Loading...
Agenda & PacketAGENDA CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, AUGUST 13, 2018 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD A.5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION ­ FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Note:  Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda. 1.2040 Comprehensive Plan 2.Review Second Quarter Revenue Activity to Date and Investments 3.Preliminary Budget and Levy Discussion B.7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ­ COUNCIL CHAMBERS 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. 1.Approval of City Council Minutes dated July 9, 2018 2.Receive Park & Recreation Minutes dated June 26, 2018 3.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated July 17, 2018 4.Approve Temporary On­Sale Liquor License Request; St. Hubert Catholic Community; Harvest Festival on September 15, 2018 E.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS F.PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.Resolution No. 2018­40: Approve Vacation of Conservation Easement on Lot 1, Block 1, Minger Addition (2300 Lukewood Drive) G.NEW BUSINESS AGENDACHANHASSEN CITY COUNCILMONDAY, AUGUST 13, 2018CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARDA.5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION ­ FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOMNote:  Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the worksession items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regularagenda.1.2040 Comprehensive Plan2.Review Second Quarter Revenue Activity to Date and Investments3.Preliminary Budget and Levy DiscussionB.7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ­ COUNCIL CHAMBERSC.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTSD.CONSENT AGENDAAll items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council andwill be considered as one motion.  There will be no separate discussion of these items.  Ifdiscussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and consideredseparately.  City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item.  Refer to thecouncil packet for each staff report.1.Approval of City Council Minutes dated July 9, 20182.Receive Park & Recreation Minutes dated June 26, 20183.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated July 17, 20184.Approve Temporary On­Sale Liquor License Request; St. Hubert CatholicCommunity; Harvest Festival on September 15, 2018E.VISITOR PRESENTATIONSF.PUBLIC HEARINGS1.Resolution No. 2018­40: Approve Vacation of Conservation Easement on Lot 1, Block1, Minger Addition (2300 Lukewood Drive) G.NEW BUSINESS 1.Galpin Property: Planned Unit Development Concept Plan Review 2.Control Concepts: Approve Site Plan with a Variance for Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition H.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS I.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS J.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION 1.Review of Claims Paid 08­13­2018 2.Website Analytics Overview ­ July 2018 K.ADJOURNMENT L.GUIDELINES GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting.  In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council.  That opportunity is provided at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations. Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor.  When called upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic.  All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City Council. If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokesperson that can summarize the issue.  Limit your comments to five minutes.  Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor.  If you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council. During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in discussion.  Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough understanding of your concern, suggestion or request. Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed.  Personnel concerns should be directed to the City Manager. Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Houlihan's, 530 Pond Promenade in Chanhassen immediately after the meeting for a purely social event.  All members of the public are welcome. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject 2040 Comprehensive Plan Section 5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION ­ FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Item No: A.1. Prepared By Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director, AICP File No: City of Chanhassen 2040 Comprehensive Plan SUMMARY Staff will summarize the final changes made to the Plan and answer any questions that council members have.  No action is required at this time.  This item will be brought back to City Council for approval of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and submittal to the Metropolitan Council. The local surface water management plan is tentatively scheduled for review and approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District on Thursday, August 23, 2018. The city may not adopt the Plan until the watershed district approves it. Hard copies of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan are being provided to each council member. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 17, 2018 and voted 6 ­ 0 to recommend approval of the City of Chanhassen 2040 Comprehensive Plan and to submit to the Metropolitan Council for their review.  This was the second public hearing held by the Planning Commission on the Comprehensive Plan.  The first public hearing was on October 17, 2017. The Planning Commission minutes for July 17, 2018 are in the consent agenda for the August 13, 2018 City Council packet. DISCUSSION The Comprehensive Plan provides a guide for the city's vision of the community as it grows in the coming years.  It establishes goals and policies to provide residents, businesses, property owners, developers, and visitors a sense of the community's values and aspirations. There have been numerous opportunities for individuals to provide input on the Plan including presentations at the Planning Commission, two public hearings, two open houses, two information stands at city events (2017 4th of July and 2018 February Festival), newsletter articles, and links on the city's web site.  Here is a link to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan:  www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/2040compplan. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 13, 2018Subject2040 Comprehensive PlanSection5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION ­FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Item No: A.1.Prepared By Kate Aanenson, CommunityDevelopment Director, AICP File No: City of Chanhassen 2040 ComprehensivePlanSUMMARYStaff will summarize the final changes made to the Plan and answer any questions that council members have.  Noaction is required at this time.  This item will be brought back to City Council for approval of the 2040 ComprehensivePlan and submittal to the Metropolitan Council.The local surface water management plan is tentatively scheduled for review and approval by the Minnehaha CreekWatershed District on Thursday, August 23, 2018. The city may not adopt the Plan until the watershed districtapproves it.Hard copies of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan are being provided to each council member.BACKGROUNDThe Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 17, 2018 and voted 6 ­ 0 to recommend approval of the Cityof Chanhassen 2040 Comprehensive Plan and to submit to the Metropolitan Council for their review.  This was thesecond public hearing held by the Planning Commission on the Comprehensive Plan.  The first public hearing was onOctober 17, 2017.The Planning Commission minutes for July 17, 2018 are in the consent agenda for the August 13, 2018 City Councilpacket.DISCUSSIONThe Comprehensive Plan provides a guide for the city's vision of the community as it grows in the coming years.  Itestablishes goals and policies to provide residents, businesses, property owners, developers, and visitors a sense ofthe community's values and aspirations.There have been numerous opportunities for individuals to provide input on the Plan including presentations at thePlanning Commission, two public hearings, two open houses, two information stands at city events (2017 4th of Julyand 2018 February Festival), newsletter articles, and links on the city's web site.  Here is a link to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan:  www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/2040compplan. RECOMMENDATION Staff requests that the City Council review the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and provide staff with any comments or direction prior to adoption. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Staff Report Dated July 17, 2018 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Review Second Quarter Revenue Activity to Date and Investments Section 5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION ­ FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Item No: A.2. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: A­039V BACKGROUND In an effort to keep the City Council informed of the city’s financial position, staff will review the current status of the 2018 revenue and expenditure budgets and recap the city’s investment portfolio at the work session. 2017 Budget Revenues:Halfway through the year, revenues are on target for all line items.As of June 30, building permit revenue has collected just over 100% of the total budget. Attached is the budget versus actual revenue report for your review. Expenditures:As of June 30, expenditures have been 47% spent.It appears there are no line items currently expected to significantly exceed the budget in 2018. In summary, it appears both revenues and expenditures are tracking with the originally­adopted budgets. Investments Attached is a summary of the city’s investments. At this evening’s meeting Reid Christianson from Wells Fargo will be present to answer any questions about the city’s investment portfolio. The average market yield of the portfolio as of June 30, 2018 is 1.65%, with an average maturity of 1.77 years. There are a number of other indicators and information about the portfolio included in the summary that will be reviewed at the meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Gen Fund Budget 6­30­18 Investment Report 6­30­18 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Reid Christianson 06/29/2018 Confidential-For Discussion and General Information Purposes Only Summary Par Value ($000):$30,817 Portfolio Market Yield:2.00 12 Mo Book Income ($000):$418 Mkt Val w/accrd ($000):$30,839 Portfolio Book Yield:1.65 12 Mo Cash Flow ($000):$14,443 Wtg Avg. Mat (Years):1.77 Book Value ($000):$30,903 12 Mo Mat Cash Flow ($000):$13,930 Effective Duration:1.59 Unr Gain/(Loss) ($000):($219)12 Mo Call Cash Flow ($000):$0 Convexity:-0.02 % Portfolio Callable:9.20 12 Mo Int Income ($000):$512 % Portfolio Floating Rate:0.00 Avg. Coupon (%):1.77 12 Mo Amort Prem/Disc ($000):($26) Number of Bonds:73 Avg. Mkt Price ($):99.63 Current Accrued Interest ($000):$154 ($000)% of Portfolio % of Portfolio % of Portfolio % of Portfolio % of Portfolio Cash Flow Distribution Duration Distribution Coupon Distribution Summary Characteristics Performance Characteristics Cash Flow Characteristics Sector Distribution S&P Long-Term Ratings Distribution Moody Long-Term Ratings Distribution 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 AAA AA N/A 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Aaa Aa N/A 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 5,902 1,861 6,679 10,462 4,937 1,854 612 . 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 1M 1-3M 3-12M 1-3YR 3-5YR 5-7YR 7+YR 45 33 11 8 2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.00 - 0.99 1.00 - 2.99 3.00 - 3.99 4.00 - 5.99 6.00 - 7.99 22 34 24 12 4 4 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.00 - 0.99 1.00 - 1.99 2.00 - 2.99 3.00 - 3.99 4.00 - 4.99 5.00 - 5.99 2 Year Cash Flow Interest Principal Prepay Total Cumulative Run - Off Run - Off Date Interest ($)Call ($)Maturity ($)MBS($)MBS($)MBS($)Cash Flow($)Cash Flow($)Mkt YTW (%)Book Yld (%) Jul-18 48,314 0 5,854,178 0 0 0 5,902,492 5,902,492 0.67 0.59 Aug-18 89,762 0 500,000 0 0 0 589,762 6,492,254 1.92 1.00 Sep-18 29,800 0 1,241,000 0 0 0 1,270,800 7,763,054 2.18 1.28 Oct-18 34,275 0 492,000 0 0 0 526,275 8,289,329 2.03 1.45 Nov-18 24,501 0 807,000 0 0 0 831,501 9,120,831 1.99 1.43 Dec-18 54,174 0 322,000 0 0 0 376,174 9,497,004 1.86 2.00 Jan-19 14,184 0 325,000 0 0 0 339,184 9,836,188 0.56 1.80 Feb-19 82,351 0 2,905,000 0 0 0 2,987,351 12,823,539 0.83 1.66 Mar-19 32,573 0 744,000 0 0 0 776,573 13,600,112 2.28 1.59 Apr-19 33,354 0 0 0 0 0 33,354 13,633,466 0.00 0.00 May-19 19,135 0 491,000 0 0 0 510,135 14,143,602 2.37 2.16 Jun-19 49,913 0 249,000 0 0 0 298,913 14,442,515 2.37 1.15 Jul-19 10,038 0 0 0 0 0 10,038 14,452,553 0.00 0.00 Aug-19 46,693 0 988,000 0 0 0 1,034,693 15,487,246 2.41 2.09 Sep-19 31,373 0 500,000 0 0 0 531,373 16,018,619 2.45 1.15 Oct-19 33,116 0 1,633,000 0 0 0 1,666,116 17,684,735 2.49 1.67 Nov-19 10,846 0 560,000 0 0 0 570,846 18,255,580 2.71 1.80 Dec-19 49,665 0 701,000 0 0 0 750,665 19,006,245 2.48 1.69 Jan-20 9,779 0 500,000 0 0 0 509,779 19,516,024 2.52 1.55 Feb-20 36,122 0 249,000 0 0 0 285,122 19,801,146 2.68 2.56 Mar-20 27,709 0 200,000 0 0 0 227,709 20,028,855 1.99 1.40 Apr-20 16,437 0 0 0 0 0 16,437 20,045,292 0.00 0.00 May-20 10,057 0 1,020,000 0 0 0 1,030,057 21,075,349 2.37 1.25 Jun-20 44,537 0 1,490,000 0 0 0 1,534,537 22,609,886 2.54 1.50 Totals:838,708 0 21,771,178 0 0 0 22,609,886 Monthly Cash Flows & Run-off Book Yield 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 Jul-18 Aug-18 Sep-18 Oct-18 Nov-18 Dec-18 Jan-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Apr-19 May-19 Jun-19 Jul-19 Aug-19 Sep-19 Oct-19 Nov-19 Dec-19 Jan-20 Feb-20 Mar-20 Apr-20 May-20 Jun-20 Interest ($)Call ($)Maturity ($)Book Yld (%) Sector Par Avg Cpn Avg Mat Mkt Price Mkt Val Book Unr.Gain/Loss Port Mkt YTW Book Yld Eff. Sector ($000)Moody S&P (%)(Yrs)($)($000)Price ($000)(%) (%)(%)Duration Conv. Govt 10,573 Aaa AA+1.47 2.54 98.19 10,381 99.53 (142)33.77 2.63 1.90 2.18 (0.12) CD 6,423 N/A N/A 1.84 1.13 99.40 6,385 100.00 (38)20.77 2.39 1.84 1.09 0.01 MMF 5,366 N/A N/A 0.52 0.00 100.00 5,366 100.00 (0)17.49 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.00 MUNI 8,455 Aa1 AA+2.90 2.41 101.15 8,552 101.60 (38)27.96 1.88 1.90 2.24 0.05 Total:30,817 Aaa AA+1.77 1.77 99.57 30,684 100.28 (219)100.00 2.00 1.65 1.59 (0.02) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Ratings Positions by Sector tandard Holdings Sector CUSIP Issuer Cpn (%)Maturity Par ($000)Moody's S&P Call Date Acq Price($)Acq Date Mkt Price($) Mkt Val ($000)Bk Price($) Gain/Loss ($000) Port (%) Mkt YTW(%) Bk Yield(%)Eff Dur Conv 3134G3ZK9 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 1.20 07/30/2018 240 Aaa AA+N/A 100.00 07/30/2012 99.94 240 100.00 (0)0.78 1.89 1.20 0.08 0.00 3134GADJ0 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 1.00 08/28/2018 500 Aaa AA+N/A 100.00 08/30/2016 99.85 499 100.00 (1)1.62 1.92 1.00 0.16 0.00 31358BAA6 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN PRIN S 0.00 02/01/2019 1,155 Aaa AA+N/A 91.43 06/19/2014 98.69 1,140 98.86 (2)3.70 2.26 1.95 0.59 0.00 3136FTR68 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 1.65 02/28/2019 500 Aaa AA+N/A 99.68 03/05/2012 99.57 498 99.97 (2)1.62 2.31 1.70 0.66 0.00 3136G4BB8 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 1.15 09/27/2019 500 Aaa AA+N/A 100.00 09/30/2016 98.42 492 100.00 (8)1.60 2.45 1.15 1.22 0.01 76116FAA5 RESOLUTION FDG FED BK PRIN S 0.00 10/15/2019 638 Aaa AA+N/A 91.69 12/10/2014 96.80 618 97.71 (6)2.00 2.53 1.80 1.28 0.01 313400BV4 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 0.00 11/29/2019 560 Aaa AA N/A 92.56 08/05/2015 96.26 539 97.49 (7)1.75 2.71 1.80 1.40 0.01 3133EG3J2 FEDERAL FARM CR BKS 1.55 01/10/2020 500 Aaa AA+N/A 100.00 01/10/2017 98.56 493 100.00 (7)1.61 2.52 1.55 1.49 0.02 3130A7ZT5 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS 1.40 05/18/2020 500 Aaa AA+05/18/2018 100.00 05/18/2016 97.83 489 100.00 (11)1.59 2.58 1.40 1.82 0.00 3133834H1 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS 1.38 06/12/2020 500 Aaa AA+N/A 101.60 07/08/2016 97.69 488 100.80 (16)1.58 2.60 0.96 1.91 0.02 3136G0R60 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 1.50 10/22/2020 500 Aaa AA+N/A 100.94 10/11/2016 97.31 487 100.54 (16)1.58 2.70 1.26 2.25 0.03 76116FAG2 RESOLUTION FDG FED BK PRIN S 0.00 01/15/2021 780 Aaa AA+N/A 93.14 04/14/2016 93.21 727 96.27 (24)2.36 2.78 1.50 2.52 0.04 742651DJ8 PRIVATE EXPT FDG CORP 4.30 12/15/2021 600 Aaa AA+N/A 114.14 04/29/2015 104.56 627 107.62 (18)2.04 2.91 2.01 3.21 0.06 3134GAQ31 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 2.15 01/26/2022 500 Aaa AA+07/26/2018 99.95 11/14/2017 97.62 488 99.96 (12)1.60 2.85 2.16 2.87 (0.41) 3134GBH39 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 2.05 09/29/2022 1,000 Aaa AA+09/29/2018 97.01 06/29/2018 96.90 969 97.01 (1)3.16 2.83 2.80 3.55 (0.34) 313383YJ4 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS 3.38 09/08/2023 205 Aaa AA+N/A 102.53 06/20/2018 102.45 210 102.51 (0)0.69 2.86 2.85 4.70 0.13 3133EJQA0 FEDERAL FARM CR BKS 3.00 10/23/2023 500 Aaa AA+N/A 100.59 06/20/2018 100.55 503 100.59 (0)1.64 2.89 2.88 4.87 0.14 3130ABLN4 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS 2.50 06/28/2024 345 Aaa AA+06/28/2019 100.00 10/11/2017 96.62 333 100.00 (12)1.08 3.12 2.50 4.58 (0.61) 3133EJBN8 FEDERAL FARM CR BKS 3.00 02/05/2025 550 Aaa AA+02/05/2019 98.39 06/21/2018 98.40 541 98.39 0 1.78 3.27 3.27 3.81 (1.35) Govt 1.47 01/09/2021 10,573 98.19 10,381 99.53 (142)33.77 2.63 1.90 2.18 (0.12) 140420SU5 CAPITAL ONE BK USA NATL ASSN 1.60 07/02/2018 248 N/A N/A 100.00 07/01/2015 100.00 248 100.00 (0)0.81 2.90 1.60 0.01 0.00 204163BU2 COMMUNITYONE BK N A NC 1.35 09/04/2018 249 N/A N/A 100.00 09/04/2015 99.95 249 100.00 (0)0.81 1.62 1.35 0.18 0.00 45083AGR7 IBERIABANK LAFAYETTE LA 1.35 09/21/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 06/21/2017 99.86 246 100.00 (0)0.80 1.97 1.35 0.23 0.00 31927LAC2 FIRST BK OWASSO OKLA 1.40 09/28/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 06/29/2017 99.86 246 100.00 (0)0.80 2.00 1.41 0.25 0.00 87164DKL3 SYNOVUS BK COLUMBUS GA 1.45 10/11/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 07/11/2017 99.84 246 100.00 (0)0.80 2.03 1.45 0.28 0.00 20364ACC7 COMMUNITY FINL SVCS BK KY 1.45 10/16/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 08/16/2017 99.84 246 100.00 (0)0.80 2.02 1.45 0.30 0.00 06426WUU4 BANK OF CHINA NEW YORK CITY 1.50 11/16/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 11/16/2017 99.78 245 100.00 (1)0.80 2.09 1.52 0.38 0.00 61747MB42 MORGAN STANLEY BK N A UTAH 1.50 11/16/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 11/16/2017 99.78 245 100.00 (1)0.80 2.09 1.52 0.38 0.00 795450RT4 SALLIE MAE BK SLT LAKE CITY 2.00 12/11/2018 247 N/A N/A 100.00 12/11/2013 99.96 247 100.00 (0)0.80 2.09 2.00 0.45 0.00 20033AXA9 COMENITY CAP BK UTAH 1.60 03/15/2019 249 N/A N/A 100.00 09/15/2017 99.54 248 100.00 (1)0.80 2.27 1.61 0.70 0.00 149159LH6 CATHAY BK LOS ANGEL CALIF 1.60 03/25/2019 249 N/A N/A 100.00 09/25/2017 99.51 248 100.00 (1)0.80 2.28 1.61 0.72 0.00 51210SND5 LAKESIDE BK CHICAGO ILL 1.55 03/29/2019 246 N/A N/A 100.00 06/30/2017 99.46 245 100.00 (1)0.79 2.28 1.55 0.73 0.01 38147JZT2 GOLDMAN SACHS BK USA NY 2.00 05/14/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 05/14/2014 99.66 246 100.00 (1)0.80 2.38 2.00 0.86 0.01 06279KKW5 BANK OF INDIA NEW YORK BRANC 2.30 05/22/2019 244 N/A N/A 100.00 05/24/2018 99.96 244 100.00 (0)0.79 2.36 2.32 0.89 0.01 59013JQY8 MERRICK BK SOUTH JORDAN UTAH 1.15 06/28/2019 249 N/A N/A 100.00 06/29/2016 98.81 246 100.00 (3)0.80 2.37 1.15 0.98 0.01 06740KHS9 BARCLAYS BK DEL 2.10 08/13/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 08/13/2014 99.51 246 100.00 (1)0.80 2.55 2.10 1.09 0.01 2.547E+13 DISCOVER BK GREENWOOD DEL 2.10 08/13/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 08/13/2014 99.63 246 100.00 (1)0.80 2.44 2.10 1.09 0.01 02587CAT7 AMERICAN EXP FED SVGS BK INS 2.05 08/14/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 08/14/2014 99.99 247 100.00 (0)0.81 2.06 2.05 1.10 0.01 628779FN5 NBT BK NA NORWICH NY 2.10 08/20/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 08/20/2014 99.49 246 100.00 (1)0.80 2.56 2.10 1.11 0.01 17284C6R0 CIT BK SALT LAKE CITY UT 2.20 12/24/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 12/24/2014 99.43 246 100.00 (1)0.80 2.59 2.20 1.45 0.01 57116AMC9 MARLIN BUSINESS BK SALT LAKE 1.25 12/27/2019 249 N/A N/A 100.00 06/29/2016 98.07 244 100.00 (5)0.79 2.58 1.25 1.46 0.01 410493DD9 HANMI BK LOS ANGELES CALIF 2.55 02/25/2020 249 N/A N/A 100.00 05/25/2018 99.81 249 100.00 (0)0.81 2.68 2.56 1.61 0.02 02007GCV3 ALLY BK MIDVALE UTAH 2.90 05/24/2021 246 N/A N/A 100.00 05/24/2018 99.77 245 100.00 (1)0.80 2.98 2.90 2.76 0.05 14042RJJ1 CAPITAL ONE NATL ASSN VA 2.15 10/12/2021 247 N/A N/A 100.00 10/12/2017 97.24 240 100.00 (7)0.78 3.04 2.15 3.13 0.06 05580AKQ6 BMW BK NORTH AMER SALT LAKE 2.05 10/13/2021 247 N/A N/A 100.00 10/13/2017 96.93 239 100.00 (8)0.78 3.04 2.05 3.14 0.06 87165HFH8 SYNCHRONY BANK 2.55 12/20/2021 246 N/A N/A 100.00 12/19/2014 98.79 243 100.00 (3)0.79 2.92 2.55 3.30 0.06 CD 1.84 08/15/2019 6,423 99.40 6,385 100.00 (38)20.77 2.39 1.84 1.09 0.01 0006CHAN6 BMO HARRIS BANK 0.00 06/30/2018 3,751 N/A N/A 100.00 06/01/2018 100.00 3,751 100.00 0 12.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0008CHAN2 NORTHLAND 1.03 06/30/2018 8 N/A N/A 100.00 06/01/2018 100.00 8 100.00 0 0.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 0003CHAN3 WF 1.72 06/30/2018 1,608 N/A N/A 100.00 06/01/2018 100.00 1,608 100.00 0 5.30 1.71 1.72 0.00 0.00 006CHAN78 PMA-4M Fund 1.23 07/06/2018 0 N/A N/A 100.00 06/01/2018 0.00 0 100.00 (0)0.00 0.00 1.25 0.00 0.00 MMF 0.52 06/30/2018 5,366 100.00 5,366 100.00 (0)17.49 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.00 591852UX4 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MINN M 1.30 09/01/2018 500 Aaa AAA N/A 100.36 03/18/2016 99.77 499 100.03 (1)1.62 2.65 1.15 0.17 0.00 196479WW5 COLORADO HSG & FIN AUTH TAX 1.62 11/01/2018 315 Aaa AAA N/A 100.94 11/05/2015 99.93 315 100.11 (1)1.02 1.83 1.30 0.34 0.00 161664DW4 CHASKA MINN GO TAX INCR REF 2.00 12/01/2018 75 N/A AA N/A 100.00 08/15/2013 100.36 75 100.00 0 0.24 1.13 2.00 0.42 0.00 60416SSG6 MINNESOTA ST HSG FIN AGY FO 1.80 01/01/2019 325 Aa1 AA+N/A 100.00 12/22/2016 100.62 327 100.00 2 1.07 0.56 1.80 0.50 0.00 373385BL6 GEORGIA ST GO BDS 2017 B 3.50 02/01/2019 500 Aaa AAA N/A 103.18 07/18/2017 100.64 503 101.23 (3)1.65 2.40 1.40 0.58 0.00 279533TN3 EDEN PRAIRIE MINN INDPT SCH 5.75 02/01/2019 225 Aa2 N/A 112.62 04/26/2016 105.49 237 102.72 6 0.79 (3.39)1.10 0.59 0.00 279533TN3 EDEN PRAIRIE MINN INDPT SCH 5.75 02/01/2019 525 Aa2 N/A 108.76 01/04/2017 105.49 554 102.51 16 1.84 (3.39)1.45 0.59 0.00 882722J69 TEXAS ST TAXABLE GO REF BDS 3.19 10/01/2019 995 Aaa AAA N/A 106.62 06/24/2015 100.90 1,004 101.99 (11)3.28 2.46 1.58 1.22 0.01 742617CD3 PRIOR LAKE MINN TAXABLE GO 1.60 12/15/2019 205 Aa2 AA+N/A 100.00 05/14/2015 99.10 203 100.00 (2)0.66 2.23 1.60 1.43 0.01 678519UC1 OKLAHOMA CITY OKLA FOR ISSU 2.00 03/01/2020 200 Aaa AAA N/A 102.21 05/17/2016 100.01 200 100.99 (2)0.65 1.99 1.40 1.63 0.02 97705MDS1 WISCONSIN ST FOR ISSUES DTD 1.15 05/01/2020 520 Aa2 AA N/A 100.15 07/28/2016 98.19 511 100.07 (10)1.66 2.16 1.11 1.80 0.02 150528LV7 CEDAR RAPIDS IOWA TAXABLE G 2.50 06/01/2020 490 Aa1 N/A 104.42 04/07/2016 100.43 492 102.08 (8)1.60 2.27 1.40 1.87 0.02 64966LN56 NEW YORK N Y TAXABLE GO BDS 2.15 06/01/2020 500 Aa2 AA N/A 100.00 06/18/2015 98.87 494 100.00 (6)1.61 2.76 2.15 1.87 0.02 113835H54 BROOKLYN CENTER MINN GO TAX 3.00 02/01/2021 400 N/A AA N/A 101.88 01/24/2014 102.89 412 100.74 9 1.35 1.85 2.70 2.47 0.04 161664HA8 CHASKA MINN TAXABLE GO BDS 1.95 02/01/2021 140 N/A AA N/A 100.00 11/29/2017 98.29 138 100.00 (2)0.45 2.64 1.95 2.48 0.04 161664HB6 CHASKA MINN TAXABLE GO BDS 2.10 02/01/2022 140 N/A AA N/A 100.00 11/29/2017 97.88 137 100.00 (3)0.45 2.72 2.10 3.39 0.07 809557BA8 SCOTT CNTY MINN CMNTY DEV A 2.35 02/01/2022 120 N/A AA+N/A 100.00 12/28/2017 98.24 118 100.00 (2)0.39 2.87 2.35 3.38 0.07 60375BDC7 MINNEAPOLIS MINN TAXABLE GO 5.00 12/01/2022 370 N/A AAA N/A 108.14 05/31/2018 108.05 400 108.00 0 1.30 3.04 3.05 3.97 0.09 161664HC4 CHASKA MINN TAXABLE GO BDS 2.25 02/01/2023 145 N/A AA N/A 100.00 11/29/2017 97.48 141 100.00 (4)0.46 2.84 2.25 4.27 0.11 092765EW2 BLAINE MINN TAXABLE GO IMPT 2.25 02/01/2023 395 N/A AA+N/A 100.00 12/05/2017 97.61 386 100.00 (9)1.27 2.81 2.25 4.27 0.11 73723RSP9 PORTSMOUTH VA GO REF BDS 20 3.09 02/01/2023 500 Aa2 AA N/A 104.37 07/05/2017 103.18 516 103.64 (2)1.69 2.35 2.25 4.22 0.10 809557BB6 SCOTT CNTY MINN CMNTY DEV A 2.50 02/01/2023 120 N/A AA+N/A 100.00 12/28/2017 97.93 118 100.00 (2)0.39 2.99 2.50 4.25 0.11 Positions by Sector tandard Holdings Sector CUSIP Issuer Cpn (%)Maturity Par ($000)Moody's S&P Call Date Acq Price($)Acq Date Mkt Price($) Mkt Val ($000)Bk Price($) Gain/Loss ($000) Port (%) Mkt YTW(%) Bk Yield(%)Eff Dur Conv 161664HD2 CHASKA MINN TAXABLE GO BDS 2.40 02/01/2024 150 N/A AA N/A 100.00 11/29/2017 97.15 146 100.00 (4)0.48 2.96 2.40 5.12 0.15 4095585H2 HAMPTON VA GO PUB IMPT REF 4.00 09/01/2025 600 Aa1 AA+N/A 104.44 06/27/2018 104.66 628 104.43 1 2.04 3.27 3.30 6.23 0.23 MUNI 2.90 11/26/2020 8,455 101.15 8,552 101.60 (38)27.96 1.88 1.90 2.24 0.05 Total: 1.77 04/04/2020 30,817 99.57 30,684 100.28 (219)100.00 2.00 1.65 1.59 (0.02) Positions by Maturity T cl. Table 2 Hldgs M CUSIP Issuer Cpn (%)Maturity Par ($000)Moody's S&P Call Date Acq Price($)Acq Date Mkt Price($) Mkt Val ($000)Bk Price($) Gain/Loss ($000)Port (%) Mkt YTW(%) Book Yield(%)Eff Dur Conv 0003CHAN3 WF 1.72 06/30/2018 1,608 N/A N/A 100.00 06/01/2018 100.00 1,608 100.00 0 5.30 1.71 1.72 0.00 0.00 0006CHAN6 BMO HARRIS BANK 0.00 06/30/2018 3,751 N/A N/A 100.00 06/01/2018 100.00 3,751 100.00 0 12.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0008CHAN2 NORTHLAND 1.03 06/30/2018 8 N/A N/A 100.00 06/01/2018 100.00 8 100.00 0 0.03 1.03 1.03 0.00 0.00 140420SU5 CAPITAL ONE BK USA NATL ASSN 1.60 07/02/2018 248 N/A N/A 100.00 07/01/2015 100.00 248 100.00 (0)0.81 2.90 1.60 0.01 0.00 006CHAN78 PMA-4M Fund 1.23 07/06/2018 0 N/A N/A 100.00 06/01/2018 0.00 0 100.00 (0)0.00 0.00 1.25 0.00 0.00 3134G3ZK9 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 1.20 07/30/2018 240 Aaa AA+N/A 100.00 07/30/2012 99.94 240 100.00 (0)0.78 1.89 1.20 0.08 0.00 3134GADJ0 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 1.00 08/28/2018 500 Aaa AA+N/A 100.00 08/30/2016 99.85 499 100.00 (1)1.62 1.92 1.00 0.16 0.00 591852UX4 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MINN M 1.30 09/01/2018 500 Aaa AAA N/A 100.36 03/18/2016 99.77 499 100.03 (1)1.62 2.65 1.15 0.17 0.00 204163BU2 COMMUNITYONE BK N A NC 1.35 09/04/2018 249 N/A N/A 100.00 09/04/2015 99.95 249 100.00 (0)0.81 1.62 1.35 0.18 0.00 45083AGR7 IBERIABANK LAFAYETTE LA 1.35 09/21/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 06/21/2017 99.86 246 100.00 (0)0.80 1.97 1.35 0.23 0.00 31927LAC2 FIRST BK OWASSO OKLA 1.40 09/28/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 06/29/2017 99.86 246 100.00 (0)0.80 2.00 1.41 0.25 0.00 87164DKL3 SYNOVUS BK COLUMBUS GA 1.45 10/11/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 07/11/2017 99.84 246 100.00 (0)0.80 2.03 1.45 0.28 0.00 20364ACC7 COMMUNITY FINL SVCS BK KY 1.45 10/16/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 08/16/2017 99.84 246 100.00 (0)0.80 2.02 1.45 0.30 0.00 196479WW5 COLORADO HSG & FIN AUTH TAX 1.62 11/01/2018 315 Aaa AAA N/A 100.94 11/05/2015 99.93 315 100.11 (1)1.02 1.83 1.30 0.34 0.00 61747MB42 MORGAN STANLEY BK N A UTAH 1.50 11/16/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 11/16/2017 99.78 245 100.00 (1)0.80 2.09 1.52 0.38 0.00 06426WUU4 BANK OF CHINA NEW YORK CITY 1.50 11/16/2018 246 N/A N/A 100.00 11/16/2017 99.78 245 100.00 (1)0.80 2.09 1.52 0.38 0.00 161664DW4 CHASKA MINN GO TAX INCR REF 2.00 12/01/2018 75 N/A AA N/A 100.00 08/15/2013 100.36 75 100.00 0 0.24 1.13 2.00 0.42 0.00 795450RT4 SALLIE MAE BK SLT LAKE CITY 2.00 12/11/2018 247 N/A N/A 100.00 12/11/2013 99.96 247 100.00 (0)0.80 2.09 2.00 0.45 0.00 60416SSG6 MINNESOTA ST HSG FIN AGY FO 1.80 01/01/2019 325 Aa1 AA+N/A 100.00 12/22/2016 100.62 327 100.00 2 1.07 0.56 1.80 0.50 0.00 279533TN3 EDEN PRAIRIE MINN INDPT SCH 5.75 02/01/2019 525 Aa2 N/A 108.76 01/04/2017 105.49 554 102.51 16 1.84 (3.39)1.45 0.59 0.00 31358BAA6 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN PRIN S 0.00 02/01/2019 1,155 Aaa AA+N/A 91.43 06/19/2014 98.69 1,140 98.86 (2)3.70 2.26 1.95 0.59 0.00 373385BL6 GEORGIA ST GO BDS 2017 B 3.50 02/01/2019 500 Aaa AAA N/A 103.18 07/18/2017 100.64 503 101.23 (3)1.65 2.40 1.40 0.58 0.00 279533TN3 EDEN PRAIRIE MINN INDPT SCH 5.75 02/01/2019 225 Aa2 N/A 112.62 04/26/2016 105.49 237 102.72 6 0.79 (3.39)1.10 0.59 0.00 3136FTR68 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 1.65 02/28/2019 500 Aaa AA+N/A 99.68 03/05/2012 99.57 498 99.97 (2)1.62 2.31 1.70 0.66 0.00 20033AXA9 COMENITY CAP BK UTAH 1.60 03/15/2019 249 N/A N/A 100.00 09/15/2017 99.54 248 100.00 (1)0.80 2.27 1.61 0.70 0.00 149159LH6 CATHAY BK LOS ANGEL CALIF 1.60 03/25/2019 249 N/A N/A 100.00 09/25/2017 99.51 248 100.00 (1)0.80 2.28 1.61 0.72 0.00 51210SND5 LAKESIDE BK CHICAGO ILL 1.55 03/29/2019 246 N/A N/A 100.00 06/30/2017 99.47 245 100.00 (1)0.79 2.28 1.55 0.73 0.01 38147JZT2 GOLDMAN SACHS BK USA NY 2.00 05/14/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 05/14/2014 99.66 246 100.00 (1)0.80 2.38 2.00 0.86 0.01 06279KKW5 BANK OF INDIA NEW YORK BRANC 2.30 05/22/2019 244 N/A N/A 100.00 05/24/2018 99.96 244 100.00 (0)0.79 2.36 2.32 0.89 0.01 59013JQY8 MERRICK BK SOUTH JORDAN UTAH 1.15 06/28/2019 249 N/A N/A 100.00 06/29/2016 98.81 246 100.00 (3)0.80 2.37 1.15 0.98 0.01 2.54671E+13 DISCOVER BK GREENWOOD DEL 2.10 08/13/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 08/13/2014 99.63 246 100.00 (1)0.80 2.44 2.10 1.09 0.01 06740KHS9 BARCLAYS BK DEL 2.10 08/13/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 08/13/2014 99.51 246 100.00 (1)0.80 2.55 2.10 1.09 0.01 02587CAT7 AMERICAN EXP FED SVGS BK INS 2.05 08/14/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 08/14/2014 99.99 247 100.00 (0)0.81 2.06 2.05 1.10 0.01 628779FN5 NBT BK NA NORWICH NY 2.10 08/20/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 08/20/2014 99.49 246 100.00 (1)0.80 2.56 2.10 1.11 0.01 3136G4BB8 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 1.15 09/27/2019 500 Aaa AA+N/A 100.00 09/30/2016 98.42 492 100.00 (8)1.60 2.45 1.15 1.22 0.01 882722J69 TEXAS ST TAXABLE GO REF BDS 3.19 10/01/2019 995 Aaa AAA N/A 106.62 06/24/2015 100.90 1,004 101.99 (11)3.28 2.46 1.58 1.22 0.01 76116FAA5 RESOLUTION FDG FED BK PRIN S 0.00 10/15/2019 638 Aaa AA+N/A 91.69 12/10/2014 96.80 618 97.71 (6)2.00 2.53 1.80 1.28 0.01 313400BV4 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 0.00 11/29/2019 560 Aaa AA N/A 92.56 08/05/2015 96.26 539 97.49 (7)1.75 2.71 1.80 1.40 0.01 742617CD3 PRIOR LAKE MINN TAXABLE GO 1.60 12/15/2019 205 Aa2 AA+N/A 100.00 05/14/2015 99.10 203 100.00 (2)0.66 2.23 1.60 1.43 0.01 17284C6R0 CIT BK SALT LAKE CITY UT 2.20 12/24/2019 247 N/A N/A 100.00 12/24/2014 99.43 246 100.00 (1)0.80 2.59 2.20 1.45 0.01 57116AMC9 MARLIN BUSINESS BK SALT LAKE 1.25 12/27/2019 249 N/A N/A 100.00 06/29/2016 98.07 244 100.00 (5)0.79 2.58 1.25 1.46 0.01 3133EG3J2 FEDERAL FARM CR BKS 1.55 01/10/2020 500 Aaa AA+N/A 100.00 01/10/2017 98.56 493 100.00 (7)1.61 2.52 1.55 1.49 0.02 410493DD9 HANMI BK LOS ANGELES CALIF 2.55 02/25/2020 249 N/A N/A 100.00 05/25/2018 99.81 249 100.00 (0)0.81 2.68 2.56 1.61 0.02 678519UC1 OKLAHOMA CITY OKLA FOR ISSU 2.00 03/01/2020 200 Aaa AAA N/A 102.21 05/17/2016 100.01 200 100.99 (2)0.65 1.99 1.40 1.63 0.02 97705MDS1 WISCONSIN ST FOR ISSUES DTD 1.15 05/01/2020 520 Aa2 AA N/A 100.15 07/28/2016 98.19 511 100.07 (10)1.66 2.16 1.11 1.80 0.02 3130A7ZT5 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS 1.40 05/18/2020 500 Aaa AA+05/18/2018 100.00 05/18/2016 97.83 489 100.00 (11)1.59 2.58 1.40 1.82 0.00 64966LN56 NEW YORK N Y TAXABLE GO BDS 2.15 06/01/2020 500 Aa2 AA N/A 100.00 06/18/2015 98.87 494 100.00 (6)1.61 2.76 2.15 1.87 0.02 150528LV7 CEDAR RAPIDS IOWA TAXABLE G 2.50 06/01/2020 490 Aa1 N/A 104.42 04/07/2016 100.43 492 102.08 (8)1.60 2.27 1.40 1.87 0.02 3133834H1 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS 1.38 06/12/2020 500 Aaa AA+N/A 101.60 07/08/2016 97.69 488 100.80 (16)1.58 2.60 0.96 1.91 0.02 3136G0R60 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 1.50 10/22/2020 500 Aaa AA+N/A 100.94 10/11/2016 97.31 487 100.55 (16)1.58 2.70 1.26 2.25 0.03 76116FAG2 RESOLUTION FDG FED BK PRIN S 0.00 01/15/2021 780 Aaa AA+N/A 93.14 04/14/2016 93.21 727 96.27 (24)2.36 2.78 1.50 2.52 0.04 113835H54 BROOKLYN CENTER MINN GO TAX 3.00 02/01/2021 400 N/A AA N/A 101.88 01/24/2014 102.89 412 100.74 9 1.35 1.85 2.70 2.47 0.04 161664HA8 CHASKA MINN TAXABLE GO BDS 1.95 02/01/2021 140 N/A AA N/A 100.00 11/29/2017 98.29 138 100.00 (2)0.45 2.64 1.95 2.48 0.04 02007GCV3 ALLY BK MIDVALE UTAH 2.90 05/24/2021 246 N/A N/A 100.00 05/24/2018 99.77 245 100.00 (1)0.80 2.98 2.90 2.76 0.05 14042RJJ1 CAPITAL ONE NATL ASSN VA 2.15 10/12/2021 247 N/A N/A 100.00 10/12/2017 97.24 240 100.00 (7)0.78 3.04 2.15 3.13 0.06 05580AKQ6 BMW BK NORTH AMER SALT LAKE 2.05 10/13/2021 247 N/A N/A 100.00 10/13/2017 96.93 239 100.00 (8)0.78 3.04 2.05 3.14 0.06 742651DJ8 PRIVATE EXPT FDG CORP 4.30 12/15/2021 600 Aaa AA+N/A 114.14 04/29/2015 104.56 627 107.62 (18)2.04 2.91 2.01 3.21 0.06 87165HFH8 SYNCHRONY BANK 2.55 12/20/2021 246 N/A N/A 100.00 12/19/2014 98.79 243 100.00 (3)0.79 2.92 2.55 3.30 0.06 3134GAQ31 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 2.15 01/26/2022 500 Aaa AA+07/26/2018 99.95 11/14/2017 97.62 488 99.96 (12)1.60 2.85 2.16 2.87 (0.41) 161664HB6 CHASKA MINN TAXABLE GO BDS 2.10 02/01/2022 140 N/A AA N/A 100.00 11/29/2017 97.88 137 100.00 (3)0.45 2.72 2.10 3.39 0.07 809557BA8 SCOTT CNTY MINN CMNTY DEV A 2.35 02/01/2022 120 N/A AA+N/A 100.00 12/28/2017 98.24 118 100.00 (2)0.39 2.87 2.35 3.38 0.07 3134GBH39 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 2.05 09/29/2022 1,000 Aaa AA+09/29/2018 97.01 06/29/2018 96.90 969 97.01 (1)3.16 2.83 2.80 3.55 (0.34) 60375BDC7 MINNEAPOLIS MINN TAXABLE GO 5.00 12/01/2022 370 N/A AAA N/A 108.14 05/31/2018 108.05 400 108.00 0 1.30 3.04 3.05 3.97 0.09 161664HC4 CHASKA MINN TAXABLE GO BDS 2.25 02/01/2023 145 N/A AA N/A 100.00 11/29/2017 97.48 141 100.00 (4)0.46 2.84 2.25 4.27 0.11 092765EW2 BLAINE MINN TAXABLE GO IMPT 2.25 02/01/2023 395 N/A AA+N/A 100.00 12/05/2017 97.61 386 100.00 (9)1.27 2.81 2.25 4.27 0.11 73723RSP9 PORTSMOUTH VA GO REF BDS 20 3.09 02/01/2023 500 Aa2 AA N/A 104.37 07/05/2017 103.18 516 103.64 (2)1.69 2.35 2.25 4.22 0.10 809557BB6 SCOTT CNTY MINN CMNTY DEV A 2.50 02/01/2023 120 N/A AA+N/A 100.00 12/28/2017 97.93 118 100.00 (2)0.39 2.99 2.50 4.25 0.11 313383YJ4 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS 3.38 09/08/2023 205 Aaa AA+N/A 102.53 06/20/2018 102.45 210 102.51 (0)0.69 2.86 2.85 4.70 0.13 3133EJQA0 FEDERAL FARM CR BKS 3.00 10/23/2023 500 Aaa AA+N/A 100.59 06/20/2018 100.55 503 100.59 (0)1.64 2.89 2.88 4.87 0.14 161664HD2 CHASKA MINN TAXABLE GO BDS 2.40 02/01/2024 150 N/A AA N/A 100.00 11/29/2017 97.15 146 100.00 (4)0.48 2.96 2.40 5.12 0.15 3130ABLN4 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS 2.50 06/28/2024 345 Aaa AA+06/28/2019 100.00 10/11/2017 96.62 333 100.00 (12)1.08 3.12 2.50 4.58 (0.61) 3133EJBN8 FEDERAL FARM CR BKS 3.00 02/05/2025 550 Aaa AA+02/05/2019 98.39 06/21/2018 98.40 541 98.39 0 1.78 3.27 3.27 3.81 (1.35) 4095585H2 HAMPTON VA GO PUB IMPT REF 4.00 09/01/2025 600 Aa1 AA+N/A 104.44 06/27/2018 104.66 628 104.43 1 2.04 3.27 3.30 6.23 0.23 T 1.77 04/04/2020 30,817 99.57 30,684 100.28 (219)100.00 2.00 1.65 1.59 (0.02) Alerts Actions Identifer Issuer Name Coupon Maturity Moodys From Moodys To Moodys Date S&P From S&P To S&P Date Fitch From Fitch To Fitch Date Sector Rating Actions:Watchlist/Outlook/Upgrades/Downgrades/Reinstated/Withdrawn/Confirmed/Initial Ratings UPGRADES:313400BV FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 0.00 11/29/2019 N/A AA-AA 06/22/2018 N/A AGY-AGY 1AB29227 809557BA SCOTT CNTY MINN CMNTY DEV A 2.35 02/01/2022 N/A AA+AAA 04/04/2018 N/A GVT-LocalAuth-MN 1AB29227 809557BB SCOTT CNTY MINN CMNTY DEV A 2.50 02/01/2023 N/A AA+AAA 04/04/2018 N/A GVT-LocalAuth-MN 1AB29227 MATURING IN 4 WEEKS:0003CHAN WF 1.72 06/30/2018 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A MM-MMF 1AB29227 0006CHAN BMO HARRIS BANK 0.00 06/30/2018 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A MM-MMF 1AB29227 0008CHAN NORTHLAND 1.03 06/30/2018 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A MM-MMF 1AB29227 006CHAN7 PMA-4M Fund 1.23 07/06/2018 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A MM-MMF 1AB29227 140420SU CAPITAL ONE BK USA NATL ASSN 1.60 07/02/2018 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A MM-CD 1AB29227 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 Report shows called bonds, ca 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 0 0 0 0.00 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 1/0/1900 01/00/1900 0 * WATCHLIST: UPG/POS = Possible Upgrade; DNG/NEG Possible Downgrade; UNC/DEV/EVO = Uncertain (Possible Upgrade or Downgrade) Call Projection Flat Scenario Coupon Eff Projected Call Projected CUSIP Issuer Name (%)Maturity Dur Convex Par($)Date of Call No Calls Projected 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 0 0 0 1/0/1900 0 0 0 06/2018 History Total Par Unrealized Wtg Avg Effective Mkt. Avg.Benchmark Avg Bk Average Average # of Date ($000)G/L ($000)Life(Yrs)Duration Convexity YTW (%)Tsy Yld (%)Yld (%)Coupon(%)Price($)Moody S&P Positions 06/29/2018 30,817 (219)1.77 1.59 (0.02)2.00 2.28 1.65 1.77 99.63 Aaa AA+73 03/29/2018 25,872 (182)1.59 1.49 (0.00)1.81 2.11 1.48 1.61 99.62 Aaa AA+70 12/29/2017 31,196 (112)1.51 1.40 (0.02)2.21 1.69 1.36 1.49 99.94 Aaa AA+80 09/29/2017 29,667 (37)1.37 1.31 0.01 1.48 1.34 1.32 1.48 100.23 Aa1 AA+73 06/30/2017 28,201 (46)1.55 1.44 (0.03)1.45 1.30 1.36 1.47 100.05 Aa1 AA+69 03/31/2017 29,892 (54)1.68 1.51 (0.05)1.35 1.15 1.27 1.35 100.00 Aa1 AA+70 12/30/2016 33,126 (58)1.51 1.44 (0.00)1.18 0.95 1.11 1.22 100.02 Aa1 AA+67 Ratings Historical Performance 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Jun-18Mar-18Dec-17Sep-17Jun-17Mar-17Dec-16 Avg Bk Yld(%)Avg Benchmark Tsy Yld(%) Rate Shock Avg Eff Market Mkt Value Change Mkt V w/o Accrd Int Yield Change Total Income Price Life Dur Convexity Value ($)w/o Accrd Int ($) Change - Instantaneous($) 30684407 -150 NaN NaN 1.20 0.80 0.76 0.01 NaN #VALUE!367,599 698,070 -100 NaN NaN 0.83 0.80 0.75 0.01 NaN #VALUE!255,294 480,211 -50 NaN NaN 0.57 1.00 0.89 (0.09)NaN #VALUE!176,128 245,475 0 NaN NaN 0.09 1.09 0.95 (0.05)NaN #VALUE!27,923 0 50 NaN NaN (0.41)1.08 0.99 (0.00)NaN #VALUE!(125,806)(248,237) 100 NaN NaN (0.91)1.06 0.99 0.01 NaN #VALUE!(278,308)(494,939) 150 NaN NaN (1.40)1.05 0.98 0.02 NaN #VALUE!(428,047)(737,039) Horizon (Mo):12 Reinv. Rate(%):2.07 Aged-Govt Spot Curve Parallel Shift Yield Curve Assumptions: ----------------------Return %----------------------Mkt Value Change w/Accrd Int ($) Portfolio Market Value Change - ($)Change in Effective Duration 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150(1,000,000) (800,000) (600,000) (400,000) (200,000) 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 Mkt Value Change w/Accrd int($)Mkt Value Change w/o Accrd Int($)Mkt Value w/o Accrd Int Change-Instantaneous($) Important Disclosures Relating to Conflicts of Interest and Potential Conflicts of Interest Accuracy of Information About Wells Fargo Securities Copyright© 2018 Wells Fargo & Company SECURITIES: NOT FDIC:-INSURED/NOT BANK-GUARANTEED/MAY LOSE VALUE Wells Fargo Securities is the trade name for the capital markets and investment banking services of Wells Fargo & Company and its subsidiaries, including but not limited to Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, a member of NYSE, FINRA, NFA and SIPC, Wells Fargo Prime Services, LLC, a member of FINRA, NFA and SIPC, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC and Wells Fargo Prime Services, LLC are distinct entities from affiliated banks and thrifts. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC may sell or buy the subject securities to/from customers on a principal basis. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC has or may have proprietary positions in the securities mentioned herein. The trading desk has or may have proprietary positions in the securities mentioned herein. The author’s compensation is based on, among other things, Wells Fargo Securities, LLC’s overall performance, the profitability of Wells Fargo Securities, LLC’s Markets Division and the profitability of the trading desk. This account summary was prepared by Wells Fargo Securities Fixed Income Market and Portfolio Strategy and is not a substitute for your monthly statement or trade confirmation. Prices and yields are current as of the date of this summary and are subject to change and availability; past performance is no guarantee of future results. Municipal leases are shown at their par value. Any rating provided for a municipal lease investment is a rating associated with the lessee, and does not constitute a rating of the lease investment itself. For Securities held away from Wells Fargo Securities, cost data and acquisition dates have not been verified and positions may not be covered by SIPC. The indicative valuation(s) provided in this report are for information purposes only and are intended for use solely by the addressee. The information contained herein is derived from sources that Wells Fargo Securities in good faith considers reliable, however Wells Fargo Securities does not guarantee the accuracy, reliability or completeness of this information and makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect thereto. The indicative valuations do not represent advice, an offer to purchase or sell any security or other instrument either at the indicative valuation(s) or any other price(s). There is no representation that any transaction can or could have been effected at the indicative valuation(s). The indicative valuations contained herein represent estimates as of the stated valuation date and are subject to change without notice. Such estimates do not necessarily reflect Wells Fargo Securities' internal bookkeeping or theoretical model-based valuation. The indicative valuations are based on certain assumptions, and different assumptions, by Wells Fargo Securities or any other source may yield substantially different results. These valuations also may vary from those of another Wells Fargo division, since they may use other sources of market information or make calculations as of a different time. Wells Fargo Securities is not responsible for any loss or damage arising out of any person's use of or reliance upon the information contained herein or otherwise, including but not limited to, errors (including errors of transmission), inaccuracies, omissions, changes in market factors or other conditions or any other circumstances whether or not such errors are within Wells Fargo Securities' control. Under no circumstances shall Wells Fargo Securities be liable for special or consequential damages that arise from any person's use of or reliance upon the information contained herein, even if Wells Fargo Securities has been advised of the possibility of such damages. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Preliminary Budget and Levy Discussion Section 5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION ­ FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Item No: A.3. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: A­039W 2019 Budget BACKGROUND During this evening’s 2019 budget discussion, staff will present three different scenarios for setting the preliminary levy.Items that will be reviewed include the assumptions made while preparing the budget document, the impact of each scenario on the average home, and staff’s recommendation for setting the preliminary levy. Attached is the budget document that will be used to present tonight’s discussion and the detailed PowerPoint presentations.The preliminary levy will be set on September 24, 2018. Budget Assumptions Staff has prepared the preliminary budget based on the following assumptions: 1. A wage increase for employees in 2019 of 3%, which will include a merit­based portion. 2. Market Adjustments for department heads, additional 2%­5% 3. Building permit revenue $100,000 larger than previous years. 4. An increase in healthcare costs of 18%. 5. No increase in the Law Enforcement contract. 6. New growth of 0.97% ($106,000) 7. Elimination of the Crime Prevention Specialist position from the budget ($73,000) For 2019, staff is including a health insurance cost increase of 18% ($106,000). This is the second year of a two­year contract for healthcare insurance with Blue Cross Blue Shield. The current contract includes a rate cap increase at 18%. It is possible for the city to get a rate increase below 18% due to our experience rating or competitive outside bids, which we are currently soliciting. Final healthcare numbers are not expected to be available until mid­September. Additionally, the city experienced a 0.97% increase in new construction.This results in approximately $106,000 in new property tax dollars payable in 2019. Staff did include an increase of $100,000 in building permit revenue.Staff believes the new base building permit revenue year to be closer to $1M rather than the $900,000 that the city has used for the past several years. The law enforcement contract for 2019 does not have an increase over the 2018 contract. The lack of increase is due to the fact that some of the officers assigned to Chanhassen in 2019 are newer to Carver County, and therefore lower CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 13, 2018SubjectPreliminary Budget and Levy DiscussionSection5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION ­FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Item No: A.3.Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: A­039W 2019 BudgetBACKGROUNDDuring this evening’s 2019 budget discussion, staff will present three different scenarios for setting the preliminarylevy.Items that will be reviewed include the assumptions made while preparing the budget document, the impact ofeach scenario on the average home, and staff’s recommendation for setting the preliminary levy.Attached is the budget document that will be used to present tonight’s discussion and the detailed PowerPointpresentations.The preliminary levy will be set on September 24, 2018.Budget AssumptionsStaff has prepared the preliminary budget based on the following assumptions:1. A wage increase for employees in 2019 of 3%, which will include a merit­based portion.2. Market Adjustments for department heads, additional 2%­5%3. Building permit revenue $100,000 larger than previous years.4. An increase in healthcare costs of 18%.5. No increase in the Law Enforcement contract.6. New growth of 0.97% ($106,000)7. Elimination of the Crime Prevention Specialist position from the budget ($73,000)For 2019, staff is including a health insurance cost increase of 18% ($106,000). This is the second year of a two­yearcontract for healthcare insurance with Blue Cross Blue Shield. The current contract includes a rate cap increase at18%. It is possible for the city to get a rate increase below 18% due to our experience rating or competitive outsidebids, which we are currently soliciting. Final healthcare numbers are not expected to be available until mid­September.Additionally, the city experienced a 0.97% increase in new construction.This results in approximately $106,000 innew property tax dollars payable in 2019.Staff did include an increase of $100,000 in building permit revenue.Staff believes the new base building permitrevenue year to be closer to $1M rather than the $900,000 that the city has used for the past several years. The law enforcement contract for 2019 does not have an increase over the 2018 contract. The lack of increase is due to the fact that some of the officers assigned to Chanhassen in 2019 are newer to Carver County, and therefore lower in their pay ranges than the previous, more tenured staff. All staffing levels and equipment maintenance schedules will remain the same, so there is no anticipated decrease in the current service levels. Staff did include wage increases of 3% for all employee’s and also included market adjustments for department head positions.  A department head salary survey was completed of all of our KFS cities and regional competitor cities.  Based on that data from the survey we found our department heads are paid 1.95% more than average of our KFS cities and are paid nearly 13% lower than our competitor cities.  Within the current budget we have included a 5% market rate adjustment in addition to the cost­of­living adjustment (3%) to get those positions at or near the top of our KFS cities and around only 8% lower than the average of our competitor cities. The Crime Prevention Specialist position has been vacant for over a year and staff has proposed eliminating the position from the budget for 2019.The duties of the position have been accomplished in most part by the CSO positions and with administration picking up some of the other small duties.Staff believes that, at least for the immediate future, the duties can be managed in a similar manner but should be monitored on an ongoing basis. The result of all these calculations, along with a detailed review of all line items and anticipated changes in the General Fund Budget, results in a levy of $76,000 above new growth. Scenarios Consistent with prior year’s preliminary budget adoptions, staff is presenting three scenarios for city council to consider when setting the preliminary levy.When discussing the following scenarios it is important to note that the average home in Chanhassen increased in value by 7.52% for budget year 2019.As always, the value of individual homes compared to the average home will dictate the final outcome of individual property tax bills. Scenario #1: This scenario includes an increase in the total levy from the previous year of $182,000 or 1.67%. Included in that amount is $106,000 in new property tax dollars thus resulting in a .69% or $6­$7 increase in the city portion of the property tax bill for the average home in the city ($76,000 above new growth). This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for department head positions, elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in total building permit revenue budget of $100,000, a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various line items (both decreases and increases).  Scenario #2: This scenario includes an increase in the total levy of $106,000 or 0.97%, the result of this scenario is a zero percent increase in the city portion of the property tax bill on the average home in the city (new growth). This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for department head positions, elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in total building permit revenue budget of $100,000, a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various line items (both decreases and increases). In order to achieve this levy, either a combination of the healthcare contract increase would need to come in lower than 18%, reduction in other expenses, or increased budgeted revenues would need to amount to $76,000 as compared to scenario #1. Scenario #3: The third scenario includes an increase in the total levy of $56,000 or 0.51% higher from the previous year. Included in that amount is $106,000 in new property tax dollars thus resulting in a 0.51% or $5­$7 decrease in the city portion of the property tax bill on the average home in the city ($50,000 below new growth). This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for department head positions, elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in total building permit revenue budget of $100,000, a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various line items (both decreases and increases). CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 13, 2018SubjectPreliminary Budget and Levy DiscussionSection5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION ­FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Item No: A.3.Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: A­039W 2019 BudgetBACKGROUNDDuring this evening’s 2019 budget discussion, staff will present three different scenarios for setting the preliminarylevy.Items that will be reviewed include the assumptions made while preparing the budget document, the impact ofeach scenario on the average home, and staff’s recommendation for setting the preliminary levy.Attached is the budget document that will be used to present tonight’s discussion and the detailed PowerPointpresentations.The preliminary levy will be set on September 24, 2018.Budget AssumptionsStaff has prepared the preliminary budget based on the following assumptions:1. A wage increase for employees in 2019 of 3%, which will include a merit­based portion.2. Market Adjustments for department heads, additional 2%­5%3. Building permit revenue $100,000 larger than previous years.4. An increase in healthcare costs of 18%.5. No increase in the Law Enforcement contract.6. New growth of 0.97% ($106,000)7. Elimination of the Crime Prevention Specialist position from the budget ($73,000)For 2019, staff is including a health insurance cost increase of 18% ($106,000). This is the second year of a two­yearcontract for healthcare insurance with Blue Cross Blue Shield. The current contract includes a rate cap increase at18%. It is possible for the city to get a rate increase below 18% due to our experience rating or competitive outsidebids, which we are currently soliciting. Final healthcare numbers are not expected to be available until mid­September.Additionally, the city experienced a 0.97% increase in new construction.This results in approximately $106,000 innew property tax dollars payable in 2019.Staff did include an increase of $100,000 in building permit revenue.Staff believes the new base building permitrevenue year to be closer to $1M rather than the $900,000 that the city has used for the past several years.The law enforcement contract for 2019 does not have an increase over the 2018 contract. The lack of increase is dueto the fact that some of the officers assigned to Chanhassen in 2019 are newer to Carver County, and therefore lowerin their pay ranges than the previous, more tenured staff. All staffing levels and equipment maintenance schedules willremain the same, so there is no anticipated decrease in the current service levels.Staff did include wage increases of 3% for all employee’s and also included market adjustments for department headpositions.  A department head salary survey was completed of all of our KFS cities and regional competitor cities. Based on that data from the survey we found our department heads are paid 1.95% more than average of our KFScities and are paid nearly 13% lower than our competitor cities.  Within the current budget we have included a 5%market rate adjustment in addition to the cost­of­living adjustment (3%) to get those positions at or near the top of ourKFS cities and around only 8% lower than the average of our competitor cities.The Crime Prevention Specialist position has been vacant for over a year and staff has proposed eliminating theposition from the budget for 2019.The duties of the position have been accomplished in most part by the CSOpositions and with administration picking up some of the other small duties.Staff believes that, at least for theimmediate future, the duties can be managed in a similar manner but should be monitored on an ongoing basis.The result of all these calculations, along with a detailed review of all line items and anticipated changes in the GeneralFund Budget, results in a levy of $76,000 above new growth.ScenariosConsistent with prior year’s preliminary budget adoptions, staff is presenting three scenarios for city council toconsider when setting the preliminary levy.When discussing the following scenarios it is important to note that theaverage home in Chanhassen increased in value by 7.52% for budget year 2019.As always, the value of individualhomes compared to the average home will dictate the final outcome of individual property tax bills.Scenario #1: This scenario includes an increase in the total levy from the previous year of $182,000 or 1.67%.Included in that amount is $106,000 in new property tax dollars thus resulting in a .69% or $6­$7 increase in the cityportion of the property tax bill for the average home in the city ($76,000 above new growth).This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for department head positions,elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in total building permit revenue budget of $100,000,a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various lineitems (both decreases and increases). Scenario #2: This scenario includes an increase in the total levy of $106,000 or 0.97%, the result of this scenario is azero percent increase in the city portion of the property tax bill on the average home in the city (new growth).This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for department head positions,elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in total building permit revenue budget of $100,000,a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various lineitems (both decreases and increases).In order to achieve this levy, either a combination of the healthcare contract increase would need to come in lowerthan 18%, reduction in other expenses, or increased budgeted revenues would need to amount to $76,000 ascompared to scenario #1.Scenario #3: The third scenario includes an increase in the total levy of $56,000 or 0.51% higher from the previousyear. Included in that amount is $106,000 in new property tax dollars thus resulting in a 0.51% or $5­$7 decrease inthe city portion of the property tax bill on the average home in the city ($50,000 below new growth).This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for department head positions,elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in total building permit revenue budget of $100,000,a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various line items (both decreases and increases). In order to achieve this levy, either a combination of the Healthcare contract increase would need to come in lower than 18%, reduction in other expenses or increased budgeted revenues would need to amount to $126,000 as compared to scenario #1. YARD WASTE COLLECTION SITE As city council may be aware, Carver County has made the decision to close their yard waste collection site for residents within the county.If the city council would like to offer this service to Chanhassen residents, staff has begun researching one­time costs as well as ongoing operating costs for a potential site at the Public Works Facility.You will find attached a memo prepared by the city’s Environmental Resource Specialist that goes into more detail of total costs and options to either provide or not provide this service going forward. If the city council would like to pursue this service, staff is recommending a special revenue fund be set up to account for all the activity (both revenue and expenditure line items) to allow for the most transparency. The revenues could include grants, a small fee for service, and a small property tax levy depending on the availability of grants and how much of a service fee would be charged for those dropping off yard waste.Based on the options presented in the memo drafted by the Environmental Resources Specialist, the annual operating expenditures would include fees for disposal, wages to man the drop­off site, and some potential small ongoing security and other costs.Staff is estimating the total operating cost based on manned operating hours of 280/year (Saturday­only drop off) to 525/year (Saturday and one weekday­7 hours), to be between $60,000/year to as much as $150,000/year, depending on the option/service level selected. Currently the county funds the city with a solid waste grant of $17,000/year.It is possible the county could decide to allocate additional resources because of the elimination of their yard waste collection site, but because of this unknown, there is a potential of a unfunded portion of this service to be between $43,000­$135,000 per year.It is important to note that if the current solid waste grant funds were to be utilized for this service it would mean no availability of funds for recycling coupons and other public recycling and composting services currently being offered to residents.Therefore, a service disposal fee or property tax levy would need to be instituted to account for as much as $150,000 per year, depending on the option/service level for yard waste, recycling and public composting services the city council desires to provide.This item is currently not included in any of the budget assumptions previously discussed and staff is looking for direction from the city council on how to proceed with this item. Staff will also be bringing with it to this evening's meeting information on potential private collection costs for individual residential yard wast collection by local refuse companies. RECOMMENDATION Based on all the information presented above, staff believes setting a preliminary levy as described in Scenario #1 would give the most flexibility before setting a final levy in December. Staff has researched all estimated costs and revenues to the fullest extent possible at this point in the year; however, a number of factors could either adversely or positively impact the budget between now and December. The unknown of the change in the healthcare insurance contract has the most significant impact on the budget. Since the final levy can only go down from the preliminary levy, staff believes setting a levy lower than Scenario #1 would not give the city as much flexibility to recover from any potential adverse factors that could impact the budget. NEXT STEP No action is required on this item. The next budget discussion will occur when department heads present their proposed 2019 budgets by department. Their presentations will be based on Scenario #1 and will highlight any significant changes in their departments. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 13, 2018SubjectPreliminary Budget and Levy DiscussionSection5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION ­FOUNTAIN CONFERENCE ROOM Item No: A.3.Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: A­039W 2019 BudgetBACKGROUNDDuring this evening’s 2019 budget discussion, staff will present three different scenarios for setting the preliminarylevy.Items that will be reviewed include the assumptions made while preparing the budget document, the impact ofeach scenario on the average home, and staff’s recommendation for setting the preliminary levy.Attached is the budget document that will be used to present tonight’s discussion and the detailed PowerPointpresentations.The preliminary levy will be set on September 24, 2018.Budget AssumptionsStaff has prepared the preliminary budget based on the following assumptions:1. A wage increase for employees in 2019 of 3%, which will include a merit­based portion.2. Market Adjustments for department heads, additional 2%­5%3. Building permit revenue $100,000 larger than previous years.4. An increase in healthcare costs of 18%.5. No increase in the Law Enforcement contract.6. New growth of 0.97% ($106,000)7. Elimination of the Crime Prevention Specialist position from the budget ($73,000)For 2019, staff is including a health insurance cost increase of 18% ($106,000). This is the second year of a two­yearcontract for healthcare insurance with Blue Cross Blue Shield. The current contract includes a rate cap increase at18%. It is possible for the city to get a rate increase below 18% due to our experience rating or competitive outsidebids, which we are currently soliciting. Final healthcare numbers are not expected to be available until mid­September.Additionally, the city experienced a 0.97% increase in new construction.This results in approximately $106,000 innew property tax dollars payable in 2019.Staff did include an increase of $100,000 in building permit revenue.Staff believes the new base building permitrevenue year to be closer to $1M rather than the $900,000 that the city has used for the past several years.The law enforcement contract for 2019 does not have an increase over the 2018 contract. The lack of increase is dueto the fact that some of the officers assigned to Chanhassen in 2019 are newer to Carver County, and therefore lowerin their pay ranges than the previous, more tenured staff. All staffing levels and equipment maintenance schedules willremain the same, so there is no anticipated decrease in the current service levels.Staff did include wage increases of 3% for all employee’s and also included market adjustments for department headpositions.  A department head salary survey was completed of all of our KFS cities and regional competitor cities. Based on that data from the survey we found our department heads are paid 1.95% more than average of our KFScities and are paid nearly 13% lower than our competitor cities.  Within the current budget we have included a 5%market rate adjustment in addition to the cost­of­living adjustment (3%) to get those positions at or near the top of ourKFS cities and around only 8% lower than the average of our competitor cities.The Crime Prevention Specialist position has been vacant for over a year and staff has proposed eliminating theposition from the budget for 2019.The duties of the position have been accomplished in most part by the CSOpositions and with administration picking up some of the other small duties.Staff believes that, at least for theimmediate future, the duties can be managed in a similar manner but should be monitored on an ongoing basis.The result of all these calculations, along with a detailed review of all line items and anticipated changes in the GeneralFund Budget, results in a levy of $76,000 above new growth.ScenariosConsistent with prior year’s preliminary budget adoptions, staff is presenting three scenarios for city council toconsider when setting the preliminary levy.When discussing the following scenarios it is important to note that theaverage home in Chanhassen increased in value by 7.52% for budget year 2019.As always, the value of individualhomes compared to the average home will dictate the final outcome of individual property tax bills.Scenario #1: This scenario includes an increase in the total levy from the previous year of $182,000 or 1.67%.Included in that amount is $106,000 in new property tax dollars thus resulting in a .69% or $6­$7 increase in the cityportion of the property tax bill for the average home in the city ($76,000 above new growth).This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for department head positions,elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in total building permit revenue budget of $100,000,a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various lineitems (both decreases and increases). Scenario #2: This scenario includes an increase in the total levy of $106,000 or 0.97%, the result of this scenario is azero percent increase in the city portion of the property tax bill on the average home in the city (new growth).This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for department head positions,elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in total building permit revenue budget of $100,000,a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various lineitems (both decreases and increases).In order to achieve this levy, either a combination of the healthcare contract increase would need to come in lowerthan 18%, reduction in other expenses, or increased budgeted revenues would need to amount to $76,000 ascompared to scenario #1.Scenario #3: The third scenario includes an increase in the total levy of $56,000 or 0.51% higher from the previousyear. Included in that amount is $106,000 in new property tax dollars thus resulting in a 0.51% or $5­$7 decrease inthe city portion of the property tax bill on the average home in the city ($50,000 below new growth).This scenario includes wage increases for employees of 3% and market adjustments for department head positions,elimination of the crime prevention specialist position, an increase in total building permit revenue budget of $100,000,a possible 18% ($106,000) for the increase to the healthcare contract, and other small adjustments to various lineitems (both decreases and increases).In order to achieve this levy, either a combination of the Healthcare contract increase would need to come in lowerthan 18%, reduction in other expenses or increased budgeted revenues would need to amount to $126,000 ascompared to scenario #1.YARD WASTE COLLECTION SITEAs city council may be aware, Carver County has made the decision to close their yard waste collection site forresidents within the county.If the city council would like to offer this service to Chanhassen residents, staff has begunresearching one­time costs as well as ongoing operating costs for a potential site at the Public Works Facility.You willfind attached a memo prepared by the city’s Environmental Resource Specialist that goes into more detail of totalcosts and options to either provide or not provide this service going forward.If the city council would like to pursue this service, staff is recommending a special revenue fund be set up to accountfor all the activity (both revenue and expenditure line items) to allow for the most transparency. The revenues couldinclude grants, a small fee for service, and a small property tax levy depending on the availability of grants and howmuch of a service fee would be charged for those dropping off yard waste.Based on the options presented in thememo drafted by the Environmental Resources Specialist, the annual operating expenditures would include fees fordisposal, wages to man the drop­off site, and some potential small ongoing security and other costs.Staff is estimatingthe total operating cost based on manned operating hours of 280/year (Saturday­only drop off) to 525/year (Saturdayand one weekday­7 hours), to be between $60,000/year to as much as $150,000/year, depending on theoption/service level selected.Currently the county funds the city with a solid waste grant of $17,000/year.It is possible the county could decide toallocate additional resources because of the elimination of their yard waste collection site, but because of thisunknown, there is a potential of a unfunded portion of this service to be between $43,000­$135,000 per year.It isimportant to note that if the current solid waste grant funds were to be utilized for this service it would mean noavailability of funds for recycling coupons and other public recycling and composting services currently being offeredto residents.Therefore, a service disposal fee or property tax levy would need to be instituted to account for as muchas $150,000 per year, depending on the option/service level for yard waste, recycling and public composting servicesthe city council desires to provide.This item is currently not included in any of the budget assumptions previouslydiscussed and staff is looking for direction from the city council on how to proceed with this item.Staff will also be bringing with it to this evening's meeting information on potential private collection costs for individualresidential yard wast collection by local refuse companies.RECOMMENDATIONBased on all the information presented above, staff believes setting a preliminary levy as described in Scenario #1would give the most flexibility before setting a final levy in December. Staff has researched all estimated costs andrevenues to the fullest extent possible at this point in the year; however, a number of factors could either adversely orpositively impact the budget between now and December. The unknown of the change in the healthcare insurancecontract has the most significant impact on the budget. Since the final levy can only go down from the preliminary levy,staff believes setting a levy lower than Scenario #1 would not give the city as much flexibility to recover from anypotential adverse factors that could impact the budget.NEXT STEPNo action is required on this item. The next budget discussion will occur when department heads present their proposed 2019 budgets by department. Their presentations will be based on Scenario #1 and will highlight any significant changes in their departments. ATTACHMENTS: General Fund Budget Levy Impact Scenarios Bond Tax Levies Yard Waste Collection Staff Report Carver County Assesors Office Summary Department Head Salary Survey CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2019 Budget 2018 2019 Dollar Percent OPERATIONAL & CAPITAL LEVY Levy Levy Change Change General Fund $8,704,333 $8,810,333 Capital Replacement Fund (for equipment) 800,000 800,000 Revolving Imp Street Reconstruction 384,838 381,223 Pavement Mgmt Fund (Sealcoating)93,000 93,000 Total Operational & Capital Levy 9,982,171 10,084,556 102,385 1.03% DEBT LEVY Public Works Facility 470,400 475,800 Library Referendum 461,297 459,512 Total Debt Levy 931,697 935,312 3,615 0.39% TOTAL TAX LEVY $10,913,868 $11,019,868 $106,000 0.97% Scenario #1 Scenario #2 Scenario #3 Levy Levy Levy Taxes applied to:General Fund $8,886,333 $8,810,333 $8,760,333 Capital Replacement 800,000 800,000 800,000 Pavement Mgmt 93,000 93,000 93,000 Revolving Imp St Recon 381,223 381,223 381,223 Total Levy subject to levy limits $10,160,556 $10,084,556 $10,034,556 Library Referendum $475,800 $475,800 $475,800 Public Works Building 459,512 459,512 459,512 Total $11,095,868 $11,019,868 $10,969,868 Tax Generation Capacity (Not actual levy, Used only for estimating the impact on the average home) Prior Year $10,913,868 $10,913,868 $10,913,868 New Construction (0.97%)$106,000 $106,000 $106,000 Total Capacity $11,019,868 $11,019,868 $11,019,868 Percent Change (To avg home city prop tax) after New Growth 0.69%0.00%-0.45% Staff recommendation for final Levy TAX LEVY City of Chanhassen, MinnesotaBond Tax Levies2006-20252005 C Ref1998A Park 2002A Subtotal of 2001C 2003A 2004A Subtotal of 1999 2001B ^^ Subtotal of 2000 Subtotal of Total Year of GO Park GO Library Market GO Equip GO Equip GO GO GO Impr GO Impr Spec Assmt GO Pub Other GeneralCollection Bonds Bonds Value Levies Certs Certs Bonds Levies Bonds Bonds Levies Proj Levies Bonded Debt2006 634,800 486,700 1,121,500 138,814 345,800 484,614 100,000 100,000 122,048 122,048 1,828,162 2007 696,500 489,100 1,185,600 141,380 346,900 488,280 100,000 100,000 122,548 122,548 1,896,428 2008 695,900 490,700 1,186,600 138,173 346,700 484,873 100,000 100,000 122,703 122,703 1,894,176 2009 972,700 491,300 1,464,000 297,900 297,900 - 122,603 122,603 1,884,503 2010 496,400 496,400 122,195 122,195 618,595 2011 495,400 495,400 126,420 126,420 621,820 2012 498,800 498,800 498,800 2013 501,200 501,200 501,200 2014 502,400 502,400 502,400 2015 502,500 502,500 502,500 2016 507,000 507,000 507,000 2017 505,100 505,100 505,100 2018 512,800 512,800 512,800 2019 513,900 513,900 513,900 2020 513,700 513,700 513,700 2021 517,500 517,500 517,500 Totals 2,999,900 8,024,500 11,024,400 - 418,367 1,337,300 1,755,667 300,000 - 300,000 738,515 738,515 13,818,582 2005 2006 2007 2008 2005 2008 2010 Total LevyExcess to ** Potential Actual Spec AssmtSpec AssmtSpec AssmtSpec Assmt 212 Bonds PW Facility Fire Station Year w/ CIP EstPay debt Excess Levy Levy200680,000 2006 1,908,162 285,000 - 1,938,790200780,000 2007 1,976,428 63,000 - 1,913,4282008285,000 2008 2,179,176 269,986 - 1,909,1902009285,000 250,000 2009 2,419,503 510,313 - 1,909,1902010285,000 250,000 2010 1,153,595 1,128,299 785,195 1,938,7902011285,000 250,000 370,000 2011 1,526,820 411,970 1,938,7902012285,000 250,000 370,000 2012 1,403,800 534,990 1,938,7902013285,000 250,000 370,000 2013 1,406,200 532,590 1,938,7902014285,000 250,000 370,000 2014 1,407,400 531,390 1,938,7902015285,000 250,000 370,000 2015 1,407,500 531,290 1,938,7902016285,000 250,000 370,000 2016 1,412,000 526,790 1,938,7902017250,000 370,000 2017 1,125,100 813,690 1,938,7902018250,000 370,000 2018 1,132,800 805,990 1,938,7902019250,000 370,000 2019 1,133,900 804,890 1,938,7902020250,000 370,000 2020 1,133,700 805,090 1,938,7902021250,000 370,000 2021 1,137,500 801,290 1,938,7902022250,000 370,000 2022 620,000 1,318,790 1,938,7902023250,000 370,000 2023 620,000 1,318,790 1,938,7902024250,000 370,000 2024 620,000 1,318,790 1,938,7902025250,000 370,000 2025 620,000 1,318,790 1,938,790Totals - - - - - - - 2,725,000 4,250,000 5,550,000 - 40,310 26,343,582 ** - These funds to be used to pay down the debt levy each of the next four years.The PW facility is for $3.9 million of which $3.0 will be bonded for and the Fire Station and Equipment is for $4.5 million in principal.^^ - The 2001B debt service fund has sufficient fund balance due to prepaid specials, we are able to cancel the levy needed to pay the debt in 2008 & 2009. It is our plan to use that excess levy for General Fund Operations rather than lower the use of Cash Reserves to keep the debt levy flat from the previous year. City of Chanhassen, MinnesotaBond Tax Levies2006-20292005 C Ref1998A Park2002A2010ASubtotal of2001C2003A2004ASubtotal of19992001B ^^Subtotal of2000Subtotal ofTotal Year of GO ParkGO LibraryGO RefundMarket GO EquipGO EquipGOGOGO ImprGO ImprSpec AssmtGO PubOtherGeneralCollectionBondsBonds2002A LibValue LeviesCertsCertsBondsLeviesBondsBondsLeviesProjLeviesBonded Debt2006634,800 486,700 1,121,500 138,814 345,800 484,614 100,000 100,000 122,048 122,048 1,828,162 2007696,500 489,100 1,185,600 141,380 346,900 488,280 100,000 100,000 122,548 122,548 1,896,428 2008695,900 490,700 1,186,600 138,173 346,700 484,873 100,000 100,000 122,703 122,703 1,894,176 2009972,700 491,300 1,464,000 297,900 297,900 - 122,603 122,603 1,884,503 2010496,400 496,400 122,195 122,195 618,595 2011495,400 495,400 126,420 126,420 621,820 2012351,648 351,648 351,648 2013445,310 445,310 445,310 2014448,880 448,880 448,880 2015446,098 446,098 446,098 2016452,792 452,792 452,792 2017451,952 451,952 451,952 2018461,297 461,297 461,297 2019459,512 459,512 459,512 2020457,412 457,412 457,412 2021465,497 465,497 465,497 Totals2,999,900 2,949,600 4,440,398 10,389,898 - 418,367 1,337,300 1,755,667 300,000 - 300,000 738,515 738,515 13,184,080 2009A@@20052016 A2008 ##2010 2010Total LevyExcess to ** Potential Actual Excess Lib212 BondsPW RefundPW FacilityFire StationAudubonYearw/ CIP EstPay debt Excess Levy Levy Levy200680,000 20061,908,162 285,000 - 1,938,790200780,000 20071,976,428 67,238 - 1,909,1902008285,000 20082,179,176 269,986 - 1,909,1902009285,000 20092,169,503 460,313 - 1,809,1902010337,500 599,300 253,795 20101,809,190 - - 1,809,1902011336,800 594,000 256,570 20111,809,190 - 1,809,1902012335,900 593,800 437,842 20121,719,190 - 1,719,1902013550,000 593,200 130,680 20131,719,190 - 1,719,1902014233,800 592,100 444,410 20141,719,190 - 1,719,1902015232,300 590,600 55,000 20151,323,998 395,192 1,719,1902016240,700 594,000 20161,287,492 431,698 1,719,1902017596,700 20171,048,652 384,838 1,433,4902018470,400 2018931,697 384,838 1,316,5352019475,800 2019935,312 381,223 1,316,5352020480,600 2020938,012 378,523 1,316,5352021479,800 2021945,297 371,238 1,316,5352022483,900 2022483,900 832,635 1,316,5352023482,300 2023482,300 834,235 1,316,5352024485,600 2024485,600 830,935 1,316,5352025487,500 2025487,500 829,035 1,316,5352026489,100 2026489,100 827,435 1,316,5352027490,600 2027490,600 825,935 1,316,5352028497,100 2028497,100 819,435 1,316,5352029498,100 2029498,100 818,435 1,316,535Totals- - - - - 2,267,000 730,000 5,820,800 4,753,700 - 1,578,297 48,420 28,333,877 1,082,536 ** - These funds to be used to pay down the debt levy each of the next four years.## - The PW facility is for 8 Million and bonding for $7 Million of the 8 Million.@@ - The 2009A Refunded the 2005A Mndot loand and 2006A MUSA area improvements.Debt Levies Excess Levy Available Excess Levy Available Original Bond Scenario New Facil Bond Scenario Difference 2010 785,195$ #REF! #REF! 2011 411,970 #REF! #REF! 2012 534,990 #REF! #REF! 2013 532,590 #REF! #REF! 2014 531,390 #REF! #REF! 2015 531,290 #REF! #REF! 2016 526,790 #REF! #REF! 2017 813,690 #REF! #REF! 2018 805,990 #REF! #REF! 2019 804,890 #REF! #REF! 2020 805,090 #REF! #REF! 2021 801,290 #REF! #REF! 2022 1,318,790 #REF! #REF! 2023 1,318,790 #REF! #REF! 2024 1,318,790 #REF! #REF! 2025 1,318,790 #REF! #REF! 13,160,325$ #REF! #REF! Residential Commercial/Industrial Apartment Ag Total 2018 EMV $3,810,563,200 $493,043,200 $81,218,200 $54,250,400 $4,439,075,000 2017 EMV $3,515,780,000 $459,150,900 $65,852,300 $61,237,700 $4,102,020,900 Total Value Change $294,783,200 $33,892,300 $15,365,900 ($6,987,300) $337,054,100 New Construction $30,457,000 $8,696,300 $3,740,200 $0 $42,893,500 Market Change $264,326,200 $25,196,000 $11,625,700 ($6,987,300) $294,160,600 % New Construction 0.80% 1.76% 4.61% 0.00% 0.97% % Market Change 7.52% 5.49% 17.65% -11.41% 7.17% 2018 Total % Increase 8.38% 7.38% 23.33% -11.41% 8.22% City of Chanhassen 2018 Assessment Summary Residential 86% Commercial/ Industrial 12% Apartment 2% Ag 1%Residential Commercial/In dustrial Apartment Ag Chanhassen Value Distribution 2018 Residential Commercial/I ndustrial Agricultural Apartments Other Total 1998 EMV $1,076,661,500 $155,066,800 $26,166,800 $12,695,100 $2,713,600 $1,273,303,800 1999 Change before N/C $14,789,800 ($4,681,800) ($356,700) $25,600 ($489,400) $9,776,900 1999 New Construction $81,551,500 $8,502,500 $104,700 $0 $0 $90,158,700 1999 Total Value Change $96,341,300 $3,820,700 ($252,000) $25,600 ($489,400) $99,935,600 1999 EMV $1,173,002,800 $158,887,500 $25,917,500 $12,720,700 $2,224,200 $1,373,239,400 1999 % Market Change Before New Construction 1.37% -3.02% -1.36% 0.20% -18.04% 0.77% 1999 Total % Change 8.95% 2.46% -0.96% 0.20% -18.04% 7.85% City of Chanhassen1999 Assessment Agricultural values and Other values reflect change in use. Commercial/Industrial values reflect tax court judgements. KFS CitiesAsst City ManagerOffice ManagerFire ChiefFinance DirectorPW Dir/City EngComm Dvlp DirMIS CoordinatorPark & Rec DirChaska90,185$ 67,343$ 106,038$ N/A102,663$ 119,208$ 104,532$ 97,864$ Cottage Grove98,936 N/A117,009 136,746 126,693 126,693 98,936 117,009 Elk River N/A 84,431 113,508 114,035 120,200 120,200 96,131 110,953 Inver Grove Heights N/A 90,336 131,856 131,856 131,856 131,856 108,036 131,856 Lino Lakes95,866 78,739 127,763 119,983 118,627 115,631 N/AN/APrior Lake112,512 N/A109,008 134,949 134,949 105,576 N/AN/ARosemount110,912 N/AN/A119,966 124,240 120,726 81,189 113,488 Savage64,228 N/A115,877 111,966 111,966 106,621 83,034 108,139 Shakopee125,116 81,254 127,644 139,020 139,020 129,751 117,601 127,644 StillwaterN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AAverage99,679$ 80,421$ 118,588$ 126,065$ 123,357$ 119,585$ 98,494$ 115,279$ Competitor CitiesAsst City ManagerOffice ManagerFire ChiefFinance DirectorPW Dir/City EngComm Dvlp DirMIS CoordinatorPark & Rec DirEdina149,781$ 75,804$ 149,781$ 141,972$ 141,972$ 134,572$ 127,556$ 141,972$ St. Louis Park N/A N/A 146,393 133,408 148,147 129,780 146,393 155,517 Minnetonka134,244 91,680 135,996 133,380 145,392 135,084 N/A 124,572 Eden Prairie N/A 60,808 136,556 128,588 148,700 140,895 110,448 143,177 Bloomington147,000 80,225 161,980 127,393 176,475 140,000 140,045 133,800 Plymouth137,664 101,976 129,084 N/A 152,136 151,248 121,380 151,248 Maple Grove N/A N/A 133,746 128,918 146,640 133,746 118,612 128,274 Lakeville122,979 N/A129,515 147,125 134,000 127,515 121,603 127,515 Average138,334$ 82,099$ 140,381$ 134,398$ 149,183$ 136,605$ 126,577$ 138,259$ Chanhassen 2018 Budget87,610$ 75,712$ 129,189$ 123,885$ 131,622$ 128,315$ 101,712$ 125,778$ % Different from KFS Avg-12.11%-5.86%8.94%-1.73%6.70%7.30%3.27%9.11%1.95%% Different from Comp Avg-36.67%-7.78%-7.97%-7.82%-11.77%-6.07%-19.64%-9.03%-13.34%Department Head Comparable Salaries CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Approval of City Council Minutes dated July 9, 2018 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.1. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No: N/A PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves the minutes dated July 9, 2018.” Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: City Council Work Session Minutes dated July 9, 2018 City Council Summary Minutes dated July 9, 2018 City Council Verbatim Minutes dated July 9, 2018 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION JULY 9, 2018 Mayor Laufenburger called the work session to order at 5:05 p.m. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Laufenburger, Councilman McDonald, and Councilwoman Ryan, and Councilman Campion COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Tjornhom STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Chelsea Petersen, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, Greg Sticha, Danielle Washburn, and Roger Knutson PUBLIC PRESENT: Dan McCormick Carver County Public Works Jacob Bongard Bolton & Menk Inc. David Mol Redpath CPA REVIEW OF 2017 AUDIT. Greg Sticha introduced Dave Mol with Redpath and Company who presented highlights from the 2017 audit regarding the Opinion of Financial Reporting, Internal Controls, Excellence in Financial Reporting and Minnesota Legal Compliance. Mayor Laufenburger asked for clarification on the term Conflict of Interest. Dave Mol continued with reports on communication to those charged with governance, changes in the audit process in the future using inputs rather than outputs, summary of financial activity, general fund budget items, property taxes by jurisdiction, and in summary that there were clean opinions on all items. Mayor Laufenburger thanked Greg Sticha, Danielle Washburn and Dave Mol for their work done on the 2017 Audit. POWERS BOULEVARD PEDESTRIAN CROSSING STUDY. Paul Oehme introduced Jake Bongard with Bolton & Menk who discussed the findings from the study that was done for the intersection of Powers Boulevard and Lake Lucy Road. He reviewed existing conditions, and proposed pedestrian crossing improvements. Councilwoman Ryan and Councilman McDonald stated concerns with the proposed removal of the southbound right turn lane at the Lake Lucy Road intersection. Dan McCormick with Carver County Public Works explained the issues associated with widening the pavement width in that location and stated that the County is looking for feedback from council members on how to proceed. Councilman McDonald suggested using the enhanced pedestrian crossing lights similar to the one on Highway 101 and Pleasant View Road. Councilwoman Ryan suggested removing the medians. Paul Oehme reviewed cost estimates for the proposed improvements. Jake Bongard discussed City Council Work Session – July 9, 2018 2 the existing conditions, proposed improvements and associated costs for the Powers Boulevard and Park Road intersection. LONG TERM ROAD FUNDING NEEDS FOR MSA, LOCAL ROAD AND COUNTY PARTNERSHIPS. Todd Gerhardt explained that the City is wanting to look at long term goals on how to fund upcoming road projects. Paul Oehme reviewed highlights of the study outlining city collector roads, local street projects, associated costs and possible funding sources before discussing the county road project for Lyman Boulevard and associated costs. Todd Gerhardt explained his belief that the Lyman Boulevard project is over engineered and needs to be reduced to decrease costs. Councilman McDonald expressed concerns with installing roundabouts. Mayor Laufenburger asked the City Attorney on the terms of the Municipal Consent Agreement with Carver County. In discussing the Galpin Boulevard improvement project Paul Oehme discussed conversations with Lyndon Ronjent from Carver County regarding cost share estimates and possible funding sources. Council members stated their belief that Galpin Boulevard is a higher priority than the Lyman Boulevard project. Greg Sticha discussed funding options to fund the proposed road projects using MSA dollars, franchise fees, property taxes, and/or assessments. Mayor Laufenburger clarified the assumptions used by staff to calculate the numbers presented and asked for feedback on possible changes to those assumptions. Councilwoman Ryan expressed her concern about the franchise fees being used for roads other than local roads because the first presentation on the need for franchise fees was for local road funding. Mayor Laufenburger explained that the key factors to think about include the decision for the need to raise money for local roads, improvements to Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard and the schedule of upcoming meetings. Todd Gerhardt explained that staff is recommending the use of franchise fees and continuation of the current assessment policy. Council members expressed support of Todd Gerhardt sending a letter to Carver County that the City of Chanhassen does not agree with their proposed improvements to Lyman Boulevard. KEY FINANCIAL STRATEGY: ECONOMIC DEVELOPDMENT-CONSIDER ECONOMIC DE ELOPMENT PRACTICES POLICY. Todd Gerhardt provided background information on how this item was put on the council’s key financial strategy. Councilwoman Ryan stated she liked the format used by Shakopee. Mayor Laufenburger asked Roger Knutson about state statute regulations on TIF before suggesting wording to continue with the existing practice. Councilwoman Ryan and Councilman Campion favored having a document similar to Shakopee but would agree with Mayor Laufenburger’s suggestion of continuing with the current city practice. Todd Gerhardt stated staff will draft a one page document outlining the city’s practice on this matter. Mayor Laufenburger adjourned the work session at 7:05 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES JULY 9, 2018 Mayor Laufenburger called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag led by Steve Tarpey with Boy Scout Troop 479. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Laufenburger, Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman Ryan, and Councilman Campion COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Tjornhom STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Chelsea Petersen, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, and Roger Knutson PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: 1. Approval of City Council Minutes dated June 25, 2018 2. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated June 19, 2018 3. Resolution #2018-38: Appoint Election Judges for State Primary and General Elections and Approve Rate of Pay 4. Approval of Retail On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor Sales for Off-Premise Consumption for Buy Chanhassen’s “Night on the Town” on Thursday, July 26, 2018 5. Approve Settlement Agreement with Mediacom All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None. RED CEDAR POINT: APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT WITH A VARIANCE FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Councilman McDonald asked for clarification of the variance request. Councilwoman Ryan asked if the subdivision of this lot will City Council Summary – July 9, 2018 2 affect future development in the area. Tom Gonyea representing Estate Development, 15250 Wayzata Boulevard, Minnetonka explained that their request should enhance the value in this neighborhood. Resolution #2018-39: Councilwoman Ryan moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council approve the preliminary and final plat for a two lot subdivision, and a 10.04 foot lot frontage variance for Lot 1, Block 1, Red Cedar Point as shown in plans dated May 15, 2018 subject to the following conditions and the adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision: Building: 1. Provide a 1:200 “clean” plat drawing. 2. Demolition permits required for the removal of any existing structures. 3. Buildings may be required to be designed by an architect and/or engineer as determined by the Building Official. 4. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. 5. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. 6. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. Engineering: 1. Drawing 4 – Site and Utility Plan: a) Change detail 1006 (Gate Valve and Box Installation) to detail 1005 (Water Service). b) Add City details 5202A (Bituminous Street Patching), 5203 (Curb and Gutter), 5208 (Concrete Driveway), 5209 (Bituminous Driveway), and 5221 (Tie Card). c) An abandoned watermain exists between the sanitary sewer and the watermain. Add note to make this known to the sanitary sewer and water installation contractor. 2. Drawing 5 – Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan: a) Add City details 5301 (Rock Construction Entrance) and 5302B (Erosion Control for Individual Lots) b) Provide geotechnical report. c) Include first floor elevation of buildings on adjacent lots. d) Existing and proposed elevations shall be shown at each lot corner and top of the curb at the lot line extension. e) Identify proposed soil stockpile locations. f) If importing or exporting soils for the development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with a detailed haul route and traffic control plan. City Council Summary – July 9, 2018 3 3. SAC and WAC fees due at the rate in force at time of building permit application. Environmental Resources: 1. Tree protection fencing must be properly installed at the edge of the grading limits as shown on the plans dated 5/15/18. This must be done prior to any construction activities and remain installed until all construction is completed. Any trees lost to construction activities shall be replaced. 2. No equipment or materials may be stored within the tree protection area. 3. One tree must be planted in the front of each yard, as per city requirements. Parks: 1. Park dedication fees for one lot at the rate in force at the time of final plat approval. Planning: 1. An escrow of 110 percent of the estimated demolition costs for the demolition of the detached garage on lot 2, block 1 must be received, and the detached garage must be removed within four months of the approval of the final plat. Water Resources: 1. All permits and approvals must be received from other regulatory agencies prior to issuing permits. 2. Must show existing and proposed drainage. 3. The applicant will need to pay the surface water management (SWMP) fee for 1.010 acres at the rate in force at the time of final plat approval. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. Councilman McDonald commented on the Chanhassen Red Birds now giving children a dollar for every foul retrieved at their games. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Todd Gerhardt thanked all city staff, fire department, law enforcement and the Rotary for their work in the City’s annual 4th of July celebration. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None. Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ryan seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. City Council Summary – July 9, 2018 4 Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JULY 9, 2018 Mayor Laufenburger called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag led by Steve Tarpey with Boy Scout Troop 479. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Laufenburger, Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman Ryan, and Councilman Campion COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Tjornhom STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Chelsea Petersen, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, and Roger Knutson PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Steve. Nice to have you with us tonight. I want to welcome everybody to this council meeting. Those of you that are present in the chambers as well as those of you that are watching on Mediacom cable channel or via our Chanhassen website watching this council meeting from anywhere in the world. Just as a record the council members are present tonight with one exception. Bethany Tjornhom is an excused absence. Our first action tonight is the agenda. Council members are there any modifications to the printed agenda this evening? There being none we will proceed with the agenda as printed. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: 1. Approval of City Council Minutes dated June 25, 2018 2. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated June 19, 2018 3. Resolution #2018-38: Appoint Election Judges for State Primary and General Elections and Approve Rate of Pay 4. Approval of Retail On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor Sales for Off-Premise Consumption for Buy Chanhassen’s “Night on the Town” on Thursday, July 26, 2018 5. Approve Settlement Agreement with Mediacom All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Chanhassen City Council – July 9, 20128 2 VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None. RED CEDAR POINT: APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT WITH A VARIANCE FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION. Mayor Laufenburger: Is this your’s Ms. Aanenson? Kate Aanenson: Yes it is. Mayor Laufenburger: Good evening. Welcome to the council. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. Thank you Mayor, members of the council. This item is a request for a two lot split. It did appear before the Planning Commission on June 19th. They did recommend approval and I will go through some of the comments on that in a minute but tonight before you then is for the final plat with approval of a variance and adoption by resolution. The location is at 3861 Red Cedar Point. There have been some other remodeling’s and tear down’s with variances on Red Cedar Point but this is a much larger lot. Just a little over one acre so it’s, meets the requirements as far as area. It’s deficient on some of the frontage which I’ll go through in a minute. Again the second lot in off of Minnewashta Parkway on Red Cedar Point and the house was built in 1957 and now they would like to be able to sell and split the lot. So the minimum requirement is 15,000. Both lots will exceed the minimum requirement. The variance is for the portion of the frontage. There is an existing garage on the proposed new lot and that will be removed and then built onto the attached to the existing house. So again the garage must be replaced. All single family dwellings do require two car garage. Except for the width on the one lot, the one will be 23,000. The other will be just over 20,000 square feet. Again there’s a pretty good tree canopy on both lots. As you can see on the proposed lot there will be some tree removal for the placement of the home but the significant amount of tree will remain. Both canopy covers do meet the coverage requirements. For the park plan there are trails and Roundhouse Park servicing this lot and there will be a charge for the park fee as a part of the extraction for the new lot. Again the right-of-way and easements. There is an existing drainage easement and new drainage easements will be required around the perimeters of the property. So the variance request itself then will be 10 feet deficient on the frontage so in looking at the opportunities to, other ways to accomplish the variance request would be one would be to put an eyebrow in. Do kind of a caddy whompis lot line or get a variance for a flag lot so the staff in reviewing this, because both lots exceed the minimum felt that the 10 foot deficiency on the frontage could be accomplished a number of different ways so we were supportive of the variance itself. So with that we did recommend approval because all the other requirements can be met. So again there was some neighborhood comments and those were just regarding a precedent of maybe not meeting the lot width and then future setback issues. There are no other variances and there’s plenty of lot coverage so if they wanted to add on even in the future either house has that capability. So again one property within the 500 feet, properties on Red Cedar Point did not meet the requirements. The subdivision can go forward with no variance so we are supportive of that and we believe that minimizing the impervious surface Chanhassen City Council – July 9, 20128 3 within the shoreland district, which this lot is, and the importance of the 90 foot frontage and again because they are well in excess of the area and that we are recommending the preliminary plat approval with the variance. So with that we are recommending approval of the final plat with a 10 foot variance and the conditions of approval and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision and approval of the resolution so with that I’d be happy to answer any questions that you have. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you Ms. Aanenson. So we have a staff report. Is there any questions or comments from council? Mr. Campion I think you. Councilman Campion: Pointing at him. Mayor Laufenburger: Oh you were directing to Mr. McDonald. Mr. McDonald, do you have a question or comment? Councilman McDonald: I have a question. I read through the report and okay I’m a little confused. So if I am you can tell me but you said that if we did some type of a cul-de-sac then at that point there wouldn’t be a need for the variance and I didn’t understand that. How could that? Kate Aanenson: Sure. It’s on this one here. If you can see this one. This would create an eyebrow. We have one of those on Lake Lucy so it’d just create additional hard cover. Additional pavement width there and that would make the 90 foot frontage. Both houses meet 90 feet at the front setback line. It’s just that part that’s contiguous to the right-of-way so we have that situation on Lake Lucy. Do you see what I’m saying this eyebrow here so that would be paved so they’d have frontage on and dedicated. You could dedicate that so you’re just adding to the impervious in that area so we felt like, because you’re trading one benefit to you know to get to the frontage without the variance. Councilman McDonald: Right and that’s already an area where we have enough problems with runoff. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. That’s why we didn’t feel that was a viable solution so there would be a way to make it work but it seems to make more sense to. Councilman McDonald: Okay, well I appreciate that and I have a better understanding now. Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: As to your question Mr. McDonald, the answer is yes. You were confused. Councilman McDonald: Yes. Chanhassen City Council – July 9, 20128 4 Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, any other questions or comments? Councilwoman Ryan: I just have a question. Mayor Laufenburger: Go ahead please Councilmember Ryan. Councilwoman Ryan: General area when I was looking at the map, can you, I think it was your very first slide and it’s not, I know we’re trying to be specific to this but how, when you divide those lots that doesn’t affect access to any of those center lots. Kate Aanenson: No. Councilwoman Ryan: It just when you talk about the development, the future development and we’re starting to change some of the lot lines and variances. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilwoman Ryan: How, if, and I know that was a concern of one of the neighbors. How does that then impact the subdivision or the division of other lots in that area? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, so that’s a good question because we’re working on some other ones right now. Everybody’s looking for lots that they can split right? So there’s, our goal as the planning department is to make sure you’re not creating, splitting one lot at the deference of somebody else. They can’t, you know so you’re land locking somebody so we have that to say, is there an opportunity to provide access to the piece to the south so Mr. Gonyea can tell you that was one of the first questions we ask because there is a potential for the property to the south to subdivide. There’s a big wetland and it’s a steep slope and so really the connection couldn’t be made at that piece but that’s a great question. That’s something we always look at to say, how does this affect the surrounding properties. Councilwoman Ryan: Right. Kate Aanenson: So in this piece it kind of goes by itself. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay. Kate Aanenson: The other properties would get access, you try not to come out additional access onto a collector so we would not want to provide additional access onto Minnewashta Parkway but there are other opportunities. There’s some just remnant pieces in there but we looked at other ways to assemble some of those that they could be subdivided. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay. Okay. Chanhassen City Council – July 9, 20128 5 Kate Aanenson: That was a good question. Councilwoman Ryan: Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Anything else? Is the applicant with us this evening and would you like to address the council? State your name please and address. Tom Gonyea: Sure. Good evening Mayor and members of the council. Tom Gonyea representing Estate Development, 15250 Wayzata Boulevard in Minnetonka. I think Kate’s presentation was pretty complete. It’s a fairly simple lot split. We did look at some of the options in the other, accessing other properties around it and there is some restrictions to that. It really seemed like the best option to do it exactly how we’re proposing tonight and I think it will definitely be an add to the area and one new house and the other one, plan on putting an attached two car garage with a little bit of space behind it potentially. Anyways so it should enhance the value of that house as well. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright Mr. Gonyea you’re familiar with all of the Findings of Fact and all of the stipulations associated with the subdivision? Tom Gonyea: Yes I am. Mayor Laufenburger: Oka, alright. And they’re agreeable to you? Tom Gonyea: Yes they are. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. Any questions or comments for Mr. Gonyea? Okay, thank you very much Tom. Tom Gonyea: Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. Let’s bring it back to the council. Unless there’s any further questions I would be ready for a comment or action. Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Laufenburger: Councilmember Ryan go ahead. Councilwoman Ryan: I’d like to propose a motion that the City Council approve the preliminary and final plat for Red Cedar Point and a 10.04 foot lot frontage variance for Lot 1, Block 1, Red Cedar Point as shown in plans dated May 15, 2018 subject to the conditions of approval and the adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision and the resolution. Mayor Laufenburger: I believe we have a valid motion. Chanhassen City Council – July 9, 20128 6 Roger Knutson: Yes. Mayor Laufenburger: We do, thank you Mr. Knutson. Is there a second to that motion? Councilman Campion: Second. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Campion. Any further discussion on the motion to approve the preliminary and final plat? Resolution #2018-39: Councilwoman Ryan moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council approve the preliminary and final plat for a two lot subdivision, and a 10.04 foot lot frontage variance for Lot 1, Block 1, Red Cedar Point as shown in plans dated May 15, 2018 subject to the following conditions and the adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision: Building: 1. Provide a 1:200 “clean” plat drawing. 2. Demolition permits required for the removal of any existing structures. 3. Buildings may be required to be designed by an architect and/or engineer as determined by the Building Official. 4. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. 5. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. 6. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. Engineering: 1. Drawing 4 – Site and Utility Plan: a) Change detail 1006 (Gate Valve and Box Installation) to detail 1005 (Water Service). b) Add City details 5202A (Bituminous Street Patching), 5203 (Curb and Gutter), 5208 (Concrete Driveway), 5209 (Bituminous Driveway), and 5221 (Tie Card). c) An abandoned watermain exists between the sanitary sewer and the watermain. Add note to make this known to the sanitary sewer and water installation contractor. 2. Drawing 5 – Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan: a) Add City details 5301 (Rock Construction Entrance) and 5302B (Erosion Control for Individual Lots) b) Provide geotechnical report. c) Include first floor elevation of buildings on adjacent lots. Chanhassen City Council – July 9, 20128 7 d) Existing and proposed elevations shall be shown at each lot corner and top of the curb at the lot line extension. e) Identify proposed soil stockpile locations. f) If importing or exporting soils for the development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with a detailed haul route and traffic control plan. 3. SAC and WAC fees due at the rate in force at time of building permit application. Environmental Resources: 1. Tree protection fencing must be properly installed at the edge of the grading limits as shown on the plans dated 5/15/18. This must be done prior to any construction activities and remain installed until all construction is completed. Any trees lost to construction activities shall be replaced. 2. No equipment or materials may be stored within the tree protection area. 3. One tree must be planted in the front of each yard, as per city requirements. Parks: 1. Park dedication fees for one lot at the rate in force at the time of final plat approval. Planning: 1. An escrow of 110 percent of the estimated demolition costs for the demolition of the detached garage on lot 2, block 1 must be received, and the detached garage must be removed within four months of the approval of the final plat. Water Resources: 1. All permits and approvals must be received from other regulatory agencies prior to issuing permits. 2. Must show existing and proposed drainage. 3. The applicant will need to pay the surface water management (SWMP) fee for 1.010 acres at the rate in force at the time of final plat approval. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Mayor Laufenburger: That motion carries 4-0. Congratulations Mr. Gonyea. Good luck with your subdivision. Tom Gonyea: Thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Look forward to seeing that home built yet this summer perhaps. Chanhassen City Council – July 9, 20128 8 Tom Gonyea: Soon as we can. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, thank you very kindly. That concludes our formal business for this evening. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. Mayor Laufenburger: Are there any council presentations this evening? Mr. McDonald, do you have anything you’d like to comment on? Councilman McDonald: I do. Nothing to do with the council per se but I want to talk about the Red Birds. Well my other favorite subject. I just wanted to say that there was a couple of articles in the paper and I was really appreciative of the fact that the Villager had mentioned the fact that we’re now giving away a dollar to the kids that retrieve foul balls and I think that is really great and I’d like to see the word get out. You know bring the kids to the ball game. A dollar really goes a long way. This past weekend my grandson is visiting and got him to go just because of that and sure enough he got a foul ball and collected a dollar and before you knew it it was spent on concession stand goodies so the point is that a dollar now goes a lot further in buying concession stand goodies for kids so parents you need to bring your kids out. There’s always a bunch of new friends that they can make. It’s always a good game and again it makes for a lot of great summertime memories and I think when the kids can get out there and it’s one of the few places where I think they can actually run free so that’s all I wanted to say was I wanted to thank the paper for pointing that out and I hope that people will read it and more people will come to the games. It’s a great team this year. Mayor Laufenburger: And by the way they won last night. Councilman McDonald: Yes they did. Mayor Laufenburger: They beat our. Councilman McDonald: Beat our arch rivals. Mayor Laufenburger: Arch rivals the Victoria Vic’s 7 to nothing. Yeah so we’re making hay while the sun shines here. Any other council presentations? Todd Gerhardt: Just to add to that we are also supporting the dentistry business here in town. Mayor Laufenburger: With the candy. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. Chanhassen City Council – July 9, 20128 9 ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt, any administrative presentations? Todd Gerhardt: Oh I have so many thank you’s for the 4th of July activities from my entire staff. I’m always amazed after each day everything’s packed up. Cleaned up. You come out to the site and you can’t tell that there was 10,000 people at a dance underneath a tent. They pick up all the garbage and thanks to the volunteer fire department. The law enforcement. The Rotary. We cannot thank them enough for everything that they do to make that event really special for the community in organizing the parade. The beer garden. The Taste of Chanhassen. A lot of positive feedback from the Taste people that this is the best event they’ve had in a long time and appreciate the support that they got from the Rotary and the City and setting up the tables and chairs so it was just a nice event. The weather pretty much held off for a mid week event. Everybody did well. We introduced ATM’s for the first time this year. Amazing how much money was dispensed from two little machines that were spent at the Taste and probably the beer garden and the carnival so you know it was just a nice clean event. No incidents that I’m aware of where anybody was hurt or injured and that’s always the cherry on top of the sundae so thank you to all my staff. The fishing contest was well attended and organized again and just a great way to celebrate the 4th and create memories with your family. So thank you to them and Todd Hoffman and his entire staff. And to have the longevity in this is huge. Knowing and seeing things year after year. Jerry Ruegemer, Katie, they’re the go to people when you have questions and they’ve experienced a lot. Especially Jerry over the years and that helps out in planning the event so. And Jill even got involved. We have compostable plates and napkins and forks and spoons and I forget the lady from the County from the Environmental Center. She worked her tail off in organizing and mix and matching what’s compostable. What was recyclable and she worked her tail off in making sure she got the right things in the right bins so what a great event. Mayor Laufenburger: I would agree Mr. Gerhardt. Those of us that experienced it, what you see here is just a grand small town all American reunion. 35 years now that this event has been going on in Chanhassen. Casablanca Orchestra and Ragtown provided band music on Tuesday evening. CBO, this is 21 years in a row. They consider this a branding event for their organization for Casablanca Orchestra. I had an opportunity to talk with a couple people who had been part of the park and rec organization in the past and they shared with me how they have observed that the event has grown over time. How at one time there was no carnival and then the carnival came in. And then no Taste of Chanhassen. Taste of Chanhassen came in. And it should give us all a great deal of civic pride to know that Chanhassen is branded so much by the welcoming, the hospitality that is provided through not only the city staff but the businesses. The Rotary. The 10 different Taste of Chanhassen vendors. Yes, the beer garden but everybody behaved so well and as long as you continue to provide the weather that you do Mr. Gerhardt then I think we’ll be in just fine shape. Chanhassen City Council – July 9, 20128 10 Todd Gerhardt: I know one of the vendors said you’re in charge of this rain so it better not rain and I said well I’m in charge of the bad weather. You better talk to the Mayor if you want good weather so he must have talked to you Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Well we do have the National Weather Service right here in Chanhassen. Dan Luna is the manager of the National Weather Service and he tells me that he’s planning good weather next July 4th so. Todd Gerhardt: Alright. Mayor Laufenburger: So we’re in good shape there. Anything else Mr. Gerhardt? Todd Gerhardt: No. Just thank you again to the Rotary and everybody that, the car show was great. There are so many things that we’re blessed for in this community and just fun for everyone and the kids especially. Mayor Laufenburger: And one last note. The Senior Commission raised over $1,000 dollars for bingo so go figure. That’s wonderful. Todd Gerhardt: They lined up an hour before bingo to get their spots. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, council any comment on the correspondence elements? CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None. Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ryan seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Receive Park & Recreation Minutes dated June 26, 2018 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.2. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No: N/A PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council receives the Park & Recreation Minutes dated June 26, 2018." Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Park and Recreation Commission Summary Minutes dated June 26, 2018 Park and Recreation Commission Verbatim Minutes dated June 26, 2018 CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES JUNE 26, 2018 Chairman Scharfenberg called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Scharfenberg, Cole Kelly, Rick Echternacht, Meredith Petouvis, Karl Tsuchiya, and Joe Scanlon MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Boettcher and Grant Schaeferle STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Superintendent; Katie Matthews, Recreation Supervisor; Adam Beers, Park Superintendent; Jodi Sarles, Rec Center Manager; and Susan Bill, Senior Center Coordinator APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The agenda was approved with the addition by Chairman Scharfenberg asking Todd Hoffman to give a recap of the capital replacement discussion held by the City Council at their June 25, 2018 meeting. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Todd Hoffman recognized Sue Bill, Senior Center Coordinator and Jim Theis from the Park Maintenance Department who will be retiring on Friday. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Echternacht moved, Petouvis seconded to approve the verbatim and summary Minutes from the April 24, 2018 and May 22, 2018 Park and Recreation Commission meetings. CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW GALPIN BOULEVARD PROPERTY. Todd Hoffman presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Kelly asked for clarification of scenario 1 and 2 in relation to concept plans 04 and 07. Representing the applicant Lennar, Joe Jablonski discussed the differences between the two concept options being presented. Commission members asked for clarification on housing types, access, trails, wetlands, cost estimates, and funding sources. Kelly moved, Petouvis seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends the City Council acknowledge the Lennar Concept Plan 07 dated June 1, 2018 depicting 199 lots clustered to the west, central and north central quadrants of the property and preserving 50, plus or minus, acres of public park area utilizing a density transfer and park dedication in the eastern quadrant of the property as the preferred starting point for the Park and Recreation Commission Summary – June 26, 2018 2 design of the preliminary plat for the proposed development. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. HIGHLIGHTS OF THE CAPITAL REPLACEMENT DISCUSSION BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Todd Hoffman discussed highlights of the discussion held by the City Council regarding the park replacement plan. REPORTS: PARK MAINTENANCE QUARTERLY UPDATE. Adam Beers presented the update on park maintenance projects. Commissioner Petouvis asked who maintains Eagle scout projects after they’re installed. Commissioner Tsuchiya asked about ball field maintenance after rain events. Chairman Scharfenberg asked about garbage at Lake Susan Park dugouts. REC CENTER QUARTERLY UPDATE. Jodi Sarles presented the update on activities and programs at the Rec Center. 2018 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION PREVIEW. Katie Matthews presented a preview of activities involved with the upcoming 4th of July celebration. SENIOR CENTER QUARTERLY UPDATE. Sue Bill presented the update on activities and programs at the Senior Center. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET. None. Kelly moved, Echternacht seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Rec Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JUNE 26, 2018 Chairman Scharfenberg called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Scharfenberg, Cole Kelly, Rick Echternacht, Meredith Petouvis, Karl Tsuchiya, and Joe Scanlon MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Boettcher and Grant Schaeferle STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Superintendent; Katie Matthews, Recreation Supervisor; Adam Beers, Park Superintendent; Jodi Sarles, Rec Center Manager; and Susan Bill, Senior Center Coordinator APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Scharfenberg: Do we have any changes to tonight’s agenda? I would make one addition under new business. Todd if you could just give us a little recap of the capital replacement discussion last night at council. We’ll put that under number 2 for new business. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Scharfenberg: Do we have any public announcements this evening? Hoffman: We do. It’s my honor to recognize two outgoing employees. Both Sue Bill and Jim Theis in our park maintenance division will be retiring this week. Friday is their last day and as you know there’s an open house for Sue on Thursday from 1:00 until 3:00 here at the Senior Center with comments by a couple of people at about 1:30 so if you can make those, that celebration and then if you happen to see Jim around, it’s his last week and he’s still out there. I saw him putting things together for the 4th of July so it’s, I think with some trepidation and sadness on all parts that we’re having two full time park maintenance employees retire this week but we’re happy for them both. Scharfenberg: Alright, thank you Todd. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Echternacht moved, Petouvis seconded to approve the verbatim and summary Minutes from the April 24, 2018 and May 22, 2018 Park and Recreation Commission meetings. Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 2 CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW GALPIN BOULEVARD PROPERTY. Hoffman: Thank you Chair Scharfenberg and members of the commission. First a little background. Tonight will be the first review by the Park and Recreation Commission of this project at the concept level and so this is concept only. There is no real layout as far as you know what the grading plan would be. Anything like that so please keep that in mind. And also it’s the first of two times that you will see this proposal. So you’ll see it at a concept plan and then it will work it’s way through concept at Planning Commission and likely back at City Council again one more time and then a second go around you’ll be seeing it at a preliminary plat level and so preliminary plat, that’s when it will actually apply the stated conditions that you’ll be recommending for the development contract between the City and Lennar for the property and so that will likely happen sometime towards the end of the summer. Maybe August or September and Joe might recall a specific time when we get something to speak so I’ll do a little bit of a background presentation. Run through some of the city documents. The 2030 comp plan. What that says about this property. The Park and Recreation System Plan and like to give Mr. Jablonski, Joe Jablonski representing Lennar some time to get up and talk about the project briefly and then have the commission ask any questions and then obviously have a discussion amongst yourselves about what you feel about the concept and what you want to make a recommendation to the City Council. So getting started Lennar’s proposing to develop 188 acres of property and it’s located midway between West 78th Street and Lake Lucy Road and east of Galpin Boulevard. It is the Prince Rogers Nelson property. It’s being referred to until the Lennar names it as the Galpin Property. The existing zoning is rural residential and the existing guide plan designation is residential low density and that is 1.2 to 4 units per acre. Two concept plans have been submitted by Lennar for consideration and Mr. Jablonski will present both of those this evening. One plan titled Concept 4 or 04 depicts an invariable plat. Uniform sized residential lots covering all quadrants of the property. A second plan titled Concept 07 depicts a variable plat of mixed lot sizes clustered to the west central near Galpin Boulevard and the north central quadrants of the property and that design is 2., it’s either plus or minus somewhere in the area of 2.26 units per acre so if you can look at low density. 1.2 to 4, this hits about right in the middle. It also will preserve 50 acres of public park utilizing a density transfer and a park dedication in the eastern quadrant of the property and that’s just the high ground and so when you think about this 50 acres, there’s also somewhere over 40 acres of wetland and so the actual expansion of Lake Ann Park would be in that 90-94 acre range. When you’re taking a look at the size of the property that would be reserved and then added onto the expansion of Lake Ann Park. At least under the second proposal. The first proposal consumes that property for housing. Some background on the property. The site, it has been held as an estate property in the community for an extended period of time. It’s now being proposed for development as a single family home community. Includes a large quadrant of land identified in the comp plan as conceptual park expansion area in the City’s Park and Recreation System Plan as a priority park expansion area and that’s the 94 acres I just referenced. The 94 acres, that includes a large wetland, wooded uplands and it also features extensive shoreline of both Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. In fact if you take a look at this entire property it includes all the shoreline on the estate property that is present. Arguably the now pending subdivision and development of this parcel Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 3 has been one of the most highly anticipated opportunities to create a quality housing community while simultaneously preserving a large tract of open public space. That guarantees the character and integrity of Lake Ann Park will be preserved. And so when the commission is thinking about this and talking to people in the community it’s not just that you’re preserving this large tract of open space. 50 acres of upland, 40 acres of wetland. So it’s also that you’re preserving the integrity of Lake Ann and Lake Ann Park. One of the biggest things I would say, one of the biggest attributes of Lake Ann Park when people visit is they look out on that lake and they see that natural vista of no homes and greenery and if that was developed, if that property was developed as a part of this property and houses were put on Lake Ann, not only would you not acquire the park expansion you would also change the character of Lake Ann Park forever. Staff met with more than a half dozen potential developers considering how they would propose to develop the property and how would they offer, what they would offer the sellers as a purchase price. Lennar stated in those initial meetings that it was their desire to bring forward a plan that was both viable and met the goals and requirements of the City’s guiding plan and ordinances. Now that Lennar has secured an option to purchase the property they have delivered two concepts that I spoke of earlier to develop the parcel to the City. It is staff’s position that concept 07 succinctly captures the dual goals of creating a quality housing community while simultaneously preserving a large tract of public open space. And so I’ll go through some of the city documents and then talk about the recommendation. So if we take a look at the 2030 comp plan, and this has just been updated so we’re in middle of updating the 2030 to the 2040 comp plan. So if we read P-1, expand Lake Ann Park to create a premiere community park. Expansion of the park would incorporated natural woodlands west of Lake Ann and would preserve views across the lake, protect wildlife habitat and preserve the community’s natural heritage. The expansion would allow for a loop trail around Lake Ann and a connection to Lake Lucy. So those kind of statements have been in the comp plan for a long time so the 2030 and the 2020 and now the 2040, they all say the same thing. That the Comprehensive Plan identifies that this property that we’re talking about should be preserved and set aside for expansion of Lake Ann Park. And this is the map that’s in the comp plan. Expand Lake Ann Park and complete a trail loop and so it shows succinctly what’s going to be happening or what’s proposed to be happening. That dashed area, it’s generally showing the upland. There’s quite a bit of wetland that’s right in this area that’s not depicted in that expansion plan. The other thing to remember is that this bottom quadrant, so you bring a line right across here. It will be showing up in a variety of other maps. This corner is not involved and so this is the Gorra property and so the loop trail cannot go all the way around at this time. If this project moves forward and if this land is acquired but the trail can come from the neighborhoods that are developed all the way through to Greenwood Shores Park and then down to Lake Ann Park and the trail would go up to Lake Lucy so there’d be one segment left for future development. Then more recently the Park System Plan, so this is the Parks and Recreation System Plan that was just approved last year. Talks about initiatives, parks, and then 1.1, develop a master plan for Lake Ann. Well first maintain Lake Ann Park as a premiere community park and develop a master plan that defines the extent of park expansion to the west and north to preserve natural areas. Extend the trail around the lake and provide traditional recreational amenities like an amphitheater. And for those of you that were at those public meetings and you read through the documentation, this Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 4 was other than trails Lake Ann, as far as parks goes, it was the number one commented on item so people were aware at the time that Mr. Nelson had passed away and they were aware that this property would likely come up for development at some point in the near future so there was lots of comments about the desire to preserve that property as the rest of it developed. And the mapping that was in that plan. If you recall during that process there was a question which plan comes first and the consultant said the Park System Master Plan so that’s the defining definition of the Park System and then the comp plan is a back-up document in this case. So there’s the map that was included. The priority expansion area and that generally describes the entire area. Both the upland and the wetland and it’s a significant parcel of property. As you can imagine as a Parks and Recreation Director for the City I spoke with Mr. and Mrs. Gorra on numerous occasions about lines on their land and expansion areas on their land. Mr. Nelson however never came and talked to us about it so we don’t know what his personal opinion was about that land being developed as park so, you know there’s only two property owners in that entire expansion area so that’s pretty unique. Then the last document we’ll show you is, so this is a concept plan so the Lake Ann Park expansion and trail loop concept plan. So this is just a start of what a plan could look like to create a trail around Lake Ann. So the context is the existing park, Lake Ann is here on the south side of Lake Ann. The City owns all the way up to Greenwood Shores and then this is the start of the Galpin property. This line right here. The Galpin property continues all the way to the west to Galpin Boulevard and so the extent of the land that’s being developed is this is the north line. It wraps up here. Comes all the way around Lake Lucy and all the way down and around Lake Ann. This is the Gorra property line and then the Galpin property extends all the way back over to Galpin and then back up. When we talk about those quadrants, this would be the west central quadrant for future development or for development. The north quadrant for development and then the eastern quadrant for preservation. And so as we talk about you know how can you acquire, this is a significant portion of the property. It’s really through the density transfer that we’ll talk about throughout the two concept plans that you’ll see. So you could put houses over here. Instead of putting those lots and homes here you transfer out those homes that would consume this area and you put them over into this area. And so it’s a density transfer. You would also be utilizing your park dedication credit and so you would take your park dedication acreage, which in this scenario is somewhere around 9 acres. You would take that first 9 acres. Take the shoreland, both Lake Ann and Lake Lucy with that 9 acre park dedication. Transfer out those homes and then leave this all as open space. Obviously as a Park and Recreation Commission if you were in a position of being asked to buy that with cash, I can’t tell you what that number is but we probably don’t, wouldn’t have it available for quite some time in your park acquisition budget so this opportunity, when a comp plan says that something should be accomplished or is desirable, and then you’re given an opportunity where you have a geographic separation. So this geographic separation of this wetland separating this quadrant of upland from this quadrant really sets it up well because there are some costs. You know there’s significantly difficulty in cost with driving roads and utilities through here to service this and the applicant recognizes that. It’s not that it couldn’t be done. It could be done but it would be beneficial to take that density out of there. Preserve it for the public. We’ve also had conversations. It would be quite a battle. If you would come in as a developer and say okay, the heck with the comp plan. We just want to put homes on Lake Ann and Lake Lucy, that Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 5 would be quite a battle with the public and so why would you want to enter into that as well. But what you’re going to hear, and the Planning Commission will have to work with this and the City Council is that people are, some people are going to say they don’t want that higher density. The 50 foot lots. You know the 60 foot lots. A traditional standard lot is 90 feet so 90 feet lots are going up here. 60 in the center and 50 down here. But it’s still all low density. So back to the park plan, you have the green as trees. This area is wetland and then the trail system would be continued, something like this where you would travel through. You would just pick up the asphalt trail at Greenwood Shores Park. You’d build a bridge here at this location which would go up and over the creek. Riley Creek. Boats and other watercraft can go underneath. Pedestrians can go over the top. Continue the trail and head to the right. This would likely would end up to be some kind of a culvert crossing because you have to have truck traffic to build it and then also truck traffic to maintain it in the future and so a culvert crossing would likely be here. The trail connection would go up to the neighborhood so these new neighbors and these existing neighbors can get down into this space and then the connection would go north to the dead end trail that currently sits right here. So the dead end asphalt trail that you would connect with and that would bring people in this way. It’d be a center loop trail system. A dead end to the south to the Gorra property for future extension and then a couple connections to what would likely be a boardwalk crossing this wetland to connect into the homes which would be constructed in this area and then eventually up to Galpin Road and to the Longacres neighborhood so other people can get into this space. So in the long view lots of people can access this trail. They can come from the north. From the west. Come from the northeast and a variety of different neighborhoods. You can even easily access this from south of Highway 5 through the underpass tunnels and then come into this area. And then obviously when this property is developed we would, the City would seek to make that final connection so you have that entire trail loop around there. I’ll be happy to answer any questions you have of my presentation and then I’d like to give Mr. Jablonski the opportunity to stand up and speak as well. Scharfenberg: Does anybody have any questions for Todd? Kelly: So Todd the 07 concept, is that the same as scenario number 2 where you have scenario number 1 and number 2 on your Galpin concept review narrative pdf? Hoffman: Scenario 1, yeah Joe will get into that. Let’s take a look at it. Scenario, right here? Kelly: It’d be the top, number 1. Hoffman: Let’s see, that’s just going to be the narrative I believe. Kelly: Right but that’s where I saw the scenario 1 and scenario 2 so. Hoffman: Let’s look. Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 6 Kelly: Go to the bottom. Hoffman: Any more? Kelly: No there it is. Scenario 1 and scenario 2. Scenario 2 I’m assuming is the 07 concept plan that we’re looking at? Hoffman: Correct. Kelly: Okay. So total home sites are going to be 199. Hoffman: Under the concept yep. Kelly: Under that concept. Okay. Hoffman: Scenario 1 spreads the houses over the entire parcel and that’s proposed at 202. Kelly: Okay. Hoffman: We can look at those quickly. This is the, spreading the concept for the houses all over the property so you’ve got all quadrants consumed with lots. So you’d push your road through here and a road through here and then this would be lotted out into homes. This would be lotted out into homes and this would be lotted out in homes. The alternative to that is the density trade. So this is the alternative where you preserve this as open space and you move the homes over in, primarily into this area and so you have 50 foot lots here. 60 foot lots. 55 and 65? Joe Jablonski: Yep. 55 and 65. Hoffman: And 90’s here. Kelly: And so that’s the concept we’re pushing. Hoffman: That’s the concept that staff is recommending that you support or you ask the City Council to support correct. Kelly: Okay, thank you Todd. Scharfenberg: Any other questions for Todd? If not we would ask Joe to come up and Joe if you could state your name and who you’re here representing tonight. Joe Jablonski: Good evening Mr. Chair, members of the commission. My name is Joe Jablonski here this evening representing Lennar as the concept plan applicant. I appreciate Mr. Hoffman’s Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 7 thorough introduction on this opportunity that we have before us. I think it’s a really unique piece of property and that we recognize not only through the comp plan reviews but also time that we’ve spent with staff. I know that some of you had the opportunity to join us on a tour so to speak of the property as well and that we’ve spent a lot of time and put up a lot of effort into trying to make sure that the needs of the City or the desires of the City are being met. And what we’re doing here is basically presenting two different concepts or two scenarios that one follows kind of the strict zoning guidelines. It would be the 90 foot wide traditional style lots. That would be concept 04 as Mr. Hoffman just showed and that one would follow more of a use of the entire property and then following the fairly prevalent in Chanhassen 90 foot wide lots throughout. The alternative, what we’ve worked with staff on is to come up with a plan that concentrates a little bit more density up towards Galpin but in exchange for that we’re preserving all that open space that we would work with the City to dedicate to the public for use for your expansion of your trail system and improvements that I think you’re looking for in that corridor. The concept plan 07 then on the north section up against the northerly neighborhood we were going to follow similar lot sizes on those. Those would be 90 foot wide traditional, similar to the neighborhood to the north. And the central area there we were proposing 65 foot wide single family detached homes that would be mostly 2 story in nature. We’ve done those particular home styles a couple different times fairly recently in Chanhassen in Boulder Cove, Reflections at Lake Riley. Some of those were built in Camden Ridge as well and they have been very well received by the public. Younger families. First move up type buyers. People that would really desire and find a real good use of the park area as well. And then on the south portion what we’re showing is 50 foot wide, 55 foot wide single family detached one level. That would be more targeted towards an empty nester type of buyer. It’s definitely under a certain market. Not just in the Twin Cities but Chanhassen and again the need or the willingness to have a walkable type community that allows you to get into park and recreational spaces and that is a really highly desirable amenity for that target market as well. And part of this is we recognize that a PUD usually means some kind of tradeoff for us and the tradeoff here is you can see the total lot count is very similar between the two. It’s actually a little bit less on the higher density version or the concentrated or density trade version. But I think we recognize that the need and the want to preserve all that space along the lake and the desire and the unique opportunity that’s there to do that and partner with the City in doing that. The reality becomes if smaller lots aren’t introduced and we did just the 88 acres that isn’t feasible as a project if it was all 90, just 90 foot lots in the area of where we’ve shown the concentrated density. So that becomes part of the reality of the feasibility of it moving forward as well. Other than that you know we’ve included house samples. We’ve included some different marketing type brochure materials. A narrative. You know I’d be happy to answer any questions that you have or if there’s anything that I can do to help answer anything or I’d be happy to do so. Scharfenberg: Thank you Joe. Any questions for Joe from the commission? Kelly: So Joe as far as scenario number 2 is concerned, as a developer you’re fine with that scenario versus scenario number 1? Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 8 Joe Jablonski: We are. In fact as Mr. Hoffman mentioned there would be some challenges getting infrastructure to the lower portion. We also recognize that I think it would almost be too much of the same use on one property. Not to say that a new community wouldn’t be viable with all 90 foot wide lots but I think there’s a real need for variety in the city and I think that’s been recognized by how well we’ve done in some of our other communities so it is something that we definitely support. Yes. Kelly: Thank you Joe. Scharfenberg: Any other questions for Joe? Echternacht: On the 50, the lower lots. Joe Jablonski: Yes. Echternacht: You said… Joe Jablonski: They would have the opportunity for a basement. Some of them just based on the topography maybe one level slab on grade but they’re designed not to be two story and so it would be like maintenance free type one story living. The master suite and open kitchen on the main level. Potential to finish basements where appropriate. Scharfenberg: Joe how many entrances are there that would be coming into the neighborhood off of Galpin? Joe Jablonski: That’s a good question. Right now we’re showing three off of Galpin. Two of them that connect to the existing Longacres community on the other side. It lines up with, I think it’s Longacres Drive and Hunter I think is the other road. We also are showing one up on the north where the cursor is there. That one is something that you know probably more so at the Planning Commission and council level we’d like to talk to them a little bit about. We’ve shown it. I think it’s a good connection but it’s not something that we feel is absolutely necessary for the community if it was desired for it to end in a long cul-de-sac. I think we could work with that as well but usually the fire and public safety people like to see another way in and out of there. And then we are showing two connections to Ashling Meadows. There is potentially a third, or would have been right about where the cursor is. There is a stub street right there too. We’ve elected to not use that one seeing that the other two up in that northwest or northeast quadrant are probably adequate. Hoffman: Our engineering also supports eliminating this because of the steep downward grade. Scharfenberg: So is this concept plan, the trails coming off, the trail coming off of Galpin would kind of come behind those homes, is that right? Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 9 Hoffman: That’s an initial concept that, taking a little broader look again on a couple other items associated with the surrounding area. There’s a Galpin Road study underway right now and initially the Galpin Road study took a look at an underpass here, which is likely not feasible. It was presented as a concept to the council last night but the price tag for this underpass was $2.7 million so that will likely be eliminated so this is still a potential location for a crossing or you can take a look either coming in a little higher up so you can cross here at Longacres and then work your way down through. But this is a good scenario for a trail. What we’ve identified with Lennar is that we would like a trail experience because that’s really what this is. You don’t want a sidewalk. There’s going to be too much traffic for trail users to come off Galpin to get to Lake Ann on the sidewalk so we want to incorporate a trail. So this is a likely location and then it might work it’s way up to this intersection. It could be mid block but they’re not really easily identifiable so it’d be better if there’s no underpass to take it up here. So that’s the, one of the things that is underway. There’s also an intersector. The Lake Ann Intersector or sewer line goes through here and so that’s shown on the plan and this trail would have to cross that in a boardwalk type situation which would need an easement or a limited access permit from Met Council and the center of that boardwalk would have to be removable. Then the other thing to keep in mind is if this all comes to bear the commission will have to allocate the resources to build these trails concurrent with the development so as they’re grading and building we want to be grading and building so when this opens up everything’s in and done. The commission knows fair well you don’t want all these people to move in and then start development and have everybody involved in what you’re constructing there. You just want it to be available and ready to go. So those were the other parameters that we need to make sure that we’re aware of as we move through the design process. Scharfenberg: Joe I know that big wetland section right in the middle, but other than that are there any other wetland issues with this property that would impact us at all with respect to park and rec? Joe Jablonski: There are a couple wetlands. There’s one at the intersection of Longacres. Yeah that. That’s right. Right where the cursor is, the south one is Hunter. So potentially depending on where that trail alignment comes in, if that has to be adjusted you know that would be one place that, but the version 07 or the density transfer version what we were trying to do is eliminate or limit the amount of wetland impacts at all. Really I think Todd’s comment about potential boardwalks to get across a couple locations might be important to think about but other than. Hoffman: There’s a small wetlands in here. Joe Jablonski: Yeah there is a small wetland there. It was kind of a man made pond in that location. And then where that trail going into the park on the north. Hoffman: Oh up here? Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 10 Joe Jablonski: Yeah to the, right through there. There’s an overflow from that central wetland that goes towards Lake Lucy. You can kind of see there’s a little bridge or a gap in there that would have to be looked at for probably boardwalk there as well but that’s, but the majority of that central park area with the exception of a couple pocket wetlands that have been delineated at this point. Hoffman: Joe can you speak to, so when this wetland is taken out, if that is the case, what does Lennar have to do? For replacement. Joe Jablonski: What, the two options there are either you have to do onsite mitigation and it’s typically a 2 to 1 so for every acre that you disturb you have to replace two or you can buy wetland replacement credits which is basically buying from a pre-determined bank within the watershed area that has created a larger or improved a larger wetland complex for the purpose of selling mitigation rights or credits. Those would be the two options. As we get into more I would say engineered type drawings we would first look to see if there was a reasonable option to do it onsite. If there isn’t then the wetland credit program is there for that reason. But that’s something that we don’t have a lot of technical information on at this point. Hoffman: Chair Scharfenberg I know that a little broader context again, watershed district review. Similar to the density transfer being attracted to a park system. Preserving all of this space is going to be very attractive to a watershed district and so preserving those shorelines are going to be their highest priority and so would they like to keep this wetland and keep this wetland? Absolutely. But is there going to be a tradeoff to, you know well we understand that in order to get this there’s got to be some propert y rights. Some development potential and so how they’ll react to that is unknown but there is again a desire that this is the highest quality and the most desirable preservation. And of 188 acres you know you’re talking about leaving 88 for the developer and you’re taking about 100 so it’s a pretty good starting point as far as a preservation type scenario. Scharfenberg: I know there’s a trail on the west side of Galpin with you’re talking about redoing Galpin. Would there be a trail also on the east side that goes both north and south? Hoffman: There will be. The concept plan for the Galpin renovations, so right now Galpin’s a rural section. No curbs. Water just runs off. What the timing is is to allow this development to be constructed. Most of the truck traffic be concluded. Then come in and rebuild Galpin to an urban section with bike lanes on the road and then boulevards, grass boulevards and then 10 foot trails on either side. And so you’ll have 10 foot pedestrian trails both on the east and west. From West 78th Street north to Lake Lucy Road. Once you get to Lake Lucy Road the proposal is for a trail on one side because the corridor, the road corridor gets much more narrow there and that would be on the east side to connect up with the future trail in Shorewood that’s being proposed there. So at this section it would be both sides. Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 11 Tsuchiya: Todd is there any estimate at this point, even a ballpark estimate of what kind of funding we would need to come up with for the building the trails and such? Hoffman: No. We don’t have a cost estimate but we’ll, as we move forward we’ll acquire that. So we’ve done some initial study with some consultants about you know what are the lengths of the trails. What trails would be asphalt. What trails would not be asphalt. What would the bridges be and we’ll bring those numbers back to you. Tsuchiya: Okay. I’m just wondering is this something where you know going to having the commission propose something to City Council and some sort of financing arrangement. Is it going to be potentially that big or is it something with other financing opportunities? Hoffman: I think with the timing, and so there’s going to be a couple year lag in here and the cash that’s going to be coming in from other developments, as long as you potentially delay some things that are currently in your CIP and stockpile that cash and then take the existing cash going to be coming in over the next years I think you’ll be fine. Tsuchiya: Okay thank you. Scharfenberg: I know we haven’t really focused on concept number, well I’ll say concept number 1 with the property down along the lake. Does anybody have any questions for Joe or Joe do you want to speak to that concept plan at all? Joe Jablonski: Yeah I can speak to that one a little bit. In the narrative portion what I was trying to do is go through and compare some of the differences between the two scenarios besides the preservation of open space. In that open space area there’s also a lot of trees so while there may be some park development and trails and things that go in, the amount of impact in scenario 1 in that lower level to the tree removal would be much more as well. It is, you know there’s no question that there would be a very high value on those type of lots that would back up to either one of the two lakes and that large wetland complex but again there’s some cost in going that. Not only with the impacts and tree replacement type scenarios but running the sewer and water out to that area would be fairly expensive. Not only initially but long term for the City as well for upkeep and plowing and those things. Scharfenberg: And Joe would this concept that we have up right now, would this have the other features that you’ve talked about with the villas and the kind of the single family? Well I know they’re single family but I mean the one level or would just the multi-level approach. Joe Jablonski: This would be similar to what I think we have about 50 of them up on the north end or 42 maybe is the number. Of the 90 foot wide lots which would be more of a luxury, higher priced single family detached home. 2,700 to 3,700 square feet. Kind of a bigger box on a bigger lot. A lot of that in Chanhassen and there’s no question that there is a demand for that Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 12 type of product but I just don’t think that it’s as strong as mixing and using a variety of choices because it would end up being 202 of very similar type product in that case. Scharfenberg: Okay. Any other questions for Joe? Thank you Joe. Appreciate it. Joe Jablonski: Thanks. Scharfenberg: I will just open it up for questions amongst commissioners. Anybody have any questions or want to discuss this at all? Kelly: So Todd I’ve got a question for you. So we’re looking at giving some park dedication on this project to, we’re going to be giving that up to get land correct? Hoffman: Correct. So the first 9 acres along the lake would be park dedication and that’s valued about $1.2 million dollars and then the rest would be required through the density transfer. Kelly: Okay, thank you Todd. Scharfenberg: Anybody else have any discussion or thoughts? From plan 1 or plan 2. Petouvis: I will share a thought. I think when we went out on our tour a couple weeks ago I asked Todd, I said so what’s the catch because in my opinion I think it’s wonderful to preserve all of that property as natural space. To be able to expand the trail system and then I think there is truly a need for the variety of housing that plan 07 or whatever, scenario 2 offers. I think it really does a service to the citizens of Chanhassen and people who I know are seeking that type of smaller single family home options so it seems in my opinion a win/win all the way around. I hope I’m not missing something. Kelly: When we get all those seniors out there we’re going to have to build some pickleball courts out there Todd. Petouvis: Yeah Roundhouse can’t handle it all. Hoffman: The Rec Center is close by. Scharfenberg: Any other comments? If not we would entertain a motion. Kelly: I’ll make a motion that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends the City Council acknowledge the Lennar Concept Plan 07 dated June 1, 2018 depicting 199 lots clustered to the west, central and north central quadrants of the property and preserving 50, plus or minus, acres of public park area utilizing a density transfer and park dedication in the eastern quadrant of the property as the preferred starting point for the design of the preliminary plat for the proposed development. Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 13 Petouvis: Second. Scharfenberg: We have a motion from Commissioner Kelly. Do we have a second? Petouvis: Sorry I jumped the gun, second. Scharfenberg: We have a second. Kelly moved, Petouvis seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends the City Council acknowledge the Lennar Concept Plan 07 dated June 1, 2018 depicting 199 lots clustered to the west, central and north central quadrants of the property and preserving 50, plus or minus, acres of public park area utilizing a density transfer and park dedication in the eastern quadrant of the property as the preferred starting point for the design of the preliminary plat for the proposed development. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. Scharfenberg: Thank you Joe. Joe Jablonski: Thanks. HIGHLIGHTS OF THE CAPITAL REPLACEMENT DISCUSSION HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Scharfenberg: Todd’s going to just give us an update on the capital replacement discussion last night with the council. Hoffman: Thank you Chair Scharfenberg. Last evening as a second work session item, let’s see we had Cole was present and Rick was present, Jim was present and. Kelly: Meredith. Hoffman: Meredith was there, that’s right. So we had 4 people present and the council talked for about 20 minutes about the, both the park system master plan and then the park replacement plan. There’s wide support amongst the council members that were there. Councilmember Elise Ryan was not present but the other 4 were. Wide support of the plan and of updating and maintaining the park system with this $250,000 annually but they wanted to get through their budget conversations, specifically as it deals with road funding. If you’re following at all they’re talking about should they continue with assessments or should they start a franchise fee where you pay a little bit of cash every month on your utility bills and then that is collected from the utility companies and put in a fund to help pay for roads in the future. Might be one. Might be the other. It might be a combination but they haven’t got that conversation settled yet and so they’re going to continue on that debate with the public until the budget process is concluded and Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 14 from what I can estimate I believe that the park replacement plan funding will be included in that CIP budget for 2019 as a part of the, probably the November presentations to the City Council before they finally approve that in December. So if it sounds to me at least from what I heard if the road funding gets straighten out that then the park replacement schedule will likely move forward. Scharfenberg: So Todd will this come, will that item come back to us again at all? Hoffman: It will not. Scharfenberg: Okay. Hoffman: You’ve made the recommendation to council. They’ve received it and they’ll continue to debate it. Scharfenberg: Okay, thank you. REPORTS: PARK MAINTENANCE QUARTERLY UPDATE. Scharfenberg: Okay next up are reports and first up is park maintenance quarterly update. Adam. Beers: Thank you Chair Scharfenberg and commissioners. Summer is in full swing. Park maintenance has been extremely busy with preparations for the 4th of July. Getting all of our facilities up and running so we’re moving and shaking. Some of the projects we’ve been working on, we’re in our last year of the picnic shelter initiative. Construction is going on at Sunset Ridge Park and Prairie Knoll Park. The structures themselves are up and restoration is, as soon as we get some consistent dry weather we’re going to be able to button things up so we’re rounding the corner. We’re getting close to completing those for the season. Fox Woods Preserve is now open for use. June 9th we had the grand opening. Had a little bit of dicey weather. We still had some people come out which was good to see so if you have another opportunity to get in there and take a look and walk around, it’s a pretty awesome addition to our infrastructure. Hoffman: And if you arrived early you got in on a baby raccoon rescue. Beers: Yeah. We were able to rescue 3 babies and they were taken to a shelter. Hoffman: A wildlife area. Beers: In St. Paul so it was kind of cool. Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 15 Hoffman: Jill was taking a preamble up the trail and raccoons came just walking towards her looking for a warm, and they were about this long so we got them a little milk and got them warmed up. Beers: Todd saved the morning. Hoffman: They wanted some warmth and milk and then Jill drove them up to the wild area afterwards so that… Beers: Yep. So I’m sure you guys are all well aware but the Lake Susan ballfield lighting project is complete and has been received as you know it’s been really positive. I think Jerry could probably speak to the staffing levels and the use has gone up significantly. Ruegemer: I just got an email, I was working the lights right now. Hoffman: Turn them on or off? Ruegemer: They were already on but I got an email that it wasn’t early enough so I adjusted the time. Hoffman: Oh wow. Beers: Which is another. Ruegemer: So I adjusted as we speak so I have an app on my phone so I can take care of it. Tsuchiya: Can I see that phone? Just kidding. Beers: Very cool. So project is complete. We’ve been busy spraying for broadleaf weeds. Fertilizing. Just kind of trying to keep up with our cultural practices on maintaining our turf surfaces. We’ve had two groups of volunteers come from Southwest Christian High School and the Minnetonka High School. They have been coming for at least the 5 years I’ve been here and I’m assuming it’s been much longer than that but it’s a great resource. It’s good for the kids. They get some work experience out in the field and you know it’s a great asset to be able to help us get some things kind of dialed up town around the library and in City Hall so. That’s about it. Todd briefly touched on Jim Theis, one of our 31 year employees. He’s going to be retiring at the end of the week so just wanted to take an opportunity to thank him myself and let you guys know that that was going on so yeah, if anybody has any questions I’d be happy to answer anything on kind of what’s been going on. Petouvis: I have a question and a comment. The question first. I was actually speaking with a neighbor, just in passing the other day and she asked me about the Eagle project, entry park sign Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 16 garden that was put in a few years ago for Roundhouse and I think this question applies to all such park signs. Who maintains those little gardens? Is that something that the City maintains or is it something that the Eagle Scout maintains or the neighborhood? Beers: Is this the one around the front sign? Hoffman: At Roundhouse. Beers: Yeah so I think initially the Eagle Scout would likely take care of it and then city staff definitely enters in at some point in the process. Hoffman: It’s our’s now. Petouvis: Okay. Beers: That’s what I was trying to say. It is our’s. Petouvis: Weeding gloves and clippers are needed. Beers: Noted. I will make sure someone is out there. Petouvis: Okay but my comment is, something I wanted to point out for those of the commission who were not able to attend last night is, Adam and his team got a huge vote of confidence about 2 minutes into his presentation from the mayor and council. Just saying yep, we know you’ve got it. We know you know what needs to get done and the best way to get it done. Let’s move on so it was not just shuffling Adam off but a huge vote of confidence for him and his team so congratulations. Beers: Appreciate it. Scharfenberg: Any other comments for Adam? Tsuchiya: I was just out of curiosity Adam, what’s the weather done for the fields out there? I know I walk through Bandimere a bit and how would you say your assessment of the different sporting fields have been through, you know we’re in the throws of soccer season and baseball season. Beers: As far as turf conditions? Tsuchiya: Yeah. And then is it foreseeable to have to close down fields or anything like that or is it too soon to say? Beers: I’m sorry for them being too wet or? Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 17 Tsuchiya: Just with all the rain and the usage, how are they holding up? Beers: No I think we look at them every morning after these rain events and specifically Bandimere has a ton of drain tile so those we don’t, it’s very rare that we have issues. Lake Ann has been, I think it’s been fine for the most part. You know we look at them and Jerry and I talk every day to make sure we’re not sending them out when we shouldn’t be so overall I think they’re fine. We’ve been doing a good job of kind of keeping an eye on them. Tsuchiya: Okay. Kelly: I think Jerry, don’t you once in a while just shut the fields down when it’s really bad and say cancel everything if they’re real bad? Ruegemer: We sure do. We do take a look at that on a daily basis and when we do have rain events sort of things so we normally try to make that call by 1:00 or 1:30 type of time frame so we can email all the associations or text them and let them know. You know if there are teams traveling from out of the region area. If they come from Mankato or Rochester or whatever for games so yeah that is look at that daily. We normally take down a field at Bandimere Community Park, or soccer field on an annual basis and kind of rotate that through depending on kind of which one is the worst condition field so we’ll go through, take that down. Remove the goals and then we’ll fill in or, if the goal mouth area has an over seed type of thing and really give the fall when it’s really great grass growing timeframe and then we’ll kind of try to keep kind of rotating those to keep them fresh for the high school and summer seasons. Beers: Yeah the fields that are, the one is taken out each season. We kind of give it a little extra attention due to try to give it a little bit of a kick start to you know being in a better condition in the spring when we get going again so. Tsuchiya: Yeah I noticed that was the one closest to the playground at Bandimere. I think that’s 1. Beers: Yeah. Tsuchiya: Yeah so I did notice that. I was just wondering, walking through and knowing being part of the CC United group now that fields get closed down and how does that help, how are they holding up. Hoffman: We had an inch of rain last night. Did anything close today? Ruegemer: It did not. And you know to your comment too, really the associations are very conditioned to keep an eye on the weather and really a lot of times it’s self imposed. They close themselves before I make an email or a phone call so they’re very aware of kind of what’s going Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 18 on and what the expectation is of the city so they really do take a very good care and they’re very stewards of our fields. Beers: Yeah it’s not too hard to, usually these big rain events coincide with thunder and lightning so it’s pretty easy. Scharfenberg: Adam one other comment. I was over at the Lake Susan ballfield the other night and I noticed that there’s garbage and recycling over at the one dugout but not at the second one. Is it possible to put out another container over there just so it’s closer to that dugout? Beers: Yeah absolutely. Scharfenberg: And then I don’t know if, you know I don’t know if we talk to the team about keeping that clean but there were sunflower seeds all over the place. I don’t know if it’s possible to put a broom in there and ask those guys to kind of clean that out when they’re done a little bit. I know we can ask but just to kind of keep it up since we have those nice dugouts now over there that would be great. Tsuchiya: Need them to act like the Japanese fans at the World Cup. Scharfenberg: Alright, thank you Adam. Beers: Yes sir. REC CENTER QUARTERLY UPDATE. Sarles: Thank you Chair Scharfenberg and commissioners. Tonight is our last night of t-ball so kind of a happy Tuesday that we haven’t had to cancel tonight so we had a lot of happy little kids out there. You may have driven by and seen some flags on the top of the building. We did replace our roof on both sides the past few years but this is just soffits and fascia on the outside of the building that’s getting replaced so that repair should be finishing up probably mid-July I believe. They’re doing another facility improvement here this summer where they’re doing a sand down through all the paint and everything in the gym so we’ll have fancy new lines come fall but we’ll be shutting down for about a month and a half so that’s kind of, it’s a good thing and a bad thing so at least we’ll have some improvements when we open up again and permanent pickleball lines so I won’t have to ask, that’s what they told me so I said that would be great. We ended up the dance season here in May. We had the high school for the recital again this year. 120 dancers participating in those two shows here at the high school. Excuse me. And a lot of families coming to see it so we had 581 tickets sold for that. For that day. Let’s see youth safety training. So we had 23 kids that went through and got their babysitting training certificates this spring. 25 more kids participated in our Safe Kids 101. I can tell you that right now we are at about those same numbers for just the next ones that are coming up so we’ve got a lot of kids that come through our safety programs out there and we have great instructors for that. As I talk Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 19 about pickleball mania. It does continue. We have, we just hosted our fourth annual tournament earlier this month. We had a great string of weather. Adam came out the first Tuesday and his crew to dry off the courts and after that we were just fine so we had 29 teams that participated and it’s a growing tournament so I have a feeling we’re going to be looking at some different changes for next year but lots of positive comments. People still love our courts. Found out that they’ll never leave us even if we want them to. We have the best courts because we have lights so they’re going to stick around so we don’t have to worry, I don’t have to worry about them leaving so. Let’s see and the pickleball crew, they are very good to us too. They are providing all of the lessons we do out there. They do at no charge to us so we have a max of 12 people that can participate each session. The last 2 months we’ve filled that up and it looks like July is at 11 right now so we’re going well with pickleball. Then our Rec Center Sports, like I said the t-ball has been a hit so for the second year we’re doing a 6 week. The 3 and 4 year olds, Small Fry t- ball and it’s been popular and we’ve got 84 little ones out there split out on 2 nights. It’s going well. We’re going to go into track and field after the 4th of July and then we’ll do another 3 week t-ball in August. And then Lil Star continues with, that’s a little bit older kids and so they’re going to be finishing up t-ball as well and then we take our week off and start up t-ball again so it’s a lot of t-ball right now. And then as far as upcoming events, well earlier today we had a Fit for Life trial class out there. Had some new folks come in and check out the program. The new session will start on Thursday. One of those is my mom so she’s taking part. We’ve also tried this this summer. The Walk and Talk with a Personal Trainer. The first date we did was earlier in June and it was kind of a iffy day for weather wise so we had a couple people that came out but it’s a nice way to promote our training there and Julie our, she works at the desk too so if you’ve been into the Rec Center you probably have met Julie as well but she likes to go out and talk to people and how they can be healthier. What they can do on their own and then if there’s a chance they want training or anything like that she’s, you know you have a relationship started with somebody so that’s nice too. So the next one is July 11th and that one’s in the morning. And so she leaves from the Rec Center and heads towards the Nature Preserve and depending on the participants how far they go so it’s usually about an hour, or about 45 minutes. And then finally starting to think about dance again for fall so those open houses are planned for this fall. Those will start in August and they’ll all be 5:30 to 7:30 so if you know of any people that have any little young ones or older ones that want to dance we’ve got plenty of great programs so with that I’ll take your questions. Scharfenberg: Any questions for Jodi? If not, thank you Jodi. Sarles: Alright, thank you. 2018 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION PREVIEW. Matthews: Thank you Chair Scharfenberg. The 35th annual 4th of July celebration will be held Monday, July 2nd through Wednesday, July 4th. Yep and then all the activities will either take place at City Center Park or Chanhassen High School or Lake Ann Park. We kick off the event with our Family Fun Night at the carnival which takes place on July 2nd and those just give Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 20 families an opportunity to partake in the carnival without all the food vendors and all the street dance and the beer and wine garden going on. We’ve got different activities going on available for all ages on July 3rd including pony rides, petting zoo, carnival rides, games, the Business Expo, live music featuring Ragtown and the ever popular street dance featuring CBO. This will be their 21st year returning to Chanhassen. They love coming to this event and we love having them. They’re great to work with. We have 10 food and beverage vendors that are registered for this year’s Taste of Chanhassen which is sponsored by the Rotary Club of Chanhassen and then Midwest Carnival and Rides supplies 6 additional concessions to kind of offset the Taste of Chanhassen. The City of Chanhassen is partnering with Carver County Department of Public Health again for this year to create a family fun and safe festival. So they provide a responsible beverage server training to those people who are volunteering with the Rotary Club in the beer and wine garden and they also provide a private tent that is next to the diaper changing tent for mothers who are breast feeding their children at this time. This year’s parade, which is produced by the Rotary Club of Chanhassen will be held on Wednesday, July 4th at 2:30 and it is the same route that it has been in the past. It starts at Chapel Hill Academy and then goes all the way through downtown Chanhassen. Additionally we are partnering with Southwest Metro so you should have in your paper, if you receive the paper should have gotten the 16 page brochure. We partner with the Southwest Metro and that is in front of you. And then we also do a tri fold which will be in the newspaper this Thursday. And then we also have it all on our Facebook, our City website and we’re doing some online advertising with the Southwest Metro again as well. We have 4th of July t-shirts that you guys all have. Those are on sale right now at the Rec Center and at City Hall and we will be selling them at the event again this year. They are $10 and we have youth sizes, small through large and adult sizes small through 2XL. Those are always really popular. We also give them out to our sponsors so as a fun way of saying thank you for becoming a community event sponsor. And this is one of the biggest event, or the biggest event of the year for the City of Chanhassen. We’re looking forward to it going off again and we just appreciate all the partnerships that we have and all the volunteers who dedicate their time to be parade Marshal or help out in the beer and wine garden. We really wouldn’t make it possible without all the help of volunteers and city staff really comes together. Does anybody have any questions? I kind of ran through all that. Scharfenberg: Any questions for Katie? Echternacht: Katie…food vendors this year, how does that compare to what we had last year? Matthews: So for the Taste of Chanhassen the past few years we strive to have those 10 food vendors and those are kind of in the Midway through. Last year we had 10 and maybe the year before we had 9 but we try to keep it right around that 10 mark. And then with the carnival we do have a contract where they have 6 food vendors available. Echternacht: There’s plenty of them out there. Matthews: We like to keep people hungry, or full. Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 21 Scharfenberg: Alright, thank you Katie. SENIOR CENTER QUARTERLY UPDATE. Scharfenberg: And last but not least Sue. Bill: Thank you Chair Scharfenberg and commissioners. Summer at the senior center, off to a great start. A lot of programs. New people coming in all the time which I always say is just a wonderful happening to attract new people and it’s because of a lot of the new housing that’s going up and it’s wonderful when we have new people come through the doors. As always education programs people love. We did get the $400 sponsorship check from BMO Bank. They’re doing a Minnesota History series. We did the history of Lake Minnetonka. We had someone from the National Historic Registry come and talk about the building of the State Capitol and then the last program will be in July, Minnesota Historic Bridges. A representative from the Bank comes and I introduce her and give her the opportunity to mingle with people and that’s really well received. Don’t know if any of you ever have heard the chorus from the senior center called the Chan-o-Laires. They started in 1992 when the senior center opened and in June, no middle of May we had a program celebrating their 25th anniversary at the Legion. There were 125 people there. Cool part was all 4 of the directors that have ever been involved were, are all alive and attended. They did a wonderful program and they’re really well received in the community and they’re a great representative when they go out and perform probably about 15 to 20 engagements a year. They represent the City very well. Started a new program through AARP where one of the pilot sites, it’s called AARP’s Smart Driver Tech. Talks about the new technology available in vehicles. If you’re interested in buying a new car or have one it talks about your back up cameras, lane changers, everything. Offered 3 programs May, June and August and they’re free. We had good attendance in the May one. We had fair attendance in June but we had to cancel because 3 people were sick at the last minute and then the August class will be in the late afternoon early evening so we can perhaps hit different demographics. Another new program we had was a traveling naturalist. This woman has lived in Alaska for a number of years. Excellent speaker. Had her. People loved her so she’ll definitely be coming back. Lake Ann Picnic was held the middle of June. It was the 22nd year of the picnic. Started in the little shelter on the lake and is now in the Klingelhutz Pavilion. Lion’s 14th year of sponsoring the picnic. We had 120 people registered and the weather was perfect. Everyone had a great time. Had a good year at the Twins game this year. Last week. We didn’t have the rain out, the epic rain out. Longest rain delay in history last year. We didn’t lose anyone. Sarles: Came close. Bill: Came close and Jodi covered for me. I wasn’t able to go. My daughter had her twins that day so thank you to Jodi and Holly from Victoria for covering for me. I’m sorry I missed it. Got a new trip this summer to the St. Paul Saints game. Joan and I from Chaska have thrown around and looked into options of going to the game but one of the big stumbling blocks was most of Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 22 those games are in the evening or on the weekend. Traffic getting to the Saints stadium in the evening is pretty horrendous so they’ve got 3 noon time games. We’re going to one in, or they’re going to one in August and I think we’ve got 48 tickets and there are only 2 tickets left so people are excited and the Saints games are great, they’re fun games to go to. Evening with the Mayor will be Thursday, July 12th. You’re all invited to come. Mayor Laufenburger does an excellent job. An activity that people love. It’s before a concert and then people go out and mingle in the park and enjoy the music. So that’s some of the, oh. Got to mention I went on my last day trip today and before I got here I just kind of tallied up in my 14 year career I’ve been on over 225 bus rides. What a great, I mean not many people can travel far and wide like I have…so I didn’t quite tally the miles but all in all they’ve been great. It’s been, brought a lot of joy to a lot of people and they really enjoy them. In closing I want to thank you all for your great support over the last 14 years. It’s been a pleasure spending some of my Tuesday evenings with you. I’ll miss them. However I might find a few things to replace them and once again thank you all for your support. Scharfenberg: Any questions at all for Sue? Kelly: So Sue I just want to say thank you for everything you’ve done over the years and I’ve watched you build up the program and I think you were excellent for the City of Chanhassen and I’m glad we had you. Thank you. Bill: Thank you. Scharfenberg: Anybody else? Sue I just wanted to say thank you for all the great work that you’ve done with the senior center. You’ve provided exceptional programming for the senior citizens of Chanhassen. You’ve grown participation by the seniors by leaps and bounds. I know the trips that you go on are always full and I’ve talked to seniors and they love the trips that you’ve planned for them and all the stuff that you’ve done. It’s been a pleasure to work with you and get to know you. I want to say how much we will miss you and we wish you and Al well with all of your future endeavors. Bill: Thank you. Scharfenberg: Thanks. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET. None. Scharfenberg: That’s it. Anybody else have anything else that they want to discuss tonight? Todd I’m assuming for the July meeting that CIP will be discussed at the next meeting. Park and Recreation Commission – June 26, 2018 23 Hoffman: Correct. Scharfenberg: And just so Joe you’re aware, kind of what we do with CIP is, it’s kind of our first opportunity to talk about projects over the next 5 years and allocating money. Some of that might not be an issue this year. Hoffman: That’s our plan. Scharfenberg: Yeah. We might have. We’ve had long discussions in other years. This year it might not be such a big discussion. So we do that at our July meeting. Todd I would also ask if you would put on the agenda, I got an email just now from Dennis Gallaher. Dennis is the head of Southwest Metro Pickleball and he wants to come and talk to us at the meeting in July so I’ll email him that we will put him on the agenda for July. Hoffman: Okay. Scharfenberg: With that can I get a motion? Kelly moved, Echternacht seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Rec Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated July 17, 2018 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.3. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No: N/A PROPOSED MOTION "The Chanhassen City Council receives the Planning Commission minutes dated July 17, 2018." Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Summary Minutes dated July 17, 2018 Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes dated July 17, 2018 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES JULY 17, 2018 Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Steve Weick, Nancy Madsen, John Tietz, and Mark Randall MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael McGonagill STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Vanessa Strong, Water Resources Coordinator; and George Bender, Assistant City Engineer PUBLIC PRESENT: Katrina Fiihr BDH & Young Jeff Gears BDH & Young Patrick Schneider Bob Ayotte 6213 Cascade Pass Danly Jones 7026 Pima Lane Kris Lenk 6895 Lucy Ridge Lane Mark Gempler 1877 Topaz Drive Kevin Sundem 1845 Topaz Drive Geri & Greg Stewart 1893 Topaz Drive Meredith McGuirk 1770 Lucy Ridge Court Jeff Cannon 1810 Emerald Lane Charles Loeffler 7327 Fawn Hill Road Deborah Medeiros 6820 Lucy Ridge Lane Tamara Sather 7090 Utica Lane Joanne & Bill Lambrecht 6990 Utica Lane Ryan Johnson Assessor Denny Scheppmann 6740 Lakeway Drive Barry Dallavalle 6960 Utica Lane Sam Kimball 6748 Kingston Drive Joy Gorra 1680 West 78th Street Cara & Angelo Galioto 1805 Emerald Lane Dale & Gloria Carlson 6900 Utica Lane Josh Kimber 2060 Majestic Way Mehdi Ayouche 2102 Majestic Way John & Julie Butcher 6915 Lucy Ridge Lane Planning Commission Summary – July 17, 2018 2 Andy Lenk 6895 Lucy Ridge Lane Matt & Deb Chambers 2169 Red Fox Circle Stacy Semler 517 Mission Hills Way West Laura Tiebert 6420 Fox Path Tim Nordberg 2126 Majestic Way Dake Chatfield 2200 Majestic Way Ron & Mary Kneedten 6850 Utica Terrace Jon Hebeisen 2150 Majestic Way Brian Hugh 7441 Windmill Drive Steve Wallace 6900 Lucy Ridge Lane PUBLIC HEARING: CONTROL CONCEPTS: SITE PLAN REVIEW. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Representing the applicant, Jeff Gears with the architectural firm BDH & Young presented samples of buildings materials that will be used on the building. Commissioner Tietz expressed concern with the location of a trail underneath a 17 foot retaining wall. Chairman Aller asked for an update on where the applicant is with the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek watershed district review process. Commissioner Randall asked for clarification on the location for snow storage. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. Madsen moved, Weick seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council the site plan for a 54,600, two story building, plans prepared by Loucks and BDH & Young, dated 06-15-2018, subject to the following conditions: Building 1. Sheets C4.1 & C4.2 a. Utility notes 8 & 9. Sanitary sewer must be schedule 40. MPC table 701.1 b. Utility notes 11, 12 & 13. Minnesota rules 4715 is no longer the State plumbing code. Minnesota rules 4714 is the current code. Please change all references to 4714 along with the current code sections. 2. Submit details on the storm detention system. 3. Retaining walls over 4 feet in heights require an engineered design. 4. Plans must be submitted by a design professional on the proposed structure. All design information should be included (i.e. exiting, code analysis, proposed occupancies and occupancies). Environmental Resources Planning Commission Summary – July 17, 2018 3 1. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to add three bur oaks to the north property line native seed area. 2. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to add a row of shrubs for screening of the parking area along Century Blvd. The screening shall be a minimum of 3 feet tall at maturity. 3. The Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be shown on the site and landscape plans. 4. The applicant shall install Conservation Area signs at the edge of the Bluff Creek Overlay District at the north and south property lines and at the trail. The signs are available for purchase at the Chanhassen Public Works. Fire 1. Fire Lane No Parking areas for all the curbing except those directly adjacent to parking spaces will need to be painted yellow with NO PARKING FIRE LANE signs posted per city/fire code. Parks 1. The developer shall be responsible for planning, engineering, and constructing the “wetland trail.” Connection points for this new trail shall be the terminus of the Trotters Ridge trail, the intersection of Century Boulevard and West 82nd Street, and the intersection of Century Boulevard and Water Tower Place. Bid documents, including plans and specifications, shall be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to soliciting bids. Project bidding shall occur in a competitive environment with a minimum of three bids being received. The results of the bidding process shall be reviewed with the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to award. Cash payment for trail construction shall be made from the City of Chanhassen to the developer upon completion, inspection, and acceptance of the trail. 2. Trail easements within Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th shall be dedicated to the city to accommodate the “wetland trail”. Planning 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement and provide the security required by it prior to receiving a building permit. 2. Additional architectural articulation shall be provided for the second unit primary access. 3. Add bike racks as well as an outdoor seating/picnic area. Planning Commission Summary – July 17, 2018 4 4. A separate sign permit application, review and approval shall be required prior to site sign installation. Water Resources and Engineering 1. The limits of the Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be identified throughout the plan set. 2. Show the western curb line along Century Boulevard and the crosswalk at Water Tower Place throughout the plan set. 3. Vacate drainage and utility easements except the standard 10 foot wide easement associated with the front of the parcel in addition to the standard 5 foot wide easement associated with the side and rear portions of the parcel. 4. The wetland, wetland buffer, and the Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be designated as Outlots. 5. Provide a permanent easement over the trail throughout the parcel. 6. Apply for an Encroachment Agreement for the private sidewalk. 7. Add detailed design for the retaining wall including a profile, proposed construction materials, and railing/fence. The trail is designed to be on the bottom side of a retaining wall that has portions of it detailed to be 17 feet in height. The safety of the users of the trail needs to be coordinated. 8. Consider adjustment of the site design to facilitate maintenance and snow removal. 9. Include a detail for tree protection. 10. Add note to protect the existing line of trees on the shared property with the parcel to the south. 11. Detail asphalt cut-out and replacement in the street to facilitate the installation of the concrete aprons. 12. Install ADA pedestrian ramp for trail crossing at Century Boulevard. 13. Adjust curb radius design to meet city detail #5207 in association with the commercial entrances. A radius smaller than 20 feet may be appropriate for the shared property with the parcel to the south. 14. Adjust slope of the northern commercial entrance to meeting city detail #5207. 15. Replace any striping removed in Century Boulevard. Planning Commission Summary – July 17, 2018 5 16. All parking stalls shall be 9 feet in width including handicapped stalls. 17. Add a radius to the trail where it connects to the existing bituminous trail to facilitate maintenance. Include additional tree removal area. 18. All striping and signage shall meet the requirements of the MN-MUTCD manual. 19. Indicate lineal slope design for the trail. 20. All disturbed areas require a minimum of 6 inches of topsoil and must meet decompaction requirements. 21. Salvage existing topsoil and indicate stockpile location. 22. Add inlet protection in the catch basins on the west side of Century Boulevard. 23. Add rock construction entrance at the southern commercial entrance. 24. Extend the silt fence installation as appropriate to protect from construction. 25. The patch for the watermain connection shall be the full width of Century Boulevard. 26. Detail 5302A is shown twice on the SWPPP plan sheet. 27. Utilize C900 PVC pipe for the water service pipe material in lieu of DIP. Fittings shall be epoxy coated. 28. Sanitary manhole detail #5101 requires the pipe connections to be sealed with a cored and sealed connection. The utility plan details a build over manhole for the sanitary service connection. Add notes identifying the pipe connection requirements. 29. Review sanitary design from a future maintenance and a cost perspective. Adding Sanitary manhole #1 approximately 35 feet to the south of an existing manhole is questionable. The sanitary service line could be routed directly to the existing manhole. The invert would need to be reconstructed and a cored and booted connection would be required. 30. Applicant is permitted a connection to municipal stormdrain system after meeting treatment and discharge requirements of city and RPBCWD. Applicant is responsible for ensuring municipal system is capable of handling the additional capacity. 31. Applicant is responsible for any improvements necessary to the municipal system to meet capacity and regulatory requirements from the point of connection up to and including the outlet/receiving water body Planning Commission Summary – July 17, 2018 6 32. Connection is not permitted in catchbasin. Must connect to storm main in Century Blvd. Include access manhole. Invert elevation in the manhole shall allow for 0.1 inches of fall through the structure. 33. Access MH missing from western most section of Contech structure. 34. Proprietary filtration devices should be used as pretreatment vs post treatment. 35. Identify snow storage location on plans. 36. Identify stockpile locations on plan. 37. Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) signs and locations are required on plans. Signs are required at each point the BCOD crosses the property boundary, every 100 feet, every point of deflection. 38. Include BCOD sign detail. 39. The proposed redevelopment will need Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) permits. 40. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure and submit proof that permits are received from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, MnDOT, Carver County, RPBCWD, Board of Water and Soil Resources, PCA, etc.). 41. Project will require stormwater management fees associated with city development review and permitting process. 42. The city is in agreement with the RPBCWD comments identified in the email dated June 26, 2018 titled ‘RPBCWD Permit 2018-43: Control Concepts – Initial Completeness Review Comments.’ With one exception: J10 – the city requests applicant provide additional performance monitoring field data to support manufacturers removal estimates. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Vanessa Strong presented information on Chapter 9, the surface water management chapter of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. Weick moved, Randall seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and submit the plan to the Planning Commission Summary – July 17, 2018 7 Metropolitan Council for their determination of consistency with the Metropolitan System Plans. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. GALPIN PROPERTY: PUD CONCEPT REVIEW. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Representing the applicant Lennar, Joe Jablonski discussed trail connections, differences between their two plans, and housing types. Chairman Aller opened up the meeting for public comments. Jon Hebeisen, 2150 Majestic Way asked if there were more options than the two proposals being offered by Lennar, questioned the wetland delineation, the buffer, and that the people who live on the south side of this project were not notified of the meeting. Dake Chatfield, 2200 Majestic Way stated he echoed the comments made my Jon Hebeisen regarding the buffer zone and wetlands. Angelo Galioto, 1805 Emerald Lane expressed concern with the overall density of the project and the affect it will have on Lake Lucy and Lake Ann. He also expressed concern with traffic through his neighborhood with the addition of houses from this project. Kris Lenk, 6895 Lucy Ridge Lane expressed concern with making Lucy Ridge Lane a through street. John Butcher, 6915 Lucy Ridge Lane expressed concern with the environmental impacts that clear cutting will have on Lake Lucy, safety concerns with Lucy Ridge Lane being a through street, neighborhood continuity, and requested that the Planning Commission do everything in your power to minimize environmental impact and if a 10 acre parcel that abuts the property can be used as a buffer. Callie Edwards, 18740 Partridge Circle commented on the need to save the “Big Woods”. Betsy Randall, 1571 Lake Lucy Road agreed with what has been said by everyone before her especially her concern with runoff, saving the huge trees and her belief that some of the lots are too small. Barry Dallavalle, 6960 Utica Lane and representing the 14 members of the Lake Lucy Homeowners Association with homes bordering the east and north side of Lake Lucy, expressed their concern with runoff impacting water quality of Lake Lucy, they would prefer the density transfer plan, and had a concern with construction noise. Brian Hugh, 7441 Windmill Drive stated he wanted to call out flooding in the area from springtime runoff. Greg Steward, 1893 Topaz Drive asked that the Lennar Corporation deed the property over to the City of Chanhassen for permanent conservancy in the name of Prince and expressed concern with impacts to the tree canopy, wildlife, and the fact that there are Native American burial grounds within this property. Joy Gorra, the widow of Mike Gorra, asked that the City and the developer take their time to develop taking into account the pristine nature of the area and develop it right. Geri Stewart, 1893 Topaz Drive discussed the need for a greater buffer between their property and the development and discussed traffic concerns. Josh Kimber, 2060 Majestic Way expressed concern with lot sizes being too small, saving trees with a buffer, and current issues with flooding. Deborah Medeiros, 6820 Lucy Ridge Lane asked if a feasibility study has been done for the road layout, impacts to wetlands and would echo the environmental concerns of everyone in the room. Mehdi Ayouche, 2102 Majestic Way stated he moved to this neighborhood because of the trees and the quietness of the neighborhood, and expressed concern with the density and impact on schools. Tamara Sather, 7090 Utica Lane stated her preference for the preservation model because the parks and trails are what drew her to Chanhassen 27 years ago and asked for a third option that allows for the preservation but limits the number of homes. Charles Loeffler, 7327 Fawn Hill Road Planning Commission Summary – July 17, 2018 8 expressed concern with the impacts road connections will have on wetlands. Danly Jones, 7026 Pima Lane, having grown up swimming in Lake Ann, asked if there is anything the City can do to preserve the land and the quality of the lake. Julie Butcher, 6915 Lucy Ridge Lane asked the City to be good stewards of this 200 acre parcel of land. Dale Carlson, 6900 Utica Lane asked who’s going to be held accountable if the wetlands and water quality are destroyed and the wildlife go away. Angelo Galioto asked if Lennar owns the property. Steve Wallace, 6900 Lucy Ridge Lane apologize for arriving late before stating he strongly opposed the plan and commented that land conservation is critical having seen the water quality deteriorate on Lake Lucy from recent developments. He also stated that if development has to occur there should only be one entrance off of Galpin Boulevard and more of a buffer zone. Chairman Aller closed the public input period of the meeting. After comments from commission members Chairman Aller noted that the item will be forwarded to the City Council with the verbatim Minutes and emails attached. The Planning Commission took a short recess at this point in the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Randall noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting on June 19, 2018 as presented. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Kate Aanenson outlined items on the Planning Commission meeting on August 7th and discussed the joint tour with the Senior Commission, Environmental Commission and Park Commission on Wednesday, August 8th. Commissioner Madsen moved to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JULY 17, 2018 Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Steve Weick, Nancy Madsen, John Tietz, and Mark Randall MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael McGonagill STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Vanessa Strong, Water Resources Coordinator; and George Bender, Assistant City Engineer PUBLIC PRESENT: Katrina Fiihr BDH & Young Jeff Gears BDH & Young Patrick Schneider Bob Ayotte 6213 Cascade Pass Danly Jones 7026 Pima Lane Kris Lenk 6895 Lucy Ridge Lane Mark Gempler 1877 Topaz Drive Kevin Sundem 1845 Topaz Drive Geri & Greg Stewart 1893 Topaz Drive Meredith McGuirk 1770 Lucy Ridge Court Jeff Cannon 1810 Emerald Lane Charles Loeffler 7327 Fawn Hill Road Deborah Medeiros 6820 Lucy Ridge Lane Tamara Sather 7090 Utica Lane Joanne & Bill Lambrecht 6990 Utica Lane Ryan Johnson Assessor Denny Scheppmann 6740 Lakeway Drive Barry Dallavalle 6960 Utica Lane Sam Kimball 6748 Kingston Drive Joy Gorra 1680 West 78th Street Cara & Angelo Galioto 1805 Emerald Lane Dale & Gloria Carlson 6900 Utica Lane Josh Kimber 2060 Majestic Way Mehdi Ayouche 2102 Majestic Way John & Julie Butcher 6915 Lucy Ridge Lane Andy Lenk 6895 Lucy Ridge Lane Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 2 Matt & Deb Chambers 2169 Red Fox Circle Stacy Semler 517 Mission Hills Way West Laura Tiebert 6420 Fox Path Tim Nordberg 2126 Majestic Way Dake Chatfield 2200 Majestic Way Ron & Mary Kneedten 6850 Utica Terrace Jon Hebeisen 2150 Majestic Way Brian Hugh 7441 Windmill Drive Steve Wallace 6900 Lucy Ridge Lane PUBLIC HEARING: CONTROL CONCEPTS: SITE PLAN REVIEW. Generous: Thank you Chairman Aller, commissioners. Control Concepts, Planning Case 2018- 11 is a public hearing for a site plan review for a 54,600 square foot office warehouse building. The public hearing is tonight. This item is scheduled to go forward to City Council on August 13th. The property is located at 8077 Century Boulevard. It’s one of the last two properties in the Arboretum Business Park. To the north of this site is a city owned land, part of the Chanhassen Nature Preserve. This property is Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition. The subdivision for this addition was approved in 1997. The overall project for Arboretum Business Park actually began in 1992 with initial preliminary approval in 1997 so this has been a long time coming and this completes one of the elements that the City’s been looking forward to. It’s called the Wetland Trail which goes along the north side and to the east of this property and connects to an existing trail in the Chanhassen Nature Preserve. The request is for a two story, 54,000 square foot multi tenant building. There’s only space in it for two tenants but that’s what makes it a multi tenant building. The property is guided in our Comprehensive Plan for office industrial uses. It’s zoned planned unit development and is part of the Arboretum Business Park. Office manufacturing and warehouse uses are permitted within this PUD so the uses that are proposed in the building would be permitted by the zoning district. The property itself is approximately 5.2 acres in size. The floor area ratio is less than, is around 2 so there’s twice as much, 5 times as much land as there is building that is going on this site. However there’s a plateau where the building is going in that’s about 970 feet. The property drops down to the northeast to a 940 foot elevation so there is significant elevation change on the property and that’s part of the issue or the concern that staff has had. There’s a retaining wall that wraps around the parking lot area. At it’s high point in the northeast corner it’s about a 17 foot tall retaining wall. This is the wetland trail that is being developed in conjunction with this. It was part of the original approval but they were waiting for this site plan to come forward before it was constructed. Control Concept is proposing taking over the west end of this building. The extreme western portion of the building is two stories. The eastern half is one story construction but it’s a 38 foot tall to the top of the parapets so it’s a pretty tall looking building. Again this is something that the, has been a little bit in flux. This picture doesn’t present a true representation of the building materials and so the applicant’s architect will be discussing that as part of their presentation but it would be an exposed, an aggregate or concrete tip up construction panels. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 3 They are proposing the use of metal panels in the corner of the building and as highlights on the top and to help break up the expanse of the walls. This would be the entrance for the, it’s sort of backwards and I’ll let them get into that but the height of the building, it’s articulated. It provides a lot of windows on the west side of the building which will be visible from Century Boulevard. That’s their primary office space and then as you go into the building they have manufacturing and warehouse space going on. Again here’s the first floor layout. This is a future tenant space. They don’t have the ultimate design so it’ll be a shell and when someone leases the space they’ll come in and do the tenant finish that they need for it. Warehouse area. Office area. And on the second floor which is only the extreme western end of the building they have additional office space and manufacturing space. The grading plan, they are going to mass grade the site including providing grading for this trail system. Some of our issues with the design and layout of the building is this parking lot area is very near to the top of the retaining wall and we’re concerned about snow storage in the winter and where they’re going to push the snow. We have been working with them on the retaining wall design and we’re still in conversations with that. We received the schematic for what they’re proposing which would be the big block type retaining wall that you’d see like at Bandimere Park and it’s subject to the Parks Director approval and review of the final plans. We believe that shall be going forward. However there is insufficient space on site for snow storage and we’re looking potentially in the southeast corner of the parking lot that they would be able to provide an open area for them to put the snow and store for it until it can be removed from the site. Again there’s a 17 foot elevation drop from the top of this retaining wall down to the trail below it. To meet ADA requirements they’re trying to maintain a 5 percent slope maximum on the trail system and then once we get off the site it will connect to existing trail that is in place. Landscaping plan. They’re providing a basic landscaping. There are, there’s a condition in there that there’s additional oaks that are being required of the developer as a part of the site plan. And shrubs along this parking area on Century Boulevard to help screen it from traffic that goes by. Utilities. Sewer and water are in Century Boulevard so they will connect to it. One of the conditions is that they connect to our existing manhole for our sanitary sewer rather than putting in a new one and the applicant has agreed to make that change as part of their approval. There is an underground stormwater system that they’re proposing for the site. There are some, we would need to get additional information from them to verify that it’s providing true treatment for the water before it discharges into the city stormwater system and goes down to our stormwater pond which is located just south of Coulter Boulevard off of Century so. Again their stormwater system would tie in and discharge around to the northwest corner of the property. Sewer and water come in on the south side of the building. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan subject to the conditions in the staff report and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Again the applicant as a part of their presentation will discuss the architectural detailing on this and mention also the retaining wall discussion that we’re having. With that I’d be happy to answer any questions. Aller: Does any of the commissioners have questions at this point in time? Alright, hearing none. Would the Water Resources Coordinator like to wait until the applicant discusses my Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 4 questions regarding the water flow and runoff issues or would you like to espouse some comments on what your thoughts are on that now? Strong: We’ll wait until they had their chance. Aller: Thank you. Strong: They might address them there. Aller: Okay, if the applicant would like to come forward. Please state your name and representational capacity and tell us about your project. Jeff Gears: Good evening commissioners, I’m Jeff Gears with the architectural firm BDH & Young and we’ve been working with Control Concepts to develop the building plan to date. We also have the civil engineer with us and I’ll let them address some of the comments pertaining to stormwater management but what I’d like to speak about this evening, as Bob had mentioned when we submitted drawings for site plan review to the City we were still working with the client in regards to the exterior precast material. We knew that we were going to be using a precast panel. We’ve been working with, the intent is to be working with Fabcon and so the original renderings that were submitted suggested a design intent. Since then we’ve elaborated on that design so I’ll start with where the concept image started. Right here? Alright. This is a photo from an existing building and what was decided upon is the aesthetic that was, the client was hoping to achieve is a, what Fabcon refers to as a random rake on the bottom portion and then exposed aggregate on the upper portion. That being said one potential option that we’re still exploring, Fabcon is in the process of producing larger samples for our review would be this scenario where on the bottom they could apply a sealer that would not actually, that’s not a different color or stain. It’s just a sealer that makes the concrete look darker so we have a little bit more tonal quality. That’s still, we’re still exploring that. We haven’t seen a final sample. But as that relates to the elevations, the intent is very similar to I think what was presented in the drawings submitted. It’s just the panels have a little more accuracy so you can see what we’re proposing in attempts to break down the building massing slightly. We have over in this area and on this area where the office space is we have this random rake going up to the second floor area. And as we work our way to the east side of the building where the warehouse space is located the raking is only on the bottom portion. So this would be a scenario if we did not use the sealer. And then this is a rendering that depicts what it might look like if we choose to go that route. Again we’re still in exploration with the precast manufacturer. This is a sample of the color of the panel. This is not showing any of the raking. They cannot achieve that raking for our review at a sample of this size so once we get a bigger sample we can share that. As mentioned there will be some accent materials. There will be, this front corner which would be facing northwest is the main entry for the office space so in lieu of precast panels in this area we’re proposing a metal panel and it will be a combination of a metal panel that has a clean anodized look to match the windows. There’ll be an accent color if red, The areas that are reflected, that are shown darker. Unfortunately I don’t have that sample but it’s a perforated Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 5 metal. It’s basically there’s round holes punched through it and so that’s what we’re seeing up here and above these other glass elements to help break up the building massing. Originally on the rendering that was submitted originally we had a red flashing at the top of the parapet. We have changed that to be a dark metal that would be similar to what we have at the main entry. So we’re limiting the amount of red on the building just to an accent band. So that is all I have for the presentation of the changes that we’ve made to the exterior from what was submitted. Aller: I guess any questions at this point in time? As far as the articulation for the color or the materials. Commissioner Madsen. Madsen: And this question may be, staff may have to address it but are all these materials that you’re using, are they, well for a PUD it’s for a better design. To use better materials. Those sorts of things and are all the materials that you’re proposing in alignment with the materials that the City would require for a PUD? Generous: They were all specified as a part of the design standards for this PUD as acceptable material. They’re using the metal as an accent rather than a primary material and so that’s one of the requirements that we have. So plus they have a lot of window space in here that really helps to break up the mass and they’ve alternated the massing on the side with that metal panel and the glass door front openings so yes we’d say it complied with the PUD standards. Madsen: Okay thank you. Tietz: Chairman Aller. Aller: Commissioner Tietz. Tietz: I don’t know if this is an appropriate question for Bob or for the architect but I’m just, I’m concerned a little bit about the location of the trail beneath a 17 foot wall and so tight to the property line. It’s a pretty expansive use of the site. I assume that there’s been other options explored and I’m just wondering if, you know looking at the aerial photo it’s not probably indicative of what’s on site but it looks like if you went off the northeast corner of the property, it appears to be some trees out in that wetland area which might tell me that there’s some ground out there. I’m just wondering if there’s a route that could get extend north from the northeast corner up to the parkway or if there could be a route that’s adjacent. Even though it’s between two industrial properties if there could be a route that hugs the south property line directly east and west. Just seems like we’re pushing a trail in a very, I don’t want to say precarious but it’s not a real hospitable area if you’ve got a 17 foot block wall looming above you. Jeff Gears: I think you ask a very good question. It’s actually been something that we’ve been having great amounts of conversation about in the last couple days. To answer your question yes. We’ve looked at a couple solutions. The location of the trail, and correct me if I’m wrong was something that we had negotiated and worked out with the park department where their Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 6 preferred route was. There was conversation about the possibility of locating it on the south side of the site. I don’t think that was, the choice that the park department nor the client would prefer so it’s location is I think the route that was most preferred. The challenge we have is, the economics of the site and the amount the site can be developed with the Bluff Creek overlay district and the wetlands and the building size and massing is really a reflection of the size required to make it an economic success for the client and then the net result of the parking is what’s required to meet that size so we’re really kind of between a rock and a hard place. If the building gets much smaller it’s not going to be economically feasible for the client. If we reduce the number of parking we’re not meeting city requirements. The trail is in a location that we understand the park would prefer and we all understand that the 17 foot high retaining wall is not the best potential solution but right now it’s the one that works. So we’re looking at alternatives. Other ways that we can maybe address that. I do understand that we’ve had communication with the park department and they have similar walls of similar height in the city that are used in parks and it’s my understanding, I wasn’t part of the conversation but I’ve been told that that was an application that they were okay with that if we used the larger block type wall with a fencing material on the top. I don’t know if that answers your question. Tietz: Well I guess that’s as far as I can go today. Jeff Gears: Yeah. Tietz: But I’m looking at this ceiling and it’s probably not even 12 feet. Jeff Gears: Yeah if there would be opportunity to potentially develop the site a bit into the Bluff Creek area I think that would be an advantage to everyone but understood that might be, there would be a variance process involved with that and we’re trying to see if there’s a way we can resolve this without having to go that route. Tietz: Okay thank you. Aller: Any additional questions Vanessa his response… What I would like to hear is about the water runoff. How you’re going to deal with the environmental impact. It looks like we’re still waiting on some information to go to Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek regarding the Bluff Creek and the watershed district and it’s rules and regulations. Where are we on that? Jeff Gears: I will defer to the civil engineer who is with me tonight. Trevor Guys: Commissions, my name is Trevor Guys. I’m a civil engineer with Loucks. Aller: Welcome. Trevor Guys: And we have been working with Riley-Purgatory. We received their initial review comments and they had deemed us incomplete but gave us quite a bit of feedback. We have Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 7 since adjusted our design to go with more of an underground filtration system since there were spots in the site where the soils allowed that to happen so we adjust to do an underground infiltration system. We have addressed most of their comments and we have resubmitted. Aller: Do we have an idea when they expect a response back? Trevor Guys: I don’t, no. It’s been a week and a half though. Typically they’re around a 3 week review period so. Aller: Great. So why don’t you explain for the people that are present here and for myself included what that, what your plan process is to get rid of the water. Trevor Guys: So we are capturing runoff around the site with on site catch basins that’s going into a large diameter pipe that’s solid that wraps around the site. That helps reduce rates that the water’s going to run off the site and then after that it dumps into a secondary system that’s perforated so that allows even more water to percolate back into the soils underground and that would refeed that wetland and the pond coincidently. Aller: Okay. Any questions regarding environmental at this point? Tietz: No. We seem to be moving in that direction with a lot of projects in the city. It appears to be a good solution to work with stormwater. Aller: Alright. And then with regard to the wall, is there any runoff impact based upon the wall? Trevor Guys: So the nice thing with, well there’s parking above it which is a concern but the nice thing with that is we are capturing all the runoff that would potentially go at the wall and you might see some freeze thaw issues on other sites but we are taking that aware from the wall underground and remediating any issues that we might have with water infiltrating behind the wall. Aller: Great. Additional questions or comments? Commissioner Randall. Randall: …for the snow capture. Trevor Guys: So as Bob had mentioned we’re looking at the southeast corner. What I think ideally us and the client want to do is maybe look at regrading that to take that wall and bring it up north so it doesn’t extend so far and then we can open up that area to push snow and store in that Bluff Creek overlay district and it is our understanding that that is permitted in the city so that is our plan of attack. Aller: Alright any additional questions based on the application? Thank you very much. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 8 Trevor Guys: Thank you. Jeff Gears: Thank you. Aller: So my question before we open it up to the public hearing would be, what are your thoughts on the water runoff situation and the application that’s been, I assume we’ve got a copy of the new application. Strong: Yeah I haven’t had a chance honestly to fully review it. We have taken the policy at the moment that we try not to dual regulate so I’ve been following along with their process through Riley-Purgatory and then not duplicating that one. At the moment it’s not how unique for them to not make it through completion the first time around. They do have some challenges. There are some challenges with verifying that their connection to the city is a connection that they can make and the city system has that capacity to take it. They have to prove that. That’s not through the watershed district. That’s just through the City but that’s also pretty standard. They certainly have the land to do you know underground detention so it depends on how they design their system. We’ll see. Aller: Very good, thank you. And Mr. Bender, with regard to the wall and the, we obviously have the requirement that it be properly engineered. Based on your experience and review of the plans are we fairly comfortable with the fact that this can actually happen? Bender: I believe the wall certainly can be built in a safe manner. One thing that comes to my mind when I’m looking at something like that is, the same as Commissioner Tietz was referring to is, you know when you walk along that you know you might feel kind of like the ant below the skyscraper a little bit and you know making sure that when I’m walking along a trail like that that I don’t have anything that’s going to be coming off of it. You know blowing on top of me so they are proposing a fence along there. Another thing that comes to my mind is maybe that wall could be extended upwards a little bit so that it creates a little bit of a parapet to kind of catch things that could be blowing in the wind or you know that could be going over the wall so. Aller: Thank you. Commissioner Weick. Weick: Now that you’ve brought it up I guess. I assume there’s no space to split the wall like, to have it be offset. Bender: Terraced. Weick: Yeah. There’s just not enough space to do that with the parking spaces that are required right? Bender: We have had that conversation with the applicant. Trying to give appropriate advice as far as alternatives. That was one that we asked them to look at. Again the response was that you Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 9 know the site is viability of the site regarding parking and building size you know as taking priority versus terracing. Weick: Yeah. Bender: And trying to create a flat spot that would be less imposing. Weick: And for reference do we know roughly how, there’s some tall retaining walls at Bandimere. Do we know? Aanenson: Yeah and also the one that’s under construction right now at, on the other side at Lyman and 101. Weick: Yeah. Aanenson: Yeah going by that new subdivision. Weick: I mean roughly do we know? It’s okay if you don’t. Aanenson: They’re pretty tall. Weick: Yeah I was going to say. Aanenson: You can’t see somebody. It’s got to be 13-20 feet yeah. Weick: Yeah and I run along there so I would assume it’s going to be similar to that. Bender: It will feel open on the other side and so you know I mean I wouldn’t be surprised if people naturally kind of walk on the part that’s almost 12 feet away from the wall just you know so it isn’t as imposing so. Aller: Okay. Anything else from the commissioners at this point? If not we’ll open up the public hearing portion of this item. This again is an opportunity for an individual present to come forward. Speak either for or against an item before us. Anyone wishing to come forward? Seeing no one come forward I’m going to close the public hearing at this point and put it out for commissioner comments and action. Commissioner Weick. Weick: I thought the, you know there were some questions in the report that were answered well. I’m satisfied with the water runoff as well so I think it’s a good use on the land. Aller: Any other comments? Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 10 Tietz: We’re playing designer over here. If you, if as George indicated you step that wall and pushed it out and because as there’s as indicated there’s a ADA or accessibility issue with the grade of the path. If that step out was wide enough that that could that path or trail be on that mid-portion? Or is that not practical or is that a problem with the city ownership and maintenance and who knows what? Bender: Maybe I’ll try to respond to this. Aller: It’s not to scale. Bender: This portion of the trail right here, this is the wetland itself and this is the buffer and then the trail is squeezed between here and where kind of the top where the site starts. So there’s your design point that is creating you know the toughest spot. So for it to go further to the north it could do that along here but keep in mind that that are is dropping so when the trail needs to tie back in, you know the grades will have to increase to get back up to where it needs to meet here so they’d have to kind of look at that a little closer to see whether they could create any additional space by moving that trail along this area but you know it can’t really go any further to the northeast at this point. Tietz: Thanks. Aller: Any additional comments? Commissioner Weick. Weick: Every time you ask a question about the trail I think of something else so keep going. Where are people going now? Generous: There’s a connection off of 82nd and Century. Weick: Right. Here right? Generous: So yeah. It comes down in this corner. Wraps around this stormwater pond and then connects to there. Just to the south of… Weick: And then it dead ends? Generous: No, then it continues around the wetland complex. So what they’re, this is the last connection to bring it. Weick: Otherwise there’s an existing path then that goes along the back of the? Generous: Yes it goes right here. Weick: I mean there’s a way around this building. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 11 Bender: There are some people trails through that, you know people are just walking over land similar to a deer trail. They’re making their own path so. Generous: Which follows basically the alignment that this trail that’s proposed. Weick: Okay. Aller: Additional comments, questions? Otherwise I’ll entertain a motion. Commissioner Madsen. Madsen: I make a motion the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the site plan for a 54,600 square foot office warehouse and manufacturing building subject to the conditions of approval and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Weick: Second. Aller: Any further discussion or comments? I think it meets all the standard requirements and since we’re, as long as it does that we’re kind of obligated to go ahead and approve. I would suggest we approve and move it along to the City Council for action. I would only request that the City Council take to heart the comments that are made and I guess we’ll see what happens with the new Riley creek decision and how that comes down and to continue to explore any modifications that would be favorable for both safety as well as efficacy of the wall. Any other comments? Madsen moved, Weick seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council the site plan for a 54,600, two story building, plans prepared by Loucks and BDH & Young, dated 06-15-2018, subject to the following conditions: Building 1. Sheets C4.1 & C4.2 a. Utility notes 8 & 9. Sanitary sewer must be schedule 40. MPC table 701.1 b. Utility notes 11, 12 & 13. Minnesota rules 4715 is no longer the State plumbing code. Minnesota rules 4714 is the current code. Please change all references to 4714 along with the current code sections. 2. Submit details on the storm detention system. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 12 3. Retaining walls over 4 feet in heights require an engineered design. 4. Plans must be submitted by a design professional on the proposed structure. All design information should be included (i.e. exiting, code analysis, proposed occupancies and occupancies). Environmental Resources 1. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to add three bur oaks to the north property line native seed area. 2. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to add a row of shrubs for screening of the parking area along Century Blvd. The screening shall be a minimum of 3 feet tall at maturity. 3. The Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be shown on the site and landscape plans. 4. The applicant shall install Conservation Area signs at the edge of the Bluff Creek Overlay District at the north and south property lines and at the trail. The signs are available for purchase at the Chanhassen Public Works. Fire 1. Fire Lane No Parking areas for all the curbing except those directly adjacent to parking spaces will need to be painted yellow with NO PARKING FIRE LANE signs posted per city/fire code. Parks 1. The developer shall be responsible for planning, engineering, and constructing the “wetland trail.” Connection points for this new trail shall be the terminus of the Trotters Ridge trail, the intersection of Century Boulevard and West 82nd Street, and the intersection of Century Boulevard and Water Tower Place. Bid documents, including plans and specifications, shall be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to soliciting bids. Project bidding shall occur in a competitive environment with a minimum of three bids being received. The results of the bidding process shall be reviewed with the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to award. Cash payment for trail construction shall be made from the City of Chanhassen to the developer upon completion, inspection, and acceptance of the trail. 2. Trail easements within Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th shall be dedicated to the city to accommodate the “wetland trail”. Planning Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 13 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement and provide the security required by it prior to receiving a building permit. 2. Additional architectural articulation shall be provided for the second unit primary access. 3. Add bike racks as well as an outdoor seating/picnic area. 4. A separate sign permit application, review and approval shall be required prior to site sign installation. Water Resources and Engineering 1. The limits of the Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be identified throughout the plan set. 2. Show the western curb line along Century Boulevard and the crosswalk at Water Tower Place throughout the plan set. 3. Vacate drainage and utility easements except the standard 10 foot wide easement associated with the front of the parcel in addition to the standard 5 foot wide easement associated with the side and rear portions of the parcel. 4. The wetland, wetland buffer, and the Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be designated as Outlots. 5. Provide a permanent easement over the trail throughout the parcel. 6. Apply for an Encroachment Agreement for the private sidewalk. 7. Add detailed design for the retaining wall including a profile, proposed construction materials, and railing/fence. The trail is designed to be on the bottom side of a retaining wall that has portions of it detailed to be 17 feet in height. The safety of the users of the trail needs to be coordinated. 8. Consider adjustment of the site design to facilitate maintenance and snow removal. 9. Include a detail for tree protection. 10. Add note to protect the existing line of trees on the shared property with the parcel to the south. 11. Detail asphalt cut-out and replacement in the street to facilitate the installation of the concrete aprons. 12. Install ADA pedestrian ramp for trail crossing at Century Boulevard. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 14 13. Adjust curb radius design to meet city detail #5207 in association with the commercial entrances. A radius smaller than 20 feet may be appropriate for the shared property with the parcel to the south. 14. Adjust slope of the northern commercial entrance to meeting city detail #5207. 15. Replace any striping removed in Century Boulevard. 16. All parking stalls shall be 9 feet in width including handicapped stalls. 17. Add a radius to the trail where it connects to the existing bituminous trail to facilitate maintenance. Include additional tree removal area. 18. All striping and signage shall meet the requirements of the MN-MUTCD manual. 19. Indicate lineal slope design for the trail. 20. All disturbed areas require a minimum of 6 inches of topsoil and must meet decompaction requirements. 21. Salvage existing topsoil and indicate stockpile location. 22. Add inlet protection in the catch basins on the west side of Century Boulevard. 23. Add rock construction entrance at the southern commercial entrance. 24. Extend the silt fence installation as appropriate to protect from construction. 25. The patch for the watermain connection shall be the full width of Century Boulevard. 26. Detail 5302A is shown twice on the SWPPP plan sheet. 27. Utilize C900 PVC pipe for the water service pipe material in lieu of DIP. Fittings shall be epoxy coated. 28. Sanitary manhole detail #5101 requires the pipe connections to be sealed with a cored and sealed connection. The utility plan details a build over manhole for the sanitary service connection. Add notes identifying the pipe connection requirements. 29. Review sanitary design from a future maintenance and a cost perspective. Adding Sanitary manhole #1 approximately 35 feet to the south of an existing manhole is questionable. The sanitary service line could be routed directly to the existing manhole. The invert would need to be reconstructed and a cored and booted connection would be required. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 15 30. Applicant is permitted a connection to municipal stormdrain system after meeting treatment and discharge requirements of city and RPBCWD. Applicant is responsible for ensuring municipal system is capable of handling the additional capacity. 31. Applicant is responsible for any improvements necessary to the municipal system to meet capacity and regulatory requirements from the point of connection up to and including the outlet/receiving water body 32. Connection is not permitted in catchbasin. Must connect to storm main in Century Blvd. Include access manhole. Invert elevation in the manhole shall allow for 0.1 inches of fall through the structure. 33. Access MH missing from western most section of Contech structure. 34. Proprietary filtration devices should be used as pretreatment vs post treatment. 35. Identify snow storage location on plans. 36. Identify stockpile locations on plan. 37. Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) signs and locations are required on plans. Signs are required at each point the BCOD crosses the property boundary, every 100 feet, every point of deflection. 38. Include BCOD sign detail. 39. The proposed redevelopment will need Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) permits. 40. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure and submit proof that permits are received from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, MnDOT, Carver County, RPBCWD, Board of Water and Soil Resources, PCA, etc.). 41. Project will require stormwater management fees associated with city development review and permitting process. 42. The city is in agreement with the RPBCWD comments identified in the email dated June 26, 2018 titled ‘RPBCWD Permit 2018-43: Control Concepts – Initial Completeness Review Comments.’ With one exception: J10 – the city requests applicant provide additional performance monitoring field data to support manufacturers removal estimates. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 16 Aller: Second item before us tonight is the review of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. This matter has been before us throughout the year. We took it section by section. It’s been on the website and there have been meetings where this has been discussed. The current form has been provided and again is on the website for review. I don’t think it will take too long to move through the sections and maybe highlight the sections and the purpose of this hearing is to again take public comment on the matter before us and forward it to the City Council for final action. So at this time we’ll take that matter up. Generous: Thank you Chairman Aller, commissioners. As you stated we’ve had numerous opportunities to review this plan. We’ve had at least 8 meetings in this chamber regarding it. There were 2 open houses that the City had. We also went out to last year’s 4th of July celebration. Had a little kiosk and the Feb Festival to try to get people’s comments and interest in this document. The Comprehensive Plan provides a guide for the future development of the city. We look at as the build out plan for the community. What the land uses would be approximately and it provides the goals and policies to reaching that buildout. We anticipate that we will be fully developed by 2040. The Comprehensive Plan contains 10 chapters. The first one is an introduction which expresses the City’s vision for itself as well as we’ve incorporated all the goals and policies from all the chapters in the Comprehensive Plan right up front so people could know what our vision is and how we intend to get there. The second chapter is our land use. There were some changes that were made based on comments that we received from the review agencies. Down in the Minnesota River valley there are some wildlife refuges that were shown as agricultural land uses. We’ve not re-guided them for parks and open spaces which is what they really are and there’s no misunderstanding about what the future holds for that. The City did also, we have a 1.9 acre parcel of land off of Powers Boulevard in the northern part of the city that we’re preserving as permanent open space. People see it on the land use plan as low density residential and they want to develop it for us and so we’re taking that out also so. We do as part of the land use element there were 3 requests for land use amendments. We provided all the information in the report from what they presented in our analysis. At the present time we are not recommending that any of those amendments be adopted for the individual properties. They would have an opportunity when they came in for development to request either land use amendments or changes in the zoning and so we believe that would be the appropriate time for that to happen. Again as part of our review of this we, our GIS system has gotten better. We picked up 40 acres of land as part of our analysis. However we de-annexed 5 acres of that with Cathcart Park and that’s now in the city of Shorewood so that’s why some of the numbers have changed. The total numbers have changed over time but it’s better geographic information system analysis. As part of the housing plan we’ve looked at the, how the city’s going to meet the diversity of housing that we have in here. We’ve done our analysis for the multi-family land that say there is sufficient land available to meet Met Council targets for the community to provide housing that is affordable or work force type housing. We also discuss the different strategies that are involved in providing that type of opportunity and we acknowledges when we would use those tools and when we would not use them. Natural resources. The only change we had was about the solar, we clarified the goal on solar. We want to provide the opportunity for people to do it and in fact our ordinance does permit it already so. The City’s biggest thing is preserving our water resources and preservation of trees and diversifying our tree canopy because the rule of not having any one species dominate our Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 17 community because of insects coming in. Parks and trails. That we just adopted, it’s long term the City’s need for facilities that people want and it provides analysis of initiatives that the City will be undertaking in the future. Under transportation we had to expand that to show where the freight is moving. Where the trucks are actually moving on that so we got that information from Carver County as well as expansion of the light rail or the transit opportunities in the community. We showed where the park and ride lots are. There’s only 2 in the city but there are some in Chaska. Victoria’s looking at one and then Eden Prairie is the main hub for Southwest Transit. We want to provide transportation, we went through all our deficient roadways in here. We have a system classification that has a hierarchy of roadways and based on that hierarchy the city also reviews it as part of any development to preserve it’s transportation capacities. The sewer chapter looks at providing sewer to the community. Again we long term we believe that we can service everyone and our plan shows that we can do it. We provide a staging plan. Our preference is to use existing facilities rather than expanding new facilities but we show how they can be expanded and what the sizes would generally be. It has a general staging plan. There are several critical facilities that need to be constructed for the rest of the community to develop. There’s several lift stations south of 212 that need to go in before we can develop the southern part of the community. A water, we know that we need one more storage facility of approximately a million gallons and then we’ll need 4 more wells and then we should be able to supply sufficient water to service our buildout numbers. I should go back as part of the transportation element we did make all our numbers consistent this time so that each chapter has the same number. As part of our negotiations with the Met Council we were able to up our final employment numbers by about 1,400 in 2040 so they agreed with our analysis and that the total way we wanted to go but they were moving to show that we can accommodate that with our land uses. Surface water management, I’ll have Vanessa talk to you on that. And then finally in Chapter 10 is the capital improvements. That’s just a snapshot right now of what we would need over the next 10 years to implement portions of the Comprehensive Plan. Aanenson: If I may. Aller: Yes Kate. Aanenson: Planning Commission members. So our goal here tonight, because you’ve reviewed each of these and then your most recently your April 3rd we went through all this so we had jurisdictional comments which means we already had a public hearing on this whole document. This is for anybody that may be listening. And then we got feedback from the Met Council and all the other jurisdictions which would mean the DNR, surrounding communities, to making sure we’re consistent and we had some of our graphics were a little bit truncated in the publication so all those have been remedied and so this is the second public hearing, just incorporating those as Mr. Generous has gone through. So the biggest component that we were still working through, which was very complex is the four watershed districts. Making sure how with the new regs that we’re aligned with all those so Vanessa’s been working very hard on making sure that’s all consistent so that’s the biggest part of the public, we expect of the public hearing tonight. I know Mr. Erhart’s here to still talk about the land use request that he has in place so I’m sure he’ll comment during the public hearing process but I’d like to maybe give a little bit more time to Vanessa just to explain too kind of how we worked or she worked to get all that through and into the chapter for the surface water. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 18 Aller: Thank you and as an additional comment this is really a dual purpose chapter because for our permitting we have to have this completed and we’ve been behind the 8 ball on that for a little bit of a while now and so it’s great that we’re coming forward and we’re catching up with all our requirements for the NPDES and other permits so please let us know what we’re doing in Chapter 9. Strong: Thank you. So as Kate mentioned this is a chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. It also has it’s own rules and regulations under Minnesota Statute 103B and it’s own requirement for review and comment which means I have to send this to the 4 watershed districts as well as Met Council for approval. Since that time, after a 60 day comment period we received all of our comments back from the watershed districts. They were all very positive in we received 3 approvals with conditions. Now these of course as you know conditions can be extensive but as in Minnehaha Creek watershed district we received an incomplete and that was primarily because their plan was actually approved while our’s was out for comment. There was an overlap with that. At this point you know this version is not 30 percent bigger to have addressed all of those comments. It might not look that way but each watershed organization kind of had it’s own comments and requirements that must be included in the plan. The City wanted to take on the role of being a single stop shop so in addition to just meeting state requirements we absolutely must address everything the watershed district has asked for in order to take back that regulatory role that would improve the development process for our residents and property owners so some of these are specifically to allow us to have that role. The other issue of course which is not something that necessarily is addressed by the watershed districts is we do have an older infrastructure. We have a lot of ponds and a lot of pipe and how do we take care of that and how do we maintain that when you know there, we have over 300 ponds. Over 500 wetlands. We have 12 lakes. We are a very water rich city and that’s a lot of benefit but it’s also something you need to balance with wanting to be a very lean and responsible city so that was another issue that we’ve kind of had to address on our own. So just to give you a surface view of kind of what we covered in this update. This comment response update. So as I said each watershed district had it’s own comments and requirements that must be addressed in the plan and they must be included in the plan. Many of these requirements and most of them involve the adoption of their strategies, standards, goals and capital improvement projects. A lot of this was including their language verbatim. They’re reflected either in the plan narrative, policies or in the implementation plan. Each watershed district did have it’s own unique focus. They are all different and so they all have their own way of looking at ways that are important to them. Lower Minnesota River, many of you might assume and it would be true that they focus a lot on the river bluff standards. Unique and natural resources and features, native protection of wetlands and native areas. The Carver County WMO really wanted more focus on education and wetland and ground water protection. That was kind of their focus. Riley-Purgatory was very technical focused as well as including research studies and standards in their specific technical language that they want to make sure are included. Minnehaha Creek watershed district, their new plan if you hadn’t had a chance to read it is very interesting and it’s a good read. They really want to incorporate planning. They’re very progressive about planning now and wanting to add value into the city’s planning process and where they can come in and best fit. Help best assist the city and best work with the city. As well as then of course they were very focused on understanding our inventories and what our procedures were for implementing our surface water Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 19 management plan so, and then each one had it’s own capital improvement project and policies as well and standards so that’s kind of the big overview of that additional 30 percent. Aller: Great thank you. And so my follow up question would be, as a homeowner, a business person or a developer when I come in where you use the term one stop shop. Just what would be an overview of that process if I wanted to come in and do something with my property and it involved this chapter? Strong: So for example Control Concepts. When they were in here they would have to come in through the City. They have to apply through the City. You know we are required to have our own requirements but then they also then have to go through the watershed districts and that process as well and so they’re running a dual process which seems burdensome to many people and I can understand that so in the future they would just come to the city. They still have to follow the same rules and requirements but they don’t have to go through two agencies to do that now. They just go to one place. Aller: Alright, and so if a homeowner or business person or a developer wants to know what our guidance on that is they can come in and they look at this book now and they can see that, along with that process these are the guidelines and our goals with regard to what we want to do. Strong: Yep and the watershed districts will always be there as technical reference and also as a resource as well. They’re not going anywhere and they’re still the… Aller: Thank you. Any additional questions? Aanenson: I was just going to add one more comment before you open up the public hearing. So with the Comprehensive Plan there’s going to be some follow up implementation things so you’ll be seeing some ordinance changes too and maybe some of the wetland buffers. It may be some of the, yeah and surface water but there might be also too some in the code alignment too so those will all require public hearings too so there’ll be plenty of opportunities to comment on those too but as part of the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan we have a timeline to go through to get some of those in place. Again going back to the one stop shop. We used to do it that way and it’s burdensome for the developers and for residents when you’re bouncing between the two. Especially if you have to place security. Often you have to place security in both places which is very onerous, especially for homeowners so trying to reconcile that. Aller: Okay, thank you. Commissioner Weick. Weick: Are we open to questions about any of this? Can I ask? Generous: Yes. Aanenson: Sure. Weick: And this is specific to Section 8 on water. I recall having good conversations about not just being able to supply the amount of water that we think we need to supply but also incentive Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 20 programs potentially to conserve and encourage homeowners to use less. Is this the, in the future is this the appropriate document to start? Aanenson: That’s correct and those will be some of the implementation strategies. Weick: Yeah. Aanenson: But they look at as part of you have to show what your, how much water are you using. There’s reduction requirements so those will be some of the things. Right now we do Water Wise. We have a tiered system on our utility so those will be some of the things that we may be revisiting. Weick: Okay, thank you. Aller: And of course there’s crossover to just about every chapter here so we’ll be hitting that with the education process as well and that’s required so, yes. Strong: We do also address in the surface water re-evaluating our credit system to allow for more of those opportunities as well because again our credit system for that type of thing is, was written in 2006 so. Weick: Thank you. Aller: Okay. Nothing further from the commissioners at this point in time I’ll open up the public hearing portion of this particular item. So any individual wishing to come forward and speak either for or against or comment on the proposed 2040 plan. Seeing no one come forward I’ll close the public hearing and remind all of you present and at home that these items can be found on the city’s website for your review and that you can follow this item for action with the City Council when it moves forward. I’ll entertain a motion. Weick: I’ll propose a motion. Aller: Thank you Commissioner Weick. Weick: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and submit the plan to the Metropolitan Council for their determination of consistency with the Metropolitan System Plans. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Randall: Second. Aller: I have a valid motion and a second. Any further discussion or comment? Weick moved, Randall seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and submit the plan to the Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 21 Metropolitan Council for their determination of consistency with the Metropolitan System Plans. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. Aanenson: Chairman just for anybody that’s following this we will go at a work session at the next City Council meeting which is August 13th. At that meeting we’ll go through the changes in a little bit more detail and so then it will be on for a later date for the adoption so there’s an opportunity for kind of a work session with the City Council. Aller: Great, thank you. GALPIN PROPERTY: PUD CONCEPT REVIEW. Aller: Moving onto new business. We have the item for Galpin Property which is a PUD concept review. Again the City Council and the City had a process in place back around 2012 which was modified to allow for this concept review type of process. You can come before the administrative review on smaller different projects or for the larger projects like this one you come before the Planning Commission to give a broader perspective and the developer receives input and direction before making further decisions on how it’s going to move forward and the Planning Commission prefers it to be a less formal process which allows for all of you to have input at this type of concept hearing. With that we’ll go ahead and have the matter heard. Aanenson: Thank you Chairman, members of the Planning Commission. This is a concept review, PUD review. Applicant U.S. Homes doing business as Lennar. Again the work session here, excuse me the conceptual review here tonight and then the City Council will review it on August 13. As you stated the concept review is not a public hearing but is the intent to get public comment because the goal for this is to allow the developer to hear the comments from the residents in order to see how they want to advance the project. So with that I’ll give a little bit of the background. So the property as was listed by Comerica Bank who is the trustee for the estate of P.R. Nelson and Paisley Park Enterprises worked with a local broker and put this on the market and Lennar was the property developer selected for the site. So what we’ve included here is all of the property which is 188.58 acres and it is guided low density. Low density is the in the city is the largest zoning district we have in the city. It’s about 32 percent of the city so that’s a majority of the city. Within the low density district there’s a lot of different zoning applications that you can use as long as it stays within the 1.2 to 4 units an acre. So that’s kind of how we got to this point. So quite a frameworks that we looked at and when we sat down with Lennar, when they introduced themselves as the developer of the property and I’m going to kind of go through those framework issues on how we got to this proposed development. So the park master plan which is currently in place, while it’s also been reiterated in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan it’s currently in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan so the park master plan around and it’s intentions around Lake Ann certainly was a major factor in how the project got laid out. The second is that there’s a Met Council sewer line that runs through it. It’s actually a large interceptor line that runs through the property. There’s significant natural features. Wetlands and in addition to that some forest, heavily forested areas which we’ll talk about and in addition the county is working on the upgrade of Galpin Boulevard and there’s been neighborhood meetings on that so all those factors come into play on how this property could be developed. So the first thing I’d like to talk about is the park master plan. As you can see on this Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 22 proposal here, this area here is, well here’s the park right here. It’s the City’s intention as this trail goes around is to continue that trail all the way around and ultimately when the property, the Gorra property comes in for development that would be the continuation of that so this wooded area here would be preserved in perpetuity and that’s been on the plan. The other plan would be the connection of these trails. In addition to that a trail connection that would tie into Galpin and that connection touchdown point is being in consideration with the upgrade and redesign of Galpin Boulevard. In the staff report I went through and talked about the surrounding properties that are neighboring this site. So the property to the south, the Gorra property actually has a couple different zoning districts in there and that’s this property down in this area here so they have some low density. Some medium density. And also some high density so there’s a potential for quite a few units there in the southern part. Otherwise the rest of this property is guided for, and maybe I can go back to this map. So this is the Gorra property and then you have a couple of different subdivisions. Majestic Way. The Brinker and then Ashling Meadows and the Lucy Ridge area and then the Longacres on the west side. So the Rottlund piece to the south is probably similar to what you’d see on this side so you’ve got some attached product there. Some smaller patio homes and then they transition into the two subdivisions to the north here. So back to the park issue. So this area right here where the interceptor runs through is a large wetland. Typically the sewer lines follow the low land in the city so with that this would be a preservation area. So that was kind of a beginning of the genesis of some of the discussions. In addition to this, this is currently in the Comprehensive Plan shows in addition the expansion of the Lake Ann trail has always been the goal and then tying that somewhere into Galpin. Again that would be worked into the subdivision design itself. So this is part of the new 2017 or going into the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Again this revisiting, reaffirming that decision to connecting that so there would be no homes inbetween Lake Lucy and Lake Ann. That would just be a trail and then a bridge crossing over the creek there connecting those two. So that’s one of the driving issues of the potential layout. In addition to that wetland delineation was done on the property so as a part of this development they will have to go through any filling of wetlands still has to go through the wetland process which we do not, we have the jurisdiction over that but they have to show and demonstrate going through all the steps and that’s still a permitting process that has to work but in order to understand the property itself, looking at the site, that was done. The delineation of the wetland and also for the potential buyer to understand how much property was upland. I failed to mention on the first section there are some other issues that were driving this factor. There is two pieces of property. One is owned by the City. That’s a well station. Then there’s also another piece of property that a little under 3 acres that’s also not included in this. Otherwise it encompasses that entire area. So back over to this side over here. You can see the comments that were attached then there. The watershed district, DNR, Board of Soil and Water Resources liked the fact that this area would be intended for preservation. So this is the forest cover. So in looking at that, that was another issue that we felt certainly drove the factor of preservation of this area over here so you can see there’s a an oak, maple overstory and then there’s maple overstory with some buckthorn underneath here so everything in this area including the low end hardwoods in this area would also be preserved in this area here. So some of these trees up in this area, when we look at the development scenario, some of those trees would be removed. Our tree ordinance allows for tree removal. If you looked at historical photos of the, for example The Woods at Longacres. There was a lot of woods in there and then also to the north. Some of these areas also had woods in there that were removed so what we do is say if you take all the trees out then you’re heavily penalized. Our Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 23 goal would be to try to create some buffers along the subdivisions to the south and around some of the adjacent properties at some of those trees preservation. There’s a significant grade change from the north to the south right here and some of those are minor bluffs. I know one of the other issues that were included in your, the email packets which you, I had shared with the Planning Commission was the connection of the streets. All these stub streets to the south were intended to in some way in the future tie into development. That’s how they get access to those parcels because this piece of property would most likely be landlocked if not providing those so that’s something we needed a little bit more information and I’ll talk about that in some of the proposals. But looking at the wetland and forest then, if all this is preserved they would still have to do the individual landscaping per lot. We require certain amount of trees per lot and the like so those were the framework issues that when we met with Lennar to tell them these are the things that they need to take into consideration how they make their subdivision work. So they brought in, showed us a traditional residential single family and as you know if a residential single family meets all the requirements of zoning districts then, and goes through the permitting process for the wetlands and the like then that would be one that you could permit but there’s also other zoning districts within the low density. One would be the RLM which we’ve done on the other side of Galpin. The most recent is, the name of that one escapes me. It’s under construction right now. The extension. Generous: Fawn Hill. Aanenson: Thank you, Fawn Hill. That one’s under construction. That’s an RLM subdivision and the PUD. The PUD, to get the PUD you have to dedicate additional or a significant amount of upland in order to get the, that zoning designation. Twin homes are also permitted in a low density zoning district and those are permitted by right. As are the residential single family so this, I had this wrong in my staff report. There was 202 units could be permitted on here. Again this is a conceptual drawing so we don’t know all the wetland permitting. If that affects anything. If all the lots work. All the street grades work. There’s a lot of information that still needs to be generated but this is the conceptual, the direction that they’re moving. So again this plan, you can see it on the aerials here, some of their intentions here and these were some of the road connections. Still would have to meet all the requirements but it doesn’t meet the requirements of the City’s desire to, and the park commission did look at this, to preserve this area as a open space. So everybody on this side could benefit from that. So the developer came back with the PUD concept so that provides 3 different types of lot sizes within that district which are permitted under the PUD. Dedicates a significant amount of open space so within that the transition to the north would be similar lot sizes as is in Ashling Meadows. Again Lennar did the Ashling Meadow project and then to the south. Again our concern here on that south side too is some of the tree preservation creating a buffer along that. In addition with the upgrade of Galpin Boulevard they’ll be dedicating an additional 1 acre for the widening of that road so the timing of that road would be after this project. I believe the County’s got that scheduled for 2021 and so that project would be done after this project is completed so not all of this development goes north and not all of the, from the north goes south so this is a separate kind of a development or neighborhood than would be to the south so this is the developer’s and the City’s preferred concept meeting some of the overriding goals so here it is with the aerial to give you a better idea of some of the issues regarding the tree preservation and the like. One of the other goals that we talked about is, and we talk about some of the, we have a lot of two story Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 24 homes in the city. Again it’s our predominant land use. Some of the older parts of town, maybe some ramblers. We like to see a mix of some other types of homes in the city and so we did ask them to provide a mix of different types of housing. You saw in the packet what they, their models. What they’re looking at for different types of housing so that would be something. Again this is all conceptual. Some direction of that, they are pursuing so those were included in the packet and to give you some idea. I also included some of the letters from the other jurisdictions that we got and, because we did send it out for comments so they would be apprised of any red flags that would be coming forward so with that we’re asking that you give open to take public comment and I think the best way to respond is maybe let the developer make a presentation and then if people want to make comments then we would just forward those comments onto the City Council. I’m not sure it’s at this point that we can refute or you know have a dialogue with all them but just listen to those comments and the developer can hear those too. With that I’d be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Aller: Any questions at this time from the commissioners? Commissioner Madsen. Madsen: There’s a section in the water resources comments that addresses lot coverage and this has been an issue that’s come up a lot that we’ve seen lately. The proposed coverage is 25 percent in the shoreland overlay district and 35 percent in the other lots and they’re, however they’re wondering if we could, the developer should limit it to 20 percent and 30 percent respectively for those areas. Can that be limited so that it would provide enough room so a homeowner could add a patio and not be outside their lot coverage? Aanenson: Well that was the goal of preserving all this is it allows you, you’re creating a greater preservation area by not allowing any development on here. This line right here is the shoreland overlay district line so most of those lots are already the 15,000 which is standard. I mean that’s what the big, our traditional lot we have in the city so those are the lots that it would be impacting. So how we traditionally do it too, when we do the RLM we give them a higher percentage because they’re actually benefitting from the preservation of a larger area, if that makes sense. So that would kind of turn it on it’s head. It wouldn’t be the benefit that the developer would want to pursue by making it more restrictive if that makes sense yeah. Madsen: Okay because they have the benefit of the open area. Aanenson: That’s correct and that’s why they would be willing to do that correct. Madsen: Okay, thank you. Strong: If I might add. If you might recall the conversation around pervious pavers and the council’s, the Commissioners concerns about new developments coming in and building up to their lot coverage as they come in the door and this, that comment was specifically in consideration of that concern. That was why I put it in there. I wanted that to be something that was thought of in advance with this one because of your concerns from the previous. Aller: Great, so I’ll just ask really quickly to set a little bit of foundation here. The preservation of the area around the lakes was something that was guided by the 2030 plan. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 25 Aanenson: That’s correct. Aller: As well as the preference that we would continue the trail around. Aanenson: That’s correct. Aller: And the 2030 plan, even before the 2030 plan but in general we are guided not to upzone until a project is actually there so we look at parcels preferably on a parcel by parcel basis or a project by project basis as it comes forward to maintain that overall guidance that’s in the plan, whether it be the 2030 or in the future the 2040. Aanenson: Let me answer that a couple different ways. So it’s consistent, it’s still low density. It’s just, it’s taking the opportunity for preservation and taking that green space and attributing that to some of the individual lots that they’re all getting the benefit of that. Also we believe in it, if you look at what, and we’ve been up there next to Avienda where we preserved that large area of Bluff Creek. Those are all smaller lots up there. A lot of those are the RLM because they’re all benefitting from the trails and the preservation that we have around the Bluff Creek corridor. So this is a similar situation around a unique feature in the city. Our premiere park around the city so it’s the City’s belief that all those lots will be benefitting from the opportunity not to have their, you know to be able to walk around the trail and enjoy that benefit as opposed to similar to what we did with Foxwood. That’s also an RLM. The City has all the woods that we acquired behind that and there’s trails through there. Similar situation so they benefit being able to have access to all those opportunities and in trade off for that they, what we allow them for dedicating that to do somewhat smaller lots. It’s still consistent with the 1.2 to 4 units an acre. Aller: And we’ve done it many times before with the trade off in density so we would allow for another feature to be maintained or created whether it be a park area or additional wetland protection and then we traded with the density so that we were able to get those benefits. Aanenson: That’s correct and that’s one of the criteria to get the RLM or the PUD to dedicate a significant amount of upland or usable area, something like that. Aller: Great. Commissioner Weick. Weick: Is it accurate to say though when we say low density zoning options of 1.2 to 4 units per acre as averaged across the development? I mean that’s a more accurate statement. Aanenson: Correct, yes. Weick: Because my issue when I read it is, I assume that means everything sits on at least a quarter of an acre. Aanenson: No. No. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 26 Weick: And that’s not what it says. Aanenson: No. No that’s not what it says. We would never apply it that way. Weick: I understand that. Aanenson: Yep. No it’s a good question. Weick: Because the reality is less than 25 percent of the home actually are on that size lot and I understand the reason why. I understand. Aanenson: Yep. Weick: I just want to make sure. Aanenson: Yeah exactly. The same with Foxwood. The same with Pioneer Pass. Those are all RLM. Those are…so the way we used to do the PUD probably 5-6 years ago was we had this one key average that you could go. If you look at how Longacres was, the smallest lot could be 11,000 but then they made one or two lots really big and then it skewed everything so we said there’s not an average. The goal is to have a great development so and that’s what…make it a good development. Weick: Okay. Audience: Excuse me, would I be out of line to ask you to please use your microphone because I’m not able to hear very well. Thank you. Aller: Absolutely not out of line, thank you. Tietz: Kate is the, to follow up on Steve’s. Is that 1.2 to 4 units per acre based upon developable acreage or total site acreage? Aanenson: It’s upland acreage yeah. Tietz: So all the wetlands, so essentially you’re saying the 88 acres is what, is the base then? Aanenson: Well anything that’s wetland, yeah and if you look at their map that’s how they took all that out too. Tietz: But that does take out the shoreland property on Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. To get the 88 acres that’s developable. Aanenson: Well you could, if you could put a larger lot on there yes. If you could meet the setbacks. Maybe. Tietz: Yeah I’m just wondering how they established the maximum. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 27 Aanenson: Taking out the wetlands. Yes. And our ordinance also says you can’t build on a bluff so anything that’s on a bluff. Tietz: Okay, because you don’t have to develop to the maximum. There’s no criteria that says that because the codes and the land use ordinances allow you to build to a certain level that you as a developer or we as the City have to allow that to occur. Aanenson: Absolutely. They could build an RSF zoning district. Sure they could plat the whole thing as, they could do that one sure. Aller: Great. Hearing no additional comments or questions at this time from the commissioners I will open the public hearing. Aanenson: Do you want to let the developer? Aller: Oh the developer would have the chance. Okay. If the developer would come forward and tell us your name, your representational capacity and then tell us about your project. Joe Jablonski: Good evening Mr. Chair, members of the commission. My name is Joe Jablonski representing Lennar this evening as the applicant. Appreciate staff’s thorough introduction. I just wanted to fairly briefly go through a little bit more detail and let you know that I’m here to listen, learn and also to answer any questions that you have that I can respond to. Do you have the ability to put the overall? Aanenson: Yes, absolutely. Joe Jablonski: So this is the concept that we had submitted that we’ve talked probably the most about at this point and a few things that I wanted to add just to show that we have provided a couple of trail connections into the park area. There is one shown through here. To the north neighborhood. That was part of the park Comprehensive Plan to show a connection up through that trail system as well as a trail that kind of meanders through here. Again this is a fairly high level concept plan review. We haven’t done a whole lot of engineering. We’re really trying to get feedback on you know what the City’s desires are for the property. We’ve met with staff several times but now kind of getting it into the process and learning what the feedback and the intentions. That’s why we submitted two different plans. It shows and demonstrates two different ways that it can be developed but it’s really up to you folks to help give us some feedback and support on which one you desire so that we can take that information and process it and feel how the best way for us to move forward is so with that a couple of the other things. There was housing types included in your packet. We did kind of break this up a little bit. We show larger home sites up here. These are 90 foot. These are conforming with the RS-1 standards that would match the existing neighborhoods to the north. The central area would be 65 foot wide lots. A little bit smaller maintaining a 2,200 to 3,400 square foot house plus the ability to finish basements so you’re still talking about fairly large houses. We have done this particular product type successfully fairly recently in Boulder. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 28 Aller: Cove. Joe Jablonski: Boulder Cove, yes thank you. And Reflections at Lake Riley and we did some of those size home sites as well in Camden Ridge. In all 3 scenarios they were very well received and we hope to continue that. In the south portion here, this is where we concentrated our villa lifestyle type lots. In the packet you have some of the sample plans. That would be a single story maintenance free type of housing opportunity. I did see in the City’s Comprehensive Plan 2030 that the housing portion of the plan does call out the need for a variety of housing types and a desire to provide housing for all types of life cycles so I think through some direction and guidance from staff we did want to make sure we included that type of housing. Not only for the City’s benefit but it also is an under served market that we recognize is important to provide housing for as well. The other plan, you know we went through, the City did get feedback from a number of jurisdictions from the Board of Water Resources, Riley-Purgatory creek, engineering and it does seem that because of the preservation opportunity a lot of them are favorable to this plan. But again I’m here tonight to listen to the comments. Get the feedback and take that from what we can do moving forward from here so with that I’ll keep my presentation short. I’m happy to answer any questions but I know there’s a lot of people here interested in speaking this evening. Aller: Anybody have any questions immediately? Okay, thank you. Joe Jablonski: Thanks. Aller: So the way I’d like to proceed is, I would love to ask you to listen to the comments of the community as they come forward. Maybe take some notes. To the extent that you can respond once the hearing is going to be closed, maybe we could have you come back and respond to some of them to the extent again that you can. The purpose of this hearing is to have the community, let you know how they feel about the project and the proposal and then move all those comments up to the City Council so both the public and you would have the opportunity to forward additional comments to the City for review at that time. Joe Jablonski: Very good. Aller: Thank you. Okay we’ll open up the public hearing portion of the item. Aanenson: If I may. Aller: Yep. Aanenson: Legally it’s not a public hearing. Aller: Oh I’m sorry it’s a concept. Aanenson: Public comment. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 29 Aller: Comment. Thank you. So we’ll open up the matter for comment. Any individual wishing to come forward, if you could please do so. State your name and address for the record and then let us know what your opinions of the project. Jon Hebeisen: Can you hear me on this mic? Okay. Good evening. My name is Jon Hebeisen. I live at 2150 Majestic Way. It’s on the south end of the proposed development. Just got a few points I want to throw out. I’ve got some notes here. I guess my threshold question is, I’ve read the materials and I’m wondering why or if two proposals are an either or. Lennar bought this property. They’ve got to make money. Here’s your choices. Everybody likes a park. Who doesn’t want a park? Everyone’s going to want that. What’s the cost of the park? Well we’re going to jam 200 houses into the small part of this property because the underlying premise is Lennar bought this property and they have to make money and I’m rejecting that premise. They bought the property just as I bought mine. There were rules in place when I bought mine. There’s rules in place when they bought their’s. One that comes to mind very obviously is the square footage of the property lots. Obviously I saw them on the south and I don’t know if it’s possible to put the picture up there again. Look on the south left there, yeah. That’s where they are. City ordinance that I buy, that I bought into requires 9,000 square feet. These are 6. That’s not a very, that’s a evisceration of any kind of an ordinance. But we’re going to get a park. On the backs of the people that have the bigger lots that we’ve paid for and pay taxes on for decades. Second of all I question the wetlands. I’ve lived there 16 years. My children and I frankly have trespassed on Prince’s land for almost all those years. Not anymore. There’s a sign up. I don’t anymore. It is wet. We’ve seen the flags that the engineering company or the surveyor came in and did. He actually came to our house to get permission to trespass on our land, which we gave him. They do not accurately reflect the wetlands. We took some pictures this spring. We’ve got ducks. Mallards, wood ducks. Their little orange flags, the wetlands go far beyond what is being depicted as the accurate wetlands and that concerns me because frankly in the spring myself and several neighbors we do get some water because we abut wetlands. If you allow development on this area, and if you call their wetlands what the flags say, where’s that water going to go? You’ve got a pretty good idea. Next I guess I’ll have a question that I’d like to address on through if possible. I haven’t heard or read anything about what the intent is for the buffer. Is it going to be a fence? Is it going to be raised land buffer? A berm. Tree planting. I’d be interested in knowing what that is. And finally many of my neighbors are here but many are not and I’m just curious are there any requirements as to some kind of notice being mailed out to people who are affected by this? Because I didn’t get anything. What’s the requirements and what was done? Aanenson: There’s an affidavit of notice. Everyone within 500 feet. There’s an affidavit that’s a part of the staff report so. Jon Hebeisen: Could I see that? Let me ask, does it list who they were sent to? Aller: There should be a name and address list on there. In the report. Jon Hebeisen: The whole south side, the people that are really getting the screws put to them here, our address is Majestic Way. How many Majestic Way people received that notice? Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 30 Aanenson: I don’t see any. Jon Hebeisen: How many? Aanenson: I do not see any on the list. Jon Hebeisen: None of us. Is that a problem? Is that a problem that you didn’t give notice to the people really getting screws put to them here? I think it is. I appreciate your time. Aller: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to come forward? Dake Chatfield: Hello, my name is Dake Chatfield. I live at 2200 Majestic Way. Two houses down from Jon. My house is kind of at the crossroads of what I kind of call ground zero of this big construction project that’s coming up and then the Galpin Boulevard improvements that are going to be made so we’re going to have significant construction going on two sides of our property so it’s quite an impact to my area. I mostly echo a lot of the comments that Jon said. I agree with what he was talking about. With the buffer zone, I don’t quite understand how that’s going to work. You can see that it looks like there’s many 25 foot setback. That’s not very large and where we butt up to the new construction area there’s a significant forest area so it seems like most of that would have to be clear cut to accommodate these properties. So I guess my question or recommendation would be if we could get a bigger buffer. Maybe try to preserve some of that forest to the north of Majestic Way there. That would be ideal. And then I also question some of the wetlands as well that Jon mentioned. I know the one just north of my house is a pretty significant wetland. I’ve noticed you know there’s geese and ducks and turtles and you know it’s a big pond and when I look at the map here it looks like the road and two properties just go right over that pond so I don’t know if we’re okay to just fill in all these wetlands. That seems like an environmental impact that we want to consider as a community. That’s primarily all I had to say. Aller: Thank you sir. Our next individual coming forward from the. Angelo Galioto: Hi Angelo Galioto at 1805 Emerald Lane and I’m in the Lucy Ridge neighborhood on the north part of the development. Aller: Welcome. Angelo Galioto: And I’ll echo what these two men said about the overall density. It’s a travesty. I mean this is going to be disaster but I want to add too, two more things that greatly concern me. We’re trying to I heard here preserve Lake Lucy, Lake Ann and the ability for all of us residents to enjoy it and I have grave fear that if we move through with this based off of minimal 4 housing development that went on Lake Lucy Road and how it impacted Lake Lucy. If you put 200 homes in there or even 150 homes or whatever the number is you’re going to destroy Lake Lucy and that’s going to go right to Lake Ann and you’re going to destroy Lake Ann and everything we’re trying to do to preserve, and I know we have these perspective I guess water quality surveys et cetera. It’s gone. It’s a beautiful lake Lake Ann and we can’t do that. The second thing, maybe it’s specific to my neighborhood. I don’t think it is but in the northern part Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 31 we have significant traffic concerns. Right now we have cars racing through our neighborhood that, you know with the few houses we have it’s bad. If you add 40 houses in that neighborhood with what we have and what we see in the way cars race through there with you know people avoiding stop signs in general. I’m thinking of the kids. I’m thinking of the overall safety. I’m thinking of the nuisance. And I really think you should give hard thought before approving something like this. Thank you. Kris Lenk: Hi my name is Kris Lenk and I live at 6895 Lucy Ridge Lane which is in the northern part and I oppose the current development concept because I have concerns also about making Lucy Ridge Lane a through street. The traffic flow on Lucy Ridge Lane would significantly increase due to the proposed number of houses to be built raising my concerns around traffic safety. We currently get a lot of traffic from our neighbors in Ashling Meadows and many don’t even stop at the stop sign coming into Lucy Ridge Lane or cars come extremely fast down the hill approaching Lake Lucy Road. I can only imagine what will happen with the additional homes. I also worry about the years of construction traffic coming through our neighborhood as there are still young kids in the neighborhood. I’d like to see the entrance of this development come off of Galpin versus making Lucy Ridge Lane a through street. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. John Butcher: Hello, I’m John Butcher and I’m at 6915 Lucy Ridge Lane so I’m thinking the best way to frame up you know all the thoughts going through my head with this development. I have 3 concerns, 2 requests and one suggestion I think tonight. Concerns paramount is the impact to the environment. We mentioned the 4 homes up on Lucy Ridge Lane that are being built or have recently been built across the street at the crossroads of Yosemite and Lucy Ridge Lane. There’s 12 acres that were razed about 2 years ago. Clear cut and that seems to be the way that we’ve been doing things recently. We come in and we completely destroy the forest. When that happened, we’ve been in Chanhassen for 14 years. When that happened Lake Lucy was materially changed and probably for decades. It looked pretty similar to Lake Ann. If you go back and look at watershed photos from the Lake Riley district, because I’m sure everyone knows Lake Lucy is the top of the watershed so what happens there starts to roll downhill. I’ll show you a photo of, anyone that might be able to see it but this is the dock on the north side of Lake Lucy 2 years after all of those trees were cut. It’s green right so there is no lake on the north side of Lake Lucy anymore. It’s all vegetation. I’m sure that the builder did what they could to control runoff but the reality is, is when we cut forests down that have been there for hundreds of year that phosphorus finds a way into the lake and that’s exactly what happened and no matter what we do around 200 acres. Around two lakes that are probably like we said today, you know Lake Ann is the prize. It is the gem of our community. Hundreds of thousands of people a year go there. There’s no way to control this unless we had a different plan for this land. As a resident I understand the need for development and trust me I’m pro commerce. I think we just have to consider something that was said before which is we don’t have to max this out. I love the idea of shared space in park but I can’t imagine that what we can do here can be undone in our generation or maybe even our kid’s unless we’re careful. Second is safety and that was mentioned before but if we have 90 homes with two access points on that north part and Lucy Ridge Lane becomes a through street, I just, I can’t imagine what that would do given all Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 32 the access already with Ashling Meadows. There’d be one entrance going west out to Galpin but anyone going north would come on Lake Lucy or Lucy Ridge Lane and that type of congestion is very concerning for me. And then third would be neighborhood continuity and when I think about the reason that we selected our home in that particular neighborhood, and it wasn’t mentioned. I mean in any of the documents that I read online no one really mentioned the Lake Lucy Ridge neighborhood of 15 homes which is attached to Ashling Meadows or I should say Ashling Meadows became attached to us. The reason we selected it is because it was, there were 14 other executive custom homes in that neighborhood and the idea of 90 homes that don’t match the way that Ashling Meadows and Lake Lucy Ridge were built doesn’t appeal to me. It’s not what I signed up for and it’s not why we bought where we did. We bought because it was a quiet neighborhood that met certain requirements. The lot sizes that are being proposed are not anywhere close to what’s in either of our neighborhoods. 15,000 square feet is, it’s almost half of what our lot sizes are. So it is definitely concerning for a number of reasons. Two requests. I guess one would be do everything in your power to minimize environmental impact here. You know we can’t undo it and make something and design something that our city and our residents can really be proud of. We don’t have many spaces like this left and I applaud the effort around shared use and park space. It’s important. We don’t, we are blessed with these resources in our city and I understand that everyone does what they can to protect it but that’s request number one. Second is there’s a second, there’s a tax ID parcel of 10 acres that abuts our neighborhood and I consider potentially some other uses for that. Either keeping it natural to create more of that buffer on the high side of the bluff. The runoff that comes, the steep bluffs if you look at the grading, and it was referenced in there too which I understand might be a very large retaining wall being proposed to be built, that’s where the natural forestation on the north side comes and runs down into Lake Lucy. I would consider is there something different that we can do with that 10 acre parcel to both protect the environment and that kind of leads me to my one suggestion. As an alternative design there might be a way to connect the streets today that dead end in Ashling Meadows with the street that dead ends on Lucy Ridge Lane but potentially connect that and probably leave maybe 15 or 20 homes up there especially with potentially I hope some larger lot requirements for those homes. I think if we can set some different expectations for what goes on those where we have the ability to protect the lake and the runoff that we should take it and I think you’re killing a lot of birds with one stone. I’d also love to see that whole north side just completely stripped. I mean if we’re really doing what could be the best of both worlds for everybody, you know Lennar would get a buildable site near Galpin that has a large wetland to protect the lakes and then you’d have the forestation up on the top part where the water runoff goes in, down into the wetland space that could remain and minimize any of that impact so I’d encourage everyone to go read the 2013 wetland study that was done. It mentions the fact that this potential exists in the long range plan and the fact that there’s risk to both lakes and you know Lake Ann is a gem. It’s 40 feet deep. It’s crystal clear and if we screw it up it’s not coming back so I understand there’s a lot of things that we’re balancing here and I hope that you guys consider alternative designs. Thank you very much. Aller: Thank you. Callie Edwards: Hello, Callie Edwards ID 18740 Partridge Circle and I just note all the trees in the pictures back there and the leaf over the council members head and I’d like to really comment on what he said earlier about the clear cutting. When we’ve done a lot of developing Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 33 in all of our area and I just want everyone to note the effect on the big woods. And if you’re not familiar with that term we have some of the only big woods in the world left here. I see some heads nodding and previously big woods have been saved such as in the Cenacle in Wayzata was saved by a conservation effort. Here it’s clear that we can’t save all 188 acres, although I know the nature conservancy had some efforts towards that. I’m really appreciative of what you all have done with the 2030 and the upcoming 2040 in the preservation of the trees and what you’re attempting to do also with the development because we all know there’ll be development. I’d just like us all to make note that there’s a way to use forestation without reforestation by keeping the existing big woods, which has an overstory and a canopy that will interact underneath in the ground with the fungi. With the whole entire ecosystem that affects as he so effectively mentioned and showed us what happens in our lakes and how important it is, as Vanessa said we’re really you know a water rich city and we need to be smart and be leaders in saving that and as we go forward just using the big woods concept I would suggest that perhaps an arborist might be included and involved and I know I believe you have Jill Seymour, is she an arborist for the City? Aanenson: Yes, Jill Sinclair on our staff yep. She’s walked the entire property as has the staff so. Callie Edwards: Okay excellent so. Strong: She’s actually a forester. Callie Edwards: Okay yeah, so wonderful and to have an arborist involved with the developer and in the wetlands. Thank you very much. Betsy Randall: I’m Betsy Randall. I live at 1571 Lake Lucy Road. I agree with basically everybody here. I am currently, I currently live across from the new developments at Yosemite and I’ve been working with Vanessa because of all the runoff that I’ve been getting from them. I’m really concerned about runoff. I don’t know that much about Prince’s property other than it’s gorgeous but again our lakes and our trees, our huge trees are very valuable. I’m concerned about clear cutting. It happened to the east of me when they put in the development oh 20 years ago. I’ve been here 22 years and I think part of that had a lot to do with Lake Lucy quality going down but is there any way, like I said I haven’t been on the property but I know I’ve got white pines. I’ve got oaks that are over 100 years old and I’m guessing there’s probably some of those on that property also and if they can be, I know it takes a lot to rope them off so that they don’t get compacted roots and stuff but I really, really think that it needs to be something that’s considered besides the small lots. Even a 15,000 square foot lot is only a third of an acre and the lots to the north I’ve gone through and looked online and most of them, there’s one or two that’s about the same size of the third but most of them are about a half acre. Maybe a little less. The 55, 65 foot lots I think are just way too small for that area. Chan’s growing. We’ve got lots of room to grow and I don’t think we need to have these teeny tiny lots. They can still build the same house on them but I just am really concerned of the quality of life of our water and our trees and the neighbors. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 34 Barry Dallavalle: Hi, I’m Barry Dallavalle and I live at 6960 Utica Lane. I’m going to try to expedite a little bit for our group. I represent the Lake Lucy Homeowners Association which has 14 members that own lots that border the east and north sides of Lake Lucy. A lot of our members are here tonight. Maybe I’ll ask for a show of hands just so you know. I have got comments from some of the other members and I’ll represent them tonight. We have a couple of concerns. One is obviously the water quality and handling of the runoff. We, our 14 members have actually taken it upon ourselves to treat the invasive species every year under the DNR permit that we can obtain so we know that this will probably impact that. Obviously because of that if we have to choose one of these plans we’re for the density transfer plan which provides the maximum amount of land undeveloped. What we only can hope for is that you know the Riley-Purgatory watershed does it’s job and make sure that the water’s properly handled. The phosphorus is removed. I did see Terry Jeffery’s input into the staff report and I’m sure that they’ll be on top of that. We just want to make sure that that’s, that due process is done. Also just to expand beyond that is, if there’s anything that we can do, that the developer can do or the City can do or the watershed can do to educate the new home buyers on proper practices of irrigation, lawn maintenance. I think the watershed’s been trying to do that but here’s a pretty good opportunity I think for a new home buyer to be educated quickly and easily with what they need to do. The other thing is construction noise. I think we are all familiar with the noise of a construction site. Obviously being on a lake that noise is transfers across the lake quite easily and we would like to see that period as short as possible. I think looking at the two plans it appears that the density transfer plan would be the fastest development because it’s developing on less land and maybe because of the lot mix that it would move those properties a little quicker and Lennar wouldn’t have to subcontract the lots to construction companies with longer horizons. And I guess that’s all I have so appreciate it. Thank you. Aller: Thank you sir. Brian Hugh: Hello, my name’s Brian Hugh. I live on 7441 Windmill Drive. Kind of on the south end of the proposed development. Just had a question related to some of what my other neighbors had said about the area kind of just on the very south end. I’ve lived there for 20 years and for as far as I can remember that area has been, is flooded most of the springtime from the melt off and I’ve heard from a fairly well informed source that there’s some discussion about bringing the hill down into there maybe to make that buildable because I can’t see with it how it floods every spring how he could develop kind of on that end. If you kind of notice every spring how it gets pretty well wet until maybe just around June or so, so I just wanted to call out that because I know it’s not marshland but we butt up right to the marshland but if you notice that area every spring it’s pretty wet throughout most of the springtime so just wanted to call that out. Aller: Thank you. Greg Stewart: Hi. My name is Greg Stewart. I live at 1893 Topaz Drive which is the northern edge of the proposed development and if you don’t mind I’d like to back the conversation up a little bit because it seems as though an awful lot of planning has gone on without a lot of public or community comment but the first request I have for the Lennar Corporation is that they deed the property over to the City of Chanhassen for permanent conservancy in the name of Prince Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 35 and this is what the City Council and what the City of Chanhassen should have done to begin with. Prince moved to Chanhassen because of the beauty of this place. In fact he bought this very property for that very reason. It’s therefore incredibly disingenuous to the City then to turn around and allow the planning to go forward to completely destroy that forest. If the City benefits from the property that Prince owns and used to operate as his recording studio and home no doubt derives tremendous amount of benefit and Chanhassen definitely derives tremendous amount of tourist dollars because of that and will continue to do so. So that’s my first request. However apparently Chanhassen likes to develop so all I can see is that there’s going to be more noise. More traffic. Loss of privacy. More crime. More pollution. Lower property values and most importantly destruction of the beautiful pristine forest that bounds our properties and several others. And so I would ask the developer if he isn’t going to deed the property over, as he should, that there be some statutes put in place that insures that the tree canopy is preserved during this building process and there are many simple ways that this could be done including increasing the buffer land between what backs up essentially on our property versus what would be built by Lennar from 10 feet, which will protect nothing given that mature trees have a 15 to 20 foot spacing, you could do the geometry there, to a 40 foot buffer. That would along preserve the main canopy of the forest. We haven’t talked about the biological impact. There are you know 10-20 species of birds. Possum. Raccoon. Deer. I’m sure the neighbors here could shout out any number of species that will all be greatly impacted by this beyond the human species that are here tonight and I hope somebody takes that into consideration. There are also archeologically sensitive areas within this that I don’t believe have been properly considered nor certainly have they been properly researched and I would hope that then they want to make sure that the City Council’s aware of this. That they go through the proper and rigorous means to insure that those archeological sites are thoroughly investigated and preserved. There are Native American burial grounds within this property. Now I don’t know if Lennar wants to be known as the builders not only for raping Prince’s forest but also for building on Native American grounds ala poltergeist but the bottom line is. Aller: Go ahead. Greg Stewart: I’m sorry, humor’s not allowed. So clearly most of the people here, maybe all of us here tonight are completely against this proposal for any number of very valid reasons that you’ve heard. All I can say is I hope going forward that there’s a concerted and honest effort to make sure that the City Council and the developers work with the community that they’re impacting to make sure if they do want to go forward with this proposal that it’s done with all the proper means that will help preserve the canopy and the biological diversity therein and also you know us as the neighbors of this new community. We want to get along with our new neighbors and the best way to do that is to work with us. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Joy Gorra: Well good evening fellow neighbors, city officials and Joe. My name is Joy Gorra and I’m the widow of Mike Gorra. I am the property south, right on Lake Ann. Everybody here in this room knows that area is truly a pristine jewel. We made that comment all through the night and what I’m asking is that we take our time on these projects. Change is inevitable but I’m going to steal a slogan from Great Plains Software. They use the term change without Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 36 change. I would love for that to happen in this area. Fast is not our friend. This has come up so quickly and I know tonight the City is talking about 2004. They’ve talked about the Gorra property as already being developed. That’s very frightening. But tonight we have a wonderful opportunity here because we still have time on our hands I believe. I would love input from my neighbors on how they would like to see that land, the Gorra property developed. I’ve heard a number of different items to go there. A golf course. A boys ranch. An amusement park. Purple Pleasures something on that order. But I know in this room there’s a lot of energy, a lot of smart people and we can do it right. So my request tonight is let’s not be quick. Let’s do it right. And I have to thank my neighbors on Lake Lucy. I have not been talking to my beaver friend and I think you guys may have something to do with that. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Geri Stewart: Hi, I’m Geri Stewart. I live on 1893 Topaz Drive. We’ve only lived there a year and so we actually knew that this land could get developed because had already died. However we thought it would take longer. That woods behind our house is gorgeous and both plans we get the woods cut down and developed and we don’t have a lot of buffer attached to our yard, although I know there’s some. I might get a surveyor out to find exactly which trees are mine but I, they’re talking about buffers but there is no buffer. There is a line like there’s our yard and here’s the other yard. I’m hoping that if it does get built out maybe they could leave a buffer of trees there because I mean the wildlife has to be able to get around somewhere and there is a lot of wildlife. Also I’ve been listening to all the traffic concerns and I’m looking there and I don’t know if there’s ordinances that you have to have more than one way into a neighborhood but I don’t see why if there’s an exit on Galpin and that road does go through, why it couldn’t end in a cul-de-sac and not join up with the Ashling Meadows neighborhood and then into Lucy Ridge. That’s all I have to say right now. Sorry. Aller: Thank you. Josh Kimber: Good evening. I’m Josh Kimber. I live at 2060 Majestic Way. You heard from the 2 gentlemen who are on the front part of the street. I’m at the very end. I’m the last house on that road. I echo pretty much everything everyone said here. I feel like the lot sizes are really small. I feel like we’re putting a ton of houses in here. But I do have a pretty serious question about the trees on the south side of Majestic. Ms. Aanenson said twice, or a couple times during the presentation that the goal is to preserve those trees. There are some huge trees back there and I would like to learn more about what that buffer is. I would imagine this map isn’t to scale but when I look at my lot compared to the house that would be behind me, it is a comparable sized lot. I don’t know how you maintain that tree coverage knowing that our lots are the same size. I have a little bit of trees on mine but how you would maintain that buffer there with the same lot size. I don’t know how that would be achieved so I would like to learn more about that buffer. But me also being at the end of Majestic Way we have had, like I’m in the low side of the street. We had two summers where me and my 3 neighbors were all flooded. My sump pump runs probably 10 or 11 months out of the year. I feel like there’s like a water ground river that goes through there or something but my sump pump is constantly running. I’ve got a sump pump that will pump 50 to 60 gallons a minute and I can’t keep up during rain storms. If they build up those lots behind me I’m going to have to do some major irrigation myself because as is my lot Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 37 goes up and then that lot does go down and if they build that up I’m going to get all that water from that back side and a majority of my neighbors on that north side of Majestic Way will be dealing with a large amount of water and flooding. But again I just can’t echo enough, I agree with everyone here that I oppose the current plan. I would love to see multiple plans. Not just two. This is great land back there. Everyone, anyone who has been back there, there are some serious grave concerns because of the elevation and constant change so I do think we need to take our time and look seriously at this gem that we have. Thanks. Aller: Thank you. Deborah Medeiros: Hi, Deborah Medeiros, 6820 Lucy Ridge Lane and I more have a question. The road that goes along the north side of the development is, like have there been feasibility studies and do we know that that road can even go in because as I looked at a map there were some ponds and I was unsure of how they would get a road in there. Aller: We’re going to hold responses until later. We’re getting comments so. Deborah Medeiros: Okay. I guess I’d want to know that because if not then everything would go through Ashling Meadows and Lake Lucy which doesn’t seem like a good reason for safety reasons and then just echoing all the environmental concerns of everyone in the room. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Mehdi Ayouche: Good evening everybody. My name is Mehdi Ayouche. I live in 2102 Majestic Way. South side. I’m new to the neighborhood so I moved like a year ago but the reason I move is the same reason Jon and other neighbors on Majestic Way moved 20 years ago. 16 years ago is I fell in love with the trees and the quietness of the neighborhood and how clean it is and I think putting the many numbers of houses on the south side, that’s going to be a big mistake because we’re dealing with a lot of wetland. A lot underground water and I feel that is not a realistic plan especially if you look at the Galpin Boulevard is going to be very congested area so I feel that there is a need to review this plan. And also nobody talk about school zoning. So how is that going to affect the neighborhood. 200 houses. Almost 1,000 people. If we average 4 people per house. I mean that’s a lot of kids so I think we should consider a better alternative or I mean I agree with the majority of the folks and I hear what their concerns. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to come forward? There we go. Tamara Sather: Hi, thank you. My name is Tamara Sather and I live at 7090 Utica Lane and I just echo what most of these people say here too. I do appreciate the preservation model because I’ve lived in Chanhassen for 27 years and it’s what drew me to this town also is the trails and the parks and I hope that we can continue that. I also, talking about the Lake Lucy Ridge property. We were here oh 14 years ago maybe and we had the same concern about the developer that was coming into that. I think it was Mr. Necker and we opposed that. My neighbors were here with me as we presented to the Planning Commission about reducing the amount of homes that were Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 38 going to go in there and it was successful and they reduced it and we all live in developments and we understand that, you know that that has to happen but again I echo the idea that does it have to be this many. We understand it’s going to happen. Huge Prince fan and sadly when he died the first thing I thought was crap it’s going to get developed and that just broke my heart and so you know my thoughts are going, I should have started a Go Fund Me page. I mean he’s so famous. All this but I just wonder if there’s another, a third proposal that still allows for the preservation but limits the amount of homes that go in. Thank you. Charles Loeffler: Good evening. My name is Charles Loeffler. I live at 7327 Fawn Hill Road so I guess I’m on the other side of Galpin compared to everybody else today. My property doesn’t quite end up on Galpin Road but there is a retention pond that’s at the end of my property and it’s an area there that’s near Hunter Drive so as the road is proposed to go into this subdivision, as the ladies and gentlemen so far have mentioned from Majestic Way, that wetland area is definitely going to get impacted and as fill gets put in there or what not it does beg to question where that water will go. Will the retention pond on the other side of Galpin grow? Certainly the gentleman who commented about his sump pump, as he mentioned that water is going to go somewhere. We really need to understand what impact that is going to have. I’m fairly new to the area. I moved in about a year and a half ago but again I moved in taking a look at the neighborhood. I looked in a lot of different areas within the Twin Cities and chose Chanhassen because of the area and because of the neighborhood and just feel that even as I look at the development on Fawn Hill Road where the new houses are being built right now and that to me very high density just isn’t part of that neighborhood and that area. And when I take a look at the vast amount of homes being planned in that lower portion, that just is not, it’s not the neighborhood that I planned on moving into a year and a half ago and would hope that as other people have mentioned we take our time. We take a look at it and determine what the right plan is for this area because right now what I’m seeing concerns me. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Danly Jones: Hi there. I’m Danly Jones. I live at 7026 Pima Lane so actually not in this neighborhood but I grew up going to Lake Ann and I have a 6 month old daughter and I want her to be able to swim in the same clean lake that I did and enjoy this land and I just don’t want to see it ruined. So I’d like to ask the question is you know, is this final? Is it final that we have to develop this land? Is there something more the City can do? Is there something more that we can do to come together to preserve either some of this from being so dense or all of it? Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to come forward? Julie Butcher: Hi, my name is Julie Butcher. I live at 6915 Lucy Ridge Lane and I just wanted to talk about the fact that I was, I really hope that our city can be good stewards of this land. We have 200 acres of forest and wetlands and bluff that is really some of if not the last within the city limits of Chanhassen. Sad enough that we have to have it developed and I same, I would love for this to not be developed at all but if it is going to be developed and we do have to have homes then I really think that this is not a responsible plan for our city. Why we have to have so many homes in such a small area. The density. One builder. A cookie cutter neighborhood Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 39 effect. All the reasons that the people here have spoken already. Chanhassen is a quaint, was a quaint small town kind of community feeling and the more that we clear cut land like this and throw up a whole bunch of houses practically zero lot lines that all pretty much look the same then we lose our identity that I’ve held so dearly to over the last 20 years that we’ve lived here. So I would just ask this committee to be good stewards of this land. What is left of it. I love it here and I want to keep being proud of the town that I live in. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Dale Carlson: Hi everyone. Ditto. Dale Carlson, 6900 Utica Lane, Chanhassen. Been there 46 years or something like that. I just have a question for you guys. I hear all this stuff about destroying wetlands and water quality. Who’s responsible, who’s going to be held accountable if that happens? Is anyone going to be held accountable if the geese go away? I hope they do maybe but I’m saying if the deer go away and all these birds. I mean there’s, I can’t tell you how many different, who will be held accountable? Thank you. Aller: Thank you sir. Audience: Is it too soon to ask questions about construction itself and practices and everything? Aller: What we’re doing here is a concept plan. You’re welcomed to come on up real quick if you have a specific question about the construction so that we’re aware of it but the information, the whole purpose of this communication and this discourse that we’re having is to get information to the developer or the owner or whoever’s going to be building on a piece of property and the City Council and let them get that information so that it can be responded to properly at City Council so if you have a specific question we’ll have you come up again. Audience: Or will there be meetings later once plans are, so that we can bring up those concerns? Aller: Yes and even though the concept may be approved eventually and it becomes a plan, they’ll come forward with an actual plan. One of the reasons why we go through this process is to allow for a less expensive and intrusive situation so they get the feedback before they invest in the property and start moving on things that they can’t turn away from and they can’t back down. They can’t really listen to the concerns of the community so this is really the best way to do it so the community can voice it’s opinion. They can hear it and then if they decide to do so and it works for them then they can take those matters into account and move forward with the project with that information. Audience: I do have one quick question. Aller: Sure. Audience: I sure would have liked to have a hearing like this before the land even got sold. Was there one and I just missed it? Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 40 Aller: Well you know I wouldn’t want to have a hearing if I wanted to sell my house so that’s the kind of situation. Audience: But the City wasn’t given first options on do you want to buy this and conserve this land? Aller: I wouldn’t know but I don’t think so. Any last individuals wishing to come forward, come on up forward. State your name and address for the record and, you’re back. Angelo Galioto: I just had one question. Angelo Galioto, 1805 Emerald Lane again. Aller: Thank you. Angelo Galioto: As we speak here today does Lennar own the property? That’s a question I have. Aller: I believe they have the right to build on the property so. Angelo Galioto: They have the right to build. Do they own it? Aller: We can ask them what their legal position is. Is that the last question? So we’ll ask, now before, it will be. So before I close the comment portion of this process we did receive several emails from individuals that are part of the record. Meredith and Greg McGuirk, David Cohn and Julie Witt and they have been read and they will be made part of the record and forwarded on along with all the other comments. Steve Wallace: I apologize I just showed up late but I’d like to make a comment. I’m Steve Wallace. I live at 6900 Lucy Ridge Lane. Aller: Welcome. Steve Wallace: Strongly oppose the plan for a lot of the reasons that I just heard towards the end of the discussion here. Obviously land conservation is critical. This is beautiful land. We’ve seen a significant impact to Lake Lucy as some of the development and runoff that has created sediment and actually really that lake is turning into a bunch of weeds because of a lot of the sediment runoff so number one oppose. If we need to do a development I would strongly recommend taking the time to evaluate other options. I would look at having a main entrance and an only entrance off of Galpin as opposed to running through some of the other subdivisions. I would cul-de-sac those off and you know buffer zone as well. I think that’s the other component. If there is going to be development a 10 foot buffer zone is not nearly enough in order to maintain the trees that are already there and make sure there’s a significant buffer between subdivisions so I would recommend those things but appreciate the time. Aller: Thank you. Okay I’m going to close the public comment section and ask the developer to come forward again and to the extent possible, with all the information that you’re gathering Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 41 which of course you’ll have a record of, if you could make some comments at this point in time that would be great. Joe Jablonski: I can that. Thank you Mr. Chair. Thank you for everyone who provided comments. I took a lot of notes. I’m not going to necessarily go through all of them but I’ll try to address a few of the broader details or concerns that were brought up. The first one, does Lennar own the property? At this point we have a contract to purchase the property. An option agreement to purchase the property. We do not own it at this time. Let’s see, let’s talk quick about connectivity and some of this will be broad connectivity discussion but what we’ve done here, which is at the direction of staff and is in general good planning, at least as far as the initial concept plan stage is we’ve attempted to line up the road connections into the property at the existing roads so there’d be one at, I can’t remember the name but there’s one on the south end that lines up there. There’s one at the north that lines there and I think there’s a road that comes across that’s called Winslow Path or. Aanenson: Wynsong. Joe Jablonski: Wynsong Path and we also have made the connections to the existing neighborhoods knowing that when those neighborhoods were built there’s a road connection at them. Probably also, I haven’t verified this but there’s probably also a sign that says future road connection possible so we’ve been given direction by staff, at least at this point to make those connections because it connects the neighborhoods. It’s connectivity. It’s for the long run it’s typical in planning so that you have the ability to get through for public safety, fire, those kind of things. We did eliminate one connection that was right here. There’s a road stub. You can kind of see it. It’s a little tough on the plan but we were not going to make that connection or we weren’t showing it in this plan. We have had other plans that did show that connection but we did eliminate one. So that’s kind of that north quadrant. There is also rules and regulations that the City has imposed that only allow you a certain distance for cul-de-sacs. Part of that I don’t know off the top of my head, I’m sure one of the staff members know what the cul-de-sac length requirements are but that’s kind of where the connectivity also comes from. If you, staff has anything to add to that. Bender: The length of the cul-de-sacs is a maximum of 800 feet. Joe Jablonski: Okay. So that’s the connecting points up in that north neighborhood. You know that obviously traffic connection concerns that was something that we’ve heard, or I heard quite a bit about. That’s something that we’re going to have to rely a little bit on the Planning Commission and council to help give us direction on how important that is to them to have those connecting points and certainly also take the input of staff on that as well. So there are a couple things that also came up. Let’s see related to wetlands and drainage. I’m going to talk real broadly about this because again we haven’t gotten into a whole lot of engineering on this. As the Chairman was explaining part of this process is, we start with a concept plan which helps establish how the lots could be laid out and then as we get into the next level, a preliminary plat and we go through that process we get into a lot more engineering details and we start figuring out some of the details of drainage, grading, some of those things that we haven’t had an opportunity to study a whole lot at this point but some of the things I will point out is, there is Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 42 earlier the wetland delineation plan, there is a wetland shown in this location that we would be impacting. We have attempted to wherever possible limit or eliminate the need to impact wetlands but this is one that is an impact. That road really cannot be moved in one form or fashion getting into that property at that location where there’s a road connection is important which is why we’ve maintained that. We would be required per state and regulator laws to mitigate in some form or fashion that wetland impact. There’s a number of different ways to do that. Drainage off of some of these back yards and buffering, both on the north and the south were also things that I had down that came up several times. Again we haven’t spent a lot of time on that but that’s something that based on the feedback and the comments that I’ve heard tonight that we’ll go back and work on between now and for sure the preliminary plat stage that I would envision us having a landscape plan and working closely with staff as well on establishing some kind of buffer at both the south and the north neighborhoods. There will be land alteration that obviously has to take place. Topography on the site is fairly dramatic so there will be a fair amount of dirt of moving that occurs but also as part of that we also have to follow the watershed and water quality rules knowing that some of that’s going to be directed to ponds that will be built that aren’t there today. A storm sewer that’s put in or will be put in that’s not there today. And just a number of things on the site through the improvement process that isn’t there to help treat that water today as natural runoff but will be with development. And we have to follow very closely the rules and the guidance of the watersheds and the city code and all that thing to help achieve because the last thing that we want is to damage or in any way cause any problems with either one of the lakes as well which is part of the reason why we’ve worked closely with staff to help try to preserve such a large area. So that, let’s see buffers. Cul-de-sacs. Lot sizes. I guess you know some of the questions and obviously I heard that quite a few times. Lot sizes are a concern. Again the reason why we’re doing it is two fold. One in order to allow the property the ability to develop it either all has to be developed or some of it has to be concentrated and you have a willing seller that wants to sell the property. You have a willing buyer who wants to buy the property and we have to do it in a manner that follows the rules and the guidelines laid out by the city code and by the zoning ordinances and doing that which is why we’ve shown two plans. One that impacts a lot of the area down in here and the other that falls within the PUD guidelines. Still maintaining the same setbacks. The same lot coverage areas are a little bit flexible but the setbacks are the same on the sides and the front usually. There may be some instances where front setbacks are relaxed or asked to be relaxed but we maintain the same side setbacks that are required in the RS-1 standards so while they are smaller and they are a little bit different it is a way to develop in a manner that allows us and gives the city the opportunity to preserve a large area of open space. Let’s see. I heard a comment about donating the land to the City. If that were to occur that probably would have occurred by the estate of the property owner and they elected to sell it and you know I don’t know if the City was prepared to pay or had any opportunity to review the use or the price of the property but they, it was shopped or put out for sale to the open market and at that time the City could have also put in the opportunity to buy it so. That, and I know it’s difficult to see these types of properties develop. It’s a very pristine piece of property. We understand that. We know that. We’ve done a lot of development not just in Chanhassen but around the Twin Cities and we really see these as partnerships with the cities and we want to see it not only develop in a way that works for us but works for the people of Chanhassen. Not just in the immediate neighborhoods but the whole neighborhood and we recognize that there’s some unique things here and we want to help the City see them so I know that’s difficult to hear or can be difficult to see and, but it is a Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 43 developable property. It is in your zoning districts. It is provided city sewer and water which gives it the ability to be developed so. Aller: Great thank you. Audience: I have a question. On your other plan all your lot sizes were 90 feet. Joe Jablonski: Correct. Audience: Why don’t you carry that over to this plan? That’s what everybody’s been talking about. Joe Jablonski: Well there’s economics involved that don’t allow the, there’s not enough lots on that plan shown in the upland areas or up in these areas only to support the ability to have it developed. Aller: Okay. Are we done? Joe Jablonski: I think I covered as many broad questions as I had written down. I know there’s some specifics but if you folks have anything more I’d be happy to address them. Aller: Anything for staff or the applicant at this point in time? Thank you. Okay I’ll open it up for comments from the commissioners. Weick: I’ll start. Aller: Commissioner Weick. Weick: If that’s okay. As I often do, I’m fairly consistent with my views. I’ll go ahead and share some of those as it relates to this. Development, before I do that I would say thank you to everyone that came out this evening. It is critically important that everyone voices their opinions and I applaud in return your respectful input that you provided tonight and appreciate that. I’m also impressed that the comments were mostly focused on our natural resources which I have a serious concern about and so I appreciate the facts that were brought forward about various lakes and things like that that got into the record tonight as well. I would say also that I’m not sure it’s fair to say that planning without public input is happening because I think that’s what tonight is the first step in representing and there’ll be more opportunities to do that as well so I hope everyone is able to feel comfortable that at least their opinions are being heard throughout this process. That said I would say that I am always and will always be opposed to large houses on small lots. I never will be convinced that if, you know if you have the land you should necessarily build on it and I understand there’s a lot of, there’s a lot of realities about developing that that doesn’t take into account but it’s still my opinion and I’m opposed to 35 percent lot coverage. I’m always opposed to increasing the lot coverage over 25 percent. I’ll continue to be opposed to that. And so I hope that the City Council is sincere in listening to the comments and the feedback from this evening as well as my own as we move forward. Thank you. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 44 Tietz: Chairman Aller? Aller: Commissioner Tietz. Tietz: Yeah I’d just like to echo all the sentiment tonight for the speaking on behalf of the resource. You know it’s a spectacular resource that we can’t duplicate. The woods. The big, the remnant big woods. The mature high quality oaks that exist on that north slope. The severity of the slope on that north side. I think the plan, the concepts really lack a respect for the landscape basically or fundamentally. And then if you took these plans, either one of them, they’re basically the same except for the shoreline development. If you walk that site with these plans it’s going to be totally mass graded and totally clear cut. There’s no, in my opinion there’s no way you can build that road on the north side. The north end of the property without virtually clear cutting that hillside. Those are severe cross slopes and to put the city grade, the city standard road in there and then to develop lots that you would put what, 15,000 square foot lots and those are going to be the largest homes. It’s going to be, you will not recognize that hillside so I think we do want a quality development and the old adage of less is more I think really applies in this situation. That we do not have to maximize the density of this property to meet a code to get a quality development and that’s all I have to say. Aller: Additional comments? Okay well I will again thank everybody present and it is not an easy conversation to have when nobody wants to hear someone tell them what they would like done with your potential property and at the same time nobody wants to have somebody come in and build something that they feel is not to their, either their standards or is something that is detrimental to an area that we all love. We’re all passionate about our safety. The safety of our kids and our roads. We’re all passionate about the trees and the lakes that we have here and so again I appreciate the civility with which you’ve handled yourself tonight and I would thank the representative of Lennar as well for coming in and actually participating in the process. Listening and attempting to answer to the best of his ability those things that are put out there on short notice. Again this matter will be moving forward to the City Council. Your comments are in the record. The information that we’ve received in emails is also in the record. Before we close I will just state that I join in my fellow commissioners in their belief that it may not be Option A or Option B but I feel that there’s an Option C out there that is going to be acceptable to all. We’re not going to please all but at least it will be a combined effort that was started here tonight with your comments and Lennar’s listening so with that I’ll request that the motion, appreciate motion be made to move this forward. Tietz: It’s just a review. Aller: It’s a review then I’ll just ask that the review be forwarded to the City Council and that will be on August 13th as well? Aanenson: Correct and we do the verbatim Minutes so the comments will be. Aller: So the verbatim Minutes will be for the City Council to hear and to read and reflect on before they take action on the concept as is presented to them on the 13th so again if you’re at Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 45 home or you’re here follow the website. Come on in and see the City Council on the 13th or follow them at home. Moving forward to, let’s take a 2 minute recess. The Planning Commission took a short recess at this point in the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Randall noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting on June 19, 2018 as presented. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Aanenson: I will give you, we do have an item on the August 7th meeting. I know it’s National Night Out but it didn’t get on the city schedule so we actually have a subdivision on that night so, and then the next night back to back, because we love being together, joint commission tour. So we do have a bus this time so we can all be together and hear the same thing which will be nice so we are going to go by some of those projects on Lake Lucy. We’ll just talk about those infill development and ask for good conversation and then we’re hoping to revisit the water treatment plant. We’re hoping it’s pretty close but the architecture in there. Weick: It’s beautiful. Aanenson: It’s beautiful. I will give a compliment to Sharmeen Al-Jaff on our staff who worked with the Public Works Director to get that looking so spiffy so. Weick: If I may I drove by with my family and I said, I said hey what do you think that looks like because they didn’t know what it was and they said it looks like a mansion. Aanenson: Good job. I’ll tell her that. Yes. So you know we really don’t have anything else. We were talking about Foxwood. A couple ideas but if somebody wants to shoot me an email of something they would like to look at for that night on Wednesday. We’ll have snacks. Again the Senior Commission, Environmental Commission, and Park Commission will all be there so let me know if you can make it and I’ll have Jenny send out to email to everybody so we can get a head count. Randall: What day again? Aanenson: It’d be Wednesday. Aller: The 8th of August. Aanenson: Throw out back to back unfortunately. Randall: No that’s fine. Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 17, 2018 46 Aanenson: We always try to find, well because our meetings are prescriptive we can’t just bump our meeting and so, so that’s where we’re at so that is all I had for you. Thank you for the long meeting. Aller: Thank you. That was a good meeting. Everybody got their voices heard and I’ll entertain a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Madsen moved to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Approve Temporary On­Sale Liquor License Request; St. Hubert Catholic Community; Harvest Festival on September 15, 2018 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: LIQ St. Hubert Catholic Community PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves the temporary on­sale liquor license request from St. Hubert Catholic Community for their Taste of St. Hubert Harvest Festival on September 15, 2018. The fee for said license will be $1.00.” Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. SUMMARY St. Hubert Catholic Community has submitted an application for a temporary on­sale liquor license for the Taste of St. Hubert Harvest Festival event on Saturday, September 15, 2018 from 5:00 pm to 10:00 pm. The event will be held in the front (north) parking lot and the fellowship hall at the church and they intend to sell beer in a beer garden. Liquor liability insurance has been provided for the event. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the request from St. Hubert Catholic Community for a temporary on­sale liquor license for their Taste of St. Hubert Harvest Festival on September 15, 2018. The fee is $1.00. ATTACHMENTS: Application Chanhassen $1.00 September 15, 2018 kmeuwissen@ci.chanhassen.mn.us 952-227-1107 August 13, 2018 July 24, 2017 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Resolution No. 2018­40: Approve Vacation of Conservation Easement on Lot 1, Block 1, Minger Addition (2300 Lukewood Drive) Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: F.1. Prepared By Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resource Specialist File No: Vacation File No. 2018­01 PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council adopts a resolution approving the vacation of a portion of Conservation Easement legally described as the northerly 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Minger Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County, Minnesota.” Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND The Conservation Easement in the Minger Addition was dedicated in order to preserve significant trees that were located on lots throughout the development.  All lots within the development have an easement.  Additionally, the easement on this particular lot “could be used as forestation or replacement areas for trees,” according to the development contract.  The Conservation Easement on 2300 Lukewood Drive is on the northerly 50 feet of the property. DISCUSSION In 1998, when the building permit application for the lot was received, it was recommend by the city to place the home to the rear of the lot where there were no significant trees.  In the front half of the lot, seven large oaks dotted the landscape.  By locating the house to the back of the lot where there were no significant trees, all seven large oak trees were preserved.  The rear half of the lot had contained the driveway for the property prior to the subdivision and the majority of the easement had no trees.  The house was built and the homeowners since then made no improvements that conflicted with the easement restrictions.  The portion of the Conservation Easement containing the house and driveway cannot meet the intent of the easement and impedes the use of the property. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends granting the vacation of a portion of the easement as shown in the attachment. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 13, 2018SubjectResolution No. 2018­40: Approve Vacation of Conservation Easement on Lot 1, Block 1,Minger Addition (2300 Lukewood Drive)Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: F.1.Prepared By Jill Sinclair, Environmental ResourceSpecialist File No: Vacation File No. 2018­01PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution approving the vacation of a portion of Conservation Easement legallydescribed as the northerly 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Minger Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof,Carver County, Minnesota.”Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDThe Conservation Easement in the Minger Addition was dedicated in order to preserve significant trees that werelocated on lots throughout the development.  All lots within the development have an easement.  Additionally, theeasement on this particular lot “could be used as forestation or replacement areas for trees,” according to thedevelopment contract.  The Conservation Easement on 2300 Lukewood Drive is on the northerly 50 feet of theproperty.DISCUSSIONIn 1998, when the building permit application for the lot was received, it was recommend by the city to place thehome to the rear of the lot where there were no significant trees.  In the front half of the lot, seven large oaks dottedthe landscape.  By locating the house to the back of the lot where there were no significant trees, all seven large oaktrees were preserved.  The rear half of the lot had contained the driveway for the property prior to the subdivision andthe majority of the easement had no trees.  The house was built and the homeowners since then made noimprovements that conflicted with the easement restrictions. The portion of the Conservation Easement containing the house and driveway cannot meet the intent of the easementand impedes the use of the property.RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends granting the vacation of a portion of the easement as shown in the attachment. ATTACHMENTS: Easement Vacation Application Public Hearing Notice Affidavit of Mailing Legal Descriptions of Easement Conservation Easement Survey Resolution COMM UNITY DEVELOPM ENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division -7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952)227-1300 / Fax: (952)227-1110 *crTYorcttAl{HAssrtt APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Submittal Date:PC Date:CC Date:60-Day Review Dale: (Reter to the appropriate Application Checklist for required submittat information that must accompany this application) tr Comprehensive Plan Amendment ..... $600 I Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers ..... $100 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) n Single-Family Residence ...................... ....... $325 fl All others......... ........ $425 lnterim Use Permit (lUP) E ln conjunction with Single-Family Residence.. $325 n Al Others......... ........ $425 Rezoning (REZ) E Planned Unit Development (PUD) .................. $750 f] Minor Amendment to existing PUD................. $100 fl Allothers......... ......$500 Sign Plan Review........ ... $150 Site Plan Review (SPR) I Rdministrative.......... ... . .........$100 I Commercial/lndustrial Districts* .. $500 Plus $'10 per 1 ,000 square feet of building area: (- thousand square feet) tlnclude number of exlsfrno employees: - 'lnclude number of new emPloYees: n Residential Districts. .................... $500 Plus $5 per dwelling unit (- units) tr Subdivision (SUB) E Create 3 lots or less ............. ....... $300 E Create over 3 |ots.............. .......$600 + $15 per lot(_ lots) n Metes & Bounds (2 lots) .............. $300 E Consolidate 1ots....... ...................$150 I Lot Line Adjustment............... ......$150 E rinatP1at.,............ ....$700 (lncludes $450 escrow for attorney costs)* .Additional escrow may be required for olher applications through the development contract. Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC)........ $300 (Additional recording fees may apply) n n n a n Variance (VAR) ..,$200 n tr fl Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) E Single-Family Residence............................... $1 50 n nttothers......... ......$275 fl Zoning Appeal........ ...... $100 ! Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA).....'.......'." $500 NOTE: When multiple applications are processed concurrently, the appropriate fee shall be charged ,or each application' ! Notifcation Sign (city to install and remove)$200 ! eroperty Owners' List within 500' (city to generate after pre-application meeting) ...... ..........: ... ... . . $3 per address E Escrow for Recordins Documents (check ail that appry).......... (3&:=Y:::::l g50 per document l-l Conditional Use Permit )E'" Vacationf] Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) n lnterim Use Permit ! Site Plan Agreement ! Wetland Alteration PermitI Variance [l Wetlan I Easements (- easements) n Deedsilri"iiie I d31, oo Property Address or Location:2300 Lukewood Drive, Chanhasen MN 553'17 Parcel#:Legal Description:Residential TotalAcreage:0.57 Wetlands Present? E Yes Z t'lo present Zoning: Single-Family Residential District (RSF) Requested Zoning:Single-Family Residential District (RSF) Present Land Use Designation:Residential Large Lot Existing Use of Property:Residential home Description of Proposal: Vacation of easement on residential property. lCheck box if separate narrative is attached. Requested Land Use Designation:Residential Large Lot APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as applicant, represent to have obtained authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. lf this application has not been signed by the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this applicition. t further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Address; Contact: Phone: City/State/Zip: Email: Signature:Date: PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do, authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Name:Michael Bierden Contact: Phone:Address:2300 Lukewood Drive (952) 2124632 Cell: Fax: Cell: Fax: Cell: Fax: City/State/Zip: Email: Chanhassen (952) 2124632 m ichaelbierden@yahoo.com Signature:Michael Bierden Date:5121t18 This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Apptication Checktist and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural requirements and fees. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within '15 business days of application submittal. written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable) Name:Contact: Phone:Address: Digilalty sioned by Michsel Eierden Date: 2018.05.21 17:06:05 -05'00' City/State/Zip: Email: Who should receive copies of staff reports?*Other Contact I nformation : Name:Via: Via: Via: Via: trtrtrtr Property Owner Applicant Engineer Other* ! Email E tvtaiteO Paper Copy l=l Email I fUaiteO Paper Copy [] Emait I tvtaiteO Paper Copy E Email ! lvtatteo Paper Copy Address: City/State/Zip: Email: INSJRU9TIONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city along with required documents and payment. SUBMTT FORM to send a digitat copy to the city for processing. Section 3:Applicant lnformation Section 4: Notification lnformation PRINT FORM SUBMIT FORM CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR VACATION OF EASEMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen City Council will hold a public hearing on August 13, 2018, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §412.851 to consider the vacation of a portion of the conservation easement described as: The north 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, all in Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota. All persons who desire to speak on this issue are encouraged to attend and will be given an opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resource Specialist Phone 952-227-1133 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on August 2 & 9, 2018) CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on July 26,2018, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Vacation of Easement (Lot 1, Block 1, Minger Addition - 2300 Lukewood Drive), Vacation File No. 18-01, to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and s 'om to before me JEAN M. STECKLING I{otary Plbllo-fullnnesota Cormbdon Eptlt. Jan 31,2019 thiJ-t rlday o L'-f- ,2018. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR VACATION OF EASEMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen City Council will hold a public hearing on August 13, 2018, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall,7700 Market Boulevard, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes $412.851 to consider the vacation of a portion of the conservation easement described as: The north 50 feet of Lot l, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, all in Chanhassor, Carver County, Minnesota. EgTI.TES r bhlb . bb.J.m- '\il 1t \- -tsIJ. \.\-\.\! ,R I I l t \ -,* _a. );t F E +H All persons who desire to speak on this issue are encouraged to attend and will be given an opportunity to be heard at this meeting. Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resource Specialist Phone 952-227-1133 TItitsl-Fi.,,J/5O3 @D ) l I \\ CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COT]NTIES, MINNESOTA DATE:Ausust 13.2018 RESOLUTION NO: SECONDED BY: 2018-XX MOTION BY: A RESOLUTION VACATING PART OF AN EASEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 412.851, after two (2) weeks' published and posted notice of the hearing and after mailing written notice of the hearing at least ten (10) days before the hearing to each property owner affected by the proposed vacation, the Chanhassen City Council has conducted a hearing to consider the vacation of a portion of the conservation easement, legally described on the attached Exhibit "A", which was dedicated by the recording of a conservation easement with the Carver County Recorder on September 16, 1994, as Document No. 1 72019 ("Easement"); and WHEREAS, following the hearing and consideration of the proposed vacation, the Council has determined that it is in the public interest to vacate a portion of the Easement, as legally described on the attached Exhibit "B" ("Vacated Area"). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen: L In light of the history of this portion of the easement, the Vacated Area has no apparent present or future benefit to the public, and the vacation of said Vacated Area is in the interest of the public. The Vacated Area is hereby vacated. The remaining portion of the Easement shall be as legally described in the attached Exhibit "C". 4. The City Manager is directed to file a certif,red copy of this Resolution with the County Auditor and County Recorder of Carver County. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 13th day of August, 2018. ATTEST: 2. a Todd Gerhardt, City Manager YES Denny Laufenburger, Mayor ABSENTNO EXHIBIT A Description of Easement: The north 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, all in Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota. EXHIBIT B Description of Vacated Area: That part of the north 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County Minnesota, lying westerly and southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast comer of said Lot 1 ; thence on an assumed bearing of South 01 degrees 39 minutes 33 seconds West along the east line of said Lot I a distance of 50.00 feet to the south line of said north 50.00 feet of Lot l; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West along said south line of the north 50.00 feet of Lot 1 a distance of 28.78 feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 08 degrees 0l minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 33.08 feet; thence North 29 degrees 02 minutes 54 seconds West a distance of 8.28 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 85.37 feet; thence South 52 degrees 50 minutes l4 seconds West a distance of 15.36 feet; thence North 45 degrees 47 minutes 5l seconds West a distance of 16.65 feet; thence North 76 degrees 55 minutes 20 seconds West a distance of 13.28 feet; thence South 17 degrees 18 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 4.43 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 130.78 feet to the southwest line of said Lot 1 and said line there terminating. EXHIBIT C Description of remainder of Easement: That part of the north 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County Minnesota, lying easterly and northerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast comer of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed bearing of South 01 degrees 39 minutes 33 seconds West along the east line of said Lot 1 a distance of 50.00 feet to the south line of said north 50.00 feet of Lot l; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West along said south line of the north 50.00 feet of Lot 1 a distance of 28.78 feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 08 degrees 01 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 33.08 feet; thence North 29 degrees 02 minutes 54 seconds West a distance of 8.28 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 85.37 feet; thence South 52 degrees 50 minutes 14 seconds West a distance of 15.36 feet; thence North 45 degrees 47 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 16.65 feet; thence North 76 degrees 55 minutes 20 seconds West a distance of 13.28 feet; thence South 17 degrees 18 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 4.43 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 130.78 feet to the southwest line of said Lot 1 and said line there terminating. TAX-NAME BARRY PINNOCK BLAIRD&MARIANELGREN BRIANA&JEANMLEBAHN CHARLES J BURKE CINDY L SKACK CRAIG A & CHRISTINE M WINTER DAVID C HOELKE DEREK G SLAUGHTER DOUGLAS M ALLEN JAMESD&LORIEDRYAN JAMESL&DARLADOLSON JEROMEA&NANCYNPARTEN LEAH MANCINI LIDFORS LIVING TRUST MARKA&NANCYEBIELSKI MICHAEL DAUWALTER MICHAEL J BIERDEN MICHAEL MEYER PATRICK J & KAREN C MINGER PAUL N KIBLER STEPHEN A WITHROW TERRY LUBBEN THOMAS L & AILEEN B TIETJEN TIMOTHY & ALISON K RONGITSCH TIMOTHYH&LYNNMLEE WESLEY BERGSTROM WILLIAM J SCHWEITZER WILLIAM ROIGER ZACHARY K BACON TAX-ADD-I1 2221 LUKEWOOD DR 2274 LUKEWOOD DR 8275 BENWOOD CIR 2305 LUKEWOOD DR 2209 LUKEWOOD DR 8250 BENWOOD CIR 8141 MAPLEWOOD TERR 8260 BENWOOD CIR 2250 LUKEWOOD DR 8121 PINEWOOD CIR 2277 LUKEWOOD DR 23Ol LUKEWOOD DR 2329 LUKEWOOD DR 8251 BENWOOD CIR 8140 PINEWOOD CIR 8141 PINEWOOD CIR 23OO LUKEWOOD DR 2224 LUKEWOOD DR 2218 LUKEWOOD DR 2201 LUKEWOOD DR 2206 LUKEWOOD DR 2351 LUKEWOOD DR 8278 BENWOOD CIR 8281 BENWOOD CIR 2255 LUKEWOOD DR 8120 PINEWOOD CIR 2215 LUKEWOOD DR 23Sl TIMBERWOOD DR 83Ol GALPIN BLVD TAX-ADD-12 CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN TAX-ADD-13 MN 55317-8425 MN 55317-8425 MN 55317-9380 MN 55317-9370 MN 55317-8425 MN 55317-9380 MN 55317-9661 MN 55317-9380 MN 55317-8425 MN 55317-9664 MN ss317-8425 MN 55317-9370 MN 55317-9370 MN 55317- MN 55317-9664 MN 55317-9664 MN 55317-9370 MN 55317-8425 MN 55317-8425 MN 55317- MN 55317-8425 MN 55317- MN 55317-9380 MN 55317-9380 MN 55317-8425 MN 55317-9664 MN 55317-8425 MN 55317-9671 MN 55317- DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County, Minnesota. DESCRIPTION OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PER DOCUMENT NO. 172019 The north 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION. Easement Area = 12,399 sq.ft. DESCRIPTION OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA TO BE VACATED That part of the north 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County Minnesota, lying westerly and southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed bearing of South 01 degrees 39 minutes 33 seconds West along the east line of said Lot 1 a distance of 50.00 feet to the south line of said north 50.00 feet of Lot 1; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West along said south line of the north 50.00 feet of Lot 1 a distance of 28.78 feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 08 degrees 01 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 33.08 feet; thence North 29 degrees 02 minutes 54 seconds West a distance of 8.28 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 85.37 feet; thence South 52 degrees 50 minutes 14 seconds West a distance of 15.36 feet; thence North 45 degrees 47 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 16.65 feet; thence North 76 degrees 55 minutes 20 seconds West a distance of 13.28 feet; thence South 17 degrees 18 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 4.43 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 130.78 feet to the southwest line of said Lot 1 and said line there terminating. Easement Vacation Area = 8,159 sq.ft. DESCRIPTION OF REMNANT CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA That part of the north 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County Minnesota, lying easterly and northerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed bearing of South 01 degrees 39 minutes 33 seconds West along the east line of said Lot 1 a distance of 50.00 feet to the south line of said north 50.00 feet of Lot 1; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West along said south line of the north 50.00 feet of Lot 1 a distance of 28.78 feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 08 degrees 01 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 33.08 feet; thence North 29 degrees 02 minutes 54 seconds West a distance of 8.28 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 85.37 feet; thence South 52 degrees 50 minutes 14 seconds West a distance of 15.36 feet; thence North 45 degrees 47 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 16.65 feet; thence North 76 degrees 55 minutes 20 seconds West a distance of 13.28 feet; thence South 17 degrees 18 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 4.43 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 130.78 feet to the southwest line of said Lot 1 and said line there terminating. Remnant Easement Area = 4,241 sq.ft. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: August 13, 2018 RESOLUTION NO: 2018-XX MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: A RESOLUTION VACATING PART OF AN EASEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 412.851, after two (2) weeks’ published and posted notice of the hearing and after mailing written notice of the hearing at least ten (10) days before the hearing to each property owner affected by the proposed vacation, the Chanhassen City Council has conducted a hearing to consider the vacation of a portion of the conservation easement, legally described on the attached Exhibit “A”, which was dedicated by the recording of a conservation easement with the Carver County Recorder on September 16, 1994, as Document No. 172019 (“Easement”); and WHEREAS, following the hearing and consideration of the proposed vacation, the Council has determined that it is in the public interest to vacate a portion of the Easement, as legally described on the attached Exhibit “B” (“Vacated Area”). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen: 1. In light of the history of this portion of the easement, the Vacated Area has no apparent present or future benefit to the public, and the vacation of said Vacated Area is in the interest of the public. 2. The Vacated Area is hereby vacated. 3. The remaining portion of the Easement shall be as legally described in the attached Exhibit “C”. 4. The City Manager is directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the County Auditor and County Recorder of Carver County. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 13th day of August, 2018. ATTEST: _________________________________ ____________________________________ Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Denny Laufenburger, Mayor YES NO ABSENT EXHIBIT A Description of Easement: The north 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, all in Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota. EXHIBIT B Description of Vacated Area: That part of the north 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County Minnesota, lying westerly and southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed bearing of South 01 degrees 39 minutes 33 seconds West along the east line of said Lot 1 a distance of 50.00 feet to the south line of said north 50.00 feet of Lot 1; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West along said south line of the north 50.00 feet of Lot 1 a distance of 28.78 feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 08 degrees 01 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 33.08 feet; thence North 29 degrees 02 minutes 54 seconds West a distance of 8.28 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 85.37 feet; thence South 52 degrees 50 minutes 14 seconds West a distance of 15.36 feet; thence North 45 degrees 47 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 16.65 feet; thence North 76 degrees 55 minutes 20 seconds West a distance of 13.28 feet; thence South 17 degrees 18 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 4.43 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 130.78 feet to the southwest line of said Lot 1 and said line there terminating. EXHIBIT C Description of remainder of Easement: That part of the north 50 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, MINGER ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County Minnesota, lying easterly and northerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed bearing of South 01 degrees 39 minutes 33 seconds West along the east line of said Lot 1 a distance of 50.00 feet to the south line of said north 50.00 feet of Lot 1; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West along said south line of the north 50.00 feet of Lot 1 a distance of 28.78 feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 08 degrees 01 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 33.08 feet; thence North 29 degrees 02 minutes 54 seconds West a distance of 8.28 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 85.37 feet; thence South 52 degrees 50 minutes 14 seconds West a distance of 15.36 feet; thence North 45 degrees 47 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 16.65 feet; thence North 76 degrees 55 minutes 20 seconds West a distance of 13.28 feet; thence South 17 degrees 18 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 4.43 feet; thence North 88 degrees 20 minutes 29 seconds West a distance of 130.78 feet to the southwest line of said Lot 1 and said line there terminating. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Galpin Property: Planned Unit Development Concept Plan Review Section NEW BUSINESS Item No: G.1. Prepared By Kate Aanenson, AICP, Community Development Director File No: PC 2018­12 SUMMARY The developer is requesting conceptual review to consider rezoning from Agricultural Estate to Planned Unit Development (PUD) Residential.  Specifically, the developer is seeking guidance if this is the zoning application for the development of this property. BACKGROUND The request for PUD provides for the opportunity for the  developer to request  a concept review. Notice of the meeting was sent to surrounding properties. It should be noted that the properties in the Royal Oaks Subdivision were inadvertently omitted from the  mailing; however, there were residents from the neighborhood in attendance.   The concept review was held by the Planning Commission on July 17, 2018. The minutes from that meeting are included in the August 13, 2018 City Council packet. DISCUSSION Those that spoke at the Planning Commission meeting were concerned about the environmental impacts, the changes to the character of the area, the number of lots and their sizes, and traffic.  Two Planning Commissioners shared their comments which included the impact to natural resources, lot sizes, and amount of grading. RECOMMENDATION The City Council provides observations and feedback on the Concept Planned Unit Development Plan, including the staff comments and the comments from  the July 17, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Staff Report PC Staff Report Attachments Letter from Brian & Donna Strauss dated July 29, 2018 Emails Affidavit of Mailing Notice of City Council Meeting CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: July 17, 2018 CC DATE: August 13, 2018 REVIEW DEADLINE: August 15 CASE # 2018-12 BY: KA PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a general concept plan review for a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The site is currently zoned Rural Residential. LOCATION: 7141 Galpin Boulevard APPLICANT: U.S. Home Corporation, d/b/a Lennar PRESENT ZONING: RR Rural Residential 2030 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential 1.2 – 4 units an acre ACREAGE: Approximately 188 acres gross DENSITY: 2.26 units an acre net 88 acres net SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The developer is requesting conceptual review to consider rezoning from Agricultural Estate PUD Residential. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION MAKING: The Planning Commission is providing the City Council with comments and direction on the Concept Planned Unit Development. Notice was sent to adjacent properties within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a general concept plan review for a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The site is currently zoned Rural Residential. BACKGROUND In November 2017 the property was listed for sale by Comerica Bank; Trust NA, as personal representatives of the Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson and Paisley Park Enterprises. On several occasions the seller’s agents and members of Lennar have met with city staff to begin reviewing the zoning standards and the best use for the property. In May of 2018 U.S. Home Corporation entered into an Option Agreement to purchase the property. (from the developer’s narrative) PROPOSED ACTION: The Planning Commission provides observations and feedback to the City Council on the Concept Planned Unit Development. Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 2 of 13 Map of property Parcel and Site Information Parcel ID Taxpayer GIS Acreage Land Use Current Zoning 256900030 PRN 8.95 Low Density 1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential 256900020 PRN 149.0 Low Density 1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential 250100100 Paisley Park Enterprises Inc. 3.23 Low Density 1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential 256900010 PRN 20.78 Low Density 1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential 250100200 PRN 6.62 Low Density 1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential Total 188.58 Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 3 of 13 The surrounding land uses are included in the following table: Subdivision Zoning Land Use Notes South Royal Oaks RSF Low Density 13 acres-33 lots West Woods at Long Acres PUD Low Density 97 acres-115 lots Wynsong - shoreland district PUD Low Density 9.4 acres 4 units North Ashling Meadows RSF Low Density 40 acres-51 units Lake Lucy Ridge RSF Low Density 9 acres-17 units East Lake Ann Recreational not applicable not applicable Undeveloped Adjacent LAND South Gorra Property Zoning Land Use Notes Rural Residential Low Density 38 (25 net) acres- 50 units Rural Residential Low/Medium 34 acres – 204 units Rural Residential Medium Density 46 acres - 276 units Rural Residential High Density 28 acres -336 units The main access point to the development will be of off Galpin Boulevard. The plan proposes connections from the Ashling Meadows subdivision streets of Topaz Drive, Ruby Lane and Lucy Ridge Lane. An existing home that is on 2.62 acres at 7011 Galpin Boulevard is not included in the subdivision. ZONING DISTRICT Low-density zoning options 1.2-4 Units an acre Residential Single Family (RSF) requires 15,000 square foot lots. This zoning district would cause the most the environmental impact to the site. In order to achieve the desire for a larger preservation area next to the lakes, the most appropriate zoning would be either a planned unit development (PUD) or residential-low and medium density (RLM). Both of these districts require preservation of environmental features. It will be the city’s goals to ensure that the request for either zoning meets the intent. ARTICLE VIII. – PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DIVISION 1. – GENERALLY Sec. 20-501. – Intent. Planned Unit Developments (PUD) offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety of uses, internal transfers of density, construction phasing, and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the city has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the use of other, more standard zoning districts. It will be the applicant’s responsibility to demonstrate that the city’s expectation is to be realized as evaluated against the following criteria. Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 4 of 13 The applicant is pursuing the PUD Zoning. In their narrative, they have stated, “The use of the PUD zoning also allows for greater specificity in the types, location and sizes of uses. The city has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would be the case with the other, more standard zoning districts. It is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the city's expectations are to be realized as evaluated by the city’s goals.” Concept PUD – What is required? Chapter 20 - Zoning, Article VIII. – Planned Unit Development District, Division 2. – Procedures Sec. 20-517. - General concept plan. (a) In order to receive guidance in the design of a PUD prior to submission of a formal application, an applicant may submit a concept plan for review and comment by the planning commission and city council. Submission of a concept plan is optional but is highly recommended for large PUDs. In order for the review to be of most help to the applicant, the concept plan should contain such specific information as is suggested by the city. Generally, this information should include the following information appropriate to the type of development, e.g., commercial, industrial or residential: (1) Approximate building areas, pedestrian ways and road locations; (2) Height, bulk and square footage of buildings; (3) Type, number or square footage or intensities of specific land uses; (4) Number of dwelling units; (5) Generalized development plan showing areas to be developed or preserved; and (6) Staging and timing of the development. (b) The tentative written consent of all property owners within the proposed PUD shall be filed with the city before the staff commences review. Approval of the concept statement shall not obligate the city to approve the final plan or any part thereof or to rezone the property to a planned unit development district. (c) The final acceptance of land uses is subject to the following procedures: (1) The developer meets with city staff to discuss the proposed developments. (2) The applicant shall file the concept stage application and concept plan, together with all supporting data. (3) The planning commission shall conduct a hearing and make recommendations to the City Council. Notice of the hearing shall consist of a legal property description, description of request, and be published in the official newspaper at least ten days prior to the hearing. Written notification of the hearing shall be mailed at least ten days prior thereto to owners of land within 500 feet of the boundary of the property and an on-site notification sign erected. (4) Following the receipt of the report and recommendations from the planning commission, the city council shall consider and comment on the concept plan. Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 5 of 13 The PUD process provides an opportunity to receive observation and feedback from other jurisdictions, Planning Commission, City Council and residents of Chanhassen. Summary of Request The applicant proposal is requesting the Low Density Residential PUD Zoning. Site Analysis Gross area 188 acres • Wetland Area 49 acres • Galpin Boulevard ROW Area 1 acre • Dedicated Public Park Area 50 area ( upland) Net acres 88 Manage 1 Wetland Standards • Buffer 30 feet • Building Setback for Buffer 25 feet • Accessory Building setback from the Buffer 15 feet Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 6 of 13 Proposed Lot standards: North lots - Shoreline Overlay non-riparian lots 45 Width 90 feet Area 15,000 sq. feet OHW 75 foot setback Bluff 30 foot setback Local street ROW setback 30 feet Impervious Surface 25 % lots with in the Shoreland District Central Lots 102 Width 65 feet Area 8,450 sq. feet Front setback 25 feet Rear setback 25 feet Side setback 5 feet and 10 feet Lot Coverage 35 % South Lots 52 Width 55 feet Area 6,000 sq. feet Front setback 25 feet Rear setback 25 feet Side setback 5 feet and 10 feet Lot Coverage 35 % The developer has submitted a plan that uses the RSF Zoning District. While the plan is not consistent with the Park Comprehensive Plan, the Developer has shown what they could achieve applying the RSF (15,000 square foot minimum) zoning district. The total lots under this proposal is 20. Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 7 of 13 Planning Departments Comments Provide a variety of housing types. Attached are Lennar’s Home Plans. Engineering Comments These comments are intended to identify major considerations for PUD plan approval based upon a review by the Engineering department in response to a development plan submitted by Lennar and received June 15, 2018. Engineering supports the “density transfer” plan. • Tie the development design into the reconstruction project along Galpin Blvd. The city is considering significantly changing the profile of roadway between Hunter Dr. and Longacres Dr. The city would add an underpass in this area and adjust the existing profile by filling between the higher areas near the intersections. • Evaluate safe intersection design requirements and sight distances along Galpin Blvd. • Detail trail connections through the development to Galpin Blvd and the existing park system. • Consider an access for city vehicles to the well house site along Galpin Blvd. • Propose and coordinate property swap near the well site to facility proposed layout. • Consider access along the MCES interceptor and their permanent easement to facilitate maintenance of the sanitary pipeline. Show the permanent easement on the site plan. Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 8 of 13 • Evaluate and maintain bluff stability along the northeast side of the site adjacent to Lake Lucy. • Communicate plan for bluff areas along north grouping of homes (90 lot area). • Develop and communicate a detailed storm water plan. • Identify sanitary and water planning meeting the city’s comprehensive plans. • Identify wetland areas intended to be mitigated. Communicate plan to address mitigation requirements. • Detail right-of-way and street widths. • Document proposed street grades. • Detail areas intended for use of retaining wall systems and proposed wall heights. Include information regarding intended block systems. • Show building pad setbacks. • Document mass grading intentions and site balancing. • Identify grading coordination with the neighboring properties. • Identify soil stockpile areas left after mass grading. • Show streams and water flow conveyances along with their protection. • Evaluate coordination with the proposed street connections to Topaz Dr. • Identify naturally occurring features intended to be preserved. • Provide traffic impact study in conjunction with the developer’s proposal. • There is outstanding Assessments for the Lake Ann Interceptor Water Resources Comments • Water resources is strongly supportive of density transfer to preserve connected wetland and woodland areas. • An open space preservation narrative should also discuss wetland and water resource protection. The importance of these spaces to the community goes beyond regulatory and stormwater requirements. • HOA (Master Association) required to maintain open spaces including permanent stormwater best management practices, and buffers. • Must include an open space preservation plan and permanent funding mechanism to ensure maintenance and preservation of open spaces. • Drain tile must be installed back of curb and all sumps connected per Chanhassen Standards and Specifications. • Developer is responsible for completing MnRAM assessments for all wetlands on the property. MnRAMs must be approved by Chanhassen Water Resources Coordinator and Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD). • Approved MnRAMs are required to determine wetland buffer requirements, impacts, and assessments. Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 9 of 13 • Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) process must be completed for all proposed impacts. A Notice of Decision for Boundary and Type is the only Decision that has been issued at this time. • All WCA conditions of approval must be completed prior to issuing a grading permit. • All buffers and setbacks must be shown on plans. • Buffer averaging must be shown on all plans. • All lots must meet minimum buffer and setback requirements. • All water resources, and water resource impacts must be shown on plans including creeks, streams, riverines, and natural drainage ways. Not all water resources are identified on the Wetland Delineation. • The creek at the northwest corner connecting Wetland 2 to Wetland 1 must be preserved as an open channel. No filling or piping is permitted. • Crossings of natural channels must be in the form of bridges to allow for passage of wildlife and native vegetation preservation. • Shoreline and streambank restorations shall be incorporated into the plan whenever possible. • Wetlands, buffers, water resources, and stormwater BMPs must be placed in outlots Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 10 of 13 • All pervious surfaces must utilize native vegetative cover, deep rooted low mow/no mow/turf alternatives, or approved landscape plantings. Landscape plantings include woody vegetation, annual and perennial forbs, ornamental grasses, fruit/vegetable gardens, and mulch. • Irrigation systems are discouraged unless they prioritize stormwater re-use. • Identify how green design practices will be prioritized to reduce environmental impact. • Tree preservation and native habitat preservation credits should be discussed further with the city and RPBCWD. • Identify all wildlife corridors, and opportunities to incorporate wildlife corridors into plans. • No structure may be constructed or reconstructed such that its lowest floor elevation is less than 3 feet above the 100 year flood elevation or emergency overflow of any water resource. Note this standard varies slightly from the RPBCWD standard. • Every effort should be made to locate any wet detention basins in low visibility locations. Residents do not find these hard working, pollutant removal devices appealing. They are critical to environmental health, function and public safety, however, these are not “water features.” • Consider aeration in wet detention basins to increase evaporation and reduce algal growth. • A master grading plan will be reviewed and approved for the development. Each lot should also be reviewed by builder and staff to identify missed opportunities to improve grading, drainage, erosion and sediment control, including impacts to adjacent lots. • Provide pet waste facilities throughout the development that include biodegradable bags, disposal containers, educational signage. Facilities must not be directly adjacent to water resources. Facilities will be owned and maintained by HOA. • Identify all public and private stormwater infrastructure, water resources, and drainage pathways on adjacent properties. • The proposed maximum lot coverage of 25% (shoreland overlay district), and 35% (all other lots) is acceptable, however, the developer should limit this to 20% and 30% respectively during the initial development of each lot. This will allow residents 5% lot coverage to utilize for future patios, pathways, sheds, fireplaces, etc. This is a significant issue in the city. • Identify opportunities to incorporate pervious surfaces into lot coverage during development. • Applicant must provide the annual runoff volumes to each wetland for the pre- and post- project conditions. • The proposed redevelopment will need Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) permits. • It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure and submit proof that permits are received from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, MnDOT, Carver County, RPBCWD, Board of Water and Soil Resources, PCA, etc.). • Project must meet all stormwater requirements of the city and RPBCWD. • Project will require stormwater management fees associated with city development review and permitting process. Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 11 of 13 • The city is in agreement with the RPBCWD comments identified in the Memorandum dated June 29, 2018 titled ‘Proposed Single Family Residential Development Galpin Boulevard Planning Case 2018-12.’ Any deviation from those comments are noted in this document. Landscaping Comments/ Tree Preservation Existing conditions on site include maple/basswood (Big Woods) forest in the eastern and northern sections of the property, a lowland floodplain forest in the center area, a mesic oak forest in the central western half and mixed hardwood forest in the southwestern corner of the site. The wooded areas cover a significant portion of the site. Aggressive understory species, such as buckthorn, are present in the western half of the site and are starting to move into the eastern half. There are significant, mature trees in all wooded areas with some of the largest trees being white and red oaks and some maples. Tree Preservation comments: • Applicant will be required to provide a tree inventory for all wooded areas within/near construction limits. Areas of preservation will not need to be inventoried. • In either Scenario, the applicant will need to meet canopy coverage requirements for the development. Preservation within the construction limits (small areas of tree groupings) should be pursued in order to meet requirements. However, oak and maples are sensitive to grade changes and if there is significant grading on site, then Scenario 2 would be highly preferable for tree preservation. • In either Scenario tree preservation along the north and south property lines adjacent to residential areas will be recommended. • The maple basswood in the eastern half of the site is of a better quality than the wooded areas on the west side of the property due to a lesser impact by invasive species. Protecting this forested area should be a priority and staff strongly recommends Scenario Two for tree preservation for future generations. • Linking wooded areas from Lake Ann and Greenwood Shores parks to the western side of the lake will be highly beneficial for forest health, wildlife protection and habitat. Landscaping Comments: • Tree Preservation/Canopy Coverage requirements may incur reforestation requirements for the developer, depending on preservation. · When re-planting, the applicant shall use a diverse mix of species • Bufferyard requirements will need to be met for the north, south, west and internal areas, depending on density differences. • Foundation plantings will be required for the Villa homes. • In common areas/HOA lots: · Preferable to have minimum mowed turf areas. Use prairie or no mow mixes in low use areas · Employ capture-and-use irrigation systems Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 12 of 13 Park Comments At their June 26th meeting, the Park and Recreation Commission recommended that the City Council acknowledged the Lennar Concept Plan 07 dated June 1, 2018 depicting 199 lots clustered to the west central and north central quadrants of the property and preserving 50+/- acres of public park area utilizing a density transfer and park dedication in the eastern quadrant of the property as the preferred starting point for the design of a preliminary plat for the proposed development. Arguably, the now pending subdivision and development of this parcel of land has been one of the most highly anticipated opportunities to create a quality housing community while simultaneously preserving a large tract of public open space that guarantees the character and integrity of Lake Ann Park will be preserved. More than a half dozen potential developers met with city staff prior to considering how they would propose to develop this property and how much they would offer the sellers as a purchase price. Lennar stated in that initial meeting that it was their desire to bring forward a plan that was both viable and met the goals and requirements of the city's guiding plans and ordinances. Now that Lennar has secured an option to purchase the property, they have delivered two concepts for developing the parcel to the city. It is staff's position that Concept Plan 07 succinctly captures the dual goals of creating a quality housing community while simultaneously preserving a large tract of public open space. Planning Commission Galpin Property Concept Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2018-12 July 17, 2018 Page 13 of 13 Park and Recreation System Initiatives – from the System Plan: While the objectives and policies offer broad guidelines for park and recreation system development, the following initiatives have been identified by city staff, the Park and Recreation Commission, and citizens as key to completing the system and improving existing facilities to meet needs today and over the next 25 years. Numbered initiatives correspond to efforts depicted in Figure 6-8. Parks and Recreation Facilities: P-1. Expand Lake Ann Park to create a premier community park. Expansion of the park would incorporate natural woodlands west of Lake Ann and would preserve views across the lake, protect wildlife habitat, and preserve the community’s natural heritage. The expansion would also allow for a loop trail around Lake Ann and a connection to Lake Lucy. P-2. Create a new ball field complex to meet demands created by increasing population. P-3. Create neighborhood parks in the general locations identified on Figure 6-8 along with development. Fire Department • Cul-de-sacs to deviate from minimum sizes for fire apparatus roads in fire code (96 feet). • Fire hydrants put into area per code. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission provides observations and feedback on the Concept Planned Unit Development along with the following comments: 1. With the Preliminary PUD, the developer shall address the comments in the staff report from a. City Engineering b. Water Resources Coordinator c. Environmental Resources Specialist d. Parks and Recreation e. Building f. Planning g. Watershed District g:\plan\2018 planning cases\18-12 galpin development - lennar\concept staff report.doc 1 Galpin Property City of Chanhassen Introduction U.S. Home Corporation, d/b/a Lennar is proposing to develop Galpin Property (actual name TBD) in a manner that is sensitive to the environment and surrounding area. With this application we are submitting two conceptual scenarios. The first scenario is a ‘lot yield’ plan that has 202 homes and demonstrates how the property could be developed following the existing RSF zoning standards with one standard lot width and home style for the entire property. The second scenario is a ‘density transfer’ plan that has 199 homes with varying lot sizes demonstrating how the property could be developed through the use of a PUD that will offer diverse housing opportunities and price points accompanied by the preservation of open space. Background/History In November 2017 the property was listed for sale by Comerica Bank; Trust NA, as personal representatives of the Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson and Paisley Park Enterprises. On several occasions the seller’s agents and members of Lennar have met with City staff to begin reviewing the zoning standards and the best use for the property. In May of 2018 U.S. Home Corporation entered into an Option Agreement to purchase the property. Property Description The site consists of approximately 188 acres made up of several tax parcels (PID 25.6900010, 25.6900020, 25.6900030, 25.0100100, and 25.0100200) located in the Notheast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 116, Range 23. All buildings have been removed and the property has been vacant for some time. The site suffers from frequent trespassers that use the property for walking trails. City Standards Land Use designation The property is designated for Low Density residential: RSF 1.2-4 units per acre. Lot yield Plan – 1.46 DU/Acre (202/138) Concept Plan – 2.26 DU/Acre (199/88) Zoning Classification The site is currently zoned as Rural Residential with underlying zoning of RSF; low density residential 1.2-4 units per acre. The lot yield plan follows RSF standards and has a density of 1.46. The density transfer plan requires a zoning 2 change to PUD to allow flexibility and the relaxation of strict application of the zoning ordinance in exchange for greater environmental sensitivity and preservation of open space for public use. At 2.26 units per acre the density transfer plan also fits within the RSF density classification. Surrounding Land Uses Residential developments of varying densities surround the site to the North, South, and West. To the West, across Galpin is Long Acres which was developed as a PUD to allow flexibility in design standards. Our primary street connections appropriately line up with Hunter Drive and Long Acres Drive. Boarding the property to the North and South are existing neighborhoods zoned RSF. The existing neighborhood to the North (Ashling Meadows) provides two existing road stubs to the subject property. There are no road connections to the South. Lake Lucy, and Lake Ann and their surrounding wetlands are located to the East. Both Ashling Meadows and Long Acres were built by Lennar under the Lundgren Bros Construction name. On the North end, both plans mirror the lot dimensions of the existing neighborhood. Topographical challenges naturally make the North portion of the site more conducive to a wider home style that may not require as much depth for building pads. On the South end of the property the ‘lot yield’ plan shows nine homes backing to the existing neighborhood to the South. The density transfer concept mitigates the visual impacts of smaller lots to the existing neighborhood by incorporating the use of cul-de-sacs and by limiting the home-style in that location to a single story Villa. In this scenario eleven homes will be visible to the existing neighborhood but will be orientated in a manner that attempts to minimize the number that back directly to the existing homes. Open Space Preservation The City of Chanhassen’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies significant trail improvements along the Eastern boundary of the property that would enhance the Lake Ann Park and trail system by completing important connections between Lake Ann, Lake Lucy and Galpin Road. As part of this application we have provided two conceptual plans. The first scenario is a ‘lot yield’ plan that follows the City’s land use designation for the property and conforms to the minimum lot sizes and setbacks allowed within the RSF and Shoreland Overlay district. Park dedication would follow the Cities requirements as described in City Code. The second scenario is the ‘density transfer’ plan that focuses housing development closer to Galpin and preserves approximately 50 acres of land adjacent to Lake Lucy and Lake Ann that could be used for park dedication to the City. The overall lot count in both scenarios is roughly 200 homes. The difference between the two lies in the concentration of acreage used. In scenario one approximately 138 acres 3 are being developed to reach 200 homes. By mixing lot sizes scenario two strategically places the same 200 homes on 88 acres of land giving the opportunity to preserve significantly more open space for use by the residents of Chanhassen. Preserving the open space in this manner not only minimizes environmental impacts but also significantly reduces the length of public infrastructure (sewer, water, roads) required for long term maintenance by the City. Building Plans/Product Information Extensive research on housing availability and market conditions within the City of Chanhassen has guided us in putting together a plan that is matched by a product portfolio that includes an architecturally interesting variety of homes, and price points, that meet multiple buyer niches in Galpin Property . Landmark Series - Designed with efficiency in mind, the Landmark series meets the demands of today’s challenging housing market by offering a fantastic value planned specially for 65’ wide homesites. Lennar has successfully built the Landmark series in Reflections at Lake Riley, Boulder Cove, and Camden Ridge. Typical footprints are 50’ wide allowing the ability to maintain setbacks designated by zoning standards. A variety of houseplans and elevations make up this series offering square footages ranging from 2,200 sq ft to 3,200 sq ft plus the ability to finish the basement to add footage to the home. With families in mind, the homes typically include four bedrooms, a large open living space on the main level, a master suite, mud room, and three car garage. Sixty-five foot wide lots allow the ability to preserve open space without compromising the integrity of the neighborhood. Typical side yard setbacks will be maintained. An interesting streetscape will be maintained through the incorporation of a variety of elevations, materials, and color packages. Lots are arranged in a manner that will include an assortment of walk-outs, look-outs, and flats.  Traditional Series - The Traditional series is designed for the 90’ wide homesites with the move up buyer in mind. A variety of house plans will be offered ranging from 2,600 sq ft to 3,700 sq ft. plus the ability to finish the basement to add additional footage to the home. These well thought out plans typically include four bedrooms, a large open living space on the main level, master suite, craft room, three car garage, and allow for luxury upgrades such as an indoor sport court. No deviation from RSF standards is requested in the large lot area. An interesting streetscape will be maintained through the incorporation of a variety of elevations, materials, and color packages. Luxury Villa – The Luxury Villa is designed for the 55’ wide homesites along the Southern Boarder. The Luxury provides minimal maintenance housing for an underserved market in Chanhassen; and the Twin Cities in general, the ‘empty nester’. Designed for single level living, the Villa homes offer a spacious first floor that includes a master suite, fireplace, open living room, gourmet kitchen, 4 and study. A deck or three season porch is included with the home to allow the opportunity to enjoy the natural features of Galpin Property . Multiple elevations and color packages will be incorporated to reduce monotony. It is important to note that the lot yield plan would be made up of all Traditional Series homes. Based on our absorption forecasts and financial modeling it is a possible that we would need to sell off portions of the lots to other builders. Environmental Impacts Wetlands - A wetland delineation was completed on the site in September 2017. Wetland impacts have been minimized by careful planning and the preservation of open space. The ‘lot yield’ plan will require more impact to existing wetlands for the extension of public infrastructure (sewer, water, streets) to serve the upland adjacent to Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. Tree Preservation – Preservation of open space for public use will allow the opportunity to preserve large wooded areas that may otherwise be disturbed with development. The ‘lot yield’ concept that follows the existing zoning guidelines will have a much greater impact on the large stands of trees located in the upland areas fronting Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. Water Quality – Water quality will be managed through the incorporation of on- site ponding and other appropriate erosion control measures. We are evaluating the potential for water re-use on site to supplement irrigation systems. Lennar is committed to following stormwater policies enacted by the City of Chanhassen and the Minnesota Pollution Control Association (MPCA). Homeowners Association(s) A Master Homeowners Association will be established to maintain private common areas and community monuments. In the density transfer concept a Sub-Association will be created to take care of the common elements within the Villa area. The Villa will be ‘full maintenance’ in nature to include; professional management, mowing, plowing, and exterior upkeep of the homes. Owners of detached single family homes will be responsible for their own upkeep and maintenance subject to City Ordinance and Architectural Controls established within the Master Association. Summary Lennar has a long history of building successful Communities in the City of Chanhassen under the names Lennar, Ryland, Lundgren Bros. Construction, and Orrin Thompson Homes. We are very excited for the opportunity that lends itself through the careful development of this fantastic property and ask for your support. 5 Project Team Developer: U.S. Home Corporation, D/B/A Lennar Builder: Lennar Corporation Primary Contact: Joe Jablonski Planner/Engineer/Surveyor: Pioneer Engineering Wetland Specialist: TBD Landscape Architect: Pioneer Engineering Legal Council: Vantage Law Group Association Manager: TBD Project summary (US Home/Lennar) Galpin Property – 188 Gross Acres Scenario # 1 Total Homesites – 202 Approximate Developed Area – 138 acres Open Space – 50 acres Traditonal homesites – 202 Average Lot – 90’ wide Scenario # 2 Total Homesites – 199 Approximate Developed Area = 88 Acres Open Space = 100 Acres Traditional homesites – 45 Average Lot – 90’ wide Landmark Homesites – 102 Average Lot – 65’ wide Villa Homesites – 52 Average Lot – 55’ wide c 1OFGALPIN BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 6-1-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS xx I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson 1CONCEPT PLAN 07 LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 55' LOTS 65' LOTS 90' LOTS c 1OFGALPIN BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 6-1-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS xx I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson 1CONCEPT PLAN 07 LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 55' LOTS 65' LOTS 90' LOTS c 1OFGALPIN BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 1-5-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS xx I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson 1CONCEPT PLAN 04 LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 c 1OFGALPIN BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 1-5-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS xx I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson 1CONCEPT PLAN 04 LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 From:Aanenson, Kate To:Potter, Jenny Subject:FW: Chanhassen Planned Unit Development Concept Review Request Date:Wednesday, July 11, 2018 2:22:21 PM Attachments:image005.png image006.png image007.png image008.png From: Carlson, Ben (BWSR) <ben.carlson@state.mn.us> Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2018 1:03 PM To: Meuwissen, Kim <kmeuwissen@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Potter, Jenny <JPotter@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: RE: Chanhassen Planned Unit Development Concept Review Request In regards to the Galpin Development – PUD Concept review, I strongly support the “Density Transfer” plan as this would result in less wetland impact and would also preserve a high quality maple-basswood forest. I do not support the “lot yield” plan for the reason previously listed. Ben Carlson Wetland Specialist Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources From: Meuwissen, Kim [mailto:kmeuwissen@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 10:28 AM To: Carlson, Ben (BWSR) <ben.carlson@state.mn.us> Cc: Potter, Jenny <JPotter@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Chanhassen Planned Unit Development Concept Review Request Mr. Carlson, Please review and respond to the attached Agency Review Request no later than Thursday, July 5, 2018. Documents related to this request can be found at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/2018-12. Thank you. Kim Meuwissen Office Manager CITY OF CHANHASSEN PH. 952.227.1107 FX. 952.227.1110 www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us protect. manage. restore. 18681 Lake Drive East Chanhassen, MN 55317 952-607-6512 www.rpbcwd.org Memorandum To: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director From: Terry Jeffery, CWD Subject: Proposed Single-Family Residential Development Galpin Boulevard Planning Case 2018-12 Date: June 29, 2018 c: Claire Bleser; Administrator Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District This proposed redevelopment will need a Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) permit prior to beginning construction activities. This includes clearing and grubbing and any grading activities. We appreciate the opportunity to provide preliminary comments on the project. The RPBCWD has not received a permit application for this project but offers the following summary of preliminary RPBCWD review comments for the proposed Galpin Boulevard Development in Chanhassen, MN. Additional comments will likely arise once an official application is submitted for RPBCWD review. We are currently scheduled to meet the developer to discuss the project the week of July 1st. The RPBCWD permit application, rules and rule guidance are available for download on the RPBCWD website: http://www.rpbcwd.org/permits/. The following comments are based on the rules that would likely apply to this project and highlight the areas where revisions or additional information would be needed to meet the RPBCWD rules. These review comments do not constitute approval, a variance, or exemption from the rules. Therefore, this project will require permit approvals from the RPBCWD Board of Managers. These comments should be considered in the context that Lake Ann has some of the best water quality in the District and that is, in large part, a result of the limited development around the lake. Urbanization of a watershed will always result in degradation of water quality. Steps should be taken to minimize and mitigate these impacts to this unique resource that is so central to Chanhassen’s park system and provides so many recreational and educational opportunities. The preservation of woodland and wetland areas, especially those more proximal to Lake Ann through better site design practices such as density transfer are strongly supported. Rule B: Floodplain Management and Drainage Alterations Rule B: Floodplain Management and Drainage Alterations applies if a project alters or fills land below the 100-year flood elevation of a waterbody in the watershed. Based on the submitted plans, it is unclear if the project will fill below the 100-year flood elevation of one or more of the wetland on the site. In this case Rule B would apply, and the comments below should be reflected in the plans. • Compensatory storage at the same elevation (+/- 1 foot) and within the floodplain of the same waterbody must be provided for any fill below the 100-year flood elevation. 2 Rule C: Erosion and Sediment Control Erosion and Sediment Control Permit (Rule C) is required from the RPBCWD because more than 50 cubic yards of earth will be placed, altered, or removed and more than 5,000 square feet of land-surface area will be altered (Rule C, Section 2.1). Please see Rule C, Section 3 for the applicable criteria and notes that must be included with the erosion control aspects of the proposed project. Given the high level, generalized nature of the provided plans the necessary erosion control notes or needed erosion prevention and sediment control features are not shown. The needed erosion control notes for inclusion on the plan sheets are available for download under supporting documents on the RPBCWD website: http://www.rpbcwd.org/permits/. Rule D: Wetland and Creek Buffer A Wetland and Creek Buffer Permit (Rule D) is required from the RPBCWD because the proposed activities trigger RPBCWD Rule J (Rule D, Section 2) and there are several wetlands on the project parcel downgradient of the proposed work based on the submitted site survey, the approved wetland type and boundary determination report, National Wetland Inventory mapping, and indicated in the project narrative. Efforts should be taken to avoid and minimize wetland impacts where possible in a manner consistent with the MN WCA and with consideration given to the comments of the Technical Evaluation Panel. Comments provided below are preliminary in nature and the applicant should review the RPBCWD’s Wetland and Creek Buffer Rule for full details on submittal requirements. The following criteria would apply. • A copy of the wetland delineation report and MnRAM assessment must be provided with the application package to confirm the wetland value in accordance with RPBCWD Appendix D1. The RPBCWD value may differ from the value assigned by the city of Chanhassen. • Buffer must be indicated by permanent, free-standing markers at the buffer’s upland edge, in material conformity with a design and text provided by the District. A marker must be placed along each lot line, with additional markers at an interval of no more than 200 feet or where the buffer changes direction. The location of the markers and a detail for the markers must be provided. • A note must be included on the plans indicating: The potential transfer of aquatic invasive species (e.g., zebra mussels, Eurasian watermilfoil, etc.) must be minimized to the maximum extent possible. • Before any work subject to District permit requirements commences, buffer areas and maintenance requirements must be documented in a declaration and recorded in the office of the county recorder or registrar. Rule J: Stormwater Management A Stormwater Management Permit (Rule J) is required for this project because more than 50 cubic yards of earth will be placed, altered, or removed and more than 5,000 square feet of land-surface area will be altered (Rule J, Section 2.1) based on the information provided by the City. Based on the information provided, it appears the project is a new development and the criteria in Rule J, Section 3 would apply to the entire parcel. Comments provided below are preliminary and general in nature and the applicant should review the RPBCWD’s Stormwater Management Rule for full details on submittal requirements. The following criteria would apply. 3 • An applicant for a permit under this rule must demonstrate, using a model utilizing the most recent applicable National Weather Service reference data (e.g., Atlas 14), that the implementation of its stormwater management plan will: o Limit peak runoff flow rates to that from existing conditions for the two-, 10- and 100-year frequency storm events using a nested 24-hour rainfall distribution, and a 100-year frequency, 10-day snowmelt event, for all points where stormwater discharge leaves the site; • Provide for the abstraction onsite of 1.1 inches of runoff from the new or fully reconstructed impervious surface of the parcel; o Soil borings must be provided at all stormwater BMP locations. These must support the infiltration rates used in the design and confirm that the ordinary high groundwater level is at least three feet below the bottom of any proposed filtration or infiltration features. o The narrative notes that ponding will be used. While it may well be that ponding becomes a part of the overall stormwater management strategy, the applicant must first look to abstract 1.1 inches using the sequencing set forth in Rule J, §3.3. o Infiltration is not the only method of abstraction. The stormwater management must consider other methods of abstraction and discuss the feasibility of these measures such as reuse mentioned in the narrative. • Provide for at least sixty percent (60%) annual removal efficiency for total phosphorus, and at least ninety percent (90%) annual removal efficiency for total suspended solids from site runoff. The onsite abstraction of runoff may be included in demonstrating compliance with the total suspended solids and total phosphorus removal requirements. • No structure may be constructed or reconstructed such that its lowest floor elevation is less than 2 feet above the 100-year event flood elevation and no stormwater management system may be constructed or reconstructed in a manner that brings the low floor elevation of an adjacent structure into noncompliance with this standard. • General Comments: o All stormwater management structures and facilities must be designed for maintenance access and properly maintained in perpetuity. A maintenance and inspection plan must be provided. The maintenance and inspection plan must include specific maintenance requirements for the proprietary BMPs installed. o See Rule J, Section 4 for permit exhibit requirements. Summary Based on the information provided to date, a permit from the RPBCWD will be required prior to construction to likely cover the following: Erosion and Sediment Control, Wetland and Creek Buffer, and Stormwater Management. It is also possible that the Floodplain Management and Drainage Alteration rule will be triggered. The online permit application, rules, maintenance declaration template, and financial assurance templates are available for download on the RPBCWD website: http://www.rpbcwd.org/permits/. The District supports and encourages the utilization of Better Site Design and other methods to protect the water quality in Lake Ann as well as the downstream water resources. Thank you for the opportunity to review this concept plan. Please contact us with any questions. From:Aanenson, Kate To:Potter, Jenny Subject:FW: Prince’s land off Galpin Date:Wednesday, July 11, 2018 2:22:45 PM -----Original Message----- From: Holly Nelson <hollysn9@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 9:12 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Prince’s land off Galpin I just read through the development plans from Lennar for Prince’s land. Those 55’ and 65’ lots make me sad. I was hoping this would be an elite development in Chan and instead it’s sadly dense. I read their justification that if they spread it out they’d fit that many lots but are condensing it for the parkland. It would be so much nicer to have the 90’ lots through the whole development and have the park land too. This is valuable land. Please don’t let them waste it. Holly Nelson BRIAN & DONNA STRAUSS 6840 Lucy Ridge Lane Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 phone: 952.474.6235 fax: 952.474.6237 cell: 310.743.4684 (Brian) cell: 952.412.6011 (Donna) e-mail: briancstrauss@me.com (Brian) e-mail: donnamstrauss@me.com (Donna) July 29, 2018 Delivered By Email The Mayor & The City Council City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 To The Attention Of: Mayor Denny Laufenburger (dlaufenburger@ci.chanhassen.mn.us) Councilwoman Bethany Tjornhom (btjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us) Councilman Jerry McDonald (jmcdonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us) Councilwoman Elise Ryan (eryan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us) Councilman Dan Campion (dcampion@ci.chanhassen.mn.us) Subject: Galpin Boulevard Property Development Dear Mayor & Councilmembers, We respectfully submit to you our concerns as residents of Chanhassen in connection with the proposed development of the land between Powers Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard – more commonly referred to as the “Prince Property”. We have resided at our current address since 2004 which is part of the Lake Lucy Ridge neighborhood; our neighborhood borders the northern most edge of the continuous parcels of land being proposed for development. To be very clear, we respect the property rights of all landowners, and do not oppose the estate of Prince R. Nelson from monetizing those land assets. However, as proposed, the concepts are offensive to us, and we suspect they are, and will continue to be, offensive to many other Chanhassen residents – particularly those in close proximity to the proposed development. We note that this matter is on the tentative agenda for the August 13, 2018 Chanhassen City Council Meeting. We request that, if the current concepts come in front of you for approval, you vote them down outright. The contents herein outline some of our more pertinent objections and provide other additional commentary. Disclaimer Of Expertise We disclaim here certain areas of expertise. By way of background, our education and professional experiences are in business and general business management. We are not experts in conservation, environmental matters, water quality, water runoff, wetlands, or watershed management. We are not arborists, forestry experts, or experts in flora or fauna. We are not zoning experts, land surveyors, property developers, or land use experts/land use attorneys. We are not experts in local governmental procedures or experts in the relevant laws of the State of Minnesota. That all notwithstanding, we have begun to put a fair amount of personal time into researching issues around this very concerning matter. The Mayor & City Council - City of Chanhassen July 29, 2018 Page 2 Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Of July 17, 2018 Unfortunately, neither of us could attend the Planning Commission Meeting of July 17, 2018. We did, however, provide a written letter (see Appendix 1) to the Commission in advance of that meeting; you all were copied on our letter as well. While we were unable to attend in person, we have watched the meeting via the on-line recording. Certain elements of that meeting raise concerns and bear mentioning here: 1. This process may already be in non-conformance with Minnesota state law. Minnesota statute 394.26 governs “public hearings” (see Appendix 2). It states in part “Written notice of public hearings regarding the application of official controls to specific properties, including but not limited to conditional uses, variances, interim uses, zoning regulations, and subdivision regulations, shall be sent to all property owners of record within 500 feet of the affected property in incorporated areas.” The City of Chanhassen is an incorporated area. Please note that in the “Affidavit Of Mailing Notice” (see Appendix 3) associated with the July 17, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting, it is clear that no notice was made to certain addresses on at least: a) Majestic Way, b) Topaz Drive, c) Emerald Lane, or, d) Lucy Ridge Lane – addresses which would be included in the “within 500 feet” requirement of the statute given that certain residents on those streets actually border the property in question. That’s before we even get the tape measure out to accommodate a full 500 feet. 2. All, or virtually all, of the Chanhassen residents who submitted advance written comments or spoke at the July 17, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting did so in strong opposition to the proposed concepts as currently contemplated. We share many of those objections, and will lay those out in this letter. 3. One long-time city resident rightly noted that when the Lake Lucy Ridge neighborhood (our neighborhood) was developed in the early 2000’s, concerned neighboring residents had an opportunity to comment – which led to the developer (Noecker Development, LLC) making substantial and accommodating changes. We are hopeful the same will hold true here. 4. When speaking to the issue of connecting the development to the northern neighborhoods, Joe Jablonski, Director of Land at Lennar stated something to the effect of “the dead end streets to the north likely are marked with signs stating future road connection possible” and “at the direction of city staff, at least at this point, we have connected the roads”. Two points bear mentioning in response to those comments by Mr. Jablonski. First, Lucy Ridge Lane does not, and has not had, such a sign. Second, it is somewhat concerning to us that city staff is apparently down a path of directing the developer on street connections. However, we would also argue that it can be inferred in Mr. Jablonski’s statement that streets to the north do not need to be connected for development to be viable. 5. Also noteworthy is Mr. Jablonski’s statement of Lennar admitting that the property has “dramatic topography” and “a fair amount of dirt will need to be moved”. 6. At the conclusion of the July 17, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting, certain commissioners offered brief comments and opinions: a. Concern over destruction to natural resources. b. Opposition to large houses on small lots. c. Opposition to 35% lot coverage and increasing lot coverage above 25%. d. This property is a natural resource that can’t be duplicated. e. The concepts do not respect the land and will require massive grading and massive tree clear cutting. f. The proposed new road to the north is difficult to envision given topographical constraints. g. Less is more in this case. h. Finding an “Option C” that serves all is preferred and should be expected. The Mayor & City Council - City of Chanhassen July 29, 2018 Page 3 Our Objections To The Concepts Being Contemplated In the event the concepts are presented to you in substantially their current form, we would request that you vote them down for at least these reasons: Environmental The current concepts will harm the environment beyond repair. These things should be considered: • Disturbance To Wetlands. The property is covered with natural wetlands. Overdevelopment like the type currently contemplated would see unacceptable destruction to those wetlands. • Disturbance To Lake Lucy, And All Downstream Bodies Of Water Including Lake Ann. As is well known, Lake Lucy sits on top of the watershed and feeds Lake Ann and subsequent bodies of water. And it is well understood by the City that the health of these lakes is paramount to our community. On the City of Chanhassen’s own webpage, Lake Ann is described as having good water quality and low phosphorous. However, perhaps what is less know outside of the surrounding neighbors of Lake Lucy, is the substantial damage already caused to Lake Lucy through recent development. We are referring to the nearby neighborhood currently being constructed at the northwest corner of Lake Lucy Road and Yosemite Avenue – Anthem On Park (see Appendix 4). During 2016, the City of Chanhassen approved the rezoning of this property from Rural Residential District (RR) to Single-Family Residential District (RSF) to accommodate this 12-lot subdivision. Two full years later the property has changed hands between builders, only one home has partially been constructed, and the water quality of Lake Lucy has suffered tremendously. All residents in at least our neighborhood have been appalled at witnessing the serious degradation of water quality, and the enormous amounts of algae and invasive growth, which has recently developed in Lake Lucy. These devastating effects are the direct result of runoff from Anthem On Park traveling across/under Lake Lucy Road, and directly into Lake Lucy. It should be noted that at least one of the current concepts being contemplated calls for just this same type of rezoning, only on a much more massive scale, and physically much closer to both Lake Lucy and Lake Ann. • Massive Clear-Cutting & The Dramatic Removal Of “Big Woods”. As you likely know, “Big Woods” refers to a type of forest of hardwoods found in parts of Wisconsin and Minnesota. They take decades and centuries to grow and conservation is key to their preservation. The proposals contemplated will result in massive clear cutting of these types of trees. At the densities contemplated, the resulting topography will be more akin to prairie land, as opposed to the existing beautiful forest we all enjoy. • Sizable Earth Moving & Massive Re-Contouring Of The Land. By Mr. Jablonski’s own admission at the July 17, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting, the property has “dramatic topography”. Combining that with the densities being contemplated will only result in a permanent scaring of that property and the environment. Buffers, Construction Traffic, Additional Traffic/Connection Points • Buffers Are Too Small. The buffers between what is being proposed, and the surrounding neighborhoods appear to be non-existent. • Construction Traffic Will Be Unbearable. This development as contemplated, involves approximately 200 homes. This will add massive construction traffic to the surrounding neighborhoods for years. And, as currently contemplated, it will open up new lanes to the north for that construction traffic to flow – directly into, and through, the Lake Lucy Ridge neighborhood, and, to a lesser degree, the Ashling Meadows neighborhood. • Additional Traffic/Connection Points. Similar to the issue of construction traffic, opening up permanent outlets to the north will overburden the Lake Lucy Ridge neighborhood and the Ashling Meadows neighborhood with new, and dramatically increased traffic. This is clearly a safety concern. The Mayor & City Council - City of Chanhassen July 29, 2018 Page 4 Connecting The Proposed Development To The North Is Inconsistent With The Lake Lucy Ridge Neighborhood • Lake Lucy Ridge Was Not A Tract Home Developed Neighborhood. Unlike the proposed concepts, our neighborhood was not developed in tract home fashion (see Appendix 5). Owners purchased lots, selected customer builders, and, complying with a light set of neighborhood covenants, built custom homes. Those qualities were desirable to the homeowners and a market need was met. However, extending our neighborhood into the proposed development is concerning from an aesthetics, lot size, and economic perspective. Concerns Over Governance/The Possibility Of An Inappropriate “Quid Pro Quo” Between City & Developer Notwithstanding the previously cited matter of the “Affidavit Of Mailing Notice”, we have these additional concerns: • Overreliance On A Comprehensive Plan. The city seems too reliant on Comprehensive Plan as a guidepost. For a document that is now many years old, and one that, when crafted, likely did not allow the citizenry to fully connect the dots with “what could really happen under this plan”, it seems to bear too much weight. Further, this Comprehensive Plan was crafted well after certain residents bought into their homes; in other words, it’s a massive curveball after the fact. • Is There Already A Quid Pro Quo? The proposed concepts (see Appendix 6 for “Yield Plan” and Appendix 7 for “Density Transfer Plan”) screams of a wink-and-a-nod deal already in place between the City of Chanhassen and Lennar. It screams to us…..we (the developer) are going to drop in 200 houses with minimal need for variances in the “Yield Plan”, but if you approve the more aggressive variances with the “Density Transfer Plan” we will give you your park – not withstanding that this jams overaggressive development to the west and overly burdens those surrounding neighborhoods. • Why Did The City Of Chanhassen Not Enter The Marketplace And Compete To Procure Land For Parks Like Any Other Person Or Entity? If The City Of Chanhassen wanted a park extension on the east side of the property, why did the City not approach the land owner and procure that land through the normal marketplace and normal governmental budgeting and expenditure avenues? Instead, as contemplated, the City is obtaining its park on the financial and quality of life backs of the western neighborhoods. • There May Be A Rush To Development Now At A Tipping Point With Chanhassen Residents. In 2017 it appears to us that there was a groundswell of massive opposition to the city center development of the retail and apartment complex (see Appendix 8 and Appendix 9) now under construction. Nevertheless, the City Council moved forward with 3 to 2 vote of approval. This is concerning to us as it is indicative of a city counsel whose majority may be out of touch with the views of the residents of Chanhassen. Other Matters For Consideration/Recommendation For Rejection • Lennar Does Not Appear To Own The Land. It appears that, given Mr. Jablonski’s comments at the July 17, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting, Lennar does not currently own the land. We would speculate they have purchased an option on the land at a de minimis fee for a fixed duration of time. • The Burden On An Acceptable Concept Does Not Fall With The City Of Chanhassen, Or Neighboring Residents. It resides firmly with the developer, and if they can’t come forward with an acceptable plan, their recourse is to simply let their option on the land expire and move on – and the City Council is within its right to reject either of these concepts as contemplated. • If The Concepts As Proposed Come To The City Council, You Should Vote Them Down Outright. For at least all the reasons cited herein. The Mayor & City Council - City of Chanhassen July 29, 2018 Page 5 What Would Be Acceptable To Us, & Likely The Surrounding Neighbors Again, the burden on landing on a concept which is feasible does not fall upon us. Nevertheless, let us outline here what would be acceptable development for the property in question: Overall • Environmental guideposts must be established for the protection of the watershed, Lake Lucy, and Lake Ann. Development should be further buffered from these wetlands and lakes from what is currently contemplated. • The property should be developed with more reasonable density, larger lot sizes, and improved lot coverage ratios which are all meaningfully different from the proposed concepts. This will be more aesthetically pleasing, but, more importantly, it preserves more of the trees than currently contemplated. • The new development should only be accessed via Galpin Road, and not connected to the northern established neighborhoods. • Substantially wider buffers of substance including trees and other natural dividers should be utilized between the proposed development and the northern neighborhoods and the southern neighborhoods. Specific To the North & Connections With Lake Lucy Ridge & Ashling Meadows • As you know, the property is a series of continuous tax parcels. Parcel #25.6900030 (see Appendix 10), the northern most parcel, is of particular interest to us and, we suspect, to many of our neighbors in the northern bordering area. We would like to see this parcel developed separately (see Appendix 11 for an illustrative example – concept only). • This parcel should be developed only as an extension of the Lake Lucy Ridge neighborhood consistent with custom homes, lot sizes, and aesthetics of the current neighborhood. We have our own neighborhood association duly on file with Carver County which is inclusive of reasonable building covenants, and it is not unrealistic to think that our neighborhood association would be willing to annex these homes into our association. Lennar could develop parcel #25.6900030 in such a fashion, or they could sell that parcel to another builder or developer who could do the same. This method of development of parcel 25.6900030 would be an ideal solution for certain issues raised in the northern neighborhoods. • We do, however, recognize not connecting that parcel leaves concerns over the length of a “one outlet” cul-de-sac for the developer in the northern section outside of parcel #25.6900030. However, if developed within the overall suggestions raised here, perhaps that becomes a small cul-de-sac with larger lots, more trees, and a wider northern buffer, all of which could satisfy a very narrow variance if needed. Again, we stand in strong opposition to this proposed development as currently contemplated. That said, we believe there are options for development that work for all parties. Thank you for your consideration. Please feel free to contact us with any questions. Sincerely, Brian C. Strauss Donna M. Strauss The Mayor & City Council - City of Chanhassen July 29, 2018 Page 6 With Copies To: Note To City of Chanhassen: Please refrain from publishing this copy list to any public docket or record Note To Media: Please refrain from publishing any materials in this copy list City Of Chanhassen Planning Commission (by mail): 1. Andrew Aller 2. Nancy Madsen 3. Michael McGonagill 4. Mark Randall 5. John Tietz 6. Mark Undestad 7. Steven Weick Lake Lucy Ridge Homeowners (by email): 8. Debbie & Gordon Medeiros - 6820 Lucy Ridge Lane (medeiros45@me.com, medeiros13@me.com) 9. Lisa & Bill Rothschild - 6860 Lucy Ridge Lane (bill.rothschild8@icloud.com, blrothschild@gmail.com) 10. Jeff & Sarah Cannon - 1810 Emerald Lane (jeffjcannon@gmail.com, sarahanncannon@hotmail.com) 11. Cara & Angelo Galioto - 1805 Emerald Lane (c_galioto@hotmail.com, agalioto@lockton.com) 12. Karin & Steve Wallace - 6900 Lucy Ridge Lane (khirschey@hotmail.com, spwallace@hotmail.com) 13. Jennifer & Barry Friends - 6935 Lucy Ridge Lane (jenniferjfriends@gmail.com, barryfriends@gmail.com) 14. John & Julie Butcher - 6915 Lucy Ridge Lane (jbutcher518@gmail.com, johnbutcher518@gmail.com) 15. Kris & Andy Lenk - 6895 Lucy Ridge Lane (k.lenk@msn.com, alenk@vardeeurope.com) 16. Molly & Per Lagerback - 6875 Lucy Ridge Lane (mmlagerback@gmail.com, lagerback@gmail.com) 17. Koen Baars & Hilke Snels – 1795 Lucy Ridge Court (hilkesnels@hotmail.com) 18. Michelle & Brian Schlichter - 1750 Lucy Ridge Court (mnb.schlichter@mchsi.com) 19. Jacquie &Mark Phillips - 1760 Lucy Ridge Court (markjacq@yahoo.com) 20. Meredith & Greg McGuirk - 1770 Lucy Ridge Court (meremcguirk@gmail.com, gomcguirk@gmail.com) 21. Carey & Doff Lohrenz - 1780 Lucy Ridge Court (ffodcbou@aol.com, badgerf14@aol.com) 22. Jeff Neichin & Chris Capko - 1790 Lucy Ridge Court (capkoc@aol.com) Ashling Meadows Contact Person (by email): 23. Greg Stewart – 1893 Topaz Drive (grstewart77@gmail.com) Majestic Way Contact Person (by email): 24. Dake Chatfield – 2200 Majestic Way (dake.chatfield@gmail.com) Media (by email): 25. Liz Sawyer - Reporter & General Assignment Reporter, Star Tribune (liz.sawyer@startribune.com) 26. Mark Olsen – Community Editor, Chanhassen Villager (editor@chanvillager.com) APPENDIX 1 BRIAN & DONNA STRAUSS 6840 Lucy Ridge Lane Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 phone: 952.474.6235 fax: 952.474.6237 cell: 310.743.4684 (Brian) cell: 952.412.6011 (Donna) e-mail: briancstrauss@me.com (Brian) e-mail: donnamstrauss@me.com (Donna) July 4, 2018 Planning Commission City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attention: Andrew Aller, Steven Weick, Mark Randall, Mark Undestad, John Tietz, Nancy Madsen, Michael McGonagill Subject: Galpin Property - Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Review Planning Commission Members, We are residents of Chanhassen and have resided at our above address since 2004. We live in Lake Lucy Ridge, the neighborhood directly north of the Chanhassen parcels of land commonly referred to as the “Prince Property”. Regarding that property, we see that during the July 17, 2018 Chanhassen Planning Commission meeting, you will be taking up a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Review. While one of us will endeavor to attend that meeting, we write to you today to register our strongest possible opposition to that proposed development. We cannot emphasize our opposition to this project enough; and please note that in our 14 years as residents of Chanhassen, this is the first stance we have taken in opposition to any development in our city. We oppose this development for at least these reasons: 1. Environmental. The proposed development is overly disruptive to the environment. As you know, there are wetlands on and around the property which need to be managed with care. This development will certainly harm the wetlands, both during construction as well as after construction. Additionally, we would imagine that hundreds of trees will need to be removed from the parcels in question. 2. Duration Of Construction. To accommodate approximately 200 new homes, our community will be burdened by construction activity for many, many years. Of note, we have a small development going in near us on the corner of Lake Lucy Road and Yosemite Avenue. That small neighborhood alone will likely take 2-3 years to complete at the current pace. 3. Congestion To The Surrounding Neighborhoods. This is not a small development being proposed. This is a massive, approximately 200 lot development and it will leave the area overly congested. 4. Traffic & Traffic Flow. The proposed development will add exorbitant traffic to the broader area. Additionally, and importantly, our neighborhood (Lake Lucy Ridge), and the existing neighborhood to the west of us (Ashling Meadows), will bear the brunt of this additional traffic, as the proposed development calls for the opening and continuation of existing dead ended streets into the proposed development. Planning Commission - City of Chanhassen July 7, 2018 Page 2 5. Proposed Housing Styles/Declining Property Value. After a review of Lenar’s presentation materials, it appears the houses being proposed for the site are of sizes and types that will lower housing values for existing neighboring homeowners. Additionally, the massive scale of approximately 200 new homes coming to market will depress housing value meaningfully. Of note, housing values are just now coming back to pricing levels seen in the early 2000’s, when much of the current housing stock in the surrounding area was built. 6. Alternatives Are Available & Have Not Been Explored. Based on our review of the Application For Development Review as posted on the City of Chanhassen website (which is not signed by the property owner), as well our review of property records on the Carver County Property Information website, it appears Prince R. Nelson (and we would assume, now, his estate) is still the taxpayer of record for the parcels. Given the property has not yet been sold, it remains that there are a multitude of development alternatives available - alternatives which are more equitable to all stakeholders in the community including the property rights of the current property owner. At least these options are available: a. Having the City of Chanhassen acquire the land, or a portion of the land for communal property benefits, and to preserve the environment. b. In keeping with the current zoning of the parcels, develop the land with larger lot sizes which will reduce the density of housing and lower the adverse impacts as previously discussed. c. The land is a continuous piece of property made up of various parcels. Parcel #25.6900030 is of particular interest to us and, we suspect, to many of our neighbors in the northern bordering area. This parcel, if it was “broken off and sold separately” could be developed in a fashion in keeping with the current zoning, and in a manner which would not require streets breaking through to the balance of the southern parcels in question. The significant benefit to that would be to minimize undue disruption to our neighborhood (Lake Lucy Ridge) and the neighborhood to the west of us (Ashling Meadows), the two existing neighborhoods which would be most adversely affected. I can assure you there would likely be a buyer for that parcel as a standalone parcel. 7. A Zoning Change Is Required. It appears the proposed development will require a zoning change to accommodate this development. Again, we stand in strong opposition to this proposed development and encourage you, as the Planning Commission, to reject it in it’s current form, using all avenues and procedures available. There are a plethora of alternatives that offer greater benefit to all stakeholders, including the property rights of the current property owner. Sincerely, Brian C. Strauss Donna M. Strauss APPENDIX 2 394.26 PUBLIC HEARINGS. Subdivision 1. [Repealed, 1974 c 571 s 51] Subd.1a.When required.In additionto publichearingsrequiredby section 375.51prior totheadoption by ordinance of any comprehensive plan or amendments thereto or of any official control or amendment thereto, public hearings shall be held before any conditional use permit, interim use permit, variance, or proposal for a subdivision is approved or denied by the responsible authority, and in circumstances where a public hearing is otherwise required by sections 394.21 to 394.37. Such public hearings may be continued from time to time and additional hearings may be held. Subd.2.Notice.Notice of thetime,place,and purposeof any publichearing shall begivenbypublication in a newspaper of general circulation in the town, municipality, or other area concerned, and in the official newspaper of the county,at least ten days before the hearing, except that notice of public hearings in connection with the adoption by ordinance of any comprehensive plan or amendments thereto or adoption or amendment of any official controls shall be given in the manner provided by section 375.51, subdivision 2. In addition to the requirements of section 375.51, subdivision 2, written notice of public hearings on all official controls and amendments thereto shall be sent to the governing bodies of all towns and all municipalities located within the county. Written notice of public hearings regarding the application of official controls to specific properties, including but not limited to conditional uses, variances, interim uses, zoning regulations, and subdivision regulations, shall be sent to all property owners of record within 500 feet of the affected property in incorporated areas. In unincorporated areas, the written notice shall be sent to property owners as follows: (a)in the case of variances,to owners of record within 500 feet of the affected property; (b)in the case of conditional uses and interim uses,to owners of record within one-quarter mile of the affected property or to the ten properties nearest to the affected property, whichever would provide notice to the greatest number of owners; (c)inthecase of all otherofficial controls,including butnot limitedtozoning regulations and subdivision regulations,to owners of record within one-half mile of the affected property. Written notice shall also be given to the affected board of town supervisors, and the municipal council of any municipality within two miles of the affected property. Subd. 3. [Repealed, 1974 c 571 s 51] Subd. 3a.Who runs hearing.The board may assign responsibility to conduct public hearings for one ormorepurposes to theplanningcommission,boardofadjustmentoranyofficialoremployeeofthecounty, except as provided in section 375.51. History:1959 c 559 s 6; 1963 c 692 s 4; 1974 c 571 s 20-22; 1976 c 177 s 1; 1980 c 477 s 1; 2008 c 331 s 4 Copyright © 2017 by the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota.All Rights Reserved. 394.26MINNESOTASTATUTES20171 APPENDIX 3 APPENDIX 4 660.00S01°56'12"W330.00 N88°03'48"W 250.00 N87°12'20"WN02°47'40"E275.0080.00 N87°12'20"W13rods3links(deed)N11°17'40"E216.4818 rods (297.00 feet deed)S87°12'20"E 285.10 49.73S01°57'26"WS88°17'20"E 330.76 48.90N03°10'50"W6.40 S 8 8°0 3'48"E N02°47'40"E170.501 2 3 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 OUTLOT A EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SEC. 3, TWP. 116, RNG. 23 333.03 (measured)EXCEPTION330.00 (deed) 80.00 (deed) 170.00 (deed)384.68(measured)610.00(measured)274.60(measured)275.00(deed)275.00(measured)275.05(measured)74.62 (measured) WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SEC. 2, TWP. 116, RNG. 23 SOUTHWEST CORNER OF NORTHWEST QUARTER OFSEC.2,TWP.116,RNG.23 (SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTEROFTHENORTHEASTQUARTEROFSEC.3,TWP.116,RNG.23 (CARVER COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT) SOUTH LINE OF NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SEC.2,TWP.116,RNG.23 SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SEC.3,TWP.116,RNG.23 FND IP UNREADABLE CAP NUMBER FND OPEN IP FND OPEN IP FNDIPRLS8506±0.70'wFNDIPw/NAIL591.5CARTWAY 591.5 CENTERLINEPERRLS38593.5680.00 (measured &deed)385.00(deed)275.00(deed)224.72N01°42'45"E154.33N01°42'40"E98.65 N88°09'48"W 200.95459.0541.77 N60°42'15"W 126.13N75°47'53"W15.78N36°00'00"E47.93R=100.00Δ=27°27'33" 79.03R=300.00Δ=15°05'37"70.86R=103.00Δ=39°25'07"60.00S02°11'00"EN88°14'02"E 60.00 3030303030303 0 Δ = 7 2 ° 2 2'4 6 " R = 8 9.5 0 1 1 3.0 6 Δ = 7 4 ° 5 8'3 0 " R = 1 1 9 .5 0 1 5 6 .3 773.99N00°49'23"W282.31 R = 60.00 Δ = 269°34'58" 30 N01°50'12"E380.2831.93 33.00298.83 1 1 . 9 5 S 5 6 ° 4 4 '4 6 "WS 5 6 °4 4 '4 6 "W 1 1 .9 5 S 6 7 °5 8 '2 6 "W 6 6 .0 8N82°54'01"W38.22 N 4 2 ° 3 9'5 2 " W 3 5.3 7N12°49'39"W86.28N01°46'05"W58.9656.05N28°59'34"E2.4065.40 65.4062.30Δ=27°27'33" Δ=27°27'33"33.55 38.73 37.95 3.823.0454.17Δ=11°29'43"16.96Δ=13°35'54"Δ=15°05'37"86.9311.1373.06 53.07 115.00 Δ = 7 2 ° 2 2'4 6 " 7 5.1 6 17.78Δ=13°57'21"96.59Δ=92°14'29"Δ =94°06'20" 98.5530.00Δ=28°38'52" 35.25Δ=33°39'41" 2 1 .9 1 Δ =2 0 °5 5 '3 5 "68.465 .5 3 12.145 3 .9 41 8.1 7 40.88N85°34'31"EN 3 2 ° 4 2 '2 0 "W5 8 . 3 2N01°46'05"W110.95139.11143.59 S87°12'20"E136.42 S87°12'20"E 170.39 S87°12'20"E174.57 S87°12'20"E 97.34 36.32S61°33'40"W94.6075.9014.26101.11101.11236.605.40110.00 90.00 49.35 42.59 92.10 162.50 N01°50'12"E137.89157.68S14°12'07"W195.90S14°12'07"W215.24S14°12'07"W200.00S02°47'40"W55.61S51°27'21"W 41.90Δ=20°05'22"30.00Δ=14°23'02"84.47Δ=40°30'06"NOTTANGENT30301 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 17 17 92.59S71°03'11"E 75.0026.46N55°33'21"E65.26101.54S80°57'29"E 55.3111.76S80°57'29"E1 3 .3 3 S 0 1 °5 6 '1 2 "W 40.9377.22 S88°03'48"E 4040S57°17'53"W 64.53 42.7448.98 S43°16'19"W 32.42 36.7815151515S53°56'16"E 82.33 91.06 50.3345 45 57.72S03°49'58"E1010101042.30S25°25'34"E17 1553.34 B L O C K O N E DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT DRAINAGE&UTILITYEASEMENTDRAINAGE&UTILITYEASEMENTWETLAND WETLAND YOSEMITEAVENUELAKE LUCY ROAD ANTHEM PLACE 333333333333333366661 4 .2 0 N 0 1 °4 6 '0 5 "W 48.84N10°43'03"W27.14N67°12'20"WS89°44'35"W 10.00' ANTHEM ON THE PARK COUNTY SURVEYOR, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA Pursuant to Chapter 395, Minnesota Laws of 1971, this plat has been approved this ________ day of ________________, 20_____. Signed: Luke Kranz, County Surveyor KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Yosemite Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, owner of the following described property: That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 2, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter, Section 2, Township 116, Range 23; thence East along the half section line 330 feet (20 rods); thence North 660.00 feet (40 rods); thence West 330 feet (20 rods) to the section line; thence South 660 feet (40 rods) to the place of beginning; EXCEPT so much of the following described tract as in the foregoing description, beginning at a point on the section line between said Section 2 and 3; Township 116, Range 23, said point being 610 feet North of the Quarter section corner between said Section 2 and 3 and marked by an iron gas pipe set in the ground; thence North along the section 591.5 feet to a cartway 16.5 (1 rod) wide; thence East along the South boundary of said cartway 280.5 feet to the center of a street 33 feet (2 rods) wide; thence South 4 degrees 47 minutes East along the center of said street 593.56 feet; thence West 330 feet to the place of beginning, according to the United States Government Survey thereof. AND That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SE1/4NE1/4) of Section 3, Township 116, Range 23, described as follows: Starting at the Southeast Corner of said NE 1/4 of said Section 3, running Westerly along the South line of said SE 1/4 of said NE 1/4 a distance of 80 feet, then Northerly 275 feet, then Easterly 80 feet, thence Southerly along the Easterly line of said SE 1/4 of said NE 1/4 to the point of beginning, Carver County, Minnesota. AND That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 116, Range 23, as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, 80 feet West of said Southeast corner; thence continuing along said line 170 feet; thence North 275 feet; thence West 80 feet; thence North 170.5 feet; thence North 8 1/2 degrees, East 13 rods and 3 links; thence East 18 rods, thence South 385 feet; thence West 80 feet; thence South 275 feet to the point of beginning, Carver County, Minnesota. Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as ANTHEM ON THE PARK and does hereby dedicate to the public for public use the public way and the drainage and utility easements as created by this plat. In witness whereof said Yosemite Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this _______ day of ___________________, 20____. YOSEMITE HOLDINGS, LLC, a MINNESOTA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Terry Forbord, Principal STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF _________________________________ This instrument was acknowledged before me on , by Terry Forbord, principal of Yosemite Holdings, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company. ____________________________________________________ (Notary Signature) ____________________________________________________ (Notary Printed Name) NOTARY PUBLIC, _____________________ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES __________________________________ CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL This plat of ANTHEM ON THE PARK was approved accepted by the City Council of Chanhassen, Minnesota, at a regular meeting thereof held this day of , 20 , and said plat is in compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subd. 2. Mayor Clerk COUNTY AUDITOR/TREASURER, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA I hereby certify that taxes payable in and prior years ave been paid for land described on this plat. Dated this _________ day of _______________, 20______. Laurie Davis, County Auditor/Treasurer By: . COUNTY RECORDER, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA I hereby certify that this plat of ANTHEM ON THE PARK was filed this ________ day of _____________________, 20___ at ___ o'clock __.M., as Document Number . Luke Kranz, County, Recorder By: . PLUG INSCRIBED WITH 43133IRON MONUMENT SET WITH PLASTICDENOTES 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH CAST IRON MONUMENTDENOTES FOUND CARVER COUNTY SEC. 2 & 3, TWP. 116, RNG. 23 (NOT TO SCALE) SITE IRON MONUMENT FOUND LAKE LUCY RD BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING STREETS AND REAR LOTS LINES AND BEING 5 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING SIDE LOT LINES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED105 510 SHOWN THUS: DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENTS (NOT TO SCALE) I, Daniel J. Roeber, do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plat have been, or will be 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 this plat. Dated this ________ day of _____________________, 20___. _________________________________ Daniel J. Roeber, Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota License Number 43133 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF _________________________________ This instrument was acknowledged before me on , by Daniel J. Roeber. __________________________________________________ (Notary Signature) ___________________________________________________(Notary Printed Name) NOTARY PUBLIC, _____________________ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES __________________________________ PLAT FILE NO. C.R. DOC. NO.YOSEMITE AVE. 50 1000 Horizontal Scale In Feet APPENDIX 5 Ultimately Developed With One Home Across Two Lots APPENDIX 6 c 1OFGALPIN BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 1-5-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS xx I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson 1CONCEPT PLAN 04 LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 APPENDIX 7 c 1OFGALPIN BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 6-1-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS xx I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson 1CONCEPT PLAN 07 LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 55' LOTS 65' LOTS 90' LOTS APPENDIX 8 Avoid the dangerous traffic and delays. Ride with us and have a stress-free trip to work this winter! For more information and to see schedules Click Here https://www.swnewsmedia.com/chanhassen_villager/news/local/council-splits-on-aldi-development-grant/article_fbd5bae9-3b41-5cb5-8731-69f95dfb86b9.html CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL Council splits on Aldi development grant By Mark W. Olson editor@chanvillager.com Jun 28, 2017 The Chanhassen City Council split on a 3-2 vote Monday night asking to support a grant application for a proposed downtown development. The development proposal, by United Properties, would tear down the Frontier retail strip mall, next to the Chanhassen Dinner Theatres complex, and replace it with a 130-unit apartment building and Aldi grocery store. The $715,000 Metropolitan Council Livable Communities grant would help pay for some items of the new development, such as a storm water tank system, “green roof,” solar power and pedestrian connection to the nearby park and ride. The city staff had recommended approval of the resolution. Councilors Jerry McDonald and Bethany Tjornhom and Mayor Denny Laufenburger voted in support of the grant, and councilors Elise Ryan and Dan Campion voted against. The council also: Approved the master plan for Manchester Park, a neighborhood park next to the city’s future West Water Treatment Plant Facility. Awarded a contract for the Park Road/Park Place street rehabilitation project to Valley Paving for $856,210.45 Noted that Councilor Jerry McDonald would throw out the first pitch at the Chanhassen Red Birds game, 7:30 p.m. Thursday, June 29, City of Chanhassen Employee Appreciation Night. The Chanhassen City Council approved, on a 3-2 vote, a request for a Metropolitan Council grant that would help fund a proposed Aldi grocery story and 130-unit apartment building along West 70th Street in downtown Chanhassen. City of Chanhassen rendering Mark Olson Community Editor Mark Olson, the Chaska and Chanhassen community editor who has worked in Carver County for 20 years, makes any excuse to write about local history. In his spare time, Mark enjoys perusing old books, watching blockbusters and taking Midwest road trips. Ryan was concerned that developers were asking for a “significant amount of money for this project” and noted that developers had also applied for a $60,000 grant through the Carver County Community Development Agency. She also said that the city has been asked to create a ($1.3 million) tax increment financing district for the development. “I just am very concerned about the amount of money that is going to this particular project,” Ryan said. Ryan said she also was concerned about the impact of using resources for the redevelopment project, when the council recently started a long-term planning process for downtown. Regarding the size of the grant application, Community Development Director Kate Aanenson said councilors should look at the “proportionality and the complexity” of the project. She also noted that the project may only get a portion of the grant request, or it may get none. “Is this funding now to make it economically viable,” Campion asked. “Without this, does the development go forward?” Mayor Laufenburger later said it was up to a developer to gauge the economic feasibility of a project. Campion also wondered if the grant application would prevent future funds for downtown. “I don’t want you to think your approving this grant application will automatically grant approval of the venue,” said City Manager Todd Gerhardt. The council will discuss the development again at its July 10 meeting. Accepted a donation from the Chanhassen Estates Residents Association for $672.50 to help the Chanhassen Fire Department purchase a thermal imaging camera. Recognized “Why I Love Chanhassen” Essay Contest Winners Ava Joos and Luke Hilgendorf; and runners-up Danica Grafelman and Hannah Quiner. (Look for essays in an upcoming edition.) Recognized “Mayor for a Day” essay winner Jacob Buboltz, a sixth- grader at Chapel Hill Academy, who began the council meeting and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Invited the public to Fourth of July festivities in downtown Chanhassen, July 2-4. APPENDIX 9 APPENDIX 10 Carver County GIS ² APPENDIX 11 1 Meuwissen, Kim From:Tim Nordberg <nord0296@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, July 19, 2018 3:11 PM To:Aanenson, Kate Subject:7141 Galpin PUD Concept Re: 7141 Galpin PUD Concept Hi Kate, I attended the 7141 Galpin PUD Concept Review session on Tuesday to learn more about the Galpin Concept and really appreciated the opportunity to learn more about the process, the city and developer's ideas and public's opinions on the matter. I know the session's public commentary has passed, but I wanted to take the time to send over some of my own thoughts, many came up in retrospect of attending the meeting and hearing what was said. Hopefully you can share this with anyone involved in the back-and- forth with the Concept Development. One takeaway I had from the meeting I had was few proposed solutions or additional ideas to consider. Nearly all in the public seemed clearly worried about environmental impact and preservation or trees / nature, while clearly the developer cares most about economics, i.e. profit. The two notions aren't necessarily polar opposites (developer profit vs environmental impacts), but they definitely trade off each other. I wonder if on the South side of the development the path connection into Lake Ann's park system could be considered along the north edge of, within, or near the current tree cover. It would help with several of the concerns I heard in the meeting:  Poorly or under marked wetland area within the Southern trees - it is really wet there, with often standing water for 4 months of the year. Development would impact the environment due to filling in the space, but also potentially push water back on other existing properties that back up to the land.  Buffer between current homes and new development - especially important if realistically considering 55' lots in this area with high percentage lot coverage. A proper buffer should add value and desire to the lots abutting it new development making it a positive for current residents and developers alike.  Preservation of Trees - during the meeting I heard this was a priority within the city overall within long term plans (i.e. 2040 review). It may be true that "replacing" if removed trees is technically allowed, but can you consider planting hundreds of new, young trees the same as replacing 30-50+ year old woods equivalent and adequate "replacement"? Hopefully it can be considered, the idea came to mind while I was enjoying a run along the Bluff Creek trail, portions nicely tucked into and around the trees are one of the things I really enjoy since moving to Chanhassen a few years ago. I have come to appreciate the City's commitment to excellence in Parks, Trails and outdoor activities (Walking, Bicycling, Running). I would love for this commitment to hold true in new developments rather than see "Trail Connections" run along a sidewalk or within a dense neighborhood. Further items I had thought of, and wanted to reiterate with my communication: 1. The Galpin Road project really needs to be closely tied to this planning. The proposed development seems to be roughly the size of Longacres, but it is effectively forced to put all traffic on Galpin while Longacres has Hwy 41 on the West Side. Galpin is already difficult to manage (as a pedestrian or in a car) near Majestic due to traffic flow including numerous cars rolling through or completely missing the stop signs at Sugar Bush Park (Galpin and Brinker). Traffic from nearly 200 additional homes would have a significant impact here that may be difficult to properly estimate with a simple traffic study. Galpin to the North (into Shorewood / Hennepin Cty) and Lake Lucy Rd do not seem suitable for significant increases either. 2. Housing density and lot coverage may be within rules (perhaps pushing the limits), but when I look at similar new developments I always worry about places for small children to play without ending up on the road. Cul-de-sacs help (because they somewhat create a safe place _in the road_ to play, but in the concept plan the cul-de-sacs were all targeting the "Empty Nester" home styles (likely without small children). Often in these new developments I see the streets lined with signs and flags (i.e. "Drive like your children live here", "Caution kids at play"), highlighting the safety risks of such layouts, density and lot coverage. 2 3. I don't fully understand the need to line up the road connections to Hunter and Longacres, especially the alignment with Hunter seems to have an immediate challenge with the large holding pond / wetland space adjacent to the road. Relaxing this need may help offer more favorable layouts within the usable land on the property. On the positive side, I really appreciate the concept that expands Lake Ann's paths and the City's long term plans for further trails and connections. The more options we have, the better for the enjoyment and health of those in the community. I really believe these concepts are primary drivers that attract people to moving to the City of Chanhassen in the first place -- it was for my wife and I. Thinking of large developments like this reminds me of the praise early Minneapolis planners now receive in setting up the groundwork for their interconnected trail system (Lake and River trails, Parkway system, etc...). This is a key chance to ensure we develop an exceptional shared natural resources (Lakes and Trails) for everyone in our community to enjoy for many years to come. Ultimately I agree with the Planning Committee's final points, especially that neither of the concepts proposed thus far seem to respect the land, but with enough effort an acceptable compromise between the Environment, the City, current residents and the developers could be made. Best Regards, Tim Nordberg 2126 Majestic Way, Chanhassen 1 Meuwissen, Kim From:Gordie Hampson <gordie.hampson@cushwake.com> Sent:Thursday, July 26, 2018 2:01 PM To:Aanenson, Kate Subject:FW: draft for consideration Dear City Council, Planning Commission and Staff:     Attention: Kate Aanenson: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us      My family and I have lived in Chanhassen for 26 years at 7003 Sandy Hook Circle. We understand that the 188 acres on Galpin Road is being considered for development. I have reviewed both plans that the developer has submitted to the city. We very strongly support the plan which shows the majority of the units on the west side of the property. Not sure how the developer was persuaded up to this point, however, it seems pretty amazing that they are offering to deed approximately 100 acres to the City of Chanhassen. This would really open up the two lakes which have been non-accessible until now! This seems like a huge win for everyone in the community! We understand that the developer could legally develop adjacent to the lake as presented in the first plan.     We hope the city supports the second plan proposed by the developer at the Planning Commission meeting July 17th. On behalf of our family, we would enthusiastically express our support for the second plan of the proposed project.     Thank you,      Gordie Hampson and Family.        Gordie Hampson  Senior Director  Brokerage Services     Direct: +1 952 465 3310  Mobile: +1 612 366 6139  gordie.hampson@cushwake.com     3500 American Blvd W, Suite 200  Bloomington, MN 55431 | USA  cushmanwakefield.com      The information contained in this email (including any attachments) is confidential, may be subject to legal or other professional  privilege and contain copyright material,   and is intended for use by the named recipient(s) only.     Access to or use of this email or its attachments by anyone else is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the  intended recipient(s), you may not use, disclose,   copy or distribute this email or its attachments (or any part thereof), nor take or omit to take any action in reliance on it. If you have  received this email in error, please notify   2 the sender immediately by telephone or email and delete it, and all copies thereof, including all attachments, from your system. Any  confidentiality or privilege is not waived   or lost because this email has been sent to you by mistake.     Although we have taken reasonable precautions to reduce the risk of transmitting software viruses, we accept no liability for any  loss or damage caused by this email or its   attachments due to viruses, interference, interception, corruption or unapproved access.   1 Meuwissen, Kim From:Meredith McGuirk <meremcguirk@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, July 17, 2018 5:15 PM To:Aanenson, Kate Subject:Fwd: Galpin Property - PUD July 17, 2018 Planning Commission City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O.Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Planning Commission Members, We recently learned of the Planned Unit Development for the Galpin Property, formerly owned by Prince. We write today to formerly register our opposition to the plan. We are residents of Chanhassen in the Lucy Ridge neighborhood, adjacent to the PUD land. Interestingly, the concept review offered by Lennar on page 2 states that the “existing neighborhood to the North (Ashling Meadows) provides two existing road stubs to the subject property.” This is inaccurate. Ashling Meadows provides one existing road stub, while our neighborhood, a 16 unit custom home development contains the other. The current plan proposes direct access through the Lucy Ridge neighborhood. We oppose the PUD in its current form for the following reasons:  Safety. We are a 16 home development currently attached to a 45 home development, commonly called Ashling Meadows. The one street leaving our community is already heavily flooded with traffic from Ashling Meadows. With one access road out of neighborhood residents cutting through often travel well beyond the speed limit and ignore stop signs, causing significant hazards to the small children living in our neighborhood. The same road proposed as a pass through to the PUD property contains a bus stop for dozens of elementary children aged k-5. I cannot imagine the additional safety hazard caused by the increased flow of traffic from another adjoining neighborhood twice the size. Simply stated, the current plan is only acceptable if the Commission disregards public safety to the children in our neighborhood.  Environmental. I think it is reasonable that even with the VERY BEST construction and water management techniques, given the proximity of proposed development to Lakes Lucy and Ann, it is, as a practical matter, impossible to prevent harmful phosphorous runoff (especially at the outset), and to furthermore expect the preservation of Lake Ann's pristine quality and clarity in concert with the proposed development would be naive and reckless.  Please also refer to Donna and Brian Strauss’ letter, dated July 4, 2018. We concur with all statements raised in their letter to the Commission and City Council. It is my sincere hope that the Planning Commission and City Council will consider alternative road access points. Alternatively I urge the Commission to consider the development of a smaller community ending in a cul de sac connecting to our community that will be less hazardous and disruptive to current community members. While I understand the desire to have several access points, I also find it alarming that the Commission would not consider the disruptive and significant impact this will have on neighborhoods developed almost 15 years ago. Sincerely, Meredith and Greg McGuirk 1770 Lucy Ridge Court 1 Meuwissen, Kim From:Archer, Jessica Sent:Thursday, July 19, 2018 1:25 PM To:Aanenson, Kate Subject:Fwd: Prince Property Lennar Development   Sent from my iPhone    Begin forwarded message:  From: Erica TenBroek <tenbre13@gmail.com>  Date: July 19, 2018 at 11:33:43 AM CDT  To: <dlaufenburger@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>, <eryan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>,  <btjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>, <dcampion@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>,  <jmcdonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>  Subject: Prince Property Lennar Development  Dear Chanhassen Mayor and City Council,     I read recently of the proposed Lennar Corporation development near Lakes Ann and Lucy in the  Tribune. It is unfortunate that the Prince heirs have decided on such a fate for a beautiful expanse of  land.  I understand you will be voting soon on options provided by the developer and wonder if it is  possible to delay the vote while the city evaluates the ramifications of such a large development.     I am writing to encourage you to act outside of the norm for this particular case by proactively enabling  requirements beyond the usual. Since this is a very large development next to two very large bodies of  water, it makes sense to consider options.  Your actions could circumvent the need for a costly and time  consuming environmental review or expensive problems in water quality down the line. Much of the  acquired land surrounding the Lakes/wetlands appears to be relatively undisturbed and likely provides  substantial habitat, supporting many species of animals and plants. The proposal to build up to 200  luxury homes will drastically change all of this.   You have a chance to make a very positive difference in  the community and even the surrounding cities by placing restrictions on how and where the  development occurs.     As a scientist/biologist with some experience in environmental restoration, I’ve heard from many  different groups how urgent it is that people with power (limited as it may be) move out of their comfort  zone to play a substantially larger role in protecting native habitat. With U.S. amphibian populations  declining more than 4% a year, and more than 1/3 of the bird species in North America on their way to  extinction, our communities need to make changes. Since 1950 at least 5 butterfly species have gone  extinct in the U.S. and some additional species are now nearly there. There is the plight of the bees, and  at least 26 U.S. freshwater mussel species have gone extinct, with at least 87 mussels listed as  threatened or endangered (Feb‐March 2017 National Wildlife WWW.NWF.org publication). A continued  progression toward more holes in the safety net that holds this large whale of humanity afloat.        Our existing protected areas are not enough. Experts who monitor such areas in Minnesota have told  me of depressing changes, such as habitat degradation due to neighboring development, agricultural  runoff, and increased population. Pressures such as these diminish biodiversity, bring in invasive species  2 and exotic disease, and gradually lead to dying off of a variety of species.  All this happening when we  actually need to increase animal and plant biodiversity if we want to successfully adapt in the face of  climate changes.      Please brainstorm to find ways to prevent damage to this very valuable and beautiful asset that your city  is lucky enough to control. Such an extensive loss of land, habitat, increased run‐off, and loss of animal  life means inevitable losses for everyone.   It also means eventual changes in the quality of Lakes Lucy  and Ann and adjacent watershed.  At the very least, the wild area surrounding the lakes could be  maintained as a natural area.   I realize the color of money is green, and that the city sees added tax  income as desirable. More importantly, you don't own the land.  But you really do have the power to  change how the development in these areas proceeds.    If you take the time to make changes now, the  citizens of your community will applaud your proactive thinking and Chanhassen will be a model that  other cities will surely follow.     Thank you for all that you do.  Below I listed some ideas, although admittedly I know little about your  city’s existing ordinances.     Warm regards,     Erica TenBroek  Roseville, MN     1) One could try to make a deal with the developer.  It might mean putting the greater good before tax  revenue, but you would be rewarded in many other ways.       For example, the city could offer to buy back, perhaps over a period of time, the woodlands next to the  lakes. Or the developer could agree to develop only the grassy open areas.  In return for waiting for a  sale or maybe to achieve a lower price point on that land, the city could agree to  ‐ pay for installation of paved trails, say connecting the new community to Lake Ann Park, and perhaps  boat slips in exchange for not developing (until the area can be transitioned to city or state as parkland)  ‐ the city could talk with the state and/or land trusts to transfer the land later for a price     2) The council could move quickly to create a city ordinance to increase the size of the buffer zone to  protect the water and to also enact a stricter tree ordinance so that every native tree removed would be  replaced with several new native trees or shrubs. For that matter, all right of ways could be required to  be native plants. There are communities in Florida now with strict requirements such as these.     A 10‐30 foot buffer is not enough to preserve the fragile ecosystems that maintain water quality. Years  ago, we learned that 300 feet of buffer around bodies of water was needed to maintain water health  and biological communities. It is no surprise that we in MN now have very expensive water woes  considering how the needed buffer zone has shrunk and shrunk and shrunk to accommodate more  development or other land use.     A larger buffer requirement would help to prevent water quality  issues that will cost your community in the years to come.     3) The developer could be given incentives to place large shoreline buffer easements around the  lakes.  Or an ordinance could require larger lots around the lakes due to the size and scope of this  development.  The lots around the lake could be required to be 6 acre lots ‐different from those on the  interior, including a natural shoreline with no loss of tree cover.   Many wealthy people will pay to own  beautiful lakesides with undeveloped land for privacy and their own enjoyment.    At least the land  would be undeveloped and would help to maintain the freshwater ecosystems in the area.     OR maybe a hybrid of ideas where the city could pay for trails or lake access in exchange for easements?  3    I do hope you are able to think of some way to preserve this jewel of an area.  Best of luck moving  forward.  ~E        1 Meuwissen, Kim From:Chrissy Boberg <cnboberg@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, July 28, 2018 12:15 PM To:Aanenson, Kate Subject:Proposed Development on Galpin Follow Up Flag:Flag for follow up Flag Status:Flagged   I am writing in in support of the proposed development of the land off of Galpin.  My family and I have lived in  Chanhassen for over 10 years and currently live at 1321 Heather Court.  We live close to Lake Ann and have enjoyed that  and other parks in the area.  After looking at the planes it looks like the developer is offering up to the city around 100 of  the 188 acres.  Of the 100 acres given to the city it appears the plan has the Lake Ann Park expanded to the west side of  the lake.  We have often visited that park and it would be wonderful to be able to walk almost entirely around the lake  with this expansion.  It seems very generous and responsible of the developer to offer such a large part of the property  to the city to preserve green space for all to use and enjoy.  We strongly hope that the city supports this plan at the  upcoming meetings.    Thank you,    Mike Boberg and Family       1 Meuwissen, Kim From:Julie Witt <juliewitt20@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, July 14, 2018 11:01 AM To:Aanenson, Kate Subject:Re: Galpin Blvd Proposed Development Thanks Kate. I appreciate the information. I’m not sure I will be able to join future meetings so I will take you up on the  offer to leave my feedback with you. Comments are below.     My vote if I had to choose between the 2 would be for concept #2. This concept builds 199 homes on 88 acres. Why this  plan is better:    1. Less impact to wetlands. One of the things I love about Chanhassen is how much natural land there is. I am concerned  how many trees the first concept will take down and the disruption to nature it will create. I would love to see  Chanhassen utilize the undeveloped acres for trails instead. It is a beautiful piece of land and I would appreciate the  ability for the public to use part of it.   2. Variety of price ranges. 65’ and 90’ lots will probably still be above average home prices especially with the  opportunity for families to add upgrades (having priced Lennar homes before).     One question, would the city consider adding trails for biking and/or hiking to the undeveloped land?    Thanks for you consideration as you assess the available plans.     Julie Witt      > On Jun  27, 2018, at 8:01 AM, Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> wrote:  >   > Julie,  >   > There will be a number of opportunities for you to give input into the proposed development.    There is a concept  review going to the Planning Commission on July 17th.  You can review the staff report online on the city's website and  should be available on July 12th.  You can attend that meeting or submit your comments in writing to me and I will share  with the Planning Commission and City Council.  The staff report outlines the review process, after the concept review  they will come go through   preliminary plat with another public hearing at the Planning Commission.  The developer has  expressed they would have a neighborhood meeting.  >   > Kate  >   > Kathryn Aanenson, AICP  > Community Development Director  > CITY OF CHANHASSEN  > PH.  952.227.1139  > FX.  952.227.1110  > www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us  >   >   >   > ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  2 > From: Julie Witt <juliewitt20@gmail.com>   > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 7:00 PM  > To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>  > Subject: Galpin Blvd Proposed Development will ou  >   > Hi Kate,  >   > Will the public be able to give input to the decision for this development?  >   > Thanks,  > Julie  CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Control Concepts: Approve Site Plan with a Variance for Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition Section NEW BUSINESS Item No: G.2. Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: PC 2018­11 PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves a Site Plan for a 54,600 square­foot office, warehouse, and manufacturing building, and a variance for constructing retaining walls in the Bluff Creek primary zone setback subject to the conditions of approval in the Planning Commission staff reports.” Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting approval for a 54,600 square­foot, two­story office/warehouse/manufacturing building with a setback variance to permit the construction of retaining walls within the 40­foot Bluff Creek Primary zone setback. BACKGROUND On July 17, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the proposed site plan.  The Planning Commission voted 6 ­ 0 to recommend approval of the site plan subject to the conditions in the staff report.  The Planning Commission was concerned about the size of the retaining wall adjacent to the proposed pedestrian trail, towering 17 feet above the path. On August 7, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review a variance request to permit the construction of retaining walls within the Bluff Creek primary zone setback.  This variance allows the construction of tiered retaining walls, reducing the height of the walls above the wetland trail creating a better pedestrian experience.  The Planning Commission voted 6 ­ 0 to recommend approval of the variance subject to the conditions in the staff report.  The only comment was if the trail was necessary since there is already a trail connection from 82nd Street West and Century Boulevard to the wetland trail. The Planning Commission minutes for July 17, 2018 are in the consent agenda for the August 13, 2018 City Council packet.  The Planning Commission minutes for August 7, 2018 are attached to this report. DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting approval to construct a 54,600 square­foot office industrial building.  As part of the project, they are constructing a "wetland trail" connection from Century Boulevard as required of the Arboretum CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, August 13, 2018SubjectControl Concepts: Approve Site Plan with a Variance for Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum BusinessPark 7th AdditionSectionNEW BUSINESS Item No: G.2.Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: PC 2018­11PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council approves a Site Plan for a 54,600 square­foot office, warehouse, and manufacturing building, anda variance for constructing retaining walls in the Bluff Creek primary zone setback subject to the conditions ofapproval in the Planning Commission staff reports.”Council approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.SUMMARYThe applicant is requesting approval for a 54,600 square­foot, two­story office/warehouse/manufacturing building witha setback variance to permit the construction of retaining walls within the 40­foot Bluff Creek Primary zone setback.BACKGROUNDOn July 17, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the proposed site plan.  The PlanningCommission voted 6 ­ 0 to recommend approval of the site plan subject to the conditions in the staff report.  ThePlanning Commission was concerned about the size of the retaining wall adjacent to the proposed pedestrian trail,towering 17 feet above the path.On August 7, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review a variance request to permit theconstruction of retaining walls within the Bluff Creek primary zone setback.  This variance allows the construction oftiered retaining walls, reducing the height of the walls above the wetland trail creating a better pedestrian experience. The Planning Commission voted 6 ­ 0 to recommend approval of the variance subject to the conditions in the staffreport.  The only comment was if the trail was necessary since there is already a trail connection from 82nd StreetWest and Century Boulevard to the wetland trail.The Planning Commission minutes for July 17, 2018 are in the consent agenda for the August 13, 2018 City Councilpacket.  The Planning Commission minutes for August 7, 2018 are attached to this report.DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting approval to construct a 54,600 square­foot office industrial building.  As part of the project, they are constructing a "wetland trail" connection from Century Boulevard as required of the Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition.  In conjunction with this, they are installing retaining walls within the 40­foot Bluff Creek primary zone setback to facilitate the construction of the parking lot for the development, as well as accommodating the wetland trail to the Chanhassen Nature Preserve.  This revised plan was in response to discussion as part of the site plan review public hearing on July 17, 2018.  The intent was to create a better pedestrian environment on the trail by reducing the 17­foot tall retaining wall on the uphill side of the trail.  The revised staged walls will create a mini­ overlook of the wetland, being 10 feet above the bottom of the lower retaining wall in the area of the northeast corner of the parking lot. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council approve the site plan with the variance to allow the construction of the 54,600 square­foot building and pedestrian trail subject to the conditions in the staff reports. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Staff Report Dated July 17, 2018 Planning Commission Staff Report Dated August 7, 2018 Retaining Wall Cross Section One Wall Retaining Wall Cross Section Tiered Walls Site Plan Findings of Fact and Recommendation ­ Site Plan Findings of Fact and Recommendation ­ Variance August 7, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: July 17, 2018 CC DATE: August 13, 2018 REVIEW DEADLINE: August 14, 2018 CASE #: 2018-11 BY: JA, GB, RG, DN, JS, VS SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting site plan approval for a 54,600 square-foot, two story office-warehouse-manufacturing building. LOCATION: Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition (PID 25.0680020) 8077 Century Boulevard APPLICANT: Bauer Design Build Zion Investments, LLC 14030 21st Avenue N 7014 Willow Creek Road Plymouth, MN 55447 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (763) 999-7217 (952) 474-6200 mikel@bauerdb.com cwatkins@ccipower.com PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development (PUD)/ Bluff Creek Overlay District PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the site plan for a 54,600 square-foot office, warehouse and manufacturing building subject to the conditions of approval and adoption of the findings of fact and recommendation.” Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 2 of 14 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Office Industrial ACREAGE: 5.23 acres DENSITY: 0.24 F.A.R. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city’s discretion in approving or denying a Site Plan is limited to whether or not the proposed project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. If it meets these standards, the city must then approve the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY Site plan approval for a 54,600 square-foot, two story office-warehouse-manufacturing building. A 16,452 square foot, one story tenant space is proposed for the eastern end of the building. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article 2, Division 6, Site Plan Review Chapter 20, Article XXIII, Division 7, Design Standards for Commercial, Industrial and Office- Institutional Developments Arboretum Business Park Development Standards BACKGROUND On May 29, 2007, the Chanhassen City Council approved the following: Preliminary and final plat for two lots and one outlot (Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition). Conditional Use Permit for development within the Bluff Creek Corridor. Site Plan for a 51,800 square-foot office/warehouse building (Mamac Systems) with a variance to permit only 32 percent building transparency on the western building elevation and with a 20- foot setback variance for the drive aisle in the southeast corner of the site for development within the Bluff Creek Corridor on Lot 1, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition. On September 24, 2001, the Chanhassen City Council approved Interim Use Permit (IUP) #2001-1 to grade a portion of the Arboretum Business Park development and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) #2001-8 to permit development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District. The IUP and CUP included this property. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 3 of 14 On July 28, 1997, the City Council approved the following: the ordinance for PUD #92-6 rezoning approximately 154 acres from Agricultural Estate, A2, to Planned Unit Development, PUD, and the PUD #92-6 granting final plat approval for Arboretum Business Park. On June 23, 1997, the City Council approved a Resolution that the AUAR be revised to incorporate the summary of issues and mitigation plan contained in the staff report, that the revisions to the Traffic Study prepared by SRF outlined in the staff report be incorporated into the study, and that the revised AUAR be adopted by the city. On May 27, 1997, the City Council approved the following: • Approved the first reading for rezoning the property from Agricultural Estate, A2, to Planned Unit Development, PUD. • Approved the preliminary PUD #92-6 for an office/industrial business park and preliminary plat approval for 12 lots, two outlots and associated right-of-way subject to the plans dated April 4, 1997, revised May 23, 1997, with conditions. • The City Council approved a Wetland Alteration Permit for Gateway Business Park subject to the conditions of preliminary PUD #92-6 approval. • The City Council approved Interim Use Permit #97-1 for Gateway West Planned Unit Development site subject to conditions. DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting site plan approval for a 54,600 square foot, two story, office- warehouse-manufacturing building. Site Constraints Wetland Protection The City of Chanhassen Wetland Inventory, the National Wetland Inventory, a review of historic aerial photography and a site visit reveal that wetland is present on the site. The applicant has submitted a wetland delineation and type determination for city review and approval. Bluff Protection There are no bluffs present on the site. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 4 of 14 Bluff Creek Primary Zone The eastern portion of the site is located within the Bluff Creek Primary Zone. A Conditional Use Permit was approved in 2007 for development in the overlay district. This area is proposed for preservation as permanent open space. A 40 foot structure setback with the first 20 feet in buffer is required. A trail connection is required by the city from Century Boulevard to the existing trail around the wetland complex. Shoreland Management The property does not lie within a shoreland overlay district. Floodplain Overlay This property does not lie within a floodplain. ARCHITECTURAL COMPLIANCE Size Portion Placement The main entry is located in the southwest corner of the building for the primary unit and on the north side for the second unit. The entrance shows an accent stone base at the entrance with a pewter colored metal canopy, below silver colored curtain wall panels around the windows, surrounded by red metal accent panels, topped with a pewter color, perforated metal Additional architectural articulation shall be provided for the second unit primary access, which may include adding a canopy element. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 5 of 14 Material, Color and Detail The applicant is proposing the predominate building material of two toned, gray and exposed aggregate, precast concrete wall panel, with partition lines and banding. Accent is added through the spacing of aluminum storefront systems, pewter colored metal panels, perforated metal panels, red accent panels and recessed walls at the storefront window locations and entrances. Height and Roof Design The building height is 38 feet to the top of the parapet. The parapet is topped with a red metal coping material. Facade Transparency The applicant meets the 50 percent glazing (window) requirements. Windows are provided in all office areas of the building. The windows are within silver colored anodized aluminum window frames. Loading areas, refuse area, etc. Delivery and service overhead doors are located on the south side of the building facing the building to the south. Trash enclosures are not shown around the building so staff assumes that trash is stored inside and brought out through the overhead doors at the time of pick-up. If exterior dumpsters are to be used, then trash enclosures will need to be constructed using material compatible with the building. Lighting The applicant is proposing 25-foot tall light poles around the parking lot as well as wall pack units around the building. LED lighting is proposed. All lighting shall be shielded and have 90 degree cut-off angles pursuant to city code. Signage The applicant is proposing signage on the west elevation of the building and a monument sign at the entrance. Signage must follow the standards for the IOP district. Signage may not be located within drainage and utility easements and will need to be moved to another location on the site or the easement may be vacated. Tenant signage may be located above the entrance of the tenant space on the north side of the building. A separate sign permit must be submitted for each sign. Site Furnishings The applicant is proposing constructing a trail as part of the development. They should add bike rakes as well as an outdoor seating/picnic area. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 6 of 14 Landscaping Minimum requirements for landscaping at the proposed development include 5,604 sq. ft. of landscaped area around the parking lot, 5 landscape islands or peninsulas, and 20 trees for the parking lot. The applicant’s proposed as compared to the requirements for landscape area and parking lot trees is shown in the following table: Required Proposed Vehicular use landscape area 5,064 sq. ft. >5,064 sq. ft. Trees/parking lot 20 trees 28 trees Islands or peninsulas/parking lot 5 islands/peninsulas 5 islands/peninsulas The applicant meets minimum requirements for trees and landscaping in the parking lot area. Bufferyard requirements: Required plantings Proposed plantings Bufferyard C – North prop. line, open space, 500 feet 7 overstory trees 12 Understory trees 15 Shrubs 1 overstory trees 12 Understory trees 20 Shrubs Bufferyard B – south prop. line, 500 feet 7 Overstory trees 15 Understory trees 22 Shrubs 8 Overstory trees 11 Understory trees 23 Shrubs The applicant shall add overstory trees to the north property line. A scattering of three oaks in the native seed planting will be acceptable. Staff also recommends that a shrub row be located between the front parking area and the property line to screen the parking lot. The rear wooded area on the lot is within the Bluff Creek Overlay District. This wooded area is in the primary zone and shall be preserved with the exception of the public trail connection. The developer shall install Conservation Area signage at the north and south property lines and at the trail. Access, Lot Frontage and Parking Location The lot fronts on Century Boulevard and proposes two access driveways. Parking is distributed on the western and northern sides of the building with truck docks located on the south side of the building. An access drive is provided around the entire building. Fire Lane No Parking areas for all the curbing except those directly adjacent to parking spaces will need to be painted yellow with NO PARKING FIRE LANE signs posted per city/fire code. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 7 of 14 Miscellaneous Sheets C4.1 & C4.2 shall be revised as follows: Utility notes 8 & 9. Sanitary sewer must be schedule 40. MPC table 701.1 Utility notes 11, 12 & 13. Minnesota rules 4715 is no longer the State plumbing code. Minnesota rules 4714 is the current code. Please change all references to 4714 along with the current code sections. Submit details on the storm detention system. Retaining walls over 4 feet in height require an engineered design. Plans must be submitted by a design professional on the proposed structure. All design information should be included (i.e. exiting, code analysis, proposed occupancies and occupancies). EASEMENTS There are several existing easements on this property as shown on the survey. Two existing drainage and utility easements are atypical. Staff believes standard drainage and utility easements associated with the lot lines are appropriate for this site. The atypical portions of the existing easements should be vacationed to avoid the need for additional encroachment easements. A permanent easement will be required to be granted over the city’s trail that will traverse through the property. PARKS & RECREATION The applicant is proposing a trail connection to the trial within Century Boulevard and the trail located within the Bluff Creek primary zone. No Park and Trail frees are being collected because there is no subdivision. The developer shall be responsible for planning, engineering, and constructing the “wetland trail.” Connection points for this new trail shall be the terminus of the Trotters Ridge trail, the intersection of Century Boulevard and West 82nd Street, and the intersection of Century Boulevard and Water Tower Place. Bid documents, including plans and specifications, shall be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to soliciting bids. Project bidding shall occur in a competitive environment with a minimum of three bids being received. The results of the bidding process shall be reviewed with the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to award. Cash payment for trail construction shall be made from the City of Chanhassen to the developer upon completion, inspection, and acceptance of the trail. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 8 of 14 Trail easements within Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition (formerly Outlot C, Arboretum Business Park) shall be dedicated to the city to accommodate the “wetland trail”. UTILITIES The developer will extend sanitary sewer and water service to the building from the existing utility lines in Century Boulevard. The developer is proposing to wet-tap the existing 12 inch watermain in the street to establish an 8 inch service connection for water to the building. Engineering recommends the site designer utilize PVC C900 watermain grade pipe in lieu of ductile iron pipe. This recommendation is based on past experience regarding the local soils being corrosive in nature. The developer is proposing to add a manhole to connect the sanitary service from the site to the main in the street. There is an existing sanitary manhole 35 feet to the north of the proposed manhole. The developer should review routing the sanitary service to the existing manhole to avoid adding another manhole in the street that the city maintains and to save on installation costs. Engineering believes the connection at a manhole is an appropriate design because it will allow Staff to monitor the flow from the site if needed. GRADING The proposed site grading is a concern because the trail location is sandwiched between the wetland buffer and the proposed parking lot for the building concept. The site includes a retaining wall to maintain a standard trail design. The design standards include a maximum of a Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 9 of 14 5 percent slope lineally along the trail throughout the site as much as is feasible. The retaining wall, which wraps around the parking lot on the north and east sides of the building, is shown to be 17 feet in height above portions of the trail and there isn’t enough buffer area between the proposed parking lot and the trail for staff to recommend this as a safe and long term design. The site layout should be reviewed by the developer to address this concern. Staff also recommends the developer consider snow removal and storage as part of the site design. Staff is concerned there isn’t enough available stockpiling space for the snow. The southern portion of the retaining wall could be placed further to the east to create more storage area that works with the lot design. DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The proposed development will exceed one (1) acre of disturbance and will, therefore, be subject to the General Permit Authorization to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity Under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination/State Disposal System (NPDES Construction Permit). All erosion control shall be installed and inspected prior to initiation of site grading activities. The proposed redevelopment will need Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) permits. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT Article VII, Chapter 19 of City Code describes the required storm water management development standards. Section 19-141 states that “these development standards shall be reflected in plans prepared by developers and/or project proposers in the design and layout of site plans, subdivisions and water management features.” These standards include abstraction of runoff and water quality treatment resulting in the removal of 90% total suspended solids (TSS) and 60 percent total phosphorous (TP). Compliance Table Code Project (Control Concepts) Building Height 3 stories 2 stories 40 feet 38 feet (to top of parapet) Building Setback N* - 0' E# - 0' N - 129' E - 237' W - 50' S - 0' W - 80' S – 64’ * There is a wetland setback. # There is a 40-foot setback required from the Bluff Creek Primary Zone boundary. Parking Stalls 103 stalls 106 stalls Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 10 of 14 (Office = 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet ((15,135/1,000)*4= 61); Manufacturing = 1 per employee on largest shift (28 employees); warehouse = 1 space per 1,000 square feet for the first 10,000 square feet, then 1 space per 2,000 square feet ((10,000/1,000)+(7,962/2,000)=14) Parking Setback N - 0' E #- 0' N - 52' E - 200' W - 10' S - 0' W - 10' S - 11' Hard Surface Coverage 70% 58.6% Lot Area 43,560 sq. ft. 227,850 sq. ft. (5.23 ac.) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the site plan for a 54,600, two story building, plans prepared by Loucks and BDH & Young, dated 06-15-2018, subject to the following conditions: Building 1. Sheets C4.1 & C4.2 a. Utility notes 8 & 9. Sanitary sewer must be schedule 40. MPC table 701.1 b. Utility notes 11, 12 & 13. Minnesota rules 4715 is no longer the State plumbing code. Minnesota rules 4714 is the current code. Please change all references to 4714 along with the current code sections. 2. Submit details on the storm detention system. 3. Retaining walls over 4 feet in heights require an engineered design. 4. Plans must be submitted by a design professional on the proposed structure. All design information should be included (i.e. exiting, code analysis, proposed occupancies and occupancies). Environmental Resources 1. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to add three bur oaks to the north property line native seed area. 2. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to add a row of shrubs for screening of the parking area along Century Blvd. The screening shall be a minimum of 3 feet tall at maturity. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 11 of 14 3. The Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be shown on the site and landscape plans. 4. The applicant shall install Conservation Area signs at the edge of the Bluff Creek Overlay District at the north and south property lines and at the trail. The signs are available for purchase at the Chanhassen Public Works. Fire 1. Fire Lane No Parking areas for all the curbing except those directly adjacent to parking spaces will need to be painted yellow with NO PARKING FIRE LANE signs posted per city/fire code. Parks 1. The developer shall be responsible for planning, engineering, and constructing the “wetland trail.” Connection points for this new trail shall be the terminus of the Trotters Ridge trail, the intersection of Century Boulevard and West 82nd Street, and the intersection of Century Boulevard and Water Tower Place. Bid documents, including plans and specifications, shall be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to soliciting bids. Project bidding shall occur in a competitive environment with a minimum of three bids being received. The results of the bidding process shall be reviewed with the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to award. Cash payment for trail construction shall be made from the City of Chanhassen to the developer upon completion, inspection, and acceptance of the trail. 2. Trail easements within Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th shall be dedicated to the city to accommodate the “wetland trail”. Planning 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement and provide the security required by it prior to receiving a building permit. 2. Additional architectural articulation shall be provided for the second unit primary access. 3. Add bike racks as well as an outdoor seating/picnic area. 4. A separate sign permit application, review and approval shall be required prior to site sign installation. Water Resources and Engineering 1. The limits of the Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be identified throughout the plan set. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 12 of 14 2. Show the western curb line along Century Boulevard and the crosswalk at Water Tower Place throughout the plan set. 3. Vacate drainage and utility easements except the standard 10 foot wide easement associated with the front of the parcel in addition to the standard 5 foot wide easement associated with the side and rear portions of the parcel. 4. The wetland, wetland buffer, and the Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be designated as Outlots. 5. Provide a permanent easement over the trail throughout the parcel. 6. Apply for an Encroachment Agreement for the private sidewalk. 7. Add detailed design for the retaining wall including a profile, proposed construction materials, and railing/fence. The trail is designed to be on the bottom side of a retaining wall that has portions of it detailed to be 17 feet in height. The safety of the users of the trail needs to be coordinated. 8. Consider adjustment of the site design to facilitate maintenance and snow removal. 9. Include a detail for tree protection. 10. Add note to protect the existing line of trees on the shared property with the parcel to the south. 11. Detail asphalt cut-out and replacement in the street to facilitate the installation of the concrete aprons. 12. Install ADA pedestrian ramp for trail crossing at Century Boulevard. 13. Adjust curb radius design to meet city detail #5207 in association with the commercial entrances. A radius smaller than 20 feet may be appropriate for the shared property with the parcel to the south. 14. Adjust slope of the northern commercial entrance to meeting city detail #5207. 15. Replace any striping removed in Century Boulevard. 16. All parking stalls shall be 9 feet in width including handicapped stalls. 17. Add a radius to the trail where it connects to the existing bituminous trail to facilitate maintenance. Include additional tree removal area. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 13 of 14 18. All striping and signage shall meet the requirements of the MN-MUTCD manual. 19. Indicate lineal slope design for the trail. 20. All disturbed areas require a minimum of 6 inches of topsoil and must meet decompaction requirements. 21. Salvage existing topsoil and indicate stockpile location. 22. Add inlet protection in the catch basins on the west side of Century Boulevard. 23. Add rock construction entrance at the southern commercial entrance. 24. Extend the silt fence installation as appropriate to protect from construction. 25. The patch for the watermain connection shall be the full width of Century Boulevard. 26. Detail 5302A is shown twice on the SWPPP plan sheet. 27. Utilize C900 PVC pipe for the water service pipe material in lieu of DIP. Fittings shall be epoxy coated. 28. Sanitary manhole detail #5101 requires the pipe connections to be sealed with a cored and sealed connection. The utility plan details a build over manhole for the sanitary service connection. Add notes identifying the pipe connection requirements. 29. Review sanitary design from a future maintenance and a cost perspective. Adding Sanitary manhole #1 approximately 35 feet to the south of an existing manhole is questionable. The sanitary service line could be routed directly to the existing manhole. The invert would need to be reconstructed and a cored and booted connection would be required. 30. Applicant is permitted a connection to municipal stormdrain system after meeting treatment and discharge requirements of city and RPBCWD. Applicant is responsible for ensuring municipal system is capable of handling the additional capacity. 31. Applicant is responsible for any improvements necessary to the municipal system to meet capacity and regulatory requirements from the point of connection up to and including the outlet/receiving water body 32. Connection is not permitted in catchbasin. Must connect to storm main in Century Blvd. Include access manhole. Invert elevation in the manhole shall allow for 0.1 inches of fall through the structure. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts July 18, 2018 Page 14 of 14 33. Access MH missing from western most section of Contech structure. 34. Proprietary filtration devices should be used as pretreatment vs post treatment. 35. Identify snow storage location on plans. 36. Identify stockpile locations on plan. 37. Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) signs and locations are required on plans. Signs are required at each point the BCOD crosses the property boundary, every 100 feet, every point of deflection. 38. Include BCOD sign detail. 39. The proposed redevelopment will need Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) permits. 40. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure and submit proof that permits are received from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, MnDOT, Carver County, RPBCWD, Board of Water and Soil Resources, PCA, etc.). 41. Project will require stormwater management fees associated with city development review and permitting process. 42. The city is in agreement with the RPBCWD comments identified in the email dated June 26, 2018 titled ‘RPBCWD Permit 2018-43: Control Concepts – Initial Completeness Review Comments.’ With one exception: J10 – the city requests applicant provide additional performance monitoring field data to support manufacturers removal estimates. CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: August 7, 2018 CC DATE: August 13, 2018 REVIEW DEADLINE: September 17, 2018 CASE #: 2018-11 BY: JA, GB, RG, DN, JS, VS SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a setback variance to permit the construction of retaining walls within the 40-foot Bluff Creek Primary zone setback as part of the site plan for a 54,600 square-foot, two story office-warehouse-manufacturing building. LOCATION: Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition (PID 25.0680020) 8077 Century Boulevard APPLICANT: Bauer Design Build Zion Investments, LLC 14030 21st Avenue N. 7014 Willow Creek Road Plymouth, MN 55447 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (763) 999-7217 (952) 474-6200 mikel@bauerdb.com cwatkins@ccipower.com PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of a Bluff Creek primary zone setback variance to construct retaining walls in the required setback subject to the conditions of approval and adoption of the findings of fact and recommendation.” Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts August 7, 2018 Page 2 of 6 PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development (PUD)/Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Office Industrial ACREAGE: 5.23 acres DENSITY: 0.24 F.A.R. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city’s discretion in approving or denying a Variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article 2, Division 3, Variances Chapter 20, Article XXXI, Bluff Creek Overlay District Arboretum Business Park Development Standards BACKGROUND On July 17, 2018, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the site plan for Control Concepts. One of the conditions was that the developer address the location of the trail relative to the 17-foot retaining wall: “Add detailed design for the retaining wall including a profile, proposed construction materials, and railing/fence. The trail is designed to be on the bottom side of a retaining wall that has portions of it detailed to be 17 feet in height. The safety of the users of the trail needs to be coordinated.” Additionally, the developer was directed to consider adjustment of the site design to facilitate maintenance and snow removal. On May 29, 2007, the Chanhassen City Council approved the following: Preliminary and final plat for two lots and one outlot (Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition). Conditional Use Permit for development within the Bluff Creek Corridor. Site Plan for a 51,800 square-foot office/warehouse building (Mamac Systems) with a variance to permit only 32 percent building transparency on the western building elevation and with a 20- foot setback variance for the drive aisle in the southeast corner of the site for development within the Bluff Creek Corridor on Lot 1, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition (Planning Case #2007-10). Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts August 7, 2018 Page 3 of 6 On September 24, 2001, the Chanhassen City Council approved Interim Use Permit (IUP) #2001-1 to grade a portion of the Arboretum Business Park development and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) #2001-8 to permit development within the BCOD. The IUP and CUP included this property. DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting approval to locate retaining walls within the 40-foot Bluff Creek primary zone setback to facilitate the construction of the parking lot for the development as well as accommodating the wetland trail to the Chanhassen Nature Preserve. This revised plan was in response to discussion as part of the site plan review public hearing. The intent was to create a better pedestrian environment on the trail by reducing the 17-foot tall retaining wall on the uphill side of the trail. The revised staged walls will create a mini-overlook of the wetland, being 10 feet above the bottom of the lower retaining wall in the area of the northeast corner of the parking lot. Site Constraints Wetland Protection The City of Chanhassen Wetland Inventory, the National Wetland Inventory, a review of historic aerial photography and a site visit reveal that wetland is present on the site. The applicant has submitted a wetland delineation and type determination for city review and approval. Bluff Protection There are no bluffs present on the site. Bluff Creek Primary Zone The eastern portion of the site is located within the Bluff Creek Primary Zone. A CUP was approved in 2007 for development in the overlay district. This area is proposed for preservation as permanent open space. A 40-foot structure setback with the first 20 feet in buffer is required. A trail connection is required by the city from Century Boulevard to the existing trail around the wetland complex. EASEMENTS A permanent trail easement will be required over the city’s trail that will cross through the property. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts August 7, 2018 Page 4 of 6 GRADING The revised grading plan shows two main retaining walls between the wetland and the parking lot. The proposed trail is located between the two retaining walls with two-foot buffer strips on each side of the trail. The overall elevation difference is split fairly equally between the two walls to allow the trail to maintain an appropriate grade. The upper wall is about eight feet in average height near the wetland and considerably shorter than was previously proposed. The parapet design in conjunction with a fence shall be added to the upper wall to protect the users of the trail from miscellaneous debris or snow coming over the upper edge above their heads. The lower wall shall incorporate an open railing style to allow snow to be moved through it when the trail is being maintained. A cut section should be detailed on the plan through the retaining wall and trail area to provide additional visualization of the design. The designer should consider maintenance for the site and determine if additional snow storage volume is needed. The available site area has been maximized and only minimal areas remain in which snow can be temporarily stored. The wall design in the southeast corner of the site could be adjusted to accommodate additional snow storage in the setback area for the BCOD. The snow storage calculation should be provided to the City for review or the information could be added to the drawing. A restoration plan for the area within the buffer areas for the wetland and the BCOD shall be provided. Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts August 7, 2018 Page 5 of 6 MISCELLANEOUS Retaining walls over 4 feet in height require an engineered design and a building permit. PARKS & RECREATION The applicant is proposing a trail connection to the trail within Century Boulevard and the trail located within the Bluff Creek primary zone. In reviewing the original trail submittal, there was concern that the trail was located next to a 17-foot tall retaining wall. One suggestion was to have a staged retaining wall that would create a more pedestrian friendly environment. TREE PRESERVATION The rear wooded area on the lot is within the BCOD. This wooded area is in the primary zone and shall be preserved with the exception of the public trail connection. To ensure the most minimal impacts to the existing woods within the BCOD, staff recommends that the trail alignment be field checked before any construction begins. Staff and developer can verify trees to be removed or preserved along the trail construction route. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve variance to permit construction of retaining walls within the Bluff Creek primary zone setback as shown in the plans prepared by Loucks, dated 06-15-2018, revised 7-12-18, subject to the following conditions: Building 1. Retaining walls over 4 feet in heights require an engineered design. Environmental Resources 1. The applicant shall coordinate a trail inspection with the city arborist to review tree removals prior to any trail construction activities. 2. Tree protection fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits along the trail. Parks 1. The developer shall be responsible for planning, engineering, and constructing the “wetland trail.” Connection points for this new trail shall be the terminus of the Trotters Ridge trail and the intersection of Century Boulevard and Water Tower Place. Bid documents, including plans and specifications, shall be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to soliciting bids. Project bidding shall occur in a competitive environment with a minimum of three bids being received. The Planning Commission 8077 Century Boulevard – Control Concepts August 7, 2018 Page 6 of 6 results of the bidding process shall be reviewed with the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to award. Cash payment for trail construction shall be made from the City of Chanhassen to the developer upon completion, inspection, and acceptance of the trail. 2. Trail easements within Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th shall be dedicated to the city to accommodate the “wetland trail”. Water Resources and Engineering 1. The limits of the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) shall be identified throughout the plan set. 2. Add detailed design for the retaining walls including a profile, proposed construction materials, and railings/fences. 3. Add cut sections through the retaining walls and the trail to provide for easier visualization and enhance constructability. 4. Create a parapet design along the upper wall when it is above the trail. 5. Extend the silt fence installation as appropriate to protect from construction. 6. Identify snow storage locations on the plans. 7. Provide a restoration plan for grading in the wetland buffer and in the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) buffer. 8. The proposed redevelopment will need Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) permits. 9. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure and submit proof that permits are received from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, MnDOT, Carver County, RPBCWD, Board of Water and Soil Resources, PCA, etc.). 10. The grade through the ADA areas of the parking lot shall be a maximum of 2% slope in any direction. The point elevations should be re-checked. Add this code requirement in a note on the plans. g:\plan\2018 planning cases\18-11 control concepts - site plan review\variance 18-11\staff report control concepts var.doc TYPICAL CROSS SECTION OF SINGLE RETAINING WALL AT RETAINING WALL ELEVATION #7 SCALE: N/A PROPOSED 42" RAILING PROPOSED RECON BLOCK GRAVITY RETAINING WALL NOTE: THIS INFORMATION IS SHOWN FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE RETAINING WALL DESIGN/SHOP DRAWINGS SIGNED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR STEEL PIPE RAILING. ELEV. 68.15 ELEV. 68.45 ELEV. 70.45 ELEV. 51.87 TYPICAL CROSS SECTION OF TIERED RETAINING WALL AT RETAINING WALL ELEVATION #7 SCALE: N/A PROPOSED 42" RAILING PROPOSED RECON BLOCK GRAVITY RETAINING WALL NOTE: THIS INFORMATION IS SHOWN FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE RETAINING WALL DESIGN/SHOP DRAWINGS SIGNED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR STEEL PIPE RAILING. ELEV. 68.02 ELEV. 67.45 ELEV. 69.45 ELEV. 60.59 ELEV. 60.31 ELEV. 51.20 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL N NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS PROVIDED BY LOUCKS. REFER TO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY DATED 05/08/18 FOR COMPLETE SURVEY INFORMATION. Gopher State One Call WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. SCALE IN FEET 300 60 9 SURVEY LEGEND C1.1 REMOVE TREE TYP REMOVE TREE PER CONVERSATION WITH TODD HOFFMAN (PARK & RECREATION DIRECTOR) REMOVE BITUMINOUS PATH CLEAR AND GRUB AS NEEDED FOR BITUMINOUS PATH CONSTRUCTION REMOVE FENCE AS NEEDED FOR BITUMINOUS PATH CONSTRUCTION SAW-CUT, REMOVE, & REPLACE BITUMINOUS AS NEEDED FOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTION REFER TO UTILITY PLAN PROTECT EXISTING UTILITIES DURING DRIVEWAY AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION REMOVE & RELOCATE EXISTING LIGHT POLE COORDINATE LOCATION WITH CITY REMOVE & RELOCATE EXISTING SIGN COORDINATE LOCATION WITH CITY REMOVE BITUMINOUS PATH REMOVE CURB & GUTTER REMOVE CURB & GUTTER REMOVE BITUMINOUS PATH PROTECT EXISTING TREES PROTECT EXISTING TREE PROTECT EXISTING TREE PROTECT EXISTING TREE PROTECT EXISTING TREES PROTECT EXISTING UTILITIES DURING DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION PROTECT EXISTING TREE LINE PROTECT EXISTING TREES SAW-CUT, REMOVE, & REPLACE BITUMINOUS AS NEEDED ALTERNATE C3 REMOVALS FOR CITY BITUMINOUS TRAIL 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL N NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS PROVIDED BY LOUCKS. REFER TO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY DATED 05/08/18 FOR COMPLETE SURVEY INFORMATION. Gopher State One Call WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. SCALE IN FEET 300 60 9 SURVEY LEGEND C1.2 REMOVE EXISTING TREES/WOODS REMOVE EXISTING CURB & GUTTER, RETAINING WALLS, FENCE, ETC. REMOVE EXISTING MANHOLES, POWER POLES, LIGHT POLES, BOLLARDS, PARKING METERS, SIGNS, ETC. REMOVE EXISTING TREES REMOVE EXISTING UTILITIES REMOVE EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVING DEMOLITION LEGEND 1.CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND/OR RELOCATE EXISTING PRIVATE UTILITIES AS NECESSARY. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE ACTIVITIES WITH UTILITY COMPANIES. 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE FEATURES NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL. 3. CONTRACTOR TO CLEAR AND GRUB EXISTING VEGETATION WITHIN CONSTRUCTION LIMITS, STRIP TOP SOIL, AND STOCKPILE ON-SITE. REFER TO GRADING PLAN AND SWPPP FOR SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS. 4.CLEAR AND GRUB AND REMOVE ALL TREES, VEGETATION AND SITE DEBRIS PRIOR TO GRADING. ALL REMOVED MATERIAL SHALL BE HAULED FROM THE SITE DAILY. ALL CLEARING AND GRUBBING AND REMOVALS SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY ESTABLISHED UPON REMOVAL. SEE THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP). 5.CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL SITE SURFACE FEATURES WITHIN REMOVAL LIMITS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SITE DEMOLITION NOTES PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 971.40 8 20 13 31 31 30'R 15'R 15'R 5'R 5'R 15'R 20'R 30'R 20'R 56'R 5'R 5'R 76'R 20'R413'R 10'R 5'R 5'R 5'R 5'R30'R 5'R 10'R 3'R 55'R18'26'18'4.7'14'35'9' TYP 9' TYP 9' TYP 8' TYP 8' TYP 6.7'9'26' 18' 26' 18'9'TYP9'TYP18'26'146.3'2.6'10.7'8.9 ' 3' 6'10'28.1'89.6'6.7'26'4.7'30.9'45.8'22.5'2.5'9' TYP 20'49.3'26'29.5'5'2.5'9' TYP 8' 3'R 3'R 8'R23'25'3'R 3'R 3'R 3'R 49'R 35'R 112.5'R 126.5'R 64'R 50'R 130'R 140'R 48'R 40'R 48'R 48'R 60'R 50'R 49'R 43'R10'10'80.1'6'6'MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER & BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER & BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER & BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT MATCH EXISTING BITUMINOUS PATH MATCH EXISTING BITUMINOUS PATH MONUMENT SIGN (COORDINATE W/ ARCHITECTURAL) MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL WITH RAILING TYP-SEE DETAIL MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL WITH RAILING TYP-SEE DETAIL B612 CURB & GUTTER TYP-SEE DETAIL HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT TYP-SEE DETAILCONCRETE PAVEMENT TYP-SEE DETAIL HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT TYP-SEE DETAILLIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT TYP-SEE DETAIL CONCRETE SIDEWALK TYP-SEE DETAIL CONCRETE STOOP COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS GENERATOR AND TRANSFORMER PAD COORDINATE WITH MECHANICAL PLANS CONCRETE STOOP COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS CONCRETE STOOP COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS CONCRETE STOOP COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS LIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT TYP-SEE DETAIL LIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT TYP-SEE DETAIL B612 CURB & GUTTER TYP-SEE DETAIL CAST-IN-PLACE RETAINING WALL SEE STRUCTURAL & ARCHITECTURAL 4 - ADA PARKING SIGN TYP-SEE DETAIL 10' TAPER TO FLAT CURB FLAT CURB TYP-SEE DETAIL 10' TAPER TO FLAT CURB CONCRETE STOOP COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS 2 - ADA PARKING SIGNS TYP-SEE DETAIL TYPICAL ADA PARKING TYP-SEE DETAIL 10' BITUMINOUS PATH WITH 2-2' BITUMINOUS MAINTENANCE STRIPS DEFINE 10' PATH W/ 4" WHITE STRIPS TYP-SEE DETAIL 10' BITUMINOUS PATH TYP-SEE DETAIL CONNECT TO EXISTING BITUMINOUS PATH FLAT CURB TYP-SEE DETAIL SURMOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER AT LOADING DOCK RETAINING WALLS TYP-SEE DETAIL MATCH EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT MATCH EXISTING BITUMINOUS PATH MATCH EXISTING BITUMINOUS PATH 10' TAPER TO FLAT CURB FLAT CURB TYP-SEE DETAIL 10' TAPER TO FLAT CURB 10' TAPER TO FLAT CURB 3' TAPER TO FLAT CURB 3' TAPER TO FLAT CURB FLAT CURB TYP-SEE DETAIL 3' TAPER TO FLAT CURB 3' TAPER TO FLAT CURB FLAT CURB TYP-SEE DETAIL 3' TAPER TO FLAT CURB 3' TAPER TO FLAT CURB 3' TAPER TO FLAT CURB CONCRETE APRON TYP-SEE DETAIL CONCRETE APRON TYP-SEE DETAIL 40' AVERAGE BUFFER AREA 20' MINIMUM BUFFER AREA 6-WETLAND BUFFER LOCATION SIGNS TYP-SEE DETAIL 3-BOLLARDS TYP-SEE DETAIL 2-BOLLARDS TYP-SEE DETAIL 6-BOLLARDS TYP-SEE DETAIL BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT SIGN TYP-SEE DETAIL (AVAILABLE FROM CHANHASSEN PUBLIC WORKS) BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT SIGN TYP-SEE DETAIL (AVAILABLE FROM CHANHASSEN PUBLIC WORKS) BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT SIGN TYP-SEE DETAIL (AVAILABLE FROM CHANHASSEN PUBLIC WORKS) SNOW STORAGE CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN RAMP TYP-SEE DETAIL 10' TAPER TO FLAT CURB 4-BIKE RACKS SEE DETAIL LIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT TYP-SEE DETAIL TRANSITION TO SURMOUNTABLE CURB SEE DETAIL 3' TAPER TO FLAT CURB DOUBLE SIDED FIRE LANE SIGNS TYP-SEE DETAIL DOUBLE SIDED FIRE LANE SIGNS TYP-SEE DETAIL DOUBLE SIDED FIRE LANE SIGNS TYP-SEE DETAIL TRANSITION TO SURMOUNTABLE CURB SEE DETAIL DOUBLE SIDED FIRE LANE SIGNS TYP-SEE DETAIL REPLACE SHOULDER AND CENTERLINE STRIPING AS NEEDED OUTDOOR SEATING AREA SURMOUNTABLE CURB SEE DETAIL CAST-IN-PLACE RETAINING WALL SEE STRUCTURAL & ARCHITECTURAL 2-BOLLARDS TYP-SEE DETAIL 2-BOLLARDS TYP-SEE DETAIL 2-BOLLARDS TYP-SEE DETAIL SURMOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER ALONG BUILDING AT LOADING DOCK TYP-SEE DETAIL SURMOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER ALONG BUILDING AT LOADING DOCK TYP-SEE DETAIL WETLAND BUFFER LOCATION SIGN TO BE MOUNTED ON RAILING 10' BITUMINOUS PATH WITH 2-2' BITUMINOUS MAINTENANCE STRIPS DEFINE 10' PATH W/ 4" WHITE STRIPS TYP-SEE DETAIL"NO PARKING ACCESS AISLE" SIGN TYP-SEE DETAIL 2 - "NO PARKING ACCESS AISLE" SIGN TYP-SEE DETAIL ALTERNATE C2 LIMITS OF SNOW MELT SYSTEM COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS TYP-SEE DETAIL ALTERNATE C1 LIMITS OF SNOW MELT SYSTEM COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS TYP-SEE DETAIL BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT ALTERNATE C1 LIMITS OF SNOW MELT SYSTEM COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS TYP-SEE DETAIL ALTERNATE C2 LIMITS OF SNOW MELT SYSTEM COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS TYP-SEE DETAIL ALTERNATE C3 CITY BITUMINOUS TRAIL TYP-SEE DETAIL 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL N NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS PROVIDED BY LOUCKS. REFER TO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY DATED 05/08/18 FOR COMPLETE SURVEY INFORMATION. Gopher State One Call WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. SCALE IN FEET 300 60 SITE NOTES 1.ALL PAVING, CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DETAILS SHOWN PER THE DETAIL SHEET(S) AND STATE/LOCAL JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS. 2.ACCESSIBLE PARKING AND ACCESSIBLE ROUTES SHALL BE PROVIDED PER CURRENT ADA STANDARDS AND LOCAL/STATE REQUIREMENTS. 3.ALL CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4.ALL BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5.TYPICAL FULL SIZED PARKING STALL IS 9' X 18' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6.ALL CURB RADII SHALL BE 5.0' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 7.BITUMINOUS IMPREGNATED FIBER BOARD TO BE PLACED AT FULL DEPTH OF CONCRETE ADJACENT TO EXISTING STRUCTURES AND BEHIND CURB ADJACENT TO DRIVEWAYS AND SIDEWALKS. 8.SEE SITE ELECTRICAL PLAN FOR SITE LIGHTING. CURRENT ZONING:PUD PROPOSED ZONING:PUD PROPERTY AREA:227,850 SF / 5.23 AC EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA: 305 SF / 0.007 AC PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA:137,763 SF / 3.16 AC SITE DATA YARD (BUILDING) SETBACKS: FRONT 30 FT MINIMUM SIDE 10 FT MINIMUM REAR 30 FT MINIMUM PARKING SETBACKS: FRONT 10 FT MINIMUM SIDE 10 FT MINIMUM REAR 10 FT MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING AND DESIGN STANDARD REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM PARKING LAYOUT DIMENSIONS (90 DEGREE PATTERN): PARKING SPACE WIDTH = 9 FT PARKING SPACE LENGTH = 18 FT DRIVE AISLE WIDTH = 26 FT DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN STANDARDS SIGNAGE AND STRIPING NOTES 1.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SITE SIGNAGE AND STRIPING AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN. 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL PAINT ALL ACCESSIBLE STALLS, LOGOS AND CROSS HATCH LOADING AISLES WITH WHITE PAVEMENT MARKING PAINT, 4" IN WIDTH. 3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PAINT ANY/ALL DIRECTIONAL TRAFFIC ARROWS, AS SHOWN, IN WHITE PAINT. 4.ALL SIGNAGE SHALL INCLUDE POST, CONCRETE FOOTING AND STEEL CASING WHERE REQUIRED. 5.ALL SIGNAGE NOT PROTECTED BY CURB, LOCATED IN PARKING LOT OR OTHER PAVED AREAS TO BE PLACED IN STEEL CASING, FILLED WITH CONCRETE AND PAINTED YELLOW. REFER TO DETAIL. 6.ANY/ALL STOP SIGNS TO INCLUDE A 24" WIDE PAINTED STOP BAR IN WHITE PAINT, PLACED AT THE STOP SIGN LOCATION, A MINIMUM OF 4' FROM CROSSWALK IF APPLICABLE. ALL STOP BARS SHALL EXTEND FROM DIRECTIONAL TRANSITION BETWEEN LANES TO CURB. 7.ALL SIGNS TO BE PLACED 18" BEHIND BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 8.FIRE LANE NO PARKING AREAS FOR ALL THE CURBING EXCEPT THOSE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO PARKING SPACES SHALL BE PAINTED YELLOW WITH "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" SIGNS POSTED PER CITY FIRE CODE. PAVEMENT TYPES NOTE: SEE PAVEMENT SECTIONS ON SHEET C8.3 FOR TYPE AND DEPTH INFORMATION. LIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 100 STALLS TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED = 107 STALLS (INCLUDES ADA STALLS) OFF-STREET PARKING CALCULATIONS ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS REQUIRED = 4 STALLS PROPOSED ACCESSIBLE STALLS PROVIDED = 6 STALLS ACCESSIBLE PARKING 73 23 CIVIL LEGEND C2.1 40' WETLAND BUFFER AREA = 10,645 SF 40' AVERAGE WETLAND BUFFER AREA = 10,650 SF WETLAND BUFFER DATA LIMITS OF SNOW MELT SYSTEM ALTERNATE LIMITS OF SNOW MELT SYSTEM 8 8 8 88 8 8888 88844GW=967.20 82.4% 2.1% 88888PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 971.40 69.00 69.45 68.43 67.71 68.51 69.01 69.18 68.71 69.00 69.44 70.18 69.82 69.85 69.78 69.61 70.10 70.50 69.90 70.15 70.09 69.92 70.13 71.48 71.39 71.75 72.07 71.37 71.71 73.36 71.82 74.17 74.77 75.1875.85 75.90 74.68 74.2774.36 75.03 74.88 73.49 73.93 71.74 71.74 71.16 71.38 70.73 70.73 71.13 71.13 71.13 69.58 69.96 70.53 70.03 68.44 68.77 69.57 68.88 69.2169.8668.7069.4769.16 68.24 67.54 55.11 49.50 49.70 57.02 57.22 53.19 53.39 58.80 58.79 59.80 60.58 61.01 61.21 71.10 70.7170.6270.60 71.14 69.98 70.60 70.25 71.26 71.40 71.27 71.26 71.40 71.10 71.22 71.40 70.81 70.92 70.72 71.01 70.74 70.24 70.44 70.38 70.5770.67 70.76 70.82 70.51 70.13 70.82 70.50 71.04 72.30 71.48 70.70 70.3970.80 71.06 71.13 71.37 71.4071.27 71.31 71.35 71.30 71.37 71.40 71.40 70.45 70.81 70.73 71.37 71.40 71.40 70.87 70.99 71.40 71.23 69.49 70.15 67.40 67.2067.58 67.40 67.16 68.58 70.50 71.40 71.40 67.40 67.20 GW=967.40 TW=971.40 GW=967.20 TW=971.25 69.90 70.50 70.50 GW=967.40 TW=969.30 TW=969.90 TW=969.60 GW=967.50 GW=967.40 TW=969.39 GW=967.17 TW=969.90 GW=967.74 TW=970.50 4. 1 %2.1%2.5%2.0%2.1%2.0%2 . 0%2.0%1.0%1.0%1.5%1.0% 70.37 69.511.0%6.1%1.1%0.3%69.12 2.0% 3.0%2.6%1.0%2.0%70.81 1.3%2.5%2.0%3.3%3.0%3. 0 % 6. 0 % 6. 0 % 6. 0 % 3.1% 1.0%1.0%1.1% 1.1% 2.0%2.0%2.5%1.1%1.5%0.8%1.5%2.9%3.1%2.1%71.74 1.3%2.0%4.3%5.0%2.0% 2.0%5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0 % 2.0% 2.0% 1.5%1.0%3.0%4.0%4.3%0.3%2.0% 2.0%1.8%1.0%1.2%1.0%4. 5 % 4. 5 % 1. 5 %9749 7 2973 971968969970968969970971 968969970971971 970975 974 973 972 97 1 972973970970971971 9 7 2972 971971971971 972 973974969 970 971971 971 970 9 6 5 9 6 1 9 6 2 9 6 3 9 6 4 9 6 6 9 6 7968 9659629639649 6 6967 94 5 950 955960 94 6947948949951952953954956957958959961 950946947948949959 958 957953 954 955 956957958959 96096171.2624.8%22.2% 16.2%23.4%58.88 70.74 97 0 96 9 970 70.9771.07 68.33 68.10 67.60 67.96 68.1867.48 71.17 71.07 70.4470.70 69.35 49.70 49.5026.5% 952 951 9509509519529539549559569609699 6 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 22 12 6.3%7. 0 %6.1%2.5%6.0%4. 3 % 4 . 8%4474.56 71.44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RETAINING WALL ELEVATIONS TW-69.82 BW(S)-67.82 BW(N)-67.82 TW-71.52 BW(S)-69.52 BW(N)-67.62 TW-70.86 BW(S)-68.86 BW(N)-66.81 TW-71.17 BW(S)-69.17 BW(N)-66.03 TW-70.40 BW(S)-68.40 BW(N)-64.11 TW-71.56 BW(S)-69.56 BW(N)-62.20 TW-70.91 BW(S)-68.91 BW(N)-60.59 8 9 10 11 12 13TW-70.11 BW(S)-68.11 BW(N)-60.59 TW-70.59 BW(W)-68.59 BW(E)-60.59 TW-70.30 BW(W)-68.30 BW(E)-58.30 TW-67.62 BW-58.30 TW-68.37 BW-59.00 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 TW-65.75 BW-65.75 TW-63.83 BW-57.50 TW-61.92 BW-55.20 TW-60.31 BW-51.20 TW-60.31 BW-50.93 TW-60.31 BW-50.30 TW-58.02 BW-50.30 22 TW-56.59 BW-49.20 23 TW-55.17 BW-55.17 14 TW-69.56 BW-68.73 TW-69.21 BW-63.50 70.54 70.15 70.51 70.8170.80 70.69 71.09 2.2%70.93 71.05 70.73 70.79 71.35 71.35 71.40 8 8 8 8 8 ACTIVITIES MUST BE CONDUCTED SO AS TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL OF AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE ALTERNATE C3 GRADING ASSOCIATED WITH CITY BITUMINOUS TRAIL 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL N NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS PROVIDED BY LOUCKS. REFER TO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY DATED 05/08/18 FOR COMPLETE SURVEY INFORMATION. Gopher State One Call WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. SCALE IN FEET 300 60 73 23 CIVIL LEGEND GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1.SPOT ELEVATIONS REPRESENT FINISHED SURFACE GRADES, GUTTER/FLOW LINE, FACE OF BUILDING, OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2.GRADE THROUGH THE ADA AREAS OF THE PARKING LOT SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF 2% SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION. 3.CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.04 FEET. ALL CATCH BASINS IN GUTTERS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.16 FEET. RIM ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON PLANS DO NOT REFLECT SUMPED ELEVATIONS. 4.ALL DISTURBED UNPAVED AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE MINIMUM OF 6 INCHES OF TOP SOIL AND SEED/MULCH OR SOD. THESE AREAS SHALL BE WATERED/MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR UNTIL VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED. 5.ACTIVITIES MUST BE CONDUCTED SO AS TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL OF AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE. 6.FOR SITE RETAINING WALLS "TW" EQUALS SURFACE GRADE AT TOP FACE OF WALL (NOT TOP OF WALL), "GW" EQUALS SURFACE GRADE AT WALL GRADE TRANSITION, AND "BW" EQUALS SURFACE GRADE AT BOTTOM FACE OF WALL (NOT BOTTOM OF BURIED WALL COURSES). 7.REFER TO THE REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION AND REVIEW (REPORT NO. B1801313), DATED MARCH 13, 2018 AS PREPARED BY BRAUN INTERTEC FOR AN EXISTING SUBSURFACE SITE CONDITION ANALYSIS AND CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS. 8.STREETS MUST BE CLEANED AND SWEPT WHENEVER TRACKING OF SEDIMENTS OCCURS AND BEFORE SITES ARE LEFT IDLE FOR WEEKENDS AND HOLIDAYS. A REGULAR SWEEPING SCHEDULE MUST BE ESTABLISHED. 9.DUST MUST BE ADEQUATELY CONTROLLED. 10.SEE SWPPP FOR ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL NOTES AND REQUIREMENTS. 11.SEE UTILITY PLAN FOR WATER, STORM AND SANITARY SEWER INFORMATION. 12.SEE SITE PLAN FOR CURB AND BITUMINOUS TAPER LOCATIONS. C3.1 8 8 8 88 8 8888 88844888888PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 971.40 9749 7 2973 971968969970968969970971 968969970971971 970975 974 973 972 97 1 972973970970971971 97 2972 971971971971 972 973974969 970 971971 971 970 9 6 5 9 6 1 9 6 2 9 6 3 9 6 4 9 6 6 9 6 7968 9659629639649 6 6 9 6 7 94 5 950 955960 94 6947948949951952953954956957958959961 950946947948949959 958 957953 954 955 956957958959 96096197 0 96 9 970 952 951 9509509519529539549559569609699 6 9 448 8 8 8 8 INLET PROTECTION TYP-SEE DETAIL ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SEE DETAIL SILT FENCE TYP-SEE DETAIL SILT FENCE TYP-SEE DETAIL EROSION CONTROL BLANKET TYP-SEE DETAIL DOUBLE ROW SILT FENCE TYP-SEE DETAIL ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SEE DETAIL ACTIVITIES MUST BE CONDUCTED SO AS TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL OF AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE TREE PROTECTION FENCE TYP-SEE DETAIL PROPOSED SOIL STOCKPILE LOCATION PROPOSED SOIL STOCKPILE LOCATION TREE PROTECTION FENCE TO BE INSTALLED AT EDGE OF GRADING LIMITS ALONG TRAIL TYP-SEE DETAIL TREE PROTECTION FENCE TO BE INSTALLED AT EDGE OF GRADING LIMITS ALONG TRAIL TYP-SEE DETAIL ALTERNATE C3 EROSION CONTROL ASSOCIATED WITH CITY BITUMINOUS TRAIL 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL N NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS PROVIDED BY LOUCKS. REFER TO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY DATED 05/08/18 FOR COMPLETE SURVEY INFORMATION. Gopher State One Call WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. SCALE IN FEET 300 60 73 23 CIVIL LEGEND C3.2 SWPPP LEGEND INLET PROTECTION SILT FENCE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN PROPOSED DRAINAGE PATTERN BIO ROLLS EROSION CONTROL BLANKET ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL 1.THE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL CONSIST OF CONSTRUCTING A BUILDING, SURFACE PAVEMENTS, RETAINING WALLS, UNDERGROUND RETENTION & DETENTION SYSTEMS, AND UTILITIES. 2.THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1.INSTALL VEHICLE TRACKING BMP 2.INSTALL INLET PROTECTION 3.INSTALL SILT FENCE AROUND SITE 4.CLEAR AND GRUB SITE 5.STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL 6.REMOVE PAVEMENTS AND UTILITIES 7.ROUGH GRADE SITE 8.IMPORT CLEAN FILL FOR REPLACEMENT AND BALANCE 9.INSTALL UTILITIES 10.INSTALL BUILDING FOUNDATIONS 11.INSTALL CURB AND GUTTER 12.INSTALL PAVEMENTS AND WALKS 13.FINAL GRADE SITE 14.REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM STORMWATER SYSTEMS 15.SEED AND MULCH 16.WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED, REMOVE SILT FENCE, INLET PROTECTION, AND RESEED ANY AREAS DISTURBED BY THE REMOVAL. 3.SITE DATA: AREA OF DISTURBANCE:4.201 AC PRE-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS AREA:0.007 AC POST-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS AREA:3.163 AC GENERAL SOIL TYPE:SEE GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT 4.THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED MUST BE IDENTIFIED WITH FLAGS, STAKES, SIGNS, SILT FENCE, ETC. BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. 5.ALL DISTURBED GROUND LEFT INACTIVE FOR SEVEN (7) OR MORE DAYS SHALL BE STABILIZED BY SEEDING OR SODDING (ONLY AVAILABLE PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 15) OR BY MULCHING OR COVERING OR OTHER EQUIVALENT CONTROL MEASURE. 6.ON SLOPES 3:1 OR GREATER MAINTAIN SHEET FLOW AND MINIMIZE RILLS AND/OR GULLIES, SLOPE LENGTHS CAN NOT BE GREATER THAN 75 FEET. DENOTES SLOPES GREATER THAN 3:1. ALL 3:1 SLOPES TO BE STABILIZED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET 7.ALL STORM DRAINS AND INLETS MUST BE PROTECTED UNTIL ALL SOURCES OF POTENTIAL DISCHARGE ARE STABILIZED. 8.TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROL AND CAN NOT BE PLACED IN SURFACE WATERS OR STORM WATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS. TEMPORARY STOCKPILES WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF SILT, CLAY, OR ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ARE EXEPMT EX: CLEAN AGGREGATE STOCK PILES, DEMOLITION CONCRETE STOCKPILES, SAND STOCKPILES. 9.SEDIMENT LADEN WATER MUST BE DISCHARGED TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN WHENEVER POSSIBLE. IF NOT POSSIBLE, IT MUST BE TREATED WITH THE APPROPRIATE BMP'S. 10.SOLID WASTE MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND MUST COMPLY WITH MPCA DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS. 11.EXTERNAL WASHING OF CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES MUST BE LIMITED TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE. RUNOFF MUST BE PROPERLY CONTAINED. 12.NO ENGINE DEGREASING IS ALLOWED ON SITE. 13.THE OWNER WHO SIGNS THE NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION IS A PERMITTEE AND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT. THE OPERATOR (CONTRACTOR) WHO SIGNS THE NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION IS A PERMITTEE FOR PARTS II.B., PART II.C, PART II.B-F, PART V, PART IV AND APPLICABLE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENTS FOUND IN APPENDIX A, PART C. OF THE NPDES PERMIT AND IS JOINTLY RESPONSIBLE WITH THE OWNER FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE PORTIONS OF THE PERMIT. 14.TERMINATION OF COVERAGE-PERMITTEE(S) WISHING TO TERMINATE COVERAGE MUST SUBMIT A NOTICE OF TERMINATION (NOT) TO THE MPCA. ALL PERMITTEE(S) MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN MET: A.FINAL STABILIZATION, PER NPDES PERMIT PART IV.G. HAS BEEN ACHIEVED ON ALL PORTIONS OF THE SITE FOR WHICH THE PERMITTEE IS RESPONSIBLE. B.TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP AS DESCRIBED IN THE PERMIT. 15. INSPECTIONS A.INITIAL INSPECTION FOLLOWING SILT FENCE INSTALLATION BY CITY REPRESENTATIVE IS REQUIRED. B.EXPOSED SOIL AREAS: ONCE EVERY 7 DAYS AND WITHIN 24 HOURS FOLLOWING A 0.5" OVER 24 HOUR RAIN EVENT. C.STABILIZED AREAS: ONCE EVERY 7 DAYS D.FROZEN GROUND: AS SOON AS RUNOFF OCCURS OR PRIOR TO RESUMING CONSTRUCTION. E.INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED FOR 3 YEARS AFTER FILING OF THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION AND MUST INCLUDE: DATE AND TIME OF ACTION, NAME OF PERSON(S) CONDUCTING WORK, FINDING OF INSPECTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION, DATE AND AMOUNT OF RAINFALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. 16. MINIMUM MAINTENANCE A.SILT FENCE TO BE REPAIRED, REPLACED, SUPPLEMENTED WHEN NONFUNCTIONAL, OR 1/3 FULL; WITHIN 24 HOURS B.SEDIMENT BASINS DRAINED AND SEDIMENT REMOVED WHEN REACHES 1/2 STORAGE VOLUME. REMOVAL MUST BE COMPLETE WITHIN 72 HOURS OF DISCOVERY. C.SEDIMENT REMOVED FROM SURFACE WATERS WITHIN (7)SEVEN DAYS D.CONSTRUCTION SITE EXITS INSPECTED, TRACKED SEDIMENT REMOVED WITH 24 HOURS. E.PROVIDE COPIES OF EROSION INSPECTION RESULTS TO CITY ENGINEER FOR ALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 12" IN 24 HOURS F.PERMITTEE MUST, AT A MINIMUM, INSPECT, MAINTAIN AND REPAIR ALL DISTURBED SURFACES AND ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES AND SOIL STABILIZATION MEASURES EVERY DAY WORK IS PERFORMED ON THE SITE AND AT LEAST WEEKLY UNTIL LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITY HAS CEASED. THEREAFTER, THE PERMITTEE MUST PERFORM THESE RESPONSIBILITIES AT LEAST WEEKLY UNTIL VEGETATIVE COVER IS ESTABLISHED. 17.THE SWPPP, INCLUDING ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY BY THE PERMITTEE(S) WHO HAVE OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THE SITE. 18.OWNER MUST KEEP RECORDS OF ALL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT, THE SWPPP, ALL INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE, PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS, AND REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. THESE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED FOR THREE YEARS AFTER FILING NPDES NOTICE OF TERMINATION. 19.SWPPP MUST BE AMENDED WHEN: A.THERE IS A CHANGE IN DESIGN, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, WEATHER OR SEASONAL CONDITIONS THAT HAS A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON DISCHARGE B.INSPECTIONS INDICATE THAT THE SWPPP IS NOT EFFECTIVE AND DISCHARGE IS EXCEEDING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS. C.THE BMP'S IN THE SWPPP ARE NOT CONTROLLING POLLUTANTS IN DISCHARGES OR IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT. 19.CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA A.CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PREFABRICATED CONCRETE WASH-OUT CONTAINER WITH RAIN PROTECTION PER PLAN. B.CONCRETE WASH-OUT TO BE IDENTIFIED WITH SIGNAGE STATING "CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA DO NOT OVERFILL". C.CONCRETE WASHOUT WATER NEEDS TO BE PUMPED WITHIN 24 HOURS OF STANDING WATER IN WASHOUT AREA. 20.IN THE EVENT OF ENCOUNTERING A WELL OR SPRING DURING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR TO CEASE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND NOTIFY ENGINEER. 21.PIPE OULTETS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER. 22.FINAL STABILIZATION FINAL STABILIZATION REQUIRES THAT ALL SOIL DISTURBING ACVTIVITIES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND THAT DISTURBED AREAS ARE STABILIZED BY A UNIFORM PERENNIAL VEGETATIVE COVER WITH 70% OF THE EXPECTED FINAL DENSITY, AND THAT ALL PERMANENT PAVEMENTS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. ALL TEMPORARY BMP'S SHALL BE REMOVED, DITCHES STABILIZED, AND SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM PERMANENT CONVEYANCES AND SEDIMENTATION BASINS IN ORDER TO RETURN THE POND TO DESIGN CAPACITY. 23.RESPONSIBILITIES A.THE OWNER MUST IDENTIFY A PERSON WHO WILL OVERSEE THE SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION AND THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE: CONTACT: __________________________________ COMPANY: __________________________________ PHONE: __________________________________ B.THE OWNER MUST IDENTIFY THE A PERSON WHO WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: CONTACT:__________________________________ COMPANY: __________________________________ PHONE: __________________________________ 24.THE WATERSHED DISTRICT OR THE CITY MAY HAVE REQUIREMENTS FOR INSPECTIONS OR AS-BUILT DRAWINGS VERIFYING PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF THE BMPS. SWPPP NOTES ESTIMATED QUANTITIES DESCRIPTION UNIT TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA PREFABRICATED CONCRETE WASHOUT EA SILT FENCE (STANDARD)/TREE PROTECTION LF EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SY INLET PROTECTION EA QUANTITY 2 1 2,635 2,065 17 BIO-ROLL LF NA SITE VICINITY MAP CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER SPECIAL WATERS SEARCH MAP C3.3 PROJECT SITE * EROSION CONTROL BLANKET 6" 6" 1' TO 3'ANCHOR TRENCH 1.DIG 6"X6" TRENCH 2.LAY BLANKETS IN TRENCH 3.STAPLE AT 1.5' INTERVALS 4.BACKFILL WITH NATURAL SOIL AND COMPACT. 5.BLANKET LENGTH SHALL NOT EXCEED 100' WITHOUT AN ANCHOR TRENCH NOTE: SLOPE SURFACE SHALL BE FREE OF ROCKS, SOIL CLUMPS, STICKS, VEHICLE IMPRINTS, AND GRASS. BLANKETS SHALL HAVE GOOD SOIL CONTACT. ANCHOR TRENCH (SEE DETAIL AND NOTES BELOW) OVERLAP END JOINTS MINIMUM OF 6" AND STAPLE OVERLAP AT 1.5' INTERVALS. OVERLAP LONGITUDINAL JOINTS MINIMUM OF 6" STAPLE PATTERN/DENSITY SHALL FOLLOW MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS. DI R E C T I O N O F SU R F A C E F L O W STAGGER JOINTS DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 3016LOUCKS 8 8 8 88 8 8888 888448888 8 8PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 971.40 448 8 8 8 8 SANITARY SEWER SERVICE STUB INV=962.13 (VERIFY LOCATION, INVERT & SIZE W/ MECHANICAL) CORE DRILL INTO EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE INV=957.97± (VERIFY INVERT & SIZE) 84 LF-6" PVC @ 2.00% 29 LF-6" PVC @ 2.00% SANMH 2 RIM=971.27 INV(N)=961.55 INV(W)=961.45 WET TAP EXISTING 12" DIP WATERMAIN (VERIFY TYPE & SIZE) 8" GATE VALVE 8"x8" TEE W/ 6" REDUCER TO HYDRANT 8" GATE VALVE DUAL 8" COMBINED DOMESTIC/FIRE WATER SERVICES (VERIFY LOCATION, INVERT & SIZE W/ MECHANICAL) 98 LF-8" PVC WATERMAIN 112 LF-6" PVC WATERMAIN 40 LF-8" PVC WATERMAIN HYDRANT W/ GATE VALVE 14 LF-6" PVC WATERMAIN 90 DEG. 6"X6" BEND SANMH 1 RIM=971.27 INV(E)=959.75 INV(W)=959.65 85 LF-6" PVC @ 2.00% 11.25 DEG. 8" BEND 22.5 DEG. 8" BEND 85 LF-8" PVC WATERMAIN 7 LF-8" PVC WATERMAIN STORM BOTTOM OF PIPE=968.83± WM TOP OF PIPE=966.81± DEFLECT WM AS NEEDED TO MAINTAIN 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION STORM BOTTOM OF PIPE=968.46± SANITARY TOP OF PIPE=959.00± 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL N NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS PROVIDED BY LOUCKS. REFER TO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY DATED 05/08/18 FOR COMPLETE SURVEY INFORMATION. Gopher State One Call WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. SCALE IN FEET 300 60 73 23 CIVIL LEGEND C4.1 UTILITY NOTES 1. ALL SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER AND WATERMAIN UTILITIES SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS,THE MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE, THE LOCAL GOVERNING UNIT , AND THE STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATION OF THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), 2013 EDITION. 2.ALL UTILITY PIPE BEDDING SHALL BE COMPACTED SAND OR FINE GRANULAR MATERIAL. ALL COMPACTION SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CEAM SPECIFICATION AND THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. 3.ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE AND LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. THE CITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT AND THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER MUST BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, OR WORK IMPACTING PUBLIC UTILITIES. 4.ALL STORM SEWER , SANITARY SEWER AND WATER SERVICES SHALL TERMINATE 5' FROM THE BUILDING FACE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5.A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND 10 FEET OF HORIZONTAL SEPARATION IS REQUIRED BETWEEN WATERMAIN AND ALL UTILITIES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6.ALL NEW WATERMAIN AND SERVICES MUST HAVE A MINIMUM OF 8.0 FEET OF COVER. EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD ADJUST WATERMAIN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER, AND SERVICES AS REQUIRED. INSULATION OF WATER AND SANITARY SEWER LINES SHALL BE PROVIDED WHERE 8.0 FEET MINIMUM DEPTH CAN NOT BE ATTAINED. 7.ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE LOCATED 5 FEET BEHIND BACK OF CURB OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 8.PROPOSED PIPE MATERIALS: WATERMAIN C900 PVC 6" TO 8" DIAMETER SANITARY SEWER PVC SCH 40 6" DIAMETER STORM SEWER DUAL WALL HDPE 12" TO 18" DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC 4" TO 6" DIAMETER 9.ALL SANITARY SEWER WYES, TEES AND SERVICES SHALL BE 6" PVC SCH 40. 10.CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OF UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEM FOR ENGINEER'S REVIEW. 11.ALL PORTIONS OF THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATCH BASINS, LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE BUILDING OR WATER SERVICE LINE MUST BE TESTED ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714.0712 12.ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT (SEE MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714.0705). APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES, CATCHBASINS, AND OTHER STRUCTURES. 13.HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (HDPE) STORM DRAINS MUST COMPLY WITH MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714.0701: a.PIPES 4-INCH TO 10-INCH IN SIZE MUST COMPLY WITH AASHTO M252. b.PIPES 12-INCH TO 60-INCH IN SIZE MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM F2306. c.ALL FITTINGS MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM D3212. d.WATER-TIGHT JOINTS MUST BE USED AT ALL CONNECTIONS INCLUDING STRUCTURES. 8 8 8 88 8 8888 888448888 8 8PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 971.40 448 8 8 8 8 CB 10 RIM=969.16 INV=965.66 SUMP=962.66 CB 20 RIM=968.70 INV=965.20 SUMP=962.20 CB 30 RIM=968.02 INV=964.52 SUMP=961.52 CBMH 40 RIM=968.44 INV=964.94 SUMP=961.94 CB 50 RIM=969.58 INV=965.27 SUMP=962.27 STMH 60 RIM=971.02 INV=963.70 SUMP=960.70 CBMH 71 RIM=970.15 INV=963.81CBMH 81 RIM=969.49 INV=963.91 CB 93 RIM=971.00 INV=968.00 CBMH 92 RIM=970.45 INV=967.34 CBMH 101 RIM=970.39 INV=966.02 CBMH 100 RIM=970.50 INV(SE)=965.25 INV(W)=960.85 SUMP=957.85 CB 110 RIM=970.13 INV=960.85 SUMP=957.85 CB 110 RIM=969.00 INV=960.76 SUMP=957.76 32 LF-12" HDPE @ 1.94% 32 LF-12" HDPE @2.00%32 LF-12" HDPE @ 2.00% INLET INV=965.04 INLET INV=964.56 INLET INV=963.88 12" ROOF DRAIN STUB INV=965.36 (VERIFY SIZE, INVERT & LOCATION W/ MECHANICAL) DET 1 72" CSP UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEM (665 LF TOTAL) TOP OF PIPE=966.04 OUTLET=960.04 INV=960.04 INLET INV=964.66 14 LF-12" HDPE @ 2.00% INLET INV=965.04 5 LF-12" HDPE @ 4.50% 33 LF-12" HDPE @ 2.00% 66 LF-12" HDPE @ 2.00% 17 LF-12" HDPE @ 4.50% 6 LF-12" HDPE @ 4.50% INLET INV=960.58 6 LF-12" HDPE @ 4.50% INLET INV=960.58 INLET INV=959.97 92 LF-12" HDPE @ 0.50% TRENCH DRAIN 61 NEENAH R-4999-CX BOLTED RIM=967.16 INV=966.16 OUT=964.16 30 LF-12" HDPE @ 0.50% INLET INV=963.55 TRENCH DRAIN 72 NEENAH R-4999-CX BOLTED RIM=967.20 INV=966.20 OUT=964.20 79 LF-12" HDPE @ 0.50% 30 LF-12" HDPE @ 0.50% 57 LF-12" HDPE @ 0.50% TRENCH DRAIN 82 NEENAH R-4999-CX BOLTED RIM=967.20 INV=966.20 OUT=964.20 76 LF-18" HDPE @ 0.50% OUTLET INV=960.04 OCS MH 1 RIM=970.52 WEIR=965.86 12"X12" ORIFICE=963.03 6"X6" ORIFICE=960.57 INV=960.01 98 LF-15" HDPE @ 1.11% 7 LF-12" HDPE @ 0.50% 7 LF-12" HDPE @ 0.50% 25 LF-4" PVC DRAINTILE SLOPE TO DRAIN TYP-SEE DETAIL 25 LF-4" PVC DRAINTILE SLOPE TO DRAIN TYP-SEE DETAIL 36" ACCESS RISER RIM=971.09 INV=960.04 36" ACCESS RISER RIM=968.83 INV=960.04 36" ACCESS RISER RIM=969.05 INV=960.04 36" ACCESS RISER RIM=970.34 INV=958.17 36" ACCESS RISER RIM=970.08 INV=960.04 25 LF-4" PVC DRAINTILE SLOPE TO DRAIN TYP-SEE DETAIL 25 LF-4" PVC DRAINTILE SLOPE TO DRAIN TYP-SEE DETAIL INFIL 1 53"x41" PERFORATED ARCH CSP UNDERGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM (1,350 LF TOTAL) TOP OF PIPE=961.58 OUTLET=959.97 INV=958.17 CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE DOWN TO NATIVE SOILS CLASSIFIED AS POORLY GRADED SAND W/ SILT OR SILTY SAND (SP-SM, SM) ESTIMATED TO BE AT AN ELEVATION OF 961± ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE SYSTEM AND 951± ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SYSTEM. CONTRACTOR TO BACKFILL WITH FREE DRAINING GRANULAR MATERIALS (100% PASSING 3-INCH SIEVE AND 0-20% PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE) UP TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SYSTEM. 36" ACCESS RISER RIM=970.81 INV=958.17 36" ACCESS RISER RIM=970.84 INV=958.17 36" ACCESS RISER RIM=970.40 INV=958.17 OUTLET INV=959.97 36" ACCESS RISER RIM=969.83 INV=958.17 INLET INV=960.58 4 LF-12" HDPE @ 4.50% 36" ACCESS RISER RIM=971.52 INV=958.17 INLET INV=961.93 37 LF-18" HDPE @ 0.50% STMH 70 RIM=970.89 INV(N)=963.65 INV(W,E)=962.11 SUMP=959.11 INLET INV=965.04 32 LF-12" HDPE @ 1.00% FES 1 W/ TRASH GUARD AND GROUTED RIP-RAP INV=958.88 12" ROOF DRAIN STUB INV=964.40 (VERIFY SIZE, INVERT & LOCATION W/ MECHANICAL) 27 LF-12" HDPE @ 1.00%STMH 91 RIM=971.07 INV=964.13 92 LF-12" HDPE @ 1.00% 22 LF-12" HDPE @ 1.00% STMH 80 RIM=970.41 INV(N)=963.77 INV(NW)=962.99 INV(E)=962.49 28 LF-12" HDPE @ 0.50% STMH 90 RIM=970.32 INV=963.21 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL N NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS PROVIDED BY LOUCKS. REFER TO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY DATED 05/08/18 FOR COMPLETE SURVEY INFORMATION. Gopher State One Call WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. SCALE IN FEET 300 60 73 23 CIVIL LEGEND C4.2 UTILITY NOTES 1. ALL SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER AND WATERMAIN UTILITIES SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS,THE MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE, THE LOCAL GOVERNING UNIT , AND THE STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATION OF THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), 2013 EDITION. 2.ALL UTILITY PIPE BEDDING SHALL BE COMPACTED SAND OR FINE GRANULAR MATERIAL. ALL COMPACTION SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CEAM SPECIFICATION AND THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. 3.ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE AND LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. THE CITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT AND THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER MUST BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, OR WORK IMPACTING PUBLIC UTILITIES. 4.ALL STORM SEWER , SANITARY SEWER AND WATER SERVICES SHALL TERMINATE 5' FROM THE BUILDING FACE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5.A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND 10 FEET OF HORIZONTAL SEPARATION IS REQUIRED BETWEEN WATERMAIN AND ALL UTILITIES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6.ALL NEW WATERMAIN AND SERVICES MUST HAVE A MINIMUM OF 8.0 FEET OF COVER. EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD ADJUST WATERMAIN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER, AND SERVICES AS REQUIRED. INSULATION OF WATER AND SANITARY SEWER LINES SHALL BE PROVIDED WHERE 8.0 FEET MINIMUM DEPTH CAN NOT BE ATTAINED. 7.ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE LOCATED 5 FEET BEHIND BACK OF CURB OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 8.PROPOSED PIPE MATERIALS: WATERMAIN C900 PVC 6" TO 8" DIAMETER SANITARY SEWER PVC SCH 40 6" DIAMETER STORM SEWER DUAL WALL HDPE 12" TO 18" DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC 4" TO 6" DIAMETER 9.ALL SANITARY SEWER WYES, TEES AND SERVICES SHALL BE 6" PVC SCH 40. 10.CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OF UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEM FOR ENGINEER'S REVIEW. 11.ALL PORTIONS OF THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATCH BASINS, LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE BUILDING OR WATER SERVICE LINE MUST BE TESTED ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714.0712 12.ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT (SEE MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714.0705). APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES, CATCHBASINS, AND OTHER STRUCTURES. 13.HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (HDPE) STORM DRAINS MUST COMPLY WITH MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714.0701: a.PIPES 4-INCH TO 10-INCH IN SIZE MUST COMPLY WITH AASHTO M252. b.PIPES 12-INCH TO 60-INCH IN SIZE MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM F2306. c.ALL FITTINGS MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM D3212. d.WATER-TIGHT JOINTS MUST BE USED AT ALL CONNECTIONS INCLUDING STRUCTURES. 8 8 8 88 8 8888 888448888 8 8PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 971.40 448 8 8 8 8 COORDINATE WITH MECHANICAL FOR INTERIOR DRAIN TILE CONNECTIONS TO EXTERIOR DRAIN TILE SYSTEM CONNECT TO UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEM ABOVE INV=960.04 35 LF-6" SOLID PVC SLOPED TO DRAIN 635 LF-6" PERFORATED PVC DRAINTILE 778 LF-6" PERFORATED PVC DRAINTILE 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL N NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS PROVIDED BY LOUCKS. REFER TO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY DATED 05/08/18 FOR COMPLETE SURVEY INFORMATION. Gopher State One Call WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. SCALE IN FEET 300 60 73 23 CIVIL LEGEND C4.2 UTILITY NOTES 1. ALL SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER AND WATERMAIN UTILITIES SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS,THE MINNESOTA PLUMBING CODE, THE LOCAL GOVERNING UNIT , AND THE STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATION OF THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), 2013 EDITION. 2.ALL UTILITY PIPE BEDDING SHALL BE COMPACTED SAND OR FINE GRANULAR MATERIAL. ALL COMPACTION SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CEAM SPECIFICATION AND THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. 3.ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE AND LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. THE CITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT AND THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER MUST BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, OR WORK IMPACTING PUBLIC UTILITIES. 4.ALL STORM SEWER , SANITARY SEWER AND WATER SERVICES SHALL TERMINATE 5' FROM THE BUILDING FACE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5.A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND 10 FEET OF HORIZONTAL SEPARATION IS REQUIRED BETWEEN WATERMAIN AND ALL UTILITIES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6.ALL NEW WATERMAIN AND SERVICES MUST HAVE A MINIMUM OF 8.0 FEET OF COVER. EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD ADJUST WATERMAIN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER, AND SERVICES AS REQUIRED. INSULATION OF WATER AND SANITARY SEWER LINES SHALL BE PROVIDED WHERE 8.0 FEET MINIMUM DEPTH CAN NOT BE ATTAINED. 7.ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE LOCATED 5 FEET BEHIND BACK OF CURB OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 8.PROPOSED PIPE MATERIALS: WATERMAIN C900 PVC 6" TO 8" DIAMETER SANITARY SEWER PVC SCH 40 6" DIAMETER STORM SEWER DUAL WALL HDPE 12" TO 15" DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC 4" TO 6" DIAMETER 9.ALL SANITARY SEWER WYES, TEES AND SERVICES SHALL BE 6" PVC SCH 40. 10.CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OF UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEM FOR ENGINEER'S REVIEW. 11.ALL PORTIONS OF THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATCH BASINS, LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE BUILDING OR WATER SERVICE LINE MUST BE TESTED ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714.0712 12.ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT (SEE MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714.0705). APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES, CATCHBASINS, AND OTHER STRUCTURES. 13.HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (HDPE) STORM DRAINS MUST COMPLY WITH MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4714.0701: a.PIPES 4-INCH TO 10-INCH IN SIZE MUST COMPLY WITH AASHTO M252. b.PIPES 12-INCH TO 60-INCH IN SIZE MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM F2306. c.ALL FITTINGS MUST COMPLY WITH ASTM D3212. d.WATER-TIGHT JOINTS MUST BE USED AT ALL CONNECTIONS INCLUDING STRUCTURES. DRAWN 3/2018 LOUCKS PLATE NO. EXTERIOR FOUNDATION DRAINTILE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE NOTE: SEE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS FOR FOUNDATION DRAINTILE ON INTERIOR OF BUILDING. PIPE DETAIL 160ƒ 90ƒ 1 4" DIA. HOLE TYPICAL TRENCH DETAIL 2" MIN. 2" MIN.6" MIN. FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION APPROVED FREE DRAINING BACKFILL MATERIAL (SEE SPECS) COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE MNDOT 3149.2H NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC FOUNDATION (SEE STRUCTURAL)6" PERFORATED PVC PIPE 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL C8.1 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL C8.2 VAN ACCESSIBLE 60"48"18" DIA.36"TYPICAL ADA PARKING SIGN / BOLLARD COMBO 12"x18" STANDARD HANDICAP PARKING SIGN WITH SEPARATE 'VAN ACCESSIBLE' PANEL. GREEN LETTERING AND BORDER ON WHITE BACKGROUND. SYMBOL OF ACCESSIBILITY SHALL BE 4"x4" AND BE WHITE ON A BLUE BACKGROUND. USE HARDWARE PER SIGN SUPPLIER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. HC SIGNAGE PER MINNESOTA RULES 1341.0502 12"x6" STANDARD 'VAN ACCESSIBLE' PANEL. GREEN LETTERING AND BORDER ON WHITE BACKGROUND. 2" DIA. 6' LONG MIN. GALVANIZED SCHEDULE 40 STEEL PIPE. EMBED IN CONCRETE FILLED BOLLARD 6" DIA. SCHEDULE 40 GALVENZIED STEEL PIPE 6' LONG MINIMUM HEAVY DUTY HDPE DOME TOP DECORATIVE SLEEVE BLUE OR YELLOW IN COLOR. AVAILABLE FROM BOLLARDSNSLEEVES.COM OR EQUAL. COMPACTED OR UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE. NOTES: 1.BOLLARDS TO BE PLACED 12" BEHIND BACK OF CURB OR SIDEWALK (REFER TO SITE PLAN.) 2.MAINTAIN PLUMB UNTIL CONCRETE IS SUFFICIENTLY CURED. 3.HOLD CONCRETE FOOTING BELOW GRADE OF FINISHED CONCRETE TO CREATE FINAL PAVING PATTERN AS SHOWN ON PLANS. 4.SIGN CENTERED AT HEAD OF PARKING SPACE - MAXIMUM OF 96" FROM HEAD OF PARKING SPACE. DRAWN 03/2017 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2038ALOUCKS6"18"6"VIOLATORS ARE SUBJECT TO A FINE OF UP TO $ 200.00 PARKINGRESERVED TYPICAL ADA PARKING STALL STRIPING DRAWN 03/2017 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2037LOUCKS LCC 4" WIDE PAINTED LINES, TRAFFIC WHITE 4" WIDE PAINTED LINES, 18" O.C., @ 45 DEG. TRAFFIC WHITE (AISLE TO CONTAIN THE DESIGNATION "NO PARKING" COMPLYING WITH MSBC 1341.0502 IF ACCESS AISLE SIGNS ARE NOT SHOWN REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR ADA PARKING SIGN LOCATION REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR ACCESS AISLE SIGN LOCATION (AISLE TO CONTAIN THE DESIGNATION "NO PARKING" COMPLYING WITH MSBC 134.0502 IF ACCESS AISLE SIGNS ARE NOT SHOWN) REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR STALL DIMENSIONS 40"PROVIDE PAINTED INTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OF ACCESSIBILITY AT EACH DESIGNATED HANDICAP PARKING STALL. CENTER SYMBOL IN STALL. HC SIGNAGE PER MINNESOTA RULES 1341.0502 ALL LINES 4" WIDE 8" DIAMETER NOT TO SCALE 67.5ƒ 5ƒ 36" TYPICAL ADA ACCESS AISLE NO PARKING SIGN / BOLLARD COMBO "NO PARKING" DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. LOUCKS60"48"18" DIA.36"ATTACH SIGN TO POST WITH APPROPRIATE STAINLESS STEEL BOLTS, WASHES & NUTS. (TYP. AT TOP & BOTTOM OF SIGN) 2" DIA. 6' LONG MIN. GALVANIZED SCHEDULE 40 STEEL PIPE. EMBED IN CONCRETE FILLED BOLLARD 6" DIA. SCHEDULE 40 GALVENZIED STEEL PIPE 6' LONG MINIMUM HEAVY DUTY HDPE DOME TOP DECORATIVE SLEEVE BLUE OR YELLOW IN COLOR. AVAILABLE FROM BOLLARDSNSLEEVES.COM OR EQUAL. COMPACTED OR UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE. NOTES: 1.BOLLARDS TO BE PLACED 12" BEHIND BACK OF CURB OR SIDEWALK (REFER TO SITE PLAN.) 2.MAINTAIN PLUMB UNTIL CONCRETE IS SUFFICIENTLY CURED. 3.HOLD CONCRETE FOOTING BELOW GRADE OF FINISHED CONCRETE TO CREATE FINAL PAVING PATTERN AS SHOWN ON PLANS. 4.SIGN CENTERED AT HEAD OF PARKING SPACE - MAXIMUM OF 96" FROM HEAD OF PARKING SPACE. 5.PROVIDE (1) SIGN PER ACCESS AISLE 6.HC SIGNAGE PER MINNESOTA RULES 1341.05026"18"R28"R68" R12" 12" 28"3/4"7"10.5"SURMOUNTABLE CURB & GUTTER SPECIFICATION NOTES: 1.UPON COMPLETION, CURBING SHOULD BE SPRAYED WITH A MEMBRANE CURING COMPOUND PER MNDOT 3754. 2.EXPANSION JOINTS AT MAX. SPACING OF 200'. 3.CONSTRUCT IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT 2531. PAVEMENT SECTION VARIES MIN. OF 4"MINIMUM 1' BEHIND BACK OF CURBAGG. BASE UNDER CURB (IF TOTAL THICKNESS OF SECTION ALLOWS) AGG. BASE VARIES 6.5"DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2014LOUCKS SLOPE GUTTER TO MATCH PARKING LOT DRAINAGE (3/4" PER FT. TYP.) TIP GUTTER OUT AS REQ'D PAVEMENT SECTION VARIES MIN. OF 4" 3/8 " LIP MINIMUM 1' BEHIND BACK OF CURBAGG. BASE UNDER CURB (IF TOTAL THICKNESS OF SECTION ALLOWS) 7" 12"8" AGG. BASE VARIES 1/2" RAD. 20" FLAT CURB AND GUTTER (12") SPECIFICATION NOTES: 1.UPON COMPLETION, CURBING SHOULD BE SPRAYED WITH A MEMBRANE CURING COMPOUND PER MNDOT 3754. 2.EXPANSION JOINTS AT MAX. SPACING OF 200'. 3.CONSTRUCT IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT 2531. DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2012LOUCKS BOLLARD 1/2" CROWN 1" CROWN 3'-6"3'-0"6"24" DIA. 2,500 PSI CONCRETE 6" DIP, CONC. FILLED, PAINTED OSHA YELLOW DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2039LOUCKS 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL C8.3 OUTLET 48" TO 72" DOGHOUSES SHALL BE GROUTED BOTH ON THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. PRECAST MANHOLE SECTIONS C OUTLET ELEVATION PIPE SIZE WILL VARY OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE - WEIR/ORIFICE INLET PRECAST BASE SLAB INLET ELEVATION A B 1 960.04 OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE ELEVATION TABLE OCS NO.A 6" E TOP OF WEIR ELEVATION WEIR TO BE REINFORCED WITH AT LEAST #4 REBAR, 12" ON CENTER. WEIR/ORIFICE E TOP OF WEIR ELEVATION H DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4318LOUCKS RIM - (EMERGENCY OVERFLOW) D 2" 0"-8" 2" ORIFICE OPENING SIZE - F INVERT ELEVATION - G 960.00 B 960.00 C 970.52 D 965.98 E F G 7.5x7.5 H 960.00 48" ORIFICE OPENING SIZE - F INVERT ELEVATION - G1'-4"VARIABLE6"3"6"4.0' OUTLET FLOW 3'MIN.2" 0"-8" 2" NYLOPLAST SNOUT STRUCTURE OR APPROVED EQUAL. CONCRETE ADJUSTING RINGS, MIN. 4" - MAX. 10" NOTE: 24"x36" SLAB OPENING FOR NEENAH R-3067 CASTING WITH D.L., D.R. OR TYPE V GRATE. 27" ɸ SLAB OPENING FOR NEENAH R-3250 & R-1733 CASTING. SUMP CATCH BASIN / MANHOLE MINIMUM SLAB THICKNESS IS 6" FOR 14' DEPTH. INCREASE THICKNESS 1" FOR 4' OF DEPTH GREATER THAN 14'. PRECAST CONCRETE MANHOLE SECTIONS WITH "O"-RING RUBBER GASKETS. SLAB TOP TO BE SET IN A MORTAR BED. 6" PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB. STEPS 16" O.C. ON DOWNSTREAM SIDE. EXTRUDED ALUMINUM OR STEEL REINFORCED COPOLYMER PLASTIC.6"DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4304LOUCKS SECTION A-A PLAN SECTION B-B DIA. 2' 2'1 4 LDIA.B B AA RIPRAP 48 15 42 36 30 24 18 12 20 8 10 12 14 18 16 8 >48 22-28 30-40 26 5 6 8 12 22 14 5 IV IV III III III III IV III III MINIMUM RIPRAP REQUIRED GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, TYPE IV EXTEND 1' UNDER APRON RIP-RAP OUT FROM THE APRON SHALL NOT BE HIGHER THAN THE APRON INVERT. GROUTED RIPRAP 1' (12"-27" DIA. PIPE) 1.5' (30" AND LARGER PIPE) GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, TYPE IV NOTE: ONE CUBIC YARD IS APPROXIMATELY 1.4 TONS. RIPRAP 1' (12"-27" DIA. PIPE) 1.5' (30" AND LARGER PIPE) 6" GRANULAR FILTER MATERIAL 32-40 32 5 7 10 13 27 17 5 CMP/HDPE QUANTITY (C.Y.) RCP QUANTITY (C.Y.) DIA. OF PIPE (IN.)L (FT.)CLASS 6" GRANULAR FILTER MATERIAL GROUT GROUT DRAWN 2/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 4309LOUCKS 957.67 958.17 962.08 961.58 FREE DRAINING ANGULAR WASHED STONE NON LIMESTONE/CARBONATE MATERIAL 5/8" MIN. PARTICLE SIZE. THE MAXIMUM LOS ANGELES RATTLER LOSS SHOULD BE 35% PER AASHTO T-96 AND NO GREATER LOSS THAN 10% PER AASHTO T-104 MAGNESIUM SULFATE SOUNDNESS TEST ON THE NON-IGNEOUS PORTIONS AND AS MODIFIED BY THE MNDOT LABORATORY MANUAL (MNDOT 2005) COMPACT TO MIN. 90% STANDARD DENSITY PER AASHTO T-99 PLACED IN LIFTS OF 4-6" INSTALL CMP PIPE PER ASSHTO M-36, AASHTO SECTION 12 OR HDPE PER ASTM D2321 (CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR REVIEW) UNDERGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM (INF 1) SCALE: N/A GRANULAR BEDDING, ROUGHLY SHAPED TO FIT THE BOTTOM OF PIPE, 6" IN DEPTH. NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC WRAPPING SIDES OF TRENCH & PIPE. 2" BIT. WEAR COURSE, MN/DOT 2360 SPWEA240B TACK COAT, MN/DOT 2357 2" BIT. NON-WEAR COURSE, MN/DOT 2360 SPNWB230B 6" AGG. BASE, CLASS 5 OR 2 MN/DOT 3138 APPROVED SUBGRADE FINISHED GRADE 12" SELECT GRANULAR, MN/DOT 3149.D STANDARD BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTION GEOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC TYPE V, MN/DOT 3733.2 DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2031LOUCKS 2.5" BIT. WEAR COURSE, MN/DOT 2360 SPWEA240B TACK COAT, MN/DOT 2357 2.5" BIT. NON-WEAR COURSE, MN/DOT 2360 SPNWB230B 8" AGG. BASE, CLASS 5 OR 2 MN/DOT 3138 APPROVED SUBGRADE FINISHED GRADE 12" SELECT GRANULAR, MN/DOT 3149.D HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTION GEOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC TYPE V, MN/DOT 3733.2 DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2032LOUCKS 8" COMPACTED AGGREGATE BASE CL. 5 OR 2 MN/DOT 3138 APPROVED SUBGRADE FINISHED GRADE 8" CONCRETE MN/DOT 2301 CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION NOTES: 1.CONCRETE SHALL BE REINFORCED WITH FIBER REINFORCEMENT FOR INCREASED TENSILE STRENGTH. PRODUCT SHALL BY NYCON-XL-200 OR APPROVED EQUAL. 2.CONTRACTION JOINS SHALL BE SPACED AT A MAXIMUM OF 8 FEET APART. JOINT SHALL BE SAWED TO A DEPTH OF 1 4 TO 1 3 OF SLAB THICKNESS. 3.1 1 4" X 15" EPOXY COATED DOWELS SHALL BE PLACED 12" OC AT THE MIDPOINT OF THE SLAB ACROSS ALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS. DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2033LOUCKS 12" SELECT GRANULAR, MN/DOT 3149.D CONCRETE SIDEWALK SECTION 4" CONCRETE WALK MN/DOT 2521 4" GRANULAR MATERIAL MN/DOT 3149 DRAWN 12/2016 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2034LOUCKS 53"x41" ARCH PERFORATED CMP PIPE 53"x41" ARCH PERFORATED CMP PIPE 53"x41" ARCH PERFORATED CMP PIPE 6" 12"17.7" 6" DRAWN 1/2014 LOUCKS PLATE NO. 2034CONCRETE SIDEWALK W/ SNOWMELT SECTION NOTES: 1.CONCRETE SHALL BE REINFORCED WITH FIBER REINFORCEMENT FOR INCREASED TENSILE STRENGTH. PRODUCT SHALL BE NYCON-XL-200 OR APPROVED EQUAL. 2.CONTRACTION JOINTS SHALL BE SPACED AT A MAXIMUM OF 8 FEET APART. JOINTS SHALL BE SAWED TO A DEPTH OF 1 4 TO 1 3 OF SLAB THICKNESS. 3.11 4" X 15" EPOXY COATED DOWELS SHALL BE PLACED 12" OC AT THE MIDPOINT OF THE SLAB ACROSS ALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS. FINISHED GRADE 2" RIGID FOAM BOARD INSULATION UNDER SLAB & ALONG EDGES 6" 4,000 PSI MINIMUM CONCRETE PAVEMENT PER MNDOT 2301 W/ SNOWMELT SYSTEM (COORD. W/ MECHANICAL) 6" COMPACTED CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE PER MNDOT 3138 EXISTING GROUND COMPACTED SUBGRADE LOUCKS TYPICAL CROSS SECTION OF TIERED RETAINING WALL AT RETAINING WALL ELEVATION #7 SCALE: N/A PROPOSED 42" RAILING PROPOSED RECON BLOCK GRAVITY RETAINING WALL NOTE: THIS INFORMATION IS SHOWN FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE RETAINING WALL DESIGN/SHOP DRAWINGS SIGNED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR STEEL PIPE RAILING. ELEV. 68.02 ELEV. 67.45 ELEV. 69.45 ELEV. 60.59 ELEV. 60.31 ELEV. 51.20 PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 971.40 13 GAC 2 SKH 1 AE 17 GF 3 SKH 42 SD 14 GF 1 QB 14 TY 3 PB SM 2 3 PB 12 TY 3 PB 12 SG 3 PB SM 2SM 2SM 2 SM 2 NS 1 AE SOD SM 2 2 KC 2 TH 4 ABS 2 AE 1 SGM 1 KC 1 SGM 3 TH 1 QB 5 AC 12 AC 6 AC 6 SG 19 GAC 18 WG 3 BO 3 AC 8 SG 2 AC 2 AC 4 SG 2 AC LANDSCAPE EDGING TYP. LANDSCAPE EDGING TYP. LANDSCAPE EDGING TYP. LANDSCAPE EDGING TYP. LIMITS OF IRRIGATION TYP. LIMITS OF IRRIGATION TYP. LANDSCAPE EDGING TYP. ALTERNATE C3 STABILIZATION ASSOCIATED WITH CITY BITUMINOUS TRAIL DECIDUOUS TREES QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME CONT SIZE AE 4 ACCOLADE ELM Ulmus `Morton`B & B 2.5"Cal BO 3 BURR OAK Quercus macrocarpa B & B 2.5"Cal KC 3 KENTUCKY COFFEETREE Gymnocladus dioica B & B 2.5"Cal PB 12 PAPER BIRCH Betula papyrifera 25 gal SGM 2 SIENNA GLEN MAPLE Acer freemanii `Sienna Glen`B & B 2.5"Cal SKH 5 SKYLINE HONEYLOCUST Gleditsia triacanthos `Skycole`B & B 2.5"Cal QB 2 SWAMP WHITE OAK Quercus bicolor B & B 2.5"Cal ORNAMENTAL TREES QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME CONT SIZE ABS 4 AUTUMN BRILLIANCE SERVICEBERRY Amelanchier x grandiflora `Autumn Brilliance`B & B 1.5"Cal TH 5 THORNLESS HAWTHORN Crataegus crus-galli `Inermis`B & B 1.5"Cal SHRUBS QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME MIN CONT MIN SIZE SPACING AC 32 AUTUMN MAGIC CHOKEBERRY Aronia melanocarpa `Magic Carpet`5 gal 24" HGT 48" o.c. GAC 32 GREEN MOUND ALPINE CURRANT Ribes alpinum `Green Mound`5 gal 24" HGT 48" o.c. GF 31 GRO-LOW FRAGRANT SUMAC Rhus aromatica `Gro-Low`5 gal 24" SPRD 48" o.c. CONIFEROUS SHRUBS QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME MIN CONT MIN SIZE SPACING SG 30 SEA GREEN JUNIPER Juniperus chinensis `Sea Green`5 gal 18" SPRD 60" o.c. TY 26 TAUNTON YEW Taxus x media `Taunton`5 gal 18" SPRD 48" o.c. PERENNIALS QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME MIN CONT MIN SIZE SPACING WG 18 ROZANNE GERANIUM Geranium `Rozanne`1 gal 24" o.c. SD 42 STELLA D` ORO DAYLILY Hemerocallis x `Stella de Oro`1 gal 24" o.c. GROUND COVERS CODE COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME SM 2 DECORATIVE STONE RIP RAP GREY TRAP ROCK RIP RAP SIZE - 5"-12" OVER FABRIC NS NATIVE SEED BWSR SEED MIX 36-211 SOD TURF SOD PLANT SCHEDULE 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL N NOTE: EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN IS PROVIDED BY LOUCKS. REFER TO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY DATED 05/08/18 FOR COMPLETE SURVEY INFORMATION. Gopher State One Call WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. SCALE IN FEET 300 60 L1.1 LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS BUFFER YARD REQUIREMENT (500 TOTAL LF) 2 CANOPY TREES PER/100' UNIT (ONLY NEED 75% OF REQUIREMENT) TREES REQUIRED = 8 TOTAL TREES PROVIDED = 8 4 UNDERSTORY TREE PER/100' UNIT (ONLY NEED 75% OF REQUIREMENT) TREES REQUIRED = 15 TOTAL TREES PROVIDED = 9 6 SHRUBS PER/100' UNIT (ONLY NEED 75% OF REQUIREMENT) SHRUBS REQUIRED = 23 TOTAL SHRUBS PROVIDED = 23 DUE TO EXISTING PLANTINGS ON OR VERY CLOSE TO THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE IN THE BUFFER YARD, MINIMAL PROPOSED PLANTINGS ARE PROVIDED TO AVOID OVER PLANTING AND ENCOURAGE LONG TERM HEALTH OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED PLANT MATERIAL. LANDSCAPE AREA REQUIREMENTS (63,310 SF OF VEHICULAR AREA) PROVIDE 8 SF OF LANDSCAPE AREA PER 100 SF OF VEHICULAR AREA LANDSCAPE AREA REQUIRED = 5,064 SF TREE REQUIREMENTS (5,064 SF OF LANDSCAPE AREA) PROVIDE 1 TREE PER 250 SF OF LANDSCAPE AREA TREES REQUIRED = 20 TOTAL TREES PROVIDED = 40 FOUNDATION PLANTINGS SHRUBS AND TREES HAVE BEEN PROVIDED ALONG BUILDING FOUNDATION GENERAL NOTES CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT SITE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING BID. HE SHALL INSPECT SITE AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF WORK. VERIFY LAYOUT AND ANY DIMENSIONS SHOWN AND BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ANY DISCREPANCIES WHICH MAY COMPROMISE THE DESIGN AND/OR INTENT OF THE PROJECT'S LAYOUT. ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE WORK OR MATERIALS SUPPLIED. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL EXISTING ROADS, CURBS/GUTTERS, TRAILS, TREES, LAWNS AND SITE ELEMENTS DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS. ANY DAMAGE TO SAME SHALL BE REPAIRED AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALIGNMENT AND LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND AND ABOVE GRADE UTILITIES AND PROVIDE THE NECESSARY PROTECTION FOR SAME BEFORE CONSTRUCTION / MATERIAL INSTALLATION BEGINS (MINIMUM 10' - 0" CLEARANCE). ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHALL BE LAID SO THAT TRENCHES DO NOT CUT THROUGH ROOT SYSTEMS OF ANY EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN. EXISTING CONTOURS, TRAILS, VEGETATION, CURB/GUTTER AND OTHER EXISTING ELEMENTS BASED UPON INFORMATION SUPPLIED TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY OTHERS. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ANY AND ALL DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF SAME. THE ALIGNMENT AND GRADES OF THE PROPOSED WALKS, TRAILS AND/OR ROADWAYS ARE SUBJECT TO FIELD ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED TO CONFORM TO LOCALIZED TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS AND TO MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL AND GRADING. ANY CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT MUST BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 06-15-18 CITY SUBMITTAL © 7001 France Avenue S, Suite 200, Edina, Minnesota 55435 952-893-9020 Fax 952-893-9299 www.bdhyoung.com interiors | architecture LOUCKS 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL LOUCKS PROJECT NO. 17516NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR INFORMATION ONLY06-19-18 WATERSHED SUBMITTAL 07-12-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 07-27-18 WATERSHED RESUBMITTAL 08-02-18 CITY RESUBMITTAL L2.1 SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" PERENNIAL PLANTING Perennial.Dwg LOOSEN ROOTS OF PLANT MATERIAL PRIOR MULCH - SEE SPECS. 3" DEPTH EDGER - SEE SPECS. 12" DEPTH (MIN). LOAMPLANTING SOIL - SEE SPECS. VARIES SEE PLAN TO PLANTING EDGE VARIES - SEE PLAN 4 L2.1 SHRUBS TO BE PLACED SO THAT MULCH - 3" DEEP - SEE SPEC LANDSCAPE FABRIC - SEE SPEC. PLANTING SOIL - SEE SPEC. SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING LOOSEN ROOTS OF ALL CONTAINERIZED PLANTS. EDGE VARIES - REFER TO PLAN REFER TO PLAN 18" MIN. SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL EDGING MATERIAL - SEE SPEC. BUILDING WALL (TYP) TOP OF CONTAINER SITS FLUSH WITH PROPOSED GRADE. 3 L2.1 Coniferous Tree.DWG EDGE VARIES - SEE PLAN WOOD STAKE (OPTIONAL) MULCH - 4" DEEP - PER SPECS. MULCH MUST ROOT BALL SET ON MOUNDED SUBGRADE SAFETY FLAGGING - ONE PER WIRE POLYETHYLENE STRAP 16"x2" POLYPROPYLENE OR HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF PERIOD. STAKING IS SUGGESTED, BUT POSITION THROUGH THE WARRANTY MAINTAINING ALL TREES IN A PLUMB THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" PLANTING. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TESTING PERCOLATION RATES PRIOR TO CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR NOT REQUIRED. ANY STAKING MUST IN A.N.A. GUIDELINES FOR STANDARD CONFORM WITH PRACTICES AS DEFINED PRACTICES IMMEDIATELY IF POOR DRAINAGE EXISTS. REMOVE ALL FLAGGING AND LABELING IN 8-12" LIFTS AND SATURATE SOIL WITH PLANTING OPERATIONS. PLACE BACKFILL WATER TREE THOROUGHLY DURING FROM TREE. AFTER PLANTING IS COMPLETE. PRUNE ANY DAMAGED BRANCHES WATER. DO NOT COMPACT MORE THAN NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN PLUMB. NOT BE IN CONTACT WITH TRUNK. 2 x ROOT BALL WIDTH 2 L2.1 EDGE VARIES - SEE PLAN WOOD STAKE (OPTIONAL) SET PLANT ON UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL SAFETY FLAGGING - ONE PER WIRE TREE WRAP TO FIRST BRANCH POLYETHYLENE STRAP 16"x2" POLYPROPYLENE OR HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF PERIOD. STAKING IS SUGGESTED, BUT POSITION THROUGH THE WARRANTY MAINTAINING ALL TREES IN A PLUMB THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" PLANTING. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TESTING PERCOLATION RATES PRIOR TO CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR NOT REQUIRED. ANY STAKING MUST IN A.N.A. GUIDELINES FOR STANDARD CONFORM WITH PRACTICES AS DEFINED PRACTICES Deciduous Tree.DWG IMMEDIATELY IF POOR DRAINAGE EXISTS. REMOVE ALL FLAGGING AND LABELING IN 8-12" LIFTS AND SATURATE SOIL WITH PLANTING OPERATIONS. PLACE BACKFILL WATER TREE THOROUGHLY DURING FROM TREE. BRANCHES AFTER PLANTING IS COMPLETE. PRUNE DAMAGED AND CROSSING WATER. DO NOT COMPACT MORE THAN NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN PLUMB. 2 x ROOT BALL WIDTH MULCH - 4" DEEP. NO MULCH IN CUT BACK WIRE BASKET CONTACT WITH TRUNK - SEE SPECS. ROOT FLARE EVEN WITH OR JUST ABOVE GRADE. 1 L2.1 LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION: COORDINATE THE PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION AND PLANTING INSTALLATION WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS WORKING ON SITE. NO PLANTING WILL BE INSTALLED UNTIL COMPLETE GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. WHERE SOD/SEED ABUTS PAVED SURFACES, FINISHED GRADE OF SOD/SEED SHALL BE HELD 1" BELOW SURFACE ELEVATION OF TRAIL, SLAB, CURB, ETC. SEED ALL AREAS DISTURBED DUE TO GRADING OTHER THAN THOSE AREAS NOTED TO RECEIVE SOD. SEED SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MULCHED AS PER MNDOT SPECS. SOD ALL DESIGNATED AREAS DISTURBED DUE TO GRADING. SOD SHALL BE LAID PARALLEL TO THE CONTOURS AND SHALL HAVE STAGGERED JOINTS. ON SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR IN DRAINAGE SWALES, THE SOD SHALL BE STAKED TO THE GROUND. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATEST EDITION OF THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, DECIDUOUS SHRUBS SHALL HAVE AT LEAST 5 CANES AT THE SPECIFIED SHRUB HEIGHT. ORNAMENTAL TREES SHALL HAVE NO V CROTCHES AND SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 3' ABOVE ROOT BALL. STREET AND BOULEVARD TREES SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 6' ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. ANY CONIFEROUS TREE PREVIOUSLY PRUNED FOR CHRISTMAS TREE SALES SHALL NOT BE USED. ALL CONIFEROUS TREES SHALL BE FULL FORM, NATURAL TO THE SPECIES, WITHOUT PRUNING. PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER PLANT SCHEDULE IF DISCREPANCIES IN QUANTITIES EXIST. SPECIFICATIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER NOTES. ALL PROPOSED PLANTS SHALL BE LOCATED AND STAKED AS SHOWN ON PLAN. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST APPROVE ALL STAKING OF PLANT MATERIAL PRIOR TO ANY AND ALL DIGGING. NO PLANT MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED UNLESS APPROVAL IS REQUESTED OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OF A BID AND/OR QUOTATION. ADJUSTMENTS IN LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLANT MATERIALS MAY BE NEEDED IN FIELD. SHOULD AN ADJUSTMENT BE ADVISED, THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST BE NOTIFIED. ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE FERTILIZED UPON INSTALLATION WITH DRIED BONE MEAL, OTHER APPROVED FERTILIZER MIXED IN WITH THE PLANTING SOIL PER THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS OR MAY BE TREATED FOR SUMMER AND FALL INSTALLATION WITH AN APPLICATION OF GRANULAR 0-20-20 OF 12 OZ PER 2.5" CALIPER PER TREE AND 6 OZ PER SHRUB WITH AN ADDITIONAL APPLICATION OF 10-10-10 THE FOLLOWING SPRING IN THE TREE SAUCER. ALL PLANTING AREAS RECEIVING GROUND COVER, PERENNIALS, ANNUALS, AND/OR VINES SHALL RECEIVE A MINIMUM OF 12" DEPTH OF PLANTING SOIL CONSISTING OF AT LEAST 45 PARTS TOPSOIL, 45 PARTS PEAT OR MANURE AND 10 PARTS SAND. ALL AREAS RECEIVING SEED OR SOD MUST RECEIVE A MINIMUM OF 6" DEPTH OF TOPSOIL. TOPSOIL TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE UNDERLYING SOIL DURING FINAL SITE GRADING. SOIL SURFACES COMPACTED DURING CONSTRUCTION AND REMAINING PERVIOUS UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION MUST BE DECOMPACTED THROUGH SOIL AMENDMENT AND/OR RIPPING TO A DEPTH OF 18". AVOID DISTURBING UTILITIES, TREE ROOTS AND OTHER EXISTING VEGETATION. ALL PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS PER PLANTING DETAILS. WRAPPING MATERIAL SHALL BE CORRUGATED PVC PIPING 1" GREATER IN CALIPER THAN THE TREE BEING PROTECTED OR QUALITY, HEAVY, WATERPROOF CREPE PAPER MANUFACTURED FOR THIS PURPOSE. WRAP ALL DECIDUOUS TREES PLANTED IN THE FALL PRIOR TO 12-1 AND REMOVE ALL WRAPPING AFTER 5-1. BLACK METAL EDGER TO BE USED TO CONTAIN SHRUBS, PERENNIALS, AND ANNUALS WHERE BED MEETS SOD/SEED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. ALL SHRUB BED MASSINGS TO RECEIVE 3" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH AND FIBER MAT WEED BARRIER. ALL TREES NOT IN PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE A 4' DIA. TREE RING WITH 4" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. NO MULCH IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK. WOOD MULCH TO BE DOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. ALL ANNUAL AND PERENNIAL PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE 3" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH WITH NO WEED BARRIER. SPREAD GRANULAR PRE EMERGENT HERBICIDE (PREEN OR EQUAL) PER MANUFACTURES RECOMMENDATIONS UNDER ALL MULCHED AREAS. MAINTENANCE STRIPS TO HAVE EDGER AND MULCH AS SPECIFIED/INDICATED ON DRAWING OR IN SPECIFICATION. IF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR IS CONCERNED OR PERCEIVES ANY DEFICIENCIES IN THE PLANT SELECTIONS, SOIL CONDITIONS OR ANY OTHER SITE CONDITION WHICH MIGHT NEGATIVELY AFFECT PLANT ESTABLISHMENT, SURVIVAL OR GUARANTEE, HE MUST BRING THESE DEFICIENCIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PROCUREMENT AND/OR INSTALLATION. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THE OWNER ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION OF ALL LANDSCAPE AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ON-GOING MAINTENANCE OF ALL NEWLY INSTALLED MATERIALS UNTIL TIME OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE. ANY ACTS OF VANDALISM OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO OWNER ACCEPTANCE SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A MAINTENANCE PROGRAM INCLUDING, BUT NOT NECESSARILY LIMITED TO, PRUNING, FERTILIZATION AND DISEASE/PEST CONTROL. CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE NEW PLANT MATERIAL THROUGH ONE CALENDAR YEAR FROM THE DATE OF OWNER ACCEPTANCE. WARRANTY (ONE FULL GROWING SEASON) FOR LANDSCAPE MATERIALS SHALL BEGIN ON THE DATE OF ACCEPTANCE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AFTER THE COMPLETION OF PLANTING OF ALL LANDSCAPE MATERIALS. NO PARTIAL ACCEPTANCE WILL BE CONSIDERED. REPRODUCIBLE AS-BUILT DRAWING(S) OF ALL LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION INSTALLATION AND PRIOR TO PROJECT ACCEPTANCE. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE THE APPROPRIATE DATES FOR SPRING PLANT MATERIAL INSTALLATION AND SEED/SOD PLACEMENT IS FROM THE TIME GROUND HAS THAWED TO JUNE 15. FALL SODDING IS GENERALLY ACCEPTABLE FROM AUGUST 15 - NOVEMBER 1. FALL SEEDING FROM AUGUST 15 - SEPTEMBER 15; DORMANT SEEDING IN THE FALL SHALL NOT OCCUR PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 1. PLANTING OUTSIDE THESE DATES IS NOT RECOMMENDED. ANY ADJUSTMENT MUST BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. CONIFEROUS PLANTING MAY OCCUR FROM AUGUST 15 - OCTOBER 1 AND FALL DECIDUOUS PLANTING FROM THE FIRST FROST UNTIL NOVEMBER 15. PLANTING OUTSIDE THESE DATES IS NOT RECOMMENDED. ANY ADJUSTMENT MUST BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. PROTECT ALL EXISTING OAKS ON SITE SCHEDULED TO REMAIN. IF EXISTING OAKS ARE DAMAGED IN ANY MANNER, ABOVE OR BELOW GROUND IN THE ROOT SYSTEM, AN ASPHALTIC TREE PRUNING PAINT SHOULD BE APPLIED IMMEDIATELY AFTER WOUNDING. OAKS ARE NOT TO BE PRUNED, REMOVED OR TRANSPLANTED BETWEEN APRIL 15 AND JULY 1. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF THESE DATES ARE UNAVOIDABLE. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL ESTABLISH TO HIS SATISFACTION THAT SOIL AND COMPACTION CONDITIONS ARE ADEQUATE TO ALLOW FOR PROPER DRAINAGE AT AND AROUND THE BUILDING SITE. MAINTENANCE STRIP AT BUILDING EDGE SCALE: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" GEOTEXTILE WOVEN BUILDING WALL SOD LANDSCAPE EDGER (TYP) SEE SPECS LANDSCAPE FABRIC ROCK MULCH - REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR MORE INFO. OR BACK OF CURB 7 L2.1 IRRIGATION NOTES: VERIFY PROPOSED IRRIGATION SYSTEM LAYOUT AND CONFIRM COMPLETE LIMITS OF IRRIGATION PRIOR TO SUPPLYING SHOP DRAWINGS. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AN IRRIGATION LAYOUT PLAN AND SPECIFICATION AS A PART OF THE SCOPE OF WORK WHEN BIDDING. THESE SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ORDER AND/OR INSTALLATION. IT SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO INSURE THAT ALL SODDED/SEEDED AND PLANTED AREAS ARE IRRIGATED PROPERLY, INCLUDING THOSE AREAS DIRECTLY AROUND AND ABUTTING BUILDING FOUNDATION. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A WATERING/LAWN IRRIGATION SCHEDULE APPROPRIATE TO THE PROJECT SITE CONDITIONS AND TO PLANT MATERIAL GROWTH REQUIREMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS NOT TO SPRINKLE ACROSS PAVEMENT. CONTRACTOR TO INCORPORATE RAIN SENSOR INTO IRRIGATION SYSTEM. PLANTINGS OUTSIDE THE LIMITS OF IRRIGATION ARE TO BE WATERED REGULARLY UNTIL PLANTING/SOD/SEED HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of Bauer Design Build and Zion Investments, LLC for Site Plan approval for a 54,600 square foot, two story, office, warehouse and manufacturing building. On July 17, 2018, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Bauer Design Build and Zion Investments, LLC for site plan approval. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed development preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development, PUD. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Office Industrial uses. 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition. 4. Site Plan Review: a. Is consistent with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; Finding: The proposed development is compliance with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides as well as meeting the design standards for Arboretum Business Park. b. Is consistent with site plan division; Finding: The proposed development complies with the Site Plan review requirements of the Chanhassen City Code. c. Preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; Finding: The site has been significantly altered by previous grading on the parcel. The proposed development is in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring 2 developed areas. The development is preserving the Bluff Creek primary zone located on the site. d. Creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; Finding: The proposed development creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development. e. Creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: 1) An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; 2) The amount and location of open space and landscaping; 3) Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and 4) Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. Finding: The proposed development creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, subject to compliance with the conditions of approval. e. Protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Finding: The proposed development protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and traffic circulation. 5. The planning report #2018-11, dated July 17, 2018 prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. 3 RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Site Plan for Control Concepts subject to the recommended conditions of approval contained within the staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of July 2018. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY:___________________________________ Its Chairman 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION IN RE: Application of Bauer Design Build and Zion Investments, LLC for a Bluff Creek primary zone setback variance to construct retaining walls in conjunction with a site plan for a 54,600 square- foot, two-story, office, warehouse and manufacturing building on property zoned Planned Unit Development – Planning Case #2018-11. On August 7, 2018, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development, PUD. 2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Office Industrial uses. 3. The legal description of the property is Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th Addition. 4. Variance Findings – Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the granting of a variance: a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Finding: The granting of the variance will provide an enhanced opportunity for the pedestrian experience on the required wetland trail. The use of the variance provides reduced impacts to the natural areas. b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. 2 Finding: While the developer could have constructed a 17-foot tall retaining wall for the parking lot outside of the required Bluff Creek primary zone setback, the trail experience would have been greatly reduced for trail users. c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The purpose of the variance is to enhance the trail experience. Economic considerations are not a factor in the decision. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The developer could have built a retaining wall that complied with the required setback, but the trail experience would have been greatly impacted. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The granting of the variance will permit an enhanced wetland trail experience for the trail users. f. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 216C.06, Subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter. Finding: This condition does not apply. 5. The planning report #2018-11, dated August 7, 2018, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends approval of a Bluff Creek primary zone setback variance to construct retaining walls in the required setback subject to the conditions of approval in the staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 7th day of August, 2018. CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: _______________________________ Chairman \\cfs5\cfs5\shared_data\plan\2018 planning cases\18-11 control concepts - site plan review\variance 18-11\findings of fact and recommendation - variance.doc CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 7, 2018 Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Steve Weick, Nancy Madsen, Mark Randall, and Michael McGonagill MEMBERS ABSENT: John Tietz STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; George Bender, Assistant City Engineer, and Vanessa Strong, Water Resources Coordinator PUBLIC PRESENT: Russ & Diana Jones 3961 Country Oaks Drive Lynn & Nancy Simpson 3980 Country Oaks Drive Court MacFarlane 3800 Leslee Curve Jane Bender 4001 Stratford Ridge Steve Arndt 2960 Stratford Ridge David Robertson 2900 Stratford Ridge Jason Watt 3961 Stratford Ridge Trent Birkholz 3851 Stratford Ridge David & Diane Lieser 3881 Stratford Ridge Linda Brand 3981 Country Oaks Garit Solheim-Witt 3850 Leslee Curve PUBLIC HEARING: CONTROL CONCEPTS: REQUEST FOR SETBACK VARIANCE. Generous: Thank you Chairman, commissioners. Control Concepts, this is part two Planning Case 2018-11. We saw the site plan at the July 17th meeting. As part of that there was concern about the size of the retaining walls adjacent to the pedestrian trail that’s being put in. So we worked with the applicant to come up with an alternative design that would reduce the size of those walls. However to do that they need a variance to encroach the retaining walls into the Bluff Creek primary zone setback. Not into the primary zone itself but into the 40 foot setback from that one. The property is located at 8077 Century Boulevard. This is in the Arboretum Business Park planned unit development. The request is in conjunction with the site plan so this is only a recommendation that we’ll make tonight. You won’t make a final decision as a Board of Appeals and Adjustments to permit the retaining wall to encroach into the primary zone setback as shown on their plans. The property is guided for office industrial uses. It’s zoned planned unit development as part of the Arboretum Business Park. It’s also within the Bluff Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018 2 Creek corridor which has additional protection requirements. This was the site plan that was approved on, or recommended for approval on the 17th. Unfortunately it’s only two dimensional so it looks really great and easy on the screen. It’s a 54,600 square foot building. The western portion is, has a two story office component and then it has warehouse and manufacturing or manufacturing space on the eastern side. There is a tenant space on the extreme eastern end of the building. As submitted with the site plan review they were proposing one, a single retaining wall adjacent to the trail system. This raised, had high points of over 18 feet at the corner of the property. At the turning points in the trail and then also down on the east end of it. That was a concern of the Planning Commission and staff and the Parks Director and what type of environment would that create for the trail users. The applicant was able to provide us with a cross section to give you an idea of what the experience would be and you can see that wall would really dominant the walking in that area so, and this is I believe at the point 7 on the trail. So as part of the alternative design we came up with the tiered wall system. It reduced, basically split the height of the retaining wall so half was on top and half was below. It reduced the highest point in the retaining wall to 12 feet on the eastern end of the building but at that corner point down in here it had an upper elevation of almost 9 feet. Just under 9 feet for the retaining wall and then another 9 foot retaining wall below it so they created like an overview or shelf area in the corner that would allow people to look over the wetland complex to the northeast of that. This is, however having this wall encroach into the 40 foot setback requires a variance and so that’s what we’re here for tonight. Again they provided a cross section to show how the experience for people using the trail would be much more human scale and so we would think it will provide an enhanced environment for people to go forward. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance to permit the retaining walls within the Bluff Creek primary zone setback. We have Findings of Fact that it is in harmony with our ordinance and it does not change the character of the area but we believe will enhance the pedestrian experience as they use this trail system. Additionally there’s adoption of Findings of Fact and Recommendation. With that I’d be happy to answer any questions. Aller: Any questions at this time of staff? Commissioner Weick. Weick: First time this came up I just did a bad job of getting clarification for myself so I just, I’m looking for clarification on the necessity for the trail. So is there currently like a dead end trail in the Preserve that’s waiting to be connected? Generous: There is a fork that was established with the 7th Addition which was built in 2007 to come towards the north. Weick: Okay. Generous: And so that was the plan and this would actually connect to the heart of the Arboretum Business Park area and provide really easy access for people to get onto the system. Right now you can get into it off of 82nd Street. There’s a connection that goes around, there’s a big stormwater pond in that corner. Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018 3 Weick: Yeah. Generous: And then into it so it was felt at the time of the subdivision and approval that this was an important connection so we’re trying to implement that. As part of the approval for the 7th Addition the developer was required to do that but we allowed them to wait until this site developed before putting in the trail. We could have had them put in the trail back in 2007 and then the development would have to come in and either fit into, their design into where the trail was or. Weick: Yeah, okay. That’s all I had. Aller: Great. Any additional questions? Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: Bob on the down slope wall, what would the fencing be along that wall to keep people from falling off of it? Do you recall? Generous: Yeah it’s a dual pipe system so two rails of pipe. Black pipe that would go along there. About 42 inches high. McGonagill: Okay, thank you. Generous: And it’s the open design so when we push snow it can go through that in the winter so that people would be able to use that year round. McGonagill: Okay thank you. Keeps bikes from going off it. Generous: Yes. Aller: Commissioner Madsen. Is that fence similar to the one that goes along 101? It’s on the right side, or on the west side of 101. Generous: Yes that’s what the design that they were talking, the Parks Director was talking about. That it’d be similar to that. Madsen: Yep south of Lyman, north of Pioneer Trail. Generous: Correct. Madsen: Okay thank you. Aller: Okay I have a question for Ms. Strong. As always I’m always concerned about the Bluff Creek so obviously they made an effort to alter their plans based upon the comments from the Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018 4 last hearing. The question I have basically is going towards when we stagger this we’re going to reduce the speed of the runoff. How will that impact, based upon the grade and the elevations or would it impact the flow as compared to, are we getting a better deal with the two as opposed to one? Strong: I thought about that too. It’s really tough to say. I think they’re attempting the best they can to meet the needs for the trail so I think when it comes to runoff, the ground level versus the two tiered, the difference is not considerable compared to the fact that they actually need to meet the trail in the first place. Obviously ideal would be to have a wider buffer. That’s really what we need. But with a balance to meet many needs so. Aller: Any additional questions based, hearing none we’ll have the applicant come forward and make a presentation. Answer questions. If you could state your name and address and representational capacity for the record that would be great. Cory Watkins: Hi. Cory Watkins. I’m with Control Concepts. We’re at 18760 Lake Drive East in Chanhassen. Aller: Welcome back. Cory Watkins: Thank you. You know I don’t have a lot to present. Your staff did a good job of presenting what we’re doing. I would say that the original proposal that we put forward did not require a variance and so the variance is really specifically because of requests to have it be a different user experience so it’s more of a trail causing the variance versus us as an entity looking for the variance so that’s really our position on it so. Aller: Additional questions, comments. Alright, thank you sir. Cory Watkins: Alright thank you. Aller: At this time I’ll open up the public hearing portion of the item. This is an opportunity for those present to come forward and speak either for or against the item. Seeing no one come forward I’m going to close the public hearing portion of the item and open it up for commissioner discussion or action. Weick: Yeah the only comment I would make, I’m not opposed to this in any way. It seems like we’re putting an awful lot of work into making this connection. I’m, I don’t know that we really need to make this connection. I use that area and you can get around. I think sufficiently without that connection. It’s really not that far from the 82nd Street that kind of brings you around in on the other side so I, personally I don’t even think we need to make the connection. It doesn’t, you know if that’s what we want to do that’s fine. It seems like a good solution. I’m just not convinced that it’s needed. Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018 5 Aller: Additional comments? Questions? I’d entertain a motion for or against. Undestad: I’ll make a motion that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of a variance to permit retaining walls within the Bluff Creek primary zone setbacks subject to the conditions of approval and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? McGonagill: Second. Aller: Having a motion and a second, any further discussion? Okay. Comments. Otherwise we’ll entertain a vote. Undestad moved, McGonagill seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval approve variance to permit construction of retaining walls within the Bluff Creek primary zone setback as shown in the plans prepared by Loucks, dated 06-15-2018, revised 7-12-18, subject to the following conditions: Building 1. Retaining walls over 4 feet in heights require an engineered design. Environmental Resources 1. The applicant shall coordinate a trail inspection with the city arborist to review tree removals prior to any trail construction activities. 2. Tree protection fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits along the trail. Parks 1. The developer shall be responsible for planning, engineering, and constructing the “wetland trail.” Connection points for this new trail shall be the terminus of the Trotters Ridge trail and the intersection of Century Boulevard and Water Tower Place. Bid documents, including plans and specifications, shall be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to soliciting bids. Project bidding shall occur in a competitive environment with a minimum of three bids being received. The results of the bidding process shall be reviewed with the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to award. Cash payment for trail construction shall Chanhassen Planning Commission – August 7, 2018 6 be made from the City of Chanhassen to the developer upon completion, inspection, and acceptance of the trail. 2. Trail easements within Lot 2, Block 1, Arboretum Business Park 7th shall be dedicated to the city to accommodate the “wetland trail”. Water Resources and Engineering 1. The limits of the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) shall be identified throughout the plan set. 2. Add detailed design for the retaining walls including a profile, proposed construction materials, and railings/fences. 3. Add cut sections through the retaining walls and the trail to provide for easier visualization and enhance constructability. 4. Create a parapet design along the upper wall when it is above the trail. 5. Extend the silt fence installation as appropriate to protect from construction. 6. Identify snow storage locations on the plans. 7. Provide a restoration plan for grading in the wetland buffer and in the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) buffer. 8. The proposed redevelopment will need Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) permits. 9. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure and submit proof that permits are received from all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project (i.e. Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, MnDOT, Carver County, RPBCWD, Board of Water and Soil Resources, PCA, etc.). 10. The grade through the ADA areas of the parking lot shall be a maximum of 2% slope in any direction. The point elevations should be re-checked. Add this code requirement in a note on the plans. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Review of Claims Paid 08­13­2018 Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: J.1. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No:  SUMMARY The following claims are submitted for review on August 13, 2018: Check Numbers Amounts 167396 – 167597 $433,999.51 ACH Payments $1,717,616.01 Total All Claims $2,151,615.52 ATTACHMENTS: Check Summary Check Summary ACH Check Detail Check Detail ACH Accounts Payable Checks by Date - Summary by Check User: dwashburn Printed: 8/3/2018 8:51 AM Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check ACH ADAPES ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC 07/05/2018 0.00 125.00 ACH CONRES CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP 07/05/2018 0.00 227.94 ACH CORMEC CORPORATE MECHANICAL 07/05/2018 0.00 670.00 ACH DAMFAR DAMON FARBER ASSOCIATES 07/05/2018 0.00 488.50 ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 07/05/2018 0.00 7.77 ACH FirCat Fire Catt, LLC 07/05/2018 0.00 3,592.00 ACH GlSpor GL Sports Camps, LLC 07/05/2018 0.00 457.00 ACH HydKle Hydro-Klean LLC 07/05/2018 0.00 129,040.27 ACH IndPla Indelco Plastics Corporation 07/05/2018 0.00 27.75 ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 07/05/2018 0.00 134.43 ACH JEFFIR JEFFERSON FIRE SAFETY INC 07/05/2018 0.00 15,315.30 ACH BENSKAYE KAYE L BENSON 07/05/2018 0.00 560.00 ACH kidplu Kidd Plumbing Inc 07/05/2018 0.00 1,231.50 ACH MinnVall Minnesota Valley Testing Laboratories, Inc. 07/05/2018 0.00 25.00 ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 07/05/2018 0.00 5,909.02 ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/05/2018 0.00 335.81 ACH OREAUT O'Reilly Automotive Inc 07/05/2018 0.00 58.66 ACH RBMSER RBM SERVICES INC 07/05/2018 0.00 4,413.04 ACH SPSCOM SPS COMPANIES INC 07/05/2018 0.00 18.32 ACH SUBCHE SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 07/05/2018 0.00 483.48 ACH UNIWAY UNITED WAY 07/05/2018 0.00 28.40 ACH VERIZO VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 0.00 4,728.34 ACH WATSON WATSON COMPANY 07/05/2018 0.00 785.21 ACH WMMUE WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/05/2018 0.00 2,729.38 ACH WWGRA WW GRAINGER INC 07/05/2018 0.00 5.52 ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 07/05/2018 0.00 16,819.33 ACH ZIEGLE ZIEGLER INC 07/05/2018 0.00 34.96 ACH AppEco Applied Ecological Services Inc 07/12/2018 0.00 517.00 ACH LANZBOB BOB LANZI 07/12/2018 0.00 196.00 ACH BROWHI BROCK WHITE CO LLC 07/12/2018 0.00 1,400.34 ACH CAMBAR CAMPION BARROW & ASSOCIATES 07/12/2018 0.00 425.00 ACH CCPNIM CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 07/12/2018 0.00 8,124.77 ACH Choice Choice, Inc. 07/12/2018 0.00 200.53 ACH CRYINF Crystal Infosystems LLC 07/12/2018 0.00 215.53 ACH DISSAL DISPLAY SALES COMPANY 07/12/2018 0.00 594.00 ACH FergEnte Ferguson Waterworks #2516 07/12/2018 0.00 7,022.26 ACH GMHASP GMH ASPHALT CORP 07/12/2018 0.00 190,702.02 ACH GOPSTA GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 07/12/2018 0.00 1,171.80 ACH HAWCHE HAWKINS CHEMICAL 07/12/2018 0.00 210.00 ACH HOIKOE HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 07/12/2018 0.00 1,297.08 ACH IMPPOR IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 07/12/2018 0.00 4,962.00 ACH INDLAN Indoor Landscapes Inc 07/12/2018 0.00 187.00 ACH KATFUE KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 07/12/2018 0.00 2,753.45 ACH MERACE MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 0.00 2,166.58 ACH MidAqu Midwest Aqua Care, Inc 07/12/2018 0.00 1,907.00 ACH PotMN Potentia MN Solar 07/12/2018 0.00 9,958.30 ACH PreWat Premium Waters, Inc 07/12/2018 0.00 10.30 Page 1 of 4 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check ACH SafVeh Safety Vehicle Solutions 07/12/2018 0.00 3,910.00 ACH TWISEE TWIN CITY SEED CO. 07/12/2018 0.00 779.00 ACH UltEve Ultimate Events, Inc 07/12/2018 0.00 23,849.01 ACH WarLit Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc. 07/12/2018 0.00 1,114.00 ACH WATSON WATSON COMPANY 07/12/2018 0.00 248.41 ACH WMMUE WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/12/2018 0.00 2,051.98 ACH WSB WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/12/2018 0.00 492.25 ACH WWGRA WW GRAINGER INC 07/12/2018 0.00 978.17 ACH ZEEMED ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 07/12/2018 0.00 136.95 ACH Z-AMAZON Amazon 07/16/2018 0.00 2,910.58 ACH Z-AMELEG American Legion 07/16/2018 0.00 700.00 ACH Z-BATPLU Batteries Plus 07/16/2018 0.00 407.76 ACH Z-BESBUY Best Buy 07/16/2018 0.00 13.96 ACH Z-BLASUP Blackhawk Supply 07/16/2018 0.00 142.18 ACH Z-BUFWIL Buffalo Wild Wings 07/16/2018 0.00 87.11 ACH Z-CDWG CDW Government 07/16/2018 0.00 953.47 ACH Z-CEMSTO Cemstone 07/16/2018 0.00 50.16 ACH Z-COSTCO Costco Wholesale 07/16/2018 0.00 103.16 ACH Z-CROAWA Crown Awards 07/16/2018 0.00 49.47 ACH Z-CUBFOO Cub Foods 07/16/2018 0.00 216.43 ACH Z-DANNER Danner 07/16/2018 0.00 280.00 ACH Z-DAVANN Davanni's 07/16/2018 0.00 120.51 ACH Z-DELTA Delta Airlines 07/16/2018 0.00 278.40 ACH Z-DOWDEV Downtown Development Center 07/16/2018 0.00 47.45 ACH Z-DSSACH DSS Achievement Products 07/16/2018 0.00 111.30 ACH Z-GERTEN Gertens 07/16/2018 0.00 2,612.00 ACH Z-GOOWIL Goodwill 07/16/2018 0.00 13.98 ACH Z-GUTTHE Guthrie Theater 07/16/2018 0.00 2,089.00 ACH Z-HACCOM Hach Company 07/16/2018 0.00 90.28 ACH Z-HALCOM Hallock Company 07/16/2018 0.00 80.15 ACH Z-HOLSTA Holiday Stationstore 07/16/2018 0.00 16.47 ACH Z-HOMDEP Home Depot 07/16/2018 0.00 917.70 ACH Z-ICMA ICMA 07/16/2018 0.00 685.00 ACH Z-KWITRI Kwik Trip 07/16/2018 0.00 20.07 ACH Z-LAMCOM Laminator.com 07/16/2018 0.00 212.46 ACH Z-LANHOS Lancer Hospitality 07/16/2018 0.00 43.00 ACH Z-LEEANN LEEANN CHIN 07/16/2018 0.00 174.36 ACH Z-LOGME LogMeIn Inc 07/16/2018 0.00 (499.15) ACH Z-LUNBYE Lunds & Byerly's 07/16/2018 0.00 108.98 ACH Z-MCMCAR McMaster-Carr 07/16/2018 0.00 22.15 ACH Z-MICHAE Michaels 07/16/2018 0.00 9.67 ACH Z-MILFLE Mills Fleet Farm 07/16/2018 0.00 109.98 ACH Z-MNTROP Minnesota Trophies & Gifts 07/16/2018 0.00 798.91 ACH Z-MYFONT MyFonts Inc 07/16/2018 0.00 128.69 ACH Z-NOOCOM Noodles & Company 07/16/2018 0.00 86.71 ACH Z-OFFMAX Office Max/Office Depot 07/16/2018 0.00 45.36 ACH Z-OTCBRA OTC Brands Inc 07/16/2018 0.00 64.09 ACH Z-PARCEN Paramount Center for the arts 07/16/2018 0.00 1,300.00 ACH Z-PARCIT Party City 07/16/2018 0.00 6.41 ACH Z-PLAPLA Plant Place 07/16/2018 0.00 10.74 ACH Z-PUMALA PumpAlarm.com 07/16/2018 0.00 49.99 ACH Z-QUITUR QuickTurn 07/16/2018 0.00 74.06 ACH Z-REDBEN Red Bench Bakery 07/16/2018 0.00 20.62 ACH Z-ROTCLU Rotary Club 07/16/2018 0.00 106.00 ACH Z-SAMCLU Sam's Club 07/16/2018 0.00 96.17 ACH Z-SOUMET Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 07/16/2018 0.00 295.00 ACH Z-SPRWAR Sprinkler Warehouse 07/16/2018 0.00 571.84 Page 2 of 4 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check ACH Z-TARGET Target 07/16/2018 0.00 190.64 ACH Z-TESSCO Tessco 07/16/2018 0.00 346.83 ACH Z-THEGAR The Garden By The Woods 07/16/2018 0.00 75.00 ACH Z-TWIBAL Twins Ballpark LLC 07/16/2018 0.00 1,231.00 ACH Z-USPS United States Postal Service 07/16/2018 0.00 6.70 ACH Z-VARIDE VARIDESK LLC 07/16/2018 0.00 555.00 ACH Z-VECSTO VectorStock 07/16/2018 0.00 50.00 ACH Z-WALMAR Wal-Mart 07/16/2018 0.00 347.84 ACH Z-WWGRAI WW Grainger 07/16/2018 0.00 19.88 ACH BATPLU BATTERIES PLUS 07/19/2018 0.00 19.99 ACH BOYTRU Boyer Truck Parts 07/19/2018 0.00 537.00 ACH CAMKNU CAMPBELL KNUTSON 07/19/2018 0.00 13,321.62 ACH carcou Carver County 07/19/2018 0.00 887.50 ACH DALCO DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC. 07/19/2018 0.00 20.48 ACH SCHMDEAN DEAN SCHMIEG 07/19/2018 0.00 2,510.75 ACH DelDen Delta Dental 07/19/2018 0.00 2,546.90 ACH LaufDenn Dennis Laufenburger 07/19/2018 0.00 570.16 ACH engwat Engel Water Testing Inc 07/19/2018 0.00 520.00 ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 07/19/2018 0.00 47.42 ACH HydKle Hydro-Klean LLC 07/19/2018 0.00 580.00 ACH JOHSUP JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 07/19/2018 0.00 139.05 ACH KIMHOR KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 0.00 6,930.00 ACH ManOil Mansfield Oil Company 07/19/2018 0.00 18,395.41 ACH Marco Marco Inc 07/19/2018 0.00 925.65 ACH MINNOCC MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 07/19/2018 0.00 253.00 ACH MNLABO MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 07/19/2018 0.00 7,292.66 ACH MRPA MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC. 07/19/2018 0.00 264.00 ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/19/2018 0.00 269.14 ACH SPRPCS SPRINT PCS 07/19/2018 0.00 103.44 ACH UniFar United Farmers Cooperative 07/19/2018 0.00 525.99 ACH UNIWAY UNITED WAY 07/19/2018 0.00 28.40 ACH WALROO WALKER ROOFING COMPANY INC 07/19/2018 0.00 38,085.00 ACH WatCon Water Conservation Services, Inc. 07/19/2018 0.00 280.70 ACH WATSON WATSON COMPANY 07/19/2018 0.00 622.40 ACH WENCK WENCK ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 0.00 2,544.78 ACH WitPub Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc. 07/19/2018 0.00 432.48 ACH WSB WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 0.00 13,630.00 ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 07/19/2018 0.00 139.05 ACH ALEAIR ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC 07/26/2018 0.00 130.00 ACH ANCTEC ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 07/26/2018 0.00 35.00 ACH carcou Carver County 07/26/2018 0.00 22,736.32 ACH CORMEC CORPORATE MECHANICAL 07/26/2018 0.00 44.40 ACH DISSAL DISPLAY SALES COMPANY 07/26/2018 0.00 380.00 ACH EMEAPP EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT. INC 07/26/2018 0.00 97.50 ACH EmeRes Emergency Response Solutions 07/26/2018 0.00 70.97 ACH Avesis Fidelity Security Life 07/26/2018 0.00 193.00 ACH INNOFF Innovative Office Solutions LLC 07/26/2018 0.00 515.48 ACH JEFFIR JEFFERSON FIRE SAFETY INC 07/26/2018 0.00 866.36 ACH AlHiJuli Juli Al-Hilwani 07/26/2018 0.00 97.50 ACH METCO Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 07/26/2018 0.00 351,801.45 ACH MUSTOG MUSIC TOGETHER LAKESIDE 07/26/2018 0.00 166.00 ACH PioEng Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 07/26/2018 0.00 7,200.00 ACH STRGUA STRATOGUARD LLC 07/26/2018 0.00 160.00 ACH SunLif Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 0.00 1,410.83 ACH WSB WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/26/2018 0.00 30,987.00 ACH AFLAC American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus 08/02/2018 0.00 39.78 ACH LANZBOB BOB LANZI 08/02/2018 0.00 245.00 Page 3 of 4 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check ACH BOYTRU Boyer Truck Parts 08/02/2018 0.00 621.42 ACH ColLif Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 08/02/2018 0.00 202.08 ACH CRYINF Crystal Infosystems LLC 08/02/2018 0.00 308.64 ACH DALCO DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC. 08/02/2018 0.00 88.05 ACH EmeRes Emergency Response Solutions 08/02/2018 0.00 215.16 ACH FergEnte Ferguson Waterworks #2516 08/02/2018 0.00 149.50 ACH GENPAR GENERAL PARTS LLC 08/02/2018 0.00 320.00 ACH HAWCHE HAWKINS CHEMICAL 08/02/2018 0.00 5,204.89 ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 08/02/2018 0.00 2,534.00 ACH JDWIN J & D Window Cleaning 08/02/2018 0.00 5,725.00 ACH AlHiJuli Juli Al-Hilwani 08/02/2018 0.00 382.50 ACH KATFUE KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 08/02/2018 0.00 136.00 ACH KEYWEL Keys Well Drilling Co 08/02/2018 0.00 41,479.37 ACH LubTec Lube Tech ESI 08/02/2018 0.00 633.00 ACH MatTri Matheson Tri-Gas, Inc. 08/02/2018 0.00 519.91 ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/02/2018 0.00 117.76 ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 08/02/2018 0.00 133.54 ACH NusEqu Nuss Truck & Equipment 08/02/2018 0.00 70.11 ACH RBMSER RBM SERVICES INC 08/02/2018 0.00 4,413.04 ACH RICLAK RICE LAKE CONSTRUCTION GROUP 08/02/2018 0.00 585,118.09 ACH SOUSTP SOUTH ST PAUL STEEL SUPPLY CO 08/02/2018 0.00 1,077.41 ACH MINCON SUMMIT COMPANIES 08/02/2018 0.00 500.00 ACH UNIWAY UNITED WAY 08/02/2018 0.00 28.40 ACH VERIZO VERIZON WIRELESS 08/02/2018 0.00 40.01 ACH WATSON WATSON COMPANY 08/02/2018 0.00 510.00 ACH WAYTEK WAYTEK INC 08/02/2018 0.00 174.88 ACH WMMUE WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/02/2018 0.00 5,399.99 ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 0.00 55,925.88 ACH ZIEGLE ZIEGLER INC 08/02/2018 0.00 499.64 Report Total: 0.00 1,717,616.01 Page 4 of 4 Accounts Payable Check Detail-Checks User: dwashburn Printed: 08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM Name Check D Account Description Amount AARP 07/26/2018 101-1560-4300 Driver Safety - 4 hr course 6183.114 425.00 AARP 425.00 AccessAbility Business Services 07/12/2018 101-1160-4300 Document Destruction Service 15.00 AccessAbility Business Services 15.00 Active911, Inc.07/05/2018 101-1220-4300 12mo renewal - 65 731.25 Active911, Inc. 731.25 Allegra Print & Imaging 07/12/2018 101-1170-4110 Postcard Perfed 2-up Templates 2500 sheets 730.00 Allegra Print & Imaging 730.00 ALLSTREAM 07/05/2018 101-1160-4300 phone system maintenance - 8/18/18-9/17/18 490.84 ALLSTREAM 08/02/2018 101-1160-4300 phone system maintenance 9/18/18-10/17/18 490.84 ALLSTREAM 981.68 American Pressure Inc 08/02/2018 101-1370-4150 Swivel 1/4" male x 1/4" female 4000 PSI SS, Coupler, Swivel 521 315.92 American Pressure Inc 315.92 American Security LLC 08/02/2018 101-1613-4300 4th of July Additional Security 1,320.00 American Security LLC 1,320.00 APACHE GROUP 07/05/2018 101-1170-4150 Tissue, Liners, Cleanser, Towels 1,593.31 APACHE GROUP 1,593.31 AQUA PRO LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEMS INC07/05/2018 101-0000-2033 Overpayment - refund permit # 2018-01721 30.00 AQUA PRO LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEMS INC 30.00 Archer Jessica 07/05/2018 101-1250-4370 mileage - Bldg Official Forum - Alexandria 154.78 Archer Jessica 154.78 ASPEN MILLS 08/02/2018 101-1220-4240 Cargo pants, leather belt 80.95 ASPEN MILLS 80.95 Bauer Built Inc 07/12/2018 101-1550-4120 E POWER ST2 TRL 124L 327.80 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 1 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount Bauer Built Inc 327.80 BCA 07/05/2018 101-1120-4300 Background Investigation 15.00 BCA 07/12/2018 101-1120-4300 Background investigation 30.00 BCA 07/19/2018 101-1120-4300 Background investigation 15.00 BCA 07/26/2018 101-1120-4300 Background investigation 45.00 BCA 105.00 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 101-0000-2012 August Family 43,840.90 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 101-0000-2012 August Family-Cobra 1,748.74 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 700-0000-2012 August Family 6,522.81 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 701-0000-2012 August Family 4,774.07 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 720-0000-2012 August Family 2,570.64 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 101-0000-2012 August Single 16,023.35 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 210-0000-2012 August Single 874.64 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 700-0000-2012 August Single 2,361.52 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 701-0000-2012 August Single 1,661.81 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 720-0000-2012 August Single 1,469.40 BCBSM, Inc.07/12/2018 101-1220-4483 August Firefighter EAP 45.92 BCBSM, Inc. 81,893.80 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 07/12/2018 101-1550-4300 Weed Pulling/Spraying and Debris removal - 6/5, 6/18 and mulch 2,125.00 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 2,125.00 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 07/26/2018 101-1170-4110 Coffee - Fire Dept 75.36 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 07/26/2018 101-1170-4110 Coffee 689.93 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 765.29 BLATZHEIM KEITH 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.49 BLATZHEIM KEITH 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.89 BLATZHEIM KEITH 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.86 BLATZHEIM KEITH 16.24 Boerboom Linda 07/12/2018 101-1541-3634 refund picnic 115.00 Boerboom Linda 115.00 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 07/12/2018 101-1370-4510 Lamps 307.56 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 07/19/2018 101-1220-4510 ECO HID LMP HPS B17 11668 GELA 97.20 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 08/02/2018 101-1370-4510 Room Sensor 171.02 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 575.78 Brandt Eric and Megan 07/26/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 8445 Mission Hills Ln 250.00 Brandt Eric and Megan 250.00 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 07/12/2018 400-4008-4706 1" Clean - June 2018 1,727.24 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 1,727.24 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 2 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount BURNET TITLE 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 23.61 BURNET TITLE 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.73 BURNET TITLE 29.34 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 16.48 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 31.00 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 7.69 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.35 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.86 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.61 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.09 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.37 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 63.77 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 69.57 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.60 BURNET TITLE LLC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.40 BURNET TITLE LLC 213.79 BURSCHVILLE CONSTRUCTION INC 07/26/2018 815-8202-2024 6650 Pawnee Drive - Erosion Control Site Compliance Work 4,000.00 BURSCHVILLE CONSTRUCTION INC 07/26/2018 720-0000-4300 6650 Pawnee Drive - Erosion Control Site Compliance Work 4,315.00 BURSCHVILLE CONSTRUCTION INC 8,315.00 BURTIS ROBERT 08/02/2018 101-1560-4300 Beachcomber Bob Performance 150.00 BURTIS ROBERT 150.00 CAP AGENCY 07/26/2018 101-1430-4300 2nd quarter services - Apr, May, June 2018 2,100.00 CAP AGENCY 2,100.00 Carahsoft Technology Corporation 07/19/2018 101-1160-4370 LyndaPro Annual Renewal - LinkedIn 1,674.95 Carahsoft Technology Corporation 1,674.95 Carlson Craig 08/02/2018 700-0000-4330 Postage - Certified/Return Receipt 12.32 Carlson Craig 12.32 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/05/2018 101-1550-4320 gas charges 23.77 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/05/2018 101-1170-4320 gas charges 85.25 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/05/2018 101-1190-4320 gas charges 232.55 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/05/2018 700-7019-4320 gas charges 49.23 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/05/2018 700-0000-4320 gas charges 16.98 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/12/2018 101-1370-4320 gas charges 89.68 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/12/2018 700-0000-4320 gas charges 11.21 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/12/2018 701-0000-4320 gas charges 11.21 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/12/2018 701-0000-4320 gas charges 23.83 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/12/2018 101-1600-4320 gas charges 16.98 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/19/2018 101-1220-4320 monthly charges 5/25/18-6/28/18 80.20 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/19/2018 101-1530-4320 monthly charges 5/25/18-6/28/18 34.31 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 07/19/2018 101-1120-4320 monthly charges 5/25/18-6/28/18 16.98 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 3 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 692.18 CenturyLink 07/19/2018 700-0000-4310 Monthly service July 2018 32.00 CenturyLink 07/19/2018 701-0000-4310 Monthly service July 2018 32.00 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 101-1170-4310 phone charges June 2018 826.98 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 700-0000-4310 phone charges June 2018 6.36 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 701-0000-4310 phone charges June 2018 6.36 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 101-1550-4310 phone charges June 2018 30.04 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 101-1350-4310 phone charges June 2018 30.04 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 101-1220-4310 phone charges June 2018 33.04 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 101-1370-4310 phone charges June 2018 50.88 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 101-1160-4320 phone charges June 2018 125.00 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 700-0000-4310 phone charges June 2018 15.13 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 700-7019-4310 phone charges June 2018 210.27 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 701-0000-4310 phone charges June 2018 15.13 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 101-1160-4320 phone charges June 2018 250.00 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 101-1190-4310 phone charges June 2018 127.20 CENTURYLINK 07/05/2018 101-1540-4310 phone charges June 2018 95.40 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 700-0000-4310 phone charges July 2018 15.13 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 700-7019-4310 phone charges July 2018 210.27 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 701-0000-4310 phone charges July 2018 15.13 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 101-1160-4320 phone charges July 2018 250.00 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 101-1190-4310 phone charges July 2018 127.20 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 101-1540-4310 phone charges July 2018 95.40 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 101-1170-4310 phone charges July 2018 832.49 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 700-0000-4310 phone charges July 2018 6.36 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 701-0000-4310 phone charges July 2018 6.36 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 101-1550-4310 phone charges July 2018 30.04 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 101-1350-4310 phone charges July 2018 30.04 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 101-1220-4310 phone charges July 2018 33.04 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 101-1370-4310 phone charges July 2018 50.88 CENTURYLINK 08/02/2018 101-1160-4320 phone charges July 2018 125.00 CENTURYLINK 3,713.17 CLASS C COMPONENTS INC 07/05/2018 101-1320-4240 Safety Vests 16.52 CLASS C COMPONENTS INC 16.52 Commercial Asphalt Co 07/12/2018 420-0000-4751 MV4 Wear Rec, Tack Oil, Rec Wear 906.39 Commercial Asphalt Co 08/02/2018 420-0000-4751 9.5MM REC WEAR, LV3 WEAR REC 240.80 Commercial Asphalt Co 1,147.19 CORE & MAIN LP 07/05/2018 701-0000-4551 Snake Pit Lite Duty Box - Sewer 226.08 CORE & MAIN LP 07/05/2018 700-0000-4552 Snake Pit Lite Duty Box Water 753.60 CORE & MAIN LP 07/12/2018 700-0000-4552 F/DI PIPE, GASKET, EPXY, C153 IMP 416.58 CORE & MAIN LP 07/19/2018 700-0000-4550 R1620679 6 HYD EXT 5-1/4 MED WITH 304 SS BOLTS AND NUTS 1,152.00 CORE & MAIN LP 08/02/2018 700-0000-4150 1056-44 4 CPLG CI/PVCSCI/PVC 9.42 CORE & MAIN LP 2,557.68 Creek Hill Custom Homes Inc.08/02/2018 815-8226-2024 As-Built Escrow - 3648 Landings Drive 2,500.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 4 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount Creek Hill Custom Homes Inc. 2,500.00 CUB FOODS 07/12/2018 101-1540-4130 Hot Dog Buns, Chips 22.98 CUB FOODS 07/12/2018 101-1540-4130 Hot Dog Buns 6.00 CUB FOODS 07/19/2018 101-1620-4130 Ice 13.47 CUB FOODS 07/19/2018 101-1540-4130 Buns, Chips 24.98 CUB FOODS 07/19/2018 101-1540-4130 Paper Towels, Soap 18.23 CUB FOODS 07/19/2018 101-1620-4300 7UP pop 15.02 CUB FOODS 07/19/2018 101-1540-4130 Buns 24.00 CUB FOODS 07/19/2018 101-1540-4130 Ketchup, Mustard 10.56 CUB FOODS 07/19/2018 101-1220-4290 Cake 44.99 CUB FOODS 07/19/2018 101-1220-4290 Water 20.00 CUB FOODS 200.23 Culligan Bottled Water 07/19/2018 101-1220-4300 Water/July 2018 equipment rental 112.56 Culligan Bottled Water 112.56 Customized Fire Rescue Training Inc 08/02/2018 101-1220-4370 (8) NFPA1002 Fire Apparatus 40 hr course 4,000.00 Customized Fire Rescue Training Inc 4,000.00 CUT ABOVE INC 07/12/2018 101-1550-4300 Remove Lg dead Elm-Carver Beach-Grind Stumps 2,600.00 CUT ABOVE INC 07/12/2018 101-1550-4300 Drop 2 dead Elms, Trim, Rack and clean up yard 400.00 CUT ABOVE INC 3,000.00 David Lutz Attorney 07/12/2018 101-0000-2033 Overpayment - refund 2300 Lukewood Drive 200.00 David Lutz Attorney 200.00 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 07/12/2018 101-1550-4120 Gloves, Hex Dies, Cleaner, Mirror 282.90 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 07/12/2018 101-1370-4260 12MM 6PTDP, 19MM 6PTDP, LG WRENCH 31.76 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 07/12/2018 101-1370-4260 13MM Met Comb WR 12.73 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 07/12/2018 101-1370-4260 Dig Tire Infltr, Wrench, Mirror, Inner Dual, tube, nozzle 176.91 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 07/19/2018 101-1370-4260 Blowgun Star Tip Bent, freight 14.76 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 07/19/2018 101-1370-4260 Electric Brake Force Meter 136.13 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 655.19 DEM-CON LANDFILL 07/19/2018 101-1320-4150 Street Sweeping - 6/8/18, 6/18/18 2,273.51 DEM-CON LANDFILL 2,273.51 Desaulniers Dan 07/05/2018 101-1766-4300 Adult Softball Umpire - 1 Game 24.50 Desaulniers Dan 24.50 Destiny Homes Inc 07/19/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 1385 Ithilien 250.00 Destiny Homes Inc 250.00 DLT SOLUTIONS INC 07/19/2018 101-1160-4220 AutoDesk License Renewals 2,045.18 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 5 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount DLT SOLUTIONS INC 2,045.18 DON'S SOD SERVICE 07/12/2018 101-1550-4150 Eagle Ridge Rd - laid 596 yds sod and extra grading 2,464.00 DON'S SOD SERVICE 2,464.00 Dultmeier Sales LLC 07/12/2018 101-1550-4120 Valve, Tees, Fittings, Elbows 66.88 Dultmeier Sales LLC 66.88 ECOLAB 07/19/2018 101-1430-4300 Solid Power XL 75.18 ECOLAB 75.18 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 34.70 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 14.72 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.59 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 16.94 EDGEWATER TITLE GROUP LLC 68.95 EDINA REALTY TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.55 EDINA REALTY TITLE 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.54 EDINA REALTY TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.88 EDINA REALTY TITLE 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.33 EDINA REALTY TITLE 8.30 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 07/12/2018 101-1550-4120 DEL 24A 88863812 C600 R113 65.22 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 07/12/2018 101-1550-4120 Return DEL24A 88863812 C600 R113 -65.22 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 07/12/2018 701-0000-4120 DEL 8DHD 336.28 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 07/19/2018 700-0000-4120 DEL 31-900CT 109.81 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 07/19/2018 700-0000-4120 DEL 31-900CT 219.62 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 08/02/2018 101-1170-4140 DEL 19257603 Evaporative Emi (B) 25.71 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 08/02/2018 101-1170-4140 DEL 20907779 Vapor Canister (SLP) 120.71 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 812.13 FARBER YURI 07/12/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 328.74 FARBER YURI 328.74 FARRELL ADAM 07/19/2018 101-1550-4240 Boots 147.89 FARRELL ADAM 147.89 Gasterland Hans Willem 08/02/2018 101-1620-4300 Summer Concert Series - The legendary percolators 500.00 Gasterland Hans Willem 500.00 GERHARDT TODD 07/12/2018 101-1120-4370 Flight to ICMA Conf 2018 236.40 GERHARDT TODD 236.40 GESKE GREGG 08/02/2018 101-1220-4290 Beans for Black Hat, Hydrants 2 Nozzles class 59.66 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 6 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount GESKE GREGG 59.66 GIBRALTAR TITLE AGENCY LLC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 35.67 GIBRALTAR TITLE AGENCY LLC 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 61.52 GIBRALTAR TITLE AGENCY LLC 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.99 GIBRALTAR TITLE AGENCY LLC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.01 GIBRALTAR TITLE AGENCY LLC 100.19 GLOBAL CLOSING & TITLE SERVICES 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.67 GLOBAL CLOSING & TITLE SERVICES 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 20.08 GLOBAL CLOSING & TITLE SERVICES 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.72 GLOBAL CLOSING & TITLE SERVICES 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.74 GLOBAL CLOSING & TITLE SERVICES 34.21 GONYEA HOMES INC 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 6.05 GONYEA HOMES INC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.91 GONYEA HOMES INC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.19 GONYEA HOMES INC 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.07 GONYEA HOMES INC 11.22 GovConnection, Inc.07/05/2018 101-1160-4530 IP Camera, Axis P3225-LV 551.03 GovConnection, Inc. 551.03 GRAYBAR 07/12/2018 101-1350-4120 Hubbell Lighting 1,463.46 GRAYBAR 1,463.46 GREAT LAKES COCA-COLA DISTRIBUTION LLC07/05/2018 101-1540-4130 Pop, Fruit drinks, Water, Sports drinks 543.54 GREAT LAKES COCA-COLA DISTRIBUTION LLC07/19/2018 101-1540-4130 Pop, Sports drinks, Fruit/Veggie drinks, Water 376.05 GREAT LAKES COCA-COLA DISTRIBUTION LLC08/02/2018 101-1540-4130 Pop, Water, Sport drinks, Fruit/Veggie drinks 361.05 GREAT LAKES COCA-COLA DISTRIBUTION LLC 1,280.64 GYM WORKS INC 08/02/2018 101-1530-4530 July Preventative Maintenance 400.00 GYM WORKS INC 400.00 Hach Company 07/05/2018 700-7019-4120 ALKALINE CYANIDE RGT, PAN IND SOLN 114.70 Hach Company 07/12/2018 700-7019-4150 Instrument Tubing Set, CA610 96.85 Hach Company 211.55 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1120-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 69.45 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1130-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 47.83 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1160-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 24.74 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1250-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 106.89 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1310-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 80.37 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1320-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 112.04 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1370-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 44.79 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1520-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 35.08 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1530-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 14.05 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 7 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1560-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 11.58 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1600-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 22.34 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1700-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 5.59 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1550-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 88.54 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1420-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 74.71 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1430-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 4.67 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 210-0000-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 17.84 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 720-7201-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 5.51 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 720-7202-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 5.51 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1170-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 12.37 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 101-1220-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 42.30 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 701-0000-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 79.49 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 700-0000-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 105.30 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 07/12/2018 720-0000-4040 July 2018 insurance premium 37.48 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 1,048.47 Hartman Companies 07/19/2018 720-7202-4300 North Manor Dr plantings 6,943.00 Hartman Companies 6,943.00 Haynes Tricia 07/26/2018 101-1620-4300 Summer Concert Series Tricia & the Toonies 500.00 Haynes Tricia 500.00 HERMAN CHAD 07/12/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.85 HERMAN CHAD 07/12/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.50 HERMAN CHAD 07/12/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.17 HERMAN CHAD 07/12/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.56 HERMAN CHAD 9.08 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 07/05/2018 101-0000-2009 7/6/2018 ID #304303 1,114.58 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 07/05/2018 210-0000-2009 7/6/2018 ID #304303 25.00 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 07/05/2018 700-0000-2009 7/6/2018 ID #304303 152.51 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 07/05/2018 701-0000-2009 7/6/2018 ID #304303 152.48 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 07/05/2018 720-0000-2009 7/6/2018 ID #304303 1.26 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 07/19/2018 101-0000-2009 7/20/2018 ID #304303 1,114.58 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 07/19/2018 210-0000-2009 7/20/2018 ID #304303 25.00 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 07/19/2018 700-0000-2009 7/20/2018 ID #304303 152.49 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 07/19/2018 701-0000-2009 7/20/2018 ID #304303 152.50 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 07/19/2018 720-0000-2009 7/20/2018 ID #304303 1.26 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/02/2018 101-0000-2009 08/03/2018 #304303 1,114.58 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/02/2018 210-0000-2009 08/03/2018 #304303 25.00 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/02/2018 700-0000-2009 08/03/2018 #304303 152.49 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/02/2018 701-0000-2009 08/03/2018 #304303 152.50 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 08/02/2018 720-0000-2009 08/03/2018 #304303 1.26 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 4,337.49 Iron River Construction 08/02/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 1481 Lake Susan Hills Drive 250.00 Iron River Construction 250.00 Irrigation Doctor Inc 08/02/2018 101-0000-2033 Overpayment - refund / Permit# 2018-02035 60.13 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 8 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount Irrigation Doctor Inc 60.13 IUOE Local #49 07/05/2018 101-0000-2004 PR Batch 00406.07.2018 Local 49 dues 444.19 IUOE Local #49 07/05/2018 700-0000-2004 PR Batch 00406.07.2018 Local 49 dues 195.51 IUOE Local #49 07/05/2018 701-0000-2004 PR Batch 00406.07.2018 Local 49 dues 80.89 IUOE Local #49 07/05/2018 101-0000-2004 PR Batch 00406.07.2018 Local 49 dues 34.50 IUOE Local #49 08/02/2018 101-0000-2004 PR Batch 00403.08.2018 Local 49 dues 448.02 IUOE Local #49 08/02/2018 700-0000-2004 PR Batch 00403.08.2018 Local 49 dues 203.89 IUOE Local #49 08/02/2018 701-0000-2004 PR Batch 00403.08.2018 Local 49 dues 83.09 IUOE Local #49 08/02/2018 101-0000-2004 PR Batch 00403.08.2018 Local 49 dues 35.00 IUOE Local #49 1,525.09 Jaguar Communications Inc 07/12/2018 700-7043-4310 July 2018 phone charges 52.10 Jaguar Communications Inc 52.10 Johnson Jerry 07/12/2018 101-1560-3637 Refund 2004620.002 53.00 Johnson Jerry 53.00 K2 Bath Design 07/19/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 10017 Trails End Road 500.00 K2 Bath Design 500.00 KAPAUN MARILYN-PAT 07/12/2018 101-1560-3637 Refund 2004621.002 53.00 KAPAUN MARILYN-PAT 53.00 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 07/05/2018 300-0000-4300 Frontier Building Redevelopment 754.00 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 07/26/2018 300-0000-4300 Frontier Building Redevelopment 156.00 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 08/02/2018 601-0000-4300 Franchise Fees - through June 2018 43.80 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 953.80 Klava Jennifer 07/26/2018 815-8228-2024 Refund Barricade Escrow - 8697 Stonefield Lane 100.00 Klava Jennifer 100.00 KNOBLAUCH BUILDERS LLC 07/26/2018 815-8226-2024 As-Built Escrow - 340 Preserve Court 2,500.00 KNOBLAUCH BUILDERS LLC 2,500.00 KODIAK CUSTOM LETTERING 07/26/2018 101-1220-4240 Chan Fire logo, Reflective logo 685.47 KODIAK CUSTOM LETTERING 07/26/2018 101-1220-4300 Names sewn on hats 24.00 KODIAK CUSTOM LETTERING 709.47 KROISS DEVELOPMENT INC 07/19/2018 815-8203-2024 Grading Escrow-6653,6671,6681 Amberwood 750.00 KROISS DEVELOPMENT INC 750.00 LANGSETH ALAN 07/12/2018 101-1766-4300 Adult Softball Umpire - 12 Games 294.00 LANGSETH ALAN 294.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 9 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount LAPPEN BILL 08/02/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 140 South Shore Ct 250.00 LAPPEN BILL 250.00 Lawson Products, Inc.07/12/2018 101-1320-4120 Maintenance Paint 62.56 Lawson Products, Inc.08/02/2018 101-1320-4120 Maintenance Paint 9.46 Lawson Products, Inc.08/02/2018 101-1320-4120 Maintenance Paint 120.24 Lawson Products, Inc. 192.26 Lebens Denise 08/02/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 8170 Hidden Ct 250.00 Lebens Denise 250.00 LIBERTY TITLE INC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 31.01 LIBERTY TITLE INC 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 45.81 LIBERTY TITLE INC 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.01 LIBERTY TITLE INC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.35 LIBERTY TITLE INC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 28.07 LIBERTY TITLE INC 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 45.31 LIBERTY TITLE INC 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 18.68 LIBERTY TITLE INC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.30 LIBERTY TITLE INC 194.54 MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 07/19/2018 101-1140-4302 Labor Relations Services - June 2018 45.00 MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 45.00 Mathews Katie 07/19/2018 101-0000-1027 Start Up Change - Penny Carnival 250.00 Mathews Katie 250.00 MAUND ENTERTAINMENT INC 07/26/2018 101-1618-4300 Penny Carnival Face Painters 360.00 MAUND ENTERTAINMENT INC 360.00 McCauley Steve 07/05/2018 101-1320-4150 Double mailbox stand accident - reimbursement 837.02 McCauley Steve 837.02 McFarland David 07/12/2018 815-8202-2024 Refund Erosion Escrow - 6321 Murray Hill Road 250.00 McFarland David 250.00 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 07/12/2018 701-0000-4509 Waste Water Services - August 2018 152,094.89 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 152,094.89 Metropolitan Plumbing 07/05/2018 101-0000-2033 Overpayment - refund permit# 2018-01694 150.25 Metropolitan Plumbing 150.25 MEUWISSEN KIM 08/02/2018 101-1180-4370 Election travel 45.47 MEUWISSEN KIM 45.47 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 10 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount Mid America Meter Inc 07/12/2018 700-0000-4550 Sensus/Rockwell-Parts W3500 register 362.00 Mid America Meter Inc 362.00 MINNESOTA TITLE 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 7.91 MINNESOTA TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.40 MINNESOTA TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.52 MINNESOTA TITLE 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 31.50 MINNESOTA TITLE 60.33 Minnesota UC Fund 07/19/2018 101-1320-4060 2nd quarter unemployment 1,661.88 Minnesota UC Fund 07/19/2018 700-0000-4060 2nd quarter unemployment 99.98 Minnesota UC Fund 07/19/2018 701-0000-4060 2nd quarter unemployment 99.98 Minnesota UC Fund 1,861.84 MN FIRE SERVICE CERTIFICATION BOARD 07/12/2018 101-1220-4300 6/6/18 (7) Fire Appartus Operator Certification Exam 980.00 MN FIRE SERVICE CERTIFICATION BOARD 07/19/2018 101-1220-4300 6/28 Fire Appartus Operator Certification Exam - Geske 140.00 MN FIRE SERVICE CERTIFICATION BOARD 1,120.00 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 07/05/2018 101-0000-2011 PR Batch 00406.07.2018 NCPERS-Life Insurance 76.01 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2011 PR Batch 00406.07.2018 NCPERS-Life Insurance 9.57 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 07/05/2018 701-0000-2011 PR Batch 00406.07.2018 NCPERS-Life Insurance 9.62 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 07/05/2018 720-0000-2011 PR Batch 00406.07.2018 NCPERS-Life Insurance 16.80 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 08/02/2018 101-0000-2011 PR Batch 00403.08.2018 NCPERS-Life Insurance 60.01 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 08/02/2018 700-0000-2011 PR Batch 00403.08.2018 NCPERS-Life Insurance 9.63 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 08/02/2018 701-0000-2011 PR Batch 00403.08.2018 NCPERS-Life Insurance 9.56 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 08/02/2018 720-0000-2011 PR Batch 00403.08.2018 NCPERS-Life Insurance 16.80 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 208.00 MN TRUCKING ASSOCIATION 07/12/2018 101-1320-4120 Simplified Driver's Vehicle Inspection Report 91.25 MN TRUCKING ASSOCIATION 07/12/2018 101-1550-4120 Simplified Driver's Vehicle Inspection Report 91.25 MN TRUCKING ASSOCIATION 07/12/2018 700-0000-4120 Simplified Driver's Vehicle Inspection Report 91.25 MN TRUCKING ASSOCIATION 273.75 MOTOROLA 07/05/2018 400-4127-4705 APX6500 Mid Power Mobile, Single System Dig 3,823.50 MOTOROLA 3,823.50 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 07/05/2018 101-1550-4120 O-Ring, Washers, Belts, Casters, Bearing, Seal, Latch 477.86 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 07/19/2018 101-1550-4120 Cap-Diesel Fuel, Sensor-Level Coolant 494.18 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 07/19/2018 101-1550-4120 Cap-Diesel Fuel, Sensor-Level Coolant 96.97 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 07/19/2018 101-1550-4120 Cap-Diesel Fuel, Sensor-Level Coolant, Pulley-Idler 67.25 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1,136.26 MULCARE CONTRACTING LLC 07/12/2018 400-4008-4706 Neighborhood Picnic Shelters 11,000.00 MULCARE CONTRACTING LLC 11,000.00 Muller Dana 07/19/2018 815-8203-2024 Grading Escrow - 8850 Sunset Trail 750.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 11 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount Muller Dana 750.00 NAAB JESSE & ANDREA 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.98 NAAB JESSE & ANDREA 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 35.01 NAAB JESSE & ANDREA 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 54.40 NAAB JESSE & ANDREA 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 11.22 NAAB JESSE & ANDREA 102.61 NEWMAN SIGNS INC 08/02/2018 101-1320-4560 Aldrich Ln, Aldrich Dr, Stonegate Rd/POST STD PUNCH 200.79 NEWMAN SIGNS INC 200.79 NHA Heating & Air Conditioning Inc 07/12/2018 700-0000-4530 Replaced relay on pre-charge circuit 247.50 NHA Heating & Air Conditioning Inc 247.50 Northern Winds Concert Band 07/26/2018 101-1620-4300 Summer Concert Series Northern Winds Concert 200.00 Northern Winds Concert Band 200.00 OLSEN COMPANIES 07/12/2018 700-0000-4530 Weld-On Excavator Hook 304.00 OLSEN COMPANIES 304.00 PINK CONSTRUCTION 07/12/2018 815-8202-2024 Refund Erosion escrow - 8577 Chan Hills Dr 250.00 PINK CONSTRUCTION 07/12/2018 815-8202-2024 Refund Erosion escrow - 1060 Lyman Ct 250.00 PINK CONSTRUCTION 500.00 POSTMASTER 07/19/2018 101-1120-4330 1st Class presort - permit 225.00 POSTMASTER 07/31/2018 700-0000-4330 July Utility Statements 628.61 POSTMASTER 07/31/2018 701-0000-4330 July Utility Statements 628.60 POSTMASTER 1,482.21 PRECISE MRM LLC 07/12/2018 101-1320-4310 pooled data plan/network access fee 149.01 PRECISE MRM LLC 149.01 PREVES DAVID & PATRICIA 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 31.28 PREVES DAVID & PATRICIA 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.45 PREVES DAVID & PATRICIA 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.37 PREVES DAVID & PATRICIA 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 18.26 PREVES DAVID & PATRICIA 65.36 Pyrotechnic Display, Inc.07/12/2018 101-1613-4300 Fireworks Display 23,000.00 Pyrotechnic Display, Inc. 23,000.00 Randy's Sanitation Inc 07/19/2018 720-7202-4130 July 4th recycling/organics 755.00 Randy's Sanitation Inc 755.00 Reherman Sharon 07/12/2018 815-8202-2024 Refund Erosion escrow - 10136 Trails End 250.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 12 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount Reherman Sharon 250.00 RESULTS TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.78 RESULTS TITLE 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 22.97 RESULTS TITLE 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.72 RESULTS TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.01 RESULTS TITLE 42.48 RHINO BOBCAT AND LANDSCAPE SERVICES07/26/2018 720-0000-4300 7640 South Shore Dr 1,684.00 RHINO BOBCAT AND LANDSCAPE SERVICES 1,684.00 Ruhland M.A. or P.A.07/19/2018 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 6275 Yosemite 250.00 Ruhland M.A. or P.A. 250.00 Santo Teresa C 08/02/2018 101-1620-4300 Summer Concert Series The Zingrays 200.00 Santo Teresa C 200.00 SCOTT COUNTY TREASURER 07/12/2018 101-1220-4370 5/21/18 Class A Burn Prop 325.00 SCOTT COUNTY TREASURER 325.00 SCOTT NELSON COACHING INC 07/12/2018 101-1220-4370 leadership team coaching w/officers 375.00 SCOTT NELSON COACHING INC 375.00 Senja Inc 08/02/2018 101-1539-4300 Tai Chi instruction 230.40 Senja Inc 230.40 SENNES DONALD 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.10 SENNES DONALD 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.49 SENNES DONALD 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.05 SENNES DONALD 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.54 SENNES DONALD 9.18 SETON 07/12/2018 101-1220-4290 Duraguard prop ID tags 178.40 SETON 178.40 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 07/12/2018 101-1320-4120 Throat Seal 10.80 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/02/2018 101-1320-4120 XHD RAC TIP GUARD, HD TIP 671 207.96 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 08/02/2018 101-1320-4120 QP EASYOUTFLTR244067 13.72 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 232.48 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 07/12/2018 101-1370-4510 Screws 18.11 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 18.11 Shryock Stephanie 08/02/2018 101-1541-3634 Picnic Refund 240.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 13 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount Shryock Stephanie 240.00 SIENA TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 34.31 SIENA TITLE 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 57.89 SIENA TITLE 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.99 SIENA TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.47 SIENA TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.49 SIENA TITLE 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.15 SIENA TITLE 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.86 SIENA TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.15 SIENA TITLE 116.31 SIGNSOURCE 07/05/2018 101-1220-4140 Vinyl text with Titles for Glass Windows on Chevy Tahoe Trucks 46.50 SIGNSOURCE 46.50 SIR LINES-A-LOT 07/12/2018 420-0000-4751 2018 Maintenance Striping 14,051.52 SIR LINES-A-LOT 08/02/2018 101-1550-4300 lot striping @ Power Hill Park 390.00 SIR LINES-A-LOT 14,441.52 Smith David 08/02/2018 101-1620-4300 Summer Concert Series Blue Groove Bluegrass 500.00 Smith David 500.00 Southwest Rental & Sales 08/02/2018 101-1320-4410 Concrete Vibrator 1 1/2" x 8' 45.57 Southwest Rental & Sales 45.57 Southwest Suburban Publishing 07/19/2018 101-1110-4340 printing/advertising 89.60 Southwest Suburban Publishing 07/19/2018 101-1310-4340 printing/advertising 51.20 Southwest Suburban Publishing 07/19/2018 101-1410-4340 printing/advertising 28.80 Southwest Suburban Publishing 07/19/2018 101-1600-4340 printing/advertising 476.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing 07/19/2018 101-1613-4340 printing/advertising 3,363.20 Southwest Suburban Publishing 4,008.80 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 07/12/2018 101-1600-4240 Com. Polos 572.05 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 07/12/2018 101-1613-4130 4th of July T-shirts 3,489.75 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 07/19/2018 101-1613-4300 Freight for good on inv# 193219, 4th of July t-shirts 66.74 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 08/02/2018 101-1801-4240 Youth Tees 356.00 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 08/02/2018 101-1806-4240 Youth Tees 643.16 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 08/02/2018 101-1807-4240 Youth Tees 1,189.00 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 6,316.70 Stephen Longman Builders Inc 07/12/2018 815-8202-2024 Refund Erosion escrow - 10124 Trails End Road 2,600.00 Stephen Longman Builders Inc 2,600.00 Superior Turf Services Inc.07/12/2018 101-1550-4150 Glyphosate T&O 41% 2x2.5 gal QP 236.69 Superior Turf Services Inc. 236.69 Taylor Electric Company, LLC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4565 Repair street lighting along 79th St/ Market & Great Plains 2,710.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 14 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount Taylor Electric Company, LLC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4565 Replace 4 countdown pedestrian indications at signal system 2,160.00 Taylor Electric Company, LLC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4565 Replace wiring system between 2 sets of street light poles 2,980.00 Taylor Electric Company, LLC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4565 Replace broken EVP Detector on signal system 480.00 Taylor Electric Company, LLC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4565 Replace 2 runs of wire between poles, bad contactor, 60 Amp fuse 2,730.00 Taylor Electric Company, LLC 11,060.00 TITLE ONE INC 07/19/2018 700-0000-2020 Utility Refund - 948 Kimberly Lane 14.52 TITLE ONE INC 07/19/2018 701-0000-2020 Utility Refund - 948 Kimberly Lane 29.73 TITLE ONE INC 07/19/2018 720-0000-2020 Utility Refund - 948 Kimberly Lane 1.81 TITLE ONE INC 46.06 TITLESMART INC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.66 TITLESMART INC 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.00 TITLESMART INC 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.00 TITLESMART INC 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.53 TITLESMART INC 9.19 TRADEMARK TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 9.72 TRADEMARK TITLE 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 27.20 TRADEMARK TITLE 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 11.91 TRADEMARK TITLE 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.10 TRADEMARK TITLE 50.93 TRAVELERS 07/26/2018 700-7050-4300 Premium for Policy# 1J374225-660, 7/1/18--9/4/18 1,752.00 TRAVELERS 1,752.00 Triethart DeeAnn 07/19/2018 101-1250-4130 Supplies - Coffee Creamer 8.99 Triethart DeeAnn 8.99 TWIN CITY HARDWARE 07/05/2018 700-7043-4150 Opperating Key/Labor Key Cut & Stamp Multi-Line 51.69 TWIN CITY HARDWARE 51.69 ULTIMATE MARTIAL ARTS INC.07/05/2018 101-1538-4300 Chanhassen Little Tigers Camp 172.80 ULTIMATE MARTIAL ARTS INC. 172.80 United Rentals (North America), Inc.07/05/2018 720-7025-4751 Pump for Lake Lucy Ln and Lake Lucy Rd 2,218.91 United Rentals (North America), Inc. 2,218.91 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 07/12/2018 101-1170-4510 Ballast 262.20 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 262.20 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 07/05/2018 101-1170-4350 garbage service 173.94 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 07/05/2018 101-1220-4350 garbage service 67.89 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 07/05/2018 101-1190-4350 garbage service 212.18 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 07/05/2018 101-1220-4350 garbage service 26.25 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 07/12/2018 101-1370-4350 garbage service - July 2018 93.23 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 07/12/2018 700-0000-4350 garbage service - July 2018 11.66 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 15 of 16 Name Check D Account Description Amount Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 07/12/2018 701-0000-4350 garbage service - July 2018 11.66 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 07/12/2018 101-1550-4350 garbage service - July 2018 388.00 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 07/26/2018 101-1613-4410 4th of July Celebration Garbage Service 340.70 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 07/26/2018 101-1613-4410 4th of July Celebration Garbage Service 1,054.97 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 2,380.48 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.11 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.89 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.58 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.45 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 6.23 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.10 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 7.00 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 6.97 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 32.62 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 52.73 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.97 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.29 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 127.94 WIDMER CONSTRUCTION 07/12/2018 720-7025-4751 Minnewashta Manor Wetland Enhancement 12,533.73 WIDMER CONSTRUCTION 12,533.73 Wilmot Todd 07/05/2018 101-1613-3630 Refund Adult Fishing Contest 20.00 Wilmot Todd 20.00 WILSON'S NURSERY INC 08/02/2018 720-7202-4300 2018 Blvd plantings 7,868.00 WILSON'S NURSERY INC 7,868.00 WING RICHARD 07/19/2018 101-1220-4350 Station 2 Cleaner - June 2018 100.00 WING RICHARD 100.00 ZAY RICHARD & ANGELA 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 48.39 ZAY RICHARD & ANGELA 07/05/2018 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 72.96 ZAY RICHARD & ANGELA 07/05/2018 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.22 ZAY RICHARD & ANGELA 07/05/2018 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.33 ZAY RICHARD & ANGELA 136.90 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY 08/02/2018 101-1320-4120 TNT 5GL, O-SHINE 5GL, TKO HC 4-1GL 177.39 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY 08/02/2018 101-1550-4120 TNT 5GL, O-SHINE 5GL, TKO HC 4-1GL 177.39 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY 08/02/2018 101-1220-4120 TNT 5GL, O-SHINE 5GL, TKO HC 4-1GL 177.39 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY 08/02/2018 701-0000-4120 TNT 5GL, O-SHINE 5GL, TKO HC 4-1GL 177.38 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY 709.55 433,999.51 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (08/03/2018 - 8:58 AM)Page 16 of 16 Accounts Payable Check Detail-ACH User: dwashburn Printed: 08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM Name Check D Account Description Amount ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC 07/05/2018 101-1170-4300 Monthly service 125.00 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL INC 125.00 ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC 07/26/2018 101-1220-4530 Quarterly Compressor Air Quality Test 130.00 ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC 130.00 Al-Hilwani Juli 07/26/2018 101-1533-4300 Personal Training 97.50 Al-Hilwani Juli 08/02/2018 101-1533-4300 Personal Training 382.50 Al-Hilwani Juli 480.00 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1170-4110 Hand Sanitizer 52.70 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1160-4530 Apple charger and cables, Anker Power core battery pack 46.98 Amazon 07/16/2018 720-0000-4120 Lowrance Hook 2-7 Inland Maps 497.97 Amazon 07/16/2018 400-4126-4703 Fargo DTC1250e badge printer 999.00 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1170-4110 Foam Board White, 30x40 inches, 10 sheet pack 64.99 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1170-4110 Round labels 19.99 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1613-4130 4th of July supplies - Grocery tote bag 54.00 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1616-4130 Playground - Stomp Rockets Jr Glow 32.20 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1220-4531 Minitor V 5 Pager Battery Belt Clip 179.90 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1220-4531 Minitor V 5 Pager Battey 185.80 Amazon 07/16/2018 400-4126-4703 Cable management bracket 54.75 Amazon 07/16/2018 400-4126-4703 Cat6 Patch Cables 92.25 Amazon 07/16/2018 400-4126-4703 Cat6 Patch Cables 23.60 Amazon 07/16/2018 400-4126-4703 Cat6 Patch Cables 25.57 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1530-4120 Barbell Deluxe Cambered Pro Style LAT Bar 42.41 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1530-4130 Tennis Grips 16.08 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1800-4130 Cones for Rec Sports 47.97 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1530-4130 Pickleballs 22.52 Amazon 07/16/2018 101-1530-4120 Bosu Balance Trainer for Fitness Center 107.36 Amazon 07/16/2018 700-0000-4150 Security Seals 192.00 Amazon 07/16/2018 700-0000-4530 Metal Mobile CPU Stand 61.88 Amazon 07/16/2018 700-0000-4550 Adhesive Tape, Splicing Kit 90.66 Amazon 2,910.58 American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus08/02/2018 101-0000-2008 July 2018 premium 39.78 American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus 39.78 American Legion 07/16/2018 101-1560-4300 700.00 American Legion 700.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 1 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 07/26/2018 101-1220-4531 G5 Dual Band VHF - Pager is locked on a screen 35.00 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 35.00 Applied Ecological Services Inc 07/12/2018 720-7202-4300 14-0988 The Preserve Management - Prairie Maintenance 517.00 Applied Ecological Services Inc 517.00 BATTERIES PLUS 07/19/2018 101-1190-4510 Battery 19.99 Batteries Plus 07/16/2018 101-1160-4530 (24) 12V Dura 12-5F2 407.76 Batteries Plus 427.75 BENSON KAYE L 07/05/2018 101-1539-4300 Fit for Life Instructor 560.00 BENSON KAYE L 560.00 Best Buy 07/16/2018 101-1600-4130 Headphone extension 13.96 Best Buy 13.96 Blackhawk Supply 07/16/2018 700-7019-4150 Damper Actuator 142.18 Blackhawk Supply 142.18 Boyer Truck Parts 07/19/2018 101-1320-4140 CAM SPRING 123.96 Boyer Truck Parts 07/19/2018 101-1320-4140 Pump GP WT 413.04 Boyer Truck Parts 08/02/2018 101-1320-4140 KYS/1090-09650-01 KIT REPAP 376.26 Boyer Truck Parts 08/02/2018 101-1320-4140 STUD TAPER, LOCKS, BOLTS, GASKETS 53.02 Boyer Truck Parts 08/02/2018 101-1320-4140 STUD TAPER, LOCKS, BOLTS, GASKETS 172.66 Boyer Truck Parts 08/02/2018 101-1320-4140 GASKETS, SEALS, RINGS 19.48 Boyer Truck Parts 1,158.42 BROCK WHITE CO LLC 07/12/2018 420-0000-4751 Detack Crafco 5 Gal 1,400.34 BROCK WHITE CO LLC 1,400.34 Buffalo Wild Wings 07/16/2018 101-1220-4370 Meals 87.11 Buffalo Wild Wings 87.11 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 07/19/2018 101-1140-4302 Legal Services 13,321.62 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 13,321.62 CAMPION BARROW & ASSOCIATES 07/12/2018 101-1220-4300 Fire service test 6/13/18 - Matthew Skogen 425.00 CAMPION BARROW & ASSOCIATES 425.00 Carver County 07/19/2018 101-1160-4320 CarverLink internet/fiber 537.50 Carver County 07/19/2018 700-7043-4310 Dark Fiber Service 350.00 Carver County 07/26/2018 101-1210-4300 2nd Quarter 2018 overtime - 4/2/18-7/8/18 22,736.32 Carver County 23,623.82 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 07/12/2018 101-1220-4320 May 2018 136.34 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 2 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 07/12/2018 101-1350-4320 May 2018 3,560.19 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 07/12/2018 101-1540-4320 May 2018 400.33 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 07/12/2018 101-1550-4320 May 2018 426.19 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 07/12/2018 101-1600-4320 May 2018 32.69 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 07/12/2018 700-0000-4320 May 2018 125.10 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 07/12/2018 700-7019-4320 May 2018 1,991.03 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 07/12/2018 701-0000-4320 May 2018 1,452.90 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 8,124.77 CDW Government 07/16/2018 400-4126-4703 Wall mount for PC 29.52 CDW Government 07/16/2018 400-4126-4703 Dell All in One 923.95 CDW Government 953.47 Cemstone 07/16/2018 701-0000-4530 Form Tube 20 inch Heavy Wall 50.16 Cemstone 50.16 Choice, Inc.07/12/2018 101-1220-4350 cleaning 5/14-6/8 200.53 Choice, Inc. 200.53 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 08/02/2018 101-0000-2008 July premium 60.72 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 08/02/2018 700-0000-2008 July premium 70.68 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 08/02/2018 701-0000-2008 July premium 70.68 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 202.08 CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP 07/05/2018 101-1320-4120 Peel-Away Aerosol 227.94 CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP 227.94 CORPORATE MECHANICAL 07/05/2018 101-1170-4530 Checked out cooling unit 670.00 CORPORATE MECHANICAL 07/26/2018 101-0000-2033 Overpayment on permit# 2018-01995 44.40 CORPORATE MECHANICAL 714.40 Costco Wholesale 07/16/2018 101-1110-4370 CC meeting supplies - Plates, Napkins, Forks 36.75 Costco Wholesale 07/16/2018 101-1170-4110 Kleenex, Coffee, Office supplies 48.06 Costco Wholesale 07/16/2018 101-1539-4130 Granola bars, bananas 18.35 Costco Wholesale 103.16 Crown Awards 07/16/2018 101-1539-4130 Tourney Medals 49.47 Crown Awards 49.47 Crystal Infosystems LLC 07/12/2018 101-1170-4110 Ink, HP 971XL Yellow 103.00 Crystal Infosystems LLC 07/12/2018 101-1170-4110 Ink, HP 951/950 Yellow, Magenta, Cyan, Black 112.53 Crystal Infosystems LLC 08/02/2018 101-1170-4110 HP Toner 4250 308.64 Crystal Infosystems LLC 524.17 Cub Foods 07/16/2018 101-1620-4130 Granola, Ice, Juice, Pop 36.71 Cub Foods 07/16/2018 101-1600-4130 Napkins, Water, Plates, Forks 26.82 Cub Foods 07/16/2018 101-1560-4130 Lemon, Ice Cream, Napkins, Plates 20.80 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 3 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount Cub Foods 07/16/2018 101-1560-4130 Chips, Ice 17.86 Cub Foods 07/16/2018 101-1560-4130 Crossiants 3.99 Cub Foods 07/16/2018 101-1170-4110 Tissues 3.21 Cub Foods 07/16/2018 101-1540-4130 Buns, Ketchup, Chips, Jalapenos 84.59 Cub Foods 07/16/2018 101-1600-4130 Water, Gatorade - Memorial Day ceremony 22.45 Cub Foods 216.43 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC.07/19/2018 101-1170-4510 Plush Tuff Mat Smoke 20.48 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC.08/02/2018 101-1370-4350 Blade Squeegee, Buffer floor pad 70.44 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC.08/02/2018 700-0000-4350 Blade Squeegee, Buffer floor pad 8.81 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC.08/02/2018 701-0000-4350 Blade Squeegee, Buffer floor pad 8.80 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC. 108.53 DAMON FARBER ASSOCIATES 07/05/2018 410-0000-4300 18-159 Chanhassen Depot Improvements 488.50 DAMON FARBER ASSOCIATES 488.50 Danner 07/16/2018 101-1550-4240 Boots 280.00 Danner 280.00 Davanni's 07/16/2018 101-1110-4370 CC Dinner 120.51 Davanni's 120.51 Delta Airlines 07/16/2018 101-1120-4370 ICMA Conference flight 278.40 Delta Airlines 278.40 Delta Dental 07/19/2018 101-0000-2013 dental insurance - Aug 1,828.85 Delta Dental 07/19/2018 101-0000-2013 dental insurance - Aug cobra 30.20 Delta Dental 07/19/2018 700-0000-2013 dental insurance - Aug 279.10 Delta Dental 07/19/2018 701-0000-2013 dental insurance - Aug 248.91 Delta Dental 07/19/2018 720-0000-2013 dental insurance - Aug 159.84 Delta Dental 2,546.90 DISPLAY SALES COMPANY 07/12/2018 101-1550-4120 US Flag, MN Flag 594.00 DISPLAY SALES COMPANY 07/26/2018 101-1550-4120 City of Chanhassen flag, set up fee 380.00 DISPLAY SALES COMPANY 974.00 Downtown Development Center 07/16/2018 101-1120-4210 Small Town Economic Development book 47.45 Downtown Development Center 47.45 DSS Achievement Products 07/16/2018 101-1616-4130 Playground supplies-Chalk 111.30 DSS Achievement Products 111.30 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT. INC 07/26/2018 101-1220-4140 Warning Serious Injury Decal 97.50 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT. INC 97.50 Emergency Response Solutions 07/26/2018 101-1220-4530 Installed new control module, batteries 70.97 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 4 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount Emergency Response Solutions 08/02/2018 101-1220-4530 C size Battery, Flow test 215.16 Emergency Response Solutions 286.13 Engel Water Testing Inc 07/19/2018 700-0000-4300 26 water samples collected - June 2018 520.00 Engel Water Testing Inc 520.00 FASTENAL COMPANY 07/05/2018 101-1550-4120 HCS 1/2-13x9.5 Z5 7.77 FASTENAL COMPANY 07/19/2018 700-0000-4552 T1CutWhl, Insect Repellnt 47.42 FASTENAL COMPANY 55.19 Ferguson Waterworks #2516 07/12/2018 700-0000-4250 5/8x3/4 T10 MTR ECDR USG INSIDE 7,022.26 Ferguson Waterworks #2516 08/02/2018 700-0000-4150 14X1/8X20MM DI ABRA BLD 149.50 Ferguson Waterworks #2516 7,171.76 Fidelity Security Life 07/26/2018 101-0000-2007 vision insurance - August 2018 148.49 Fidelity Security Life 07/26/2018 700-0000-2007 vision insurance - August 2018 23.88 Fidelity Security Life 07/26/2018 701-0000-2007 vision insurance - August 2018 17.94 Fidelity Security Life 07/26/2018 720-0000-2007 vision insurance - August 2018 2.69 Fidelity Security Life 193.00 Fire Catt, LLC 07/05/2018 101-1220-4530 Fire hose testing/Ground ladder testing 3,592.00 Fire Catt, LLC 3,592.00 GENERAL PARTS LLC 08/02/2018 101-1170-4530 Adjustment to temp control on fridge 320.00 GENERAL PARTS LLC 320.00 Gertens 07/16/2018 400-4118-4706 Plants/Flowers 896.00 Gertens 07/16/2018 400-4118-4706 Plants/Flowers 475.00 Gertens 07/16/2018 400-4118-4706 Plants/Flowers 492.00 Gertens 07/16/2018 400-4118-4706 Plants/Flowers 749.00 Gertens 2,612.00 GL Sports Camps, LLC 07/05/2018 101-1730-3636 Skyhawks Tennis/Tennis Camp 457.00 GL Sports Camps, LLC 457.00 GMH ASPHALT CORP 07/12/2018 601-6032-4751 Street Reconstruction Proj 16-01 Minnewashta Manor 190,702.02 GMH ASPHALT CORP 190,702.02 Goodwill 07/16/2018 701-0000-4240 Shirt, Jeans 6.99 Goodwill 07/16/2018 700-0000-4240 Shirt, Jeans 6.99 Goodwill 13.98 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 07/12/2018 400-0000-4300 FTP Tickets 1,171.80 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 1,171.80 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 5 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount Guthrie Theater 07/16/2018 101-1560-4300 Show-West Side Story 1,500.00 Guthrie Theater 07/16/2018 101-1560-4300 Show-West Side Story 589.00 Guthrie Theater 2,089.00 Hach Company 07/16/2018 700-7019-4150 Alkaline Cyanide Reagent 90.28 Hach Company 90.28 Hallock Company 07/16/2018 701-0000-4150 3-phase Volt.Mon DIN RAIL MOUNTABLE 80.15 Hallock Company 80.15 HAWKINS CHEMICAL 07/12/2018 700-7019-4160 Chlorine Cylinder 80.00 HAWKINS CHEMICAL 07/12/2018 700-7019-4160 Chlorine Cylinder 130.00 HAWKINS CHEMICAL 08/02/2018 700-7019-4160 Azone 5,204.89 HAWKINS CHEMICAL 5,414.89 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 07/12/2018 101-1420-4300 Chanhassen DT Vision Update - June 2018 1,297.08 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 1,297.08 Holiday Stationstore 07/16/2018 101-1600-4130 Ice 16.47 Holiday Stationstore 16.47 Home Depot 07/16/2018 700-0000-4150 7" Wire Strip, Elec Tape 21.10 Home Depot 07/16/2018 101-1550-4150 D-Handle Hand Truck, Home Sod 118.98 Home Depot 07/16/2018 101-1160-4150 5E keystone jacks 31.93 Home Depot 07/16/2018 101-1160-4150 Cat 5E keystone jacks 44.71 Home Depot 07/16/2018 101-1550-4150 Harmony Home Sod 449.69 Home Depot 07/16/2018 101-1220-4120 Valves 31.43 Home Depot 07/16/2018 101-1220-4370 Drywall Screws, Whitewood Studs, Drywall 85.34 Home Depot 07/16/2018 700-0000-4530 Conduit nipple, Locknut 3.09 Home Depot 07/16/2018 700-7050-4705 Homer bucket, Lids 10.82 Home Depot 07/16/2018 701-0000-4551 Coupling, Elbows, Clamps, Copper 110.42 Home Depot 07/16/2018 701-0000-4530 Power outlet 8.41 Home Depot 07/16/2018 701-0000-4530 Power outlet -8.41 Home Depot 07/16/2018 701-0000-4530 Grounding outlet 10.19 Home Depot 917.70 Hydro-Klean LLC 07/05/2018 701-7048-4751 2017 I&I Project 129,040.27 Hydro-Klean LLC 07/19/2018 720-0000-4300 Clean/televise storm sewer to inspect hole in pipe 580.00 Hydro-Klean LLC 129,620.27 ICMA 07/16/2018 101-1120-4370 ICMA Conference Attendance 685.00 ICMA 685.00 IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 07/12/2018 101-1613-4400 4th of July Portable restrooms 4,962.00 IMPERIAL PORTA PALACE 4,962.00 Indelco Plastics Corporation 07/05/2018 700-7043-4120 5/8" Tube x 1/2" MPT Connector, KYNAR 27.75 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 6 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount Indelco Plastics Corporation 27.75 Indoor Landscapes Inc 07/12/2018 101-1170-4300 July Plant svc 187.00 Indoor Landscapes Inc 187.00 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 07/05/2018 101-1170-4110 Paper, Ltr Pouch 79.50 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 07/05/2018 101-1170-4110 Plate, Forks 54.93 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 07/26/2018 101-1170-4110 Pens, Folders, Binders, Index 319.48 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 07/26/2018 101-1170-4110 Paper, Stamp pads 196.00 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 08/02/2018 400-0000-4703 Desk/Conference Room Chairs 2,534.00 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 3,183.91 J & D Window Cleaning 08/02/2018 101-1220-4300 Window cleaning svc @ Chanhassen Fire building 7/2/18 475.00 J & D Window Cleaning 08/02/2018 101-1170-4300 Window cleaning svc @ Chanhassen City Center building 7/4/18 2,250.00 J & D Window Cleaning 08/02/2018 101-1190-4300 Window cleaning svc @ Chanhassen Library 7/3/18 3,000.00 J & D Window Cleaning 5,725.00 JEFFERSON FIRE SAFETY INC 07/05/2018 400-4105-4705 (7) Honeywell Tails and Pants - Gold 15,315.30 JEFFERSON FIRE SAFETY INC 07/26/2018 400-4105-4705 INNOTEX GRAY 25 HOOD NOM/LENZING W/STEDAIR 866.36 JEFFERSON FIRE SAFETY INC 16,181.66 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 07/19/2018 101-1170-4300 Refrigerant 139.05 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 139.05 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 07/12/2018 700-0000-4170 Fuel - Ultra Low #1 Dyed, #2 Ultra LS Dyed B10 2,753.45 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 08/02/2018 101-1370-4170 CIRKAN1005 136.00 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 2,889.45 Keys Well Drilling Co 08/02/2018 700-7025-4751 Wells #7 and #14 Maintenance Project 41,479.37 Keys Well Drilling Co 41,479.37 Kidd Plumbing Inc 07/05/2018 101-1190-4300 Library 4/13/18-flush sediment from valves, pump and test 343.00 Kidd Plumbing Inc 07/05/2018 101-1370-4300 Public Works 4/2/18-repair leaking in flr heat manifold pipes 343.00 Kidd Plumbing Inc 07/05/2018 101-1220-4300 Main Fire Station 4/2/18-run drain line to clear clog 261.00 Kidd Plumbing Inc 07/05/2018 101-1170-4300 City Hall 5/14/18-Pull community toilet, clean jets and rebuild 284.50 Kidd Plumbing Inc 1,231.50 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 720-7213-4300 Private Dev Field Observ - svc through 5/31/18 - Avienda 630.00 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 400-0000-1155 Private Dev Field Observ - svc through 5/31/18 6,300.00 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 6,930.00 Kwik Trip 07/16/2018 101-1520-4130 Foxwood Preserve - Coffee, Water, Milk 8.10 Kwik Trip 07/16/2018 101-1530-4130 Ice 1.99 Kwik Trip 07/16/2018 101-1539-4130 Ice, Bananas - PB Tourney 4.35 Kwik Trip 07/16/2018 700-0000-4170 Fuel 5.63 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 7 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount Kwik Trip 20.07 Laminator.com 07/16/2018 101-1170-4110 (2) Laminating Pouches 212.46 Laminator.com 212.46 Lancer Hospitality 07/16/2018 101-1120-4370 Lunch meeting w/Dave Callister & Tom Workman - Galpin Improvemnt 43.00 Lancer Hospitality 43.00 LANZI BOB 07/12/2018 101-1766-4300 Adult Softball Umpire - 8 Games 196.00 LANZI BOB 08/02/2018 101-1766-4300 Adult softball Umpire - 10 games 245.00 LANZI BOB 441.00 Laufenburger Dennis 07/19/2018 101-1110-4370 January-March mileage, Breakfast for Carver Cty Mayors 310.74 Laufenburger Dennis 07/19/2018 101-1110-4370 April-June mileage 259.42 Laufenburger Dennis 570.16 LEEANN CHIN 07/16/2018 101-1110-4370 CC Dinner 174.36 LEEANN CHIN 174.36 LogMeIn Inc 07/16/2018 101-1160-4300 Prorated Annual renewal to 1 user -499.15 LogMeIn Inc -499.15 Lube Tech ESI 08/02/2018 101-1370-4510 5.7" LCD for MOD 30 PANEL 362.00 Lube Tech ESI 08/02/2018 101-1370-4510 Omntec Sump Sensor 271.00 Lube Tech ESI 633.00 Lunds & Byerly's 07/16/2018 101-1600-4130 Foxwoods - cake 67.99 Lunds & Byerly's 07/16/2018 101-1110-4370 Marilyn Luthy Birthday/Retirement Cake on 6/11/18 CC meeting 40.99 Lunds & Byerly's 108.98 Mansfield Oil Company 07/19/2018 101-1370-4170 ULSD 20% BIO DY DYED 7,881.49 Mansfield Oil Company 07/19/2018 101-1370-4170 87 UNL W/10%ETH 10,513.92 Mansfield Oil Company 18,395.41 Marco Inc 07/19/2018 101-1170-4410 Monthly maintenance charges - July 2018 675.65 Marco Inc 07/19/2018 700-0000-4410 Monthly maintenance charges - July 2018 100.00 Marco Inc 07/19/2018 701-0000-4410 Monthly maintenance charges - July 2018 100.00 Marco Inc 07/19/2018 720-0000-4410 Monthly maintenance charges - July 2018 50.00 Marco Inc 925.65 Matheson Tri-Gas, Inc.08/02/2018 101-1370-4170 ARG 382 CF, ARGON IND, PRO 33 NET, PROPANE 301.94 Matheson Tri-Gas, Inc.08/02/2018 101-1370-4170 MILLER ELECTRODE, TIP XT60, SHIELD DRAG 217.97 Matheson Tri-Gas, Inc. 519.91 McMaster-Carr 07/16/2018 700-7050-4705 Strut Channel, Low-Profile, Slotted, White, Powder Coated Steel 22.15 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 8 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount McMaster-Carr 22.15 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 700-7050-4705 misc parts/supplies 85.02 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 101-1320-4120 misc parts/supplies 8.99 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 101-1220-4120 misc parts/supplies 92.33 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 101-1220-4290 misc parts/supplies 196.87 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 101-1530-4150 misc parts/supplies 54.92 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 101-1540-4130 misc parts/supplies 1.42 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 101-1550-4120 misc parts/supplies 284.53 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 101-1550-4150 misc parts/supplies 502.07 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 101-1550-4410 misc parts/supplies 45.79 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 700-0000-4120 misc parts/supplies 55.66 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 700-0000-4150 misc parts/supplies 309.77 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 700-0000-4550 misc parts/supplies 65.32 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 700-7019-4150 misc parts/supplies 76.53 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 07/12/2018 700-7050-4705 misc parts/supplies 387.36 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 2,166.58 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 07/26/2018 101-1250-3816 SAC-June -3,553.55 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 07/26/2018 701-0000-2023 SAC-June 355,355.00 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 351,801.45 Michaels 07/16/2018 101-1600-4130 Ribbon - Foxwoods 9.67 Michaels 9.67 Midwest Aqua Care, Inc 07/12/2018 101-1550-4300 Weed & Algae Control Treatment - Lake Ann 6/8/18 1,113.00 Midwest Aqua Care, Inc 07/12/2018 101-1550-4300 Weed & Algae Control Treatment - Lake Lotus 6/12/18 463.00 Midwest Aqua Care, Inc 07/12/2018 101-1550-4300 Weed & Algae Control Treatment - Lake Minnewashta 6/20/18 331.00 Midwest Aqua Care, Inc 1,907.00 Mills Fleet Farm 07/16/2018 700-0000-4240 Jeans, Work boots 54.99 Mills Fleet Farm 07/16/2018 701-0000-4240 Jeans, Work boots 54.99 Mills Fleet Farm 109.98 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 07/19/2018 101-1370-4300 Drug/Alcohol/Mileage - Charlie 114.00 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 07/19/2018 101-1550-4300 Drug Test/Mileage - Adam 70.00 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 07/19/2018 700-0000-4300 Drug Test/Mileage - Joey 34.50 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 07/19/2018 701-0000-4300 Drug Test/Mileage - Joey 34.50 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 253.00 Minnesota Trophies & Gifts 07/16/2018 101-1600-4130 Sponsor plaques 798.91 Minnesota Trophies & Gifts 798.91 Minnesota Valley Testing Laboratories, Inc.07/05/2018 700-0000-4300 Copper/Price Adjustment 25.00 Minnesota Valley Testing Laboratories, Inc. 25.00 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 07/19/2018 101-1250-3818 Surcharge - June 2018 -148.83 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 9 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 07/19/2018 101-0000-2022 Surcharge - June 2018 7,441.49 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 7,292.66 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC.07/19/2018 101-1766-4300 Softball Team Registrations 264.00 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC. 264.00 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 07/05/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 4,821.40 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 07/05/2018 101-1600-4320 electricity charges 54.78 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 07/05/2018 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 179.87 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 07/05/2018 701-0000-4320 electricity charges 577.06 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 07/05/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 31.06 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 07/05/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 69.10 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 07/05/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 144.94 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 07/05/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 30.81 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/02/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 83.91 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 08/02/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 33.85 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 6,026.78 MUSIC TOGETHER LAKESIDE 07/26/2018 101-1537-4300 Music lessons 166.00 MUSIC TOGETHER LAKESIDE 166.00 MyFonts Inc 07/16/2018 101-1170-4110 Monotype Library Subscription Yearly 128.69 MyFonts Inc 128.69 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/05/2018 701-0000-4120 Oil and Air Filters, Fuel Primer 67.46 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/05/2018 101-1550-4140 Fuel Pump Assembly - Electric 236.49 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/05/2018 700-0000-4140 Belt Tensioner Assembly 31.86 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/19/2018 101-1320-4120 Core Deposit on inv# 967366 -128.66 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/19/2018 101-1550-4120 Fuel Pump kit 51.96 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/19/2018 101-1550-4120 Air Filter 34.69 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/19/2018 700-0000-4120 Oil and Fuel Filters, Serpentine Belt, Blister Pack Capsules 136.18 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/19/2018 101-1320-4140 Alternator Belt 19.97 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/19/2018 101-1220-4120 Fuel Pump kit 51.96 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 07/19/2018 101-1550-4120 Trimmer Line 103.04 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 08/02/2018 700-0000-4120 Oil Filters, Halogen Lamp 21.83 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 08/02/2018 101-1320-4120 Oil and Fuel Filters 74.28 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 08/02/2018 101-1550-4120 Oil and Fuel Filters, Filter Kit, Spark Plug 37.43 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 738.49 Noodles & Company 07/16/2018 101-1616-4130 Summer playground meeting 86.71 Noodles & Company 86.71 Nuss Truck & Equipment 08/02/2018 101-1320-4140 Gaskets 71.36 Nuss Truck & Equipment 08/02/2018 101-1320-4140 Latches 44.07 Nuss Truck & Equipment 08/02/2018 101-1320-4120 Switches -45.32 Nuss Truck & Equipment 70.11 Office Max/Office Depot 07/16/2018 101-1160-4530 USB-C Network Adapter 42.74 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 10 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount Office Max/Office Depot 07/16/2018 101-1540-4130 Folders 2.62 Office Max/Office Depot 45.36 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 07/05/2018 101-1550-4120 Dust Caps 10.27 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 07/05/2018 101-1310-4140 Oil Filter 4.07 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 07/05/2018 101-1320-4120 Absorbent 29.36 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 07/05/2018 101-1550-4140 Int Dr Handl 14.96 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 58.66 OTC Brands Inc 07/16/2018 101-1539-4130 50PC Polynonwoven Tote - PB Tourney 64.09 OTC Brands Inc 64.09 Paramount Center for the arts 07/16/2018 101-1560-4300 Show - Forever Elvis 1,300.00 Paramount Center for the arts 1,300.00 Party City 07/16/2018 101-1600-4130 Table cover - Foxwoods Preserve Grand opening 6.41 Party City 6.41 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.07/26/2018 420-0000-4300 Lake Susan Trail Rehabilitation Proj 118132 through June 2018 7,200.00 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 7,200.00 Plant Place 07/16/2018 101-1550-4120 Single Pot 10.74 Plant Place 10.74 Potentia MN Solar 07/12/2018 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 2,313.24 Potentia MN Solar 07/12/2018 101-1190-4320 electricity charges 4,317.82 Potentia MN Solar 07/12/2018 101-1170-4320 electricity charges 3,327.24 Potentia MN Solar 9,958.30 Premium Waters, Inc 07/12/2018 101-1550-4120 Monthly rental - July 2018 10.30 Premium Waters, Inc 10.30 PumpAlarm.com 07/16/2018 700-0000-4310 5/26 , 4CDR9F - Standard SMS Plan 49.99 PumpAlarm.com 49.99 QuickTurn 07/16/2018 101-1534-4130 Recital DVD's 74.06 QuickTurn 74.06 RBM SERVICES INC 07/05/2018 101-1170-4350 Nightly Janitorial/Shampoo Public Safety Monthly-July 2018 2,239.99 RBM SERVICES INC 07/05/2018 101-1190-4350 Nightly Janitorial/Weekend Janitorial-July 2018 2,173.05 RBM SERVICES INC 08/02/2018 101-1170-4300 Nightly Janitorial/Shampoo Public Safety Monthly-Aug 2018 2,239.99 RBM SERVICES INC 08/02/2018 101-1190-4300 Nightly Janitorial/Weekend Janitorial-Aug 2018 2,173.05 RBM SERVICES INC 8,826.08 Red Bench Bakery 07/16/2018 101-1520-4370 Lunch w/ Chaska P&R Dir 20.62 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 11 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount Red Bench Bakery 20.62 RICE LAKE CONSTRUCTION GROUP 08/02/2018 700-7050-4751 Chanhassen West WTP 55,185.50 RICE LAKE CONSTRUCTION GROUP 08/02/2018 700-7050-4751 Chanhassen West WTP 529,932.59 RICE LAKE CONSTRUCTION GROUP 585,118.09 Rotary Club 07/16/2018 101-1120-4360 monthly dues - Todd Gerhardt 53.00 Rotary Club 07/16/2018 101-1520-4360 monthly dues - Todd Hoffman 53.00 Rotary Club 106.00 Safety Vehicle Solutions 07/12/2018 400-4135-4704 #205 - Install/Labor 3,910.00 Safety Vehicle Solutions 3,910.00 Sam's Club 07/16/2018 101-1560-4300 Pound Cake, Napkins, Cups, Wipes, Plates, Cutlery 88.19 Sam's Club 07/16/2018 101-1530-4130 Folgers 7.98 Sam's Club 96.17 SCHMIEG DEAN 07/19/2018 101-1370-4350 PW Cleaning 2,008.60 SCHMIEG DEAN 07/19/2018 700-0000-4350 PW Cleaning 251.08 SCHMIEG DEAN 07/19/2018 701-0000-4350 PW Cleaning 251.07 SCHMIEG DEAN 2,510.75 SOUTH ST PAUL STEEL SUPPLY CO 08/02/2018 101-1320-4120 Parts/misc supplies 359.14 SOUTH ST PAUL STEEL SUPPLY CO 08/02/2018 101-1550-4120 Parts/misc supplies 359.14 SOUTH ST PAUL STEEL SUPPLY CO 08/02/2018 700-0000-4120 Parts/misc supplies 359.13 SOUTH ST PAUL STEEL SUPPLY CO 1,077.41 Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 07/16/2018 101-1110-4370 SW Metro Chamber meeting fee - D Laufenburger 30.00 Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 07/16/2018 101-1120-4370 SW Metro Chamber meeting fee - C Petersen 30.00 Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 07/16/2018 101-1210-4370 SW Metro Chamber meeting fee - E Kittelson 30.00 Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 07/16/2018 101-1420-4370 SW Metro Chamber meeting fee - B Generous 30.00 Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 07/16/2018 720-7201-4300 Environmental Commission - Jill Sinclair 175.00 Southwest Metro Chamber of Commerce 295.00 Sprinkler Warehouse 07/16/2018 101-1550-4151 Valves, Coupling Key, Swing joints, Nozzle, Spray body 571.84 Sprinkler Warehouse 571.84 SPRINT PCS 07/19/2018 701-0000-4310 monthly charges 51.72 SPRINT PCS 07/19/2018 700-0000-4310 monthly charges 51.72 SPRINT PCS 103.44 SPS COMPANIES INC 07/05/2018 101-1370-4510 Garden Hose Cap w/washer 18.32 SPS COMPANIES INC 18.32 STRATOGUARD LLC 07/26/2018 101-1160-4300 Proofpoint Business Inbound & Outbound Filtering - August 2018 160.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 12 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount STRATOGUARD LLC 160.00 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 07/05/2018 101-1220-4140 20805A F-PANEL 398.96 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 07/05/2018 101-1220-4140 BED5 KNOB 7.74 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 07/05/2018 101-1220-4140 1819C HANDLE 76.78 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 483.48 SUMMIT COMPANIES 08/02/2018 101-1550-4300 MCFS Monitoring - June 2018-May 2019 Lake Ann Park Shed 500.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 500.00 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1120-4040 Life insurance - August 29.90 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1130-4040 Life insurance - August 20.59 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1160-4040 Life insurance - August 10.53 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1250-4040 Life insurance - August 45.54 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1310-4040 Life insurance - August 34.49 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1320-4040 Life insurance - August 47.34 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1370-4040 Life insurance - August 18.60 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1520-4040 Life insurance - August 15.35 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1530-4040 Life insurance - August 6.03 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1560-4040 Life insurance - August 9.90 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1600-4040 Life insurance - August 9.58 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1700-4040 Life insurance - August 2.39 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1550-4040 Life insurance - August 37.26 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1420-4040 Life insurance - August 31.95 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1430-4040 Life insurance - August 1.98 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 210-0000-4040 Life insurance - August 7.65 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 720-7201-4040 Life insurance - August 2.34 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 720-7202-4040 Life insurance - August 2.34 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1170-4040 Life insurance - August 5.31 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-1220-4040 Life insurance - August 18.45 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 701-0000-4040 Life insurance - August 33.71 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 700-0000-4040 Life insurance - August 44.69 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 720-0000-4040 Life insurance - August 16.06 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 101-0000-2011 Life insurance - August 712.99 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 210-0000-2011 Life insurance - August 6.00 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 700-0000-2011 Life insurance - August 103.76 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 701-0000-2011 Life insurance - August 103.76 Sun Life Financial 07/26/2018 720-0000-2011 Life insurance - August 32.34 Sun Life Financial 1,410.83 Target 07/16/2018 101-1520-4130 Cards 8.57 Target 07/16/2018 101-1616-4130 Wipes, Clorox, Craft Tape 28.82 Target 07/16/2018 101-1616-4130 Playground 48.93 Target 07/16/2018 101-1220-4290 Gatorade 16.07 Target 07/16/2018 101-1530-4130 Mr Clean, Sanitizer, Neosporin, Bandages 26.95 Target 07/16/2018 101-1530-4130 Band-Aids, Granola bars, water, Band-Aid case 33.40 Target 07/16/2018 701-0000-4150 Batteries 27.90 Target 190.64 Tessco 07/16/2018 701-0000-4530 1/2" Foam Heliax Cable - Black Jacket 346.83 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 13 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount Tessco 346.83 The Garden By The Woods 07/16/2018 720-7202-4300 PW planting pot 75.00 The Garden By The Woods 75.00 TWIN CITY SEED CO.07/12/2018 101-1550-4150 Lawn seed, Straw blanket, staples 779.00 TWIN CITY SEED CO. 779.00 Twins Ballpark LLC 07/16/2018 101-1560-4300 6/21 Twins Game 657.00 Twins Ballpark LLC 07/16/2018 101-1560-4300 Game 500.00 Twins Ballpark LLC 07/16/2018 101-1560-4300 Game 74.00 Twins Ballpark LLC 1,231.00 Ultimate Events, Inc 07/12/2018 101-1613-4410 4th of July Tents, tables and chairs 23,849.01 Ultimate Events, Inc 23,849.01 United Farmers Cooperative 07/19/2018 101-1550-4120 KITCLUTCH CMS250 416.85 United Farmers Cooperative 07/19/2018 101-1550-4120 SPRING, PAWL, WASHER 5.15 United Farmers Cooperative 07/19/2018 101-1550-4120 KITCLUTCH, GROMMET FUEL, TRIMMER HEAD, AUTOCUT 103.99 United Farmers Cooperative 525.99 United States Postal Service 07/16/2018 700-0000-4330 PM 2 Day shipping 6.70 United States Postal Service 6.70 UNITED WAY 07/05/2018 101-0000-2006 PR Batch 00406.07.2018 United Way 28.40 UNITED WAY 07/19/2018 101-0000-2006 PR Batch 00420.07.2018 United Way 28.40 UNITED WAY 08/02/2018 101-0000-2006 PR Batch 00403.08.2018 United Way 28.40 UNITED WAY 85.20 VARIDESK LLC 07/16/2018 400-0000-4703 CubeCorner stand up desk, Mat 555.00 VARIDESK LLC 555.00 VectorStock 07/16/2018 101-1170-4110 50 IMAGES 50.00 VectorStock 50.00 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1220-4310 phone charges 6/19/18-7/18/18 40.01 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1550-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 405.22 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1520-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 51.50 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1600-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 315.43 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1530-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 51.50 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-0000-2006 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 10.00 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 700-0000-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 631.25 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 701-0000-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 497.48 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 720-0000-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 118.32 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1160-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 113.00 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1120-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 374.56 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1170-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 31.81 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 14 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1260-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 103.63 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1130-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 51.50 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1250-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 144.81 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1310-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 823.02 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1370-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 120.12 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1320-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 357.07 VERIZON WIRELESS 07/05/2018 101-1220-4310 phone charges 5/19/18-6/18/18 488.11 VERIZON WIRELESS 08/02/2018 101-1220-4310 phone charges 6/19/18-7/18/18 40.01 VERIZON WIRELESS 4,768.35 WALKER ROOFING COMPANY INC 07/19/2018 700-0000-4510 7001 Hazeltine Blvd - Well 8, Install roofing 7,450.00 WALKER ROOFING COMPANY INC 07/19/2018 701-7025-4706 1801 Lyman Blvd - LS24, Install roofing 30,635.00 WALKER ROOFING COMPANY INC 38,085.00 Wal-Mart 07/16/2018 101-1550-4120 Minn Kota Endura Thrust Trolling Motors 328.55 Wal-Mart 07/16/2018 700-0000-4150 Tide 19.29 Wal-Mart 347.84 Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc.07/12/2018 101-1613-4410 4th of July cones and barricades 1,114.00 Warning Lites of Minnesota, Inc. 1,114.00 Water Conservation Services, Inc.07/19/2018 700-0000-4300 Leak 7/5/18 @ Powers Blvd and Lyman Blvd 280.70 Water Conservation Services, Inc. 280.70 WATSON COMPANY 07/05/2018 101-1540-4130 Lake Ann Concession Supplies 785.21 WATSON COMPANY 07/12/2018 101-1540-4130 Lake Ann concession supplies 248.41 WATSON COMPANY 07/19/2018 101-1540-4130 Lake Ann Concession supplies 622.40 WATSON COMPANY 08/02/2018 101-1540-4130 Lake Ann concession supplies 374.94 WATSON COMPANY 08/02/2018 101-1540-4130 Lake Ann concession supplies 135.06 WATSON COMPANY 2,166.02 WAYTEK INC 08/02/2018 101-1550-4120 Marker, Electrical Tape, Cable Seal, Toggle Switch, Eyelet 174.88 WAYTEK INC 174.88 WENCK ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 720-0000-4300 Lake Lucy Lane Culvert Replacement 1,508.78 WENCK ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 720-0000-4300 Local Plan Update Completion 1,036.00 WENCK ASSOCIATES INC 2,544.78 Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc.07/19/2018 400-4105-4705 Fire Boot Pull-On - Men's, 12 1/2M, Standard Calf 432.48 Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc. 432.48 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/05/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 636.08 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/05/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 1,066.96 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/05/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 275.84 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/05/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Tack 750.50 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/12/2018 720-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 278.73 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/12/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 171.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 15 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/12/2018 720-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 790.00 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/12/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 285.00 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 07/12/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 527.25 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/02/2018 700-0000-4552 Streets 1,763.73 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/02/2018 700-0000-4552 Watermain Breaks 536.00 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/02/2018 700-0000-4552 Watermain Breaks 616.00 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/02/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 635.16 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/02/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 316.00 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/02/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 315.78 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/02/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 580.58 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 08/02/2018 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant 636.74 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 10,181.35 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/12/2018 700-0000-4300 OMS Facilities Implementation - May 2018 492.25 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 601-6039-4752 Lake Drive East Street Improvement Proj 18-02, svc from May 2018 85.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 601-6038-4752 Orchard Lane Area Street/Utility Reconstruction Proj 18-01, May 2,486.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 601-6032-4752 Street Reconstruction Project 16-01, svc from May 2018 3,236.50 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 700-7050-4752 West Water Treatment Plant CMT's, svc from May 2018 3,007.50 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/19/2018 720-7213-4300 Avienda Development Stormwater Review, svc from May 2018 4,815.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/26/2018 101-1320-4300 2018 GIS Support Services - svc from May 2018 403.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/26/2018 101-1320-4300 OMS Pavement Distress History Import - svc from May 2018 468.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/26/2018 101-1320-4300 OMS Sewer Televising History Import - svc from May 2018 468.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/26/2018 700-7050-4752 West Water Treatment Plant - svc from May 2018 27,148.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/26/2018 101-1160-4300 DataLink Maintenance - Annual Fee 1,250.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 07/26/2018 720-0000-4300 DataLink Maintenance - Annual Fee 1,250.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 45,109.25 WW Grainger 07/16/2018 700-7019-4120 Reducing Washer 19.88 WW Grainger 19.88 WW GRAINGER INC 07/05/2018 101-1190-4530 Tank Drain Valve 5.52 WW GRAINGER INC 07/12/2018 700-7050-4705 Signs, Trash Can Top, Trash Can, Container Dolly 360.02 WW GRAINGER INC 07/12/2018 700-7050-4705 Signs,Trash Can, Dry Erase Board 618.15 WW GRAINGER INC 983.69 XCEL ENERGY INC 07/05/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 16,819.33 XCEL ENERGY INC 07/19/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 6/12/18-7/12/18 11.31 XCEL ENERGY INC 07/19/2018 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 6/10/18-7/10/18 127.74 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 18,002.24 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 701-0000-4320 electricity charges 7,041.84 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 2,969.90 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1540-4320 electricity charges 2,039.39 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1600-4320 electricity charges 57.98 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1550-4320 electricity charges -110.56 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1600-4320 electricity charges 531.03 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 11.31 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1600-4320 electricity charges -15.09 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 700-0000-4320 electricity charges -3.75 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 16.79 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 24.09 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges -8.24 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 16 of 17 Name Check D Account Description Amount XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 700-7019-4320 electricity charges 7,778.89 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 11,457.64 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 55.80 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1600-4320 electricity charges 19.89 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1170-4320 electricity charges 535.15 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1190-4320 electricity charges 1,524.44 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1220-4320 electricity charges 1,185.11 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1370-4320 electricity charges 2,093.20 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 101-1120-4320 electricity charges 195.53 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 261.65 XCEL ENERGY INC 08/02/2018 701-0000-4320 electricity charges 261.65 XCEL ENERGY INC 72,884.26 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 07/12/2018 101-1320-4120 medical supplies 34.24 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 07/12/2018 101-1370-4120 medical supplies 34.24 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 07/12/2018 101-1550-4120 medical supplies 34.24 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 07/12/2018 700-0000-4120 medical supplies 34.23 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 136.95 ZIEGLER INC 07/05/2018 700-0000-4120 VEE Belt 34.96 ZIEGLER INC 08/02/2018 700-0000-4120 10R-0734 CORE CREDIT / PO# 3703 -1,518.88 ZIEGLER INC 08/02/2018 101-1613-4130 4th of July lights 930.00 ZIEGLER INC 08/02/2018 700-7019-4530 Troubleshoot warning/indicator light 1,088.52 ZIEGLER INC 534.60 1,717,616.01 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (08/03/2018 - 10:09 AM)Page 17 of 17 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, August 13, 2018 Subject Website Analytics Overview ­ July 2018 Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: J.2. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No:  ATTACHMENTS: Website Analytics Overview ­ July 2018 City of Chanhassen All Web Site Data GO TO REPORT Top Channels Users Conversions Acquisition Behavior Set up a goal. To see outcome metrics, define one or more goals. GET STARTED Conversions Acquisition Overview Jul 1, 2018 -Jul 31, 2018 Primary Dimension:Conversion: Edit Channel Grouping To see all 6 Channels click here. Top Channels All Goals Organic Search Direct Social Referral Email Display 22.7% 69.3%  Users  Goal Conversion Rate …Jul 8 Jul 15 Jul 22 Jul 29 4,0004,000 8,0008,000 …Jul 8 Jul 15 Jul 22 Jul 29 0.00%0.00% 100.00%100.00% 1 Organic Search 2 Direct 3 Social 4 Referral 5 Email 6 Display Users 26,300 New Users 22,750 Sessions 37,783 18,806 6,148 1,081 1,063 24 21 Bounce Rate 69.68% Pages / Session 1.80 Avg. Session Duration 00:01:29 68.09% 75.11% 77.46% 61.83% 75.86% 92.00% © 2018 Google All Users 100.00% Users City of Chanhassen All Web Site Data GO TO REPORT Page Rows 1 - 10 of 2780 Pages Jul 1, 2018 -Jul 31, 2018 Explorer Pageviews Unique Pageviews Avg. Time on Page Entrances Bounce Rate % Exit Page Value 67,973 % of Total:100.00% (67,973) 56,360 % of Total:100.00% (56,360) 00:01:51 Avg for View:00:01:51 (0.00%) 37,783 % of Total:100.00% (37,783) 69.68% Avg for View:69.68% (0.00%) 55.59% Avg for View:55.59% (0.00%) $0.00 % of Total:0.00% ($0.00) 1.19,684 (28.96%) 17,239 (30.59%)00:04:47 16,660 (44.09%)84.50%83.05%$0.00 (0.00%) 2.7,985 (11.75%) 5,607 (9.95%)00:02:02 5,169 (13.68%)41.83%38.13%$0.00 (0.00%) 3.2,246 (3.30%) 1,828 (3.24%)00:01:35 1,606 (4.25%)52.55%53.61%$0.00 (0.00%) 4.1,165 (1.71%) 782 (1.39%)00:00:39 270 (0.71%)22.96%16.82%$0.00 (0.00%) 5.1,055 (1.55%) 852 (1.51%)00:00:51 325 (0.86%)49.23%37.25%$0.00 (0.00%) 6.1,010 (1.49%) 856 (1.52%)00:00:51 746 (1.97%)35.21%36.24%$0.00 (0.00%) 7.918 (1.35%) 823 (1.46%)00:03:00 364 (0.96%)82.97%69.61%$0.00 (0.00%) 8.851 (1.25%) 685 (1.22%)00:03:19 289 (0.76%)79.93%61.69%$0.00 (0.00%) 9.721 (1.06%) 650 (1.15%)00:01:06 292 (0.77%)86.99%67.13%$0.00 (0.00%) 10.706 (1.04%) 632 (1.12%)00:01:28 434 (1.15%)80.65%66.71%$0.00 (0.00%)  Pageviews …Jul 8 Jul 15 Jul 22 Jul 29 6,0006,000 12,00012,000 /272/4th-of-July-Celebration / /284/Lake-Ann-Park /194/Proposed-Developments /31/Parks-Recreation /296/Recreation-Center /567/Watercraft-Rentals /240/Agendas-Minutes-Videos /1018/Job-Opportunities /775/Penny-Carnival © 2018 Google All Users 100.00% Pageviews City of ChanhassenAll Web Site Data GO TO REPORT Search Term Rows 1 - 10 of 1217 Search Terms Jul 1, 2018 -Jul 31, 2018 Explorer Site Usage Total Unique Searches Results Pageviews / Search % Search Exits % Search Refinements Time after Search Avg. Search Depth 1,695 % of Total:100.00% (1,695) 1.20 Avg for View:1.20 (0.00%) 30.68% Avg for View:30.68% (0.00%) 18.99% Avg for View:18.99% (0.00%) 00:02:20 Avg for View:00:02:20 (0.00%) 1.46 Avg for View:1.46 (0.00%) 1.4th of july 27 (1.59%)1.15 18.52%3.23%00:02:01 1.44 2.4th of July Celebration 27 (1.59%)1.22 37.04%3.03%00:01:35 1.56 3.Parade 15 (0.88%)1.13 86.67%0.00%00:00:41 0.20 4.4th of July Tri-Fold 14 (0.83%)1.14 35.71%12.50%00:00:47 0.64 5.Lake ann 11 (0.65%)1.00 27.27%9.09%00:01:05 1.18 6.Mayor 11 (0.65%)1.00 100.00%0.00%00:00:00 0.00 7.zoning map 10 (0.59%)1.50 70.00%26.67%00:01:21 0.30 8.4th of July Parade 9 (0.53%)1.00 55.56%11.11%00:00:59 0.56 9.Pickleball 9 (0.53%)1.44 33.33%15.38%00:00:49 0.67 10.4th of July 7 (0.41%)1.00 28.57%0.00%00:01:31 1.43  Total Unique Searches …Jul 8 Jul 15 Jul 22 Jul 29 100100 200200 © 2018 Google All Users 100.00% Total Unique SearchesCity of Chanhassen All Web Site Data GO TO REPORT Rows 1 - 3 of 3 Overview Jul 1, 2018 -Jul 31, 2018 Explorer Summary 26,300 % of Total: 100.00% (26,300) 26,300 % of Total: 100.00% (26,300) 1.mobile15,25557.64% 2.desktop9,45735.73% 3.tablet1,7556.63%  Users …Jul 8Jul 15 Jul 22 Jul 29 4,0004,000 8,0008,000 Device CategoryUsersUsers Contribution to total: Users 6.6% 35.7% 57.6% © 2018 Google All Users 100.00% Users City of Chanhassen All Web Site Data GO TO REPORT Rows 1 - 3 of 3 Overview Jul 1, 2018 -Jul 31, 2018 Explorer Summary 26,300% of Total: 100.00% (26,300)26,300% of Total: 100.00% (26,300) 1.mobile 15,255 57.64% 2.desktop 9,457 35.73% 3.tablet 1,755 6.63%  Users …Jul 8 Jul 15 Jul 22 Jul 29 4,0004,000 8,0008,000 Device Category Users Users Contribution to total: Users 6.6% 35.7% 57.6% © 2018 Google All Users 100.00% Users JULY 2018 WEBSITE ANALYTICS OVERVIEW City of ChanhassenAll Web Site Data GO TO REPORT Language Users % Users 1.en-us 25,870 98.56% 2.en-gb 127 0.48% 3.fr 62 0.24% 4.ko 17 0.06% 5.zh-cn 17 0.06% 6.es-xl 15 0.06% 7.en-ca 14 0.05% 8.de-de 11 0.04% 9.en 9 0.03% 10.fr-fr 9 0.03% Audience Overview Jul 1, 2018 -Jul 31, 2018 Overview  Sessions  Pageviews …Jul 8 Jul 15 Jul 22 Jul 29 5,0005,000 10,00010,000 6,0006,000 12,00012,000 Users 26,300 New Users 22,750 Sessions 37,783 Number of Sessions per User 1.44 Pageviews 67,973 Pages / Session 1.80 Avg. Session Duration 00:01:29 Bounce Rate 69.68% New Visitor Returning Visitor 27.5% 72.5% © 2018 Google All Users100.00% Users SESSIONS VS. PAGEVIEWS 37,783 Sessions vs. 67,973 Pageviews Session: The period of time a user is actively engaged with our website, app, etc. Pageview: Total # of pages viewed. Repeated views of a single page are counted. HOW ARE THEY FINDING US? 18,806 Organic Search 6,148 Direct 1,081 Social 1,063 Referral WHAT ARE THEY USING TO VIEW OUR SITE? WHAT ARE THEY SEARCHING FOR?WHAT PAGES ARE THEY VISITING? NEW VS. RETURNING VISITOR 22,508 New Visitors 8,531 Returning Visitors WHAT CAN WE LEARN? July had the all-time record for page visits, primarily to 4th of July related pages. The Facebook event created for the 4th of July celebration reached over 90,000 users. Focus should remain ensuring 4th of July information is easily locatable on the website and is user-friendly.