The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2023-03-23 Council Agenda Packet RevisedCorcoran City Council Agenda 1.Call to Order / Roll Call 2.Pledge of Allegiance 3.Agenda Approval 4.Commission Representatives* 5.Open Forum – Public Comment Opportunity 6.Presentations/Recognitions 7.Consent Agenda a.2022-06-23 Draft Work Session Minutes* b.2023-02-09 Draft Council Minutes* c.Financial Claims* d.CSAH 10 & Brockton Lane Turn Lane Improvements – Accept Plans/Specs; Authorize Bids* e.Horseshoe Bend Drive Drainage Improvements - Engineering Design Services Proposal* f.City Center Drive and 79th Place Street Improvements – Engineering Design Services Proposal* g.Schedule Work Session – Rental Ordinance – April 13* h.2023 Fee Schedule Amendment* 8.Planning Business – Public Comment Opportunity a.Concept Sketch Plan – Amira Village* b.PUD Zoning Ordinance Discussion* 9.Unfinished Business – Public Comment Opportunity a.2023A Bonds Discussion* b.Cropland Rental Discussion* c.Commissioner Appointments* d.RFPs – Additional Information on Financials for City vs. Developer Costs* e.Photography Donation Update* 10.New Business – Public Comment Opportunity 11.Staff Reports a.Planning Project Update* b.Downtown Utility Services Connection Letter* c.2022 Minutes Update* 12.Closed Session -- Hackamore Road Project and Purchase of Property* 13.2023 City Council Schedule* 14.Adjournment *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the Council Chambers Agenda Packet book located by the entrance. The complete Council Agenda Packet is available electronically on the City website at www.corcoranmn.gov. HYBRID MEETING OPTION AVAILABLE The public is invited to attend the regular Council meetings at City Hall. Meeting Via Telephone/Other Electronic Means Call-in Instructions: +1 312 626 6799 US Enter Meeting ID: 859 1482 0601 Press *9 to speak during the Public Comment Sections in the meeting. Video Link and Instructions: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85914820601 visit http://www.zoom.us and enter Meeting ID: 859 1482 0601 Participants can utilize the Raise Hand function to be recognized to speak during the Public Comment sections in the meeting. Participant video feeds will be muted. In-person comments will be received first, with the hybrid electronic means option following. For more information on options to provide www.corcoranmn.gov * March 23, 2023 - 7:00 pm REVISED MARCH 21, 2023 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item : 4. Council Meeting: Prepared By: Topic: Action Required: Summary : • • Financial/Budget: Attachments: DRAFT1 CITY OF CORCORAN City Council Work Session Minutes June 23, 2022 – 5:30 pm The Corcoran City Council met on June 23, 2022, in Corcoran, Minnesota. The City Council work session meeting was held in person and the public was present in person and remotely through electronic means using the audio and video conferencing platform Zoom. Mayor McKee, Councilor Bottema, and Councilor Nichols were present. Councilor Schultz and Councilor Vehrenkamp were excused. City Administrator Beise, Public Works Director Mattson, and Director of Public Safety Gottschalk were present. 1.Call to Order / Roll Call Mayor McKee called the work session to order at 5:30 pm. 2.Police Officer Recruitment and Retention Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the police officer recruitment and retention is a separate but related conversation to overall police officer compensation and incentives discussed are specific to police officers. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted some of the incentives do not have wellness initiatives, and some are incentives other police departments offer. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk reviewed possible impacts and effects that may occur depending on Council consensus. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk outlined the current shortage of good employees within law enforcement and noted the first goal would be retention of the current staff with the police department and focusing on being the best, small-city workplace as Corcoran will not likely be the highest paid wages city. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk reviewed a recent correspondence sent to Corcoran police officers to suggest recruitment and retention ideas. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk reviewed the correspondence indicated a paid sabbatical that supports police officer mental health aspects and noted the City of Painesville currently has a sabbatical program. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the City’s mental health care provider regarded sabbaticals as an option police agencies should consider for officer wellness. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted mental injuries of officers and the necessity to focus on mental health support. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the sabbatical program would cycle every 4 years, for approximately 30 days for police officers, noted it takes approximately 8 days for a person to reach an initial peak recovery period to de-stress. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the next item within the correspondence was vacation reimbursement. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted vacation reimbursement would encourage officers to enjoy recreation during their time off, rather than taking the time off to work a second job. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted it would be structured as a reimbursement for travel or recreation expenses,to support mental wellness and encourage officers to connect with family members. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk added the officer could determine whatever family trip they chose, but would submit for approvable, reimbursable vacation expenses and included an example of $1,000 per year, and carried over for up to three years, and could be used in conjunction if there was consideration for the sabbatical and the vacation reimbursement. Council noted it would make sense to vary the amount based on seniority or tenure, or rank within the force to incentivize officers. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the option as a possibility as long as there was not a wage equity issue related to age. City Administrator Beise added additional review would be necessary and noted generally equity is based on base pay but noted a need to verify impacts.Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the vacation reimbursement would be tied to a requirement that the officer is accomplishing what the goal is for a recreation aspect and could include a step process similar to the wage scale or something similar. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk reviewed the additional retirement health insurance premium contribution for retired police officers and noted the City used to pay 50 percent of the premium for retired police officers with 15 years of service, but noted the provision was negotiated out of the contract. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted frequently with law enforcement, officers retire early,as after age 55 there are Agenda Item: 7a. DRAFTmore injuries, and the health insurance contribution benefit would be an incentive for police officers. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the retention incentive could be structured not as an accrued entitlement, but upon years of service. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted an example of $300 per month, or $3600 a year, an officer with five years of service would have $18,000 banked. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted many police departments are offering hiring bonuses of $5000 to $10,000, and noted the health insurance contribution benefit incentive somewhat negates the one-time hiring bonus elsewhere.Council and staff discussed the situation where an officer would leave before retirement age and therefore would lose eligibility for the benefit.Council and staff discussed the importance of how the benefit is structured and noted accrued benefit versus a one-time payout of benefit upon retirement. Council and staff discussed retaining police officers, how the incentives would apply if there was a termination of employment, separation of employment, and the necessity for legal review to for see such circumstances. Council and staff discussed identifiable need such as healthcare, and the structure of the benefit would be employee accrual upon retirement, with the accrual going into a Health Savings Bank or post-retirement health insurance, not an HSA fund. City Administrator Beise noted if Council wishes to pursue this direction, staff would need to make sure it meets public purpose and is technically and structurally sound.Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted many agencies are offering health club memberships, personal development lessons, or anything that would support police officer health and wellness. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk reviewed additional career opportunities within the police department and noted the costs and benefits to the City in implementing investigative services, or street crimes, which translates into additional staff opportunity as an incentive, but also benefits the community with those services. Council noted incentives and how they may apply to admin and Public Works staff. City Administrator Beise noted incentive items could be applied across all staff, and noted separate options are being reviewed for Public Works and administrative staff. Council and staff discussed other potential incentive options for police officers such as assigned take home squad cars for work use only, the costs associated with the incentive, and the parameters of a squad car program. Council and staff discussed education financial incentives, reimbursement for trainings or degrees relevant to the current employee’s role, and what an education incentive might look like for an employee as a percentage of the employee’s base wage. Council and staff discussed compensated community service and benefits of the incentive to both staff and the community. Council and staff discussed hiring and referral bonuses noting it broadens the scope of candidates in the process. Council and staff discussed family training and support incentive options, EAP services, and broadening the contracted mental health support services to family and not staff only. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted general numbers for the sabbatical include 30 days every four years, equating to an employee accruing 7.5 days per year, with an annual cost to for the whole department of just over $30,000 accrual per year, with the sabbaticals scheduled out. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk reviewed general numbers for the vacation reimbursement would cost $1,000 per year per police officer, so approximately $12,000 per year cost for vacation reimbursement. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk reviewed the insurance contributions equates to $300/mo, $3600 per officer at 12 full- time officers with a total cost $43,000 per year. Council and staff discussed availability of non-qualified plans, administering retirement health care plans, funding a city liability, and one-time payout upon retirement regarding health insurance benefits. Council discussed retrieving feedback from officers in the form of a survey.Council and staff discussed format and scoring of the survey. Council initiated creation of a Council sub-committee to review survey options. 3.Unscheduled Items No unscheduled business was heard. 4.Adjournment MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Bottema to adjourn. Voting Aye: McKee, Bottema, and Nichols (Motion carried 3:0) Meeting adjourned at 6:32 pm. ________________________________ Michelle Friedrich – Deputy Clerk 1 CITY OF CORCORAN City Council Meeting Minutes February 9, 2023 - 7:00 pm The Corcoran City Council met on February 9, 2023, in Corcoran, Minnesota. The City Council meeting was held in person and the public was present in person and remotely through electronic means using the audio and video conferencing platform Zoom. Mayor McKee, Councilor Bottema, Councilor Nichols, Councilor Schultz, and Councilor Vehrenkamp were present. City Administrator Beise, City Clerk Friedrich, Planner Davis McKeown, City Planner Lindahl, Public Works Director Mattson, and Director of Public Safety Gottschalk were present. 1.Call to Order/Roll Call Mayor McKee called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. 2.Pledge of Allegiance Mayor McKee invited all in attendance to rise and join in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3.Agenda Approval City Administrator Beise noted Senator Limmer was present for a brief presentation under item 6, a clerical error on item 7d Seasonal Pay within the Employee Handbook Update, a map update on item 10a Streetlighting for Hackamore Road, and an addition to New Business, item 10b Stanchion Bar Event Request for Extended Time on July 7 and July 8. Council requested item 10b, be moved ahead of 10a. MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Vehrenkamp to approve the agenda as amended, and move agenda 10b, ahead of 10a. Motion fails for lack of vote. MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Nichols to approve the agenda as amended, and move agenda 10b, ahead of 10a. Voting Aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 5:0) Council made a friendly amendment to move item 10b, ahead of item 9, Unfinished Business. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Nichols to approve the agenda as amended with the friendly amendment of moving the relocated item 10b., ahead of item 9 Unfinished Business. Voting Aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 5:0) 4.Commission Representatives Mayor McKee noted Trails Commissioner Friedrich was present at the meeting. Planning Commissioner Shoulak was excused. 5.Open Forum (Public Comment Opportunity) Mayor McKee invited residents to communicate in-person or telephonically during Open Forum for items not included on the agenda. City Administrator Beise noted a letter received by a resident regarding a general comment and noted a copy was included on the dais for Council and agenda packet book and noted staff would reach out to the resident with a formal response. Council and staff briefly discussed the landscaping and lighting compliancy regarding the resident letter. City Administrator Beise explained the instructions to participate in the meeting via the Zoom video format and reviewed instructions for participation in the meeting through telephone or computer. No residents participated in the public comment opportunity. 6.Presentations/Recognitions a.Senator Limmer Senator Limmer noted the redistricting map, and the annual 10-year census data that reviews population growth and district boundary lines. Senator Limmer noted the cities included within the boundary changes. Agenda Item: 7b. 2 Senator Limmer noted challenges for western cities such as Corcoran that are experiencing growth. Senator Limmer noted the current laws and Hennepin County’s position regarding criminal penalties. Senator Limmer noted his concentration on the Highway 55 corridor. Council posed a question on funding assistance for traffic on County Road 30. Senator Limmer responded knowledge of high traffic within the area. Council and Senator Limmer discussed increase in juvenile crimes. Council thanked Senator Limmer for his time and long tenure in the State of Minnesota. 7.Consent Agenda a.2023-01-12 Draft Council Work Session Minutes b.2023-01-12 Draft Council Minutes c.Financial Claims d.Employee Handbook Update e.Authorize 2023 Road Materials Bid f.66th Ave/Gleason Parkway Corridor Improvements – Change Order 3 & Pay Request 7 g.Rescinding CUP Resolution 2023-12 h.Remodel Payment Application #10 – 1-24-2023 i.Supporting Corridors of Commerce HWY 55 Council request review of agenda item 7h., and 7i. MOTION: made by Vehrenkamp, seconded by Schultz to approve agenda items 7a-7g. Voting Aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 5:0) Council requested additional information on 7h, regarding total costs and final payment status. City Administrator Beise noted the last change order of $16,155 is the final amount of the total contract of $742,655. Council noted review of the Council Chambers audio malfunctions and requested updates to the system to correct the audio malfunctions. City Administrator Beise noted the malfunction correction is a separate project and noted staff is working with a vendor on necessary system updates. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Vehrenkamp to approve agenda item 7h. Voting Aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 5:0) Council requested additional information for actual quarter development would look like on item 7i. City Administrator Beise noted a copy was provided to Councilmember Schultz regarding his question on transit related to the project. City Administrator Beise noted an update was received from the Highway 55 Coalition related to the Quarters of Commerce Grant. City Administrator Beise reviewed the application status for the Corridors of Commerce project, noting Highway 55 is identified as a strong potential for bus rapid transit in the future, along with a park and ride facility. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Vehrenkamp to approve agenda item 7i. Voting Aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 5:0) 8.Planning Business 10.New Business (Public Comment Opportunity) Mayor McKee reiterated the agenda change to move item 10b, ahead of Unfinished Business. Mayor McKee invited residents to communicate in-person or telephonically during the public comment opportunity for New Business. City Administrator Beise explained the instructions to participate in the meeting via the Zoom video format and reviewed instructions for participation in the meeting through telephone or computer. No persons participated in the public comment period. b.Added: Stanchion Bar Event Request Extended Time – July 7 and July 8 City Administrator Beise outlined the Stanchion Bar’s request to for extended hours for noise for July 7-8, 2023, until 12:30am each night. City Administrator Beise noted the Council approved a similar noise waiver request last year through 12:00am, and the current request extends the time by 30 minutes. Kristie Monnens, Stanchion Bar owner, reviewed the event last year, referenced different entities contacted in the community, and noted the Corcoran Police Department was hired for the event as well. Ms. Monnens noted permission has been received by surrounding homeowners. Ms. Monnens clarified her business has a 2:00 am license but would not be utilizing the license for this event. MOTION: made by McKee, seconded by Schultz to authorize extended noise waiver for amplified music until 12:30 am, with crowd related noise until 1:00 am, on July 7-8, 2023. 3 Voting Aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 5:0) Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the ordinance regarding liquor licensing and the appropriate application process that will need to be completed for expanding the licensed premises for the event. 9.Unfinished Business (Public Comment Opportunity) Mayor McKee invited residents to communicate in-person or telephonically during the public comment opportunity for Unfinished Business. City Administrator Beise explained the instructions to participate in the meeting via the Zoom video format and reviewed instructions for participation in the meeting through telephone or computer. No persons participated in the public comment period. a.RFP – History and Discussion of Schedule City Administrator Beise outlined RFP history, Council discussion, and noted the last RFP process in the City was 2009. City Administrator Beise noted comments by local cities regarding schedules for RFPs and it was determined many cities utilize RFPs on an as needed basis. Council noted planning, engineering, legal, and IT, are could potentially all be included in an RFP. City Administrator Beise noted including auditing services as well. City Administrator Beise noted RFPs could be completed on contracted services that provide a service to the City, or on contracted services that work directly with City on day to day services, and noted building official services as an example. Council discussed city costs for contracted services and escrow pass through costs, or partial pass-through costs like recycling collection. Council asked for a list of contracted services with dollar amount paid per year for both city costs that affect th e city budget, and pass-through costs with escrow accounts, with a definition of what each service encompasses for the City. Council noted if services are meeting quality standards, with costs covered through escrow and picked up by developers, there may not be a need to complete and RFP, and sited engineering as an example. Council discussed developing a timeline with a rotating schedule for RFPs with due diligence in understanding the best service is received for the City. Council also discussed cost of RFPs, staff effort, and consumed time of completing an RFP once a year. Council asked what the Stantec fee is for water system project for services provided to the City. Council and staff discussed water system project planning fees and project management from Stantec. Council and staff discussed percentages of contracted services for water tower and water treatment projects noting the cost of the water treatment facility is approximately $20 million dollars and $4 million for the water tower. Council and staff noted typical project management fees range from 15 to 20 percent of project cost and varies on larger projects. Public Works Director Mattson noted much of the engineering costs for the City are pass- through costs. Council noted completing RFPs every two or three years to utilize cost savings. Council noted contracted service history and knowledge of City is a benefit included with existing contracted services, and RFP with a new contracted service may include empirical pricing within a learning curve of City processes and actions. City Administrator Beise noted annually a letter of engagement is issued with current contracted services each January. Council and staff noted options for RFPs. Council requested list of all contracted services for RFPs, and to review services at annual appointments, identifying true costs to cities along with pass through costs. Council noted ability to change contracted services mid-year with current annual agreements if needed. Council requested staff to bring back information to Council at a future meeting. Council noted increases in engineering in the future, with opportunity for savings in engineering, dependent upon how competitive contracted engineering is priced. Public Works Director Mattson noted WSB is being utilized for the Hackamore Road project, and comparisons could be submitted to Council for review. Public Works Director Mattson noted utilizing a strategic RFP for specific projects and developing relationships with independent engineering companies. Public Works Director Mattson noted the City receives good value from current contracted engineering services. Council noted engineering straight rate, and history with contracted service with a long-term relationship benefits City receives through long-term contracted services status. Council requested further review at future Council meeting. b.Strategic Planning Report City Administrator Beise reviewed the work session on January 23, and noted the goals determined for 2023 identified nine high priority goals and presented the final report. City Administrator Beise noted staff will be putting together action steps and measurables. City Administrator Beise noted the February 23 meeting will include the high priority goals we had identified. MOTION: made by Mckee, seconded by Bottema to adopt the core strategies and short-term goals for 4 2023. Voting Aye: McKee, Bottema, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 5:0) 10. New Business (Public Comment Opportunity) Mayor McKee invited residents to communicate in-person or telephonically during the public comment opportunity for New Business. City Administrator Beise explained the instructions to participate in the meeting via the Zoom video format and reviewed instructions for participation in the meeting through telephone or computer. No persons participated in the public comment period. a. Streetlighting for Hackamore Road City Administrator Beise reviewed the street lighting plan with bituminous trail on north side, and reviewed the City’s collector roads policy. Public Works Director Mattson outlined the stoplight location, and outlined differentiation of lighting, costs of lighting , and maintenance of streetlighting. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted illumination of light, pedestrian crossings (pedestal lighting), noise pollution, and heavier use intersection lightings (overhead lights ), and balancing pedestrian safety with light noise. Council noted the number of lights, especially by the house s in close proximity to Hackamore Road. Council and staff noted the Hunter Road pedestrian crossing with overhead light reasoning. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the 300 feet between lighting could be adjusted. Council noted impacts of lighting to existing homes. Council inquired if staff had reviewed standards for streetlight spacing with other cities. Public Works Director Mattson noted lighting plan is consistent with surrounding communities, noting if concern is too much lighting in a specific area, light could be stubbed, and not utilized until needed, with minimal cost. Council referenced Lawndale, with a bituminous trail, from Weaver Lake Road and County Road 30 and only including intersection lighting. Council noted lighting specific intersections on Hackamore Road. Council and staff discussed a broader 6-foot bike shoulder on the Medina side of Hackamore Road. City Administrator Beise noted public engagement has not yet been established and noted residents along corridor would be included in neighborhood meetings. Council and staff discussed staggered lighting in the Ravinia neighborhood. Council noted at Hackamore Circle to utilize pedestal lighting. Council discussed pedestal lighting at intersections. Council and staff discussed overhead lighting would be similar to 66th and County Road 116 and is through WH Hennepin Electric. Council noted maintenance cost of lights. Council noted support of wiring for pedestal li ghts, motion sensing lights, and timing of decision. Council and staff discussed improvements to Hunters Ridge. Staff noted City Center Drive lighting, landscaping, and future conversations, noting there isn't a standard for street lighting. Public Works Director Mattson noted vision for rural improvement on Hackamore, and competing interest of public safety, and future potential. Council noted support of pedestal lighting on neighborhood roads, with overhead lighting at County Road intersections, and main intersections of development corridors. Council noted including all lighting stubs, not utilizing until needed, and overhead light on Goldenroad (Walcott Glenn); utilizing overhead lighting at intersections and pedestal lighting at other locations along Hackamore. Council and staff discussed shading of pedestal lighting where light noise is apparent. Mayor indicated he could gather information from t he Mayor of Medina. 11. Closed Sessions a. Real Estate – Trail Haven Bridge Replacement b. Real Estate – PID 35-119-23-42-0035 Mayor McKee stated: “The City Council is going into a closed session to consider an offer for real estate. Under the authority of Minn. Stat. § 13D.05 Subd. 3(c)(3), the City is permitted to close a meeting to consider offers and counteroffers for the purchase or sale of real or personal property. The City Council is now going into closed session to consider an offer for real estate to purchase easements for the Trail Haven Bridge Replacement; the following properties are the subject of the closed meeting: 10500 Trail Haven Ro ad, 10440 Trail Haven Road, 10405 Trail Haven Road, and PID 35-119-23-42-0035.” Mayor McKee recessed the Council meeting at 8:45 pm. 5 Mayor McKee reconvened the Council meeting at 9:08 pm. Mayor McKee stated: “In the first closed session, the City Council discussed an offer for real estate; staff was provided direction and now present the recommended purchase agreement for the easements .” City Administrator Beise noted the three easement agreements for the replacement project and allow staff to move forward and authorize the execution of those purchase agreements and to disperse the funds for the project. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Vehrenkamp to authorize execution of the purchase agreements and authorize the release of funds for the purchase of land for easements the Trail Haven Bridge Replacement including the following properties 10500 Trail Haven Road, 10440 Trail Haven Road, and 10405 Trail Haven Road. Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 4:0) Mayor McKee stated: “In the second closed session, staff was provided direction.” 12. Staff Reports 13. 2023 City Council Schedule Council received schedule. 14. Adjournment MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Vehrenkamp to adjourn. Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp (Motion carried 4:0) Meeting adjourned at 9:10 pm on February 9, 2023. Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk Agenda Item 7c. Council Meeting Date:3/23/2023 Prepared By:Maggie Ung Amount Project name $0.00 -$ $225,573.93 225,573.93$ 161,903.19$ 387,477.12$ Date Paid to Amount Description 3/3/2023 Postalia 400.00$ Postage 3/6/2023 The Hartford 1,635.53$ Employee Disability Premium 3/7/2023 Invoice Cloud 1,100.09$ Credit Card Fee 3/8/2023 RevTrak 158.29$Credit Card Fee 3/9/2023 ADP 121,139.71$ Net Payroll and Taxes 3/13/2023 ADP 310.60$ Payroll Processing Fee 3/13/2023 MN State - Empower 6,105.63$ Employee Deferred Comp/Healthcare Savings 3/13/2023 MN PERA 26,405.40$ Employee Pension 3/14/2023 Optum Bank 4,456.42$ Employee HSA 3/16/2023 Mn Dept Of Revenue 191.52$ Fuel Taxes Total 161,903.19$ TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR APPROVAL Auto Deductions / Electronic Fund Transfer / Other Disbursements ALL OTHER FINANCIAL CLAIMS Check Register (See attached Check Detail Registers) Total Checks Total of Auto Deductions Total Total Fund #500 = (See attached Payments Detail) FINANCIAL CLAIMS CHECK RANGE FUND #500 ESCROW CLAIMS Paid to SEE THE REGISTER FOR #500 CLAIMS CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 1/6Page: 03/17/2023 08:51 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/10/2023 - 03/23/2023 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK CheckAmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 33540 3354017,081.40 03/10/230001152684WASTE WATER SERVICE 04/2023METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRO03/02/23602-49450-50312 17,081.40 Total For Check 33540 Check 33541 33541111.14 03/23/233609452CITY HALL PEST CONTROLADAMS PEST CONTROL, INC.02/03/23100-41900-50401 111.14 Total For Check 33541 Check 33542 33542169.46 03/23/2314024YEARS OF SERVICE BLOCKALTA03/08/23100-41900-50210 169.46 Total For Check 33542 Check 33543 33543348.99 03/23/23 19G4-DDDN-GGPGDUAL MONITOR STANDS/WIRELESS KEYBOAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES03/04/23100-41920-50210 3354399.87 03/23/231JFN-CC64-9T1YSLIP-ON TRACTION CLEATS FOR SNOW AAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES03/02/23100-42100-50417 33543358.10 03/23/231YWN-VLJX-16N6WATER SOFTNER SANITIZERAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES03/06/23100-43100-50401 33543(195.99)03/23/23CM1D17-M341-1M6CREDIT MEMO - VIDEO PROJECTOR WITH AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES03/06/23207-42100-50210 610.97 Total For Check 33543 Check 33544 3354465.00 03/23/23373422APA MEMBERSHIP 4/1/23 - 3/31/24 (NAMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATIO03/01/23100-41910-50207 3354499.00 03/23/23373422APA MEMBERSHIP 4/1/23 - 3/31/24 (NAMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATIO03/01/23100-41910-50433 164.00 Total For Check 33544 Check 33545 33545359.76 03/23/234330884488OIL FILTERSAUTOZONE10/25/22100-42100-50220 359.76 Total For Check 33545 Check 33546 3354675.00 03/23/2328122DMT-G ONLINE RECERTIFICATION TRAINBCA TRAINING03/04/23100-42100-50207 75.00 Total For Check 33546 Check 33547 33547349.27 03/23/232281547PROPANEBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/06/23100-41900-50210 3354726.33 03/23/232286558UNLEADED 87BEAUDRY OIL COMPANY02/27/23100-41900-50212 335471,158.70 03/23/232286558UNLEADED 87BEAUDRY OIL COMPANY02/27/23100-42100-50212 33547131.67 03/23/232286558UNLEADED 87BEAUDRY OIL COMPANY02/27/23100-43100-50212 335472,205.08 03/23/232286557ULS DYED KODIAK PLUSBEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/27/23100-43100-50212 33547593.09 03/23/232281546PROPANE - 9525 CAIN ROAD BEAUDRY OIL COMPANY03/06/23100-43100-50380 4,464.14 Total For Check 33547 Check 33548 335481,702.89 03/23/239884559-7 02-23PUBLIC WORKS GAS BILL 1/30/23-02/2CENTERPOINT ENERGY 03/02/23100-43100-50380 1,702.89 Total For Check 33548 Check 33549 33549350.95 03/23/2302-2023GAS BILLCENTERPOINT ENERGY 03/08/23100-41900-50380 350.95 Total For Check 33549 Check 33550 33550133.06 03/23/234148723275CITY HALL MATSCINTAS - 47003/08/23100-41900-50400 3355055.12 03/23/234148723323LG BATH TOWEL BLUECINTAS - 47003/08/23100-43100-50400 3355087.81 03/23/234148723209CRT BLUE/CABINETCINTAS - 47003/08/23100-43100-50400 33550194.17 03/23/234148723355UNIFORMS CINTAS - 47003/08/23100-43100-50417 470.16 Total For Check 33550 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 2/6Page: 03/17/2023 08:51 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/10/2023 - 03/23/2023 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK CheckAmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 33551 33551139.18 03/23/2303052023CITY HALL/POLICE INTERNETCOMCAST - 002320203/05/23100-41900-50321 33551139.17 03/23/2303052023CITY HALL/POLICE INTERNETCOMCAST - 002320203/05/23100-42100-50321 278.35 Total For Check 33551 Check 33552 33552295.05 03/23/23167961555INTERNETCOMCAST - 93089903503/01/23100-43100-50380 295.05 Total For Check 33552 Check 33553 335531,008.00 03/23/23345411IT SUPPORT SERVICESCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH02/28/23100-41920-50300 1,008.00 Total For Check 33553 Check 33554 335540.36 03/23/23114X90217601OFFICE WATER (FEB 2023)CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER02/28/23100-41900-50210 3355486.00 03/23/23100X07628006PD OFFICE WATER CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER02/28/23101-42100-50210 86.36 Total For Check 33554 Check 33555 3355555.62 03/23/23919881NOV 21 PH EASEMENT VACATION/P PO #ECM PUBLISHERS INC11/13/22100-41900-50350 55.62 Total For Check 33555 Check 33556 33556128.85 03/23/23RI105681888QTRLY MAIL METER (03/04/23 TO 06/0FP MAILING SOLUTIONS03/06/23100-41900-50322 128.85 Total For Check 33556 Check 33557 33557148.51 03/23/23023594757GAS MASK POUCHSGALLS, LLC02/17/23100-42100-50417 148.51 Total For Check 33557 Check 33558 33558323.88 03/23/2310000203085PUBLIC WORKS RADIO LEASE FEB 23HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTS REC03/02/23100-43100-50323 323.88 Total For Check 33558 Check 33559 335591,622.12 03/23/231000203018POLICE RADIO LEASE 02/2023HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTS REC03/02/23100-42100-50323 1,622.12 Total For Check 33559 Check 33560 3356046.00 03/23/2303102023HENNEPIN COUNTY EASEMENT AGREEMENT HENNEPIN COUNTY RECORDER03/10/23100-41900-50210 3356046.00 03/23/2303102023-2HENNEPIN COUNTY EASEMENT RECORDING HENNEPIN COUNTY RECORDER03/10/23100-41900-50210 3356046.00 03/23/2303102023-3HENNEPIN COUNTY EASEMENT RECORDING HENNEPIN COUNTY RECORDER03/10/23100-41900-50210 138.00 Total For Check 33560 Check 33561 3356123.00 03/23/2303092023WASTEWATER OPERATOR CERTIFICATE REKOTTKE, ROBBIE03/09/23602-49450-50207 23.00 Total For Check 33561 Check 33562 33562125.00 03/23/233778692023 CITY DAY ON THE HILL - J.BEISLEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES03/01/23100-41400-50433 125.00 Total For Check 33562 Check 33563 33563128,255.00 03/23/23031420232023 PROPERTY/CASUALTY INSURANCELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSUR.TR03/14/23100-41900-50360 128,255.00 Total For Check 33563 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 3/6Page: 03/17/2023 08:51 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/10/2023 - 03/23/2023 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK CheckAmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 33564 3356466.00 03/23/2303022023REFUND - CANCELED PERMIT #P23-0121LEGACY RESTORATION03/02/23100-42400-50300 66.00 Total For Check 33564 Check 33565 33565300.00 03/23/2303072023LABOR RELATIONS SERVICES (2/1/2023 MADDEN, GALANTER, HANSEN LLP03/07/23100-41900-50300 300.00 Total For Check 33565 Check 33566 3356614.06 03/23/2313282SCREWS AND ANCHORS FOR FLASHLIGHT MENARDS MAPLE GROVE03/04/23100-42100-50223 33566146.16 03/23/2313010SPRING WATER MENARDS MAPLE GROVE02/28/23100-43100-50210 33566146.16 03/23/2313010SPRING WATER MENARDS MAPLE GROVE02/28/23207-42100-50210 306.38 Total For Check 33566 Check 33567 335671,104.20 03/23/23INV2210351COPIER CHARGESMETRO SALES INC01/25/23100-41130-50350 335672,519.12 03/23/23INV2210351COPIER CHARGESMETRO SALES INC01/25/23100-41920-50210 3,623.32 Total For Check 33567 Check 33568 33568359.90 03/23/23CTCS6992172021 CHEVY SILVERADO (VIN 4378) REMILLER CHEVROLET02/28/23100-42100-50403 359.90 Total For Check 33568 Check 33569 3356910,530.00 03/23/238230403704DEVICE LICENSE & SUPPORT FEESMOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INC03/09/23100-41920-50210 10,530.00 Total For Check 33569 Check 33570 33570143.76 03/23/23452792BRAKE CLEANERNAPA AUTO PARTS - Corcoran01/24/23100-42100-50220 3357077.94 03/23/23450793SNOW BRUSH & SCRAPERSNAPA AUTO PARTS - Corcoran01/11/23100-42100-50220 3357077.60 03/23/23459457HOSE FITTINGSNAPA AUTO PARTS - Corcoran03/08/23100-43100-50220 33570143.76 03/23/23452792BRAKE CLEANERNAPA AUTO PARTS - Corcoran01/24/23100-43100-50220 443.06 Total For Check 33570 Check 33571 33571192.31 03/23/2303132023DEPENDENT CARE REIMBURSEMENTNATALIE DAVIS MCKEOWN03/13/23100-00000-21710 192.31 Total For Check 33571 Check 33572 3357219.71 03/23/23NT11167TRANSCRIPT SERVICESNET TRANSCRIPTS INC06/15/22100-42100-50300 3357252.08 03/23/23NT14603PD TRANSCRIPTSNET TRANSCRIPTS INC02/28/23100-42100-50300 71.79 Total For Check 33572 Check 33573 33573650.00 03/23/2303172023ESCROW REFUND - GORDON COUNTRY ESTOVERCOTT, JACOB03/17/23100-00000-22205-035 650.00 Total For Check 33573 Check 33574 335745,672.00 03/23/2315622BASEBALL APPAREL PROMOWEAR, INC. 03/09/23100-45100-50210 5,672.00 Total For Check 33574 Check 33575 33575414.14 03/23/230894-006138383CITY HALL GARBAGE FEB 2023REPUBLIC SERVICES02/28/23100-41900-50380 33575334.43 03/23/230894-006139268PUBLIC WORKS GARBAGE FEB 2023REPUBLIC SERVICES02/28/23100-43100-50380 33575115.01 03/23/230894-006140505WILDFLOWER PARK GARBAGE MARCH 2023 REPUBLIC SERVICES02/28/23100-45200-50380 3357538.15 03/23/230894-006138222CITY PARK GARBAGE MARCH 2023REPUBLIC SERVICES02/28/23100-45200-50380 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 4/6Page: 03/17/2023 08:51 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/10/2023 - 03/23/2023 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 33575 901.73 Total For Check 33575 Check 33576 3357646.41 03/23/2323-85040UTILITY BILL PAPER STOCKRITEWAY BUSINESS FORMS03/06/23601-49400-50200 3357646.41 03/23/2323-85040UTILITY BILL PAPER STOCKRITEWAY BUSINESS FORMS03/06/23602-49450-50200 92.82 Total For Check 33576 Check 33577 3357711,659.25 03/23/232035700PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - CITY CENTESTANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES09/19/22408-48010-50303 11,659.25 Total For Check 33577 Check 33578 33578117.86 03/23/23I1619535TRAFFIC WANDS AND CHARGER STREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT02/28/23100-42100-50209 33578339.72 03/23/23I1621518HOBBLE & TRANSPORT HOODSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT03/10/23100-42100-50220 33578323.99 03/23/23I1619535TRAFFIC WANDS AND CHARGER STREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT02/28/23100-42100-50417 33578444.93 03/23/23I16192842022 UNIFORMS - A. BURNSSTREICHER'S POLICE EQUIPMENT02/27/23100-42100-50417 1,226.50 Total For Check 33578 Check 33579 3357928.29 03/23/23652392SQUAD 569 SERVICE REPAIRSUPERIOR FORD03/07/23100-42100-50403 28.29 Total For Check 33579 Check 33580 3358050.00 03/23/2320040861FILE CABINETSSURPLUS SERVICES03/09/23100-41900-50210 50.00 Total For Check 33580 Check 33581 33581693.00 03/23/230455817HAT BADGES SYMBOLARTS LLC03/02/23100-42100-50417 693.00 Total For Check 33581 Check 33582 33582457.92 03/23/2303012023PD UNION DUES MARCH 2023TEAMSTER LOCAL 32002/28/23100-00000-21707 457.92 Total For Check 33582 Check 33583 33583518.00 03/23/2351800DRILL REFILL MDK-51TERMINAL SUPPLY CO03/08/23100-45200-50210 518.00 Total For Check 33583 Check 33584 33584526.76 03/23/2302-2023FEBRUARY 2023 - DRY CLEANING TIDE CLEANERS03/01/23100-42100-50417 526.76 Total For Check 33584 Check 33585 3358575.00 03/23/233609221-202302-PD INVESTIGATIONS - FEBRUARY 2023TRANSUNION RISK & ALTERNATIV03/01/23100-41920-50300 75.00 Total For Check 33585 Check 33586 3358658.00 03/23/2303082023SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION - LUNCCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/08/23100-41400-50207 335863.70 03/23/2303012023 - 1245PARKING FEES (BEISE) CREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/01/23100-41400-50331 335863.20 03/23/2303072023 - 1228PARKING FEES (BEISE) CREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/07/23100-41400-50331 3358644.55 03/23/2302102023PICTURE FRAMESCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/08/23100-41900-50210 33586149.90 03/23/23INV192536337ZOOM SUBSCRIPTIONCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/11/23100-41900-50210 33586100.00 03/23/2364158335466REGISTRATION - STATE OF THE CITIES CREDIT CARD PURCHASES01/17/23100-41900-50433 335862.27 03/23/23QRCG PRO-964590QR CODE GENERATOR YEARLY SUBSCRIPTCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/04/23100-41920-50210 3358616.13 03/23/234137447332DIGITAL BOOK CREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/15/23100-42100-50207 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 5/6Page: 03/17/2023 08:51 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/10/2023 - 03/23/2023 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK CheckAmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number Check 33586 3358623.97 03/23/2302282023FOOD AT JOB FAIR CREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/28/23100-42100-50207 3358656.98 03/23/233336256532-2LODGING (MARCH 07-09, 2023) - C. ACREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/07/23100-42100-50207 3358660.00 03/23/23598022SQUAD MAINTENANACE (FLEETIO)CREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/09/23100-42100-50220 3358665.00 03/23/23EM-1420442022 CHEVY GRILL WRAP AND INSTALL TRANSPORT GRAPHICS02/03/23100-42100-50220 33586270.00 03/23/23EM-1420442022 CHEVY GRILL WRAP AND INSTALL TRANSPORT GRAPHICS02/03/23100-42100-50403 33586100.00 03/23/232024426-347AMEM ANNUAL DUES - R. BURNSAMEM03/06/23100-42100-50433 33586180.00 03/23/2303032023ANDRESS/DECKER POST LICENSE RENEWACREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/03/23100-42100-50433 33586386.90 03/23/230382023LARGE KENNELCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/08/23100-42100-50438 335861,034.44 03/23/2302202023FIREARMS SAFETY GENERATIONS FIREARMS, LLC02/20/23204-42100-50210 335863,348.00 03/23/2303022023TRUCK SAFETY SEMINAR - FOODCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/02/23207-42100-50210 33586286.92 03/23/23022823TRUCK SAFETY SEMINAR - FOODCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/22/23207-42100-50210 33586249.75 03/23/2303022023-0637FOOD FOR TRUCK SAFETY SEMINARCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/02/23207-42100-50210 3358653.98 03/23/230302TRUCK SAFETY SEMINAR SUPPLIESCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/02/23207-42100-50210 33586202.00 03/23/2394439099ARCGIS DESKTOP BASIC SINGLE USE PRCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/28/23601-49400-50210 3358691.35 03/23/23230308-06-10SEWER WATER TRAINING - FOOD CREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/08/23602-49450-50207 335865.00 03/23/2303082023-5113SEWER WATER TRAINING - PARKINGCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/08/23602-49450-50207 3358692.50 03/23/23230307-11-10SEWER WATER TRAINING - FOODCREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/07/23602-49450-50207 335865.50 03/23/2303072023-5099SEWER WATER TRAINING - PARKING CREDIT CARD PURCHASES03/07/23602-49450-50207 33586202.00 03/23/2394439099ARCGIS DESKTOP BASIC SINGLE USE PRCREDIT CARD PURCHASES02/28/23602-49450-50210 7,092.04 Total For Check 33586 Check 33587 33587246.76 03/23/239928653254PD/CH CELL PHONE VERIZON WIRELESS02/26/23100-41900-50321 335871,329.33 03/23/239928653254PD/CH CELL PHONE VERIZON WIRELESS02/26/23100-42100-50321 1,576.09 Total For Check 33587 Check 33588 3358836.00 03/23/2303102023LAB FEES WATER LABORATORIES, INC. 03/10/23601-49400-50210 36.00 Total For Check 33588 Check 33589 33589236.72 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23100-00000-22205 33589264.54 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23100-00000-22205-007 33589445.94 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23100-00000-22205-056 335891,041.98 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23100-00000-22205-065 33589425.04 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23100-00000-22205-087 33589206.36 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23100-00000-22205-098 335892,469.65 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23100-41900-50381 3358959.96 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23100-42151-50381 33589211.54 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23100-43100-50381 33589185.17 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23100-45200-50381 3358993.27 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23601-49400-50380 33589310.49 03/23/2335030324725UTILITY SERVICESWRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELECT03/10/23602-49450-50380 5,950.66 Total For Check 33589 Check 33590 3359014,015.00 03/23/23R-020743-000-8HACKAMORE RD FINAL DESIGN & CONSTRWSB02/28/23419-43100-50303 14,015.00 Total For Check 33590 Check 33591 33591412.50 03/23/2384004COUNCIL CHAMBERS - ZOOM AUDIO TROUZ SYSTEMS, INC03/06/23100-41920-50221 412.50 Total For Check 33591 CHECK REGISTER - COUNCIL INVOICE GL DISTRIBUTION REPORT FOR CITY OF CORCORAN 6/6Page: 03/17/2023 08:51 AM User: jpeterson DB: Corcoran EXP CHECK RUN DATES 03/10/2023 - 03/23/2023 JOURNALIZED PAID - CHECK TYPE: PAPER CHECK Check AmountChk DateInvoice Invoice Desc.VendorInvoice DateGL Number 176,655.09 Fund 100 GENERAL FUND 86.00 Fund 101 LONG-TERM PLANNING FUND 1,034.44 Fund 204 FIREARMS SAFETY 3,888.82 Fund 207 TRUCK SAFETY 11,659.25 Fund 408 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT 14,015.00 Fund 419 HACKAMORE UPGRADE (LENNAR) 377.68 Fund 601 WATER 17,857.65 Fund 602 SEWER Fund Totals: 225,573.93 Total For All Funds: Memo To: Kevin Mattson, City of Corcoran From: Steve Hegland, PE, Nick Wyers, PE Project: 227705990 Date: March 15, 2023 Subject: County Road 10 and Brockton Lane Turn Lane Improvements – Authorization to Bid Council Action Requested •We ask the City Council to consider the County Road 10 and Brockton Lane Turn Lane Improvements Project as presented and accept plans and specifications and authorize bidding for the project. Background •The Cook Lake Highlands development has begun construction with requires intersection improvements at County Road 10 and the new Brockton Lane access at the development. The County directs the design requirements through the access permit process and has approved the design and are processing final signatures. •Improvements to County Road 10 consist of the construction of westbound right turn and eastbound left turn lanes into the development’s main entrance. Improvements to Brockton Lane include constructing the 100’ north of the turn lanes. •The project is bid with alternates that maximize the scope of the improvements and provide the developer flexibility in their ability to self-perform a portion of the work. The two alternates provided are for paving the top lift of bituminous road through the 73rd Street intersection and installing the trail and sidewalk through the 73rd street intersection. •A portion of the access improvement costs are being paid for by the City of Maple Grove and the Met Council due to the shared access at this location for the adjacent development on 73rd Street and the Met Council lift station north of the development. Schedule The following is an anticipated schedule: •Council Authorizes Ad for Bids March 23 •Project Bidding Period March/April •Bid Opening April 18 •Council Awards Bid April 27 •Project Construction May - July •Substantial Completion August 2023 •Final Completion September 2023 Agenda Item: 7d. March 15, 2022 Kevin Mattson Page 2 of 2 Reference: County Road 10 and Brockton Lane Turn Lane Improvements – Authorization to Bid wn u:\227705990\technical\07 - bidding\00 - bid authorization\authorize for bid recommendation memo.docx Cost and Funding This project is funded via an escrow from the Cook Lake Highlands development as well as cost shares from both the Met Council and the City of Maple Grove for the shared access. The total construction cost for this project with alternates is estimated to be $507,572.73 as shown in the attached table. Prior to award, the developer will contribute cash escrow to cover all remaining project costs which aren’t already provided by the other project partners including construction, engineering, administration, utility relocations, etc. Recommendations Staff is recommending that Council review and accept the plans and specifications and authorize the advertisement for bids for the County Road 10 and Brockton Lane Turn Lane Improvements. Site plans (Sheets C-601 and C-602) are attached for reference. A complete set of plans and specifications are available for review upon request. Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Steve Hegland, PE Project Engineer Phone: 763-479-4237 steven.hegland@stantec.com Attachments: •Cost Estimate •County Road 10 and Brockton Lane Turn Lane Improvements Site Plans •Advertisement for Bid COST ESTIMATE CITY OF CORCORAN COUNTY ROAD 10 AND BROCKTON LANE TURN LANE IMPROVEMENTS Bid Item Description Units Unit Price Quantity Total Cost 1 MOBILIZATION AND DEMOBILIZATION LUMP SUM $ 20,000.00 1 $20,000.00 2 PAVEMENT MARKING REMOVAL LUMP SUM $ 7,500.00 1 $7,500.00 3 REMOVE SIGN EACH $ 175.00 3 $525.00 4 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL SIGN EACH $ 175.00 6 $1,050.00 5 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT $ 2.50 1251 $3,127.50 6 REMOVE STORM SEWER CULVERT LIN FT $ 45.00 86 $3,870.00 7 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT $ 30.00 20 $600.00 8 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ YD $ 6.50 860 $5,590.00 9 COMMON EXCAVATION - ONSITE (EV) (P)CU YD $ 15.00 180 $2,700.00 10 COMMON EXCAVATION - OFFSITE (LV)CU YD $ 25.00 1670 $41,750.00 11 GRANULAR BORROW TON $ 20.00 130 $2,600.00 12 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW, MOD 8%TON $ 35.00 390 $13,650.00 13 STABILIZING AGGREGATE, 3" MINUS TON $ 35.00 150 $5,250.00 14 STRIP, STOCKPILE, AND RESPREAD TOPSOIL LUMP SUM $ 10,000.00 1 $10,000.00 15 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE 5, NON-WOVEN (P)SQ YD $ 3.00 2394 $7,182.00 16 AGGREGATE SURFACING CLASS 2, 100 % CRUSHED LIMESTONE TON $ 45.00 100 $4,500.00 17 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM)HOUR $ 150.00 15 $2,250.00 18 WATER FOR DUST CONTROL MGAL $ 45.00 15 $675.00 19 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5, 100% CRUSHED TON $ 23.00 1460 $33,580.00 20 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (2.0")SQ YD $ 5.00 600 $3,000.00 21 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL $ 4.00 150 $600.00 22 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B)TON $ 150.00 20 $3,000.00 23 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3,C)TON $ 110.00 50 $5,500.00 24 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (3,C)TON $ 105.00 437 $45,885.00 25 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (3,C)TON $ 100.00 440 $44,000.00 26 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION - OFFSITE (EV)CU YD $ 20.00 110 $2,200.00 27 ADJUST EXISTING CASTING EACH $ 900.00 1 $900.00 28 4" PERFORATED PVC SCH 40 DRAIN TILE PIPE LIN FT $ 25.00 235 $5,875.00 29 CLEANOUT W/ THREADED CAP EACH $ 250.00 2 $500.00 30 6" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SQ FT $ 15.00 810 $12,150.00 31 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 LIN FT $ 18.00 300 $5,400.00 32 TRUNCATED DOMES SQ FT $ 70.00 40 $2,800.00 33 INSTALL RETAINING WALL LIN FT $ 90.00 30 $2,700.00 34 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM $ 15,000.00 1 $15,000.00 35 INSTALL SIGN TYPE C AND POST EACH $ 250.00 4 $1,000.00 36 SIGN PANELS TYPE C SQ FT $ 40.00 36 $1,440.00 37 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT - MAINTAINED LUMP SUM $ 2,500.00 1 $2,500.00 38 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION - MAINTAINED EACH $ 200.00 9 $1,800.00 39 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS - MAINTAINED LIN FT $ 3.00 1370 $4,110.00 40 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE STRAW - MAINTAINED LIN FT $ 5.00 150 $750.00 41 ROLLED EROSION PREVENTION CATEGORY 25 SQ YD $ 3.50 2900 $10,150.00 42 HYDROMULCH MnDOT SEED MIXTURE 25-131 SQ YD $ 1.00 230 $230.00 43 MnDOT SEED MIXTURE 25-141 SQ YD $ 2.00 2900 $5,800.00 44 4" SOLID LINE MULTI-COMPONENT GROUND IN LIN FT $ 1.00 755 $755.00 45 6" SOLID LINE MULTI-COMPONENT GROUND IN LIN FT $ 1.50 1178 $1,767.00 46 24" SOLID LINE MULTI-COMPONENT GROUND IN LIN FT $ 10.00 55 $550.00 47 4" BROKEN LINE MULTI-COMPONENT GROUND IN LIN FT $ 1.00 1374 $1,374.00 48 4" DOUBLE SOLID LINE MULTI-COMPONENT GROUND IN LIN FT $ 2.00 700 $1,400.00 49 PAVEMENT MESSAGE (LT ARROW) PREF THERM GR IN EACH $ 400.00 2 $800.00 50 PAVEMENT MESSAGE (RT ARROW) PREF THERM GR IN EACH $ 400.00 2 $800.00 $351,135.50 $17,556.78 $368,692.28 $73,738.46 $442,430.73 5% CONTINGENCY AND INDIRECT COSTS TOTAL BASE BID COSTS March 15, 2023 227705990 20% ENGINEERING ESTIMATED BASE BID TOTAL BASE BID BASE BID CONSTRUCTION COSTS Bid Item Description Units Unit Price Quantity Total Cost 1 MOBILIZATION AND DEMOBILIZATION LUMP SUM $ 2,500.00 1 $2,500.00 2 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL $ 4.00 40 $160.00 3 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (3,C)TON $ 110.00 70 $7,700.00 4 ADJUST VALVE BOX-WATER EACH $ 500.00 2 $1,000.00 5 ADJUST EXISTING CASTING EACH $ 900.00 2 $1,800.00 6 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM $ 1,500.00 1 $1,500.00 $14,660.00 $733.00 $15,393.00 $3,078.60 $18,471.60 Bid Item Description Units Unit Price Quantity Total Cost 1 MOBILIZATION AND DEMOBILIZATION LUMP SUM $ 2,500.00 1 $2,500.00 2 COMMON EXCAVATION - OFFSITE (LV)CU YD $ 25.00 90 $2,250.00 3 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5, 100% CRUSHED TON $ 20.00 103 $2,060.00 4 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B)TON $ 150.00 26 $3,900.00 5 6" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SQ FT $ 15.00 1283 $19,245.00 6 TRUNCATED DOMES SQ FT $ 70.00 62 $4,340.00 7 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION - MAINTAINED EACH $ 200.00 2 $400.00 8 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS - MAINTAINED LIN FT $ 3.00 290 $870.00 9 HYDROMULCH MnDOT SEED MIXTURE 25-131 SQ YD $ 1.00 425 $425.00 $37,040.00 $1,852.00 $38,892.00 $7,778.40 $46,670.40 $402,835.50 $20,141.78 $422,977.28 $84,595.46 $507,572.73 BASE BID + ALTERNATES CONSTRUCTION COSTS 5% CONTINGENCY AND INDIRECT COSTS TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 20% ENGINEERING ALTERNATE #2 ESTIMATED TOTAL 5% CONTINGENCY AND INDIRECT COSTS TOTAL ALTERNATE #2 COSTS 20% ENGINEERING ESTIMATED TOTAL ALTERNATE #1 CONSTRUCTION COSTS 5% CONTINGENCY AND INDIRECT COSTS TOTAL ALTERNATE #1 COSTS ALTERNATE #2 CONSTRUCTION COSTS ALTERNATE 1 SCHEDULE: WEAR COURSE PAVING ALTERNATE 2 SCHEDULE: SIDEWALK AND TRAIL EXTENSION 20% ENGINEERING ALTERNATE #1 ESTIMATED TOTAL 10+0011+0012+0013+0014+0015+0016+0017+0018+0019+0019+22BROCKTON LANE CSAH 1010000989.40LMF /CAP10249988.10MHS10250988.06MHS10330990.90MHS10331990.70HY10343987.61WV10344987.70WV>>>>XXXXXXRIGHT OF WAY LINEBROCKTON LANE CSAH 10300'180'1:151:156'12'12'6'3'2'12'12'12'38'36'12'442'1AB4DY4TW6SW222222312R40'R40'5'90+00 91+00 92+00ALTERNATESALT #1:WEAR COURSE PAVINGBROCKTON LANEGROUND IN THERMOPLASTICGROUND INTHERMOPLASTIC6SW4SW5KB618 CURB4DY4SWB618 CURB4DYGROUND INTHERMOPLASTIC2+003+004+005+006+007+008+009+0010+0011+0012+00CSAH 10BROCKTON LANE XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXRIGHT OF WAY LINECSAH 10BROCKTON LANE 300'1:151:45180'6'12'12'12'6'3'2'300'12'12'12'6'12'12'38'36'33335222BC4DY24SY6SW4SW4TW222312R40'R40'90+00 91+00 92+00 ALTERNATESALT #1:WEAR COURSE PAVINGBROCKTON LANEDEFHJFI GROUND INTHERMOPLASTIC5KB618 CURB4DY4SWB618 CURB4DYGROUND INTHERMOPLASTICGROUND INTHERMOPLASTIC5555WARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OFALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIESIN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUNDWIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACETHE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THEOWNER.TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGNOTESC6.01PROPOSED LAYOUT ANDSTRIPING PLAN3/6/2023 ISSUED FOR REVIEW 0DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:227705990\\US0242-PPFSS01\shared_projects\227705990\drafting\03 - DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\227705990-C601.dwg DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:3/15/2023 11:01:46 AM CLIENT:CITY OFCORCORANCOUNTY ROAD 10 AND BROCKTON LANE TURN LANE IMPROVEMENTS CORCORAN, MINNESOTA PROJECT TITLE:ADGCHK'D BY:NPWAPP'D BY:SKHCERTIFICATION:8200 COUNTY ROAD 116CORCORAN , MN 55340ONE CARLSON PARKWAY, SUITE 100PLYMOUTH MN, 55447PHONE: 763-479-4200FAX: 763-479-4242WWW.STANTEC.COM3/6/20230DATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.: 52243##/##/######SEE ABOVE SEE BELOWPAVEMENT MARKING LEGEND2ND DIGIT - PATTERN3RD DIGIT - COLOR4 - 4 INCH6 - 6 INCH 24 - 24 INCHS - SOLIDB - BROKEND - DOUBLET - DOTTEDW - WHITEY - YELLOWEXAMPLE: 4SW - 4" SOLID WHITE LINE MULTI-COMPONENT1ST DIGIT - WIDTHDESCRIPTIONSYMBOLSIZEKEYNOTE LEGEND54" X 30"R3-8AAONLYONLYONLY1.ALL 4 INCH AND 6 INCH LONGITUDINAL MARKINGS TO BEMULTI-COMPONENT, GROUND IN2.ARROWS AND 24 INCH LONGITUDINAL MARKINGS(CROSSHATCHING) TO BE GROUND IN THERMOPLASTIC.CROSSHATCHING TO BE INSTALLED AT 45 DEGREES WITH A20 FOOT PERPENDICULAR GAP.3.SEE SHEET G-0.02 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES ANDLEGEND4.4" DOTTED LINE-8' CYCLE (2' STRIPE. 6' GAP) UNLESS NOTEDOTHERWISE IN THE PLANSASIGNING NOTES1F & IINPLACESALVAGEREMOVEINSTALL2345R1-136" X 36"OR30" X 30"STOPBR3-8AC36" X 30"CONLYONLYSEE SHEET C6.02SEE SHEET C6.02WESTM3-4M1-610COUNTY18" X 18"24" X 24"R8-3ASPEEDLIMIT5024" X 30"R2-1D14-3ADOPT A HIGHWAYNEXT XX MILESTHANKS TOORGANIZATION NAMECity of CORCORANDEFHIJEXISTINGEXISTINGEXISTINGCITY SIGNKEXISTINGUTLITY MARKERVARIES 10+0011+0012+0090+00 91+00 92+00 93+0094+00ALTERNATESALT #2:5' WIDE, 6" CONCRETE SIDEWALKALT #2:8' BITUMINOUS TRAILALT #1:WEAR COURSE PAVINGALT #2:CONCRETE PED RAMPALT #2:CONCRETE PED RAMPWARNING:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OFALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIESIN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND/OR RELOCATION OF LINES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUNDWIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIEDSTRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACETHE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THEOWNER.TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166CALL BEFORE YOU DIGNOTESC6.02PROPOSED LAYOUT ANDSTRIPING PLAN -ALTERNATES3/6/2023 ISSUED FOR REVIEW 0DWN BY:ISSUE DATE:PROJECT NO.:227705990\\US0242-PPFSS01\SHARED_PROJECTS\227705990\drafting\03 - DESIGN\1_CAD\3 PLANSHEETS\227705990-C601.dwg DESCRIPTION:DATE:ISSUE NO.:ISSUE NO.:SHEET NO.:SHEET TITLE:3/15/2023 11:21:27 AM CLIENT:CITY OFCORCORANCOUNTY ROAD 10 AND BROCKTON LANE TURN LANE IMPROVEMENTS CORCORAN, MINNESOTA PROJECT TITLE:ADGCHK'D BY:NPWAPP'D BY:SKHCERTIFICATION:8200 COUNTY ROAD 116CORCORAN , MN 55340ONE CARLSON PARKWAY, SUITE 100PLYMOUTH MN, 55447PHONE: 763-479-4200FAX: 763-479-4242WWW.STANTEC.COM3/6/20230DATE:I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM ADULY LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THESTATE OF MINNESOTA.LICENSE NO.: 52243##/##/######BROCKTON LANE 1.ALL 4 INCH AND 6 INCH LONGITUDINAL MARKINGS TO BEMULTI-COMPONENT, GROUND IN2.ARROWS AND 24 INCH LONGITUDINAL MARKINGS(CROSSHATCHING) TO BE GROUND IN THERMOPLASTIC.CROSSHATCHING TO BE INSTALLED AT 45 DEGREES WITH A20 FOOT PERPENDICULAR GAP.3.SEE SHEET G-0.02 FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT NOTES ANDLEGEND4.4" DOTTED LINE-8' CYCLE (2' STRIPE. 6' GAP) UNLESS NOTEDOTHERWISE IN THE PLANS73RD ST Project No. 227705990 Advertisement for Bids 00 11 13-1 SECTION 00 11 13 ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS County Road 10 and Brockton Lane Turn Lane Improvements NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS Electronic Bid Proposals will be received by the City of Corcoran, 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, Minnesota 55340, until 10:00 a.m., Tuesday April 18, 2023 at which time such bids will be publicly opened and read aloud. The work, in accordance with Drawings and Specifications prepared by Stantec Consulting Services Inc., consists of the following major items of work and approximate quantities: 1670 Cubic Yards 2394 Square Yard Common Excavation – Offsite (LV) Geotextile Fabric, Type V Non-Woven 390 Tons Select Granular Borrow, Mod. 8% 1560 Tons Aggregate Base, Class 5, 100% Crushed 100 Tons Aggregate Surfacing, Class 2, 100% Crushed Limestone 1043 Tons Bituminous Pavement 300 Linear Feet Curb and Gutter 2093 Square Feet 6” Concrete Walk Together with selective demolition, traffic control, erosion controls, seeding, and other related appurtenances. Each bid proposal shall be accompanied by a "Bid Security" in the form of a certified check made payable to the “City of Corcoran” (OWNER) in the amount not less than five percent (5%) of the total bid, or a surety bond in the same amount, running to the OWNER, with the surety company thereon duly authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota. Such Bid Security to be a guarantee that the bidder will not, without the consent of the OWNER, withdraw their bid for a period of ninety (90) days after the opening of bids, and if awarded a contract, will enter into a contract with the OWNER; and the amount of the certified check will be retained or the bond enforced by the OWNER in case the bidder fails to do so. All bid securities except those of the three lowest bidders will be returned within five days after the opening of bids. Eligible Bidders for this project must meet the Minimum Criteria as defined in the Section 00 45 49 Responsible Contractor Law in accordance with Minnesota Statutes § 16C.285, subdivision 3, and additional criteria required by the OWNER. Bids shall be submitted electronically through the QuestCDN website in accordance with the Instructions to Bidders. No bidder shall withdraw their bid, without the consent of the OWNER, for the period of days indicated above after the date for the opening thereof. The OWNER, however, reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to waive any minor irregularities, informalities or discrepancies. A work history detailing qualifications and past experience must be provided upon request. Project No. 227705990 Advertisement for Bids 00 11 13-2 The Project Manual is available on QuestCDN (www.questcdn.com). You may download the digital plan documents for $40.00 by inputting Quest Project #8413922 on the website’s project search page. Please contact QuestCDN at 952- 233-1632 or info@questcdn.com for assistance in free membership registration, downloading, and working with this digital project information, and submission of electronic bids. Direct inquiries to Nick Wyers at (763) 479-5174 or nick.wyers@stantec.com. Nick Wyers Project Engineer Stantec Consulting Services PUBLISHED: QuestCDN.com: March 24, 2023 Crow River News March 24, 2023 March 17, 2023 Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works Director 9100 County Road 19 Corcoran, MN 55340 Dear Kevin: Reference: Horseshoe Bend Drive Drainage Improvements We appreciate the opportunity to present this scope of work for the drainage improvement project for Horseshoe Bend Drive near the Rolling Hills Road intersection. Council has authorized drainage improvements to upgrade the system to manage a 10-year storm event that is typical of current municipal standards for new construction. Residents are supportive of drainage improvements and this scope assumes all utility work can be completed within existing ROW or easements and if necessary Right of Entries would be obtained for any grading work outside of easements (yard grading, driveway tie-ins, etc.). The following tasks are separated into the typical project breakdown to bring bid results back to Council. Scope of Work Task 100 - Design Survey Stantec will conduct a design level survey with utility locates and topography to supplement the limited culvert surveying that was performed for the Feasibility Study. Task 200 – Final Design and Permitting Services Finalize the stormwater conveyance design including finalizing pipe sizing, grading ditch profiles, identifying any driveway adjustments and identifying small utility conflicts. The modeling will be upgraded with the design level survey to complete the conveyance final design. Plan preparation, including title sheet, existing conditions/demo, plan and profiles, storm sewer improvements, typical sections and details. The wetland permitting process involves showing temporary wetland impacts to obtain a No-Loss determination for culverts and receive a No-Loss for the minor bounce to the main ponding area/wetland that is east of Rolling Hills Road. Task 300 - Bid Process Stantec will complete the bid process that includes posting the project on Quest CDN for virtual bidding, corresponding with contractors, issuance of addendums and managing the virtual bid opening. Once bids have been opened on the project, we will prepare a bid tabulation and present bid results to the Council for their consideration. Construction Administration costs will be presented with the bid tabulation. Agenda Item: 7e. March 17th, 2023 Kevin Mattson PE Public Works Director Page 2 of 3 Reference: Horseshoe Bend Drive Drainage Improvements Engineering and permitting totals are as follows: Task Cost Task 100—Design Survey $ 1,900 Task 200-- Final Design and Permit $ 15,100 Task 300 – Bidding Assistance $ 1,200 Total $18,200 This scope of work would be in addition to the $10,750 that was previously approved by the City at the time of the feasibility study. Additional scope would be provided to staff to provide additional easement work such as legal survey or easement exhibits. Closing We hope this letter defines the of scope work and the estimated fee of services to your satisfaction. Stantec will complete this scope of work according to the Master Services Agreement and previous practices with the City of Corcoran. On behalf of our Stantec team, we thank you for this opportunity to be of service to your community. Regards, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Kent Torve PE (MN, TX, SD), LEED AP City Engineer/ Principal Phone: 612.209.7919 Kent.torve@stantec.com Steve Hegland, PE (MN) Client Manager Phone: 612-741-6548 steven.hegland@stantec.com March 17th, 2023 Kevin Mattson PE Public Works Director Page 3 of 3 Reference: Horseshoe Bend Drive Drainage Improvements By signing this proposal, City of Corcoran authorizes Stantec to proceed with the services herein described and the work will be completed in accordance with the existing Master Service Agreement. This proposal is accepted and agreed on the ___________ day of _________,_________ . Per: __________________________ _______________________________________________________ Print Name & Title Signature March 17, 2023 Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works Director 9100 County Road 19 Corcoran, MN 55340 Dear Kevin: Reference: City Center Drive and 79th Place Design Documents We appreciate the opportunity to present this scope of work to provide professional engineering services for the completion of Design Documents for the City Center and 79th Place Project. This scope of services will include the completion of final design and bidding documents, technical specifications, construction documents and bidding assistance. Project Understanding The City Center and 79th Place project is the construction project of the public infrastructure associated with the first phase of the Downtown district. This project is being completed in partnership with multiple stakeholders including the St. Therese senior housing development and the M&I Rush Creek Reserve development. In addition to the stakeholder, a portion of the project is anticipated to be funded through special assessments. The preliminary assessment hearings were held in August of 2021 and the final assessment roll is anticipated to be completed with the construction phase of this project. The overall scale of the project including the roadway, turn lane improvement, and utility improvements is approximately $6.0 million. The majority of the utilities with this project are required of and being paid for by the St. Therese Senior Housing and MI Rush Creek Reserve developments but are being installed with this project under a cost share agreement. The mass grading project is underway and planned to be completed in the spring/summer of 2023 and design of the utilities for the project has been ongoing and is not covered in this scope of work as they are funded by the developers. We are requesting authorization to complete the final Design Documents for the project which include the final roadway, and landscaping portions of the projects to be bid in one package. Scope of Work Task 100 - Final Construction Documents Stantec will provide final construction documents for the project which will include the information outlined below. ·Utilize topographic survey data that was collected with the mass grading portion of the project. ·Preparation of final easement exhibits and descriptions for the necessary easements on the project. We will provide onsite staking of proposed easement limits for each property. ·Coordination with small utility companies with utility relocations. ·Final plan preparation of design documents in accordance with the MnDOT State Aid Highway Standards. This will include including title sheet, existing conditions/demo, plan and profiles, storm sewer improvements, utility sheet, striping and signage plan, erosions control plan, SWPPP, typical sections and Agenda Item: 7f. March 17th, 2023 Kevin Mattson PE Public Works Director Page 2 of 3 Reference: City Center Drive and 79th Place Design Documents details. A portion of this project will be funded utilizing the City of Corcoran Municipal State Aid funds so the plans will be completed to those standards for construction. ·A development of a SWPPP in accordance with MPCA NPDES permitting requirements will be required and will be provided with this scope of work. It is assumed the SWPPP will be included with the bidding documents and the MPDES permit will not be submitted until the project has been bid. ·A portion of the work will include turn lanes into both 79th Place and City Center Drive along the County Road. This work will include coordination with Hennepin County to ensure those improvements are designed in conformance with their design standards. ·Stormwater management design. The pond and stormwater management devices were designed with eh mass grading of the project but additional calculations will be necessary for the State Aid Hydraulic submittals. ·Engineers Cost estimate of the final design documents ·Landscaping plan in accordance with the SE District Standards. It is assumed that a preliminary landscaping plan will be presented to the City Council for their consideration incorporating the design elements of the complete downtown district. The final plan may include some components of that plan that make sense with an initial phase with some elements anticipated to be provided with future linear park or downtown development. ·Wetland permitting was addressed with the mass grading portion of the project and no additional wetland permitting is anticipated to be necessary with this phase of the project. Task 200 - Bidding Assistance ·Stantec will provide assistance in the bidding process that includes preparing the advertisement for bids, responding to contractor questions, attending the bid opening, providing a bid tabulation, evaluate qualifications and provide an award recommendation. ·As there are multiple stakeholders within the project, the bid tabulation will be used to present updated cost share information to those parties. Task Cost Task 100 – Final Construction Documents $ 128,000 Task 200 – Bidding Assistance $ 8,500 Total $ 136,500 Closing We hope this letter defines the of scope work and the estimated fee of services to your satisfaction. Stantec will complete this scope of work according to the Master Services Agreement and previous practices with the City of Corcoran. On behalf of our Stantec team, we thank you for this opportunity to be of service to your community. March 17th, 2023 Kevin Mattson PE Public Works Director Page 3 of 3 Reference: City Center Drive and 79th Place Design Documents Regards, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Kent Torve PE (MN, TX, SD), LEED AP City Engineer/ Principal Phone: 612.209.7919 Kent.torve@stantec.com Steve Hegland, PE (MN) Client Manager Phone: 612-741-6548 steven.hegland@stantec.com By signing this proposal, City of Corcoran authorizes Stantec to proceed with the services herein described and the work will be completed in accordance with the existing Master Service Agreement. This proposal is accepted and agreed on the ___________ day of _________,_________ . Per: __________________________ _____________________________ __________________________ Print Name & Title Signature STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 7g. Council Meeting: March 23, 2023 Prepared By: Jessica Beise Topic: Work Session Topic – April 13, 2023 Action Required: Schedule Work Session Summary: Council noted additional discussion was necessary for the rental ordinance. Work sessions were needed, work session topics would be determined and included in the scheduled work session meeting. At the November 21 Council work session, Council discussed and reviewed a potential rental ordinance. Staff recommends a work session to further review the rental ordinance addition to city code on April 13, 2023 at 5:30 pm. Financial/Budget: N/A Options: 1.Authorize staff to move forward with work session topic as presented. 2.Provide different work session topic. 3.Decline to schedule work sessions on the topic. Recommendation: Authorize staff to move forward with work session topic as presented. Council Action: Authorize staff to move forward with work session topic as presented. Attachments: None STAFF REPORT Agenda Item : 7h . Counc il Meeting: March 23, 2023 Prepared By : Maggie Ung Topic : 2023 Fee Schedule Amendment Action Required: Approval Su m m ar y : On the December 22, 2022 Council meeting, the 2023 Fee Schedule was adopted. Since adoption, there were concerns by the impacted commercial properties within the City regarding the basis on how water and sewer base fees were charged. At the March 9, 2023 Council meeting, Council directed staff to amend the base fees for water and sewer to remove “per SAC unit” basis. Staff is looking into alternative methods to equitably charge all properties in the City for water and sewer base fees. Fi n anc i al/B ud g et: The fee schedule sets the amounts charged for various item/services. Op t i o n s : 1.Adopt Ordinance 2023-480 Amending 2023 Fee Schedule. 2.Amend and adopt Ordinance Amending 2023 Fee Schedule. Rec o mm endat i on : Staff recommends adopting Ordinance 2022-476 Amending 2023 Fee Schedule. Co un c i l A c t i on : Consider a motion to adopt Ordinance 2022-476 Amending 2023 Fee Schedule. At t ac h m en ts: 1.Ordinance 2023-480 Amending 2023 Fee Schedule. City of Corcoran March 23, 2023 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2023-480 Motion By: Seconded By: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING 2023 FEE SCHEDULE The Corcoran City Council ordains as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The Corcoran City Council has determined that the fees to be charged by the City for development, inspections, and other related services shall be adopted by ordinance. Section 2. Amendment of the 2023 Fee Schedule. The fees to be charged by the City of Corcoran for 2023 are listed on the attached Exhibit A, (copy is available at City Hall); that said fee schedule is hereby adopted and retro- effective on January 1, 2023. Section 3. Continuation/Amendment. Any amendment to the fee schedule shall be made annually, or more often if necessary, by ordinance; if there are no amendments to the fee schedule, the most recently adopted fee schedule ordinance shall remain in force and effect until amended. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its publication and passage. ADOPTED by the City Council on the 23rd day of March, 2023. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Tom McKee – Mayor ATTEST: City Seal Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk Records & Service for City Document Processing Fees Code Books Recycling Fee Copies City Park - Picnic Facility Labor/Staff Research Engraved Memorial Bricks Late Fees / Penalties / Cancellation Administrative Fees - Rentals Liquor/Tobacco/Lawful Gambling Grading & Land Reclamation Permit Burning Permit Overweight Vehicle Permit Driveway Permit Sign Permit Utility Permit Police Reports Rental Fee Car Seat Checks Vehicle Impound Police Patch Animal Impound Finger Printing Event Security Rates False Alarm Fire Emergency Emergency Communications Systems Fee False Alarm Police Fire Department Entry Key Lock Box Firearm & Hunting Permits Equipment Usage Swing Away Mail Box Arms Public Works Labor Street Department Fees Lawn Mowing - Property Cleanup Water Fees Connection Fees Sanitary Sewer Fees Other Utility Fees CITY OF CORCORAN 2023 FEE SCHEDULE Table of Content Public Safety Licenses & Miscellaneous Permits Administrative Fees Building Permit and Related Fees Public Works Planning Development & Zoning Fees Land Use Permit/Application Type Utility Rates CITY OF CORCORAN 2023 FEE SCHEDULE Notes ADMINISTRATIVE FEE SCHEDULE Records & Service for City Document (Includes Tax) Assessment Search from County USB Flash Drive Interest charge on 30 day past due Escrow accounts Notary Fee - per document Candidate Filing Fee Code Books Code Book (Codes/Zoning/Subd) Binder Municipal Code Only Subdivision Code Only Zoning Code Only Comprehensive Plan Book Printed - special order Copies Copies black/white - up to 8 1/2x14 per page Copies black/white - 11 x 17 per page Copies Color up to 8 1/2x14 pp Copies Color 11x17 Copies Oversize (Larger than 11X17) - Special Order Labor/Staff Research Data Request Retrieval Cost per hour Normal Business Hrs (1 hr minimum) per hour After Hours (1 hr minimum) per hour Late Fees / Penalties / Cancellation Returned Check Fee ACH Return / NSF (non-sufficient fund) Chargeback Delinquent Fee Permit Cancellation Fee Processing Fees Recreation Credit Card Processing Fee - Transactions under $100.00 Recreation Credit Card Processing Fee - Transactions over $100.00 InvoiceCloud Credit Card Processing Fee - Utility Bills InvoiceCloud Credit Card Processing Fee - Building Permits InvoiceCloud Credit Card Processing Fee - Miscellaneous Maps Color Maps - on cardstock Oversized or Laminated - special order Topos - special order Recycling Fee Recycling Fee - Annually Recycling Delinquent Fee Recycling Provider Late Fee City Park - Picnic Facility Group 1 (Local Non-Profit Groups): NW Area Jaycees, Corcoran Lions, Pioneer Society, NW Trails, Corcoran Garden Club, Corcoran Bee Club, St. John's Lutheran School *Damage deposit required Group 2: Corcoran Residents *Damage deposit required Damage Deposit - Required for All Rentals / Amenities Pavilion Rental Fee Soccer/Football/Baseball - per field (per hour usage | minimum 2 hours) Lights (Lions Field only) - Additional per game Scoreboard and PA System (Snyder Field only | per game) Tennis Courts - All courts 2 hour usage Engraved Memorial Bricks (tax included) 4 x 8 Engraved Brick 12 x 12 Engraved Brick Engraved Stone (Large) Engraved Stone (X-Large) 48" Maintenance Free Bench Concrete Bench - 22 Characters Granite Bench *Product and prices subject to change with vendors Administrative Fees - Rentals Mutiple Date Change Fee (1 Date Change Per Year Free) Varies* Varies* 10.00 50.00 100.00 135.00 175.00 Varies* 22.00 30.00 25.00 15.00 N/C 10% Discount 350.00 100.00 Varies 51.42 10.00 1.5% per month 3.25% 2.50 3.00 Varies 25.00 N/C 3.49% less $3.49 1.25% 100.00 35.00 35.00 10.00 1.50 Varies Salary of the lowest-paid entity employee who can complete the task 65.00 100.00 0.25 0.55 1.00 2023 FEE 25.00 10.00 0.10 1.00 10.00 65.00 65.00 35.00 35.00 CITY OF CORCORAN 2023 FEE SCHEDULE Notes ADMINISTRATIVE FEE SCHEDULE 2023 FEE Licenses & Miscellaneous Permits Liquor/Tobacco/Lawful Gambling License/Permit Temporary 3.2 Malt Liquor License - 1 - 4 Day Event Temporary Malt Liquor License - 1 - 4 Day Event Temporary 3.2 Malt Liquor License - Annual Max On Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor Off Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor Investigation (New/Transfer License) On Sale Intoxicating Liquor On Sale Wine Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor (Fee limited by State Law) Sunday Sale Intoxicating Liquor (Fee limited by State Law) Investigation Fee (New/Transfer License) 2:00 am Closing Tobacco License Fireworks Permit-Per Event Hobby Kennel - Annual Fee Exempt Gambling Permit - Held at Non-Premise Permitted Site Exempt Gambling Permit - Held at a Premise Permitted Site (ie. Conducts Regular Charitable Gambling Activities Solid Waste Hauler License Application Burning Permit Valid for 1 month Valid for 6 months Public Safety Police Reports Police Reports - Per Page Audio/Video on USB Flash Drive Normal Business Hrs (1 hr min.) per hour Car Seat Checks Resident Non-Resident - 1st Seat Non-Resident - Additional Seats Police Patch Police Patch - Available Only to Full-time Police Officers Finger Printing Resident Non-Resident Additional Cards - Resident Additional Cards - Non-Resident False Alarm Fire/Medical Emergency 2-3 In any 12-month period ( Each) 4+ In any 12-month period (Each) False Alarm Police 1-3 In any 12-month period 4+ In any 12-month period Firearm & Hunting Permits Shooting Range Annual Review Fee Goose Lake Hunting Permit Permit to Purchase/Transfer Rental Fee Range contract per day (law enforcement agencies only) Command Post per day Vehicle Impound Vehicle Impound Release Storage Fee Daily Animal Impound 1st Offense (Plus impound fees to shelter) 2nd and Subsequent Offenses (Plus impound fees to shelter) No Kennel License Event Security Rates Officer - per hour Officer - per hour Holiday rate Reserve Officer - per hour 50.00 100.00 125.00 30.00 10.00 35.00 21.48 42.96 N/C 100.00 250.00 10.00 5.00 N/C 100.00 250.00 10.00 5.00 75.00 150.00 75.00 10.00 50.00 150.00 50.00 75.00 N/C 50.00 0.25 10.00 Salary of the lowest-paid entity employee who can complete the task N/C N/C 25.00 N/C 25.00 2,000.00 150.00 200.00 300.00 Paid to State 100.00 100.00 25.00 100.00 4,000.00 25.00 25.00 CITY OF CORCORAN 2023 FEE SCHEDULE Notes ADMINISTRATIVE FEE SCHEDULE 2023 FEE Emergency Communications Systems Fee Per Single Residential Unit Up to 4 Units Up to 10 Units For Any Number of Units Above 10 Units Fire Department Entry Key Lock Box DAMA Box and/or Mounting Kits Recreational Vehicle Permit Recreational Vehicle Permit *Term depends on year issued 1,000.00 Cost plus 10% $10.00 per year 100.00 200.00 500.00 CITY OF CORCORAN 2023 FEE SCHEDULE Notes ADMINISTRATIVE FEE SCHEDULE 2023 FEE Public Works Equipment Usage Per Hour (Government Agency Assistance) Tractor/Backhoe Dump Truck Front End Wheel Loader Road Grader Skid Loader Wood Chipper Public Works Labor Per Hour Lawn Mowing - Property Cleanup Mowing 1 acre & under Mowing over 1 acre - $315 + additional hourly rate Contract tree and weed removal Contract rubbish removal Swing Away Mail Box Arms (Sales Tax included) Post only (mailbox not included) Post and Installation (mailbox not included) Street Department Fees Street Sign Install Labor (Per hour) Bituminous Trail Reimbursement Cost (per lineal foot) Culvert priced per foot Grading & Land Disturbance Permit Greater than 50 Cubic Yards (or less than 50 Cubic Yards non-exempt) One Acre or greater of disturbance Driveway Review (New or Altered Access) Escrow Determined by City Engineer or City Representative* Engineering Review - per hour Overweight Vehicle Permit Agriculture Commercial Tow Truck Daily Permit - Non Exempt Emergency Seasonal - Emergency (Septic, Liquid Propane & Similar) No Permit Penalty All Charges are Per Truck - Permits are Restricted Utility Permit Utility Work in the Right-of-Way - IE:Comcast, Century Link, CenterPoint Energy, Wright-Hennepin, etc Local Government Unit Fees Non-Refundable Application Fee Escrow Exemption Certificates 200.00 1,000.00 Determinations 200.00 1,000.00 Delineation Review 200.00 2,000.00 Pond Excavations 200.00 1,000.00 Wetland Replacement Plans <10,000 SF Impact on Single Basins or , 1/4 Acre Impact for Private Driveways 400.00 2,000.00 All Other Replacement Plans 400.00 2,500.00 Replacement Plan in Conjunction with Wetland Banking 400.00 3,500.00 All Other Wetland Banking Applications 400.00 3,500.00 Monitoring - Per Basin 400.00 6,000.00 *Additional Weland Replacement Plan and Banking Escrows and Sureities are determined on a site-specific basis. Wetland Conservation Act Violations (Restoration Order) Any person or entity that fails to obtain a permit under City Ordinance prior to performing work shall pay a penalty of two times the original permit fee and shall be required to pay all costs associated with enforcement, including reasonable attorney’s fees. Moved to Public Works section 100.00 Per FEMA's Current Schedule of Equipment Rates 750.00 100.00 N/C Double Fee 100.00* Varies -1000.00 Minimum Contract Rate N/C 17.00 Cost + 65.00 100.00* 300.00* 65.00 150.00 75.00 315.00 85.00 Cost + 65.00 Cost + 65.00 65.00 CITY OF CORCORAN 2023 FEE SCHEDULE Notes ADMINISTRATIVE FEE SCHEDULE 2023 FEE Planning Development & Zoning Fees Land Use Permit/Application Type Non-Refundable Application Fee Escrow Agriculture Preserve Application - Placement (fee limited by state)50.00 - Agriculture Preserve Application - Removal (fee limited by state)50.00 - Administrative Permit 100.00 1,000.00 Minor Subdivision, Lot Line Adjustment/Consolidation 100.00 1,500.00 Certificate of Compliance 80.00 - Development Rights Appeal 100.00 500.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 1,000.00 2,200.00 Conditional Use Permit (CUP)550.00 2,200.00 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Amendment 200.00 1,000.00 Environmental Review 500.00 5,000.00 Interim Use Permit 500.00 2,000.00 Final Plat – Base Fee Regular / OSP 400.00 5,000.00 Final Plat – Per Lot Regular /OSP 15.00 - Residential Park Dedication Fees (Subdivision Ordinance) Section 955 Single Family Per Unit 5,954.00 - Multi Family Per Unit 4,040.00 - Commerical and Industrial Per Acre 5,866.00 - Preliminary Plat – Base Regular / OSP 400.00 5,000.00 Preliminary Plat – Per Lot Regular / OSP 15.00 - PUD -Preliminary Development Plan 575.00 5,000.00 PUD - Final Development Plan 500.00 5,000.00 PUD - Sketch Plat/Plan Review 450.00 2,000.00 Rezoning 575.00 2,000.00 Sign - Wetland Buffer Sign (per sign - requires site inspection)20.00 - Sign - Development Notice Sign $165.00 first sign/ $50.00 each additional 165.00 - Site Plan 425.00 1,500.00 Site Plan Amendment - Minor 200.00 1,000.00 Sketch Plat/Plan Review - Regular / OSP 450.00 1,750.00 Topography Exemption, Wetland Waiver, Electronic File Waiver 200.00 1,000.00 Vacation 350.00 1,000.00 Variance 550.00 2,000.00 Zoning/Subdivision Code Amendment 700.00 2,000.00 Infrastructure Feasibility Study / Review 5,000.00 Additional Escrow May Be Required on a Project by Project Basis Meeting with City Consultants and City Staff (first hour no charge)Over 1 hour Contract fee 500.00 Public Works Director Review - per hour 90.00 Additional Escrow May Be Required on a Project by Project Basis City Planner Review - per hour 65.00 Additional Escrow May Be Required on a Project by Project Basis Fence Permit Fence (residential within 6’ of property line)35.00 Zoning and Setback Review Only Sign Permit No Planning Commission Review - Temporary 35.00 No Planning Commission Review - Permanent 150.00 Any fence taller than 7’ requires a building permit fee based on valuation + state surcharge CITY OF CORCORAN 2023 FEE SCHEDULE 2023 FEE UTILITY FEE SCHEDULE WATER FEES Residential Water Base Fees - per SAC unit per month 21.63 Water Usage Rates - residential (monthly use) per 1,000 gallons Tier 1: 0 gallons to 4,999 gallons 2.31 Tier 2: 5,000 gallons to 8,999 gallons 2.78 Tier 3: 9,000 gallons to 19,999 gallons 3.48 Tier 4: 20,000 gallons and over 4.49 Multi-Residential (7+ units) Water Base Fees - per SAC unit per month 21.63 Water rates - Multi-residential (monthly use) per 1,000 gallons Tier 1: 1,000 gallons +2.78 *REU = residential equivalent unit Non-Residential Water Base Fees - per SAC unit per month Non residential - Under 1" Meter 26.73 Non residential - 1" to 3" Meter 26.73 Non residential - Over 3" Meter 34.61 Water rates - non residential (monthly use) per 1,000 gallons Tier 1: 1,000 gallons +2.78 SANITARY SEWER FEES Residential Sewer Base Fees - per SAC unit per month 30.45 Sewer rates - residential (monthly use) per 1,000 gallons Existing Customers - Based on Winter Water Usage (November-March)3.02 New Customers - Based on 4,500 gallons per month 3.02 Multi-Residential Sewer Base Fees - per SAC unit per month 30.45 Sewer rates - non residential (monthly use) per 1,000 gallons Tier 1: 1,000 gallons +3.02 Non-Residential Sewer Base Fees - per SAC unit per month 30.45 Sewer rates - non residential (monthly use) per 1,000 gallons Tier 1: 1,000 gallons +3.02 Manufactured Homes Park Sewer rates - (monthly use) per 1,000 gallons Maple Hill Estates (804,000 gallons per month)3.85 CITY OF CORCORAN 2023 FEE SCHEDULE 2023 FEE UTILITY FEE SCHEDULE CONNECTION FEES Trunk Line Availability Charge (TLAC) Watermain & Raw Water - Trunk Line Availability Charge (TLAC) - per acre: Southeast 9,197.81 Treatment & Storage - Trunk Line Availability Charge (TLAC) - per acre: Southeast 12,433.97 Watermain & Raw Water - Trunk Line Availability Charge (TLAC) - per acre: Northeast 12,198.97 Treatment & Storage - Trunk Line Availability Charge (TLAC) - per acre: Northeast 24,922.12 Sewer Trunk Line Availability Charge (TLAC) - per acre 7,526.31 Connection Fees - City of Corcoran Water Connection Fee (per unit) - Single Family 1,294.00 Water Connection Fee (per unit) - Multi-Family 1,034.00 Water Connection Fee (per unit) - Non-Residential 1,294.00 Sewer Connection Fee (per unit) - Single Family 1,280.00 Sewer Connection Fee (per unit) - Multi-Family 1,024.00 Sewer Connection Fee (per unit) - Non-Residential 1,280.00 Connection Fees - City of Maple Grove (Per Maple Grove Fee Schedule) Water Connection Fee (per unit) - Residential/individual laundry facilities 2,942.00 Water Connection Fee (per unit) - Residential/ no individual laundry facilities 2,942.00 Water Connection Fee (per acre) - Commercial/Industrial/Mixed 11,767.00 Water Connection Fee (per acre) - All other Churches which do not house weekday school, preschool, and/or daycare activities 11,767.00 Volumetric Charges - per 1,000 gallons 2.3600 Connection Fees - Metropolitan Council Sewer Access Charge (SAC)2,485.00 Meter Fees Meter - standard Cost plus 10% Meter - larger than standard Cost plus 10% Meter Inspection 65.00 Meter - Temporary Installation 65.00 OTHER UTILITY FEES Miscellaneous Fees Maple Grove Serviced Properties Cost plus 10% Broken Water Meter Fee - payable by each user for each month (Based on 4,500 gallons of water used per month)10.40 Late/Past Due Payments Delinquent Utility Fee 10.00 Late Payment Penalty 10% of unpaid bill Water Disconnect 65.00 Water Reconnect 65.00 Bulk Water Sales Set Up/Administrative Fee 65.00 Water Meter Rental Deposit 1,000.00 Tier 1: 1,000 gallons +2.78 2023 CITY OF CORCORAN BUILDING PERMIT AND RELATED FEES SCHEDULE BUILDING PERMIT FEE - Fee is 100% of the adopted fee schedule below, plus State surcharge and applicable reviews listed below. TOTAL VALUATIONS BUILDING PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE (Residential & Commercial) $1.00 to $500.00 $21.00 $501.00 to $2,000.00 $21.00 for the first $500.00 plus $2.75 for each additional $100.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00. $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $62.25 for the first $2,000.00 plus $12.50 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00. $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $349.75 for the first $25,000.00 plus $9.00 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00. $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $574.75 for the first $50,000.00 plus $6.25 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00. $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $887.25 for the first $100,000.00 plus $5.00 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00. $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $2,887.25 for the first $500,000.00 plus $4.25 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00. $1,000,001.00 and up $5,012.25 for the first $1,000,000.00 plus $2.75 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof PLAN REVIEW FEE: 65% of the Building Permit Fee calculated from the above schedule. REPETITIVE PLAN REVIEW FEE: 25% of the Building Permit Fee calculated from the above schedule PLAN REVIEW FEE IS NON-REFUNDABLE STATE SURCHARGE: Based on the table below. For valuation use the fees listed above BUILDING VALUATION STATE SURCHARGE* One Million or less .0005 x valuation with minimum of $1.00 for Flat Rate Permits [up to $10,010 valuation] $1,000,001 to $2,000,000 $ 500 + .0004 x (Value -$1,000,000) $2,000.001 to $3,000,000 $ 900 + .0003 x (Value - $2,000,000) $3,000,001 to $4,000,000 $1200 + .0002 x (Value - $3,000,000) $4,000,001 to $5,000,000 $1400 + .0001 x (Value - $4,000,000) Greater than $5,000,000 $1500 + .00005 x (Value - $5,000,000) SEC FEE: .0005 x permit valuation for all Building Permits except Re-Roof, Re-side, Re-Window, Decks & Interior Remodels. Minimum $150.00 New Home or Commercial Construction, Minimum $50.00 on any other non-exempt construction ZONING AND SET BACK REVIEW: $25.00 for permits requiring review, $75.00 for New Construction plus any costs for City Planner to review. Agricultural Structure requires a Certificate of Compliance. EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS FEE: $100.00 for new construction single family homes. Multiple residential unit rates per adopted fee schedule. 2023 CITY OF CORCORAN BUILDING PERMIT AND RELATED FEES SCHEDULE OVER THE COUNTER PERMITS Re-Roof, Re-side and Windows $90.00 each + State Surcharge Fee ($1.00) General Plumbing (Residential) $50.00 minimum + additional $5.00 per fixture + State Surcharge Fee ($1.00) Water Heaters / Water Softeners (change out only) Water Heater $35.00 per unit + State Surcharge Fee ($1.00) Water Softener $35.00 per unit + State Surcharge Fee ($1.00) Mechanical (Residential) $75.00 per unit + State Surcharge Fee ($1.00) (Furnace, AC or Gas line) Additional $10.00 gas fitting/connection fee for each unit over 3 units The following qualify as a “unit” Furnace, AC, Air Exchange, In-floor heat, Boiler, Geothermal System, Ground System Heat Pump, Garage Heater, etc. Gas Fireplace $75.00 + State Surcharge Fee ($1.00) *State Surcharge fee is subject to State change OTHER INSPECTIONS AND FEES Inspection outside normal business hours; minimum two hour charge $90.00 per hr. Re-inspection Fee $45.00 per hr. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated $60.00 per hr. Site Inspection Fee RESIDENTIAL $45.00 ea. COMMERCIAL $80.00 ea. Additional plan review required by changes, additions, or revisions to approved plans (min. ½ hour charge) $60.00 per hr. Miscellaneous and special services per contract $60.00 per hr. Water Hook Up/Connection Permit (Plan review and inspection of the connection to the municipal water system for existing properties) $100.00 + $45.00 for per additional inspection Sewer Hook Up/Connection Permit (Plan review and inspection of the connection to the municipal water system for existing properties) $100.00 + $45.00 for per additional inspection Pre-Move inspection $150.00 ea. Moved – In structure (not including foundation, interior remodel, etc.) $250.00 ea. Commercial Plumbing permit and plan review Based on valuation Commercial Mechanical permit and plan review Based on valuation Electrical Inspections (Residential & Commercial) Per State Inspector Demolition Residential $150.00 + State Surcharge ($1.00) Commercial $250.00 + State Surcharge ($1.00) Mobile Home Installation $250.00 + State Surcharge ($1.00) Permit Cancellation Fee $25.00 + Plan Review Fee Replacement Permit Card Fee $30.00 2023 CITY OF CORCORAN BUILDING PERMIT AND RELATED FEES SCHEDULE CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY City Ordinance Title IV: 40-2 Certificate of Survey requirement. A certificate of survey shall be required with all building permit applications for new construction and building permits that enlarge or alter the footprint of an existing structure. Application for exemption (Building permits only) – If the proposed structure meets all of the required setbacks from the property line, flood plain, wetlands and easements by two times. PENALTY Any person or entity that fails to obtain a permit under City Ordinance Title lV: 40-40.04 prior to performing work shall pay a penalty of two times the original permit fee and shall be required to pay all costs associated with enforcement, including reasonable attorney’s fees. All fees are to be paid at time of permit issuance Page 1 of 14 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 8a. City Council Meeting: March 23, 2023 Prepared By: Natalie Davis McKeown Topic: Amira Village Sketch Plat (PID 25-119-23-12-0002) (City File No. 23-003) Action Required: Direction Review Deadline: May 2, 2023 1.Application Request The applicants, Hempel Acquisition Company and Trek Development, request an opportunity to appear before the City Council to solicit informal comments on a concept plat for the “Chastek” property at 7600 Maple Hill Rd. The subject property is roughly 38 acres located northeast of the County Road 10 (Bass Lake Rd) and Maple Hill Road intersection. 2.Background The Chastek property previously housed a wholesale greenhouse business known as “Chastek Greenhouses, Inc.” The property was put up for sale in 2022. The land was last platted in 1992 under the name “Chastek Farm” to carve out a 1.5-acre parcel used as a single- family home. The 1.5-acre parcel is not a part of this sketch plan and was recently sold to a private party. Additionally, staff believes there is an existing private access easement that runs along the south property line in favor of the Leuer property to the east. This item was previously scheduled for the February 23, 2023 Council meeting, but the applicant requested the item to be pulled from the agenda. In the beginning of March, the applicant requested to proceed with the concept plan at the March 23rd meeting. A revised narrative was submitted (attached to this report), but the concept plan and elevations remain the same. The changes are highlighted in yellow throughout the report for easy reading. Location Map of 7600 Maple Hill Rd Page 2 of 14 3. Context Zoning and Land Use The proposed property is guided for low density residential and zoned RSF-2 (Single Family Residential 2). There is a small sliver of the property in the southeast corner that is within the Shoreland Overlay District. It appears most of the greenhouses have been removed from the property, but a few structures are still present on the site as of this report, including a single-family home. The property is within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and Phase 1 of the 2040 Staging Plan. Surrounding Properties The guiding, zoning, and existing use of the surrounding properties are detailed in the table below. All surrounding properties are within the MUSA and Phase 1 of the Staging Plan. Direction Guided Zoning District Use North Medium Density Residential Manufactured Home Park Residential Maple Hills Estates East Low Density Residential RSF-2 Shoreland Overlay Agriculture South Low Density Residential Planned Unit Development (PUD) Residential Bass Lake Crossing West - Adjacent/enclosed homestead Low Density Residential RSF-2 Residential West - Across Maple Hill Rd - Mixed Use - Public/Semi- Public - Downtown Mixed Use (DMU) - Public / Institutional - Agriculture - Good Shepard Lutheran Church 2040 Future Land Use Map Page 3 of 14 Natural Characteristics of the Site The 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s Natural Resource Inventory Areas map does not reflect any natural communities of note on the subject property. A wetland delineation was completed on this property and finalized in January of this year. This process confirmed five, relatively small, wetlands throughout the property as shown in the image to the right. 4. Analysis Planning staff coordinated review of the sketch plan with Public Works and Engineering as well as the Public Safety team. Memos from the City Engineer and Public Safety are enclosed in this report as well as incorporated into the following analysis as appropriate. The applicant is responsible for reviewing the entirety of both memos and incorporating the feedback as the project moves forward. Use The concept plan for “Amira Village” proposes a purpose-built rental community for United Properties. This is a departure from the original narrative which proposed a 55+ age-restricted rental community. It is still possible that it could be a senior living community; however, United Properties must complete additional market research to confirm demand for such housing in the area. The plan includes 141 single-family villas with two-car attached garages, smart-home technologies, and either a deck or patio. The original narrative explains the intention to provide the following amenities within the community: - Centrally located clubhouse with an outdoor kitchen. - Fitness center. - Social room with prep kitchen facilities. - Outdoor pool and hot tub. - Pickleball and bocce ball courts. - A pet exercise area. All of these uses are permitted by-right within the RSF-2 zoning district. Wetland Delineation Exhibit Page 4 of 14 Density The concept plan estimates a net density of roughly 3.9 unites/acre. This is within the required 3-5 units per acre required for the low density residential land use designation. The math behind the calculation was not included in the application submittal. It is possible the post-development calculations will come back slightly higher than 3.9 units/acre once features such as wetlands and wetland buffers are removed from the calculations. Staff believes the proposed development would still be within the 3-5 units/acre range. Lot Analysis The lot standards for the RSF-2 district are as follows: RSF-2 Standard Minimum Lot Area 11,000 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 80 ft. Minimum Principal Structure Setbacks - Front, Major Roadways 100 ft. - Front, All Other Streets 20 ft. - Front Porch (less than 120 sq. ft.) 15 ft. - Side (living) 10 ft. - Side (garage)* 5 ft. Sketch Plat Page 5 of 14 - Rear 30 ft. Maximum Principal Building Height 35 ft. * Minimum separation between structures on adjacent parcels shall be 15 ft. However, residential PUDs are more often compared to the district standards of RSF-3. The Zoning Ordinance states that the RSF-3 district “is intended to be the primary single-family zoning district for future residential developments.” The setbacks are the same in RSF-3 as RSF-2, but there are smaller lot size standards as provided in the table below. RSF-3 Standard Minimum Lot Area 7,500 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 65 ft. The concept plan proposes 39 lots with a width of 44’ and 102 lots with a width of 50’. The home sizes are expected to range from 1,200 sq. ft. to 2,500 sq. ft. The sketch plan notes proposed standards to be considered under a Planned Unit Development (PUD) district (areas where flexibility is desired are in red text): Proposed PUD Standards Standard Minimum Lot Area 5,000 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 44’ Minimum Principal Structure Setbacks - Front Setback 20’ - Front Porch (less than 120 sq. ft.) 15’ - Minimum Side Setback 5’ - Minimum Rear Setback 25’ Maximum Principal Building Height 35 ft. For the sake of comparison, Bellwether was approved with a minimum lot width of 44’, and Bass Lake Crossing South was approved with a minimum lot width of 40’. These PUDs were approved with a minimum lot area of 5,000 sq. ft. and 5,103 sq. ft, respectively. Several residential PUDs have a 5’ side setback with a minimum separation between structures of 10’. The more common rear setback granted to PUDs is 25’. The Council is asked to provide feedback on the proposed PUD lot standards. The City recently approved an updated lot width definition to allow lots on a cul-de-sac to measure the lot width at the required front setback. However, staff notes that there are a few lots on a curve, but not a cul-de-sac, that are shown as a 50’ lot but may measure less than 44’ wide at the front property line. The lot dimensions would be further reviewed as part of a preliminary PUD/plat application. The Council should Page 6 of 14 provide feedback if they are willing to consider allowing lots on a curve to measure the lot width at the required front setback as part of a PUD. This flexibility has been granted for previous PUDs, such as Rush Creek Reserve. Shoreland Overlay District The standards for the Shoreland Overlay are provided in Section 1050.020 of the Zoning Ordinance. The shoreland overlay district extends 1,000 feet from the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of Cook Lake. The district boundary is indicated on the plans along the southeast corner of the property and crosses over lots 34-39. Cook Lake is a Natural Environment Lake, so there are additional lot standards applied which are outlined in the table below. Areas where flexibility would be required are provided in red. Shoreland Overlay Proposed PUD Standards Lot 34-39 Minimum Lot Area 20,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 125’ 50’ Setback from OWHL 150’ 150’ Impervious Surface Limit 25% Percentage unclear; building pad, driveway, and patio/deck will likely exceed 25%.* * Flexibility from the impervious surface limit may only be necessary for lot 34. The Council may choose to discuss if they are open to PUD standards that deviate from the Shoreland Overlay District standards and to what extent. Previous PUDs that allowed flexibility from the Shoreland Overlay District standards include Bass Lake Crossing and Cook Lake Highlands. Residential Architectural Standards Section 1040.040, Subd. 8 provides design standards for single-family homes that are applicable to properties within the RSF-1, RSF-2, and RSF-3 zoning districts. The applicant would be expected to comply with these standards unless specific flexibility is requested and granted. Three concept elevations were provided in the application submittal and are attached to this report. Further, the narrative explains the exterior design of each home will be harmonious with varied elevations and color schemes. The code requires a minimum of five different front elevations styles through the development. At least two additional elevation styles will need to be added that provide additional variations in color, accents, and/or building materials. Shoreland Overlay District Boundary Page 7 of 14 The front elevation must consist of brick, stone, stucco, fiber cement board, redwood, cedar, or a similar material with a minimum of two different materials required. Vinyl can also be used with a minimum of 3 different variations in color, style, and/or material required. Additionally, the front elevation shall have no more than 75% of any one type of exterior finish unless the finish is brick, stucco, and/or stone. Not enough information was provided to confirm the submitted elevations comply with these standards. The building materials and percentages would need to be confirmed in the preliminary application. The residential architectural standards require the front elevation to consist of doors, windows, and variations of the wall face with the use of architectural elements such as pilasters or columns, wainscots, or canopies. The submitted concept plans do not comply with this standard, and an architectural element will need to be added to the elevations. Garages must be architecturally styled to match the exterior design of the home and must not comprise more than 55% of the viewable ground floor street- facing linear building frontage. The concept elevations may be able to comply with this standard. However, the measurement and percentage of the garage structure would be confirmed with the preliminary application. Allowable roofing materials include asphalt shingles, wood shingles, concrete, clay, ceramic tile, or residential steel roofing with hidden fasteners. Roof overhangs must be at least 12 inches. It appears the submitted concept elevations will be able to comply with these standards. Each façade that is visible from a street shall receive equal architectural treatment. This will likely be necessary for lots 3-7, 8-13, 34-35, 51-52, 73-74, 88, 60, 89, 95-96, and Concept Elevation 1 Concept Elevation 2 Page 8 of 14 102 of the 50’ wide lots. Additionally, lots 1, 5-6, 11, 26, 35, and 39 of the 44’ wide lots may also have an additional façade visible from a street. All other elevations that are not visible from a street must make an effort to incorporate elements from the front elevation, and each side elevation must include at least one window or door opening. Finally, a maximum of 18 inches of the foundation may be exposed on any elevation. Again, the applicant has not requested flexibility from the underlying residential architectural standards at this time. However, the Council may choose to discuss whether any standards may be negotiable and to what extent. Of all the above-discussed architectural standards, staff believes the most likely deviation in the current plans would be from the garage percentage. Streets & Access The sketch plan shows a central primary access into the development from Maple Hill Rd. The plans reflects a design compatible with a future connection to Fir Lane North to the southeast when the property to the east is developed. The homes in the northwest corner look to be served by a private road with a cul-de-sac. The applicant’s narrative explains that the cul- de-sac and road in the northwest corner of the site could be adjusted to allow for a secondary access from Maple Hill Rd to support emergency vehicles. Staff prefers that the applicant work with the property owner to the east to Concept Elevation 3 Northwest Corner Access Page 9 of 14 extend Fir Lane North as a part of the Amira Village development. However, the Engineering Memo provides that the proposed emergency access in the northwest corner is an option if approved by Public Safety. The Public Safety Memo notes that a minimum road width of 20’ is required for emergency vehicles and recommends no parking signs to be posted along the roadway in the northwest corner (particularly if it remains a cul-de-sac). Public Safety would review the plans further at the time of the preliminary application. The Engineering Memo explains that improvements to Maple Hill Rd will likely be needed. A feasibility study will be required to understand the extent of recommended and required improvements. Upgrades to the condition of Maple Hill Rd will likely benefit existing residents that utilize Maple Hill Rd (Bass Lake Crossing, Maple Hill Estates, etc.) as well as the users of Good Shepard Lutheran Church. Historically, this has been seen as a PUD benefit for other developments, and the applicant expressed a willingness to negotiate their participation in such improvements. The Council may choose to discuss whether they see improvements to a pre-existing condition a PUD benefit to offset requested flexibilities. Finally, staff recommends a ghost plat for the exception parcel to show how access could be removed from Maple Hill Drive and be served by Amira Village should that parcel be redeveloped. Parking Parking standards are provided in Section 1060.060 of the Zoning Ordinance. Single- family homes require two parking spaces per unit. The narrative and concept elevations confirm the homes will have attached 2-car garages. This, in addition to parking space within driveways, satisfies the parking requirements. However, the Council may choose to discuss whether they think additional guest parking should be accommodated on the site as a part of PUD negotiations. Guest parking has not been typically required for single-family home PUDs in the past. The parking performance standards require a 10’ side setback that is applied to drive aisles/driveways. The concept plan does not provide driveway locations, so it is unclear if flexibility to the driveway setback is necessary for this project. Based on the concept elevations submitted with the application, it appears likely that a 5’ driveway setback would be needed. For reference, Bass Lake Crossing has a 5’ driveway setback from the side property lines. The Council may choose to provide feedback on whether they are open to considering a similar setback for the Amira Village development. Utilities The Engineering Memo touches on various items related to municipal sewer and water for the site. As part of the feasibility study, Engineering will review the need to loop the watermain to the existing water network to the south. Valve and hydrant locations will be Page 10 of 14 reviewed at the time of final plat, and the Public Safety Memo recommends locating a fire hydrant within 100’ of the common building shown on the sketch plat. Stormwater Management The concept plan shows 5 stormwater ponds located on the western half of the site. The Engineering Memo explains the site currently drains to the northeast where there is a lowland area adjacent to Maple Hill Estates. Additionally, there may be an existing drain tile which also contributes to drainage patterns going east. Drainage for the site will be reviewed further with the preliminary and final plats as part of a stormwater management plan to ensure stormwater is managed without impacting adjacent properties and complies with the City’s and Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission’s standards. Wetlands There are five wetlands located on the site. Two of the wetlands are considered seasonally flooded basins (Type 1), and the remaining three wetlands are considered fresh wet meadows (Type 2). None of these wetlands are included on the City’s Natural Resources Communities Quality Ranking Map. The City assumes wetlands not included on this map to be of medium quality. However, there is a MNRAM process with the State of MN the applicant can pursue to confirm the wetlands are considered low quality to reduce the required buffer area. Based on the concept plan, it appears the applicant plans to impact three of the wetlands while preserving the two wetlands along the northern border of the property. Impacts to wetlands must be reviewed and approved through the appropriate WCA permitting process. If for some reason approval is not granted, the lot design would need to be modified accordingly to avoid the wetland(s) and account for the required wetland buffer(s). Wetland buffers will be required for any unimpacted wetlands and will need to be shown along with the required wetland buffer monuments at the time of preliminary plat. The applicant will need to confirm whether they plan to use existing buffers as allowed and defined by City Code or if they plan to establish new buffers. Lighting Street lighting will be required as a part of the development. A lighting plan was not provided, but the applicant would be expected to comply with the performance standards in Section 1060.040 of the Zoning Ordinance. Street lighting locations will be reviewed by Public Safety with the final lighting locations determined at the time of final plat. Landscaping Page 11 of 14 A detailed landscaping plan was not provided. Landscape standards are provided in Section 1060.070 of the City Code. Residential uses must provide one overstory tree per dwelling unit. The applicant is expected to comply with this standard. The Council may choose to discuss whether they believe more vegetation requirements should be established as a part of the PUD negotiations. The concept plan seems to show a boulevard area within the primary entrance of the development. The applicant’s revised narrative expresses a willingness to include a well-landscaped boulevard and entrance visible from public streets which has historically been considered as a PUD benefit. The Council may choose to discuss whether additional landscaping of this boulevard is a PUD benefit they would consider to offset the requested flexibilities. Trails and Parks A proposed off road trail is shown along the northern property line in the Parks and Trails Plan in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. This trail is reflected on the proposed sketch plat. The developer would get park dedication credit for the area of the easement for the off-road trail. The developer is responsible for the base (grading and gravel) of the trail, and the City typically reimburses the developer for pavement. However, the developer is open to paving the trail at their cost, and this has historically been considered a public benefit for PUDs. The Council may choose to discuss whether they believe this could be a benefit of the PUD to offset some of the requested flexibilities. The trail location would be further reviewed by the Parks and Trails Commission at the time of preliminary plat. Signage Entrance Boulevard 2040 Parks and Trails Plan Page 12 of 14 No signage is discussed in the narrative or shown in the sketch plan. Signs throughout the development must comply with Chapter 84 of the City Code. Residential uses are allowed 2 freestanding signs with a sign copy area of up to 32 sq. ft. with a height of 6’. Rental Dwelling Ordinance Draft The applicant’s narrative explains United Properties hopes to discuss the single-family homes in Amira Village as a professionally managed rental housing option within the City. The City Council is working on a rental dwelling ordinance that would limit the amount of rental licenses that can be owned by a single entity as well as the density of rental dwelling units on a block within low density residential areas (5 units/acre or less). As the draft is currently written, the Council would need to grant an exemption for United Properties. This process is still being outlined, and the ordinance is not yet in effect. The Council may choose to consider whether an intentional rental community with full-time, on-site management is a situation where an exemption would be justified should the Ordinance move forward. The density limit would also need to be waived for this development under the current rental draft. The draft allows this to be done under a “temporary” permit, so should the Council consider allowing the exemption, the draft will likely need to be revised to allow the Council to grant a long-term permit. This revision could be made specific to intentional rental developments. Buffer Ordinance Draft Based on the most recent draft of the buffer ordinance reviewed at the January 26th Council Work Session, a buffer yard would be required on the east and south property lines. Along the east property line, a buffer yard class of “A” would apply. The planted buffer yard options are provided in the table below. Along the south property line, the development would be required to maintain a side and rear setback equivalent to the rear setback, but no additional plantings are required. This could make lot 34 of the 50’ wide lots unbuildable. This development would not be expected to buffer from the trailer park. Buffer Yard Class Width Overstory Plantings Understory Plantings Shrubs Structures A 10’ 1 2 0 None 15’ 1 1.5 0 None 20’ 0.5 1.25 0 None As of this staff report, the Buffer Ordinance is not yet adopted. However, it appears a small buffer yard along the east property line could be accommodated. It may result in smaller lots than anticipated in this area of the development, but the Council can choose to discuss if they see this as a PUD benefit for negotiations to offset the requested flexibilities. Pre-existing Environmental Contamination Page 13 of 14 The applicant submitted an email on March 16th (attached to this report as the “Supplement to the Revised Narrative”) that explains a petroleum leak from an underground storage tank was identified on the property through the completion of Environmental Survey Assessments. This must be disclosed to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency which the applicant commits to facilitating. This process will include several steps such as a Limited Site Investigation to determine the extent of the leak and a “leak closure” to contain the contamination. This process itself does not correct the contamination which are within a portion of the site’s soils and may lead to (if it hasn’t already) contamination of groundwater. This means the property will be classified as a “brownfield”. While arguably any developer that moves the contaminated soil would be required to clean up the contamination, there is arguably a benefit in having a developer (with experience in environmental cleanups) willing to commit to completing this work in the immediate future. It is a possibility that other developers will see the brownfield status as a significant risk which could leave the property as a brownfield for an undetermined amount of time. It is also possible that a future property owner will keep the site as a homesteaded farm, commercial greenhouse, and/or develop around the contaminated area. The applicant would like this to be considered a PUD benefit in negotiations, and staff believes there is public value in a commitment to correcting the pre-existing condition. The Council may choose to provide feedback on whether they consider the environmental cleanup of the site as a public benefit. Summary of Flexibilities & Benefits for Discussion The applicant specifically asked for the following PUD standards that deviate from the RSF-2 and RSF-3 district standards: - Lot width minimum of 44’. - Side setback of 5’. - Rear setback of 25’. - Minimum lot area of 5,000 sq. ft. Additionally, the applicant is asking for PUD flexibility from the Shoreland Overlay district to allow for the following standards: - Lot width minimum of 50’ - Side setback of 5’ - Rear setback of 25’ - Minimum lot area of 5,000 sq. ft. - Impervious surface limit – to be determined at time of preliminary plat. Further, staff noted the following flexibilities will likely be needed for the plan to move forward as drafted: - Measuring lot width at the required front setback for lots on a curve. - A 5’ driveway setback from the side property lines. Page 14 of 14 Lastly, understanding the intention to establish a rental dwelling ordinance, the applicant is requesting Amira Village be considered for an exemption from the license and density caps currently contemplated in the draft. The applicant’s revised narrative proposes the following public benefits for negotiation: - Improvement of Maple Hill Road to be determined after a feasibility study to the benefit of existing residents, church users, and future residents. - Paved public trail. - A landscaped boulevard at the development entrance. - Appropriate transition from the Bass Lake Crossing neighborhood to the south and the manufactured home park to the north. - HOA-maintained amenity and open space. - Environmental clean-up of a known contamination on the site that places the property within a “brownfield” status. Next Steps Assuming this project moves forward, the next steps are outlined below: 1. Feasibility Study. 2. A land use application for a Rezoning, Preliminary PUD Plan, and Preliminary Plat. 3. A land use application for a Final PUD and Final Plat. 4. Watershed approval of City-approved final grading and stormwater plans. 5. WCA permitting for wetland impacts. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council review and discuss the sketch plat and provide the applicant with informal comments. The Council should provide clear direction to the applicant so that they can decide whether to proceed with a formal application. Any comments given by the City Council are advisory in nature and non-binding. While the comments are non-binding, the applicant will consider the input from the City Council when they prepare their formal submittal. Attachments: 1. Applicant’s Original Narrative Dated 1/23/2023. 2. Applicant’s Revised Narrative Dated 3/7/2023. 3. Applicant’s Supplement to Revised Narrative Dated 3/16/2023. 4. City Engineer’s Memo 5. Public Safety Memo 6. Sketch Plat 7. Amira Village Concept Packet with Elevations 250 Nicollet Mall, Ste 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (952) 835-5300 1331 17th Street, Ste 604 Denver, CO 80202 (720) 898-8866 1617 West 6th Street, Ste A Austin, TX 78703 (512) 866-6500 Amira Village — Concept Sketch Plan Review Project Narrative Chastek Greenhouse Parcel Corcoran, MN January 23, 2023 The proposed development — branded as “Amira Village” — is an age-restricted, 55+ Active Adult/Senior Living rental community to be developed by United Properties. The planned community will encompass approximately 40 acres of land, currently occupied by Chastek Greenhouse, Inc. Located north of the existing Bass Lake Crossing development and east of Maple Hill Road, the site will have primary access off Maple Hill Road and designed for a future connection extension to Fir Lane North. A secondary access to Maple Hill Rd is included in the concept design to support the needs of emergency vehicles if needed. Situated in a growing area, our residents will have easy access to shopping, dining, healthcare and recreational opportunities. Amira Village will offer approximately 141, well-appointed single-family villa homes, featuring flexible floorplans and a wide variety of amenities for a vibrant, maintenance-free lifestyle: • Centrally located clubhouse with outdoor kitchen • Fitness Center • Social room with prep kitchen facilities • Outdoor pool / hot tub • Pickleball Courts and Bocce Ball 250 Nicollet Mall, Ste 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (952) 835-5300 1331 17th Street, Ste 604 Denver, CO 80202 (720) 898-8866 1617 West 6th Street, Ste A Austin, TX 78703 (512) 866-6500 • Pet exercise area Amira Village will offer maintenance-free living with thoughtfully designed indoor and outdoor spaces and premium finishes and fixtures. Home sizes start at approx. 1,200 sf on 44’ wide lots and will range from 1,450 to 2,500 sf on the 50’ wide lots. There will be a mix of patio homes and floor plans with basements. All homes will consist of two-car attached garages, quality finishes, smart-home technologies and will incorporate a deck or patio. The exterior design of each home will be harmonious to its surroundings and feature beautiful architecture, non-monotonous elevations, and varying color schemes. The beautifully landscaped grounds will pay specific attention to enhancing the central common area and buffering for the yards of neighbors immediately north and south. Sidewalks, walking paths and programmed activities located within the community are designed to encourage physical activity and social engagement. United Properties works with preeminent local operators who employ an on-site community manager, maintenance technician, and life enrichment director, to deliver best-in-class services for our residents. Rental rates will vary based on home size and will be very competitive to the cost of homeownership. Monthly rent will include high-speed internet, cable television, water & sewer, trash removal, home maintenance, as well as landscaping, snow removal services, and secured access to all common amenities. Rental terms are flexible and designed for residents to “Lock & Leave” as they enjoy the freedom to travel, volunteer, or pursue their passions. Amira’s core values include creating a sense of belonging for every resident —a commitment to fostering a sense of community and prioritizing meaningful experiences. Our communities provide older adults the opportunity to live and thrive within environments where they feel supported, engaged and connected. Residents can focus on what matters most to them: community, family, friends, interests and more. A robust calendar of scheduled activities encourages creativity and wellness for a fun and active lifestyle. 250 Nicollet Mall, Ste 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (952) 835-5300 1331 17th Street, Ste 604 Denver, CO 80202 (720) 898-8866 1617 West 6th Street, Ste A Austin, TX 78703 (512) 866-6500 United Properties’ 18 years of experience in senior living sets a new standard for senior housing options with forward-thinking designs and resident-focused solutions. United Properties has completed over 30, multi-family projects that support the full continuum of senior living and currently owns over 1,200 units. United Properties is excited to expand its Amira brand to include this innovative single-family community model, fittingly named Amira Village. Sincerely, Dave Young Vice President United Properties Encl: Concept Site Plan Concept Elevations Concept Imagery Community Map Amira Family Brands 250 Nicollet Mall, Ste 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (952) 835-5300 1331 17th Street, Ste 604 Denver, CO 80202 (720) 898-8866 1617 West 6th Street, Ste A Austin, TX 78703 (512) 866-6500 Amira Village — Concept Sketch Plan Review Project Narrative Chastek Greenhouse Parcel Corcoran, MN March 6, 2023 The proposed development — branded as “Amira Village” — is a luxury rental community to be developed by United Properties. The planned community will encompass approximately 40 acres of land, currently occupied by Chastek Greenhouse, Inc. Located north of the existing Bass Lake Crossing development and east of Maple Hill Road, the site will have primary access off Maple Hill Road and designed for a future connection extension to Fir Lane North. A secondary access to Maple Hill Rd is included in the concept design to support the needs of emergency vehicles if needed. Situated in a growing area, our residents will have easy access to shopping, dining, healthcare, and recreational opportunities. Amira Village will offer approximately 141, well-appointed single-family villa homes, featuring flexible floorplans and a wide variety of amenities for a vibrant, maintenance-free lifestyle: • Centrally located clubhouse with outdoor kitchen • Fitness Center • Social room with prep kitchen facilities • Outdoor pool / hot tub • Pickleball Courts and Bocce Ball • Pet exercise area 250 Nicollet Mall, Ste 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (952) 835-5300 1331 17th Street, Ste 604 Denver, CO 80202 (720) 898-8866 1617 West 6th Street, Ste A Austin, TX 78703 (512) 866-6500 Amira Village will offer maintenance-free living with thoughtfully designed indoor and outdoor spaces and premium finishes and fixtures. Home sizes start at approx. 1,200 sf on 44’ wide lots and will range from 1,450 to 2,500 sf on the 50’ wide lots. There will be a mix of patio homes, 2-story designs, and floor plans with basements. All homes will consist of two-car attached garages, quality finishes, smart-home technologies and will incorporate a deck or patio. The exterior design of each home will be harmonious to its surroundings and feature beautiful architecture, non-monotonous elevations, and varying color schemes. The beautifully landscaped grounds will pay specific attention to enhancing the central common area and buffering for the yards of neighbors immediately north and south. Sidewalks, walking paths and programmed activities located within the community are designed to encourage physical activity and social engagement. United Properties works with preeminent local operators who employ an on-site community manager, maintenance technician, and life enrichment director (if age-restricted), to deliver best-in-class services for our residents. Rental rates will vary based on home size and will be very competitive to the cost of homeownership. Monthly rent will include high-speed internet, water & sewer, trash removal, home maintenance, as well as landscaping, snow removal services, and secured access to all common amenities. Rental terms are flexible and designed for residents to “Lock & Leave” as they enjoy the freedom to travel, volunteer, or pursue their passions. Amira’s core values include creating a sense of belonging for every resident —a commitment to fostering a sense of community and prioritizing meaningful experiences. Our communities provide residents the opportunity to live and thrive within environments where they feel supported, engaged, and connected. Residents can focus on what matters most to them: community, family, friends, interests and more. United Properties’ 18 years of experience in residential and senior living sets a new standard for housing options with forward-thinking designs and resident-focused solutions. United Properties has completed over 30, multi-family projects that support the full continuum of 250 Nicollet Mall, Ste 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (952) 835-5300 1331 17th Street, Ste 604 Denver, CO 80202 (720) 898-8866 1617 West 6th Street, Ste A Austin, TX 78703 (512) 866-6500 housing and currently owns over 1,200 units. United Properties is excited to expand its Amira brand to include this innovative single-family community model, fittingly named Amira Village. Sincerely, Dave Young Vice President United Properties From: Steph <Steph@trek-development.com> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2023 10:14 AM To: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov>; Beth Hustad <beth@trek-development.com> Subject: RE: Chastek Concept Hi Natalie, You are right – I am so sorry I spaced getting that to you sooner. Please see our brief overview below to include in your staff report: As part of our site investigation and due diligence, we have completed both Phase I and Phase II Environmental Survey Assessments (ESA). The Phase I ESA identified Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) that triggered the Phase II ESA, which includes a more detailed scope of investigation. The Phase II ESA identified one area of actionable impacts, which has been analyzed and identified as a petroleum leak from an underground storage tank. Part of our efforts if we proceed with Preliminary Plat entitlements, we intend to perform the necessary steps to notify the MPCA of the leak, determine the extent of the leak via a Limited Site Investigation, and apply for a Leak Closure with the MPCA via the Petroleum Brownfields Program. Furthermore, we plan to pursue further investigation steps with the intention to gather and analyze the necessary data, develop a Response Action Plan (RAP) and Construction Contingency Plan (CCP) to submit to the MPCA for approval to be implemented at the time the use of the site is changed from its current use via development. The intent is that an environmental consulting firm would be on-site during the excavation of the petroleum impacted area to provide oversight, document the removal help segregate the impacted material and collect confirmation samples. And, once the earthwork is complete, a RAP Implementation Report would be submitted asking for a Petroleum No Action Letter for the petroleum impacts. These action steps in performing site analysis, investigation, developing and implementing action plans are all to be completed under consultation with environmental professionals and following industry standards. Let us know if you have any questions. Thanks again for your time yesterday! Steph Steph Griffin Vice President Trek Real Estate & Development (612)804-5345 From: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2023 9:32 AM To: Beth Hustad <beth@trek-development.com>; Steph <Steph@trek-development.com> Subject: Chastek Concept Good morning Beth & Steph, When we spoke on the phone about a week ago, you mentioned that there may be some environmental cleanup on the site that you would be willing to correct as a part of the PUD. Did you want me to include this in the upcoming staff report? If so, please send me a high-level overview of the situation today, and I will get that added to the benefits section of the report. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Natalie Davis McKeown Planner City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 www.corcoranmn.gov ndavis@corcoranmn.gov Direct: 763-338-9288 Work Cell: 763-258-4272 City Hall: 763-420-2288 City of Corcoran - A Hidden Gem Waiting To Be Discovered Memo To: Kevin Mattson, City of Corcoran From: Kent Torve, City Engineer Steve Hegland, PE Project: Amira Village - Chastek Concept Review Date: February 13th, 2023 Exhibits: This Memorandum is based on a review of the following document: 1. Concept Plan – Amira Village, Dated January 23rd, 2023 Comments: General: 1. In addition to engineering related comments, the proposed plans are subject to additional planning, zoning, land-use, and other applicable codes of the City of Corcoran. 2. Final approval by the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission must be attained before any site grading or activity may commence. 3. An encroachment agreement shall be required for all site improvements or items placed within the City ROW or easements. 4. A demolition permit shall be obtained prior to construction activities beginning. Plat: 1. The applicant shall have all drainage and utility easements provided and shown and all platting requirements met per the City Code. Drainage and utility easements (5’ – 10’) shall be provided along property lines, as standard per City requirements. 2. Existing easements which conflict with the proposed plan will need to be vacated, and City is aware of an access agreement for adjacent property owner along the south property line. Erosion Control/SWPPP 1. Preparation of and compliance with a SWPPP shall be required for construction. Transportation 1. All roadways shall match City standard details. 2. It is anticipated that improvements to Maple Hill Road will be necessary with this development. The scope for the roadway improvements would be further reviewed at the time of the feasibility study. 3. The private road for possible public ROW access should be reviewed by public safety. Private roads shall at a minimum be constructed to the city standard section. 4. Temporary turnarounds meeting City standards are required at the end of dead-end streets to facilitate emergency vehicle movements. 5. Access provided to exception piece in future. February 13, 2023 Amira Village - Chastek Concept Kevin Mattson Page 2 of 2 Site Plans 1. The existing and proposed drainage and utility easements shall be clearly shown and labeled on all plan drawings. 2. Street lighting locations shall be reviewed by public safety and final lighting locations shall be determined at the time of final plat. 3. If access to the adjacent Bass Lake Crossings development is necessary, applicant shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary easements for the access. Grading /Stormwater 1. Stormwater from the site generally drains to the northeast of the site to a lowland area adjacent to the neighboring property Maple Hill Estates. It is believed that an existing draintile also drains the area to the east. The drainage in this area will need to be reviewed with the preliminary plat and final plat to ensure drainage from this site is managed without impacting adjacent properties. o Any offsite drainage improvements necessary to mitigate the proposed development is the developer responsiblity. This will be reviewed with the feasibility study. 2. The southern property line has wetlands and WCA process will determine if the lots need to be modified or if the wetlands can be impacted. 3. A stormwater management plan shall be provided to confirm that stormwater management is in accordance with City of Corcoran and Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Standards. 4. Reference the City of Corcoran Stormwater Guidelines for Development Review for standards for stormwater systems and modeling. 5. The wetland buffer zones and wetland buffer signage shall also be clearly identified and labeled. 6. Label clearly on plans EOF’s for all areas where water will be collected including all low areas in roadways and greenspaces. 7. All drainage swales shall maintain a minimum of 2% slope and all slopes should be 4:1 or flatter unless approved by the City Engineer. 8. If wetlands are impacted, they shall be reviewed and approved through the appropriate WCA permitting process. 9. At the time of preliminary plat, the wetland buffers should be identified as either newly established wetland buffers or whether they are existing buffers as defined by City Code. Watermain/Sanitary Sewer 1. Plan and profiles for all utilities shall be provided at the time of final plat submittals. 2. Valve locations to be reviewed at time of final plat. Generally, valves shall be located at all intersection as one less valve than the number of legs. Valves should typically be located out from the end radius points unless specific circumstances don’t allow. 3. Hydrant spacing to be reviewed by Public Safety at time of final plat. 4. Watermain likely will need to be looped to the existing water network to the south. Additional details will be reviewed at the time of the feasibility study. End of Comments Page 1 of 1 CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763.420.2288 E-mail - general@corcoranmn.gov / Web Site – www.corcoranmn.gov Memo To: Planning (Planners Lindahl and Davis McKeown) From: Lieutenant Burns Date: February 6, 2023 Re: City File 23-003 Amira Village (Chastek Property) Sketch Plan A Public Safety plan review meeting was held on February 1, 2023. In attendance were: Lieutenant Ryan Burns, Planner Davis McKeown, Fire Chief Feist, Fire Chief Leuer, Fire Chief Malewicki, Building Official Geske, and Construction Services Specialist Pritchard. The comments below are based on the preliminary review of the concept plans received by the City on January 23, 2023 and are intended as initial feedback as further plan review will need to be completed as construction plans becomes available. 1. Recommended to post no parking signs on the private road shown in the northwest corner of the property. 2. The cul-de-sac in the northwest corner of the site must be built to City spec. 3. Private roads must be at least 20’ wide for fire access. 4. A review of all the hydrant locations will be required with the fire chief for final approval. • Recommend locating a fire hydrant within 100’ of the common building. 5. Prefer the future access point shown in the southeast portion of the site to be constructed at the time of the project, not with a future project. PONDMAPLE HILL DRIVECOOK LAKE COOK LAKE HIGHLANDS BASS LAKE CROSSING EXCEPTION OHW 942.1POND WETLAND WETLAND WETLAND WETL A N D POOLCLUB HOUSEPICKLE BALL POND FUTURE ACCESS ONTO FIR LANE FIR LANEPOND PONDRUSH CREEK GOLF COURSE POTENTIAL PUBLIC ROW ACCESS POINT c 1OFCHASTEK PROPERTY CORCORAN, MINNESOTA TREK DEVELOPMENT1-20-2023 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2022 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS xx I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson 1 SITE DATA: GROSS AREA: ±38.1 ACRES WETLAND/FLOODPLAIN: ±1.5 ACRES NET DEVELOPABLE AREA: ±36.6 ACRES ZONING: RSF-2 2040 GUIDE PLAN: LD LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (3-5 UNITS/ACRE) PROPOSED UNITS: 141 50' VILLA: 102 44' VILLA: 39 NET DENSITY: ±3.9 UNITS/ACRE RSF-2 STANDARDS: AREA: 11,000 SF WIDTH: 80' FRONT SETBACK: 20' GARAGE, 15' FRONT PORCH SIDE SETBACK: 10' LIVING SPACE, 5' GARAGE MINIMUM STRUCTURE SEPARATION 15' REAR SETBACK: 30' PROPOSED PUD STANDARDS: VILLA LOTS: WIDTH: 50' AND 44' FRONT SETBACK: 20' SIDE SETBACK: 4' REAR SETBACK: 20' CONCEPT PLAN 7 WETLAND EDGE (ESTIMATED) PROPOSED TRAIL POSSIBLE PUBLIC ROW ACCESS LOCATION PUBLIC ROW LENGTH: 5,300 LF PRIVATE DRIVE LENGTH: 600 LF MAPLE HILL DRIVE LENGTH: 1,330 LF Agenda Item 8b. Page 1 of 8 8200 County Road 116  Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288  www.corcoranmn.gov MEMO Meeting Date: March 23, 2023 To: Planning Commission From: Natalie Davis McKeown, Planner Re: City Code Updates – Planned Unit Development Standards ____________________________________________________________________ Updating the Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance was identified as a City Council priority in 2022. Staff and Council held work sessions to review the PUD ordinance on July 28, 2022, October 27, 2022, and January 26, 2023. In July, staff was directed to identify basic standards for PUDs, create a points system to aid in the review of public benefits offered by PUD proposals, as well as create a super majority (4/5) threshold for approval of all PUDs. At the October work session, staff was directed to test out the draft points system on the Tavera development and see what options there were for allowing a vote to proceed if only three Council members are seated at a meeting to avoid running up against the review deadline. During the January work session, Council and staff worked through questions pertaining to open space and the points threshold for review. Council asked staff to bring the ordinance draft to the joint work session with the Planning Commission on February 9, 2023 to give the Commission a chance to provide feedback on the overall draft, proposed point categories to capture PUD benefits, the super majority approval requirement, and when the required neighborhood meeting should take place. An in-depth discussion was held about the proposed changes at the work session. However, the Commission was not able to provide feedback on the categories and point allotments within the proposed points system. The Council directed staff to bring the points system back for discussion with the Planning Commission at the March 2nd meeting. Due to a series of unforeseen circumstances, the Planning Commission in March was cancelled due to a lack of a quorum. However, Planning Commissioners were told they were welcome to submit individual feedback to staff that could be forwarded to the City Council for the anticipated discussion on March 23. All Agenda Item 8b. Page 2 of 8 Planning Commission members submitted written feedback which is summarized in and attached to this report. Updates to Draft Since Joint Work Session Open Space Instead of a flat 15% open space requirement of all PUDs that include dwellings, the verbiage has been changed to require low density residential PUDs to set aside a required percentage of open space based on the proposed lot width. A table is provided in the draft ordinance for clarity. Neighborhood Meeting The neighborhood meeting requirement was moved to occur after the sketch plan but before submittal of a preliminary PUD development plan application. Verbiage was added to clarify that a preliminary PUD application would not be considered complete until the neighborhood meeting is held. Encouragement of Larger Lot Sizes In addition to lot widths of 72’ or larger not having to set aside additional open space, a points category was added to the draft points system that awards points for every 10% of lots that exceed the minimum lot width or lot area standards of the RSF-3 district. Clarification on Expectations with Rural Structures At the joint work session, a desire was stated to consider relief for the ultimate homeowners and HOAs when it is no longer feasible to retain a historical structure due to the ongoing financial requirements necessary to keep it structurally sound. Staff added a paragraph under this category in the drafts points system that clarifies the City will allow for a historical building to be replaced with a small monument, such as a plaque, if and when this occurs. Commissioner Feedback Staff identified four questions related to the proposed categories within the PUD points system. The individual feedback is summarized below. Some of the individual feedback does contradict which is to be expected. Council is asked to direct staff on what changes should be made to the current draft. 1. What points categories should be adjusted in terms of the amount or how points are allotted? Agenda Item 8b. Page 3 of 8 Based on the submitted feedback, the Council may want to consider adjusting the following categories in how they are weighted in importance as compared to other categories: - 3. Appropriately located neighborhood scale commercial/office uses. o 10 points maximum. o Should more points be possible in this category? o Could there be value in increasing the available points in this category to encourage small businesses to work with larger developers? - 4. Percentage of units within ¼ mile of an identifiable neighborhood focal point. o 50 points maximum determined by the percentage of units / 2. o Should the number of points possible be reduced as compared to other priorities such as use of native plants, restoration, or preservation of natural resources?  Alternatively, the points possible for other priorities could also be increased. - 16. Natural resources and features retained. o 20 points maximum. o Should more points be possible in this category? - 18. Use of native plants in landscaping. o 5 points maximum. o Should more points be possible in this category? - 19. Existing rural structures are retained and/or reused. o 10 points with 5 bonus points available for preservation of a silo. o Does it make sense for the available points in this category to exceed category #18 (use of native plants in landscaping)? Should this be more balanced? - 24. Areas of parkland, woodland, or other open space (above minimum) o 1 bonus point per acre of dedicated parkland (acceptable to the City) or other open space areas that are in outlots or conservation easements with no maximum limit. o Should this be reduced to 0.5 points per acre? An additional suggestion is to reduce the number of categories to 10 to 15 categories, and make each category 1 point. A score of 8-10 points moves the application forward. 2. Are there additional categories that should be added? - Lawns into legumes. Agenda Item 8b. Page 4 of 8 o Give credit for multi-species prairie or native grasses. o Assign points based on percentage of area or by acre. -On-site neighborhood compost system. -Utilization/incorporation of previously established trails, driveways, and walkways. -Use of local contractors or suppliers for materials or landscaping. -Minimum number of backyards facing streets. -Percentage of homes deeded as affordable housing only. -Edible landscaping in commons, greenspace, or boulevard plantings. o Edible to humans and/or birds. -Varied age/height/girth of trees planted at the time of development. o Award points based on the percentage of more mature trees initially planted. -Build playgrounds or other recreational areas. -Create community gardens/farms in developments. -Community shelter or building with picnic area. -Conformance with pre-existing zoning district lot sizes or 75% of the units have lot sizes of at least 1/3 acre. 3.Are there categories that bring up concerns and/or should be removed? Categories identified as something to discuss for removal from the PUD points system are listed below. -3. Appropriately located neighborhood scale commercial/office uses. o 10 points maximum -4. Percentage of units within ¼ mile of an identifiable neighborhood focal point. o 50 points maximum determined by the percentage of units divided by 2. -5. Distribution of attached units. o 40 points maximum determined by the formula (50 – A) where A = the largest percentage of attached units in any one group. Agenda Item 8b. Page 5 of 8 -6. Creation of open space using multi-story buildings. o 10 points maximum (this category is not available in low density residential areas) -7. Visual Termini o 5 points maximum. -8. Attached units are embedded. o 25 points maximum determined by (50 – A) / 2. A = % of the perimeter roadway in linear feet with attached units. o Specific concerns noted include: Trends supporting the fact that single family homebuyers desire to be more secluded and would prefer interior lots. Higher density within the interior of a development would direct more traffic through the neighborhood. Single-family homes along roadways are more likely to put up privacy fencing. May make sense to focus on landscaping and buffering for attached homes along roadways or the exterior of developments. -10. Percentage of units within 1,000 feet walk from a park. o 10 point maximum determined by the percentage of units / 10. -12. Cul-de-sacs are open ended. o 5 points maximum. -13. Open space is consolidated and usable. o 25 points possible with 5 bonus points possible if the applicant commits to privately owned open space being made accessible and usable to the public. -14. Open space is connected with green (natural) corridors. o 10 points maximum -15. Viable open space master plan is created. o 5 points maximum. -19. Existing rural structures are retained and/or reused. o 10 points maximum with 5 bonus points for preservation of a silo. -21. Lot size variety o 50 points maximum with 5 points awarded for every 10% of lots that exceed a lot width of 65’ or exceed a lot area of 7,500 square feet. Agenda Item 8b. Page 6 of 8 - 22. Natural restoration work o 10 bonus points possible with 1 point per acre of restoration. 4. Are there categories or descriptions that could use additional clarity? The following feedback was received from commissioners: - 9. Exceptional landscaping to buffer homes major roads o 50 points maximum  At least 70% evergreen trees but no more than 85% (10 points)  Decorative open fencing (10 points)  Understory trees and shrubs (10 points)  All vegetation must be salt tolerant (10 points)  Retention of existing woods may qualify as well and can be awarded up to 10 bonus points in this category. o Should additional criteria be added? If so, what? o Do we want to be so specific with a 70% requirement of evergreen trees?  Non-native evergreen trees may not thrive and end up looking brown, dying, or being clipped from the bottom as they grow.  Should we specify that they must be native evergreen trees? - 10. Percentage of units within 1,000 feet walk from a park. o 10 point maximum determined by the percentage of units / 10. o How are we defining park? Does it require a playground structure, a bench, or simply green space? - 11. Internal trail connections o 10 points maximum o Should criteria be added to this category to further define when points are awarded? If so, what criteria should be added? - 18. Use of native plants in landscaping. o Currently 5 points maximum. o Should the explanation of this category be updated to include native grasses and small growing clover to encourage this type of vegetation rather than turf grasses? - 22. Natural restoration work. o 10 bonus points possible with 1 point per acre of restoration. o Would this need to be certified? o Regarding the note that buckthorn removal would qualify, are we considering removal to be the removal/grinding of the stumps? Or the chemical application to the cut stumps? Or both? Agenda Item 8b. Page 7 of 8 o Buckthorn is persistent and the seeds can lay dormant in the soil for years. If we are giving credit for this restoration, how are we determining the efficacy of the effort? - Any point category that provides a “maximum” or “case-by-case” should be reworded to either provide all points or none. o If it is not practical to award points on an all-or-nothing basis for a category, then consider removing the category. - Clarify how bonus points are calculated. o Does it impact the denominator in the 75% of the calculation? o Truly bonus points would not be included in the denominator. Additional feedback The attached emails provided additional questions and concerns summarized below. - There is potential that the PUD review process could make housing more unaffordable by increasing costs significantly for developers and homebuyers. o This could be mitigated with an effort to incorporate an affordable housing component to the process. - Who and how will maintenance of open areas or preserved natural resources be handled? o Nature needs wise human interaction in order to thrive. - The potential for the PUD process to force or favor a Homeowners Association. - Are there too many categories creating extra work for staff and confusion for developers? - The simultaneous rigidness and subjectivity of the PUD points system. o Leaving awarding of points in subjective categories up to the discretion of staff. - Potential legal challenges of denying a PUD application that meets the threshold for staff recommendation of approval. Council Discretion The topic of the Council’s discretion in denying a PUD that meets the points threshold has been a common theme in the previous discussions. Staff reached out to Maple Grove to understand their experience with denying a PUD that meets the points threshold. Maple Grove City Staff stated their Council has yet to deny a PUD application that has met the points threshold. This means we don’t have an example or established Agenda Item 8b. Page 8 of 8 case law as to how a legal decision will hold up should an applicant choose to fight a denial determination. In speaking with the City Attorney, he believes an applicant will likely rely on the points rewarded in the staff analysis in an argument as to why the rezoning should have been approved. This isn’t to say the Council would not be able to deny a PUD application that satisfies the points threshold, but the City Attorney stressed that clear findings of fact would be necessary and should explain where staff’s analysis is mistaken or what other findings of fact are leading to the denial that were not captured by the points system. There could be a risk in denying an application because the Council (or a couple of Council members) simply doesn’t like the application as discretion is arguably reduced when defined standards for review and approval are established. A denial position in this instance may be made further difficult to defend when it is a minority position on the Council. Staff believes the extensive discussion on what the Council views as a public benefit in reviewing PUDs is already proving beneficial in meetings with developers. If the Council decides to move away from the points system, the PUD district could be amended to include the identified categories in an unweighted list of desirable public benefits/development traits. This may help in avoiding legal challenges as the lack of a defined threshold should retain a similar level of discretion as the Council has today in deciding to approve or deny a PUD. Next Steps Council should direct staff on any changes that should be made to the draft ordinance and draft points system. If changes are minimal, then a public hearing could be scheduled as early as May 4, 2023. Attachments 1.Draft Ordinance 2.Draft Points System 3.Planning Commissioner Emails to Staff Page 1 of 16 1040.140 – PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) Subd. 1. Purpose. In return for greater flexibility in site design requirements, the Planned Unit Development (PUD) district is expected to deliver creative community designs of exceptional quality. PUDs shall honor the rural character of Corcoran by prioritizing nature through preservation, restoration, and/or enhancement of the natural systems that sustain the City. PUDs will include a combination of public benefits such as above-average open space amenities; incorporate creative design in the layout of buildings, open space, and circulation; assure compatibility with surrounding land uses and neighborhood character; and provide greater efficiency in the layout and provision of roads, utilities, and other infrastructure. The purpose of the PUD, Planned Unit Development District, is to promote creative and efficient use of land by providing design flexibility A PUD can be used in the development of residential neighborhoods and/or nonresidential areas in a manner that would not be possible under a conventional zoning district. The decision to zone property to PUD is a public policy decision for the City Council to make in its legislative capacity. Subd. 2. Intent. The intent of this district is to include most of the following: I. Provide for the establishment of PUD districts in appropriate settings and situations to create or maintain a development pattern that is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. II. Potentially Aallow for the mixing of land uses within a development when such mixing of land uses is determined to be compatible with the surrounding area and could not otherwise be accomplished under the existing zoning and subdivision regulations. III. Provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporating design elements, e.g. construction materials, landscaping, lighting, etc., that exceed the City’s standards to offset the effect of any variations. Desired design elements may include the following: innovative design, integration of historical or rural structures and design elements, utilization of newly established technologies in building design, special construction materials, additional landscaping, creating parking and pedestrian connections, stormwater management, pedestrian-oriented design, or transitions to residential neighborhoods. IV. Promote more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City. Page 2 of 16 V. Preserve and enhance natural features, and open spaces, trees, and scenic views. VI. Maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities. VII. Ensure appropriate transitions between differing land uses. VIII. Ensure high quality of design and designs that are compatible with surrounding land uses, including existing and planned. Subd. 3. Application Applicability. A PUD district shall not be established for parcels guided in the Comprehensive Plan for Rural/Ag Residential and Rural Service/Commercial, except where allowed for an Open Space Preservation Plat. It will be used in areas guided Mixed Use or Mixed Residential on the Land Use Plan and in other areas where A PUD district can be established for parcels guided in the Comprehensive Plan as any other land use designation than those stated above when the City finds that the proposal meets the intent of this the PUD district. Subd. 4. Allowed Uses. All permitted uses, permitted accessory uses, conditional uses, and interim uses contained in the underlying zoning districts shall be treated as potentially allowable uses within a PUD district. Uses within the PUD will generally be limited to those uses considered associated with the general land use category shown for the area on the City’s Comprehensive Plan. A. Low Density Residential. PUDs located on land that is guided for existing and low density residential shall be limited to permitted and accessory uses in addition to uses allowed by conditional, interim, and/or administrative permit as contemplated with the following single-family residential districts: RSF-1, RSF-2, and RSF-3. B. Presumption of Underlying Zoning District. I. PUDs located on land that is guided as one of the land use designations in the table below will be presumed to include permitted and accessory uses in addition to uses allowed by conditional, interim, and/or administrative permits of the underlying zoning district(s) associated with the land use designation. Land Use Designation in Comprehensive Plan Underlying Zoning District Medium Density Residential RMF-1 Mixed Residential RMF-2 High Density Residential RMF-3 Page 3 of 16 Mixed Use GMU and DMU Commercial C-1 and C-2 Business Park BP Light Industrial I-1 Public/Semi-Public PI II. Additional uses not contemplated in the underlying zoning district may be approved by Ordinance if the Council determines such uses to be compatible with the intent of the underlying zoning district. C. Mixed Use. PUDs located on land guided as mixed use are expected to include a combination of residential and commercial uses. Subd. 5. Presumptive Performance Standards. Lot Dimensions, Setbacks and Building Heights. The district regulations (e.g., minimum lot dimensions, building height, and building coverage ratio) of the most closely related underlying zoning district shall be considered presumptively appropriate, but may be departed from to accomplish the purpose and intent described in this Section. Subd. 6. Design Standards. The PUD plan establishes the requirements for a PUD and shall govern land uses and design. The following is a list of minimum standards required of PUDs: A. Appropriate Integration. PUDs shall be appropriately integrated into existing and proposed surrounding development. This does not mean the PUD reflects the specific standards of the surrounding area such as lot size, density, setbacks, or design. While integration may be achieved through such standards, it may also be achieved through continuation of existing land use types, architectural transitions, landscaping buffering, or other means. B. Variety and Enhanced Design. Since PUDs are expected to exceed standards, most residential PUDs should include a wide variety of styles. Style refers to the exterior image and footprint, not the floor plan. Where a wide variety of styles does not make sense, the PUD should include enhanced building design that exceeds underlying standards. I. PUDs with detached homes must provide house elevations for approval. There should be no less than 5 styles of detached homes. II. PUDs with attached homes (not including apartment buildings) must include no less than 2 styles. Page 4 of 16 III. For PUDs without a residential component, applicants must provide material boards with renderings for design evaluation. C. Open Space. A low density residential PUD shall provide a percentage of the project area as open space based on the requested lot width minimum as shown in the subsequent table. If the PUD is to be developed in phases, the applicant must include the entire site in the plat of the first phase of development and designate as open space. Open space is a landscaped area of areas available for the common use of and is accessible by all residents or occupants of the buildings within the PUD. Open space shall consist of upland and be calculated on a net basis which excludes private yards, private streets from back of curb to back of curb, public rights-of-way, or any other non-recreational impervious surface area. Areas within easements shall be used in calculating open space unless the easement is over an inaccessible and/or unusable space such as wetlands or stormwater ponds. The calculation will be based off the net pre-development area. Dedicated parkland shall not be used in calculating open space for a development if it is anticipated in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The applicant shall be required to submit an open space plan along with the PUD development plan. The open space plan will illustrate the use and/or function of the open space area or areas. The open space plan shall include any proposed improvements and/or design of the open space area. Proposed Lot Width Required Open Space 72’ or more 0% Less than 72’ – 65’ 7% Less than 65’ – 55’ 12% Less than 55’ 15% D. Perimeter Buffer. PUDs shall provide a landscaping buffer to screen homes from arterial and major collector roads. E. Public Accessibility. When a PUD includes natural features such as creeks, streams, ponds, and lakes, the PUD shall provide public access to these features. F. Discretionary Standards. In addition to the above standards, the City Council may impose such other standards for a PUD project as are reasonable and as the Council deems are necessary to protect and promote the general health, safety, and welfare of the community and surrounding areas. G. Prohibited Features and Modifications. Page 5 of 16 I. The City will not grant side setbacks that result in less than a 15-foot minimum required separation between two detached dwellings. II. PUDs with detached homes shall be designed to avoid interior perimeter roads that are parallel to arterial roadways. Roadways should be curvilinear wherever feasible with a variety of building orientation along arterial roadways. III. PUDs cannot request flexibility from meeting the minimum required screening and/or buffering standards otherwise required in the Zoning Ordinance unless the applicant can show there is a site constraint out of their control that justifies a deviation from these requirements, proposes an alternative screening method that will meet the intent of the requirements, and/or proposes relocating screening methods to a more beneficial location within the development. Subd. 7. PUD Benefits. PUDs are expected to provide a combination of public benefits in exchange for flexibility in Zoning Ordinance requirements. A. All new PUDs of 30 or more acres that have not submitted a PUD sketch plan for City Council review prior to [date of adoption] shall be reviewed by staff against Corcoran’s PUD Point System hereby made a part of this Section. Projects of 30 acres or more must receive a minimum score of 75% of the applicable and attainable points for the project in order for staff to forward the project to the Planning Commission and City Council with a recommendation of approval. A score of 75% of higher does not guarantee City Council approval. The City Council shall use their statutory discretion in determining approval or denial of the PUD rezoning request. B. An applicant may petition for credit of a proposed PUD benefit that is not captured by Corcoran’s PUD Point System and is not otherwise required in the underlying zoning district. If the petition is granted, the PUD benefit shall only be allotted up to 10 points. Page 6 of 16 C. Projects less than 30 acres shall provide at least three public benefits contemplated within Corcoran’s PUD Point System in order for staff to forward the application to the Planning Commission and City Council with a recommendation of approval. Complaince with this standard does not guarantee City Council approval, and the City Council may use their statutory discretion in determining approval or denial of the PUD rezoning request. An applicant may petition for credit of a proposed PUD benefit that is not captured by Corcoran’s PUD Point System. If the petition is granted, the remaining two PUD benefits must be based on the PUD Point System. D. A PUD that offers tree preservation as a public benefit will be required to replace any removed trees that were intended for preservation on a 1:1 caliper inch basis. Subd. 68. Processing Procedures. The general sequence for application, review and action on a PUD shall be according to the following procedures: A. Pre-application Conference Prior to filing of an application or submittal of a sketch plan the applicant shall arrange for and attend a conference with the Zoning Administrator. The primary purpose of the conference shall be to provide the applicant with an opportunity to gather information and obtain guidance as to the general suitability of the proposal for the area and its conformity to the provisions of this district prior to incurring substantial expenditures in the preparation of plans, surveys, and other data. B. PUD Sketch Plan Prior to filing a preliminary PUD development plan application, the applicant shall submit a sketch plan of the project to the Zoning Administrator prior to submission of a formal application. The Zoning Administrator shall refer the sketch plan to the City Council for discussion, review and informal comment. Any opinions or comments provided to the applicant shall be considered advisory only and shall not constitute a binding decision on the request. The purpose of the sketch plan is to inform the City of the applicant’s intentions and to inform the applicant as to the general acceptability of the proposal before extensive costs are incurred. The PUD Sketch Plan shall be conceptual in nature but shall be drawn to scale and shall contain at a minimum the following: Page 7 of 16 1. Location map showing the location within the City and more detailed locations on half-section plat maps showing all perimeter property lines. 2. Aerial photograph of the area. 3. General location of all identified natural resources and wetland inventories on and abutting the premise. 4. General location of existing and proposed structures. 5. Tentative access, circulation and street arrangements, both public and private. 6. Amenities to be provided such as recreational areas, open space, walkways, parking, landscaping, etc. 7. A representative example of the style of structures to be constructed. 8. Proposed public sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage. 9. A general statement of concept, identifying the intent of the project and compatibility with the surrounding area. 10. Extent of and any proposed modifications to land within the Overlay Districts as described and regulated in Section 1050. 11. Any other items as may be deemed necessary by City staff. (Ord. 286, passed 9-25-14) C. Neighborhood Meeting Prior to filing an application or submittal of a preliminary PUD plan, the applicant shall arrange and conduct a neighborhood meeting with notice provided to property owners within at least 350 feet of the desired site’s perimeter. The primary purpose of this meeting shall be to provide information on a proposed development to surrounding neighborhoods and allow feedback to be provided and incorporated early in the process. An application for a preliminary PUD development plan will not be considered complete until after a neighborhood meeting is held. D. Preliminary PUD Development Plan The purpose of the preliminary PUD development plan is to establish the intent, density, and intensity of the proposed development. Upon receipt of the complete application for rezoning to PUD and the preliminary PUD Page 8 of 16 development plan, the item shall be scheduled for a public hearing at the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing in accordance with the provisions of the City’s Code. Upon due consideration, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council. Following the Planning Commission recommendation, the City Council shall consider the rezoning request and preliminary PUD development plan. At this meeting the City Council shall receive the recommendation from the Planning Commission and a report from the City Staff. Upon due consideration the City Council shall approve, disapprove, or approve with specified modifications and/or conditions by majority vote. If a preliminary development plan has been denied by the City Council, the owner or applicant may not reapply for the same or similar on the same property for a six (6) month period following the date of the denial. E. Final PUD Development Plan The applicant shall submit a final PUD development plan to the City. The Planning Commission shall review the final plan in accordance with the provisions of this Section. The Planning Commission shall review the application to ensure that the proposed final PUD development plan is in substantial conformance with the approved preliminary PUD development plan. Upon due consideration the Planning Commission shall make their recommendation to the City Council. Following the Planning Commission recommendation, the City Council shall consider the final development plan. Upon due consideration the City Council shall approve, disapprove, or approve with specified modifications and/or conditions by majority vote. If the applicant desires, and the City Council concurs, the preliminary and final development plans may be processed concurrently, provided all items required for both applications are submitted. The rezoning of the property defined in the development plan shall not become effective until such time as the City Council approves an ordinance reflecting said amendment, which shall take place at the time that the City Council approves the final development plan. Subd. 7 9. Required Findings. The Planning Commission and the City Council shall find the following prior to the approval of a preliminary development plan or final development plan: A. The planned development is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Page 9 of 16 B. The planned development is not in conflict with the intent of the underlying zoning district and is compatible with surrounding land uses. C. The planned development is not in conflict with other applicable provisions of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. D. The planned development or unit thereof is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and/or operation is feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any other subsequent unit or phase. E. The planned development will not create an excessive burden on parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the planned development. F. The planned development will not have an undue and adverse impact on the reasonable enjoyment of the neighborhood property. G. The quality of the building and site design proposed by the PUD plan shall substantially enhance the aesthetics of the site, shall demonstrate higher standards, more efficient and effective uses of streets, utilities and public facilities, it shall maintain and enhance any natural resources within the development, and create a public benefit that is greater than what would be achieved through the strict application of the primary zoning regulations. Subd. 8 10. Preliminary Development Plan Content. The intent of the preliminary development plan is to allow City review of site plan and general development issues, without the need for detailed architectural plans. The applicant shall submit preliminary development plans which include the following: A. A location map which indicates existing and future land uses. B. Maps of existing and proposed site features and uses at a minimum scale of 1” = 100’ scale which indicates topography in two-foot contours; building outlines; location of significant vegetation; water bodies and wetlands; location of streets, drives and parking areas; and other significant features. C. A site plan showing all proposed structure and building locations including signs. Plans shall note structure height, general architectural design features and anticipated exterior materials. Page 10 of 16 D. A preliminary circulation plan indicating pedestrian and vehicular movement systems. This plan shall also include service access and screening for receiving material and trash removal. E. Preliminary drainage, grading, utility and erosion control plans. F. A concept landscaping plan illustrating preservation of existing vegetation, and new landscaping and buffer areas. G. A written report which describes the proposed uses, indicates covenants or agreements which will influence the use and maintenance of the proposed development, describes the analysis of site conditions and development objectives which has resulted in the planned development proposal, and statement of which primary zoning district provisions are being modified by the planned development. H. A shift of density or intensity of the plan, if applicable. For example, a ten-acre site with seven acres of “Commercial” guiding and three acres of “Medium Density Residential” guiding could be developed with 70 percent of the land area commercial and 30 percent of the land area at the Medium Residential density identified in the Comprehensive Plan. This type of shift would only be allowed as part of a PUD and the location of uses within the site would be determined as part of the PUD process. This implementation technique would not require an amendment to the Land Use Guide Plan Map. I. Any other information deemed necessary by the City Staff in order to evaluate plans. J. Twenty copies of the above information shall be submitted no larger than 11 x 17 inches. K. Five copies of the above information shall be submitted on 24 x 36 inch sheets. L. For City initiated rezonings to Planned Unit Development District, the preliminary development plan may consist of any information deemed necessary to identify and protect the public interest. Subd. 9 11. Final Development Plan Content. The final development plan shall include all of the information required for submission of the preliminary development plan plus architectural plans, detailed site, landscaping, grading and utility plans and all additional information which was requested by the planning commission as a result of its review of the preliminary plan. The final plan shall incorporate all recommendations of the planning commission and City Council, or shall indicate how the final plan fails to incorporate the Page 11 of 16 commission's recommendations. The final plan shall also include and reflect all changes in preliminary plan data since the submission of the preliminary plan. The applicant shall submit final development plans which include the following information: A. A location map which indicates existing and future land uses. B. Maps of existing and proposed site features and uses at a minimum scale of 1” =100’ scale which indicate topography in two-foot contours; building outlines; location of significant vegetation; location of streets, drives and parking areas; and other significant features. C. Detailed drawings of all proposed structure elevations, including scaled elevations and exterior building materials of all buildings and signs. Samples of all proposed materials which will be used on the exterior of structures may be required with the elevation drawings. D. Proposed floor plans for all floor levels of multi-family and non-residential buildings, including locations of electrical, mechanical and gas metering equipment, and storage areas for trash and recyclable materials. E. A landscape plan indicating tree, shrub and ground cover species, size, provisions for plant material watering. F. A final circulation plan indicating pedestrian and vehicular movement systems. This plan shall also include service access for receiving and trash/recycling removal. G. A lighting plan showing foot-candle levels, luminaire location, fixture type and height. H. Rooftop equipment and screening plan and elevation drawings of rooftop equipment and screening of views from adjacent streets and property. I. A final drainage, grading, utility, and erosion and sedimentation control plan. Such plans shall comply with the requirements of this Ordinance. J. Identification and delineation of all wetlands on the site including preservation and filling and mitigation. K. A written report which completely describes the proposal and indicates covenants or agreements which will influence the use and maintenance of the proposed development, describes the analysis of site conditions and development objectives which has resulted in the planned development proposal, describes any changes from the approved preliminary Page 12 of 16 development plan, and statement of which primary zoning district provisions are being modified by the planned development. L. A shift of density or intensity of the plan, if applicable. For example, a ten-acre site with seven acres of “Commercial” guiding and three acres of “Urban Residential” guiding could be developed with 70 percent of the land area commercial and 30 percent of the land area at the urban residential density identified in the Comprehensive Plan. This type of shift would only be allowed as part of a PUD and the location of uses within the site would be determined as part of the PUD process. This implementation technique would not require an amendment to the Land Use Guide Plan Map. M. Any other information deemed necessary by the City Staff in order to evaluate plans. N. Twenty copies of the above information shall be submitted no larger than 11 x 17 inches. O. Five copies of the above information shall be submitted on 24 x 36 inch sheets. Subd. 10 12. Performance Guarantees A. The City Council shall require the owner and developer of a PUD to execute a development agreement which may include, but not be limited to, the approved development plan, conditions of approval, association and maintenance agreements, and a timetable for construction. B. The City Council shall require an applicant for PUD rezoning/development plan to provide a financial guarantee in accordance with Section 1070.050 of this Chapter to ensure that the development will be executed in performance with the approved final PUD development plan. C. The City Council is empowered to require that all required improvements be constructed and completed prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits. D. Construction of each PUD development shall be commenced within one year after the effective date of the PUD rezoning by the City Council. Upon good cause shown, the City Council may extend the time for one additional year. If construction is not commenced within these time periods, any building permits issued for the PUD shall be void and the Planning Commission may initiate proceeding to rezone the subject property. Page 13 of 16 E. Any building permit issued for construction pursuant to PUD rezoning shall be valid only so long as there is compliance with the final development plan as accepted by the City Council. Subd. 11 13. Changes To Final Development Plans. Minor changes to final development plans adopted by the City Council may be approved by the City Administrator, provided that the changes do not involve the following: A. Increase in floor area of structures or number of dwelling units. B. Change in exterior building material. C. Alteration of any condition attached or modification to the final development plan made by the City Council. D. A major change to a final development plan which is at variance with any standards of the City Code or is less restrictive than any conditions of approval for the initial final development plan, shall require approval by a majority vote of all members of the City Council. (Ord 348, passed 05-25-17, Ord. 378, passed 09-13-18) Page 14 of 16 SECTION 1070 – ADMINISTRATION, PERMITS AND PROCEDURES 1070.010 – ZONING AMENDMENTS (TEXT AND MAP) Subd. 1. Procedure. An application for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map shall be approved or denied, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 15.99. Additional City requirements are as follows: A. Request for rezoning (text or map) shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator on an official application form. A non-refundable fee as set forth in the City Code shall accompany such application. Detailed written and graphic materials, the number and size as prescribed by the Zoning Administrator, fully explaining the proposed change, development, or use, shall also accompany such application. The application shall be considered as being officially submitted and complete when the applicant has complied with all the specified information requirements. B. Upon completion of preliminary staff analysis of the application and request, the Zoning Administrator, when appropriate, shall set a public hearing following proper hearing notification. The Planning Commission shall conduct the hearing and report its findings and make recommendations to the City Council. C. Notice of said hearing shall be mailed to all owners of land within 350 feet of the boundary of the property in question. This provision shall not apply in the case of a rezoning if the amendment affects an area greater than five (5) acres pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §462.357. D. Failure of a property owner to receive said notice(s) shall not invalidate any such proceedings as set forth within this Chapter. E. Notice of said hearing shall also be published in the official newspaper at least 10 days prior to the hearing and consist of: Page 15 of 16 1. Legal property description. 2. Description of request. 3. Map detailing property location. F. The Planning Commission and City staff shall have the authority to request additional information from the applicant concerning operational factors or to retain expert testimony with the consent and at the expense of the applicant concerning operational factors, said information to be declared necessary to establish performance conditions in relation to all pertinent sections of this Chapter. G. The applicant or a representative thereof may appear before the Planning Commission in order to present information and answer questions concerning the proposed request. H. The Planning Commission shall make findings of fact and a recommendation on the request. Such recommendations shall be accompanied by the report and recommendation of the City staff. I. The City Council shall not act upon an amendment until they have received a report and recommendation from the Planning Commission and the City staff. J. Upon receiving said reports and recommendations of the Planning Commission and the City staff, the City Administrator shall schedule the application for consideration by the City Council. Such reports and recommendations shall be entered in and made part of the permanent written record of the City Council meeting. K. Upon receiving said reports and recommendations, the City Council shall have the option to set and hold a public hearing if deemed necessary. L. The applicant or a representative thereof may appear before the City Council in order to present information and answer questions concerning the proposed request. M. For any application that changes all or part of the existing classification of a zoning district from residential to either commercial or industrial, approval shall require passage by a two-thirds vote of the full City Council. Approval of any other proposed amendment shall require passage by a majority vote of the full Council. N. For any application requesting a rezoning to a Planned Unit Development District, approval shall require passage by a four-fifths vote of the seated Page 16 of 16 City Council at the time of the vote. Approvals of a proposed amendment shall require passage by a majority vote of the seated Council. A vote that fails due to failure of requisite votes is deemed a denial. O. The amendment shall not become effective until such time as the City Council approves an ordinance reflecting said amendment. P. Whenever an application for an amendment has been considered and denied by the City Council, the Planning Commission or City Council shall not consider a similar application for an amendment affecting substantially the same property again for at least 6 months from the date of its denial. A subsequent application affecting substantially the same property shall likewise not be considered again by the Planning Commission or City Council for an additional 6 months from the date of the second denial unless a decision to reconsider such matter is made by not less than a majority of the full City Council. Page 1 of 9 Corcoran PUD Points System 1. Placement of uses so as to integrate with adjacent uses. Purpose: To reward developments that make connections to adjacent properties and uses. Criteria: Points will be awarded if there is an opportunity to connect adjacent uses and such connections are made. If no opportunities exist, the category will be eliminated. 25 points maximum for the following: - 5 points will be awarded for placing features, such as private parks and conservation areas, contiguous to existing or planned private parks or conservation areas (as long as there was a choice to put it somewhere else.) - 10 points will be awarded if there are no restrictions for public access to these areas. Public parks are not eligible. - 5 points will be awarded if there is a conscious effort to link the neighborhood to public or semi- public uses (schools, religious institutions, etc.). - 5 points will also be awarded for developers who give adjacent development the opportunity to link to the development in question. 2. Collaboration with adjoining landowner(s). Purpose: To encourage an open dialogue between many landowners. Criteria: Points will be awarded on a case-by-case basis when collaboration is demonstrated. 10 points maximum Applicants must host a neighborhood meeting early in the process as part of the PUD process. Applicants will get collaboration points if they demonstrate that they incorporated feedback and continued ongoing discussions in an effort to work with neighboring property owners to create a more unified plan for the larger neighborhood. Collaboration may also offer a better chance to gain points in other categories. 3. Appropriately located neighborhood scale commercial/office uses. Page 2 of 9 Purpose: To reward developments that provide small scale commercial/office uses. Criteria: Points will be awarded on a case-by-case basis. Category will be considered on a very limited basis. This category is typically not applied to land guided as low-density residential in the City’s Comprehensive Plan; however, consideration will be given to appropriately located non-residential uses contemplated in RSF- 1, RSF-2, or RSF-3 (e.g., daycare facilities, educational facilities, and places of worship). 10 points maximum 4. Percentage of units within ¼ mile of an identifiable neighborhood focal point. Purpose: Encouragement to give new neighborhoods a unique identity and to serve as an ordering device. Criteria: Percentage of units / 2 50 points maximum Examples include the following: parks, greens, squares, monuments, historic structures (silos, barns, granaries, foundations, community gardens, etc.). 5. Distribution of attached units. Purpose: Encourage smaller clusters of attached units. Criteria: Points = (50 – A) A = the largest percentage of attached units in any one group. Page 3 of 9 40 points maximum Example: If there are 100 attached units in a project, and the largest group has 30 units in it, then 20 points would be awarded. Under this criterion, a PUD must have at least 3 groups of attached units to get any points. 6. Creation of open space using multi-story buildings. Purpose: Promote the creation of open using multi-story buildings. Criteria: Points will be awarded if it was demonstrated that the applicant had purposefully used multi-story buildings for the purpose of creating open space. 10 points maximum This criterion wouldn’t apply to PUDs for land guided as existing residential or low density residential in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 7. Visual Termini Purpose: Encourage the placement of monuments, statutes, gazebos, or other landmarks at the end of streets. Criteria: Points will be awarded if visual termini are provided. 5 points maximum Page 4 of 9 8. Attached units are embedded. Purpose: Reduce the amount of attached units visible from major roadways. Criteria: Points = (50 – A) / 2 Where A = (% of the perimeter roadway in linear feet with attached units). 25 points maximum Examples: A development has 1,000 linear feet of arterial roadway and 200 feet of the arterial roadway has attached units adjacent to it. “A” = 20 so Points = (50 -20) / 2 = 15 Only areas where there is an opportunity to build units will be included in the total perimeter measurement. Wetlands or otherwise unbuildable areas will not be included. Attached units are not considered to abut the ROW if there is an outlot or feature between them and the ROW of the area is landscaped and/or has a setback exceeding 60 feet. If the percentage of ROW with abutting attached units is over 50%, the development will get zero points in this category. This criterion is only applicable to proposals with land guided as low-density, medium-density, or mixed residential and detached units are a component of the proposed development. Areas guided for high-density and mixed use are not subject to this criterion. 9. Exceptional landscaping to buffer homes major roads. Purpose: Buffer homes from major roadways. Criteria: Score will be based on criteria below: - At least 70% evergreen trees but no more than 85% (10 points) - Undulating berms (10 points) - Decorative open fencing (10 points) - Understory trees and shrubs (10 points) - All vegetation must be salt tolerant. (10 points) - Retention of existing woods may qualify as well and can be awarded up to 10 bonus points in this category. 50 points maximum 10. Percentage of units within 1,000 feet walk from a park. Page 5 of 9 Purpose: Promote location of parks within a short walk from people’s homes. Criteria: Percentage / 10 10 points maximum Measured along roadways and/or trails. 11. Internal Trail Connections Purpose: Encourage the creation of off-road trails within a neighborhood. Criteria: Points will be awarded for the creation of internal trails to provide pedestrian and/or bicycle movement within a development. 10 points maximum 12. Cul-de-sacs are open ended Purpose: Foster the creation of pedestrian and bicycle connections or trail systems along arterial and collector roadways. Criteria: Points = (% of cul-de-sacs that are open ended) / 20 5 points maximum Cul-de-sac with a trail connection to the arterial at the end. 13. Open Space is consolidated and usable. Purpose: Create open space areas that can be usable to the neighborhood, either passively or actively. Criteria: Points will be awarded based on the following guidelines: - Buildings should be organized around the open space. - Open space should be a framing and organizing feature. - Open space should be accessible to the local population (within the neighborhood). Page 6 of 9 - Open space should be designed in such a way that it doesn’t appear like it is someone’s backyard. - Stormwater ponds should be incorporated as a design feature. - 5 bonus points will be provided if the applicant commits to privately owned open space being made accessible and usable to the public. 25 points maximum with 5 bonus points possible. 14. Open space is connected with green (natural) corridors. Purpose: Connect open spaces and reduce the occurrent of isolated open space areas. Criteria: Points will be awarded for linking open space areas with natural corridors. 10 points maximum Combining open space areas, trails, and storm ponds is a good way to get points in this category. 15. Viable open space master plan is created. Purpose: Encourage developers to create a unified open space plan for their proposed neighborhoods and to use that open space as an organizing device for the neighborhood. Criteria: Points will be awarded for providing a plan that highlights open space areas and the pedestrian corridors and connections between them. 5 points maximum 16. Natural resources and features are retained. Purpose: Encourage the preservation significant or unique natural resources and/or topographical features if they exist. Criteria: Points will be awarded if significant and unique natural features are retained. (Examples include trees, ravines, hilltops) 20 points maximum 17. Extensive internal landscaping. Page 7 of 9 Purpose: Encourage a larger amount of landscaping than required by code. Criteria: (% of landscaping units above minimum) / 10 10 points maximum Examples: 100 units required, 120 units provided = 2 points 18. Use of native plants in landscaping. Purpose: Use vegetation that is better adapted to our climate to reduce water consumption and required maintenance. Criteria: Points will be awarded if landscaping incorporates appropriate use of native plants. 5 points maximum 19. Existing rural structures are retained and/or reused Purpose: Preserve existing structures that are in good condition and have historical value. Criteria: 10 points awarded if a structure is retained 5 bonus points are awarded for the preservation of a silo (for a total of 15 points in this category). 10 points maximum with an additional 5 bonus points. Incorporation of existing structures, foundations, etc., into the development for aesthetic and historic preservation purposes. Examples are barns, silos, foundations, etc., If structures are structurally unsound and removal is advised, a developer would not be penalized for their removal. Historic structures can be used as identifiable neighborhood centers if integrated into park/open space. Developers, homebuilders, Homeowner Associations, and homebuyers will not be required to retain historical structures that were retained as a public benefit in the approval of a PUD when it is determined it is no longer structurally or financially feasible. If/when this occurs, a small monument, such as a plaque, would satisfy the intent of this category. 20. Higher Architectural Standards Purpose: Encourage a higher architectural standard within PUD proposals. Criteria: Points will be awarded where the developer goes above and beyond the architectural standards required in code. Points will be awarded when plans for residential developments that include recommended architectural styles and elements noted in the Southeast District Plan. 10 points maximum 21. Lot Size Variety Page 8 of 9 Purpose: Encourage larger lot sizes. Criteria: 5 points will be awarded for every 10% of lots that exceed a lot width of 65’ or exceed a lot area of 7,500 square feet. 50 points maximum Bonus Categories 22. Natural restoration work Purpose: Reward developments that restore wooded areas, prairies, wetlands, soils, etc. Criteria: 1 point per acre of restoration 10 points maximum Buckthorn removal would qualify. 23. Extraordinary environmental protection Purpose: Reward any other unregulated environmental protection that has not already been addressed. Criteria: Points would be awarded for other extraordinary environmental protection that hasn’t been addressed. 10 point maximum 24. Areas of parkland, woodland, or other open space (above minimum) Purpose: Encourage creation of open space areas in a development, whether they are active park areas in a development, whether they are active park areas or passive woodland areas or other open space. Criteria: 1 point per acre of dedicated parkland (acceptable to the City) or other open space areas that are in outlots or conservation easements. No maximum points. Wetlands and areas on steep slopes would not count. Open space areas must be 50 feet or larger in the smallest dimension to be counted in this category. 25. Innovation and Utilization of New Technologies and Materials Purpose: Reward innovative proposals that include new and creative design approaches and/or utilize new technologies and/or building materials within the overall site layout, buildings, and/or other development features. Criteria: Points will be awarded where the applicant’s plans feature creative and efficient methods of design or incorporate new technologies or materials. For example, the use of building-integrated solar technology (AKA solar skins) for a development that Page 9 of 9 provides high energy efficiency while being aesthetically compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. 10 point maximum From: horn.jon1964@gmail.com <horn.jon1964@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 3, 2023 6:45 PM To: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: PUD Ordinance Update Hi Natalie, I mentioned that I had a few comments regarding the PUD ordinance update and the proposed points system, and since we didn’t have a PC meeting last night, passing them along via e-mail for consideration. 1. Are there too many categories creating extra work for staff and confusion for potential developers? I thought that categories 4, 6, 7, 12 and 15 were the ones that could warrant some discussion for removal. 2. How are the bonus points handled in determining the denominator in the 75% calculation? Are they truly bonus points or does the maximum amount of the bonus get included in the denominator? How about category 24 where there is no maximum, what is included in the denominator if this category is included in the overall 75% calculation? 3. The categories that are weighted the highest (greater than 10 points) are 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 13, 16, 21, and 24. I thought that most of these made sense, except for category 4. Why is category 4 so highly valued at 50 points? I also thought that category 16 at 20 points max could be weighted higher. No need for a response, just wanted to pass along my notes. Let me know if you have questions on anything. Jon From: Corinne Brummond <corinne.brummond@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2023 1:08 PM To: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: PUD Categories Natalie, I received your voicemail earlier today about the cancellation of tonight's attempt to reschedule the Planning meeting from last week. Since it seems that the PUD ordinance will go before Council before the Planning Commission is able to meet again, I want to email some thoughts and responses to the questions Council was asking the Planning Commission to consider on the topic. Question #1: What point categories should be adjusted in terms of the amount or how the points are allotted? I was hoping to receive additional information and explanation on the PUD category awarded 50 points for the percentage of units within ¼ mile of a neighborhood focal point. This is one of three items that is ranked the highest in number of points. In my limited knowledge of the subject, a neighborhood focal point helps to create a sense of community and achieves a higher green score because of the walkability factor. These are great but I would like to know why else it is scored so highly. In my opinion other subjects such as native plants, restoration or preservation of natural resources have a greater impact on the environment in the long run and are ranked significantly less than this category. I believe that PUD category #18 Use of native plants in landscaping should be higher than five points, especially if we included native grasses and small growing clover rather than turf grasses as an option. The category #19 for preserving rural structures is higher than native plantings and this seems unbalanced in its longterm impact. I would be interested in discussing the increase of points for proposal #3 appropriately located neighborhood scale commercial/office uses. In the past, I heard a proposal before Council for a small business. The owner stated that the requirements for the development of the road would be the thing that might keep him from being able to pursue this proposal. I'm wondering if this category could be an opportunity for small business owners to work with larger developers. If so, I would see this as a category more valuable than 10 points. Question #2: Are there additional categories that should be added? The ordinance proposal does feel bulky in its length; however, if this process is to be implemented in practice, it seems that more categories will be needed in order to achieve diverse benefits for various plots of land. Not all plots of land or proposals will find every PUD category relevant so when the irrelevant categories are removed, will enough categories remain to justify a benefit? As a result of this thinking, I have come up with several other categories for consideration. I am not certain if all or any of these are legally possible, but I was trying to think outside the box. Suggested categories: • Lawns into legumes-rather than planting lawns, large green or common areas with non- native, heavily irrigated turf grasses, give credit for multi-spieces prairie or native grasses. I see this as a category eligible for points based on percentage of area or by acre. • onsite neighborhood compost system-this could be built in a common space and be a place for the residents to compost kitchen scraps, lawn clippings, sticks, etc as well as for residents to retireve the dirt from the completed composting process. I see this as a benefit because people wouldn't need to haul these things far away to hennepin county sites, and they wouldn't then have to pay for the rich compost to amend their gardens and pot their plants, etc • pervious trails, driveways, walkways-this would reduce the amount impact a new development would have on stormwater (I know this something like this could fit under the existing exceptional environmental efforts category but thought perhaps if we made a few specific environmental efforts their own category it may be helpful) • Local contractors or suppliers for materials or landscaping-if there were a certain number of contracts that the developer filled with local (we could define what radius this would be) contracts then the businesses in our area would see a benefit from the development. Another bonus would be reduced transportation distance for those materials. • Minimum number of backyards facing streets because it results in high privacy fences- this is one, I'm not sure is applicable and may be too similar to the exceptional buffering/landscaping on major roads • Percentage of homes deeded as afforadable housing only-it is my understanding that when a developer is asked to do more to benefit the future residents and the city, it can have an impact on the cost of the houses built in that development. I want to ensure a high standard of development but find a way to achieve accessibility. • Edible landscaping-this doesn't necessisarily need to be on private resident's home but in the common, greenspace, or boulevard plantings and it could be considered edible if it was consumable by humans or specific plantings for birds (such as hawthorn trees) • Age/height/girth of trees planted at the time of development-I have received feedback from Ravinia residents who are displeased with the fact that evey tree is essentially the same size and age and it will take so long for them to mature. What if we awared points for the percentage of more mature trees or varied aged trees that were planted at the time of development? In the long run this benefits a development not only in appearance but the varied ages of trees means a more diverse life cycle of the trees themselves as well as the animals that inhabit them. Question #3 Are there categories that bring up concerns and/or be removed? Proposed category #8 Attached units are embedded: My concern with this category is that while it may be more visualing appealing from the roadway, I believe the market supports the fact that single family homes desire more seclusion and would prefer the interior lots. Since attached units have a higher density wouldn't having them embedded also drive more traffic through residential neighborhoods rather than keeping it on the outskirts? Additionally, single family residents along roadways would be more likely to put up privacy fencing so rather than a row of attached homes, we may just get a row of fencing. I think perhaps we should consider a landscaping or buffering requirement for having attached homes along roadways or the exterior or developments. Proposed category #9 Exceptional landscaping to buffer home major roads: The currently lists a requirement of at least 70% of evergreen trees. If these are non-native evergreen trees they will not thrive and will end up looking brown, dying or being clipped from the bottom as they grow. Do we want to be this specific with the evergreen requirement? If so, should we not also specify that they must be native evergreen trees? Question #4 Are there categories or descriptions that could use additional clarity? Proposed category #22 Natural restoration work: Would this need to be certified? It states that buckthorn removal would qualify and I'm wondering if we are considering removal to be the removal/grinding of the stumps or the chemical application to the cut stumps or both? Buckthorn is persistent and the seeds can lay dorment in the soil for years. If we are giving credit for this restoration, how are we determining the efficacy of the effort or does that not have a bearing on the category? Proposed category #10 Percentage of units within 1,000 feet walk from a park-how are we defining a park? Does it require a playground structure, a bench, or simply green space? I would think any of the previous would qualify but I wasn't certain. In conclusion, I have some concerns not specific to the categories themselves but to the process in general. I do not want this to make housing more unaffordable by increasing costs significantly for homebuyers and even if it doesn't, I would like to see an effort made to incorporate an affordable housing component to the process. I am concerned about who/how the open areas or preserved natural resources will be maintained. It is a myth that nature doesn't need human stewardship to thrive. In the currrent state of our environment, lack of herd animals and natural fire to name a few, nature needs wise human interaction in order to thrive. For example, a wooded area that is not occassionally burned will have a buildup of leaves that prevents the native seeds from reaching the soil and germinating. If that same are is not ever pruned or harvested for timber than the trees will block out the sunlight preventing younger seedlings from establishing well and the area may not have a diverse age of trees to sustain it in a healthy manner. Lastly, I am not against attached homes or associations but since the early 2000s there has been a significant increase in the number of homes (single family and multi-family) that have HOAs. I want to ensure that the PUD categories do not in fact force or show favored support for such associations. In other words, could a developer come in without an HOA and still be able to meet the requirements of natural corriders, open green spaces, etc and not have to have an HOA that maintains those areas for the long-term. Thank you, Corinne Brummond corinne.brummond@hotmail.com 612.207.8581 From: Van Den Einde, Jay <j_vandeneinde@uhc.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2023 1:41 PM To: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: PUD Ideas Hello Natalie, I hope you are having a good day. Here are a few thoughts that can be shared. Other Ideas for points - Build playgrounds or other recreational areas - Create community gardens/farms in developments - Community shelter or building with picnic area Pag 1 of 8 - #3 – I like this one and was wondering if it should be more points - #9 – I was wondering if we should have more criteria o For instance, what if I have 1 foot of fence, plant 1 evergreen tree, plant 1 shrub. Is that 30 points? o What determines buffering - #11 – Wondering if we need criteria listed or is it subjective by the city Thanks, Jay Van Den Einde Senior Director of Software Engineering OptumCare Strategic Platform, Facets From: Mark Lanterman <mlanterman@compforensics.com> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 1:08 PM To: Natalie Davis <ndavis@corcoranmn.gov> Cc: Tom McKee <tmckee@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Feedback Thank you, Natalie. I would like to refer the Council to my previous commentary about the PUD point system. Briefly, I think that, as a concept, the point system is simultaneously too rigid, and too squishy. It is rigid because it provides 2 dozen points to categories defined by the current administration. It is squishy because many of those categories issue points on a subjective basis for subjective elements of a development. If this is an administrative function, those awards may be left to the discretion of staff, which I see as a potential issue. Furthermore, I sense that any PUD application that meets the threshold for points (and is therefore heard by the Council), will invariably be approved because developers will rely on those categories to obtain an approval. The City will face a hard road if it denies an application that met the points threshhold for this reason. I think that this is a legal doctrine, too, called estoppel. Basically, the City could be precluded from denying an application that meets the points threshold because applicants would rely on those categories for approval. In other words, developers will argue that the City has told developers what the City wants to see. If a developer does that, and gets denied, I could see legal challenges. I sense that my comments above have not swayed the Council, and it seems to me like the bigger question of whether this is something the City should do at all has apparently been decided already. Therefore, to answer your specific questions: 1 What point categories should be adjusted in terms of the amount or how points are allotted? For any point category that provides a “maximum” or “case by case” should be reworded to either provide all the points, or none. Again, I think that the points system is too rigid because it defines a rubric that applies to all PUD regardless of their individual characteristics. The points system draft tries to get around this reality by making it more subjective, and including the language like “maximum.” If it is not practical to award points on an all or nothing basis for a category, then I think that category should be removed, especially since this will be an administrative function (i.e., points awards shouldn’t be close calls left to unelected staff). 1 Are there additional categories that should be added? Conformance with pre-existing zoning district lot sizes, or 75% of units have lot sizes of at least 1/3 acre. I just note these here for discussion. 1 Are there categories that bring up concerns and/or be removed? See my comment above re: “maximums". I think that the points system categories should be significantly narrowed, and the points requirement should be reduced. For example, require 10 points out of 15 categories, with each category having one point available for an award. This will make it easier to identify, and will, in fairness to applicants, not have them rely on checking a significant number of boxes. I think it may be easier to share the categories that I think can be kept: 1)Placement of uses to integrate with adjacent uses 2)collaboration with other land owners 3)Attached units are embedded 4)Landscaping to buffer homes 5)Internal trail connections 6)Cul-de-sacs open ended 7)Natural resources retained 8)Extensive internal landscaping 9)Use of native plants 10)Higher architectural standards 11)Extraordinary environmental protection 12)Area of parkland, woodland, or other open space (perhaps .5 pt per acre). Award one point per, if 8-10 points are met, then it moves on in the application process. In short, I think that if the points system is the direction that the Council wants to take, it should be simple and just an initial “check” of only the most important categories before moving on. 1 Are there categories or descriptions that could use additional clarity? See comment above re: maximum point awards. These are just my quick thoughts. I hope they make sense. Thank you, Natalie. Mark Mark Lanterman Chief Technology Officer ComputerForensic Services 800 Hennepin Avenue, 5th Floor Minneapolis, MN 55403 952-924-9920 office mlanterman@compforensics.com www.compforensics.com STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 9a. Council Meeting: March 23, 2023 Prepared By: Jessica Beise/Kevin Mattson Topic: 2023A Bonds Discussion Action Required: Approval Summary: The city has been working over the last year to align the bond issuance for 2023 to include the variety of infrastructure projects that are slated for this year. The projects include the construction of water supply facilities, improvements to Hackamore Road, a storm water improvement project along Horseshoe Bend, and street improvements for City Center Drive and 79th Place. In preparation for the bonding sale, staff reviewed costs and recommends the adjusted amounts included in the attached draft Total Issue Sources and Uses from Northland Securities. The changes to the bonds for each project fund are outlined below. •Water Supply Infrastructure – the deposit to the construction fund increased by $1,300,000 as the result of including the construction administration engineering proposal with the bond sale ($1,107,560) and finalizing the contract bid alternates ($192,440). It was originally anticipated that the engineering services proposal would be financed with cash from the water fund (and this is still an option), but staff believes there may be value in preserving additional cash reserves. •Hackamore Road Improvements – the deposit to the construction fund was reduced by $5,000 and the bonding portion decreased by $775,000 as staff proposes utilizing eligible Municipal State Aid funds. •Horseshoe Bend Drainage Improvements – the deposit to the construction fund was reduced by $125,000 to match recently approved project design cost estimate. •City Center Drive and 79th Place Street Improvements – the deposit to the construction fund was increased by $1,000,000 as the result of updated design considerations (streetscape/electrical) and revised cost estimates. Funding source adjustments were increased to bonding ($615,000), eligible Municipal State Aid funds ($100,000), and Planned Issuer Equity Contributions - St. Therese Development ($280,000). Considering the proposed changes in bonding amounts and individual project financial plans, staff wanted to update Council and ensure that Council was comfortable with the updated bonding plan. Page 2 Specifically, staff would like input on the use of water fund cash reserves that could offset some of the bonding costs. In speaking with the City Financial Advisor Tammy Omdal, the bonding plan as presented with the staff recommendations would not be a material change and is in alignment with the city’s recent financial planning efforts. Additionally, this financial package proposes that the city use 3 years of the possible 5 years of future Municipal State Aid allotments ($975,000). It should be noted that approximately $1,000,000 of the proposed bonding sale covers deferred compensation consistent with each individual projects financial plan. Bonds would be sold at the April 13th meeting. Recommendation: Staff would recommend the bonding plan as presented. Council Action: Direct staff to finalize the sale of bonds in the amount of $27,135,000. Attachments: Draft Total Issue Sources and Uses from Northland Securities City of Corcoran, Minnesota $27,135,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2023A Preliminary Non-BQ Aa3 Rates as of 3/3/23 plus 0.50% Total Issue Sources And Uses Dated 04/19/2023 | Delivered 04/19/2023 Water Supply NE Tax Abatement (Hackamore Road) Tax Abatement (Horseshoe Bend) Tax Abatement (City Center Dr. & Develop. Grading) Issue Summary Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $22,925,000.00 $1,030,000.00 $285,000.00 $2,895,000.00 $27,135,000.00 Municipal State Aid -775,000.00 -2,300,000.00 3,075,000.00 Federal Funds 3,000,000.00 ---3,000,000.00 Proceeds from Sale of Property ---670,000.00 670,000.00 Planned Issuer Equity Contribution ---280,000.00 280,000.00 Total Sources $25,925,000.00 $1,805,000.00 $285,000.00 $6,145,000.00 $34,160,000.00 Uses Of Funds Deposit to Project Construction Fund 25,500,000.00 1,750,000.00 275,000.00 6,000,000.00 33,525,000.00 Total Underwriter's Discount (1.450%)332,412.50 14,935.00 4,132.50 41,977.50 393,457.50 Deposit to Capitalized Interest (CIF) Fund -32,273.33 8,246.54 90,737.42 131,257.29 Costs of Issuance 91,759.14 4,122.65 1,140.74 11,587.47 108,610.00 Rounding Amount 828.36 3,669.02 (3,519.78)697.61 1,675.21 Total Uses $25,925,000.00 $1,805,000.00 $285,000.00 $6,145,000.00 $34,160,000.00 2023A GO Bonds 15 yr abat | Issue Summary | 3/10/2023 | 12:40 PM Northland Securities, Inc. Public Finance Page 1 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item : 9b . Council Meeting: Prepared By: Topic: Action Required: Page 2 Options: Rec ommendation: Counci l Action: Attachments: CITY OF CORCORAN, MN CROP RENTAL AGREEMENT NORTH PARCEL 13-119-23-32-0001 2022 and 2023 CROP YEARS This Agreement is entered into this 30th day of March, 2022, between the City of Corcoran (hereinafter CITY) and Peter Leuer, 6411 Hunter Road, Corcoran MN, 55340 for the purpose of outlining the terms by which Peter Leuer, may plant, maintain and harvest a crop on the City owned land legally described as: The West 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13, Township 119, Range 23, City of Corcoran, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, except road (Subject Property). The CITY and Peter Leuer agree as follows: 1. The CITY agrees to make available to Peter Leuer, the use of the above- described land to plant and harvest a crop of corn, soybeans, or other crops, which the CITY and Peter Leuer, agree to. 2. Peter Leuer will not expand or add tillable area without expressed written consent of the CITY. 3. Peter Leuer will be responsible for the control of weeds on the tillable land on the above-described property and must till the land at the end of harvest. 4. The CITY agrees to allow Peter Leuer, to use any herbicide but atrazine. 5. The CITY agrees to allow Peter Leuer, the use of the land for a charge of $186.00/acre or $5,022.00 (tillable acreage being 27 acres) for the crop years 2022 and 2023. 6. Full lease amount to be paid to the city by April 1st of each crop year. CITY OF CORCORAN Dated: _______________ by: ________________________________ Jessica Beise, City Administrator Dated: ________________ by: ________________________________ Peter Leuer STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 9c. Council Meeting: March 23, 2023 Prepared By: Jessica Beise Topic: Commission Appointments Action Required: Appointment Summary: The City accepted a notice of resignation from Jim Shoulak of the Planning Commission effective February 28, 2023. The City also accepted notice of resignation from Sharon Meister of the Parks and Trails Commission also effective February 28, 2023. Council recognized Jim Shoulak and Sharon Meister for their years of service on their respective commissions and declared seat vacancies on March 9, 2023. The vacancies were advertised, and applications were accepted through March 17. As of March 16, only one application had been received for the Planning Commission. Mayor McKee and Councilor Schultz consist of the commission appointment subcommittee for this appointment. The subcomittee is reviewing the application(s) and will attempt to reach out to candidates prior to the Council meeting on March 23. The subcomittee may recommend appointment if candidates can be reached, or may consider tabling appointment to a future meeting. Financial/Budget: Planning Commission members serve without compensation. Options: 1.Appoint an individual to the Planning Commission as recommended by the commission appointment subcommittee. Recommendation: Staff recommends reviewing application(s) and appoint if applicable. Council Action: Consider a motion to appoint an individual to the Planning Commission and continue to accept applications for the Parks and Trails Commission. Attachments: 1.Application for Planning Commission – Lyndsay Jacobs CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763.420.2288 – Office 763.420.6056 – Fax E-mail - general@ci.corcoran.mn.us / Web Site - www.ci.corcoran.mn.us COMMISSIONS APPLICATION Please indicate by order which of the following you are interested in (1,2,3, etc.): ________ Parks and Trails Commission Meets the 3rd Tuesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. - City Hall ________ Planning Commission Meets the 1st Thursday of the month at 7:00 PM - City Hall ________ Watershed Commission Meets the 2nd Wednesday of the month, 11:30 AM – Maple Grove City Hall ________ Other ________ We welcome you as an applicant for one of the City’s commissions. Residents of Corcoran are eligible for nomination to any of the City’s commissions as established by the City Council. Please complete the following information, attach extra sheets if necessary, and return. Accommodations will be provided, upon request, to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in the application process. DATA PRACTICES ADVISORY We are required to provide the following information to you. Under Minnesota law, your name and home address are public information, which must be provided to anyone who requests it. If appointed to a commission, the following information will also be public: education and training background, previous work experience, work location, a work telephone number, and any expense reimbursement. The other information requested below is classified as private. This information will be used by the Commissioners, and the City Council in determining whether you should be appointed to a commission. Therefore, all of the information will be provided to the Commissioners and City Council in a public forum and will be reviewed in public. Failure to provide the requested information may result in your not being considered for an appointment. H:\City Hall Information\Forms\Administrative Applications Information\2012 Commission Application.doc x Please complete the information below: Name: Address: Phone: (h) (w) (c) Fax: E-mail: Please answer the following questions (use the back side if more space is needed): 1) How long have you been a Corcoran resident? 2) Please list any city committees/ commissions you have served on in the past, either for the City of Corcoran or another community. Please include the dates of service and if you held any positions such as Chair or Secretary. 3) Please describe why you feel qualified to serve on the Commission for which you are applying, including any other relevant experience with the issues faced by the Commission. 4) Why are you interested in serving on this Commission? H:\City Hall Information\Forms\Administrative Applications Information\2012 Commission Application.doc Lindsay Marie Jacobs I was raised in Corcoran from 1995 - 2011, and then became a full time resident again in May 2022. I served as an intern for the Corcoran City Park & Trails Commission, from approximately 2008 - 2010. I havebeen involved in a number of non-profit organization committees for fundraising and have led the HomecomingCommittee for Concordia College, which involved managing over 35 individuals for all elements of the annualevent. I feel that I bring a historical understanding and context of the area (having grown up here) and a fresh perspective as I've most recently lived in Moorhead, MN, and St. Paul, MN as well. IIn my professional life, I work in a corporate sales environment where I am required to manage multi-million dollar contracts and sales pursuits with Fortune 500 organizations. I mention this because I think there are noteable skills that apply to managing varying opinions, belief systems, and priorities to accomplish a goal like isnecessary on the commission team. I am trained in servant leadership through my Masters in Business Administration, and exercise my passion for people in every day life as I engage with my colleagues and community. I have a vested interest in Corcoran thriving and flourishing as I plan to raise children here and continue the legacy that my parents started back in 1995 when they built our hobby farm in Corcoran, which I now own and live on. I understand and appreciate the rural lifestyle and would like to be involved in the principles andvalues we define to foster our growing and beautiful community. H:\City Hall Information\Forms\Administrative Applications Information\2012 Commission Application.doc If appointed, I agree to disclose any conflict of interest I might have in reviewing or approving any contract, license, permit, application, appointment, land use decision, public improvement, or other matter that comes before me? Please sign and date this Application and return to: City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran MN 55340 ______________________________________ Date_________________ Applicant Signature February 16th, 2023 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 9d. Council Meeting: March 23, 2023 Prepared By: Jessica Beise Topic: RFPs – City vs. Developer Costs Action Required: Direction Summary: In December of 2022, staff was directed to reintroduce information to Council regarding City Consultant Requests For Proposals (RFP). In reviewing City Council agenda history and city files, it appears 2009 was the last time a full RFP process was conducted for City Consultants. At the February 9, 2023 City Council meeting, staff was directed to bring back additional information related to City costs versus development costs for consultants. Attached is an outline of those City Costs versus those paid by development. In past discussions with the Council, there has been discussion of conducting RFPs on a regular schedule. Council should provide feedback to staff on the following: Which consultant services should be sent for RFP? How often should RFPs be completed? Is the City interested in completing an RFP in 2023? If so, which service should be considered first? Financial/Budget: Staff time and Council time would be expended on the process. No additional expenses are anticipated. Options: 1. Provide feedback to staff and determine if an RFP should be solicited for 2023. Recommendation Provide feedback to staff and determine if an RFP should be solicited for 2023. Council Action: Provide feedback to staff and determine if an RFP should be solicited for 2023. Attachments: 1.Consultant Fees CITY GENERAL FUND CITY OTHER FUND CONSTRUCTION FUNDS ESCROW TOTAL 2020 CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER 60,742.96$ 4,376.34$ 6,621.85$ 13,839.42$ 85,580.57$ LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 108,043.25$ 1,748.00$ 119,269.64$ 229,060.89$ WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. / STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES 72,560.45$ 185,804.94$ 142,654.71$ 546,105.93$ 947,126.03$ 2021 CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER 79,480.20$ 812.52$ 13,629.88$ 20,013.35$ 113,935.95$ LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 132,757.75$ 166,942.25$ 299,700.00$ WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. / STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES 114,993.42$ 103,250.31$ 288,560.86$ 640,463.09$ 1,147,267.68$ 2022 CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER 91,951.45$ 78.38$ 17.50$ 34,763.99$ 126,811.32$ LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 122,368.50$ 9,147.50$ 204,415.75$ 335,931.75$ WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. / STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES 123,056.25$ 844,747.15$ 191,284.51$ 925,445.54$ 2,084,533.45$ 01/01/2023 - 03/15/2023 CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER 15,865.70$ 1,695.88$ 1,808.50$ 2,164.75$ 21,534.83$ LANDFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 15,792.50$ 14,637.25$ 30,429.75$ WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. / STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES 10,518.50$ 55,533.25$ 10,797.38$ 116,049.30$ 192,898.43$ STAFF REPORT Agenda Item : 9e. Council Meeting: February 23, 2023 Prepared By: Jessica Christensen Buck Topic: Sports Star Photography Donation Action Required: Approval Summary : During the February 23, 2023 City Council meeting, a donation for $791.90 from Sports Star Photography was brought forward. Staff was directed to look into alternative options other than a direct financial donation (i.e., discounted rate to those that order photos). Since that meeting, staff has worked with Sports Star Photography to determine other options. Sports Star Photography has informed staff they would be willing to offer free shipping to the parents in the programs, which would take off $3.50 per order. The company noted that this would likely be higher on average than the donation would have otherwise been. Staff is looking for feedback and guidance from City Council to determine if this option meets the vision of the City Council. Financi al/Bud get : Staff time spent on photography coordination (i.e., coordinating dates, parent questions, etc.) would no longer be offset by the yearly donation. Options: 1.Direct staff to accept the check from the 2022 season and proceed with accepting free shipping for parents. 2.Direct staff to decline the check from the 2022 season and proceed with accepting free shipping for parents. 3.Direct staff to accept the check from the 2022 season and continue accepting yearly donation. 4.Direct staff to further explore alternative options. Recommendation Direct staff to decline the check from the 2022 season and proceed with accepting free shipping for parents. Council Acti on: Provide feedback to staff and determine if the 2022 season check will be accepted and how to proceed with future photography donations. Attac hments : N/A Agenda Item: 11a. Page 1 of 2 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288 email: general@corcoranmn.gov / website: www.corcoranmn.gov MEMO Meeting Date: To: From: Re: March 23, 2023 City Council Dwight Klingbeil, Planning Technician Active Corcoran Planning Applications The following is a status summary of active planning projects: 1.Transition/Buffer Zones ZOA (City File 22-034). After multiple discussions on this topic in 2022, the City Council reviewed a draft of a Buffer Yard Ordinance at the January 26th work session. Remaining questions and discussion regarding enforcement was discussed further at the February 23rd regular Council meeting. The public hearing for this item is scheduled for the April 6th Planning Commission meeting and will return to the City Council at the April 27th Meeting. 2.Pioneer Trail Industrial Park, Rezoning and Preliminary Plat and PUD (PID 32-119- 23-34-0013, 32-119-23-34-0007, 32-119-23-43-0005 and 32-119-23-43-0006) (City File No. 22-039). An application was submitted to move forward with the preliminary approvals for the Pioneer Trail Industrial Park off Highway 55. The item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing on December 1st and was recommended for approval on a 3-1 vote. The City Council reviewed this item at the January 12th meeting, and the application was approved at the January 26th regular meeting. 3.PUD Standards Zoning Ordinance Amendment (City File No. 22-045). After various discussions on planned unit development standards in 2022, staff and City Council continued to discuss verbiage changes in the working draft of the new PUD district standards at the January 26th City Council Work Session as well as a joint Work Session with the Planning Commission and Parks and Trails Commission on February 9th. The Council asked the Planning Commission to continue discussion of the point categories. This item is scheduled for further discussion at the March 23rd Council Meeting. This is expected to go to the Planning Commission for a public hearing in the first half of 2023. 4.Rental Ordinance (City File No. 22-046). Staff and City Council continue to work through the draft ordinance and planning for administrative implementation. This item will go to another Council work session on April 13th before proceeding with Council approval. Since the Rental Ordinance will not be contained within the Zoning or Subdivision Ordinances of City Code, a public hearing is not required. Page 2 of 2 5.Keefe Minor Subdivision (PID 33-119-23-12-0007) (City File No. 22-063). An application for a two-lot subdivision at 6801 Willow Drive was submitted. The application has been determined to be complete for review. This type of application does not require review by the Planning Commission and is tentatively scheduled for the April 27th City Council meeting. 6.Dish Tower Site Plan Amendment (PID 25-119-23-44-0005) (City File No. 22-066). A minor site plan amendment application was submitted for installation of new ground equipment at an existing telecommunications tower at 7205 County Road 101. The applicant provided all the materials necessary, and staff approved this application administratively. 7.“Vollrath Compost Site Sketch Plan” (PID 19-119-23-12-0002) (City File No. 22-078). Trent Vollrath submitted an application to ask the Council for feedback on allowing a commercial compost site within the Rural Residential district. The application was determined to be incomplete at this time. 8.“MS4 Updates” (Citywide) (City File No. 23-001). Staff anticipates needing to process further changes to MS4-related regulations to comply with the City’s MS4 permit. Currently, Public Works and Engineering are focusing efforts on establishing new requirements for salt storage. The salt storage ordinance amendments are tentatively scheduled for Council review on March 9th. The salt storage ordinance was approved by City Council at the March 9th meeting. 9.“Gmach Accessory Dwelling Unit CUP” (PID 05-119-23-13-0011) (City File No. 23- 002). George Gmach submitted an application for a conditional use permit to allow an accessory dwelling unit over 960 square feet at 22600 Oakdale Drive. This item was intended to be discussed at the March Planning Commission meeting. Due to a lack of quorum, the public hearing was rescheduled to the April 6th Planning Commission Meeting with City Council Review on April 13th. 10.“Amira Village” (PID 25-119-23-12-0002) (City File No. 23-003). Hempel Acquisition Company submitted a sketch plat application for a 141-unit development consisting of single- family homes for a senior living rental community at the Chastek property on Maple Hill Rd. This item was pulled from the City Council meeting on February 23rd and is scheduled to return to the Council at the March 23rd meeting. 11.“Kariniemi/Wicht Sketch Plat” (PID 18-119-23-11-0002; 18-119-23-42-0001) (City File No. 23-004). Nathan Kariniemi of Willow1 LLC submitted a sketch plat application for an Open Space & Preservation plat near Kariniemi Meadows on County Road 19 and County Road 10. The plan includes three commercial lots that wrap around the existing Public Works building in addition to 8 small residential lots off Larsen Road. The plat includes a 40-acre outlot to be preserved as open space. The Council provided the applicant informal feedback on their concept plan and is not scheduled for another meeting at this time. 12.“Kwik Trip CUP, Lot Line Adjustment, and Site Plan” (PID 12-119-23-14-0006; 12- 119-23-14-0004) (City File No. 23-005). Kwik Trip Inc. submitted a Site Plan, Lot Line Adjustment and CUP application for the two parcels north of Mama G’s. The application was determined to be incomplete for City review and is not currently scheduled for review by the City Council. A Hidden Gem Waiting To Be Discovered www.corcoranmn.gov 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Phone: 763-420-2288 Administrative Offices Public Works Offices 9100 County Road 19 Corcoran, MN 55357 Phone: 763-420-2652 Phone: 763-420-8966 Police Department Offices 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 March xx, 2023 OWNER ADDRESS CORCORAN, MN 55340 Re: Sewer and Water Connection at Address, Corcoran, MN. PID: Dear Property Owner: In 2016, the City initiated a utility and street improvement project including municipal sewer and water services in the Corcoran downtown area. As part of this project and per City Ordinance 51.020, all commercial and industrial properties are required to connect to these services. The original deadline to connect was May 1, 2019, however, this deadline was extended by property owner(s)’ request. Subsequently, the deadline was extended several more times and in 2022 was extended again until June 30, 2023. Staff again received a property owner request for an extension and the Council reviewed this request on February 23, 2023. The Council has set a final deadline for connection and directed staff to follow-up with property owners. The final deadline for connection to City sewer and water is October 31, 2024. Failure to connect by this deadline may result in fines and penalties. Specific language example: The City currently has a finance agreement in place for the street and utility project, trunk line access fees, and connection fees. Fees due at permit issuance will include SAC, permit fees, and meter fee. For permit information, please contact: Mike Pritchard 763-400-7033 or mpritchard@corcoranmn.gov. Please feel free to reach out with questions. Thank you, Jessica Beise City Administrator Agenda Item: 11b. STAFF REPORT Agenda Item : 11c . Council Meeting: Prepared By: Topic: Action Required: Summary : Required Council Minute Contents Financial/Budget: Council Action: Attachments: Agenda Item: 12. Revised agenda item) Page 1 of 1 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288 email: general@corcoranmn.gov / website: www.corcoranmn.gov MEMO Meeting Date: To: From: Re: March 23, 2023 City Council Jessica Beise, City Administrator Closed Session Staff realized that a closed session that was discussed was inadvertently left off the final version of the March 23rd, 2023 City Council Agenda. Upon discovery on March 21, 2023 that the closed session was not on the agenda, staff contacted the Mayor. The Mayor has requested an amendment to the agenda to include a closed session and staff has revised the agenda for the City’s website and house agenda packet. The closed session will be closed in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 13D.03; 13D.05, subd. 3 to consider develop offers or counteroffers for the purchase of property. The properties discussed will be: PID 3611923330009 and PID 3611923330010. City of Corcoran 2023 City Council Schedule Agenda Item: 13. Revised agenda item order Below is a tentative schedule for City Council meetings. The items and schedule are subject to change. April 13, 2023 (Tentative) •Rental Ordinance April 13, 2023 (Mayor Mckee – Excused) •Commissioner Anderson (Presentation) •Accept NW Jaycees Tree Donation •Resolution 2023-Northwest Trails Resolution of Support •Fund Creation •2021 and 2022 Transfers •Juneteenth Holiday •Juneteenth Council Approval for 2024 •Logo Approach and Staff Process for Logo •Gmach ADU Conditional Use Permit (Tentative) •Corcoran Meat Locker (Tentative) •2023 CIP Purchases •Placeholder to THC Regulations Follow Up •Watershed Letter of Support •2023A Bond Sale •Logo Approach and Staff Process for Logo •Ordinance Change for Downtown Connection •Public Works Maintenance Operator Job Description and Hiring Process Update April 27, 2023 •Proclamation – National Public Service Week •Award RFP for City Park •Firearms Ordinance Draft •Buffer Ordinance •CSAH 10 & Brockton Lane Turn Lane Improvements – Award Bid •Organics Recycling - •Keefe Minor Subdivison May 11, 2023 •Proclamation – National Police Week •Park Signs Plan May 25, 2023 •Proclamation – National Public Works Week •CR 116 & Hunters Ridge Turn Lane Improvements – Award Bid •Hope Site EAW Page 2 of 2 June 8, 2023 • 2024 Budget Goals and Priorities • Schedule Budget Work Sessions June 22, 2023 • Progess Report – 2023 Goals and Measurables July 13, 2023 Work Session (Tentative) • Draft 2024 Budget July 13, 2023 • Mid-Year Code Enforcement – Add November Report Next • Draft 2024 Budget July 27, 2023 August 10, 2023 • Draft 2024-25 CIP and Pre Orders • Draft 2024 Budget August 24, 2023 • September 14, 2023 • Preliminary Budget and Levy • Levy Insert September 28, 2023 • Progess Report – 2023 Goals and Measurables October 12, 2023 • October 26, 2023 Additional Future Meetings Host Special Charter Commission Meeting – March 21, 2023 at 5:30pm Annual Charter Commission Meeting – September 13, 2023 at 5:30pm