)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this -L- day of
9 ttvlo, ' 2o24,bv NICOLE A. DETERS SPADER aS joint tenant.
otary
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1 day of
0 C{f uta-r- ' 2o24,bY CAROLYN A.asjoint tenant.
Noury
JENNIFER ANN POTTER
Notary Public-Minnesota
My Commlrslon ExpirB Jan 31, 2027
DRAFTED BY:
CatvrpnEll KNUTsoN,
h olessional A s s o ci ttio n
Grand Oak Offrce Center I
8(r0 Blue GentianRoad, Suite 290
Eag;aru Minnesota 55121
Telephone: (65 I ) 452-5000
AMP/mkl
)
I
5
JENNIFER ANN POfiER
Notary Public-Minnesota
My Commlssbn Erpi6rJen 31,2027
23285v1
W
287
EXHIBIT'A"
Page I of2
FENCE ON
PROPERW LINE
NEAR STORM LINE
REOUIRES EA, TO
BE EUILT PER
OETAILEOH
1
t./)
I
r \trr
l\It
I
,t
I
\
fu4/t>
/2a, 22 3,t '33
sS
. ALSO UEETING OFFSET
FROM STRUCTURE OR
. TO BE II.}CLUDEO IN EA
SUTVEYOR'S CERTIFTCATE KEYLAND HOMES
a\
\)
Y1
I
t t
1
D't
\
\
Er*
r{(,."\
N,s
a
!I
+*r**'l(r.
\:
\
_3 ,y
14 ".1/
E4@
6232895v1
\
I
)
\
7
I
4
\
\
\
288
c.lqio
ot
(l)
oo(,
or
oz
o-iloz
LUx.:)
l--O
=x.Fa
Eog.
tJ-t-
LUa
I.Lllo
UJ
C)zu,
TL
F
uJ<ht!]to
u,E:]t-()
ldF
?h;
\
=
at!
=J
Fz
trJ
=L[J
U)a,
UJ
l€o
g.
lrjF
LlJ
6
g.
uJF)oglwzg:;(L>Lg
UJa
frE
tl-
U)
n^
\
I
6€
d
d
t--\
289
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Approve an Encroachment Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and the
property owner at 7576 Walnut Curve
File No.N/A Item No: D.8
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Stacy Osen, Administrative Support Specialist
Reviewed By Charlie Howley
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council approves an Encroachment Agreement allowing the property owner
to install a fence located within the city's easement areas at 7576 Walnut Curve."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Asset Management
SUMMARY
N/A
BACKGROUND
The property owners of 7576 Walnut Curve (Andrew J. & Megan E. Schwindt) desire to construct a
fence located within the city's easement areas. The property is legally described as Lot 10, Block 1,
Walnut Grove, and shown in Exhibit A (consisting of two pages). This fence will encroach into the
city's public easement area that has an active storm sewer pipe and therefore the city requires an
Encroachment Agreement (EA) be entered into to protect the maintenance access to our asset.
DISCUSSION
The attached EA was drafted by the City Attorney's office. Upon city approval and full execution, the
290
EA will be recorded against the property.
BUDGET
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends City Council approve the Encroachment Agreement.
ATTACHMENTS
7576 WALNUT CURV -EA 10.14.24
291
232989v1
(reserved for recording information)
ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT made this ____ day of _____________, 2024, by and between the
CITY OF CHANHASSEN,a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”), and ANDREW J.
SCHWINDT and MEGAN E. SCHWINDT, married to each other (“Owners”).
1.BACKGROUND.Owners are the fee owners of certain real property located in
the City of Chanhassen, County of Carver, State of Minnesota, legally described as follows:
Parcel ID No. 25.8480100
Lot 10, Block 1, WALNUT GROVE, according to the recorded plat thereof
(abstract property)
having a street address of 7576 Walnut Curv, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 (“Subject Property”).
The City owns easements for drainage and utility purposes over portions of the Subject Property
(“Easement Areas”). Owners desire to construct a fence on the Subject Property that encroaches
on the City’s Easement Areas as depicted on the attached Exhibit “A”.
2.ENCROACHMENT AUTHORIZATION.The City hereby approves the
encroachment in its Easement Areas on the Subject Property for the fence conditioned upon
removable fence panels in areas where the fence encroaches on existing utilities and/or installation
292
232989v1
of gates having a clear span the width of the easement for City access to its Easement Areas.
Further conditions of encroachment approval are as follows:
The fence must allow water to pass under it so as not to impede overland water flow
during rain events.
The fence must remain a minimum distance of five (5’) feet from the outside edge of
all drainage and utility structures (or 7.5’ from the center of the manhole structure) and
a minimum of two (2’) feet from the outside edge of all storm sewer piping (or 2’ 6”
from the center of the pipe) as indicated on Exhibit A. Pipe location will be verified
during final inspection of the fencing.
The fence posts shall be placed on the Subject Property but not attached to neighboring
fences and must not cross the property lines.
The City shall have no responsibility to maintain the fence located in the Easement
Areas.
Owner must maintain the fence located on the Subject Property.
Owner is fully responsible and liable for any and all damage caused to the fence
because of their location in the Easement Areas.
Further, Owners agree that the fence shall be constructed consistent with all applicable
federal, state and local laws and regulations.
3.HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNITY.In consideration of being allowed to
encroach in the City's Easement Areas, Owners, for themselves, their heirs and assigns, hereby
agree to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any damage caused to the Subject Property,
including the fence and removal of fence panels and/or gates in the City’s Easement Areas, caused
in whole or in part by the encroachment into the City's Easement Areas.
4.TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT. The City may terminate this Agreement at
any time if it is reasonably necessary for the City to occupy the easement areasfor drainage or utility
purposes and the fence is inconsistent with the City’ s use of the easement. Prior to termination, the
City will give the then ownersof the Subject Property thirty (30) days advance written notice, except
that no notice period will be required in the case of an emergency condition as determined solely by
the City and this Agreement may then be terminated immediately. The property ownersshall remove
that portion of the fence to the extent it impacts the Easement Area to the effective date of the
293
232989v1
termination of this Agreement. If the owners fail to do so, the City may remove the fence to the
extent it impacts the Easement Area and charge the cost of removal back to the owners for
reimbursement.
5.RECORDING.This Agreement shall run with the land and shall be recorded
against the title to the Subject Property.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
By ___________________________________
(SEAL)Elise Ryan, Mayor
And __________________________________
Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of
__________________, 2024, by Elise Ryan and by Laurie Hokkanen, respectively the Mayor
and City Manager of the City of Chanhassen,a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of
the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
____________________________________
Notary Public
294
232989v1
PROPERTY OWNERS
_____________________________________
Andrew J. Schwindt
_____________________________________
Megan E. Schwindt
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF ____________)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
__________________, 2024, by Andrew J. Schwindt, spouse to Megan E. Schwindt.
____________________________________
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF ____________)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
__________________, 2024, by Megan E. Schwindt, spouse to Andrew J. Schwindt.
____________________________________
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON,
Professional Association
Grand Oak Office Center I
860 Blue Gentian Road, Suite 290
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
Telephone: (651) 452-5000
AMP/mew
295
232989v1
EXHIBIT “A”
Page 1 of 2
296
232989v1
Page 2 of 2
297
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Approve Contract Amendment With SEH Related For The Lake Ann Park
Preserve Project.
File No.Item No: D.9
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Recreation Director
Reviewed By Jerry Ruegemer
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council Approves A Contract Amendment Of $50,000 With SEH For Phase
II Archeological Survey Work For The Lake Ann Park Preserve Project."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Asset Management
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
On September 23, staff presented the City Council with a construction and archeological update relating
to the Lake Ann Park Preserve project. After much discussion, the Council directed staff to move
forward with creating a contract amendment with SEH to:
develop the project scope of the Phase II Archeological Survey work; and to move forward
utilizing the archeological budget council approved ($20K)
to begin developing and drafting the research design needed to complete Phase II survey work
298
to submit an application to the Office of the State Archeologist (OSA) for review, approval, and
issuance of a Phase II license. It was estimated to take up to 3-4 weeks to process and review the
application so extra time was needed to perform the Phase II fieldwork yet this year prior to
winter.
A summary of the September 23 work session is attached to this staff report.
Scope Amendment
During the archaeological investigation required to satisfy the State Historic Preservation Office,
(SHPO) requirements to complete Phase I archaeological review along all proposed trail alignments and
within the footprint of the proposed parking lot and associated stormwater improvements, the 106
Group found two locations that they are recommending either avoidance or to conduct a Phase II
investigation. Upon discussion with SHPO staff, and the city council it was recommended to proceed
with the Phase II investigation.
The scope of the Phase II investigation includes:
• A research design to cover FS-01 and FS-03 sites and obtaining Office of the State Archaeologist
(OSA) licenses to conduct fieldwork.
• Up to 20 close-interval shovel tests distributed between the two sites.
• Up to six (6) formal 1-ft x 1-ft excavation units distributed between the two sites.
• Collecting, processing, analyzing, and curating up to 75 artifacts between the two sites.
• A formal report to present results and recommendations for both sites.
BUDGET
The additional $50,000 will be funded by additional interest earnings from the project fund.
RECOMMENDATION
The Chanhassen City Council Approves A Contract Amendment Of $50,000 With SEH For Phase II
Archeological Survey Work For The Lake Ann Park Preserve Project
ATTACHMENTS
Lake Ann Park Preserve Construction and Approach Discussion 9.23.24
Lake Ann Park Preserve Options 2024-09-23
Chan Lake Ann Arch Scope Amendment-100124
Summary Notes City Council Work Session 9-23-24
299
City Council Item
September 23, 2024
Item Lake Ann Park Preserve Construction and Approach Discussion
File No.Item No: A.1
Agenda Section 5:30 P.M. - WORK SESSION
Prepared By Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Recreation Director
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
Discuss
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
The Lake Ann Preserve has been identified as a key priority by City Council as well as our residents of
Chanhassen. Council reviewed the project at their September 25, 2023 Work Session and approved
Phase 1 funding. The Lake Ann project achieved a high priority goal of gaining access into the preserve
through substantial completion of all three boardwalks. The project has made great strides in working
through and securing approvals from multiple agencies such as the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek
Watershed District, Minnesota DNR and the Metropolitan Council.
DISCUSSION
The city was successful in obtaining a $250,000 Minnesota DNR Local Trail Connection Grant that was
earmarked to pay a portion of Boardwalk A which is the longest spanning 350'. Council is aware that in
receiving the DNR Grant our Lake Ann Park Preserve project was subject to review by multiple state
300
agencies including the State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO). With SHPO's review, the city was
informed that an archeological site was identified in 1977 and that our project was subject to further
investigation to determine if any additional artifacts were present that would interfere with the trail
design. Council approved a second Professional Services Contract with SEH on February 12, 2024 that
included finalizing 90% construction documents that were necessary to submit and obtain the necessary
permits from the watershed district during their review process to finalize details for the development of
Bid Package #2 and Phase I and II of the archeological investigation. The city hired an archeologist
(106 Group) to conduct shovel tests survey work throughout the entirety of the designed 10' bituminous
trail. This field work was conducted in April/May with three separate artifact sites discovered. Those
discoveries led the project team to consider many options as it was made known that Phase II
recommendations were likely a certainty due to artifact discovery.
Staff investigated redesign features that include rerouting a portion of the trail to avoid direct interaction
with sensitive archeological areas that have been identified. SEH identified four trail redesign options.
Each of the trail redesigns present challenges with topography, wetland buffers, watershed district
review and further/additional field testing by the 106 Group. All review and investigative work must be
complete prior to moving forward with many components of Phase II.
Options for this section of
trail:Action Items:Estimated
Costs:
1. Expand the Phase I
Archaeological Survey both
north and south of this site to
determine a new trail alignment
that avoids archaeological
resources
a. Expand Phase I archaeological survey both
north and south of existing trail alignment (106
Group) based on new expanded limits as determined
by SEH.
b. Based on findings, fit trail into new alignment
that does avoids archaeological resources (SEH)
c. Additional survey needed along new alignment
(SEH)
d. Redesign trail alignment, profile, cross-sections
and redraft construction plans (SEH)
10106
Group
$38,000
SEH
$30,000
Total
$68,000
2. Realign the trail south towards
Lake Ann to avoid this site (red
line)
a. Additional survey needed between existing trail
to the edge of Lake Ann (SEH)
b. Determine new trail alignment that limits
grading and tree removal (SEH)
c. Redesign alignment, profile, cross sections to
establish construction limits (SEH)
d. Conduct a new archaeological Phase I survey
along the new alignment (106 Group)
e. If there are findings within the new alignment,
determine new alignment and redesign before
sending it back for additional Phase I survey
(SEH/106 Group)
106 Group
$14,000
SEH
$30,000
Total
$44,000
301
3. Realign the trail north
between wetlands to avoid this
site (orange line)
a. Additional survey needed between existing trail
to the edge of Lake Ann (SEH)
b. Determine new trail alignment that limits
grading and tree removal (SEH)
c. Redesign alignment, profile, cross sections to
establish construction limits (SEH)
d. Conduct a new archaeological Phase I survey
along the new alignment (106 Group)
e. If there are findings within the new alignment,
determine new alignment and redesign before
sending it back for additional Phase I survey
(SEH/106 Group)
106 Group
$17,000
SEH
$30,000
Total
$47,000
4. Reroute this entire segment of
trail (cyan line)
a. Additional survey needed between existing trail
to the edge of Lake Ann (SEH)
b. Determine new trail alignment that limits
grading and tree removal (SEH)
c. Redesign alignment, profile, cross sections to
establish construction limits (SEH)
d. Conduct a new archaeological Phase I survey
along the new alignment (106 Group)
e. If there are findings within the new alignment,
determine new alignment and redesign before
sending it back for additional Phase I survey
(SEH/106 Group)
106 Group
$19,000
SEH
$38,000
Total
$57,000
5. Do not pave this section of
trail (wood
chip or gravel)
a. Update to the plans (SEH)No cost.
6. Keep all the existing paths
natural and do not pave any of
them
a. None.No cost.
7. Complete Phase II and
mitigation
a. Archaeologists complete Phase II Evaluation
(106 Group)
b. If site is determined NRHP-eligible, coordinate
with
SHPO regarding Phase III mitigation options (106
Group)
106 Group
$70,000 (for
both sites)
An archeological sites was identified in Greenwood Shores Park that is in conflict with the proposed
parking lot and stormwater BMPs. Listed are the options.
Options for Greenwood Shores
Parking Lot area:Action Items:Estimated Costs:
302
1. Redesign the BMPs out of the
FS-01 area
a. Additional survey
needed to widen out the area
to evaluate options (SEH)
b. Water resources
engineer to review options to
meet Watershed District
requirements (SEH)
c. Design technician to
redraft construction plans
(SEH)
d. New application to
Watershed District (SEH)
e. Archaeological survey
for expansion outside of
previous construction limits
(106 Group)
106 Group
$15,000
SEH
$25,000
Total
$40,000
2. Reduce the parking lot area to
reduce the BMPs
a. Water resources
engineer determines how
much impervious surface
needs to be reduced to allow
elimination of southern basin.
(SEH)
b. Design technician to
redraft construction plans
(SEH)
c. New application to
Watershed District (SEH)
SEH
$20,000
3. Remove parking lot
improvements from the
construction plans
a. Minor edits to the plan
to remove parking lot
improvements
No cost.
4. Complete Phase II Evaluation
and Phase III Mitigation
a. Archaeologists complete
Phase II Evaluation (106
Group)
b. If site is determined
NRHP-eligible, coordinate
with SHPO regarding Phase
III mitigation options (106
Group)
106 Group
$70,000 (for both sites)
A meeting was held with our project team and SHPO to discuss the facts and findings of the Phase I
Archeological Survey and to gauge a sense as to what their professional agency's opinion was of the
circumstances related to artifact discovery of our Lake Ann Park Preserve Project. The SHPO
discussion was helpful to understand the process needed to gain approvals and it was evident that they
are recommending that we complete Phase II survey work to determine the significance of the identified
sites. After Phase II work is completed the data collected will indicate a clearer path of the next steps
needed to proceed. Completing Phase II doesn't necessarily indicate the city will need any additional
survey phasing. Phase II survey work may indicate that the noted archeological sites are insignificant
303
and SHPO could grant approvals to proceed. If survey work is completed and the sites are found to have
significance, the city can develop recommendations and data to demonstrate that it's impossible to avoid
these areas and the trail must be built as designed. If SHPO agrees with the city's assessment, mitigation
strategies are developed. Passed excepted practices may include educational articles that could be
published on our city website, social media platforms or other city publications. This often satisfies
SHPO's requirements and the city would be granted approvals to proceed.
The project team reached out to the 106 Group regarding Phase II work.
$70,000 (this does not include Phase III mitigation work if needed)
They have $20,000 left on their current contract that approved by city council
Schedule is a little difficult to predict (much is out of their control)
Drafting the Research Design: 2-3 weeks
They can use their remaining budget to get started on this before getting a contract
amendment from the City if approved and could work September 23 – October 14
Submit to OSA for review, approval, and issuance of a Phase II license: 4-8 weeks
October 14 – November 8 (4 weeks); December 6 (8 weeks)
Field work: Depends on weather conditions if they can get started this fall or will need to
wait until spring.
BUDGET
See attachment
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
Lake Ann Preserve City Council Construction Update
Lake Ann Preserve Project Update
304
Lake Ann Park Preserve Project Budget
Total Identified Revenue Sources 3,125,000$
Total Spent to Date (9/18/2024) - Bid Package 1 (1,213,768)$
Items to complete for Bid Package 1 (46,129)$
Remaining Funds after Bid Package 1 1,865,103$
Estimated Cost of Bid Package 2
Greenwood Shores Parking Lot
BMPs for Greenwood Shores Parking Lot
Tree Clearing
Excavation & Base Material for Trail
Trail Improvements
Trail Paving (1,600,000)$
Soft Costs for Bid Package 2 (245,103)$
Remaining Funds after Bid Package 2 20,000$
Additional Costs for Phase 2 Archeological (70,000)$
Funding Gap (50,000)$
To be covered by Investment Earnings
Potential Additional Costs
(Assume most expense options selected)
Trail Work (Option 1) 68,000$
Redesign Parking Area (Option 1) 40,000$
Total Potential Additional Costs 108,000$
Potential funding sources:
General Fund Budget Surplus from 2024
Park Dedication Fees (no guarantee on this)
Investment Earnings (portion)
305
Engineers | Architects | Planners | Scientists
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 10650 Red Circle Drive, Suite 500, Minnetonka, MN 55343-9229
952.912.2600 | 800.734.6757 | 888.908.8166 fax | sehinc.com
SEH is 100% employee-owned | Affirmative Action–Equal Opportunity Employer
SCOPE AMENDMENT
October 1, 2024 RE: City of Chanhassen
Lake Ann Park Preserve Archaeological
Investigation Scope Amendment
SEH No. CHAPR 177499
Jerry Ruegemer
Park and Recreation Director
7700 Market Boulevard
Chanhassen, MN 55317
jruegemer@chanhassenmn.gov
Dear Jerry:
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH®) appreciates the opportunity to submit an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and SEH dated February 12, 2024 for the Lake Ann Park Preserve Boardwalk and Trail project. Scope Amendment
During the archaeological investigation required to satisfy the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)’s
requirements to complete Phase I archaeological review along all proposed trail alignments and within the
footprint of the proposed parking lot and associated stormwater improvements, the 106 Group found two
locations that they recommended either avoidance or to conduct a Phase II investigation. Upon
discussion with SHPO staff, it was recommended to proceed with the Phase II investigation.
The scope of the Phase II investigation includes:
• A research design to cover FS-01 and FS-03 sites and obtaining Office of the State Archaeologist
(OSA) licenses to conduct field work.
• Up to 20 close-interval shovel tests distributed between the two sites.
• Up to six (6) formal 1-ft x 1-ft excavation units distributed between the two sites.
• Collecting, processing, analyzing, and curating up to 75 artifacts between the two sites.
• A formal report to present results and recommendations for both sites.
SEH will continue to oversee a contract with the 106 Group and will coordinate and manage the project.
Amended Fees & Billing
This amendment letter describes how we will provide these services for an additional not-to-exceed fee of
$50,000.
Pursuant to the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and SEH dated
February 12, 2024, we will bill the City monthly for reimbursable expenses and on an hourly basis for
labor.
Any additional tasks added to, or deleted from this project shall be by written amendment to the contract
and signed by both parties.
Feel free to contact me at 952-912-2610 or at jdesrude@sehinc.com if you have any questions regarding
any of the above-mentioned information.
306
Jerry Ruegemer
October 1, 2024
Page 2
Sincerely,
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC.
Jen Desrude, PE (Lic. MN)
Project Manager
Toby Muse, PE (Lic. MN)
Principal
x:\fj\h\hoisi\171884\1-genl\10-setup-cont\02-contract\construction-materials-archeological\amendment\chan-lakeannarch-scopeamendment-100124.docx
Accepted on this ___day of________________, 2024
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
By: _________________________________
Name
_________________________________
Title
307
Summary Notes - Lake Ann Park Preserve
City Council Work Session, September 23, 2024
Through Phase I of Archeological survey work, 3 sites were identified to contain
artifacts
Site 1 and Site 3 directly impact the completion of the trail between boardwalks
A/B and the Greenwood Shores parking lot/BMPS, as they are currently
designed
Options included Greenwood Shores parking lot adjustments and rerouting the
trail to avoid the known artifact locations
Council discussed reducing the parking lot size to avoid the artifact site
Staff presented redesign options for the trail. Any deviation from the planned,
designed trail would trigger new Phase I survey work to determine if artifacts are
present with the new alignment. A new alignment would also necessitate
Watershed District approvals.
Council inquired about leaving the trails natural and not pave. This is an option,
but trails would remain largely as they are and would not be re-graded or re-
inforced. The City Council may visit this option in the future, pending other the
result of further archeological work.
The City Council inquired about adding crushed limestone rock and still plowing
the paths in winter. This is not possible because we are not able to do the work
to re-grade the trails for an acceptable slope and stabilize the base to support
plowing equipment.
The City Council expressed concern about the ability to utilize the designated
ARPA funding within the deadline of December 31, 2024. The Finance Director
explained that the city would reallocate those dollars to the general fund and then
in 2025, would transfer that money out of the general fund and reallocate it for
the project. The ARPA money would not be directly used, but would still make this
project possible.
There is currently $20,000 in the council-approved archeological fund that can be
used toward phase II. That would include writing the research plan and
submitting the permit to the OSA (Office of State Archeology to perform Phase II
fieldwork. The City Council approved moving forward with this at the September
23 meeting.
An additional $50,000 is needed totaling $70,000 for Phase II. The $50,000
request could be covered by Investment earnings from the Grants Fund. This
expenditure is on the October 14 Council agenda for approval.
The archeological consultant has indicated they are available and committed to
finishing the Phase II fieldwork this year if the weather is favorable and OSA
could obtain the necessary permit/license.
308
The City Council preferred not to spend additional dollars on archeology and
engineering work for this project. If the results of the additional work are not
favorable, the City Council will consider a change in approach or scope.
309
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Approve Development Contract for Avienda Townhomes Addition
File No.24-17 Item No: D.10
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Eric Maass, Community Development Director
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council approves the Development Contract as presented with minor
modifications as may be required by the City Attorney."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Development & Redevelopment
SUMMARY
The City Council approval of the Development Contract is the next step in the development review
process for the Avienda Townhomes Addition. The Chanhassen City Council approved the Preliminary
Plat and Final Plat for Avienda Townhomes Addition at their meeting on September 23, 2024, subject
to Developer executing the Development Contract for the Plat.
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
310
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Development Contract as presented.
ATTACHMENTS
Avienda Townhomes Development Contract
Avienda Townhomes Addition Final Plat
311
232919v4
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
AVIENDA TOWNHOMES ADDITION
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
(Developer Installed Improvements)
312
232919v4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
1. REQUEST FOR PLAT APPROVAL ............................................................................ SP-1
2. CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL........................................................................SP-1
3. DEVELOPMENT PLANS .............................................................................................SP-1
4. IMPROVEMENTS .........................................................................................................SP-2
5. TIME OF PERFORMANCE ..........................................................................................SP-2
6. SECURlTY.........................................................................................................................SP-2
7. NOTICE..............................................................................................................................SP-3
8. OTHER SPECIAL CONDITIONS ................................................................................SP-3
9. GENERAL CONDITIONS .............................................................................................SP-5
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. RIGHT TO PROCEED ................................................................................................. GC-1
2. PHASED DEVELOPMENT .........................................................................................GC-1
3. PRELIMINAR.Y PLAT STATUS.................................................................................GC-1
4. CHANGES IN OFFICIAL CONTROLS ......................................................................GC-1
5. IMPROVEMENTS ........................................................................................................GC-1
6. IRON MONlJMENTS...................................................................................................GC-2
7. LICENSE...........................................................................................................................GC-2
8. SITE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL..........................................................GC-2
8A. EROSION CONTROL DURlNG CONSTRUCTION OF A DWELLING OR
OTHER BUILDING.........................................................................................GC-2
9. CLEAN UP....................................................................................................................GC-3
10. ACCEPTANCE AND OWNERSHIP OF IMPROVEMENTS ....................................GC-3
11. CLAIMS ........................................................................................................................GC-3
12. PARKDEDICATION...................................................................................................GC-3
13. LANDSCAPING ...........................................................................................................GC-3
14. WARRANTY ................................................................................................................GC-4
15. LOT PLANS..................................................................................................................GC-4
16. EXISTING ASSESSMENTS .......................................................................................GC-4
17. HOOK-UP CHAR.GES.................................................................................................GC-4
18. PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING ....................................................................................GC-4
19. SIGNAGE.........................................................................................................................GC-5
20. HOUSE PADS..............................................................................................................GC-5
21. RESPONSIBILITY FOR COSTS ................................................................................GC-5
22. DEVELOPER'S DEFAULT.........................................................................................GC-6
22. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Construction Trailers ........................................................................................GC-6
B. Postal Service ...................................................................................................GC-7
C. Third Parties .....................................................................................................GC-7
D. Breach ofContract............................................................................................GC-7
E. Severability .......................................................................................................GC-7
313
232919v4
F. Building Permits ............................................................................................... GC-7
G. Waivers/Amendments ......................................................................................GC-7
H. Release..................................................................................................................GC-7
I. Insurance...............................................................................................................GC-7
J. Remedies ..........................................................................................................GC-8
K. Assignability .....................................................................................................GC-8
L. Construction Hours...........................................................................................GC-8
M. Noise Amplification .........................................................................................GC-8
N. Access...................................................................................................................GC-8
0. Street Maintenance ...........................................................................................GC-8
P. Storm Sewer Maintenance ................................................................................GC-9
Q. Soil Treatment Systems .....................................................................................GC-9
R. Variances ...........................................................................................................GC-9
S. Compliance with Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations .....................................GC-9
T. Proof of Title ....................................................................................................GC-9
U. Soil Conditions ................................................................................................GC-10
V. Soil Correction................................................................................................GC-10
W. Haul Routes ..........................................................................................................GC-10
X. Development Signs...............................................................................................GC-10
Y. Construction Plans................................................................................................GC-10
Z. As-Built Lot Surveys............................................................................................GC-11
314
232919v4
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
(Developer Installed Improvements)
AVIENDA TOWNHOMES
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
AGREEMENT dated October __, 2024 by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a
Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"), and, Level 7 Development, LLC, a Minnesota limited
liability company (the "Developer").
1. Request for Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for
Avienda Townhomes Addition (referred to in this Contract as the "plat"). The land is legally described
on the attached Exhibit "A". The plat is a replat of the Avienda Townhomes plat previously approved
by the City with only minor adjustments to the lot lines Avienda Townhomes plat.
2. Conditions of Plat Approval The City hereby approves the plat on condition that the
Developer enter into this Contract, furnish the security required by it, and record the plat with the
County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 30 days after the City Council approves the plat.
3. Development Plans. The plat shall be developed in accordance with the following
plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. With the exception of Plan A, the plans may
be prepared, subject to City approval, after entering the Contract, but before commencement of any
work in the plat. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, the written terms shall
control. The plans are:
Plan A:
Plan B:
Plan C:
Plan D:
Final plat approved _________________, prepared by Landform Professional
Services, LLC.
Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan dated August 23, 2024, prepared by
Landform Professional Services, LLC.
Plans and Specifications for Improvements dated August 23, 2024, prepared by
Landform Professional Services, LLC.
Landscape Plan dated August 23, 2024 , prepared by Landform Professional
Services, LLC.
315
232919v4
4. Improvements. The Developer shall install and pay for the following:
A. Sanitary Sewer System
B. Water System
C. Storm Water Drainage System
D. Streets
E. Concrete Curb and Gutter
F. Street Lights
G. Site Grading/Restoration
H. Underground Utilities (e.g. gas, electric, telephone, CATV)
I. Setting of Lot and Block Monuments
J. Surveying and Staking
K. Landscaping
L. Erosion Control
5. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required improvements except
for the wear course on public streets by November 15, 2025. The Developer may, however, request
an extension of time from the City Engineer. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon
updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion
date.
6. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Contract, payment of
special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements, and construction of all public
improvements, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit in the form attached hereto,
from a bank acceptable to the City, or cash escrow ("security") for $981,972.19. The amount of the
security was calculated as 110% of the following:
Site Grading/Erosion Control/Restoration
Sanitary Sewer
Watermain
Storm Sewer, Drainage System, including cleaning and maintenance
Streets
Sub-total, Construction Costs
Engineering, surveying, and inspection (7% of construction costs)
Landscaping (2% of construction costs)
$ 23,955.00
$ 345,937.65
$ 238,755.00
$ 55,095.00
$ 155,250.00
$ 818,992.65
$ 57,329.49
$ 16,379.85
Sub-total, Other Costs $ 73,709.34
TOTAL COST OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS $ 892,701.99
SECURITY AMOUNT (110% of892,701.99) S 981,972.19
This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. The security
shall be subject to the approval of the City. The City may draw down the security, without notice, for
316
232919v4
any violation of the terms of this Contract. If the required public improvements are not completed at
least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the security, the City may also draw it down. If the
security is drawn down, the draw shall be used to cure the default. With City approval, the security
may be reduced from time to time as financial obligations are paid, but in no case shall the security
be reduced to a point less than 10% of the original amount until (1) all improvements have been
completed, (2) iron monuments for lot comers have been installed, (3) all financial obligations to the
City satisfied, (4) the required "record" plans have been received by the City, (5) a warranty security
is provided, and (6) the public improvements are accepted by the City.
The City retains the letter of credit provided for the Avienda Townhomes plat and Developer
authorizes the Avienda Townhomes letter of credit to be retained as the security identified in this
Paragraph 6 for the Avienda Townhomes Addition plat.
7. Notice. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand
delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by registered mail at
the following address:
Mark Nordland
Level 7 Development, LLC
4600 Kings Point Road
Minnetrista, MN 55331
Phone: 612-812-7020
Email: mnordland@nordlandpartners.com
Level 7 Development, LLC
4600 Kings Point Road
Minnetrista, Minnesota 55344
Attn: Mercedes Rhodes
(612) 203-2494
Email: ariusrealestatedevelopment@gmail.com
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
150 South Fifth Street, Suite 700
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Attn: Larry Wertheim
(612) 337-9216
Email: lwertheim@kennedy-graven.com
Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed
to the City by certified mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City
Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952)
227-1100.
8. Other Special Conditions.
A. FEES
317
232919v4
1. Prior to release of the plat for recording and prior to scheduling a pre-construction
meeting, Developer shall submit to the City $1,270.00 for the following City fees:
GIS fee: 39 parcels @ $30/parcel + $100 for the plat $1,270
Total $1,270
B. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning
1. Homes shall be constructed and designed consistent with the PUD (Ordinance 696).
2. Outlots B, C and F shall be conveyed to a Homeowners Association
contemporaneously with recording final plat.
Building
1. Final plat must be recorded before lot addresses can be established and before
any building permits can be issued
2. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before
building permits will be issued.
3. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building
meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or
requirements may be required after plan review
4. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction.
5. Retaining walls (if present) more than four feet high, measured from the bottom of the
footing to the top of the wall, must be designed by a professional engineer and a building
permit must be obtained prior to construction. Retaining walls (if present) under four
feet in height require a zoning permit.
Fire Comments
1. Road widths - no parking signs required on one side or both depending on width.
See City Code for road widths and signage.
2. No combustible construction to begin until fire hydrants and temp/permanent fire access
roads are installed and maintained.
3. Addressing and street signs to be installed immediately upon finish and before
occupancy of first unit. Temp addressing and street signs to be maintained throughout
construction.
4. Construction vehicles and material may not block fire apparatus access or hydrants
once combustible material construction starts.
Landscaping and Tree Preservation
1. The Developer shall install Conservation Easement signage along the south property
line abutting Outlot E. Markers shall be placed at property corners and each deflection
point in the property line.
Engineering and Water Resources
1. All newly constructed public streets (Mills Drive) will be publicly owned and maintained
318
232919v4
after acceptance of the public improvements by the City Council.
2. All sanitary sewer and water mains will be publicly owned and maintained after
acceptance of the public improvements by the City Council.
3. The Developer will be required to enter into a Development Contract with the City and
all applicable securities and fees provided prior to recording of the final plat.
4. It is the Developer's responsibility to ensure that permits are received from all other
agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, MnDOT,
Carver County, RPBC Watershed District, Board of Water and Soil Resources , PCA,
etc.).
5. A Homeowners Association will be responsible for the maintenance of all common areas
and private streets and utilities.
9. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Contract are attached as Exhibit
"B" and incorporated herein.
319
232919v4
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
By:_______________________________
Elise Ryan, Mayor
And:_______________________________
Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
(ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day ______, 20__ by
Elise Ryan, Mayor, and by Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota
municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City
Council.
NOTARY PUBLIC
320
232919v4
LEVEL 7 DEVELOPMENT, LLC:
BY:_____________________________
Bahram Akradi, Its President
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
(ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day ______, 20__ by
Bahram Akradi, the President of Level 7 Development, a Minnesota limited liability company, on
behalf of the company, on behalf of the corporation.
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
321
232919v4
EXHIBIT “A” TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY:
Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1; Lot 2, Block 2; Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, Block 3; Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5,
Block 4; Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11, Block 5; and Outlot D, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES,
Carver County, Minnesota.
322
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
CHARLES CUDD CO., LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, fee owner of all or part
of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract,
affirms and consents to the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound by the provisions as the same may
apply to that portion of the subject property owned by it.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
CHARLES CUDD CO., LLC
By:
__________________________ [print name]
Its: _______________________ [title]
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2024, by _________________________, the _________________________ of CHARLES CUDD
CO., LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of said entity.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
323
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
ROBERT F. PRINCE and JENIFER KENIS PRINCE, spouses married to each other, fee
owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing
Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the
provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
Robert F. Prince
Jenifer Kenis Prince
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2024, by Robert F. Prince and Jenifer Kenis Prince, spouses married to each other.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
324
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
TODD DAVID MICHELS, a single person, fee owner of all or part of the subject property,
the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, affirms and consents to
the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion
of the subject property owned by him.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
Todd David Michels
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2024, by Todd David Michels, a single person.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
325
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
DEBORAH A. JUNGCLAUS, a single person, fee owner of all or part of the subject property,
the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, affirms and consents to
the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion
of the subject property owned by him.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
Deborah A. Jungclaus
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2024, by Deborah A. Jungclaus, a single person.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
326
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
DAVID SCHLIESMAN and SARAH SCHLIESMAN, spouses married to each other, fee
owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing
Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the
provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
David Schliesman
Sarah Schliesman
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2024, by David Schliesman and Sarah Schliesman, spouses married to each other.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
327
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
DENNIS H. HEPPELMANN and JEANNE A. HEPPELMANN, spouses married to each
other, fee owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the
foregoing Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound
by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
Dennis H. Heppelmann
Jeanne A. Heppelmann
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2024, by Dennis H. Heppelmann and Jeanne A. Heppelmann, spouses married to each other.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
328
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
KELLY PATTON and KAREN PATTON, spouses married to each other, fee owners of all
or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development
Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the
same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
Kelly Patton
Karen Patton
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2024, by Kelly Patton and Karen Patton, spouses married to each other.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
329
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
CARVER COUNTY HOLDINGS, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, fee owner
of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing
Development Contract, affirms and consents to the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound by the
provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by it.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
CARVER COUNTY HOLDINGS, LLC
By:
__________________________ [print name]
Its: _______________________ [title]
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2024, by _________________________, the _________________________ of CARVER COUNTY
HOLDINGS, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of said entity.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
330
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
JDV INVESTMENTS, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, fee owner of all or part
of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract,
affirms and consents to the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound by the provisions as the same may
apply to that portion of the subject property owned by it.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
JDV INVESTMENTS, LLC
By:
__________________________ [print name]
Its: _______________________ [title]
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2024, by _________________________, the _________________________ of JDV
INVESTMENTS, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of said entity.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
331
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
WILLIAM I. HAMILTON and SUSAN E. HAMILTON, spouses married to each other, fee
owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing
Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the
provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
William I. Hamilton
Susan E. Hamilton
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2024, by William I. Hamilton and Susan E. Hamilton, spouses married to each other.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
332
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
Cara L. Black and Sherman L. Black as Trustees of the Cara L. Black Revocable Trust U/A dated
April 17, 2008, fee owner of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by
the foregoing Development Contract, affirms and consents to the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound
by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by it.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
CARA L. BLACK REVOCABLE TRUST
U/A DATED APRIL 17, 2008
By:
Cara L. Black, Trustee
By: ________________________________
Sherman L. Black, Trustee
STATE OF ______________)
)ss.
COUNTY OF ____________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2024,
by Cara L. Black as Trustee of the Cara L. Black Revocable Trust U/A Dated April 17, 2008, on behalf of
the trust.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF ______________)
)ss.
COUNTY OF_____________)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2024,
by Sherman L. Black as Trustee of the Cara L. Black Revocable Trust U/A Dated April 17, 2008, on behalf
of the trust.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
333
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
Charles A. Bobertz and Mary B. Bobertz as Trustees of the Bobertz Living Trust, fee owner of all
or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development
Contract, affirms and consents to the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound by the provisions as the
same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by it.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
BOBERTZ LIVING TRUST
By:
Charles A. Bobertz, Trustee
By: ________________________________
Mary B. Bobertz, Trustee
STATE OF ______________)
)ss.
COUNTY OF ____________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2024,
by Charles A. Bobertz as Trustee of the Bobertz Living Trust, on behalf of the trust.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF ______________)
)ss.
COUNTY OF_____________)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2024,
by Mary B. Bobertz as Trustee of the Bobertz Living Trust, on behalf of the trust.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
334
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
Sungsook Kim and K. Dennis Kim as Trustees of the Sungsook Kim Revocable Trust, fee owner
of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development
Contract, affirms and consents to the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound by the provisions as the
same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by it.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
SUNGSOOK KIM REVOCABLE TRUST
By:
Sungsook Kim, Trustee
By: ________________________________
K. Dennis Kim, Trustee
STATE OF ______________)
)ss.
COUNTY OF ____________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2024,
by Sungsook Kim as Trustee of the Sungsook Kim Revocable Trust, on behalf of the trust.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF ______________)
)ss.
COUNTY OF_____________)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2024,
by K. Dennis Kim as Trustee of the Sungsook Kim Revocable Trust, on behalf of the trust.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
335
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
TIMOTHY D. FOSTER and TERESA A. FOSTER, spouses married to each other, fee owners of
all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development
Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same
may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
Timothy D. Foster
Teresa A. Foster
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2024, by
Timothy D. Foster and Teresa A. Foster, spouses married to each other.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
336
232919v4
FEE OWNER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
AVIENDA VILLAS II ASSOCIATION, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, fee owner of all or
part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract,
affirms and consents to the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound by the provisions as the same may
apply to that portion of the subject property owned by it.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
AVIENDA VILLAS II ASSOCIATION
By:
__________________________ [print name]
Its: _______________________ [title]
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2024, by
_________________________, the _________________________ of AVIENDA VILLAS II
ASSOCIATION, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, on behalf of said entity.
________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
337
232919v4
MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
TRADITION CAPITAL BANK, a Minnesota banking corporation, which holds:
1. a Combination Mortgage, Assignment of Leases and Rents, Security Agreement and Fixture
Financing Statement executed by Level 7 Development, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability
company, as Mortgagor, and Tradition Capital Bank, a Minnesota banking corporation, as
Mortgagee, dated July 1, 2021, filed July 2, 2021, with the Office of the County Recorder, Carver
County, Minnesota, as Document No. A728034, securing the amount $18,000,000.00;
AND
2. an Amended Combination Mortgage, Assignment of Leases and Rents, Security Agreement and
Fixture Financing Statement, dated December 27, 2022, filed December 28, 2022, with the Office
of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota, as Document No. A755936;
and any other amounts which may become due and payable under the terms thereof, on the subject property,
the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, agrees that the Development
Contract shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
[Remainder of page is intentionally left blank.
Signature page is to follow.]
338
232919v4
TRADITION CAPITAL BANK
By:
_________________________ [print name]
Its: ______________________ [title]
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF ___________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2024,
by ___________________________________, the _____________________________ of Tradition
Capital Bank, a Minnesota banking corporation, on behalf of said entity.
________________________________________
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
339
232919v4
MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
TRADITION CAPITAL BANK, a Minnesota banking corporation, which holds:
1. a Combination Mortgage, Security Agreement, Fixture Filing and Assignment of Leases and Rents
executed by Charles Cudd Co., LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, as Mortgagor, and
Tradition Capital Bank, a Minnesota banking corporation, as Mortgagee, dated September 15,
2023, filed September 18, 2023, with the Office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota,
as Document No. A764954, securing the amount $12,500,000.00;
AND
2. a Modification of Mortgage, dated June 7, 2024, Filed June 7, 2024, with the Office of the County
Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota, as Document No. A773885;
and any other amounts which may become due and payable under the terms thereof, on the subject property,
the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, agrees that the Development
Contract shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
[Remainder of page is intentionally left blank.
Signature page is to follow.]
340
232919v4
TRADITION CAPITAL BANK
By:
_________________________ [print name]
Its: ______________________ [title]
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF ___________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2024,
by ___________________________________, the ________________________________ of Tradition
Capital Bank, a Minnesota banking corporation, on behalf of said entity.
________________________________________
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen 7700
Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
341
232919v4
MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
MIN 1010104-1000199401-6
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTARTION SYSTEMS, INC., as nominee for
BELL BANK, a North Dakota banking corporation, which holds a mortgage on the subject
property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, which
mortgage is dated January 23, 2024, filed January 23, 2024, in the Office of the County Recorder,
Carver County, Minnesota, as Document No. A769142, securing the amount $350,000.00, agrees
that the Development Contract shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its
mortgage.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC
REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.,
AS NOMINEE FOR BELL BANK
By:
_________________________ [print name]
Its: ______________________ [title]
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF ____________)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of
________________, 2024, by_____________________________________, the
___________________________, of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., a
Delaware corporation, acting solely as nominee for Bell Bank, a North Dakota banking
corporation, on behalf of the entity.
_____________________________________
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market
Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
342
232919v4
MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
TRADITION CAPITAL BANK, a Minnesota banking corporation, which holds a
Mortgage from William I. Hamilton and Susan E. Hamilton, spouses married to each other, to
Tradition Mortgage, LLC dated February 2, 2024, filed February 2, 2024 with the Office of the
County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota, as Document No. A769492 in the principal amount
of $766,550.00, said mortgage assigned to Tradition Capital Bank, a Minnesota banking
corporation, by Assignment of Mortgage, dated February 2, 2024, filed February 2, 2024 with the
Office of the County Recorder, Carver County, Minnesota as Document No. A769493 and any
other amounts which may become due and payable on the subject property, the development of
which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, agrees that the Development Contract
shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage.
Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
TRADITION CAPITAL BANK
By:
_________________________ [print name]
Its: ______________________ [title]
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF ___________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of
_____________, 2024, by ___________________________________, the
________________________________ of Tradition Capital Bank, a Minnesota banking
corporation, on behalf of said entity.
________________________________________
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market
Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
343
232919v4
IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT
No. ___________________
Date: _________________
TO: City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard, Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Dear Sir or Madam:
We hereby issue, for the account of (Name of Developer) and in your favor, our Irrevocable
Letter of Credit in the amount of $____________, available to you by your draft drawn on sight on the
undersigned bank.
The draft must:
a) Bear the clause, "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. __________, dated ________________,
2______, of (Name of Bank) ";
b) Be signed by the Mayor or City Manager of the City of Chanhassen.
c) Be presented for payment at (Address of Bank) , on or before 4:00 p.m. on November 15,
2______.
This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless, at least forty-
five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date (which shall be November 15 of each year), the Bank
delivers written notice to the Chanhassen City Manager that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this
Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S.
Mail, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: Chanhassen
City Manager, Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317, and is
actually received by the City Manager at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal date.
This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which shall not in any way be modified,
amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument, or agreement, whether or not
referred to herein.
This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This is not a Notation Letter of Credit. More than one draw
may be made under this Letter of Credit.
This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the most recent revision of the Uniform Customs and
Practice for Documentary Credits, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 600.
We hereby agree that a draft drawn under and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly
honored upon presentation.
BY: ____________________________________
Its:______________________________
344
232919v4
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
(Developer Installed Improvements)
EXHIBIT "B"
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Right to Proceed. Within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not grade
or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct sewer lines, water lines, streets, utilities, public
or private improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this
agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary
security and fees have been received by the City, 3) the plat has been recorded with the County
Recorder's Office or Registrar of Title's Office of the County where the plat is located, and 4) the City
Engineer has issued a letter that the foregoing conditions have been satisfied and then the Developer
may proceed.
2. Phased Development. If the plat is a phase of a multiphased preliminary plat, the
City may refuse to approve final plats of subsequent phases if the Developer has breached this Contract
and the breach has not been remedied. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until
Development Contracts for such phases are approved by theCity. Park charges and area charges for
sewer and water referred to in this Contract are not being imposed on outlots, if any, in the plat that
are designated in an approved preliminary plat for future subdivision into lots and blocks. Such charges
will be calculated and imposed when the outlots are final platted into lots and blocks.
3. Preliminary Plat Status. If the plat is a phase of a multi-phased preliminary plat, the
preliminary plat approval for all phases not final platted shall lapse and be void unless final platted into
lots and blocks, not outlots, within two (2) years after preliminary plat approval.
4. Changes In Official Controls. For two (2) years from the date of this Contract, no
amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current
urban service area, or official controls shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size,
lot layout or dedications of the approved plat unless required by state or federal law or agreed to in
writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Contract to the
contrary, to the full extent permitted by state law the City may require compliance with any
amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements
enacted after the date of this Contract.
5. Improvements. The improvements specified in the Special Provisions of this Contract
shall be installed in accordance with City standards, ordinances, and plans and specifications which
have been prepared and signed by a competent registered professional engineer furnished to the City
and approved by the City Engineer. The Developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services and other pertinent agencies before proceeding
345
232919v4
with construction. The City will, at the Developer's expense, have one or more construction inspectors
and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part-time basis. The Developer shall also provide a
qualified inspector to perform site inspections on a daily basis. Inspector qualifications shall be
submitted in writing to the City Engineer. The Developer shall instruct its project engineer/inspector
to respond to questions from the City Inspector(s) and to make periodic site visits to satisfy that the
construction is being performed to an acceptable level of quality in accordance with the engineer's
design. The Developer or his engineer shall schedule a preconstruction meeting at a mutually agreeable
time at the City Council chambers with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the
program for the construction work.
6. Iron Monuments. Before the security for the completion of utilities is released, all
monuments must be correctly placed in the ground in accordance with Minn. Stat.§ 505.021. The
Developer's surveyor shall submit a written notice to the City certifying that the monuments have been
installed.
7. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and
contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the
City in conjunction with plat development.
8. Site Erosion and Sediment Control Before the site is rough graded, and before any
utility construction is commenced or building permits are issued, the erosion and sediment control plan,
Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional
erosion and sediment control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the
excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in
that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion and sediment control plan, seed shall be certified
seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized,
mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the
essence in controlling erosion and sediment transport. If the Developer does not comply with the
erosion and sediment control plan and schedule of supplementary instructions received from the City,
the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion and sediment transport at the
Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed
action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations
hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in
full compliance with the erosion and sediment control requirements. Erosion and sediment control
needs to be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored, even if construction has been completed
and accepted. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer
a need for erosion and sediment control, the City will authorize the removal of the erosion and
sediment control, i.e. hay bales and silt fence. The Developer shall remove and dispose of the erosion
and sediment control measures.
8a. Erosion Control During Construction of a Dwelling or Other Building. Before a
building permit is issued for construction of a dwelling or other building on a lot, a $500.00 cash escrow
or letter of credit per lot shall also be furnished to the City to guarantee compliance with City Code§ 7-
22.
346
232919v4
9. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily
clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that
has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns.
10. Acceptance and Ownership of Improvements. Except for streets and utilities
identified as private under the terms of this Agreement, all other improvements lying within
public easements shall become City property upon completion and acceptance by the City of the
work and construction required by this contract. After completion of the improvements, a
representative of the contractor, and a representative of the Developer's engineer will make a final
inspection of the work with the City Engineer. Before the City accepts the improvements, the City
Engineer shall be satisfied that all work is satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved
plans and specifications and the Developer and his engineer shall submit a written statement to the
City Engineer certifying that the project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans
and specifications. The appropriate contractor waivers shall also be provided. Final acceptance of
the public improvements shall be by City Council resolution.
11. Claims. In the event that the City receives claims from laborers, materialmen, or
others that work required by this Contract bas been performed, the sums due them have not been paid,
and the laborers, materialmen, or others are seeking payment out of the financial guarantees posted
with the City, and if the claims are not resolved at least ninety (90) days before the security required
by this Contract will expire, the Developer hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader
action pursuant to Rule 22, Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts, to draw upon
the letters of credit in an amount up to 125% of the claim(s) and deposit the funds in compliance with
the Rule, and upon such deposit, the Developer shall release, discharge, and dismiss the City from
any further proceedings as it pertains to the letters of credit deposited with the District Court, except
that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to determine attorneys' fees.
12. Park Dedication. The Developer shall pay full park dedication fees in conjunction
with the installation of the plat improvements. The park dedication fees shall be the current amount
in force at the time of final platting pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinances and City Council
resolutions.
13. Landscaping. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with Plan D. Unless
otherwise approved by the City, trees not listed in the City's approved tree list are prohibited. The
minimum tree size shall be two and one-half (2½) inches caliper, either bare root in season, or balled
and burlapped. The trees may not be planted in the boulevard (area between curb and property line).
In addition to any sod required as a part of the erosion and sediment control plan, Plan B, the Developer
or lot purchaser shall sod the boulevard area and all drainage ways on each lot utilizing a minimum of
six (6) inches of topsoil as a base. Seed or sod shall also be placed on all disturbed areas of the lot. If
these improvements are not in place at the time a certificate of occupancy is requested, a financial
guarantee of $750.00 in the form of cash or letter of credit shall be provided to the City. These
conditions must then be complied with within two (2) months after the certificate of occupancy issued,
except that if the certificate of occupancy is issued between October 1 through May 1 these conditions
must be complied with by the following July 1st Upon expiration of the time period, inspections will
be conducted by City staff to verify satisfactory completion of all conditions. City
347
232919v4
staff will conduct inspections of incomplete items with a $50.00 inspection fee deducted from the
escrow fund for each inspection. After satisfactory inspection, the financial guarantee shall be returned.
If the requirements are not satisfied, the City may use the security to satisfy the requirements. The
City may also use the escrowed funds for maintenance of erosion control pursuant to City Code Section
7-22 or to satisfy any other requirements ofthis Contract or of City ordinances. These requirements
supplement, but do not replace, specific landscaping conditions that may have been required by the
City Council for project approval.
14. Warranty. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be constructed by it
pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The Developer shall submit
either 1) a warranty/maintenance bond for 100% of the cost of the improvement, or 2) a letter of credit
for twenty-five percent (25%) of the amount of the original cost of the improvements.
A. The required warranty period for materials and workmanship for the utility contractor
installing public sewer and water mains shall be two (2) years from the date of final written City
acceptance of the work.
B. The required warranty period for all work relating to street construction, including
concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, materials and equipment shall be subject to two (2) years
from the date of final written acceptance.
C. The required warranty period for sod, trees , and landscaping is one full growing
season following acceptance by the City.
15. Lot Plans. Prior to the issuance of building permits, an acceptable Grading, Drainage,
Erosion Control including silt fences, and Tree Removal Plan shall be submitted for each lot for review
and approval by the City Engineer. Each plan shall assure that drainage is maintained away from
buildings and that tree removal is consistent with development plans and City Ordinance.
16. Existing Assessments. Any existing assessments against the plat will be re-spread
against the plat in accordance with City standards.
17. Hook-up Charges.. At the time of final plat approval the Developer shall pay
30% of the City Sewer Hook-up charge and 30% of the City Water hook up charge for each lot
in the plat in the amount specified in Special Provision, Paragraph 8, of this Development
Contract. The balance of the hook-up charges is collected at the time building permits are issued
are based on 70% of the rates then in effect, unless a written request is made to assess the costs
over a four year term at the rates in effect at time of application.
18. Public Street Lighting. The Developer shall have installed and pay for public street
lights in accordance with City standards. The public street lights shall be accepted for City ownership
and maintenance at the same time that the public street is accepted for ownership and maintenance.
A plan shall be submitted for the City Engineer's approval prior to the installation. Before the City
signs the final plat, the Developer shall pay the City a fee of $300.00 for each street light installed in
348
232919v4
the plat The fee shall be used by the City for furnishing electricity and maintaining each public street
light for twenty (20) months.
19. Signage. All street signs, traffic signs, and wetland monumentation required by the
City as a part of the plat shall be furnished and installed by the City at the sole expense of the Developer.
20. House Pads. The Developer shall promptly furnish the City "as-built" plans indicating
the amount, type and limits of fill on any house pad location.
21. Responsibility for Costs.
A. The Developer shall pay an administrative fee in conjunction with the installation
of the plat improvements. This fee is to cover the cost of City Staff time and overhead for items such
as review of construction documents, preparation of the Development Contract, monitoring
construction progress, processing pay requests, processing security reductions, and final acceptance of
improvements. This fee does not cover the City's cost for construction inspections. The fee shall be
calculated as follows:
i) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is less than
$500,000, three percent (3%) of construction costs;
ii) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is between $500,000
and
$1,000,000, three percent (3%) of construction costs for the first
$500,000 and two percent (2%) of construction costs over $500,000;
iii) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is over $1,000,000,
two and one-half percent (2½%) of construction costs for the first
$1,000,000 and one and one-half percent (1½%) of construction costs
over $1,000,000.
Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall deposit with the City a fee based upon
construction estimates. After construction is completed, the final fee shall be determined based upon
actual construction costs. The cost of public improvements is defined in paragraph 6 of the Special
Provisions.
B. In addition to the administrative fee, the Developer shall reimburse the City for all
costs incurred by the City for providing construction and erosion and sediment control inspections.
This cost will be periodically billed directly to the Developer based on the actual progress of the
construction. Payment shall be due in accordance with Article 21E of this Agreement.
C. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from
claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat
approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for
all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims,
including attorneys' fees.
349
232919v4
D. In addition to the administrative fee, the Developer shall reimburse the City for
costs incurred in the enforcement of this Contract, including engineering and attorneys' fees.
E. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations
incurred under this Contract within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the
City may halt all plat development work and construction, including but not limited to the issuance of
building permits for lots which the Developer may or may not have sold, until the bills are paid in full.
Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year.
F. In addition to the charges and special assessments referred to herein, other charges
and special assessments may be imposed such as, but not limited to, sewer availability charges
("SAC"), City water connection charges, City sewer connection charges, and building permit fees.
G. Private Utilities. The Developer shall have installed and pay for the installation of
electrical, natural gas, telephone, and cable television service in conjunction with the overall
development improvements. These services shall be provided in accordance with each of the respective
franchise agreements held with the City.
H. The developer shall pay the City a fee established by City Council resolution,
to reimburse the City for the cost of updating the City's base maps, GIS data base files, and converting
the plat and record drawings into an electronic format. Record drawings must be submitted within
four months of final acceptance of public utilities. All digital information submitted to the City shall
be in the Carver County Coordinate system.
22. Developer's Default In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work
to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall
promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given
notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the
City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the
land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost
in whole or in part.
23. Miscellaneous.
A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site construction trailers and temporary job
site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the pre-construction meeting for
installation of public improvements. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty
(30) days following the acceptance of the public improvements unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer.
B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal
service in accordance with the local Postmaster's request.
C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this
Contract. The City is not a guarantor of the Developer's obligations under this Contract. The City
350
232919v4
shall have no responsibility or liability to lot purchasers or others for the City's failure to enforce this
Contract or for allowing deviations from it.
D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Contract by the Developer shall
be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. The City may also issue
a stop work order halting all plat development until the breach has been cured and the City has
received satisfactory assurance that the breach will not reoccur.
E. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or
phrase of this Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion of this Contract.
F. Building Permits. Building permits will not be issued in the plat until sanitary
sewer, watermain, and storm sewer have been installed, tested, and accepted by the City, and the streets
needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the site graded and revegetated in
accordance with Plan B of the development plans.
G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a
waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall
be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's
failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release.
H. Release. This Contract shall run with the land and may be recorded against the
title to the property. After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Contract, at
the Developer's request the City Manager will issue a Certificate of Compliance. Prior to the issuance
of such a certificate, individual lot owners may make as written request for a certificate applicable to
an individual lot allowing a minimum often (10) days for processing.
I. Insurance. Developer shall take out and maintain until six (6) months after the City
has accepted the public improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering
personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of Developer's
work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them.
Limits for bodily injury and death shall be not less than $500,000 for one person and $1,000,000 for
each occurrence; limits for property damage shall be not less than $500,000 for each occurrence; or a
combination single limit policy of $1,000,000 or more. The City shall be named as an additional
insured on the policy, and the Developer shall file with the City a certificate evidencing coverage
prior to the City signing the plat. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given ten (10)
days advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance. The certificate may not contain any
disclaimer for failure to give the required notice.
J. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is
cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, expressed or implied, now or
hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and
every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time
351
232919v4
to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver
of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy.
K. Assignability. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written
permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and
effect even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it.
L. Construction Hours. Construction hours, including pick-up and deliveries of
material and equipment and the operation of any internal combustion engine , may only occur from
7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays with no such activity
allowed on Sundays or on legal holidays. Contractors must require their subcontractors, agents
and supplies to comply with these requirements and the Contractor is responsible for their failure
to do so. Under emergency conditions, this limitation may be waived by the written consent of the
City Engineer. If construction occurs outside of the permitted construction hours, the
Contractor shall pay the following administrative penalties:
First violation
Second violation
Third & subsequent violations
$ 500.00
$ 1,000.00
All site development and construction must
cease for seven (7) calendar days
M. Noise Amplification. The use of outdoor loudspeakers, bullhorns, intercoms, and
similar devices is prohibited in conjunction with the construction of homes , buildings, and the
improvements required under this contract. The administrative penalty for violation of construction
hours shall also apply to violation of the provisions in this paragraph.
N. Access. All access to the plat prior to the City accepting the roadway
improvements shall be the responsibility of the Developer regardless if the City has issued building
permits or occupancy permits for lots within the plat.
0. Street Maintenance. The Developer shall be responsible for all street maintenance
until streets within the plat are accepted by the City. Warning signs shall be placed by the Developer
when hazards develop in streets to prevent the public from traveling on same and directing attention to
detours. If streets become impassable, the City may order that such streets shall be barricaded and
closed. The Developer shall maintain a smooth roadway surface and provide proper surface drainage.
The Developer may request, in writing, that the City plow snow on the streets prior to final acceptance
of the streets. The City shall have complete discretion to approve or reject the request. The City shall
not be responsible for reshaping or damage to the street base or utilities because of snow plowing
operations. The provision of City snow plowing service does not constitute final acceptance of the
streets by the City.
P. Storm Sewer Maintenance. The Developer shall be responsible for cleaning and
maintenance of the storm sewer system (including ponds, pipes, catch basins, culverts and swales)
within the plat and the adjacent off-site storm sewer system that receives storm water from the plat.
The Developer shall follow all instructions it receives from the City concerning the cleaning and
352
232919v4
maintenance of the storm sewer system. The Developer's obligations under this paragraph shall end
two (2) years after the public street and storm drainage improvements in the plat have been accepted
by the City. Twenty percent (20%) of the storm sewer costs, shown under section 6 of the special
provisions of this contract, will be held by the City for the duration of the 2-year maintenance period.
Q. Soil Treatment Systems. If soil treatment systems are required, the Developer
shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are first
provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the platting process for each lot. This shall be
done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render
them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to
obtain a building permit.
R Variances. By approving the plat, the Developer represents that all lots in the plat
are buildable without the need for variances from the City's ordinances.
S. Compliance with Laws. Ordinances. and Regulations. In the development of the
plat the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities:
l . City of Chanhassen;
2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions;
3. United States Army Corps of Engineers;
4. Watershed District(s);
5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions.
T. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall furnish the City with evidence
satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers to
enter into this Development Contract.
U. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no
representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for
construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of
such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the
City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of
the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or
pollutants were caused to be there by the City.
V. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on
the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature of suitability
of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. On lots which have
no fill material a soils report from a qualified soils engineer is not required unless the City's building
inspection department determines from observation that there may be a soils problem. On lots with
fill material that have been mass graded as part of a multi-lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report
from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided before the City issues a building permit for the lot.
On lots with fill material that have been custom graded, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified
soils engineer shall be provided before the City inspects the foundation for a building on the lot.
353
232919v4
W. Haul Routes. The Developer, the Developer's contractors or subcontractors
must submit proposed haul routes for the import or export of soil , construction material,
construction equipment or construction debris, or any other purpose. All haul routes must be
approved by the City Engineer
X. Development Signs. The Developer shall post a six foot by eight foot
development sign in accordance with City Detail Plate No . 5313 at each entrance to the project.
The sign shall be in place before construction of the required improvements commences and shall
be removed when the required improvements are completed., except for the final lift of asphalt on
streets. The signs shall contain the following information: project name, name of developer,
developer's telephone number and designated contact person, allowed construction hours.
Y. Construction Plans. Upon final plat approval, the developer shall provide the
City with two complete sets of full -size construction plans and four sets of 11"xl 7" reduced
construction plan sets and three sets of specifications. Within four months after the completion of
the utility improvements and base course pavement and before the security is released, the Developer
shall supply the City with the following: (1) a complete set of reproducible Mylar as-built plans, (2)
two complete full-size sets of blue line/paper as-built plans, (3) two complete sets of utility tie sheets,
(4) location of buried fabric used for soil stabilization, (5) location stationing and swing ties of all
utility stubs including draintile cleanouts, (6) bench mark network, (7) digital file of as-built plans in
both .dxf & .tif format (the .dxf file must be tied to the current county coordinate system), (8) digital
file of utility tie sheets in either .doc or .tif format, and (9) a breakdown of lineal footage of all utilities
installed, including the per lineal foot bid price. The Developer is required to submit the final plat in
electronic format.
Z. As-Built Lot Surveys. An as-built lot survey will be required on all lots prior to
the Certificate of Occupancy being issued. The as-built lot survey must be prepared, signed, and dated
by a Registered Land Surveyor. Sod and the bituminous driveways must be installed before the as-
built survey is completed. If the weather conditions at the time of the as-built are not conducive to
paving the driveway and/or installing sod, a temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued and the
as-built escrow withheld until all work is complete.
354
AVIENDA TOWNHOMES ADDITIONKNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Level 7 Development, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, owner of thefollowing described property situated in the County of Carver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1; Lot 2, Block 2; Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, Block 3; Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 4; Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and11, Block 5; and Outlot D, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION and does hereby dedicate to the public for publicuse the public ways as shown on this plat.In witness whereof said Level 7 Development, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, has caused these presents to be signed by itsproper officer this _________ day of ______________________, 20____.LEVEL 7 DEVELOPMENT, LLC_____________________________________________(Title)________________________________________STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ______________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________________________, 20____ by___________________________________, its ____________________of Level 7 Development, LLC, a Minnesota limited liabilitycompany, on behalf of the company.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Charles Cudd Co., LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, owner of the following described property situated in the County ofCarver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lot 4, Block 1 and Lot 11, Block 5, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Charles Cudd Co., LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, has caused these presents to be signed by its properofficer this _________ day of _______________________, 20____.CHARLES CUDD CO., LLC_____________________________________________(Title)________________________________________STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ______________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________________________, 20____ by___________________________________, its ____________________of Charles Cudd Co., LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company,on behalf of the company.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Robert F. Prince and Jennifer Kenis Prince, husband and wife, as owners of the following described property situated the County ofCarver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lot 5, Block 1, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Robert F. Prince and Jennifer Kenis Prince have hereunto set our hands this _______________ day of_____________________, 20____.________________________________________________Robert F. PrinceJennifer Kenis PrinceSTATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ___________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________, 20____ by Robert F. Prince andJennifer Kenis Prince, husband and wife.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Todd David Michels, a single person, fee owner of the following described property:Lot 1, Block 2, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWNHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Todd David Michels, a single person, has hereunto set his hand this ______ day of_________________________________, 20____.________________________________Todd David MichelsSTATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF _________________________________This instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ________________________________, 20____ by Todd David Michels.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Debra A. Jungclaus, a single person, fee owner of the following described property:Lot 3, Block 2, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWNHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Debra A. Jungclaus, a single person, has hereunto set her hand this ______ day of_________________________________, 20____.____________________________Debra A. JungclausSTATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF _________________________________This instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ________________________________, 20____ by Debra A. Jungclaus.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That David Schliesman and Sarah Schliesman, husband and wife, as owners of the following described property situated the County ofCarver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lot 1, Block 4, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said David Schliesman and Sarah Schliesman have hereunto set our hands this _______________ day of_____________________, 20____._____________________________________________David SchliesmanSarah SchliesmanSTATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ___________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________, 20____ by David Schliesman and SarahSchliesman, husband and wife.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Dennis H. Heppelmann and Jeanne A. Heppelmann, husband and wife, as owners of the following described property situated theCounty of Carver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lot 1, Block 5, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Dennis H. Heppelmann and Jeanne A. Heppelmann have hereunto set our hands this _______________ day of_____________________, 20____.______________________________________________Dennis H. HeppelmannJeanne A. HeppelmannSTATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ___________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________, 20____ by Dennis H. Heppelmann andJeanne A. Heppelmann, husband and wife.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Kelly Patton and Karen Patton, husband and wife, as owners of the following described property situated the County of Carver, Stateof Minnesota, to wit:Lot 1, Block 6, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Kelly Patton and Karen Patton have hereunto set our hands this _______________ day of_____________________, 20____._____________________________________________Kelly PattonKaren PattonSTATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ___________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________, 20____ by Kelly Patton and KarenPatton, husband and wife.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Carver County Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, owner of the following described property situated in the Countyof Carver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lot 2, Block 6, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Carver County Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, has caused these presents to be signed by itsproper officer this _________ day of _______________________, 20____.CARVER COUNTY HOLDINGS, LLC_____________________________________________(Title)________________________________________STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ______________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________________________, 20____ by___________________________________, its ____________________of Carver County Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liabilitycompany, on behalf of the company.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That JDV Investments, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, owner of the following described property situated in the County ofCarver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lot 3, Block 6, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said JDV Investments, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, has caused these presents to be signed by its properofficer this _________ day of _______________________, 20____.JDV INVESTMENTS, LLC_____________________________________________(Title)________________________________________STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ______________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________________________, 20____ by___________________________________, its ____________________of JDV Investments, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company,on behalf of the company.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That William I. Hamilton and Susan E. Hamilton, husband and wife, as owners of the following described property situated the County ofCarver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lot 4, Block 6, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said William I. Hamilton and Susan E. Hamilton have hereunto set our hands this _______________ day of_____________________, 20____._______________________________________________William I. Hamilton Susan E. HamiltonSTATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ___________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________, 20____ by William I. Hamilton andSusan E. Hamilton, husband and wife.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Cara L. Black and Sherman L. Black, as Trustees of the Cara L. Black Revocable Trust U/A dated April 17, 2008, owner of thefollowing described property situated in the City of Chanhassen, County of Carver, State of Minnesota:Lot 5, Block 6, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Cara L. Black and Sherman L. Black, Trustees of the Cara L. Black Revocable Trust U/A dated April 17, 2008, havehereunto set their hands this ______ day of _________________________________, 20____._____________________________________________________________________________Cara L. Black, Trustee of theSherman L. Black, Trustee of theCara L. Black Revocable Trust U/ACara L. Black Revocable Trust U/Adated April 17, 2008dated April 17, 2008STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF _________________________________This instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ________________________________, 20____ by Cara L. Black andSherman L. Black, as Trustees of the Cara L. Black Revocable Trust U/A dated April 17, 2008.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Bobertz Living Trust dated May 31, 2013, owner of the following described property situated in the City of Chanhassen, County ofCarver, State of Minnesota:Lot 6, Block 6, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Bobertz Living Trust dated May 31, 2013, have hereunto set their hand this ______ day of_________________________________, 20____.____________________________________________TrusteeBobertz Living Trustdated May 31, 2013STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF _________________________________This instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ________________________________, 20____ by____________________, Trustee of the Bobertz Living Trust dated May 31, 2013.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Sungsook Kim Revocable Trust dated December 30, 2021, owner of the following described property situated in the City ofChanhassen, County of Carver, State of Minnesota:Lot 7, Block 6, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Sungsook Kim Revocable Trust dated December 30, 2021, have hereunto set their hand this ______ day of_________________________________, 20____.____________________________________________TrusteeSungsook Kim Revocable Trustdated December 30, 2021STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF _________________________________This instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ________________________________, 20____ by__________________, Trustee of Sungsook Kim Revocable Trust dated December 30, 2021.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Timothy D. Foster and Teresa A. Foster, husband and wife, as owners of the following described property situated the County ofCarver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lot 8, Block 6, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Timothy D. Foster and Teresa A. Foster have hereunto set our hands this _______________ day of_____________________, 20____.______________________________________________________Timothy D. Foster Teresa A. FosterSTATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ___________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________, 20____ by Timothy D. Foster andTeresa A. Foster, husband and wife.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Avienda Villas II Association, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, owner of the following described property situated in the County ofCarver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Outlot B and Outlot C, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Avienda Villas II Association, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, has caused these presents to be signed by itsproper officer this _________ day of _______________________, 20____.AVIENDA VILLAS II ASSOCIATION_____________________________________________(Title)________________________________________STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ______________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________________________, 20____ by___________________________________, its ____________________of Avienda Villas II Association, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation,on behalf of the corporation.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________That Avienda Villas I Association, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, owner of the following described property situated in the County ofCarver, State of Minnesota, to wit:Outlot F, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES, Carver County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as AVIENDA TOWHOMES ADDITION.In witness whereof said Avienda Villas I Association, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, has caused these presents to be signed by itsproper officer this _________ day of _______________________, 20____.AVIENDA VILLAS I ASSOCIATION_____________________________________________(Title)________________________________________STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ______________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________________________, 20____ by___________________________________, its ____________________of Avienda Villas I Association, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation,on behalf of the corporation.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires ________________________I, Lynn P. Caswell, do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a dulyLicensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that allmathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plat have been, or willbe correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01,Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on thisplat.Dated this _________ day of ___________________, 20____._______________________________________________Lynn P. Caswell, Licensed Land SurveyorMinnesota License Number 13057STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ______________________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _________ day of _________________________, 20____ byLynn P. Caswell.(Sign)_____________________________________________(Print)_____________________________________________Notary Public, _________________ County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires _________________________355
Δ ΔΔΔ
ΔΔΔΔ
Δ
ΔΔNot TangentΔL=116.60Δ=27°50'08"131.1259.69N47°54'08"W 157.29L=199.85Δ=47°42'40"LYMAN BOULEVARD(C.S.A.H. NO. 18)S52°50'29"E 580.68
L=433.23R=1815.00Δ=13°40'34"OUTLOT DWest line of OUTLOT C, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES1358680
80
103Right of Way width variesAll of OUTLOT D is Drainage and Utility Easementper plat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMES
6060
60ΔΔS01°05'17"W 1201.162560Drainage & Utility Easementper Doc. No. A574725L=60.42Δ=1°54'27"60.00LS #43933LS #21729LS #21729LS #21729LS #21729LS #23021Wet LandWetLand Wet Land
AVIENDA TOWNHOMES ADDITIONDenotes 1/2 inch iron pipe monument found and markedby License No. 24332, unless otherwise shown.Denotes 1/2 inch by 14 inch iron pipe monument set, or tobe set within one year of platting, and marked by LicenseNo. 13057Bearings shown are based upon the west line of Outlot C,AVIENDA TOWNHOMES which has an assumed bearingof N01°05'17"E.NORTH0601201 INCH = 60 FEETSCALE IN FEETINSET A(SEE SHEET 3 OF 4 SHEETS)INSET B(SEE SHEET 4 OF 4 SHEETS)INSET A(SEE SHEET 3 OF 4 SHEETS)CITY COUNCIL OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTAThis plat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMES ADDITION was approved and accepted by the City Council of Chanhassen, Minnesotaat a regular meeting thereof held on this ______ day of ____________________, 20____, and said plat is in compliance withthe provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subdivision 2.By:____________________________________________ MayorBy:____________________________________________ ClerkCOUNTY SURVEYOR, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTAPursuant to Chapter 395, Minnesota Laws of 1971, this plat has been approved this ______ day of___________________________, 20____.Brian E. Praske, County SurveyorBy: ____________________________________________COUNTY AUDITOR, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTAI hereby certify that taxes payable in _____________ and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat.Dated this ______ day of _________________________, 20____.Crystal Campos, County AuditorBy: ____________________________________________COUNTY RECORDER, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTAI hereby certify that this plat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMES ADDITION was filed this ______ day of ____________________,20____, at ______ o'clock ___. M. as Document No. __________________________.Kaaren Lewis, County RecorderBy: ____________________________________________356
OUTLOT DAll of OUTLOT D is Drainage and Utility Easementper plat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMES
ΔS52°50'29"E 580.68 L=199.85R=240.00Δ=47°42'40"N58°09'43"W 69.13N20°07'11"W 283.96N4
3
°
5
2
'
3
1
"W
1
2
3
.
0
5
N64°31'23"E 22.36S15°24'41"W 80.84N28°51
'00
"W
78
.85S63°42'44"E 29.36S65°49'35"E 25.5027.21S29°04'55"ES01°05'17"W 385.00S01°05'17"W 220.00N88°54'43"W 99.00S01°05'17"W 220.00N01°05'17"E 385.00S88°54'43"E 99.00
29.64
29.64 N23°34'16"E 101.40S66°
2
5
'
4
4
"
E
5
3
.
5
4
S75°33'27"E 55.88S84°45'32"E 52.03N89°37'00"E 110.16S00°23'00"E 101.22N89°37'00"E 115.55 S84°45'23"E 66.00 S75°32'58"E 70.55 S66°25'44"E 61.96
N01°05'17"E 381.72S01°05'17"W 381.72S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S01°05'17"W 271.67N01°05'17"E 271.67S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S00°59'45"W 99.00S88°54'43"E 164.86 S01°05'17"W 64.07R=1825.00 Δ=1°06'31"L=35.31 C.Brg.=S07°19'38"ES88°54'43"E 159.85
(Concave to East)N18°48'44"E 101.75N10°35'55"E 101.69N02°40'47"E 101.36S00°23'00"E 101.22S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
N88°54'43"W 99.00
N88°54'43"W 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
N88°54'43"W 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S88°54'43"E 99.00
S01°05'17"W 99.00S01°05'17"W 99.0060.00L=60.42Δ=1°54'27"55.1655.0055.00 60.57
55.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0051.7251.7255.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0051.6755.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0055.0051.67159.85 159.85 159.85
164.86164.86164.86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
321
5
4
3
2
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1 2 3 4 5
3
4
5
1
2
OUTLOT C
OUTLOT COUTLOT B
S88°54'43"E 115.21
L=31.42 R=20.00Δ=90°00'00"S01°05'17"W 145.00L=12
5.66
R
=
8
0
.00Δ
=
9
0°
0
0
'
0
0"
S88°54'43"E 105.00
S88°54'43"E 105.00 L=31.42 R=20.00Δ=90°00'00"S01°05'17"W 145.00L=1
2
5
.
6
6
R
=80.00Δ=
9
0
°
0
0'00"
S88°54'43"E 122.32
66556
6
5
5
5
6
5 6
6
6
5
5
6
6
6
5
5
5 566565Drainage & Utility Easement perplat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMESDrainage & Utility Easement per platof AVIENDA TOWNHOMESDrainage & Utility Easement per platof AVIENDA TOWNHOMES
Drainage & Utility Easement perplat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMESAll of OUTLOT C is Drainage & UtilityEasement per plat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMES
All of OUTLOT B is Drainage & Utility Easement
per plat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMESDrainage & Utility Easement perplat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMESDrainage & Utility Easement perplat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMESDrainage & Utility Easement per
plat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMES L=433.23R=1815.00Δ=13°40'34"S01°05'17"W 1201.16ΔΔ6060
6046.03R=10.00 L=11.20Δ=64°09'29" C.Brg.=N56°49'59"W14.00Not TangentNot TangentAll of OUTLOT C is Drainage & UtilityEasement per plat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMESWest line of OUTLOT C, AVIENDA TOWNHOMES2560Drainage & Utility Easementper Doc. No. A574725LS #43933LS #23021Wet LandWetLand
AVIENDA TOWNHOMES ADDITIONDenotes 1/2 inch iron pipe monument found and markedby License No. 24332, unless otherwise shown.Denotes 1/2 inch by 14 inch iron pipe monument set, or tobe set within one year of platting, and marked by LicenseNo. 13057Bearings shown are based upon the west line of Outlot C,AVIENDA TOWNHOMES which has an assumed bearingof N01°05'17"E.INSET ANORTH040801 INCH = 40 FEETSCALE IN FEET357
ΔΔΔΔΔΔΔ
S75°03'05"E 56.50S76°54'20"E 70.64N90°00'00"E 237.35N78°49'22"W 110.90S12°01'2
1
"
W
1
1
1
.
1
2
S77°58'39"E 60.30S82°49'41"E 66.07S89°59'33"E 177.37S85°27'40"E 55.89S81°24'57"E 53.21S75°05'21"E 56.50S14°56
'
5
5
"
W
1
0
8
.
0
056.5056.5064.3755.5855.3356.9556.5056.5067.40S09°36'1
2
"
W
1
1
2
.
0
4
N03°55'46"E 108.25
N00°00'00"E 108.00
S00°00'00"E 108.01
S00°00'00"E 108.02
S05°55'57"W 11
3
.
0
5
S14°5
6
'
5
5
"
W
1
0
8
.
0
4N72°11'01"E 149.54N16°24'52"W 81.43105.12
106.04
102.24
102.00
102.00
102.00
107.04
102.0
0
102.0
0Drainage & Utility Easement perplat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMESDrainage & Utility Easement perplat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMES123456786OUTLOT FAll of OUTLOT F is Drainage & Utility Easementper plat of AVIENDA TOWNHOMESAVIENDA TOWNHOMES ADDITIONDenotes 1/2 inch iron pipe monument found and markedby License No. 24332, unless otherwise shown.Denotes 1/2 inch by 14 inch iron pipe monument set, or tobe set within one year of platting, and marked by LicenseNo. 13057Bearings shown are based upon the west line of Outlot C,AVIENDA TOWNHOMES which has an assumed bearingof N01°05'17"E.INSET BNORTH030601 INCH = 30 FEETSCALE IN FEET358
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Approve Contract for Adding Bluetooth Enabled Card Readers to the Public
Works Overhead Bay Doors
File No.Item No: D.11
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Rick Rice, IT Manager
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council approves the state bid contract from Pro-tec Design for the addition
of five card readers for five overhead doors at the Public Works facility."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Asset Management
SUMMARY
There are five exterior overhead roll up doors in the vehicle storage area at the Public Works facility.
These doors are currently controlled by induction loops that are active only when the building security
system is unarmed. This leaves these doors unsecured while staff are working in the office area and for
when the building is used for after hours meetings, elections, and cleaning. The bluetooth enabled card
readers are being added to allow the doors to be secured without arming the security system and to be
opened with the use of a bluetooth app on a mobile device. The doors will be reconfigured to be
managed by the cities access control system instead of the security system.
The project quote from Pro-tec Design is covered on State Contract Release S-813(5), Pro-Tec Contract
# 184435.
BACKGROUND
359
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
This project was approved and funded in the 2024 CIP.
RECOMMENDATION
The Chanhassen City Council Approves A Contract Of $21,685.16 With Pro-Tec Design For The Addition Of Five
Card Readers For The Overhead Doors At The Public Works Facility.
ATTACHMENTS
Pro-Tec Design - Overhead Door Reader Additions
360
361
362
363
364
365
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Resolution 2024-XX: Approval to enter into a Cooperative Grant Agreement
with Great River Greening for the Lake Ann Park Preserve
File No.Item No: D.12
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Recreation Director
Reviewed By Jerry Ruegemer
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council adopts a resolution authorizing the city to execute a cooperative grant
agreement with Great River Greening for woodland enhancement for the Lake Ann Park Preserve."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Asset Management
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
Annually, Great River Greening - working with its partners - restores at least 6,000 acres of habitat on
public lands and engages 5,000 volunteers and community members in the implementation of these
restoration projects. They currently work throughout Minnesota but have deep programmatic roots in
the Twin Cities Metro, Anoka Sandplain, Canon River watershed, and Minnesota River watershed.
Their team of ecologists have broad experience and training, working on a range of sites, including
county and city parks, wildlife management areas, and scientific and natural areas. Partners have
366
included the US Fish & Wildlife Service, the Department of Natural Resources, and hundreds of city
and county landowners across Minnesota.
DISCUSSION
The Lake Ann Park Preserve has been isolated from public access for many years, which has allowed a
high-quality maple basswood forest to flourish in the central area of the property. Invasive species, such
as buckthorn, garlic mustard, reed canary grass, and narrow-leaved cattails are creeping into the site
along the edges of the property, but much of the area is high quality and represents historic vegetative
communities. The most prominent invasive species on the property is buckthorn, which is dense within
the forested fringes and adjacent private properties.
Great River Greening (GRG) will restore and enhance 100 acres of forest habitat. Projects include
invasive tree removal, tree stand thinning, onsite biochar processing, planting and seeding native grass
and wildflowers, planting climate-resilient large stock and bare-root trees and shrubs, understory
management, herbicide application and spot-spraying, and prescribed burning. GRG will be
implementing the use of a mobile biochar system to process biomass, reduce offsite disposal, minimize
the environmental impacts of pile burning, and incorporate biochar onsite to promote healthier soil.
Below is a description of project details, grant timelines, and grant funding available for the Lake Ann
Park Preserve.
Metro Big Rivers Phase 13 - active July 2023 - June 2028
BIG132, Lake Ann Park Preserve Phase 1
40 acres of forest enhancement
Project budget = $139,600 (including $112,800 in contracting, $5,000 in supplies, and
$21,800 in GRG staff time and travel)
Requested cash match from City = $20,000 (total over the duration of the grant for GRG
operational costs)
Metro Big Rivers Phase 14 - active July 2024 - June 2029
BIG141, Lake Ann Park Preserve Phase 2
60 acres of forest enhancement
Project budget = $210,700 (including $180,000 in contracting, $7,500 in supplies, and
$23,200 in GRG staff time and travel)
Requested cash match from City = $22,000 (total over the duration of the grant for GRG
operational costs)
Collectively, these grant budgets can be combined to work on the approximately 100 acres of woodland
and adjacent wetlands focusing on invasive buckthorn removal, follow-up control, and ash removal, in
the newer portion of the Lake Ann Park Preserve. Great River Greening staff will provide the oversight
and coordination for the design and implementation of the contracted natural resource management
work, with full approval from the city, as funded by the OHF grants described above. The broad
timeline for the project would be as follows:
Fall / Winter 2024/2025
1st year buckthorn cut and stump treat. The material would be slash-cut flush with the
ground to decompose. Possible pile burning where the material is denser.
Fall / Winter 2024 (or Fall / Winter 2025 if access after buckthorn initial removal is
367
required)
Selective removal hazard trees ( Emerald ash borer affected trees)
2025 through spring 2029 -
Multiple years of buckthorn follow-up control (summer brush cut w/ fall herbicide
treatment)
As needed BT grass understory seed mix
Garlic mustard treatment and mapping
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
The Chanhassen City Council adopts a resolution authorizing the city to execute a cooperative grant
agreement with Great River Greening for woodland enhancement for the Lake Ann Park Preserve.
ATTACHMENTS
Lake Ann Park Preserve Feasibility Study 19 November 2019 Reduced
BIG132 and BIG141 Lake Ann City of Chanhassen Cooperative Agreement
Resolution To Approve Grant Agreement Great River Greening_10-14-24.docx
368
LAKE ANN
PARK PRESERVE
FEASIBILITY
STUDY
NOVEMBER 25, 2019
369
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Elise Ryan
Council Member Dan Campion
Council Member Julia Coleman
Council Member Jerry McDonald
Council Member Bethany Tjornhom
CHANHASSEN PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
Jim Boettcher, Chair
Meredith Petouvis, Vice Chair
Matt Kutz
Haley Pemrick
Joseph Scanlon
Sandy Sweetser
Karl Tsuchiya
CHANHASSEN CITY STAFF
Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director
Adam Beers, Park Superintendent
Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resource Specialist
Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
INTRODUCTION 1-1
Study Purpose 1-1
Project Background 1-2
EXISTING CONDITIONS 2-1
Site Analysis 2-1
Natural Resource Analysis 2-4
CONCEPT PLAN 3-1
Concept Plan 3-1
IMPLEMENTATION 4-1
Cost Estimate 4-1
Permitting 4-3
Project Phasing 4-4
Construction Access and Staging 4-4
Funding Sources 4-5
LAKE ANN FEASIBILITY STUDY II 370
STUDY PURPOSE
This study addresses feasibility and pricing for the creation of a trail network
at the newly acquired City property known as the Lake Ann Park Preserve.
The study’s purpose is to understand the design limitations of the site,
develop a conceptual development plan, and estimate the overall project
cost.
The design has been vetted through public outreach, staff input, and Park
and Recreation Commission and City Council review. The design will be
further refined as construction documents are developed. The design shown
in this document is used to develop cost estimates and changes may impact
the final cost of development of the park preserve.
Pricing reflects planning level estimates that take into account site conditions
as they are understood today. Final costs may vary based on future labor
and material costs, inflation, and unforeseen circumstances that may be
discovered as part of the next phase of design and engineering.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
LOCATION
Chanhassen is a city of approximately 26,000 people in the southwest part
of the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The city is often listed among
the best places to live nationally, in part based on the strength of the outdoor
recreation offerings of parks, trails, and lakes.
Lake Ann Park Preserve
Lake Ann
Lake Lucy
Arboretum Blvd / 5Galpin BlvdHazeltine BlvdPowers BlvdLake Ann Park
Greenwood
Shores Park
1 INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION 1-1 NOVEMBER 2019 371
LOCAL CONTEXT
LAKE ANN AND LAKE LUCY
Lake Lucy sits at the northern portion of the parkland. The lake is 87.5 acres
and reaches a depth of 20 feet. The Lake Lucy watershed is 994 acres and
encompasses many of the neighborhoods to the northwest, as well as some
wetland and park space. The wetland portion of Lake Ann Park Preserve
drains into Lake Lucy.
Lake Lucy then drains into Lake Ann on the south side of the site. Lake Ann
gets up to 45 feet deep with a surface area of 115.7 acres. The Lake Ann
watershed is much smaller at 252 acres, which is nearly a 1 to 1 ratio of lake
surface and land surface area. The watershed is made up of parkland and
undeveloped private land. This results in very little negative impact to the
water flowing overland into Lake Ann.
ADJACENT GREEN SPACE
Lake Ann Park sits on the south shore of Lake Ann, between the lake and
Highway 5. The park has ballfields to the south, playgrounds, a beach, and
picnic shelters near the water, and wooded trails on the west. The park is
a popular community park in Chanhassen. It is actively programmed and
hosts many visitors and events. The parkland also encompasses a trail
corridor along the eastern edge of the lake. The corridor width varies, but is
is typically approximately 75’ wide.
Greenwood Shores Park is a public park on the northeast corner of Lake
Ann. There is a swimming beach and a picnic shelter.
While the land to the southwest of Lake Ann is not public, it is worth noting
that the property has not been intensely developed and helps Lake Ann
retain its natural, undeveloped character.
NEW NEIGHBORHOOD
Lake Lucy and Lake Ann define much of the north and south edges of
the new parkland, but the new neighborhood development to the west
will also play a role in the character of the park. Trail connections to that
neighborhood will allow residents of Chanhassen to access the parkland
from the west side of the city.
Lake Ann
Lake Lucy
P
ow
e
r
s
B
l
v
d
Galpin BlvdHazeltine Blvd Lake Lucy2018What’s happening
Dive deeper
Aquatic plants
Dunne, M. and Newman, R. 2017. Aquatic Plant Community of
Lakes Lucy, Mitchell, Susan, Riley and Staring: Annual Report for
2016. University of Minnesota.
JaKa, J. and Newman, R. 2014. Aquatic Plant Community of
Lakes Ann, Lotus, Lucy, Mitchell, Susan, Riley and Staring within
the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed: Final Report 2009 –
2014. University of Minnesota.
Wenck Associates Inc. 2015. Lake Lucy Aquatic Plant
Management Plan.
Watershed study
BARR Engineering. 2013. Lake Lucy and Lake Ann:
Use Attainability Analysis.
Carp management
Bajer P.G., Headrick,M., Miller B. D. and Sorensen
P. W. 2014. Development and implementation of
a sustainable strategy to control common carp in
Riley Creek Chain of Lakes. U of M.
Stormwater ponds
RPBCWD. 2013. Stormwater pond project.
Interested in learning more? Explore the following reports on our website.
18681 Lake Drive East
Chanhassen, MN
55317
Contact usDISTRICT OFFICE CONTACT INFO
952.607.6512
info@rpbcwd.org
rpbcwd.org
FIND US ON
instagram
facebook
twitter
and find out how you
can get involved
Zebra mussels, an aquatic invasive species (AIS) were discovered in Lake Riley in October 2018. This is the first lake within the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District where they have been spotted. Zebra mussels live in dense clusters and can spread quickly. They attach to docks, boats, rocks, logs, and other surfaces in the lake, and can threaten recreation and the underwater ecosystem. The District will continue to monitor the zebra mussel population in Lake Riley, and work with our partners to try to prevent this species from spreading to other lakes. ZEBRA MUSSELS FOUND IN LAKE RILEYDecreasing pollution, beautifying your yard, and creating habitat are all possible through a cost-share grant with the watershed district. The district’s cost-share grant program was created to help community members implement clean water projects. These could be projects that conserve water, like rainwater reuse systems, or projects that clean water, like raingardens. Awards: up to $5000
(25% homeowner match)
Technical help available
Interested? Contact:
952-607-6481
mjordan@rpbcwd.org
GRANTS AVAILABLE FOR PROJECTS THAT HELP PROTECT CLEAN WATER Lake Lucy is the headwaters to Riley Creek.
Water flows out of Lucy to Lake Ann and then
Riley Creek. On its way south to the Minnesota
River, Riley Creek passes through Lakes Susan,
Rice Marsh, and Riley.
Size 88 acres
Volume 558 acre-ft
Average depth 6.5 ft
Max depth 20 ft
Watershed size 997 acres
Land draining directly into 111 acres
MPCA lake classification Shallow
Impairment listing Mercury
Trophic status Eutrophic
Common fish Bluegill, Northern Pike,
Yellow Bullhead
Invasive species
Curlyleaf Pondweed,
Eurasian Watermilfoil,
Common Carp
Water that falls anywhere within the white border
drains to Lake Lucy.
CHARACTERISTICS
WATERSHED BOUNDARIES
45% Residential
14% Open Water
39% Open Space
LAND USE in the Lake Lucy Watershed
N
2% Commercial
Celebrating our 50th Anniversary in 2019. Learn more at www.rpbcwd.org/50years
You can help!
Remember to
always clean,
drain, and dry any
watercraft and
equipment when
leaving a lake.
Lake Ann
Located in Chanhassen, Lake Ann is at the
headwaters of Riley Creek. Over the past 40
years, Lake Ann has consistently met Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency clean water standards.
What’s happening
DIVE DEEPER
Aquatic plants
Johnson, J. 2017. 2017 Aquatic Plan Survey: Lake Ann.
JaKa, J. and Newman, R. 2014. Aquatic Plant Community of
Lakes Ann, Lotus, Lucy, Mitchell, Susan, Riley and Staring
within the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed: Final
Report 2009 – 2014. University of Minnesota.
Watershed study
BARR Engineering. 2013. Lake Lucy and Lake Ann: Use
Attainability Analysis.
Lake Ann
Lake Lucy
Powers BlvdN
Stormwater ponds
RPBCWD. 2013. Stormwater pond project.
Carp management
Bajer P.G., Headrick,M., Miller B. D. and Sorensen
P. W. 2014. Development and implementation
of a sustainable strategy to control common
carp in Riley Creek Chain of Lakes. University of
Minnesota.
2018
Size 119 acres
Volume 2005 acre-ft
Average depth 16.8 ft
Max depth 40 ft
Watershed size 250 acres
Land draining directly into 105 acres
MPCA lake classification Deep
Impairment listing Mercury
Trophic status Mesotrophic
Common fish Bluegill, White Sucker,
Black Crappie, Yellow Perch
Invasive species
Curlyleaf Pondweed,
Eurasian Watermilfoil,
Common Carp, Brittle
Naiad
Water that falls anywhere within the
white border drains to Lake Ann.
Interested in learning more? Explore the following reports on our website.
18681 Lake Drive East
Chanhassen, MN
55317
Contact usDISTRICT OFFICECONTACT INFO
952.607.6512
info@rpbcwd.org
rpbcwd.org
FIND US ON
instagram
facebook
twitter
and find out how you
can get involved
In Summer 2018, District staff completed a series of fish surveys on local lakes,
including Lake Ann. Staff set fyke nets near the shoreline, and fish swam in and
became trapped. After a 24-hour period, they removed the nets and took an
inventory of all fish inside, before releasing the fish back into the lake.
These surveys help us to better understand the wildlife in local lakes, and
assists the District in planning for future management. Species found in
Lake Ann include black crappie, bluegill, common carp, green sunfish, hybrid
sunfish, largemouth bass, northern pike, pumpkinseed, yellow bullhead, yellow
perch. Nine painted turtles and one snapping turtle were also recorded during
this survey.
LAKE ANN FISH SURVEY
CHARACTERISTICS
WATERSHED BOUNDARIES
Hwy 5
6% Farmland
2% Residential
45% Open Water
47% Open Space
LAND USE in the Lake Ann Watershed
Celebrating our 50th Anniversary in 2019. Learn more at www.rpbcwd.org/50years
ZEBRA MUSSELS FOUND IN LAKE RILEY
Zebra mussels, an aquatic invasive species (AIS) were discovered in Lake Riley in
October 2018. This is the first lake within the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed
District where they have been spotted. Zebra mussels live in dense clusters and can
spread quickly. They attach to docks, boats, rocks, logs, and other surfaces in the lake,
and can threaten recreation and the underwater ecosystem.
The District will continue to monitor the zebra mussel population in Lake Riley, and work
with our partners to try to prevent this species from spreading to other lakes. You can
help! Remember to always clean, drain, and dry any watercraft and equipment when
leaving a lake.
The beach at Lake Ann Park Greenwood Shores Park
The watersheds for Lake Lucy (top) and
Lake Ann (bottom)
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY
1
372
A HISTORY OF PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE
None of the land around Lake Ann has been heavily developed. Historically,
it has been farmed or kept in a more naturalized state of forest or prairie.
Private property owners have preserved the land, which remains a unique
asset for the community. The trees and open space along the edges of the
lake in all directions contribute to the ecological, recreational, and scenic
value of Lake Ann within the community.
The site has long been identified in City planning documents for a trail
to complete a loop around Lake Ann. Even as far back as the 1970s, a
conceptual trail has been shown in the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
The City acquired the parkland for Lake Ann Park in 1969 through a
$250,000 referendum, choosing to preserve the shoreline for natural and
water based recreation, and locating ballfields to the south between the lake
and Highway 5.
In the 1980s, with the development of the parcel to the east of Lake Ann, the
City of Chanhassen was able to secure property along the lake to create a
paved trail and continue the loop for the public.
The development of the Greenwood Shores neighborhood also brought the
dedication of Greenwood Shores Park, with a public beach on Lake Ann, as
well as frontage on Lake Lucy.
When the property that Lake Ann Park Preserve sits on became available
for development, the City worked with the housing developer that purchased
the property to dedicate and otherwise preserve the eastern half of the site,
including approximately 40 acres of wetland and 60 acres of upland with
over a mile of shoreline on Lake Ann and Lake Lucy.
This long term approach to the preservation of Lake Ann’s shoreline for a trail
loop will have preserved approximately 3/4ths of the way around the lake,
with a desire to complete the loop if/when the current owner of the private
property decides to sell or subdivide the land.
A sign at Lake Ann Park showing the planned
eventual connection of a trail loop around the
lake.
INTRODUCTION 1-3 NOVEMBER 2019 373
PARK SITE
The recently acquired land is approximately 115 acres approximately split
with 40 acres of wetland and 60 acres of upland. The remaining 15 acres will
largely be used for grading and stormwater management related to the new
neighborhood development.
The site boasts approximately 3,600 feet of shoreline on Lake Lucy and
3,400 feet on Lake Ann.
2EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Creek
The Overlook
The Edge
The Cathedral
High Quality Forest
Visual ImpactsVisual
Impacts
Views
Compelling Hill
Lake Connections
Greenwood
Shores Park
Edges of Forest, Wetland, & Grassland
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY
2
374
Left: The Creek - Between Lake Ann and Lake Lucy
Right: The Overlook - A unique hill feature that feels like a great place to stop and rest
Left: The Cathedral - Maples have raced to fill in the canopy as Oaks have fallen
Right: The Edge - A surprise when one emerges from the woods and into the sunlight
EXISTING CONDITIONS 2-2 NOVEMBER 2019 375
TOPOGRAPHY
The wetland complex running through the middle of the site separates the
new neighborhood from the parkland. The east parkland sits lower than the
neighborhood to the west, but well above the lake elevations.
The terrain is rolling hills with a few notable nobs that provide long views
across the lakes, especially during the winter when leaves are down.
WETLANDS
The largest wetland is a mix of forested wetland and emergent marshes with
a few small pockets of open water. The wetland drains into Lake Lucy.
There are also small perched ponds in the wooded areas of the upland park,
all less than 1/2 an acre.
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY
2
376
Left: Wooded wetland perched in the middle of the forested area
Right: Wetland at the southwest corner of the woods looking towards the site of the new neighborhood
FLOODPLAINS
Floodplains do not generally impact the site,
except in areas that area already wet. This
does not affect the potential paved trails
in the upland areas, but any crossing of a
wetland that also has floodplain designation
will require additional permitting and design
considerations outlined in the following
chapter.
SOILS
As part of the planning process, soil borings
were completed along the trail alignment.
These provide a better understanding of the
soil conditions on site than the Soil Survey
Geographic Database collected through the
National Cooperative Soil Survey distributed
by the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS). Please see the appendix for
soil boring information.
EXISTING CONDITIONS 2-4 NOVEMBER 2019 377
NATURAL RESOURCES ANALYSIS
OVERVIEW
The proposed trail is located within undeveloped land, which is bordered
by two lakes, single-family residential development, and city parkland.
Approximately 5,000 feet of shoreline form the northern and eastern edges of
the property. The western portion of the property is dominated by a 30-acre
wetland complex, which flows north into Lake Lucy through a natural overflow.
The site has been isolated from public access for many years, which has
allowed a high quality maple basswood forest to flourish in the central area
of the property. Invasive species, such as a buckthorn and garlic mustard are
creeping into the site along the edges of the property, but much of the area is
high quality, and represents historic vegetative communities.
EVALUATION METHOD
Visits to the site were completed on July 16, and September 19, 2019. Plants
were observed and photographed in mid and late-summer conditions.
PLANT COMMUNITIES
A high-quality, old growth maple basswood forest dominates the central part of
the property, which is an approximately 15-acre contiguous area. The high and
enclosed canopy of the maple trees forms a mostly solid shade cover over the
forest floor. This has limited the growth of shrubs and herbaceous layers, as it
is light-limited, however where breaks are present, an abundant herbaceous
layer and numerous tree seedlings are present, which indicate a natural seed
bank is present. Naturally downed trees are located throughout the property,
which provide habitat for wildlife and various fungi, lichen, and moss. The
forest floor is covered with maple seedlings, leaf litter, and an abundance
native plant species. Native species observed on the site during the two site
visits are listed in Table 1. This is not a comprehensive survey, but represents
the common and most noticeable species present.
The edges of the site have been affected by various invasive and aggressive
species, such as buckthorn, reed canary grass, and narrow-leaved cattails.
The most prominent invasive species on the property is buckthorn, which is
dense within the forested fringes and adjacent private properties. Several
seedlings and large 2-3” caliper trees were observed on the site. The
buckthorn was seen on all edges of the site and will likely migrate to the central
area of the site if not managed aggressively to contain the natural expansion.
Invasive, non-native species observed on the site are listed in Table 2.
Table 1. Native Species
ANIMAL HABITAT
While not an exhaustive list, the site visits did observe the following animals
or evidence of the following animals. The abundant habitat suggests there
are likely more species than are identified here.
• Deer
• Turkey
• Coyote
• Frogs
• Scarlet Tanager
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY
2
378
Buckthorn Edges
(Approximate)Buckthorn Edges(Approximate)Reed Ca
n
a
r
y
G
r
a
s
s
EXISTING CONDITIONS 2-6 NOVEMBER 2019 379
NATIVE SPECIES SCIENTIFIC NAME LOCATION VIEWED NOTES
Ostrich fern Matteuccia
struthiopteris
northern edge of
property adjacent
to Lake Lucy
Wood Fern?Dryopteris spp.Upland, central
areas
Jack-in-the-Pulpit Arisaema
triphyllum throughout the site
Zig Zag Goldenrod Solidago flexicaulis Upland, central
areas
Lindley’s Aster Symphyotrichum
ciliolatum
Upland, central
areas
Swamp Smartweed Persicaria amphibia Wet, low areas
Pennsylvania
Sedge
Carex
pennsylvanica
Wet, low areas,
central part of site
American Hog
Peanut
Amphicarpaea
bracteata
northern and
western edges and
into the center
property-ground
cover
Aggressive native
Wild Cucumber Echinocystis lobata Western and
northern areas Aggressive native
Canadian Wood
Nettle Laporta canadensis Moist areas Aggressive native
Sugar Maple tree Acer saccharum Central area
Northern Red Oak
tree Quercus rubra Upland Oak wilt concerns
Ironwood Ostrya virginiana Western edge
Paper Birch Betula papyrifera Southwestern area
American
Basswood Tilia americana
Cottonwood Populus deltoides Northwestern area
Table 2: Invasive Species
INVASIVE PLANT
SPECIES SCIENTIFIC NAME LOCATION VIEWED THREAT LEVEL
Glossy Buckthorn
aka European
Buckthorn
Frangula alnus
northern and
western edges of
property
High
Common
Buckthorn
Rhamnus
cathartica
northern and
western edges of
property
High
Garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata northwestern edge
of property Moderate
Reed canary grass Southern wet edge
of property
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY
2
380
American Hog Peanut
Jack-in-the Pulpit
Blue Beech or Ironwood??
Pennsylvania Sedge Ostrich Fern Ironwood
Smartweed Sugar Maple Sugar Maple
Glandular or Spreading Wood
Fern??
Zig Zag Goldenrod Lindley’s Aster
Native Species
Garlic Mustard Reed Canary GrassCommon Buckthorn European or Glossy Buckthorn
Invasive Species
EXISTING CONDITIONS 2-8 NOVEMBER 2019 381
CONCEPT PLAN
The concept plan was developed based on input gathered from the public,
elected and appointed officials, and City of Chanhassen staff. The input was
combined with an analysis of the physical characteristics and constraints to
inform the layout, design, and features of the plan. The plan is based on the
following 5 principles:
»Continue trails around Lake Ann to allow for an eventual loop
»Preserve the land as a valued natural area in Chanhassen
»Connect residents with nature, trails, and parks
»Protect the ecological functioning (habitat, water quality) of the site
»Celebrate Lake Ann, Lake Lucy, and this property as community
amenities
TRAILS
PAVED TRAILS
A continuation of the paved trails at Lake Ann Park will allow a wide range
of users to use the trail system and experience the park preserve. Paving
allows walkers, runners, those in wheelchairs or with walkers, bicyclists, and
skaters to enjoy the trails.
Trails are designed to be 10 feet wide to safely accommodate various users
going in each direction.
Layout of the trails on the plan is generalized and a final alignment will
require an on site flagging of the trail to better retain the vegetation and tree
canopy on site. This also helps combat the spread of invasive species, many
of which thrive in disturbed areas and outcompete native species in these
locations.
PUBLIC INPUT
Throughout the City’s Park System
Plan process, the desire for a
connection around Lake Ann
emerged as a key initiative for the
City.
Later, as part of the Feasibility Study
process, the planning team solicited
input from residents. Through in
person attendance at events and with
an on-line survey, the team gathered
523 responses.
Residents were offered alternatives
to different development approaches
of the property. The key findings from
the public input were:
»Strong desire to protecting the
natural environment, especially
sensitive habitat
»People are excited about trails.
Sentiment mixed about material,
but leans toward paved trails
»Varied experiences for trail users
(interact with the lake, different
views, see unique areas)
Surveys were provided online and in
person to solicit input from the public Lucy Ridge LnRuby LnSapphire LnAt Rice Marsh Lake, the City of Chanhassen utilized on-site flagging for final trail locations to
avoid trees and preserve the canopy of the site. The effects can be seen in the aerial, with the
site located trail to the left of the red line, compared with the trail design on the right side,
and the obvious cut in the canopy.
3CONCEPT PLAN
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY 3-1 382
Lake LucyLake AnnLake Ann ParkGreenwood Shores ParkGalpin BlvdMajestic WayTopaz DrUtica LnUtica LnTecumseh LnBrinker StWalnut CurveWindmill DrLucy Ridge LnRuby LnSapphire LnPaved Trails - Built by CityPaved Trails - Built by DeveloperPaved Trails - Rebuilt by CityBoardwalkPrefabricated BridgeNatural Surface TrailsReconstructed Trail to Lake Ann Park - WidenReconstructed Trail to Lucy Ridge Ln - Address drainageNatural Resource Preservation/Invasive Species ControlProtect center of site from Buckthorn ExpansionManage/Treat/Remove invasivesPreserve wetlandsField align trails to retain tree canopySignage and WayfindingNatural resources/historical educationTell the story of Lake Ann trail loop planningProvide directional signage for trail usersNatural Surface Trail Waterbars and drainage crossings as neededNew paved trailNew paved trailBoardwalkSet elevation >floodOrient for viewsBoardwalkSet elevation >floodNew Paved TrailBuilt by developerNew Paved TrailBuilt by developerCoordinate grading for pond and boardwalkBridgeSet elevation to allow watercraft underParking+/- 6 spacesN200’600’400’CONCEPT PLAN 3-2 NOVEMBER 2019 383
Due to the soils on site, the paved trails will require a sturdier section than
is typical. In order to mitigate against the high water table and challenging
freeze/thaw cycles the overall section of the trail will be thicker and
incorporate sub-surface structure and drainage. While this represents a
larger up-front investment, it is a better long term approach, increasing the
life span and reducing the maintenance demands.
A typical trail section (left) and the recommended trail section (right) show the difference in construction methods needed to create a robust,
sustainable trail. While a normal trail section may only require 3 inches of bituminous over 6 inches of compacted class 5 gravel, trails in this
location may require up to 2 feet of muck excavation, geotextile fabric, select granular borrow, drain tile, geogrid, and 4 inches of coarse aggregate
in addition to the 6 inches of class 5 and 3 inches of bituminous.
RECONSTRUCTION OF PAVED TRAILS
An existing section of paved trail connecting to the northern part of the
park from Lucy Ridge Road will need to be reconstructed. The trail was
constructed originally during the development of the neighborhood and has
aged significantly.
Depending on the staging and construction access points, the trail from Lake
Ann Park to Greenwood Shores Park may also need to be reconstructed. In
order to minimize the impacts to the Greenwood Shores neighborhood, the
main construction access is anticipated to come from Lake Ann Park and
follow the trail along the east side of the lake. The wear and tear caused by
construction vehicles will necessitate the reconstruction of the trail.
Illustrative sections
Not for construction
Existing Trail Condition from the Lucy Ridge
Neighborhood
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY 3-3 384
NATURAL SURFACE TRAILS
In addition to the paved trail system, some of the natural surface trails will
be preserved and enhanced to provide users with a secondary experience
of the natural areas of the site. In some instances there are locations where
water must be managed. In these cases, minimal improvements such as
small culverts, waterbars, and plank boardwalks will be required to avoid
negatively impacting the trails. The trails that exist today see minimal use
and are not degraded as quickly as could happen with the transition to public
park land. A key to preventing the degradation will be to manage water and
avoid erosion.
Left: The image illustrates a strategy for keeping trail users on the specified trail and out of the erodable creek bank.
Right: Illustration of a look out off the side of the bridge. This could also include benches.
BRIDGES AND BOARDWALKS
LAKE ANN/LAKE LUCY CROSSING
The creek between Lake Ann and Lake Lucy will be traversed with a
prefabricated pedestrian bridge set on precast concrete abutments. The
bridge should be wide enough to accommodate two way traffic and people
stopping to enjoy the creek and lake views on both sides. This could include
space for seating.
The bridge needs to be built high enough to stay out of the floodplain, and to
allow for the passage of small watercraft (canoes, kayaks, fishing boats, etc.)
under the bridge.
The design of the approaches to the bridge should continue the railings/
fencing well beyond the bridge so that users have committed to staying on
the bridge and are not drawn down to the water’s edge. This is to reduce
erosion and degradation of the banks of the creek.
CONCEPT PLAN 3-4 NOVEMBER 2019 385
LAKE LUCY/WETLAND CROSSING
Due to the long approaches and mucky soils, the creek that drains the
wetland into Lake Lucy will be crossed with a boardwalk. The boardwalk
should be oriented to provide views of the wetland and the forest. To the
extent possible, it should also be aligned to minimize the visual impact of the
grading and housing being built in the new neighborhood.
WETLAND CROSSING
A boardwalk will also be used to connect the south part of the new
neighborhood to the park preserve. The boardwalk is located to minimize
the length of the crossing. The boardwalk will also go across a Metropolitan
Council Sewer Interceptor that is in the wetland. In order to allow crews to
maintain that pipe, a portion of the boardwalk will need to be built with a
longer steel span and be removable on a temporary basis. Maintenance of
the interceptor is not a common occurrence, but the boardwalk does need to
allow for it on an occasional basis.
BOARDWALK DESIGN
Both boardwalks will be designed to accommodate 2 way pedestrian and
bicycle traffic. They also need to be able to handle vehicle loads such as
maintenance pick-up trucks. The boardwalks should be at least 12 feet clear
width with 4-6 foot railings. Boardwalks should also incorporate look outs to
allow trail users the chance to enjoy and experience the scenery.
The boardwalks are anticipated to utilize helical anchor supported H-10
design, where anchors are essentially drilled into the ground until they reach
soils that will support the design load.
As discussed above, a portion of one boardwalk will need to be removeable
to allow for occasional maintenance to the Metropolitan Council Interceptor.
In this instance, the span between helical anchors is lengthened and the
structure of the boardwalk under this section is supported with steel I-beams.
The elevation of the bottom of the boardwalk needs to be set above the
floodplain elevations so as not to impact the flow of water in flood events.
GREENWOOD SHORES
PARK PARKING LOT
The addition of a small parking lot at
Greenwood Shores Park will help mitigate
parking in the neighborhood and allow
residents to park vehicles at Greenwood
Shores Park while using the beach, picnic
shelter, and park preserve trails. This will
be done by relocating the existing gate and
paving 6 spaces off of the entry drive.Uti
c
a
L
a
n
e
Relocated
Gate
To Lake Ann Park
To Lake Ann
Park Preserve
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY 3-5 386
Left: The image illustrates the helical anchor structural support system that will be used for the boardwalks
Right: Illustration of an extended span with steel I-beams as will be needed for the Metropolitan Council Regional Sewer Interceptor Crossing.
Both Images illustrate the character of the finished boardwalk in forested and wetland marsh environments.
CONCEPT PLAN 3-6 NOVEMBER 2019 387
RECOMMENDATIONS
PRESERVATION OF EXISTING HIGH QUALITY PLANT
COMMUNITIES
NATURAL RESOURCE PRESERVATION
SHORELINE MANAGEMENT
With the beaches that are available to the public at Lake Ann Park and
Greenwood Shores Park, the new park land design is not focused on
bringing people to the water’s edge, unless they are on a sustainable
surface such as a bridge, boardwalk, or dock. This will help reduce erosion
and degradation of the shoreline as well as minimize the opportunity for the
spread of invasive species to these locations.
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
The design of the park incorporates a 50 foot minimum buffer from the
wetlands in all locations where feasible. This meets or exceeds the guidance
provided by the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District for wetland
buffers. In instances where trails are built within standard buffer zones, the
locations are driven by a need to minimize erosion and grading impacts, or to
cross wetlands on sustainable, constructed surfaces and keep people out of
the wetlands themselves.
FOREST MANAGEMENT
Education, signage, and paved trails will direct future park users to avoid
accessing the high quality areas of the property in order to preserve the
existing natural resources of the site. Encroachment into these areas will
directly damage vegetation, but can also spread invasive species.
Etiquette signage and park rules should be posted at all entrances to the
park to inform visitors of the value of the high-quality forest community.
Trails should be clearly defined and direct visitors to access only areas
where trails exist rather than promoting hiking through the high-quality areas
of the park.
Educational and interpretive signage along the trails should point out
significant species and features of the forest and warn of the effects of
invasive species.
INVASIVE SPECIES MANAGEMENT
The highest priority for management of natural resources on the property
is to address the existing buckthorn. Management methods should be
evaluated based on cost, success rate, and the size of the existing trees.
Potential methods include:
• Forestry mowing with follow up treatment of stumps
• Cutting and application of glyphosate to stumps
• Goat grazing of seedlings and small trees
The Mn DNR recommends that garlic mustard is pulled or cut at ground level
in areas where there is light infestation. Glyphosate may be applied in early
spring or late fall when native plants are dormant.
Reed canary grass may be treated in large swaths with aquatic glyphosate.
Use of wick applications may be helpful to control reed canary grass, which
encouraging other species to become established.
Every invasive species management plan should include a phasing plan to
ensure that initial and follow up treatments are planned.
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY 3-7 388
OTHER AMENITIES
INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE
Interpretive signage should be incorporated into the park preserve along the
trails in appropriate locations to help tell the story of the parkland. Themes
should include:
»Site Ecology
»Site History
»City Trail and Park Planning
In locations where natural surface trails intersect with paved trails, foot
cleaning stations should be paired with informational signage about invasive
species to help prevent their spread.
WAYFINDING SIGNAGE
While many people may get to know the trail system in the park preserve, the
new land will draw visitors and wayfinding signage will help them navigate
and better understand where they are and how to get to where they want to
go. Signage should be located at entries to the park preserve and at decision
points where trails split.
Left: An example of educational signage
Center: An example of a boot brush foot cleaning station and informational signage
Right: An example of wayfinding signage
Left: An example of a fishing pier
Right: An example of a bird blind dock
WATER ACCESS
While the best location is to be determined, there is an opportunity to
connect park users with the lakes. This could occur with a fishing pier or
a bird blind. When locating this feature, it is important to consider both the
views it provides to users and also the views the dock will become a part of
(what does it look like from across the lake?).
CONCEPT PLAN 3-8 NOVEMBER 2019 389
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
1 NEW BITUMINOUS TRAIL - PARK INTERIOR LF 6,250 $152 $950,000
2
RECONSTRUCT EXISTING BITUMINOUS TRAIL
- NW CORNER OF LAKE LUCY ADJACENT TO
RESIDENTIAL HOMES
LF 1,250 $132 $165,000
3
RECONSTRUCT EXISTING BITUMINOUS TRAIL
- EAST SIDE OF LAKE ANN - CONSTRUCTION
ACCESS CORRIDOR
LF 2,675 $100 $267,500
4 TIMBER BOARDWALK STRUCTURE LF 800 $1,000 $800,000
5 PREFABRICATED PEDESTRIAN TRUSS BRIDGE EA 1 $175,000 $175,000
6 NATURAL TRAIL ENHANCEMENTS ALLOWANCE LS 1 $100,000 $100,000
7 GREENWOOD SHORES PARKING LOT
IMPROVEMENTS
SQ YD 200 $125 $25,000
8 TEMPORARY ACCESS AND HAUL ROAD
MAINTENANCE
LS 1 $50,000 $50,000
9 EDUCATIONAL/INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE
ALLOWANCE
LS 1 $50,000 $50,000
10 INFORMATIONAL KIOSKS EA 3 $15,000 $45,000
11 WAYFINDING ALLOWANCE LS 1 $20,000 $20,000
12 INVASIVES TREATMENT/REMOVAL ACRE 30 $2,500 $75,000
13 FISHING PIER/BIRD BLIND EA 1 $75,000 $75,000
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $2,797,500.00
CONTINGENCY (20%) $559,500.00
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL $3,357,000.00
ESTIMATED OVERHEAD COSTS (ADMIN, DESIGN,
ENGINEERING LEGAL) (25%)
$839,250.00
ESTIMATED OVERALL PROJECT COST $4,196,250.00
IMPLEMENTATION
COST ESTIMATE
The following cost estimate has been prepared to provide guidance on
the costs associated with build-out of the concept plan. This estimate was
prepared in November of 2019 and reflects current conditions.
Prices are subject to change based on any number of factors including,
but not limited to changing labor and material costs, the bidding schedule
and environment, phasing considerations, inflation, changes to the design,
donations/volunteers, and other unknown circumstances.
4 IMPLEMENTATION
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY 4-1 390
Notes:
1 - Includes construction costs associated with interior park paved trail construction including mobilization, 2-foot muck
excavation, select granular borrow, geotextile fabric, draintile, geogrid, 4-inch coarse aggregate, 6-inch Class 5
aggregate base, 3-inch trail pavement, culverts, erosion control, topsoil, seed and signage.
2 - Includes construction costs associated with new paved trail construction including mobilization, earthwork (minimal
grade changes), 6-inch Class 5 aggregate base, 3-inch trail pavement, culverts, erosion control, topsoil, seed and
signage.
3 - Includes construction costs associated with replacing existing paved trail with new 10 foot trail due to construction
hauling damage. Includes 6-inch Class 5 aggregate base, 3-inch trail pavement, erosion control, topsoil and seed.
4 - Assumes helical anchor supported H-10 design (bridge) capable of carrying vehicles, 12’ clear width with 4’-6” railings.
Actual depth and size of helical anchors is unknown until sub-surface soil borings can be completed. Pricing could be
greatly affected up or down depending on results. Assumes 400’ needed near Lennar site. Assumes 400’ at Bridge #2
location
5 - Assumes prefabricated truss bridge with precast concrete abutments. Assumes bridge spans do not exceed 35 feet in
length. Includes costs for creating look-outs on each side of the bridge.
6 - Includes construction costs associated with narrow planked boardwalks, culverts, and waterbars to manage water and
user impacts on natural surface trails
7 - Includes construction costs associated with grading, adding paved parking, curb stops, bollards. Relocate existing gate.
8 - Assumes temporary bridge is required at Bridge #1 location to facilitate boardwalk and paved trail construction. Includes
costs to place wood chips or other materials to maintain haul routes into the site.
9 - Assumes costs associated with the manufacture and installation of educational signage related to the history, planning,
and ecological functioning of the site.
10 - Includes costs for informational kiosks located at parking lots
11 - Assumes costs associated with the manufacture and installation of wayfinding signage at trail intersections and parking
lots.
12 - Includes costs related to Buckthorn removal and stump treatment, spraying (Buckthorn, Garlic Mustard, other
invasives), forest mowing.
13 - Assumes construction of DNR Fishing Pier or Bird Blind
IMPLEMENTATIONNOVEMBER 2019 4-2 391
PERMITTING
Based on site visits and review of available resources and rules, the
proposed alignment can be constructed with minimal regulatory review.
Permits will be needed from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the
MNDNR for the two areas were wetland/water will be crossed, but these
are reasonable provided the design achieves the goal of a complete span.
Outside of City requirements, the primary permitting agency is the Riley
Purgatory Creek Watershed District, which will regulate the majority of the
project features. There will be components of the project that will need to be
designed in compliance with their rules, however these all seem achievable.
Pre-design consultation with the watershed district is recommended to
discuss the project, timing, and ensure that they can proceed with permitting
the project as design is finalized. The watershed district is aware of the
project and has expressed an interest in partnering to ensure it is a good
example of best practices.
Overall, this project fits well into the regulatory framework. Certainly some
components will require compliance with the rules, but I see no fatal flaws
that would prevent the concept plans that have been prepared from being
used as a basis for more formal processing and finalization. The main things
needed are to:
1. Remain outside of wetlands
2. Maintain the minimum buffer setbacks
3. Ensure the design of the wetland crossings (the one into Lake Lucy and
the channel between Lake Lucy and Lake Ann) are complete spans, do
not contribute to floodplain capacity, and meet your trail design standards.
4. Have early and often regulatory correspondence.
Based on the proposed trail alignments, the route will be able to avoid any
impacts to delineated wetlands. Two channel crossings will be needed, but
we assume that they will be constructed to span the channels, and have no
discharge within the wetland boundaries.
Permitting
»It is recommended that the plans be shared with the Riley Purgatory
Bluff Watershed District, and request a No-Loss determination under the
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act.
»The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also regulates wetlands in the project
area, and will need to permit the two crossings.
»The channel from Lake Lucy to Lake Ann would also be considered Public
Water and would be regulated by the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources.
»Provided the crossings of the channel and the wetland flowing into
Lake Lucy completely span the wetland, there would be no mitigation
requirements, however the MNDNR typically likes to see the crossing
design include a hydraulics and hydrology report to ensure the crossing
will have no effects on the lakes or channel.
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY 4-3 392
»Floodplain impacts may occur if there is discharge within the floodplain.
This discharge may reduce the floodplain capacity, which is why it is
regulated, however it can also be mitigated if an equal volume of storage
can be created. Impacts would be determined with design, and mitigation
would be included within the grading plan. This is also regulated by the
Riley Creek Watershed District.
»The watershed also regulated grading and erosion control, the water
crossing, and wetland buffers. Trails are allowed within the wetland
buffers, provided the minimum buffer width is maintained. I am assuming
that Lake Ann is considered an Exceptional wetland, and therefore
you would need to keep the trail a minimum of 40-feet away from the
delineated wetland edge around the lake. This appears to be possible,
although some additional grading to maintain the desired slops may be
needed to achieve.
»Crossing the interceptor will require review and approval from the
Metropolitan Council for encroachments.
PROJECT PHASING
There are a number of actions that still must be done to accomplish the full
build out of the park preserve. It is preferrable for construction of the wetland
boardwalk to occur in coordination with the construction of the developer’s
portion of the trails at the south end of the new neighborhood to minimize
impacts on new residents.
ACTION NOTES
Secure Funding
Design and Engineering
Soil Borings Wetland borings should be done in the early winter
Permitting Can be done at 90% Plan Completion of design/engineering
Bidding Preferred bidding environment in the fall for construction the next year
Construction
Set Boardwalk Structural Supports Should be done in Winter
Construct Boardwalk Top Should be done Spring/Summer/Fall
Construct Trail Should be done Spring/Summer/Fall
CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND STAGING
The selected contractor will have their own approach to access and staging,
but it must be consistent with the City’s goals. The construction of the
wetland boardwalk is anticipated to come from the west in coordination with
the development of the new neighborhood. In order to minimize the impacts
to the Greenwood Shores neighborhood, the main construction access for
the paved trails is anticipated to come from Lake Ann Park and follow the
trail along the east side of the lake. There will still be some disruption to the
Greenwood Shores neighborhood and the Lucy Ridge neighborhood as
trails, bridge, boardwalks, and parking lot are constructed.
This estimate assumes a haul road will be necessary for certain parts of the
project, especially for a temporary crossing of the Lake Ann/Lake Lucy creek.
It is of the utmost importance that all areas impacted by construction are
restored to a natural condition.
IMPLEMENTATIONNOVEMBER 2019 4-4 393
FUNDING SOURCES
A number of funding sources may be available for the development of the
Lake Ann Park Preserve. Possible opportunities have been identified from
the City’s Park System Plan:
GENERAL FUNDS
General funds can and should be used to develop and maintain the parks
and recreation system. General funds are the primary funding source for on-
going maintenance, operations, and amenities.
DEDICATED TAX LEVY
A city can hold a referendum for a dedicated tax levy with proceeds directed
specifically for parks and recreation. This levy can be used for capital
projects as well as operations and maintenance. The proceeds may be in
place of general funds or be supplemented by general funds.
BONDING
General Obligation Bonds and Revenue Bonds provide another source of
implementation funding for new public facilities, as well as repairs and/or
upgrades to existing facilities.
GENERAL PARK BOND ISSUE
Residents can decide to raise revenue through a permanent or temporary
tax increase dedicated for specific purposes such as park, trail, and bikeway
improvements and maintenance. These funds are usually provided through
bonds approved as part of a voter referendum.
PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION
Minnesota Statutes allow local governments to require dedication of land or
cash in-lieu of land for parks and trails from new subdivisions. The dedication
must be reasonable and rationally related to the recreation demand created
by the development.
The land for the park preserve was secured in part through park dedication.
Fees collected are deposited into the City’s park and recreation development
fund or its multipurpose trail fund and are used for the development of new
or expanded facilities. Park dedication may not be used for maintenance or
replacement of existing facilities.
UTILITY/FRANCHISE FEES
Franchise fees are included on the monthly bill that customers receive
from a utility, such as natural gas, electricity or cable. The fee can be a flat
amount each month or a percentage of the monthly bill. A franchise fee can
be implemented with an ordinance, which must be approved by the City
Council.
PARTNERSHIPS
Public and private partnerships have been key to the development of
the parks and recreation system. These relationships have led to the
development of different types of parks, including natural resource
management. The Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District may
be a viable partner on this project to be an example of best management
practices for wetlands and lakes
LAKE ANN PARK PRESERVE FEASIBILITY STUDY 4-5 394
DONATIONS
Private donations are another potential funding source. These may be
financial donations from individuals or area corporations, or donations of
labor from recreation clubs or use agreements.
GRANTS
The City has been successful at securing grant funding and should continue
to pursue opportunities when potential award outweigh the costs for applying
or administrating.
MINNESOTA DNR
The Minnesota DNR is one of the most comprehensive resources when
it comes to state funding for park and trail programs. They offer a variety
of grant programs and technical assistance. Current programs provide
assistance for many features including recreational trails. Some programs
also offer assistance for the development of parks or for trail amenities such
as restrooms, lightning, benches, etc.
Each of the Minnesota DNR grant programs is unique. The DNR should
be consulted before pursuing a grant to clarify funding availability and
qualifications.
CLEAN WATER, LAND AND LEGACY AMENDMENT
On Nov. 4 2008, Minnesota voters approved the Clean Water, Land and
Legacy Amendment to the Minnesota State Constitution which increased
the general sales and use tax rate by three-eighths of one percentage point
(0.375%) to 6.875% and dedicated the additional proceeds for the Arts and
Cultural Heritage Fund, the Outdoor Heritage Fund, Clean Water Fund, and
Parks and Trails Fund.
Funding from the Legacy Amendment is administered by a variety of
agencies such as the Department of Natural Resources, Pollution Control
Agency, Department of Health, Historical Society, Minnesota State Arts
Board and regional art councils. A number of new grant programs were
created. Information about grant opportunities can be found on individual
state department and organization websites.
FOUNDATIONS & NON-PROFITS
There are foundations and non-profits that are interested in fulfilling their
missions by supporting local projects. There are a number of on-line tools
that can assist with the process of identifying additional foundations that may
provide financial support for park, trail, and bikeway improvements.
IMPLEMENTATIONNOVEMBER 2019 4-6 395
1
GREAT RIVER GREENING
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, hereinafter referred to as “Agreement”, is made the 20th of September, 2024, by and between the City
of Chanhassen, hereinafter referred to as the “City” and/or “Landowner”, and Great River Greening, hereinafter referred to
as “GRG” and/or “Grantee”.
RECITALS
GRG is a non-profit 501 (c)(3) conservation organization based in St. Paul, Minnesota organized for the purpose of restoring
natural areas and open spaces through community engagement; and
Funding for this project was provided from the Outdoor Heritage Fund, as appropriated by the Minnesota State Legislature
and recommended by the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council (LSOHC).
Under Minn. Stat. §84.026 the Department of Natural Resources is empowered to enter into grant agreements.
Great River Greening has received an appropriation under ML 2023, Ch. 40, Article 1, Section 2, Subd. 5(j), Metro
Big Rivers Phase 13, $15,339,000 the first year is to the commissioner of natural resources for agreements to acquire
land in fee and permanent conservation easements and to restore and enhance natural habitat systems associated
with the Mississippi, Minnesota, and St. Croix Rivers and their tributaries in the metropolitan area.
Great River Greening has received an appropriation under ML 2024, Ch. 106, Art. 1, Sec. 2, Subd. 5(o), Metro Big
Rivers Phase 14, $8,123,000 the second year is to the commissioner of natural resources for agreements to acquire
land in fee and permanent conservation easements and to restore and enhance natural habitat systems associated
with the Mississippi, Minnesota, and St. Croix Rivers and their tributaries within the metropolitan area.
GRG desires to contribute $350,300 towards the partnership project(s); and
The City desires to contribute $42,000 towards the partnership project(s); and
The City seeks to enter into an agreement with GRG for the purpose of detailing partnership contributions and the provision
of Technical Services in support of the Lake Ann Park Preserve Project(s). With GRG contributing funds from the appropriation
to the project(s), the City is subject to the terms as described in Exhibit A.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreement contained within this agreement, the City and
GRG hereby agrees as follows:
1. Compensation and Terms of Payment
a. Compensation
Total Project Costs: $392,300
GRG Contributions Lake Ann Phase 1: $139,600
GRG Contributions Lake Ann Phase 2: $210,700
City of Chanhassen Contributions Lake Ann Phase 1: $ 20,000
City of Chanhassen Contributions Lake Ann Phase 2: $ 22,000
The Parties agree that GRG will complete or arrange for services to be completed under this Agreement. The
cost of such services will be funded by joint contributions of the parties.
The City’s contributions/compensation under this agreement shall be paid to GRG, plus expenses and
construction costs necessary to complete the project described in Section 3 Scope of Work of this contract, not
to exceed $42,000.
After the City’s contribution, GRG shall assume fiscal responsibility for all services completed under this
agreement. GRG’s financial obligation, as set out above, shall be in accordance with the Outdoor Heritage
Fund which is attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit A, and may be met through actual payment for
services to a third party or calculation of the value, on an hourly basis, for “in-kind” services provided.
396
2
b. Terms of Payment
For the City’s contribution, GRG shall submit invoices on an annual basis to the authorized agent of the City for
payment of the annual allocation, as shown in the table below. Payments shall be made within thirty (30) days
after receipt of invoices by the authorized agent of the City.
June 2025 $14,000
June 2026 $14,000
June 2027 $14,000
2. Condition of Payment
All services provided by GRG pursuant to this agreement shall be performed to the satisfaction of the City and its
authorized agent, and in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules and
regulations. Payment shall be withheld for work found by the City or its authorized agent to be unsatisfactory, or
performed in violation of federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules or regulations.
3. Scope of Services (Project Map can be found in Exhibit B)
Lake Ann Park Preserve Restoration Project(s) Phase 1 (40 acres of forest enhancement) and Phase 2 (60 acres of
forest enhancement).
Project overview: Understory enhancement through invasive species removal and dead downed wood and dying tree
removal in developing park preserve site.
GRG agrees to provide the following list of services for the Lake Ann Park Preserve projects:
• Project oversight by GRG Ecologists.
• Draft, release, and award public RFB (Request for Bid) and specifications to hire qualified natural resources service
providers to implement prescribed management activities.
• Coordination of contracted work.
• Potential coordination and facilitation of public volunteer engagement and educational opportunities.
• All required state grant administration, yearly auditing, biannual reporting, and required storage of grant related
documents for 7 years after completion.
The City agrees to provide the following list of services for the Lake Ann Park Preserve projects:
• Access to site by GRG or subcontractors.
• Coordination and approval of Project activities consistent with the City plans, goals and policies.
• Resident and park user notification and signage as appropriate for communication to the public.
• In-kind Landowner or volunteer labor or assistance as agreed upon to facilitate tasks required for the completion of
the project which otherwise would have been paid for by the grant. If in-kind is provided, the Landowner will submit
a memorandum summarizing the value of services provided, no less than 30 days after completion.
Anticipated Timeline:
• Fall / Winter 2024 - o 1st year buckthorn cut and stump treatment. Material would be slash cut flush with ground to decompose.
Possible pile burning where material is denser or biochar kiln use if applicable and approved.
• Fall / Winter 2024 (or Fall / Winter 2025 if access after buckthorn initial removal is required or if trail construction
impedes access) - o Selective removal hazard trees (Emerald ash borer affected trees).
• 2025 through spring 2029 - o Multiple years of buckthorn follow up control (summer brush cut w/ fall herbicide treatment) o Buckthorn replacement grass understory seed mix purchase and sowing as needed o Garlic mustard and other potential invasive herbaceous understory plants treatment and mapping
All plans, specifications and documents will be shared with the City for documentation of work and for building future
staff knowledge. Contracted work plan(s) subject to change from above and will only go forward with prior
authorization from the City.
397
3
4. Effective Date of Contract
This agreement shall be effective on the date the agreement has been fully executed by all parties.
5. Term of Contract
This agreement shall remain in effect until June 30th, 2029, or until all obligations set forth in this agreement have
been satisfactorily fulfilled or unless earlier terminated as provided, whichever occurs first.
6. Notices
The City shall appoint an authorized agent for the purpose of administration of this agreement. GRG is notified of the
authorized agent of the City as follows:
The City of Chanhassen Great River Greening
Authorized Contact Authorized Contact
Jerry Ruegemer Rebecca Tucker
Address Address
7700 Market Blvd,
Chanhassen, MN 55317
251 Starkey Street, Suite 2200
St Paul, MN 55107
Phone Number Phone Number
(952) 227-1129 (715) 212-5125
Email Address Email Address
Jruegemer@chanhassenmn.gov rtucker@greatrivergreening.org
7. Partner and State Audit
Pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 16C.05, Subd. 5 (2007), the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures
and practices of GRG relative to this agreement shall be subject to examination by the City and the State Auditor.
Complete and accurate records of the work performed pursuant to this agreement shall be kept by GRG for a
minimum of six (6) years following termination of this agreement for such auditing purposes. The retention period shall
be automatically extended during the course of any administrative or judicial action involving the City regarding
matters to which the records are relevant. The retention period shall be automatically extended until the administrative
or judicial action is finally completed or until the authorized agent of the City notifies GRG in writing that the records
need no longer be kept.
8. Indemnity
GRG agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the City , its employees and officials harmless from any claims, demands,
actions or causes of action, including reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses resulting directly or indirectly from any
negligent act or omission on the part of the GRG, or its subcontractors, partners or independent contractors or any of
their agents or employees, in the performance of or with relation to any of the work or services to be performed or
furnished by the vendor or the subcontractors, partners or independent contractors or any of their agents or
employees under the agreement.
GRG shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy, and the coordination of all services
furnished by GRG under this agreement. GRG shall, without additional compensation, correct or revise any errors or
deficiencies in GRG's final reports and services.
9. Insurance
GRG shall not commence work under this agreement until it has obtained, at its own cost and expense, all insurance
required herein. All insurance coverage is subject to approval of the City and shall be maintained by GRG until final
completion of the work.
a. Workers' Compensation
1) State: Minnesota – Statutory
2) Employer's Liability with minimum limits of:
Bodily Injury by Accident: $100,000 each Accident
Bodily Injury by Disease: $100,000 each Employee
Bodily Injury by Disease: $500,000 policy limit
3) Benefits required by union labor contracts: as applicable
398
4
In the event GRG is a sole proprietor and has not elected to provide workers' compensation insurance, GRG shall be
required to execute and submit an affidavit of sole proprietorship in a form satisfactory to the City before entering into
the agreement.
b. Commercial General Liability
Including Premises, Operations, Products, Completed Operations, Advertising, and Personal Injury Liability, with the
following minimum limits of liability:
$2,000,000 Aggregate
$2,000,000 Products & Completed Operations Aggregate
$1,000,000 Personal Injury & Advertising Injury
$1,000,000 Occurrence
$ 100,000 Fire Damage Limit
$ 5,000 Medical Expense
Policy should be written on an occurrence basis and include explosion, collapse and underground.
c. Commercial Auto Liability
Automobile Liability should include Hired and Non-Owned, and the City should be named as an additional insured.
Minimum limits of liability shall be:
If split limits: $1,000,000 each person/$1,000,000 each occurrence for Bodily Injury
$1,000,000 each occurrence for Property Damage
If combined single limit: $1,000,000 per occurrence
d. Proof of Insurance
Insurance certificates evidencing that the above insurance is in force with companies acceptable to City and in the
amounts required shall be submitted to City for examination and approval prior to the execution of the agreement,
after which they shall be filed with the City. The insurance certificate shall name the City as an additional insured
and specifically provide that a certificate shall not be materially changed, canceled or non-renewed except
upon sixty (60) days prior written notice to the City. Neither the City failure to require or insist upon certificates,
nor other evidence of a variance from the specified coverage requirements, amends GRG’s responsibility to comply
with the insurance specifications.
10. Subcontracts
GRG shall ensure and require that any subcontractor agrees to and complies with all of the terms of this agreement.
Any subcontractor of GRG used to perform any portion of this agreement shall report to and bill GRG directly. GRG
shall be solely responsible for the breach, performance or nonperformance of any subcontractor.
11. Force Majeure
The City and GRG agree that GRG shall not be liable for any delay or inability to perform this agreement, directly or
indirectly caused by, or resulting from, strikes, labor troubles, accidents, fire, flood, breakdowns, war, riot, civil
commotion, lack of material, delays of transportation, acts of God or other cause beyond reasonable control of GRG
and the City.
12. Data Practices
GRG, its agents, employees and any subcontractors of GRG, in providing all services hereunder, agree to abide by
the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, as amended, and Minn. Rules
promulgated pursuant to Ch. 13. GRG understands that it must comply with these provisions as if it were a
government entity. GRG agrees to indemnify and hold the City, its officers, department heads and employees
harmless from any claims resulting from the GRG’s unlawful disclosure, failure to disclose or use of data protected
under state and federal laws.
399
5
13. Termination
This agreement may be terminated by either party, with or without cause upon 30 days written notice to GRG or the
Authorized Agent of the City.
14. Independent Contractor
It is agreed that nothing contained in this agreement is intended or should be construed as creating the relationship of
a partnership, joint venture, or association with the City and GRG. GRG is an independent contractor, and it, its
employees, agents, subcontractors, and representatives shall not be considered employees, agents or
representatives of the City. Except as otherwise provided herein, GRG shall maintain, in all respects, its present
control over the means and personnel by which this agreement is performed. From any amounts due to GRG, there
shall be no deduction for federal income tax, FICA payments, state income tax, or for any other purposes which are
associated with an employer/employee relationship unless otherwise required by law. Payment of federal income tax,
FICA payments, state income tax, unemployment compensation taxes, and other payroll deductions and taxes are the
sole responsibility of GRG.
15. Notices
Any notices to be given under this agreement shall be given by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, postage
prepaid, and depositing the same with the United States Postal Service, addressed to GRG at its address stated
herein, and to the authorized agent of the City at the address stated herein.
16. Controlling Law
The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and
construction of this agreement, the legal relations between the parties and performance under the agreement. The
appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation hereunder will be those courts located within the County or the
City, State of Minnesota. Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving the parties will be in the appropriate
federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this contract is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the
remaining provisions will not be affected.
17. Successors and Assigns
The City and GRG, respectively, bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives to
the other party to this agreement and to the partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives of such other
party with respect to all covenants of this agreement. Neither the City nor GRG shall assign, sublet, or transfer any
interest in this agreement without the prior written consent of the other.
18. Equal Employment and Americans with Disabilities
In connection with the work under this agreement, GRG agrees to comply with the applicable provisions of state and
federal equal employment opportunity and nondiscrimination statutes and regulations. Failure on the part of GRG to
conduct its own employment practices in accordance with applicable laws may result in the withholding of all or part of
regular payments by the City due under this agreement unless or until GRG complies with the Partner policy, and/or
suspension or termination of this agreement.
19. Changes
The parties agree that no change or modification to this agreement, or any attachments hereto, shall have any force
or effect unless the change is reduced to writing, dated, and made part of this agreement. The execution of the
change shall be authorized and signed in the same manner as for this agreement.
20. Severability
In the event any provision of this agreement shall be held invalid and unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall be
valid and binding upon the parties unless such invalidity or non-enforceability would cause the agreement to fail its
purpose. One or more waivers by either party of any provision, term, condition or covenant shall not be construed by
the other party as a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same by the other party.
21. Entire Agreement
It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained herein and that this agreement
supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as
any previous agreements presently in effect between the City and GRG relating to the subject matter hereof.
400
6
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby.
THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY: ___________________________
NAME: ___________________________
TITLE: ___________________________
DATE: ___________________________
GREAT RIVER GREENING:
BY: ___________________________
NAME: Kateri Routh
TITLE: Executive Director
DATE: ___________________________
Grant Manager Initials: TR 9/25/24
Conservation Director Initials: TR 9/25/24
Director of Finance Initials: GS 9/25/24
401
7
EXHIBIT A: State of Minnesota – 2023 and 2024 Outdoor Heritage Fund
Metro Big Rivers Habitat – Phases 13 and 14
Grantee Landowner
Great River Greening The City of Chanhassen
Great River Greening has received an appropriation under ML 2023, Ch. 40, Article 1, Section 2, Subd. 5(j), Metro Big Rivers
Phase 13, $15,339,000 the first year is to the commissioner of natural resources for agreements to acquire land in fee and
permanent conservation easements and to restore and enhance natural habitat systems associated with the Mississippi,
Minnesota, and St. Croix Rivers and their tributaries in the metropolitan area.
Great River Greening has received an appropriation under ML 2024, Ch. 106, Art. 1, Sec. 2, Subd. 5(o), Metro Big Rivers Phase
14, $8,123,000 the second year is to the commissioner of natural resources for agreements to acquire land in fee and permanent
conservation easements and to restore and enhance natural habitat systems associated with the Mississippi, Minnesota, and St.
Croix Rivers and their tributaries within the metropolitan area.
As a sub-recipient of this funding, the Landowner is subject to the terms below:
COMPLIANCE
The Landowner acknowledges that these funds are proceeds from the State of Minnesota Outdoor Heritage Fund, which is
subject to certain legal restrictions and requirements, including Minnesota Statutes Chapter 116P. The Landowner is
responsible for compliance with this and all other relevant state and federal laws and regulations in the fulfillment of the
Project.
LIABILITY
The Landowner must indemnify, save, and hold the State, its agents, and employees harmless from any claims or causes
of action, including attorney’s fees incurred by the State, arising from the performance of this grant agreement by the
Grantee or the Grantee’s agents or employees. This clause will not be construed to bar any legal remedies the Grantee
may have for the State's failure to fulfill its obligations under this grant agreement.
ACCESS AND MONITORING
The Landowner agrees to allow the Recipient and the State access at any time to conduct periodic site visits and
inspections to ensure work progress in accordance with this grant agreement, including a final inspection upon program
completion. At least one monitoring visit per grant period on all state grants of over $50,000 will be conducted and at least
annual monitoring visits on grants of over $250,000.
Following closure of the program, the State’s authorized representatives shall be allowed to conduct post-completion
inspections of the site to ensure that the site is being properly operated and maintained and that no conversion of use has
occurred.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND ENDORSEMENT
Acknowledgment. The Landowner must acknowledge financial support from the Outdoor Heritage Fund in program
publications, signage and other public communication and outreach related to work completed using the appropriation.
Acknowledgment may occur, as appropriate, through use of the fund logo or inclusion of language attributing support from
the fund.
Endorsement. The Landowner must not claim that the State endorses its products or services.
ECOLOGICAL AND RESTORATION PLAN
For all restorations, the Grantee in coordination with the Landowner must prepare and retain an ecological restoration and
management plan that, to the degree practicable, is consistent with current conservation science and ecological goals for
the restoration site. Consideration should be given to soil, geology, topography, and other relevant factors that would
provide the best chance for long-term success and durability of the restoration. The plan must include the proposed
timetable for implementing the restoration, including, but not limited to, site preparation, establishment of diverse plant
species, maintenance, and additional enhancement to establish the restoration; identify long-term maintenance and
management needs of the restoration and how the maintenance, management, and enhancement will be financed; and use
current conservation science to achieve the best restoration.
LONG TERM MANAGEMENT
As a partner with Great River Greening, the Landowner commits to maintaining the investment put forward over time.
402
8
LONG TERM RESTORATION
The Landowner acknowledges the long term maintenance and enhancement needs of the restoration process to achieve
restoration goals. The Landowner agrees to maintain restoration for a minimum of 10 years. The Recipient agrees to make
reasonable good faith effort to significantly contribute to the successful maintenance of the project.
If the Landowner(s) should fail to maintain the habitat restoration for 10 years, then the Landowner(s) agrees to reimburse
the Minnesota Outdoor Heritage Fund for the pro-rated costs of all habitat restoration projects placed on the described land
through this Agreement.
PROTECTED LAND
Landowner testifies that the restoration project is on land permanently protected by a conservation easement or public
ownership or in public waters as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005, subdivision 15; and will provide
reasonable written documentation of such protection.
RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT GUIDELINES
Recipient and Landowner practices shall comply in every respect with:
DNR Pollinator Best Management Practices and Habitat Restoration Guidelines
(http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/npc/2014_draft_pollinator_bmp_guidelines.pdf); and
Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources’ Native Vegetation Establishment and Enhancement Guidelines
(https://bwsr.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/2019-07/Updated%20guidelines%20Final%2007-01-19.pdf January 2019
version)
MN-DNR Operational Order #113 Invasive Species
(http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/assistance/grants/habitat/heritage/oporder_113.pdf)
MN-DNR Operational Order #59 Pesticide and Pest Control
(http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/assistance/grants/habitat/heritage/oporder_59.pdf);
MN-DNR Division of Fish and Wildlife Pest and Pest Control Guidelines
(http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/assistance/grants/habitat/heritage/faw_pest.pdf);
403
9
EXHIBIT B: Project Map
404
1
CITYOFCHANHASSEN
CARVERANDHENNEPINCOUNTIES,MINNESOTA
DATE: October14,2024 RESOLUTION NO:2024-XX
MOTION BY:SECONDED BY:
ARESOLUTIONAPPROVINGAGRANTAGREEMENTWITHGREATRIVER
GREENING FOR WOODLAND ENHANCEMENT
WHEREAS,theCityofChanhassensupportsthecooperativegrantagreementmadewith
GreatRiver Greening. The agreement partners with thecityto restore and enhance 100 acresof
forest habitat and natural areas within the Lake Ann Park Preserve; and
WHEREAS, Great River Greening staff will provide the oversight and coordination for the
design and implementation of the contracted natural resource management work, with full approval from
the City, as funded by the OHF grant
WHEREAS,theCityofChanhassenrecognizesthatithassecuredtherequiredcash-
matching funds for this project; and
WHEREAS,theCityofChanhassen agreesto accept thegrantaward andmayenterintoan
agreementwithGreatRiverGreeningfortheabove-referencedproject.TheCityofChanhassenwill
complywithallapplicablelaws,environmentalrequirements,andregulations asstatedinthegrant
agreement; and
WHEREAS,thattheChanhassenCityCouncil namesthefiscalagentfortheCityof
Chanhassen for this project as:
Kelly Grinnell
Finance Director
CityofChanhassen
7700 Market Blvd
P.O.Box147
Chanhassen,MN55317
WHEREAS, All services provided by GRG pursuant to this agreement shall be
performed to the satisfaction of the City and its authorized agent, and in accordance with all
applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. Payment shall be
withheld for work found by the City or its authorized agent to be unsatisfactory, or performed in
violation of federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules or regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thatthe Chanhassen City Council hereby
authorizesenteringinto acooperativegrant agreementwithGreatRiverGreeningfortheMetroBig
Rivers Phase 13 and Phase 14 grants totaling $350,300
405
2
PASSEDANDADOPTED bytheChanhassenCityCouncil this 14dayofOctober, 2024.
ATTEST:
JennyPotter,CityClerk EliseRyan,Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
406
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Resolution 2024-XX; Call for Improvement Hearing for Crimson Bay Road
Improvements Project
File No.ENG 23-02 Item No: D.13
Agenda Section CONSENT AGENDA
Prepared By Charlie Howley, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council accepts the Feasibility Report for the Crimson Bay Road
Improvements Project and Calls for the Improvement Hearing to be held at the November 18, 2024
City Council meeting."
Motion Type Simple Majority Vote of members present
Strategic
Priority Asset Management
SUMMARY
The Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project is a sub-project of the larger Highway 5 project and part
of the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan (AATP). The existing access of Crimson Bay Road and
Highway 5 needs to be removed, with a plan to reconnect it from the north off of West 78th Street.
Accepting the Feasibility Report is a formal step in the overall project implementation. A public open
house is scheduled for the evening of October 30, 2024, to review the project with interested parties.
The Improvement Hearing is scheduled for the November 18, 2024 which is a Public Hearing held at a
City Council meeting to formally consider authorizing moving ahead with the final design of the
project. At that meeting, staff will give an overview of the project and a summary of the public
comments.
BACKGROUND
407
The connection of Crimson Bay Road to the north has been planned for many years with a concept
design first developed in 2018. The AATP has pushed up the need to implement the project and in 2022
the city hired a consultant for the design services. The project was intended to have been constructed in
2024, however competing project needs and staff workload has pushed it to 2025 construction which
still aligns with the overall Highway 5 project.
DISCUSSION
N/A
BUDGET
The total estimated project cost is $2.4M. The project is included in the City's 5-yr Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP).
Due to its tie to the Highway 5 project, the city received a $710k Local Partnership Project (LPP) Grant
from MnDOT and the project was granted eligibility to use State Aid funds even though not a formal
MSA route. The project revenue also includes private property assessments made up of the typical 40%
of the street costs, along with Sanitary Sewer and Watermain assessments as the benefiting properties
are all currently on private well and septic systems.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends accepting the Feasibility Report and Calling for the Improvement Hearing to be held
on November 18, 2024.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
CBR Improvements Feasibility Report
408
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: October 14, 2024 RESOLUTION NO:2024-XX
MOTION BY: SECONDED BY:
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR AN
IMPROVEMENT HEARING FOR THE CRIMSON BAY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 23-02)
WHEREAS,pursuant to resolution of the City Council adopted February14, 2022, a
feasibility report has been prepared by the Consultant with reference to the above-referenced
project, and this report is being received by the City Council on October 14, 2024: and
WHEREAS,the feasibility report provides information regarding whether the proposed
project is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible; whether it should best be made as proposed or in
connection with some other improvement; the estimated cost of the improvement as
recommended; and a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for
the applicable benefitting properties; and
WHEREAS,the project includes pavement reconstruction, curb and gutter replacement,
addition of watermain and sanitary sewer, and storm sewer and stormwater management
facilities; and
WHEREAS,a public open house is scheduled for the 30th day of October 2024, at
Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED bythe Chanhassen City Council that:
1. The City Council has received and accepts the feasibility report on October 14, 2024; and
2. The City Council will consider the improvements of such project in accordance with the report
and the assessment of applicable benefitting properties for a portion of the cost of the
improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, at their City Council meeting
scheduled for November 18, 2024.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 14th day of October 2024.
ATTEST:
Jenny Potter, City Clerk Elise Ryan, Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
409
Submitted by:
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
2638 Shadow Lane
Suite 200
Chaska, MN 55318
P: 952-448-8838
F: 952-488-8805
City of Chanhassen, MN
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project
Feasibility Report
City Project No. 23-02
November 2023
410
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. Certification
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project 0C1.126763 / C.P. 23-02
Certification
Feasibility Report
For
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project
City of Chanhassen
Carver County
City Project No. 23-02
BMI Project No. 0C1.126763
November 10, 2023
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was
prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of
the State of Minnesota.
By:
Joshua Eckstein, P.E.
License No. 48224
Date: 11/10/2023
411
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. Table of Contents
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project 0C1.126763 / C.P. 23-01
Table of Contents
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 1
Background and Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1
Proposed Improvements .............................................................................................................. 1
Estimated Costs ............................................................................................................................ 2
II. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 2
III. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ................................................................................................................ 3
Street Improvements .................................................................................................................... 3
Water System Improvements ....................................................................................................... 3
Stormwater Runoff Management System Improvements ........................................................... 4
Sanitary System Improvements .................................................................................................... 4
IV. FINANCING & FUNDING ........................................................................................................................ 5
Financing ....................................................................................................................................... 5
Funding ......................................................................................................................................... 5
Project Budget Recommendation ................................................................................................ 6
V. ASSESSMENTS ....................................................................................................................................... 6
VI. PROJECT SCHEDULE / NEXT STEPS ........................................................................................................ 7
Appendix
Appendix A: Figures
Appendix B: Preliminary Cost Estimates
Appendix C: City Assessment Practice
412
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project 0C1.126763 / C.P. 23-02 Page 1
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background and Introduction
As requested by the City of Chanhassen, Bolton & Menk, Inc. has evaluated the feasibility of
the proposed Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project. The project includes reconstruction of
Crimson Bay Road in addition to extending the street to the north to connect to Dogwood
Avenue. The access to Trunk Highway 5 for Crimson Bay Road will be eliminated and the
properties will use W 78th Street to access the road network in the future. Reconstruction of
Crimson Bay Road includes watermain, stormwater drainage infrastructure, sanitary sewer
main, and a new sanitary sewer lift station to serve the neighboring residents that are currently
on well and septic systems. The impetus for the project is the planned Trunk Highway 5
reconstruction as part of the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan and the desire to eliminate
the current Crimson Bay Road access to Highway 5.
Proposed Improvements
All improvements addressed within this report are feasible from a technical standpoint. This
study addresses issues with aging, substandard, or non-existent infrastructure including
pavement, storm sewer, watermain, and sanitary sewer. The improvements recommended in
this report are necessary to provide safe and adequate infrastructure and represent cost effective
solutions for doing so.
1. Street Improvements
The proposed Crimson Bay Road improvements consist of full depth
reconstruction from the 78th Street intersection to the proposed cul-de-sac to the
south. The existing connection to Highway 5 will be removed as part of the project
to accommodate the future expansion of Highway 5. Proposed City standard street
improvements include:
· Crimson Bay Road
o Curb and Gutter on Both Sides
o 31-Foot Street Width
2. Water System Improvements
The proposed water system improvements will include installation of watermain
from the 78th Street intersection to the existing watermain on Highway 5. All
hydrants, gate valves, and service lines are also proposed to be constructed as part
of the project. A review of the system wide pressure zones is still underway to
inform the need of a Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV)
3. Storm Sewer Improvements
The proposed storm sewer improvements will include manholes, catch basins,
pipe, castings, and a rain garden. Drain tile behind the back of curb is also
proposed to be included as part of the project improvements.
4. Sanitary Sewer Improvements
The proposed improvements will include installation of a new 8-inch PVC main,
sanitary sewer services, a lift station, and associated forcemain.
413
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. PUBLIC OUTREACH
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project 0C1.126763 / C.P. 23-02 Page 2
Estimated Costs
Cost estimates have been prepared for the proposed improvements. Itemized cost estimates are
provided in Appendix B and summarized below in Table 1. A $710,000 grant from MnDOT
has been awarded to offset the street costs. 40% of the street costs and 100% of the utility costs
are planned to be assessed to the benefiting properties per the City’s assessment policy.
Table 1: Estimated Project Costs
Proposed Improvements Total Estimated Project Cost
Street Reconstruction Cost $1,387,760.50
Watermain Cost $318,409.00
Storm Sewer Cost $138,348.00
Sanitary Sewer Cost $555,254.00
Total Estimated Project Cost $2,399,771.50
*NOTE: these costs include soft costs, contingency and right-of-way / easement acquisition.
II. PUBLIC OUTREACH
The project management team has engaged the adjacent property owners in a number of ways to
receive input and information related to the project. An open house informational meeting was held
in November 2022 to give an outline of the project and gather initial feedback and information. A
second meeting is planned for September to give an update on the planned improvements and
project timeline. A third neighborhood meeting will be held in the spring to discuss construction
expectations and timeline.
III. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
The impetus for this report is a request by the City of Chanhassen to evaluate the feasibility of planned
improvements to Crimson Bay Road, prior to the expansion of Highway 5. The goal of these
improvements is to remove the access to Highway 5 and renew and repair municipal infrastructure
along Crimson Bay Road, as well as construct new facilities to serve property owners along the
corridor.
In an effort to gather input and engage impacted public, an open house was held on November 16,
2022.
This report is based on record drawings, aerial photography, City utility maps, topographical data,
geotechnical exploration report, staff inspection reports, feedback solicited from property owners and
City staff input. This report examines various potential infrastructure components within the Crimson
Bay Road area. More specifically, this report reviews considerations for:
· Bituminous Pavement Surfacing Needs
· Transportation and Parking Needs
· Stormwater Conveyance System Needs
· Stormwater Quality Needs
414
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project 0C1.126763 / C.P. 23-02 Page 3
· Wastewater System Facility Needs
· Water Supply System Needs
IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
Street Improvements
Proposed street improvements are indicated on Figure 1 in Appendix A.
The existing Crimson Bay Road typical section consists of approximately 31-foot wide
bituminous street with concrete curb and gutter on each side. The existing concrete curb and
gutter is a surmountable style curb. The existing pavement has many transverse and
longitudinal cracks. The current OCI rating of the existing street is 28 out of 100. Based on
the existing pavement condition and the scope of the proposed utility work, the recommended
repair measure is full depth reconstruction.
Proposed street improvements are indicated on Figure 1 in Appendix A.
The proposed improvement consists of full depth reconstruction of the street structural
section from the 78th Street intersection to the proposed cul-de-sac to the south. Adjacent
driveways will also be reconstructed as necessary to match the reconstructed roadway. The
proposed street section will be designed to match the City standard street section including 4-
inches of bituminous pavement, 12-inches of aggregate base, 24-inches of select granular
borrow, and draintile installed behind the back of curb. Additional excavation may be
necessary if poor subgrade soils are encountered. The proposed street will also include new
surmountable concrete curb and gutter.
The proposed street dimensions are as follows:
· Crimson Bay Road
o Surmountable Concrete Curb & Gutter on both sides
o 31.0-Feet Wide
The total project cost for the proposed street reconstruction is estimated to be $1,387,760.
Itemized cost estimates are included in Appendix B.
Water System Improvements
Proposed water system improvements are indicated on Figures 1 in Appendix A.
The existing properties along Crimson Bay Road are currently on privately owned wells. The
proposed water system includes an 8-inch watermain extending from the 78th Street intersection
to the existing watermain along Highway 5. This proposed watermain connection will provide
adequate service, looping, and fire protection to the adjacent properties for the life of the
system. The proposed pipe material is PVC. Isolation valves and hydrants will be installed to
bring the system up to current standards. One-inch PE service lines will be constructed, and
curb stops will be installed at the right-of-way line. At this location residents will then be able
to connect when private improvements are complete. Watermain construction will provide
residents the opportunity to connect to the city’s water system and receive access to a safer,
cleaner, and more reliable water source in addition to better fire protection service.
To protect certain watermain components against corrosion, the following items will be
included with the design and installed during construction:
415
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project 0C1.126763 / C.P. 23-02 Page 4
1. All hydrants and valves will be manufactured and secured using stainless steel
bolts.
2. All fittings will be coated with fusion bonded epoxy.
3. All fittings, hydrants, and service line connections shall be provided with cathodic
protection (sacrificial anodes).
The total project cost for the Crimson Bay Road water system improvements is estimated to
be $318,409. Itemized cost estimates are included in Appendix B.
Stormwater System Improvements
Proposed stormwater improvements are indicated on Figure 1 in Appendix A.
Existing drainage patterns and discharge locations will be maintained by this project.
Stormwater generally drains to the low point in the existing cul-de-sac to the north and to the
Highway 5 ditch to the south. A rain garden will be required to treat storm water runoff and
will be located at the low point as shown in Figure 1. All components, pipe and manholes, are
proposed to be concrete. Additional intakes will be evaluated and added if necessary. New
castings and drain tile will also be added behind the back of curb.
The total project cost for the Crimson Bay Road stormwater system improvements is
estimated to be $138,348. Itemized cost estimates are included in Appendix B.
Property Acquisition
In order to complete planned improvements a number of easements are required. These
easements include the following:
Regents of the University of Minnesota – Permanent roadway and utility easement
and temporary grading easement
The Arbors HOA – permanent roadway and utility easement
Melissa Herbst Schiena - permanent roadway and utility easement
All easement negotiations are in progress and will be finalized prior to advertising for bids.
Sanitary System Improvements
The properties along Crimson Bay Road are currently on privately owned septic systems. All
except one of those systems are old and reaching the end of their useful life. The proposed
sanitary sewer improvements include the installation of a lift station, forcemain, and gravity
sewer mains. Six-inch service lines will be installed and stubbed to the right-of-way line. At
this location residents will be able to connect to the City sanitary sewer as part of their private
improvements. The proposed lift station will include a new control panel, connection for
remote monitoring, and a connection for backup power. The new forcemain piping will be
installed at a frost proof depth, sized appropriately and shall be constructed of high-density
polyethylene material with isolation valves and check valves.
The total project cost for sanitary sewer system improvements is estimated to be $555,254.
Itemized cost estimates are included in Appendix B.
416
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. FINANCING & FUNDING
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project 0C1.126763 / C.P. 23-02 Page 5
V. FINANCING & FUNDING
Financing
Based on the assessment policy methodology, all of the components of the project presented
in this report can be financed through the sale of a Chapter 429 Improvement Bond and meet
the statutory requirement for a minimum assessable percentage of 20%. The Chapter 429
Bond is the most common financing method for local street reconstruction projects that
contain assessments. The Financing & Funding table located at the end of this section shows
that the estimated assessable percentage of the project with all components is 35.1% for the
unit method.
Funding
This project is proposed to be funded with general City funds, special assessments imposed
on benefiting properties and state grant funds awarded to the project. There are several
funding sources proposed to fund the project including the following:
· Property Tax Revenue
· Sanitary Sewer Revenues
· Water Revenues
· Surface Water Revenues
· Franchise Fee Revenues
· Special Assessments
· MnDOT LPP Grant
CRIMSON BAY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
The total project costs for the proposed project are apportioned as follows:
CRIMSON BAY ROAD
Total Project Cost $2,399,771.50
Street Standard Cost $1,387,760.50 PMP Fund and Special Assessments
Storm Sewer Cost $138,348.00 Surface Water Fund
Sanitary Sewer Cost $555,254.00 Sanitary Sewer Fund
Watermain Cost $318,409.00 Watermain Fund
LPP Grant $710,000.00
Street Costs
Total Standard Section Street Cost $1,387,760.50
Subtotal Street Cost $1,387,760.50
City Contribution (60%) $832,656.60
Assessable Portion (40%) $555,104.20
LPP Grant Assessment Credit $305,104.20
Assessable Portion Adjusted $250,000.00
417
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. ASSESSMENTS
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project 0C1.126763 / C.P. 23-02 Page 6
Total Units 21.0
Cost Per Unit $25,000.00
Adjusted Cost Per Unit $11,904.76 Special Benefit Analysis
Assessable Units 6.0
Total Assessed Amount $71,428.57 Special Assessments
Total City Cost $1,316,331.93 PMP Fund
Utility Costs
Total Utility Cost $1,012,011.00
LPP Grant Assessment Credit $404,895.80
Assessable Portion Adjusted $607,115.20
Total Units 21.0
Cost Per Unit $28,910.25
Assessable Units 6.0
Total Assessed Amount $173,461.49 Special Assessments
Total City Cost $838,549.51 Utility Funds
Project Budget Recommendation
All improvements addressed within this report are feasible from a technical standpoint. This
study addresses issues with aging, substandard, or non-existent infrastructure including street
pavement, storm sewer, watermain, and sanitary sewer. The improvements recommended in
this report are necessary to provide safe and adequate infrastructure and represent cost effective
solutions for doing so. The overall budget for this project (23-02) has been set at $2,400,000.
VI. ASSESSMENTS
The project is proposed to be assessed to the benefiting properties in accordance with the adopted
City Assessment Practices policy as follows:
Street Rehabilitation: 40% Assessed on a Unit Basis
Watermain: 100% Assessed
Storm Sewer: 100% Assessed
Sanitary Sewer: 100% Assessed
Figure 2 of this section indicate the proposed assessment area. Properties included on the
preliminary assessment roll include those that have access to a street within the project area. The
estimated assessment amount for each property is tabulated on the preliminary assessment roll
located at the end of this section. A copy of the current Assessment Practice policy is included in
Appendix C of this report for reference.
418
TOTAL
PROP.PROPERTY ASSMT STREET ASSMT UTILITY ASSMT NOTES
NO.ADDRESS UNIT ASSMT UNIT ASSMT
1 PAUL GREGORY & MARY SUMMERS 7620 CRIMSON BAY RD 252610050 1 $11,904.76 1 $28,910.25 $40,815.01
2 JOHN & ROSE MASTRICOLA 7640 CRIMSON BAY RD 252610040 1 $11,904.76 1 $28,910.25 $40,815.01
3 MARY HAGEMAN 7660 CRIMSON BAY RD 252610030 1 $11,904.76 1 $28,910.25 $40,815.01
4 ROB & CALI OLSON 7700 CRIMSON BAY RD 252610010 1 $11,904.76 1 $28,910.25 $40,815.01
5 DARLENE HANSON 7750 CRIMSION BAY RD 252610011 2 $23,809.52 2 $57,820.50 $81,630.02
6 REGENTS OF THE UNIV OF MINN 250080110 15 $178,571.43 15 $433,653.71 $612,225.14
UMN WILL NOT BE ASSESSED, CITY WILL COVER THESE COSTS
Assessment Basis Unit 21 $250,000.00 21 $607,115.20 $857,115.20
CRIMSON BAY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
11/10/2023
OWNER P.I.D.
STREET ASSESSMENT UTILITY ASSESSMENT
419
Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. PROJECT SCHEDULE / NEXT STEPS
Crimson Bay Road Improvements Project 0C1.126763 / C.P. 23-02 Page 7
VII. PROJECT SCHEDULE / NEXT STEPS
The City should be aware of the following steps and requirements necessary to meet the
requirements of MN Statute 429 that allows for a portion of the project costs to be assessed:
Project specific meetings with property owners
City Council to accept the Feasibility Study and call for an Improvement Hearing.
City Council to conduct an Improvement Hearing
Property Acquisition
City Council to order the improvements (by 4/5ths vote) within 6 months of the
Improvement Hearing.
City Engineer to design, advertise and open bids.
City Council to call for an Assessment Hearing.
City Council to conduct an Assessment Hearing. Final assessment roll must be formally
adopted.
City Council to award the project. The construction contract must be signed within 12
months of ordering the improvements.
Construction to occur (months of July 2024 to July 2025).
City staff to certify final assessment roll with the County by November 30th, 2024
The following project schedule shows the necessary steps along with a tentative date to complete.
November 2023 Present Study to the City Council
December 2023 Conduct Public Hearing, Order Improvements
January 2024 Complete Final Design and Plan Reviews/Approvals
February 2024 Advertise and Bid Project
March 2024 Neighborhood Meeting
March 2024 Conduct Assessment Hearing
March 2024 Award Project, Construction Contracts
May 2024 - July 2025 Construct Project
August 2025 Project Closeout
420
Appendix A: Figures
421
SSSXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXCOCOCOCOSSSSlllllll>>>llll>>>l l>>>>>>>>
>lllllllll>l l l l l l>>>lll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SCONTROLD>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SCONTROL>>D>>>>>>>>CCGUUPPGGPGPFCCCCCPPCDPPPPCCECOCCCCFUFUPUCCCCCCEEEEEEEEEEECCCCCCGGG||||||||||||GGG G G G EEGCCCCCCCCCCCCCGECCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCEEEEEGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGEEEEGGGGGGGGOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XOUOUOUOUOUOU>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>COCOCOC-C
C-CC-CC-CC-CC-CC-C
C-C
C-C
C-C
C-CSS SS>
>E-CE-CE-CE-C>>>>G-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-COUG-C G-C G-C G-C G-C G-C G-C G-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-CG-C
G-C G-CG-C
G-CG-Cllllllllllllllllllllllllllll>llll
l
>l>>G-ClPPPPPSXXUU>>>>E-DE-D
E-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-D
E-
D
E-D
E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-D E-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-D E-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-D E-D
E-DE-DCCCCCCCCF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CF-CEH:\CHAN\0C1126763\CAD\C3D\FIGR_126763_FEASABILITY-Hammer Head.dwg 11/10/2023 9:58:38 AM
RCrimson Bay RoadCity of ChanhassenFigure 1: Proposed StreetNovember 2023RFEETSCALE060120HORZ.RESTRIPE EXISTING RIGHTTURN LANE INTO SHOULDERCLOSE ACCESS78TH STCRIMSON BAY RDMN TH 5MELISSA HERBST SCHIENAN/APID: 252610070REGENTS OF THE UNIV OF MINNN/APID: 250080110DARLENE J HANSON7750 CRIMSON BAY RDPID: 252610011ROB M & CALI L OLSON7700 CRIMSON BAY RDPID: 252610010MARY M HAGEMAN7660 CRIMSON BAY RDPID: 252610030ROSE MARIE MASTRICOLA7640 CRIMSON BAY RDPID: 252610040PAUL GREGORY & MARY S SUMNERS7620 CRIMSON BAY RDPID: 252610050DEREK GEARMAN7590 DOGWOOD RDPID: 250580030JOE BILLER7580 DOGWOOD RDPID: 250580020BRIAN D GARSHELIS7570 DOGWOOD RDPID: 250580010PERRY K PLEDGER3361 78TH ST WPID: 250590150THE ARBORS HOAN/APID: 25059023050' EXISTING ROW60' EXISTING ROW10' EXISTING D&U10' EXISTING D&U25' EXISTING ROWPROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY (60')LAKE MINNEWASHTAROADWAYCURB & GUTTEREMERGENCY/MAINTENANCE ACCESS ROUTEEXISTING & PROPOSED SPEED LIMITDESIGN FEATURE COLOR KEYSPEEDLIMIT30SPEEDLIMIT30DESIGNPOSTEDDRIVEWAYSPROPOSED REMOVALSPROPOSED RETAINING WALLEXISTING RIGHT OF WAYPROPOSED RIGHT OF WAYPROPOSED TEMPORARY EASEMENTXXPROPOSED FENCE>>PROPOSED SANITARY SEWERl ll lPROPOSED SANITARY FORCEMAINllPROPOSED WATERMAIN>>>>PROPOSED STORM SEWER>>>>>>>>PROPOSED DRAINTILEDIRECTIONALLY DRILLWET TAPPROPOSED LIFT STATION422
SSSXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX543216H:\CHAN\0C1126763\CAD\C3D\FIGR_126763_FEASABILITY-Hammer Head.dwg 11/10/2023 9:58:43 AM
RCrimson Bay RoadCity of ChanhassenFigure 2: Assessment RollNovember 2023RFEETSCALE060120HORZ.78TH STCRIMSON BAY RDMN TH 5LAKE MINNEWASHTAASSESSMENT AREAPROPERTY NUMBERPROPOSED REHABILITATION AREALEGENDXXXOWNERP.I.D.PROP.PROPERTYNO.ADDRESS1PAUL GREGORY & MARY SUMMERS7620 CRIMSON BAY RD2526100502ROSE MARIE MASTRICOLA7640 CRIMSON BAY RD2526100403MARY HAGEMAN7660 CRIMSON BAY RD2526100304ROB & CALI OLSON7700 CRIMSON BAY RD2526100105DARLENE HANSON7750 CRIMSION BAY RD2526100116REGENTS OF THE UNIV OF MINN250080110423
Appendix B: Preliminary Cost Estimates
424
CRIMSON BAY ROAD IMPROVEMENT
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
SAP 231-124-002
BMI # 0C1.126763
DATE: 11/10/2023
ITEM MN/DOT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL
NO. SPEC NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY COST COST QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT
BASE BID:
1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 0.574 $57,400.00 0.058 $5,800.00 0.134 $13,400.00 0.234 $23,400.00
2 2101.502 CLEARING EACH 60 $350.00 $21,000.00 60.000 $21,000.00
3 2101.502 GRUBBING EACH 60 $350.00 $21,000.00 60.000 $21,000.00
4 2101.505 CLEARING ACRE 0 $50,000.00 $1,000.00 0.020 $1,000.00
5 2101.505 GRUBBING ACRE 0 $50,000.00 $1,000.00 0.020 $1,000.00
6 2102.503 PAVEMENT MARKING REMOVAL LIN FT 950 $3.00 $2,850.00 950.000 $2,850.00
7 2102.602 PAVEMENT MESSAGE REMOVAL EACH 3 $325.00 $975.00 3.000 $975.00
8 2104.502 REMOVE PIPE APRON EACH 2 $350.00 $700.00 2.000 $700.00
9 2104.502 REMOVE LIGHT UNIT EACH 2 $750.00 $1,500.00 2.000 $1,500.00
10 2104.502 REMOVE HYDRANT EACH 1 $700.00 $700.00 1.000 $700.00
11 2104.502 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 5 $725.00 $3,625.00 5.000 $3,625.00
12 2104.502 REMOVE SIGN EACH 7 $100.00 $700.00 7.000 $700.00
13 2104.503 REMOVE WATERMAIN LIN FT 10 $20.00 $200.00 10.000 $200.00
14 2104.503 REMOVE PIPE SEWER (STORM)LIN FT 205 $25.00 $5,125.00 205.000 $5,125.00
15 2104.503 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT 2,675 $11.00 $29,425.00 2675.000 $29,425.00
16 2104.503 REMOVE RETAINING WALL LIN FT 190 $30.00 $5,700.00 190.000 $5,700.00
17 2104.503 REMOVE FENCE LIN FT 900 $5.00 $4,500.00 900.000 $4,500.00
18 2104.504 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 15 $50.00 $750.00 15.000 $750.00
19 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 20 $35.00 $700.00 20.000 $700.00
20 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ YD 4,740 $8.00 $37,920.00 4740.000 $37,920.00
21 2014.602 SALVAGE MAILBOX EACH 3 $100.00 $300.00 3.000 $300.00
22 2104.618 REMOVE BRICK PAVERS SQ FT 3,750 $7.00 $26,250.00 3750.000 $26,250.00
23 2106.507 EXCAVATION - COMMON (P)CU YD 5,492 $32.00 $175,744.00 5492.000 $175,744.00
24 2106.507 EXCAVATION - SUBGRADE CU YD 15 $35.00 $525.00 15.000 $525.00
25 2106.507 SELECT GRANULAR EMBANKMENT (CV) (P)CU YD 2,982 $38.00 $113,316.00 2982.000 $113,316.00
26 2106.507 COMMON EMBANKMENT (CV) (P)CU YD 546 $42.00 $22,932.00 546.000 $22,932.00
27 2106.507 STABILIZING AGGREGATE (CV)CU YD 150 $62.00 $9,300.00 150.000 $9,300.00
28 2112.604 SUBGRADE PREPARATION (P)SQ YD 4,500 $3.50 $15,750.00 4500.000 $15,750.00
29 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM)HOUR 16 $175.00 $2,800.00 16.000 $2,800.00
30 2123.610 MACHINE TIME HOUR 22 $850.00 $18,700.00 22.000 $18,700.00
31 2211.507 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 5 (P)CY YD 1,491 $47.00 $70,077.00 1491.000 $70,077.00
32 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3,C)TON 440 $105.00 $46,200.00 440.000 $46,200.00
33 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (3,C)TON 440 $105.00 $46,200.00 440.000 $46,200.00
34 2411.618 PREFABRICATED MODULAR BLOCK WALL SQ FT 2,150 $58.00 $124,700.00 2150.000 $124,700.00
35 2501.502 12" RC PIPE APRON EACH 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 1.000 $1,500.00
36 2501.502 18" RC PIPE APRON EACH 2 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 2.000 $4,000.00
37 2501.602 TRASH GUARD FOR 12" PIPE APRON EACH 1 $1,800.00 $1,800.00 1.000 $1,800.00
38 2501.602 TRASH GUARD FOR 18" PIPE APRON EACH 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 2.000 $5,000.00
39 2502.503 4" PVC PIPE DRAIN LIN FT 2,250 $15.00 $33,750.00 2250.000 $33,750.00
40 2502.602 4" PVC PIPE DRAIN CLEANOUT EACH 4 $350.00 $1,400.00 4.000 $1,400.00
41 2503.503 12" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS V LIN FT 145 $100.00 $14,500.00 145.000 $14,500.00
42 2503.503 18" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLASS V LIN FT 60 $130.00 $7,800.00 60.000 $7,800.00
43 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 1 $1,300.00 $1,300.00 1.000 $1,300.00
44 2503.603 8"X6" PVC WYE EACH 5 $1,900.00 $9,500.00 5.000 $9,500.00
45 2503.603 6" PVC PIPE SEWER (SANITARY SERVICE)LIN FT 170 $85.00 $14,450.00 170.000 $14,450.00
46 2503.603 8" PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 35 LIN FT 650 $90.00 $58,500.00 650.000 $58,500.00
47 2503.603 8" PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 26 LIN FT 20 $175.00 $3,500.00 20.000 $3,500.00
48 2503.603 1.5" PVC FORCE MAIN LIN FT 250 $85.00 $21,250.00 250.000 $21,250.00
49 2503.608 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS (SANITARY)POUND 200 $20.00 $4,000.00 200.000 $4,000.00
50 2504.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN EACH 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 2.000 $5,000.00
51 2504.602 HYDRANT EACH 2 $7,600.00 $15,200.00 2.000 $15,200.00
52 2504.602 1" CORPORATION STOP EACH 5 $725.00 $3,625.00 5.000 $3,625.00
53 2504.602 6" GATE VALVE & BOX EACH 2 $2,800.00 $5,600.00 2.000 $5,600.00
54 2504.602 8" GATE VALVE & BOX EACH 2 $4,500.00 $9,000.00 2.000 $9,000.00
55 2504.602 12"X8" WET TAP EACH 1 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 1.000 $5,500.00
56 2504.602 1" CURB STOP & BOX EACH 5 $950.00 $4,750.00 5.000 $4,750.00
57 2504.602 WATERMAIN AIR RELEASE MANHOLE EACH 1 $28,000.00 $28,000.00 1.000 $28,000.00
58 2504.603 1" TYPE PE PIPE LIN FT 200 $50.00 $10,000.00 200.000 $10,000.00
59 2504.603 8" WATERMAIN HDPE (DIRECTIONAL DRILLED) LIN FT 175 $150.00 $26,250.00 175.000 $26,250.00
60 2504.603 6" PVC WATERMAIN C900 DR 18 LIN FT 50 $95.00 $4,750.00 50.000 $4,750.00
61 2504.603 8" PVC WATERMAIN C900 DR 18 LIN FT 1,210 $100.00 $121,000.00 1210.000 $121,000.00
62 2504.604 4" POLYSTYRENE INSULATION SQ YD 32 $80.00 $2,560.00 32.000 $2,560.00
63 2504.608 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS (WATERMAIN)POUND 726 $20.00 $14,520.00 726.000 $14,520.00
64 2506.502 CASTING ASSEMBLY (SANITARY)EACH 4 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 4.000 $4,000.00
65 2506.502 CASTING ASSEMBLY (STORM)EACH 5 $1,000.00 $5,000.00 5.000 $5,000.00
66 2506.503 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 1 - 2'X3' LIN FT 25 $650.00 $16,250.00 25.000 $16,250.00
67 2506.503 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 3 - 48" DIA. LIN FT 5 $900.00 $4,500.00 5.000 $4,500.00
68 2506.503 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE (SAN)LIN FT 45 $1,500.00 $66,900.00 44.600 $66,900.00
69 2506.601 CONSTRUCT LIFT STATION LUMP SUM 1 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 1.000 $250,000.00
70 2506.602 CONSTRUCT DROP MANHOLE (SAN)EACH 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 1.000 $25,000.00
71 2506.602 EXTERNAL CHIMNEY SEAL (SAN)EACH 4 $325.00 $1,300.00 4.000 $1,300.00
72 2511.507 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III CU YD 10 $225.00 $2,250.00 10.000 $2,250.00
73 RAIN GARDEN LUMP SUM 1 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 1.000 $40,000.00
74 2521.618 3" BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SQ FT 370 $8.00 $2,960.00 370.000 $2,960.00
75 2531.504 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SQ YD 60 $165.00 $9,900.00 60.000 $9,900.00
76 2531.603 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN SURMOUNTABLE LIN FT 2,470 $20.00 $49,400.00 2470.000 $49,400.00
77 2540.602 INSTALL MAILBOX EACH 3 $175.00 $525.00 3.000 $525.00
78 2540.618 BRICK PAVER (DRIVEWAY)SQ FT 1,700 $15.00 $25,500.00 1700.000 $25,500.00
79 2545.502 LIGHTING UNIT TYPE SPECIAL EACH 4 $5,000.00 $20,000.00 4.000 $20,000.00
80 2557.502 VEHICULAR GATE-SPECIAL EACH 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 1.000 $5,000.00
81 2557.603 WOVEN WIRE FENCE LIN FT 850 $55.00 $46,750.00 850.000 $46,750.00
82 2557.603 ORNAMENTAL FENCE DESIGN SPECIAL LIN FT 305 $180.00 $54,900.00 305.000 $54,900.00
83 2557.603 TEMPORARY WOVEN WIRE FENCE LIN FT 850 $20.00 $17,000.00 850.000 $17,000.00
84 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 0.574 $8,610.00 0.058 $870.00 0.134 $2,010.00 0.234 $3,510.00
85 2564.502 OBJECT MARKER EACH 1 $175.00 $175.00 1.000 $175.00
86 2564.518 SIGN PANELS TYPE C SQ FT 65 $65.00 $4,225.00 65.000 $4,225.00
87 2564.602 SIGN PANELS TYPE SPECIAL EACH 1 $350.00 $350.00 1.000 $350.00
88 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LUMP SUM 1 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 1.000 $7,500.00
89 2573.501 EROSION CONTROL SUPERVISOR LUMP SUM 1 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 0.574 $3,444.00 0.058 $348.00 0.134 $804.00 0.234 $1,404.00
90 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 5 $250.00 $1,250.00 5.000 $1,250.00
91 2573.503 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS LIN FT 2,200 $2.50 $5,500.00 2200.000 $5,500.00
92 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER LIN FT 800 $3.75 $3,000.00 800.000 $3,000.00
93 2573.602 ROCK DITCH CHECK EACH 10 $450.00 $4,500.00 10.000 $4,500.00
94 2574.505 SOIL BED PREPARATION ACRE 1 $2,500.00 $1,625.00 0.650 $1,625.00
95 2574.508 FERTILIZER TYPE 3 POUND 130 $1.25 $162.50 130.000 $162.50
96 2575.504 ROLLED EROSION PREVENTION CATEGORY 20 SQ YD 1,100 $2.75 $3,025.00 1100.000 $3,025.00
97 2575.505 SEEDING ACRE 1 $1,000.00 $650.00 0.650 $650.00
98 2575.508 SEED MIXTURE 25-141 POUND 39 $5.00 $195.00 39.000 $195.00
99 2575.508 HYDRAULIC BONDED FIBER MATRIX POUND 1,500 $2.00 $3,000.00 1500.000 $3,000.00
100 2575.523 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 3 MGAL 4 $900.00 $3,510.00 3.900 $3,510.00
101 2582.503 4" SOLID LINE MULI COMP GR IN LIN FT 700 $4.00 $2,800.00 700.000 $2,800.00
102 2582.503 6" SOLID LINE MULTI COMP GR IN LIN FT 250 $4.00 $1,000.00 250.000 $1,000.00
103 2582.503 24" SOLID LINE MULTI COMP GR IN LIN FT 100 $40.00 $4,000.00 100.000 $4,000.00
$1,943,771.50 $1,115,366.50 $113,350.00 $260,655.00 $454,400.00
1.00 0.574 0.058 0.134 0.234
$121,000.00 $69,454.00 $7,018.00 $16,214.00 $28,314.00
$2,064,771.50 $1,184,820.50 $120,368.00 $276,869.00 $482,714.00
$310,000.00 $177,940.00 $17,980.00 $41,540.00 $72,540.00
$25,000.00 $25,000.00
$2,399,771.50 $1,387,760.50 $138,348.00 $318,409.00 $555,254.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST:
TOTAL WITHOUT PRORATA ITEMS
RATIO
PRORATA ITEMS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COSTS:
RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITON
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST:
WATERMAIN SANITARY SEWER
SP 1002-123, CITY OF CHANHASSEN
STORM SEWERROADWAY
425
Appendix C: City Assessment Practice
426
Page 1 of 2
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
ASSESSMENT POLICY
Last updated January 2022
The City of Chanhassen’s Assessment Policy is intended to provide general direction to City Staff and their
consultants in preparation of assessment rolls to ensure fair and consistent treatment of all properties within the
City that are subject to an assessment. This document will also be used to educate and explain to property owners
about the Policy. All assessments shall follow the process outlined in Minnesota State Statues, Chapter 429, which
gives the City the legal authority to assess property.
This Policy may not apply in all circumstances, at which time the City Council may direct staff to determine an
alternate assessment methodology. All benefiting properties that currently have access, or may have future access,
to the public street being reconstructed or rehabilitated shall be included in the assessment roll. This includes
property with a shared driveway or private street access to the public street, except where said private street meets
applicable criteria to allow for a reduced or no assessment. Applicable criteria includes whether the private street
has standard street width, section, and turn-around.
There are various ways to calculate assessments, typically done based on the number of parcels, an area, or linear
foot calculation. The City shall use the calculation method that creates a reasonable distribution of assessments
across the entire roll. When more than one “neighborhood” is contained within the same project, the assessment
shall be calculated per each neighborhood, rather than the total project. Public property, private associations, and
non-profits will be included in the calculations. Commercial, Medium, and High Density Residential property shall be
assessed based on a reasonable determination of vehicular traffic generated.
NEW CONSTRUCTION: 100% assessed to all benefitting properties. New construction is typically paid for by the
development itself and therefore not formally assessed. In some instances, the City will undertake proactive
installation of public utilities to unserved areas and then assess the benefiting properties for the added service.
In other instances properties may petition the City directly for the installation of the public improvement.
Assessable Costs Include:
• Construction of a new public street, trail and/or sidewalk.
• Installation of public water main, storm sewer and/or sanitary sewer system, including appurtenances
(structures, valves, hydrants, lift stations, etc.), where it did not previously exist.
• Indirect costs (design, legal, and administration fees).
Notes:
• Oversizing of streets and utilities beyond what is needed for the development itself, are paid for by the City
and are typically not assessed.
RECONSTRUCTION/REHABILITATION: 40% assessed to all benefitting properties
Assessable Costs Include:
• Pavement associated with public streets, trails and/or sidewalks. This includes draintile, geotechnical (soil
corrections, etc.), and other improvements needed to support the function of the pavement structure.
• Curb and gutter, including curb impacted solely by utility improvements.
• Driveway pavement directly affected by the project work.
• Multi-Modal improvements such as ADA ramps and actuated pedestrian crossings such as Rectangular Rapid-
Flashing Beacons (RRFB’s).
427
Page 2 of 2
• Signing and stripping.
• Retaining walls required within the Right-of-Way.
• Tree removal and/or landscaping improvements directly affected by the project work.
• Applicable percentage of indirect costs (design, legal, and admin fees).
Notes:
• Rehabilitation is typically defined as mill and overlay and/or full depth reclamation activities.
• If a residential property benefits from a collector street, the assessment amount shall be based on an
equitable formula compared to a typical local roadway, including normalizing to a 31-foot wide street, street
section, and other applicable factors.
• Pavement projects on streets that provide direct access to Chanhassen property(s) that are being
implemented by an adjacent municipality shall not be assessed to the Chanhassen property(s) unless the
adjacent municipality is assessing the benefitting property in their jurisdiction as part of the project.
• Replacement or repair of existing public water main, storm sewer and/or sanitary sewer shall not be assessed.
The City will pay 100% of these improvement costs out of the associated enterprise fund.
REGULAR MAINTENANCE: Benefiting properties are not assessed
• Activities Include: Pavement patching, pothole filling, crack sealing, chip sealing, sealcoating, and re-stripping.
ASSESSMENT PAYMENT OPTIONS
• Assessments can be paid in full up front with no charge, or added to annual property taxes with interest.
• If elected to be added to annual property taxes, the balance can be paid off at any time during the term if later
requested by the property owner.
• Interest will be charged to property owners who choose to not pay their assessments in full by November 15th
in the year the special assessment is levied. The interest rate will be equal to the average interest cost of the
City’s most recent bond issue plus 2%. If the City has not issued bonds in the past year, the City will use the
current municipal bond index rate for AAA rated issuers at the time the special assessment is approved.
• Unless approved otherwise by the City Council, the maximum financing term for assessments shall be as
follows:
o $0-$500 1 year
o $501-$2,500 5 years
o $2,501-$5,000 8 years
o $5,001 and above 10 years
The City has developed a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document addressing the most common questions
concerning assessments. The FAQ document can be found on the City’s website.
428
G:\ENG\Assessments\Assessment FAQ 2022 Update - Clean.docx Page 1 of 2
What are assessments?
Assessments are charges to benefiting properties utilized to help finance an improvement
project. In Chanhassen and most metro area cities, assessments are used to help finance street
reconstruction and rehabilitation projects. These projects are programmed via the Pavement
Management Program (PMP). Minnesota State Statutes, Chapter 429, allows the City the
authority to assess for projects.
Who is assessed for a street improvement project?
Owners of property that directly access a public street, or that have a private driveway that has
access to a public street, or that have potential future access within the project area are
assessed. These properties are determined to be “benefitting properties” and are assessed a
cost based on the City’s Assessment Policy.
Does the City have an Assessment Policy?
Yes. It can be found on the City’s website at this location:
https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/432/Assessment-Policy
The City started assessing for street improvements in 1993. The Policy was last updated in
January 2022. For the construction of a new public streets or public utilities, 100% of the cost is
assessed to the benefitting properties. For an improvement project of an existing street, 40%
of the cost is assessed to the benefitting properties and the City pays 60% of the street
improvement cost. 100% of the public storm sewer, sanitary sewer and water main costs
associated with the project are paid by the associated utility enterprise funds and are not
included in the cost assessed to the benefitting properties.
Why does the City assess for street improvement projects? Why doesn’t the City pay 100% of
the project cost?
Public streets are part of the City’s Multi-Modal transportation system to provide access to all
residents. The City acknowledges the system benefit of a street project by paying 60% of the
project cost. Benefitting properties use the roads to get to and from their property on a daily
basis, which is why they are assessed 40% of the street project cost. When someone buys a
new home in a new subdivision, the cost to construct the new infrastructure was incorporated
into the purchase price of the home and property by the Developer and thus was the initial
assessment to the property.
When is the assessment amount determined?
An estimate of the assessment is calculated with the Feasibility Study, which is typically
completed six months to a year before a project begins. The final assessment amount is based
on the lowest responsible bid amount and is set by City Council at the assessment hearing,
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
FAQs: ASSESSMENTS
429
G:\ENG\Assessments\Assessment FAQ 2022 Update - Clean.docx Page 2 of 2
which typically occurs in April or May of the construction year. Properties being assessed for
the project are notified of the assessment hearing formally by US mail, but the process is also
communicated by the City via its website, public open houses, the Chanhassen Connection,
social media, and at City Council meetings.
What are the payment options for assessments?
Please refer to the timeline below for payment options. The City does not accept partial
payments of the assessment.
Assessment Hearing &
final assessment
amount is determined
and the Assessment
Roll is adopted
Payments
received by
this date are
not charged
interest
Payments received by
this date are charged
the interest that has
accrued from the
date the Assessment
Roll is adopted
Annual payments to the
assessment are paid with your
property taxes. Interest is
collected each year based on
the outstanding principle owed
on the assessment
April or May
(typically)
90 days after
the Assessment
Roll is adopted
End of the year Term of the assessment*
*You can pay off an assessment after it has been certified to your property taxes. The City of Chanhassen Finance Department will calculate the
payoff amount, which will include the interest. The Term is based on a tiered amount found in the Policy.
Why does the City charge interest on assessments?
The City finances the entire project cost until all the assessments have been paid. The interest
charged on assessments is the rate the City pays for the bonding (as of the date of the
assessment) plus 2%. The interest charged is calculated as simple interest and not a compound
interest. Benefitting property owners are encouraged to consult private financial institutions
for other ways that can be used to pay off the assessment. This allows the property owner the
ability to negotiate the term and interest rates within the competitive market and may have
some tax advantages.
What does the Franchise Fees Pay for?
The Franchise Fees (passed in 2018) help pay for the City’s cost of the project. In lieu of
Franchise Fees, the annual property tax levy would have to be adjusted to fund the overall
Pavement Management Program (PMP).
How can I provide input on the project and the planned improvements?
A couple ways:
1. The City and their design consultants typically hold 2 public open houses during the
project implementation process. You can attend one or both of these and verbally
discuss the project or provide written comments on a comment card at those meetings.
2. Call the City’s Engineering Department at (952) 227-1160 and talk to one of the staff
working on the project.
3. E-mail the City’s Engineering Department at Engineering@ci.chanhassen.mn.us and
provide your comments or concerns.
430
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Southern Valley Alliance Presentation, Domestic Violence Awareness Month -
Kevin Hill
File No.Item No: E.1
Agenda Section VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Prepared By Jenny Potter, City Clerk
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority N/A
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
431
Purple Patch Program 2024
432
PURPLE
PATCH
PROGRAM
Buy a patch to support Southern Valley Alliance!
Scott and Carver county law enforcement agencies have partnered with
SVA to sell Domestic Violence Awareness Month patches with
proceeds supporting domestic abuse services in our community.
$15 Each | Set of all 10 for $135
Domestic shipping is included
Purchase at SVAMN.ORG
or use the QR code:
433
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) Annual Summary
File No.N/A Item No: J.1
Agenda Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
Prepared By Charlie Howley, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Reviewed By Laurie Hokkanen
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority Operational Excellence
SUMMARY
Attached is the annual summary of the Traffic Safety Committee.
BACKGROUND
https://www.chanhassenmn.gov/departments/public-works/engineering-gis/traffic-concerns
DISCUSSION
N/A
BUDGET
N/A
434
RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ATTACHMENTS
20241014 City Council TSC Correspondence
435
City Council Update Presentation
October 14, 2024
436
Overview
•TSC Members
•A Year in Review
•Q&A
437
TSC Members
“The TSC’s membership ensures that a broad spectrum of City
offices, in all its diversity, is reasonably represented…”
Departments –Public Works, Planning, Engineering, Carver County Sherriff, Parks
& Recreation, and the Fire Department
•Charlie Howley – Public Works Director/City
Engineer
•Charlie Burke – Public Works Operations
Manager
•Rachel Arsenault – Planner
•Lt. Lance Pearce – Carver County
•George Bender – Assistant City Engineer
•Priya Tandon – Recreational Supervisor
•Stacy Osen – Support Specialist
•Vacant Until Filled – Project Engineer
•Don Nutter, Asst. Fire Chief/Fire Marshal
Meetings are held monthly, allowing enough time for each months’ cases to be
addressed
438
A Year in Review: 7/2023 – 7/2024
•Cases Reviewed – All cases logged up to the July 2024 TSC meeting have been
reviewed:
o 28 of 34 (82%) cases have been completed after TSC evaluation
o 15 of 28 (54%) – recommended action taken: cost TBD
o 13 of 28 (46%) – recommended no action taken or out of city’s jurisdiction
o 6 of 34 (18%) cases remain open after TSC evaluation with a majority of
these requiring follow-up studies or resident coordination
*Half of the 2023-2024 “Misc. Requests” were sight obstructions due to vegetation
2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
Pedestrian Safety 37%30%35%13%
Signage 26%29%16%23%
Speeding 11%26%27%32%
Misc. Requests 18%15%22%32%*
Total Cases 57 65 33 34
The most frequent cases, a yearly comparison
439
A Year in Review: Cases & Their Impact
•Crosswalk Improvements (Proactive vs. Reactive) – The most frequent requests remain
crosswalk enhancements & pedestrian safety, and in response to multiple crosswalk
improvement installations in accordance with the Crosswalk Policy, the TSC conducted a city-
wide crosswalk evaluation of all 215 existing crosswalks identifying 64 minor treatments to
be completed between 2024-2026, and 9 substantial treatments to be programmed. The
local newspaper chose to write an article on this topic as well.
•Monthly Traffic Accidents Reporting – Every meeting now includes a review of accidents city
wide during the past 30-day period by Lt. Lance Pearce. This helps keep the TSC informed of
potential existing safety issues with local roads and evaluate if additional improvements or
recommendations are necessary.
•Capital Project Incorporation – All capital improvement projects that impact the
transportation network (whether local, county, or state) include collaboration and partnership
with residents regarding tracked TSC cases.
•TH 101 Improvements: two RFFBs are being installed at key crosswalks
•Minnetonka Middle School West Project: Intersection improvements
•Minnewashta Parkway (post project): added fog lines, a pedestrian bollard at Kings Rd
intersection, and continued evaluation of additional improvements along the corridor
440
A Year in Review: Cases & Their Impact
•See Click Fix – “Traffic Concerns” was integrated into SCF making it easier and more
convenient for residents to have potential traffic concerns addressed: 62% of cases
through SCF, up 17% from last year.
•Speed Trailer Deployment – The TSC developed a continually rotating schedule, spring
through fall, to deploy the speed trailer along major collectors and other hotspots
identified by case tracking: 2 additional locations added totaling 15 locations.
•The old trailer was decommissioned due to age and a new speed trailer was added to
the fleet in late 2023. The city had a “Speed Trailer Naming Contest” which was well
received with many resident submissions (35 total) and voted the winner…. “DARTH
RADAR”
•4 special deployments based on TSC cases have been conducted so far in 2024
•City Engineers Association of Minnesota (CEAM) Presentation - Chanhassen’s TSC was
selected to present at the 2024 CEAM Conference. “Effectively Establishing and Utilizing
Traffic Safety Committees…” was an opportunity to share with cities around Minnesota
how Chanhassen’s TSC was formed, how the TSC processes and responds to traffic-related
concerns, best practices we’ve implemented, and provided an opportunity to promulgate
the benefits of road authorities having a TSC.
441
Thank you
442
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Follow-up on Citizen Action Request Items
File No.Item No: J.2
Agenda Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
Prepared By Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
Receive update
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority Communications
SUMMARY
Follow-up and information related to requests raised during Visitors Presentation at previous City
Council meetings:
Comcast installation on Frontier Trail
The city has informed Comcast about the planned street reconstruction project on Frontier Trail in 2025.
Comcast has acknowledged the project and made a business decision to proceed, fully understanding
that any necessary relocations of their infrastructure will be their responsibility. The city will not bear
any additional costs related to Comcast's work. Comcast has also stated that they are working to place
their lines in areas that will not be impacted by the construction, which aligns with the city's preference.
Solar related to Civic Campus project:
The new City Hall was designed to be solar-ready, and we are nearing the final stages of awarding a
contract to Ideal Energies for the installation of solar panels on the building’s roof. We have submitted a
grant application to the Minnesota Department of Commerce, which, if approved, will cover 50% of the
project costs. Additionally, a Federal Tax Direct Pay Credit will cover another 30%. The project’s
443
implementation is contingent on receiving the grant, but we are confident in a successful outcome. An
agenda item related to this project is scheduled for the October 14 meeting.
Request to discontinue Fireworks at the annual Fourth of July celebration:
The City Council discussed this at their roundtable discussion. The city will continue to include
fireworks in the celebration. The city does have a practice of noticing fireworks displays (city and
others) on social media to assist those with sensitivities.
Rhizosphaera needle cast
The city still permits the planting of Black Hills spruce. While Rhizosphaera needle cast more severely
affects Colorado blue spruce, which we do not recommend planting, Black Hills spruce is less
susceptible to this fungal disease. Although it can contract the fungus, it is far less likely to be impacted
compared to Colorado blue spruce. As an alternative, we also recommend Norway spruce, especially in
areas with sufficient space, as it is a fast-growing and large tree.
CenterPoint Energy Grants
The city is a grateful recipient of CenterPoint Energy Community Safety grants. In July 2024, the city
received a 50/50 matching grant of $2,4000 for technical rope rescue equipment. View the thank you
social media post here.
Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center
The study cited in the citywide mailer with information about the proposed Community Center is citing
a study completed for the City of Chanhassen by the University of Minnesota. That report is available
on the project website.
Tennis Court Conversion to Pickleball Request
This topic was discussed by the Parks and Recreation Commission on September 24. The City Council
will discuss on October 28, 2024.
Election Processes/Carver County
Individuals members of the City Council researched the issues raised and contacted Carver County
Commissioners to discuss. No further action is planned.
2024 Street Project Tree Removals and Replacement Proposals
Approximately 50 trees have been or will be removed as a result of the 24-01 neighborhood street
reconstruction project. Trees were removed due to water and sanitary service replacements up to the
right-of-way boundary. The city intends to plant replacement trees following completion of the roadway
construction work. The number of replacement trees will be determined following completion and is
based on the availability of suitable locations and resident interest. Staff is in contact with Ms. Harder
and will continue to discuss the logistics of a possible increase in bare root trees that are available to
residents for planting.
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
444
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
Tree programs Correspondence - Judy Harder
445
PH 952.227.1100 • www.chanhassenmn.gov • FX 952.227.111 0
7700 MARKET BOULEVARD • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN • MINNESOTA • 55317
October 9, 2024
Judy Harder
541 W. 78th St.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: Response to September 9,2024 visitor presentation
Dear Judy,
Thank you for meeting with me on August 23 and for your ongoing involvement with the city. This letter
is a summary response to your presentation made at the City Council meeting on September 9th, 2024.
Below is a list of the programs that have been implemented, as well as those currently in progress, all
focused on replenishing the tree canopy in both residential and public spaces.
Starting with the most recently implemented program, the City of Chanhassen held its first residential
tree sale in Spring of 2024. As part of the sale, 8 different species of bare root, deciduous trees were
available for $85-$100. The trees were about 1-1.5” in diameter and ranged from about 8-12’ tall
depending on the species. During the tree sale in April 2024, 62 of the 100 trees were sold. The city
plans to offer the tree sale again in Spring of 2025.
In the Summer of 2023, the Chanhassen Parks Department constructed a gravel bed at the Parks Facility
at Lake Ann Park. The gravel bed can temporarily hold approximately 20-25 bare root trees which allows
the trees to form a dense, fibrous root system before they are planted in the fall time. Having the gravel
bed helps to expand the city’s planting capacity by splitting up planting projects and the associated
maintenance i.e. watering, any necessary staking etc. Trees are ordered in the Springtime where about
20-25 of those trees are planted at the Arbor Day celebration, about 100 are set aside for a Spring tree
sale and the remainder are held in the gravel bed until Fall for another planting project. The goal is to
expand the size of the gravel bed to allow for more tree storage which would open opportunities to offer
trees for additional programs.
With bare root trees being more affordable than traditional stock, the city was able to expand the
number of trees planted in 2024. A total of 42 trees have been planted in city parks so far. Of the 42
trees, 25 were planted as a part of the annual Arbor Day celebration at Meadow Green Park and 17 were
planted by a local Eagle Scout who did this as a community service project at Lake Ann Park. There will
be a Fall planting project where an additional 8 trees are planted in city parks.
Teaching the community about the importance of trees is key in maintaining a healthy canopy. One way
the city does this is by holding an Arbor Day event each year where volunteers gather to learn about the
importance of tree canopy and celebrates by planting about 20 trees in a Chanhassen Park. The city
446
PH 952.227.1100 • www.chanhassenmn.gov • FX 952.227.111 0
7700 MARKET BOULEVARD • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN • MINNESOTA • 55317
would like to invite you to participate in our Arbor Day celebration and to guide volunteers during the
planting process. Your experience and expertise would be appreciated as we aim to expand tree canopy,
diversify our parks’ landscapes and make our parks more beautiful!
I hope this summary of the City’s tree canopy expansion programs gives you a clearer understanding.
There are volunteer opportunities for the upcoming tree sale and our Arbor Day planting event, and I’d
love to see you there! In 2025, I plan to work with the Environmental Commission to expand educational
and volunteer opportunities focusing on trees and the environment. I also encourage you to share any
ideas you have during visitor presentations at our monthly meetings.
Sincerely,
City of Chanhassen
Jamie Marsh
Environmental Resource Specialist
447
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Notice of Public Hearing to Consider an Ordinance Amending the County Code
and Cannabis Regulations: Carver County
File No.Item No: J.3
Agenda Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
Prepared By Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
N/A
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority Communications
SUMMARY
Received in the US Mail on September 30, 2024.
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
448
ATTACHMENTS
Public Hearing Notice
449
450
City Council Item
October 14, 2024
Item Postcard: Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center Referendum
File No.Item No: J.4
Agenda Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
Prepared By Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
Reviewed By
SUGGESTED ACTION
n/a
Motion Type N/A
Strategic
Priority Communications
SUMMARY
Postcard mailed to each home in Chanhassen; likely to arrive in mailboxes about October 15.
BACKGROUND
DISCUSSION
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
ATTACHMENTS
451
Community Center mailer
452
THE FUTURE OF OUR
COMMUNITY CENTER IS UP TO YOU
YOUR VOTE DETERMINES IT
Voting “YES” this November
secures a new community center
for Chanhassen.
YES NO
Voting “NO” means the community center
project and location will no longer be
an option for future consideration by the city.
453
POSTAGE
ADDRESS
For more information about the Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center,
including renderings and financing, visit ChanhassenMN.gov/ChanhassenBluffs
This November, your vote will determine whether Chanhassen has a new
community center or not.
The Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center is a proposed 300,000-square-foot
community center located at the corner of Powers Blvd. and Highway 212 that
will feature a multi-purpose arena with seating for 3,500, an indoor walking track,
a field house with sport courts and turf, two ice sheets, an indoor playground,
dance and fitness studios, community rooms and a restaurant.
A “YES” vote will move the Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center proposal
forward, with design planned for 2025 and an expected building opening in 2027.
The city will provide numerous opportunities for public input and ideas that will
help us fine-tune and enhance the new community center so that the final design
reflects the needs and aspirations of our residents.
A “NO” vote likely means that no community center will be built, now or in the
future. This is due to a few key factors.
1) The state legislature has placed a moratorium on future local sales tax requests,
meaning that this essential funding option may not be available in the future.
The Chanhassen City Council has stated that, without the local option sales tax,
the project cannot proceed.
2) The land lot where the proposed Chanhassen Bluffs Community Center is set to
be built may not continue to be available for purchase in the future and it remains
one of the only developable properties of this size available in Chanhassen.
This November, make your voice heard in this pivotal decision for our community.
The future of our community center is in your hands.
454