Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Agenda and Packet
AGENDA CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2019 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD A.5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Note: Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda. 1.Key Financial Strategy: Conduct a Thorough Review of all Utility Fund Fees 2.Resolution 2019XX: Approval/Certification of Maximum Proposed Preliminary Levy to Carver County Auditor B.7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE) C.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS D.CONSENT AGENDA All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to the council packet for each staff report. 1.Approve City Council Minutes dated September 9, 2019 2.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated September 3, 2019 3.Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 27, 2019 4.Consider Interim Use Permit for Moon Valley Gravel Pit 5.Consider a Request for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to the Bottom of the Bluff at 1181 Homestead Lane E.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Visitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete and submit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda) 1.Ann Miller Citizen Action Request Form F.FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE AGENDACHANHASSEN CITY COUNCILMONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2019CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARDA.5:30 P.M. WORK SESSIONNote: Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the worksession items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regularagenda.1.Key Financial Strategy: Conduct a Thorough Review of all Utility Fund Fees2.Resolution 2019XX: Approval/Certification of Maximum Proposed Preliminary Levy toCarver County AuditorB.7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE)C.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.Approve City Council Minutes dated September 9, 20192.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated September 3, 20193.Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 27, 20194.Consider Interim Use Permit for Moon Valley Gravel Pit5.Consider a Request for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to theBottom of the Bluff at 1181 Homestead LaneE.VISITOR PRESENTATIONSVisitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete andsubmit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda)1.Ann Miller Citizen Action Request Form F.FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE 1.Fire Department Update 2.Law Enforcement Update G.OLD BUSINESS H.PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.Approval of OnSale Beer & Wine License for Friends & Family Creative Enterprises, LLC, dba Board & Brush Creative Studio, 7882 Market Boulevard I.NEW BUSINESS 1.Resolution 2019XX: Approval/Certification of Maximum Proposed Preliminary Levy to Carver County Auditor J.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS K.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS L.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION 1.Perkins & Marie Callender's, LLC Notice of Sale... 2.Review of Claims Paid 09232019 3.Citizen Action Request Followup Letter to Mack Titus 09132019 M.ADJOURNMENT N.GUIDELINES GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations. Anyone seeking a response or action from the City Council following their presentation is required to complete and submit a Citizen Action Request Form. An online form is available at https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/action or paper forms are available in the city council chambers prior to the meeting. Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor. When called upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City Council. If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokesperson that can summarize the issue. Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor. If you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council. During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in discussion. Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough understanding of your concern, suggestion or request. Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual AGENDACHANHASSEN CITY COUNCILMONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2019CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARDA.5:30 P.M. WORK SESSIONNote: Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the worksession items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regularagenda.1.Key Financial Strategy: Conduct a Thorough Review of all Utility Fund Fees2.Resolution 2019XX: Approval/Certification of Maximum Proposed Preliminary Levy toCarver County AuditorB.7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE)C.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.Approve City Council Minutes dated September 9, 20192.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated September 3, 20193.Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 27, 20194.Consider Interim Use Permit for Moon Valley Gravel Pit5.Consider a Request for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to theBottom of the Bluff at 1181 Homestead LaneE.VISITOR PRESENTATIONSVisitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete andsubmit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda)1.Ann Miller Citizen Action Request FormF.FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE1.Fire Department Update2.Law Enforcement UpdateG.OLD BUSINESSH.PUBLIC HEARINGS1.Approval of OnSale Beer & Wine License for Friends & Family CreativeEnterprises, LLC, dba Board & Brush Creative Studio, 7882 Market BoulevardI.NEW BUSINESS1.Resolution 2019XX: Approval/Certification of Maximum Proposed Preliminary Levyto Carver County AuditorJ.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONSK.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONSL.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION1.Perkins & Marie Callender's, LLC Notice of Sale...2.Review of Claims Paid 092320193.Citizen Action Request Followup Letter to Mack Titus 09132019M.ADJOURNMENTN.GUIDELINES GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONSWelcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen CityCouncil wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council. That opportunity is providedat every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations.Anyone seeking a response or action from the City Council following their presentation is required tocomplete and submit a Citizen Action Request Form. An online form is available athttps://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/action or paper forms are available in the city council chambers prior tothe meeting.Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor. Whencalled upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the CityCouncil as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the CityCouncil.If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokespersonthat can summarize the issue. Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor. If youhave written comments, provide a copy to the Council.During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in discussion.Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough understandingof your concern, suggestion or request. Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be directed to the City Manager. Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Houlihan's, 530 Pond Promenade in Chanhassen immediately after the meeting for a purely social event. All members of the public are welcome. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Key Financial Strategy: Conduct a Thorough Review of all Utility Fund Fees Section 5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Item No: A.1. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation City of Chanhassen Utility Rate Study and Development Fees Rate Setting Policies Rate Study Results Overview of Water, Sewer, and Storm Utilities Development Fee Comparisons Development Fee Options and Impacts Agenda 9/18/2019 2 Growth pays for growth through hook-up fees Allocate 50% of capital costs for water treatment plant to growth Maintain adequate reserves (50% of operating expenses less depreciation plus 10% of accumulated depreciation) Prudent use of debt Change in policies will impact rates Rate Setting Policies 9/18/2019 3 Summary of Rate Study Results 9/18/2019 4 Projected Usage Rate Increases 2018 Study 2019 Study Water 5.00%5.00% Sewer 5.00%5.00% Storm Water 4.00%5.00% Projected Hook-Up Fee Increases 2018 Study 2019 Study Water 3.50%3.50% Sewer 0.00%0.00% Storm Water 2.00%2.00% Water Utility 9/18/2019 5 Rate increases maintained at 5% by financing a larger portion of future capital projects and delaying projects. Total CIP (2019-2028)2018 Study 2019 Study % Change Capital (Inflated) Capital (Inflated) Water $21,574,814 $26,541,571 23% Projected Usage Rate Increases 2018 Study 2019 Study Water 5.00%5.00% Water CIP 9/18/2019 6 Project Year Amount Average Debt Service Annually $1,800,000 Watermain Replacement Annually $550,000 Street Improvement Program Annually $700,000 TH101 Imp-Pioneer Tr to Flying Cloud Dr 2020-2021 $1,000,000 Low Zone 1M Gal. Elevated Storage Tank 2024 $2,600,000 New Wells 2024 and 2029 $2,600,000 Lower Bluff Creek Trunk Utility Improvements 2026 $1,100,000 Sewer Utility 9/18/2019 7 Rate increases maintained at 5% by delaying improvements. Total CIP (2019-2028)2018 Study 2019 Study % Change Capital (Inflated) Capital (Inflated) Sewer $10,937,842 $12,278,443 12% Projected Usage Rate Increases 2018 Study 2019 Study Sewer 5.00%5.00% Sewer CIP 9/18/2019 8 Project Year Amount Average Debt Service Annually $65,000 Sanitary Lift Station Rehabilitation Program Annually $100,000 Street Improvement Program Annually $700,000 Inflow and Infiltration Abatement Annually $200,000 TH101 Imp-Pioneer Tr to Flying Cloud Dr (CSAH 61) 2020/2021 $500,000 Lower Bluff Creek Trunk Utility Improvements 2026 $1,800,000 Storm Water Utility 9/18/2019 9 Higher rate increases needed to pay for future capital projects. Total CIP (2019-2028) 2018 Study 2019 Study % Change Capital (Inflated) Capital (Inflated) Storm Water $7,549,494 $12,055,719 60% Projected Usage Rate Increases 2018 Study 2019 Study Storm Water 4.00%5.00% Storm Water CIP 9/18/2019 10 Project Year Amount Storm Water Pond Improvements Annually $300,000 Storm Water Infrastructure Maintenance/Replacement Annually $100,000 Street Improvement Program Annually $600,000 Comparison of Utility Bill -Neighbors 9/18/2019 11 Comparison of Utility Bill –KFS Cities 9/18/2019 12 Single Family Fee Comparison Neighboring Cities 9/18/2019 13 Single Family Fee Comparison KFS Cities 9/18/2019 14 Industrial Fee Comparison Neighboring Cities 9/18/2019 15 Industrial Fee Comparison KFS Cities 9/18/2019 16 Multi-Family Fee Comparison Neighboring Cities 9/18/2019 17 Multi-Family Fee Comparison KFS Cities 9/18/2019 18 #1 Reduce water hook-up fees Allocate more debt service to current and future customers #2 Change fee structure for multi-family units Count one apartment as .8 SAC units #3 Change timing of fee collection Collect more of fee with building permit instead of plat Options for Development Fees 9/18/2019 19 Reallocate debt on water treatment plants to: 30% -hook-up fees 70% -user charges Reduces water hook-up fees by 20% Requires a 6.25% annual usage rate increase (vs. 5%) Option #1: 20% Fee Reduction 9/18/2019 20 Many communities count 1 apartment as less than 1 single family unit due to lower water use Assumed 1 apartment = .8 SAC units Reduces water hook-up fees for multi-family by 20% Requires a 5.85% annual usage rate increase (vs. 5%) Option #2: Change Multi-Family Fees 9/18/2019 21 Currently 1/3 of fee collected at platting and 2/3 with building permit Developers prefer to pay all of it with building permit City could collect more or all fee with building permit, which would be better for developer but increases the financial risk to the City •City installs and pays for trunk line before permit is pulled. If development and receipt of fee is delayed, City would not be reimbursed in timely manner Option #3: Change Timing of Fee Collection 9/18/2019 22 2020 Sample Water Bill 9/18/2019 23 Base Line Option #1 Option #2 Quarterly Bill $78.05 $78.98 $78.68 % Increase 5%6.25%5.85% Assumes quarterly use of 26,000 gallons Water hook-up fees have been set to pay for 50% of water treatment plants that serve future growth Reducing water hook-up fees shifts water treatment costs to current and future ratepayer Policy discussion Summary and Discussion 9/18/2019 24 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Resolution 2019XX: Approval/Certification of Maximum Proposed Preliminary Levy to Carver County Auditor Section 5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Item No: A.2. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: PROPOSED MOTION The City Council approves the Preliminary Levy of $11,231,368 for 2020 and Establishes the TruthinTaxation Hearing Date for 2019 as December 2, for Taxes Collectible in 2020.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND At our August 26 city council work session, staff reviewed the detailed budget with the city council. At this evening’s meeting staff will go through the attached PowerPoint presentation and the potential preliminary levy scenarios. At the end of the discussion, the council will be asked to approve a preliminary levy which needs to be submitted to Carver County before September 30. Scenario #1:Total levy of $11,231,368, an increase of $211,500 (1.92%), $34,400 above 2019 new growth. This scenario is an increase in service levels for the expanded duty crew. It would also leave the entire Library Levy intact to allow more flexibility in future years. The result of this levy would be between a $3$4 increase in the property tax bill (city portion) on the average home. Scenario #2: Total levy of $11,196,968, an increase of $177,100 (1.61%), the amount of new growth in 2019. This scenario does result in increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. Staff would recommend the use of $34,400 of the Library Levy to achieve this total levy.The result of this levy would be no change in the city portion of the average homes tax bill. Scenario #3:This scenario would include increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. It also could include additional known funding needs for future years as follows: Fund additional park maintenance employee ($80,000) Fund additional street maintenance employee ($80,000) Fund half time fire department administrative position at full time ($37,000) Fund a portion of Pavement Management Levy of 2021 ($350,000) Fund permanent revenue stream for Park Equipment Replace Levy by 2022 ($250,000) The result of this levy would be an increase to the city portion of the property tax bill on the average home by CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, September 23, 2019SubjectResolution 2019XX: Approval/Certification of Maximum Proposed Preliminary Levy to CarverCounty AuditorSection5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION Item No: A.2.Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: PROPOSED MOTIONThe City Council approves the Preliminary Levy of $11,231,368 for 2020 and Establishes the TruthinTaxationHearing Date for 2019 as December 2, for Taxes Collectible in 2020.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDAt our August 26 city council work session, staff reviewed the detailed budget with the city council. At this evening’smeeting staff will go through the attached PowerPoint presentation and the potential preliminary levy scenarios. At theend of the discussion, the council will be asked to approve a preliminary levy which needs to be submitted to CarverCounty before September 30.Scenario #1:Total levy of $11,231,368, an increase of $211,500 (1.92%), $34,400 above 2019 new growth.This scenario is an increase in service levels for the expanded duty crew. It would also leave the entire LibraryLevy intact to allow more flexibility in future years. The result of this levy would be between a $3$4 increase inthe property tax bill (city portion) on the average home. Scenario #2: Total levy of $11,196,968, an increase of $177,100 (1.61%), the amount of new growth in2019. This scenario does result in increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. Staff wouldrecommend the use of $34,400 of the Library Levy to achieve this total levy.The result of this levy would beno change in the city portion of the average homes tax bill. Scenario #3:This scenario would include increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. It also couldinclude additional known funding needs for future years as follows:Fund additional park maintenance employee ($80,000)Fund additional street maintenance employee ($80,000)Fund half time fire department administrative position at full time ($37,000)Fund a portion of Pavement Management Levy of 2021 ($350,000)Fund permanent revenue stream for Park Equipment Replace Levy by 2022 ($250,000) The result of this levy would be an increase to the city portion of the property tax bill on the average home by about $10 for every $100,000 of additional levy. There are a number of items that still could significantly impact the final budget. Because of the possible significance of those unknowns, staff believes setting a preliminary levy lower than Scenario #1 would allow for less flexibility in setting the final budget for 2020 and in future years as well. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends setting a preliminary levy using Scenario #1 ($11,231,368, new growth) to allow for flexibility and planning before setting a final levy. It is staff’s belief that this will provide the city the most flexibility in the event of significant or unplanned cost increases or fluctuations between now and December. ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation Levy Impact Scenarios Resolution Bond Tax Levy Schedule Detailed General Fund Budget KFS Full Time Employee Comparison 202 0 Budget Assumptions •$177,100 (1.61%) increase in levy dollars due to new construction •A 16% reduction in healthcare costs •Building permit revenue budgeted same as 2019 •A 3% increase for cost of living and merit pay •A 5% increase in the police services contract •The average home in Chanhassen increased in taxable market value by 5% 2020 Scenario #1 •LEVY –Scenario #1 would be a total levy of $11,231,368, an increase of $211,500 (1.92%), $34,400 above 2019 new growth. •POTENTIAL BUDGET IMPACT –This scenario is an increase in service levels for the expanded duty crew. It would also leave the entire Library Levy intact to allow more flexibility in future years. •RESIDENT IMPACT –The result of this levy would be between a $3-$4 increase in the property tax bill (city portion) on the average home. 2020 Scenario #2 •LEVY –Scenario #2 would be a total levy of $11,196,968, an increase of $177,100 (1.61%), the amount of new growth in 2019. •POTENTIAL BUDGET IMPACT –This scenario does result in increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. Staff would recommend the use of $34,400 of the Library Levy to achieve this total levy goal. •RESIDENT IMPACT –The result of this levy would be no increase in the property tax bill (city portion) on the average home. 2020 Scenario #3 •LEVY –Scenario #3 could include funding for future needs. •POTENTIAL BUDGET IMPACT -This scenario would include increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. It also could include additional known funding needs for future years as follows: -Fund additional park maintenance employee ($80,000) -Fund additional street maintenance employee ($80,000) -Fund half time fire dept admin position at FT ($37,000) -Fund a portion of Pavement Management Levy of 2021 ($350,000) -Fund permanent rev stream for Park Eqpt Replace Levy by 2022($250,000) •RESIDENT IMPACT –The result of this levy would be an increase to the city portion of the property tax bill on the average home by about $10 for every $100,000 of additional levy. 2020 Gen Fund Budgeted Expenditures % Increase City Population 2018 2019 From 2018 Chanhassen 25,955 11,414,000 11,618,060 1.8% Chaska 26,941 16,511,385 16,896,838 2.3% Cottage Grove 36,399 20,160,615 20,958,986 4.0% Elk River 24,567 16,072,250 17,096,650 6.4% Inver Grove Heights 35,106 24,925,500 27,189,400 9.1% Lino Lakes 21,117 9,675,086 9,984,864 3.2% Prior Lake 25,735 12,651,813 13,336,972 5.4% Rosemount 23,965 13,566,000 14,261,600 5.1% Savage 30,713 14,948,819 15,951,876 6.7% Shakopee 41,519 26,928,100 27,558,500 2.3% Stillwater 19,748 14,996,044 15,995,345 6.7% Average 28,342 16,537,783 17,349,917 4.8% KFS General Fund Budgeted Expenditure Comparison 2020 Per Capita City Spending 2019 Chanhassen 447 Chaska 627 Cottage Grove 576 Elk River 696 Inver Grove Heights 774 Lino Lakes 473 Prior Lake 518 Rosemount 595 Savage 519 Shakopee 664 Stillwater 810 Average 609 KFS General Fund Per Capita Spending Comparison 202 0 City 2019 Tax Rate** Chanhassen 21.104 Chaska 27.678 Victoria 31.271 Mayer 49.252 Carver 50.592 Waconia 52.500 Watertown 56.473 Cologne 62.415 Norwood Young America 70.399 New Germany 97.651 Hamburg 122.130 Average 58.315 ** Based on Urban Tax Rates Carver County Tax Rates 2020 Hennepin County Tax Rates -2019 2020 City Tax Rate**City Tax Rate** Chanhassen 21.104 Mound 43.107 Medina 21.529 St. Louis Park 46.373 Wayzata 21.672 Crystal 48.771 Minnetrista 24.915 Robbinsdale 50.807 Plymouth 26.355 Rockford 50.931 Excelsior 27.124 Brooklyn Park 52.695 Edina 27.499 Golden Valley 53.780 Shorewood 28.539 Richfield 54.737 Eden Prairie 31.690 Minneapolis 57.312 Maple Grove 34.899 Osseo 60.009 Minnetonka 34.960 New Hope 67.990 Rogers 35.917 Hopkins 71.697 Champlin 39.611 Brooklyn Center 71.860 Bloomington 41.581 AVERAGE 42.499 ** Based on Urban Tax Rates Recommendation Staff recommends setting a preliminary levy using at least Scenario #1 ($11,231,368, or $34,400 above new growth) to allow for flexibility and planning before setting a final levy in December. 202 0 Thank You. 202 0 Thank you! CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2020 Budget 2019 2020 Dollar Percent OPERATIONAL & CAPITAL LEVY Levy Levy Change Change General Fund $8,810,333 $9,021,833 Capital Replacement Fund (for equipment) 800,000 800,000 Revolving Imp Street Reconstruction 381,223 378,523 Pavement Mgmt Fund (Sealcoating)93,000 93,000 Total Operational & Capital Levy 10,084,556 10,293,356 208,800 2.07% DEBT LEVY Public Works Facility 475,800 480,600 Library Referendum 459,512 457,412 Total Debt Levy 935,312 938,012 2,700 0.29% TOTAL TAX LEVY $11,019,868 $11,231,368 $211,500 1.92% Scenario #1 Scenario #2 Scenario #3 Levy Levy Levy Taxes applied to:General Fund $9,021,833 $9,021,833 $9,121,833 Capital Replacement 800,000 800,000 800,000 Pavement Mgmt 93,000 93,000 93,000 Revolving Imp St Recon 378,523 378,523 378,523 Total Levy subject to levy limits $10,293,356 $10,293,356 $10,393,356 Library Referendum $480,600 $480,600 $480,600 Public Works Building 457,412 423,012 457,412 Total $11,231,368 $11,196,968 $11,331,368 Tax Generation Capacity (Not actual levy, Used only for estimating the impact on the average home) Prior Year $11,019,868 $11,019,868 $11,019,868 New Construction (0.97%)$177,100 $177,100 $177,100 Total Capacity $11,196,968 $11,196,968 $11,196,968 Percent Change (To avg home city prop tax) after New Growth 0.31%0.00%1.20% Staff recommendation for final Levy TAX LEVY CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: September 23, 2019 RESOLUTION NO: 2019- MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PRELIMINARY LEVY OF $11,231,368 FOR 2020, AND ESTABLISHING TRUTH-IN-TAXATION PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR 2019, FOR TAXES COLLECTIBLE IN 2020 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the total preliminary levy to be certified to Carver County by September 30, 2019 is $11,231,368; and 2. That the preceding sums of money have been scheduled as “Proposed Levy Certification” to fund operations of the general fund, capital replacement fund, MSA fund and debt service funds to be levied in 2019 for collection in 2020 upon the taxable property in the City of Chanhassen as shown in this resolution; and 3. That the City Council of the City of Chanhassen determines that certain bonded indebtedness levies are hereby adopted to meet current and future bond requirements and that the County Auditor is hereby authorized and directed to increase or reduce the previously adopted bonded debt levies as shown on the attached Tax Levy Certification document; and 4. That the public meeting date will be set for December 2, 2019 and the budget and tax levy adoption will be set for December 9, 2019 as allowed by law; and 5. That the City of Chanhassen authorizes the County Auditor to certify the amounts as set forth in the attached Proposed Levy Certification document for purposes of preparing the Truth-in-Taxation notices. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 23rd day of September, 2019. ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor YES NO ABSENT 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! 2019 2020 % Change Operational & Capital Levies General Fund 8,810,333$ Capital Replacement 800,000 Revolving Imp Street Reconstruction 381,223 MSA (Sealcoating) 93,000 Total Operational & Capital Levies 10,084,556$ -$ -100.00% Debt Levies Public Works Facility 475,800 Library Referendum 459,512 Total Debt Levies 935,312$ -$ -100.00% Total All Levies 11,019,868$ -$ -100.00% 2020 Tax Levy Personal Materials Contractual Capital 2020 2019 %2018 Services & Supplies Services Outlay Total Total Change Actual General Government 1110 Legislative 46,700 - 81,600 - 128,300 128,300 0.00%127,686 1120 Administration 497,900 - 56,400 - 554,300 564,300 -1.77%527,332 1130 Finance 330,500 200 48,300 - 379,000 371,500 2.02%348,833 1140 Legal - - 200,000 - 200,000 200,000 0.00%191,253 1150 Property Assessment - - 161,000 - 161,000 156,000 3.21%152,430 1160 MIS 168,800 41,400 48,000 - 258,200 257,800 0.16%229,810 1170 City Hall 92,400 41,400 277,500 - 411,300 395,800 3.92%405,703 1180 Elections 26,000 4,000 18,000 - 48,000 48,000 0.00%38,829 1190 Library Building - 2,500 109,100 - 111,600 111,600 0.00%105,505 *Total 1,162,300 89,500 999,900 - 2,251,700 2,233,300 0.82%2,127,383 Law Enforcement 1210 Police Administration - 1,000 1,977,800 - 1,978,800 1,885,800 4.93%1,780,646 1220 Fire Prevention & Admin 1,012,200 45,100 152,000 - 1,209,300 1,020,000 18.56%1,008,779 1250 Code Enforcement 696,500 6,800 11,700 - 715,000 742,500 -3.70%651,006 1260 Community Service 57,200 1,200 5,400 - 63,800 60,800 4.93%55,873 *Total 1,765,900 54,100 2,146,900 - 3,966,900 3,709,100 6.95%3,496,303 Public Works 1310 Engineering 675,400 800 29,300 - 705,500 669,900 5.31%609,793 1320 Street Maintenance 876,000 115,300 43,400 - 1,034,700 1,015,100 1.93%1,003,974 1350 Street Lighting & Signals - 4,000 359,500 - 363,500 357,500 1.68%375,319 1370 Fleet Department 323,400 161,700 64,800 5,500 555,400 558,700 -0.59%550,586 *Total 1,874,800 281,800 497,000 5,500 2,659,100 2,601,200 2.23%2,539,672 Community Development 1410 Planning Commission - 200 1,500 - 1,700 1,700 0.00%828 1420 Planning Administration 519,600 400 11,500 - 531,500 540,900 -1.74%502,004 1430 Senior Commission 29,600 - 15,000 - 44,600 40,200 10.95%44,876 *Total 549,200 600 28,000 - 577,800 582,800 -0.86%547,708 Park & Recreation 1510 Park & Rec Commission - 200 1,000 - 1,200 1,200 0.00%25 1520 Park & Rec Administration 250,300 200 5,700 - 256,200 256,800 -0.23%235,876 1530 Recreation Center 234,500 17,700 94,400 - 346,600 346,800 -0.06%327,125 1540 Lake Ann Park Operations 12,300 10,200 48,600 - 71,100 68,800 3.34%64,106 1550 Park Maintenance 830,700 84,200 104,300 - 1,019,200 1,002,700 1.65%1,068,895 1560 Senior Citizens Center 84,500 4,300 30,700 - 119,500 121,700 -1.81%130,212 1600 Recreation Programs 257,500 22,300 128,800 - 408,600 393,560 3.82%362,400 1700 Self-Supporting Programs 21,000 3,300 12,500 - 36,800 38,400 -4.17%51,000 1800 Recreation Sports 30,400 7,900 300 - 38,600 38,600 0.00%31,653 *Total 1,721,200 150,300 426,300 - 2,297,800 2,268,560 1.29%2,271,291 Total Operational Expenditures 7,073,400 576,300 4,098,100 5,500 11,753,300 11,394,960 3.14%10,982,357 Transfer for Roads - - - - **Total General Fund 11,753,300 11,394,960 3.14%10,982,357 Dollar Change from Previous Year 358,340 2020 General Fund Budget Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 Inc Over 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget PY Budget Estimate General Property Tax 3010 Current Property Tax 8,475,905 8,679,991 8,810,333 9,021,833 2.4%9,122,300 3002 Allowance for Delinquent Taxes (75,108) (46,746) (70,000) (40,000) (60,000) 3011 Delinquent Property Tax 7,050 14,350 15,000 20,000 15,000 3090 Excess TIF Taxes 86,633 - - *Total General Property Tax 8,494,480 8,647,594 8,755,333 9,001,833 2.8%9,077,300 Licenses 3203 Dog Kennel 250 325 500 500 500 3206 Massage License 150 50 500 100 100 3213 Solicitor - - - - 3226 Liquor On and Off Sale 92,018 76,904 93,000 90,000 90,000 3284 Rubbish 3,000 1,200 3,500 3,000 3,000 *Total Licenses 95,418 78,479 97,500 93,600 -4.0%93,600 Permits 3301 Building 518,620 778,694 520,000 520,000 565,000 3302 Plan Check 253,777 428,932 255,000 255,000 278,000 3305 Heating & A/C 172,701 183,881 119,300 119,300 140,000 3306 Plumbing 97,615 149,778 90,000 90,000 95,000 3307 Trenching 55,066 54,154 30,000 30,000 35,000 3308 Hunting/Shooting 840 700 1,400 1,400 700 3309 Sprinkler 11,074 16,664 11,000 11,000 11,000 3311 Sign 4,015 8,280 5,000 5,000 5,000 3316 Septic Tank - 222 - - - 3320 Stable 200 190 300 300 300 3331 Firework's Application Fee 200 200 - - - 3390 Misc. Permits 5,525 4,545 3,000 3,000 5,000 *Total Permits 1,119,633 1,626,240 1,035,000 1,035,000 0.0%1,135,000 Fines & Penalties 3401 Traffic & Ordinance Violation 126,636 93,455 115,000 115,000 115,000 3402 Vehicle Lockouts 950 1,400 1,000 1,000 1,000 3404 Dog/Cat Impound 808 496 500 500 500 3405 Other Fines and Penalties - - - - *Total Fines & Penalties 128,394 95,351 116,500 116,500 0.0%116,500 Intergovernmental Revenue 3503 Reimbursement from School Dist.49,407 51,233 45,000 55,000 52,000 3509 Other Shared Taxes 196,021 201,162 195,000 200,000 200,000 3510 Grants-State 163,912 176,847 160,000 180,000 180,000 3530 Grants-Federal - - - - - 3533 Grants-Other 6,291 7,016 - 7,000 5,000 *Total Intergovernmental Revenue 415,632 436,258 400,000 442,000 10.5%437,000 2020 General Fund Budget Revenue 2017 2018 2019 2020 Inc Over 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget PY Budget Estimate Charges for Current Services 3601 Sale of Documents 950 779 800 800 800 3602 Use & Variance Permits 21,533 17,660 20,000 25,000 25,000 3603 Rezoning Fees 1,750 1,675 2,000 2,000 2,000 3604 Assessment Searches - 45 - - - 3605 Plat Recording Fees 2,290 1,537 3,000 2,000 2,000 3607 Election Filing Fees - 40 - - - 3613 Misc.-General Government 5,616 2,456 5,000 5,000 5,000 3614 Admin. Charge-2% Constr.52,225 10,806 50,000 50,000 50,000 3617 Engineering General - - - - - 3619 Investment Management Fee 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 3629 Misc.-Public Safety 9,971 8,412 10,000 10,000 10,000 3630 Recreation Program Fees 59,520 63,596 52,000 65,000 62,000 3631 Recreation Center 217,077 228,935 218,000 225,000 225,000 3633 Park Equipment Rental 93 34 100 100 100 3634 Park Facility Usage Fee 19,022 16,976 19,000 19,000 19,000 3635 Watercraft Rental 18,020 17,543 18,000 18,000 18,000 3636 Self-Supporting Programs 45,276 42,366 42,000 42,000 42,000 3637 Senior Programs 47,025 39,327 45,000 45,000 45,000 3638 Food Concessions 10,862 11,023 11,000 11,000 11,000 3639 Misc.-Park & Rec.1,347 1,345 1,200 1,200 1,200 3642 Recreation Sports 44,384 34,061 44,000 40,000 38,000 3649 Misc.-Public Works 3,651 1,038 2,000 2,000 2,000 3651 Merchandise Sales 2,950 2,339 2,800 2,800 2,800 *Total Charges for Current Services 638,562 576,992 620,900 640,900 3.2%635,900 Other Revenue 3801 Interest Earnings 36,120 73,165 30,000 50,000 50,000 3802 Equipment Rental & Sale 186,978 192,792 250,000 275,000 275,000 3803 Building Rental 5,798 5,849 5,800 5,800 5,800 3804 Land Sale 8,100 - - - - 3807 Donations 28,609 25,387 24,127 25,467 25,000 3808 Insurance Reimbursements 18,709 10,267 - 10,000 10,000 3816 SAC Retainer 4,386 8,449 4,000 6,000 6,000 3818 Sur-Tax Retainer 740 903 700 700 700 3820 Misc. Other Revenue 766 930 500 500 500 3903 Refunds/Reimbursements 55,635 50,160 55,000 50,000 50,000 3980 Cash Short/Over 1 (1) - - - *Total Other Revenue 345,843 367,900 370,127 423,467 14.4%423,000 **Total General Fund Revenue 11,237,962 11,828,816 11,395,360 11,753,300 3.1%11,918,300 Total General Fund Expenditures 11,753,300 Net Levy Remaining (Use of Gen Fund Reserves)- 2020 General Fund Budget Revenue 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 42,000 41,550 43,600 43,600 0.0%45,400 4030 Contributions-Retirement 2,804 2,769 3,000 3,000 0.0%3,200 4050 Workers Compensation 90 85 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Personal Services 44,894 44,404 46,700 46,700 0.0%48,700 4300 Fees, Services - - 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4340 Printing & Publishing 29,911 33,838 32,000 32,000 0.0%33,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 41,560 42,031 42,000 42,000 0.0%43,000 4370 Travel & Training 5,650 5,686 6,000 6,000 0.0%6,000 4375 Promotional Expenses 599 1,727 600 600 0.0%600 *Total Contractual Services 77,719 83,282 81,600 81,600 0.0%83,600 **Total Legislative 122,613 127,686 128,300 128,300 0.0%132,300 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Legislative (1110) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 360,011 357,790 377,300 378,700 0.4%390,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 209 2,331 300 300 0.0%300 4021 Overtime-Temp - 98 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 51,126 51,704 55,500 57,400 3.4%59,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 59,127 63,824 68,000 58,000 (14.7%)64,300 4050 Workers Compensation 3,045 2,844 3,700 3,500 (5.4%)3,500 *Total Personal Services 473,517 478,591 504,800 497,900 (1.4%)517,100 4300 Fees, Services 4,634 3,685 15,000 10,000 (33.3%)12,000 4310 Telephone 5,677 4,752 5,800 5,800 0.0%5,800 4320 Utilities - 302 200 300 50.0%300 4330 Postage 22,968 22,500 23,000 23,000 0.0%23,000 4340 Printing & Publishing - 380 300 300 0.0%300 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 4,633 5,238 4,600 5,000 8.7%5,000 4370 Travel & Training 9,503 10,115 8,600 10,000 16.3%10,000 4380 Mileage 1,079 1,349 1,000 1,200 20.0%1,200 4410 Rental-Equipment 860 420 1,000 800 (20.0%)800 *Total Contractual Services 49,355 48,741 59,500 56,400 (5.2%)58,400 **Total Administration 522,872 527,332 564,300 554,300 (1.8%)575,500 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Adminstration (1120) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 226,932 225,766 239,500 246,600 3.0%254,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 33,129 31,855 36,300 37,400 3.0%38,500 4040 Contributions-Insurance 38,281 46,400 50,900 44,500 (12.6%)50,000 4050 Workers Compensation 1,937 1,778 2,300 2,000 (13.0%)2,000 *Total Personal Services 300,279 305,799 329,000 330,500 0.5%344,500 4120 Supplies-Equipment - 64 100 100 0.0%100 4210 Books & Periodicals - - 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Materials & Supplies - 64 200 200 0.0%200 4300 Fees, Services 14,087 10,447 16,000 16,000 0.0%16,000 4301 Fees, Financial/Audit 19,147 26,047 20,000 26,000 30.0%26,000 4310 Telephone and Communications 997 1,082 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4340 Printing & Publishing 200 1,087 300 300 0.0%300 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 465 425 500 500 0.0%500 4370 Travel & Training 3,926 3,883 4,500 4,500 0.0%4,500 *Total Contractual Services 38,821 42,970 42,300 48,300 14.2%48,300 **Total Finance 339,100 348,833 371,500 379,000 2.0%393,000 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 Fees, Financial/Audit A small increase is included for the negotiated Audit Contract as well as new GASB Requirement for actuarial services related to pension reporting. 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Finance (1130) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4302 Fees, Legal 198,417 191,253 200,000 200,000 0.0%200,000 *Total Contractual Services 198,417 191,253 200,000 200,000 0.0%200,000 **Total Legal 198,417 191,253 200,000 200,000 0.0%200,000 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Legal (1140) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4300 Fees, Services 146,422 152,430 156,000 161,000 3.2%166,000 *Total Contractual Services 146,422 152,430 156,000 161,000 3.2%166,000 **Total Property Assessment 146,422 152,430 156,000 161,000 3.2%166,000 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Property Assessment (1150) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 112,230 118,751 123,800 128,000 3.4%131,800 4030 Contributions-Retirement 16,505 17,286 18,800 19,400 3.2%20,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 19,697 21,908 23,300 20,400 (12.4%)22,800 4050 Workers Compensation 957 935 1,200 1,000 (16.7%)1,000 *Total Personal Services 149,389 158,880 167,100 168,800 1.0%175,600 4150 Maintenance Materials 1,062 875 1,300 1,000 (23.1%)1,300 4210 Books & Periodicals 55 83 100 100 0.0%100 4220 Software Licensing & Support 27,670 24,100 43,000 40,000 (7.0%)35,000 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 274 35 300 300 0.0%300 *Total Materials & Supplies 29,061 25,093 44,700 41,400 (7.4%)36,700 4300 Fees, Services 21,368 21,846 22,000 24,000 9.1%22,000 4310 Telephone and Communications 1,980 1,700 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000 4320 Utilities 11,070 10,998 11,000 11,000 0.0%11,000 4370 Travel & Training 5,755 7,465 6,000 6,000 0.0%6,000 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 4,990 3,828 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 *Total Contractual Services 45,163 45,837 46,000 48,000 4.3%46,000 **Total MIS 223,613 229,810 257,800 258,200 0.2%258,300 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Management Information Systems (MIS) (1160) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 58,399 59,964 60,000 61,200 2.0%63,000 4011 Overtime-Reg - 965 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 8,301 8,557 9,000 9,200 2.2%9,500 4040 Contributions-Insurance 14,691 18,183 19,300 17,000 (11.9%)19,000 4050 Workers Compensation 3,479 3,417 4,200 4,000 (4.8%)4,000 *Total Personal Services 84,870 91,086 93,500 92,400 (1.2%)96,500 4110 Supplies-Office 32,629 35,553 34,000 35,000 2.9%36,000 4120 Supplies-Equipment 176 8 900 500 (44.4%)500 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 411 453 500 500 0.0%500 4150 Maintenance Materials 4,250 5,576 4,500 5,000 11.1%5,000 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 144 56 400 400 0.0%400 *Total Materials & Supplies 37,611 41,645 40,300 41,400 2.7%42,400 4300 Fees, Services 11,166 11,442 11,000 12,000 9.1%12,000 4310 Telephone 10,357 10,424 11,000 10,500 (4.5%)11,000 4320 Utilities 37,768 39,509 39,000 39,000 0.0%41,000 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 29,201 30,434 30,000 31,000 3.3%32,000 4370 Travel & Training - - 200 200 0.0%200 4410 Rental-Equipment 14,442 12,342 14,500 14,500 0.0%14,500 4440 License & Registration - 32 100 100 0.0%100 4483 Insurance-General Liability 141,675 158,898 150,000 160,000 6.7%170,000 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 12,932 5,386 1,000 5,000 400.0%5,000 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles - - 200 200 0.0%200 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 10,245 4,505 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 *Total Contractual Services 267,785 272,972 262,000 277,500 5.9%291,000 **Total City Hall 390,266 405,703 395,800 411,300 3.9%429,900 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget City Hall (1170) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp - 27,088 26,000 26,000 0.0%28,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement - - - - 0.0%- 4050 Workers Compensation - - - - 0.0%- *Total Personal Services - 27,088 26,000 26,000 0.0%28,000 4110 Supplies-Office - 1,239 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500 4120 Supplies-Equipment - 114 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500 *Total Materials & Supplies - 1,352 4,000 4,000 0.0%4,000 4300 Fees, Services - 4,090 12,000 12,000 0.0%14,000 4340 Printing & Publishing - 447 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4370 Travel & Training - 5,851 5,000 5,000 0.0%6,000 *Total Contractual Services - 10,388 18,000 18,000 0.0%21,000 **Total Elections - 38,829 48,000 48,000 0.0%53,000 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Elections (1180) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4150 Maintenance Materials 2,333 50 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500 *Total Materials & Supplies 2,333 50 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500 4300 Fees, Services 3,258 7,191 3,000 4,000 33.3%5,000 4310 Telephone 1,526 1,526 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,700 4320 Utilities 56,908 58,149 63,000 60,000 (4.8%)60,000 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 29,304 33,301 30,500 32,500 6.6%33,000 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 10,274 4,954 6,500 6,500 0.0%6,500 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 5,562 333 4,500 4,500 0.0%4,500 *Total Contractual Services 106,832 105,455 109,100 109,100 0.0%110,700 **Total Library Building 109,165 105,505 111,600 111,600 0.0%113,200 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Library Building (1190) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 5,209 - - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 766 - - - 0.0%- 4040 Contributions-Insurance 1,442 - - - 0.0%- 4050 Workers Compensation 45 - - - 0.0%- *Total Personal Services 7,463 - - - 0.0%- 4130 Program Supplies 313 342 1,000 1,000 0.0%- *Total Materials & Supplies 313 342 1,000 1,000 0.0%- 4300 Fees, Services 1,795,040 1,779,397 1,882,700 1,976,700 5.0%2,075,500 4370 Travel & Training 15 90 100 100 0.0%100 4375 Promotional Expense 1,405 817 2,000 1,000 (50.0%)1,000 *Total Contractual Services 1,796,460 1,780,303 1,884,800 1,977,800 4.9%2,076,600 **Total Police Administration 1,804,236 1,780,646 1,885,800 1,978,800 4.9%2,076,600 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Police Administration (1210) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 217,749 205,907 217,000 225,200 3.8%232,000 4011 Overtime-Reg 292 2,724 3,000 3,000 0.0%3,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 153,469 208,252 200,000 345,000 72.5%350,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 222,858 232,909 230,000 252,000 9.6%255,000 4031 Fire Relief Required Contribution - 54,749 40,000 50,000 25.0%50,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 25,335 22,068 23,500 21,000 (10.6%)23,000 4050 Workers Compensation 71,572 68,767 75,000 80,000 6.7%80,000 4060 Unemployment 439 36 - - 0.0%- 4070 Contracted Wages 34,048 34,048 36,000 36,000 0.0%38,000 *Total Personal Services 725,763 829,461 824,500 1,012,200 22.8%1,031,000 4120 Supplies-Equipment 6,994 7,015 7,000 7,000 0.0%7,000 4130 Supplies-Program 3,073 3,282 2,200 2,200 0.0%2,200 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 6,943 4,310 9,000 9,000 0.0%9,000 4150 Maintenance Materials 1 164 400 400 0.0%400 4210 Books & Periodicals - - 500 500 0.0%500 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 9,044 9,853 11,000 11,000 0.0%11,000 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 4,924 8,166 8,000 8,000 0.0%8,000 4290 Misc. Materials & Supplies 3,642 6,407 7,000 7,000 0.0%7,000 *Total Materials & Supplies 34,620 39,197 45,100 45,100 0.0%45,100 4300 Fees, Services 29,088 26,056 32,000 34,000 6.3%35,500 4310 Telephone 8,541 7,815 8,000 8,000 0.0%8,000 4320 Utilities 15,464 18,392 16,000 17,000 6.3%17,000 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 4,469 5,606 5,100 5,100 0.0%5,100 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 1,327 1,452 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000 4370 Travel & Training 40,072 43,692 41,500 41,500 0.0%41,500 4375 Promotional Expense 6,922 7,415 10,000 8,000 (20.0%)8,000 4483 Insurance-General Liability 734 1,175 800 2,400 200.0%2,400 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 5,775 7,544 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 1,909 100 7,000 4,000 (42.9%)4,000 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 20,338 20,367 20,500 22,500 9.8%23,600 4531 Repair & Maintenance-Radios 63 508 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000 *Total Contractual Services 134,704 140,122 150,400 152,000 1.1%154,600 **Total Fire Prevention and Admin 895,087 1,008,779 1,020,000 1,209,300 18.6%1,230,700 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Fire Prevention and Administration (1220) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 537,534 474,940 504,000 515,700 2.3%531,200 4011 Overtime-Reg 82 310 - - 0.0%- 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 14,490 972 18,000 1,000 (94.4%)1,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 75,207 70,259 76,400 78,000 2.1%80,500 4040 Contributions-Insurance 96,731 88,481 120,300 98,200 (18.4%)110,000 4050 Workers Compensation 3,575 3,298 4,200 3,600 (14.3%)3,800 *Total Personal Services 727,619 638,260 722,900 696,500 (3.7%)726,500 4120 Supplies-Equipment - - 100 100 0.0%100 4130 Supplies-Program 877 689 900 800 (11.1%)800 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 279 891 2,000 1,500 (25.0%)1,500 4210 Books & Periodicals 77 331 1,500 2,500 66.7%2,500 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 956 1,242 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 344 74 400 400 0.0%400 *Total Materials & Supplies 2,534 3,227 6,400 6,800 6.3%6,800 4310 Telephone 2,535 2,736 4,500 3,000 (33.3%)3,000 4340 Printing & Publishing - 594 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 761 1,120 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4370 Travel & Training 3,336 4,973 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 4440 License & Registration - 96 500 500 0.0%500 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles - - 300 300 0.0%300 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip - - 900 900 0.0%900 *Total Contractual Services 6,632 9,518 13,200 11,700 (11.4%)11,700 **Total Code Enforcement 736,784 651,006 742,500 715,000 (3.7%)745,000 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Code Enforcement (1250) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 35,473 42,434 45,500 48,000 5.5%50,000 4021 Overtime-Temp 289 83 300 300 0.0%300 4030 Contributions-Retirement 4,576 6,490 6,000 7,000 16.7%7,500 4040 Contributions-Insurance 321 590 600 600 0.0%600 4050 Workers Compensation 1,115 1,280 1,300 1,300 0.0%1,300 4060 Unemployment 527 524 - - 0.0%- *Total Personal Services 42,302 51,400 53,700 57,200 6.5%59,700 4120 Supplies-Equipment 175 116 300 300 0.0%300 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 17 105 700 200 (71.4%)300 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 801 250 700 700 0.0%700 *Total Materials & Supplies 993 470 1,700 1,200 (29.4%)1,300 4300 Fees, Services 4,126 2,757 3,200 3,200 0.0%3,200 4310 Telephone 1,229 1,245 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,600 4340 Printing & Publishing 16 - 100 100 0.0%- 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles - - 200 200 0.0%- 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip - - 100 100 0.0%- 4531 Repair & Maintenance-Radios - - 200 200 0.0%- *Total Contractual Services 5,370 4,002 5,400 5,400 0.0%4,800 **Total Community Service 48,665 55,873 60,800 63,800 4.9%65,800 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Community Service (1260) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 464,860 419,427 473,000 491,800 4.0%506,500 4011 Overtime-Reg 6,157 7,436 6,000 7,000 16.7%7,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 13,897 7,047 14,000 12,000 (14.3%)12,000 4021 Overtime-Temp - 51 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 68,941 62,455 71,700 74,500 3.9%78,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 80,702 78,157 73,500 86,600 17.8%97,000 4050 Workers Compensation 3,588 2,833 4,000 3,500 (12.5%)3,500 *Total Personal Services 638,144 577,405 642,200 675,400 5.2%704,000 4120 Supplies-Equipment 21 399 500 500 0.0%500 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 10 416 300 300 0.0%300 *Total Materials & Supplies 32 814 800 800 0.0%800 4300 Fees, Services 10,822 23,254 16,000 16,000 0.0%16,000 4310 Telephone 3,915 4,350 4,000 4,600 15.0%4,600 4340 Printing & Publishing 292 358 300 300 0.0%300 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 1,383 1,280 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500 4370 Travel & Training 3,971 2,331 4,500 6,300 40.0%6,300 4380 Mileage 149 - 100 100 0.0%100 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip - - 500 500 0.0%500 *Total Contractual Services 20,533 31,573 26,900 29,300 8.9%29,300 **Total Engineering 658,709 609,793 669,900 705,500 5.3%734,100 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Engineering (1310) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 489,181 493,599 543,100 560,500 3.2%577,000 4011 Overtime-Reg 27,554 65,137 27,000 40,000 48.1%45,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 24,366 27,994 28,000 32,000 14.3%34,000 4021 Overtime-Temp 428 438 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 77,435 84,190 82,300 86,000 4.5%88,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 100,282 119,357 120,000 97,500 (18.8%)109,000 4050 Workers Compensation 59,215 58,393 66,000 60,000 (9.1%)62,000 4060 Unemployment 3,328 4,008 - - 0.0%- *Total Personal Services 781,789 853,116 866,400 876,000 1.1%915,000 4120 Supplies-Equipment 43,237 38,254 45,000 40,000 (11.1%)45,000 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 18,263 9,420 12,000 12,000 0.0%12,000 4150 Maintenance Materials 33,014 50,856 48,000 55,000 14.6%55,000 4210 Books & Periodicals - - 100 100 0.0%100 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 5,439 4,308 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 2,758 1,706 2,700 2,700 0.0%2,700 *Total Materials & Supplies 102,710 104,543 113,300 115,300 1.8%120,300 4300 Fees, Services 9,353 3,953 3,500 3,500 0.0%3,500 4310 Telephone 5,128 8,299 5,200 8,300 59.6%9,100 4340 Printing & Publishing 63 173 300 300 0.0%300 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 2,051 522 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - 100 200 100 (50.0%)100 4370 Travel & Training 1,589 2,111 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,600 4410 Rental-Equipment 8,383 8,260 3,000 8,000 166.7%8,000 4440 License & Registration 5 464 500 500 0.0%500 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 450 16 100 100 0.0%100 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 200 2,824 800 800 0.0%800 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 650 2,250 700 700 0.0%700 4540 Repair & Maintenance-Streets 6,875 5,800 6,500 6,500 0.0%6,500 4560 Repair & Maintenance-Signs 11,850 11,544 11,000 11,000 0.0%11,000 *Total Contractual Services 46,597 46,316 35,400 43,400 22.6%44,200 **Total Street Maintenance 931,096 1,003,974 1,015,100 1,034,700 1.9%1,079,500 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Street Maintenance (1320) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4120 Supplies-Equipment 4,679 5,233 3,000 4,000 33.3%5,000 *Total Materials & Supplies 4,679 5,233 3,000 4,000 33.3%5,000 4300 Fees, Services 2,166 - 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4310 Telephone 360 360 500 500 0.0%500 4320 Utilities 320,328 328,234 323,000 323,000 0.0%332,000 4565 Repair & Maintenance-Light/Signal 31,664 41,492 30,000 35,000 16.7%40,000 *Total Contractual Services 354,518 370,086 354,500 359,500 1.4%373,500 **Total Street Lighting and Signals 359,197 375,319 357,500 363,500 1.7%378,500 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Street Lighting and Signals (1350) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 206,685 213,491 217,100 224,400 3.4%231,100 4011 Overtime-Reg 4,771 14,072 5,000 7,000 40.0%9,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 4,182 4,500 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,500 4021 Overtime-Temp - 127 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 30,569 32,815 33,000 35,000 6.1%36,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 40,026 44,291 48,300 42,000 (13.0%)47,000 4050 Workers Compensation 9,266 9,276 11,000 10,000 (9.1%)10,000 *Total Personal Services 295,498 318,572 319,400 323,400 1.3%338,600 4120 Supplies-Equipment 1,610 502 2,000 1,600 (20.0%)1,600 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 48 60 200 200 0.0%200 4150 Maintenance Materials 113 2,058 600 600 0.0%600 4170 Motor Fuels & Lubricants 144,222 142,536 165,000 155,000 (6.1%)155,000 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 1,055 1,104 1,200 1,300 8.3%1,300 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 2,605 2,293 3,000 3,000 0.0%3,000 *Total Materials & Supplies 149,654 148,552 172,000 161,700 (6.0%)161,700 4300 Fees, Services 4,798 3,539 5,000 4,000 (20.0%)4,000 4310 Telephone 2,432 2,375 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500 4320 Utilities 32,540 36,441 32,000 36,000 12.5%36,000 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 5,145 5,342 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 40 40 200 200 0.0%200 4370 Travel & Training 691 - 800 800 0.0%800 4440 License & Registration - 425 300 300 0.0%300 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 12,451 31,448 12,000 12,000 0.0%12,000 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 8,798 291 3,500 3,500 0.0%3,500 *Total Contractual Services 66,895 79,901 61,800 64,800 4.9%64,800 4703 Office Equipment - - 500 500 0.0%500 4705 Other Equipment 6,761 3,561 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 *Total Capital Outlay 6,761 3,561 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500 **Total Fleet Department 518,808 550,586 558,700 555,400 (0.6%)570,600 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Fleet Department (1370) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4210 Books & Periodicals - - 200 200 0.0%200 *Total Materials & Supplies - - 200 200 0.0%200 4340 Printing & Publishing 1,090 702 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - - 200 200 0.0%200 4370 Travel & Training 249 126 300 300 0.0%300 *Total Contractual Services 1,338 828 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500 **Total Planning Commission 1,338 828 1,700 1,700 0.0%1,700 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Planning Commission (1410) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 339,898 366,597 403,400 402,300 (0.3%)414,400 4011 Overtime-Reg - 1,410 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 48,624 52,927 61,000 61,000 0.0%63,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 62,321 65,198 61,000 53,300 (12.6%)60,000 4050 Workers Compensation 2,860 2,888 3,800 3,000 (21.1%)3,200 *Total Personal Services 453,704 489,020 529,200 519,600 (1.8%)540,600 4120 Supplies-Equipment 62 66 300 100 (66.7%)100 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 441 284 100 300 200.0%300 *Total Materials & Supplies 503 350 400 400 0.0%400 4300 Fees, Services 37,392 10,354 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 909 1,894 800 2,000 150.0%2,000 4370 Travel & Training 3,722 385 5,500 4,500 (18.2%)4,500 *Total Contractual Services 42,024 12,633 11,300 11,500 1.8%11,500 **Total Planning Administration 496,230 502,004 540,900 531,500 (1.7%)552,500 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Planning Administration (1420) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 21,852 22,594 22,600 23,300 3.1%24,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 3,220 3,305 3,500 3,500 0.0%3,600 4040 Contributions-Insurance 2,481 2,748 2,900 2,600 (10.3%)2,900 4050 Workers Compensation 182 177 200 200 0.0%200 *Total Personal Services 27,735 28,824 29,200 29,600 1.4%30,700 4300 Fees, Services 14,240 14,737 10,000 14,000 40.0%14,000 4370 Travel & Training 295 - 200 200 0.0%200 4375 Promotional Expense 984 1,316 800 800 0.0%1,000 *Total Contractual Services 15,519 16,052 11,000 15,000 36.4%15,200 **Total Senior Commission 43,254 44,876 40,200 44,600 10.9%45,900 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Senior Commission (1430) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4130 Supplies-Program - 25 100 100 0.0%100 4210 Books & Periodicals - - 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Materials & Supplies - 25 200 200 0.0%200 4340 Printing & Publishing - - 100 100 0.0%100 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - - 500 500 0.0%500 4370 Travel & Training 175 - 400 400 0.0%400 *Total Contractual Services 175 - 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 **Total Park and Rec Commission 175 25 1,200 1,200 0.0%1,200 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Park and Recreation Commission (1510) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 172,863 168,124 182,300 186,700 2.4%192,300 4030 Contributions-Retirement 25,112 23,811 27,600 28,200 2.2%29,100 4040 Contributions-Insurance 26,993 36,543 38,900 33,900 (12.9%)39,000 4050 Workers Compensation 1,452 1,331 1,800 1,500 (16.7%)1,500 *Total Personal Services 226,420 229,809 250,600 250,300 (0.1%)261,900 4120 Supplies-Equipment 16 - 100 100 0.0%100 4130 Supplies-Program - 324 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Materials & Supplies 16 324 200 200 0.0%200 4300 Fees, Services 828 - 300 300 0.0%300 4310 Telephone 617 998 700 700 0.0%700 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 3,448 2,716 3,100 2,800 (9.7%)2,800 4370 Travel & Training 1,821 2,029 1,800 1,800 0.0%1,800 4380 Mileage - - 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Contractual Services 6,713 5,743 6,000 5,700 (5.0%)5,700 **Total Park and Rec Admin.233,149 235,876 256,800 256,200 (0.2%)267,800 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Park and Recreation Administration (1520) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 64,313 66,539 68,100 70,800 4.0%73,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 97,000 103,816 113,000 113,000 0.0%116,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 24,008 25,377 30,000 30,000 0.0%30,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 9,848 10,920 11,600 10,200 (12.1%)12,000 4050 Workers Compensation 9,909 9,667 10,500 10,500 0.0%10,500 *Total Personal Services 205,079 216,319 233,200 234,500 0.6%241,500 4120 Supplies-Equipment 1,358 1,678 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,600 4130 Supplies-Program 13,066 14,884 15,000 15,000 0.0%15,000 4150 Maintenance Materials 450 248 500 500 0.0%500 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 631 500 600 600 0.0%600 *Total Materials & Supplies 15,505 17,310 17,700 17,700 0.0%17,700 4300 Fees, Services 50,812 50,977 52,000 51,000 (1.9%)52,000 4310 Telephone 917 618 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4320 Utilities 35,409 37,345 37,000 37,000 0.0%38,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 351 410 400 400 0.0%400 4370 Travel & Training 15 30 400 400 0.0%400 4375 Promotional Expense 700 890 800 800 0.0%800 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 1,978 1,745 2,500 2,000 (20.0%)2,000 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 1,653 1,481 1,800 1,800 0.0%2,000 *Total Contractual Services 91,834 93,496 95,900 94,400 (1.6%)96,600 **Total Recreation Center 312,419 327,125 346,800 346,600 (0.1%)355,800 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Recreation Center (1530) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 8,164 9,121 10,700 11,000 2.8%11,400 4021 Overtime-Temp - 8 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 625 698 700 700 0.0%800 4050 Workers Compensation 500 523 600 600 0.0%600 *Total Personal Services 9,288 10,351 12,000 12,300 2.5%12,800 4130 Supplies-Program 10,477 8,143 9,000 10,000 11.1%10,000 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 200 200 200 200 0.0%200 *Total Materials & Supplies 10,677 8,343 9,200 10,200 10.9%10,200 4300 Fees, Services 35,341 32,346 35,000 35,000 0.0%35,000 4310 Telephone 1,288 1,145 1,200 1,200 0.0%1,200 4320 Utilities 10,765 11,642 11,000 12,000 9.1%12,000 4340 Printing & Publishing 214 268 400 400 0.0%400 4903 Bad Debt Expense - 12 - - 0.0%- *Total Contractual Services 47,607 45,413 47,600 48,600 2.1%48,600 **Total Lake Ann Park Operations 67,573 64,106 68,800 71,100 3.3%71,600 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Lake Ann Park Operations (1540) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 489,295 500,639 457,100 458,000 0.2%471,800 4011 Overtime-Reg 32,956 46,899 30,000 40,000 33.3%46,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 112,282 119,810 118,000 126,000 6.8%133,000 4021 Overtime-Temp 3,829 4,776 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 83,513 86,052 88,000 91,000 3.4%95,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 78,394 81,739 84,000 73,700 (12.3%)82,000 4050 Workers Compensation 36,995 35,687 39,000 37,000 (5.1%)38,000 *Total Personal Services 837,263 875,602 821,100 830,700 1.2%870,800 4120 Supplies-Equipment 45,221 41,455 40,000 41,000 2.5%41,000 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 11,122 3,049 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 4150 Maintenance Materials 21,561 35,339 27,000 30,000 11.1%30,000 4151 Irrigation Materials 3,967 1,515 5,000 4,000 (20.0%)4,000 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 2,453 3,304 2,600 3,000 15.4%3,000 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 2,032 1,022 1,200 1,200 0.0%1,200 *Total Materials & Supplies 86,356 85,684 80,800 84,200 4.2%84,200 4300 Fees, Services 52,825 46,982 43,000 45,000 4.7%45,000 4310 Telephone 5,813 6,704 5,900 6,200 5.1%6,200 4320 Utilities 4,796 5,220 4,800 5,200 8.3%5,200 4340 Printing & Publishing 105 254 200 200 0.0%200 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 3,591 3,932 3,700 3,900 5.4%3,900 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - - 400 400 0.0%400 4370 Travel & Training 2,537 684 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4400 Rental-Land & Buildings 29,984 34,853 36,000 35,000 (2.8%)36,000 4410 Rental-Equipment 1,274 973 700 1,000 42.9%1,000 4440 License & Registration 44 368 300 300 0.0%300 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 5,073 134 1,700 1,500 (11.8%)1,500 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 2,387 - 100 100 0.0%100 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 8,889 6,344 1,000 3,000 200.0%3,000 4560 Repair & Maintenance-Signs 754 1,159 2,000 1,500 (25.0%)1,500 *Total Contractual Services 118,073 107,608 100,800 104,300 3.5%105,300 **Total Park Maintenance 1,041,692 1,068,895 1,002,700 1,019,200 1.6%1,060,300 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Park Maintenance (1550) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 64,425 77,833 56,200 58,100 3.4%60,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 9,772 8,907 8,600 8,900 3.5%9,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 3,536 10,900 19,300 16,900 (12.4%)19,000 4050 Workers Compensation 535 493 600 600 0.0%600 *Total Personal Services 78,268 98,133 84,700 84,500 (0.2%)88,600 4120 Supplies-Equipment 41 116 300 300 0.0%300 4130 Supplies-Program 4,431 3,688 4,000 4,000 0.0%4,000 *Total Materials & Supplies 4,472 3,804 4,300 4,300 0.0%4,300 4300 Fees, Services 34,713 27,561 32,000 30,000 (6.3%)30,000 4310 Telephone - 180 - - 0.0%- 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 95 98 100 100 0.0%100 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 110 110 100 100 0.0%100 4370 Travel & Training 222 233 300 300 0.0%300 4375 Promotional Expense 60 11 100 100 0.0%100 4380 Mileage - 82 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Contractual Services 35,200 28,275 32,700 30,700 (6.1%)30,700 **Total Senior Citizens Center 117,940 130,212 121,700 119,500 (1.8%)123,600 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Senior Citizens Center (1560) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 103,215 105,339 121,860 122,900 0.9%126,600 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 64,368 73,798 68,000 78,000 14.7%86,000 4021 Overtime-Temp 402 562 1,000 700 (30.0%)800 4030 Contributions-Retirement 20,434 21,321 27,000 27,000 0.0%29,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 10,720 11,947 28,000 23,400 (16.4%)27,400 4050 Workers Compensation 4,802 5,148 5,000 5,500 10.0%5,500 *Total Personal Services 203,942 218,116 250,860 257,500 2.6%275,300 4120 Supplies-Equipment 2,019 2,352 2,500 2,300 (8.0%)2,300 4130 Supplies-Program 22,063 19,277 18,000 18,000 0.0%18,000 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 2,035 1,982 1,700 2,000 17.6%2,000 *Total Materials & Supplies 26,117 23,611 22,200 22,300 0.5%22,300 4300 Fees, Services 65,606 58,900 66,600 66,600 0.0%66,600 4310 Telephone 2,155 2,418 2,200 2,400 9.1%2,400 4320 Utilities 4,660 7,447 4,600 7,500 63.0%7,500 4340 Printing & Publishing 9,683 7,477 7,500 7,500 0.0%7,500 4370 Travel & Training 507 364 500 500 0.0%500 4380 Mileage - - 100 100 0.0%100 4400 Rental-Land & Buildings 8,303 8,298 7,000 8,200 17.1%8,200 4410 Rental-Equipment 32,412 35,768 32,000 36,000 12.5%36,000 *Total Contractual Services 123,325 120,673 120,500 128,800 6.9%128,800 **Total Recreation Programs 353,384 362,400 393,560 408,600 3.8%426,400 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Recreation Programs (1600) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 25,806 26,335 13,600 13,700 0.7%14,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 1,950 1,100 2,200 2,200 0.0%2,200 4030 Contributions-Retirement 4,020 3,991 2,100 2,100 0.0%2,300 4040 Contributions-Insurance 2,645 2,951 3,100 2,600 (16.1%)3,000 4050 Workers Compensation 337 271 400 400 0.0%400 *Total Personal Services 34,757 34,647 21,400 21,000 (1.9%)21,900 4130 Supplies-Program 4,283 4,424 4,500 3,300 (26.7%)3,300 *Total Materials & Supplies 4,283 4,424 4,500 3,300 (26.7%)3,300 4300 Fees, Services 11,573 11,929 12,500 12,500 0.0%12,500 *Total Contractual Services 11,573 11,929 12,500 12,500 0.0%12,500 **Total Self-Supporting Programs 50,614 51,000 38,400 36,800 (4.2%)37,700 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Self-Supporting Programs (1700) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 23,393 21,525 26,000 26,000 0.0%27,000 4021 Overtime-Temp - 19 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 2,438 2,386 2,800 2,800 0.0%2,800 4050 Workers Compensation 1,481 1,235 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,600 *Total Personal Services 27,311 25,164 30,400 30,400 0.0%31,400 4120 Supplies-Equipment 82 - - 0.0%- 4130 Supplies-Program 2,438 1,573 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 5,427 4,917 5,400 5,400 0.0%5,400 *Total Materials & Supplies 7,947 6,490 7,900 7,900 0.0%7,900 4375 Promotional Expenses - - 300 300 0.0%300 *Total Contractual Services - - 300 300 0.0%300 **Total Recreation Sports 35,258 31,653 38,600 38,600 0.0%39,600 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Recreation Sports (1800) Dept Chaska*Cottage Grove Inver Grove Lino Lakes Prior Lake Rosemount Savage Shakopee Avg Chanhassen Elk River Stillwater Admin 7.10 8.00 8.00 4.00 6.00 5.00 6.50 9.00 6.70 4.50 NR NR Finance 5.00 6.00 7.60 4.00 6.00 7.00 4.60 4.00 5.53 2.80 NR NR MIS 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.67 1.50 NR NR City Hall Bldg 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 4.00 1.42 1.00 NR NR Fire 5.00 9.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 8.00 3.86 2.50 NR NR Code Enforcement/Insp 6.00 8.60 3.50 4.00 5.00 6.30 6.00 5.63 7.00 NR NR CSO - 2.00 1.50 1.50 2.18 1.00 1.36 1.50 NR NR Engineering 7.00 5.00 9.00 contracted 5.00 4.00 5.00 9.00 6.29 5.75 NR NR Street Maint 13.00 13.00 9.00 6.50 10.00 10.00 10.23 6.00 9.72 8.25 NR NR Fleet Maint 3.00 4.00 3.00 1.50 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.69 3.00 NR NR Planning 13.00 6.00 3.00 1.00 4.50 4.00 2.30 5.00 4.85 4.55 NR NR Senior Commission - N/A - - - 0.25 0.05 0.25 NR NR Park & Rec Admin 54.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 7.00 3.00 2.50 9.06 2.00 NR NR Rec Center 3.00 6.25 N/A - - - 2.50 1.96 1.00 NR NR Park Maint 13.00 13.00 15.00 4.00 8.60 8.00 10.00 9.00 10.08 7.25 NR NR Senior Citizen Center 1.00 N/A - - - 1.00 0.40 1.00 NR NR Rec Programs 1.00 1.00 temps. 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.42 1.80 NR NR Self Support Progs (Adults)- N/A - - - - 0.20 NR NR Cable TV - 1.00 - - 2.50 0.50 0.67 1.25 NR NR Water 7.50 4.50 11.00 3.33 1.00 1.00 6.60 4.99 7.50 NR NR Sewer 7.50 4.50 - 3.33 3.00 1.00 6.60 7.00 4.12 5.50 NR NR Surface Water Mgmt 2.00 - 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 3.50 NR NR 139.10 80.00 98.45 37.15 60.60 62.50 78.81 75.25 78.98 73.60 - - * Chaska has 203.5 FTE, including police, and electric utility services. They have 21.0 FTE in "Administrative Services" most of which has been split into each department NR = Did not respond City of Chanhassen FTE Comparison with KFS CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Approve City Council Minutes dated September 9, 2019 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.1. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No: PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves the minutes dated September 9, 2019.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: City Council Summary Minutes dated September 9, 2019 City Council Verbatim Minutes dated September 9, 2019 City Council Work Session Minutes dated September 9, 2019 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES SEPTEMBER 9, 2019 Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilman McDonald, Councilman Campion, and Councilwoman Coleman COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Tjornhom STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Jake Foster, Kate Aanenson, Jason Wedel, Todd Hoffman, and Roger Knutson PUBLIC PRESENT: DeeDee Kahring 11 Peavey Road, Chaska Brandon Arnold 3118 Bavaria Hills Trail, Chaska Miles Nablo 18288 Evener Way, Eden Prairie Chris Hentges 11 Peavey Road, Chaska Greg Boe 114200 Huntermark Road, #110, Chaska Steve Scharfenberg 1470 Lake Susan Hills Drive Mike Smith 9524 Upton Avenue No, Brooklyn Park Greg Hastings 9217 Lake Riley Boulevard Terre Kemble Chanhassen Red Birds PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: PROCLAMATION-CHANHASSEN RED BIRDS 2019 STATE AMATEUR BASEBALL CLASS “B” CHAMPIONS. Mayor Ryan asked for a round of applause for the Chanhassen Red Birds on winning the 2019 Class “B” State Amateur Baseball Championship for a second consecutive year. Representative Greg Boe read a letter of congratulations from District 47B and the State of Minnesota. Steve Scharfenberg reviewed the accomplishments of the Chanhassen Red Birds over the 2019 season before thanking the City and staff for all their assistance. Mayor Ryan read a proclamation recognizing the Chanhassen Red Birds as the 2019 State Amateur Baseball Class “B” Champions. The City Council took a short recess at this point in the meeting to take photographs and celebrate with cake. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Coleman moved, Councilman Campion seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: City Council Summary – September 9, 2019 2 1. Approve City Council Minutes dated August 26, 2019 2. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated July 16, 2019 3. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated August 20, 2019 4. Approve Wetland Replacement Plan for CSAH 101 Project 5. Item pulled for separate discussion. 6. Resolution #2019-43: Approve Quotes for Lift Station 22 Rehabilitation 7. Glendale Drive Homes: Approve Amended Development Contract 8. Item pulled for separate discussion. 9. Resolution #2019-44: Accept Advertisement for Bids: Award Contract for the Bluff Creek Trail Rehabilitation Project 10. Consider a Site Plan Review with Variance for Chanhassen Butcher for Property Located at 590 West 79th Street All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. EASTERN CARVER COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 112 REFERENDUM – DEEDEE KAHRING, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND OPERATIONS. DeeDee Kahring and Chris Hentges presented information pertaining to the upcoming Eastern Carver County School District Referendum being held on November 5, 2019 before showing a video. Mack Titus, 2747 Century Trail discussed his issue with the inability of the Chanhassen engineering department to manage privatization within Arboretum Village. He suggested that the Chanhassen council table any discussion of the franchise fee until the engineering department mission statement is focused on retaining individual property values. PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVAL OF ON-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE WITH SUNDAY SALES FOR CHANHASSEN BUTCHER, LLC DBA TEQUILA BUTCHER, 590 WEST 79TH STREET. Todd Gerhardt presented the staff report on this item. Mayor Ryan opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. The applicant Tony Donatell introduced his City Council Summary – September 9, 2019 3 business partners, wife Rheata, Rodrigo, and Blaine before explaining that they are very excited to open Tequila Butcher in Chanhassen. Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Coleman seconded that the City Council approves the request of an on-sale intoxicating liquor license with Sunday sales from Chanhassen Butcher LLC doing business as Tequila Butcher located at 590 West 79th Street. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. CONSENT AGENDA: 5. APPROVE QUOTE FOR STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS IN CARVER BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD. Jason Wedel presented the staff report on this item. Councilman McDonald asked about the impact of this project on Lotus Lake. Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council approves the quote from Minger Construction in the amount of $23,967.50 for stormwater improvements in the Carver Beach neighborhood. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. 8. ADOPT AMENDED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION BYLAWS. Councilman McDonald pulled this item for a public vote. Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council adopts the amended Economic Development Commission Bylaws. All voted in favor, except Councilman McDonald who opposed, and the motion carried 3-1. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. None. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None. Councilwoman Coleman moved, Councilman Campion 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 8:15 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2019 Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilman McDonald, Councilman Campion, and Councilwoman Coleman COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Tjornhom STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Jake Foster, Kate Aanenson, Jason Wedel, Todd Hoffman, and Roger Knutson PUBLIC PRESENT: DeeDee Kahring 11 Peavey Road, Chaska Brandon Arnold 3118 Bavaria Hills Trail, Chaska Miles Nablo 18288 Evener Way, Eden Prairie Chris Hentges 11 Peavey Road, Chaska Greg Boe 114200 Huntermark Road, #110, Chaska Steve Scharfenberg 1470 Lake Susan Hills Drive Mike Smith 9524 Upton Avenue No, Brooklyn Park Greg Hastings 9217 Lake Riley Boulevard Terre Kemble Chanhassen Red Birds Mayor Ryan: Again good evening everybody and welcome to our council meeting. To those of you that are watching at home or livestreaming from the Chanhassen website, welcome and thank you for joining us. For the record we have four council members present with Councilmember Tjornhom absent tonight. First action on our agenda is the agenda approval. Council members are there any modifications to the agenda as printed? If not we will proceed with the public agenda. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: PROCLAMATION-CHANHASSEN RED BIRDS 2019 STATE AMATEUR BASEBALL CLASS “B” CHAMPIONS. Mayor Ryan: And first up is very exciting part of the meeting for us is our public announcements but before I begin with the actual proclamation I would love everybody to join me in a round of applause for our 2019 State Champions. So just to give a little bit of an idea of what we’re going to do tonight, I’d like to say a few words and then ask council if they would as well. We have Representative Greg Boe here tonight and I know he would like to say a few words as well and then Steve Scharfenberg I think is going to say some words and then I will Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 2 read the official proclamation and then invite everybody up and we’ll, your get your proclamation certificate and then like we do here at City Hall we always celebrate with cake so we’ll do a little cake celebration after that so. Again congratulations to all of you. The Chanhassen Red Birds are so much more then the incredible two time state amateur baseball champions that they are. They truly are part of the heart and soul of this community. We often get asked what makes Chanhassen so special. In addition to the great parks and trails and events that we have, the school district, we have a small town feel where everybody in this community comes together and gets behind you guys, our team. The Chanhassen Red Birds. There is certainly a passion at the core from the board and the group. There have been long time Chanhassen residents who brought the Red Birds back years ago onto the field and continue over the past years to grow the brand and continue the interest of the Red Birds so we thank you for that. I know some of the members are here. I see the Strands. The Kemble’s. We appreciate all that you do in working the, helping with the Red Birds. And then of course to the coaches. You’ve obviously given some great advice and strategy over the past seasons but additionally your both mentors and leaders of these men and likely support them in ways that go beyond the field and so I want to acknowledge that and thank you for that because that goes a long way and is very important. And then of course to the guys. You are the ones that put in the sweat equity and through your determination, grit, and passion for the game we thank you for being such an important part of this community. The championship obviously means a lot to you as it does to us but really it is the icing on the cake for everybody here at city hall. As council we spend a lot of our time talking about community and so we are appreciative of you, whether you realize it or not. With each season you are making this community an even better place to live. You bring people of all generations to the ballpark. There are families. Little League teams and people who simply love to come and watch baseball and you are the reason that the community continues to come together. You inspire the young and you entertain the masses every single time you step onto the field so thank you for your contribution to the sense of pride and community in Chanhassen and again a huge congratulations on your second championship because like I said let’s be honest who doesn’t love to win so congratulations. Council members are there any other comments that you would like to make? Councilman McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Well I just want to say congratulations. You know I’ve been watching you guys for many years. The past 3 years have been really exciting. You’ve made it to the championship game. First time through again you seem to want to make it really hard on yourselves and your fans. You didn’t quite make it that year but you came real close. The next year you came through and again you had to go through the losers bracket. You had to win more games and you did it and I was really proud of you guys. This year you even went one better. You lost the game earlier than what you normally do so you had to play an extra game on that weekend to even get into the championship and you did it again so I was really proud. It was a really enjoyable game. I love watching you guys. You know I try to show up as much as I can but yeah you’ve done a lot for the community. You’ve made us proud and every year I’ve watched as the stands get a little bit fuller and a little bit fuller and I’m hoping that next year they’ll be even fuller because now you won twice. You know maybe people will start to think, you know maybe I ought to go out and watch these guys so hopefully next year will be bigger Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 3 and better and one of these years I just hope you can just go straight on through the tournament and not have to play those extra games so good luck to you and again thank you for a great show. Councilwoman Coleman: If I may I just want to say congratulations. Thank you for making our city so proud and for being a good example. It takes a lot of hard work, dedication and teamwork which is something that every citizen can learn from and be inspired by. I did promise my husband I would put in one request if there are parents of left handed pitchers in the audience please email me any tips you have. He is hoping that is in store for our son coming in a few weeks so any tips would be appreciated but thank you all so much for making us so proud. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Councilman Campion: And I’ll close it out. Congratulations. You guys you know make us all proud and there are a lot of little kids that look up to you. My 8 year old son still has a ball that sits on the shelf in his room that many of you signed for him last year when he decided to forego the quarter or dollar that Councilman McDonald might have been giving out for the spare balls but yeah, thank you and congratulations and we’re all proud of you. Mayor Ryan: Great thank you. Representative Boe if you would like to step forward. Welcome. Representative Greg Boe: Thank you Madam Mayor. Would you like me to read this now? Mayor Ryan: Yes please. Yes, yes. Representative Greg Boe: Okay. I didn’t want to go in front of your proclamation. Mayor Ryan: No, go ahead. Please do. Representative Greg Boe: Well it’s a pleasure to be here tonight. I’m Greg Boe and I’m proud to represent District 47B which is Chanhassen, Chaska, and Victoria. Now I’d like to tell you that the entire district is really, really happy with how you but I think there’s at least a couple people that are a little jealous but nonetheless all in all we’re very proud and very happy of the job you’ve done and so I wanted to read a quick letter. I have a nice congratulatory letter from the State of Minnesota to read on your behalf tonight. So congratulations to the Chanhassen Red Birds Baseball Team, Class B 2019 State Champions. On behalf of the residents of our community we congratulate you on back to back state championships. What an extraordinary feat. The team fought hard. Trained hard and your success is a testament to your endurance and commitment to excellence. The residents of Chanhassen could not be more proud of your success. I want to personally extend my well wishes to the entire team. I’m sure your family and friends and community are all celebrating your successes of this season so congratulations on a job well done. Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 4 Mayor Ryan: Thank you Representative Boe. Mr. Scharfenberg. Steve Scharfenberg: Steve Scharfenberg, 1470 Lake Susan Hills Drive, Chanhassen. Mayor Ryan, council members and city staff. On behalf of the Chan Red Birds organization I’m proud to be here tonight to introduce the 2019 Class B State Champions. The Red Birds defeated the Dundas Dukes on September 2nd in two games by scores of 8 to 1 and then in the championship game 9 to 2 to bring home the trophy for a second consecutive year. In addition several members of the team were named to the All Tournament Team. Those team members included Miles Nablo, Logan Spitzack, Mike Jurgella, and John Straka was named the tournament MVP with a pitching record of 2 and 1. The Red Birds had a very successful 2019 season with an overall record of 32 and 5 and an RVL record of 11 and 1. Now the Twins weren’t the only team hitting a lot of home runs this year. The Red Birds hit 40 home runs and 70 doubles during the 2019 season and scored 230 runs to their opponents 90 runs during this season. And finally had a team pitching ERA of 1.805 which is just amazing. We also had a number of other highlights throughout the year that I just wanted to point out. We hosted a 5 team tournament for the first time this year which we were successful in winning both of our games against Moorhead and Cold Springs. For the second consecutive year the players themselves ran a team sponsored baseball clinic for youth during the course of a 3 day period at the high school with many attending and probably the greatest achievement I think that we had, besides the championship was the Channel 9 Town Ball game which took place in the middle of July against the Minnetonka Millers. Now we weren’t successful in defeating the Millers who are a very good team but that evening when you talk about community that truly was a community event. We had over 500 people attend the ballgame that night. I’ve never seen that many people there for a game. I can tell you that we’ve never had that many people there and it was just a tremendous event and it was all made possible because of the hard that we as a team put in, the City put in and the community put in because we had help from Rotary and a number of different organizations to come out and help us that evening. So finally I do want to say thank you to the City and the City for all the work that they do in supporting the Red Birds. Todd and Jerry do a tremendous job in helping market the team. They put up the signs for us on game nights. They help promote us throughout the year and we couldn’t do what we do without the help of the City so thank you again. Again we’re proud to be here. We’re proud to be part of this community and let’s do it again next year. Mayor Ryan: Awesome, thank you. Alright now for the official proclamation. The 2019 State Amateur Baseball Class “B” Champions. Whereas the Chanhassen Red Birds town baseball team became the Minnesota Amateur Baseball Class “B” State champions on Monday, September 2, 2019 during the playing of the 96th Annual Minnesota Baseball Association tournament, and Whereas the team had a season record of 32 wins and only 5 loses; and Whereas the team defeated the Dundas Dukes in the final two games of the state tournament by the scores of 8 to 1 and 9 to 2; and Whereas the team was coached by Mike Ralston, Mike Arnold and scorekeeper Matt Schrad; and Whereas the players on the team are Brandon Arnold, Nick Smith, Derek Smith, Michael Jurgella, Aaron Pfaff, Aaron Kloeppner, Matthew Smith, Logan Spitzack, Justin Arnold, Luke Roskam, Joe Jersak, Justin Bach, Riley Johnson, Ryan Diers, John Straka, John Eischens, Miles Nablo, Zach Hartford, Dominic Reed, Zach Hoffman, Garrett Fischer, Justin Anderson, Chris Choles, Justin Jeronimous, and Shawn Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 5 Riesgraf. Thanks for the nods guys. It’s like calling in a pitch right? Alright now Be It Resolved that the Honorable Mayor Elise Ryan, myself, and the members of the City Council of the City of Chanhassen on behalf of all citizens do hereby recognize the Chanhassen Red Birds for being the 2019 Minnesota Amateur Baseball Class “B” State Champions and for being the pride of Chanhassen and do hereby declare September 9, 2019 Chanhassen Red Birds Day in Chanhassen, Minnesota. Congratulations. Alright now I’ll, Steve do you want to join me up there and call their names and we’ll hand the proclamations. Todd Gerhardt: You guys have to find more Johnson’s. Mayor Ryan: Greg if you want to come up and shake hands as well that’d be great. You want to call their names? Representative Greg Boe: Sure. Mayor Ryan: Alright. Steve Scharfenberg: Shawn Riesgraf. Mayor Ryan: Congratulations. Steve Scharfenberg: Brandon Arnold. Mayor Ryan: Congratulations. Steve Scharfenberg: Matt Smith. Miles Nablo. Mayor Ryan: Congratulations. Steve Scharfenberg: Okay and Terre Kemble and Ken, Marcia come on up. Bring the trophy. Todd Hoffman: We’re all going to get Terre to smile. Terre Kemble: Thank you very much. Mayor Ryan: Marsha. Marcia Strand: A lot of people don’t know but Elise actually helped to start the team back in the day when we were trying to get the team going. She was on the park board then and she was one of the people that helped us get it going so we have to thank Elise Ryan for all her help. Mayor Ryan: Alright let’s do a quick photo. Congratulations again everybody. Jerry Ruegemer: We’ll take one without proclamations and one with proclamations. The City Council took a short recess at this point in the meeting to take photographs and celebrate with cake. Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 6 CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Ryan: Alright we are back in session. Thank you everybody. Next on our agenda we have the consent agenda. Tonight we have consent agenda items number 1 through 10. All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be considered as a single motion based on staff recommendation. There will be no separate discussion on these items. If discussion is desired by anyone on council or here in the chambers you may request to have the item removed and have it considered separately on our agenda this evening. Are there any items that council would like to consider separately? Councilman McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Madam Mayor. Yes Madam Mayor. I would like to remove item 5 and item 8 for separate discussion. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Item number 5 and item number 8. We will move those two items under H, under New Business. Perfect, thank you. So is there a motion to approve consent agenda items 1 through 4, 6, 7, 9 and 10? Councilwoman Coleman: So moved. Mayor Ryan: Is there a second? Councilman Campion: Second. Councilwoman Coleman moved, Councilman Campion seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: 1. Approve City Council Minutes dated August 26, 2019 2. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated July 16, 2019 3. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated August 20, 2019 4. Approve Wetland Replacement Plan for CSAH 101 Project 5. Item pulled for separate discussion. 6. Resolution #2019-43: Approve Quotes for Lift Station 22 Rehabilitation 7. Glendale Drive Homes: Approve Amended Development Contract 8. Item pulled for separate discussion. 9. Resolution #2019-44: Accept Advertisement for Bids: Award Contract for the Bluff Creek Trail Rehabilitation Project Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 7 10. Consider a Site Plan Review with Variance for Chanhassen Butcher for Property Located at 590 West 79th Street All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. EASTERN CARVER COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 112 REFERENDUM – DEEDEE KAHRING, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND OPERATIONS. Mayor Ryan: We have one scheduled visitor presentation so I invite you to the podium please. This is the Eastern Carver County School District 112 Referendum. Welcome. DeeDee Kahring: Well thank you. Thank you Madam Mayor, council members. Mr. Gerhardt and Mr. Knutson, thanks for allowing us to be here to share some information about upcoming referenda so I’ll just take a little time, along with Chris Hentges who’s here with us and Chris is with our teaching and learning department so we’ll just provide you with a little bit of information about the upcoming referenda and then we have a short video to show you. So as I mentioned on November 5th Eastern Carver County Schools will present a referenda to the residents of our community and a vote on 3 different items. You have a copy of our document in front of you. We’ll just kind of go over that. So the 3 questions, Question 1 will be an operating levy to increase support for student learning. Question 2 will be bond funds to address growth and building maintenance needs. We’ll go over that as well. Levy to renew our support for school security and technology. So the ballot questions, Question 1 the operating levy is an increase to continue strong academic preparation of our students to prevent cuts to programs and services. Maintaining our class size and assist with managing our growing enrollment. Question 1 needs to pass in order for Question 2 to pass, and I’ll explain that in just a minute. Question 2 is a bond referenda to build a new elementary school on district owned property that we purchased with the last referenda. It’s also to include a fairly significant amount of it to address deferred maintenance and to, deferred maintenance and building repair projects across the district as well as building a new larger bus garage. Again this question can pass only if Question 1 passes. Question 3 is a no tax increase renewal of our existing security and technology. This levy is used to support the technology in our schools. The security systems. Cameras. Our secured entrances. Our technology support and infrastructure in our schools. So what you need to know that’s kind of on that right hand side of the page is really the district is growing with our current demographic study and you’ve seen developments within your community as well as the 3 other communities that we support, or that support us and that’s Victoria, Carver and Chaska as well so 1,400 students on 5 years, that equates to about one new classroom per month per year. So a lot of growth in the communities. Many of our elementary schools are either at capacity or near capacity and we’re planning for the growth to meet the needs of those students. Additionally the Question 1, the operating levy is to take into consideration that State funding has not kept up with inflation. If it had kept up with inflation we would be receiving about $6 million dollars per year more than we currently are so funding has Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 8 to do with that. As far as our referenda on the deferred maintenance, the median age of our schools are about 34 years. We do have some newer schools but we definitely have some older schools as well and as our schools age and just like your home the maintenance needs increase on all of that. So addressing the deferred maintenance sets things such as roofs, parking lots, heating, ventilation equipment, all to sustain optimal student learning environments for all of our children. Additionally we’re looking for funds to improve our bus garage situation. Currently our bus garage in downtown Chaska is undersized. We have buses that are outside. We do not have ample space for maintenance and care of all of our buses. We will be bringing our bus service in house. We will no longer be contracting out for that so there is even a greater need for us to make sure that we’re protecting the assets that we will own which will be all of the buses and maintaining them. And finally the funding from the District security and technology levy has supported the secure school entrances, the infrastructure as I mentioned and learning devices for both students and staff. And now I’ll bring Chris up here to explain a little bit further and then we’ll show you the video. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Chris Hentges: Thank you and good evening. If you want to flip your sheet to the back side of your folder and I’ll talk about some of the highlights on the back side of the sheet and start on the top right with the operating levy information and a reminder that this is really supporting our general fund so classrooms, staffing, building operations, supplies, student support. You can see where on this graph where Eastern Carver County currently sits with our operating levy per students in that bottom third. If we were to pass the referendum and if it were to be approved we’d slide up into the, inbetween Edina and Eden Prairie so up towards that second half of the top half so these are 14 districts that we benchmark ourselves against, They have similar size and similar demographics so it just gives us some context as we’re doing our work. You take a look at the right, community supports our schools and this support has been reflected through a variety of community surveys that have been conducted over the last year. So residents, the surveys were conducted with residents that have students in our schools and residents that do not have students in our schools and there’s high support and belief that our students are receiving a high quality education from great teachers across the district, K through, or E through 12 really. Moving down to the left hand side, the bottom left, just some information around if the funding is not approved around those 3 questions. Things that we will need to take a look at as a school district as crowding. Our students continue to come as DeeDee said how do we support increase in class sizes. Our facilities continue to get older and not being able to meet the needs of the maintenance pieces. Teacher layoffs. Continued cuts to some of our academic programs. Also looking at our technology and how do we continue to support that and then also continue to keep up with school security. All really, really important things to us that we need to make sure that we continue to support and grow. Financial accountability. That’s DeeDee’s team has won 8 consecutive awards in their excellence in being fiscally responsible with our dollars and ensuring that those dollars are supporting our students and families in our school district is really important and DeeDee and her team does a great job with that. And then also some specific information around the tax impact. So you can see on the bottom there the 3 questions Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 9 separating out the operating levy, the bond and then the security and technology. And this, this little graph here is connected to the average price home in our 4 communities which is $350,000 and you can see the tax, monthly tax impact for those 3 different questions. As DeeDee said Question number 3 does not have an increase because that would be a renewal of the existing security and technology. If you take a look at the bottom right in the very bottom where it says learn more, and if you visit that website it does have a calculator where you can go in and put the value of your home and it will give you information as to what the monthly impact would be for, for the value of your home. And then last voting information. It is November 5th from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and you’ll see the polling locations for the 4 communities that our school district serves. Residents in Chanhassen you’ll see at the Chanhassen Rec Center. There are also options, two other options to vote early in person and that can be at the District office starting on September 20th through November 4th and that would be Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and they’re also going to have some extended hours Thursday, October 24th from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and then Saturday, October 26th from 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. And they will also, you can vote by mail so an absentee option as well and on the website that’s on this document provides more information of how to get that ballot and then submit that. Submit that ballot. So with that we will show a video that will go into a little bit more depth on the referendum. Mayor Ryan: Great, thank you. A video was shown at this point in the meeting. DeeDee Kahring: Okay, thank you. That’s it. We’re here to answer any questions that you might have. Mayor Ryan: Perfect, thank you very much. Council do you have any questions? I just have a couple just for information sake for anybody that’s watching. How about anymore public forums, meetings? Are there any more opportunities to learn more about this? DeeDee Kahring: There is. I’m sorry I just don’t remember the date off the top of my head but we are going to every City Council such as this. We are going to all of the organizations such as Chan Rotary. Chaska Rotary. We’re going to some of the various apartments and buildings throughout the community so we do have a list of those at the, at our district education center that we can get out but I can more information, I forgot the date. Mayor Ryan: Okay. And is that, is any of it posted on your, the website? DeeDee Kahring: Yep, yep. Mayor Ryan: Okay so people can go there for information. Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 10 DeeDee Kahring: There’s a wealth of information on our website about all of this. There’s some frequently asked questions too. We have a web email address where people can send in questions that they might have about the referenda and then all of those questions and responses are put on the website as well. Mayor Ryan: Perfect and kind of in conjunction with that, when you talk about the, some of the projects that you’re looking at is there a list of the projects that you’re considering as part of this? DeeDee Kahring: Yes there is. Mayor Ryan: Okay. DeeDee Kahring: So all of the main ones that I mentioned and then the deferred maintenance there is a long list of all of those, to cover all of those. Mayor Ryan: Okay. DeeDee Kahring: If I could also mention along with that deferred maintenance list we will continue to receive what’s called long term facility maintenance funding which we get, but it’s not enough every year so there will be some projects listed through that as well so that’s another source to help us. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. So the recommendation is if people have questions or want more information the best thing is to visit the District 112 website then says Vote 2019, correct? DeeDee Kahring: Yes, that’s correct. Mayor Ryan: Okay perfect, thank you for being here tonight. We appreciate it. DeeDee Kahring: Thank you so much. Thanks for your support. Mayor Ryan: Absolutely. Thank you. Are there any other visitor presentations this evening? Yes please ahead. Just please state your name and address please. Mack Titus: Mack Titus, 2747 Century Trail. In 2018 I successfully argued for a reduction in my property assessment of about $7,000. One of my arguments was the, that I presented was the inability of the Chanhassen engineering department to manage privatization. The council may recall back in April, on April 8th of this year I spoke and tried to clarify the response, who had responsibility for driveway inspections. The response that I received was that it depends on whether your driveway is accessed by a public or private street which I think sends a wrong message because it creates, then creates a double standard for driveways within a given community. I would also point out that private streets are not identified in the 45 page contract between Chanhassen and the developer, Pulte in that case. This is the disclosure statement. The Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 11 first 11 pages of this are the disclosure statement for Arboretum Village developed by Pulte. There’s no mention of private streets in that disclosure statement. When I asked for my inspection report from 2000 and for the property that I own now, 2000 it was built. 2002 I was told that you were privatized and this is a quote. You were privatized. There are no inspection reports. What that implied to me was that there is the privatization. It’s not just with regard to certain streets but the entire development of Arboretum Village has been privatized. It also says that the engineering department did not conduct any driveway inspections in the 2001 to 3 development period when there was no association and there was no management company who could do this. So our driveways have never been inspected so far as I can tell. The, I also asked for a driveway permit and I find that flawed. It does not stipulate the criteria and whether your driveway is accessed by a public or a private street. It does not mention the 14 foot rule that was mentioned to me when I spoke to an individual in the engineering department which is that only 14 feet of your driveway can be inspected and that’s measured from the curb. In my case that’s 7 feet of driveway apron, 5 feet of sidewalk and 2 feet of my actual driveway. The other 34 feet or 94 percent of my driveway apparently is not eligible for an engineering department inspection. And as I said earlier I suspect that no driveway in Arboretum Village has ever been inspected. So what I’m suggesting is that the Chanhassen council table any discussion of the franchise fee until the engineering department mission statement is focused on retaining individual property values. I would ask that the council do that. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Thank you Mr. Titus. Alright Mr. Titus we’ll have somebody, I know you’ve been in touch with staff but we will consider this, your comments as part of our franchise fee discussion. In which we are not having tonight but it’s an ongoing discussion and so we’ll make sure that we are communicating with staff in regards to your questions. Mack Titus: Thank you very much. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Are there any other visitor presentations this evening? Okay. PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVAL OF ON-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE WITH SUNDAY SALES FOR CHANHASSEN BUTCHER, LLC DBA TEQUILA BUTCHER, 590 WEST 79TH STREET. Mayor Ryan: Ms Aanenson? Kate Aanenson: No. Mayor Ryan: No, okay. Mr. Gerhardt. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor and council. Yep, tonight before you is a request for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license with Sunday sales from Chanhassen Butcher LLC, going to do business as Tequila Butcher in the old Applebee’s site at 590 West 79th Street. There’s been a background check on the managers and background check has come clear so there are no Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 12 findings as a part of that background check. They are zoned appropriately. They’re still going through the planning process when it comes to site coverage that the council will consider at your next, which meeting Kate? Kate Aanenson: Actually it was approved as part of the consent tonight. Todd Gerhardt: Oh, well there we go. Kate Aanenson: They have been approved. We’re still working on the parking lot across the street but yes their site plan is. Todd Gerhardt: And again this is a public hearing. They do own 3 other restaurants in Farmington, Eagan, and Savage and we have not found any issues at those locations either. Staff would ask that the mayor and council open this public hearing for citizen comments and any questions that you may have of staff. Mayor Ryan: Thank you Mr. Gerhardt. Before I open the public hearing council do you have any questions at this time? And then after we have the public hearing if the applicants want to come forward and address the council that would be great but right now I hereby open the public hearing. Please step forward and state your name and address for the record. With nobody coming forward I will close the public hearing and return it to council. But in the meantime I would love if the applicants would like to come forward and talk to us a little bit about this new venture. That everybody in Chanhassen is very excited about. It’s created a lot of buzz. So welcome. Tony Donatell: Thank you. Good evening everyone. My name is Tony Donatell and with, together with my wife Rheata and my two sons are here and then business partner Rodrigo and Blaine. We’re all beyond excited to have the opportunity to bring in a new restaurant concept to the city. Like you said we have a couple other restaurants so we’re a growing restaurant group but very family oriented and community oriented. We’ll be at your community parades. We’ll support the festivals. Support the sports teams and we’re just excited for this opportunity so. Mayor Ryan: Wonderful. Tony Donatell: Thank you guys. Mayor Ryan: Yes would you like to share a little bit about the menu or you know a little bit more about your business would be great. Tony Donatell: We’re, our restaurant group is pretty well known for it’s smoked meats and so we’re going to take the smoked meats and we’re going to give it kind of a Mexican flare to it so can still get the brisket and the ribs and some of those entrees but also an opportunity to make it into some tacos. Like street style tacos and then big tequila list. Craft cocktails. Local beer. Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 13 Mayor Ryan: Great. Tony Donatell: Yeah. Mayor Ryan: Making us hungry. And what is your timeline? I know there’s always a lot of variables but what is your goal for opening? Tony Donatell: We have a demolition permit already so if everything goes well tonight we’ll hopefully start construction this week still and hopefully with the plan to get construction done towards the end of November and open early December if everything goes according to plan. Mayor Ryan: Great. Fantastic. Well as I said when you were walking forward I know there’s been a lot of interest in the community. I think you may have even jumped on a Facebook page or somebody to clarify what the name was going to be so you know there’s definitely a lot of interest and excitement around this new restaurant in town so we look forward to working with you and having you be part of the community. Tony Donatell: Thank you. Thank you all. Mayor Ryan: So thank you. Go ahead. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor all you have to do is consider approval of the liquor license before you this evening and, or any questions that you may have of any of staff. Mayor Ryan: Council if there’s any questions or a motion. Councilman Campion: I will make a motion. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion. Councilman Campion: Alright the City Council approves the request of an on-sale intoxicating liquor license with Sunday sales from Chanhassen Butcher LLC doing business as Tequila Butcher located at 590 West 79th Street. Mayor Ryan: We have a valid motion. Is there a second? Councilwoman Coleman: Second. Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Coleman seconded that the City Council approves the request of an on-sale intoxicating liquor license with Sunday sales from Chanhassen Butcher LLC doing business as Tequila Butcher located at 590 West 79th Street. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 14 Mayor Ryan: That motion carries 4-0. Congratulations. Tony and Rheata Donatell: Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Well done boys. Great job. Todd Gerhardt: Good job. Couldn’t have done it without you. CONSENT AGENDA: 5. APPROVE QUOTE FOR STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS IN CARVER BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD. Mayor Ryan: The next one is new business. The first one, let’s see here from the consent agenda that we moved forward is item number 5. And that is the approved quote for stormwater improvements in Carver Beach neighborhood. Mr. Wedel? Jason Wedel: Yep so Mayor, members of the council. So this item is for making some stormwater improvements in that neighborhood. This year in particular with all the rain we’ve had we had a number of residents call us out to look at problem areas. With the street reconstruction that was done in 2015 curb and gutter was added where curb and gutter didn’t exist in certain places and so the stormwater runoff has been, the flows have been concentrated and directed to specific spots that just aren’t handling the stormwater very well so we need to make some tweaks to that neighborhood to address those issues because there are properties that are being damaged but the stormwater flows over topping the streets and running through yards so this is one of those spots where we’re proposing to basically add a larger catch basin manhole on the street so that it can take in more of the stormwater runoff when we do have a large rainfall event and get it into the storm sewer system rather than having it run down the street and over topping the curb and running through people’s yards. So we got 3 quotes. The low quote was $23,967.50 from Minger Construction and if council approves that this evening that work could be done yet this fall. Mayor Ryan: Alright thank you Mr. Wedel. Councilman McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Yes the big question I had about this was, this is in the Carver Beach area. Will this have any impact, positive or negative for Lotus Lake? Jason Wedel: It really shouldn’t impact, well it actually probably would improve the water quality of Lotus Lake because right now we’ve got surface water running over the land causing erosion and sediment to wash down to some of the surrounding areas around Lotus Lake so this will actually get it into the stormwater system so it actually would improve the water quality. Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 15 Councilman McDonald: Okay the reason I asked about that is one of the anecdotes I guess I had heard from all this, and I heard both positive and negative about water clarify in Lotus Lake, was that evidently the runoff this year has caused a problem with water clarity. I don’t know if that’s true or not but I just wanted to know if this is a project that again would hopefully begin to address some of those issues. Jason Wedel: It certainly will help with some of the erosion issues and we’ve had a couple of sloped areas that are running into some wetlands that directly feed Lotus Lake so this would have a positive impact. Councilman McDonald: Okay, thank you very much. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council. Mayor Ryan, Jason and I were both out at this site with several residents and you could see substantial silt running down the hill, across the road, over the curb onto individuals property and then you know the natural flow of that water is into Lotus Lake so to say that it’s going to make a significant impact on Lotus Lake, it would be hard to measure but it definitely is having an impact because the way the water flows. And as a part of the reconstruction of the streets in Carver Beach, as Jason mentioned, we directed more through a swale. That swale is carrying more water than what it originally carried and it overflows the curb that was built to where the flow was to go to so we need a larger manhole to catch that water and that will be an environmental manhole so some of the silt will settle out and then occasionally our vac truck will go out there and then clean out that manhole. Councilman McDonald: Okay well I think anything you do to try to improve the situation is an improvement and I thank you for addressing that issue that the neighbors have brought up and then the further environmental impacts on Lotus Lake so thank you for paying attention. Mayor Ryan: And I’ll second that comment. I know there were a lot of frustrated residents when we were standing out there about the overflow across the road onto their property and then ultimately their concern was going into the lake so I appreciate the quick action. Are they, have they been told about this project or are they familiar that it’s happening? Jason Wedel: I’ve not informed the residents yet of this work happening. I wanted to wait until it actually got approved. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Jason Wedel: So we can definitely give them an update tomorrow if council approves that this evening. Mayor Ryan: Okay, I just didn’t know where they were at with being familiar with this process so I appreciate that. Council any further questions, comments or motion? Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 16 Councilman McDonald: Well Mayor if you’re ready I’ll propose a motion since I pulled it off. I would propose that the City Council approves the quote from Minger Construction in the amount of $23,907.50 for stormwater improvements in the Carver Beach neighborhood. Mayor Ryan: Say that number one more time Councilman McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Yeah, $23,907.50. Mayor Ryan: 67. Councilman McDonald: I’ve got 50. Oh $967.50. Mayor Ryan: I was like now we’re really off. Councilman McDonald: Yeah now we’re really off. I’ll say it one more time just to get it down. It’s $23,967.50. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. We have a valid motion. Is there a second? Councilman Campion: Second. Mayor Ryan: We have a valid motion and a second. Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council approves the quote from Minger Construction in the amount of $23,967.50 for stormwater improvements in the Carver Beach neighborhood. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Mayor Ryan: That motion carries 4-0. Thank you. 8. ADOPT AMENDED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION BYLAWS. Mayor Ryan: Next is item from consent agenda number 8 and this is to adopt the amended Economic Development Commission Bylaws. Mr. Gerhardt do you want to? Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, staff did make some modifications to the bylaws. Those are highlighted in the staff report. Nothing significant. Staff is looking for any feedback that the council may have regarding those bylaws. Mayor Ryan: Councilman McDonald was there a question or just for a public vote on this? Councilman McDonald: I actually wanted a public vote. Chanhassen City Council – September 9, 2019 17 Mayor Ryan: Okay, perfect. Council any questions or motion? Councilman McDonald: And again since I pulled it off I’ll be glad to make the motion. I would propose that the City Council adopts the amended Economic Development Commission Bylaws. Mayor Ryan: We have a valid motion. Is there a second? Councilman Campion: Second. Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council adopts the amended Economic Development Commission Bylaws. All voted in favor, except Councilman McDonald who opposed, and the motion carried 3-1. Mayor Ryan: And I think we’re through the old business. Or new business. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. None. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None. Councilwoman Coleman moved, Councilman Campion 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 8:15 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 9, 2019 Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilman McDonald, Councilman Campion and Councilwoman Coleman COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Tjornhom STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Jake Foster, Kate Aanenson, Jason Wedel, Todd Hoffman, and Greg Sticha PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Meredith Petouvis UPDATE ON THE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE NEWLY ACQUIRED PARKLAND AT LAKE ANN PARK. Todd Hoffman provided background information on neighborhood input before introducing Kevin Clark and Paul Page with the Hoisington-Koegler Group. Kevin Clark reviewed the schedule for developing the feasibility study, securing funding, refining design work and permitting. Mayor Ryan asked for clarification of phase 1 and phase 2 for the park property. Kevin Clark continued discussing the parkland and wetland issues associated with the entire property, and key points associated with the need to upgrade the existing foot paths for community use. The findings from citizen input is a desire to protect natural habitat, and excitement about trails but mixed feelings on the materials to be used. Input from the Park and Recreation Commission asked that an emphasis be put on accessibility, telling the history of the site, and exploring future potential uses. Paul Page clarified what a feasibility study entails as a planning tool. Mayor Ryan expressed how well done the questionnaire was to get open ended feedback. Councilwoman Coleman asked for a cost analysis for the different materials and maintenance of trails. Councilman McDonald asked to locate a place for a natural trail system. Councilman Campion stated he would like to be educated on the use of different trail materials. All council members concurred that it will be helpful to see a cost analysis for different trail materials. Mayor Ryan concurred with having a variety of trails i.e. paved and natural, accessory structures located throughout the site, associated phasing plan and the possibility of using parking at Greenwood Shores Park. KEY FINANCIAL STRATEGY: PAVEMENT MANAGEMENY FOLLOWUP DISCUSSION Q & A, Todd Gerhardt reviewed the list of questions generated from the public listening session, phone calls and emails. Greg Sticha discussed questions regarding exemption from utility bills, already City Council Work Session – September 9, 2019 2 paying high taxes so why pay more for roads, private streets should receive an exemption, and use of franchise fee versus tax levy. Jason Wedel addressed the need for increased funding for street replacement and mill and overlay. Councilman Campion suggested another graph showing the outcome for the number of years it will take for mill and overlay with increased funding. Jason Wedel addressed the question regarding the number of miles for private and public streets. Greg Sticha and Jason Wedel addressed the question if other cities use franchise fees, and if franchise fees can be used for other things than road maintenance. Councilman Campion asked about the potential of having to come back in the future to increase the franchise fee. Greg Sticha explained the Q&A will be posted on the city’s website, and upcoming schedule. Mayor Ryan asked staff to clarify that the questions came from the public not council members. Councilwoman Coleman asked staff to clarify for the public the difference between private versus public streets. Mayor Ryan adjourned the work session at 6:55 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated September 3, 2019 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.2. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No: PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council receives the Planning Commission minutes dated September 3, 2019.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Summary Minutes dated September 3, 2019 Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes dated September 3, 2019 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES SEPTEMBER 3, 2019 Chairman Weick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Weick, Mark Randall, John Tietz, Michael McGonagill, and Laura Skistad MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Undestad and Doug Reeder STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; and George Bender, Assistant City Engineer PUBLIC PRESENT: Dan Zwiers Elko Michael Baier Box 340, Chanhassen Larry & Susan Nowlin 3713 South Cedar Drive PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW WITH A VARIANCE FOR HARD COVER FOR EXPANSION OF A RESTAURANT LOCATED AT 590 WEST 79TH STREET. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Tietz asked for clarification on the impervious surface and cross access parking agreements. Commissioner McGonagill asked for clarification on the pedestrian crossing to and from the city parking lot across the street. The applicant Blaine Eggen discussed his other restaurants similar to the one being proposed. Chairman Weick opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. After comments from commission members the following motion was made. Tietz moved, McGonagill seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve Site Plan #2019-08 to permit the construction of two exterior patios with a variance to permit an additional 946 square feet of hardcover for a total of 73 percent hardcover, plans prepared by CNH Architects dated 8/22/19, and Westwood dated 8/20/19, subject to the following conditions and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation: Building 1. Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. Planning Commission Summary – September 3, 2019 2 2. Building plans must include a code analysis that contains the following information: Key plan, Occupancy group, Type of construction, Allowable height and area, Fire sprinklers, Separated or non-separated, Fire resistive elements (Ext. walls, Bearing walls - exterior or interior, Shaft, Incidental use), Occupant load, Exits required (Common path, Travel distance), Minimum plumbing fixture count. 3. Detailed occupancy related requirements will be addressed when complete building plans are submitted. Engineering 1. All newly proposed pedestrian access routes shall be ADA compliant. 2. An Encroachment Agreement Application shall be filed for any structures places in public drainage and utility easements. 3. Grading plans shall be updated to include erosion control Best Management Practices upon submittal of building permits. 4. Site plan shall be updated upon submittal of building permits to include: a. Legend b. Engineering scale c. Vicinity map d. Existing utilities (and services) e. Detail plates f. Call 811 notes Fire 1. Remodel of interior will require separate fire sprinkler, fire alarm, and kitchen hood suppression system permits. 2. Sprinklers will possibly be required under exterior covered patio ceiling. Planning 1. The applicant shall enter into a Site Plan Agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. The applicant shall install an additional over-story tree to the southeast of the south deck. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR MINING OPERATION AT 100 & 200 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE (MOON VALLEY GRAVEL PIT). Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Commissioners McGonagill and Tietz asked for clarification on the best management practices being used with this site. Michael Baier with Terry Brothers and Dan Zwiers, the land owner of the property, discussed erosion control and the timeline associated with the Interim Use Permit. Chairman Weick opened the public Planning Commission Summary – September 3, 2019 3 hearing. Dan Glode who lives on Lakota Avenue asked about the status of the closed trail near his property. Chairman Weick closed the public hearing. Randall moved, Skistad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Interim Use Permit, Planning Case #2019-09, to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., dated July 26, 2019, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the Findings of Fact and Decision: Engineering 1. The interim use permit shall be approved for a period of five (5) years from the date of City Council approval. The applicant will need to request a formal extension 60 days prior to the expiration date of the interim use permit. 2. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agency must be obtained; including but not limited to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District and Carver County. 3. The applicant must submit a phasing plan. The phasing plan shall address the spent lime stockpile and equipment removal. This information shall be submitted annually a minimum of 30 days before the anniversary of City Council approval. 4. An administration fee shall be collected each year and shall be based on the number of cubic yards of material being graded as identified in the phasing plan. The fees are taken from the Uniform Building Code Appendix, Chapter 33. 5. The applicant must submit a summary of the quantity of material that has been removed from the site and the quantity of remaining material. This information shall be submitted annually a minimum of 30 days before the anniversary of City Council approval. 6. The applicant shall provide updated stormwater and drainage calculations that meet the requirements set forth in Chapter 19 Article VII of City Code. 7. The applicant shall clean out the existing Pond 2 and the temporary sediment basin based on the stormwater and drainage calculations and design of Pond 2 and the sediment basin. 8. The applicant must provide the city with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of 110% of the construction costs for the appropriate phase of the grading operations to guarantee erosion control measures, site restoration, and compliance with the interim use permit. The amount of the security shall be established annually and shall be submitted by the anniversary date of City Council approval. 9. Permitted hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday with no work permitted on Sunday or legal holidays. Planning Commission Summary – September 3, 2019 4 10. Grading on the east side of the creek must cease at or above the 756-foot contour and all disturbed soils must be permanently stabilized and restored in accordance with the Restoration Plan as specified in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan dated July 26, 2019. 11. If any excess material is hauled to another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit will be required for the other property. 12. The new CSAH 61 will be rated for a 10-ton per axle road. All oversize/overweight loads leaving the mining operation to the east must apply for Hennepin County Transportation OS/OW trip permits. 13. Machine-sliced or Hand-installed woven geotextile silt fence must be installed and maintained at the northwest corner of project, and in all areas specified in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. Machine-sliced or Hand-installed woven geotextile silt fence must be reinforced using sediment logs, wire-backing, or other effective Best Management Practice and meet the specifications of MnDOT Standard Specifications for Construction (Section 3886). 14. Exposed, unworked soils must continue to be stabilized with temporary or permanent stabilization BMPs in accordance with the construction sequencing as stated in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. 15. Exposed, unworked erodible soils with positive slopes must continue to be stabilized using erosion control blanket or alternate effective BMPs according to the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. 16. All other sediment and erosion control measures must be in place and maintained according to the Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan dated July 26, 2019, and phasing plan to be submitted by the applicant. 17. A driveway access to 230 and 240 Erie Avenue must be maintained at all times during construction. 18. Grading west of the unnamed creek shall not commence until the grading on the existing mining operation and site restoration has been completed east of the creek. 19. The applicant must comply with all Carver County requirements and coordinate the mining activities with Carver County. Environmental Resources 1. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits. 2. No tree removal is allowed beyond the 756-foot contour on the east side of the creek. 3. MN State Seed Mix 35-621 shall be used for the seeding. Planning Commission Summary – September 3, 2019 5 4. All restored slopes shall be planted with trees. The trees shall be bare-root, native species, one- half to one-inch in diameter, five- to ten-foot spacing in a random pattern from the top to the toe of the slope. The approximate number of trees needed is 20,000 (7’ x 7’ spacing). A minimum of 75% survival rate for plantings must be achieved. Tree tubes are required for plantings. Spacing (feet) Trees per acre 5 x 5 1,742 6 x 6 1,210 7 x 7 889 8 x 8 681 10 x 10 436 Miscellaneous 1. Permit holder must use and maintain accepted Best Management Practices for erosion control, including but not limited to construction entrances to limit tracking or scaring of the new road surface. 2. The new CSAH 61 will be rated for a 10-ton per axle road. All oversize/overweight loads leaving the mining operation to the east must apply for Hennepin County Transportation OS/OW trip permits. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A FRONT YARD SETBACK AND LOT COVER VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT AN ATTACHED GARAGE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3713 SOUTH CEDAR DRIVE. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. The applicants, Susan and Larry Nowlin explained plans to remodel their house and add an attached garage. Chairman Weick opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. Tietz moved, Randall seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approve the 5-foot front yard setback variance and 1.83 percent lot cover variance, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit. 2. The applicant must apply for and receive all necessary permits from the Watershed District. 3. The applicant shall submit a removal plan for the driveway abutting South Cedar Drive right-of-way upon submittal of building permits. The applicant shall also provide an erosion control plan with the grading plans upon submittal of building permits (adhere to city detail #5302B). Planning Commission Summary – September 3, 2019 6 4. The applicant shall include all trees 6” dbh and larger within the construction limits on the building permit survey and note tree(s) to be removed. All preserved trees must be protected during construction. 5. One tree will be required to be planted in the front yard if no tree is present at the end of construction. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO REPLACE AND EXPAND AN EXISTING GARAGE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6641 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner McGonagill asked about the standard for a two car garage and runoff from the roof. Commissioner Randall asked about snow storage. The applicant Jim Way discussed the need for expansion of the existing garage. Chairman Weick opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. Randall moved, Skistad seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approve a 6-foot side yard setback variance and 3 percent lot cover variance, subject to the following Conditions of Approval and adopt the attached Findings of Facts and Decision: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit. 2. Eaves that are between 2 feet from the property line and less than 5 feet from the property line require a 1-hour fire-resistance-rating on the underside of the projection. 3. The applicant must apply for and receive all necessary permits from the Watershed District. 4. Submit a grading plan that illustrates existing and proposed grades (if any), include drainage arrows that show the direction of stormwater runoff, and include an erosion control plan. 5. Abandon one of the two driveway accesses off of Minnewashta Parkway serving the property and submit removal plans that are in accordance with City Standards. 6. Edge of the garage foundation must be 5 from the south lot line, eaves may project an additional 1 foot. 7. Garage gutter downspouts may not be oriented to the south. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Skistad noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated August 20, 2019 as presented. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE. Kate Aanenson provided an update on action taken by the City Council at their last council meeting. Planning Commission Summary – September 3, 2019 7 Randall moved, McGonagill seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 3, 2019 Chairman Weick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Weick, Mark Randall, John Tietz, Michael McGonagill, and Laura Skistad MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Undestad and Doug Reeder STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; and George Bender, Assistant City Engineer PUBLIC PRESENT: Dan Zwiers Elko Michael Baier Box 340, Chanhassen Larry & Susan Nowlin 3713 South Cedar Drive PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW WITH A VARIANCE FOR HARD COVER FOR EXPANSION OF A RESTAURANT LOCATED AT 590 WEST 79TH STREET. Generous: Thank you Chairman and commissioners. As you stated Planning Case 2019-08 is a site plan review with a variance. They are proposing to slightly expand an existing restaurant site in the community. Normally we would have done this administratively but they’ve gone over 10 percent of the allocated square footage and so it has to come through the public hearing process. The applicant is Chanhassen Butcher LLC and the public hearing is tonight, September 3rd and it goes to City Council on September 9th so it’s a quick turn around. The property is located at 590 West 79th Street. It’s just to the east of the Walgreen’s and south of the Tires Plus. Across the street is city owned property and we’ll discuss that a little later as long, as well as some stormwater facilities. Again this is a site plan review for expansion of a restaurant to add two exterior seasonal patios. One with a partial roof cover and there’s a variance for hard cover. The property is guided for commercial uses in the Comprehensive Plan. It’s zoned Highway and Business Services District and restaurants are permitted use in the district. The site plan. I’ve highlighted the two areas of the patio. This is the south patio. This is going to be their adults only area and this would be open to anyone that comes to the restaurant. They’re proposing that this area is be fenced in also. They’re making these of composite wood materials so low maintenance requirements. Long life on it. They will be having a roof over 70 percent of the southern patio area and that’s where additional hard cover is brought into the equation. As part of our review the Fire Marshal required that they provided egress, sidewalk from the patio to the Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 2 street system and then additionally staff had recommended that they provide this access from West 79th Street into their building. Currently there is an access point on the end over here. There’s a small stairway. The City Engineer felt it would be better to move that farther to the east to accommodate anyone using that new crosswalk that will be developed on the corner. Again this is a view of the, a schematic of the building. Here’s the new metal roof. It will be standing seam black in color. They’ll have wood columns. They’re going to wrap those in cedar and then they’ll have the composite decking. The surfaces allow water to percolate through them so for the uncovered patio there’s no additional pervious surface and for the southern patio the total size is 900 square feet, 670 square feet of that is in their, underneath the cover so it’s counted in the hard cover. I should point out that as part of the variance request 56 percent of the hard cover is due to the pedestrian circulation that the City is requiring them to install on the site. There will be minimal grading for the sidewalk and this is an old plan. They don’t show the connection but they’ll be some grading to bring the sidewalk to the west to connect in here. The one condition that we have regarding the sidewalk is that we make it ADA compliant and so that would mean that the steps would have to be removed and they’d have to revise the grading to lengthen out that slope. I should note that the City is working with the property owner concurrently or in parallel for a public parking lot on the south side of West 79th Street. This will be a one way operation so they’ll enter from the west side and exit out on the east side. After, this is the entrance to the Crosswoods Plaza development. There will be a sidewalk installed as well as a little island for pedestrians in the middle of West 79th Street. In reviewing the site plan, oh I should probably go back and point out. If you look at all these properties have cross access and cross parking agreements so once you get in here you can actually drive internally without going out onto West 79th Street and go over to the pharmacy. After 5:00 the restaurant has right to use parking within the Walgreen’s site and historically it’s been the ones right on the periphery but under the easement agreement it could be anything in here. There is a small sidewalk section in here. This is the end of the sidewalk that’s being removed as part of this project and this is the location of the public parking lot that will be available for all the properties and development within the Crosswoods Plaza development. Finally staff is recommending approval of the expansion of the 900 square foot patio on the south side of the building. The 677 square foot patio on the west side of the building and to permit an additional 946 square feet of hard surface which will bring it up to 73.1 percent hard cover. Currently they have a variance to allow 70 percent. Had this property been located north of the railroad tracks there would be no variance requirements in this. This is an extension of our downtown area and so at the time it was zoned Business Highway they were looking for low profile buildings and so they didn’t feel that they would cover that much. However when you bring in a restaurant the parking standard are increased so high that they tend to eat up all the hard cover with that. With that, and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. With that I’d be happy to answer any questions. Weick: Thanks Bob. Appreciate it. Just go ahead and open it up to the commission to go ahead and kind of take turns and ask questions. If you want to start Commissioner Tietz. Tietz: I will. Thanks Steve. Regarding the deck is, it’s specified as decking material but it’s called a patio so is that, it’s pervious? Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 3 Generous: It’s pervious yeah. Tietz: It’s pervious. Generous: So the slots between the boards and so. Tietz: So that will drain and it will go under the ground. Generous: Under the ground and the water. Tietz: Okay. And on the parking, a couple questions on parking. The Walgreen’s on that side, if you count just the sites that are highlighted in your red. In red in your diagram Bob, there are 87 parking so I’m not, one I’m not sure how they got to current of a 124 and proposed is 136. Now does that assumes that it’s cross access parking agreement allows for that. Generous: That’s correct. Tietz: In the future when this takes off and we have a lot of people coming there the tire stores stays open til 7:00. The drug store stays open til 10:00. How do you resolve conflicts of parking in the future if there are more stalls required of the facility? And I’m also concerned, is the City building the parking lot across the street or are they building it on city property? Aanenson: They are building it on city property. Tietz: They are? Aanenson: They are, correct. And so that’s also going through the watershed district for stormwater and all that too so correct. Tietz: Okay, well just go back to the parking numbers. I just, it’s kind of confusing. The numbers don’t seem to work out. And I don’t know what the occupancy of the building is because those sheets were not included in the documentation. Generous: They based it on the City’s requirement of 1 per 64 in the building square footage and that includes their cooler and cooking area. The numbers they had, on site there were 87 spots on the specific property. Tietz: In that red. Generous: Yeah in the red area which is their lot. And then they counted 24 of the spaces over, off on the periphery of the Walgreen’s site. I don’t know if you’ve ever been there at 7:00 or Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 4 8:00 at night but I don’t, I’ve never seen any conflict there. But if it became an issue it’s something that we would address with the property owner. Tietz: Well it’s just you know it’s just those cross access agreements sometimes can get kind of muddy and if there’s ever a conflict, it doesn’t appear that there would be but you know there’s not too many people buying tires and having tires put on at 7:00 at night but happy hour starts at 5:00 I think doesn’t it so there’s, it’s just a concern with the cross access and if there ever is a conflict how do we, or is it spelled out in that document? We didn’t have access to that document. Aanenson: In the cross access agreement? Tietz: Yeah. Aanenson: Yes it’s spelled out. I mean between the individual parties. Tietz: For resolution of problems. McGonagill: Yeah same question I had frankly. Aanenson: Well it’s between the individual property owners so if they would have to resolve that which Walgreen’s would assert their rights too. What the hours are and how many they’re using, right. Tietz: Okay. McGonagill: Bob, thanks Commissioner Tietz because that was the very first same question. If you can go with me Bob to, first off I want to start with the parking lot across the street because I need to understand something on the 78th, the parking lot across the street that’s being built. Okay, go to the diagram. Is there, when I look at that I can see where the fence is. They’re putting the fence in along there right? Is that a sidewalk in there too? Generous: No. McGonagill: Okay, alright. So this comes to my question. If you now can go to the site plan of the building, that one. My concern is this, I understand the fire department and they’re dumping everybody out on the street. Right they’re dumping everybody out, right there. Generous: Onto the sidewalk. McGonagill: Onto that sidewalk. People are going to go across the street right there. What’s going to prevent them from just walking off and then walking down the fence line? I mean I realize that’s not what they’re supposed to do but you built this crosswalk and everything over Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 5 here on the left to try to put traffic flow there so people would not do that. But people line of sight, I mean furthest distance between two points is a straight line and I’m really I think I know exactly what’s going to happen. People are going to walk down the street. Either going to go, and unfortunately they’re hitting the parking lot across the street right in the middle so they’ll go this way. They’re going to go to the right or the left and work their way around that fence. Aanenson: Yep a lot of time was spent looking at that issue with the applicants. The City did, the City Engineer did work with SRF to give us a recommendation for the best crossing and we did not want them to cross mid block nor did we want them to cross at the intersection because people are committed so if they cross mid block they’re still not going to be able to get in. There’s a fence there which is the reason why we put the fence there is to deter that so the fire department, and it isn’t a building code issue. It’s a fire department issue to get people safely out of the building to a surface. Again they would go back, can you go back to the parking lot. Go back to the intersection where you’ve got a. McGonagill: Yeah they’re going to come out basically where that car is. Generous: It will be right here. McGonagill: Right in there. Aanenson: Correct. Have to go left or right because you can’t talk them in the box. Either go a controlled intersection so part of everything that we discussed with this is, you know with the tax increment district that’s, that we put in place with the Venue project is the improvement of Market Boulevard so what we looked at that is kind of a short range this project is and as we make those improvements on Market Boulevard this intersection would also be re-examined too but there is a mid point crossing. Again if you could go back to the parking lot design. There is a mid point crossing that shows a, there would be a base sidewalk similar to what’s at Galpin and 5. McGonagill: Well I get when I first saw the design of this I was fine. Okay they’re going to come off here. They go straight across. Straight line. They’ll go into the restaurant. Makes all the sense in the world. But putting the sidewalk right in the middle you’ve negated that whole approach of trying to force people to go in a certain direction. Do you follow what I’m saying? Aanenson: Right but he other, we spent a lot of time discussing that too so if you’re going up there is no access going up the driveway and you’re coming into the dumpster and some fire hydrant equipment so currently right now the entrance is on the other side of the building. McGonagill: Right it’s over on the left. You come around and you have to go around that. Aanenson: Correct. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 6 McGonagill: I understand that but the, with the fence and the parking that will make people do that. I’m just saying when they come out of the restaurant or they come out of the play area they’re going to be on that sidewalk and they’re going to head south and they’ll dump onto the street. I mean that’s. Aanenson: That’s a smaller percentage of the people that are going to go there too. Those 25 yeah. Right. McGonagill: It only takes one to get hit so that’s my point. Kids coming out of there running, you know they’re going to go straight. And so then they’ll go down the street. So I understand what you’re trying to go and that was one of my concerns. I want to understand that’s what you did or how it was designed so I understand the point. And I’m, it was kind of, I was surprised to see that but I understand what the fire department did. Now I understand why it was there to start with so makes sense. On the site, can you go back to the site plan again? That one. One of the things that when I was reading the write up I was curious why you, why this was done. Up in the upper left corner, and we talked about, you know we talk about coverage. We talk about hard cover and we talk about trying to get water into the ground to control it you know and to void that which makes sense and even though we’re over the percentage, why did you replace the, the way I read it. Maybe I read it wrong. Why did you replace the rain garden with a tree? To me rain gardens work great. I mean this rain garden in the upper left corner. That’s the one I’m concentrating on because this water’s dumping off of this shed, that would be an ideal to me a place for a rain garden. I have one in my yard and it does a great job of controlling my wet area but when…knows this a lot better than I do that if rain garden’s work, why was that one, why did you take it out? Bender: I believe it was felt that the tree in and of itself would, the root system would be absorbing water. There were no details provided on the rain garden from the applicant at all and all it said was potential rain garden and it wasn’t felt that it was completely necessary. McGonagill: I understand, okay. Obviously if they had, with a concern of hard cover to me one of the best solutions of handling hard cover is rain gardens and retention areas which is really what a rain garden is. And given, if I go back, go back to the photograph Bob if you would please. Generous: Of the aerial? McGonagill: Of the aerial yeah. When I look at that area and going to me if you’re going to put one it’d be a great spot for it. It’d be a great place to hold the water because the drainage kind of, if I remember right runs this way doesn’t it? And you could at least keep it on the site. Let it slow down and then move it’s way. Bender: Hit a tile and go straight to the storm sewer. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 7 McGonagill: Yeah and move it’s time. You know take it’s time to not overflow, particularly since you have all this parking lot up to the north. That was my reaction to the question. That’s really what I was wondering. Because it really was about that. I would like to see something in there to kind of control it and I was also thinking that’s, you know if you had it is that a way you could keep people from going across the street but you can’t the way it’s designed. You have to go to the sidewalk so. Bender: The applicant still can, you know when they come with their final plans and what not still include one. That will be up to them. McGonagill: Great. I think it’d be a great spot for it and be the right environmental thing to do. Weick: Question. Will the, that parking lot be signed in any way? That’s across the street. Aanenson: I don’t believe so. Weick: In other words like. Generous: One way. Weick: They won’t say parking for. Aanenson: No. Weick: Because technically that parking is for anybody. Aanenson: Correct. Weick: So to assume that everybody that parks there is going to be going to the, the Butcher restaurant isn’t, that’s not. They could be going to BW3. They could be going to Walgreen’s. They could be going anywhere. Aanenson: That’s correct. Weick: Okay. Which then and my point to say that is then that sort of central walkway you know might make more sense because it is servicing then the entire. McGonagill: Central, which one Chairman? Weick: The way they have it now. McGonagill: Oh yeah. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 8 Weick: Because not everybody’s going to be going there. McGonagill: No and that’s a perfect place to put it. I mean that was a good design. It solved the problem for parking. It was across the street and it forced everyone, my point was it forced everyone to go through at least the most controlled access point you could. They put a median in there for protection so they had done a lot to protect the residents and I think that’s great. I agree with you. It’s just when they come out of the restaurant and swing around go south they’re going to head to the parking lot and they’re not going to go around. They’re going to go straight. Weick: Okay. McGonagill: It kind of, to there’s a particular restaurant close to the lake in Excelsior that has this situation and people go across the street all the time in every direction. That’s, I don’t want to recreate that issue. Weick: Sure, yeah. Tietz: We did have some conversation at one of the last meetings too about, hopefully that could be more of employee parking. Is that correct or is that not correct? Aanenson: It’s intended how they want to use it, yeah. Tietz: Yeah. Aanenson: Again that was the purpose of the fence. You can get over there but there’s no sidewalk on that side so you’re really encouraging someone if you want to make the crossing to try to jump a fence or walk in the street that you would stay on the sidewalk. Because there’s a fence so that was the intent of that. Weick: Questions? None, okay. Thank you. At this time I’d like to have the applicant come forward. If they would like and either answer any of the concerns you’ve heard so far or just give us a general overview of the project that’d be great. Good evening. Blaine Eggen: Good evening. So my name is Blaine Eggen. This is Tony. We’re excited to be coming to Chanhassen if we can get this thing done. The name of the restaurant would be Tequila Butcher. It’s going to be a, I don’t know if any of you have been to Whiskey Inferno in Savage but it’s a lot of smoked meats but this one, Tony likes to do, Tony’s the main orchestrator behind all this. So we’re continuing to smoke meats but we’re adding a Mexican flare to it. Tony started in Eagan. If anybody’s been to Folsted House. The Grandson’s Eatery and Burgers and Bottles is in Eagan on Lone Oak Road. That’s where he got his start and then went to Farmington with Bourbon Butcher and then Whiskey Inferno was our last one that we just did. Completed last year. We’ve had a lot of good success there and we’re excited to bring this to Chanhassen, this concept. In this particular setting we chose to do the split patios to try and give Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 9 a family oriented one on the side where we’ve got the fenced in area. We were trying to incorporate like a Bocce Ball type of situation but with the terrain and the area that we’re left with it didn’t work out so we kind of just created this fenced in area for families to, if their kids want to play in the grass and do some sorts of activities there, that they would have that where it’s safe for them to do that. The back patio with the covered feature is a key thing for us. We have it in Farmington and we have it in Savage. It’s one of our main themes that we have where you’ve got a fireplace to sit at back there and it’s just a, that area is going to be more of a quiet adult area for people to mingle and have cocktails and stuff. The inside project if you guys care, it will be different from all the other places but, I don’t know do you want to add anything to the inside? Tony: Hi guys, good evening. We’re, I guess what Blaine’s trying to say is we’re beyond excited to be in Chanhassen. We want to bring something unique to the community that’s not already here. We always spend a lot of time looking at what’s competition doing and we try to not head on compete with what’s going on but create something completely unique to the community so that’s what he’s saying with the two patios. One that’s family friendly and one for much needed night out with friends and date night where you don’t bring the kids and there’s not kids throwing crayons on the floor so very cocktail focused and just something very unique to Chanhassen so. Blaine Eggen: And then as far as the working with planning, we had come to the table with, with eliminating 4 parking stalls so that we wouldn’t have to do the variance and they suggested obviously we didn’t want to do that but we thought that would be a solution because we need parking is also a big key to this. And they suggested no, that we go for the variance and keep the parking which is great with us. So that’s where that all came about. Other than that if you guys have any questions. Weick: Great, thank you very much and please don’t misinterpret us kind of getting into the weeds on some of these things as not being excited about you guys coming to town because I’ve been on this commission for a few years and we consistently hear that people want solutions like this you know for dining and for relaxing and having a drink or whatever it is. So certainly it’s a cool, I think it’s a great thing for Chanhassen, speaking on behalf of myself only but I don’t have any specific questions about the site but certainly if anybody does of the applicant. No? Okay, well thank you. Thanks for coming. Blaine Eggen: Thank you. Weick: At this time I would open it to, I don’t gavel that. I gavel it closed. I’ll open up the public hearing portion of this. Anyone wishing to come forward and voice an opinion on this project or what you’ve heard so far tonight please do so. And seeing nobody come forward I will close the public hearing portion and open this item up for commissioner discussion and/or motion. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 10 Tietz: Probably not too much to say. I think it’s a great idea and a great solution for Chan. I think it’s going to be good. I’m just always concerned about parking and I’m sorry but I am concerned about parking and with the system that you have there with the cross, cross access agreements for parking it just looks like, I don’t know what, how big is Houlihan’s across the way? Sometimes that parking lot, I mea it’s over into Total Wine. It’s down by Bookoo. It’s all over and it’s just my caution that hopefully we don’t run into some issues at certain times of the evening but I think it’s great. I look forward to dining there so thanks. McGonagill: Yeah I’ll reiterate what the commissioner said. It’s real excited about having it there and I think it will be a great addition. Something that we’ve needed for a long time. My concern goes, and it’s not the restaurant. It’s the parking just like you’ve talked. How you access it and what it is. The cross agreements. They’re going to have to work that out. I do, I can’t, you know my issue is with the sidewalk and having access in and where it’s going to egress. I’d like to see some additional thought put into that some way. You know we have great engineering staff and we have an applicant that wants to work with us to try to prevent people from going across the street and walking down the street. That happens at another restaurant all the time and people coming around those corners and people having a great time and you’re out for a good time and you’re just walking. You don’t think about those things. So traffic flow or pedestrian flow is a concern but it doesn’t take away from the value of the restaurant. I want to make that clear. Weick: Sure. Yeah. McGonagill: And the hard cover I think they can, there’s ways to solve that that I’ve already talked about so they can, but I would ask them to really consider that. But that’s really where all my comments start and stop is the, is accessing the, I think we’ve done a great job with that parking lot across the street trying to prevent people from going across the street except in one spot. I want to see that discipline maintained someway. Weick: Yeah. Because ultimately the parking affects the business right. I mean if there aren’t enough spots for people to park then that ends up hurting the business so he’s not. McGonagill: We want that. Weick: Right yeah so we want. McGonagill: We absolutely want that. Weick: People to succeed and. McGonagill: Yeah I think this will be a very busy place so it’s, I don’t know what the answer is but I’m not the engineer. I just try to follow a want to be engineers. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 11 Weick: There you go. And no issues with the actual variance which is the hard cover variance. I mean we don’t. McGonagill: Not for myself. Weick: Okay. Tietz: Are you ready for a motion? Weick: I love it. Tietz: I’ll make a motion. The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the restaurant expansion to include two exterior patios of 900 and 677 square feet, for the variance to permit the addition of 946 square feet of hard cover to permit 73 percent hard cover subject to the conditions of the staff report and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Weick: We have a valid motion from Commissioner Tietz. Do we have a second? McGonagill: I’ll second it. Weick: We have a second from Commissioner McGonagill. Any last comments before we vote? Tietz moved, McGonagill seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve Site Plan #2019-08 to permit the construction of two exterior patios with a variance to permit an additional 946 square feet of hardcover for a total of 73 percent hardcover, plans prepared by CNH Architects dated 8/22/19, and Westwood dated 8/20/19, subject to the following conditions and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation: Building 1. Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 2. Building plans must include a code analysis that contains the following information: Key plan, Occupancy group, Type of construction, Allowable height and area, Fire sprinklers, Separated or non-separated, Fire resistive elements (Ext. walls, Bearing walls - exterior or interior, Shaft, Incidental use), Occupant load, Exits required (Common path, Travel distance), Minimum plumbing fixture count. 3. Detailed occupancy related requirements will be addressed when complete building plans are submitted. Engineering Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 12 1. All newly proposed pedestrian access routes shall be ADA compliant. 2. An Encroachment Agreement Application shall be filed for any structures places in public drainage and utility easements. 3. Grading plans shall be updated to include erosion control Best Management Practices upon submittal of building permits. 4. Site plan shall be updated upon submittal of building permits to include: a. Legend b. Engineering scale c. Vicinity map d. Existing utilities (and services) e. Detail plates f. Call 811 notes Fire 1. Remodel of interior will require separate fire sprinkler, fire alarm, and kitchen hood suppression system permits. 2. Sprinklers will possibly be required under exterior covered patio ceiling. Planning 1. The applicant shall enter into a Site Plan Agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. The applicant shall install an additional over-story tree to the southeast of the south deck. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Weick: The variances unanimously 5-0. How was that to count? Thank you very much. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR MINING OPERATION AT 100 & 200 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE (MOON VALLEY GRAVEL PIT). Weick: Is this you again Bob? Generous: This is me again. Weick: Great. Generous: Thank you Chairman, commissioners. Moon Valley, Planning 2019-09 is a public hearing. This, the grading permit or the IUP for this project expires at the end of this month and so they’re required to come in and renew it. As part of their, the application is Moon Valley Aggregate Inc. They own the easterly parcel. Beatrice Zwiers Irrevocable Trust owns the westerly parcel. The active portion of the mining operation is on the eastern portion of the site so. This item is a public hearing tonight and is forwarded to City Council for September 23rd. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 13 Again this is located at 100 and 200 Flying Cloud Drive. It’s approximately 75 acre site total. The active portion of the mining operation is on this eastern part of the site and this is future expansion that they’d like to do. As part of their application they’ve taken the existing IUP and are requesting two changes. One, that they have another 10 year term for their IUP and two, that we release the condition that prohibits them from starting the mining operation on the western part of the site until the eastern part of the site has been closed up. Finished or at least closed up and restored so that erosion doesn’t become an issue. Again they’re requesting an extension of the IUP to continue the mining and excavation operation on the property. Existing conditions. Again the eastern part of the site is where active mining is going on. There’s access truck. Currently they’re using part of it as a staging area for the road construction for Flying Cloud Drive or County Road 61. This is the unnamed creek that is mentioned in our staff report. We want to stop the grading elevation approximately in this location at the 756 elevation. This is the western part of the site that they would like to be able to open up. And then we zoomed in on the eastern part of the site. You can see their access road in. This is the active mining area. They have a stockpile pit for lime here. A storage, again more equipment storage on the property. And this is the northern part of that eastern site. It was cut off about here. This area has been mined and is being reclaimed or restored. Portions of it have been replanted with trees and I’ll have the applicant discuss that because they’re doing very well on that part of the project. This is the overall grading plan that they’re looking at. They would look to create approximately a 14 acre site in the future for development. This property is guided for residential high density uses so they would need a rather large area. There’s over 100 foot fall on the bluff to the north of the property and then the Minnesota River Valley is across the street on the south side and the wildlife area. Again this is the western portion of the site. This plan shows a potential access to city owned property. They do have a plan that shows how they could come in on the east side of the western property and access it. This is the easterly grading plan. You see their finished elevation they bring it down. Again here’s where the 756 contour is so they’d stop grading at that elevation and then slope it down. They actually are raising up the finished elevation from this plan from 10 years ago so, and I’ll let the applicant discuss their mining operations in a little more detail. This is the north part. As I said they’ve completed the tree planting at the top of the slopes up here and it’s been very successful. They’ve been recognized by the environmental groups for doing the work up there. They would restabilize the slopes. They’d have a 2 ½ to 1 slope on there so we’re looking at a high concentration of trees being planted as well as having the wood fiber blanket put in place to help hold erosion back and revegetate that slope. The westerly grading plan we’ll look at that but really until the easterly side is closed up we don’t, we would have them come in with additional information to get provided for access and erosion control measures. And then here again would be their finished plan with the slopes all returned to the final elevations. Erosion control measures in place. Stormwater ponding in place and discharges and then all of this water would discharge across into the Rice Lake. And this is, we have submitted this to the lower watershed district. Their recommendation was that they close up the eastern side of the property before they go to the, start beginning grading on the western side of the property. Again our engineering department has recommended that this be approved for only a 5 year period. Because of, during that time best management practices can change for erosion control measures and we would like to be more up to date or current with them, and getting their information for their phasing plan on an annual basis. Any changes to their plans over a shorter time and then allow it to come back for the public hearing process to get a renewal of that. We also submitted this to Hennepin County who is the lead agency for Flying Cloud Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 14 Drive east of 101. They’re rebuilding that. They have a requirement that they need to go to Hennepin County for a permit for oversized loads to use that and then we submitted it to Carver County because this is in Carver County and it’ll be a county road and they have requirements that the applicant must meet for them to go forward with the project. So staff is recommending approval of the extension of the IUP for a 5 year period and that’s one of the conditions in the report based on the grading plans presented to you tonight and subject to conditions of approval in the staff report and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. And that’s only on the eastern side that they can go forward until such time as that’s buttoned up. Thank you. Weick: Great. Bob as we look past, so the eastern side being finished, what are you envisioning in that land? I mean then does it open it up for development? Aanenson: Yeah. If you remember. Weick: That’s the idea right? Aanenson: Yep when we did the 61 corridor we kind of examined all those properties, whether or not we could cost effectively provide municipal services because the views there are fantastic and everybody’s seeing that flow up. We saw a vertical product there. We kind of looked at some senior housing or something like that so it will eventually have municipal services. It will be a while so it allows them to get mineral extraction out of there. Our biggest goal is to make sure that there’s not erosion problem or a blow out of this, of the containment there and then also that they’re doing the reclamation plan which is, and our City Forester follows up on that. That they’re making sure, there’s escrow monies that go into place. That they re-establish that so to Bob’s point on the 5 year, the DNR changed the slope requirements as did the City of how much slope you can impact so this kind of pre-dates some of that and so there’s a long history on that but our main goal here is to make sure that, while we certainly are in favor of them doing the mining that we follow the reclamation plan or doing responsible, doing that responsibly to the property and ultimately we see development down there at some point yeah. Weick: Okay. Other questions for the City from the commission? McGonagill: Just I have one. Tietz: Go ahead Mike. McGonagill: And maybe to George and it was mostly just education for my part. In the write up, I think it was on page 12 you talk about the erosion control and best management practices. Is there a standard written on that and I was just, what is the standard? Bender: You know we run into a bit of a problem with this being an industrial use permit and it’s not necessarily falling under the construction practices that the standard being applied is generally the construction standards to the permit you know and trying to make sure that there isn’t an erosion concern. There have been some. The applicant’s been very good about replying or responding to our requests as needed. If you remember you know over a year ago when Krista was still here she was working with the Terry Brothers to take care of some things that Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 15 occurred. We also have requirements in there for them to monitor the pond. Clean out the pond on an as needed basis if it comes to that. And Hennepin County has a, you know a concern with their project and making sure from a hauling perspective that not only are they worried about the overweight but they’re also worried about scarring of the roadway or deterioration so you know having a construction entrance that works for them is one of their requirements. And you know but generally the construction standards are kind of what’s being applied. McGonagill: And the reason I ask the question. Bender: MPCA. McGonagill: When you’re dealing with something this big an rehabilitation that’s going to go this long people change out and then the only thing that you can depend upon is a standard. Everybody can point to the standard. This is what we adhere to once a debate come up and that was the reason I was asking for the, really it’s for the benefit of the city staff. I want to be sure there is a standard that you all are using that everybody points to. Everybody understands and then you get a good product in the end so thank you George. Bender: That’s basically our erosion control manual and training that we go into on an annual to bi-annual basis so. Tietz: Yeah, George I just and I want to follow up on Mike’s comment too. I’m assuming your best management practices are different than mounds of soil we have at the Holasek property which needs to be stabilized and protected too but that’s all basically organic material. Here we have a very highly erodible material in those hillsides. I still recall what 25 or 30 years ago when they had the blow out at the landfill up on Flying Cloud Airport and it all went down the hill into the national wildlife refuge. I don’t think we’re faced with a situation like that here because we don’t have the water source at the top of the hill that could blow through but I think best practices for a mining operation there has to be something someplace. You know Wisconsin’s dealing with frack sand mining right now and I’m sure there’s some best practices that they’re trying to employ on stabilization and protection from erosion because I think that’s probably one of the biggest concerns. I think this could be dynamite when it gets done but I also question why in 10 years only 400,000 yards have been taken out when a permit allows for 1.8 million and is this material of a high quality that’s desirable? Maybe this is a question for the owners and are we just going to be hitting different pockets to try and find the best sources of the marketable material and thus create some, you know are we looking at another 1.4 million coming out or are we looking at another 400,000 coming out so? Aanenson: I’ll just address one question really quick on the, so in my years here, which have been a few, this started off with some, you know the DNR are getting to the motion so to the point that’s our biggest concern is that we’re doing it at such a scale that we can manage it and they can manage it and there’s not an erosion problem and that’s always the challenge. As you know a couple years ago we had a super storm. We did have some people on the bluff that had some problems so that’s always the challenge which has been, which they’ve done a good job of re-establishing that. There was security put in place that they have to manage that so that’s an annual inspection. And again that’s why we wanted to go to the 5 year so if there’s a significant Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 16 rule change by any jurisdiction that we would make sure that that’s being employed but yes, how long they’re going to use it, again looking at that 5 year but that’s why we’re saying we don’t want to open up that other side because we want to just manage what we can on this side and not kind of, and open up a greater risk of some sort of failure. Tietz: Well it says highly erodible soil and we seem to have 100 year storms every other week now as compared to every 50 years so I’m sure that’s a concern in a situation like this with a steep slopes and I don’t know, you know there’s not much topsoil to begin with and when you try to reclaim that land I’m not, I’m sure that it’s a difficult task. Aanenson: Right well they can tell you how long they’ve been mining there. It’s been a long time. Tietz: I used to shoot shotguns down there. Aanenson: Yes, yes. Tietz: When I was a kid I think and ski. Aanenson: Correct. Tietz: The Moon Valley Ski area was there. Aanenson: Yeah, yep so they cleaned up all the shot. Tietz: Back in the 50’s and 60’s. Aanenson: Out of the slopes so that was one of the things we got accomplished so again we’re moving towards the clean up towards redevelopment ultimately but yes I think soil erosion being the biggest issue we have too. Tietz: Yeah. Weick: Other thoughts? Questions. Skistad: Yes I was only, I was just going to ask how long is the application process for this typically? So how long does the business have to… Aanenson: Well interim use typically runs whatever you think the appropriate time line so like if there was sewer and water it might be a time line but on this because the nature of it, it’s something that we want to make sure that we’re, obviously we inspect it annually and you know if we get complaints on but we just think again, we think 5 years is appropriate. Skistad: I just mean for the applicant so when they apply for their interim use permit and they have to go through the process of talking to different cities and counties, what are they looking at? From a time line. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 17 Aanenson: Yeah 60 days. Yeah that’s the law. I mean they can ask for more time if additional information is required just like us you know so we try to get them through in a timely manner and let them know that their timeline’s coming up and give them a chance to respond. The same with Hennepin County and Carver County has that same 60 days. Was that your question? Skistad: Yeah. Aanenson: Okay. Weick: Thank you. Seeing no other questions I would invite the applicant or a representative of the applicant to share their project with us. Thanks for coming tonight. Michael Baier: Hi, I’m Michael Baier. I work for Terry Brothers so, and I’ve been in charge of that site now for most of it and this is Dan Zwiers. Weick: Welcome. Michael Baier: Land owner along with his mom and so he’s the applicant so. I guess what I wanted to start is that you know Bob did a good job of kind of explaining what’s been going on but I wanted to maybe speak to some of your questions on erosion control and the length of time and why it’s taking so long just because those questions came up. I think first it’s important to know that this was always a reclamation project just like you said. It used to be a shooting range and so Dan did a good job of taking the lead out that was in there and so we also then went into restore the northeast slope where there’s housing up there. That was a straight up and down cliff when we first started in there and so it’s always been a reclamation project so it’s not really just a simple mining project. The reason that we asked for 10 years and we’re completely fine with 5 is that we think that’s a realistic timeframe with the quality of dirt that’s in there so. I forget who it was that had talked about is it kind of a hunt and peck and it is kind of that way so you’re absolutely right. What had happened is that according to the borings we thought that it would be select sand much deeper than it is so we ran into kind of a silt layer which is real typical of the area but it’s higher up than we thought it would be and so it’s still marketable but at a slower rate. We’re also selling black dirt out of there but that’s at a slower rate and so again things just kind of have slowed down a bit so that kind of explains why that is. As far as the slopes, the good news is you’re right. The stuff’s that in there is highly erodible but the stuff that’s going back into the slopes tends to be the clays and the black dirt that’s in the area so anything that we’ve restored is not quite as erodible and we’re able again to plant trees in it. We’ve had real good luck with our tree planting and with them growing and then also blanket and stabilizing with seed. So I think with that I think that kind of covered some of your’s and I just I guess open it up for questions. Weick: Great. Any, go ahead. Tietz: I see what was that, Minnesota 35-621 seed mix. Has that been successful? Is that working on those slopes? Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 18 Dan Zwiers: You know the problem is, is yes. I’ll talk on that. Yeah it’s a wonderful idea to go plant a seed mix and then when you’re in a, you know basically a wild area, whatever’s in that area tends to take over so I think you’ve seen before with some more natural prairie mixes. Eventually if you want that to continue you need to go in with a burn and then kind of take care of that so, so yes and no. I mean you can see that those are planted. Tietz: Was that kind of a prairie mix? Dan Zwiers: Yeah it’s supposed to be more of a prairie mix to kind of you know reclaim it back to the way it was. Tietz: …you’ve got some deeper roots maybe to help you out but. Dan Zwiers: Right, yep. Tietz: I was just curious. Dan Zwiers: Yep. Tietz: I didn’t know what that was. Dan Zwiers: Well yeah unless you burn you know whatever’s in the topsoil at the time it’s hard to get rid of that’s going to grow along with whatever seed you put in. Tietz: Thanks. Weick: There are quite a few, you know as part of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation there’s quite a few kind of stipulations I’ll say and without going through each one I guess if you’ve had a chance to read those and you’re comfortable with kind of the rules that are in place I guess going forward. Michael Baier: Yeah they’re real typical to what we’ve been working under anyway so yeah. Weick: Other thoughts or questions for the applicant? Seeing none thank you very much. Appreciate your time. Public hearing? Yeah at this time we will open for public opinion. Public hearing. Anyone wishing to come forward and speak their mind about this project please do so. Thank you. Welcome. Dan Glode: Thank you, hi there. My name is Dan Glode. I’m a relatively new resident to Chanhassen but I own one of the properties up above the bluff on Lakota Avenue now and this is maybe more of a question for the after the 5 year if it’s, and on the west end is being looked at but the trail right there is currently because of erosion problems as I understand it and the west end gets a lot closer to that trail so are we, is there, is there anything that the commission, the planning look at that aspect or is there anything that potentially impacts the trail further or you know how is that being re-opened? You know I don’t know if a part of it is the 61 corridor Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 19 project as well but it’s been closed for a long, you know for the last year that we’ve owned the property. McGonagill: Bob can you show me where, on here where the trail goes that he’s talking about? This little break? Okay. I just want to follow just to be sure. Dan Glode: You know it’s a little farther away on the east end but maybe as long as it’s. McGonagill: So it’s closed right now? Dan Glode: It’s closed from 101 to I don’t know where. Aanenson: There was a blow out, yeah. Generous: Yeah the sloughing of the slope was in this area at the creek. So the bottom of the creek came up and they’re looking at the restoration of that. Hennepin County is taking a lead on that project. Aanenson: And actually you have to come from the bottom and so the owners of the property were permitting that to get in to fix that but to be clear we’re not recommending going to the western side right now. Dan Glode: No I know. I know that. Aanenson: That would be some of the things we want to look at more closely what the impacts would be, yeah. Dan Glode: Right but I didn’t know whether the east side had impacted it or where. Aanenson: No. It’s actually on top. Dan Glode: Closed down or whatever so. Generous: It’s right here and then the stopped their operation in this area. Dan Glode: So they didn’t, I haven’t heard any plans on when that might be. Aanenson: Well I can tell you real quickly. Dan Glode: …101 project. Aanenson: We applied for FEMA money on that and it’s a pretty expensive project between Hennepin County and Carver County it was a pretty expensive fix so we’re still working on that. It was denied by FEMA. I think they applied like 3 times and so the other problem, with the slope we had in Chanhassen was fixed through a FEMA so still working on that issue. Trying to get that resolved and get that portion of the trail open. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 20 Weick: Yeah for sure. Thank you for coming forward. Any other, anyone else wishing to come forward? Seeing nobody come forward I will close the public portion of this hearing and open up for commissioner comment and/or a motion. Tietz: I don’t know if we want to make any additions to this and I’m sure that the program that we’ve had in the past for erosion control and best management practices is sufficient but I, you know there’d have to be some other than just regular industrial guidelines George that are out there with, again I’ll refer to the frack sand mining in Wisconsin and I know some of those counties have been extremely diligent about protecting the reclamation process and also, and they have, unfortunately they’ve had some huge ponds that they’ve had to have over there because of the processing and the frack sand and they’ve had some big blow out’s. I don’t anticipate we’re going to have that here but again since we’re on a 5 year program we’re probably just fine but you know you never know. You just don’t know what’s going to happen with our weather conditions and you know just don’t want to lose anymore soil so that’s, I’m not requesting that we pursue it to any greater degree but I think it is something to monitor as we go forward with this. McGonagill: And I support the Commissioner’s thought on that because best management practices are a standard to me. Coal mining’s got one for example in the coal business for reclamation and they deal with a lot heavier slopes sometimes than this and strip mining so, you know I would just encourage that. Bender: I’m not saying that we don’t, aren’t open to looking for them. Not trying to say that at all but you know MPCA is part of the review process. MPCA sets the standard and we’re trying to you know apply that as best as we can. McGonagill: Sure. Bender: We feel that the construction standards are so stringent and looked at continuously that you know that applying those are more like the best management practices for us to actually point to and go to. McGonagill: And Mr. Bender I understand the comment. It’s not a criticism. Again it’s, you’re blessed. You have an applicant that’s working with you. If you didn’t you would really be wanting to have very hard standards. That was my point if it ever were to change underneath you. Bender: Yep. McGonagill: You would want them. I’m done. Weick: Good feedback for the record by the way. Any other thoughts or desires for motions? Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 21 Randall: I’ll make a motion. The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the Interim Use Permit Planning Case number 2019-09 to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by, is it Sathre-Berquist? Weick: Sathre yeah. Randall: Sathre-Berquist okay. Incorporated dated July 26, 2019 subject to conditions of approval and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Weick: Thank you. We have a valid motion from Commissioner Randall. Do we have a second? Skistad: I’ll second it. Weick: We have a valid second from Commissioner Skistad. Any final comment for the record? Randall moved, Skistad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Interim Use Permit, Planning Case #2019-09, to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., dated July 26, 2019, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the Findings of Fact and Decision: Engineering 1. The interim use permit shall be approved for a period of five (5) years from the date of City Council approval. The applicant will need to request a formal extension 60 days prior to the expiration date of the interim use permit. 2. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agency must be obtained; including but not limited to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District and Carver County. 3. The applicant must submit a phasing plan. The phasing plan shall address the spent lime stockpile and equipment removal. This information shall be submitted annually a minimum of 30 days before the anniversary of City Council approval. 4. An administration fee shall be collected each year and shall be based on the number of cubic yards of material being graded as identified in the phasing plan. The fees are taken from the Uniform Building Code Appendix, Chapter 33. 5. The applicant must submit a summary of the quantity of material that has been removed from the site and the quantity of remaining material. This information shall be submitted annually a minimum of 30 days before the anniversary of City Council approval. 6. The applicant shall provide updated stormwater and drainage calculations that meet the requirements set forth in Chapter 19 Article VII of City Code. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 22 7. The applicant shall clean out the existing Pond 2 and the temporary sediment basin based on the stormwater and drainage calculations and design of Pond 2 and the sediment basin. 8. The applicant must provide the city with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of 110% of the construction costs for the appropriate phase of the grading operations to guarantee erosion control measures, site restoration, and compliance with the interim use permit. The amount of the security shall be established annually and shall be submitted by the anniversary date of City Council approval. 9. Permitted hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday with no work permitted on Sunday or legal holidays. 10. Grading on the east side of the creek must cease at or above the 756-foot contour and all disturbed soils must be permanently stabilized and restored in accordance with the Restoration Plan as specified in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan dated July 26, 2019. 11. If any excess material is hauled to another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit will be required for the other property. 12. The new CSAH 61 will be rated for a 10-ton per axle road. All oversize/overweight loads leaving the mining operation to the east must apply for Hennepin County Transportation OS/OW trip permits. 13. Machine-sliced or Hand-installed woven geotextile silt fence must be installed and maintained at the northwest corner of project, and in all areas specified in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. Machine-sliced or Hand-installed woven geotextile silt fence must be reinforced using sediment logs, wire-backing, or other effective Best Management Practice and meet the specifications of MnDOT Standard Specifications for Construction (Section 3886). 14. Exposed, unworked soils must continue to be stabilized with temporary or permanent stabilization BMPs in accordance with the construction sequencing as stated in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. 15. Exposed, unworked erodible soils with positive slopes must continue to be stabilized using erosion control blanket or alternate effective BMPs according to the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. 16. All other sediment and erosion control measures must be in place and maintained according to the Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan dated July 26, 2019, and phasing plan to be submitted by the applicant. 17. A driveway access to 230 and 240 Erie Avenue must be maintained at all times during construction. 18. Grading west of the unnamed creek shall not commence until the grading on the existing mining operation and site restoration has been completed east of the creek. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 23 19. The applicant must comply with all Carver County requirements and coordinate the mining activities with Carver County. Environmental Resources 1. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits. 2. No tree removal is allowed beyond the 756-foot contour on the east side of the creek. 3. MN State Seed Mix 35-621 shall be used for the seeding. 4. All restored slopes shall be planted with trees. The trees shall be bare-root, native species, one- half to one-inch in diameter, five- to ten-foot spacing in a random pattern from the top to the toe of the slope. The approximate number of trees needed is 20,000 (7’ x 7’ spacing). A minimum of 75% survival rate for plantings must be achieved. Tree tubes are required for plantings. Spacing (feet) Trees per acre 5 x 5 1,742 6 x 6 1,210 7 x 7 889 8 x 8 681 10 x 10 436 Miscellaneous 1. Permit holder must use and maintain accepted Best Management Practices for erosion control, including but not limited to construction entrances to limit tracking or scaring of the new road surface. 2. The new CSAH 61 will be rated for a 10-ton per axle road. All oversize/overweight loads leaving the mining operation to the east must apply for Hennepin County Transportation OS/OW trip permits. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Weick: I lost my, I completely lost my train of thought. The moral of the story is that it passes 5-0. Can we just go with that in the record and another embarrassing moment for Commissioner Weick. Thank you. Do you just lose your complete like where you are. I had no idea what to say. McGonagill: When you get older it happens. Weick: Thank you very much. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 24 Michael Baier: Thanks for your time. Weick: You bet. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A FRONT YARD SETBACK AND LOT COVER VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT AN ATTACHED GARAGE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3713 SOUTH CEDAR DRIVE. Aanenson: Thank you. This is a request for a variance for a front yard setback. Applicant Susan and Larry Nowlin. Again located at 3713 South Cedar Drive. I think we did another one recently in this neighborhood. This property is zoned residential single family. 20,000 square foot lot area. These are the standards. 30 foot front. 30 in the rear. 75 feet from the lake. 10 foot on the side and 25 percent lot coverage. So the conditions on this is the 9,500 square foot lot. As you can see it’s deficient. Currently it has a 90, excuse me. 29.43 lot cover. It’s non- conforming on the side yard setback. 9.5 on the east side. There’s a variance. The request for the variance is for a detached garage with a 15 foot front setback. Actually the garage is 8.2 feet from the setback and as you know as we talked about last time enough parking in the front so the house in the rear deck completely comply with the setbacks. So the applicant’s proposal then is to remove the existing detached garage and move it closer to the house. In reviewing this the staff’s justification of based on city code for single family homes is the proposal increases the front yard setback from 8.2 to 25 feet giving what staff believes is great guest parking. The proposal also decreases the lot cover by 2.6. Again there’s currently hard cover on that area where it’s as a driveway but now becomes part of the garage so it does decrease the hard cover. The lot is substandard. Requires a variance to accommodate the two car garage. The position of the house and the narrowness of the lot make it impossible to adequately attached the two car garage meeting the 30 foot front yard setback. So MacKenzie worked on this one. MacKenzie Waters. Staff member and worked hard with the applicants through a number of different designs to minimize the amount of variances that were needed and so the plan before you accommodates that. So there was two letters from residents and you did receive another one in your packet and that was from Ms. Reamer and so that was regarding how her subdivision or her variance request and this variance request differed so again there was a request about the pavers. Why doesn’t this one require new pavers or vegetated buffer on this site and so again it’s significantly smaller lot cover variance. The 1.83 versus the 10 percent that was required on the, on Mrs. Reamer’s recent variance and then the location of the impervious surface is outside of the 75 foot lakeshore setback so that’s again we look at each project and apply the mitigation standards based on the, what we as staff see as the implications so because the amount of lot cover that was reduced from 29 to 26 versus the 35 to the 34 so significantly higher amount of hard cover on the first request as opposed to this one so again that was the reason for not requiring the landscape buffer. I believe that she stated that she had met with MacKenzie and she tried to get this hard cover. I’m not aware of those discussions and I apologize for that but the scope on the work of the addition reducing the non-conformity versus the demo rebuild and expanding variances where we applied the additional standards so no this one isn’t required to do the pervious pavers because they originally…nor are they required for the buffer. They do have a greater setback adjacent to the lake so that was our basis for that. So again the staff’s assessment summary, the proposed lot is substandard and given the current house placement Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 25 cannot accommodate a two car garage without a variance and the applicant’s proposed lot cover is not excessive and therefore there are not areas that would be, would be reasonable to further reduce it. The proposed garage is reasonably sized to accommodate two vehicles and provide some additional storage. Based on lot coverage you know try to put that inside the garage itself and the proposal significantly improves the non-conforming front yard setback in the current, in the proposed configuration. And the applicant has worked with staff again trying to find the best solution. There was a number of different iterations before this one was settled upon so with that staff is recommending that you approve, acting as the Board of the Adjustments and Appeals that you approve the 5 foot front setback and 1.83 lot cover variance for the construction of an attached garage to the, subject to the conditions of the staff report and the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. So with that I’d be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Weick: Thanks Kate. I have one. There is a picture on, I think it’s page 5 of 8 and I think it’s just an optical illusion but the current garage is not connected right? That’s not a roof there? Aanenson: Correct. Weick: That’s actually the pavement inbetween. Aanenson: Right, correct. Correct. Weick: Okay. I just wanted to clarify. Aanenson: That’s an optical illusion. Weick: I was like wait, that doesn’t look right. It looks like there’s a building there. Okay that’s all I had. Any other questions? Tietz: I just. Weick: Yeah. Tietz: Steve to your counter point. I drove by. That link, the current link between the garage and the house looks lower than the garage elevation. Is that accurate? And yet the section here, the house it looks like the new garage is lower than the first floor of the house. Are you going to have a, am I, he’s nodding. Did I misread something? Aanenson: I’ll let you ask the applicant that. I’m going to bring up one other point if I may Chairman. Weick: Yeah. Aanenson: I know this was asked of, if there’s something missing on the survey so this is the variance request and there are conditions of approval that are enumerated in the staff report and those are that they have to provide a survey with additional information. If I may just for the record so if you do approve it they have to apply for a building permit. They also have to apply Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 26 for necessary permits from the watershed district. They also have to submit a plan for removal of the driveway abutting South Cedar right-of-way. And then they also have to show the erosion control plans we talked about within them and they also have to show any additional trees. The City Forester did go out there today and didn’t believe there was anything over the 6 inch width but also all trees have to be preserved during construction and those are things that we didn’t know on the building permit itself when that comes forward and then if there’s not one tree in the front yard then we would request that one tree so those are the conditions of approval so I just want to make sure that those are part of the record as well. Weick: Yep and those are on page 8 of 8 in the report. And we’ll save that question for the applicant when they, okay. Any other questions for Kate? Hearing none I would invite the applicants to come forward and share their project with us. Thank you for coming tonight. Susan Nowlin: I’m Susan. This is Larry. Weick: Hello. Hi there. Susan Nowlin: And we moved in on June 26th and are going to remodel the home and we’ve been learning a lot along the way and our initial plans were for a little bit larger remodel and a side variance and in working with MacKenzie realized that that was not a favorable way to go and we scaled down our remodel. We scaled down the width of the garage so we’re at 21 foot garage now which is about as small as we feel, that’s an outside measure so we’re getting it as far back as we can. Still allowing the cars to fit in and allowing there to be stairs to go up to the house so we can get into the home. And you asked the question about what it looked like, you know the slope is down. We are going to have, the current garage demolished. There is currently a large 4 square patio that covers the full distance between the current garage and the home. That’s coming out. That’s where part of the new garage will be and it will be part of, they’re putting in a foundation so that it will be level with the first floor of the home is what the plan is. Tietz: Okay. Yeah it looks, I think it was when you look from the road, I didn’t wander around your property. Susan Nowlin: We were wondering who that guy was. Tietz: But it looked so that patio must be actually lower than you go up to the first floor, is that about right? Because it looks. Larry Nowlin: That’s right. Susan Nowlin: Yeah. Tietz: Sheet 2 of 6 on your architectural elevations it looks like the driveway or the garage slab will be just a little bit lower than your current first floor elevation. Larry Nowlin: It could be. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 27 Tietz: And that’s fine. I just wanted. Susan Nowlin: Yes and so then we will have the stairs that go up. Tietz: On the west side that goes up to the house. Yep, that’s fine. Susan Nowlin: Right, correct. Tietz: I just needed to clarify. Susan Nowlin: Yep. Tietz: Because I think that gap between, I think this is a great solution to get rid of that old garage. Susan Nowlin: Yeah. Tietz: Too bad you can’t get a little bit wider but it looks like you’ve got some depth. Susan Nowlin: We’ve got the depth. At least it will get the cars in and we’ve got at least enough space I think that we’ll be able to walk between them and then get up to the, but just the lot is so narrow we couldn’t get a wider garage without, unless you want to give us a side variance. You know what. Weick: It’s a lot harder. I think MacKenzie was right. Susan Nowlin: Yeah, yeah. Weick: Good, any other comments about the project or? Larry Nowlin: We’re anxious to get going we need your help. Weick: Okay. Susan Nowlin: Yes, yes. Weick: Other questions from the commission. McGonagill: …help you row the boat. Larry Nowlin: Thank you. You noticed. Weick: Well thank you for coming tonight. Susan Nowlin: Okay, thank you so much. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 28 Larry Nowlin: Appreciate it. Weick: At this time I would open the public hearing portion and invite anyone to come forward who would like to speak an opinion on this project. And seeing nobody come forward I will close the public hearing portion of this item. I’m having trouble. And open it up for commissioner discussion and/or appropriate motion. Commissioner Tietz I think you said it. It seems like a good use of what’s there. Tietz: It’s a great solution. Nice push back and get the garage gone and. Weick: I mean it’s a heck of an area. Tietz: Have a new garage and your neighborhood is great. Weick: Yeah. Beautiful. Susan Nowlin: Thank you. Tietz: We’ve had a couple projects further out on the point over the last few years and I had an opportunity to drive through again and boy every time you turn around there’s something new happening and it looks, it’s really a great neighborhood. Weick: It’s very unique right in the way it’s laid out. Any thoughts or? Tietz: Well I’ll make a motion if everyone’s ready. Weick: That’d be great. Tietz: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 5 foot front yard setback variance and a 1.83 percent lot cover variance for the construction of an attached garage subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decisions. Weick: We have a valid motion from Commissioner Tietz. Do we have a second? Randall: Second. Weick: We have a second from Commissioner Randall. Any final comments for the record? Tietz moved, Randall seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approve the 5-foot front yard setback variance and 1.83 percent lot cover variance, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit. 2. The applicant must apply for and receive all necessary permits from the Watershed District. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 29 3. The applicant shall submit a removal plan for the driveway abutting South Cedar Drive right-of-way upon submittal of building permits. The applicant shall also provide an erosion control plan with the grading plans upon submittal of building permits (adhere to city detail #5302B). 4. The applicant shall include all trees 6” dbh and larger within the construction limits on the building permit survey and note tree(s) to be removed. All preserved trees must be protected during construction. 5. One tree will be required to be planted in the front yard if no tree is present at the end of construction. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Weick: This item passes 5 to 0. Larry Nowlin: Thank you. Susan Nowlin: Thank you very much. Weick: You bet. Thank you for coming tonight. And we have one more item on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO REPLACE AND EXPAND AN EXISTING GARAGE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6641 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY. Weick: Kate is this you as well? Aanenson: Yes it is. Weick: Okay. Aanenson: This is on Minnewashta Parkway as you stated and the applicant is James and Jean Way. This is for a 6 foot side yard setback with a 3 percent lot cover variance to expand an attached garage. Again this is in the shoreland district. Same standards as the previous application. 20,000 square foot minimum where you have a riparian lot. 30 feet in the front. 30 in the rear. 75 foot lake setback. 10 on the side and 25 percent lot coverage. So the subject site here is 15,950 square feet so it’s deficient in the square footage required under the 20,000. It has almost 30 percent lot coverage. It’s non-conforming on the one side when it’s only 9.8 feet on the south side setback and it’s non-conforming on the lakeshore setback by, at only 52.3 feet. The 6 foot lake variance for additional setback of the deck and then the house and rear deck comply with all other setbacks. So the proposed project is to expand the existing driveway. Excuse me, the existing garage by approximately 5 feet. I’m just going to hit my laser pointer here. And 5 feet in width and 5 feet in depth. Have you noticed in some of the older areas we’ve seen a lot of the garage where we have bigger cars, taller cars and we had one recently up in this area where they couldn’t get the pickup truck in where it’s a lower profile so meeting today’s standards so at 18 feet wide the existing garage is too narrow. Pretty similar to the other case Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 30 that you just saw to get 2 cars in and not be able to get out. If you look at our standard parking stalls those are 18 feet wide so when you’re pulling them into the garage it makes them pretty tight. Many of the surrounding properties had 2 or 3 car garages in that area so it would remove, so the goal of this as we work with the applicants is really to figure out a way to, if we’re going to give the variance what can we do to improve the situation so this has a horseshoe driveway. When you’re on a collector street the engineering staff prefers to have the one control. Actually a controlled access point with the street but if there are direct access that that be minimized so with this application part of the driveway then will be eliminated. As you can see the driveway comes like this so a portion of that driveway will be eliminated so we’ll be removing again the second driveway and the existing garage is in disrepair and must be replaced so this, the configuration of the existing home makes it feasible to expand the garage and work it onto the site without the variance. So the existing 19 foot garage is well below the minimum so this is our assessment and there’s no practical way to expand without the variance and again due to the constraints of the lot they can’t add a shed or anything down below and to provide the access so the neighbor’s garage is a side loaded as you can see over on this side is a side loaded garage and it’s 27.8 feet from the applicant’s lot line so the expansion area while this is where the variance would be coming in, there’s still quite a bit of separation between the neighbor’s garage and the applicant’s garage. So looking at that we felt it wouldn’t negatively impact that and then you can see again that they would remove the, a portion of that driveway allowing them to back up and not have to back out onto Minnewashta Parkway, a minor collector. So again the proposal reduces the non-conforming lot coverage but it creates another variance and that would be to expand on the side variance. So with that the staff is recommending approval. Again staff member MacKenzie Walters spent a lot of time with the applicant trying to get the best design and reduce the non-conformities as best the applicant could and we can do working with the, so we are recommending approval of the 6 foot side yard variance and a 3 percent lot coverage variance for the expansion of the attached garage subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. So with that I’d be happy to answer any questions. Weick: Thank you Kate. I’d certainly open it up. Anyone can speak up. Skistad: It’s pretty straight forward. McGonagill: Always got a question. Weick: Let’s do it. McGonagill: So Kate on stuff, again it’s education on my part. Do we have a standard width garages that we want to try and go people to like two cars? Aanenson: Yes two car garage is standard. McGonagill: The reason I ask that, okay but 2 cars how wide because we just had one that we talked at that was 21. This one’s going to be 24 and so I’m kind of like going. Aanenson: I would say 21 is pretty narrow. You know a standard garage is really closer to 24. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 31 McGonagill: Right. Aanenson: Yeah because that’s your outside perimeter. Then you put the garage door on there. You want to get at least you know a wider garage door that you can get in and out and most people would prefer to have the garage your waste and stuff inside your garage so if you had that kind of thing it allows for those sort of things to put your recycling and the trash container inside your garage which is a desirable. McGonagill: And I’m not trying to revisit the previous decision. Aanenson: No. McGonagill: But that was a question I had. Aanenson: No they wanted to go wider but it would have required a lot more variances and so we try to stay within because that was even a smaller lot you know. McGonagill: Yeah correct. Aanenson: Again it comes back to proportionality you know. McGonagill: Right so it’s. Aanenson: If this was a brand new lot I could tell you what the standard is going to be pretty much a 3 car garage. McGonagill: Right or like you said a 24. Aanenson: 24 at a minimum yep. McGonagill: This is, on this chart here, and this is the other question I had. When I look, again I’m thinking about this going you’ve got an expansion. When I looked at the fall line of the expansion of the roof line it’s going to be dumping water off the top probably. I’m sure there’ll be gutters to the left end of that expansion. I’m looking at the expansion between the two lots. It will dump water on the left side. It will dump water on the right side of that expansion. You have a driveway there. I’m curious, I’m wondering why or should we ask for like a French drain to run between the property lines to go down that, to dump the water off because one of the bigger issues when you’re this close is one property owner dumping water on the other property owner and they play, I had to deal with that in my own subdivision right now so that was a question I had. Aanenson: Yep that’s a great question and actually we spent some time on that. We actually had, we call it the double dip rule where we’ve given variances for 5 feet and so the building structure goes out and they actually extended the eaves over further. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 32 McGonagill: The eaves right. Aanenson: Correct. McGonagill: Pushing the water out. Aanenson: Yep so MacKenzie and I did spend some time talking about this. So we actually added a condition that they have to put gutters on there. If they have to oversize so that’d be part of the building permit. Making sure they’re controlling some of that water on that property. They would put substantial gutters on that. McGonagill: Well that was my point. The gutters come off the end on each end of the expansion. It’s going to could it not move across the lot? Aanenson: No based on the grades. We looked at the grades on that too so I think we’re in good shape on that so we did look at the grades. What would be the best way to manage it so we thought that the gutters would probably be, that they not be orientated to the south and that they manage it so looking at the grades that’s the way we came up with that. McGonagill: Okay. Aanenson: So that’s a good question but we did look at that because that does sometimes happen to your point. McGonagill: Oh it happens a lot when you get close. Aanenson: Yep, yep. Bender: The other thing that might be helpful if you have the staff report handy, looking at the rendering on page 6 of 7. McGonagill: Okay hold on. Bender: Looking at the street. McGonagill: Okay. Okay. Bender: Just showing that it’s, the most of the peaking is heading to the street side. Aanenson: Correct. Bender: There is the dormer on the front but that doesn’t go all the way across. McGonagill: So you mean it would come to the front and go down the driveway. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 33 Aanenson: Yeah that’s typically what we like to see have happen. Run going towards the street where it’s getting into the stormwater pond, yeah. As opposed to running it back way towards the lake yeah. McGonagill: Okay. Thank you. Aanenson: Good question. Yep. Randall: Is there any issues with snow pile up for snowing? Aanenson: No we looked at that too but that’s because the setback on the neighbors, that driveway there, somewhere in the staff report it’s at least 10 feet plus so they should be fine. Randall: Okay. Aanenson: That’s another good question yep. McGonagill: Well I’m glad they’re going to remove the driveway. That will help. Aanenson: Yeah. I think engineering likes that too. Bender: I do. We like it a lot. Weick: Good items. Any other questions for Kate? Hearing none I would invite the applicant to come forward and tell us about your project if you would like. Jim Way: Yeah I’m Jim Way. We bought the property about 25 years ago. It was kind of like buying a nice lake front lot that included a house and we really rebuilt that house. We gut it out. We put new siding. New windows. We put an addition in the back. Never did anything to the garage so now is the time. We have to replace that garage. It is coming apart. Wasn’t really built very well to begin with in ’62 and you’ve got a swale in the roof and the back, and the spancrete has got a dip and it looks like it could fall through so we’re anxious to get that and we have to replace it anyway. Secondly it’s such a small garage. 19 feet on the inside. It’s very difficult to work with. I have to leave my wife outside. You can’t drive into that garage with any passengers. That’s just the way it is and we’ve got to watch you know when you open the doors you don’t hit the other car. We do that quite a bit anyway. We try not to but it’s been a struggle so we’re looking forward to having a nice garage. Weick: Well that’s great. Jim Way: So that’s about it. Thank you very much. Weick: Does anyone have any questions for the applicant? No, thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks for sharing. With that I would open up the public hearing portion. Anyone wishing to come forward. Seeing nobody come forward I will close the public hearing portion and open for commissioner comment or motion. I will say I had the exact same thought on the Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 34 width. You know it’s fine now but like what if someone else moves in next door and then they want to do something close to the lot line and all of a sudden we’re, you know we’re bumping up against each other so I, but seeing the pictures and kind of understanding a little more about the project I think it makes sense. But I shared your thoughts there. It seems to work for everybody including the neighbors. That’s always nice. Randall: I know that drive through, your drive through lot would be nice but at least you still have a turn around spot there to back up. Jim Way: …it’s worth it…and give up that turnaround. It’s nice having the turnaround but we can live without it. Weick: Yeah, fair enough. McGonagill: Is this your last project? Jim Way: Is it what? McGonagill: Is this your last project on the house? Jim Way: I hope so. Weick: I would certainly entertain a motion. Randall: I’ll make a motion. The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 6 foot side yard setback variance and a 3 percent lot coverage variance, cover variance for the expansion of the attached garage subject to the conditions of approval and adoption, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. Weick: We have a valid motion from Commissioner Randall. Do we have a second? Skistad: I’ll second that one. Weick: We have a second from Commissioner Skistad. Any comment for the record before we vote? Randall moved, Skistad seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approve a 6-foot side yard setback variance and 3 percent lot cover variance, subject to the following Conditions of Approval and adopt the attached Findings of Facts and Decision: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit. 2. Eaves that are between 2 feet from the property line and less than 5 feet from the property line require a 1-hour fire-resistance-rating on the underside of the projection. 3. The applicant must apply for and receive all necessary permits from the Watershed District. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 35 4. Submit a grading plan that illustrates existing and proposed grades (if any), include drainage arrows that show the direction of stormwater runoff, and include an erosion control plan. 5. Abandon one of the two driveway accesses off of Minnewashta Parkway serving the property and submit removal plans that are in accordance with City Standards. 6. Edge of the garage foundation must be 5 from the south lot line, eaves may project an additional 1 foot. 7. Garage gutter downspouts may not be oriented to the south. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Weick: The item passes 5 to 0 unanimously. Thank you for coming tonight. Jim Way: Thank you very much. Weick: And waiting us out. Thanks. Is there any new business to bring forward tonight? Aanenson: Not tonight. Weick: Not tonight. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Skistad noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated August 20, 2019 as presented. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE. Weick: Kate how about City Council update? Aanenson: Yep I’ve got some updates. Weick: Great. Aanenson: So you looked at the Life Time parking lot. The City Council did approve that so they’ll get working on the parking lot. Glendale Homes was approved for the final. McGonagill: I have a question on the parking lot. Aanenson: Yeah. McGonagill: Have they actually started work on that before they? Generous: They have the Class V all in. McGonagill: Yeah. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 36 Aanenson: They put the Class V in, yeah. Generous: Now they have to pull it out and put in the… Aanenson: The park in there, yeah. Glendale Homes, that was one up on, off of Minnewashta Parkway. The 5 homes. Finally got the stormwater figured out. Approved the development contract. I do believe they need to make some tweaks on the development contract so that will go back onto the City Council at the next meeting. Just in that same area, those two lots south. One of those lots is going to come in for a, they were kind of assembling the two lots. Now we’re back to two separate but they’re going to split one of the lots. They were going to bring that before you just, we haven’t done it for a while but under our, on our agenda we have open discussion and that’s an opportunity where we notice the public but we just internally talk. We’re not on tape and it’s just an opportunity for someone to present an idea to you. We kind of give our perspective. They give their perspective and just, you can ruminate on it and give us, give them both parties some direction. But I think right now because they’ve kind of agreed to just do a two lot split it’s really less complicated so that probably wouldn’t be on your next agenda but there are some other, those properties are still being worked through so stay tuned on that one. Control Concept, the City Council approved that driveway easement when we talked about realigning that intersection so it moves to the north across our property. They have to move a hydrant or electrical box. Generous: Electrical box. Aanenson: So that’s been approved so that permit’s been issued so we should be seeing that moving along. And then also something that you probably weren’t aware of but the last 7 years I’ve been working on with the Flying Cloud Joint Zoning Board so that’s controlled by Metropolitan Airports Commission so the City of Eden Prairie wanted to work through their zoning issues and that had to be approved through the Metropolitan Airports Commission and MnDOT. We were close to getting an agreement. We probably worked on it for 3 or 4 years. Had all the public hearings and then it got way laid and so they brought it all back the last year and a half. Councilman McDonald’s been also on that board so really the only part that has jurisdiction in the fly way for the city of Chanhassen is really over a portion of Lake Riley and that that area is all zoned low density residential which is only 35 feet so it really doesn’t impact us but we are in the fly way zone so what it does is it restricts types of uses within the zoning district so this, the cities that were involved in that, it’s an indemnification clause that we’re all part of that if something happens so the City Attorney had, Metropolitan Council put that out to us. The joint zoning board. City Attorney reviewed that so that was adopted by the council. You will be seeing that. We have a litany of things we want to bring back to you. I mean one of the things could be the gravel pit standards. Some of those sort of things but we have a lot of other things we want to bring back too. I think right now we’d like to let the council kind of know the direction we go before we have the public hearing and then we find out that’s not the direction they wanted to go so but we’re going to try to do those this fall and then so you have an opportunity to look at those so, but that’s all I had. We do have one item on your next agenda and that is a variance for a septic system. Is that the one that’s on? Oh Carver Beach. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 37 Generous: Yeah and then we have a small subdivision. Two lot subdivision. Aanenson: Two lot subdivision so we’re trying to get this one on subdivision, septic, those tend to be a bit of a challenge and so we’re kind of racing them against the clock because they need to get resolution or they’ll have to be forced to pump so we’re trying to find a resolution. I’m not sure all parties are agreeing. The County would be Carver County on that too so but you will have, for sure have a meeting in 2 weeks for sure and I think we have a couple other small things coming forward so. Generous: That’s when the open discussion was supposed to go. Aanenson: Yeah but we won’t have that done but that’s it so. Weick: Okay. Skistad: I’d like to ask a question. Aanenson: Absolutely. Skistad: I’ve seen a helicopter several times now where it’s actually like over by Stone Creek area, like down Galpin and actually one time it, when I was driving down there it actually was close enough and flying crazily up and down like this where it knocked a rock into my windshield and I’ve seen that same helicopter over again on Galpin but farther up. Aanenson: It’s not the mosquito control district? Skistad: I highly doubt it. Hopefully they wouldn’t be flying that recklessly. Aanenson: Call the sheriff’s office. Skistad: But I’m wondering yeah. I mean how do you. Aanenson: There’s a non-emergency number. Skistad: I mean I had. Aanenson: You can call that non-emergency number at the sheriff’s office. Randall: Yeah it’s usually the mosquito control people that are doing that but yeah. Aanenson: Yeah we haven’t had any other calls but they might be going over there too. Skistad: It’s usually so quick that you know it’s like it just happened to be, I was at the stop light the last time. It wasn’t that long ago. It shouldn’t have been the mosquito control. I would thing… Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 3, 2019 38 Aanenson: Yeah I don’t know. I haven’t had anybody else talk to us about it at the city that I’m aware of. Skistad: Because it was just one of those things that like you mentioned Flying Cloud and I’m like oh yeah, that’s something I was going to ask on. Aanenson: We can check on that. Maybe you can too Mark. Randall: Yeah. I know we get a lot of calls for mosquito control. Skistad: Because I mean my concern and maybe okay. Aanenson: Safety. Skistad: I mean yeah, well what if it hits residential areas. Aanenson: Yeah. Skistad: I mean that’s, there’s a lot of people’s houses right through there you know. And it’s usually in the middle of the day. It’s not like. Randall: Yeah it’s the mosquito. Aanenson: We can check on it. That’s all I had. Weick: Okay. Unless there’s other business I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Randall: Move to adjourn. Weick: All in favor signify with aye. Randall: Doesn’t there need to be a second? McGonagill: It has to be seconded. We second it and say aye. You’re good. Weick: Is there a second? McGonagill: Yes there is a second. Randall moved, McGonagill seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 27, 2019 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.3. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No: PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council receives the Park and Recreation Commission minutes dated August 27, 2019.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Verbatim Minutes CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 27. 2019 Chairman Boettcher called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Boettcher, Meredith Petouvis, Joe Scanlon, Karl Tsuchiya, Sandy Sweetser, and Haley Pemrick MEMBERS ABSENT: Matt Kutz STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Superintendent; and Audrey Swantz, Recreation Supervisor PUBLIC PRESENT: Joseph and Brea Shamla 1691 Mayapple Pass Thy and Mitchell Tan 1711 Mayapple Pass APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Boettcher: Looking at approval of the agenda. Any additions or deletions at this time? Petouvis: I have a couple sort of pull out’s that I’d like to do to highlight. They’re not, I think they’re kind of embedded within the agenda as it is but I’d like to pull them out as things that we’re sure to discuss. The first would probably be a beginner to our CIP discussion and that would be a specific discussion around the Arboretum trail. Boettcher: Okay. Petouvis: Especially since we have new members and members who weren’t here at the, in 2015 I think it was when it was initially decided upon and we’ve had some fairly beyond price increases and changes to the scope of the project so I think it would be good to. Boettcher: Do you want to read that as 2. G-2(a)? Petouvis: Yeah that probably makes sense. Boettcher: Okay. And then the recommendation that’s currently at 2(b)? Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 2 Petouvis: Yeah. That makes sense to me if it does to everybody else. And then the other probably falls within the discussion on possible future park and recreation improvements I think, if that makes, somewhere around Lake Ann. Discussing that. Boettcher: Under I(2)? Petouvis: Yes. Boettcher: I(2) Okay. Petouvis: Yeah. That discussion would be just following through on the specific directive we received I think twice that I’ve heard from Mayor Ryan to think outside the box and come up as a commission with possible vision for the use of Lake Ann, and I know the feasibility study is underway but I think since we’ve been given that directive multiple times it’s time that we just have a discussion and a brainstorming session as a group so. That’s what I have to add. Boettcher: And this would be some of the items when we met with council in April and the Mayor challenged us to think outside the box. I was thinking that was initially under K(1) but maybe not. It would probably work better under I(2). Petouvis: Yeah the bond referendum is K(1) so I think you’re right, I(2) makes sense. Boettcher: Okay, I(2). Okay. Petouvis: And yes she brought it up again at the July 22nd City Council meeting so I think it’s time. Boettcher: Yeah it is. We would have done it last month but we weren’t here. Any other additions, deletions at this time? Todd, staff have anything? Okay motion to approve the agenda as amended. Tsuchiya: So moved. Boettcher: Second? Petouvis: Second. Tsuchiya moved, Petouvis seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission approve the agenda with the amendments outlined by Commissioner Petouvis. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 3 Boettcher: Anything on the docket? Hoffman: Just would like to let everybody know that, you going to talk about the Red Birds? Ruegemer: I was just looking, yeah. Hoffman: Jerry take it over. Boettcher: I saw they won. Ruegemer: Thank you. Good evening everybody. Just want to let, Todd and I wanted to let everybody know that the Red Birds did win their second playoff game. They have a playoff game coming up here Friday, August 30th at 7:30. They’ll be playing Blaine in Dassel so if anybody would like to attend please feel free to and so coming into this weekend it will be another state champion and hopefully it’s the Red Birds so hopefully they’re on the right path right now so thanks everybody. Boettcher: I was reading the article about that Jerry and it talked about the one player that did the walk off in the ninth inning, that he was, he was going to leave the team. He was being asked to leave. Can you dive into that? It was a little bit confusing trying to read it. Ruegemer: Yeah I think basically kind of the shorten version of that is that there was a protest of his eligibility. They were questioning, other teams in the league were questioning his status, that he was not a legal player within the playing radius I guess of what the Chanhassen Red Birds can play it so it went to the River Valley Board and ultimately they ruled in favor of the Red Birds and he was reinstated to play. Boettcher: So how would he have been out of the realm of the? Ruegemer: I think he was outside, some people thought he was outside the legal borders that they can draw players from. Boettcher: Oh okay. Ruegemer: But it was proven that he was just fine. Boettcher: Okay, yeah because I read that and I was a little confused and I thought well it’s good they had him in the ninth inning. Ruegemer: He’s a really good player. Boettcher: Made all the difference, one to nothing. Good. Anything else? If not let’s move onto visitor presentations. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 4 VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. Boettcher: I see some people in the audience. If you would step up to the podium and start for the record with your name and address please. Joseph Shamla: Joseph Shamla, 1691 Mayapple Pass. Pioneer Pass subdivision. Boettcher: It was Joseph? Joseph Shamla: Yes. Boettcher: Okay thank you. Joseph Shamla: So I’m here to request that Pioneer Pass be considered for an ice rink. Basically in, late in 2018 the neighborhood requested an ice rink. Due to the timing and how late it was we were unable to get anything figured out between the City and the neighborhood but I would say Pioneer Pass is one of the most utilized parks in this city. Any summer day if you’re out and about please stop by and take a look at it. Constantly traffic. You come to January, February it’s a ghost town. There’s nothing to do out there so originally as part of the Pioneer Pass plan it had a sledding hill. Due to constraints with the site and how it was developed the sledding hill never did get established so I guess something that would be a smaller footprint and fit within the park that we have would be an ice rink so I guess I sent out a petition to my neighborhood just to see how many people would be interested. Within the last 3 weeks we got 112 signatures on it so there’s definitely an interest and now I see on the agenda is under New Business number one is ice skating rink locations. I don’t know what is recommended because I don’t have the packet but I’m hoping that we are part of those recommendations. Any questions? Boettcher: Any questions for Joseph? Tsuchiya: Are you requesting, do you delineate your care between a hockey rink versus a pleasure rink? Joseph Shamla: I mean I’d be fine with anything to start especially just to get kind of something to see how much demand there is. I think you’re going to see a lot of people using it so I think it’s going to show that maybe it does deserve hockey rink status but for the first year just to kind of get a feel maybe it doesn’t. Tsuchiya: That’s what I was wondering just because I know with a hockey rink there’s a large initial investment with you know paving an area. Putting up boards and such. Not to mention space requirement so something to look at and just consider. Joseph Shamla: Okay. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 5 Sweetser: Just as an FYI are you familiar with, can you hear me? That there is Bandimere. I think you guys, I just pulled up on MapQuest just to see exactly where you were, that Bandimere does have those opportunities. As well as the Rec Center. Joseph Shamla: Well aware of that. Bandimere is way under utilized. The neighborhood wants to gather somewhere close. I’m sure as you’re aware the closer you are to a park the more you’re going to use it. Bandimere is a great park. It’s huge but it doesn’t get used unfortunately. So if my daughter sees her friends there she can go down to the park and skate. She’s not, I’m not going to take her by Bandimere to see if any of her friends are there so it’s a neighborhood park’s different than a regional park I guess. That’s why we’re hoping we can get it closer to home. Boettcher: Any other questions? Alright well thank you. We’ll take it in. We do have a list right now and it isn’t included but we will take it in consideration you know because we have to, we’re talking about our CIP. Our money that we’re spending the next 5 years so if we can fit something in there. We can’t make promises though that’s the problem right now but we do have it noted in the record. We’ll ask staff to give us any information. Additional as far as cost you know before games, pleasure, what’s the difference. That type of thing and because we have to have someone out there. It’s an additional cost too for flooding and everything else for staff. Todd you have something? Hoffman: Yes some good questions to I guess answer between Mr. Shamla and the commission are, if it’s just a sheet of ice that’s one thing. If you want a warming house and staffing for that warming house that’s another thing. We’ve done this in the past so neighborhood parks traditionally had skating rinks so if you think back to the 70’s there really wasn’t indoor ice. Just about every neighborhood park in the metropolitan area and the outstate area had a hockey rink, lights and warming house. That was just the model. That model changed dramatically when indoor ice became available. Neighborhood rinks slowly disappeared. We probably flooded close to a dozen neighborhood rinks at some time. Ruegemer: Maybe more. Hoffman: And so they were all over. All over the neighborhood parks. The last one, well one of the last ones to be taken out, Chanhassen Hills actually the commission put a light up so they put a light up for the neighborhood rink. It was just a flat sheet of ice. Put the warming house out there. The neighborhood was originally excited about it and then use just waned so it all went away so we really, other than Roundhouse and, which has the round house there and then North Lotus, those are only the two kind of pseudo neighborhood parks that would have an ice rink anymore when we used to have a dozen so this would be reinventing that old model. But if they just want a sheet of ice, you could flood the aggregate ballfield and just leave it at that and see if people utilize it and go from there. That’s pretty easy. If you want a warming house and Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 6 attendants that would take a budget amendment for the 2020 budget and so that would be a different thing so I guess that would be a good conversation to have. Boettcher: Okay thank you Todd. Joseph Shamla: Can I add one, I mean so I see there’s a recommendation. So does that mean somebody has determined that certain parks have been chosen for the? Boettcher: Yeah as part of our CIP discussion staff makes a determination of what’s out there. What the current budget is. That type of thing so we can make a decision like I said for the next 5 years where our money is going so. Joseph Shamla: Will that be decided tonight then? Boettcher: Parts of it will be. Here’s the list of the rinks and the costs are on the back side of that. Hoffman: Those are available online too. Joseph Shamla: Okay. Petouvis: Question for you Todd. The ballfield that is potentially the site of a rink, a flat surface rink, is that a high quality grass ballfield? Hoffman: So we would flood the infield, then you wouldn’t kill the grass. Petouvis: Okay I just ask because I know at Roundhouse it is not the same grass underneath what’s flooded as. Hoffman: No it dies… Petouvis: Yeah, it’s pretty hard on the feet in the summertime so I don’t think we’d want to ruin anything that’s actually quality turf. Would your neighborhood be satisfied with a sheet of ice without a warming house? Joseph Shamla: I think that’d be a great first step. The one thing with the warming house is everybody’s so close there if you get cold you can walk home so I don’t see the warming house as being like oh we really need a warming house and we need an attendant. Petouvis: Okay. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 7 Joseph Shamla: I don’t see that as being like that’s something that, you know maybe over time if you see wow there’s 50 kids out there every day, well maybe then it’s worth it but to begin with I think start slowly and see how many people use it. Petouvis: Okay. Todd perhaps for our next meeting could we have just an idea of figures for budget for sheet of ice. Hoffman: Yep. So it would, we’d give you an allocation of hours and so it would basically take an allocation of hours away from other duties that we do and they would procure them to this. They’re already in the budget so you already have staffing and overtime in the budget. We would just tell you how many hours it would take to maintain it. Flood it. Maintain it for a season and then what would go away to make that happen. Petouvis: Okay that would be very valuable information as we work on an extremely tight budget so every penny is accounted for so. Hoffman: Joe used to work for the City. He knows. Petouvis: He knows so. So this is not news to you so I think helping to further the discussion would be good. Boettcher: Alright. Joseph Shamla: Can you just explain what will be discussed tonight of number 1? I’m not sure if I should stick around to listen or if it’s going to be helpful. Hoffman: So the recommendation tonight would be for the same rinks that we had last year so annually they approve the rink program and that’s what the recommendation will be tonight is the same rink program that we had last year. The addition of Bandimere is a newer location so yeah it sees some of the lower use now but we’re, as a new location we’re hoping that builds over time. Very nice facility. And it was in the master plan so one thing about master park master plans is they’re intentional. They’re planned early on in the process and when something’s included or not included that’s intentional and so when you come back you should also, if this is a permanent facility then you’ll have to change that master plan and that’s another conversation. Public doesn’t like to be surprised. If you put something out there that’s not in the master plan there might be people that say hey, we don’t like that. Why did you put that out here? We were at the master plan meeting 4 years ago. 8 years ago. It wasn’t included so what’s going on and so other people may not like what you do. They might like the peace and solitude in the park. You know potentially neighbors that live very close and so there’s always that conversation that you want to make sure that you have as well. Petouvis: And then I would imagine maintaining a good balance and distribution of locations of our rinks has been important in site selection which we choose to maintain year after year. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 8 Hoffman: Yep, the model has just really changed to make it the most successful you want a warming house. You want hockey and you want open skate and they’re going to be in traditionally not as many locations and so we used to flood up to 18 rinks. 20 rinks. 22 rinks. Now we flood far fewer just because of the change in the ice skating model. Joseph Shamla: Can I add one more thing? Boettcher: Yeah. Joseph Shamla: I think like I completely get there was 12 and now there’s less. I think it all depends on the neighborhood. Our neighborhood has a lot of kids this age. They want to get out on the ice. In 10 years from now, 15 years from now, our neighborhood may not be the right place for it so it’s, I mean when we moved in 8 years ago our kids were too small to use one. I was not here until now because nobody was going to use it. So it’s kind of a cyclical thing. Like now it might be time to have one at this park. 10 years from now some other park will want one and we won’t need one so it’s kind of got to look at the ages of the kids to see how much use you’re going to get too. Boettcher: Right. Joseph Shamla: And then the nice part about our’s is we’ve got a ton of townhomes around us so I’d say traditionally there’s people that own townhomes, maybe younger families or older families. You know starter homes or they don’t want a single family house anymore so it should keep the younger generation wanting to use the ice rink so. Food for thought. Hoffman: Yep agreed. Joseph Shamla: Thank you. You want to Thy? Thy Tan: Just now the kids play on by the street, on side of street. The snow because the park is. Boettcher: Go ahead and, if you want to make a statement please. Give your name and address please. Thy Tan: Alright, my name’s Thy Tan. Address is 1711 Mayapple Pass. I live close by to the park there. But what he’s trying to say is pretty much every winter time it’s, a lot of kids play with the snow by the side of the street. It’s so dangerous. They just try to slide out there and stuff like that because the park is no ice rink and no sledding hills or anything so all they do is they get bored in winter times and a lot of kids come out and just play by the side of the street there and the cars drive by there and then they slide and it just the side of the street. So dangerous you know that one of these day going to get hit so that’s why is to have this ice rink Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 9 more at the park so they can just go to the park and play there and stuff like that more safe than by the street there. Side of street. Boettcher: Thank you. Anyone else visitor presentation? Alright. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Boettcher: Anyone have any changes, additions, deletions? Sandy. Sweetser: The only I noticed was. Boettcher: They cross you up again? Sweetser: I think so. I don’t know if it was myself and Haley or myself and Meredith. Petouvis: It was me. Sweetser: Yeah there just a couple notes that said Sandy Sweetser that should have been Meredith so we’re going to just try to talk more into the camera and to the microphone so, but it was nothing critical. Petouvis: Sandy just doesn’t want references to sewage associated to her name so. Sweetser: But it was nothing critical that needs to be changed. I would just make that note. Boettcher: Alright. We can handle that Hoffman: Six months from now Nann will have it down. New voices. She’ll get it. Boettcher: So with no changes to the Minutes can I get a motion to approve? Tsuchiya: So moved. Boettcher: Second? Petouvis: Second. Tsuchiya moved, Petouvis seconded to approve the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated June 25, 2019 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. 2019-2020 ICE SKATING RINK LOCATION RECOMMENDATION. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 10 Boettcher: Onto new business. Number G-1. 2019-2020 ice skating rink location recommendations. Jerry looks like this is your’s. Ruegemer: Thank you Chair Boettcher. Good evening commissioners. Just wanted to go through the 2019-2020 ice rink location recommendations. I think we have it on the table now as to what we’re going to be recommending for approval tonight. Basically kind of to summarize that. The locations and go with corresponding rinks, pleasure rinks and hockey rinks are identical to last year’s locations. Hours of operation during the days. Weekdays. The weekends. Holidays and school days out. Those days and times are located with a corresponding locations with that so the locations are the Chanhassen Recreation Center, North Lotus Lake Park, City Center, Bandimere Park, and Roundhouse Park with that so, that’s what staff is recommending for approval at this point. To kind of give, there’s on the second page of that there’s a background of kind of the 2018-2019 recorded participants per location for that. Kind of has a breakdown of the temporary and seasonal wages of last year. Over $19,000 for that. The warming house rentals for the locations that need portable warming houses and then the rink maintenance cost associated with overtime, flooding, maintaining those rinks throughout the days that we were open during that, during the season so if you kind of look to last year. We were open 67 days total and closed a total of 19 days for a variety of reasons so as part of the continuous discussion staff is recommending that we change our temperature for closing. Warming houses that be adjusted from negative 15 below to negative 20 below which seems kind of crazy but there is a desire to keep those rinks open during those temperatures so it is staff’s recommendation that we change that procedure and then we kind of fit that into our operation for the upcoming season. Boettcher: Do you know how much that change would have affected last year? 3 days? 2 days? 4 days? Ruegemer: I’d say probably more than that because we had you know January was relatively tame but once we got into February there was large amounts of snow and cold and then it went into March as well but you know I would imagine that would have been probably at least 4 to 5, 6 days of that. Boettcher: Okay. Ruegemer: Snow was probably the bigger contributing factor this year with the closures. Pemrick: What are the safety concerns for frostbite time with that change because that makes we nervous? Ruegemer: Yep. You know it’s, you know there is the desire for that. There is warming houses and people can choose not to go out or come in when they get cold so kids are hearty. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 11 Sweetser: Jerry I have a, kind of a question just about, I’m not a skater. I’m not familiar with, I’m familiar with most of these but Roundhouse I’m not. And I know for a lot of people it looks like, that aren’t familiar with it, that was one of the questions I had was, especially in light of some of the other discussion tonight. What is at that location? There is a warming house there then? Ruegemer: There is a round house building. Sweetser: So that is. Hoffman: It’s used as a warming house. Sweetser: So it’s permanent. It’s not a rental then. Ruegemer: It’s an old water tower. Sweetser: It’s not costing us money to have that there then? Just the staffing. Ruegemer: Staffing and there is certainly is utility costs associated with keeping that going t throughout the course of the year but right. Sweetser: Just those numbers are pretty low compared to other, however I understand the discussion of location. Of where that is so. Ruegemer: And that has more limited hours than any of the other locations because of lighting and attendance numbers so that has I guess abbreviated hours versus the other locations. Sweetser: Got ya. Ruegemer: That will dictate then the lower participation numbers. Petouvis: And it is also solely a pleasure rink so no boards or anything like that which has. Hoffman: It’s important to note these numbers are just a snapshot. It’s only when the attendants are there. It’s not when attendants are not there so they’re just a snapshot. Petouvis: Yeah, you’d be surprised how many people are out in the dark on, I know because we live there and I drive by there every time I go home so lots of dark skaters. Sweetser: Okay, fair enough. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 12 Boettcher: Alright any other discussion? Jerry thank you very much for the numbers and the update. Any other questions or discussion? If not anyone would want to put it to the question. We have the proposed motion in front of us. Tsuchiya: I guess I’m wondering given the discussion earlier, Todd maybe you weigh in on this, with Meredith’s request for insight into you know shifting hours as you explained. If we pass the motion now does that pre-empt any change if we were to entertain a Pioneer Ridge. Hoffman: No, not at all. Other representatives of the neighborhood have been coming and asking and so I don’t think it’s a bad trial and so you would want to have some communication. The City can put out some communication that this is a trial situation. We’re just going to put that rink down there. We’ll explain what it’s going to cost to you. You can make a motion to approve that next month at your meeting and then see how it works after that. See what the feedback is. Beyond that if you see enough use that you want to have a warming house then you just add that in in the following year. You know be aware that this will then bring back other neighborhoods. It will say hey they got their neighborhood skating rink back. Maybe we should get our neighborhood skating rink back so it might spur that kind of activity or that conversation so. Tsuchiya: Well if there’s the demand and the interest then. Hoffman: And the money. Tsuchiya: And the money of course. There’s always two sides to the coin but yes, if there’s demand then we can maybe make supply. Petouvis: In the interest of informed decision making and the absence of a warming house should we just choose to flood an area and leave no amenities besides the ice, how would we track usership? How would we get a handle on how many people are using it? Hoffman: That’s a great job for a park board to drive by on Saturday afternoon. Staff and the park commission would keep track of that. Petouvis: Okay. I kind of thought that would be the answer. Boettcher: See what happens when you ask? Tsuchiya: I think she just volunteered. Boettcher: Any other discussion? Hearing none, anyone want to make a motion? No motion? Sweetser: No. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 13 Petouvis: I will move that the commission follow staff recommendation on the 2019-20 ice skating rink locations to be held at the Chan Rec Center, North Lotus, City Center, Bandimere and Roundhouse Parks as outlined in the detailed documents. Hoffman: And you can add the. Boettcher: You want to add the warming house to the? Hoffman: Well you can add that. We’re going to bring back the numbers for next month. Petouvis: Oh for. Hoffman: Yep. For Pioneer Pass. Petouvis: Oh yes and please add that we would like budget numbers for the potential Pioneer Pass flooded area. Sweetser: Temperature adjustment does that need to be. Petouvis: Oh good grief guys. I mean I took, alright. Boettcher: Now this is Sandy’s. Hoffman: What was your question? Tsuchiya: Make sure that the temperature adjustments are included in your motion. Petouvis: Yes. Boettcher: 15 below to 20 below. Sweetser: Should we start over? Hoffman: No. Petouvis: Goodness gracious. Alright, but it says staff recommends. That’s what got me all messed up so I’m just going to read the proposed motion and let it fly from there. And I will add about the Pioneer Pass. Okay. Staff recommends that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to the City Council that the following ice skating rink locations and warming house hours be maintained for the 2019-20 season. Staff also recommends that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to the City Council that the warming house closing temperature be adjusted from negative 15 degrees to negative 20 degrees. And the Park and Rec Commission also recommends that the Park and Rec Department come back at the next meeting with Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 14 budgetary numbers for the possible addition of a flooded rink at Pioneer Pass. And I’m never doing a motion again. Hoffman: Why not it was perfect. Tsuchiya: I’ll second that. Boettcher: After all that we do have a motion and a second. Petouvis moved, Tsuchiya seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to the City Council that the attached ice skating rink locations and warming house hours be maintained for the 2019-20 season, that the warming house closing temperature be adjusted from negative 15 degrees to negative 20 degrees, and that the Park and Rec Department come back at the next meeting with budgetary numbers for the possible addition of a flooded rink at Pioneer Pass. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. Boettcher: Motion is unanimous and carried so next month we’ll look at some budget numbers. Thank you. Thanks for showing up Joseph. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL 2020-2024 PARK AND TRAIL ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP). Boettcher: So item G-2(a), a change to the agenda as recommended by Commissioner Petouvis. Discussion on Arboretum trail. And this is an issue mainly because of the change in the dollar amount which from what we’ve seen lately it has doubled and causing some discern among many people. Sweetser: Among the person to your right. Boettcher: So as the amender. Petouvis: As the amender shall I kick it off again? Boettcher: Would you please convene discussion. Petouvis: So when I joined the park and rec commission for the people who joined after I did, we were given, Karl and I the budget documents. The current 2017 through 21 budget documents and within there the Arboretum trail and Highway 41 underpass cost share, cost share between the County, the City and the Arboretum, our portion was listed in the budget as $140,000. And then last year based on increased knowledge of what the project would actually entail the figure went from $140,000 to $640,000ish and now with again more detailed knowledge of this project the current estimate of our cost share, which is 25 percent of the Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 15 remaining cost outlay after roughly $1 million dollar federal grant is our current share, 25 percent is $1.2 million. That’s just the current estimate so the reason I bring it up for you know sort of a more detailed discussion within the CIP discussion is that, that’s an awful lot of budgetary change within 2 years. It’s a valuable project. Of any commissioner at the table I can walk to that trail so it has, so just to give credence to my concerns I’m the one who would use it the most of anybody sitting here and I see the value but perhaps the discussion since Jim you were here initially but none of the rest of us were here to actually discuss before we, I assume before contracts were entered into. I just thought it would be helpful to get some more of the background and get everyone up to speed and on the same page knowing what the project is. What it entails as far as construction because it seems like it entails kind of a heck of a lot at this point and just so that we, we have a full understanding because $140,000 would not have emptied the park dedication fund back in 2015 when this was decided. $1.2 million comes extraordinarily close to emptying our current park fund so it seems like sort of a different ballgame. And we do have, there are contracts. There are a lot of reasons to be in favor of this but we’re not locked in. We can you know, and I’m sure Todd will detail the reasons why we would not want to but we do have flexibility as far as I understand to say hey, this is getting a little out of control folks or whatever we want to say. I just want to open it up. I’ll stop talking and let us get educated on what the project is and where it stands so. Boettcher: Sandy you had something? Sweetser: Well I was just going to say do we have details of these changes? What 120 went to 640. What was causing some of that? Hoffman: I can talk over that, yeah. Sweetser: That’d be great. Boettcher: I just real quick, because I see two sides. Not differing sides but I’m also on Carver County Park Commission and these same numbers we’ve been discussing there for 4 years and Todd is very familiar. Knows Marty Walsh very well. The Carver County Parks Director and he likes to, he has his own section each meeting. He goes through all the staff, all the updates so it was honestly every 3 to 4 months a change in the number and I don’t even try to keep track of it. After the first 3 or 4 I just knew, and it’s not anyone’s fault as such. I mean there are so many things. The one thing is the, was it 2014 when the trail down here. Hoffman: Fox Woods? Boettcher: Yeah the landslide. I mean that thing went from, I think it’s, is it $2.8 or $3.2 million? Hoffman: Something like that. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 16 Boettcher: And it started out at one, I want to say $1.1 and that was in 2015. Late 2015 so you can see there in about a 3 to 3 ½ year period it did a 200, 270 percent increase. I mean it’s one of those if you snooze you lose type of things. If you can use that as a cheap analogy but you know you wait for something like this, it’s like an estimate on your house. You want to add that four season porch. You want to add that deck. You want to do whatever and you get an estimate this year and 3 years later okay now I’ve got the money and all of a sudden it went from $200,000 to $320,000. What happened you know so Commissioner Petouvis is right. I mean it is a shock. It’s definitely is sticker shock especially when we look at our numbers which we will in just a few minutes. At the end of this year we’re going to have about $1.4 in the bank and we’re going to spend about $1.375 next year. That’s if nothing changes so if it gets any tighter than that we have bake sale. We do whatever. It is just that critical but again it’s something that it is a project that we need. I think we do need to do. If it isn’t done, but again I have the same concerns that Commissioner Petouvis does. When do you say enough is enough? You know if we wait 2 months is it going to go up again but anyone else? If I would I’ll ask, if anyone else has any comments and then Todd if you would give us a little bit of the background that Meredith is requesting. Tsuchiya: I’ve got, you know your last comment Jim. I’m questioning you know if we wait too long how much is it going to go up? How long until they actually start this is you know because we have no control over the project. We’re just paying into it so. Boettcher: The latest thing from Carver County, the construction was supposed to start this fall. Tsuchiya: Okay. Boettcher: Something I think has delayed that again. Something in the Arboretum with the boardwalk or. Hoffman: Yeah State permitting and so the last I heard they were hoping to bid it in late September. Tsuchiya: I’m just you know, they bid it. Is that locked in? Hoffman: No. So our agreement with the County has a variety of statements…so you can decide and the $1.2 is my number. Their current number is a million fifty and so that’s their current number but it’s not been updated based on all these recent requests by the State for additional permitting. Additional design. Additional protections for the environment. All sorts of additional things that are coming into play. Very challenging. Very complicated project and I will talk about that a little bit but that’s the current. They have to bid it this fall for landscape, for that total funding to be locked in. Tsuchiya: That’s what I remember some deadline about that, okay. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 17 Boettcher: Joe or Haley you have any? Pemrick: I rather hear more details just in case they’re answered. In case… Boettcher: Okay Todd if you want to take it away. Hoffman: I want to thank you commissioners. I’ll be as brief as I can. Thanks Jerry. So $140,000 estimate, that’s a line on a map and they calculate a per lineal foot cost. They say okay we’ve got this much trail. Times X amount per foot. That’s how that gets started. Then somebody says oh but are we going to let people cross at grade at Highway 41 or do we want an underpass? Oh well we would prefer an underpass. And then you start designing an underpass and that’s just a rough number. Underpass. X amount of money. This much trail. That bumps up to $600,000. Everybody says wow that’s a, you know now we’re in real money. $600,000- $640,000. Then you get to the detailed design and you start clicking off the years and so the first $640,000 that was estimated 3 years ago when construction costs were you know on a project this size probably a half a million dollars less because you’re in 3 years old. Your numbers are 3 years old. Construction costs continue to rise. The design gets more finite. You start to actually understand the realities and I can tell you after doing this for over 30 years everybody always wants to give you the best information which is the cheapest number. That’s what they want to give you. There’s like we want to give you the most optimistic number because we know you’re a government agency. We’re trying to be optimistic. We’re trying to design this thing as tight as we can and then they get into the realities of the project and oh my gosh. We’ve got to twist this tunnel because we’ve got gas lines in here and we’ve got a much more elaborate system. It’s in your packet. You can see how you get down into the box culvert with these sheet pilings and so, I should switch to this camera while we’re up there. So these are steel sheet pilings with a concrete top and this is coming out of the trail heading west to the Arboretum. And these things become very tall. That’s looking at going into the box culvert and so costs just get more and more refined. Then the permitting starts. All of the review. All the wetland management. Is it a boardwalk? Is it not a boardwalk? Boardwalks are a lot more expensive and so all these details come in an I’m still calling both Marty and the gentleman over at SRF about weekly and there is no additional information at this time. So the last time we met as a group, we’ve been meeting quarterly at the Arboretum. The engineer’s estimate was $4,894,000. And then you added on wetland credits, cultural resource work, engineering plans and inspection and your total went to $5,294,200. Less federal funds which is a million ten. 3840. Gets down to the cost share of $4,190,360. And then, so that was, that’s divvied up by the City, the Arboretum, Carver County. And so we’re a partner to this project which is the only way it could get done. If anyone of these agencies was doing this alone, and the City was that agency just before the County took it over. We applied for that federal grant. We were like 40 points short and it just didn’t look like we’d gain those extra 40 points. The way to do that is to move up the food chain. We knew if the County was the applicant for the grant that that would move it up the food chain. They would secure the grant. They would do the project. We were fortunate enough that it was a regional section of trail so the County would do that. County’s like yeah, we’ll do it. They really weren’t in the trail business if you think back. The County just was not in the trail business but Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 18 Chanhassen, Chaska we were building trails. Even in county road ditches. Even in state highways. We were the ones in the trail business. We were making trails happen in our community so we were happy to have the County as a partner. They got the grant money. I can tell you when we got, the grant was awarded everybody thought the million one sounded like a huge number. Doesn’t sound so huge anymore based on the current budget of the project but it’s still some significant cash to put back in. The other thing is the Arboretum would not typically get into this kind of a deal. And so to have the Arboretum at the table for a million four, right now the number. So the number splits is a $1,047,590. That’s for Chanhassen. $1,047,590 for the University. And Carver County $2,095,180 and so those are the current estimated cost splits. And so for the Arboretum to be at the table with that kind of cash is a significant coup for this project. The other thing is typically they would charge users, local governments for the right-of- way where their trails, where trails go in their property. They’re like you want a city regional trail through here, you’re going to pay us for that property and they have charged everybody around that facility for right-of-way to build a trail which they use. Their patrons use. Doesn’t matter. That was their policy. They’ve exempted this project from that. They’ve exempted that. They’re not going to charge you for the right-of-way. They’re going to pay you the million. They’re going to pay their full cost, share which is not coming out of downtown. It’s coming out of the facility out here and then they’re going to maintain their section of trail. So once we hit the Arboretum they’re going to maintain it and they’re going to maintain their section of trail. They’re going to plow it. They’re going to maintain it. They’re going to maintain it into the future. That’s a huge bonus for this project and so the project can be bid hopefully in September. Marty has been juggling the plates on this thing to even get it to a bid and so it’s your option once it’s bid. You don’t know where the costs are going to come in. Right now the City Council has signed a joint powers agreement. It’s in your packet and it says we’re a party to this process. We love this trail project. We want this trail project because the County doesn’t want to get involved with expending all their time and money without the support of the City so you’ve signed a resolution supporting the Trunk Highway 5 Regional Trail Master Plan. This was back in February, 2018 whereas Carver County is implementing a trail master plan. Proposed a regional trail consistent whereas proposed regional trail is consistent with the City’s plan. Now therefore be it resolved the City of Chanhassen City Council supports the Trunk Highway 5 Regional Trail Master Plan. Passed and adopted this day so that is in addition to the joint powers agreement that you have. You’ve made that recommendation. You made a recommendation to the council. You said we as the park commission supports this project. We support you moving forward with it. We support you signing that joint powers agreement. The council took that recommendation. That was back in 2018 and they said yep, we’re going to do this. They signed a joint powers agreement. The County said alright. We have all our partners. We have a joint powers agreement with the Arboretum. With the City of Chanhassen. We’re moving forward and that’s where we’re at today. The bids come in and you don’t want to spend the $1.2 million you can make that recommendation to the council that you don’t want to spend that. It’s their decision if they want to spend it or not. So the balance of the park fund, you know the park fund will probably generate another $18 to $20 million dollars over it’s life span. This is one of the last 3 or 4 segments of comprehensive trail to build in our community. You know what, the most expensive ones are last and it’s just the way it works out and so you know you have a lot of, you Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 19 have an option. You can always walk away. If you walk away this project will not, probably not come back for 15-20 years or longer. Petouvis: Todd can you speak to, I know we see on the map where the trail is. Can you speak more to the value of making that connection? Hoffman: Oh sure. Petouvis: And what that accomplishes. Hoffman: Oh sure yeah. So Life Time Fitness is also a partner of this project. They’re going to give their right-of-way up because it goes onto this property in certain places so this is a pretty significant section of trail. It starts at Century Boulevard which is at the Life Time entrance and then heads all the way in front of Life Time Fitness. Dives underneath Highway 41 at that location. The box culvert and the underpass will be engineered so when 41 is upgraded to the south and lowered that this fits in that plan and so this shoots underneath Highway 41 at that location. It goes up and behind the big sign that the Arboretum, that big beautiful sign, this was not easy for the Arboretum to say hey we’re supporting this because they’re taking down landscaping that is built for that sign but they understand the pain that’s necessary. It’s always the middle of a project. You know the planning. It’s just that middle messy part that nobody really likes. And so they’re like yep, we’re on board with that. The alignment once you get in the Arboretum used to be on Highway 5. Very close to Highway 5 and everybody said let’s move it into the Arboretum. We’re in the Arboretum. Let’s have a much better trail experience so when you get into the Arboretum you’re going to be into these much more beautiful serene areas. Now you’re going to go past the gate house. You’re going to stay outside of their deer fence. This project is very important to the Arboretum. It’s going to include their deer fence on the full north property line and so as you move along sections of this trail, you’ve got the deer fence inbetween the trail and the property. Then you’re going to have the trail so it’s on the outside of the deer fence proper and the trail can be utilized by the public. You’ll continue through and you’ll connect to the underpass at State Highway 41. Or excuse me State Highway 5. You always like to bundle value and so the City, the federal government, the State of Minnesota has invested in that underpass that’s sitting out there now getting people from the west into the Arboretum. Now you’re going to be able to get people both ways. So you have an underpass at the east. Underpass at the west. Trail in the middle. If you think of just the people that would like to get to the Arboretum by bike or running or walking, it’s a regional destination. It’s a regional trail. It’s part of our transportation network. People that live in Victoria want to get to Chanhassen by bike, by work. People that work at the Arboretum want to get to work by bike. It’s just an important section of trail for the community. Life Time Fitness itself will probably send 200-300 people a day from their health club into the Arboretum to experience that. Mostly via running probably. That’s why they’re onboard. They’re like are you kidding me? We have our world corporate campus next to a beautiful Arboretum facility that we can’t even access currently now. By being a partner to this project and giving some right-of-way up we can have our people just scoot right underneath Highway 41 and into the Arboretum. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 20 Experiencing that. You know they have significant running clubs that run all over the community now. Now you’re going to be able to head into the Arboretum. And the Arboretum is still onboard because they had a change in leadership. There was a leader at the Arboretum previously that did not value penetrating the gates other than by car into the Arboretum. When that change of leadership happened those people said this is amazing. If we get people into our Arboretum by bike, pedestrian, we don’t care. They’re not members. They’re going to come back. They’re going to say wow, this place is just absolutely remarkable. We want to come back and support this. Probably drive their car then and come, you know take on a membership. So that’s the basis of it. When I first got involved, when I came to Chanhassen this was a project on the docket. And then in 2010 the City did detailed plans for this project. And then in 2015 the County did detailed projects and when we went to the Arboretum they pulled out a plan from 1972 that had a detailed plan to reach the Arboretum via trail so it’s been a long term, long term goal for everybody to get the Arboretum connected to the local community via trail and you know everybody’s working towards that goal. If you feel in the dark, I can tell you I’m about as in the dark as you. I know where we’re at with the documents. Don’t know where we’re at with the money yet until it’s bid. Once it’s bid that’s the true cost of the project. It’s a pretty significant project. If there’s not a lot of competition out there for work and if we get a high bid then people can walk away or they can rebid it. Hopefully there’s some competition in the marketplace and we get a good bid and everybody can move forward. So those are the basis of that project. Pemrick: Question. Actually two questions. First one you said Arboretum is taking care of the maintenance of their section of it so how much of, how much trail is the City then going to be taking on for maintenance? Hoffman: Yep so we’d maintain from Century to 41. Pemrick: Okay so that’s not a lot at all. Okay. And then the other one was, I remember last fall there was discussion about adding or continuing the trail along Powers Boulevard into, down to West 78th and all the way up into Excelsior. Do you have an update on that because I was just thinking that’s the other way. That’s the only way I’ve ever biked to Victoria is go up Powers and then catch that trail and take that over to Victoria. Hoffman: Yep so that’s called the Mill Street trail extension and being worked on by Hennepin County and I’ll be at a TAC meeting, Technical Advisory Committee meeting tomorrow with Jason Wedel our City Engineer. So that’s continuing to move forward. It’s a Hennepin County project. It would pick the trail up at the Hennepin County/Carver County border. At Powers Boulevard where it turns into Mill Street and take it into Excelsior. Another very complicated project. You know somewhat, there’s two sides to that project because you’ve got people that live there that are going to be affected you know pretty dramatically at their front yard and, but everybody understands the need for that project. The desire. You’ll probably see just as many people coming south to get to Chanhassen as people going north to get to Excelsior. So that project is still in the planning stages. You know we’ll be on the hook for a section so we have a Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 21 one block section there that’s not completed and we want them to include it in the plans and then we would pay for that and so that would come at some future time. We don’t know what that cost would be. And that’s the section just right there where it left off just one block south of the Hennepin County line and the City of Shorewood. Pemrick: So that’s still way. Hoffman: Not way out. Pemrick: Not way out? Hoffman: Not way out. Could be built in 2020. Could be built in 2021. Pemrick: Okay. Hoffman: Yep. And the real power behind that project is Hennepin County came to the table and so when you understand how these things happen, there was also a leader at Hennepin County that did not want to get involved in these local projects in the outskirts of Hennepin County. Had no interest. That person left. New person came on and said what have we been doing ignoring these people for all this time? Let’s get out there and help these folks out. They pay county taxes just like everybody else. Let’s find the highest need areas. A trail from Chanhassen to Excelsior is one of their highest needs. They’re like yeah, let’s make this happen. For years and years and years we’d get together a park commissioner from Excelsior, Shorewood and Chanhassen and they would sit down and talk about how this was going to happen and with the cash equivalent of the City of Shorewood, City of Excelsior and City of Chanhassen it was just never going to happen and so that happened on 3 different meeting occasions. Let’s get going. Let’s talk to our mayors. Let’s get some, build some energy behind this and it just wasn’t going to happen because you didn’t have that big player. Now you’ve got Hennepin County. They’re a big player in the room. They can make that project move forward. Boettcher: Any other discussion? Joe you have anything? Scanlon: No, I mean it’s great to get caught up on the, I joined shortly after all that was recommended by the previous commissioners. Sounds like very essential projects so it’d be hard to you know react or do anything before we get a formal bid so I think it’s worth keeping an eye on for sure. Boettcher: Sandy you just hit the button. Sweetser: Yes I did. Quick question for the slides. I’m a very visual person so slide number one Todd, it’s got the low wall. I get what number 2 is showing. What is number one? Where does all this wall kind of start and is this the whole, along the whole trail that there would be that wall and the fence? Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 22 Hoffman: Nope. This is on both sides and primarily on the, most of it is on the west side so it’s diving into the tunnel from Life Time Fitness and coming out of the tunnel on the Arboretum. Sweetser: So it’s not the entire, it’s just that portion? Hoffman: No right there. Getting it down to grade so you can get underneath. Sweetser: Okay. Boettcher: It kind of if you expand this picture you can kind of see the artist misconception of where it would start and end. Sweetser: I was like well maybe we can cut down on some of the seating that’s in there but I understand what it is now. Boettcher: Well and that just, I just wanted to add real quick too. The fact that the Arboretum is onboard with this. I remember in the County Park Commission we were talking about the initial alignment of the trail right along Highway 5. It was like they were telling us we don’t want you here. You know stay out there. Don’t get too close. Now to open it up and let us right there, I mean let the trail come right up against the parking lot like that, that’s pretty amazing that they’re coming to the table like that and letting people march through their property. I mean that’s, like you said that was unheard of just a few years ago. Never would have happened. Sweetser: It’s no doubt a great partnership but what do we do if all of a sudden that $1.2 goes up to $1.5? You know I guess I’m asking more us. What do we do you know? Tsuchiya: Well I think it depends on how strongly you recommend it. We don’t make the decision. The council does. If we strongly recommend it then we also put on them, we have to find the funding for this. Hoffman: Yeah this is no doubt an opportunity for the recommending bodies and the policy makers of the city and it’s a legacy project and you walk away from a legacy project you’re always going to be known for that so. Sweetser: That was my next question was can we get this sponsored? I don’t have the money. Petouvis: How about if Life Time sponsors it? Sweetser: I’m joking but not joking really. But is there sponsorship opportunity? Hoffman: Life Time is kicking in a significant cash on their end, and they’re going to name a section, their section of the trail after a gentleman that passed away that worked on this project in Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 23 the early stages. There’s always a lot of ways to look at a number and look at a project and if, whatever the number is. Let’s say it ends up to be the $1.2 million or the million fifty, the multiplier on that, and there’s at least half that number in multiplier that’s been attached to that in energy, time, cash, over the years and so if you throw away the $1.2 million because you don’t want to spend it you’re going to throw away $600,000 as a multiplier that’s been invested to make that $1.2 million become a project. Boettcher: Quick question Todd. Wasn’t the County going to take over the maintenance within the city after a period of time? Hoffman: The County will do the blacktop maintenance so long term blacktop maintenance but we do the daily plowing and the sweeping and those type of things yeah. Boettcher: Okay. I thought there was something where the County was taking it over. Petouvis: We find ourselves in the exciting and daunting position of having lots of legacy projects on our shoulders with no money so that is. Very exciting legacy projects but at the same time money is money and it doesn’t grow on trees so that puts us in an interesting position so. Boettcher: Yeah it’s good to be able to hear all the background on what actually happened. Petouvis: Exactly. Boettcher: So that the initial number that you and Karl saw when you joined, that $140,000 like Todd said, that was just like for this you use simple math. Petouvis: Right I know but so that it’s really interesting because that’s the number that’s in front of you as a commission when your decision making and you’re looking at what your park dedication fund balance is and you’re saying well $140,000 that’s what we spend a year in I don’t know. Boettcher: Trees. Petouvis: Exactly. It’s no, that’s relatively no big deal. Boettcher: Right. Petouvis: And so we’re not talking apples to apples here. It’s a different kind of project and a different kind of bite out our funding. Certainly no argument from me about the value of the project. It’s just, it’s how this project fits into the puzzle of you know our overall goals as a city and what we have as funding and the fact that we’ve made a very conscious decision over the past at least 1 to 2 budgeting cycles to save money knowing that Lake Ann was coming as an opportunity and so, and then you know the question mark is the Arboretum trail. That impacts a Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 24 huge cross section of our area. Is that a more important project than the Lake Ann project? Is it, you know where do we fit all of these puzzle pieces so this was all why I wanted to talk about it tonight. Tsuchiya: I don’t disagree with you Meredith. I’m just wondering do we need to prioritize them as you’re suggesting or do we just say you know we group them instead to say look are these the Class A projects. These are ones that have to be done. We don’t rank them within the class and then these are Class B and Class C because I envision you know we look at it and say what are the ones that really should be done now. We have improvements in place. There’s momentum behind these projects. The Arboretum trail is at a stage now where yeah we can pull out of it. We’re not at that stage but we still have the option. Of course we’re just the recommending body so it’s not our decision but we look at that and then we look at Lake Ann. That’s going to come at sometime. We don’t know what that’s going to, you know that dollar amount’s going to dwarf this more than likely than not so we don’t know how the City and the park dedication fund is going to be replenished over time so I think we just have to face the reality that we’re going to spend beyond our means right now but the opportunity is there right now to say this is what we have to do and we have to then you know, the other thing you add it to the agenda. Think outside the box but you know there’s a minimum level of money we’re going to have to spend to do these projects. You can’t go below that and if you want to do the project this is where you start. So I see like the Arboretum trail, Lake Ann and then Todd what you’d call it? Mill Street project? Yeah, I mean unless there’s more but those seem to be those kind of projects where they’ve been on the master plan for so long and they’re an opportunity of presenting itself now where not only the City but the County and other cities are involved with federal funds. I’m not saying that these are going to happen no matter what but I think that’s something to keep in mind that you just kind of have to put it to the city like we feel that this is really important. The commission does. I think the citizens of Chanhassen think so. Obviously it impacts citizens outside of Chanhassen which is a great benefit but they’re going to have to find the money somehow and we can make recommendations but I think looking at the value of these projects will provide to the city long term is undeniable at this point. Petouvis: Well said. Boettcher: Very good. Anymore discussion or we want to move on to CIP and the core. You were the convener on that. Petouvis: I just wanted to make sure we had it on the table as a point of discussion and I feel like we’ve done that. I feel like we’re all on the same page, or we all are at the same level of knowledge. No matter where our own personal opinions may lie so that’s good. Mission accomplished as far as I’m concerned so thank you. Tsuchiya: Thank you Meredith. I think that was great. Boettcher: It was, thank you. So we’ll move onto new business item G-2(B). Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 25 Tsuchiya: Wait, don’t we have to make a motion? Boettcher: No, no we’re going to do the CIP. That was in addition. Tsuchiya: Oh that was G(A). Boettcher: That was A. Tsuchiya: A, okay. Excuse me. Boettcher: Now we’re on 2(B). And this is the big kahuna and we’re looking at 2020 through 2024. So you have several pages of items here. We’re looking at our traditional costs. Every year we’ve got the picnic tables and park benches. We’ve got the trees. Then we get into the bigger dollar amounts. Chanhassen Nature Preserve Trail. Final phase. Get into Bandimere. This is one that’s been hanging out there for a long time. It’s Bandimere Park sport court. Rec Center fence, dugouts and backstops. So this is taking us out through the entire 5 year period. And there’s the one we’ve just been discussing. Arboretum trail, Highway 41 underpass. That’s a 2020 item. And then the final page is projects by funding source. So when you look, did everyone receive Todd’s email that had the history of the park dedication funds? And if you looked at that for where we’re currently at or where we’re projected, where we were at the end of 2018, the year end fund balance of $1,419, 972. And if you look at the last page in this packet I just went through our spending for next year is listed at $1.375 so we’re pretty much, there’s not a lot of leeway there. So again any changes in any of this? Any estimates? Any engineering changes, whatever is really going to take us down. We could be in trouble there but start the discussion. Anybody have any recommendations? You want any of these items you want to discuss? You want to move something down. Pull something in. You know 2020 goes, 2022, 2023 to 2021. This is the time to do the head cutting as they say. Sweetser: I would just like to throw in, not necessarily moving the time frame but for Bandimere, could we at least kind of put in the notes the new, potentially doing new soccer nets. Soccer system. You know hopefully by that point a few years from now maybe it could be rolled in with the sport court company or something to that effect but at least putting that kind of on a potential Bandimere list because those, even though I know CC United believes that those nets are, those systems are not the correct size. They’re definitely getting old as well so they’ll probably by 2020-24 need to be replaced anyway. Just like to add that in. Petouvis: As a point also just to bring our new members up to speed on what our budgeting philosophy has been over the past couple of years. I think you saw it noted somewhere else in the CIP that those projects are actually kind of you know pushed out because we’ve made the conscious decision to try and preserve funding for it so just to, just so you know. Those bigger dollar Bandimere projects and the Rec Center dugout that’s been back burnered. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 26 Boettcher: And if you look at the way that funding, the spending is listed right now on that final page. Because of the big hit we’re taking, scheduled to take in 2020, 21 through 23 is minimal. That’s trees and benches. Petouvis: Right. Boettcher: So we’re hoping to build the fund back up because there could be additional things that pop up you know after that 3 year period so with that in mind, I mean Bandimere has been one, as Meredith said, it has been pushed out. That can has been kicked down the road so many times it’s nothing but dents so. Petouvis: But it is still solidly on the radar. Boettcher: Definitely. I think that was reiterated in our meeting with City Council. Petouvis: Yes sir. Boettcher: We have not forgotten. Or we shall return, which ever. Pemrick: I don’t know if I’m just totally forgetting, give some more back story on the Chanhassen Nature Preserve Trail. Final phase. Because is that set in stone right, I know this is, how set in stone is that and what is it? Hoffman: Sure. Pemrick: And what does it all encompass. Hoffman: Yep. So the Chanhassen Nature Preserve is west of the Recreation Center. It’s a trail that circles around by the Holiday Inn Express. It was acquired. It’s just about 100 acres so it’s a significant piece of property and there was a master trail plan developed and then development contract agreements between the developers and the City. This is the last piece of property so there’s a company called Mamac Systems right there on the portion and then there’s an empty lot and then there’s going to be a building built in that empty lot. When that’s built by their development contract it says okay, you’re going to build the section of trail for the City. We’re going to pay you for the cost of the asphalt, the rock. You’re going to do the design. You’re going to do the grading. You’re going to install it and we’re just going to pay you back those costs. It’s an effective way to get comprehensive trail sections installed. If you try to do them beforehand typically what happens is you build it in the way of their future construction and the investment is wasted. So it’s an efficient way to say when your lot comes in you’re going to build that section of trail. For example when the Holiday Inn Express was built they had to build a long section of trail on their lot. We had to pay them for the cost of the materials and so it’s an effective way to get things done. This is, I believe it’s Control Concepts that’s coming in and they’re going to build a building there. They build the trail. We don’t have the cost yet. The Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 27 $150,000 is my estimate and it will, once it’s bid and the project is underway then we’ll understand what the complete cost is. So we’re under contract with Control Concepts. We have a development contract which says you’ll do this. We’ll do that and we’ll get along and you build your building, you build our trail, we’ll pay you back for it. Pemrick: Okay. Thank you. Boettcher: Todd do you happen to have, can we see a, is there an overhead or GPS satellite view of this? Hoffman: Of that trail? Boettcher: Pull it up on the website or something. Hoffman: Let’s see if we can find, do you want to look something up Jerry and then the overhead. Let me see if I might have it right here. Boettcher: Because that’s one we’ve discussed a few times but it’s not clear where the boundaries are. Petouvis: I guess it popped on real quick and popped right back off just as fast last year to our discussions. Pemrick: Has Control Concepts started building their building? Hoffman: They’re close. They’re close to get it started so, I saw the gentleman in the office the other day and they’re close to getting started. It was on again, off again, and now it’s back on again. Let’s zoom in on this Jerry. Okay that’s good. So that’s the Mamac building and they, this is Century Boulevard, Highway 5. Holiday Inn Express sits right here and the dentist is right there. Tweet is right there. So this is the road that goes right through the nature preserve and this is where the trail will touch down and this is going to be the new building, Control Concepts. And the trail’s going to touch down here and then wrap around their building and connect. It’s the last segment of trail and there’s a trail that goes this way now and then this trail loops all the way around the nature preserve and then comes back this way. So this is the last piece on their property. Pemrick: Thank you. Hoffman: So that master plan is 20 years old and it’s the last piece of the puzzle that’s being built and again there was a park commission here 20 years ago that made that deal. City Council agreed with it. Everybody’s got to agree with it now but you’re under a contract. Development contract with them. And that allows them to understand what they’re getting involved in and it keeps, you know it gets public trails built by private parties and then it also it leverages, they’re Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 28 there. They’re doing grading. It’s a benefit to their property. Their employees can you know take a nice lunch hour walk so they’re investing because they’re going to do some planting. Some grading. You know it would just be easier for them if it wasn’t there so they’re investing some costs and so we’re leveraging that fact that they’re there and as long as again everybody gets along. Gets their job done and we pay our bills and I know that’s a challenge. One thing to, that I think the park board also can remember is lots of cities spend lots of money on park things that are not park dedication funds and so when you’re struggling that’s because that’s what you have as an access to funding but there’s been many park improvements done in this community without park dedication funds so you can buy a dump truck. You can build a trail. You know you can buy a fire truck or you can build a park. So there’s cash. You know it’s allocated already but that’s a council decision and they’re going to weigh the same things you’re talking about is this valuable? Do we want to do this? Do we want to find the cash to do this? We know Lake Ann’s coming up. We know Bandimere is down the road. I think this is probably the reason that the referendum discussion has come up. You know should we congeal some of these projects and put a referendum out there and let people vote for them and so that’s another process as well. This is the same scenario that happened the last time around we had a referendum. There’s lots of things tumbling down on the park commission and City Council because we had tons of development going on. Lots of desires. Lots of needs and so they said well let’s have a referendum. And when we get to that discussion for just something to jot down is, this commission in this room said in 1994 we should have a park referendum. That referendum occurred on June 19, 1997. Three years later so it’s, can be a long process as well. They had two surveys that they did. First survey said that the citizenry wouldn’t support it so they modified the proposal. Modified the approach. The second survey said the citizenry would support it and it just took you know 2 ½-3 years to make that process but that’s for a later discussion. Boettcher: Other discussion? Looking at the numbers as they’re laying out from 2020 to 2024, does anyone see a reason to make any changes on the timeline of scheduled projects? Hoffman: Chair Boettcher it’s important for the commission, if you look at projects by funding source. I want to do some doodling with you so you understand exactly what’s being recommended. So projects by funding source includes those 3 items on the right. Bandimere $640,000. Bandimere $245,000. Rec Center, those are crossed out. Those are not included. Those are out. Boettcher: Oh they are, okay. Hoffman: Everything else is in and everything else adds up to the $1,475,000. So if you make the recommendation and the council supports it you’re going to build an Arboretum trail. You’re going to build a Chan Nature Preserve trail. Then you’re going to wait and we don’t even have to plant trees or buy benches for 4 years. We can save that money and then you’re just going to wait and see what the next opportunity is and what the next funding source is and so park dedication dollars come in sporadically based on development. Sometimes you give it away like Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 29 you did at Lake Ann. You said here’s your $980,000 back. Thank you for your land and sometimes you take their money and you utilize it somewhere else. The need for this cash is why the City has so feverishly supported park dedication and where we were at with that and so early on in the city’s history park dedications were down in the, you know the mid 2,000’s and we knew that our land values were higher than that and we needed to generate more money. We were the first ones to top out in the metro area at $5,800 per house. Again that’s defensible. It’s made by State statute. Developers didn’t like it but we knew we had a lot of business to do and so over the years Chanhassen has captured more than our, not more than our fair share. We’ve captured our fair share but we’ve captured more than many other cities because they’ve just left their fees lower. $2,800 per house. $3,200 per house. So this city has maxed out what you can gain. You’ve maxed out your investments. You’ve utilized park dedication quite aggressively and when people from the outside look at this community what they tell me is we can’t believe what you’ve built with what little you’ve had. That’s the over riding story when people from the outside look at Chanhassen. So when you’re struggling over your cash, I think there’s always a celebration that you’ve accomplished a great deal. Boettcher: Good. Meredith’s thinking. Petouvis: Oh no. Boettcher: It’s always interesting. Petouvis: Yes. Boettcher: It’s a challenge more some years than others but. Sandy anything else? Sweetser: No. Petouvis: I’m just the type of person guys. I don’t carry a credit card balance. I don’t buy what I can’t, I mean so this is where I’m coming from. I know it’s not a surprise to anybody at this table but you know there are a lot of people. Hoffman: Did you charge anything this month? Tsuchiya: Her card melted. Petouvis: My card did melt. Yes but that balance will not be there so I don’t swipe that card if I don’t have the money to pay for it and that’s not really how lots of governments work so. Boettcher: Any of them. Petouvis: Yeah I get that so I just don’t want us to become over extended in the way that I think it has irresponsibly happened in higher portions. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 30 Boettcher: I think based on this group I don’t think it would be our fault. It would be other circumstances. Petouvis: So, but I want to build these things. Don’t get me wrong. Don’t get me wrong. Just want to have the discussions. Boettcher: You’ll be out there handing out the money as they’re grading. You’ve got a thousand worth there. Go another foot. Here’s another thousand. Petouvis: No because I’ll be at Pioneer Pass making sure that the skating rink is getting used. Pemrick: So quick question though is, so if we’re aware the Lake Ann expansion is right now, is that too early to be on this plan at this point in time? Would be my only other question. Tsuchiya: I think the answer is we don’t know. Petouvis: Is that part of our little deeper down the agenda? Hoffman: Yeah and the feasibility study will start to estimate costs and you’ll know that information in October or November this year. Pemrick: Okay. Hoffman: And then you’ll have that information. There’s also some timing that we’ll talk about and so with the staging, the phasing the Lennar’s doing. There’s some additional timing I think that we can stretch this out so we’ll talk about that as well. Pemrick: So this is everything best known information at this point in time? Okay. Boettcher: So at this point if there’s no other discussion does someone want to try to read the motion again? Tsuchiya: I’ve got this one. Boettcher: Commissioner Tsuchiya. Tsuchiya: I’m going to try. I’ll make a motion the Park and Recreation Commission recommends the City Council approve a 2020 to 2024 Fund 410 Park and Trail Acquisition and Development Capital Improvement Program totaling $1,475,000 to complete the projects listed in Attachment 2. Boettcher: We have a motion. Do we have a second? Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 31 Petouvis: Second. Boettcher: Motion and a second. Tsuchiya moved, Petouvis seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends the City Council approve a 2020 to 2024 Fund 410 Park and Trail Acquisition and Development Capital Improvement Program totaling $1,475,000 to complete the projects listed in Attachment 2. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. REPORTS: 2019 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATIN EVALUATION. Boettcher: Todd is there anything we have old business to discuss? Hoffman: Jerry’s going to talk briefly about the 4th. Ruegemer: Talking about old business. This seems like a while ago but I’m just not, and in the essence of time here tonight I’m not going to go through line item by line item. Just want to thank all the commissioners that were involved this year. We celebrated our 36th year. Really a lot of cooperation between community groups and organizations. Everything just went off splendidly with the event with that so we just, we have a lot to celebrate and so we’re very appreciative of our community. Generations of families come. Keep coming back every year so, so that’s really it. I’m not going to go item by item but it’s very detailed. All the information is there. The expenditures. The revenues so kind of see kind of where we’re at. We just wanted to give the commission a real brief update. Audrey Swantz who was our Recreation Supervisor did resign her position effective August 16th with that so just, she just felt she wanted to pursue other areas. Potentially go back to school. Don’t say it Jim. I knew you’d say it. Boettcher: I’m just adding up. Ruegemer: So I just wanted to give the commission a quick update on that so if there’s anything in the interim process right now please feel free to give me a call. Her position is being advertised right now. The deadline is September 10th and then we will go through that selection process again. Hopefully have some one in here the first couple weeks in October. Boettcher: As a suggestion, you know GM and Ford and all companies have it. Anybody with more than 2 people you have the order chart. So you could change this from reporting to Jerry. Do a dotted line to report to Todd. Would that, I think this was the shortest tenure of any that I know of. Was it 4 months? Ruegemer: It was 7 to 8. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 32 Boettcher: 7 to 8? Ruegemer: Yeah she started in January so. No but I appreciate your comments Jim. Thank you. Boettcher: I’m just thinking anything we can do to ease this, you know take some of the burden off the people come in that they’re not shocked. Hoffman: It takes a special kind of person. We’ll find them. Tsuchiya: I would like to circle back and help Jerry out. Great job with the 4th of July. My kids since moving here have really come to appreciate being up there and we went, I think it was the 3rd when they do that $25 wrist band for the rides. That’s their highlight and I saw Adam up there. He was working hard sort of but everything’s great. I like the set up this year. The different set up with the rides and the food and the big seating area in the tent. I thought that was fantastic so I would like to see that again and bigger and better. There’s so many people up there so that was great. Ruegemer: Okay, thank you. Boettcher: And thank you for bringing in the Armadillo’s. Sweetser: They were very good. Tsuchiya: Yes that was that night. They were good. Sweetser: Does Rotary keep all the beer money? Ruegemer: They do. That is a fund raiser for their organization that they redistribute the revenues that are generated out for community outreach programs and it goes to good use. Hoffman: The next day about $12,000 goes right back into the parade. Ten. Depending on what it is. Sweetser: I just was curious. Boettcher: So that takes care of the old business and 4th of July celebration. UPDATE ON THE FEASIBILITY STUDY AT NEWLY ACQUIRED PARKLAND AT LAKE ANN PARK. Boettcher: So to 2-A as suggested again by Commissioner Petouvis. The directive by the Mayor where we were challenged back in April at our meeting to think out of the box. Thinking of the fact that we may not have any funds and things that we can do to, there has been some discussion Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 33 among individuals on the commission. I know Commissioner Petouvis and I have talked about it but anything, if you want to start. I’ll start. Whatever it doesn’t matter. Hoffman: You may want to reverse these two. Petouvis: Yeah I was thinking the same thing. Yeah. Boettcher: So you want to start at B instead? Petouvis: Yeah. Boettcher: Okay. Let me see if I can make an A into a B. So let’s go with update on the feasibility study. We have a couple of documents in front of you here. Hoffman: We’ve got a presentation from Kevin Clark from Hoisington-Koegler. Boettcher: Okay. And your name for the record please. Kevin Clark: Kevin Clark. Boettcher: Kevin Clark. Okay. Kevin Clark: Yep and I work with Hoisington-Koegler Group and we’ve been working with the city and SEH to get this feasibility study underway. Boettcher: Can you get our, these monitors back on Jerry? They’re off line again. Ruegemer: When I did that the big TV’s shut off so I’m not sure why. Boettcher: Okay that’s fine. Ruegemer: I shut those off when they came back on so. Hoffman: If we can get their screens? Ruegemer: Would you like to do that? Hoffman: Yeah let’s try that. Ruegemer: Alright give me a quick second. Petouvis: And for my education what is SEH? Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 34 Kevin Clark: Short Elliott Henricksen. They’re an engineering firm. Petouvis: Okay. Kevin Clark: So we’ve got them on the project to handle some of the permitting stuff as well as some of the water crossings. Petouvis: Okay. Kevin Clark: So they’ve got quite a bit of experience with that. One of the ones, Nine Mile Creek trail that goes through Edina is like a few miles worth of boardwalk so. Petouvis: Okay. Kevin Clark: You’ve got a whole and a strength built around some of those pieces. Petouvis: Great, thank you. Hoffman: So Hoisington really planning architectural focus. SEH engineering focused so you combine the two and then you work on the different portions of the project. Petouvis: Okay thank you. Kevin Clark: Yep. So I’ll try to go through this fairly lengthy process. Tonight some of the site analysis stuff, we’ll walk through some maps. Public input, what we’ve heard so far. And then open it up for discussion among you all. So I mean similar to smaller projects but this is a line that has been on the map for a very long time. Not just the most recent comp plan. Not the 2030 comp plan. We spoke with a Planning Commission member who had done work and had found a plan that I think had been done in the 70’s that showed that connection going all the way around Lake Ann as well as in the park system plan. Then that has transitioned into a park master plan. So an approach to looking at this property and specifically thinking about what might go there. And then with the subdivision of the property that was the triggered that allowed the City to acquire the parkland. I’d like to commend the City on being able to come up with a way to you know keep that connection all the way around Lake Ann. At least still moving in the right direction. There’s a lot of places that you know don’t have that kind of shoreland within their, you know open to the public and it’s a pretty unique opportunity for the City to have that. So then where we’re at now is we’re talking about the feasibility study. After that, as we’ve also heard a fair amount about tonight there’s the question of securing funding and then going through the refined design work and permitting and the construction of the process. So the feasibility study is intended to look at some of the opportunities and the challenges that are out there and you know really get a better understanding of constructability. What is feasible there from what can be built. What the costs are really going to look like. Try to get a better idea so that when those discussions come back we’re not talking about expansion kind of in that same Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 35 percentage wise like you were dealing with with some of the other trails. And as well as understanding kind of the environmental concerns that are out there. The regulatory so there are a number of different agencies that will have to sign off on different parts of the development of that plan as well as the phasing of the plan and how different pieces get built at different times. So we started in July with some background analysis. Through the end of July and into August looking at plan alternatives. Through August we’ve been collecting stakeholder input. We’re at the Park and Recreation Commission meeting that’s going on here at the end of August. We’ll be back next month is the plan. So with your input as well as the City Council we’ll move ahead with kind of preferred plan and then finalizing the feasibility report. So the key principles are the framework of the plan that we’ve been working with are to continue trails around Lake Ann to allow for an eventual loop. Preserving lands as valued natural area in Chanhassen. Connecting residents with nature trails and parks. Protect the ecological functioning of the site and celebrate Lake Ann, Lake Lucy and this property’s community amenity so there’s about, there now is and going to be about 100 acres worth of public land over a mile of shoreland on those two lakes and those are pretty cool community amenities. So I’ll run through some of these maps real quick just to kind of get centered. So Lake Ann Park on the south with the trail corridor that’s gone up through and inbetween the lake and the temple. And then up to Greenwood Shores Park. What this most recent piece of property does is really takes care of all that northwest section of Lake Ann and adds that to the system. The purple outline is that original Galpin property. The purple on the inside is what will wind up being public property as part of the City’s stuff so. The original property, the subdivision that is happening. That is the land that’s trail corridors. Some of that will be graded for ponding and things but generally this is the outline of what will be public as part of this process. So that purple line then becomes that, the public land. Then you see where Greenwood Shores Park and Lake Ann Park come up to it. This just shows some of the land form that’s out there so really you’ve got that bigger wetland complex that runs through it and really separates the new development, the new neighborhood from some of the other upland that is part of the park. As well as some of the perched uplands that are inside of the park property. So you’ve got some of the wetland connections, the lake front as well as to think about as well as some of those internal wetlands too. All of them are really pretty high quality wetlands so as we think about the ecological functioning, making sure we’re preserving and protecting the way those are working. There are some edges of buckthorn that are coming into the park. When you really get into the heart of the park it’s really impressive the lack of buckthorn that’s there. So thinking about how as the park is developed and what sorts of things are put into the park, how to manage some of the buckthorn. How to keep buckthorn from spreading and how to really kind of fight it back. So the picture on the left is quite a bit of buckthorn. You can see how it just really forms that very intense impenetrable kind of edge. Inside the heart of the park walking around with some of the ecological folks on our site tour were just absolutely wowed by the absence of it. And you can sort of, the whole character is entirely different. There are some informal existing foot trails that have been used by a number of people over the years. And generally those trails are where they are because they respond to views. They don’t go through areas where people were going to get their shoes wet anyways. They choose, you know so there is some pretty good logic to where those trails go today. What you as kind of what those trails are they’re generally dirt trails that have been put in place by Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 36 people who have been out hiking through them. There are also spots that are crossings of wetlands or the creek inbetween the two lakes. There will have to be a thought about that when there’s just a handful of people that are out walking on the trails some of these trails could handle it. If it becomes a much more popular place that has different impacts in terms of what happens from an erosion perspective. What happens with you know leaving seeds that are on people’s boots or things like that is there coming through and what those impacts are to the park. As part of the development process there will be built trails that come up so that’s the orange trails that are going on. Up to the wetlands. That is part of the neighborhood development process. The City will be managing the crossings and then everything on the other side of those parks. Hoffman: We need to modify, the orange on the top is city except for just the two connections to the cul-de-sac. Kevin Clark: Just the two connections to the cul-de-sac. Hoffman: Did you guys follow that? This is all city built. This is city built. They build these steps to the end and then this is city built. This is our property. Typically we build what’s on our property. They build what’s on their property so this is all single back here and that piece is not. That’s their’s and this is their’s to build but we’re paying, they’re building this. They’re building that. We’re not paying any costs of that. We do all the internal trips. Kevin Clark: Yeah. There will be some stormwater retention that’s happening to the south sort of in that area where Todd just talked about switching those trails degreeing so coordinating the building of those trails with the, with the wetland, or with the water, stormwater retention that’s going to be happening out there will be an important piece of this. So they are in the process of building out the site in phases so that the first phase, the second phase, the third phase, and then the final phase. As part of it the City has acquired the, for whatever reason the graphic should come straight across on the top with it, the purple but the City has acquired up to that line. When the fourth phase is, goes through it’s final plat then the City will be acquiring that top piece but until then the City doesn’t have guaranteed access to some of those pieces so that has implications in terms of phasing construction. Where some of those other trails can come in. How you get those things built. Then the second piece so that will meet with that, the fourth phase. Tsuchiya: Todd has that deed been recorded? Is that done? Hoffman: It’s in the process. Tsuchiya: Okay. Hoffman: So Outlot A is the first acquisition. Big one and that comes with the final platting of their first addition and that’s again a pretty big piece of history for this city. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 37 Tsuchiya: I was just wondering if it’s been recorded. Hoffman: When it is I’ll let you know. Tsuchiya: I’m truly interested. Hoffman: It’s in the process. Tsuchiya: When it’s done in the County level. Kevin Clark: So in terms of the trails that are coming in, especially on that north side, we’re just doing some thinking about how that can actually happen. Then what the timing of that needs to look like. So this is the concept plan that was done a couple of years ago. Shows paved trail with bituminous trail connections. The key pieces of that being thinking about the crossings so there’s the wetland crossing in the southwest. The crossing where that whole wetland drains into Lake Lucy on the north and then the crossing of the stream inbetween Lake Lucy and Lake Ann to, over by Greenwood Shores Park. Thinking about how those trails are going to facilitate the loop all the way around the lake as well as connect to existing trail network and connect to neighborhoods and residents of the city. So the key points to address at the planning, extending the trail further around Lake Ann and connecting to neighborhoods and residents. Preserving the ability to complete the loop in the future so there’s still a piece of property that’s privately owned in the southwest side of Lake Ann. If that property subdivides that may be another opportunity for the City to complete that loop but without kind of taking the steps that happened with Lake Ann and with the Galpin property that would then be off the table so that’s, you know this is an important piece of making that loop happen. Protecting environment functions of the site. Providing a durable trail surface to minimize the disturbance, the erosion, the introduction of foreign plant material that will come along with higher uses. We want visitors to connect with and enjoy nature and that’s views. That’s education talking about what’s going on on the site. Being able to do nature observation. Bird watching. As well as being able to sit and relax and take in some pretty cool forest and then managing the crossings so. As part of the public process we wanted to present, there are two variations that were intended to illicit more of a response one way or the other. Help people think about either a lighter touch that may be an aggregate trail in the interim until there’s the ability to complete the entire trail’s paved loop and really kind of minimizing secondary trails. Or thinking more about actually having secondary trails. The paved loop. And then thinking about more the benches. How people are able to look at the lake. Interact with it so. So to date we’ve got 457 responses and that’s a survey and in person. I’d like to thank Commissioner Petouvis and Pemrick for being out at the concert on, I think it was the bluegrass concert. August 8th concert and so we got to talk to some folks out there. We had a table set up. Some people were able to take the survey there. As well as a number of people that have done it online. I think a number of you have also helped share it because those numbers have kept going up as well so thank you all for helping get the word out. The input to date. Some of the really key findings, I know you all had a copy of the input in your packets. Those numbers have grown. Generally the trends still are looking the same. The strong desire to Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 38 protect the natural environment and especially sensitive habitat. People are generally excited about trails. There are a lot of people with kind of a wide range of opinions. But right now the general opinion has leaned more towards paved trails. I think most people are excited to get on the property and being able to walk around it an excited about the long term connection all the way around the lake. An interest in sort of varied experiences for trail users. Interacting with the lake. Different views. Seeing unique areas. There’s some different opportunities on that site to see different kinds of wetlands. See pretty cool forests. Be able to look out at the lakes, things like that so. We’ve asked people kind of on both schemes things they liked and things that they didn’t and then said you know what are the things that are the most important to you when it comes to the future development of this park. Preserving sensitive habitat was the highest ranked one. The varied trail’s experiences and locations and then lake experiences. Paved trail came in higher than having aggregate trails. The, as something that people were seeing as the mot important kind of piece. And some of the other pieces as well so, with that I’d be interested in kind of having the discussion with you all, would be a lot further in terms of having made a bunch of these decisions when we come back to you so now would be a good time to make sure that I’ve answered any questions you’ve got or if I can that Todd has. But then also trying to think a little bit about you know what are the, what is the biggest opportunity for the city with regards to this project. You know how do you hope to use this area in the future and that can help us sort of understand what direction the design really should go and then what other ideas, opportunities, concerns, things like that should be considered so. Thank you very much. Hoffman: And so the commissioners are aware this will also go to the council on, I believe it’s 9-9, September 9th and so we’ll be doing this same kind of presentation and offering your input at that meeting and then also you can be there in person at that work session as we go through this first rendition with the council. Boettcher: To me it’s always interesting to read in the verbatim responses. I mean everything is, you know somebody wants to save all the butterflies which I appreciate. I mean that’s not a knock but then on the other side somebody just wants to say that building the houses was a mistake. We destroyed everything. Wildlife’s going to die and it’s, I mean people have really strong feelings about it but to really get, to answer your questions it doesn’t get into that type of detail but I live right, well at the south end of the property there and a lot of my neighbors were the ones that have been very contentious if you want to say that about what’s going on. And I understand that. I mean their views have changed. They’ve lived there 15, 20, 25 years and all of a sudden things change like that. It’s hard to accept. I have a problem too just driving by and seeing where the new entrance is across from Hunter Drive and by Sugarbush Park, really close to where I turn into the subdivision but you know I look at this opportunity and everything and not everybody’s going to be in favor of everything but everybody’s going to be in favor of something. There aren’t as many people that I’ve seen that are opposed to it you know. Somebody wants their own flavor of this and their flavor of this and, but 90 plus percent of the people that I’ve talked to really, they’re enthused about it. It doesn’t take it6’s not a hard sell. And I appreciate, how long is it til the 6th that the survey’s up? Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 39 Kevin Clark: That would be through the end of this month. Boettcher: That’s to the end of the month, okay. And you got 400 and. Kevin Clark: 457 responses yep. Boettcher: 457 okay. Sweetser: Is there a certain number you were looking for, that you thought would be a good percentage? Kevin Clark: 457 is a, we feel pretty confident about that. And then even just looking at, you know I think when you guys got the packet published it was maybe at 330 or somewhere around there. Once you start getting into some of those numbers you can feel more confident in the trends. You know there may still be somebody that’s got a specific piece of input but you start to see kind of what are the things that are really important to people. What are the things that are less. Sweetser: I thought it was very interesting. I read through all the comments too that definitely we need to keep in mind a lot of different demographics and groups of people. You know seniors a couple people mentioned I know. People with disabilities you know which I’m sure is going to tend to lead to a little bit of a different, you know that’s going to help kind of at least some of the trails looking at what types of materials those are going to be made of but, so that was one thing that just really stuck out to me that we need to just keep that in mind. And then just I was amazed at all the snowshoe comments and you know kind of some of those activities that I don’t really go out that much in the winter to be honest but a lot of people do so I thought that kind of helped lead a little bit about what do you need to do in the winter. What do Todd’s folks need to do in the winter? Maybe not a lot. Those were just two things that kind of stuck out to me so. Boettcher: Yeah and the same thing on the comments. I mean I think over 90 percent want to keep it as natural as possible. You do have the difference between people that do want the aggregate versus the paved we know and mobility for people of a certain age group the paved is the only way to go but I think the whole thing, keeping everything natural. Nothing motorized in there. You know walking, riding a bike, whatever is really a big deal. Pemrick: I guess it would be nice after reading these comments, ideas starting triggering you know. If we do end up with, what’s the word I’m looking for? Like the different benches and look out points and what not, having some education on what are some birds that you may be seeing from this spot. You know because that I mean I think would be great for kids. It’d be great for adults. A lot of people are, what are the different types of trees that you’re looking at. I know when we went on our tour with you Todd I was, I know a little bit about trees and I learned a lot more that day from you and it was fun because you just get to learn about it and at the same Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 40 keeping as much nature as possible. And I think the other thing I kind of caught a lot of is, a lot of wildlife is getting displaced from this and you know really truly trying to ensure that they don’t get squeezed out more than they already are right now and I know at some of the Planning Commission meetings when before this sold I was listening, that was a common theme a lot of people were talking about was the turkeys and deer, the fox. I like seeing then. I want to keep seeing them in my back yard or you know I don’t want them all to leave the area so. Boettcher: Yeah. They’re eating my apples right now so they’re still there. My wife would let them in the house if they would come in. Tsuchiya: I was wondering, can we put down as an idea something to celebrate the long term planning that Chanhassen has had with this Lake Ann area? The phases that have gone through. You know when this whole concept started. I think you know there’s still the Gorra property to complete the entire circle around the park but I think there’s an opportunity here to really kind of plant the flag for the City and say you know this is a long term, very unique piece of property in the metro area that was long term planning was the, the culmination of all this long term planning created and preserved this space for the city and you’re not going to find this anywhere else so I think that’s something that we an explore. I don’t know if it’s something to put in one location or to spread out, you know kind of take a walk through the history or something like that but I think that this is, that’s something that could be really special in this area. Boettcher: So you’re wanting your name in lights specifically? Tsuchiya: No. Boettcher: Tsuchiya Bend in the trail there. Tsuchiya: No, that’s where people would fall down. Boettcher: Oh okay. This is significant. I mean there is no doubt about it. Hoffman: Both Commissioner Tsuchiya and Commissioner Pemrick were talking interpretative signage and that can be a package as a part of the study. Tsuchiya: And I don’t know if there’s also something that comes to mind, if there’s some sort of like, I can’t remember what, like Eagle Scout project or you know something like that that something maybe the City doesn’t have to do but you make opportunities for those scouts or, or the Girl Scout equivalent. I can’t recall. Hoffman: Gold Award. Tsuchiya: I’m sorry? Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 41 Hoffman: Gold Award. Tsuchiya: Gold Award, thank you. You know be great to get youth involvement. Maybe youth commissioners eventually. Sweetser: I like the tree house idea too. That was a cute idea. Reminded me, have you guys ever seen the show that’s on one of the cable stations where they come in and build these huge tree houses but they, they’re just immense and gorgeous and. Tsuchiya: Sandy we had a budget conversation. Sweetser: No, yeah yeah yeah. No I’m talking about that company coming in and doing it. Boettcher: Looking at Meredith’s credit card… Petouvis: My limit is very low. Boettcher: We’ll buy one board at a time. Sweetser: We would make it look like Paisley Park. No, I’m kidding. Pemrick: Another thing I noticed on some of the comments is mountain bike trails. Are people actually mountain biking back there right now? Because some of them said that are currently there and I, okay. My personal opinion is to not do that. It will disturb a lot of things. Sweetser: There was just a big news story on tonight, I think it was on KARE 11. I didn’t get to see it. Yeah, exactly. That that is a challenge for them right now. Boettcher: What was it? Pemrick: Carver Park is building one aren’t they? Hoffman: Carver is yep. Boettcher: Three Rivers. It’s Three Rivers building it. Hoffman: Yeah…Carver Park is there. Sweetser: In Minnetonka they’re talking about building mountain bike trails. Hoffman: They approved it yeah. Sweetser: So and just the news story obviously is citizens that are up in arms about it. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 42 Hoffman: Yeah that’s been going on for 18 months, yeah. Sweetser: Yeah. Tsuchiya: And there’s been a real push on that. Pemrick: Another thing I walked back on Greenwood Park the other day and I kind of just hopped in to Riley Creek and I saw a lot of people kayaking through Riley Creek and I think it would be pretty critical to make sure whatever bridge is put there is high enough that people don’t have to portage. When it’s high enough for them to kayak through the creek. Petouvis: Going back sort of taking a tangent on the interpretative signage idea. One of, when I was interviewing to join the commission my opportunity that I saw for the City of Chanhassen is more focus on straight up nature play. Chanhassen does paved trails incredibly well. Chanhassen does the traditional metal, plastic playground very well but we’re seeing, you know research is showing and experience is showing that that true interaction directly with nature is so critical for health and wellness that it’s an opportunity for Chanhassen to take up and this area around Lake Ann is such a pristine, beautiful nature area that I don’t know, in my original concept that I had in my head was sort of like what the Arboretum does with their nature play right outside the learning center. Some area, maybe taking what would be a traditional plastic and pipe playground and turning it into more of a logs and rocks and sticks playground, but maybe there are other ways that we could, rather than doing a dedicated area of nature play maybe we can use this whole area through interpretative signage. Through scavenger hunts. Through you know whatever our brains can come up with to help kids and families really have that interaction with nature that’s not as easy anymore so. Boettcher: And I think that’s getting into our next discussion point too as part of the directive by the mayor where we said we would try to think out of the box. Meredith and I had discussed this after the City Council meeting. We were last month when they were doing their initial discussion on a park bond referendum and I believe I always get it wrong. Is it Murphy Hanrehan? The park with Carver County Park Commission we visited it I think 3 years ago and it’s exactly what you’re talking about. You park in the parking lot. There’s a big picnic shelter and right off to the side it looks like somebody just took a bunch of driftwood and rocks and stuff and threw it together. If you know what Ihduhapi is, the Eskimos or the, they have the thing where if you get this award it’s shaped like a bunch of rocks. They’re just stacked up. Doesn’t mean, doesn’t look pretty but it really means something to the Inuit people and you see this off to the side of the shelter and the kids will get out of the car. They’ll run to the shelter. They see this stuff piled up. It’s what it looks like, driftwood and they’re running down there and playing and they’re reorganizing stuff and we have a little bit of that in Norwood-Young America at Baylor Regional Park. As you walk through the trail you get to the back end. There’s like a couple of teepees and basically the kids just get in there and they make a teepee or do whatever Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 43 and it is, I mean it’s one of our directives was what can we do that is thinking out of the box and there’s no charge to it so we don’t need Meredith’s credit cards. Petouvis: No sponsors or anything needed. Boettcher: And in talking to a couple of the people, actually someone that used to be on the park commission here. He’s on the Carver County Park Commission with me now, he knows about the canopy. The cathedral and I was mentioning this natural play area and he said, you know this guy isn’t married. Doesn’t have kids he says well if you wanted something for kids put it there at the Cathedral. He says they’ll stay there all day long. I mean we all saw that on our walk back in May. I mean when Todd pointed it out but all of us, I think we all stopped at the same time and it’s like, have never seen this before. Just really some amazing opportunities of things that could be done there so. Petouvis: Just put benches in for the parents, that may be all we need to do. Sweetser: Move that natural playground idea though. That’s very cool. Petouvis: Yeah. Sweetser: Just, even just Goggling, you look up some, you know this looks like totally a tree that has just kind of fallen over but they’ve created you know, they call it creative of a thing but just really cool looking. Pemrick: Now if you just throw some sticks there kids will figure it out. We build those all the time in the woods when I was growing up. Sweetser: Oh yeah. Pemrick: As long as they have sticks to play with they’re happy. Petouvis: Well it’s true and if you think about most of the developments that are around we’ve taken away the access to the sticks and the big mature trees and, I mean my brother and I spent hour upon hour when we were kids. Even you know getting to be bigger kids you know 10-12. Underneath two big evergreens that we had and I mean that was anything from a fort, to a store, to a I don’t know, war games area. I mean the imagination is really just inspired by very minimal things and I think, I mean what great things could happen without much intervention from us. Boettcher: Oh now you’re taking everybody back too far. No my cousin and I in the front yard of mom and dad’s house we had 3 maple trees. Two soft maples and a hard maple…but the one soft maple, there were two tree limbs coming out and there was here and one was about 3 feet lower and that was the cockpit of a P-51 Mustang. I mean I even took a pencil out there and I Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 44 drew gauges. I guess that’s why I became an engineer. I had gauges and altimeter and air speed and he had, Jerry my cousin had the bomb sights down here which you know was not realistic on a P-51 but like I said if you had your imagination as a kid there’s no limit. Petouvis: Yeah and the imagination happens more with the more minimal you know, the less the adults can be involved in it, the better. Tsuchiya: We ruin everything. Petouvis: We do. Boettcher: I was just at a meeting, was it last week. Have you heard of No Child Left Inside? Hoffman: (Yes). Tsuchiya: Yeah. Boettcher: That’s, yeah it gets rid of these and put the kids outside and shut the door and don’t let them back in the house. Not quite to that extreme but I mean it’s getting back to that level. You know you see the memes, there’s one going around on Facebook where it shows a mom and her daughter sitting here and then another mom and her daughter sitting next to them and the mom and daughter when they laugh they both had their phones out and the other mom and daughter were both reading a book and the mom with the phone says how do you get your child to read a book? Well I don’t have this and I have a book so this same thing. Getting, because I see it. I mean in the neighborhood I live in there aren’t a lot of kids, for the first few years that we lived there I didn’t know that the one neighbor on my cul-de-sac had two kids because I never saw them. You know just on the rare chance you would timing you’d see them getting into a car out in the driveway but I knew they had a son and all of a sudden this girl started popping up and I’m like, and she was 12 and we’d been there for 4 years. I just, I mean yeah I was traveling a lot but you know when I was a kid you knew everybody within 2 miles of the house because you were always out every day but I think we have a lot of opportunities here though. We really do. It just takes imagination. You know anything you see in, putting trails in. Doing studies, whatever you know the stuff that Todd showed us. I think there’s so much we can do there and we can keep everything natural other than a paved trail. Everything else can be natural and probably should be. Petouvis: And can we do a mix of paved and unpaved trails that would you know paving to give that loop around Lake Ann but then perhaps everything else would be unpaved and more you know, keep your mulch down. Hoffman: So yep, and then something to think about is the paved trails get you there so there’s all these neighborhood trails that likely should be finished because you don’t want to switch materials. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 45 Petouvis: Yep. Hoffman: So and when you draw that, that completes most of the trail connections but there could be, there’s kind of a middle loop that could be unpaved and. Sweetser: And I think most, I shouldn’t say most, a lot of people will want to do the perimeter. They’re not going to want to you know the older folks, we’re not going to want to go inside. My kids are older so I’m not as interested in going on that adventure but I think that would make a lot of sense for people if you want to snowshoe you’re in the middle. Hoffman: Yep. Yeah design is one thing. Management of this public space, right now it’s not public so nobody can argue the dog walker’s off leash did not argue with the bikers because they’re both trespassing. Once it’s public you’re going to have to set some ground rules. Petouvis: Yeah and so what is the thought on what those ground rules would be? Is there a baseline sort of. Hoffman: Well you’ve been talking about some of them. You might not want biking. Off line biking. You know dogs right now are currently on leash on trails. And what’s the other big ones that were in here. Cross country skiing. I mean people ski off trails. We plow our trails when people want to use them in the winter and for walking and running and other things but you could, you know in the winter you could cross country ski or snowshoe anywhere. You’re not going to hurt the vegetation. Boettcher: Any other questions? Discussion? If not thank you. Kevin Clark: Thank you. Tsuchiya: Great presentation. Boettcher: Thank you very much. Hoffman: Kevin will be back next month so get to know him. Tsuchiya: See you then. Sweetser: Alright, thank you. Tsuchiya: Sounds good, look forward to it. Boettcher: Thank you. Appreciate it. So did that take care of the second half of the directive by the mayor? Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 46 Petouvis: No, we thought outside the box. I don’t know a treehouse is pretty nice and outside the box. Sweetser: Hey just telling you. I’m just saying. Could make it look like Paisley Park. Petouvis: But brainstorming has no bad ideas right. Right. You just put them all down so. Sweetser: I just thought it was a fun comment of an idea. A couple people I think had it in there. Tsuchiya: I do like the natural play. I think you know. Petouvis: Yeah. Tsuchiya: Things are going to be composed so every once in a while haul some stuff in there somehow. Access is an issue but. Pemrick: I have at least one tree that falls in my yard a year. I can donate… Boettcher: I’ve got a black willow that loses branches every 3 mile an hour wind or higher so. Tsuchiya: No I’ve got a birch in my front yard that drops you know little stuff. That’s something to consider. Petouvis: But I’m sure Adam and his team take care of a lot of trees and branches and things so. Boettcher: Yep. Petouvis: And there are a lot that are already fallen in there that are great, you know if we have the trail access and we have you know natural resting spots assigned, kids can, I don’t know how much we have to bring in. Kids can find it and just by having access to it or maybe something like. Pemrick: They can create more than we can ever think of. Petouvis: Exactly. Exactly. Maybe we just have something to spur the idea of, maybe don’t just walk through here. You know I don’t know whether it is like I said a scavenger hunt or like you were saying. Do you see these kinds of birds as you look around or you know what does this cathedral area remind you of? What do you think of when you’re in the cathedral area? Just things to maybe get people on that path of enjoying and looking around. Not just being you know, I mean there’s a lot of value in being on the trail and just being out in the fresh air but just maybe the looking up and looking around. Maybe we can encourage that. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 47 Boettcher: Todd do you remember talking about scouting projects when Lauren Dale was a youth commissioner? What was her project that she completed? Hoffman: She did way finding signs. The one right there at Lake Ann that shows this so people are being educated by her project because many of the people that are going down to check out this area are seeing her project. Seeing the lines that go around the lake. So it’s called a way finding. Boettcher: Because that was her equivalent of an Eagle. Hoffman: That was her Gold Award yep. Boettcher: Gold Award yeah. Pemrick: So do you get requests regularly from Girl Scouts or Boy Scouts for something in the city? Hoffman: All the time. Pemrick: Okay. Boettcher: Yeah one of the first ones I remember was when Mayor Furlong was in office his son did the sign at the entrance of Lake Ann Park. Hoffman: Planted the plants, yep. Boettcher: Very good. Any more discussion on this? Do you want to get into the some of the phasing? I think Todd had already covered this about as the phases come in. You know we can’t do anything with the trails until we have both of the outlots and the second outlot doesn’t get turned over to the City until Phase 4. So until that’s done we really can’t, so this gives us a cushion of at least a couple of years as far as our fund. Where the money’s going to come from for the trail. Tsuchiya: So we can plan it but we can’t put shovel to dirt is what you’re saying? Boettcher: Yep. So until we get the second, and that was what 2022 probably Todd? Hoffman: That’s what they’re thinking. Phases 1, 2, 3, 4. This might be 20-21 and 22. We have this property now. We get this property in the future so there’s some time to get the plan. The urgency is down here at this boardwalk. As these people start to move in it would be nice to be complete with this boardwalk. 2020 or 2021 so this is in and completed and then you build the rest coming from this direction to meet up with it. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 48 Tsuchiya: For that boardwalk on the south you’re just saying build it and stub it out? Hoffman: Yep build it. Put your interpretative sign out there so everybody knows what’s coming in the future and then stop it, and that’s an important less that we’ve learned time and time again. If you allow all these people to move in and then you want to bring your construction equipment down there and start that process they might just be sitting in this row of chairs asking you not to do that. Petouvis: Are we segue waying into the potential referendum discussion? Boettcher: We do have a, we have a couple of items first. If we’re done with items I. J is commission member committee reports. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. Boettcher: Any discussion? We weren’t here last month. I did want to say a couple of the Town Ball game was very good. The Mayor was there. The former mayor was there. A couple of former park commission members. Todd was there. Jerry was there and really a pretty good turnout. The game wasn’t that great. Didn’t win the game but it was really a great turnout. I mean you see the enthusiasm of the people there and really at that level, I mean I used to be a really big baseball fan when I was growing up but even at that level you sit there and you listen to these guys pitch and you’re hearing that ball coming in, I mean this isn’t pee wee or Babe Ruth league. I mean these guys are slinging it. I mean it’s like national or American league stuff coming in. It’s pretty impressive and to see the city, you know and then people were coming because it was what, the Minnetonka Millers is what they’re called? People from Minnetonka. Two couples that I knew were there too so, and I think we had kind of somebody here that was routing for the other team but. Is what I was told. Hoffman: Kate. Boettcher: Is what I was told. Hoffman: No, no. Ruegemer: Yeah not me. Boettcher: Oh okay. Alright. Someone else from the City told me that. Hoffman: Kate lives in, Kate’s a Minnetonka Miller. Her husband. Boettcher: That’s what it was, okay. I got Jerry in there. And then the other item was earlier this month was National Night Out or whatever it’s been renamed to. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 49 Hoffman: Night to Unite. Boettcher: And I think this was my third year so it’s really great. It’s so exciting every year that I actually get to ride in the front of a police car. Versus the back. Like Karl’s used to the view from the back of the car I know but to actually see it from the front. But to get out and visit, I think we went to at least 4. Four different neighborhoods and the people are just so enthused. They want to see the officer. They don’t want to see me but I’m just along for his moral support but to see all these people out there, I mean the way everyone is connected. Especially down on, is it Mission Hills? 86th Street down there. You know it’s mostly all senior citizens but I think they’re still eating the food. They had 20 people and enough food for 400 and they kept saying you boys need to eat. Well yeah but anyone that hasn’t done it, I mean it’s great just to get out there. The first one we went to actually, the fire truck was just leaving when we pulled up and then the mounted posse was just leaving too and then we showed up so these people got the full gamut of everything you know. Some of them just got an officer. Some just got a fire truck. Some just got the mounted posse but how many did we, was it 55? Hoffman: 44 this year. Boettcher: It was 44 okay. But that was pretty impressive. I mean the people just enjoy having somebody to come and talk, and I did my part as Chair of the commission. I was pushing, I said if by chance on the ballot within the next 3 years you see a referendum for a park. To complete a trails and Bandimere and all I said just check the box that says yes and everything will be fine and dandy. We’ll take care of the rest. So I don’t know how much that’s going to help whatever but a lot of fun. Anyone that hasn’t done it I recommend it. Really do. It’s really enjoyable. Sweetser: I have one last thing. With school starting back the junior commissioners. Is there something that we need to be doing or, I can’t remember where we left that with kind of recruiting some kids. Boettcher: Someone had made the recommendation or that was going to put the word out with one of the schools. Scanlon: Yeah I’ve got a cousin in the high school. She’s constantly looking for people. Boettcher: In Chanhassen? Scanlon: Yep. She recruiting and I had told her that anybody contact me if they’re interested and I’ll remind her again as the school year starts here too. Sweetser: I may be, I could probably send a note to social studies or looking up somebody that’s a contact with that program. You know one of the teachers. I have a sophomore. My daughter’s a sophomore there just to see if there’s you know any kids through AP classes. Things like that so I’ll do that as well. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 50 Boettcher: Okay. Yeah because we’ve had 2 at a time. We’ve had 1 at a time. I think is it 4 total we’ve had or 5? Hoffman: In total probably 5. Boettcher: Probably 5 of them. Hoffman: And before that many more because this was a program that was around 10 to 15 years ago for a long time as well. Boettcher: Oh okay. I thought Mayor Furlong just started it 6 or 7. Hoffman: Started it again. Boettcher: Oh again. He reignited it, okay. Any other member presentations? DISCUSSION ON POSSIBLE FUTURE PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT BOND REFERENDUM. Boettcher: If not K(1), discussion on possible future park and recreation improvement bond referendum. Hoffman: Chair Boettcher your bylaws would say that you would want to table this. Your bylaws and your bed laws. Your bedtimes. Boettcher: That will work. Hoffman: Based on time. That’s up to you of course. Until September. Boettcher: Wow. 2 1/2 hours already. Tsuchiya: So moved. Petouvis: Is there any downside to tabling that? Tsuchiya: I think we have plenty of time don’t we? Boettcher: We do. Petouvis: Yes at this point. Tsuchiya: Okay. Park and Recreation Commission Summary – August 27, 2019 51 Boettcher: With that, administrative packet anything? Hoffman: Motion to table. Boettcher: Alright. How about adjournment? Tsuchiya: Motion to table. I move that we table that discussion til next month. Petouvis: Second. Tsuchiya moved, Petouvis seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission table the discussion on possible future park and recreation improvement bond referendum to the September meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. None. Petouvis moved, Pemrick 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 9:55 p.m. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Rec Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Consider Interim Use Permit for Moon Valley Gravel Pit Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4. Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: Planning Case No. 201909 PROPOSED MOTION City Council approves the Interim Use Permit (IUP), Planning Case #201909, to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by SathreBerquist, Inc., dated July 26, 2019, subject to the Conditions of Approval in the Planning Commission staff report, and adopts the Planning Commission's Findings of Fact. Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting an extension of the IUP to continue the mining and excavation operation on the property. They would like a tenyear extension and to be allowed to begin operations on the western portion of the site. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 3, 2019 to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted 50 to recommend approval of the IUP subject to the conditions of the staff report. Their only concern was that erosion control measures incorporate the latest best management practices. Planning Commission minutes for September 3, 2019 are in the consent agenda for the September 23, 2019 City Council packet. DISCUSSION Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending a fiveyear extension of the IUP as well as limiting mining operations to the eastern side of the property until the east mining operation is completed and the site is stabilized and restored. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the IUP to permit mining of the property subject to the conditions in the staff report and adoption of the Findings of Fact. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, September 23, 2019SubjectConsider Interim Use Permit for Moon Valley Gravel PitSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4.Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: Planning Case No. 201909PROPOSED MOTIONCity Council approves the Interim Use Permit (IUP), Planning Case #201909, to permit grading, excavation andslope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by SathreBerquist, Inc., dated July 26, 2019, subject to theConditions of Approval in the Planning Commission staff report, and adopts the Planning Commission's Findings ofFact.Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council.SUMMARYThe applicant is requesting an extension of the IUP to continue the mining and excavation operation on the property. They would like a tenyear extension and to be allowed to begin operations on the western portion of the site.BACKGROUNDThe Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 3, 2019 to review the proposed development. ThePlanning Commission voted 50 to recommend approval of the IUP subject to the conditions of the staff report.Their only concern was that erosion control measures incorporate the latest best management practices.Planning Commission minutes for September 3, 2019 are in the consent agenda for the September 23, 2019 CityCouncil packet.DISCUSSIONStaff and the Planning Commission are recommending a fiveyear extension of the IUP as well as limiting miningoperations to the eastern side of the property until the east mining operation is completed and the site is stabilized andrestored.RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the IUP to permit mining of the property subject to the conditions in the staff report and adoption of the Findings of Fact. ATTACHMENTS: September 3, 2019 Planning Commission Staff Report Planning Commission Signed Findings of Fact and Recommendation PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday,September 3,2019 Subject Consider a Request for an Interim Use Permit for Mining Operations at 100 200 Flying Cloud Drive Moon Valley Gravel Pit) Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No:C.2. Prepared By Bob Generous,Senior Planner File No:Planning Case No.2019-09 PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the Interim Use Permit,Planning Case 2019- 09 to permit grading,excavation and slope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by Sathre- Bergquist,Inc.,dated July 26,2019,subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is requesting an extension of the Interim Use Permit to continue the mining and excavation operation on the property. APPLICANT Dan Zwiers,Moon Valley Aggregate,Inc. SITE INFORMATION PRESENT ZONING:Agricultural Estate District A2) LAND USE:Residential High Density 8-16 units per net acre) ACREAGE:72.24 acres DENSITY:NA APPLICATION REGULATIONS Chapter 7,Article III.Excavating,Mining,Filling and Grading Chapter 20,Sections 20-231 through 20-237,Conditional Use Permits Interim Use Permits are processed in the same manner as Conditional Use Permits.) Chapter 20,Article X.A2”,Agricultural Estate District BACKGROUND PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORTTuesday,September 3,2019SubjectConsideraRequest for an Interim Use Permit for Mining Operations at 100 200 FlyingCloudDriveMoonValleyGravelPit)Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No:C.2.Prepared By Bob Generous,Senior Planner File No:Planning Case No.2019-09PROPOSEDMOTION:The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the Interim Use Permit,PlanningCase2019- 09 to permit grading,excavation and slope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist,Inc.,dated July 26,2019,subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the Findings of FactandRecommendation.SUMMARY OFREQUESTTheapplicantisrequestingan extension of the Interim Use Permit to continue the mining and excavation operationontheproperty.APPLICANTDanZwiers,Moon Valley Aggregate,Inc.SITEINFORMATIONPRESENTZONING:Agricultural Estate District A2)LAND USE:Residential High Density 8-16 units per net acre)ACREAGE:72.24 acresDENSITY:NAAPPLICATIONREGULATIONSChapter7,Article III.Excavating,Mining,Filling andGradingChapter20,Sections 20-231 through 20-237,Conditional Use Permits Interim Use Permits are processed in thesamemannerasConditionalUsePermits.)Chapter 20,Article X.A2”,Agricultural Estate District BACKGROUND On September 28,2009,the Chanhassen City Council approved an Interim Use Permit,Planning Case 09-14,to permit grading,excavation and slope restoration.The Interim Use Permit was approved for ten years. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Interim Use Permit to permit mining of the property subject to the conditions of the staff report and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Findings of Fact and Recommendation Development Review Application Plan Sheets Pages 1-3 Plan Sheets Pages 4-6 Plan Sheets Pages 7-9 Carver County Memorandum Affidavit of Public Hearing Mailing CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: September 3, 2019 CC DATE: September 23, 2019 REVIEW DEADLINE: October 1, 2019 CASE #: 2019-09 BY: GB, RG, EH, JS SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting an extension of the Interim Use Permit (IUP) to continue the mining and excavation operation on the property. LOCATION: 100 and 220 Flying Cloud Drive South of Hennepin County Regional Railroad, north of Flying Cloud Drive and east of Sorensen Addition. PIDs: 25-0360200 and 25-0360700 APPLICANT: Dan Zwiers Moon Valley Aggregate, Inc. 11111 Deuce Road Elko, MN 55020 612) 720-5154 distintivetruck@gmail.com PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District, A-2 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential – High Density (net density range 8-16 units per acre) ACREAGE: 72.24 acres DENSITY: NA LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city has limited discretion in approving or denying IUPs, based on whether or not the proposal meets the use standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If the city finds that all of the applicable use standards are met, the permit must be approved. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting an extension of the interim use permit to mine gravel from the site located north of Flying Cloud Drive, approximately one mile east of Highway 101. The original IUP was granted on September 27, 2004 to Beatrice Zwiers of Moon Valley Aggregates, Inc. In 2006, Terry Brothers, Moon Valley, LLC took over the grading, excavation and slope restoration PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the Interim Use Permit, Planning Case #2019-09, to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration as proposed on the plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., dated July 26, 2019, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the Findings of Fact and Decision.” Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 2 operation. Terry Brothers has requested that the IUP be extended since there is a decrease in demand for the product due to the lower valued soils located on the active mining site. The applicant would like to extend the mining to the western portion of the property. There is approximately one million cubic yards of material to be removed from the site; the applicant anticipates this will take 10 years to accomplish. Staff has not received any complaints related to the site operations. The applicant is requesting a 10-year extension to the IUP to permit the excavation, grading, and restoration of the existing mining pit and a future development area west of the mining pit. The existing IUP had a 10-year time limit, which was set to end in September, 2019. The operation will require the removal of approximately1.8 million cubic yards of material from the site. However, staff believes a five-year extension is more appropriate to allow the city a better opportunity to evaluate and track the progress of the mining operation. The project site is adjacent to the Richard T. Anderson Conservation Area in Eden Prairie. To the south across County Road 61 (Flying Cloud Drive) are the Minnesota Valley Wildlife Refuge, the Minnesota River and State Wide Auto Salvage, Inc. To the north are the Hennepin County Regional Trail and the Settlers West subdivision. Access to the site is proposed via County Road 61. The proposed site grading and slope restoration will prepare the site for future development when urban services are available, stabilize the site to reduce run-off and erosion, and permit the vegetation, especially the trees, to grow between now and the time the site is developed. A Phase I Environmental Audit dated November, 2004 was prepared by McCain and Associates, Inc. for Moon Valley Aggregates, Inc. This audit pointed out several recognized environmental Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 3 issues that needed to be addressed. A Phase II Site Investigation Work Plan was prepared for the Moon Valley property in July, 2005. The Phase II study spelled out the environmental cleanup that would be performed on the site. Lead in the gun range was cleaned up. All house structures have been removed from the site. The house well has been capped. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 7, Article III. Excavating, Mining, Filling and Grading Chapter 20, Sections 20-231 through 20-237, Conditional Use Permits (Interim Use Permits are processed in the same manner as Conditional Use Permits) Chapter 20, Article X, “A-2”, Agricultural Estate District BACKGROUND On September 28, 2009, the Chanhassen City Council approved Interim Use Permit, Planning Case #09-14, to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration. The IUP was approved for ten years. On September 27, 2004, the Chanhassen City Council approved Interim Use Permit, Planning Case #04-27 to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration. The IUP was good for five years. February 1996, the city executed an earthwork permit agreement resolving the mining operation and restoration. June 22, 1992, the Chanhassen City Council approved an earthwork permit for the mining operation (IUP #92-4). SITE CONSTRAINTS Wetland Protection There is a wetland located on property. The proposed grading does not directly impact the wetland. Bluff Protection There are bluffs on the property. Shoreland Management The property is located within the Shoreland Overlay District for Rice Lake. Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 4 Floodplain Overlay This property is not within a floodplain. ACCESS Access to the properties are from CSAH 61, Flying Cloud Drive. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The applicant has submitted an updated plan showing what areas are untouched, the areas that are currently being graded, and the areas that have been graded and restored. Staff is requesting a phasing plan, a summary of the quantities removed and a summary of the quantity of remaining material to be removed. This information shall be submitted annually a minimum of 30 days before the anniversary of City Council approval. The applicant last received an IUP to excavate approximately 1.8 million cubic yards of material from the site in 2009. To date, the mine has reported approximately 400,000 cubic yards of material excavated since. The goal of the grading was to restore the severe erosion areas on the site and to leave the site in a condition that would allow future multi-family housing to be developed. Similar to the previously approved IUP, the applicant is proposing to grade down at steep, 40% (2.5:1) slopes from the high points on the north and south sides of the property. This will allow a relatively flat area with a gentle slope of 4% (25:1) to be developed in the center of the property. The flat area will be developed into multi-family housing sites when municipal sewer and water is extended to the area in the future. Permanent vegetation will be established over all bare soil areas. Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 5 Previously, a restoration plan for the main pit area east of the creek had been prepared in 1992 and approved by the city for this site. The 1992 plan proposed to grade approximately three acres of bluff area with 3.9 acres of tree removal. The 2009 proposal had approximately 2.6 acres of bluff grading and 7.3 acres of tree removal approved. While the 2009 plan resulted in more tree loss, the impact to the bluff area was less than the previously approved plan. Also, the amount of total usable or developable area for the entire site was increased from approximately 8.5 to 14 acres. In an effort to try and preserve more of the mature trees on the site, staff recommended in 2009 that grading on the east side of the creek cease at or above the 756-foot contour as a condition of approval. This was approved and staff recommends the same conditions be implemented for the current IUP application for the site as this would preserve approximately 1.6 acres of additional tree canopy while decreasing the bluff impact from 2.6 to 2.4 acres. The usable area available on this east side will still be 12.4 acres, which is nearly four acres greater than the 1992 plan and consistent with the 2009 plan. The existing site generally drains from the north to the south. There is an existing creek/wetland which runs through the center of the site. Eventually, the entire site drains to the Minnesota River valley through existing culverts under County Road 61 (Flying Cloud Drive). Under proposed conditions, the entire graded site area will drain to the two proposed ponds on either side of the creek which divides the site. Pond 1, on the west side of the creek, will outlet to the adjacent creek, and the existing pond (Pond 2) outlets to the County Road 61 ditch. Each of the ponds was previously designed to NURP standards and sized for the future developed state of the site. The previously submitted drainage calculations showed that the existing 10- and 100-year runoff rates were being met, per City Code. As City Code and the pond areas have changed over the Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 6 past 10 years, the applicant shall provide updated calculations that meet Chapter 19 Article VII of City Code. In the future, when a development proposal is submitted, drainage and utility easements over the ponds and creek will be required. Erosion control has been shown on the plan in accordance with industry best management practices. Continued efforts shall be made by the applicant to ensure erosion control practices remain up to date with City Standards, ordinances, and best management practices. Staff recommends additional silt fence in the southeast corner of the site around the grading limits when grading reaches this area, around the proposed pond outlet apron, and around the spent lime stockpile. All disturbed areas are required to be reseeded and mulched within two weeks of site grading. If erosion control measures installed in conjunction with this IUP are deemed by the city to be ineffective, the city will inform the applicant in writing of any deficiencies. The applicant will be required to remedy the deficiencies prior to continuing grading operations. The required remedy(ies) may include, but are not limited to: increased frequency of plantings, additional erosion control blanket, or terracing of the northernmost slope to permanently break up the length of the slope. Phasing is a very important management tool for erosion control, thus the existing grading east of the creek shall be restored and achieve final stabilization prior to grading and mining west of the creek. Stabilization of the toe (first 150 feet of the slope) is needed immediately upon final grading. Stabilization should continue to be done in phases. Large portions of the site should not be left exposed over weekends or during forecasted heavy rains. The slopes should be tracked with a dozer at all times. The dozer should be run perpendicular to the slope to track the slope. Due to the steep slopes and long runs of the slope, bio-rolls may be needed to aid in stabilization of all the slopes. Bio-rolls would help break up the length of slope and minimize erosion potential of the slope with the erosion control blankets. Six-inch bio-rolls are needed every 15 to 20 feet. Proper blanket application is crucial for this site. The blankets must make 100% contact with the soil and stapled according to the manufacture’s specifications. The staple pattern is vital to proper blanket function. The blankets should be head trenched as well. Geotextile and riprap or geogrids or other approved stabilization is needed to provide toe protection; there is a chance the toe of the 2.5 to 1 may start head cutting without toe protection. The seed mix shall be MN State Seed Mix 35-621 (Dry Prairie Southeast). Depending on the final soil used, blanket application may be difficult. If the soil is too sandy, stapling the blanket over long runs will be futile. ‘Terracing’ blankets or using strips of blankets with a heavy application of the seed mix 20 pounds per acre) and hydro mulch will be needed. The northeast “corner” of the site was a previous area of concern for instability addressed in 2009. It was recommended that a terrace, turf reinforcement mat and slope drain was likely needed in this area to promote long-term stability. On August 28, 2018, a letter was sent by staff to the applicant which addressed sluffing and a high level of erosion within the area of concern northeast “corner” of the site). While the applicant was responsive to the request for Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 7 stabilization, the area still remains of concern. The applicant shall provide an assessment of this location by a registered geotechnical engineer to ensure no excessive slumping or obvious slope failures exist, along with recommendation of remediation (if any). Silt fence should be installed at least 25 feet away from the toe of the slope to provide storage and allow the silt fence to function properly. As stated on the plan, Pond 2 and the temporary sediment basin have been constructed. The applicant will be required to clean out Pond 2 and the temporary sediment basin to ensure adequate storage based on the updated runoff calculations and design of the stormwater structures. Coordination of these activities with the CSAH 61 project are required. Subsurface stormwater movement should be considered with surface movement of stormwater. When considering stormwater management, installation of draintile at the toe should be considered to reduce any future possibility of sloughing due to saturation from groundwater or slope seepage. Final restoration plan east of the unnamed creek: Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 8 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 applicant should be aware that if excess material is transported to another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit will be required for the other property. Permitted hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday with no work permitted on Sunday or legal holidays. A proposed haul route must also be submitted as required. In addition, appropriate signage for hauling along County Road 61 will be required and the new CSAH 61 will be rated for a 10-ton per axle road. All oversize/overweight loads leaving the mining operation to the east must apply for Hennepin County Transportation OS/OW trip permits. Grading on the east side of the creek must cease at or above the 756-foot contour and all disturbed soils must be permanently stabilized and restored in accordance with the Restoration Plan as specified in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan dated July 26, 2019. This must be continually reflected on all subsequent plan submittals. Terminating the grading at this elevation would follow the natural drainage pattern in the area. It would also alleviate the need for additional storm sewer in the future in order to capture the drainage and route it back to Pond 2. The future developable area available would still be 12.4 acres. A phasing plan shall be required on an annual basis. The plan shall be subject to city staff review of conformance with the conditions of the IUP. Financial security to guarantee restoration and erosion control measures will be required with the annual updated phasing plan. The plan is also subject to administration fees. An administration fee shall be collected each year and shall be based on the current year’s development review fee for IUPs from Chapter 4 of City Code. The applicant will need to request a formal extension 60 days prior to the expiration date for the IUP. The applicant provided the city with an original cash escrow in the amount of 110% of the construction costs (balance to date of $87,295.24) in 1996. This escrow is to guarantee erosion control measures, site restoration, and compliance with the IUP. The amount of the security shall be established annually and shall be submitted by the anniversary of the date of City Council approval. Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 9 Silt fence shall be furnished in accordance with MnDOT Construction Standards, Section 3886. Machine-sliced or Hand-installed woven geotextile silt fence must be installed and maintained at the northwest corner of project, and in all areas specified in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. Machine-sliced or Hand-installed woven geotextile silt fence must be reinforced using sediment logs, wire backing, or other effective Best Management Practice. Exposed, unworked soils must continue to be stabilized with temporary or permanent stabilization BMPs in accordance with the construction sequencing as stated in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. Exposed, unworked erodible soils with positive slopes must continue to be stabilized using erosion control blanket or alternate effective BMPs according to the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. All other sediment and erosion control measures must be in place and maintained according to the Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan dated July 26, 2019, and phasing plan to be submitted by applicant. LANDSCAPING Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of the grading limits. No tree removal is allowed beyond the 756 contour on the east side of the creek. MN State Seed Mix 35-621 shall be used for the seeding. All restored slopes shall be planted with trees. The trees shall be bare- root, native species, one-half to one-inch in diameter, five to ten-foot spacing in a random pattern from the top to the toe of the slope. The approximate number of trees needed is 20,000 (7’ x 7’ spacing). Spacing (feet) Trees per acre 5 x 5 1,742 6 x 6 1,210 7 x 7 889 8 x 8 681 10 x 10 436 MISCELLANEOUS The permit holder must use and maintain accepted Best Management Practices for erosion control, including but not limited to construction entrances to limit tracking or scaring of the new road surface. The new CSAH 61 will be rated for a 10-ton per axle road. All oversize/overweight loads leaving the mining operation to the east must apply for Hennepin County Transportation OS/OW trip permits. UTILITIES City utilities are not available at present to the property. Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 10 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the IUP to permit mining of the property subject to the following conditions and adopt the Findings of Fact and Recommendation: Engineering 1. The interim use permit shall be approved for a period of five (5) years from the date of City Council approval. The applicant will need to request a formal extension 60 days prior to the expiration date of the interim use permit. 2. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agency must be obtained; including but not limited to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District and Carver County. 3. The applicant must submit a phasing plan. The phasing plan shall address the spent lime stockpile and equipment removal. This information shall be submitted annually a minimum of 30 days before the anniversary of City Council approval. 4. An administration fee shall be collected each year and shall be based on the number of cubic yards of material being graded as identified in the phasing plan. The fees are taken from the Uniform Building Code Appendix, Chapter 33. 5. The applicant must submit a summary of the quantity of material that has been removed from the site and the quantity of remaining material. This information shall be submitted annually a minimum of 30 days before the anniversary of City Council approval. 6. The applicant shall provide updated stormwater and drainage calculations that meet the requirements set forth in Chapter 19 Article VII of City Code. 7. The applicant shall clean out the existing Pond 2 and the temporary sediment basin based on the stormwater and drainage calculations and design of Pond 2 and the sediment basin. 8. The applicant must provide the city with a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of 110% of the construction costs for the appropriate phase of the grading operations to guarantee erosion control measures, site restoration, and compliance with the interim use permit. The amount of the security shall be established annually and shall be submitted by the anniversary date of City Council approval. 9. Permitted hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday with no work permitted on Sunday or legal holidays. 10. Grading on the east side of the creek must cease at or above the 756-foot contour and all disturbed soils must be permanently stabilized and restored in accordance with the Restoration Plan as specified in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan dated July 26, 2019. Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 11 11. If any excess material is hauled to another site in Chanhassen, a separate grading permit will be required for the other property. 12. The new CSAH 61 will be rated for a 10-ton per axle road. All oversize/overweight loads leaving the mining operation to the east must apply for Hennepin County Transportation OS/OW trip permits. 13. Machine-sliced or Hand-installed woven geotextile silt fence must be installed and maintained at the northwest corner of project, and in all areas specified in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. Machine-sliced or Hand-installed woven geotextile silt fence must be reinforced using sediment logs, wire-backing, or other effective Best Management Practice and meet the specifications of MnDOT Standard Specifications for Construction (Section 3886). 14. Exposed, unworked soils must continue to be stabilized with temporary or permanent stabilization BMPs in accordance with the construction sequencing as stated in the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. 15. Exposed, unworked erodible soils with positive slopes must continue to be stabilized using erosion control blanket or alternate effective BMPs according to the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan. 16. All other sediment and erosion control measures must be in place and maintained according to the Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan dated July 26, 2019, and phasing plan to be submitted by the applicant. 17. A driveway access to 230 and 240 Erie Avenue must be maintained at all times during construction. 18. Grading west of the unnamed creek shall not commence until the grading on the existing mining operation and site restoration has been completed east of the creek. 19. The applicant must comply with all Carver County requirements and coordinate the mining activities with Carver County. Environmental Resources 1. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits. 2. No tree removal is allowed beyond the 756-foot contour on the east side of the creek. 3. MN State Seed Mix 35-621 shall be used for the seeding. 4. All restored slopes shall be planted with trees. The trees shall be bare-root, native species, one- half to one-inch in diameter, five- to ten-foot spacing in a random pattern from the top to the toe Moon Valley IUP Planning Case 2019-09 September 3, 2019 Page 12 of the slope. The approximate number of trees needed is 20,000 (7’ x 7’ spacing). A minimum of 75% survival rate for plantings must be achieved. Tree tubes are required for plantings. Spacing (feet) Trees per acre 5 x 5 1,742 6 x 6 1,210 7 x 7 889 8 x 8 681 10 x 10 436 Miscellaneous 1. Permit holder must use and maintain accepted Best Management Practices for erosion control, including but not limited to construction entrances to limit tracking or scaring of the new road surface. 2. The new CSAH 61 will be rated for a 10-ton per axle road. All oversize/overweight loads leaving the mining operation to the east must apply for Hennepin County Transportation OS/OW trip permits. ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact 2. Development Review Application 3. Moon Valley Plan Sets Sheets 1-9 4. Carver County Access Review Comments Dated August 26, 2019 5. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-09 moon valley gravel pit iup\staff report moon valley iup.doc 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of Moon Valley Aggregates, Inc. (Dan Zwiers) for an Interim Use Permit to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration. On September 3, 2019, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Moon Valley Aggregates, Inc. (Dan Zwiers) for an Interim Use Permit for the property located at 100 and 220 Flying Cloud Drive. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed interim use which was 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 Agricultural Estate District (A2). 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential High Density use. 3. The legal description of the property is: All that part of Government Lot 1, Section 36, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, which lies northerly of Trunk Highway No. 212; and, 27 acres in the west half of northeast ¼ south of the railroad and north of Trunk Highway No. 212, Section 36, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota; 1 acre in Government Lot 3 north of Trunk Highway 212 being that part of the northwest ¼ of the northeast ¼ and the northeast ¼ of the northwest ¼ in Government Lots 2 & 3, Section 36, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota. 4. When approving an Interim Use Permit, the city must determine the capability of a proposed development with existing and proposed uses. The general issuance standards of the conditional use Section 20-232, include the following 12 items: a. The mining operation will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. The site work will result in the stabilization and re-vegetation of the slope and the reduction in site erosion. 2 b. The mining operation will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and the zoning code by creating a future development area that may be developed consistently with the land use designation of the property and through the protection and stabilization of the slopes. The earthwork will be maintaining the site in a form suitable for residential use which is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and this chapter. c. The mining operation will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area because the site will be re- vegetated and the slopes stabilized reducing site erosion. The aesthetics of the site will be enhanced with the elimination of the gullies/ravines in the site and the establishment of site vegetation. d. The mining operation will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses because the grading and drainage will be contained within the site perimeters. Additionally, hours of operation are limited and specific conditions of approval will be in place and enforced by the city. e. The mining operation will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use since development of the site will be delayed until urban services are available. The use is temporary which does not need to be served by public facilities and services. The proposed grading will prepare the site for future development. The development of the site will require additional city review and approval. f. The mining operation will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community since this is a temporary use. When the site is developed in the future, the development will enhance the city’s economic welfare. g. The mining operation will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare due to excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. The proposed grading could result in a temporary increase in traffic, noise and fumes. The conditions of the approval will provide standards by which the activities should be minimized. h. The mining operation will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. Through the use of signage, limits on the hours of operation, and if traffic becomes congested, additional limits on the hours of hauling operation could be instituted, potential traffic problems will be mitigated. 3 i. The mining operation will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. The proposal will result in the removal of some existing canopy. However, the site will be re-vegetated and there will be less bluff impact vis-à-vis the previously approved grading/restoration plan for the site. j. The mining operation will be aesthetically compatible with the area since the grading and re-vegetation of the site will improve the site aesthetics. k. The mining operation will not depreciate surrounding property values since the plan will improve the site and its impacts on the surrounding properties. l. The mining operation will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in Chapter 7, Article III of the Chanhassen City Code. 5. The planning report #2019-09 dated September 3, 2019, prepared by Erik Henricksen, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Interim Use Permit to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration subject to the conditions of the staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 3rd day of September, 2019. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY:___________________________________ Steven Weick, Chairman g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-09 moon valley gravel pit iup\findings of fact.doc Sore^o1 COiliiUNITY DEVELOPiIENT DEPARTTENT Planning Division - 7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952) 227-1300 / Fax: (952) 227-1'l1o APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW suumitatDate: ? Ia / fA PC Date q 3 I ccoate:Q /an lrq SGDay Review Date:to( tI Lc Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply) Refer to tp apprcpiate Applitxtin c/?f,cldistr tor ,pqui.E,d submiftal infomat*m tl!€,l musl a@npany this applbatim) n Comprehensive Plan Amendment......................... $600 ! SuMivision 1suB1EMinorMUSAlinebrf;ailing on-site sewers.....$100 E Create 3 lots or less ........................................ $300Ecreateover3lotsDConditionalUsePermat (CUP) Single-Family Residence ... E rut ottrers...... E p ntt otners...... E nezoning 1nez1EPlannedUnit Oevelopment (PUO).... n Minor Amendment to existing PUD... E A others...... E Sign Plan Review.......... E site Plan Review (SPR) E Administrative......... lnterim Use Permit (lUP) fl ln conjunction with Single-Family Residence.. $325 600 + 915 per tot(__ lots) E Uetes & Bounds (2 lots). E Consolidate Lots..... ... ... .. E Lot Line Adjust nent........ E Final Plat......................... lncludes $450 escrow for attomey cosb)' Additbnal es$ow may be ,equired ior other applications through the development contrad. E Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (vAC)........ $300 Additional recording fees may apply) 325 425 425 7s0 100 s00 1s0 100 9500 300 1s0 1s0 700 tr tr E Commerciaulndustrial Districts' Plus $'10 per 1,000 square feet of building area( thousand square feet) lnclude number of g!!s!Dg enployees: Variance (VAR) ...... . Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) E Singl+.Family Residence........ 200 E Att ohers......... D zoning Appeal........ E Zoning ordinance Amendment (ZOA)........-........ $500 200 150 27s 100 lnclude number of @!t employees: tr nesioentiar oiiiti"t"-.....--f -.-.......---..--- Ssoo !QIE*: when rnuhirlc ' Pplio'tior rrt Foo'ss'd concurrundv' Plus $5 per dwelling unit r uni;i th' ' PPropritt' lbc sh'll b' oh"god ior .toh rPPllottion' K d" Notification Sign (city to install and remove) Property Owners' List within 500' (city to generate after pre-application meeting) ..... Escrow for Recording Oocuments (check all that E Conditional Use Permit app D lv)........................... lnterim Use Permit E Vacation E variance n Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) E Easements ( easements) 3 per address t lSaddresses) 50 per document E site Ptan Agreernent Alteration ko EweuanoEoeeos TOTAL FEE Permit Section 2: Required lnformation Description of Proposal: Mootl \)all -t truP L(\on*;on flz:r,,e cloJ Drit-loo + 2o0PropertyAddressorLocation Parcel #:Legal Description:Lol Weuands PresenP ! Ves E tto 3 .49 Total Acreage: Present Zoning Present Land Use Designation: Requested Zoning . Select One Requested Land Use Designation:Select ne E ffnecX box if separate nanative is attached AUb 0z z0lg SCfNNEt) Select One One Existing Use of Property: et Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant lnformation 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 perteining to this application. I ' rill keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this applic€tion. I further understand that additional fees may be charged ior 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 conect. Name:Contect: Phone:Address: City/State/Zip Email: study. Name Address:ill City/State/Zip: Email <. Signature PROJECT ENGINEER (if appl icable Name: Address orla f / aaaual conect. azti,:,, o Cell ar\.r.- Fax: Cell: Fax: Date Davt Z ie,t'5 phone: 6ra 'f'zo-5154 Datei 7-3o- 11 Signature I certity that the information and exhibits submitted are true and Contact: Phone:o0 i lvl tlt {szq I sa{1"te..Conn This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Bebre filing this application, rerer to the appropriate Application Checklist and conEr with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural requirements and Ees. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. Section 4: Notification lnformation Who should roccive copi6s ot staft r.ports? trn Property Owner Via: ! EmailApplicantVia: DEmailnEngineerMa: EEmailEomerVia: E Emait E ttiitaiteo Paper copy E ttrtaileo Paper copy E tvtaiteo Paper copy E uaneo Paper copy Address INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Com plete all necessery form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city along with required documents and payrnent. SUBMIT FORM b send a digital copy to the city for processing SAVE FORTI PRINT FORM SUB N FORM PROPERW OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as property owner, have tull 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 turther understand that additional fiees may be charged br consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the city/state/zip: Email: Cell: Fax: Othor Contact lntomation: No-o ciMstate/zip: Email: Carver County Public Works 11360 Highway 212, Suite 1 Cologne, MN 55322 Office (952) 466-5200 | Fax (952) 466-5223 | www.co.carver.mn.us CARVER COUNTY August 26, 2019 City of Chanhassen c/o Bob Generous, AICP Senior Planner Phone: 952-227-1131 bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Re: Development / Access Review Comments: Moon Valley Pit CUP Extension Plat on County Highway 61 Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject development in the City of Chanhassen. Please reference the Public Works Development Review Process document on the County’s website for detailed instructions. Provided the land use proposal is a plat, the County assumes compliance with State Statute 505.03 Subdivision 2 regarding road authority review for plat approval. Consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and County Codes, the following are comments and recommended conditions of approval and as potential requirements for any necessary permits to be issued for the project: 1. The proposed Land Development Proposal appears to include several parcels all of which are located adjacent to County Highway 61 and the Minnesota River Bluffs Regional Trail, for which the County is a formal authority or agent for the right of way and facilities. As part of any final approval, a comprehensive parcel and plan map will need to be provided to the County for review and approval showing all of the parcels and buildings from 100 Flying Cloud Drive to 220 Flying Cloud Drive, the City of Chanhassen, Erie Avenue, the Mn River Bluff Regional Trail, and those parcels of 450-470 Flying Cloud Drive, including any and all access permits and cross-access easements related thereto. 2. A comprehensive plan map of the proposed development and lots involved will need to be provided showing the highway right of way adjacent to the subject properties and along County Hwy 61 (Flying Cloud Drive) and the Minnesota River Bluffs Regional Trail. Current info shows that the right of way varies between approximately 80 ft. to 90 ft. along the property frontage. The preferred right of way for a County Highway with a two-lane undivided rural roadway section is 120 ft., or 60 ft. from centerline (Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan). In addition, this section of County Highway 61 is identified as a Tier 1 RBTN Alignment, as designated by the Metropolitan Council. The preferred right of way for a two-lane undivided rural County Highway with a trail on one side increases by 20 ft. to 140 ft. total. A clear denotation of a setback shall be included and shown on the plan set of between 90 ft. and 100 ft from centerline. The planned ROW and needs for the Regional Trail will need further coordination with the County and the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority. 3. An overall access plan will need to be provided and reviewed and approved by the County related to the Regional Trail and Co Hwy 61. Revisions and / or further review of the access points and turn lane plans for the uses, parcels, and frontage along Co Hwy 61 are needed. This segment of County Highway 61 is designated as Category #5A in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Access Spacing Guidance. The access spacing for this roadway type is: mile full intersection spacing and ¼ mile secondary intersection spacing. The existing access is a full access located approximately 0.32 miles east of Erie Ln. (private road) and approximately 0.39 miles west of the Anderson Conservatory Access. The proposed access just west of Erie Avenue is too close to Erie Ave and the culvert crossing facility of Flying Cloud Drive and will need to be reviewed further. A better location is at the western most parcel line where the existing access serves the 450-470 Flying Cloud Drive addresses. In addition, right turn lanes and left turn lanes may be required unless otherwise determined or provided. 4. An updated Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control Plan, and Stormwater Plan will need to be provided to the County for review and approval. Among other things, the subject Plan will need to show how it relates to the current Co Hwy 61 Reconstruction Plan, the Regional Trail Reconstruction Plan, and related facilities, grading, stormwater, and highway / trail rights of way. 5. All the ponds noted (and unnoted) on the plans will need further review and approval by the County, and eventually reflected in any updated Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control Plan, and Stormwater Plan. a. The most western Pond-1 is located on a City of Chanhassen parcel and the County requests a report of due diligence for western Pond-1 to verify that a pond can be placed in this area due to proximity to potentially contaminated soils. In addition, this pond will need to show how it relates to the current Co Hwy 61 Reconstruction Plan and related facilities and highway right of way. More review and approval of western Pond-1 by the County is required. b. The contours appear to show road and drainage ditches east of western Pond-1 western Pond-1) that connects/outlets directly to County Highway 61 and bypasses the pond. Please provide more information on what this is. If this is the case, it should connect to the existing Erie Avenue private road to the west. c. It appears that Pond-2 will only capture runoff from the site directly west of the pond based on the contours. The County has existing issues with erosion onto County Highway 61 at the main driveway with rain events. This issue needs to be addressed with the current plans and any expansion. The plan appears like it will make it worse with the east expansion or at least leveling of the site, as it all appears to free flow towards the main driveway unmanaged, based on the County’s information at this time. d. The plans or site currently does not propose a formal pond just to the east of Erie Avenue, the existing creek, and new eastern Pond-1; however, there is an existing informal pond in this location that appears to add flow and silt to this sub area and drainage under Co Hwy 61. A response and clear remedy on the plans related to this will need to be provided for review and approval by the County. 6. The development plan’s interim use and permanent final plans related to but not limited to grading, stormwater / drainage facilities, embankment, erosion control, right of way, and access to and along the Minnesota River Bluffs Regional Trail will need to be reviewed and approved by the County and Parks Manager. 7. The development plan will need to provide some form of reciprocal cross access easement / agreement and construction and maintenance easement / agreement to the County from Co Hwy 61 to the Minnesota River Bluffs Regional Trail at various points, and for the interim and permanent final plans, to be reviewed and approved by the County and Parks Manager. 8. The development plan’s final grading plans, drainage flows, ponds, and right of way along the Regional Trail will need to be reviewed and approved. Prior to development approval, the County will need to review and approve an exhibit drawing with cross sections of the Regional Trial showing proposed grades for the trail and subject lots for the entire frontage of the trail in increments of 50-100 ft sections. A grading permit will be required for grading work within the trail / highway right of way or for any facilities affecting or flowing into or under such right of way. 9. The development plan’s final grading plans, drainage flows, ponds, and right of way along County Highway 61 will need to be reviewed and approved. Prior to development approval, the County will need to review and approve an exhibit drawing with cross sections of County Highway 61 showing proposed grades for the roadway and subject lots for the entire frontage of Co Hwy 61 in increments of 50-100 ft sections. A grading permit will be required for grading work within the highway right of way or for any facilities affecting or flowing into or under the right of way. 10. A final check with the County is required for stormwater/drainage, utility, and access easement needs, as well as water / sewer main and utility needs and locations along County Highway 61 and the Minnesota River Bluffs Regional Trail. 11. The technical details of the parcels of plat, its boundaries and form(s) will need to be reviewed and approved by the County Surveyor. 12. For any work planned or required on a county highway, county or regional trail facilities, the City will be required to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with the County to formalize that the City is required to be responsible for Plans, Specifications, and Engineering PS&E) to the County’s standards and requirements, including Construction Administration and Inspection and related activities. Such work requires a CSAH State Aid certified professional engineer and a series of meetings and project development with the County prior to any formal right of way or utility permit applications, to include project scoping, concept development, 30-60-90 PS&E plan development, review, and approval involving the County Engineer. 13. Prior to any work affecting or on County highways, County trails, or in County right of way, the applicant shall coordinate plans with the County Engineer and obtain a Utility or Excavating/Filling/Grading Permit(s) from Carver County Public Works: http://www.co.carver.mn.us/how-do-i/apply-for/a-permit). Final details of locations, grades, and profiles affecting County roads as well as any utility connections will need to be reviewed and approved prior to any permits. 14. Any damages, modifications, or changes incurred on County highways from current or approved conditions will need to remedied or updated at development expense, including costs incurred by the County. These are the County’s comments at this time. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact those noted below: Dan McCormick, P.E. PTOE Transportation Manager Carver County Public Works Angie Stenson AICP Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Martin Walsh Parks and Recreation Director Carver County Summary of State Statute 505.03 Subdivision 2 text truncated, emphasis added) If any proposed preliminary plat or initial plat filing includes land located in a city or town bordering an existing or proposed county road, highway, or county state-aid highway, and the property, road, or highway is designated on a map or county highway plan, then the plat or plat filing must be submitted by the city or town to the county engineer within five business days after receipt by the city or town of the preliminary plat or initial plat filing for written comments and recommendations. The county engineer's review shall be limited to factors of county significance in conformance with adopted county guidelines developed through a public hearing or a comprehensive planning process with comment by the cities and towns. Within 30 days after county receipt from the city or town of the preliminary plat or initial plat filing, the county engineer shall provide to the city or town written comments stating whether the plat meets county guidelines and describing any modifications necessary to bring the plat into conformity with the county guidelines. No city or town may approve a preliminary plat until it has received the county engineer's written comments and recommendations or until the county engineer's comment period has expired, whichever occurs first. Within ten business days following a city's or town's approval of a preliminary plat, the city or town shall submit to the county board notice of its approval, along with a statement addressing the disposition of any written comments or recommendations made by the county engineer. In the event the city or town does not amend the plat to conform to the recommendations made by the county engineer, representatives from the county and city or town shall meet to discuss the differences and determine whether changes to the plat are appropriate prior to final approval. Full Text of State Statute 505.03 Subdivision 2 Subd. 2.Plat approval; road review. a) Any proposed preliminary plat in a city, town, or county, which includes lands abutting upon state rail bank property or upon any existing or established trunk highway or proposed highway which has been designated by a centerline order filed in the office of the county recorder shall first be presented by the city, town, or county to the commissioner of transportation for written comments and recommendations. Preliminary plats in a city or town involving state rail bank property or both a trunk highway and a highway under county jurisdiction shall be submitted by the city or town to the county highway engineer as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) and to the commissioner of transportation. Plats shall be submitted by the city, town, or county to the commissioner of transportation for review at least 30 days prior to the home rule charter or statutory city, town or county taking final action on the preliminary plat. The commissioner of transportation shall submit the written comments and recommendations to the city, town, or county within 30 days after receipt by the commissioner of such a plat. Final action on such plat by the city, town, or county shall not be taken until after these required comments and recommendations have been received or until the 30- day period has elapsed. b) If any proposed preliminary plat or initial plat filing includes land located in a city or town bordering either state rail bank property or an existing or proposed county road, highway, or county state-aid highway, and the property, road, or highway is designated on a map or county highway plan filed in the office of the county recorder or registrar of titles, then the plat or plat filing must be submitted by the city or town to the county engineer within five business days after receipt by the city or town of the preliminary plat or initial plat filing for written comments and recommendations. The county engineer's review shall be limited to factors of county significance in conformance with adopted county guidelines developed through a public hearing or a comprehensive planning process with comment by the cities and towns. The guidelines must provide for development and redevelopment scenarios, allow for variances, and reflect consideration of city or town adopted guidelines. c) Within 30 days after county receipt from the city or town of the preliminary plat or initial plat filing, the county engineer shall provide to the city or town written comments stating whether the plat meets county guidelines and describing any modifications necessary to bring the plat into conformity with the county guidelines. No city or town may approve a preliminary plat until it has received the county engineer's written comments and recommendations or until the county engineer's comment period has expired, whichever occurs first. Within ten business days following a city's or town's approval of a preliminary plat, the city or town shall submit to the county board notice of its approval, along with a statement addressing the disposition of any written comments or recommendations made by the county engineer. In the event the city or town does not amend the plat to conform to the recommendations made by the county engineer, representatives from the county and city or town shall meet to discuss the differences and determine whether changes to the plat are appropriate prior to final approval. This requirement shall not extend the time deadlines for preliminary or final approval as required under this section, section 15.99 or 462.358, or any other law, nor shall this requirement prohibit final approval as required by this section. d) A legible preliminary drawing or print of a proposed preliminary plat shall be acceptable for purposes of review by the commissioner of transportation or the county highway engineer. To such drawing or print there shall be attached a written statement describing: 1) the outlet for and means of disposal of surface waters from the proposed platted area; 2) the land use designation or zoning category of the proposed platted area; 3) the locations of ingress and egress to the proposed platted area; and 4) a preliminary site plan for the proposed platted area, with dimensions to scale, authenticated by a registered engineer or land surveyor, showing: i) the state rail bank property; ii) the existing or proposed state highway, county road, or county highway; and iii) all existing and proposed rights-of-way, easements, general lot layouts, and lot dimensions. e) Failure to obtain the written comments and recommendations of the commissioner of transportation or the county highway engineer shall in no manner affect the title to the lands included in the plat or the platting of said lands. A city, town, or county shall file with the plat, in the office of the county recorder or registrar of titles, a certificate or other evidence showing submission of the preliminary plat to the commissioner or county highway engineer in compliance with this subdivision. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of Moon Valley Aggregates, Inc. (Dan Zwiers) for an Interim Use Permit to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration. On September 3, 2019, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Moon Valley Aggregates, Inc. (Dan Zwiers) for an Interim Use Permit for the property located at 100 and 220 Flying Cloud Drive. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed interim use which was 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 Agricultural Estate District(A2). 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential High Density use. 3. The legal description of the property is: All that part of Government Lot 1, Section 36, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, which lies northerly of Trunk Highway No. 212; and, 27 acres in the west half of northeast 1/4 south of the railroad and north of Trunk Highway No. 212, Section 36, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota; 1 acre in Government Lot 3 north of Trunk Highway 212 being that part of the northwest 1/4 of the northeast '/4 and the northeast 1/4 of the northwest 1/4 in Government Lots 2 & 3, Section 36, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota. 4. When approving an Interim Use Permit,the city must determine the capability of a proposed development with existing and proposed uses. The general issuance standards of the conditional use Section 20-232, include the following 12 items: a. The mining operation will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. The site work will result in the stabilization and re-vegetation of the slope and the reduction in site erosion. 1 b. The mining operation will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and the zoning code by creating a future development area that may be developed consistently with the land use designation of the property and through the protection and stabilization of the slopes. The earthwork will be maintaining the site in a form suitable for residential use which is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and this chapter. c. The mining operation will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area because the site will be re- vegetated and the slopes stabilized reducing site erosion. The aesthetics of the site will be enhanced with the elimination of the gullies/ravines in the site and the establishment of site vegetation. d. The mining operation will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses because the grading and drainage will be contained within the site perimeters. Additionally, hours of operation are limited and specific conditions of approval will be in place and enforced by the city. e. The mining operation will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use since development of the site will be delayed until urban services are available. The use is temporary which does not need to be served by public facilities and services. The proposed grading will prepare the site for future development. The development of the site will require additional city review and approval. f. The mining operation will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community since this is a temporary use. When the site is developed in the future,the development will enhance the city's economic welfare. g. The mining operation will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare due to excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. The proposed grading could result in a temporary increase in traffic, noise and fumes. The conditions of the approval will provide standards by which the activities should be minimized. h. The mining operation will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. Through the use of signage, limits on the hours of operation, and if traffic becomes congested, additional limits on the hours of hauling operation could be instituted, potential traffic problems will be mitigated. 2 i. The mining operation will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. The proposal will result in the removal of some existing canopy. However, the site will be re-vegetated and there will be less bluff impact vis-à-vis the previously approved grading/restoration plan for the site. j. The mining operation will be aesthetically compatible with the area since the grading and re-vegetation of the site will improve the site aesthetics. k. The mining operation will not depreciate surrounding property values since the plan will improve the site and its impacts on the surrounding properties. 1. The mining operation will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in Chapter 7, Article III of the Chanhassen City Code. 5. The planning report#2019-09 dated September 3, 2019, prepared by Erik Henricksen, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Interim Use Permit to permit grading, excavation and slope restoration subject to the conditions of the staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 3rd day of September, 2019. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY: ,)- v. V eick, C g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-09 moon valley gravel pit iup\findings of fact.doc 3 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Consider a Request for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to the Bottom of the Bluff at 1181 Homestead Lane Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.5. Prepared By Robert Generous, Senior Planner, AICP File No: Planning Case 201912 PROPOSED MOTION "City Council approves a variance from the bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system, and a deviation from the 50foot bluff setback for septic systems in Section 19 67 (6), subject to adopting the Planning Commission's Findings of Fact and Decision and the following Conditions of Approval: 1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, as applicable.An engineerdesigned plan is required to divert the existing drainage ravine that would be impacted by the proposed SSTS. 2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system. 3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for an SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil). 4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval. 5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree removal should be required. All trees 6 inches and larger in and around the construction area shall be shown. Replacement planting will be required in areas cleared outside of the septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved by the city. 6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the construction area." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. SUMMARY The applicant is proposing to replace an existing, failing septic system with a system that encroaches into the Bluff Creek primary zone as well as into the required bluff setback. BACKGROUND CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, September 23, 2019SubjectConsider a Request for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to the Bottom of theBluff at 1181 Homestead LaneSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.5.Prepared By Robert Generous, Senior Planner, AICP File No: Planning Case 201912PROPOSED MOTION"City Council approves a variance from the bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone forthe construction of a septic system, and a deviation from the 50foot bluff setback for septic systems in Section 1967 (6), subject to adopting the Planning Commission's Findings of Fact and Decision and the following Conditions ofApproval:1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, asapplicable.An engineerdesigned plan is required to divert the existing drainage ravine that would be impactedby the proposed SSTS.2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system.3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for an SSTS (e.g. ageotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil).4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval.5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree removal should berequired. All trees 6 inches and larger in and around the construction area shall be shown. Replacementplanting will be required in areas cleared outside of the septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved bythe city.6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the construction area."Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.SUMMARYThe applicant is proposing to replace an existing, failing septic system with a system that encroaches into the BluffCreek primary zone as well as into the required bluff setback. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 17, 2019 to review the request. The Planning Commission voted 60 to approve the requested variances subject to the six Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission believed that the applicant had investigated all possible alternatives and the proposed septic location was the most environmentally sound alternative. While staff had recommended denial of the variance, the applicant provided additional testimony which addressed some of staff's concerns and requested justifications. DISCUSSION The applicant shall submit detailed construction plans for the septic system, engineered drainage and erosion control plans for the realignment of the ravine around the septic tanks and drain fields, and a tree survey in and around the proposed construction area. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends approval of the variance from the bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system, subject to the Conditions of Approval in the staff report. ATTACHMENTS: Findings of Fact and Decision September 17, 2019 Planning Commission Staff Report September 17, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes City Code Sec. 1967 (6) CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION APPROVAL) IN RE: Application of John Jensen II for variance from the bluff setback and encroachment in to the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system on a property zoned Rural Residential District(RR) - Planning Case 2019-12. On September 3, 2019, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,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 Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District(RR). 2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Large Lot Residential. 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 10, Block 3,Pioneer Hills, Carver County, Minnesota 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 installation of a septic system in this location will have a minimal impact on the bluff and the Bluff Creek primary zone. Once installed,the site can be revegetated to maintain the environmental benefits of the area. 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. Finding: The applicant cannot install a compliant septic system on the property without a variance. 1 c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The property is located in an older subdivision and the existing structure does not conform to the current zoning code. The parcel is significantly smaller than the minimum size required for riparian lots zoned RSF. The lot's substandard size and pre- existing house placement means that a two-car garage cannot be situated on the lot without a variance. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The property is located in a large lot residential subdivision. The proposed construction of a septic system in the Bluff Creek primary zone and within the bluff setback will not alter the essential character of the locality and will provide a working septic system. 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 does not apply to this request. 5. The planning report#2019-12, dated September 17, 2019, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. DECISION The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance from the bluff setback and encroachment in to the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, as applicable. An engineer-designed plan is required to divert the existing drainage ravine that would be impacted by the proposed SSTS. 2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system. 3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for an SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil). 4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval. 2 5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree removal should be required. All trees 6" and larger in and around the construction area shall be shown. Replacement planting will be required in areas cleared outside of the septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved by the city. 6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the construction area." ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of September, 2019. CITY OF CHA HASSEN BY: /Ai i y even Weick, Cha.; an g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-12 1181 homestead lane var\findings of fact and decision 1181 homestead In(approval).docx 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday,September 17,2019 Subject Consider a Request for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to the Bottom of the Bluff at 1181 Homestead Lane Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No:B.1. Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,Associate Planner File No:Planning Case 2019-12 PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies the bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system,adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision and directs the applicant to: Submit plans showing conformance with City Ordinance and City Standards for the subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS)being installed in the front yard,or provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for an SSTS e.g.a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil). SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is proposing to replace an existing septic system with a system that encroaches into the Bluff Creek primary zone as well as into the required bluff setback. APPLICANT John Jensen II,1181 Homestead Lane,Chanhassen,MN 55317 SITE INFORMATION PRESENT ZONING:Rural Residential District,RR LAND USE:Large Lot Residential ACREAGE:2.5 acres DENSITY:NA APPLICATION REGULATIONS Chapter 19,Water,Sewers and Sewage Disposal,Article IV,Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems Chapter 20,Article II,Division 3,Variances PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORTTuesday,September 17,2019SubjectConsideraRequest for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to the Bottom oftheBluffat1181HomesteadLaneSectionPUBLICHEARINGSItemNo:B.1.Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,AssociatePlanner File No:Planning Case 2019-12PROPOSEDMOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies the bluff setback and encroachment into theBluffCreekprimaryzonefortheconstructionofasepticsystem,adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decisionanddirectstheapplicantto:Submit plans showing conformance with City Ordinance and City Standards for the subsurface sewagetreatmentsystem(SSTS)being installed in the front yard,or provide further justification of the impracticability of suchalocationforanSSTSe.g.a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil).SUMMARY OFREQUESTTheapplicantisproposingto replace an existing septic system with a system that encroaches into the BluffCreekprimaryzoneaswellasintotherequiredbluffsetback.APPLICANTJohnJensenII,1181 Homestead Lane,Chanhassen,MN55317SITEINFORMATIONPRESENTZONING:Rural Residential District,RRLANDUSE:Large LotResidentialACREAGE:2.5 acresDENSITY:NAAPPLICATION REGULATIONS Chapter 19,Water,Sewers and Sewage Disposal,Article IV,Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems Chapter 20,Article II,Division 3,Variances Chapter 20,Article XI,RR”Rural Residential District Chapter 20,Section 20-1401,Structure Setbacks Bluffs) Chapter 20, 20-1564 Structure Setbacks Bluff Creek primary zone) BACKGROUND Pioneer Hills was platted on February 4,1985.The house was built in 1986. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the variance to permit construction of the septic system within the bluff setback and Bluff Creek primary zone since a feasible alternative that conforms to ordinance may be installed, adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision and directs the applicant to: Submit plans showing conformance with City Ordinance and City Standards for the SSTS being installed in the front yard,or provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for an SSTS e.g.a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil). ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Findings of Fact and Decision Denial Findings of Fact and Decision Approval Development Review Application Narrative Survey Septic Site Sketches Public Hearing Notice Affidavit of Mailing CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: September 17, 2019 CC DATE: September 23, 2019 REVIEW DEADLINE: October 15, 2019 CASE #: 2019-12 BY: RG, EH, JS, ET SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is proposing to replace an existing septic system with a system that encroaches into the Bluff Creek primary zone as well as into the required bluff setback. LOCATION: 1181 Homestead Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 Lot 10, Block 3, Pioneer Hills, Carver County, Minnesota PID 256100190) OWNER: John Jensen II 1181 Homestead Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: Rural Residential District (RR) and Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCO). 2030 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Large Lot ACREAGE: 2.5 acres DENSITY: NA 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. PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies the bluff setback and encroachment in to the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.” Note: A motion for approval and appropriate Findings of Fact are also included at the end of the report.) Planning Commission 1181 Homestead Lane – Planning Case 2019-12 September 17, 2019 Page 2 of 6 Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant would like to install their septic system within the Bluff Creek primary zone as well as encroach into the bluff setback zone. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 19, Water, Sewers and Sewage Disposal, Article IV, Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances Chapter 20, Article XI, “RR” Rural Residential District Chapter 20, Section 20-1401, Structure Setbacks (Bluffs) Chapter 20, 20-1564 Structure Setbacks (Bluff Creek primary zone) BACKGROUND Pioneer Hills was platted on February 4, 1985. County records indicate that the house was built in 1986. Bluff Creek Primary Zone Planning Commission 1181 Homestead Lane – Planning Case 2019-12 September 17, 2019 Page 3 of 6 SITE CONDITIONS The property is zoned Rural Residential District and is located within the city’s Bluff Creek overlay district. This zoning classification requires lots to be a minimum of 2.5 acres and that the primary zone be preserved as permanent open space. The exiting septic system is failing and must be replaced. SITE CONSTRAINTS Wetland Protection There is not a wetland located on the property. Bluff Protection There is a bluff on the property. Shoreland Management The property is not located within a shoreland overlay district. Floodplain Overlay This property is not within a floodplain Bluff Creek Corridor The property is located within the Bluff Creek overlay district. Variances within 500 feet: Variance 2007-28, 951 Homestead Lane, variance to permit a 1,177 square foot accessory structure on November 20, 2007. ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing a septic system to be installed in a naturally wooded area within the Primary Zone of the Bluff Creek Watershed District as well as near a bluff. The existing site has 100% tree cover from the home to the Powers Boulevard right-of-way. Locating the septic field in this area will permanently affect the wooded area and primary zone. A number of homes own a share of the continuous wooded area and have protected the area since the development of the area. Staff recommends that protection of the wooded area continue. Ideally, an alternative location Planning Commission 1181 Homestead Lane – Planning Case 2019-12 September 17, 2019 Page 4 of 6 could be found on the property for the system. If not, then a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree removal should be required and replacement plantings be approved by the city. The Engineering Department has reviewed the Variance submittal for 1181 Homestead Lane. These comments are divided into two categories: general comments and proposed conditions. General comments are informational points to guide the applicant in the proper planning of public works infrastructure for this project, to inform the applicant of possible extraordinary issues and/or to provide the basis for findings. Proposed conditions are requirements that Engineering recommends be formally imposed on the developer in the final order. Note that references to the “City Standards” herein refer to the Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. General Comments/Findings 1. Any and all utility and transportation plans submitted with this application have been reviewed for the purpose of determining the feasibility of providing utility and transportation facilities for the project in accordance with City Standards and City Ordinances. Recommendation of a variance approval does not constitute final approval of details, including but not limited to alignments, materials and points of access, connection or discharge, that are depicted or suggested in the application. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, as applicable. The City of Chanhassen Engineering and Public Works Department will review plans, in detail, when they are submitted and approve, reject or require modifications to the plans or drawings based upon conformance with City Standards, the Chanhassen Code of Ordinances and the professional engineering judgment of the City Engineer. 2. It is the opinion of the Engineering Department that the proposed subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS) variance should not be approved as other locations on the subject property would allow for the SSTS to function properly while not creating the need for a variance from bluff and slope setbacks based on the information provided. a. Upon submittal of the variance request, the applicant’s justification for not locating the SSTS in the front yard was discussed under point 3.c. “Moving Planning Commission 1181 Homestead Lane – Planning Case 2019-12 September 17, 2019 Page 5 of 6 the entire system to the front yard would also be problematic as there is not enough workable space to install a system.” b. After review by staff it was determined that there was enough room to install the SSTS between the existing garage and existing house. As currently designed, the treatment area requires 1,600 square feet, while the front yard provides over 2,400 square feet of workable area outside building setbacks and slope/bluff setbacks. c. Staff reached out to the applicant to obtain further justification to point 3.c. and received a follow-up e-mail on September 5, 2019 in which the contractor concluded: “there is no room in the front due to the well setback and all cut and fill or compacted soils, and the contours do not work either.” d. After re-reviewing the setbacks (well and slopes) from the provided plans, staff determined that there was enough room as discussed in item 2.b. of this report and that if there are concerns regarding compacted soils, a type 3 system should be proposed and subsequent perk tests provided to ensure feasibility. 3. Staff will reassess the recommendation for denial of variance if further justification is provided for the infeasibility of the front yard location for installation of the SSTS. See Condition 1. Proposed Conditions 1. Submit plans showing conformance with City Ordinance and City Standards for the SSTS being installed in the front yard, or, provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for a SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil). SUMMARY The applicant’s proposed project does not comply with city ordinance. Based on staff’s review, an alternative system compliant with City Code could be installed. The Building Department supports any comments or concerns that the Soil & Water Conservation District and Water Resources has concerning the placement of the septic system. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the variance to permit construction of the septic system within the bluff setback and Bluff Creek primary zone since a feasible alternative that conforms to ordinance may be installed, adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision and directs the applicant to: Planning Commission 1181 Homestead Lane – Planning Case 2019-12 September 17, 2019 Page 6 of 6 Submit plans showing conformance with City Ordinance and City Standards for the SSTS being installed in the front yard, or provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for a SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil). Should the Planning Commission approve the variance request, it is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion and attached Finding of Fact and Decision: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the bluff setback variance and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system as shown in the plans shown on the Certificate of Survey by SISU Land Surveying dated 8/19/19, subject to the following conditions, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision. 1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, as applicable. An engineer-designed plan is required to divert the existing drainage ravine that would be impacted by the proposed SSTS. 2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system. 3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for a SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil). 4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval. 5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree removal should be required. All trees 6” and larger in and around the construction area shall be shown. Replacement planting will be required in areas cleared outside of the septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved by the city. 6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the construction area.” ATTACHMENTS 1. Finding of Fact and Decision Denial 2. Finding of Fact and Decision Approval 3. Development Review Application and Narrative 4. 1181 Homestead Lane Survey 5. Septic Site Sketches 6. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-12 1181 homestead lane var\staff report-1181 homestead ln-pc.docx 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION DENIAL) IN RE: Application of John Jensen II for variance from the bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system on a property zoned Rural Residential District (RR) - Planning Case 2019-12. On September 17, 2019, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District (RR). 2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Large Lot. 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 10, Block 3, Pioneer Hills, Carver County, Minnesota 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 intent of the city’s bluff protection and Bluff Creek Overlay District ordinances are to protect the city’s natural areas and aquatic resources by establishing a minimum bluff setback as well as preserve the Bluff Creek corridor. These two requirements are designed to work together to prevent excessive development that could generate unnecessary alterations which could potentially degrade the bluff area as well as Bluff Creek. 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: An alternative system compliant with City Code could be installed without a variance. c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: While the septic system has failed and must be replaced, an alternative system compliant with City Code could be installed. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The property is located in one of the city’s large lot residential subdivisions. The properties within 500 feet of the parcel have septic systems that comply with city ordinances. The proposed encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone and bluff setback could lead to other alterations to the natural area of the neighborhood. 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 does not apply to this request. 5. The planning report #2019-12, dated September 17, 2019, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. DECISION The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies a variance request to allow a variance from the bluff setback and encroachment in to the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system.” ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of September, 2019. CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: Steven Weick, Chairman g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-12 1181 homestead lane var\findings of fact and decision 1181 homestead ln (denial).docx 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION APPROVAL) IN RE: Application of John Jensen II for variance from the bluff setback and encroachment in to the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system on a property zoned Rural Residential District (RR) - Planning Case 2019-12. On September 3, 2019, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, 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 Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District (RR). 2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Large Lot Residential. 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 10, Block 3, Pioneer Hills, Carver County, Minnesota 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 installation of a septic system in this location will have a minimal impact on the bluff and the Bluff Creek primary zone. Once installed, the site can be revegetated to maintain the environmental benefits of the area. 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. Finding: The applicant cannot install a compliant septic system on the property without a variance. 2 c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The property is located in an older subdivision and the existing structure does not conform to the current zoning code. The parcel is significantly smaller than the minimum size required for riparian lots zoned RSF. The lot’s substandard size and pre- existing house placement means that a two-car garage cannot be situated on the lot without a variance. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The property is located in a large lot residential subdivision. The proposed construction of a septic system in the Bluff Creek primary zone and within the bluff setback will not alter the essential character of the locality and will provide a working septic system. 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 does not apply to this request. 5. The planning report #2019-12, dated September 17, 2019, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. DECISION The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance from the bluff setback and encroachment in to the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, as applicable. An engineer-designed plan is required to divert the existing drainage ravine that would be impacted by the proposed SSTS. 2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system. 3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for an SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil). 4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval. 3 5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree removal should be required. All trees 6” and larger in and around the construction area shall be shown. Replacement planting will be required in areas cleared outside of the septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved by the city. 6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the construction area.” ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of September, 2019. CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: Steven Weick, Chairman g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-12 1181 homestead lane var\findings of fact and decision 1181 homestead ln (approval).docx COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT IlkPlanningDivision— 7700 Market Boulevard CITY OFCHANIIASSENMailingAddress—P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952)227-1300/Fax: (952) 227-1110 1 APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Submittal Date: [ , ( l(.r 1 ( 9e`)PC Dat ' I I I gCC Date ` I-)3 1 1 60-Day Review Date: ! ' t k`S.- I, n Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply) Refer to the appropriate Application Checklist for required submittal information that must accompany this application) Comprehensive Plan Amendment 600 El Subdivision (SUB) El Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers $100 El Create 3 lots or less 300 Create over 3 lots 600 + $15 per lot Conditional Use Permit (CUP) lots) Single-Family Residence 325 El Metes & Bounds (2 lots) 300 All Others 425 Consolidate Lots 150 ElInterim Use Permit(IUP) CI Lot Line Adjustment 150 El In conjunction with Single-Family Residence..$325 Final Plat 700 Includes $450 escrow for attorney costs)* 425AllOthers Additional escrow may be required for other applications through the development contract. Rezoning (REZ) Planned Unit Development (PUD) 750 El Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way(VAC) $300 Minor Amendment to existing PUD 100 Additional recording fees may apply) El All Others 500 El Variance(VAR)200 Sign Plan Review 150 El Wetland Alteration Permit(WAP) Site Plan Review(SPR) Single-Family Residence 150 Administrative 100 All Others 275 Commercial/Industrial Districts* 500 Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area: El Zoning Appeal 100 thousand square feet) Include number of existing employees: CI Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) 500 Include number of new employees: Residential Districts 500 NOTE: When multiple applications are processed concurrently, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. Plus$5 per dwelling unit (units) 18 Notification Sign (City to install and remove) 200 Property Owners' List within 500' (City to generate after pre-application meeting) 3 per address y addresses) Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that apply) 50 per document Conditional Use Permit Interim Use Permit Site Plan Agreement ElVacation 6 Variance Wetland Alteration Permit Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) Easements ( easements) El Deeds TOTAL FEE: Section 2: Required Information Description of Proposal: Asking to alloy m right to the edge of the e.a ement Eas eet on w- ..' . . ..- .. r.• : _ e . ture. Property Address or Location: 1181 Homestead Lane Parcel#: 10 Legal Description: Section 26 Township 116 Range 023 Total Acreage: 2.5 Wetlands Present? Yes No Present Zoning: Mixed Low Density Residential District(I Requested Zoning: Not Applicable Present Land Use Designation: Residential Low Density Requested Land Use Designation: Not Applicable Existing Use of Property: Single family home Check box if separate narrative is attached. Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant Information APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, 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. If 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 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: Contact: Address: Phone: City/State/Zip: Cell: Email: Fax: Signature:Date: PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, 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: John Jensen Contact: Address: 1181 Homestead Lane Phone: 612-790-3614 City/State/Zip: Chanhassen, MN 55317 Cell: 612- 790-3614 Email: jjensenii2@msn.com Fax: Signature:Date: 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 Application Checklist 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. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. PROJECT ENGINEER(if applicable) Name: Contact: Address: Phone: City/State/Zip: Cell: Email: Fax: Section 4: Notification Information Who should receive copies of staff reports? Other Contact Information: El Property Owner Via: 0 Email Mailed Paper Copy Name: El Applicant Via: Email El Mailed Paper Copy Address: El Engineer Via: Email El Mailed Paper Copy City/State/Zip: El Other* Via: El Email Mailed Paper Copy Email: INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select yt..rORIV to save a copy to your I device. and deliver to city along with required documents and payment. SUBMIT ;to send a digital copy to the city for processing. SAVE FORM PRINT FORM SUBMIT FORM f\-) Variance Request 1181 Homestead Lane 1. The septic system at 1181 homestead was found to be failing during an inspection of the property.The septic system needs to be replaced because there are no available sewer lines. 2. A Variance is being requested to put the septic system at the bottom of the bluff. Any septic system that is installed within 50 feet of the bluff with 25%grade requires a variance. Because of an easement on the property extending 75 feet into the property,the septic system has to be installed closer to the bluff. 3. This placement of the septic system at the bottom of the bluff is the optimal placement a. Installing the septic system at the top of the bluff would also require a variance b. This will be an optimal place as it will allow for ease of connection to a future sewer system.There is sewer pipe along the property, but it is not currently connected to the city sewer system.This will be a future development. c. Moving the entire system to the front yard would also be problematic as there is not enough workable space to install a system. d. The easement of 75 feet, does not allow for the septic system to be installed further away from the bluff. e. The septic system when installed will still be 75 feet from the property line due to the easement. f. Several properties along Homestead lane have Septic systems at the bottom of the bluff, however they have additional flat land and may not have needed a variance. IIMMINIMIM I 00 ac 111 2 N" [ / , ,. /..,.. v..„../''7. -_ _.------ _ -- t f s„,,,,,_, i , i ds 11111 s' ti 7 f 1:'-- t Px til Ik/ ZE tilt y w.. I . t , r CIV r j y I.--,F P. 4 f . Ill—r C Q d 1 Nr A flk ii , ilk C ---7---)1 ti s ,7,'..."CZ. . . , s, tk, ; fil. 11110., 1 ZA) 1- ;{ .c._ • 1> f r, i 7. 44444‘ 4 ' •Cah emsodoompe N_, t..- 113 ) I 97- 7/7 I ,• etirn _...._ 41 \ t' • - ,I 1 ac,.._. i /• /0... IIll* IZ,- k i 0 L,4, t I k kvii1 i1ol ..,. .4 t. . ..._:____ I1 1 N.„, m i; 7.-: t 0- 1r, I14N f ii i -:_..... iz. ite- I. . 1 ICI Ai .1 I IR 1- 411 4 ri• 1... . . - , ? t.1 4 i 4i 0.51 1 fii , 10,..... , . , ;•,,,.:, r-- 4 ti L • ..' -_ ,.:, -.,./,-- • 4. trtt •'*:-'---.1...' -' ---:-... _______, 4z .&.. P. / oixasA- /ago - Aasz. is 1 1, 7:S7 N.,... s....L., ...... m. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-12 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, September 17, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for a variance to replace and move a septic system to the bottom of the bluff at 1181 Homestead Lane. Zoned Rural Residential (RR). Owner: John Jensen. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review on the city’s web site at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/2019-12 or at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. MacKenzie Young-Walters Associate Planner Email: mwalters@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Phone: 952-227-1132 Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on September 5, 2019) g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-12 1181 homestead lane var\ph notice to villager.docx CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 2019 Chairman Weick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Weick, Mark Undestad, Mark Randall, Michael McGonagill, Doug Reeder, and Laura Skistad MEMBERS ABSENT: John Tietz STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner Weick: Welcome to everybody here and watching. For the record we do have a quorum this evening with Commissioners Undestad, McGonagill, Skistad, Reeder and Randall. Thank you for coming this evening. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO REPLACE AND MOVE A SEPTIC SYSTEM TO THE BOTTOM OF THE BLUFF AT 1181 HOMESTEAD LANE. Weick: Tonight we do have a single case. I do not have the number in front of me so Bob I’ll let you say that when you introduce the item and with that I will turn it over to Mr. Generous. Generous: Thank you Chairman, commissioners. Planning Case 2019-12 is a variance request for a bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone. There’s a secondary variance that you’re not reviewing is from Chapter 19 of the City Ordinance. It’s a sub-surface sewage treatment system ordinance which requires setbacks from bluffs also. The property is located at 1181 Homestead Lane. The property backs up to Powers Boulevard and accessed via Homestead Lane. There’s a significant hill on the back of this property. It’s zoned Rural Residential. Minimum lot sizes are 2 ½ acres. 50 foot front and rear setbacks and 10 foot side yard setbacks. This property has 2 ½ acre on it so it is fairly large. Part of the issues with the property is that there’s a bluff on the property. The rear of the property is located within the Bluff Creek primary zone and there’s a drainage swale on the south side of this property that runs down the hill that staff was concerned about. This is the area of the bluff on the property. The applicant is proposing to replace a failing septic system which is located back here I believe and run the line down and have some tanks and then some drain fields. However this whole area on the, from the top of the slope down is in the primary zone. Another constraint on the property is the right-of-way for Powers Boulevard is 75 feet into the property so all this is actually road right-of-way. The drain field sites are here and here and the tanks are there. The Bluff Creek primary zone requires that the area be preserved as permanent open space and so no development is supposed to take place in that. Again the applicant is proposing to put their septic system within the primary zone. Be approximately here on the property. And also the drain fields Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 2 would be right at the bottom of the toe of the slope. Under our ordinance there’s a 40 foot structure setback. Under Chapter 19 requirements there’s a 20 foot for the drain field and 50 feet for the tanks themselves. Again the applicant is proposing to place a septic system within the Bluff Creek primary zone and within the bluff setback. Their existing system is failing. They need to replace it. Again they have the easement on the bottom. And this gets into what staff is proposing that we do believe there are alternatives but they say that it would be problematic and it's not enough workable space to install the system in the front yard. They’ve noted several homes along Homestead Lane have septic systems at the bottom of the bluff. I checked the city records. I couldn’t find any on, that back up to Powers Boulevard. There are some on Pioneer Trail that have some but they have a larger landing area. A flat area at the bottom of the hill so all the other ones that I found are within 50 or 60 feet of the house so at the top of the bluff. Staff’s assessment is based on the required separations from the structures and the well that there is an area within the front yard of the property up on top of the bluff outside of the primary zone that they could potentially put in a septic system. It meets the 10 foot structure setback on this side and it’s out of the primary zone and out of the bluff area so staff believes that they could do it. If their concern is about the compaction of the soil there are additional Type 3 systems that can be used to provide septic treatment and so we believe absent of them providing additional information that they can comply with city ordinance. Therefore staff is recommending denial of the variance request and adoption of the Findings of Fact and direct the applicant to submit plans in conformance with the city code requirements. I should note that I did provide an email that we received from Commissioner Tietz. He concurs with staff’s recommendation. With that I’d be happy to answer any questions. Weick: I will open kind of questions are over or points of clarification. The issue with putting the septic system in a proposed location is that because it’s in the bluff zone you’re not supposed to put any type of structure in that area? It’s not because it’s specific to a septic system right? Generous: Correct. It would be any structure would need to be out of the primary zone and 40 feet away from the, any the toe of the bluff. Weick: So if it were a shed or anything. Generous: Or a house or anything else. A garage. Weick: I just wanted to be sure that it wasn’t something specific to a septic code or anything like that. Generous: No, well they have their own design requirements that this is a variance from but it’s not, we’re looking from the zoning standpoint about permitting it in an area that’s supposed to remain permanent open space. Weick: That was my question. Commissioners can certainly just jump in. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 3 McGonagill: One clarification Bob just so myself and people listening, back up what is the primary zone so people know. We use that term. It’s defined. It’s application. Why it’s there. Maybe go to the map and kind of talk through it and say this is what it’s there for just so we kind of know. Thank you. Generous: I don’t have a good map on it. The primary zone is any lands that contribute to the watershed of the Bluff Creek creek. Bluff Creek. And it’s lands that any development or alteration may have a detrimental impact to the water quality going in that and so the City has adopted an ordinance to preserve that whole corridor as permanent open space to help improve as, for habitat. For water quality issues. And as a community amenity. It runs two-thirds of the length of the city from 41, north of Highway 5 all the way down to the Minnesota River Valley and so it’s an amenity in our community that we want to preserve and protect. McGonagill: And that corridor, the primary zone was designated by the City and not so much by Minnesota water quality or another state agency? Generous: No it was a study that the City did in the early 90’s and then we adopted an ordinance to protect it and implement that study and the preservation. We’re trying to create a link system so eventually we will see a trail system that goes from the headwaters of Bluff Creek all the way down to the Minnesota River valley. McGonagill: Okay thanks Bob. I don’t have no more questions. Undestad: I’ve got a question for you. The proposed septic down at the bottom I noticed that was a drain field. Or is that a mound, two mound system or is that a drain, just drain fields? Generous: Those would be I believe they are mound type structures. Undestad: Are they? And is that what the staff looked at for up by the house? The mound structure. Generous: Yes. That would be the Type 3 system that they’d have to do because, well their contention I believe is that it’s compacted up there and had been altered and so they can’t meet the minimum requirements for the septic system. Undestad: Okay. Skistad: The creek is on the other side of Powers, is that correct? Generous: Correct. Skistad: So what do we do about the runoff on Powers? Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 4 Generous: That is treated in the stormwater systems before it goes into that. That’s the one thing we exempt from our ordinance is public facilities because we have to provide transportation for the community. Skistad: So how far is the distance, what’s the distance between Powers and the creek? Generous: Well it’s, there’s wetlands adjacent to the, just across Powers Boulevard. As a matter when they were building Powers Boulevard they had to surcharge this area because the road sank. Or the underlayment of the road sank because of the wetlands that were contingent, or next to that. Skistad: And so to answer my question though how far is it from Powers? Generous: To the creek? Skistad: To the creek, yeah. Generous: It’s a couple hundred feet maybe. Skistad: Okay, thank you. Generous: It runs, I wish I would have brought a bigger map. It runs diagonally across the land, across the street and it’s about at the corner of Powers and Pioneer where it goes underneath Pioneer and continues to the south. Weick: Any follow up? Skistad: I guess my other question would be if you move, if you have it in a septic near the well I mean to me that would be a concern as a homeowner. I wouldn’t want my septic right next to my well. Generous: And under Minnesota Chapter 7080 is the standard that they have. That’s the minimum separation between your well and your septic drain fields. McGonagill: So it’d meet that code? Generous: Yes. That’s what they tried to show here. The well is located on the east side of the house and so they did a radius out from that. McGonagill: Let me ask, the 50 foot radius so it’s beyond that. Generous: So it would be beyond that. It would be this area that would comply with the standard. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 5 McGonagill: Okay thank you. If you kept going beyond the other side of the garage Bob, could that? There. Can that be done? Used? Generous: Theoretically yes. It’s a longer system. McGonagill: Right but it could be used. Generous: I would think so yeah, if it meets. You’d have a 10 foot setback from the structure but then this area becomes usable. McGonagill: Okay thanks. So there’s options. Right or left of the driveway. Or even yes it’s a farther line. You have gravity feed at the south but, okay I understand now thank you. Skistad: Can I ask one more question? What is that green dotted line that goes into the, yeah right there. Generous: Well this is a drainage area. Swale. A ravine that runs down the hill and I believe this is what, a 25 percent slope edge and this is a 20 or it could be vice versa. That’s a 20 and that’s 25 percent. But this is one thing that the Carver County pointed out to us. There was concern about this running down the hill and washing out those drain systems at the bottom. McGonagill: Yeah. Skistad: And then the red line, the red dotted line that’s the? Generous: That’s again it’s a slope designation. It shows where the, I believe it’s a 25 percent. Skistad: That’s just the, okay that’s just the grade. Okay. Dale Denn: If I can chime in. I believe the yellow was the 25 which is your bluff and then the other one’s a 20. Generous: 20 yeah. Dale Denn: I think the ordinance here we can’t site a drain field on that much of a grade. Generous: Or within 20 feet of it or something like that. 50 feet of it. Skistad: So is there only one, like the first, the first mound or whatever that is, is that the only one that’s an issue essentially? Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 6 Generous: Well both of these are. They don’t meet, well one they’re both, all this is within the Bluff Creek primary zone and this doesn’t meet the standard for the septic drain fields. So they’re requesting a variance from the setback from the bottom of that slope, whether it’s 20 percent or 25 percent. McGonagill: Bob can you go back to the larger. Point out where the existing field is just so I know. Generous: I believe it’s right behind the house. Dale Denn: Yeah the existing is the trenches. There’s like 4 or 5 of them and they’re banged right in the bluff below the house. Weick: Let’s just, if we could hold that thought yeah because you’re not at the microphone. It’s real hard to get you on the record but we will get you on the record. So if you have questions. That’s okay. McGonagill: Thank you, that’s all I have. Weick: Anything else for the City? On this. Okay, thank you Mr. Generous. Then I’d be glad to invite the applicant to join us and give a presentation. John Jensen: I’m in. I’m John Jensen. Weick: Welcome. John Jensen: So what we could do, what I would like to is actually start by going back to the diagram that we have with the well. McGonagill: That one? John Jensen: Yes. And so when I provided this document I provided the original survey to the surveyor and what wasn’t realized that there had been an addition after the original survey and so even though it shows that right under the house, which is where it is essentially, it’s actually 10 feet further in the direction towards the garage. So yeah it’s out that way an additional 10 feet so that does take up more of that space and also I have some other things I’m going to show you that relate to this whole area and why it would be a problem and then we can talk about you know too why it’s good down in the other area. So another thing is you mentioned on the other side of the garage. Towards the street. Generous: I switched it to your’s. It might be easier for you to work off of. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 7 John Jensen: Oh no that’s not mine. Can you make it bigger? Okay I’ve got to move things. Okay there we go. Alright there’s a hill here. Pretty substantial hill. You know so you definitely would have difficulty putting it in that area because of the hill. So, and also another thing that I will get to in a minute too is water. I have a lot of water that comes, I don’t know if it comes off the street or where it comes from but I get a lot of water in this area and it actually comes along the garage and goes back and goes down into this ravine. So and in fact I think right now I have a couple puddles sitting there right now. They usually go away in a little while but all the rain lately it’s kind of made it a little more difficult. And also this is another area that I just want to make sure we were in consideration. This is where an old driveway was and it’s just really dug up and would really be a problematic area, plus it is also a very hilly area. And then also in this area I didn’t designate any trees but there are a lot of substantial trees in that area so I know my neighbor would not be happy about me taking out any of these trees because in fact he even said to me because of the old driveway he’s like I’m happy that that old driveway’s not there because it affords me more privacy so I know he would not be happy taking out trees. So what I do want to go back to is, I drew a line here and this is not exact but it does give you a better idea of where approximately that well line would be and then also I have a big blue line. This is my neighbor’s yard and he has a septic system in the front of his yard and he, his house is a little bit higher than mine and the septic system actually creates like a valley in his yard so all the water when it rains hard comes towards my yard. And so what happens here is I really have a drain area. I mean I cannot do pretty much anything at this point except for just, I don’t know if you can see this but this is running all the way across my yard. All this area. It’s like a thick stream running across the yard and that would, if we were to put a mound up there it’s going to exacerbate the situation, possibly make it even worst and I don’t know what kind of issue that would create with the mound since they’re saying that you know water going into it would not be good but this is a lot more than you get at the hill because it absorbs in the hill but this is just, like I said it’s a lot. So one last thing. I’m not sure how relevant this is but there is an electrical cable line running from the house that does run under this area also. And I think, and so that’s pretty much why you know all my indications as to why we shouldn’t put it at the top because there’s just, there’s no room and anything that’s you know anywhere it’s going to go it’s going to create problems. They did do some measurements as to how much space it would take up and they came up with 1,600 feet and I think that was just the sand and rock. Yeah it doesn’t include the additional 3 structures which is approximately another thousand square feet so we would have to figure out where those would go too up at the top because they couldn’t go right there so they would have to be moved somewhere else. As far as the bottom, why is it a good area? It’s a good area because it is a natural undisturbed soil that will absorb easily. Also another thing that the City mentioned, they’re like okay well what about big trees. There are no big trees in the proposed area. All the big trees are outside of that area and then on the side of Powers Street the only thing that’s pretty much there is buckthorn and we would be getting a lot of rid of a lot of that invasive buckthorn when we’re doing this because that is you know not something that helps anything. Also one other thing I’d like to point out that there is a sewer line down below. I don’t know if you can see this but you can see that there’s a sewer line. Unfortunately that sewer line is not currently connected to the city otherwise I’d be like okay let’s just connect there but it’s not connected but it’s there for future use. So and one last item I would like to mention is Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 8 that the City opposes this, or the Planning Commission opposes this but they, the City is also building a road just on the other side of my neighbor’s property. And that will be very close to the Bluff Creek zone too so I’m not sure why they’re opposed to mine but they’re okay with a road so with that I would like to give it to the guy who would like to put the septic system, unless you guys have questions of me. Weick: They might. John Jensen: I can come back. Weick: Yeah let’s just listen all the way through. John Jensen: Okay. Weick: If that’s okay. Okay. Dale Denn: My name’s Dale Denn with the Homestead Septic. I’m the owner/operator. 1108 Goldenrod Lane, Shakopee. Weick: Welcome. Dale Denn: Thanks. So I’ve been, this is my second time out on this property. Actually about 3 years ago with the current owner. Previous owner. I was out here working with them a little bit also trying to get a system put in so I think some of my point of view in the general, and if I step over here I can still here. Can this turn? Weick: Sure. Dale Denn: So I sent in, I didn’t bring them but I took some aerial photos too a couple, 2-3 years. Maybe 3 years ago when this previous homeowner was there and he was a contractor and I don’t, do you have a copy John? John Jensen: No I don’t. Dale Denn: But if you, so first off this regards soil and siting. One of the reasons why I’m staying away from this area, if we looked at an aerial photo from 3 years ago it shows a contractor yard. He had a lot of stuff out here and when I was out there when he was there a lot of this was, I mean I can’t remember what it was. The aerial photo shows a whole lot of stuff but I think a lot of this was cut with some Class V. There was stuff here. There was a whole bunch of stuff here. Pallets. Weick: Can you pull that into the, I think you’re referencing an area that we can’t quite see. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 9 Dale Denn: Oh okay. Weick: It just really helps. Yeah yeah yeah. So you’re talking about the City’s proposed area for the septic? Dale Denn: Yeah. Weick: Okay. Dale Denn: Right. So all around this garage, this is all contractor stuff. And if you look at the aerial you see it’s kind of white and hazy too which from my understanding of an aerial photo shows some kind of harder surface. So that’s the first issue there when we come out as designer looking at a general area to go to. And so these soils would be considered compacted. Cut. Fill soils. And then the State Code always directs us to try to find the best soils for longevity of the system which is Type 1 soils. Now and I do beg to differ a little bit on the square footage. So John has a 5 bedroom home and so this is a mound septic system and the reason there’s two zones down below is because I couldn’t get it set on a contour so I have to split the mound into two components so it’s basically two little mini mounds with a common feed inbetween because mounds are pressurized also. And so one other thing, speaking of that, so if this mound is up here you have to bear in mind that a 2 inch pump line has to come up to pressurize the mound or whatever type of system it is because it’s higher than the tanks which come out the back so his tanks right now are actually right here. That is the approximate area of the existing septic tank and now his gravity’s down the hill and feeds all the trenches. So if we were looking at coming up here, well this is where the sewer come out so then we’d have new septic tanks which number one are impossible to get back there so they would actually, so this is some more design parameters. They would have to be a poly type plastic tank which if we absolutely have to use them we do but there’s a lot of issues with the poly tank when you pump them out. If you’ve got ground water they tend to want to come out of the ground. They collapse. It’s a product and it’s registered but the uses are not what we usually want to try to use. But then pump tanks would have to be out here as well and so then a pump line is going to have to come somewhere all the way up to this, if it was a mound up here someplace. So you have to bear that in mind so that would be a 2 inch line that’s going to have to come. There’s hardly any room over here but a 2 inch pump line’s going to have to come all the way up to charge up whatever type of septic system it is. So that’s something to also consider. So now back to the square footage. So he has a 5 bedroom house. The rock bed for a mound is 10 by 63 feet. That’s just the rock bed area. So if this was all one mound where it says rock these dimensions would be 10 by 63 and that’s where your lateral’s go and that’s where we have to run the pump line to to charge that area. Now the absorption area is another, at a minimum 16 to 20 feet below the rock and that’s just the absorption area so the absorption area, I did some math here, is almost 2,400 square feet. Just for the absorption area. Now the mound is going to have the wings, the dikes we call them, which are about 15 feet on the sides and then we have to finish a mound at a 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 finish so the down slope dike generally on a slope would carry another 10 feet past the absorption area so the short of that is, the footprint for this mound is almost 50 by 100. So if I needed an area to Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 10 finish it down to grade, all the side slopes for a 5 bedroom on somewhat of a, say a 5-6 percent slope, it’s going to be just about 50 by 100. Because we don’t want to build them real steep on the sides so we have to finish them off at a 3 to 1or 4 to 1. So you’re pushing really easily 4,000- 4,500 square feet. I can tell you that on a 12 percent slope the dike carries over 50 feet just to catch up on that 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 finish. So down here below the hill is what we would call a toe slope. It’s a very dramatic bluff to a toe. The slopes down here I believe are only about 8 percent where these are sited right now. So that’s just a nice number. That’s pretty common so that’s a generous slope. Very workable. Again the reason it’s split into is because, and here’s another issue up here. The whole length of the rock bed has to be set on the contour at the same elevation from end to end so it can’t twist against the contours and so we have to, with our laser we have to ride contours fairly tight. And to be honest with you I think a lot of this area was cut because it’s pretty level. I don’t even think these contours represent what this past homeowner did because it’s pretty flat and then just, so and another thing this slope here is concaved. This is called a swale. It’s very difficult for us to, the code actually has restrictions on, there’s some math involved that it’s not a good idea to set a mound in a swale like this because the water tends to want to run together and so it’s not going linear down to absorb like it should so that’s another design issue. Honestly I think that berm actually was probably, I think it is a berm. I think some of that might even be man made up there now I’m not sure but that is a pretty dramatic berm. But keeping in mind if we were to scale that out we’d have to have about a 50 by 100 box that is outside of the easements yet so that’s a pretty good area to site a 5 bedroom mound. And as far as the environmental aspect it is a mound septic you know and the research on them is they’re like the best thing going as far as treating the effluent and recycling it and you know putting it back into the water system so there’s really no environmental threat whatsoever from the mound just to make mention of that. And again the State Code would push us as a designer to find the most suitable soils on the property. Generally even if we, a homeowner wanted to take me and say I want my system over here and it’s bad soils and we have some virgin soils down here, the County’s not going to let me appease the homeowner and say we can just bang in a Type 3 over here. A Type 3 system is your non-standard system for compacted soils. Cut and fill. What those are, those are very high risk systems and there is a place for them when there’s absolutely no other options to install a standard septic so we always lean on the side of standard because the first soils, if we were to do something in fill soil most of the time we’d have to add the pre- treatment component to clean it up and that’s an aerobic type of system that’s on the front end of a system so it’s a lot more bells and whistles. It takes management and bacteria checks and monitoring and that goes on for the life of the system so these ain’t something that we as a designer just try to go and sell because it’s, there’s a lot of associated costs with them and they’re pretty high risk. What you have to keep in mind is in that footprint of the mound in the absorption area, if it’s a 5 bedroom house that’s 750 gallons per day per potential use. If we do the math on that over a year’s time just to give you some idea, that’s a column of water almost I think roughly about 18 feet deep that has to go through every square foot of that area so we’re putting a lot of, and that’s dirty water so that’s putting a lot of water through that footprint. That’s why we like to have our best soils for structure and for the perc test and everything going through. And also treatment. Whenever you remove the topsoil you’re taking the biological component out of the treatment and then it’s just trying to pressure it through without any Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 11 biological treatment and that’s usually why we’re going to add the pre-treatment is to kill off some of the bacteria ahead of time. So that’s another drawback. We can say yes there’s soils there but soils to us is the organic component and then your nice viable sub-soils. Not just cut and fill soils. So going down below from an install point of view, from a designer’s point of view there are good soils. The water tables are down over 3 feet. I could actually do a different design but for sake of room and stuff like that the mound is the best option down there so, but what that is, that is a split mound that will just be built as one unit and then there’s a pump line that’s going to go over and still has to pressurize those so our take, everything with gravity down piece of cake. And then we’d have our tanks and it is true that the swale does come down but if you were to walk out here and look it really delta’s out down there so it’s not the ravine like it is up here. It’s just kind of a flat area with a little bit of a, you can kind of see where the water’s going but that’s next to the mound but it’s, it’s really not a threat in my opinion. I’ve been at this quite a while because it’s, the water there is kind of feathering out and losing it’s force and there probably is some pretty easy ways to modify that a little bit with some rip rap and some fabric to even improve that area and catch some of the sediment that is coming down the hill. But as far as erosion and impacting the mound I just really don’t see that happening from my experience and that could be modified and pushed over a little bit because it’s just simply discharging out into the ditch there so that could be moved. There’s no trees that would come out. It’s just a little bit of forcing it to go mostly straight west. It kind of turns and it goes a little bit northwest when it wraps around, when it wraps around the tank. It’s kind of going just about like that. So that could be almost just pushed straight down. I think I covered most of my, oh. I guess one more point. So constructability, it’s true that it does butt right up to the bluff and it’s pretty dramatic where it goes up so keep in mind after we actually would put this mound in I, in my opinion it’s actually going to stabilize the bluff because if you try to visualize this being the bluff, it’s pretty sharp and then the mound is right here. The mound’s going to be up and on the top side of the mound, which ordinarily would go down, that can literally be filled in with some additional sand and so from the crest of the mound, which we usually would go down and then there would be a swale, on the up slope side we don’t get any credit for absorption so we can literally fill that in so from the peak of the mound it would just go right uphill on an angle and then just blend right into the bluff. As a matter of fact there’s a lot of times on new construction, when it’s on some steeper slopes I will park the mound at the minimum 20 feet to a house and they always ask me why is, you know why do you want to put that thing right next to my house for and then I explain to them the same situation. They’re going to be coming down a slope. We put the mound in which would have the valley but we fill it and it just plateaus right off the lawn and then goes down on the 4 to 1 and you can’t even tell it’s there. And that would be the same situation down here. Not that it’s, not that we’re concerned about aesthetics but that’s just going to blend up against the hill and all that mound sand and the soil and everything is really just going to, instead of having it a real sharp demarcation it’s just going to be more gradual as it goes over the mound. Yeah that’s just kind of my general overview from a design standpoint. And again if I had the aerial photos here though you would see that this was a pretty busy contractor yard so to be honest with you I didn’t even do soils here but when I was out there 3 years ago it’s like no this just, I mean it was, it was a construction yard. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 12 John Jensen: …do you have your picture of the lot? Dale Denn: Going back to the 2000. John Jensen: The one that you were using. I think that one’s a little bit older one. Dale Denn: 16. Generous: I believe Mr. Chairman there is an attempt…and it should be in your’s too. It’s one of the attachments. Dale Denn: It would be nice to take a peak at that if somebody has it and I apologize for not bringing it. I assumed it was in a packet. Weick: Thanks Bob. Dale Denn: So yeah it’s still a little small but you can see the lighter area, all this stuff. Stuff was over here. Weick: So we’re looking at the garage there? Dale Denn: Yeah around the garage. Weick: Okay. Dale Denn: Yep. McGonagill: Put that picture up so we can see the bottom of the slope. Dale Denn: Up this way? McGonagill: Yes that’s correct. Keep going. Thank you. Shows where your mounds are going. Dale Denn: That’s not the oldest one though because that road, because the one I have the driveway still goes, the driveway goes through here and I can tell you the one I have is a lot busier than this one. I think he started down sizing here at this point. But I truly I have another one that, where the road goes straight and it’s a lot busier than this one here. McGonagill: Can I ask a quick question? Weick: Do you have any other, anything else to your statement? If not we can certainly open it up for questions if that’s okay. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 13 Dale Denn: I don’t think I do. I think I covered most of my. Weick: Okay Commissioner McGonagill, please. McGonagill: Thank you. At the bottom of where you’re proposing to put the two mounds, and if you, okay slide it to the right where I can see. The other way. I’m sorry to my right. This way. There you go. Sorry. When I look at the gradient there at the, so right below the yellow area where the sand and rock is you’re right at like 170 contour. Just for example. The height of the mound off that contour, how much higher than that contour would the mound be? If you did what you were talking about. Dale Denn: Yeah. In the center of the rock bed would be the highest point of the mound from grade starting with 12 inches of sand in that slope. It would be up about 3 ½ feet. McGonagill: And the same for the other one? Same for the other one? Dale Denn: Yeah. Yeah the slopes are pretty much the same. McGonagill: Thank you. Dale Denn: Sure. McGonagill: It just gave me an idea of mass. Weick: Lots to process here and I know we are not, well some of us aren’t septic experts. Undestad: I’ve got a question. John Jensen: I have one more comment if you don’t mind. Real quick. Weick: Yeah. John Jensen: So I had a whole bunch of notes before and I didn’t look at them while I was talking up here and I did want to bring up a couple things and one, both of them actually are related the area up above where the City was talking about putting the septic system. So this ravine is pretty steep and it’s been wearing away and at some point I’m going to need to reinforce it. I’m going to need to do something and if there’s a mound system in there it’s going to be incredibly difficult to get stuff in there and reinforce it or take care of it because it, you know it just, I won’t be able to get by the mound system because you can’t drive on it once it’s there. So that’s one option. And the other thing I did want to bring up something that Laura brought up, and I thought about too is that while 50 feet is the minimum for the septic system it would still be practically right on top of the well. I mean that would be close if you put it right up there. And I don’t think any of my neighbors have their’s that close. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 14 Weick: Okay thank you. John Jensen: Yep. Undestad: Question for you so you did perc tests down on the lower side. Did you do any perc tests anywhere else? Dale Denn: Yeah. Initially I was on the bluff trying to site something where the old drain fields were which is an almost impossible for a mound build. It’s almost impossible to get materials in on that top part of the bluff because he has no room along the side of the house. It’s just wide enough for a Bobcat. That’s another, but I was on the bluff and Erick was actually out. We did soils but it’s a tough area to work. Undestad: I was just going to ask, would you be able to locate the existing drain field now? Dale Denn: I can pretty much. So they’re coming down, they’re probably, they’re on the, they’re relatively on these contours so right now they are on these right and they go all the way over. There’s about 4 runs. They’re trenches so they’ll follow the contour pretty close so they’re, I’d say they’re just on the shoulder so I’d say they’re right, right in this area. So they go into the yellow. They’re pretty long. They actually start about 10 feet from this very sharp ravine right now. The trenches and obviously there hasn’t been any impact either. Erosion but these trenches are failing. It technically it shouldn’t be trenches because there is a seasonal water table there and right now there’s, they’re having some issues as far as performance and they don’t meet the soil separation there for trenches. So if I was to work there, and I’ve been through a couple different proposals. But it’s dramatic. It would be trying to do an above ground system there. Another option is an at grade system. It’s we start on top of the soil but we don’t have to have the sand but it’s just very difficult getting materials in to that, apart from coming up the hill. And I mean I was trying to pull the rabbit out of the hat and if that was our last spot to go we could come up with something but it was getting to be unfeasible with the soils and the workability. And plus it’s, I think it’s right in the bluff. It’s still a bluff, some of it. Undestad: But if you looked at, if you were able to put one between, where the old drain field is and then up towards the house, then you’d kind of be building a better back yard for them too wouldn’t you with your? Dale Denn: Yeah the only thing though that’s the slopes there, well see there’s some limits on the mounds. I think we’re limited to 18 percent slope to build them on per code. Trenches we can go up to 25 but, for a mound I believe the limit’s 18. And at grade I was, I was exploring an at grade. Laying out an at grade and at grade I can go up to 25 percent but the slopes there, they always look better on this map but they’re kind of, see on the back side of the house the slopes here start working against me so if I was to try to lay out an at grade, an at grade, a single at grade for this house would have to be 180 feet long. They’re only 10 feet wide but they’re long Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 15 so I would still be splitting it in half but it would be, the problem was the old trenches were in and if we had other soils then we, we’re not, we’re supposed to stay off the trenches because that’s disturbed soil again. Plus the trenches would probably have to be dug out because if you’ve got 3, 2-3 feet of rock in the trenches and one foot of cover materials say for example, we don’t get any credit for the rock so we technically don’t meet the soil separation so that, all the trenches would have to be dug out and probably just filled in with some mound sand before we could even contemplate doing a new system. And then right away that’s going to push us into a Type 3 type of system. But I did because I had the luxury of the slope being like right there, almost 25, 23, 24. What I was trying to lay out in that grade but I just couldn’t dodge the trenches just because of how they were configured. So that really kind of fell apart as far as the design. I was ascertaining anything I could think of to see what we could come up with. Like I say this, I’ve been out there 3-4 years ago already. I’ve been out there quite a bit on this site. So I guess the short answer is it’s still a very difficult area and the old trenches are in there and it would push into a Type 3 and it’s very hard getting materials in, and the big trees are in that area. Undestad: So just to correct me, when you’re looking at the mount up on top you said for a 5 bedroom house with the slopes and everything if you went up top it would cover a 50 by 100 area? Dale Denn: Pretty close. The rock bed itself is 63 feet. Undestad: Okay so by 100 would be the same. Dale Denn: Oh definitely it’d be yeah. Oh yeah it’d be the same all over. Yeah because down below a hill there those rock beds are 26 feet so it’s cut in half. Undestad: Okay. Dale Denn: I’m sorry it’s 160. Undestad: 160 or 180 feet. Dale Denn: 30 something yeah. So they still equal their. McGonagill: …could go behind the house. Okay. Dale Denn: And I’m still getting cheated down there just a little bit by virtue of that 75 foot setback but the soils are pretty nice soils. They’re a nice loam soil. So you can see they’re kind of diagonal. The sand bed and the sand bed is essentially are absorption area. And to keep it within that 75 feet it’s crunching me a little bit but I’m a little wider on the other side. I’m a little narrower on the one side but from a design standpoint they are a nice, light loamy soil so they perc out really good so I probably don’t even have to have technically quite that big but as Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 16 designers if we, we always make the sand extra because that extra absorption area for the long haul is pretty cheap insurance. Skistad: When you say it’s failing is it failing, thank you. When it’s failing, when you say it’s failing is it leaking at this point? Dale Denn: I’m not so sure about leaking but it had a compliance inspection so it fails from the 36 inch soil separation rule that’s in the State Code so it’s too close to a seasonal water table. So right now the trenches, so they’re more of an environmental threat than anything because they’re too close to that seasonal water table. Skistad: Okay. Weick: How we doing down there? Questions? Randall: I don’t have any. Reeder: Is there no way to fix the existing system to make it work so it does meet this requirement? Dale Denn: Yeah not conveniently because it’s, it’s less than 3 feet of separation. On occasion if that was the only existing system, and this would be up to the local unit of government, there’s times where we would take the trenches. Design the Type 3. Put in an aerobic treatment unit that has three classes of design, A, B, C. The short of that is Class C, we need a minimum of 2 feet of separation so we can design and install at less than 3 feet for Type 3 generally with no other options so the short answer is yes there is designs that would probably be able to come back and utilize a trench. I’ve done a few. If it’s 18 inches of separation or less then we’re into a Class B type of pre-treatment which is trying to kill more bacteria. More bells and whistles. Higher risk and we can go down, just to be honest, we can go within 12 inches of the water table. Super high risk. As a designer I can say I can, I have the technology to design at 12 inches and at the end of 12 inches there wont’ be any E.coli bacteria but then of course I have to put in, implement the monitoring and the maintenance to prove that that design is going to perform to those standards so I’ve never done A. I’ve done a few C’s because I’m working with 2 feet but that still is basically pre-treatment bacteria. Lab tests. Monitoring. Maintenance. The units need to be cleaned and serviced every year so I don’t ever sell them. There is a place for them where they’re absolutely needed but I probably sold maybe 6 in my lifetime because they, when they start failing the bottom layering those aerobic unit just turns into a big, just sludge because this bio-mat layer will start forming. See what’s going on with the drain field is the effluent comes in. There’s food in there. There’s bacteria that, and that’s the other thing about the biological component of the soil being gone. The bacteria, so you’ve got to keep in mind the septic system is not a mechanical treatment. It’s really a biological treatment so the bio-mat layer essentially is just a bunch of good bacteria that are acting on all the nutrients. Utilizing Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 17 them. Taking some of the nitrates and things out so with the bio-mat layer gone up here the risk of it working environmentally is a lot less. Just to reiterate that. Reeder: So the answer is yes but you wouldn’t recommend that solution? Is that? Dale Denn: Yeah. It’s a high risk for us designers. We already, our bonds are up to $25,000 so we always got to stand behind our work and to be honest with you, John probably would not be able to hire me to do a system up here. It’s a high risk type of situation. To get 18 feet of water to go through the soil every year so number one, the water has to get into the soil and disappear. So there’s two major breakdowns in a mound. Does it take the water? Maybe there’s a water table under it or something. And I’ve got one or two of them in my 30 years and they’re a pain in the butt because they, they bleed out the toe of your mound a little bit and they’re just a pain to fix. That’s the one breakdown is it doesn’t take all the water that you give it, and there’s things we can do there. We can put timers in and regulate the flow but the other side is the environmental treatment. Is it killing off the bacteria? Is it reducing some of the nitrates and that’s where that natural soil that has some organic matter and it does the best job and it’s really a biological treatment system. Reeder: So clearly the best system you think is the one you have proposed? Dale Denn: Yeah based on those soils. As far as treating the effluent and constructability is not a, is in my eyes a piece of cake. That to me as a designer is the best for treatment because it has the best soils. And for longevity of the water going in. Keeping in mind again about 18 feet has to go through. Reeder: So is staff not agreeing with that? I mean are you saying that there is a workable, that possibly they could bring in a workable solution that you guys would approve? Generous: That’s what, we think they can. We didn’t have enough information to make that determination though so. If you look we also made an alternate motion within the packet. Reeder: I see it but I’ve learned more about sewers than I ever wanted to know. Generous: With this I’m learning a lot myself. Skistad: I have one more question. Weick: Sure, please. Skistad: So if we look at where you’re putting it up eventually, I mean it looks to me like if it goes down there maybe the next upgrade would be to go right into the city sewer system that’s plotted down there. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 18 Dale Denn: Ah yeah. I mean definitely whether or not that’s a point of debate or not but obviously the pipe is down there and he can hook up that pipe right here and just simply continue right in. Skistad: So that would be, so for me for longevity that also makes sense where you could once the city has septic that you’re already set up to feed into it. Dale Denn: That’s the part of my whole plan too. The pipe’s already in. The tanks can just be abandoned and then sure. Reeder: Is that ever something we’re going to look at? Generous: It is shown in the City’s Comprehensive Sewer Plan to provide that. We need a lift station just to the north of this area by, well there’s some office land available. I don’t know what is it, maybe a quarter mile to the north so as part of the Powers Boulevard project we did put sewer line in so we didn’t have to tear up the road again. So it’s a gravity system there. And then that lift station will serve all of southern Chanhassen actually. McGonagill: And that’s pushing it all away. Generous: Yeah and. Reeder: So that’s a lift station that we probably will build. Generous: Yes. We will build it. It’s development driven though so timing is the question. Dale Denn: And you know if that’s the case and these mounds are built, again I’m trying to get you to just visualize the finish look of the mound you know. It’s top soil. It just comes from the slope. It just kind of up and then just go up again. I mean really looking at them in this situation like I do it on the houses, you can’t even tell it’s a mound. And all that soil and everything is really going to be kind of pushing up against the bluff. I mean it’s true that we have to finish up into the bluff a little bit. I think I talked with Erick about that just to get the grade so that we you know shed a little water over the mound. But aesthetically you look from the road it’s just going to look like a little natural feature. And John is correct about the trees. We take that in mind too as designers of course. That’s the issue with down on the bluff down here. I was doing everything I could to dodge all of this, these big trees and that was getting difficult. That was another challenge I had as a designer. Down here surprisingly for some reason they’re just, they’re all just small. I don’t think there’s anything over 6 inches diameter DBH down there do, and a lot of brush and buckthorn but no major, no major trees. And we don’t, and when we come to a mound, just so you know if there was a big tree there or something we don’t dig out the stumps so we just essentially, we but them within 6 inches of grade and we just leave them intact because if we dig them out we’re disturbing the soil so it ain’t like a major construction project down there. It’s just we cut all the trees off and at that site we’re being protective of the Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 19 soils and stuff but that’s all pretty small stuff and it doesn’t take mechanical or big equipment to come in there because we always have a concern once we identify a site and you have to do some clean up, is they can’t be in there with rubber tired Bobcats and ripping and turning so that, a lot of that stuff was small so that’s pretty much going to have to come out by hand. So that’s another advantage of that area. Undestad: But all the material you’re bringing in will just come off of Powers Boulevard then? Dale Denn: Yeah. Yeah. We’ll have a little bit of a temporary road through the ditch there at the, some of the highest points but yeah we definitely got to bring some truckloads of materials in. And the tree line, there’ll still be a tree line there as far as visually from the road because where the sand is, well is this still on? Do this mound, this is the center of the rock is the high point. 3 ½-4 feet and it tapers all the way down so it’s going to finish off right at the easement and there’s some trees along here yet that don’t have to come out so I’ve got an idea over here, there’s two oaks. Actually it’s the spot where I would want to alter the swale a little bit between two large oaks is where I would come in with the trucks because I have to build most of the stuff from the top side of the mount so that I’m not driving over the absorption area with 500 passes on the skid loader. So I mean to be honest I have to have a little bit of a lane just to Bobcat width. Just getting into the bluff here a little bit so I can drive level and then place my materials from the up slope side but that’s already rolled through my mind. But again that little bit of cutting I do when the mound is finished the top soil’s going to come back over that so that’s our restoration plan and I think we had two grasses and whatever. That’s no problem either. But my thoughts would be to change the swale just a little bit. It takes about 1, 1 ½ to 2 feet of cutting at the most to just make that swale go straight. Straight east into the ditch and that would be my temporary road anyway and I’d, I probably would flatten that out because I have, to give you some idea for this system it’s pushing about 30 truckloads of product that have to come in here. And that’s the problem with trying to construct it in the back. This, he’s got a propane tank over here. There’s, I can barely get a skid loader in over here. And there’s no room to come around here because this is, this is a walkout area and I think you have a deck over here too. It’s impossible to get in. So access wise, apart from up here of course you know, this is very doable. Weick: Go ahead yeah. Skistad: Well I can understand, thank you. I can understand the City’s point of view before you came in just to speak about it but I think overall I think you’ve done your due diligence and that you want to, you want to protect that ground water table which is high on the other end which is why you want it down below where the grade is less and I think it also leads into eventually to what the City’s sewer system is going to be anyway so to me this, I think this is a very due diligence and I appreciate all of the effort that you’ve put into it to make sure that we’re protecting really our creek and our bluff by doing this. Weick: Thank you commissioner. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 20 Dale Denn: And just for the record I happen to be a soil scientist too, whether that makes any difference. That’s what my degree is in so I am kind of a tree hugger so. And I used to be in the tree business also and yes I adore trees. Big ones. Weick: Any other questions for the applicant or the applicant’s contractor? Seeing none thank you. It’s very informational. At this time I would open the public hearing portion of this item. Anyone wishing to come forward and share an opinion please do so. Welcome. Tim Bloudek: Hi thanks. My name’s Tim Bloudek. I’m at 1107 Homestead Lane, right next door to the south of the property. Weick: Okay. Tim Bloudek: I’ve lived in that property for 33 years and when they were talking about the construction site, it pretty much looked like that. Where they were describing the area to the east of the current, additional garage space the aerials may have shown, when they put Powers through behind us they took out a number of our trees as part of the project. We knew that was coming way back in the 80’s. My former neighbor was able to somehow work with the crew and they deposited lots of large trees and they drove on it a lot. There was heavy equipment up there so the comments about the construction site, it looked like that for more than 20 years so I believe when they were talking about the compaction issue up in the front area there was concern even without doing the soil testing so. That was just one of the observations as I listened to this. The other thing I learned today was this, the zoning along the backs of our properties. I’m sorry I forget. Weick: Primary bluff. Tim Bloudek: Primary yeah. Anyway I live there but I was unaware that that went through. It’s a good idea and yet I think some things need to be adjusted when a good plan is brought forward. It was interesting, I appeared before this, the council I think it was back in 1985 when I built my home. I had to get a variance because of the setbacks. It was a 10 foot side and 100 foot side and I remember a comment from Ursula Dimler who was on the council at the time, she said my house wouldn’t fit on your property. We have to be practical about this and with that being said they said, she said I move we approve and it was just, it was something that was just practical so even though we have this primary area, and it’s definitely worth protecting I think we need to be somewhat practical in our decisions. I don’t think the variance is dramatic. It makes sense. The plan that was, that I listened to. This is the first time I heard it by the way. The plan I heard sounded good. I’m not an expert. I do digital stuff. I don’t do soil stuff but it sounded good so I would just lend my support to my neighbor and thank you for listening to me. Weick: Thank you. Anyone else would like to come forward? Seeing no one else come forward I will close the public hearing portion and open this item up for commissioner discussion. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 21 Undestad: Well I’ll pipe in. Weick: Yeah please, thank you. Undestad: I did look at all the aerial history of that and it was seriously covered with just about anything at any time up there so I’m sure that would be a soils issue for the perc test. Not to say that a Type 3 system won’t go up there but a regular you know would not work up there. The location at the bottom you know I kind of, I get that too. I mean it does make the most sense down there and I think our bluff, that’s the hard part is trying to figure out the bluff protection side on there and I’m trying to look at what is, what is that going to do to the bottom of the bluff down to that toe of the heel and I don’t really see, you know I’ve seen a lot of mound systems and they just blend in and it is sod. You look at the grass when you’re all done and, so you know I guess, and there may be room right behind the house to do the same type of thing but you know I just, I don’t know if we have to go through a lot, jump through more hoops to see if will this work. Will that work and it looks like they’ve done a lot of research on the whole thing as it is but, that’s all. But I know what it looks totally different than it does in this picture for the last 15 years anyway. McGonagill: I do think the homeowner and the neighbors coming in and all the work that’s done on that, you’ve done a lot of optionality. I will say that the, you’ve come in with the best logical solution for your, for the homeowner which is what I would have done as well. My issue is, is the fact that it is in the primary zone. My other issue is the fact is yeah you are cutting in the toe of the hill and I never want to touch a toe of a hill when I used to do geotechnical work you know because that’s what gets, it’s being stabilized naturally and when you start destabilizing it with the vegetation and the rest of it yes you can put a mound in and try to bank it back but I worry about that particularly with the amount of geotechnical drop that occurs right on top of those mounds. I’m going to sit here and look at this going the amount of water that would come through it. So it, you’re messing with the toe. It is in the primary zone and our job on the commission, yes we’re here to be practical but we also are charged stewardship at a very high level of a lot of quality of life issues in the city and, which is something I take pretty seriously. I’m not a tree hugger. I build big construction projects but at the same time trees are very important. I’ve got a lot of them in my yard as well so, you know I think, I’m not a sewer expert either but I look at the room in front of the house. Yes it’s compacted. I keep asking myself the question about mounds. Mound systems up there. I understand the problem of pumping up there. I get that but while it is a difficult problem of the property that the homeowner owns, from a City standpoint I come back and say there’s a primary zone here that we’re charged to protect and I look at that as my first duty and I don’t compromise that frankly. I also look at the swale coming down off of the ravine. It will move. You know it is going to move as we know. They all do. We spent a lot of time coming through it so I wish I could, I’m not a sewer expert. I wish I could in my own mind come up with a solution here. I don’t see one but I don’t like where it’s at at the bottom of the hill. That’s just basically where I land. I think that I would, I would, I’m challenging the homeowner and the firm to say okay you’ve got, what’s the solution that’s higher Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 22 up on the hill. I don’t think anything around the bluff or in front of the house because I don’t want to mess with the primary zone. Weick: Thank you. Other thoughts. Randall: I’ll go after you. Reeder: I think he’s, they’ve convinced me that they’ve looked at a lot of options to try to solve the problem and it’s knowing nothing about sewer systems it convinced me that the system they’ve designed may be the best environmental system to take care of the treatment from this house. It’s unfortunate that it’s in the area that we’re trying to protect but he’s also convinced me that the other area has larger trees and would not be beneficial to the neighborhood or that property either so I’m pretty much convinced that we should go with the staff’s second motion that gives them certain criteria that we need to have them to prove that he’s going to do it correctly but I would go with that. Weick: You next. Randall: I feel the same way. However I think, not that I have no idea when the sewer connection’s going to happen but that might be a removal of this system when it gets hooked up and eventually we know in the future that will happen so I was convinced by it too. I just think that, especially when you brought up the point about the primary, the bluff primary area, it’s only, it’s for structures. It’s not septic only and that was kind of my thought on it too once you said that. That’s why I’m going to vote in favor of the second option with those conditions in place. Skistad: I feel like I said my piece. Weick: Okay. I will say this is, for me this is very difficult because I, you know similar to you Commissioner Reeder I don’t, I don’t have any knowledge of these systems and so I struggle to make a decision maybe because it doesn’t, you know whether it’s on a hill or are hills good or bad or we could put a Type 3 but not, you know and is that like cost prohibitive and that’s what I come back to. So I’ll take myself out of the technical discussions and I’ll say in my mind this is not, this is not a structure that’s a nice to have. Right? We’re not talking about a deck or a shed or something that someone wants to impose on a bluff area as a, what I would consider a nice to have. To me this is a must have. The current system is, needs to be replaced. To your point you know I’m convinced of that and are we burdening the homeowner with something that’s really cost prohibitive? That’s what I’m trying to weigh in my mind. I’m with you the primary bluff you know being a sacred area and I struggle with that but then I also, I’m really struggling with the burden that we would potentially be putting on the homeowner from a cost perspective. And I’m just, I don’t know what the costs are but I’m imaging that the things he was describing would be significantly, I think at some point he even said I’m not even sure he could hire me. Right? Because I’m assuming that means because of the cost that it would take to monitor the Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 23 material and to put in a Type 3 above, whatever it is. Like all that kind of stuff. I am, that’s what I’m leaning on and so I would be willing to you know, I’d be willing to vote I think in favor of a variance to assist the homeowner in this way. That’s where my head’s at. Skistad: I think the risk of failure is too with that water table being so high on the upper part. Weick: Right. Skistad: You know if that sludge goes in there that’s really a big problem. Weick: Sludge is bad right? Skistad: That’s your number two okay. Weick: Okay I gotch ya. McGonagill: Can you see, can you put up the second…? Generous: I don’t have that. It’s on the back of the staff report. McGonagill: Those are good comments commissioners and. Weick: It would be this and I don’t know if you want me to read it or not. McGonagill: No I’m just wondering I, Commissioner Randall’s suggestion I think is a good one. Weick: There’s several conditions obviously. McGonagill: I’m talking about the removal of it after it. Weick: Oh oh oh oh oh. Generous: Connection to city service. Reeder: When we put a pipe like that in would we normally require a connection within a certain amount of time or not? Generous: Commissioner Reeder it’s, the ordinance says if your structure is within 150 feet you have to connect so. Weick: The structure is the house? Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 24 Generous: The house so they wouldn’t by ordinance be required to do that. They may want to from a practical standpoint connect to it. Weick: So it doesn’t sound like we could add a condition but we could, it’s certainly in the record that we would prefer if we were to approve the variance that at the time that the city sewer became available we would certainly encourage the homeowner to connect, connect into that city sewer line. Randall: Can I ask a question? Weick: Sure. Randall: I know we’ve been educated a lot about septic systems but we never learned what the life of a septic system is. I mean is that something that this thing will in 25 years it will need to be replaced by that time? If sewer’s available will they have to connect? Weick: Could you re, yeah engage? Randall: Because that might solve the problem right there. I mean if it’s got a 25 year life by that time we’ll have to connect. Dale Denn: Yeah I’m glad I get to come back up here. The main reason why as a designer I wouldn’t design in those soils, they’re really high risk because it’s a lot of water that has to get in and I have one or two that have been leaking and they’re just a big headache and then we’re out on some farm soils and so they have a whole nother set of problems. So the longevity, it’s quite a range. I’ve been at it over 30 years. I have mounds going for over 30 years because again they’re operating on a biological principle. The thing that kills a mound is the deep pumping is important every 3 years to take out what’s called the total suspended soils so that’s the component of the sewage that doesn’t break down. Excuse me. That doesn’t break down and those are small particles so long story short they will continue to migrate into the soil and those are the physical little things that don’t break down so they start plugging up the soil pores so the most of the time when a system is starting to come up it can’t go down because all the pores and that all goes back to the soil structure and that’s why up here in this area there’s no soil structure. Structure’s like a pallet of bricks, a whole bunch of bricks sitting on a pallet that between the bricks are your pores you know so when that’s gone it’s really hard to get the water to go through that’s clean water. Now keep in mind the little bacteria which builds this dark little black bio-mat layer where the soil, where the effluent first hits the soil, that’s called bio-mat. Within that one inch or two inch, excuse me again. Properly developer bio-mat layer, most of the treatment is within 3 or 4 inches in that little layer and so if that layer’s not there the treatment disappears. But if it’s already a bad soil and it’s perking at say 50-60 minutes per inch which is slow, and then the bio-mat layer gets in there, that actually slows the water down but it slows it down for the purpose so that there’s time to treat it and to act upon it. So that water starts going slow with the bio-mat layer. That’s why we’ve got to have the soil structure intact Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 25 because if that’s gone being a soil scientist, it’s just a high risk design. So my question is then if we did do something up here and it fails you know an environmental health threat. You have a public health threat because now you have E.coli bacteria on the surface coming out of the toe of the mound because it doesn’t want to go down and I had meant to just instill that into the whole thinking process. It’s a high risk system and if it fails he’s got big issues. McGonagill: Go to the bottom and it fails. What, how will you protect the mound from being washed out from the bluff? Because you’re going to cut into the bluff. Dale Denn: Yeah that’s a good question but I don’t see on the, on that bluff itself that’s basic sheet flow, being a soil scientist, those soils are stabilized by the vegetation but they’re also, it’s a loamy soil. There’s a lot of water soaking into the bluff. You can go out there after a snow melt or heavy rain and you don’t really see channeling reversion. McGonagill: I understand you’re saying that it won’t do it but how will you protect the bluff? That’s my question. Or not the bluff, the mounds from starting to leak or wash out or. Dale Denn: Oh oh, well we can go right into straw blankets. We can seed it and put down the doubled sided straw blankets which pops that grass right up within a week it’s getting green. Towards the end of the year. McGonagill: But I saw the drawing. You have block walls and stuff, I don’t know are you building rock behind it to hold that toe? There was some rock on the, or maybe that was natural rock. Dale Denn: Oh in the drawing? McGonagill: Yes. Dale Denn: Well that rock is, that’s internal. That’s embedded within the mound. McGonagill: But this, no right here. This, back over to the other way. I’ll have to look at the contour map. I seen it on one of the maps. Undestad: And just a note that systems are inspected by the City every 3 years or required for? Generous: We require that they be inspected and pumped out. Dale Denn: Yeah that the tanks be pumped, yeah. But not inspected. Generous: Not the mounds per se. Dale Denn: Just pumped. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 26 McGonagill: So you just basically lay it in there. You’re not going to put, there’s no sort of reinforcement to it per se? Dale Denn: If I could just take a minute I could do a little cross section which really helps, not to insult anybody’s intelligence. McGonagill: No…get an exam on sewage systems we might as well get the whole 9 yards. Weick: While he’s doing that I would say in response to your question also there’s no guarantee that these homeowners will be here you know whenever. You know they can certainly sell the house and new owners. Randall: Yeah well that’s another concern too. If like right now based on their system that they have now I don’t know if they could sell their home because it has to be up to county code in order to sell so. Weick: Oh, oh yeah yeah yeah I get it. Randall: So now they’re kind of locked in. They have to do something you know. Weick: I’m with you. Randall: So yeah. McGonagill: So from the City standpoint you talk about, I’m looking at the motion. Weick: For approval. McGonagill: Yeah. When you talk about, you said you’ve asked for, you would want an erosion control plan. You want them to protect the ravine. I’m looking at point 1. To protect the ravine and then you talk about point 4, erosion control plan. What particularly are you looking to see from them in order to say yeah this is good to go? Generous: Chairman, Commissioner McGonagill, it would be like a standard erosion control plan. Where are they going to put this blanket or rows. How are they going to revegetate any slopes to show all that as part of their submittal to us. Additionally we were looking at how that ravine system will be redirected which is something you’ve already been talking about as part of your construction. You would just have to show it on a plan what you’re proposing for that. Dale Denn: And so we definitely can address all those points. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 27 McGonagill: Is there anything that they could do as part of that erosion control plan at the toe of that ravine? Because I think about this going okay if that’s the area of concern is there something new on the toe itself to help stabilize even further? Like down at the bottom of the ravine and you know what I’m thinking about because you do that sometimes. You can build a toe out. Weick: Well isn’t he going to build into it? Skistad: He’s going to. McGonagill: He’s going to cut, he’s going to cut onto the slope. I’m thinking back in here. Weick: Oh that way. McGonagill: That way. Undestad: No he won’t be back in. McGonagill: Well he’s coming through here is what he’s saying he’s going to come this way and that’s where he’s going to redirect so is that okay what, he’s going to shed the water that way. Generous: And that could be part of his design that they submit what they’re going to do to help, either slow it down or redirect. McGonagill: Or stabilize it yeah. Okay. Generous: And then yeah, our engineering staff and our surface water management people would look at it. And of course he’s been working with our building official on the whole design issue so. McGonagill: Okay. You got a drawing for me? Dale Denn: Yeah. McGonagill: Can you turn it the other way? Thank you. Dale Denn: Okay. So, so here’s the bluff and this demarcation here is pretty dramatic so the rock bed’s a few feet back. This is the absorption area. So if you look down you have rock and then you have the sand. So this is the sand so a typical mound to finish off and have this, have this valley right. But when you have such a steep slope this can all be good top soil and this can be just, just blended right in like this and then down and away it goes. And that’s almost going to happen automatically there because that bluff comes down so steep and by the time I take my Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 28 crown of the mound and come back the 10 feet I need it’s just right there. I mean there’s hardly any back slope because it’s just boom right there. McGonagill: As long as that fill is maintained you’ve protected the crown. On your drawing. Dale Denn: Yeah. McGonagill: Don’t move your drawing. Go the other way. You moved it out of, there you go. As long as you protect what you filled in then. Dale Denn: Yeah this cutting is just, it’s just a little bit. McGonagill: I understand that but when you fill it up to level it as long as you keep that in there you’ve protected the crown. Dale Denn: Yeah, we would take straw blankets and then we would this, we could put straw blankets over all this and staple them down with a prairie vegetation. We have a lot of choices you know vegetation. It could be a prairie mix. Something that’s going to have to grow in the shade there. So again it’s probably good that I still do that because that’s what it’s going to look like and then if you’re down in on the street and you’re looking up, this is all going to green up and natural weeds and stuff will grow. Brush and trees will not grow on it because it’s droughty so that rock bed is, it’s inside the mound and this is all, this is all 6 inches of black soil minimum has to be placed over the mound and blended in with the original landscape. So it’s topsoil. So it’s going to green up. It’s going to grow grass. Weeds. Some people plant flowers. I mean it could be hostas. It can be, I’ve seen all kinds of creative stuff done to both protect the mound and green it up. So lots of ideas there. And then the swale, again that is a flat area. It delta’s out. We can move it a little bit and we could put some rip rap down with some fabric and break the force of the water. Some nice lime stone that looks pretty good. Kind of make it where the delta is. We could easily draft something up like that. We’ve already talked about doing that. McGonagill: Okay. Weick: Thank you again. Reeder: Mr. Chairman one more question. Weick: Sure. Reeder: How difficult would it be to hook this whole system up into the sanitary sewer pipe once we put it in? Dale Denn: Oh to hook up? Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 29 Reeder: Yeah. Dale Denn: Oh they got, wherever the curb stop is, it’s real simple just taking the pipe. This will be a 4 inch schedule 40. Reeder: But I mean so it would flow from the house by gravity down to that thing with no problem without reconstructing everything? Dale Denn: No, just taking. Reeder: So is there something we could do to make that connection easier in the future in your design now? McGonagill: You can stub, have a stub at the end couldn’t you? Dale Denn: Yeah, number one the tank up here is going to be gone I think. We have a choice. We could leave extra septic or it can be taken out. But down here then most likely these tanks would come out of the picture and then the digging would just have to start from right here. This is a pump tank so this has to be lower than my system so I can’t configure that too much different to make it any more practical but it’s pretty practical right now because it’s a straight shot right out to wherever the curb stop is. Reeder: So you just remove those tanks and put a pipe through and you’re down? Dale Denn: Yep. Yeah. Reeder: Okay. Dale Denn: And there’s going to be clean out’s on this pipe every 100 feet already also and so you’ll be able to see where that pipe is and it will have the clean out’s. Weick: Good. McGonagill: I think you all have made some pretty good convincing arguments that why you can do that. Why you should do it. It’s good resulting dialogue. Weick: It is. I’m glad we talked it through. McGonagill: Okay need a motion? Weick: We do. I cannot do it. That’s the only rule that I know of. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 30 Undestad: Alright I will make a motion. The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance for the bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system subject to the conditions 1 through 6. Weick: Thank you. We have a valid motion. Do we have a second? Skistad: I will second it. We have a motion and a second. Any comments before we vote? Generous: Mr. Chairman? Weick: Yes. Generous: Does that also include adoption of the Findings of Fact for approval? Weick: Yes. Undestad: Yes. McGonagill: Yes it does. I would suggest it does Mr. Chair. Weick: Yes it does. So we will note that as well. Again I will, the thanks both to the applicant, your contractor as well as the Planning Commission and the City. Tonight’s discussion was, it was good. I mean there’s a lot of us admittedly that you know don’t have a lot of experience in this area so we’re really trying to do our best to you know weigh the, you know all of the mitigating factors that go into this and so I appreciate your expertise to my left as well as your’s. It was very helpful. So with that any other comment? None. Undestad moved, Skistad seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the bluff setback variance and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system as shown in the plans shown on the Certificate of Survey by SISU Land Surveying dated 8/19/19, subject to the following conditions, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision: 1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, as applicable. An engineer-designed plan is required to divert the existing drainage ravine that would be impacted by the proposed SSTS. 2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system. 3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for a SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil). 4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval. Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019 31 5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree removal should be required. All trees 6” and larger in and around the construction area shall be shown. Replacement planting will be required in areas cleared outside of the septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved by the city. 6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the construction area. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. Weick: The motion passes 6 to 0. Generous: Do you have a second? Weick: We did. Commissioner Skistad. Yes. Generous: Thank you. Weick: So with that, I did not print an agenda in front of me but I believe the next item would be the Minutes. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner McGonagill noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated September 3, 2019 as presented. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATION. CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE. Weick: Any presentations from the City? Generous: Council items. The Tequila Butcher was approved with the variance so to go forward. And they amended the development contract for Glendale Homes. The one on Glendale and Minnewashta Parkway. They have a new developer name. that was the only change that they had with that. Weick: Okay. Generous: We do have one item at our next Planning Commission meeting. It’s a variance. Not quite as involved as that and so at this meeting we were supposed to have a second hearing for a subdivision but the applicant withdrew that application. He's revising his plat and he hopes to come back yet this year so. Weick: Okay. McGonagill: Question? CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Ann Miller Citizen Action Request Form Section VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Item No: E.1. Prepared By File No: ATTACHMENTS: Ann Miller Citizen Action Request Form CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Fire Department Update Section FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE Item No: F.1. Prepared By Don Johnson, Fire Chief File No: SUMMARY Monthly fire department update with call data from August. ATTACHMENTS: Narrative Report Graphs and Tables Open House Flyer TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Don Johnson, Fire Chief DATE: September 23, 2019 SUBJ: Monthly Fire Department Update, September 2019 Fire Department Staffing Department staffing is at 43 of 45 paid on-call firefighters. One firefighter is on personal leave. Fire Department Response The fire department responded to 85 calls for service in July. (1) Chief Only, (23) Day Only, (25) Duty Crew Calls leaving (36) all calls for the month. Duty Crew calls YTD = 164 Significant calls for July included the following: • (44) Rescue/EMS calls with (8) motor vehicle accidents. • (1) Car Fire • (2) Citizen complaints • (1) Unauthorized burning incident Monthly Training Training that occurred since my last update: • Officer and Leadership Development Training • EMS Skills Training • Live Burn Training involving High Rise Operation – SCALE Training Facility Other Activities • Chan Fire hosted the Southwest Regional Chiefs Meeting on Sept 3. • I assisted Waconia Fire with Fire Ground Command Training on Sunday, Sept 8. • I assisted Carver Fire with Fire Ground Command Training on Tues/Wed, Sept 10/11 Todd Gerhardt Fire Department Update Page 2 • As chair of the MN Chiefs Conference Committee I attended the final planning meeting for the annual fall conference in Duluth on Sept 12. • I attended the Association of Minnesota Emergency Manager’s Conference at Breezy Point for Continuing Education Credits from Sept 15 – 18. Carver County Emergency Management reimburses the total cost of this conference • Assistant Chief Murphy, Captain Eastman, Engineer Pribble, and Charlie Seagle traveled to Appleton, Wisconsin for a mid-construction inspection of Engine 1. Final inspection is scheduled for Oct 3 & 4. The dealer is planning on displaying Engine 1 at the MN Chiefs Conference in mid- October with a planned delivery to Chanhassen after the conference. • I assisted Minnetonka Fire with promotional assessments on Sept 23 Fire Marshal Council Update for August 2019 Construction Projects of Note/Fire Inspections: • The Venue Apartments has finished all life safety testing and occupancy was given to allow residents to move in last week. They will need to add a public safety radio repeater system, per previous agreement, and finish inspections on several units set back due to water damage during construction. • Riley Crossing Senior Living – most fire sprinkler testing completed and moving forward with a plan to get temp occupancy by middle of October to allow building furnishings and staff training in the building before opening to full occupancy in November for residents and daycare students. • Several areas of Minnetonka West Middle School were remodeled and passed final inspection as the new school year started. Fire Prevention • Most of the planning is complete for the October 7th Fire Department Open House. Preparations for building the burn house and kid’s obstacle course commence next week. Vendors working with us again this year to provide food and services at the event. New this year – Rescue Themed Bounce House/Maze, Kids Firefighter Obstacle Course, and expanded Live Burn to show importance of closing your doors and how it can make you safer during a fire. • Planning underway and visits are being scheduled to schools and daycares in town for this year’s Fire Prevention Week. This also takes place the week of October 7 but we generally schedule visits throughout the month. Fire Investigations No fire investigations took place this month. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 June July Aug 2019 Calls by Month and Type Rescue & Emergency Medical Service Alarm Calls Good Intent Call Hazardous Condition Service Call Fire 55 51 63 65 55 86 66 60 59 80 57 56 71 50 66 79 86 76 66 72 84 85 85 101 94 88 76 64 71 88 102 85 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Chanhassen Fire Department Calls By Month Comparison 2017 2018 2019 621 691 690 753 921 1,003 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 PROJECTED Calls for Service By Year Rescue & Emergency Medical Service 55% Alarm Calls 15% Good Intent Call 13% Hazardous Condition 7% Service Call 7% Fire 3% 2019 Calls for Service by % of Call Type "F)³CH ±"F) !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( LakeMinnewashta Lake Lucy LakeAnn Lotus Lake Lake Susan LakeRiley LakeHarrison Rice MarshLake Rice Lake LakeSaintJoe LakeVirginia LakeMinnewashtaRegional Park(County Park) HermanField Park RoundhousePark MinnewashtaHeights Park PheasantHillPark NorthLotusLakePark CarverBeachPark MinnesotaLandscapeArboretum Minnesota Landscape Arboretum ChanhassenNaturePreserve Bluff CreekPreserve BluffCreekPreserve BluffCreekPreserve PioneerPassPark Bluff Creek Golf Course Hesse FarmPreserve Seminary FenScientific and Natural Area(SNA) Raquet WildlifeManagement Area(WMA) Raquet WildlifeManagement Area(WMA) MN Valley NationalWildlife Refuge FoxwoodsPreserve RileyRidgePark BandimerePark Lake SusanPark LakeSusanPreserve LakeAnnPark MeadowGreenPark SouthLotusLakePark PowerHillPark PleasantViewPreserve M innesota R iverCathcartPark K eber P ondChristmasLake BrendanPond ?©A@?©A@?©A@ ?©A@ +¢ +¢ +¢ ?ûA@ ?ûA@ ?«A@ ?«A@ ?ÌA@ ?ÌA@ ?ÌA@ ?ûA@ ?ûA@ GoWX GrWX GrWX GrWX GïWX GqWX GqWX GqWX GqWX GqWX GnWXGnWXGnWX GÇWX GÇWX GÇWX GïWX Date Created: 9/4/2019 Document Path: K:\WSB\Maps\Fire\FireIncidentMap_August2019.mxd Created By: City of Chanhassen - Fire Department !(Calls For Service - August 2019 ³CH ±City Hall "F)Fire Station Railroad Rivers Lakes Parks Parcel Boundaries Fire Box Alarm Zones North Box South Box West Box City of ChanhassenFire Calls for Service - August 2019 µ0 4,000Feet 0 0.5Mile OPEN HOUSEOPEN HOUSE MONDAY, OCTOBER 7 H 6 - 8PM H 7610 LAREDO DRIVE » Carver County Sheriff’s Office » Ridgeview Ambulance Service» Centerpoint Energy» MN DNR FOR MORE INFORMATION EMAIL DNUTTER@CI.CHANHASSEN.MN.US OR CALL 952.227.1153 NEW EVENTS ADDED THIS YEAR INCLUDE:» Firefighter OBSTACLE COURSE for kids » HANDS-ON FIRE EXTINGUISHER TRAINING with the Electronic Fire Extinguisher Trainer.» AUTO EXTRICATION DEMO at 6:30pm LIVE - FIRE DEMOS: » KITCHEN GREASE FIRE, LIVING ROOM FIRE, & BEDROOM FIRE See a live fire and witness how closing your bedroom door can protect your family in the event of a fire! Food, snacks, ice cream, & drinks available throughout the night, and a bounce house on site for kids. See a LIVE FIRE AT 7:30PM! SEE A FIRE FIGHTERIN ACTION! H LIVE FIRE H7:30PM FREEFAMILYFUN! STATION1#FIRE TRUCK RIDES! CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Law Enforcement Update Section FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE Item No: F.2. Prepared By Lt. Lance Pearce, CCSO File No: ATTACHMENTS: Law Enforcement Update CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Approval of OnSale Beer & Wine License for Friends & Family Creative Enterprises, LLC, dba Board & Brush Creative Studio, 7882 Market Boulevard Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: H.1. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: LIQ BOARD & BRUSH PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves the request for an onsale beer and wine license from Friends & Family Creative Enterprises, LLC, dba Board & Brush Creative Studio.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND This office has received a request for an onsale beer and wine license from Friends & Family Creative Enterprises, LLC dba Board & Brush Creative Studio. The business concept for Board & Brush Creative Studio combines a do ityourself (DIY) wood sign workshop where participants can also consume wine and beer while crafting. Minnesota state law requires that an onsale beer and wine license be issued to restaurants with seating for at least 25 guests. In order to meet this regulation, the applicant has applied for the appropriate food license from the Minnesota Dept. of Health and plans to sell cold and heatandserve food items along with the beer and wine. The workshop/restaurant will seat 26, which meets the state's seating requirements. This workshop/restaurant will occupy approximately 1,440 square feet in the Market Square Shopping Center located at 7882 Market Boulevard (former Iris Valley Boutique location). The workshop/restaurant is anticipated to open in November, 2019. Currently, there are five other Board & Brush studio locations with liquor licenses in Minnesota: Location License Type Duluth BYOB (Consumption & Display)* St. Louis Park Beer & Wine License Woodbury BYOB (Consumption & Display)* Lakeville BYOB (Consumption & Display)* Rochester Beer & Malt Beverages License (no wine) *Not issued in Chanhassen per city code Additional information regarding the business can be found on the Board & Brush Creative Studio's website. Friends & Family Creative Enterprises, LLC is a limited liability corporation with two named managers, Susan Kibler Owner Name Percent of Ownership Susan Kibler 50% Terri Berg 50% CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, September 23, 2019SubjectApproval of OnSale Beer & Wine License for Friends & Family Creative Enterprises, LLC,dba Board & Brush Creative Studio, 7882 Market BoulevardSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: H.1.Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: LIQ BOARD & BRUSHPROPOSED MOTION“The City Council approves the request for an onsale beer and wine license from Friends & Family CreativeEnterprises, LLC, dba Board & Brush Creative Studio.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDThis office has received a request for an onsale beer and wine license from Friends & Family Creative Enterprises,LLC dba Board & Brush Creative Studio. The business concept for Board & Brush Creative Studio combines a doityourself (DIY) wood sign workshop where participants can also consume wine and beer while crafting. Minnesotastate law requires that an onsale beer and wine license be issued to restaurants with seating for at least 25 guests. Inorder to meet this regulation, the applicant has applied for the appropriate food license from the Minnesota Dept. ofHealth and plans to sell cold and heatandserve food items along with the beer and wine. The workshop/restaurantwill seat 26, which meets the state's seating requirements. This workshop/restaurant will occupy approximately 1,440 square feet in the Market Square Shopping Center locatedat 7882 Market Boulevard (former Iris Valley Boutique location). The workshop/restaurant is anticipated to open inNovember, 2019.Currently, there are five other Board & Brush studio locations with liquor licenses in Minnesota: Location License TypeDuluthBYOB (Consumption & Display)*St. Louis Park Beer & Wine LicenseWoodburyBYOB (Consumption & Display)*Lakeville BYOB (Consumption & Display)*Rochester Beer & Malt Beverages License (no wine)*Not issued in Chanhassen per city codeAdditional information regarding the business can be found on the Board & Brush Creative Studio's website. Friends & Family Creative Enterprises, LLC is a limited liability corporation with two named managers, Susan Kibler and Terry Berg. The following table reflects the ownership breakdown as shown on the application: The Carver County Sheriff’s Office has been requested to complete a background investigation on the owners listed in the table above. The investigation includes criminal history checks, driving records, and outstanding warrants. No negative comments were found on either of these individuals. Susan Kibler will also be the operating manager of the workshop/restaurant. A public hearing notice was published in the Chanhassen Villager on September 12, 2019 and sent to all property owners within 500 feet of the site (see attached list). As of the date of this writing, staff has not received any comments from the public. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the request for an onsale beer and wine license from Friends & Family Creative Enterprises, LLC dba Board & Brush Creative Studio. Approval will be contingent upon the applicant supplying liquor liability insurance, license fee, a copy of the stateissued food license, and all other necessary paperwork associated with the application. Approval of this license requires a simple majority vote of the council. ATTACHMENTS: Property Report Card Floor Plan Public Hearing Notice Affidavit of Mailing of Public Hearing Notice Property Card Taxpayer Information Property Address Parcel Information Building Information Miscellaneous Information Assessor Information Ta xp ayer N ameMARKET SQUARE ASSOC LTD PTRSHP Mailin g Address PO BOX 404 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-0404 Parcel ID Number 25451 0010 Address 7836 MARKET BLVD City CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 Uses Comme rcial GIS Acre sDeeded AcresPlatLotBlock 8.9 1 MARKET SQ UARE001001Tax Description Bu ilding Style Year Built Garag e Ab ove G radeFinished Sq Ft Be drooms Scho ol District Watershed District Homestead Green Acre s Ag Preserve0112WS 0 64 RIL EY PURG BLU FF N N N Estimated Market Value Land Bu ilding To tal 2018 Value s(Paya ble 2019 )2019 Value s(Paya ble 2020 )Last Sale Date of Sale Sa le Va lue $4,133,600.00 $4,891,600.00 $9,025,200.00 $4,340,300.00 $5,399,200.00 $9,739,500.00 2/2 8/1 992 $1,313,785.00 C/O V CLAYTON & ASSOCIATES The data provided herewith is for reference purposes only. This data is not suitable for legal, engineering, surveying or other similar purposes. Carver County does not guarantee the accuracy of theinformation contained herein. This data is furnished on an ‘as is’ basis and Carver County makes no representations or warranties, either expressed or implied, for the merchantability or fitness of theinformation provided for any purpose. This disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03 and the user of the dataprovided herein acknowledges that Carver County shall not be liable for any damages, and by using this data in any way expressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and holdharmless Carver County, its officials, officers, agents, employees, etc. from any and all claims brought by anyone who uses the information provided for herein, its employees or agents, orthird parties which arise out of user's access. By acceptance of this data, the user agrees not to transmit this data or provide access to it or any part of it to another party unless the user includeswith the data a copy of this disclaimer. Wednesday, September 4, 2019 Carver Co unty, MN Net Acre s il FrOzTn 5fir64-`Er- -- w 1 I`O 119 cf. r 3. i 10 5V.-- .-.. (711/..5-e4•CfZe 4 1 1 o I Q O 0 I I d x_Lig 1n i 1I __....., •,-...:.-_::::::-:__:_il..-...-:":-- 1 I I CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST FOR AN ON-SALE BEER & WINE LICENSE FRIENDS & FAMILY CREATIVE ENTERPRISES, LLC DBA BOARD & BRUSH CREATIVE STUDIO 7882 MARKET BOULEVARD NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, September 23, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 7700 Market Boulevard, to consider issuing an on-sale beer and wine liquor license to Friends & Family Creative Enterprises, LLC, DBA Board & Brush Creative Studio located at 7882 Market Boulevard. All interested persons may appear and express their opinions regarding this application at said time and place. Chanhassen City Code requires that all property owners within 500 feet of the site be notified in writing. If you have any questions, contact Kim Meuwissen at 952-227-1107. Todd Gerhardt City Manager (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on September 12, 2019) CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Resolution 2019XX: Approval/Certification of Maximum Proposed Preliminary Levy to Carver County Auditor Section NEW BUSINESS Item No: I.1. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: PROPOSED MOTION The City Council approves the Preliminary Levy of $11,231,368 for 2020 and Establishes the TruthinTaxation Hearing Date for 2019 as December 2, for Taxes Collectible in 2020.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND At our August 26 city council work session, staff reviewed the detailed budget with the city council. At this evening’s meeting staff will go through the attached PowerPoint presentation and the potential preliminary levy scenarios. At the end of the discussion, the council will be asked to approve a preliminary levy which needs to be submitted to Carver County before September 30. Scenario #1:Total levy of $11,231,368, an increase of $211,500 (1.92%), $34,400 above 2019 new growth. This scenario is an increase in service levels for the expanded duty crew. It would also leave the entire Library Levy intact to allow more flexibility in future years. The result of this levy would be between a $3$4 increase in the property tax bill (city portion) on the average home. Scenario #2: Total levy of $11,196,968, an increase of $177,100 (1.61%), the amount of new growth in 2019. This scenario does result in increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. Staff would recommend the use of $34,400 of the Library Levy to achieve this total levy.The result of this levy would be no change in the city portion of the average homes tax bill. Scenario #3:This scenario would include increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. It also could include additional known funding needs for future years as follows: Fund additional park maintenance employee ($80,000) Fund additional street maintenance employee ($80,000) Fund half time fire department administrative position at full time ($37,000) Fund a portion of Pavement Management Levy of 2021 ($350,000) Fund permanent revenue stream for Park Equipment Replace Levy by 2022 ($250,000) The result of this levy would be an increase to the city portion of the property tax bill on the average home by CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, September 23, 2019SubjectResolution 2019XX: Approval/Certification of Maximum Proposed Preliminary Levy to CarverCounty AuditorSectionNEW BUSINESS Item No: I.1.Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: PROPOSED MOTIONThe City Council approves the Preliminary Levy of $11,231,368 for 2020 and Establishes the TruthinTaxationHearing Date for 2019 as December 2, for Taxes Collectible in 2020.”Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDAt our August 26 city council work session, staff reviewed the detailed budget with the city council. At this evening’smeeting staff will go through the attached PowerPoint presentation and the potential preliminary levy scenarios. At theend of the discussion, the council will be asked to approve a preliminary levy which needs to be submitted to CarverCounty before September 30.Scenario #1:Total levy of $11,231,368, an increase of $211,500 (1.92%), $34,400 above 2019 new growth.This scenario is an increase in service levels for the expanded duty crew. It would also leave the entire LibraryLevy intact to allow more flexibility in future years. The result of this levy would be between a $3$4 increase inthe property tax bill (city portion) on the average home. Scenario #2: Total levy of $11,196,968, an increase of $177,100 (1.61%), the amount of new growth in2019. This scenario does result in increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. Staff wouldrecommend the use of $34,400 of the Library Levy to achieve this total levy.The result of this levy would beno change in the city portion of the average homes tax bill. Scenario #3:This scenario would include increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. It also couldinclude additional known funding needs for future years as follows:Fund additional park maintenance employee ($80,000)Fund additional street maintenance employee ($80,000)Fund half time fire department administrative position at full time ($37,000)Fund a portion of Pavement Management Levy of 2021 ($350,000)Fund permanent revenue stream for Park Equipment Replace Levy by 2022 ($250,000) The result of this levy would be an increase to the city portion of the property tax bill on the average home by about $10 for every $100,000 of additional levy. There are a number of items that still could significantly impact the final budget. Because of the possible significance of those unknowns, staff believes setting a preliminary levy lower than Scenario #1 would allow for less flexibility in setting the final budget for 2020 and in future years as well. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends setting a preliminary levy using Scenario #1 ($11,231,368, new growth) to allow for flexibility and planning before setting a final levy. It is staff’s belief that this will provide the city the most flexibility in the event of significant or unplanned cost increases or fluctuations between now and December. ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation Levy Impact Scenarios Resolution Bond Tax Levy Schedule Detailed General Fund Budget KFS Full Time Employee Comparison 202 0 Budget Assumptions •$177,100 (1.61%) increase in levy dollars due to new construction •A 16% reduction in healthcare costs •Building permit revenue budgeted same as 2019 •A 3% increase for cost of living and merit pay •A 5% increase in the police services contract •The average home in Chanhassen increased in taxable market value by 5% 2020 Scenario #1 •LEVY –Scenario #1 would be a total levy of $11,231,368, an increase of $211,500 (1.92%), $34,400 above 2019 new growth. •POTENTIAL BUDGET IMPACT –This scenario is an increase in service levels for the expanded duty crew. It would also leave the entire Library Levy intact to allow more flexibility in future years. •RESIDENT IMPACT –The result of this levy would be between a $3-$4 increase in the property tax bill (city portion) on the average home. 2020 Scenario #2 •LEVY –Scenario #2 would be a total levy of $11,196,968, an increase of $177,100 (1.61%), the amount of new growth in 2019. •POTENTIAL BUDGET IMPACT –This scenario does result in increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. Staff would recommend the use of $34,400 of the Library Levy to achieve this total levy goal. •RESIDENT IMPACT –The result of this levy would be no increase in the property tax bill (city portion) on the average home. 2020 Scenario #3 •LEVY –Scenario #3 could include funding for future needs. •POTENTIAL BUDGET IMPACT -This scenario would include increased service levels for the expanded duty crew. It also could include additional known funding needs for future years as follows: -Fund additional park maintenance employee ($80,000) -Fund additional street maintenance employee ($80,000) -Fund half time fire dept admin position at FT ($37,000) -Fund a portion of Pavement Management Levy of 2021 ($350,000) -Fund permanent rev stream for Park Eqpt Replace Levy by 2022($250,000) •RESIDENT IMPACT –The result of this levy would be an increase to the city portion of the property tax bill on the average home by about $10 for every $100,000 of additional levy. 2020 Gen Fund Budgeted Expenditures % Increase City Population 2018 2019 From 2018 Chanhassen 25,955 11,414,000 11,618,060 1.8% Chaska 26,941 16,511,385 16,896,838 2.3% Cottage Grove 36,399 20,160,615 20,958,986 4.0% Elk River 24,567 16,072,250 17,096,650 6.4% Inver Grove Heights 35,106 24,925,500 27,189,400 9.1% Lino Lakes 21,117 9,675,086 9,984,864 3.2% Prior Lake 25,735 12,651,813 13,336,972 5.4% Rosemount 23,965 13,566,000 14,261,600 5.1% Savage 30,713 14,948,819 15,951,876 6.7% Shakopee 41,519 26,928,100 27,558,500 2.3% Stillwater 19,748 14,996,044 15,995,345 6.7% Average 28,342 16,537,783 17,349,917 4.8% KFS General Fund Budgeted Expenditure Comparison 2020 Per Capita City Spending 2019 Chanhassen 447 Chaska 627 Cottage Grove 576 Elk River 696 Inver Grove Heights 774 Lino Lakes 473 Prior Lake 518 Rosemount 595 Savage 519 Shakopee 664 Stillwater 810 Average 609 KFS General Fund Per Capita Spending Comparison 202 0 City 2019 Tax Rate** Chanhassen 21.104 Chaska 27.678 Victoria 31.271 Mayer 49.252 Carver 50.592 Waconia 52.500 Watertown 56.473 Cologne 62.415 Norwood Young America 70.399 New Germany 97.651 Hamburg 122.130 Average 58.315 ** Based on Urban Tax Rates Carver County Tax Rates 2020 Hennepin County Tax Rates -2019 2020 City Tax Rate**City Tax Rate** Chanhassen 21.104 Mound 43.107 Medina 21.529 St. Louis Park 46.373 Wayzata 21.672 Crystal 48.771 Minnetrista 24.915 Robbinsdale 50.807 Plymouth 26.355 Rockford 50.931 Excelsior 27.124 Brooklyn Park 52.695 Edina 27.499 Golden Valley 53.780 Shorewood 28.539 Richfield 54.737 Eden Prairie 31.690 Minneapolis 57.312 Maple Grove 34.899 Osseo 60.009 Minnetonka 34.960 New Hope 67.990 Rogers 35.917 Hopkins 71.697 Champlin 39.611 Brooklyn Center 71.860 Bloomington 41.581 AVERAGE 42.499 ** Based on Urban Tax Rates Recommendation Staff recommends setting a preliminary levy using at least Scenario #1 ($11,231,368, or $34,400 above new growth) to allow for flexibility and planning before setting a final levy in December. 202 0 Thank You. 202 0 Thank you! CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2020 Budget 2019 2020 Dollar Percent OPERATIONAL & CAPITAL LEVY Levy Levy Change Change General Fund $8,810,333 $9,021,833 Capital Replacement Fund (for equipment) 800,000 800,000 Revolving Imp Street Reconstruction 381,223 378,523 Pavement Mgmt Fund (Sealcoating)93,000 93,000 Total Operational & Capital Levy 10,084,556 10,293,356 208,800 2.07% DEBT LEVY Public Works Facility 475,800 480,600 Library Referendum 459,512 457,412 Total Debt Levy 935,312 938,012 2,700 0.29% TOTAL TAX LEVY $11,019,868 $11,231,368 $211,500 1.92% Scenario #1 Scenario #2 Scenario #3 Levy Levy Levy Taxes applied to:General Fund $9,021,833 $9,021,833 $9,121,833 Capital Replacement 800,000 800,000 800,000 Pavement Mgmt 93,000 93,000 93,000 Revolving Imp St Recon 378,523 378,523 378,523 Total Levy subject to levy limits $10,293,356 $10,293,356 $10,393,356 Library Referendum $480,600 $480,600 $480,600 Public Works Building 457,412 423,012 457,412 Total $11,231,368 $11,196,968 $11,331,368 Tax Generation Capacity (Not actual levy, Used only for estimating the impact on the average home) Prior Year $11,019,868 $11,019,868 $11,019,868 New Construction (0.97%)$177,100 $177,100 $177,100 Total Capacity $11,196,968 $11,196,968 $11,196,968 Percent Change (To avg home city prop tax) after New Growth 0.31%0.00%1.20% Staff recommendation for final Levy TAX LEVY CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: September 23, 2019 RESOLUTION NO: 2019- MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PRELIMINARY LEVY OF $11,231,368 FOR 2020, AND ESTABLISHING TRUTH-IN-TAXATION PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR 2019, FOR TAXES COLLECTIBLE IN 2020 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the total preliminary levy to be certified to Carver County by September 30, 2019 is $11,231,368; and 2. That the preceding sums of money have been scheduled as “Proposed Levy Certification” to fund operations of the general fund, capital replacement fund, MSA fund and debt service funds to be levied in 2019 for collection in 2020 upon the taxable property in the City of Chanhassen as shown in this resolution; and 3. That the City Council of the City of Chanhassen determines that certain bonded indebtedness levies are hereby adopted to meet current and future bond requirements and that the County Auditor is hereby authorized and directed to increase or reduce the previously adopted bonded debt levies as shown on the attached Tax Levy Certification document; and 4. That the public meeting date will be set for December 2, 2019 and the budget and tax levy adoption will be set for December 9, 2019 as allowed by law; and 5. That the City of Chanhassen authorizes the County Auditor to certify the amounts as set forth in the attached Proposed Levy Certification document for purposes of preparing the Truth-in-Taxation notices. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 23rd day of September, 2019. ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor YES NO ABSENT 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! 2019 2020 % Change Operational & Capital Levies General Fund 8,810,333$ Capital Replacement 800,000 Revolving Imp Street Reconstruction 381,223 MSA (Sealcoating) 93,000 Total Operational & Capital Levies 10,084,556$ -$ -100.00% Debt Levies Public Works Facility 475,800 Library Referendum 459,512 Total Debt Levies 935,312$ -$ -100.00% Total All Levies 11,019,868$ -$ -100.00% 2020 Tax Levy Personal Materials Contractual Capital 2020 2019 %2018 Services & Supplies Services Outlay Total Total Change Actual General Government 1110 Legislative 46,700 - 81,600 - 128,300 128,300 0.00%127,686 1120 Administration 497,900 - 56,400 - 554,300 564,300 -1.77%527,332 1130 Finance 330,500 200 48,300 - 379,000 371,500 2.02%348,833 1140 Legal - - 200,000 - 200,000 200,000 0.00%191,253 1150 Property Assessment - - 161,000 - 161,000 156,000 3.21%152,430 1160 MIS 168,800 41,400 48,000 - 258,200 257,800 0.16%229,810 1170 City Hall 92,400 41,400 277,500 - 411,300 395,800 3.92%405,703 1180 Elections 26,000 4,000 18,000 - 48,000 48,000 0.00%38,829 1190 Library Building - 2,500 109,100 - 111,600 111,600 0.00%105,505 *Total 1,162,300 89,500 999,900 - 2,251,700 2,233,300 0.82%2,127,383 Law Enforcement 1210 Police Administration - 1,000 1,977,800 - 1,978,800 1,885,800 4.93%1,780,646 1220 Fire Prevention & Admin 1,012,200 45,100 152,000 - 1,209,300 1,020,000 18.56%1,008,779 1250 Code Enforcement 696,500 6,800 11,700 - 715,000 742,500 -3.70%651,006 1260 Community Service 57,200 1,200 5,400 - 63,800 60,800 4.93%55,873 *Total 1,765,900 54,100 2,146,900 - 3,966,900 3,709,100 6.95%3,496,303 Public Works 1310 Engineering 675,400 800 29,300 - 705,500 669,900 5.31%609,793 1320 Street Maintenance 876,000 115,300 43,400 - 1,034,700 1,015,100 1.93%1,003,974 1350 Street Lighting & Signals - 4,000 359,500 - 363,500 357,500 1.68%375,319 1370 Fleet Department 323,400 161,700 64,800 5,500 555,400 558,700 -0.59%550,586 *Total 1,874,800 281,800 497,000 5,500 2,659,100 2,601,200 2.23%2,539,672 Community Development 1410 Planning Commission - 200 1,500 - 1,700 1,700 0.00%828 1420 Planning Administration 519,600 400 11,500 - 531,500 540,900 -1.74%502,004 1430 Senior Commission 29,600 - 15,000 - 44,600 40,200 10.95%44,876 *Total 549,200 600 28,000 - 577,800 582,800 -0.86%547,708 Park & Recreation 1510 Park & Rec Commission - 200 1,000 - 1,200 1,200 0.00%25 1520 Park & Rec Administration 250,300 200 5,700 - 256,200 256,800 -0.23%235,876 1530 Recreation Center 234,500 17,700 94,400 - 346,600 346,800 -0.06%327,125 1540 Lake Ann Park Operations 12,300 10,200 48,600 - 71,100 68,800 3.34%64,106 1550 Park Maintenance 830,700 84,200 104,300 - 1,019,200 1,002,700 1.65%1,068,895 1560 Senior Citizens Center 84,500 4,300 30,700 - 119,500 121,700 -1.81%130,212 1600 Recreation Programs 257,500 22,300 128,800 - 408,600 393,560 3.82%362,400 1700 Self-Supporting Programs 21,000 3,300 12,500 - 36,800 38,400 -4.17%51,000 1800 Recreation Sports 30,400 7,900 300 - 38,600 38,600 0.00%31,653 *Total 1,721,200 150,300 426,300 - 2,297,800 2,268,560 1.29%2,271,291 Total Operational Expenditures 7,073,400 576,300 4,098,100 5,500 11,753,300 11,394,960 3.14%10,982,357 Transfer for Roads - - - - **Total General Fund 11,753,300 11,394,960 3.14%10,982,357 Dollar Change from Previous Year 358,340 2020 General Fund Budget Expenditures 2017 2018 2019 2020 Inc Over 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget PY Budget Estimate General Property Tax 3010 Current Property Tax 8,475,905 8,679,991 8,810,333 9,021,833 2.4%9,122,300 3002 Allowance for Delinquent Taxes (75,108) (46,746) (70,000) (40,000) (60,000) 3011 Delinquent Property Tax 7,050 14,350 15,000 20,000 15,000 3090 Excess TIF Taxes 86,633 - - *Total General Property Tax 8,494,480 8,647,594 8,755,333 9,001,833 2.8%9,077,300 Licenses 3203 Dog Kennel 250 325 500 500 500 3206 Massage License 150 50 500 100 100 3213 Solicitor - - - - 3226 Liquor On and Off Sale 92,018 76,904 93,000 90,000 90,000 3284 Rubbish 3,000 1,200 3,500 3,000 3,000 *Total Licenses 95,418 78,479 97,500 93,600 -4.0%93,600 Permits 3301 Building 518,620 778,694 520,000 520,000 565,000 3302 Plan Check 253,777 428,932 255,000 255,000 278,000 3305 Heating & A/C 172,701 183,881 119,300 119,300 140,000 3306 Plumbing 97,615 149,778 90,000 90,000 95,000 3307 Trenching 55,066 54,154 30,000 30,000 35,000 3308 Hunting/Shooting 840 700 1,400 1,400 700 3309 Sprinkler 11,074 16,664 11,000 11,000 11,000 3311 Sign 4,015 8,280 5,000 5,000 5,000 3316 Septic Tank - 222 - - - 3320 Stable 200 190 300 300 300 3331 Firework's Application Fee 200 200 - - - 3390 Misc. Permits 5,525 4,545 3,000 3,000 5,000 *Total Permits 1,119,633 1,626,240 1,035,000 1,035,000 0.0%1,135,000 Fines & Penalties 3401 Traffic & Ordinance Violation 126,636 93,455 115,000 115,000 115,000 3402 Vehicle Lockouts 950 1,400 1,000 1,000 1,000 3404 Dog/Cat Impound 808 496 500 500 500 3405 Other Fines and Penalties - - - - *Total Fines & Penalties 128,394 95,351 116,500 116,500 0.0%116,500 Intergovernmental Revenue 3503 Reimbursement from School Dist.49,407 51,233 45,000 55,000 52,000 3509 Other Shared Taxes 196,021 201,162 195,000 200,000 200,000 3510 Grants-State 163,912 176,847 160,000 180,000 180,000 3530 Grants-Federal - - - - - 3533 Grants-Other 6,291 7,016 - 7,000 5,000 *Total Intergovernmental Revenue 415,632 436,258 400,000 442,000 10.5%437,000 2020 General Fund Budget Revenue 2017 2018 2019 2020 Inc Over 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget PY Budget Estimate Charges for Current Services 3601 Sale of Documents 950 779 800 800 800 3602 Use & Variance Permits 21,533 17,660 20,000 25,000 25,000 3603 Rezoning Fees 1,750 1,675 2,000 2,000 2,000 3604 Assessment Searches - 45 - - - 3605 Plat Recording Fees 2,290 1,537 3,000 2,000 2,000 3607 Election Filing Fees - 40 - - - 3613 Misc.-General Government 5,616 2,456 5,000 5,000 5,000 3614 Admin. Charge-2% Constr.52,225 10,806 50,000 50,000 50,000 3617 Engineering General - - - - - 3619 Investment Management Fee 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 3629 Misc.-Public Safety 9,971 8,412 10,000 10,000 10,000 3630 Recreation Program Fees 59,520 63,596 52,000 65,000 62,000 3631 Recreation Center 217,077 228,935 218,000 225,000 225,000 3633 Park Equipment Rental 93 34 100 100 100 3634 Park Facility Usage Fee 19,022 16,976 19,000 19,000 19,000 3635 Watercraft Rental 18,020 17,543 18,000 18,000 18,000 3636 Self-Supporting Programs 45,276 42,366 42,000 42,000 42,000 3637 Senior Programs 47,025 39,327 45,000 45,000 45,000 3638 Food Concessions 10,862 11,023 11,000 11,000 11,000 3639 Misc.-Park & Rec.1,347 1,345 1,200 1,200 1,200 3642 Recreation Sports 44,384 34,061 44,000 40,000 38,000 3649 Misc.-Public Works 3,651 1,038 2,000 2,000 2,000 3651 Merchandise Sales 2,950 2,339 2,800 2,800 2,800 *Total Charges for Current Services 638,562 576,992 620,900 640,900 3.2%635,900 Other Revenue 3801 Interest Earnings 36,120 73,165 30,000 50,000 50,000 3802 Equipment Rental & Sale 186,978 192,792 250,000 275,000 275,000 3803 Building Rental 5,798 5,849 5,800 5,800 5,800 3804 Land Sale 8,100 - - - - 3807 Donations 28,609 25,387 24,127 25,467 25,000 3808 Insurance Reimbursements 18,709 10,267 - 10,000 10,000 3816 SAC Retainer 4,386 8,449 4,000 6,000 6,000 3818 Sur-Tax Retainer 740 903 700 700 700 3820 Misc. Other Revenue 766 930 500 500 500 3903 Refunds/Reimbursements 55,635 50,160 55,000 50,000 50,000 3980 Cash Short/Over 1 (1) - - - *Total Other Revenue 345,843 367,900 370,127 423,467 14.4%423,000 **Total General Fund Revenue 11,237,962 11,828,816 11,395,360 11,753,300 3.1%11,918,300 Total General Fund Expenditures 11,753,300 Net Levy Remaining (Use of Gen Fund Reserves)- 2020 General Fund Budget Revenue 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 42,000 41,550 43,600 43,600 0.0%45,400 4030 Contributions-Retirement 2,804 2,769 3,000 3,000 0.0%3,200 4050 Workers Compensation 90 85 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Personal Services 44,894 44,404 46,700 46,700 0.0%48,700 4300 Fees, Services - - 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4340 Printing & Publishing 29,911 33,838 32,000 32,000 0.0%33,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 41,560 42,031 42,000 42,000 0.0%43,000 4370 Travel & Training 5,650 5,686 6,000 6,000 0.0%6,000 4375 Promotional Expenses 599 1,727 600 600 0.0%600 *Total Contractual Services 77,719 83,282 81,600 81,600 0.0%83,600 **Total Legislative 122,613 127,686 128,300 128,300 0.0%132,300 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Legislative (1110) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 360,011 357,790 377,300 378,700 0.4%390,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 209 2,331 300 300 0.0%300 4021 Overtime-Temp - 98 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 51,126 51,704 55,500 57,400 3.4%59,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 59,127 63,824 68,000 58,000 (14.7%)64,300 4050 Workers Compensation 3,045 2,844 3,700 3,500 (5.4%)3,500 *Total Personal Services 473,517 478,591 504,800 497,900 (1.4%)517,100 4300 Fees, Services 4,634 3,685 15,000 10,000 (33.3%)12,000 4310 Telephone 5,677 4,752 5,800 5,800 0.0%5,800 4320 Utilities - 302 200 300 50.0%300 4330 Postage 22,968 22,500 23,000 23,000 0.0%23,000 4340 Printing & Publishing - 380 300 300 0.0%300 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 4,633 5,238 4,600 5,000 8.7%5,000 4370 Travel & Training 9,503 10,115 8,600 10,000 16.3%10,000 4380 Mileage 1,079 1,349 1,000 1,200 20.0%1,200 4410 Rental-Equipment 860 420 1,000 800 (20.0%)800 *Total Contractual Services 49,355 48,741 59,500 56,400 (5.2%)58,400 **Total Administration 522,872 527,332 564,300 554,300 (1.8%)575,500 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Adminstration (1120) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 226,932 225,766 239,500 246,600 3.0%254,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 33,129 31,855 36,300 37,400 3.0%38,500 4040 Contributions-Insurance 38,281 46,400 50,900 44,500 (12.6%)50,000 4050 Workers Compensation 1,937 1,778 2,300 2,000 (13.0%)2,000 *Total Personal Services 300,279 305,799 329,000 330,500 0.5%344,500 4120 Supplies-Equipment - 64 100 100 0.0%100 4210 Books & Periodicals - - 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Materials & Supplies - 64 200 200 0.0%200 4300 Fees, Services 14,087 10,447 16,000 16,000 0.0%16,000 4301 Fees, Financial/Audit 19,147 26,047 20,000 26,000 30.0%26,000 4310 Telephone and Communications 997 1,082 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4340 Printing & Publishing 200 1,087 300 300 0.0%300 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 465 425 500 500 0.0%500 4370 Travel & Training 3,926 3,883 4,500 4,500 0.0%4,500 *Total Contractual Services 38,821 42,970 42,300 48,300 14.2%48,300 **Total Finance 339,100 348,833 371,500 379,000 2.0%393,000 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 Fees, Financial/Audit A small increase is included for the negotiated Audit Contract as well as new GASB Requirement for actuarial services related to pension reporting. 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Finance (1130) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4302 Fees, Legal 198,417 191,253 200,000 200,000 0.0%200,000 *Total Contractual Services 198,417 191,253 200,000 200,000 0.0%200,000 **Total Legal 198,417 191,253 200,000 200,000 0.0%200,000 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Legal (1140) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4300 Fees, Services 146,422 152,430 156,000 161,000 3.2%166,000 *Total Contractual Services 146,422 152,430 156,000 161,000 3.2%166,000 **Total Property Assessment 146,422 152,430 156,000 161,000 3.2%166,000 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Property Assessment (1150) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 112,230 118,751 123,800 128,000 3.4%131,800 4030 Contributions-Retirement 16,505 17,286 18,800 19,400 3.2%20,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 19,697 21,908 23,300 20,400 (12.4%)22,800 4050 Workers Compensation 957 935 1,200 1,000 (16.7%)1,000 *Total Personal Services 149,389 158,880 167,100 168,800 1.0%175,600 4150 Maintenance Materials 1,062 875 1,300 1,000 (23.1%)1,300 4210 Books & Periodicals 55 83 100 100 0.0%100 4220 Software Licensing & Support 27,670 24,100 43,000 40,000 (7.0%)35,000 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 274 35 300 300 0.0%300 *Total Materials & Supplies 29,061 25,093 44,700 41,400 (7.4%)36,700 4300 Fees, Services 21,368 21,846 22,000 24,000 9.1%22,000 4310 Telephone and Communications 1,980 1,700 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000 4320 Utilities 11,070 10,998 11,000 11,000 0.0%11,000 4370 Travel & Training 5,755 7,465 6,000 6,000 0.0%6,000 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 4,990 3,828 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 *Total Contractual Services 45,163 45,837 46,000 48,000 4.3%46,000 **Total MIS 223,613 229,810 257,800 258,200 0.2%258,300 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Management Information Systems (MIS) (1160) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 58,399 59,964 60,000 61,200 2.0%63,000 4011 Overtime-Reg - 965 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 8,301 8,557 9,000 9,200 2.2%9,500 4040 Contributions-Insurance 14,691 18,183 19,300 17,000 (11.9%)19,000 4050 Workers Compensation 3,479 3,417 4,200 4,000 (4.8%)4,000 *Total Personal Services 84,870 91,086 93,500 92,400 (1.2%)96,500 4110 Supplies-Office 32,629 35,553 34,000 35,000 2.9%36,000 4120 Supplies-Equipment 176 8 900 500 (44.4%)500 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 411 453 500 500 0.0%500 4150 Maintenance Materials 4,250 5,576 4,500 5,000 11.1%5,000 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 144 56 400 400 0.0%400 *Total Materials & Supplies 37,611 41,645 40,300 41,400 2.7%42,400 4300 Fees, Services 11,166 11,442 11,000 12,000 9.1%12,000 4310 Telephone 10,357 10,424 11,000 10,500 (4.5%)11,000 4320 Utilities 37,768 39,509 39,000 39,000 0.0%41,000 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 29,201 30,434 30,000 31,000 3.3%32,000 4370 Travel & Training - - 200 200 0.0%200 4410 Rental-Equipment 14,442 12,342 14,500 14,500 0.0%14,500 4440 License & Registration - 32 100 100 0.0%100 4483 Insurance-General Liability 141,675 158,898 150,000 160,000 6.7%170,000 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 12,932 5,386 1,000 5,000 400.0%5,000 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles - - 200 200 0.0%200 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 10,245 4,505 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 *Total Contractual Services 267,785 272,972 262,000 277,500 5.9%291,000 **Total City Hall 390,266 405,703 395,800 411,300 3.9%429,900 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget City Hall (1170) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp - 27,088 26,000 26,000 0.0%28,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement - - - - 0.0%- 4050 Workers Compensation - - - - 0.0%- *Total Personal Services - 27,088 26,000 26,000 0.0%28,000 4110 Supplies-Office - 1,239 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500 4120 Supplies-Equipment - 114 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500 *Total Materials & Supplies - 1,352 4,000 4,000 0.0%4,000 4300 Fees, Services - 4,090 12,000 12,000 0.0%14,000 4340 Printing & Publishing - 447 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4370 Travel & Training - 5,851 5,000 5,000 0.0%6,000 *Total Contractual Services - 10,388 18,000 18,000 0.0%21,000 **Total Elections - 38,829 48,000 48,000 0.0%53,000 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Elections (1180) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4150 Maintenance Materials 2,333 50 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500 *Total Materials & Supplies 2,333 50 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500 4300 Fees, Services 3,258 7,191 3,000 4,000 33.3%5,000 4310 Telephone 1,526 1,526 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,700 4320 Utilities 56,908 58,149 63,000 60,000 (4.8%)60,000 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 29,304 33,301 30,500 32,500 6.6%33,000 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 10,274 4,954 6,500 6,500 0.0%6,500 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 5,562 333 4,500 4,500 0.0%4,500 *Total Contractual Services 106,832 105,455 109,100 109,100 0.0%110,700 **Total Library Building 109,165 105,505 111,600 111,600 0.0%113,200 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Library Building (1190) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 5,209 - - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 766 - - - 0.0%- 4040 Contributions-Insurance 1,442 - - - 0.0%- 4050 Workers Compensation 45 - - - 0.0%- *Total Personal Services 7,463 - - - 0.0%- 4130 Program Supplies 313 342 1,000 1,000 0.0%- *Total Materials & Supplies 313 342 1,000 1,000 0.0%- 4300 Fees, Services 1,795,040 1,779,397 1,882,700 1,976,700 5.0%2,075,500 4370 Travel & Training 15 90 100 100 0.0%100 4375 Promotional Expense 1,405 817 2,000 1,000 (50.0%)1,000 *Total Contractual Services 1,796,460 1,780,303 1,884,800 1,977,800 4.9%2,076,600 **Total Police Administration 1,804,236 1,780,646 1,885,800 1,978,800 4.9%2,076,600 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Police Administration (1210) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 217,749 205,907 217,000 225,200 3.8%232,000 4011 Overtime-Reg 292 2,724 3,000 3,000 0.0%3,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 153,469 208,252 200,000 345,000 72.5%350,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 222,858 232,909 230,000 252,000 9.6%255,000 4031 Fire Relief Required Contribution - 54,749 40,000 50,000 25.0%50,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 25,335 22,068 23,500 21,000 (10.6%)23,000 4050 Workers Compensation 71,572 68,767 75,000 80,000 6.7%80,000 4060 Unemployment 439 36 - - 0.0%- 4070 Contracted Wages 34,048 34,048 36,000 36,000 0.0%38,000 *Total Personal Services 725,763 829,461 824,500 1,012,200 22.8%1,031,000 4120 Supplies-Equipment 6,994 7,015 7,000 7,000 0.0%7,000 4130 Supplies-Program 3,073 3,282 2,200 2,200 0.0%2,200 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 6,943 4,310 9,000 9,000 0.0%9,000 4150 Maintenance Materials 1 164 400 400 0.0%400 4210 Books & Periodicals - - 500 500 0.0%500 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 9,044 9,853 11,000 11,000 0.0%11,000 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 4,924 8,166 8,000 8,000 0.0%8,000 4290 Misc. Materials & Supplies 3,642 6,407 7,000 7,000 0.0%7,000 *Total Materials & Supplies 34,620 39,197 45,100 45,100 0.0%45,100 4300 Fees, Services 29,088 26,056 32,000 34,000 6.3%35,500 4310 Telephone 8,541 7,815 8,000 8,000 0.0%8,000 4320 Utilities 15,464 18,392 16,000 17,000 6.3%17,000 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 4,469 5,606 5,100 5,100 0.0%5,100 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 1,327 1,452 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000 4370 Travel & Training 40,072 43,692 41,500 41,500 0.0%41,500 4375 Promotional Expense 6,922 7,415 10,000 8,000 (20.0%)8,000 4483 Insurance-General Liability 734 1,175 800 2,400 200.0%2,400 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 5,775 7,544 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 1,909 100 7,000 4,000 (42.9%)4,000 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 20,338 20,367 20,500 22,500 9.8%23,600 4531 Repair & Maintenance-Radios 63 508 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000 *Total Contractual Services 134,704 140,122 150,400 152,000 1.1%154,600 **Total Fire Prevention and Admin 895,087 1,008,779 1,020,000 1,209,300 18.6%1,230,700 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Fire Prevention and Administration (1220) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 537,534 474,940 504,000 515,700 2.3%531,200 4011 Overtime-Reg 82 310 - - 0.0%- 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 14,490 972 18,000 1,000 (94.4%)1,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 75,207 70,259 76,400 78,000 2.1%80,500 4040 Contributions-Insurance 96,731 88,481 120,300 98,200 (18.4%)110,000 4050 Workers Compensation 3,575 3,298 4,200 3,600 (14.3%)3,800 *Total Personal Services 727,619 638,260 722,900 696,500 (3.7%)726,500 4120 Supplies-Equipment - - 100 100 0.0%100 4130 Supplies-Program 877 689 900 800 (11.1%)800 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 279 891 2,000 1,500 (25.0%)1,500 4210 Books & Periodicals 77 331 1,500 2,500 66.7%2,500 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 956 1,242 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 344 74 400 400 0.0%400 *Total Materials & Supplies 2,534 3,227 6,400 6,800 6.3%6,800 4310 Telephone 2,535 2,736 4,500 3,000 (33.3%)3,000 4340 Printing & Publishing - 594 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 761 1,120 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4370 Travel & Training 3,336 4,973 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 4440 License & Registration - 96 500 500 0.0%500 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles - - 300 300 0.0%300 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip - - 900 900 0.0%900 *Total Contractual Services 6,632 9,518 13,200 11,700 (11.4%)11,700 **Total Code Enforcement 736,784 651,006 742,500 715,000 (3.7%)745,000 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Code Enforcement (1250) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 35,473 42,434 45,500 48,000 5.5%50,000 4021 Overtime-Temp 289 83 300 300 0.0%300 4030 Contributions-Retirement 4,576 6,490 6,000 7,000 16.7%7,500 4040 Contributions-Insurance 321 590 600 600 0.0%600 4050 Workers Compensation 1,115 1,280 1,300 1,300 0.0%1,300 4060 Unemployment 527 524 - - 0.0%- *Total Personal Services 42,302 51,400 53,700 57,200 6.5%59,700 4120 Supplies-Equipment 175 116 300 300 0.0%300 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 17 105 700 200 (71.4%)300 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 801 250 700 700 0.0%700 *Total Materials & Supplies 993 470 1,700 1,200 (29.4%)1,300 4300 Fees, Services 4,126 2,757 3,200 3,200 0.0%3,200 4310 Telephone 1,229 1,245 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,600 4340 Printing & Publishing 16 - 100 100 0.0%- 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles - - 200 200 0.0%- 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip - - 100 100 0.0%- 4531 Repair & Maintenance-Radios - - 200 200 0.0%- *Total Contractual Services 5,370 4,002 5,400 5,400 0.0%4,800 **Total Community Service 48,665 55,873 60,800 63,800 4.9%65,800 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Community Service (1260) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 464,860 419,427 473,000 491,800 4.0%506,500 4011 Overtime-Reg 6,157 7,436 6,000 7,000 16.7%7,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 13,897 7,047 14,000 12,000 (14.3%)12,000 4021 Overtime-Temp - 51 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 68,941 62,455 71,700 74,500 3.9%78,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 80,702 78,157 73,500 86,600 17.8%97,000 4050 Workers Compensation 3,588 2,833 4,000 3,500 (12.5%)3,500 *Total Personal Services 638,144 577,405 642,200 675,400 5.2%704,000 4120 Supplies-Equipment 21 399 500 500 0.0%500 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 10 416 300 300 0.0%300 *Total Materials & Supplies 32 814 800 800 0.0%800 4300 Fees, Services 10,822 23,254 16,000 16,000 0.0%16,000 4310 Telephone 3,915 4,350 4,000 4,600 15.0%4,600 4340 Printing & Publishing 292 358 300 300 0.0%300 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 1,383 1,280 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500 4370 Travel & Training 3,971 2,331 4,500 6,300 40.0%6,300 4380 Mileage 149 - 100 100 0.0%100 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip - - 500 500 0.0%500 *Total Contractual Services 20,533 31,573 26,900 29,300 8.9%29,300 **Total Engineering 658,709 609,793 669,900 705,500 5.3%734,100 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Engineering (1310) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 489,181 493,599 543,100 560,500 3.2%577,000 4011 Overtime-Reg 27,554 65,137 27,000 40,000 48.1%45,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 24,366 27,994 28,000 32,000 14.3%34,000 4021 Overtime-Temp 428 438 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 77,435 84,190 82,300 86,000 4.5%88,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 100,282 119,357 120,000 97,500 (18.8%)109,000 4050 Workers Compensation 59,215 58,393 66,000 60,000 (9.1%)62,000 4060 Unemployment 3,328 4,008 - - 0.0%- *Total Personal Services 781,789 853,116 866,400 876,000 1.1%915,000 4120 Supplies-Equipment 43,237 38,254 45,000 40,000 (11.1%)45,000 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 18,263 9,420 12,000 12,000 0.0%12,000 4150 Maintenance Materials 33,014 50,856 48,000 55,000 14.6%55,000 4210 Books & Periodicals - - 100 100 0.0%100 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 5,439 4,308 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 2,758 1,706 2,700 2,700 0.0%2,700 *Total Materials & Supplies 102,710 104,543 113,300 115,300 1.8%120,300 4300 Fees, Services 9,353 3,953 3,500 3,500 0.0%3,500 4310 Telephone 5,128 8,299 5,200 8,300 59.6%9,100 4340 Printing & Publishing 63 173 300 300 0.0%300 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 2,051 522 2,000 2,000 0.0%2,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - 100 200 100 (50.0%)100 4370 Travel & Training 1,589 2,111 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,600 4410 Rental-Equipment 8,383 8,260 3,000 8,000 166.7%8,000 4440 License & Registration 5 464 500 500 0.0%500 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 450 16 100 100 0.0%100 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 200 2,824 800 800 0.0%800 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 650 2,250 700 700 0.0%700 4540 Repair & Maintenance-Streets 6,875 5,800 6,500 6,500 0.0%6,500 4560 Repair & Maintenance-Signs 11,850 11,544 11,000 11,000 0.0%11,000 *Total Contractual Services 46,597 46,316 35,400 43,400 22.6%44,200 **Total Street Maintenance 931,096 1,003,974 1,015,100 1,034,700 1.9%1,079,500 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Street Maintenance (1320) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4120 Supplies-Equipment 4,679 5,233 3,000 4,000 33.3%5,000 *Total Materials & Supplies 4,679 5,233 3,000 4,000 33.3%5,000 4300 Fees, Services 2,166 - 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4310 Telephone 360 360 500 500 0.0%500 4320 Utilities 320,328 328,234 323,000 323,000 0.0%332,000 4565 Repair & Maintenance-Light/Signal 31,664 41,492 30,000 35,000 16.7%40,000 *Total Contractual Services 354,518 370,086 354,500 359,500 1.4%373,500 **Total Street Lighting and Signals 359,197 375,319 357,500 363,500 1.7%378,500 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Street Lighting and Signals (1350) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 206,685 213,491 217,100 224,400 3.4%231,100 4011 Overtime-Reg 4,771 14,072 5,000 7,000 40.0%9,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 4,182 4,500 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,500 4021 Overtime-Temp - 127 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 30,569 32,815 33,000 35,000 6.1%36,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 40,026 44,291 48,300 42,000 (13.0%)47,000 4050 Workers Compensation 9,266 9,276 11,000 10,000 (9.1%)10,000 *Total Personal Services 295,498 318,572 319,400 323,400 1.3%338,600 4120 Supplies-Equipment 1,610 502 2,000 1,600 (20.0%)1,600 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 48 60 200 200 0.0%200 4150 Maintenance Materials 113 2,058 600 600 0.0%600 4170 Motor Fuels & Lubricants 144,222 142,536 165,000 155,000 (6.1%)155,000 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 1,055 1,104 1,200 1,300 8.3%1,300 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 2,605 2,293 3,000 3,000 0.0%3,000 *Total Materials & Supplies 149,654 148,552 172,000 161,700 (6.0%)161,700 4300 Fees, Services 4,798 3,539 5,000 4,000 (20.0%)4,000 4310 Telephone 2,432 2,375 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500 4320 Utilities 32,540 36,441 32,000 36,000 12.5%36,000 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 5,145 5,342 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 40 40 200 200 0.0%200 4370 Travel & Training 691 - 800 800 0.0%800 4440 License & Registration - 425 300 300 0.0%300 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 12,451 31,448 12,000 12,000 0.0%12,000 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 8,798 291 3,500 3,500 0.0%3,500 *Total Contractual Services 66,895 79,901 61,800 64,800 4.9%64,800 4703 Office Equipment - - 500 500 0.0%500 4705 Other Equipment 6,761 3,561 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 *Total Capital Outlay 6,761 3,561 5,500 5,500 0.0%5,500 **Total Fleet Department 518,808 550,586 558,700 555,400 (0.6%)570,600 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Fleet Department (1370) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4210 Books & Periodicals - - 200 200 0.0%200 *Total Materials & Supplies - - 200 200 0.0%200 4340 Printing & Publishing 1,090 702 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - - 200 200 0.0%200 4370 Travel & Training 249 126 300 300 0.0%300 *Total Contractual Services 1,338 828 1,500 1,500 0.0%1,500 **Total Planning Commission 1,338 828 1,700 1,700 0.0%1,700 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Planning Commission (1410) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 339,898 366,597 403,400 402,300 (0.3%)414,400 4011 Overtime-Reg - 1,410 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 48,624 52,927 61,000 61,000 0.0%63,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 62,321 65,198 61,000 53,300 (12.6%)60,000 4050 Workers Compensation 2,860 2,888 3,800 3,000 (21.1%)3,200 *Total Personal Services 453,704 489,020 529,200 519,600 (1.8%)540,600 4120 Supplies-Equipment 62 66 300 100 (66.7%)100 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 441 284 100 300 200.0%300 *Total Materials & Supplies 503 350 400 400 0.0%400 4300 Fees, Services 37,392 10,354 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 909 1,894 800 2,000 150.0%2,000 4370 Travel & Training 3,722 385 5,500 4,500 (18.2%)4,500 *Total Contractual Services 42,024 12,633 11,300 11,500 1.8%11,500 **Total Planning Administration 496,230 502,004 540,900 531,500 (1.7%)552,500 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Planning Administration (1420) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 21,852 22,594 22,600 23,300 3.1%24,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 3,220 3,305 3,500 3,500 0.0%3,600 4040 Contributions-Insurance 2,481 2,748 2,900 2,600 (10.3%)2,900 4050 Workers Compensation 182 177 200 200 0.0%200 *Total Personal Services 27,735 28,824 29,200 29,600 1.4%30,700 4300 Fees, Services 14,240 14,737 10,000 14,000 40.0%14,000 4370 Travel & Training 295 - 200 200 0.0%200 4375 Promotional Expense 984 1,316 800 800 0.0%1,000 *Total Contractual Services 15,519 16,052 11,000 15,000 36.4%15,200 **Total Senior Commission 43,254 44,876 40,200 44,600 10.9%45,900 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Senior Commission (1430) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4130 Supplies-Program - 25 100 100 0.0%100 4210 Books & Periodicals - - 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Materials & Supplies - 25 200 200 0.0%200 4340 Printing & Publishing - - 100 100 0.0%100 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - - 500 500 0.0%500 4370 Travel & Training 175 - 400 400 0.0%400 *Total Contractual Services 175 - 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 **Total Park and Rec Commission 175 25 1,200 1,200 0.0%1,200 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Park and Recreation Commission (1510) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 172,863 168,124 182,300 186,700 2.4%192,300 4030 Contributions-Retirement 25,112 23,811 27,600 28,200 2.2%29,100 4040 Contributions-Insurance 26,993 36,543 38,900 33,900 (12.9%)39,000 4050 Workers Compensation 1,452 1,331 1,800 1,500 (16.7%)1,500 *Total Personal Services 226,420 229,809 250,600 250,300 (0.1%)261,900 4120 Supplies-Equipment 16 - 100 100 0.0%100 4130 Supplies-Program - 324 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Materials & Supplies 16 324 200 200 0.0%200 4300 Fees, Services 828 - 300 300 0.0%300 4310 Telephone 617 998 700 700 0.0%700 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 3,448 2,716 3,100 2,800 (9.7%)2,800 4370 Travel & Training 1,821 2,029 1,800 1,800 0.0%1,800 4380 Mileage - - 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Contractual Services 6,713 5,743 6,000 5,700 (5.0%)5,700 **Total Park and Rec Admin.233,149 235,876 256,800 256,200 (0.2%)267,800 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Park and Recreation Administration (1520) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 64,313 66,539 68,100 70,800 4.0%73,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 97,000 103,816 113,000 113,000 0.0%116,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 24,008 25,377 30,000 30,000 0.0%30,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 9,848 10,920 11,600 10,200 (12.1%)12,000 4050 Workers Compensation 9,909 9,667 10,500 10,500 0.0%10,500 *Total Personal Services 205,079 216,319 233,200 234,500 0.6%241,500 4120 Supplies-Equipment 1,358 1,678 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,600 4130 Supplies-Program 13,066 14,884 15,000 15,000 0.0%15,000 4150 Maintenance Materials 450 248 500 500 0.0%500 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 631 500 600 600 0.0%600 *Total Materials & Supplies 15,505 17,310 17,700 17,700 0.0%17,700 4300 Fees, Services 50,812 50,977 52,000 51,000 (1.9%)52,000 4310 Telephone 917 618 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4320 Utilities 35,409 37,345 37,000 37,000 0.0%38,000 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 351 410 400 400 0.0%400 4370 Travel & Training 15 30 400 400 0.0%400 4375 Promotional Expense 700 890 800 800 0.0%800 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 1,978 1,745 2,500 2,000 (20.0%)2,000 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 1,653 1,481 1,800 1,800 0.0%2,000 *Total Contractual Services 91,834 93,496 95,900 94,400 (1.6%)96,600 **Total Recreation Center 312,419 327,125 346,800 346,600 (0.1%)355,800 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Recreation Center (1530) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 8,164 9,121 10,700 11,000 2.8%11,400 4021 Overtime-Temp - 8 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 625 698 700 700 0.0%800 4050 Workers Compensation 500 523 600 600 0.0%600 *Total Personal Services 9,288 10,351 12,000 12,300 2.5%12,800 4130 Supplies-Program 10,477 8,143 9,000 10,000 11.1%10,000 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 200 200 200 200 0.0%200 *Total Materials & Supplies 10,677 8,343 9,200 10,200 10.9%10,200 4300 Fees, Services 35,341 32,346 35,000 35,000 0.0%35,000 4310 Telephone 1,288 1,145 1,200 1,200 0.0%1,200 4320 Utilities 10,765 11,642 11,000 12,000 9.1%12,000 4340 Printing & Publishing 214 268 400 400 0.0%400 4903 Bad Debt Expense - 12 - - 0.0%- *Total Contractual Services 47,607 45,413 47,600 48,600 2.1%48,600 **Total Lake Ann Park Operations 67,573 64,106 68,800 71,100 3.3%71,600 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Lake Ann Park Operations (1540) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 489,295 500,639 457,100 458,000 0.2%471,800 4011 Overtime-Reg 32,956 46,899 30,000 40,000 33.3%46,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 112,282 119,810 118,000 126,000 6.8%133,000 4021 Overtime-Temp 3,829 4,776 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 83,513 86,052 88,000 91,000 3.4%95,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 78,394 81,739 84,000 73,700 (12.3%)82,000 4050 Workers Compensation 36,995 35,687 39,000 37,000 (5.1%)38,000 *Total Personal Services 837,263 875,602 821,100 830,700 1.2%870,800 4120 Supplies-Equipment 45,221 41,455 40,000 41,000 2.5%41,000 4140 Supplies-Vehicles 11,122 3,049 5,000 5,000 0.0%5,000 4150 Maintenance Materials 21,561 35,339 27,000 30,000 11.1%30,000 4151 Irrigation Materials 3,967 1,515 5,000 4,000 (20.0%)4,000 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 2,453 3,304 2,600 3,000 15.4%3,000 4260 Small Tools & Equipment 2,032 1,022 1,200 1,200 0.0%1,200 *Total Materials & Supplies 86,356 85,684 80,800 84,200 4.2%84,200 4300 Fees, Services 52,825 46,982 43,000 45,000 4.7%45,000 4310 Telephone 5,813 6,704 5,900 6,200 5.1%6,200 4320 Utilities 4,796 5,220 4,800 5,200 8.3%5,200 4340 Printing & Publishing 105 254 200 200 0.0%200 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 3,591 3,932 3,700 3,900 5.4%3,900 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships - - 400 400 0.0%400 4370 Travel & Training 2,537 684 1,000 1,000 0.0%1,000 4400 Rental-Land & Buildings 29,984 34,853 36,000 35,000 (2.8%)36,000 4410 Rental-Equipment 1,274 973 700 1,000 42.9%1,000 4440 License & Registration 44 368 300 300 0.0%300 4510 Repair & Maintenance-Building 5,073 134 1,700 1,500 (11.8%)1,500 4520 Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles 2,387 - 100 100 0.0%100 4530 Repair & Maintenance-Equip 8,889 6,344 1,000 3,000 200.0%3,000 4560 Repair & Maintenance-Signs 754 1,159 2,000 1,500 (25.0%)1,500 *Total Contractual Services 118,073 107,608 100,800 104,300 3.5%105,300 **Total Park Maintenance 1,041,692 1,068,895 1,002,700 1,019,200 1.6%1,060,300 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Park Maintenance (1550) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 64,425 77,833 56,200 58,100 3.4%60,000 4030 Contributions-Retirement 9,772 8,907 8,600 8,900 3.5%9,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 3,536 10,900 19,300 16,900 (12.4%)19,000 4050 Workers Compensation 535 493 600 600 0.0%600 *Total Personal Services 78,268 98,133 84,700 84,500 (0.2%)88,600 4120 Supplies-Equipment 41 116 300 300 0.0%300 4130 Supplies-Program 4,431 3,688 4,000 4,000 0.0%4,000 *Total Materials & Supplies 4,472 3,804 4,300 4,300 0.0%4,300 4300 Fees, Services 34,713 27,561 32,000 30,000 (6.3%)30,000 4310 Telephone - 180 - - 0.0%- 4350 Cleaning & Waste Removal 95 98 100 100 0.0%100 4360 Subscriptions & Memberships 110 110 100 100 0.0%100 4370 Travel & Training 222 233 300 300 0.0%300 4375 Promotional Expense 60 11 100 100 0.0%100 4380 Mileage - 82 100 100 0.0%100 *Total Contractual Services 35,200 28,275 32,700 30,700 (6.1%)30,700 **Total Senior Citizens Center 117,940 130,212 121,700 119,500 (1.8%)123,600 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Senior Citizens Center (1560) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 103,215 105,339 121,860 122,900 0.9%126,600 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 64,368 73,798 68,000 78,000 14.7%86,000 4021 Overtime-Temp 402 562 1,000 700 (30.0%)800 4030 Contributions-Retirement 20,434 21,321 27,000 27,000 0.0%29,000 4040 Contributions-Insurance 10,720 11,947 28,000 23,400 (16.4%)27,400 4050 Workers Compensation 4,802 5,148 5,000 5,500 10.0%5,500 *Total Personal Services 203,942 218,116 250,860 257,500 2.6%275,300 4120 Supplies-Equipment 2,019 2,352 2,500 2,300 (8.0%)2,300 4130 Supplies-Program 22,063 19,277 18,000 18,000 0.0%18,000 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 2,035 1,982 1,700 2,000 17.6%2,000 *Total Materials & Supplies 26,117 23,611 22,200 22,300 0.5%22,300 4300 Fees, Services 65,606 58,900 66,600 66,600 0.0%66,600 4310 Telephone 2,155 2,418 2,200 2,400 9.1%2,400 4320 Utilities 4,660 7,447 4,600 7,500 63.0%7,500 4340 Printing & Publishing 9,683 7,477 7,500 7,500 0.0%7,500 4370 Travel & Training 507 364 500 500 0.0%500 4380 Mileage - - 100 100 0.0%100 4400 Rental-Land & Buildings 8,303 8,298 7,000 8,200 17.1%8,200 4410 Rental-Equipment 32,412 35,768 32,000 36,000 12.5%36,000 *Total Contractual Services 123,325 120,673 120,500 128,800 6.9%128,800 **Total Recreation Programs 353,384 362,400 393,560 408,600 3.8%426,400 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Recreation Programs (1600) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4010 Salaries & Wages-Reg 25,806 26,335 13,600 13,700 0.7%14,000 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 1,950 1,100 2,200 2,200 0.0%2,200 4030 Contributions-Retirement 4,020 3,991 2,100 2,100 0.0%2,300 4040 Contributions-Insurance 2,645 2,951 3,100 2,600 (16.1%)3,000 4050 Workers Compensation 337 271 400 400 0.0%400 *Total Personal Services 34,757 34,647 21,400 21,000 (1.9%)21,900 4130 Supplies-Program 4,283 4,424 4,500 3,300 (26.7%)3,300 *Total Materials & Supplies 4,283 4,424 4,500 3,300 (26.7%)3,300 4300 Fees, Services 11,573 11,929 12,500 12,500 0.0%12,500 *Total Contractual Services 11,573 11,929 12,500 12,500 0.0%12,500 **Total Self-Supporting Programs 50,614 51,000 38,400 36,800 (4.2%)37,700 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Self-Supporting Programs (1700) 2019 to 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Account Description Actual Actual Budget Budget % Inc/(Dec)Estimate 4020 Salaries & Wages-Temp 23,393 21,525 26,000 26,000 0.0%27,000 4021 Overtime-Temp - 19 - - 0.0%- 4030 Contributions-Retirement 2,438 2,386 2,800 2,800 0.0%2,800 4050 Workers Compensation 1,481 1,235 1,600 1,600 0.0%1,600 *Total Personal Services 27,311 25,164 30,400 30,400 0.0%31,400 4120 Supplies-Equipment 82 - - 0.0%- 4130 Supplies-Program 2,438 1,573 2,500 2,500 0.0%2,500 4240 Uniforms & Clothing 5,427 4,917 5,400 5,400 0.0%5,400 *Total Materials & Supplies 7,947 6,490 7,900 7,900 0.0%7,900 4375 Promotional Expenses - - 300 300 0.0%300 *Total Contractual Services - - 300 300 0.0%300 **Total Recreation Sports 35,258 31,653 38,600 38,600 0.0%39,600 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE 2020 2021 2020 General Fund Budget Recreation Sports (1800) Dept Chaska*Cottage Grove Inver Grove Lino Lakes Prior Lake Rosemount Savage Shakopee Avg Chanhassen Elk River Stillwater Admin 7.10 8.00 8.00 4.00 6.00 5.00 6.50 9.00 6.70 4.50 NR NR Finance 5.00 6.00 7.60 4.00 6.00 7.00 4.60 4.00 5.53 2.80 NR NR MIS 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.67 1.50 NR NR City Hall Bldg 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 4.00 1.42 1.00 NR NR Fire 5.00 9.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 8.00 3.86 2.50 NR NR Code Enforcement/Insp 6.00 8.60 3.50 4.00 5.00 6.30 6.00 5.63 7.00 NR NR CSO - 2.00 1.50 1.50 2.18 1.00 1.36 1.50 NR NR Engineering 7.00 5.00 9.00 contracted 5.00 4.00 5.00 9.00 6.29 5.75 NR NR Street Maint 13.00 13.00 9.00 6.50 10.00 10.00 10.23 6.00 9.72 8.25 NR NR Fleet Maint 3.00 4.00 3.00 1.50 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.69 3.00 NR NR Planning 13.00 6.00 3.00 1.00 4.50 4.00 2.30 5.00 4.85 4.55 NR NR Senior Commission - N/A - - - 0.25 0.05 0.25 NR NR Park & Rec Admin 54.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 7.00 3.00 2.50 9.06 2.00 NR NR Rec Center 3.00 6.25 N/A - - - 2.50 1.96 1.00 NR NR Park Maint 13.00 13.00 15.00 4.00 8.60 8.00 10.00 9.00 10.08 7.25 NR NR Senior Citizen Center 1.00 N/A - - - 1.00 0.40 1.00 NR NR Rec Programs 1.00 1.00 temps. 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.42 1.80 NR NR Self Support Progs (Adults)- N/A - - - - 0.20 NR NR Cable TV - 1.00 - - 2.50 0.50 0.67 1.25 NR NR Water 7.50 4.50 11.00 3.33 1.00 1.00 6.60 4.99 7.50 NR NR Sewer 7.50 4.50 - 3.33 3.00 1.00 6.60 7.00 4.12 5.50 NR NR Surface Water Mgmt 2.00 - 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 3.50 NR NR 139.10 80.00 98.45 37.15 60.60 62.50 78.81 75.25 78.98 73.60 - - * Chaska has 203.5 FTE, including police, and electric utility services. They have 21.0 FTE in "Administrative Services" most of which has been split into each department NR = Did not respond City of Chanhassen FTE Comparison with KFS CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Perkins & Marie Callender's, LLC Notice of Sale... Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: L.1. Prepared By File No: ATTACHMENTS: Perkins & Marie Callender's, LLC Notice of Sale CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Review of Claims Paid 09232019 Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: L.2. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No: SUMMARY The following claims are submitted for review on September 23, 2019: Check Numbers Amounts 171561 – 171666 $712,525.67 ACH Payments $299,643.75 Total All Claims $1,012,169.42 ATTACHMENTS: Check Summary Check Summary ACH Check Detail Check Detail ACH Accounts Payable User: Printed: dwashburn 9/13/2019 10:07 AM Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount UB*01758 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 09/05/2019 0.00 194.14171561 ALLSTR ALLSTREAM 09/05/2019 0.00 490.84171562 UB*01773 NANCY BAXTER 09/05/2019 0.00 83.18171563 BORSTA BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 09/05/2019 0.00 394.19171564 UB*01786 ADAM & AMBER BRUMBAUGH 09/05/2019 0.00 88.31171565 UB*01765 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 0.00 27.15171566 UB*01770 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 0.00 30.56171567 UB*01782 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 0.00 30.31171568 UB*01783 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 0.00 33.71171569 UB*01784 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 0.00 6.32171570 UB*01789 CCA & T 09/05/2019 0.00 55.30171571 CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/05/2019 0.00 42.10171572 EmbMinn CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 0.00 1,824.47171573 CORMAI CORE & MAIN LP 09/05/2019 0.00 863.11171574 UB*01781 CORNERSTONE TITLE INC 09/05/2019 0.00 18.74171575 CULLIG CULLIGAN 09/05/2019 0.00 100.00171576 UB*01766 CUSTOM HOME BUILDERS TITLE 09/05/2019 0.00 77.66171577 CUTABO CUT ABOVE INC 09/05/2019 0.00 2,400.00171578 DONSOD DON'S SOD SERVICE 09/05/2019 0.00 3,772.00171579 DulSal Dultmeier Sales LLC 09/05/2019 0.00 42.62171580 UB*01777 EDINA REALTY 09/05/2019 0.00 76.46171581 UB*01778 EDINA REALTY TITLE 09/05/2019 0.00 23.76171582 UB*01760 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 09/05/2019 0.00 40.68171583 UB*01774 EXECUTIVE TITLE SERVICES 09/05/2019 0.00 26.00171584 FACMOT FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 09/05/2019 0.00 445.14171585 FerEnt Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. #1657 09/05/2019 0.00 685.64171586 UB*01769 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INC 09/05/2019 0.00 58.34171587 GONHOM GONYEA HOMES 09/05/2019 0.00 2,500.00171588 HEALSTEV Steve Healy 09/05/2019 0.00 102.00171589 UB*01759 ERIC & DANA HUSEMOEN 09/05/2019 0.00 108.50171590 JACMCC JACK MCCLARD & ASSOCIATES 09/05/2019 0.00 171.32171591 LANDTITL Land Title Inc 09/05/2019 0.00 334,053.73171592 LEAMIN LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 09/05/2019 0.00 30.00171593 UB*01756 LIBERTY TITLE INC 09/05/2019 0.00 229.84171594 UB*01761 BRENT MAHER 09/05/2019 0.00 179.88171595 MCKMED McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc 09/05/2019 0.00 493.37171596 MIDPLA MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 09/05/2019 0.00 456.00171597 UB*01771 MINNESOTA TITLE 09/05/2019 0.00 130.95171598 NEWSIG NEWMAN SIGNS INC 09/05/2019 0.00 2,543.84171599 NHAHea NHA Heating & Air Conditioning Inc 09/05/2019 0.00 259.50171600 UB*01764 RICHARD & SARAH PINAMONTI 09/05/2019 0.00 15.61171601 UB*01785 BRYAND & ALLY REHNELT 09/05/2019 0.00 23.51171602 UB*01780 CHRISTOPHER & ANGELA SCOTT 09/05/2019 0.00 45.84171603 UB*01775 PAUL SCOTT 09/05/2019 0.00 263.43171604 Senja Senja Inc 09/05/2019 0.00 200.00171605 UB*01779 JAMES & JESSICA SUTHERLAND 09/05/2019 0.00 42.84171606 UB*01762 CHARLES SWANSON 09/05/2019 0.00 58.52171607 Page 1AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (9/13/2019 10:07 AM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount THUSPE Thul Specialty Contracting Inc 09/05/2019 0.00 19,105.00171608 UB*01768 TITLE MARK LLC 09/05/2019 0.00 11.07171609 UB*01772 TITLE MARK LLC 09/05/2019 0.00 193.07171610 UB*01763 TITLE MARK, LLC 09/05/2019 0.00 23.08171611 UB*01767 TITLE SMART INC 09/05/2019 0.00 37.72171612 UPS UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 09/05/2019 0.00 28.52171613 UB*01787 JOSHUA VICTORIAN 09/05/2019 0.00 142.70171614 WastMana Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/05/2019 0.00 1,238.33171615 UB*01757 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/05/2019 0.00 97.77171616 UB*01788 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/05/2019 0.00 26.55171617 UB*01776 ADAM & KRISTAL WENDT 09/05/2019 0.00 76.19171618 WILNUR WILSON'S NURSERY INC 09/05/2019 0.00 4,094.00171619 APAGRO APACHE GROUP 09/12/2019 0.00 684.96171620 BluCro BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 0.00 87,382.35171621 BERCOF BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 09/12/2019 0.00 1,306.51171622 BORSTA BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 09/12/2019 0.00 1,541.06171623 CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 0.00 472.18171624 CHANVAC Chanhassen Vacuum Sales Center 09/12/2019 0.00 12.85171625 CONPLA Consolidated Plastics Company 09/12/2019 0.00 456.76171626 CulBot Culligan Bottled Water 09/12/2019 0.00 105.07171627 ERSTES ERS Testing LLC 09/12/2019 0.00 33.02171628 FirSaf Fire Safety USA 09/12/2019 0.00 2,250.00171629 GRABAR GRAYBAR 09/12/2019 0.00 6,336.57171630 HARTLIFE Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company09/12/2019 0.00 1,064.44171631 HEALSTEV Steve Healy 09/12/2019 0.00 102.00171632 HenPro Henning Professional Services, Inc 09/12/2019 0.00 13,328.05171633 ICMART ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 09/12/2019 0.00 1,366.67171634 Loc49 IUOE Local #49 09/12/2019 0.00 700.00171635 JAGCOM Jaguar Communications Inc 09/12/2019 0.00 53.60171636 JHLAR JH LARSON COMPANY 09/12/2019 0.00 58.90171637 JMSCUST JMS Custom Homes LLC 09/12/2019 0.00 750.00171638 KENGRA KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 09/12/2019 0.00 6,005.00171639 LANNRYAN Ryan Lannon 09/12/2019 0.00 169.99171640 LAROTONI TONI LAROSE 09/12/2019 0.00 85.00171641 LEAMIN LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 09/12/2019 0.00 20,270.00171642 LENCHE LENZEN CHEVROLET BUICK 09/12/2019 0.00 4,123.01171643 MCKMED McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc 09/12/2019 0.00 57.11171644 MECHCLAY Clayten Mechtel 09/12/2019 0.00 150.00171645 METCO2 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 09/12/2019 0.00 157,423.55171646 MINROA Minnesota Roadways Co 09/12/2019 0.00 257.00171647 MCMA MN CITY/COUNTY MGMT ASSOC.09/12/2019 0.00 202.10171648 NCPERS MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 09/12/2019 0.00 96.00171649 NOBWIN NOBLE WINDOWS INC 09/12/2019 0.00 1,299.37171650 parapart Paragon Party Ponies LLC 09/12/2019 0.00 300.00171651 QUAFIR Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 09/12/2019 0.00 500.00171652 REIGAR Reiman Gardens 09/12/2019 0.00 646.00171653 RIGWAY Right-Way Builders of Wright Co Inc 09/12/2019 0.00 500.00171654 RILBUS RILEY BUS SERVICE INC 09/12/2019 0.00 2,065.00171655 ROSCAR ROSELYN CARPET CLEANERS LLC 09/12/2019 0.00 1,060.00171656 SABIDEAN DEAN SABINSKE 09/12/2019 0.00 199.92171657 sarljodi Jodi Sarles 09/12/2019 0.00 300.00171658 SEH SEH 09/12/2019 0.00 11,437.15171659 SHOTRU SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 09/12/2019 0.00 98.40171660 SIGNSO SIGNSOURCE 09/12/2019 0.00 431.00171661 SOUSUB Southwest Suburban Publishing 09/12/2019 0.00 1,112.52171662 SpeScr Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 09/12/2019 0.00 1,982.63171663 TRIDIM TRI-DIM FILTER CORP 09/12/2019 0.00 124.60171664 Page 2AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (9/13/2019 10:07 AM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount VOSPLU VOSON PLUMBING 09/12/2019 0.00 2,211.92171665 WOODES Woodcraft Design Build Inc 09/12/2019 0.00 2,500.00171666 Report Total (106 checks): 712,525.67 0.00 Page 3AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (9/13/2019 10:07 AM) Accounts Payable Checks by Date - Summary by Check User: dwashburn Printed: 9/13/2019 10:08 AM Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount ACH AMEENG AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 09/05/2019 0.00 21,311.45 ACH AMESOL AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 09/05/2019 0.00 1,708.51 ACH BOLMEN BOLTON & MENK INC 09/05/2019 0.00 18,276.50 ACH BRAINT BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 09/05/2019 0.00 1,768.75 ACH CARCOU Carver County 09/05/2019 0.00 48.00 ACH engwat Engel Water Testing Inc 09/05/2019 0.00 520.00 ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY 09/05/2019 0.00 4.50 ACH FergEnte Ferguson Waterworks #2516 09/05/2019 0.00 2,656.13 ACH HAWCHE HAWKINS CHEMICAL 09/05/2019 0.00 16,678.25 ACH HeaStr Health Strategies 09/05/2019 0.00 346.00 ACH HOIKOE HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 09/05/2019 0.00 11,471.18 ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 09/05/2019 0.00 98.09 ACH AlHiJuli Juli Al-Hilwani 09/05/2019 0.00 34.50 ACH KATFUE KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 09/05/2019 0.00 16,322.99 ACH MACEQU MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT 09/05/2019 0.00 1,136.22 ACH MailEnte Maile Enterprises Inc. 09/05/2019 0.00 2,131.13 ACH MilAut Milestone Auto Inc. 09/05/2019 0.00 255.00 ACH MinEqu Minnesota Equipment 09/05/2019 0.00 568.05 ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/05/2019 0.00 5,667.05 ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 09/05/2019 0.00 42.90 ACH NusEqu Nuss Truck & Equipment 09/05/2019 0.00 32.79 ACH TCIInc TCIC, Inc. 09/05/2019 0.00 2,424.00 ACH USABLU USA BLUE BOOK 09/05/2019 0.00 3,137.20 ACH VERIZO VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 0.00 3,896.19 ACH WAYTEK WAYTEK INC 09/05/2019 0.00 449.68 ACH WMMUE WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/05/2019 0.00 6,253.06 ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 09/05/2019 0.00 16,881.97 ACH BATPLU BATTERIES PLUS 09/12/2019 0.00 57.90 ACH BOYTRU Boyer Ford Trucks 09/12/2019 0.00 163.31 ACH BRAINT BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 09/12/2019 0.00 3,368.50 ACH CARSWC CARVER SWCD 09/12/2019 0.00 220.00 ACH CCPNIM CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/12/2019 0.00 7,161.89 ACH CHOICE Choice, Inc. 09/12/2019 0.00 192.96 ACH DIAVOG DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS 09/12/2019 0.00 489.90 ACH ELEPUM ELECTRIC PUMP INC 09/12/2019 0.00 249.43 ACH GILMEC GILBERT MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS 09/12/2019 0.00 3,687.00 ACH GOPSTA GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 09/12/2019 0.00 911.25 ACH HAWCHE HAWKINS CHEMICAL 09/12/2019 0.00 1,050.00 ACH INDLAN Indoor Landscapes Inc 09/12/2019 0.00 187.00 ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 09/12/2019 0.00 176.74 ACH AlHiJuli Juli Al-Hilwani 09/12/2019 0.00 285.00 ACH KIMHOR KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 09/12/2019 0.00 24,277.22 ACH Marco Marco Inc 09/12/2019 0.00 970.68 ACH MERACE MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 0.00 1,398.38 Page 1 of 2 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount ACH METCO Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 09/12/2019 0.00 110,706.75 ACH MINNOCC MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 09/12/2019 0.00 288.00 ACH MNLABO MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 09/12/2019 0.00 5,465.44 ACH MRPA MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC. 09/12/2019 0.00 185.00 ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 09/12/2019 0.00 146.21 ACH PREMRM PRECISE MRM LLC 09/12/2019 0.00 134.29 ACH ProTec Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 09/12/2019 0.00 261.25 ACH HLBTAU REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD 09/12/2019 0.00 845.00 ACH SafFas Safe-Fast, Inc. 09/12/2019 0.00 36.42 ACH STREIC STREICHER'S 09/12/2019 0.00 625.00 ACH UNIWAY UNITED WAY 09/12/2019 0.00 29.40 ACH USABLU USA BLUE BOOK 09/12/2019 0.00 579.20 ACH VIKIND VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER 09/12/2019 0.00 177.74 ACH WMMUE WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/12/2019 0.00 1,196.80 Report Total: 0.00 299,643.75 Page 2 of 2 Accounts Payable Check Detail-Checks User: dwashburn Printed: 09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM Name Check D Account Description Amount ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 63.23 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 93.22 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 33.26 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.43 ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO INC 194.14 ALLSTREAM 09/05/2019 101-1160-4300 Phone System Maintenance 10/18/19-11/17/19 490.84 ALLSTREAM 490.84 APACHE GROUP 09/12/2019 101-1170-4150 Towels, Hand Soap, Liners, Tissue 684.96 APACHE GROUP 684.96 BAXTER NANCY 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 25.07 BAXTER NANCY 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 38.68 BAXTER NANCY 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 17.15 BAXTER NANCY 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.28 BAXTER NANCY 83.18 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 101-0000-2012 October - Family 46,977.91 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 210-0000-2012 October - Family 1,416.71 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 700-0000-2012 October - Family 6,762.41 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 701-0000-2012 October - Family 4,873.47 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 720-0000-2012 October - Family 2,304.52 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 101-0000-2012 October - Single 19,764.43 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 210-0000-2012 October - Single 755.81 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 700-0000-2012 October - Single 2,550.87 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 701-0000-2012 October - Single 1,795.04 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 720-0000-2012 October - Single 75.58 BCBSM, Inc.09/12/2019 101-1220-4483 October - Firefighter EAP 105.60 BCBSM, Inc. 87,382.35 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 09/12/2019 101-1170-4110 Coffee 580.47 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 09/12/2019 101-1170-4110 Coffee 686.10 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 09/12/2019 101-1170-4110 Coffee 39.94 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 1,306.51 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 09/05/2019 101-1170-4510 Lamps, Emergency Light Fixture 394.19 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 09/12/2019 701-0000-4530 misc parts/supplies 1,514.58 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 09/12/2019 101-1170-4510 Emergency Exit Sign 26.48 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 1 of 11 Name Check D Account Description Amount BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 1,935.25 BRUMBAUGH ADAM & AMBER 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 27.48 BRUMBAUGH ADAM & AMBER 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 43.33 BRUMBAUGH ADAM & AMBER 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 15.44 BRUMBAUGH ADAM & AMBER 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.06 BRUMBAUGH ADAM & AMBER 88.31 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.19 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.09 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.42 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.45 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 28.63 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.93 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 9.62 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 16.28 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.89 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.52 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.84 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.19 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.25 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.43 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.39 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.21 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.52 BURNET TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.20 BURNET TITLE 128.05 CCA & T 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 14.00 CCA & T 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 25.07 CCA & T 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 14.32 CCA & T 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.91 CCA & T 55.30 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/05/2019 101-1370-4320 monthly charges 33.68 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/05/2019 700-0000-4320 monthly charges 4.21 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/05/2019 701-0000-4320 monthly charges 4.21 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 101-1370-4320 monthly charges 59.12 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 700-0000-4320 monthly charges 7.39 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 701-0000-4320 monthly charges 7.39 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 101-1190-4320 monthly charges 186.23 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 700-7043-4320 monthly charges 51.52 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 101-1170-4320 monthly charges 71.99 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 700-0000-4320 monthly charges 15.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 101-1550-4320 monthly charges 21.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 700-7019-4320 monthly charges 21.50 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 701-0000-4320 monthly charges 16.04 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 09/12/2019 101-1600-4320 monthly charges 15.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 514.28 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 101-1540-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 95.40 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 2 of 11 Name Check D Account Description Amount CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 101-1190-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 127.20 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 700-0000-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 15.13 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 700-7019-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 210.27 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 701-0000-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 15.13 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 101-1160-4320 phone charges 8/21-9/20 250.00 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 101-1170-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 829.62 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 700-0000-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 6.36 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 701-0000-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 6.36 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 101-1550-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 30.04 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 101-1350-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 30.04 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 101-1220-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 33.04 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 101-1370-4310 phone charges 8/21-9/20 50.88 CENTURYLINK 09/05/2019 101-1160-4320 phone charges 8/21-9/20 125.00 CENTURYLINK 1,824.47 Chanhassen Vacuum Sales Center 09/12/2019 101-1220-4260 Belts 12.85 Chanhassen Vacuum Sales Center 12.85 Consolidated Plastics Company 09/12/2019 101-1250-4130 Minigrip Bag 456.76 Consolidated Plastics Company 456.76 CORE & MAIN LP 09/05/2019 700-0000-4550 misc parts/supplies 349.80 CORE & MAIN LP 09/05/2019 700-0000-4550 misc parts/supplies 17.68 CORE & MAIN LP 09/05/2019 700-0000-4550 misc parts/supplies 83.07 CORE & MAIN LP 09/05/2019 701-0000-4551 misc parts/supplies 160.30 CORE & MAIN LP 09/05/2019 700-0000-4550 misc parts/supplies 17.98 CORE & MAIN LP 09/05/2019 700-0000-4550 misc parts/supplies 234.28 CORE & MAIN LP 863.11 CORNERSTONE TITLE INC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 6.70 CORNERSTONE TITLE INC 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 11.01 CORNERSTONE TITLE INC 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.61 CORNERSTONE TITLE INC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.42 CORNERSTONE TITLE INC 18.74 CULLIGAN 09/05/2019 101-0000-2033 Overpayment - permit# 2019-02258 100.00 CULLIGAN 100.00 Culligan Bottled Water 09/12/2019 101-1220-4300 bottled water equipment rental fee/water 105.07 Culligan Bottled Water 105.07 CUSTOM HOME BUILDERS TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 29.31 CUSTOM HOME BUILDERS TITLE 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 43.48 CUSTOM HOME BUILDERS TITLE 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.30 CUSTOM HOME BUILDERS TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.57 CUSTOM HOME BUILDERS TITLE 77.66 CUT ABOVE INC 09/05/2019 101-1550-4300 Power Hill Park - Remove large Willow 2,400.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 3 of 11 Name Check D Account Description Amount CUT ABOVE INC 2,400.00 DON'S SOD SERVICE 09/05/2019 101-1550-4300 Sunset Ridge Park - sod 3,108.00 DON'S SOD SERVICE 09/05/2019 101-1550-4300 Greenwood Shores Park - sod 664.00 DON'S SOD SERVICE 3,772.00 Dultmeier Sales LLC 09/05/2019 400-0000-4704 misc parts/supplies 36.95 Dultmeier Sales LLC 09/05/2019 400-0000-4704 misc parts/supplies 5.67 Dultmeier Sales LLC 42.62 EDINA REALTY 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 27.64 EDINA REALTY 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 39.29 EDINA REALTY 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 8.41 EDINA REALTY 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.12 EDINA REALTY 76.46 EDINA REALTY TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 9.07 EDINA REALTY TITLE 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.80 EDINA REALTY TITLE 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.43 EDINA REALTY TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.46 EDINA REALTY TITLE 23.76 ERS Testing LLC 09/12/2019 101-0000-2033 Overpayment on permit# 2019-02384 33.02 ERS Testing LLC 33.02 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.86 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 21.48 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.60 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.74 EXECUTIVE TITLE NORTHWEST LLC 40.68 EXECUTIVE TITLE SERVICES 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 8.14 EXECUTIVE TITLE SERVICES 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.13 EXECUTIVE TITLE SERVICES 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.18 EXECUTIVE TITLE SERVICES 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.55 EXECUTIVE TITLE SERVICES 26.00 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 09/05/2019 700-0000-4120 misc parts/supplies 445.14 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 445.14 Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. #1657 09/05/2019 700-7019-4150 Drain Grate, Locking Device 355.32 Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. #1657 09/05/2019 700-7019-4150 Drain Grate, Locking Device 330.32 Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. #1657 685.64 Fire Safety USA 09/12/2019 400-4127-4705 Groves Single Sided Mobile Red Rack 2,250.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 4 of 11 Name Check D Account Description Amount Fire Safety USA 2,250.00 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 17.53 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INC 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 27.02 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INC 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.17 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.62 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INC 58.34 GONYEA HOMES 09/05/2019 815-8226-2024 As-Built Escrow - 7575 Fawn Hill Road 2,500.00 GONYEA HOMES 2,500.00 GRAYBAR 09/12/2019 701-0000-4530 Schneider Electric USA Inc/Compact Drive 1,497.27 GRAYBAR 09/12/2019 101-1350-4120 Millerbernd Design and Fabrication 4,839.30 GRAYBAR 6,336.57 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1120-4040 September 2019 - LTD 70.40 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1130-4040 September 2019 - LTD 49.27 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1160-4040 September 2019 - LTD 26.39 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1250-4040 September 2019 - LTD 106.39 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1310-4040 September 2019 - LTD 71.02 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1320-4040 September 2019 - LTD 143.93 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1370-4040 September 2019 - LTD 46.30 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1520-4040 September 2019 - LTD 35.96 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1530-4040 September 2019 - LTD 14.61 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1560-4040 September 2019 - LTD 11.99 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1600-4040 September 2019 - LTD 16.16 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1700-4040 September 2019 - LTD 1.80 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1550-4040 September 2019 - LTD 94.49 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1420-4040 September 2019 - LTD 80.50 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1430-4040 September 2019 - LTD 4.81 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 210-0000-4040 September 2019 - LTD 18.03 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 720-7201-4040 September 2019 - LTD 5.68 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 720-7202-4040 September 2019 - LTD 5.68 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1170-4040 September 2019 - LTD 12.61 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 101-1220-4040 September 2019 - LTD 43.14 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 701-0000-4040 September 2019 - LTD 77.59 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 700-0000-4040 September 2019 - LTD 104.31 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 09/12/2019 720-0000-4040 September 2019 - LTD 23.38 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 1,064.44 Healy Steve 09/05/2019 101-1767-4300 Adult Softball Umpire - 4 games, 8/29/19 102.00 Healy Steve 09/12/2019 101-1767-4300 Adult Softball Umpire - 4 games, 9/5/19 102.00 Healy Steve 204.00 Henning Professional Services, Inc 09/12/2019 605-0000-4300 TH 101 from CSAH 61 to CSAH 14 - svc through Aug 2019 12,985.95 Henning Professional Services, Inc 09/12/2019 605-0000-4300 Carty Relocation - svc through Aug 2019 342.10 Henning Professional Services, Inc 13,328.05 HUSEMOEN ERIC & DANA 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 38.50 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 5 of 11 Name Check D Account Description Amount HUSEMOEN ERIC & DANA 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 58.42 HUSEMOEN ERIC & DANA 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.22 HUSEMOEN ERIC & DANA 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.36 HUSEMOEN ERIC & DANA 108.50 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 09/12/2019 101-0000-2009 09/13/2019 ID #304303 1,060.42 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 09/12/2019 700-0000-2009 09/13/2019 ID #304303 150.63 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 09/12/2019 701-0000-2009 09/13/2019 ID #304303 154.36 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 09/12/2019 720-0000-2009 09/13/2019 ID #304303 1.26 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 1,366.67 IUOE Local #49 09/12/2019 101-0000-2004 PR Batch 00413.09.2019 Local 49 dues 448.00 IUOE Local #49 09/12/2019 700-0000-2004 PR Batch 00413.09.2019 Local 49 dues 151.76 IUOE Local #49 09/12/2019 701-0000-2004 PR Batch 00413.09.2019 Local 49 dues 100.24 IUOE Local #49 700.00 JACK MCCLARD & ASSOCIATES 09/05/2019 101-1370-4120 Seal Kit, Release Valve 171.32 JACK MCCLARD & ASSOCIATES 171.32 Jaguar Communications Inc 09/12/2019 700-7043-4310 monthly charges 53.60 Jaguar Communications Inc 53.60 JH LARSON COMPANY 09/12/2019 101-1190-4510 Lamps 58.90 JH LARSON COMPANY 58.90 JMS Custom Homes LLC 09/12/2019 815-8201-2024 Landscape Erosion - 7530 Fawn Hill 750.00 JMS Custom Homes LLC 750.00 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 09/12/2019 605-0000-4300 Acquisition of Right of Way for CR 101 - svc through 7/31/19 6,005.00 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 6,005.00 Land Title Inc 09/05/2019 720-0000-4701 770 Pioneer Trail - 25.0260400 334,053.73 Land Title Inc 334,053.73 Lannon Ryan 09/12/2019 101-1550-4240 Clothing allowance - Boots 169.99 Lannon Ryan 169.99 LAROSE TONI 09/12/2019 101-1761-3636 Refund Paddle & Grub Club Session 2 85.00 LAROSE TONI 85.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 09/05/2019 101-1110-4360 Minnesota Mayors Assoc Annual Dues 2019 - E Ryan 30.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 09/12/2019 101-1110-4360 Membership Dues 2019-2020 20,270.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 20,300.00 LENZEN CHEVROLET BUICK 09/12/2019 400-0000-4520 Repair - GMC Sierra Right Side 4,123.01 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 6 of 11 Name Check D Account Description Amount LENZEN CHEVROLET BUICK 4,123.01 LIBERTY TITLE INC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 73.89 LIBERTY TITLE INC 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 130.83 LIBERTY TITLE INC 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 22.17 LIBERTY TITLE INC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.95 LIBERTY TITLE INC 229.84 MAHER BRENT 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 56.84 MAHER BRENT 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 101.13 MAHER BRENT 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.34 MAHER BRENT 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.57 MAHER BRENT 179.88 McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc 09/05/2019 101-1220-4130 Naloxone 197.87 McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc 09/05/2019 101-1220-4130 Naloxone 295.50 McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc 09/12/2019 101-1220-4130 Gloves 57.11 McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc 550.48 Mechtel Clayten 09/12/2019 101-1537-4300 Barnyard Boogie DJ 150.00 Mechtel Clayten 150.00 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 09/12/2019 701-0000-4509 Waste Water Services - Oct 2019 157,423.55 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 157,423.55 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 09/05/2019 101-1550-4530 Belt Seats, Swing Hangers, Clevis 456.00 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 456.00 Minnesota Roadways Co 09/12/2019 420-0000-4751 CSS-1H Asphalt Emulsion 257.00 Minnesota Roadways Co 257.00 MINNESOTA TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 28.73 MINNESOTA TITLE 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 70.90 MINNESOTA TITLE 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 27.64 MINNESOTA TITLE 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.68 MINNESOTA TITLE 130.95 MN CITY/COUNTY MGMT ASSOC.09/12/2019 101-1120-4360 Membership Renewal - Gerhardt 202.10 MN CITY/COUNTY MGMT ASSOC. 202.10 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 09/12/2019 101-0000-2011 PR Batch 00413.09.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 68.01 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 09/12/2019 210-0000-2011 PR Batch 00413.09.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 8.00 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 09/12/2019 700-0000-2011 PR Batch 00413.09.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 9.50 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 09/12/2019 701-0000-2011 PR Batch 00413.09.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 9.70 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 09/12/2019 720-0000-2011 PR Batch 00413.09.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 0.79 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 7 of 11 Name Check D Account Description Amount MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 96.00 NEWMAN SIGNS INC 09/05/2019 101-1320-4560 Signs 2,543.84 NEWMAN SIGNS INC 2,543.84 NHA Heating & Air Conditioning Inc 09/05/2019 700-7019-4550 Svc Cutler Hammer 259.50 NHA Heating & Air Conditioning Inc 259.50 NOBLE WINDOWS INC 09/12/2019 101-1370-4510 Bad Seals - Public Works 235.96 NOBLE WINDOWS INC 09/12/2019 101-1170-4510 Bad Seals - City Office 360.08 NOBLE WINDOWS INC 09/12/2019 101-1220-4510 Bad Seals - Fire Station 1 703.33 NOBLE WINDOWS INC 1,299.37 Paragon Party Ponies LLC 09/12/2019 101-1537-4300 Deluxe petting zoo - Barnyard Boogie 300.00 Paragon Party Ponies LLC 300.00 PINAMONTI RICHARD & SARAH 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.97 PINAMONTI RICHARD & SARAH 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 8.51 PINAMONTI RICHARD & SARAH 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.88 PINAMONTI RICHARD & SARAH 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.25 PINAMONTI RICHARD & SARAH 15.61 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 09/12/2019 101-1370-4350 August 2019 general cleaning 400.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 09/12/2019 700-0000-4350 August 2019 general cleaning 50.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 09/12/2019 701-0000-4350 August 2019 general cleaning 50.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 500.00 REHNELT BRYAND & ALLY 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 7.37 REHNELT BRYAND & ALLY 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 11.91 REHNELT BRYAND & ALLY 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.73 REHNELT BRYAND & ALLY 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.50 REHNELT BRYAND & ALLY 23.51 Reiman Gardens 09/12/2019 101-1560-4300 Tour w/Cafe Deli Lunch 646.00 Reiman Gardens 646.00 Right-Way Builders of Wright Co Inc 09/12/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 1360 Oakside Circle 500.00 Right-Way Builders of Wright Co Inc 500.00 RILEY BUS SERVICE INC 09/12/2019 101-1560-4300 Bus Service for extended overnight Iowa trip 2,065.00 RILEY BUS SERVICE INC 2,065.00 ROSELYN CARPET CLEANERS LLC 09/12/2019 101-1190-4300 Carpet Cleaning, Strip & Wax - Library 880.00 ROSELYN CARPET CLEANERS LLC 09/12/2019 101-1170-4300 Carpet Cleaning - City Hall 180.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 8 of 11 Name Check D Account Description Amount ROSELYN CARPET CLEANERS LLC 1,060.00 SABINSKE DEAN 09/12/2019 101-1320-4240 Clothing allowance - jeans 199.92 SABINSKE DEAN 199.92 Sarles Jodi 09/12/2019 101-0000-1028 Petty Cash - Barnyard Boogie change 300.00 Sarles Jodi 300.00 SCOTT CHRISTOPHER & ANGELA 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.56 SCOTT CHRISTOPHER & ANGELA 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 25.35 SCOTT CHRISTOPHER & ANGELA 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 6.12 SCOTT CHRISTOPHER & ANGELA 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.81 SCOTT CHRISTOPHER & ANGELA 45.84 SCOTT PAUL 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 83.94 SCOTT PAUL 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 149.77 SCOTT PAUL 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 26.23 SCOTT PAUL 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 3.49 SCOTT PAUL 263.43 SEH 09/12/2019 701-7052-4751 CHANH PP I&I Study 11,632.95 SEH 09/12/2019 701-7052-4751 CHANH PP I&I Study -39.16 SEH 09/12/2019 701-7052-4751 CHANH PP I&I Study -156.64 SEH 11,437.15 Senja Inc 09/05/2019 101-1539-4300 Tai Chi instruction 200.00 Senja Inc 200.00 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 09/12/2019 101-1190-4510 Water Softner 38.94 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 09/12/2019 101-1170-4260 Tape 10.99 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 09/12/2019 101-1170-4510 Wall Anchors 32.99 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 09/12/2019 101-1220-4510 Cleaner and Bulbs 15.48 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 98.40 SIGNSOURCE 09/12/2019 720-7202-4300 Exterior Sign Panels and Stakes - Pollinator Habitat 431.00 SIGNSOURCE 431.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing 09/12/2019 300-0000-4300 printing/advertising 39.54 Southwest Suburban Publishing 09/12/2019 101-1530-4375 printing/advertising 526.40 Southwest Suburban Publishing 09/12/2019 101-1110-4340 printing/advertising 82.38 Southwest Suburban Publishing 09/12/2019 101-1310-4340 printing/advertising 322.51 Southwest Suburban Publishing 09/12/2019 101-1410-4340 printing/advertising 141.69 Southwest Suburban Publishing 1,112.52 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 09/12/2019 101-1806-4240 Shirts 1,557.63 Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 09/12/2019 101-1807-4240 Shirts 425.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 9 of 11 Name Check D Account Description Amount Spectrum Screen Printing Inc 1,982.63 SUTHERLAND JAMES & JESSICA 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 9.85 SUTHERLAND JAMES & JESSICA 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 27.94 SUTHERLAND JAMES & JESSICA 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.46 SUTHERLAND JAMES & JESSICA 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.59 SUTHERLAND JAMES & JESSICA 42.84 SWANSON CHARLES 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 20.72 SWANSON CHARLES 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 22.79 SWANSON CHARLES 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 13.24 SWANSON CHARLES 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.77 SWANSON CHARLES 58.52 Thul Specialty Contracting Inc 09/05/2019 701-0000-4551 2019 Manhole Repairs and Sealing 19,105.00 Thul Specialty Contracting Inc 19,105.00 TITLE MARK LLC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 11.07 TITLE MARK LLC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 64.98 TITLE MARK LLC 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 107.61 TITLE MARK LLC 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 18.07 TITLE MARK LLC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.41 TITLE MARK LLC 204.14 TITLE MARK, LLC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 7.13 TITLE MARK, LLC 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 10.92 TITLE MARK, LLC 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.44 TITLE MARK, LLC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.59 TITLE MARK, LLC 23.08 TITLE SMART INC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 11.97 TITLE SMART INC 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 21.17 TITLE SMART INC 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 4.04 TITLE SMART INC 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.54 TITLE SMART INC 37.72 TRI-DIM FILTER CORP 09/12/2019 101-1190-4510 Filters for Fresh Air 124.60 TRI-DIM FILTER CORP 124.60 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 09/05/2019 101-1320-4300 City to Newman Signs 28.52 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 28.52 VICTORIAN JOSHUA 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 45.10 VICTORIAN JOSHUA 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 75.35 VICTORIAN JOSHUA 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 19.64 VICTORIAN JOSHUA 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 2.61 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 10 of 11 Name Check D Account Description Amount VICTORIAN JOSHUA 142.70 VOSON PLUMBING 09/12/2019 700-0000-3664 Refund Turbine on permit # 2019-01363 1,030.00 VOSON PLUMBING 09/12/2019 700-0000-2021 Refund Turbine on permit # 2019-01363 75.96 VOSON PLUMBING 09/12/2019 700-0000-3664 Refund Turbine on permit # 2019-01364 1,030.00 VOSON PLUMBING 09/12/2019 700-0000-2021 Refund Turbine on permit # 2019-01364 75.96 VOSON PLUMBING 2,211.92 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/05/2019 101-1220-4350 garbage service - Sept 2019 71.87 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/05/2019 101-1170-4350 garbage service - Sept 2019 191.21 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/05/2019 101-1220-4350 garbage service - Sept 2019 27.57 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/05/2019 101-1190-4350 garbage service - Sept 2019 223.67 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/05/2019 101-1370-4350 garbage service - Sept 2019 176.44 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/05/2019 700-0000-4350 garbage service - Sept 2019 22.06 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/05/2019 701-0000-4350 garbage service - Sept 2019 22.06 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 09/05/2019 101-1550-4350 garbage service - Sept 2019 503.45 Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc 1,238.33 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 33.30 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 50.58 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 12.26 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 1.63 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.79 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 7.40 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 17.86 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.50 WATERMARK TITLE AGENCY 124.32 WENDT ADAM & KRISTAL 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 29.30 WENDT ADAM & KRISTAL 09/05/2019 701-0000-2020 Refund Check 40.55 WENDT ADAM & KRISTAL 09/05/2019 720-0000-2020 Refund Check 5.59 WENDT ADAM & KRISTAL 09/05/2019 700-0000-2020 Refund Check 0.75 WENDT ADAM & KRISTAL 76.19 WILSON'S NURSERY INC 09/05/2019 101-1550-4300 Removal of shrubs, Mulch, soil, Spireaea's 4,094.00 WILSON'S NURSERY INC 4,094.00 Woodcraft Design Build Inc 09/12/2019 815-8226-2024 As-Built Escrow - 6675 Horseshoe Curve 2,500.00 Woodcraft Design Build Inc 2,500.00 712,525.67 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (09/13/2019 - 10:08 AM)Page 11 of 11 Accounts Payable Check Detail-ACH User: dwashburn Printed: 09/13/2019 - 10:09 AM Name Check Da Account Description Amount Al-Hilwani Juli 09/05/2019 101-1533-4300 Personal Training 34.50 Al-Hilwani Juli 09/12/2019 101-1533-4300 Personal Training 285.00 Al-Hilwani Juli 319.50 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 09/05/2019 605-0000-4300 CSAH 101 Improvements 21,311.45 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 21,311.45 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 09/05/2019 101-1130-4340 Envelopes 208.67 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 09/05/2019 700-0000-4340 Utility Bill Envelopes 431.84 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 09/05/2019 701-0000-4340 Utility Bill Envelopes 431.83 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 09/05/2019 700-0000-4340 Utility Bill Window Envelopes 318.08 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 09/05/2019 701-0000-4340 Utility Bill Window Envelopes 318.09 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 1,708.51 BATTERIES PLUS 09/12/2019 700-7019-4150 6V Lead Batteries 57.90 BATTERIES PLUS 57.90 BOLTON & MENK INC 09/05/2019 601-6045-4300 Powers Blvd/Lake Lucy Rd Pedestrian Improvements 18,276.50 BOLTON & MENK INC 18,276.50 Boyer Ford Trucks 09/12/2019 101-1320-4140 misc parts/supplies 163.31 Boyer Ford Trucks 163.31 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 09/05/2019 601-6038-4752 Orchard Lane Area CP 18-01 - svc through 8/10/19 1,768.75 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 09/12/2019 601-6039-4752 Lake Drive Impts SAP 194-110-005 - svc through 8/30/19 3,368.50 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION 5,137.25 Carver County 09/05/2019 101-1320-4120 Recycle Tires 48.00 Carver County 48.00 CARVER SWCD 09/12/2019 400-0000-1155 4/4/19 CSEC Monitoring/Inspections - Arbor Glen Site 110.00 CARVER SWCD 09/12/2019 400-0000-1155 4/4/19 CSEC Monitoring/Inspections - Mission Hills Site 110.00 CARVER SWCD 220.00 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/12/2019 101-1220-4320 August 2019 119.92 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/12/2019 101-1350-4320 August 2019 3,131.79 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/12/2019 101-1540-4320 August 2019 352.90 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/12/2019 101-1550-4320 August 2019 377.05 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (09/13/2019 - 10:09 AM)Page 1 of 6 Name Check Da Account Description Amount CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/12/2019 101-1600-4320 August 2019 28.81 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/12/2019 700-0000-4320 August 2019 112.87 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/12/2019 700-7019-4320 August 2019 1,747.51 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 09/12/2019 701-0000-4320 August 2019 1,291.04 CCP NI MASTER TENANT 4 LLC 7,161.89 Choice, Inc.09/12/2019 101-1220-4350 fire station cleaning 7/15-8/9 192.96 Choice, Inc. 192.96 DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS 09/12/2019 420-0000-4751 White MN ACR TRF FD 489.90 DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS 489.90 ELECTRIC PUMP INC 09/12/2019 701-0000-4530 Lifting Handle 249.43 ELECTRIC PUMP INC 249.43 Engel Water Testing Inc 09/05/2019 700-0000-4300 26 water samples - Aug 2019 520.00 Engel Water Testing Inc 520.00 FASTENAL COMPANY 09/05/2019 700-0000-4120 T-Bolt Clamp 4.50 FASTENAL COMPANY 4.50 Ferguson Waterworks #2516 09/05/2019 700-0000-4250 N-Sight Plus Software Annual Maint 2,656.13 Ferguson Waterworks #2516 2,656.13 GILBERT MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS09/12/2019 700-0000-4510 Demo of HVAC at Galpin Blvd pump house 3,687.00 GILBERT MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS 3,687.00 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 09/12/2019 400-0000-4300 August 2019 tickets 911.25 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 911.25 HAWKINS CHEMICAL 09/05/2019 700-7043-4160 Chemicals 16,678.25 HAWKINS CHEMICAL 09/12/2019 700-7043-4160 Chemicals 1,050.00 HAWKINS CHEMICAL 17,728.25 Health Strategies 09/05/2019 101-1220-4300 Medical Exam, Mask Fit 346.00 Health Strategies 346.00 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 09/05/2019 410-0000-4300 Proj 019-035 Chanhassen Lake Ann Trail - July 2019 11,471.18 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 11,471.18 Indoor Landscapes Inc 09/12/2019 101-1170-4300 September Plant Service 187.00 Indoor Landscapes Inc 187.00 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 09/05/2019 101-1170-4110 Pens 7.94 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (09/13/2019 - 10:09 AM)Page 2 of 6 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Innovative Office Solutions LLC 09/05/2019 101-1170-4110 Ink Roller, Tape, Note Pads 34.18 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 09/05/2019 101-1170-4110 Labels, Paper 55.97 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 09/12/2019 101-1170-4110 Pens, Pencils, Markers, Cups 82.16 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 09/12/2019 101-1170-4110 Calendars 94.58 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 274.83 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 09/05/2019 101-1370-4170 Unleaded 87 Eth 10 16,322.99 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 16,322.99 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC09/12/2019 400-0000-1155 Private Dev Field Observ - svc through 7/31/19 8,258.00 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC09/12/2019 601-6043-4752 Minnewashta Parkway Rehab - svc through 7/31/19 16,019.22 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 24,277.22 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT 09/05/2019 701-0000-4120 Pendant Control 8 Button w/Vac 1,136.22 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT 1,136.22 Maile Enterprises Inc.09/05/2019 700-0000-4550 5' Hydrafinder fire hydrant markers 2,131.13 Maile Enterprises Inc. 2,131.13 Marco Inc 09/12/2019 101-1170-4410 Monthly maintenance charges - Sept 2019 720.68 Marco Inc 09/12/2019 700-0000-4410 Monthly maintenance charges - Sept 2019 100.00 Marco Inc 09/12/2019 701-0000-4410 Monthly maintenance charges - Sept 2019 100.00 Marco Inc 09/12/2019 720-0000-4410 Monthly maintenance charges - Sept 2019 50.00 Marco Inc 970.68 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 101-1220-4120 misc parts/supplies 74.65 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 101-1220-4290 misc parts/supplies 19.40 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 101-1320-4140 misc parts/supplies 9.38 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 101-1550-4120 misc parts/supplies 628.55 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 101-1550-4150 misc parts/supplies 14.92 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 101-1600-4130 misc parts/supplies 31.47 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 101-1731-4130 misc parts/supplies 20.68 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 700-0000-4120 misc parts/supplies 264.13 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 700-0000-4150 misc parts/supplies 71.39 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 700-0000-4260 misc parts/supplies 91.72 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 700-7019-4120 misc parts/supplies 18.15 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 700-7019-4150 misc parts/supplies 74.26 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 09/12/2019 700-7043-4150 misc parts/supplies 79.68 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE 1,398.38 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 09/12/2019 101-1250-3816 SAC - August 2019 -1,118.25 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 09/12/2019 701-0000-2023 SAC - August 2019 111,825.00 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 110,706.75 Milestone Auto Inc.09/05/2019 101-1550-4120 misc parts/supplies 255.00 Milestone Auto Inc. 255.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (09/13/2019 - 10:09 AM)Page 3 of 6 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Minnesota Equipment 09/05/2019 101-1550-4120 misc parts/supplies 409.44 Minnesota Equipment 09/05/2019 101-1320-4120 misc parts/supplies 158.61 Minnesota Equipment 568.05 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH09/12/2019 101-1370-4300 Drug Screens - T Bresnahan, A Stark 124.00 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH09/12/2019 101-1550-4300 Drug Screens/Alcohol Test - A Beers, A Farrell 164.00 MINNESOTA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 288.00 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 09/12/2019 101-1250-3818 Surcharge - August 2019 -111.54 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 09/12/2019 101-0000-2022 Surcharge - August 2019 5,576.98 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 5,465.44 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC.09/12/2019 101-1766-4300 USSSA Tournament Men's D 185.00 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC. 185.00 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/05/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 30.33 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/05/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 138.89 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/05/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 69.09 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/05/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 31.28 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/05/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 4,693.17 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/05/2019 101-1600-4320 electricity charges 34.04 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/05/2019 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 152.80 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/05/2019 701-0000-4320 electricity charges 462.61 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 09/05/2019 605-0000-4300 electricity charges 54.84 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 5,667.05 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 09/05/2019 101-1550-4120 UJoint 42.90 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 09/12/2019 101-1550-4120 Carburetor Kit 10.45 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 09/12/2019 101-1550-4140 Brake Rotor 135.76 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 189.11 Nuss Truck & Equipment 09/05/2019 101-1320-4140 misc parts/supplies 32.79 Nuss Truck & Equipment 32.79 PRECISE MRM LLC 09/12/2019 101-1320-4310 Data Plan - July 2019 134.29 PRECISE MRM LLC 134.29 Pro-Tec Design, Inc.09/12/2019 101-1370-4510 SVC Call - Repair Utility Man Door Sensor 261.25 Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 261.25 REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD 09/12/2019 700-7050-4300 Assistance with sales tax refund claim 845.00 REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD 845.00 Safe-Fast, Inc.09/12/2019 101-1320-4240 Ear Plugs 36.42 Safe-Fast, Inc. 36.42 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (09/13/2019 - 10:09 AM)Page 4 of 6 Name Check Da Account Description Amount STREICHER'S 09/12/2019 101-1260-4120 CSO Vest 625.00 STREICHER'S 625.00 TCIC, Inc.09/05/2019 701-0000-4530 misc parts/supplies 2,424.00 TCIC, Inc. 2,424.00 UNITED WAY 09/12/2019 101-0000-2006 PR Batch 00413.09.2019 United Way 29.40 UNITED WAY 29.40 USA BLUE BOOK 09/05/2019 700-0000-4550 Hydrant Meter w/Backflow 3,137.20 USA BLUE BOOK 09/12/2019 700-0000-4530 Hydrant Gate Valve 579.20 USA BLUE BOOK 3,716.40 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1220-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 40.01 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1550-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 457.37 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1520-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 42.80 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1600-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 144.16 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1530-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 42.80 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 700-0000-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 572.21 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 701-0000-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 419.32 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 720-0000-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 108.15 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1160-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 90.60 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1120-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 225.64 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1170-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 25.34 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1260-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 35.01 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1130-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 42.80 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1250-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 290.65 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1310-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 224.09 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1370-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 93.48 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1320-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 322.33 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/05/2019 101-1220-4310 phone charges 7/19-8/18 719.43 VERIZON WIRELESS 3,896.19 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER 09/12/2019 700-0000-4240 Lime Sweatshirts, Safety Glasses 177.74 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER 177.74 WAYTEK INC 09/05/2019 400-0000-4704 misc parts/supplies 449.68 WAYTEK INC 449.68 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/05/2019 420-0000-4751 7901 Park Place - Lundquist CY 120.00 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/05/2019 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant - 1/4" Fine Mix 343.40 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/05/2019 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant - 1/2" Blacktop 1,168.08 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/05/2019 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant - Blacktop, Fine Mix 3,123.98 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/05/2019 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant - Blacktop, Fine Mix 728.35 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/05/2019 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant - Fine Mix 769.25 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/12/2019 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant - 1/4" Fine Mix 514.25 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/12/2019 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant - 1/4" Fine Mix 344.25 WM MUELLER & SONS INC 09/12/2019 420-0000-4751 Asphalt Plant - 1/4" Fine Mix 338.30 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (09/13/2019 - 10:09 AM)Page 5 of 6 Name Check Da Account Description Amount WM MUELLER & SONS INC 7,449.86 XCEL ENERGY INC 09/05/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 16,881.97 XCEL ENERGY INC 16,881.97 299,643.75 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (09/13/2019 - 10:09 AM)Page 6 of 6 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, September 23, 2019 Subject Citizen Action Request Followup Letter to Mack Titus 09132019 Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: L.3. Prepared By Jason Wedel, Director of Public Works/City Engineer File No: ATTACHMENTS: Mack Titus Letter 09132019